For far too long in Africa, as on other continents, the pursuit of socioeconomic objectives has been viewed as separate from the urgent obligation to protect our environment. Striking the right balance between these two imperatives is not something that can be postponed, as neglecting conservation jeopardises the attainment of sustainable development.

We in Africa are witnesses to the alarming disappearance of biodiversity — rich wetlands and rainforests, and the accompanying loss of indigenous species and natural habitats.

But we have also seen the reverse — where resettlement of human and livestock populations from fragile habitats have led to the resurgence of original ecosystems that in turn has multiplier effects on socioeconomic sectors that generate wealth.

Reforestation efforts in parts of our continent, including in Rwanda have shown that, with the right approach, we can undo severe environmental degradation. Replanting trees limits soil erosion, stabilises hillsides, modulates seasonal flooding and protects downstream water resources from siltation. Where this action has been pursued aggressively in Africa, it has proved the point that development and protection of our environment need not be hostile to one another.

In Rwanda, no case illustrates this argument better than the rehabilitation of the Rugezi Wetlands, located in the northern part of our country. An area rich in biodiversity, especially rare bird species, it is also a key source of water supply for Rwanda’s economic infrastructure needs. The wetlands feed two big lakes, Burera and Ruhondo, and drive hydropower generation at Ntaruka and at Mukungwa downstream. The importance of the Rugezi Wetlands goes beyond Rwanda’s borders. This reservoir is a key supplier to Lake Victoria and the White Nile and, therefore, affects the livelihoods of the Nile Basin population from Rwanda to Egypt.

In the past human and livestock populations that settled near these wetlands caused a loss of ground cover that resulted in lower water levels. The damage to this habitat was so severe that the birds migrated and electricity generation effectively ceased, seriously affecting Rwanda’s power supply. However, corrective measures are bearing fruit. The removal of cattle and the restocking of indigenous plants have produced a resurgence of the ecosystem. Not only is the biodiversity of the area recovering, the hydro dams that lay idle because of low water levels are driving power generation .

Rwanda and the rest of the developing world rely on natural resources. Neglecting conservation and failing to mitigate climate change will adversely affect our tourism, proving that there can be no effective development strategy without an equally effective conservation agenda. That is why we must involve environmental challenges in the broader development dialogue and agenda. The forthcoming Copenhagen meeting is an opportunity for Africans and other citizens of the developing world to participate actively in the global discourse on climate change and to offer innovative solutions to our development and environmental challenges, which must be addressed together, not separately.

• Paul Kagame is the President of the Republic of Rwanda Poor people love beautiful things, too,” Ron Bills says. He is talking about stoves but he likens them to cars. The difference between buying the cheapest stove at $5 and the most expensive at $40 is akin to the difference between a basic Volkswagen and a top BMW.

Mr Bills is the chairman and chief executive of Envirofit International, a not-for-profit organisation that makes simple cooking stoves for use in developing countries. His is one of a handful of organisations that seek to develop low-cost stove technology.

He says: “When we set out to design the products, I looked at the market and saw that there was a lot of cheap junk out there, and it does not work or last.”

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), more than half the world’s population relies on burning biomass — wood, coal, cow dung and other agricultural waste — for their energy needs. Such materials are usually burnt on open fires and often indoors or in confined spaces. The WHO says that 1.6 million people — mostly women and children — die each year because the smoke contains a range of pollutants.

From a climate change perspective , the fires are a source of carbon dioxide. Mr Bills says that the stoves improve efficiency over open fires by 50 per cent, or up to 1.5 tonnes of CO2 each year, the equivalent of a return flight from London to New York. “We can bring efficiency into lives where people are burning half as much wood and where they either don’t have to buy it or gather it,” he says.

Envirofit launched its products in India last year. Part of the challenge has been establishing the network of distributors and dealers that carry the products.

“We handle all the warehousing, logistics and transport to the distributor’s locations,” Mr Bills says. The company is selling up to 20,000 stoves a month and will introduce them in Africa this year.

But providing the stoves is not sufficient — you have to convince people on low incomes that they have to buy them. “Where it’s been the norm to cook on a three-stone fire, it becomes the norm that you’re going to have smoke in your kitchen,” Mr Bills says. Awareness-building campaigns are powerful. “Once people see and use a stove, they understand the benefits. They don’t want their children to breathe in toxic fumes.”

Times recommends

• Energy-saving ideas from switched-on professor
• Rooks are as clever with tools as chimpanzees
• Burping of the lambs blows roast off menu