Executive Magazine

Confined to misery

by Greg Demarque & Jeremy Arbid September 21, 2016

written by Greg Demarque & Jeremy Arbid

Executive visited ZaZoo City in Hazmieh disguised as tourists in order to collect photographic evidence of the conditions of the animals held captive there. What we found was appaling: ducks lying in a waterless pool, a tiger trapped in a shade-less cage and a fox asleep next to litter and a pile of its own feces. Several of the animals were suffering from untreated wounds, the cages were dirty, no information was provided about the animals present and no one was available to tour us around. Interview requests by Executive went unanswered.

One of several neglected monkeys kept in one of ZaZoo City’s cages. The cage does not come close to simulating the monkey’s natural habitat; the cage flooring is concrete and lacks branches and plants.

A ZaZoo City tiger is held in a small cage with a cement floor, unable to play, run or freely move around. It faces the risk of dehydration with no water or shelter from the sun.

Two lions, one male and one female, share a cement-floored cage, with no greenery and barely enough room for either to move around freely.

A fox shares its barren cage with only litter and its own feces. It has severe, untreated wounds covering both its ears.

Their wings clipped, two breeds of ducks and two pelicans inhabit a squalid, drained pool, strewn with their feces.

A theme park-style kiosk provides visitors with meager food offerings to distribute to the animals.

A badger with untreated wounds on its back shares its cage with a well of stagnant water.

September 21, 2016 2 comments

Trash and the towns

by Matt Nash September 15, 2016

written by Matt Nash

Lebanon’s garbage crisis predates independence. Case in point, the country’s first sanitary landfill was built in the 1990s even though the technology emerged around the 1920s. Despite repeated policy failures by successive governments, however, the situation could be turning around.

Their own devices

By law, municipalities in Lebanon have the authority to handle their own garbage. Beginning in the mid-1990s, the central government contracted waste management in the country’s most populous areas (Beirut and the coastal districts from Jounieh in the north down to the Chouf) to the Averda companies Sukleen and Sukomi. This service area accounts for around 50 percent of the waste Lebanon generates. The rest of the country has mostly been managing its own trash (which means relying on foreign grants or – as is the case in Saida – a mix of grants with foreign and local private investment). Waste collection in Lebanon has long been reported to be 99 percent, according to the Ministry of Environment. Picking it up is relatively cheap. In areas outside of the Sukleen/Sukomi service zone, disposal has been the big problem. There are hundreds of open dumps in the country and uncontrolled garbage fires are still a part of waste management strategy in some places. Sorting facilities to recover recyclables, composting facilities for organic waste and sanitary landfills for what’s left are expensive to build and often don’t make sense if they are servicing too small a population (meaning municipalities can most efficiently manage their trash by sending it to facilities that serve more than one locale).

waste-jbeil

Because of financing troubles, donors and non-governmental organizations have largely filled Lebanon’s waste management gaps. Following the 2015 waste crisis in the Sukleen/Sukomi service area, more of the country’s municipalities have been exploring their options.

Inefficiency in Jbeil

Ayoub Bark smiles at the question. “We’re rich,” the vice president of the Jbeil Municipality tells Executive when asked about the city’s finances. He then quickly clarifies that development projects are budget breakers beyond the city’s means. Bark says local banks with corporate social responsibility (CSR) dollars to burn as well as Mexican-Lebanese billionaire Carlos Slim have helped co-finance big-ticket projects. When it came to waste management in the city outside of the Sukleen/Sukomi service zone, however, private sector donors were impossible to find, he says. So the city turned to the European Union via the Med 3-R Project, a sustainable waste management initiative focused on the Mediterranean region.

[pullquote]Because of financial troubles, donors and non-governmental organizations have largely filled Lebanon’s waste management gaps[/pullquote]

While the wider Jbeil district was hailed in the local news as a model waste manager during the stinkiest days of the summer 2015 waste crisis in Beirut and its five environs, the truth is not so clean cut. Bark confirms the district sends most of its waste to an open dump, not a sanitary landfill, in Hbaline, some 550 meters above sea level. He also confirms that sorting and composting facilities near the dump has not been operating for over a year.

chouf-1

Bark says that in early September, the city will break ground on its own sorting and composting facilities, intended for use by four neighboring municipalities. Jbeil is on the hook for 20 percent of the cost, and the 400,000 or so euros coming from Med 3-R is separate from the nearly 78 million euros in EU grants for waste management in Lebanon. Bark explains the city secured other funding for more bins and will soon begin demanding city residents sort at source. As Executive spoke to him in late August, an awareness raising campaign was about to kick off, with maps of the city’s neighborhoods for door-to-door message delivery brought to Bark’s office during the interview. He explains that six months after recycling bins are distributed to each household in the city, fines will be issued for those not sorting (the amount of fine had yet to be determined, he says). Should the plan for fining residents who shun sorting actually be implemented, it will be the first time in Lebanon such a fine is levied. (The 1977 law governing municipalities lists fines as a potential source of revenue, but does not detail what municipalities can and cannot impose monetary penalties for).

Higher ambitions

If imitation is the highest form of flattery, Sukleen should be blushing. The waste management company’s name is a hybrid of the family name of the firm’s founder (Sukkar) and a misspelling of the world “clean.” When Sukleen stopped collecting waste because the government closed the country’s largest sanitary landfill in July 2015, some customers decided they’d finally had enough and chose to sort their own garbage. Literally. Three months into the waste crisis, up in the Chouf, the “Chou-clean” project was in full swing.

With donations of an undisclosed sum from Chouf MPs Walid Jumblatt and Nehme Tohme, the Union of Municipalities of the Higher Chouf bought 5,000 square meters of land and built a trash sorting facility as well as a hangar for composting organic waste, Union President Roger Ashi tells Executive. The union comprises 15 villages (including Moukhtara) with a total population of around 25,000 and a waste stream of between 22 and 25 tons per day, Ashi explains.

waste-chouf-2

Ashi also aims for sorting at source in the union’s villages, but says no fines are planned for violators. He envisions the villages soon sending no waste to a landfill. The union is currently not handing any of its waste to Sukleen, he says, recycling and composting as much as possible and storing the rest until the union can purchase a baler (or a machine to compress the “reject” waste, which would end up in a landfill in many other jurisdictions). While he insists the rejects won’t be landfilled, he only smiles when asked where the trash will end up (remember: there are potential commercial uses for this garbage).

For now, the Union of Municipalities of the Higher Chouf “is not accepting waste from any outside area” and the success of the project has the union thinking of scaling up. He says they may buy more land to build new facilities to service other cities and villages nearby. Given the right scale, waste management can be a very lucrative business.

Correction:

This article has been amended. Orignally, Executive incorrectly wrote that the Union of Municipalities of the Higher Chouf sued Sukleen, resulting in a third party weighing the waste Sukleen collects from the union. In fact, the company says, weighing the union’s waste separately resulted from a 2013 decision by the Ministry of Interior and Municipalites, not a court case. Executive regrets the error.

September 15, 2016 0 comments

Economics & Policy Waste Management

Wasting time

by Matt Nash September 14, 2016

written by Matt Nash

There, blocking the right-hand lane of traffic, was history repeating itself. Four days after the municipality of Bourj Hammoud blocked access to a temporary waste storage facility on August 24, uncollected garbage was spilling onto the Mirna Chalouhi Road in an eastern suburb of Beirut. If the latest pile-up of trash on the ground suggests anything, it’s that the government’s most recent waste management plan (agreed to in March) is not going well.

Less ambitious than previous policy attempts in the past 18 months, the plan focuses on Lebanon’s most populous areas (Beirut and the districts of Keserwan, Metn, Baabda, Aley and Chouf – a.k.a. Sukleen country), not the entire nation. It also relies on a popular technology that faced stiff local opposition in the past. By 2020, in theory, the burden of daily national power cuts will be a bit easier to bear as waste incineration is expected to provide a new source of electricity production, according to the plan. The last functioning incinerator near Beirut (at Amroussiyeh, south of the capital) was burned to the ground by angry residents convinced it was unclean back in the late 1990s. A 2010 plan to build three waste incinerators along the country’s heavily populated coast went up in smoke because of activist opposition to incineration and resident opposition to living near an incinerator. Despite this, waste to energy is back on the books. And the government’s given itself a four-year deadline to get there.

In the medium term, the plan is to build three sanitary landfills (one off the coast near Bourj Hammoud, one off the coast south of the airport – in an area called Costa Brava land – and one to service the districts of Chouf and Aley, the site of which has not yet been determined). Only one of the three has been successfully contracted for construction (Bourj Hammoud), but work is on hold. The landfills are expected to have a lifespan of four years (offshore stopgap measures until the bitterly opposed incinerators fire up on schedule). Meanwhile, semi-sorted garbage is being wrapped up (bailed, in industry parlance) and parked next to the soon-to-be landfills in Bourj Hammoud and Costa Brava (Executive has not been given an answer as to where the trash from Aley and Chouf ends up).

Semi-sorted garbage piles up next to the soon-to-be landfill in Bourj Hammoud

More immediately (as in, it was originally scheduled to have been finished by now), the government should sign new contracts for waste management in the capital and five surrounding districts. For years, Averda companies Sukleen and Sukomi have monopolized waste in this service zone. Sukleen collects it from stinking road-side bins, and Sukomi sorts out what’s still valuable, composts a small fraction of the organics (the company was promised more land for a larger-capacity composting facility in the 1990s but the government never delivered), and used to send the rest of the waste to the Naameh sanitary landfill, which Sukomi operated and maintains. All contracts with the companies expired in July 2015, but a clause of those agreements stipulates they must continue work if no alternate waste manager is in place, Sukleen’s Executive Director Anthony Kurban told Executive at an April press conference. In late July, after several delays, the Council for Development and Reconstruction (CDR), in charge of organizing these tenders, closed bids on a sorting facility contract and a composting facility contract for the Sukleen/Sukomi service area (it’s unclear if the government was requesting new facilities be built or whether it was simply seeking a new operator for the facilities it technically owns, currently operated by Sukomi). CDR also closed bids, in late July, on waste collection contracts, one covering Beirut, Metn and Keserwan, and a second covering Baabda, Aley and Chouf (splitting the collection zone in two, with a condition of thebid being that each must have a different contractor, according to Beirut daily Al-Akhbar). CDR is not granting interviews concerning waste management, a representative tells Executive. No winners for any of the aforementioned contracts have been announced.

[pullquote]If a municipality – or union of municipalities – wants a solution, the ministry will help them find donors to finance the project[/pullquote]

Foreign funding

While numerous plans have been written, Lebanon has never attempted to implement a national waste management strategy. Areas outside of the Sukleen/Sukomi service zone have largely been left to fend for themselves. Beginning in 2003, the European Union began to step in, earmarking grant money for waste management in Lebanon. Through various projects that are scheduled to last until 2017, the EU is financing the construction or rehabilitation of 15 recycling or waste sorting facilities, 16 composting facilities and 8 sanitary landfills to the tune of 77.6 million euros. Taken all together, the EU-financed projects will serve a “population of over 3.5 million in 540 municipalities,” with total waste treatment capacity at “more than 2,395 [tons per day] (against the 5,500 [tons per day] generated in Lebanon,” according to a Fact Sheet the EU sent Executive. According to a September 2014 report by the Ministry of Environment, the EU projects will create modern waste management solutions for nearly the entire country outside of the Sukleen/Sukomi service area. Still left to their own devices, according to the 2014 report, will be the districts of Jbeil, Batroun, Bcharre and Hermel in the north as well as Jezzine, Rachaya, Hasbaya and Marjayoun in the south/south-west.

A plan approved by the government back in September 2015 called for providing municipalities with training and financing to handle waste management on their own. Nearly one year later, a committee that was supposed to spearhead the training aspect of this plan established under the umbrella of the Ministry of Interior and Municipalities met only once, confirms Khalil Gebara, an advisor to Interior Minister Mohammad Mashnouk. Asked if the committee is effectively dead, Gebara insists it is not. Pressed on what the ministry is doing to facilitate municipality-owned solutions to waste management problems, he says, “we respond to demand.” If a municipality – or union of municipalities – wants a solution, the ministry will help them find donors to finance the project. And while he as well as representatives of the EU and the World Bank (which is also financing two waste management facilities in Lebanon) insist donors are not wasting money by building redundant infrastructure, Gebara admits “the central government needs to do proper coordination.”

Clarification:

In writing that “Sukleen and Sukomi have monopolized waste in the capital and five surrounding districts,” Executive meant that the companies are the only providers in their service area and they handle the waste stream from collection and sweeping to treatment and final disposal. The magazine did not mean to imply the company broke any laws.

September 14, 2016 0 comments

Economics & Policy Wildlife trafficking

Lebanon’s wildlife villain

by Jeremy Arbid September 9, 2016

written by Jeremy Arbid

In the shade the temperature reached 34 degrees celsius as Executive met Samir Ghattas at Animal City for an interview in early August. “I turned this place into nature,” he said, “the zoo is my baby.” Executive had visited the zoo two weekends prior to this meeting, first posing as tourists in order to photograph conditions at Animal City and later to take photographs by invitation. What was clear was that conditions of captivity were less than ideal: wildlife lacked water in the sweltering heat and cages hardly provided shade from the sun. Executive also wanted to learn whether allegations of wildlife trafficking were true and wanted to find out more about the zoo’s business model.

It is not profitable, Ghattas says of Animal City, but how much money the zoo is losing is not clear. Over the course of a 90 minute interview Ghattas declined to give many specifics on the zoo’s financial performance or its expenses. He did claim that he subsidizes the zoo with cash from his other businesses or his own pocket, though he wouldn’t say how much. He also said that average attendance per year stood at 70,000 visitors. With each visitor paying $5 entry, that would amount to a total of up to $350,000 in annual revenue.

[pullquote]Conditions of captivity were less than ideal: wildlife lacked water in the sweltering heat and cages hardly provided shade from the sun[/pullquote]

As for expenses, Animal City rents 26,000 square meters of land along the Nahr el Kalb river from the Melkite church at the rate of $3 per square meter per year, or $78,000 annually. Ghattas also says he shells out $12,000 per year to a company managing only the zoo’s Facebook page and there are media costs too like a program OTV was filming when Executive first visited incognito. No figures were given for food, veterinary care or maintenance expenses at the zoo.

The lack of data is not isolated to the zoo alone. Until August the government officially had no idea Animal City existed. Executive was not able to obtain an inventory of the zoo’s wildlife stock. Without knowing the total number of animals kept at the zoo, and with no clear picture of revenues and expenses it’s impossible to pinpoint how much is spent on food and health for those animals, or to evaluate whether that amount is appropriate. No knowledge of how much money actually goes toward animal care obscures the quality of that care. This leaves only anecdotes of conditions: lack of water and shade in the heat of summer, small cages with concrete flooring, the poor health of a chimpanzee, the death of a lion cub. Visual confirmation backs up those anecdotes, and even Ghattas admits the conditions at Animal City fall far short of international standards for captivity (see explainer on standards).

No law, no consequences

What is more troubling is his admission to Executive of the zoo’s implicit participation in wildlife trafficking. He points blame at the government for not having rules that legitimize his zoo, and says how suppliers import wildlife into Lebanon is none of his concern. That line of reasoning was partly true. A January decision issued by the Ministry of Agriculture that went into effect last month asked animal businesses (zoos, pet shops and veterinarians) to self-report on the animals in their possession.

Conditions for wildlife at Animal City zoo in Nahr El Kalb are far below international standards

But Animal City itself is not registered as a business in Lebanon. Instead it is a tourist attraction operated by a Ghattas-owned business called Gesco Entertainment sarl. In its commercial registration, Gesco describes its business activities in part as importing, exporting, breeding and selling animals.

Ghattas says Animal City cannot import wildlife directly because Lebanon’s government did not recognize the zoo, blocking it from obtaining permits required by international conventions affecting animal welfare (see explainer on conventions). But the bigger complication could be its registration as Gesco, an entertainment company, instead of soley as a business with a zoo description, or as a nonprofit in line with best practice where wildlife are no longer bought or sold by zoos but instead ‘loaned’.

In the United States, for example, the practice of one zoo loaning an animal to another addresses both ethical and business concerns: placing a dollar figure on animals reduces their value to education and conservation purposes, increases their value to traffickers in black markets and avoids a lengthy and costly permitting process required by US law when wildlife is exchanged for money. So despite now being recognized by the government, the way Ghattas has set up his company may hinder the zoo’s ability to comply with the international rules of animal trade.

Because there are so few indicators, the best picture of wildlife imports and exports comes from Customs data, totalling less than one percent by value of all live animals entering or exiting Lebanon since 2012. That data doesn’t catch the extent of wildlife trafficking because traders skirting international conventions assumedly also bypass Lebanese Customs. In 2014 the United Nations Environment Program valued global wildlife trafficking at anywhere between $50 to $150 billion every year, describing the illegal trade as “often carried out by criminal groups operating across borders…[that] are attracted by high profits and low risks associated with weak governance and lax penalties”.

An August decision by Cabinet should control the trafficking of big cats like this tiger at Animal City

Ghattas admits to buying wildlife from traffickers but insists he does not sell his animals, except for the time he was caught this summer when news broke that a lion cub sold by Animal City to a private owner had died. In trading wildlife, Ghattas says he only deals with third-parties, but the zoo as a cash business and the way Gesco is structured under holding company Gatas Group (a holding of companies across Africa, Lebanon, Iraq and Canada) enables the potential for further involvement in the illicit trade. Whether Gesco directly imports or exports wildlife was not clear from the interview, and Ghattas did not respond to follow up questions seeking clarification.

[pullquote]Ghattas was comfortable operating in such a lawless climate because there were no consequences[/pullquote]

Before, Animal City never had to play by the rules. Ghattas could do what he wanted because Lebanon has no law, was not, until recent years, a signatory to conventions, and until August had few regulations. Ghattas was comfortable operating in such a lawless climate because there were no consequences. He only needed to shell out extra cash to get the next exotic animal for his collection. Now that the zoo has registered with the Ministry of Agriculture, and with another just-issued decision to control big cat trafficking, Animal City can no longer plead ignorance of wildlife trading rules.

INTERVIEW WITH SAMIR GHATTAS OF ANIMAL CITY

You say the government does not legally define what a zoo is in Lebanon, leaving Animal City to operate in a sort of gray zone. How does that affect your business?
Not being legalized means we cannot contact other zoos worldwide to buy animals they reproduce. Zoos don’t allow animals to go to other zoos that are not legally recognized. So we are stuck here: you cannot collaborate with other zoos and you are stuck because you have to buy your animals from smugglers.

Is the business model for Animal City a sustainable one, is the zoo profitable?
It is not profitable and financially it is not a good business. But it doesn’t mean that I will give up. It needs to be improved. If someone will come to adopt and sponsor this place, I am ready. The more people that come the more income.

Does the revenue from Animal City even factor into the earnings of the zoo’s holding company, Gatas Group?
In terms of revenue, it’s not a big deal when compared to the catering that we do for Chevron – we’re feeding 3,000 people per day. You cannot compare Animal City to that. I have a hotel in Zimbabwe where all the mines are, you cannot compare it to that either. I have a construction business in Faqra, one small chalet that I’m selling for $1.2 million and you cannot compare that to Animal City. Animal City is my baby and I am not looking to make money from it. It’s a baby that needs me to invest and inject money in it. It’s my baby you see, it’s something I’m attached to.

Does the zoo need help financially?
No. Let me explain what I said. At the legal level, why am I paying $10,000 for a lion from a local business that smuggles it, when I can send an email to a registered legal zoo asking them to send me two lion cubs via the international airport of Beirut and Customs to Animal City for a few hundred dollars? Why are you pushing me to deal with smugglers when you can tell me these are the rules? Comply with them and they could give you the papers to buy animals the legal way. This is my problem.

So because the government doesn’t have rules to classify zoos you have to do business with illegitimate sources?
I am buying according to an invoice signed by the supplier inside Lebanon. Now the problem of how he brought this [wildlife] in is his problem. But I don’t buy it under the table. I don’t buy it during nighttime. I buy from a petshop that has an address, a telephone number, an owner and an invoice.

When you sell offspring are you not contributing to trafficking?
This was one case, and I defy anybody who can say he went to Animal City and bought a lion. I’m not selling. For me it’s nonsense to focus on such incidents, I don’t understand why they are focusing on it. [Editor’s note: Here Ghattas is referring to the August 2015 death of a lion cub sold by Animal City to a private owner. The question was not specific to lions and activists allege the zoo has sold other wildlife].

September 9, 2016 1 comment

Economics & Policy Wildlife trafficking

Animal rights activists to the rescue

by Jeremy Arbid September 7, 2016

written by Jeremy Arbid

When the August 2015 death of a lion cub finally made news this past July, one could tell that Lebanon’s perception of animal welfare had changed. Not in recent memory had one animal’s death made so profound an impact on the country, the public’s outrage harnessed by activists demanding new rules for their protection. Late last month, the Ministry of Agriculture delivered, issuing a ministerial decision regulating the ownership of big cats. Just how the nonprofit behind it all, Animals Lebanon, was able to lobby the government toward regulation and attract wealthy backers (like the owner of this publication, Antoun Sehnaoui) is an interesting story that serves as an example to other nonprofits looking for change.

Last August, the lion cub, Queen, died of complications resulting from severe malnourishment. In the care of a private owner, the cub had shattered its legs jumping from a couch before being sent back to the zoo it was purchased from, Animal City. This year in July, AFP reported that Agriculture Minister Akram Chehayeb pledged rules that would clamp down on big cat ownership. The minister delivered, issuing a decision at the end of August that would limit possession of big cats (tigers, lions, jaguars, leopards, cheetahs and cougars) to zoos and rescue centers registered with the government. Those owners not qualifying to possess big cats are to turn the animals over to the ministry or other accredited facilities.

Even into August, there was not much hope the government could, or would, do much about wildlife trafficked into the country and held in subpar conditions. A draft law by Animals Lebanon had been stuck in parliament since the beginning of 2015, and without it not much could be done in way of protecting the animals. In recent years, Lebanon has become a signatory to international conventions affecting animal welfare (see explainer on conventions below), but those rules have limited effect without local legislation in place. Regulation was the only remaining option, but with the minister overseeing the waste management file and garbage threatening to spill once again onto the streets of the capital, animals just did not seem like much of a priority.

EXPLAINER ON INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS

Lebanon has no law protecting animals. Instead, it is signatory to several conventions that affect animal welfare through frameworks for countries to adopt legislation protecting animal health, controlling their trade and prescribing international standards for how they’re obtained, kept and cared for. Without a local law these conventions do not achieve full effect, but they do provide the necessary foundation that Lebanon needs were it to one day pass legislation.

OIE
The importance of animal health has long been recognized as safeguarding the international trade of animals and their byproducts, thereby protecting human health. Still known as OIE since its first agreement in 1924, the World Organization for Animal Health today is the responsible authority coordinating global standards of animal health and welfare relating to breeding and healthcare, transit of animals and food and byproduct safety. In 2004 OIE began codifying animal welfare standards into the agreement, and is slowly expanding into new areas of animal welfare. OIE complements other conventions in at least two ways: it more broadly affects endangered species in its standards for animal transport and in its standards for animal health. Like other OIE member countries, Lebanon needed to establish an animal vaccination contingency plan to prevent or isolate the outbreak of infectious diseases. To do so Lebanon first needed to know what animals were in the country and where they were. A January decision by the Ministry of Agriculture asking animal businesses to self-report their animal stock accomplishes that data collection. Knowing what animals are where is useful to control the spread of disease from one country to another, but the data can also be used to combat wildlife trafficking.

CITES
The main legislation in the fight against wildlife trafficking is an international convention commonly referred by its acronym CITES, the United Nation Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. First agreed upon in 1975, CITES protects endangered plant and animal species from exploitation by regulating their trade. Lebanon only became a signatory to this treaty in 2013.
The illicit trade in wildlife is largely driven by demand and disproportionately affects developing nations rich in natural resources that have gaps in the management of those resources along with law enforcement and trade control deficiencies. The numbers on the size of trafficking varies. The United Nations says it may total up to $150 billion every year, including endangered wildlife, logging and fishing. A report prepared for the US government estimates the trafficking of endangered wildlife and their by products between $7 to $10 billion annually, plus an additional “$30 billion to $100 billion annually and $10 billion to $23 billion annually” for illegal logging and fishing respectively. “Such figures may place illegal wildlife trafficking among the top 10 most lucrative criminal activities worldwide,” the report concludes.
The international agreement specifies the conditions under which endangered species can be traded, creates a licensing system and database to track the movement of species as they’re bought and sold, and defines conditions for shipping live animals to minimize risks of injury, sickness or cruelty during transit in line with OIE standards.
At the time of its introduction, regulating the trade was not a priority partly because there were few parameters quantifying its size. With a permitting process in place it became clear that their legal trade was a big business. A 2005 study by TRAFFIC, a monitoring NGO, estimated the value of legal international wildlife trade at $279 billion for live animals and plants and the products derived from them, for example: food products, leather, luxury furniture or medicines. CITES has arguably not slowed down their trade but instead works to protect endangered species from overexploitation by keeping their trade above the table away from traffickers in black markets that might sling species for cash to criminal groups moving drugs, weapons or other illicit products.

UNTOC
The United Nations connects the protocols of CITES to a convention under the mandate of the UN Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the UN Convention on Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC). UNTOC was adopted by Lebanon in 2005 and while it is geared toward curbing the activities of global organized criminal groups (such as money laundering, narcotics trafficking or human trafficking) it does have implications for endangered species. UNTOC indirectly affects endangered species because the UNODC prescribes wildlife exploitation as a criminal offense, works with local and national authorities to prevent environmental crimes, and is a member of the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime.

The ministry had issued decision #1238 at the beginning of this year asking animal businesses (zoos, pet shops and veterinarian clinics) to register and list the animals in their, or their clients’, possession. That decision set the stage for the big cat rules, but it also satisfied another need. Without a national count of all wildlife and livestock in the country, Lebanon did not have the baseline data needed to develop a vaccine contingency plan were an infectious disease to occur. That lack of preparation was put to the test earlier this year when avian flu threatened some 300,000 chickens. The government was eventually able to stem the outbreak by isolating the diseased birds and vaccinating chickens at nearby farms. Without the January decision the government officially had no idea zoos like Animal City (see Animal City story) existed. Until early August most of the animal businesses required to register with the ministry had not yet done so, calling into question whether Agriculture Minister Chehayeb would be able to deliver on his July promise of a big cat decision.

Three malnourished wolves lie in the only shaded area of their dusty cage at Animal City

Animals Lebanon counts some 50 pet shops within the Beirut Municipality, but the total number of pet shops in the country is not known. The Ministry of Agriculture has not yet finished registering the stores as per the January decree, and it’s questionable whether a system of self-reporting will fully capture the size of the industry. One of Lebanon’s larger chain of pet stores, Pet Mart, did not respond to requests for comment on how the new rules might affect their business, and neither did Lebanon’s other zoo, ZaZoo City. It’s not clear whether Pet Mart actually trades big cats, so the big cat rule may not affect the chain. But ZaZoo City does hold lions and tigers and, according to the text of the decision (unofficial English translation), it will have to give those animals up to the ministry if the zoo does not receive accreditation or ensure their appropriate welfare. Private owners in possession of big cats are also required by decision to turn their felines over.

[pullquote]The government will rely on Animals Lebanon to find rescued big cats homes abroad and cover the cost of their relocation[/pullquote]

But there are two problems. The decision does not specify what those welfare conditions are exactly, and there is no national legislation defining them either. That leaves standards prescribed in the international conventions (see explainer on standards below), but those are not always binding without local laws. One exception was Charlie, a chimpanzee first trafficked into the country over a decade ago. Animals Lebanon was able to point to international rules requiring trade permits for wildlife like Charlie. Lebanon’s judiciary agreed, ordering the chimp’s seizure from Animal City.

Saving the animals

The other hurdle is that the Ministry of Agriculture does not have the resources to rescue these animals. Ali el-Romeh of the ministry’s animal resources directorate confirmed there was no money for such a purpose in the ministry’s budget. Instead, he said, the government will rely on Animals Lebanon to find rescued big cats homes abroad and cover the cost of their relocation – for an adult lion or tiger, that cost per animal, could be anywhere from $5,000 to $7,000, says the NGO’s director, Jason Mier. For his part, el-Romeh explained to Executive that, “I will ask this question to Animals Lebanon: ‘are you able to do it?’ If they say yes we will start with this procedure: register the animal, insert a microchip and send them to Europe or South Africa. If they tell us ‘no we don’t have the resources to rescue this animal’ then we will go with Plan B: keep the animal here, register them and keep it under our oversight.”

A hyena hiding in a shaded corner of its cage near what appears to be a pool of urine at Animal City

Animal City has borne the brunt of criticism from Animals Lebanon and other animal welfare activists that allege poor conditions at the zoo and the trafficking of wildlife, accusations that are not new but stretch back several years. Attention has centered in part on Animal City because its owner, Samir Ghattas, has chosen to publicly quarrel with activists, telling The Daily Star in early August that activists were starting a war. Activists insist the zoo has not been singled out and say the welfare of all animals, domestic and wildlife, needs to improve across the country and that trafficking must be stopped.

Fairly or not, the spotlight has shone more on Animal City because it is one of the few public places in Lebanon to view wildlife, whereas conditions at other facilities or in the homes of private owners allow for less visibility. Ghattas acknowledged to Executive, to other media outlets and in meetings with activists and the government, that his zoo does not meet the standards of captivity found at zoos in other parts of the world, though it is far from the worst, even in Lebanon (see ZaZoo City photo essay). Ghattas has also gone on record, telling Executive and others, that he buys wildlife from traffickers (except for Queen, he denies selling animals).

For several years the zoo has been at the center of controversy because it has been directly linked to incidents that have sparked public outrage. A couple years ago it was Charlie, the chimpanzee, that was rescued from Animal City (Animal City’s website still lists Charlie as an attraction at the zoo). Queen, the lion cub, is the latest example, whose death and the delayed public outrage that followed fueled efforts to pass the big cats regulation. With the weight of public dismay behind them, activists lobbied the government to pass the new rule.

Leveraging the public’s outrage over wildlife conditions has become something of a speciality of Animals Lebanon. Their strategy goes like this: once individuals get personal with an animal, they embrace it and identify with its suffering. Then you can use that connection to essentially wrench their hearts when a baby lion dies.

This lioness’ cement-floored cage at Animal City is too small for her to be able to run around or do any exercise

“You have to pick the species which people are going to care about and have some interest in. With baboons, for example, you can demonstrate those problems just as easily or, possibly, even more easily than what we have with big cats. But [the Lebanese public doesn’t feel] a connection to baboons. The vast majority of animals [at Animal City] are not in that great of condition but with lions and tigers you can see it much easier,” Mier told Executive.

[pullquote]Once individuals get personal with an animal, they embrace it and identify with its suffering[/pullquote]

Though its owner surely doesn’t see it that way, Animal City has become the poster child of poor captivity conditions and wildlife trafficking, a sort of villain opposite animal rights crusaders. With the battle for big cat legislation won, Animals Lebanon will look for what can be achieved moving forward. “We can’t get the law passed yet. That’s less strong but it’s better to work through decisions even if they’re somehow weaker, than to just sit and wait. Let’s see what we really believe could be improved over the course of the next five to 10 years. But not that all of a sudden your zoo should be this sparkly, fancy place – that’s not how we work and it’s not possible.”

EXPLAINER ON STANDARDS OF CAPTIVITY

At a high level there are several important standards for captivity that are all interrelated. The question of how animals should be held in captivity informs the question of what contribution their captivity can make to education and the preservation of endangered species. How animals are obtained affects their value to education and conservation efforts, discouraging overexploitation and illicit trading.
Once on display as the prized trophy collections of big game hunters or as a menagerie of some distant, exotic land in, say, a P.T. Barnum traveling circus. Over the late 19th and early 20th centuries, animal welfare organizations in the United States slowly worked to enact anti-cruelty laws and other legislation that affected how animals could be kept in captivity. Later legislation, following international conventions (see explainer above) pushed standards from caged captivity to enclosures and animal sanctuaries. The question asked amongst standard-bearers in the United States today is whether wildlife should be kept in captivity at all. Beyond entertainment, the expectation is that captivity should advance knowledge of animal behavior and, more broadly, our planet’s environment.
The most recent example comes from the Cincinnati Zoo, where earlier this year a gorilla, Harambe, was shot and killed in order to protect a child that had climbed into the gorilla’s enclosure. The gorilla’s shooting sparked a flurry of memes criticizing the zoo, creating more awareness of and empathy toward animals kept in captivity. In March, Seaworld, an oceanarium and animal theme park with several locations throughout the United States, announced an end to their orca whale breeding program as well as plans to reinvent how visitors will experience killer whales at the park. Instead of choreographed theatrical shows, visitors, according to Seaworld’s website, will one day view orcas in “more natural looking habitats, and with a focus on the whales’ natural behaviors…with an added emphasis on education and conservation.”
Zoos must contribute to conservation efforts and serve educational purposes. Part of how zoos in the United States contribute to conservation is in preserving populations of endangered species, fostering research of those species to broadly understand animal behavior and the impact of human encroachment on their natural habitats. Hosting researchers at zoos contributes to conservation in that sense and also adds to visitors’ educational experience. In-house or visiting experts give lectures that are seen live or replayed for future visitors. They also inform descriptions of the animals’ behavior in natural habitats as well as other materials delivered via digital mediums at the zoo or remotely.
Another important standard to note is how zoos in the United States obtain animals. Developed in response to legislation, wildlife are no longer bought or sold by zoos but instead ‘loaned’. For example, the practice of one zoo loaning an animal to another addresses both ethical and business concerns: placing a dollar figure on animals reduces their value to education and conservation purposes, increases their value to traffickers in black markets and avoids a lengthy and costly permitting process required by the US’ Endangered Species Act of 1973 when wildlife are exchanged for money.

September 7, 2016 1 comment

Leaders Opinion

More work needed

by Executive Editors September 7, 2016

written by Executive Editors

Two new rules regulating animal businesses and the ownership of big cats are a welcome step forward, but alone they are not sufficient. Lebanon needs a law governing if and how all types of animals can be brought legally into the country, the conditions in which they’ll be kept and prescribing how violators of such a law will be penalized. More rules are necessary to formalize an industry that, as a whole, has operated without government oversight and with impunity, where poor standards of captivity are the norm, where trafficking is seemingly ubiquitous.

If, as several stakeholders hope, Lebanon could one day have a zoo as a sort of national attraction, drawing visitors from all over the country and from neighboring ones too, then it needs an appropriate legislative framework. Such a concept requires long-term thinking, government oversight and demands clear rules for such a business, all while ensuring high standards for animal welfare and eliminating trafficking concerns. Lebanon may never approach the per animal potential of say, Uganda, whose native gorillas pull in some $1 million each per year in tourism revenues, and it probably wouldn’t compete, in terms of tourist numbers, with regional animal attractions like the Dubai Aquarium & Underwater Zoo. But a national zoo could help diversify Lebanon’s tourism sector, contributing eco-tourism dollars and creating potential opportunities for other players, such as travel agencies offering package deals including a visit to the zoo, airfare or other local transportation options like buses as well as hotel accommodation.

That may be a far off dream, and Lebanon must first get its house in order by ratifying a law and issuing the necessary regulations. Such legislation is not likely to be forthcoming given the political impasse that has frozen work in parliament, and rolling out additional regulations to fill legal gaps is patchy at best and will take time. But there are a number of issues Lebanon can confront without legislation; measures that the government, judicial system and private sector can take to address the ethical and business concerns of subpar conditions and trafficking.

In 2014 Lebanon’s judiciary showed some receptivity toward protecting animals suffering in poor conditions, citing a violation of administrative protocols. An update to the criminal code is necessary by first adding penalties in line with the government’s new regulations for animal businesses and big cat ownership. To go further, the government must issue rules defining animal cruelty and the trafficking of all species, the violations of which must be prosecutable.

To contain animal trafficking the government needs to gain more control of the country’s entry and exit points. Part of that does need to come through legislation and regulation, but administrations can do more. One positive move was the recent expansion of customs at Beirut’s Rafic Hariri International Airport, and the installation of new technology and procedures for cargo inspection. The late August upgrade should curb trafficking at the airport, the minister of finance said in a press release.

But it is fair to point out that customs would be more effective with trained agents with a solid understanding of wildlife species, perhaps working alongside inspectors from the ministry of agriculture, that can distinguish between what may be written on import forms and what is actually being transported. The sheer volume passing through airport customs might demand more agents or ministry inspectors, and manpower deficiencies are not exclusive to Lebanon. One US airport was targeted by elephant ivory traffickers exploiting such weakness, the Washington Post found in 2014.

Customs officials are the gatekeepers of our borders and should be well-positioned to not only limit tax and duties evasion, the smuggling of drugs or counterfeit goods but also wildlife trafficking. According to a 2014 survey commissioned by the World Customs Organization, the MENA region’s customs administrations (the results were not country specific) ranked wildlife trafficking as their lowest priority. The study concluded that “Customs administrations with special investigation units tailored to wildlife smuggling have more interest in combating it than those relying on basic regular check-ups at borders”. If Lebanon’s customs does not already have such an investigation team then it needs to establish one. To have specialized agents or an investigative unit, alongside ministry of agriculture inspectors, may require additional financial resources and, without a budget being passed, that may not be feasible.

But at the airport, businesses too can have an impact. For starters, airlines and shipping firms hosted at Beirut’s airport can commit to an industry promise to shut down the illicit trade of endangered species and their products. Middle East Airlines must join regional carriers, such as Qatar Airways, Etihad Airways and Emirates Airline, pledging to the commitment set forth by the industry’s trade body, the International Air Transport Association (IATA). Freight forwarders too can commit to the IATA pledge. Local companies like BCC Logistics and global shippers like DHL or Aramex moving freight via the airport can improve cargo screening before it leaves sorting facilities, and they should also share cargo information more freely with customs and law enforcement officials at the points of departure, transit and destination.

Lastly, Lebanon’s flag carrier can contribute to the public’s awareness of wildlife trafficking and its consequences to the environment with a short public service announcement on flights arriving to and leaving Beirut. Other companies in the transport business can play their part by sponsoring awareness programs through, for example, social media to reach younger audiences or by increasing clients’ and customers’ awareness of wildlife trafficking. A law is needed, but these small steps can have positive results for animal welfare and to limit trafficking.

September 7, 2016 0 comments

Editorial Opinion

Picking a proxy

by Yasser Akkaoui September 6, 2016

written by Yasser Akkaoui

Lebanon’s economy only grows when the country is given a geopolitical purpose bigger than its size. This country’s first “Golden Era” was arguably ushered in during the presidency of Fouad Chehab. The US loved him and – up until 1967 – viewed Lebanon as a key partner in the fight against Communism in the Middle East, while of course keeping a close watch over our northern pipelines and refineries of the time. The US lost interest after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and our then nascent banking industry was used by different foreign backed militias to pile up cash that financed their 1975 civil war. We, the people, paid the price.

Skipping our dark days, the proverbial Lebanese economic phoenix began rising again in 1992 only a couple of years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Once again, the US had a man they could work with in the late Rafik Hariri. Peace in the region actually seemed like a real possibility, and Lebanon once again was part of the bargain. The death of both the peace process and Hariri took its toll and today our economy is barely limping along.

Today, I have the sneaking suspicion that an offer is being put on the table. Last May, US Ambassador to Lebanon David Hale announced his government would be building a new embassy here in Lebanon. The price tag? Nearly $1 billion, up from the $111 million previously announced in 2008. That’s a megaproject equal to around 2 percent of Lebanon’s GDP. Factor in a multiplier for that sort of investment, and the new embassy could boost growth by nearly a percentage point.

I see it as a message. Remember, the announcement of a new embassy came as the Iran deal was being sealed. The Americans like to choose whoever is ruling the roost in the region to push their agenda. Saudi Arabia played that proxy role until the crisis in Syria. With a resurgent Iran, the times are changing. The embassy plans coupled with the Iranian central bank’s decision late August to open an account at our central bank are competing signals. We hope that the US wants stability in this region, and found the Iranians to be reliable partners, but we are always in fear that both countries could be gearing toward another war on our soil.

People here talk with great fear about the Iranian era in the Middle East. I think we’re a few years into it, and it seems the Americans – however reluctantly – are on board. While we remain skeptical of this new reality and our new bigger purpose, poverty rates are growing among resident Lebanese and our various refugee populations.

Unless our economy picks up again soon, no deal will save us from the imminent socio-economic troubles ahead.

September 6, 2016 1 comment

Economics & Policy Refugees

Time is running out for Syrian refugee kids out of school

by Bassam Khawaja August 18, 2016

written by Bassam Khawaja

“We can’t afford to put them in school here. All my children were studying in Syria, but if I put them in school here, how would I live?” “Muna”, 45, and her family live across the street from a school in Mount Lebanon, but her children, “Yousef”, 11, and “Nizar”, 10, have never set foot in a Lebanese classroom. Instead, they sell gum on the street to help their family pay for rent and food. “Even if everything was free, the children wouldn’t be able to go to school,” she said. “They are the only ones who can work.”

Lebanon has taken in more than 1.1 million Syrian refugees since the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011. Of this number, 500,000 are of school age, three to 18. Despite the Education Ministry’s efforts to ensure that all children enroll in education, more than 250,000 Syrian children are still out of school.

Research I conducted for a new Human Rights Watch report found that despite the government’s decision to allow Syrians to enroll in public schools for free, with the assistance of international donors, several barriers are still keeping them out of the classroom.

Some school directors are imposing arbitrary enrollment requirements, like asking Syrians to provide valid residency in Lebanon – despite the Education Ministry’s policy which does not require residency for enrollment. Students are also struggling to understand classes taught in English or French without adequate language support, and children with disabilities and secondary school-age children face particularly acute obstacles.

Our research found that access to education is also inextricably tied to the deteriorating living conditions of Syrians in Lebanon. Seventy percent of Syrians lived below the poverty line of $3.84 per person per day in 2015. Many simply cannot afford to pay for basic school-related costs like transportation. Increasingly, children are being pulled out of school as their parents rely on child labor to survive. New residency regulations introduced in January 2015 have made it difficult or impossible for Syrians to maintain legal status in Lebanon, and an estimated two-thirds of refugees now lack residency and are unable to move around to find work for fear of arrest.

Lebanon cannot address the challenge of educating Syrian children alone, but there are clear steps that the Lebanese government can take to address this major issue. It can revise its residency policy to ensure that Syrian adults can look for work without fear of arrest to be able to afford to keep their children in school.

Lebanon needs international investment in livelihood programs to create jobs and strengthen the country’s economy in order to address living conditions that are currently deteriorating for everyone.

The World Bank estimates that the conflict in Syria has cost the country $13.1 billion since 2012, Lebanese officials said in February. The impact of the conflict on Lebanon is real, but the refugee presence is also an opportunity to use international attention as well as funding to bolster the country’s weak infrastructure and limited services.

In the education sector, international funding is already improving a public school system that struggled even before the current refugee crisis, when only 30 percent of Lebanese families chose to send their children to public schools. Donors are funding projects to rehabilitate schools, train teachers, and last year covered enrollment fees for 197,000 Lebanese children.

Other countries hosting Syrian refugees have developed plans to stimulate economic growth. For example, on July 12, the European Council approved a measure to improve Jordan’s access to the European Union (EU) market by relaxing the EU rules of origin for 10 years, with the goal of creating 200,000 jobs for Syrian refugees. This would allow them to contribute to the economy without competing for jobs with Jordanian citizens.

At a major donor conference in London in February, Lebanon proposed several projects to bolster the economy and create jobs, including through investments in municipalities and national-level infrastructure. It also acknowledged the need to review existing residency and work regulations for Syrians, but so far, little has changed.

There is a real need for private sector engagement with international donors, humanitarian agencies and government officials to develop innovative solutions to the livelihood problem in a way that improves the living conditions of Syrians and their host communities while benefitting the country in the long term.

It’s in Lebanon’s best interests to ensure that a quarter of a million children are not left out of school here but can get an education and develop the tools they need to eventually rebuild Syria. This is also an opportunity for Lebanon to attract investment and bolster basic services and infrastructure, all the while ensuring that Syrians can afford to send their children to school.

August 18, 2016 0 comments

Leaders Opinion

Another red flag

by Executive Staff August 18, 2016

written by Executive Staff

On Friday, July 1, two men walked toward a microphone to speak as representatives of their respective political parties, but not in their official capacity as ministers. Following a closed-door meeting, they declared the end to a three-year feud. A bilateral deal had been reached concerning the nation’s potential hydrocarbon resources. Lebanon was set to finally close its first offshore oil and gas licensing round which is a decision cabinet was supposed to make. After reading a statement that any thinking person will tell you means absolutely nothing (unless it’s laced with coded language only true insiders can decipher), a reporter’s request for details was rebuffed with a promise that consultations with the prime minister would be held. With that, the two men left. A fait acompli, in local political parlance. In all fairness, it was probably a stunt and the deal looks dead (see cover story page 14), but either way, the whole thing stinks.

First and foremost, the deal shouldn’t have been discussed in private by two political parties. By law, it is cabinet’s job to set the country’s oil and gas policy while the “oil deal” meeting is far more egregious, it is sadly the rule for how this sector has been officially discussed in the past two years. Prime Minister Tammam Salam created a ministerial committee to debate oil and gas back in early 2014. The committee met only a few times. Instead of using the official venue on offer, each individual minister had the Lebanese Petroleum Administration (LPA) come for a one-on-one visit to explain the sector and the LPA’s vision for an oil and gas strategy. Oil and gas is a complicated and technical topic. Imagine if the LPA gave the ministerial committee 15 or 20 workshops on the subject, first bringing everyone up to speed on the basics of how the industry works and then outlining different options for a Lebanese oil and gas strategy while weighing the pros and cons of various choices. We would have more informed ministers. The “classroom” environment would help those from rival camps see how the other side thinks, which could help avoid future years long delays at important junctures as cabinet decides on every step forward in this sector. If these workshops were televised (and made permanently avail- able on YouTube), interested citizens and civil society groups would today be more equipped to oversee this sec- tor as it is born and hopefully grows. Moving forward, this must be our model. There is no legitimate reason for talk on this subject to be secret. All oil and gas discussions must be public.

Equally offensive was the reaction to the deal. Where was civil society? The silence is shameful. Civil society must protest questionable proceedings like these. The method of protest is irrelevant. At least do something a statement, anything. Except tire burning. Please.

Weeding corruption out of the system is a long-term goal that will take time and effort. It has been grow- ing for decades, and its roots have a strangle hold on nearly every state institution. The nascent oil and gas sector, however, is an opportunity. Three years ago Executive asked how millions of dollars in survey data revenue are being managed. We were answered with a defamation lawsuit (which we won this month, for the re- cord). Two years ago, we noted a flaw in the prequalification process that allowed Mohamad Chouqair, head of the Beirut chamber of commerce, and Mahmoud Sidani, chairman of Unigaz, to participate in the first licensing round. Their company is registered in Hong Kong and they pay a yearly fee to obscure their ownership of it (Panama Papers, anyone?). Perhaps not surprisingly, the disclosure changed nothing. It is time we all wake up. This sector is being built from scratch and we have the chance to get something right. We must not squander it.

August 18, 2016 0 comments

Jewelery and watches

Working together for stronger brands

by Yasser Akkaoui August 12, 2016

written by Yasser Akkaoui

In June, Executive sat with Mick Desmond, commercial and media director, and James Ralley, head of marketing and commercial, at the All England Lawn Tennis Club Wimbledon, to discuss how the tennis club envisions its brand promotion through collaboration with luxury brands such as Rolex.

E: How do you promote your brand to the world and what role does Rolex play in that brand promotion?
Mick Desmond: We always try to tell the story that Wimbledon is tennis in an English garden, and in the UK everyone understands what that means. If you go to China or South America or the Middle East, they don’t always know what an English garden looks like. We’ve done a lot of research over the last three to four years with Kantar Media to try to get an understanding of how our brand is perceived. When you mention Wimbledon, everyone says tennis, and they know it’s a great tennis event. Although tennis is the core of our brand, we think that it is one of those events that transcends the sport. It’s about the occasion, the fashion, the food, the wine, the strawberries, the Royal Box. We are embarking on a new global campaign and over the past four or five years we have been building up our digital assets in accordance with our brand. IBM has been our partner for 30 years, and in the beginning, they suggested we try things in a similar way to other sporting brands; but we were determined to do it our way. Rolex were fantastic when we pitched to the club for a budget, which we hoped would drive up our digital strategy. When we renewed with Rolex four or five years ago, they were great in terms of taking that leap of faith with us and also have a prominent position in terms of all our digital assets. We now have the likes of Arsenal Football Club and the NFL coming to us about digital assets. We swept up all the digital awards at BT Sports awards, as well as many others. We’ve come a long way, but we’re never satisfied. I think that this is the strength of Wimbledon. We have an obsession with wanting to better ourselves.
Last Friday, at the player meeting, our head of player liaison showed the players a film called The List. The title is a reference to a list of things that need fixing, which comes from both the players and the staff. By showing the film, we were able to say “look, we do really cover the list.” Every year we have a list of about 2,000 items, which comes from everyone and we act upon them. We look at them in terms of priority, and see how we can better ourselves all the time. That’s the essence of the brand’s campaign. About 20 or 30 years ago, understandably, the club was obsessed with the site itself. This still remains, but what we are now trying to do is take everything that is world class about this event and bring it to a worldwide audience. We don’t just rely on our broadcaster, we try and work with our partners to push the Wimbledon brand. The essence is very much the pursuit of greatness, by striving for perfection. We have 13 partners and Rolex is probably one of the most important, which works fantastically for them. It’s a platform, which helps us reach a wider audience. We have 10 media partners, which deliver about 85 percent of our global audience, so we don’t have to talk to hundreds of different broadcasters. We’ve sat down with them over the past 18 months and spoken to them and started to talk with them about how we can work [together] more closely. Our media partners are the biggest communicators of our brand so we’ve been very enthusiastic about how much they want to get involved. After the championships we will be visiting our partners and doing a full review. They all have a thirst for more content. Beyond the tennis, they want to know how the menus are prepared, how the Royal Box works, how do the strawberries get delivered, how do you make the perfect Pimms. There are so many different stories that we can give them to provide them the context and allow them to create a much richer narrative about the championships. Tennis is still at the core. We never want to stop being the biggest and best tennis event in the world.
James Ralley: This is the first year that we have created content and our ambition is to use this as a platform and over the next five to 15 years invest more particularly in the men’s game, and to make the brand and audience grow. Hopefully this will inspire people to play the game.

E: Your job must be difficult when you don’t have big characters playing in the games?
MD: I used to come to Wimbledon a lot, and when you had players like [Boris] Becker, [John] McEnroe or even further back with the likes of people like [Jimmy] Connors. And now when someone like Roger Federer arrives on the scene with a ponytail and is followed by players like Rafael [Nadal], you wonder what they are going to be like. What we’re looking for is the next great wave of players to come through. We are like a great theater; we try to present the best global stage for these fantastic talents to play on. We don’t know who the actors or actresses are going to be, but we try to provide the best stage for them to play on.
JR: We don’t compete against the other Grand Slams, we actually work together. It’s all about how we can inspire people to come and play and want to be a professional tennis player. We hope the uniqueness of these events will inspire people.
MD: We do think that the more perfect the stage, the more inspiration they have. The players say that they were inspired by watching Wimbledon as children. We just try to create the best possible platform that we can.

E: What other values do you and Rolex share?
MD: We both have a huge heritage and an attention to detail. Like Rolex, we perceive ourselves as offering a luxury experience. Everyone has a visit to Wimbledon on their bucket list, much like owning a Rolex. People aspire to have a Rolex. There have been plenty of well-known, global brands which have approached us to be partners and we’ve simply said no. We respect the Rolex brand and they respect us, and I think that makes us work in harmony.
JR: There is a quiet innovation in both brands. There is a phrase that we use quite a lot which is that Wimbledon is always changing, but staying the same. We feel that Rolex has a similar philosophy.
MD: We understand what Rolex are trying to achieve. We’ve both been around for a long time. It’ll be Wimbledon’s 150th anniversary in 2018. I think the other similarity that we have is that we are both fairly private. We don’t go and shout about things. We have a private membership club, who basically control the championship and the club. Like Rolex, we don’t talk about our figures or revenues. We both have foundations and social responsibilities which we spread across the regions. So we have a lot of similarities and you can see why it is such a great synergy. I think it’s tradition blended with innovation. We had a very good press session with IBM, who spoke about what you can learn from your past. He said that the brand which protects its heritage best is the brand that keeps innovating. Complacency is your worst enemy. You have to keep moving on. You can’t sit still.

E: What’s your master plan moving forward?
MD: The club came to this location in 1922. We previously didn’t own a large amount of this land. It was a rugby club, and the land was bought in mid 60s, knowing that it would not have access to the land until the late 70s, but with the ambition that it would become Court 1 and practice facilities. The club also bought a golf course in the 80’s, but the lease does not go through until 2041, so we know we’ll have it then, but we are trying to get it ahead of that date. The whole rationale of that is that we don’t want to be land locked. This helps us keep with our idea of tennis in an English garden. On August 1 they are going to start removing the roof from Court 1, which will be completed by 2018, much like Centre Court in 2007. Then part of the roof will be put back on, although we will also be building 17 new suites with balconies around it, and in 2019 the retractable roof will be put on Court 1. So when it’s raining we will be able to seat around 29,000 people across the two courts. As soon as that is finished in 2019, the indoor courts will be demolished and replaced by brand new indoor courts with a tunnel between them and the club which has already been built and will be opened up soon. We always have a long term plan. Whilst a large amount of the surface goes to the Lawn Tennis Association for the growth of tennis, we also take quite a large proportion off to reinvest into the business. There has always been a long term plan. They usually last ten years and then once they are completed a new long term plan is mapped out. We all know where we are going and a lot of time is spent making sure that everyone in the team understands where they fit into that long term plan and what our ambition is.

E: Considering the global economic problems, how have you coped with finding the right sponsors that are willing to follow your vision?
MD: Obviously large proportions of our revenue come from our broadcast partners. The broadcasters understand that if we push into the US market they are going to get a return and then are capable of paying us more while maintaining their margin. We have seen our revenues grow strongly each year. We’ve just had a new debentures process for Court 1 where we increased the debentures by 86 percent and we were oversubscribed. When we did it a year ago on Centre Court by 104 percent, we were oversubscribed. We’re not complacent or arrogant, but the more we create strength in our brand the greater value it has.

E: How have new technologies affected your brand?
MD: We want most of our global media partners – the BBC in the UK, ESPN in the US, Fox Asia in Southeast Asia – to take as much content as they can. Most of them have eight or nine channels, so they aren’t just showing the Centre Court games. Alongside that we work very closely with our broadcast partners to celebrate our digital assets. We don’t want to compete with them on long form content. We have our own channel which is “Live at Wimbledon” and we have some live action, but it is short form. We’ve made an agreement with our partners that we can show one game per set per hour of any game happening. It’s usually something like Roger closing the first set, and if you’re in the UK it will say that you can follow this game live and exclusive on BBC One or if you’re in the US you can follow on ESPN 1. If people want to watch live action then we can tell them where to go.

E: Have you been approached by the likes of Google or YouTube or Netflix?
MD: All the time. We have relationships with some. On YouTube we do have Live at Wimbledon going out.
JR: In terms of it becoming a main point of broadcast, for us it’s more of an extension of our media partners. We have an excellent relationship with them, but in five or ten years we don’t know. It’s interesting times.

E: So you haven’t felt the switch between new media and traditional broadcasting?
MD: I think that we see online media as more of a means of marketing and communications. We have done some fantastic stuff with Facebook and we’ve done some stuff on Snapchat. But it’s more about us marketing, rather than allowing them to sell advertising around us. We don’t want that. Because we are a strong brand I think they respect that. We’ve lived through different media models. I’ve worked for a network television station for over 20 years, and we’ve gone from terrestrial network to subscription and now we are in a completely different media landscape. It will continue to change and we want to be on the leading edge. We will see where we can take our brand without undermining our brand.
JR: We very much believe in a proof of concept strategy. We want to see something working and then we’ll make the leap.

E: Would you say that you are trying to develop a strategy around lifestyle with your brand?
MD: We have quite a big strategy coming next year where we want to celebrate the food and wine of Wimbledon. We have a renowned chef who oversees all the menus of Wimbledon, and in fact his son is now taking over. We have fine wines from around the world. One great thing is that a lot of the tennis fans that come to Wimbledon come from some of the world’s best wine producing countries. We’ve been talking about having our own garden at the Chelsea Flower Show, which is huge in the UK and covered by the BBC. Should we grow our own pears or create our own honey? And with fashion, from 2017 we’ll have our own designers creating our own line of clothes and products, so that’s something that we think will grow. But we want to ensure it’s done in a stylish and proper way.
JR: When you’re looking at the audience on site and the audience watching at home, it’s a great blend. There are lots of people who love tennis and are very passionate about it, but we’re aware that there are lots of people who just come for a day out just to enjoy the occasion as much as the tennis. We like to see Wimbledon as a cultural event as much as a sporting event.
MD: The Royal Box is a ‘money can’t buy’ ticket. The only way that you can get in there is to be invited by the chairman. You’ll have fantastic global sports stars, royalty, politicians or actors, so it’s a wonderful part of our brand. There is a huge clamor for people wanting to be in there. Much like us turning down brands, we also turn people away from the Royal Box.

E: Can Wimbledon develop outside of the UK?
MD: We’ve been approached by the Middle East and China. Our worry would be that we wouldn’t be running it. One of the things that we do is ‘The Road to Wimbledon’, which has been running in the UK for 14 years now and three years ago we took that to India. It’s for children under 14 who compete and come to Wimbledon to play in a tournament in August. It’s like a mini Wimbledon. We took that to China this year and Rolex came as our partner. How can we take tennis, and especially playing on grass, to different parts of the world? I think with something physical, you have to be very careful. Rolex doesn’t allow anybody to create the workings of their watches outside the company. You see lots of brands that go international and you have to wonder whether it is still the same brand. There is a mystique about Wimbledon which we are guardians of. It’s tempting to pull the curtain back, but you don’t want to reveal everything.

August 12, 2016 0 comments