Without proper governance and input from multiple stakeholders artificial intelligence poses risks to freedom of expression and elections. Credit: Unsplash/Element5 Digital
By Naureen Hossain
UNITED NATIONS, May 7 2025 (IPS)
The prevalence of artificial intelligence (AI) is changing the flow and access of information, which has a wider influence on how freedom of expression is affected. National and local elections can demonstrate the particular strengths and vulnerabilities that can be exploited as AI is used to influence voters and political campaigns. As people grow more critical of institutions and the information they receive, governments and tech companies must exercise their responsibility to protect freedom of expression during elections.
This year’s World Press Freedom Day (May 3) focused on AI’s effect on press freedom, the free flow of information, and how to ensure access to information and fundamental freedoms. AI brings the risk of spreading misinformation or disinformation and spreading online hate speech. In elections, this can violate free speech and privacy rights.
In a parallel event hosted in the context of the World Press Freedom Global Conference 2025. The event also coincided with the launch of a new issue brief from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) detailing the growing influence of AI and the potential risks—and opportunities—to freedom of expression during elections.
Recommender algorithms that determine what a user sees and interacts with when it comes to information can have wider implications on the information that that user has access to during an election cycle, according to Pedro Conceição, UNDP Director of the Human Development Report Office.
“I think we need the humility to recognize that they are so complex and they have this element of novelty that requires us to bring together perspectives from across a range of stakeholders,” said Conceição.
Freedom of expression is essential for elections to be run in a credible, transparent environment. Fostering this freedom and access to information allows for public engagement and discourse. Countries are obligated under international law to respect and protect the freedom of expression. During elections, this responsibility can become challenging. How this responsibility is handled across state authorities varies between countries. The increased investments in AI have allowed for actors in the electoral process to make use of this technology.
Electoral management bodies are responsible for informing citizens on how to participate in elections. They may rely on AI to disseminate the information more readily through social media platforms. AI can also help with the implementation of strategic information strategies and public awareness efforts, as well as online analysis and research.
Social media and other digital platforms have been visibly employing generative AI as their parent companies experiment with how it can be integrated into their services. They are also employing it in content moderation. However, there has been an emphasis on increasing platform engagement and retention, at the risk of compromising information integrity. Young people in particular increasingly use social media as their main source of information, according to Cooper Gatewood, Senior Research Manager focusing on mis/disinformation at BBC Media Action.
“Audiences are aware of and understanding of the quantity of false information circulating at the moment,” said Gatewood. He discussed the findings of surveys conducted in Indonesia, Tunisia, and Libya, where 83, 39, and 35 percent of respondents, reported concerns with coming across misinformation or disinformation on a regular basis. Conversely, there was a “parallel trend” emerging in reports from Tunisia and Nepal that many users agreed that it was more important for information to be spread quickly than for it to be fact-checked.
“So this clearly demonstrates that AI-generated disinformation, especially in situations like elections, humanitarian contexts, crisis situations… where information can be spotty, or difficult to access, or move quite quickly… [the] false information that is shared quickly by audiences can very quickly have an impact and can produce a harm,” Gatewood warned.
Within the context of freedom of expression and elections, AI poses several risks to their integrity. For one, technological capabilities vary across the gamut among countries. Developing countries with a smaller tech infrastructure are less likely to have the tools to make use of AI or to deal with the issues that emerge. The frameworks on governing digital spaces and AI in particular would also affect how effectively countries can regulate them.
Frameworks outlined in documents such as UNESCO’s Guidelines for the Governance of Digital Platforms (2023) and their recommendations on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (2021) provide stakeholders with insight into their responsibilities in protecting freedom of expression and information in the governance process. They also provide policy recommendations around data governance, ecosystems, and the environment, among other areas, based on the core need to protect human rights and dignity.
As Albertina Piterbarg, a UNESCO Electoral Project Officer in the Freedom of Expression and the Safety of Journalists Section, remarked at the panel, the organization found early on that it was “increasingly complex” to address digital information in only a “black-and-white” way. What they realized was that it was important to “create a multi-stakeholder approach” in dealing with digital technology and AI. This meant working with multiple stakeholders, such as governments, tech companies, private investors, academia, the media, and civil society, to build up a “common understanding” of the impacts of AI through capacity-building, for example.
“We need to address this in a human rights-based approach. We need to address this in an egalitarian way. And in every election, every democracy is important. It doesn’t matter the commercial impact or other private interests,” said Piterbarg.
Pamela Figueroa, President of the Board of Directors of the Electoral Service of Chile, spoke at the panel on her country’s experiences with AI during the electoral process, notably the risk of “information pollution.” She warned that the deluge of information thanks to AI could “generate asymmetry in the political participation,” which can in turn affect the level of trust in institutions and the whole electoral process itself.
Information has become increasingly complex in the digital age, and AI has only added to that complexity. While people are increasingly aware of the presence of AI. AI-generated content, namely “deepfakes,” is being used to undermine the political process and discredit political candidates, and the technology to create deepfakes is unfortunately easily accessible to the public.
It has been proven that AI models are not immune from human biases and discrimination, and this can be reflected in their outputs. AI has also been used in spreading gender discrimination through harassment and cyberstalking. Women politicians are more likely to be victims of deepfakes depicting them in sexualized contexts. When used in social media, gender discrimination and harassment can discourage women from political participation and public debate during elections.
With that said, AI also presents opportunities for freedom of expression. The brief points out that a multi-stakeholder approach is needed to address the specific needs for information integrity in the face of AI. Ensuring trust in the electoral process is more important than ever. State authors can achieve this through effective and reliable strategic communications campaigns, with the support of other stakeholders such as the media, civil society, and tech companies. Media and information literacy must be further cultivated to navigate the complex information spaces, with investments in both long-term and short-term interventions targeting youths and adults.
Digital platforms also have the responsibility to implement safeguards on AI and ensure protections in election-specific contexts. The brief outlines certain measures that can be taken, including investing in adequate content moderation for election needs; prioritizing the public good in how algorithms recommend electoral information; conducting and publishing risk assessments; promoting high-quality and accurate electoral information; and consulting civil society and electoral management bodies.
What this demonstrates is that the dynamics between AI, freedom of expression, and elections require multi-stakeholder approaches. Shared understanding and structured methods will be critical in conducting elections in a fast-moving environment, and the insights drawn from this specific context can provide strategies for how to cultivate AI’s broader potential for humanity. This must be taken into account when we consider that modern generative AI technology has been made more accessible and mainstream in the last two years and has already resulted in transformations across multiple sectors.
“We’ve taken these AI tools and they’re basically in everyone’s phone, And… to some extent it’s free,” said Ajay Patel, Technology and Election Expert, UNDP and the author of the issue brief. “So, where is that going to lead? What happens? What kind of innovation is going to be unleashed? For good? Sometimes for ill, when everyone has access to this sort of powerful flat technology?”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By Simone Galimberti
KATHMANDU, Nepal, May 7 2025 (IPS)
A UN groundbreaking report published in 1982 laid the legal ground for defining the inalienable rights of Indigenous Peoples.
The document, written by José Martínez Cobo, a United Nations Special Rapporteur, analyzed the complex discrimination patterns faced by Indigenous Peoples.
If the international community is serious about protecting and safeguarding their rights, then it is indispensable to go back to one of the central questions raised in that report: the identity of indigenous people has always been intrinsically interconnected to their lands.
This tenant, now a legal concept mainstreamed in the international human rights jurisprudence, is with few exceptions, unheeded.
Disregarding and violating the rights of Indigenous Peoples to their own lands had led to disenfranchisement, alienation and countless suffering.
The relationship of Indigenous Peoples with their lands with all the measures needed to be enforced to protect it, are the foundations of United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), adopted by the General Assembly on 13 September 2007.
Upholding the Declaration’s principles and ensuring its implementation remains one of the key challenges faced by Indigenous Peoples worldwide. It was also the theme of this year’s United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, (UNPFII) the most important UN sanctioned gathering of Indigenous Peoples.
In its 24th session, hosted at the UN HQ in New York from 21 April to 2 May 2025, discussions were focused on how power sharing should underpin any quests of implementing the UNDRIP.
Because, essentially and let’s not forget it, the UNDRIP, is about recognizing Indigenous Peoples’ power. Ensuring Indigenous Peoples’ rights to their lands is paramount if we really want to ensure an inclusive form of governance that respects them.
Discussions over more inclusive forms of governance for Indigenous Peoples should yield to venues for them to have a much stronger saying over their own affairs. After many years of advocacy and legal battles, there have been some victories.
New Zealand, before the rise to power of its current conservative government, and Canada made major strides to respect and uphold the sovereign rights of their Indigenous Peoples.
There have also been strides also on other fronts, more locally.
A research presented at last year’s session of the Forum, showed some encouraging practices. For example, the Sami Parliament in Norway, the concept of Indigenous Autonomies in Mexico City and some traditions from the Tharu and Newar Peoples of Nepal, do offer some models of self-governance.
But, overall, the picture is grim.
Despite the legal framework that has been established and despite many declarations, still, the right to self-determination of Indigenous Peoples, paramount to their quest towards autonomous decision making, is contested and fought back.
And the only way to ensure its realization is when states will accept that in case of governance, whenever the rights of Indigenous Peoples are implied, it should be shared.
To be clear, this process should not be seen as a devolution of power. Rather it should be understood as a legitimate reclamation of power. The just concluded UNPFII tried to underscore this concept.
One of the conclusions of this year’s session underscored that “there has been growing recognition of the need for formal UN mechanisms that ensure Indigenous Peoples’ meaningful participation in global governance”.
The Secretary General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, acknowledged, in his opening remarks at the Forum, the violations and abuses faced by Indigenous Peoples.
“The difficulties facing Indigenous Peoples around the world are an affront to dignity and justice. And a source of deep sorrow for me personally”.
The daunting challenges posed by climate warming and the imperative to transition to a net zero economy are going to further challenge the compliance of the UNDRIP.
At the 24th Session, a central focus was the role of Indigenous Peoples in the context of the extraction of critical minerals that are indispensable to ensure a just transition.
On this aspect, a major study, submitted by Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim and Hannah McGlad, two members of the Forum, highlighted that there is no quest for critical minerals nor any just transition unless Indigenous Peoples are put at the front of this epochal shift.
One of the key questions is to think how governments, already pressed by geopolitical imperatives and in many cases already not compliant with the UNDRIP, can really involve, engage and consult with Indigenous Peoples.
The principle of Free, Prior, Informed Consent (FPIC) a foundational pillar of the UNDRIP, is normally only paid lip service to. But without respecting the FPIC, there won’t be a “Just Transition”.
In this regard, the worst performers in upholding this right are often multilateral and bilateral banks. Some difficult questions must be solved.
What could be done to ensure that Indigenous Peoples are at the center of the decision making whenever their lives and lands are concerned?
How to shift from a legal landscape in which the few positive exceptions become the norm? How can Indigenous Peoples better channel their grievances and come forward with their own solutions?
The UNPFII remains the only major platform that Indigenous Peoples can leverage. Yet, no matter its relevance, we are still dealing with a tool driven by symbolism that holds no binding powers.
Certainly, we cannot forget the existence of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples.
If the former can offer valuable insights, the latter, as all the special procedures within the United Nations Human Rights Council, lacks teeth and enforceable powers.
One of the major requests at UNPFII, since several years, has been the appointment of a Special Representative or Advisor on Indigenous Issues to the Secretary General. Yet, even if this demand were to be fulfilled, such a new role would not lead to any substantial impact.
Even within the UNFCCC process, Indigenous issues do struggle to get attention. The recently approved Baku Work Plan could be seen just as unambitious document and the existing
The UNFCCC Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform (LCIPP) is not only designed to dilute the voice of Indigenous Peoples but it is made ineffective by purpose.
More promising it is the upcoming debate to create an Indigenous Voice, the so called on Article 8(j), within the framework of the UN Convention on Biodiversity but the negotiations are going to be contentious.
The real crux is how to engage the many governments that, even now, do not recognize the unique identities of Indigenous Peoples. But here is still a lot that the United Nations system could do on its own.
This was a major point of discussion at UNPFII because UN agencies and programs must do a much better job at involving and engaging Indigenous Peoples beyond tokenism.
The probable restructuring process that the UN might be forced to undertake following the cuts in official aid by the new American Administration, should simplify its governance. But such redesign should lead to imagining new spaces that, at minimum, would enable Indigenous Peoples to have their voice heard.
The call for a “Second World Conference on Indigenous Peoples” to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the UNDRIP in September 2027, offers an important opportunity for Indigenous Peoples.
But the advocacy work needed to hold such a historic event would only be justified if the focus in 2027 will be on measures to return the decision making to Indigenous Peoples. Essentially, any new World Conference on Indigenous Peoples should be centered on new forms of governance and power sharing.
These are the two key but inconvenient concepts that must be analyzed and discussed and ultimately internalized with the overarching goal of finally giving back Indigenous Peoples what is due.
Simone Galimberti writes about the SDGs, youth-centered policy-making and a stronger and better United Nations.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, May 7 2025 (IPS)
The UN’s proposed plans for restructuring the world body, currently under discussion at the highest echelons of the Secretariat, have provoked a protest from the UN Staff Union (UNSU) in New York which claims it is being left out of the ongoing negotiations.
The proposed restructuring–including staff cutbacks, the elimination of redundant departments and the merging of several UN agencies under one roof– is expected to be an integral part of Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ highly-ambitious UN80 project.
In a memo to staffers on International Labour Day May 1, UNSU President Narda Cupidore says: “We stand in solidarity with all our colleagues globally; and we see you and support you in Geneva at your gathering on the Place des Nations in Geneva to denounce the austerity measures affecting the entire United Nations system”.
“UN80 Initiative from the looks of what we are seeing from the media will have far-reaching implications of this initiative—particularly in terms of job functions, relocations, and potential abolishment of posts.”
Staff Representatives and, by extension, staff at large, she pointed out, were not consulted or involved in shaping the direction of this process.
“This exclusion is not only disheartening, but it also runs counter to the principles of participatory decision-making and the commitments made under the Staff-Management Committee framework”.
Staff have consistently shown resilience, commitment, and adaptability in the face of repeated structural changes, all while continuing to uphold the values and mandates of the Organization.
“It is appalling that once again, those who will be most affected by such measures are the last to be informed and the least involved in contributing to the process”.
Asked for a response, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told IPS: “We fully understand that the current situation is a cause of concern, and anxiety, for many of our staff.”
“It is important to note that we are in the initial phase of formulating positions and proposals. Consultations have taken place, and they will continue to do so, as the insights of staff are valued and will be carefully considered.”
At the global town hall meeting in March 2025, the Secretary-General emphasized that the UN80 Initiative is a management-led effort. However, he of course committed to consulting with staff representatives through the Staff-Management Committee (SMC) on decisions impacting the staff.
In April, during the annual meeting of the SMC, management briefed the staff representatives on the UN80 Initiative. Also in April, a dedicated UN80 Initiative page was created on iSeek, inviting staff at large to submit ideas via a suggestion box. The responsive was impressive as over 1,400 suggestions have been received. Management will review all of the suggestions, said Dujarric.
A dedicated extraordinary SMC meeting will be held in June to further amplify consultation with staff representatives on the UN80 Initiative, he assured.
Ian Richards, an economist at the Geneva-based UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and former President of the Coordinating Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations (CCISUA), told IPS: “Yes, two things. One is that there hasn’t been consultation on the direction of these reforms. The only offer so far has been to propose that there be consultation once all is decided, which isn’t consultation. The suggestion box is also a way to justify certain changes post facto by pointing out that one or other staff member may have also made that suggestion.”
Second, he pointed out, the proposals being circulated and leaked seem somewhat random and done from a position of panic rather than coherent reflection on how the UN can better play to its strengths and better impact people every day.
Some sections of the document appear to have been written by AI and the main thrust included merging the IMF into the UN. How can this be serious? asked Richards.
In analyzing the crisis further, the UNSU said what is even worse, is finding all this news, developments, memos mentioning detailed relocations of jobs, directly from the press and articles in different social media platforms.
“We call upon our Secretary General and senior leadership to reaffirm its commitment to transparency, collaboration, and respect for staff voices.
“As we move forward, we will continue to advocate for our inclusion in all decisions that impact our roles, livelihoods, and futures. Now more than ever, it is essential that we remain united, informed, and engaged,” said Cupidore.
Meanwhile, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the UN’s humanitarian agency, is facing significant budget cuts due to a funding gap, primarily stemming from a reduction in US funding. This has led to plans for a 20% reduction in staff and a scaled-back presence in several countries, according to OCHA.
Besides OCHA, the budget cuts have also impacted on the World Food Program (WFP), UNICEF and the UN High Commission for Refugees, who are either closing offices, reducing staff or ending programs due to a sharp decrease in US funding
According to one published report last week, the three Rome-based food agencies, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the World Food Program (WFP), are likely to be merged into a single UN agency.
In the health sector, one possible move would be to dissolve UNAIDS and absorb it within the World Health Organization (WHO).
The same restructuring could be a reality with the merger of three agencies that address refugees and migration: the office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), and the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA).
Asked about the impact of new US budget cutbacks, UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told reporters May 6: “We’re not going to speculate on the new US budget and what it’s going to be, because, as you know, the shape of that budget changes over the course of the year as a process of the dialogue between, in particular, the executive and legislative branches of the US system.”
“And so, we’ll continue to follow, as that happens. But from our standpoint, we are taking steps to identify making how to make the UN more efficient and more effective while working with the sort of constraints in terms of budget and in terms of liquidity that we’ve been facing.”
So, we’re certainly continuing to work on those sorts of measures, said Haq.
Meanwhile, the Chief Executives Board the Secretary-General is meeting with in Copenhagen will discuss the UN 80 initiative, “and we’re taking steps along those lines to deal with how we can make more efficiencies within current arrangements, how we can deal with the mandates that we receive from Member States – to implement the ones that can be done while removing a certain amount of duplication in the work that we do – and of course, how we’ll pursue down the line any structural changes and programme realignment that will be needed.”
“Those will be designed to make us more efficient, but they will also help deal with the prospect of less money coming in, which is something that, to be honest, we’ve been getting more and more used to in the last years, regardless of what’s happening in the US right now,” declared Haq.
In introducing UN80 last month, Guterres said the United Nations stands out as the essential one-of-a-kind meeting ground to advance peace, sustainable development and human rights.
But resources are shrinking across the board – and they have been for a long time. For example, for at least the past seven years, the United Nations has faced a liquidity crisis because not all Member States pay in full, and many also do not pay on time.
“From day one of my mandate, we embarked on an ambitious reform agenda to strengthen how we work and deliver. To be more effective and cost-effective. To simplify procedures and decentralize decisions. To enhance transparency and accountability. To shift capacities to areas such as data and digital.”
And this 80th anniversary year of the United Nations, Guterres said, “is a prime moment to expand all our efforts, recognizing the need for even greater urgency and ambition”.
“That is why I have informed UN Member States that I am officially launching what we call the UN80 Initiative. I have appointed a dedicated internal Task Force led by Under-Secretary-General Guy Ryder – and composed of principals representing the entire UN system,” he said.
The objective will be to present to Member States proposals in three areas:
First, rapidly identifying efficiencies and improvements in the way we work. Second, thoroughly reviewing the implementation of all mandates given to us by Member States, which have significantly increased in recent years.
Third, a strategic review of deeper, more structural changes and programme realignment in the UN System, declared Guterres.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Even with its high healthcare expenditures, the US continues to lag behind other developed countries on virtually every measure of the chances of dying and living, including preventable and treatable deaths. Credit: Shutterstock
By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, May 6 2025 (IPS)
On the crucial matters of life and death, the United States is a costly anomaly. Simply stated, women and men in the US pay more for health but get less life.
Although the United States has the highest healthcare costs per capita among developed countries, it does poorly compared to other developed countries on the vital issues of life and death.
The US spends close to twice the amount on healthcare per capita as other developed nations. In 2023, for example, the United States spent approximately $13,400 per person on healthcare, while the comparable average for other OECD countries was about $7,400 (Figure 1).
Source: OECD.
Even with its high healthcare expenditures, the US continues to lag behind other developed countries on virtually every measure of the chances of dying and living, including preventable and treatable deaths.
Despite the US paying higher healthcare costs per capita than other developed countries, men and women in the United States are ending up with higher death rates and shorter lives than their peers abroad
The poor standing of the United States on measures of life and death persists despite the US having: (1) the world’s largest economy; (2) the most powerful military; (3) the third largest land area, population and workforce; (4) enormous amounts of resources; (5) a highly educated population; (5) a top migration destination; and (6) higher expenditures on health care per capita than other developed countries.
Starting at birth, the comparatively poor standing of the United States on matters of life and death is strikingly evident. The US has a higher infant mortality rate than the majority of other developed countries.
In 2023, the US ranked 33rd out of 38 OECD countries in terms of infant mortality. The US infant mortality rate of 5.6 deaths per 1,000 live births, which in 2023 resulted in 20,162 infant deaths, is more than three times the infant mortality rates of Japan, Norway and Sweden, which were about 1.7 deaths per 1,000 live births.
If the US had experienced an infant mortality rate of any of those three countries in 2023, the number of infant deaths would have been about 6,113, or 30% of the actual number of infant deaths.
Regarding maternal deaths, the United States also has one of the highest maternal mortality rates among wealthy nations. Its standing on maternal mortality is well below other developed countries, ranking 30th among OECD countries. In 2021, the US maternal mortality rate was three times the OECD average, i.e., 33 deaths per 100,000 versus 11 deaths per 100,000.
Furthermore, the life expectancy at birth of the United States ranks at about 32nd among OECD countries. In 2023, the US had a life expectancy of about 78 years, compared to an average of about 83 years among peer countries. The US life expectancy at birth is well behind countries such as Canada, France, Japan, Sweden and Switzerland (Figure 2).
Source: OECD.
It is the case that life expectancy at birth varies considerably across the large territory of the United States. Nevertheless, the life expectancies of all 50 US states fall below the average for comparable developed countries.
With respect to premature death before age 70 years, the US level is substantially higher than those of other developed countries. In 2021, the premature death rate before age 70 years of the United States was approximately twice the average for similar wealthy countries, i.e., 408 versus 228 per 100,000 people below age 70 years.
In the ages 25 to 29 years, men and women in the US experience death rates nearly three times higher than their counterparts in other developed countries. In particular, men and women in the United States are almost twice as likely as those in peer countries to die of cardiovascular diseases before age 70.
Also, US death rates from chronic diseases of the liver, kidneys and respiratory system as well as diabetes are increasing, especially among young people. In contrast, the death rates from those diseases in other developed countries have generally not changed or decreased during the recent past.
The reasons for the increase in chronic diseases among young people in the US are believed to be related to health behavior. For example, the prevalence of diabetes is strongly influenced by diet, respiratory diseases are linked to smoking and chronic liver conditions often result from heavy alcohol consumption.
The poor standing of the United States on the chances of survival continues well into old age. With respect to life expectancy at age 65 years, for example, the US is ranked 30th among OECD countries. Again, the US level is well below the life expectancies at age 65 years of other developed countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Japan, Sweden and Switzerland.
Many societal, communal, institutional and cultural factors influence life and death outcomes across the United States. Income, inequalities, access to healthcare, delays for care, lack of health insurance coverage, costs, affordability, shortages of healthcare professionals, administrative complexities and related shortcomings within the healthcare system are certainly critical determinants of survival outcomes and longevity in the US.
Moreover, the United States continues to be in a class by itself in the underperformance of its healthcare sector.
That underperformance is expected to worsen in the near future with the US administration’s proposed tax reduction legislation disproportionally going to the rich that is to be partially offset by huge cuts in Medicaid healthcare coverage, food assistance and related programs aimed at people with limited income, resources and security.
In contrast to the underperformance of the US healthcare, many high-income developed countries have found ways to meet most of the basic healthcare needs of its citizens, including universal coverage.
In addition to the shortcomings of the US healthcare sector, health behavior, including cigarette smoking, alcohol misuse, illicit drug use, motor vehicle crashes, firearms deaths, violence including homicides, obesity and the lack of exercise, also affect preventable deaths and average lifespans.
With respect to health behavior, men and women in the United States are doing relatively poorly in comparison to their peers in other developed countries. In terms of obesity, for example, the US level of approximately 42% is the highest among OECD countries with the percentages of many countries being a fraction of the US level, including Italy, Japan and South Korea, all at less than 10 percent.
In terms of daily food consumption, the United States consumes more calories and sugar per capita than any other OECD country. The US also has the highest level of ultra processed food consumption in the world, estimated to account for approximately half of the calorie intake of the average person in the United States.
Regarding motor vehicle crashes, the United States has one of the highest motor vehicle death rates among OECD countries. Among the reasons believed to account for the higher vehicle fatality rate of the US are distracted driving, speeding and impaired driving.
In 2022, for example, the US fatality rate from registered motor vehicles was one of the highest among OECD countries. The motor vehicle fatality rates of some OECD countries, such as Canada, Denmark, Italy, Japan, Sweden and the UK, were less than half of the US rate (Figure 3).
Source: OECD.
In sum, despite the US paying higher healthcare costs per capita than other developed countries, men and women in the United States are ending up with higher death rates and shorter lives than their peers abroad. Moreover, considering the recent actions and proposed legislation of the US government, the existing healthcare system and the health behavior of the country’s population, the anomaly of healthcare costs and length of life in the United States is not likely to improve any time soon.
Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division and author of numerous publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and Differentials”.
Dominican Republic’s Minister of Labor Eddy Olivares Ortega and Javier Cremades, President of the World Jurist Association, hand the Medal of Honor award to Just Rights for Children founder Bhuwan Ribhu.
By Stella Paul
NEW DELHI, May 6 2025 (IPS)
Bhuwan Ribhu didn’t plan to become a child rights activist. But when he saw how many children in India were being trafficked, abused, and forced into marriage, he knew he couldn’t stay silent.
“It all started with failure,” Ribhu says. “We tried to help, but we weren’t stopping the problem. That’s when I realized—no one group can do this alone. Calling the problem for what it truly is—a criminal justice issue rather than a social justice issue—I knew the solution needed holistic scale.”
Today, Bhuwan Ribhu leads Just Rights for Children—one of the world’s largest networks dedicated to protecting children. In recognition of his relentless efforts to combat child marriage and trafficking, he has just been awarded the prestigious Medal of Honor by the World Jurist Association. The award was presented at the recently concluded World Law Congress in the Dominican Republic.
But for Ribhu, the honor isn’t about recognition. “This is a reminder that the world is watching—and that children are counting on us,” he tells IPS in his first interview after receiving the award.
Looking Back: One Meeting Changed Everything
For Ribhu, a lawyer by profession, it has been a long, arduous, and illustrious journey to getting justice for children. But this long journey began during a meeting of small nonprofits in eastern India’s Jharkhand state, where someone spoke up: “Girls from my village are being taken far away, to Kashmir, and sold into marriage.”
That moment hit Ribhu hard.
“That’s when it struck me—one person or one group can’t solve a problem that crosses state borders,” he says. He then started building a nationwide network.
And just like that, the Child Marriage-Free India (CMFI) campaign was born. Dozens of organizations joined, and the number grew steadily until it reached 262.
So far, more than 260 million people have joined in the campaign, with the Indian government launching Bal Vivah Mukt Bharat—a national mission towards ending child marriage in India.
Across villages, towns, and cities, people are speaking up for a child marriage-free India.
“What used to feel impossible is now within reach,” Ribhu says.
Taking the Fight to Courtrooms
Ribhu is a trained lawyer, and for him, the law is a powerful weapon.
Since 2005, he’s fought—and won—dozens of important cases in Indian courts. These have helped define child trafficking in Indian law; make it mandatory for police to act when children go missing; criminalize child labor; set up support systems for abuse survivors; and remove harmful child sexual abuse content from the internet.
One big success came when the courts accepted that if a child is missing, police should assume they might have been trafficked. This changed everything. Reported missing cases dropped from 117,480 to 67,638 a year.
“That’s what justice in action looks like,” said Ribhu.
Taking Along Religious Leaders
One of the most powerful moves of CMFI was reaching out to religious leaders.
The reason was simple: whatever the religion is, it is the religious leader who conducts a marriage.
“If religious leaders refuse to marry children, the practice will stop,” says Ribhu.
The movement began visiting thousands of villages. They met Hindu priests, Muslim clerics, Christian pastors, and others. They asked them to take a simple pledge: “I will not marry a child, and I will report child marriage if I see it.”
The results have been astonishing: on festivals like Akshaya Tritiya—considered auspicious for weddings—many child marriages used to happen until recently. But temples now refuse to perform them.
“Faith can be a big force for justice,” Ribhu says. “And religious texts support education and protection for children.”
Going Global with a Universal Goal
But the campaign is no longer just India’s story. In January of this year, Nepal, inspired by the campaign, launched its own Child Marriage-Free Nepal initiative with the support of Prime Minister K. P. Sharma Oli. All the seven provinces of the country have joined it, vowing to take steps to stop child marriage
The campaign has also spread to 39 other countries, including Kenya and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where calls for a global child protection legal network are gaining momentum.
“The legal systems of different countries and regions may differ, but justice should be the same everywhere,” says Ribhu, who has also authored two books—Just Rights and When Children Have Children—where he has laid out a legal, institutional, and moral framework to end child exploitation called PICKET. “It’s not just about shouting for change. It’s about building systems that protect children every day,” Ribhu says.
Sacrifices and Hope
Ribhu gave up a promising career in law practice. Many people didn’t understand why.
“People said I was wasting my time,” he remembers. “But one day my son said, ‘Even if you save just one child, it’s worth it.’ That meant everything to me.”
A believer in the idea of Gandhian trusteeship—the belief that we should use our talents and privileges to serve others, especially those who need help the most.
“I may not be the one to fight child marriage in Iraq or Congo. But someone will. And we’ll stand beside them.”
A Powerful Award and a Bigger Mission
The World Jurist Association Medal isn’t just a trophy. For Ribhu, it’s a platform. “It tells the world: This is possible. Change is happening. Let’s join in.”
He also hopes that the award will help his team connect with new partners and expand their work to new regions.
“In 2024 alone, over 2.6 lakhs Child Marriages were prevented and stopped and over 56,000 children were rescued from trafficking and exploitation in India. These numbers show that change is not just a dream—it’s real,” he says.
By 2030, Ribhu hopes to see the number of child marriages in India falling below 5 percent.
But there’s more to do. In some countries, like Iraq, girls can still be married as young as 10, and in the United States, 35 states still allow child marriage under certain conditions.
“Justice can’t be occasional,” Ribhu says. “It must be a part of the system everywhere. We must make sure justice isn’t just a word—it’s a way of life.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
LDC Future Forum Banner. Credit: The Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States (UNOHRLLS)
By May Yaacoub
LUSAKA, Zambia, May 6 2025 (IPS)
The 3rd LDC Future Forum, held from April 1-3, 2025, in Zambia, brought together global leaders, policymakers, and experts to address the urgent need for resilience in the world’s 44 Least Developed Countries (LDCs).
Under the theme of enhancing resilience, the forum emphasized innovative financing, climate-smart agriculture, sustainable infrastructure, circular economy and multi-stakeholder partnerships to combat systemic shocks.
A Call for Proactive Resilience
The forum opened with a powerful speech by Ms. Rabab Fatima, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative of the UN-OHRLLS, who highlighted the vulnerability of LDCs to climate change, economic instability, and ongoing geopolitical crises, underscoring that the theme of this year’s Forum is both timely and urgent.
Ms. Fatima highlighted Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme and Cambodia’s digital IDPoor database that show how timely, targeted, digitally enabled, and shock-responsive mechanisms can break cycles of vulnerability. In this regard, she asserted that “LDCs possess immense potential for transformation, but this requires stronger financing mechanisms, climate-smart agriculture, and inclusive social protection systems.”
Rabab Fatima, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative of the OHRLLS. Credit: OHRLLS
Zambia’s Leadership on being proactive and developing Resilience
Mr. Hakainde Hichilema, the 7th President of Zambia, emphasized the need for Zambia and other LDCs to transition from dependence on foreign aid to achieving proactive self-reliance. He highlighted how evolving geopolitical dynamics have led to reductions in aid, signaling that traditional reliance on external assistance is no longer a sustainable strategy for development.
President Hichilema stressed the importance of building resilience by leveraging domestic solutions and greater solidarity among LDCs. The LDC Future Forum, he explained, embodies this shift—preparing Zambia to face emerging challenges internally rather than relying on external aid.
The President highlighted his administration’s efforts in navigating crises, including the pandemic and a severe drought. Key advancements include enhanced irrigation for food security, expanded hydroelectric infrastructure, and greater solar energy adoption—all driving the nation toward self-sufficiency.
He said times have changed, stressing that “resilience is an absolute must.” and underscored the country’s desire to graduate from the LDC category in the years ahead.
Group Photo at 3rd LDC Future Forum, Lusaka, Zambia. Credit: OHRLLS
Finland’s Model for Development
Mr. Ville Tavio, Finland’s Foreign Trade and Development Minister, highlighted Finland’s enduring commitment to supporting LDCs and advancing the SDGs with a focus on inclusivity—ensuring no one is left behind, saying “The Future Forums bolster LDCs in harnessing their full potential to achieve social and economic growth”.
Mr. Tavio noted that Finland has developed a comprehensive model to strengthen resilience at home but acknowledged that this approach may not be universally applicable. Reflecting on his country’s journey, he noted that at independence in 1917, only 5% of its population had more than basic education, and much of the country was rural farmland.
Today, Finland has achieved developed-nation status, with education and social services accessible to all, pointing out that, with the right support and innovation, LDCs can also make fast progress in enhancing their resilience.
Key Highlights of the High-level dialogues and the thematic sessions:
2. Climate-Smart Agriculture: Digital tools and AI for farmers took center stage, alongside calls for regional cooperation to combat food insecurity. Anticipatory action and resilience-building emerged as critical pillars of climate-smart strategies, including strengthening early warning systems, improving risk analysis, and tailoring solutions to each region’s specific environmental and socioeconomic conditions.
3. Water management and renewable energy: Participants highlighted scalable, innovative strategies for sustainable water management and renewable energy integration, emphasizing their critical role in enhancing resilience. Discussions also explored pathways to achieving water and energy security, with a particular focus on gender-sensitive approaches.
4. Circular Economy: Success stories in waste reduction and green industrialization were show-cased for Rwanda, Bangladesh and Ethiopia. These efforts, powered by partnerships, advanced technologies, and integrated approaches, pave the way for resilient and prosperous futures for LDCs.
5. Social Safety Nets: Tanzania’s TASAF program—which integrates cash transfers with public works—was highlighted as a successful model for supporting vulnerable communities while fostering long-term development. Similarly, Burundi’s use of social protection programs to mitigate the effects of recurring climate shocks, such as droughts and floods, showcased how targeted interventions can both lift people out of extreme poverty and strengthen community resilience.
The Road Ahead
The forum concluded with a consensus on accelerating the Doha Programme of Action (DPoA), prioritizing climate resilience, and strengthening partnerships. USG Fatima closed with a rallying call saying, “by working together, we can ensure that LDCs have the necessary tools and resources to achieve sustainable development and graduate from the LDC category with resilience and stability”.
As LDCs face escalating climate and economic threats, the forum’s outcomes offer a roadmap for sustainable development—one built on collaboration, innovation, and unwavering resolve.
Based on those outcomes, and to advance the Doha Programme of Action and build resilience in LDCs, it is crucial to expand innovative financing, and invest in climate-smart agriculture, sustainable water management, and renewable energy, and enhance monitoring and accountability.
Promoting economic diversification, circular economy models, and adaptable social protection systems-alongside strong multi-stakeholder partnerships-will reduce vulnerabilities and support sustainable growth amid ongoing challenges.
These steps aim to help LDCs build resilience, achieve sustainable development, and progress toward graduation from LDC status.
About the LDC Future Forum
The annual forum convenes leaders to address LDC vulnerabilities and solutions. Zambia’s hosting marked the first time the event was held in an LDC, amplifying local voices in global dialogues.
For more information, click here.
About UNOHRLLS
The Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States (UNOHRLLS) is dedicated to advocating for the sustainable development of LDCs, LLDCs, and SIDS. It promotes global awareness of their unique challenges and mobilizes international support for their development priorities.
Key Links:
• Op-Ed by USG Rabab Fatima
• Curtain Raiser Video
• Previous editions of LDC Future Forum
• Doha Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries
• Roadmap to Doha Programme of Action
May Yaacoub is Head of Advocacy and Outreach, Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States (UN-OHRLLS)
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, May 6 2025 (IPS)
US President Donald Trump has deliberately sown discord worldwide in attempting to remake the world to serve supposed American interests better. He will not cede influence, let alone power and control, to other nations, let alone people.
Jomo Kwame Sundaram
Mar-a-Lago AccordFor Miran, Trump is reshaping the US-led unipolar world more equitably by getting others to bear more of the costs of ‘global public goods’ that the US ostensibly provides.
As geopolitical economist Ben Norton has noted, the US spends trillions on its global empire, with around 800 military bases abroad! While influential US corporate interests have benefited most, others have also gained.
The US contributed to the Global North’s reconstruction boom after World War II (WW2). After pre-empting growing Soviet influence from the last year of WW2, the US enhanced its hegemony by strengthening allies during the first Cold War.
However, Miran complains it is too “costly” to maintain the post-Cold War unipolar order without others bearing their “fair share” of the US costs of providing a “global security umbrella” and international dollar liquidity.
1985 Plaza Accord
In the 1980s, many complained about how Japan and Germany, which had lost WW2, had benefited from imposed military spending constraints and US occupation to gain industrial leadership worldwide.
At its second meeting at New York’s Plaza Hotel, the US-led Group of Five (G5), of the largest Western economies, agreed that the yen and Deutschemark should greatly appreciate against the US dollar.
This would ensure US recovery from its slowdown following dollar strengthening due to the Fed’s high-interest rate policy to quell inflation after the second oil price hike.
As the yen appreciated, Japan’s 1989 ‘Big Bang’ financial reforms sealed its fate. Its asset price bubble burst, also ending the post-war Japanese miracle boom.
Miran acknowledges US dollar “overvaluation has weighed heavily on the American manufacturing sector while benefiting financialised sectors of the economy in manners that benefit wealthy Americans”.
From Plaza to Mar-a-Lago
Unlike Plaza, Miran’s proposed Mar-a-Lago Accord, named for Trump’s private Florida retreat, will be imposed on all, especially allies in the Global North.
The Global North must improve the US trade balance by deterring imports and increasing exports by letting the dollar depreciate. Allies have been threatened with tariffs and unilateral withdrawal of the US security umbrella.
Miran’s proposal also envisions foreign governments holding 100-year US Treasury bonds. This should transfer long-term losses due to inflation to bondholders abroad.
He also wants a US sovereign wealth fund financed by revaluing US gold reserves to market prices. Meanwhile, his proposed cryptocurrency stabilisation fund already threatens to disrupt international finance.
His plan claims to reduce US trade deficits and bring back good jobs. Miran expects it will significantly shrink the US current account and fiscal deficits without requiring more tax revenue or spending cuts.
Weaker dollar not enough
Jenny Gordon has challenged Miran’s argument. She reasons that his plan is unrealisable without significantly shifting US resources from non-tradables to tradables.
Manufacturing investments needed to substitute imports and increase exports have to be financed. But the US has been a net borrower for almost half a century!
Its current account deficit reflects these savings-investment imbalances. The US would have to cut its capital account surplus by borrowing much less from others to reduce its current account deficit.
Making manufacturing more competitive requires a weaker dollar and new investment. The US must encourage Americans to save more, consume less, divert investment from elsewhere, and cut its fiscal deficit.
Otherwise, foreign borrowings financing manufacturing investments will strengthen the US dollar. Worse, a weaker greenback is needed to boost US competitiveness.
Miran may prevail
Even if US manufacturing recovers, well-paid jobs in depressed areas remain unlikely. Besides ageing, changing technology, consumption, and incomes have adversely affected prospects for reviving US manufacturing.
Government spending cuts have hurt state-sponsored research, which enabled the US to lead technological innovation worldwide until early this century.
Miran’s proposed forced conversion of US Treasury bonds held in official reserves to ‘century bonds’ will reduce confidence in the dollar and its liquidity value.
Besides lowering US borrowing costs, it would undermine the deep secondary market for US T-bills and dollar-denominated trade and financial flows—all key to dollar privilege.
The dollar’s status as a reserve currency has enabled the US to maintain massive fiscal deficits without high interest rates or the threat of currency collapse. But it has also constrained US economic options, favouring finance and other modern services.
Trump does not want to lose the dollar’s status as a reserve currency. His threat to the BRICS suggests likely harsh retaliation against efforts to reduce reliance on the US dollar.
The dollar’s status in international finance also enables the US to threaten others credibly. However, Trump’s treatment of allies reminds us that compliance does not ensure stability.
Miran presumes that trade and investment partner countries will do as he wants. While few may agree to his proposal, which will not work, not many may stand up to Trump. Worse, some are already giving lip service to the proposal.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau