School children crossing the road on a pedestrian crossing in Kyrgyzstan. Credit: Victor Lacken - UNRSF.
By Nneka Henry
GENEVA, Feb 17 2022 (IPS)
When we think about global crises, road safety isn’t one that comes to mind. The reality is that unsafe roads is a health crisis gone rogue.
Unlike the COVID-19 pandemic, road traffic injuries are the leading cause of death from people between the ages of 5-29. And, with an estimated 1.35 million fatalities and 50 million non-fatal injuries every year, unsafe vehicles and roads affect everyone and impact several areas of development – including environmental sustainability.
Road traffic injuries are the leading cause of death from people between the ages of 5-29. And, with an estimated 1.35 million fatalities and 50 million non-fatal injuries every year, unsafe vehicles and roads affect everyone
In 2015, the United Nations raised the alarm. The 2030 Global Development Agenda expressly recognizes that road safety can be improved by governments providing access to safe, affordable and “greener” ways of moving, including public transport. (Sustainable Development Goal 11.2)
There are plenty of things that the UN is doing to solve this global crisis, but it cannot solve it alone. Here are three questions to spur action towards making roads safer for road users everywhere.
How committed are our governments to solving the road safety crisis?
To solve this crisis, we need a show of commitment, especially from governments. One way of doing that is for leaders across the developed and developing world to take an active role in safe and sustainable mobility.
The UN General Assembly High-Level Meeting on Improving Road Safety on 30 June 2022 in New York could be the moment in history when UN member states commit to consciously prioritize and fund a development assistance package of safe and clean mobility measures in low- and middle-income countries.
This package could include designing and implementing safe modes of transport that are equally low-emission solutions such as affordable public transportation; accessible walking and cycling lanes; or safe and clean used vehicle standards.
It’s time for governments to show support, attend the High-Level Meeting and make the case for why road safety is a national priority and a priority for development assistance. And, in turn, for G7 countries to include road safety as a priority in the G7 Summit Communique 26-28 June 2022, just days before the UN High-Level Meeting on Road Safety.
How can we collectively build capacity in countries with high road fatalities?
The WHO together with UN Regional Commissions have helped structure a targeted action plan on road safety for the global community to rally around and implement. However, with more than 90% of road traffic fatalities occurring in low- and middle-income countries, with Africa as the hardest hit region, mobilizing finances to implement the plan remains a critical challenge.
The UN is crowding in and around a wide range of partners to ensure the transfer of technical knowledge, best practices, and financial resources to the countries that need help the most.
Since 2018, the United Nations Road Safety Fund has been playing a coordinating role among UN agencies to support governments through projects to improve land use for walking and cycling lanes, driving licensing, vehicle inspection, speed enforcement, safe school zone design and emergency post-crash response systems.
FIA Foundation, the World Bank’s Global Road Safety Facility, the International Federation of the Red Cross, Bloomberg Philanthropies, NGOs, regional Road Safety Observatories and major government and corporate funders are among those consulted and engaged in designing and delivering these projects.
From Armenia to Paraguay to West Africa, UNRSF now serves 30 countries with new calls for proposals to respond to country-led priorities that catalyze investments for better road safety.
How do we advocate for effective road safety financing?
Awareness-raising and advocacy of road safety financing is a game changer. The UN’s Special Envoy for Road Safety, Jean Todt’s, advocacy efforts helped launch the UN Road Safety Fund and raised close to $20 million dollars for related UN road safety performance reviews in Africa and capacity building projects in developing countries across the world.
Organisations such as the Global Alliance of NGOs for Road safety are there to support and empower local groups and community-based organisations working on road safety. And at the grassroots we can replicate and take part in global advocacy initiatives such as the biennial UN Global Road Safety Week.
The week’s 2021 edition, through a Streets for Life campaign, called for 30 km/h speed limits worldwide on streets with mixed vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Or the Global Road Safety Film Festival on 21-22 February 2022, which screens short films from all over the world to help explain the challenges and solutions to improve road safety.
For the Second Decade of Action for Road Safety 2021 – 2030, success hinges on the marriage between safe, sustainable mobility and targeted financing, which promises to bear fruit for people and the planet. Together with UN efforts, it’s time we all started doing more about it.
Asking the right questions is the start of a positive disruption to the global road safety crisis.
Excerpt:
The author is Head of the UN Road Safety FundBy 2030 the ambition is to restore 100 million hectares of currently degraded land and sequester 250 million tons of carbon. Credit: Greatgreenwall.org
By Baher Kamal
MADRID, Feb 17 2022 (IPS)
Once completed in 2030, it could well be considered the world’s eighth wonder, this time natural. It is the African-led Great Green Wall or the largest living structure on the planet – an 8.000 kilometres natural hit stretching across the entire width of the continent.
It is a symbol of hope in the face of one of the biggest challenges of our time – desertification, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) informs. And it aims at restoring Africa’s degraded landscapes and transforming millions of lives in one of the world’s poorest regions, the Sahel.
Launched in 2007 by the African Union, the Great Green Wall Initiative is being implemented in more than 20 countries across Africa.
The UN Convention adds that the initiative brings together African countries and international partners under the leadership of the African Union Commission and the Pan-African Agency of the Great Green Wall.
Its implementation coincides with the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 2021-2030.
What for?
On this, the UNCCD also reports that, by 2030, the ambition of the initiative is to restore 100 million hectares of currently degraded land; sequester 250 million tons of carbon and create 10 million green jobs.
This will support communities living along the Wall to the following five ‘grows’:
— Grow fertile land, one of humanity’s most precious natural assets
— Grow economic opportunities for the world’s youngest population
— Grow food security for the millions that go hungry every day
— Grow climate resilience in a region where temperatures are rising faster than anywhere else on Earth
— Grow a new world wonder spanning 8.000 km across Africa
Another challenge facing the African nations which will benefit from the Great Green Wall is the rapid advance of desert dunes on cultivated areas and entire villages and towns, which the Wall will help reduce.
From Senegal to Djibouti, from West to East
The Great Green Wall snakes the Sahel region from Senegal in the West to Djibouti in the East of Africa, explains UNCCD.
The 11 countries selected as intervention zones for the Great Green Wall are: Burkina Faso, Chad, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, and Sudan.
The total area of the Great Green Wall initiative extends to 156 million hectares, with the largest intervention zones located in Niger, Mali, Ethiopia and Eritrea. Since its launch, major progress has been made in restoring the fertility of Sahelian lands.
The big race
The race to restore 100 million hectares of Africa’s Great Green Wall now begins, the world Convention to Combat Desertification reported, as the ministers of Environment, Finance and Planning from Africa’s Great Green Wall countries and the partners active in the initiative met by the end of last October to discuss new arrangements to help countries in the Sahel Region in this giant effort.
Meeting for the first time since the Great Green Wall Accelerator was announced in January 2021, the partners reviewed proposals to overcome bottlenecks. Pledges have so far reached 19 billion US dollars.
According to Ibrahim Thiaw, Executive Secretary of the UNCCD: “In a world that looks at the Sahel region and sees only despair, the Great Green Wall offers hope. In a world struggling to work out what ‘build back better’ or climate resilience or sustainable development really looks like, the Great Green Wall makes tangible and practical sense.”
The restoration of 100 million hectares of land by 2030 in the Sahel would create an estimated 10 million jobs and lock away 250 million tonnes of Carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into the soil.
Worth investing
Africa’s Great Green Wall initiative to combat desertification in the Sahel region is not only crucial to the battle against climate change but also makes commercial sense for investors, a recent study led by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) and published in Nature Sustainability shows.
For every US dollar put into the massive effort to halt land degradation across the African continent from Senegal in the west to Djibouti in the east, investors can expect an average return of 1.2 US dollars, with outcomes ranging between 1.1 US dollars and 4.4 US dollars, the study finds.
“The greening and land restoration along this belt stretching 8,000 km across the continent is already underway. Communities are planting resilient and hardy tree species such as the Acacia senegal, providing gum arabic, widely used as an emulsifier in food and drinks and the Gao tree or Faidherbia albida, which helps to fertilise soil for the cultivation of such staples as millet, and for animal fodder.”
Growing a World Wonder
The UNCCD has launched a public awareness campaign on the Great Green Wall, called “Growing a World Wonder.”
The campaign aims at boosting global awareness of the initiative in public spheres, policy debates, as well as media and cultural sectors with a clear view towards inspiring long-term public and private investment in the initiative.
As importantly, the Great Green Wall places local populations and national institutions at the center, making traditional knowledge and capacities the entry points, taking a holistic approach and putting in place effective governance and accountability systems.
History tells that in the so-called ‘Black Continent’ — home to nearly 1,4 billion people–, the region covered by the Great Green Wall was, once upon a time, a huge green valley.
Data collected by Transparency International looks at bribery, the diversion of public funds, officials using their office for private gain, conflicts of interest and legal protections for those denouncing corruption. Credit: UN News/Daniel Dickinson
By Gabrielle Gorder and Seth Robbins
MEDELLÍN, Colombia, Feb 17 2022 (IPS)
Latin American countries scored poorly on Transparency International’s latest corruption index, with the worst joining the ranks of war-torn nations and dictatorships.
Of the 19 Latin American countries ranked, three-quarters scored below 50 in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) for 2021. The worst was Venezuela, which scored below North Korea and Afghanistan.
Using assessments from country experts, business analysts, and international organizations, the index rates countries on a scale from zero to 100. Scores below 50 indicate flagrant corruption problems.
The data collected by Transparency International looks at bribery, the diversion of public funds, officials using their office for private gain, conflicts of interest and legal protections for those denouncing corruption.
Caribbean countries fared better in the index. Of the ten ranked, six scored above 50, though none rated above 65.
When Canada and the United States are excluded, the average score for the region is 41, putting it a notch below the global average of 43. Without the Caribbean, it drops to 37.
Below, InSight Crime breaks down the scores in a region that continues to be rife with corruption.
Scores of 0 to 25: Highly Corrupt
Venezuela held the title for the seventh consecutive year as the most corrupt country in the Western Hemisphere with a score of 14, an all-time low for the country.
As InSight Crime has reported, Venezuela has essentially become a mafia state. Officials and security forces at every level are involved in criminal activity. Pilfering of state coffers is rampant, while drug trafficking, illegal mining, and other criminal economies are widespread.
Venezuelan government officials are known to collaborate with gangs. State security forces have colluded with the Colombian guerrilla group the National Liberation Army (Ejército de Liberación Nacional – ELN) to take control of illegal gold mines in the Amazon.
The rot in Venezuela starts at the top, with President Nicolás Maduro, whom the United States Department of Justice has accused of narco-terrorism, corruption, drug trafficking and other offenses.
Just above Venezuela were Haiti and Nicaragua, which each received a score of 20.
Haiti saw a slight uptick as compared with the last two years, as the effects of the July 2021 assassination of the country’s president, Jovenel Moïse, are only just beginning to be felt.
Meanwhile, Nicaragua saw its score hit a new low. This is not surprising, considering that, on his way to winning his fourth consecutive presidential election, President Daniel Ortega used the country’s justice system to silence political opponents, some of whom were jailed or subjected to a range of abuses.
Honduras also hit a new low, scoring a 23 — tying the country with Iraq. The low score stemmed partly from accusations linking Honduras’ former president, Juan Orlando Hernández, to his brother’s drug trafficking ring.
Meanwhile, Guatemala’s score of 25 remained unchanged from the previous year. The country tied with Iran. High-profile graft probes and the dismissals of those investigating corruption explain the country’s low ranking.
Scores of 26 to 50: Corruption Issues
The average global corruption perception score was 43 out of 100. Of the 21 Latin American and Caribbean countries scoring less than 50, 19 fell below the global average.
The countries scoring in this bracket were Paraguay (30), the Dominican Republic (30), Bolivia (30), Mexico (31), El Salvador (34), Panama (36), Ecuador (36), Peru (36), Brazil (38), Argentina (38) and Colombia (39), Guyana (39), Suriname (39), Trinidad and Tobago (41).
Only Jamaica (44) and Cuba (46) scored higher than the global average.
In the case of Paraguay, InSight Crime published an investigation just last year revealing how a Paraguayan congressman conspired with an alleged drug trafficker to protect cocaine shipments in exchange for illicit funds.
El Salvador’s declining score reflects growing corruption within the government of President Nayib Bukele, including the decision to dissolve the International Commission against Impunity in El Salvador (Comisión Internacional Contra la Impunidad de El Salvador – CICIES) after the entity started to investigate several members of the Bukele administration for mismanaging coronavirus emergency funds. Additionally, the US government, in 2021, blacklisted two officials with close ties to Bukele for allegedly making deals with street gangs.
Ecuador’s plummeting score was also to be expected. The country has emerged as a key trafficking route for drugs, arms, explosives, and migrants. Corruption has eaten away at state institutions.
Peru’s falling score comes as President Pedro Castillo faces corruption allegations that have led to impeachment proceedings, while in Argentina, instances of corruption among judicial authorities have created the impression of impunity.
Cuba’s comparatively high CPI ranking may come as a surprise to some, given that it is a one-party state.
While Cuba’s low corruption perception score may reflect steps taken to rein in corruption during the administrations of former president Raúl Castro and President Miguel Díaz Canel, political corruption remains an issue, and the low perception score could be more a reflection of the country’s limits on press freedom.
Scores of 50 to 100: Relatively Clean
Only three Latin American countries scored above 50: Uruguay, Chile and Costa Rica.
Uruguay scored higher than the United States, but lower than Canada. Transparency International credited its “independent judiciary and the protection of basic rights [as] vital in preventing corruption from permeating the [Uruguayan] State.” Chile, meanwhile, tied with the United States.
The Caribbean countries of Barbados, The Bahamas, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Lucia, Dominica and Grenada all scored above 50, suggesting minimal corruption concerns. But these countries are all known hubs for money laundering, a known contributor to corruption worldwide.
This story was originally published by InsightCrime
Asian Population and Development Association (APDA) and the Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development (AFPPD) continued their crucial role of supporting parliamentarians in promoting population and development agenda during the COVID-19 pandemic by organizing online and hybrid events. The organizations this year celebrate their 40th anniversary. Credit: APDA
By IPS Correspondent
Tokyo, Feb 17 2022 (IPS)
The Asian Population and Development Association (APDA) has been ahead of the international community in addressing population and development issues, says the former Japanese Prime Minister and Chair of APDA Yasuo Fukuda.
Yasuo Fukuda, Yoko Kamikawa, MP and Chair of Japan Parliamentarians Federation for Population (JPFP), and Professor Keizo Takemi, MP and Chair of Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development (AFPPD), were speaking to IPS ahead of the 40th anniversary of APDA and AFPPD.
JPFP was formed in 1974 out of concern for burgeoning populations, food security, and other development issues in Japan. APDA and AFPPD were founded in 1982 – ahead of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo in 1994.
“APDA has consistently propounded groundbreaking concepts and frameworks and led international public opinion and activities in this field,” says Fukuda.
“Based on the idea that it is necessary to promote balanced development through social development to ameliorate a rapid increase in population and poverty, APDA has consistently advocated, ahead of the international community, to address population issues from such a perspective of economic and social development.”
Kamikawa agrees and sees the organizations playing a crucial role in post-COVID-19 development as countries and continents race to meet the ICPD 25 commitments.
“APDA has been working on food and population issues from a wide perspective, and now it is required to deepen the discussions on topics such as health, “water for life”, and climate change from the perspective of population,” Kamikawa said. She added that “what we learned from the COVID-19 pandemic is how important it is to share experiences and knowledge of each country with the rest of the world.”
Looking toward the future, Takemi says climate change, the impact of COVID-19, and digitalization have impacted on widening the gap between rich and poor.
He also notes that an ageing population is Asia’s “most emerging issue.” AFPPD has put this on the agenda, and it counts as a crucial success.
Looking back on the 40th years and looking forward to the future are former Japanese Prime Minister and Chair of APDA Yasuo Fukuda, Yoko Kamikawa, MP and Chair of JPFP, and Prof. Keizo Takemi, MP and Chair of Asian AFPPD. Takemi was interviewed by Prof. Kiyoko Ikegami, Executive Director of AFPPD. Credit: APDA
Here are excerpts from the interviews:
IPS: In 1974, some 20 years before the ICPD conference in Cairo in 1994, JPFP was formed because of concerns about burgeoning populations, food security, and other development issues in Asia. Then APDA was established in 1982. What would you consider to be the most significant success of the organization?
Former PM Hon. Yasuo Fukuda: For one, APDA has consistently propounded groundbreaking concepts and frameworks and led international public opinion and activities in this field.
Based on the idea that it is necessary to promote balanced development through social development to ameliorate a rapid increase in population and poverty, APDA has consistently advocated, ahead of the international community, to address population issues from such a perspective of economic and social development.
Under this principle, Japanese parliamentarians launched JPFP, the world’s first supra-partisan parliamentary group on population and development, in 1974, followed by the founding of APDA in 1982. JPFP and APDA strongly supported the establishment of regional parliamentary fora and National Committees on Population and Development in various countries and created a groundbreaking framework of a parliamentary network.
Through this network of parliamentarians, APDA and JPFP have taken the lead in parliamentary activities on population and development worldwide, effectively sharing diverse knowledge, including Japan’s experiences and promoting international cooperation, which resulted in concrete results.
Japanese politicians, who were involved in JPFP and APDA, also played a central role in the formation of the concept of “sustainable development”, which is the basis for today’s SDGs. They requested the United Nations to establish the World Commission on Environment and Development (commonly known as Brundtland Commission) in 1984. The concept of “sustainable development” was presented in their report adopted in 1987.
On the occasion of our 40th anniversary, we would like to continue to promote inter-regional cooperation and collaboration in response to the challenges faced by each region and address population and development issues both domestically and internationally from a long-term perspective, beyond the SDGs. In particular, we would like to focus not only on economic development but also on valuing each individual, drawing out the full potential, respecting each culture and tradition, and fostering the importance of cultivating humanity.
IPS: APDA and JPFP have established global partnerships in Asia, Africa, and the Arab region. How necessary are these multilateral arrangements to achieve the ICPD Programme of Action?
Hon. Yoko Kamikawa, Chair of JPFP:
As various global issues are becoming more and more serious, it has become clear that population and development issues are complicatedly and closely related to various other areas, with diversified demographics worldwide.
Therefore, as the principles of the ICPD, which is a major outcome of our activities to date, have been taken over by the principles of the SDGs, it is no exaggeration to say that addressing population issues will also mean the achievement of the SDGs.
APDA has been working on food and population issues from a broad perspective, and now it is required to deepen the discussions on topics such as health, “water for life”, and climate change from the perspective of the population.
Our role as parliamentarians is to serve the people of respective countries, fulfilling a responsible role in legislation and administration to realize a society where everyone can maintain life and health and enjoy human rights and quality of life bestowed upon people. However, what we learned from the COVID-19 pandemic is how important it is to share experiences and knowledge of each country with the rest of the world.
I hope that APDA will further contribute to achieving the ICPD Programme of Action and SDGs and ushering in a new post COVID era by strengthening the networks and platforms of parliamentarians it has developed over the past 40 years.
Prof. Kiyoko Ikegami, Executive Director of AFPPD: Is there a crucial new challenge in the Asia region that parliamentarians need to confront?
Hon. Prof. Keizo Takemi, Chair of AFPPD: The ageing population is the most emerging issue in Asia, although UNFPA did not yet recognize this in the past. I believe that one of the great outcomes of the AFPPD was to improve the recognition of the issues relating to ageing, not only demographic change but as improvement of quality of life of the older people.
AFPPD co-sponsored seminars on the ageing and nursing service in Vietnam in 2017, which helped members of AFPPD to fully understand the issue of ageing. With the Health Ministry of Vietnam, AFPPD National Committees of Vietnam, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, and JCIE, AFPPD conducted discussions about a caring service to ensure people can age happily.
Unemployment is also a serious problem, especially in central Asia, where the youth population is rapidly increasing, and migrant worker numbers are also increasing. It is an urgent matter to be resolved due to the dynamics of youth behavior in the context of a nation-building process. An AFPPD-led seminar on youth has looked at how to get youth involved in industry after being trained, and at the same time how to encourage industry to respond to the needs of each nation.
Ikegami: What are the crucial discussions to be had in this anniversary year on SDGs and the ICPD25 Programme of Action?
Takemi: The recognition and addressing climate change and population are the most critical issues in front of us. We have learned that it is inevitable to create and accept the new framework and concept of population issues in the Anthropocene era, in order to respond to current and future population-related issues. The discussions have just begun, but there are several ideas to be debated, such as the close relation between water and population, demographic analysis on human movement of refugees, and internally displaced persons. It is definitely challenging for all of us, MPs, to foresee the future planning of our nations.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureauRelated Articles
Credit: Pacific Community (SPC)
By Michelle Belisle
SUVA, Fiji, Feb 17 2022 (IPS)
All over the world, students who attend tertiary education do so with the belief that the investment of their time, money and effort will provide them with returns on that investment that will change their lives and the lives of their families for years to come. As qualified graduates, those students emerge from their tertiary programmes with recognised skills and knowledge making them employable in their chosen fields, moving them forward along a career pathway and in many cases, bringing recognition to the institutions that trained them as they experience success and achievements related to their expertise.
While it is relatively straight forward to see that the graduates of a given program from a specific institution will be recognised and employed in the community and even the country that houses the institution, taking those qualifications to other jurisdictions, either for employment or further education, becomes much more complicated. While the institution that has awarded the qualification stands fully behinds its content and quality, the employers, regulators and institutions in other places don’t have that same depth of knowledge and therefore trust, to give the same level of recognition. This is where accreditation, particularly regional and international accreditation, come into play.
The accreditation of a qualification is a formal confirmation that the qualification is recognised and meets quality assurance and industry standards and requirements. Employers look for accredited qualifications as they know they are quality assured and are deemed “fit for purpose”. The industry’s trust in the qualification will translate to increased employability for the graduates.
National accreditation by a recognized authority provides students with assurance that their qualification will be accepted and paves the way to employment in the country in which it was awarded.
EQAP Director Michelle Belise
In the Pacific, however, a region where remittances from those who have moved to live and work abroad is a significant portion of national revenue, labour and student mobility is critical. Students need to know that their tertiary programmes open doors to employment and further education opportunities beyond their national borders. For graduates, students, and faculty to become more mobile in the region and internationally, regional and international accreditation of qualifications; and development of regional qualifications are necessary.
A qualification accredited internationally is generally widely recognised. Learners can therefore move across borders, in search of qualifications that are recognised internationally, and completion of which will qualify them for employment opportunities in different countries and regions.
By encouraging and supporting institutions of higher education to seek international recognition of programs, there is a strengthening of both the institution in terms of its appeal to prospective students and faculty, and the programs themselves by way of ongoing efforts to meet and maintain internationally agreed standards in program content, delivery and assessment.
A regional qualification is one that is developed and endorsed with input from stakeholders in the region, is accredited regionally, is available for delivery by providers in the region and is owned by the region. The learners enrolled in a regional qualification also have the option of moving from one provider to another to complete a qualification, and similarly, the faculty involved in the delivery of a regional qualification could move from one institution to another almost seamlessly as the learning outcomes and requirements of the qualification remain constant across all institutions delivering the programme.
International accreditation and regional qualifications have a great deal to offer for higher education in the Pacific. However, one of the greatest challenges to increasing the mobility of graduates, students and faculty are fears, at institutional and national levels, of losing individual identity and autonomy. The Tokyo Convention can become the catalyst for increased labour and student mobility.
The Convention is significant in providing the platform for countries to appreciate and respect the differences that exist in their education and qualifications systems and to work towards embracing a common recognition system. Strong and robust institutional as well as national quality assurance systems are instrumental in ensuring national recognition mechanisms are recognised and valued and they consequently can become the pillar upon which a regional recognition process is built. To facilitate and support the establishment of a regional recognition process, it is imperative that national mechanisms exist to enable institutions to recognise each other’s programs and qualifications.
Ratification of the Tokyo Convention by countries in the Pacific Region will strengthen and fortify the efforts already being undertaken to establish a regional recognition process mutually agreed to by the countries; it can become the next step in the process where national and regional mechanisms already exist.
Through the continued collaboration of governments, higher education institutions, and regional and international organizations it is our hope that Pacific Island students and graduates will reap the benefits of international recognition of their education and at the same time, the world at large will benefit from the contributions of Pacific Islanders in their workplaces and higher education institutions.
Dr Michelle Belisle is the Director of the Educational Quality and Assessment Programme (EQAP) at the Pacific Community (SPC).
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Nature Insight: Speed dating with the Future’, an IPBES podcast, is spreading the love for science and nature. Its aim is to change perceptions and ignite interest even in animals like the bat. Bats are often blamed for ills but in reality we, as humans, have expanded into bats' territory. Credit: Geoff Brooks/Unsplash
By Busani Bafana
Feb 17 2022 (IPS)
In a busy world where love is a complicated affair, speed dating is one way to connect, but can it work to ignite more sustainable relationships with nature? Are we open to a romance with science and evidence?
The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is spreading the love for science through an innovative podcast series, ‘Nature Insight: Speed dating with the Future’. A podcast is a regular series of digital audio episodes focused on a particular topic, which can be subscribed to, downloaded, or streamed.
Talking science
The IPBES podcast was first piloted in 2021 to help make the work of IPBES more accessible to a wider audience. IPBES is involved in documenting, synthesizing, and critically evaluating relevant knowledge about our relationship with the rest of nature to help reverse the global loss of biodiversity.
A second podcast season, launched just last week, will feature interviews with experts offering insights about biodiversity loss from many angles. This will include the sustainable use of wild species, the many values of nature, how the law can address the nature crisis, the role of the financial sector in biodiversity protection, and mobilizing private sector philanthropy for nature.
“We want to bring our work to new audiences and explain to decision-makers outside the environment space why they should care about the science of biodiversity and the science behind nature and the protection of nature,” explains Rob Spaull, Head of Communications at IPBES. He argues that biodiversity is often made to sound academic, something that belongs in a lab or a university, with little effect on people’s lives.
“That is furthest from the truth because biodiversity and nature’s contributions to people are all about what happens in our daily life; the food that we eat, the water that we drink, the air that we breathe, and the diseases that we try to avoid. Biodiversity is the cornerstone of human wellbeing.”
Rob Spaull, Head of Communications at IPBES says the idea behind the podcast was to bring IPBES’ work to new audiences. Credit: IPBES
“Our first season of Nature Insight has been downloaded in dozens of countries and broke into the Top Ten charts for podcasts about nature and science. By the end of our first season, we had the evidence to show that not only had we produced a good podcast but that we had managed to expand our IPBES audience, particularly among non-environment decision-makers,” Spaull said. He noted that the podcast series also sought to give decision-makers the best evidence possible on biodiversity issues. For instance, in the first season, Dr Anne Poelina, an indigenous leader from Australia, discusses the value of different kinds of knowledge systems. She argues that indigenous knowledge should complement western science in science-policy reports.
Biodiversity under threat
IPBES is an independent intergovernmental body established to strengthen the science-policy interface on biodiversity and ecosystem services for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, long-term human wellbeing, and suitable development. Its seminal publication, The Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services, released in 2019, found that 1 million animals and plant species are threatened with extinction, many within decades. Changes in land and sea use, direct exploitation of organisms, climate change pollution, and invasive alien species are the leading causes of changes in nature.
According to the Global Assessment Report, the average abundance of native species in most major land-based habitats has fallen by at least 20 percent, mostly since 1900. More than 40 percent of amphibian species, almost 33 percent of reef-forming corals, and more than a third of all marine mammals are threatened. The picture is less clear for insect species, but available evidence supports a tentative estimate of 10 percent being threatened.
“The overwhelming evidence of the IPBES Global Assessment, from a wide range of different fields of knowledge, presents an ominous picture,” said Robert Watson, former IPBES Chair, in 2019. “The health of ecosystems on which we and all other species depend is deteriorating more rapidly than ever. We are eroding the very foundations of our economies, livelihoods, food security, health, and quality of life worldwide.”
The IPBES podcast had been recorded remotely and launched during the first wave of COVID-19, which relates directly to nature loss. Spaull said the first episode of the first season had focused on the links between the risk of pandemics and the destruction of nature.
Speaking on the first episode of the show, zoologist and expert on disease ecology Dr Peter Daszak said people cannot blame the rest of nature – especially not pangolins, snakes, and bats, for our environmental health problems.
“I feel really sorry for bats in particular that they are getting blamed, already they have got such a bad rap in films, TV shows, and books. They are going about their daily business doing what they have done for millions of years,” said Daszak, who is also President of EcoHealth Alliance. This non-profit organization supports global health. He explained that human populations have expanded to reach into the habitats of all animal species, like bats.
“We are eating them, cutting down the trees they live in, we invading the caves that they inhabit, and as by-products of that, we get exposed to the viruses they have carried for millions of years which do not harm them and unfortunately kill us. It’s really our fault actually if we want to point the blame.”
Admitting to having taken something of a gamble with the podcast’s title, Spaull said the podcast was essentially offering listeners a chance to speed date with nature and the future.
“As with real speed dating, you get this opportunity to connect, for a very short time, with people you might never otherwise have a chance to meet – and if what they say resonates with you, it could make a difference to both of your lives,” said Spaull. “We want to give people information about the science of biodiversity so that they can better understand our relationships with the species and ecosystems with whom we share our planet – so that we can all take better action and make better-informed choices.”
Mangroves substantially reduce the vulnerability of coastlines to erosion from waves and tides and are an important contributor to biodiversity. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS
Policymakers listening to the science?
Governments, decision-makers, and ordinary citizens need to protect biodiversity through transformative change. This was the underlying message in an episode entitled ‘Choose your own adventure (what is transformative change and how we all can make it happen)’ with Professor Kai Chan, an interdisciplinary, problem-oriented sustainability scientist at the Institution for Resources, Environment, and Sustainability at the University of British Columbia.
Dr David Obura, one of the world’s leading experts on coral reefs and fisheries and the importance of coral reefs and coastlines for biodiversity and people, said the podcast has helped communicate science.
“I have enjoyed doing the podcast. It helps build up awareness about IPBES as an institution and what it does,” said Obura. He admitted that the Speed Dating podcast had introduced him to listening to podcasts.
“Policymakers are listening to the science to a greater extent in different countries and different sectors. I think the COVID pandemic has shown the importance of science and how we communicate it,” he said. “Amazing science is being done, but getting the message out about this science and evidence is critical.”
Acting for the future of biodiversity
With the second season of the Nature Insight: Speed Dating with the Future podcast now underway, Spaull said the series would continue to offer the views of seldom-heard voices and people with great stories to tell.
“Season two is timely; the global negotiations will take place later this year to agree on the biodiversity targets for the next ten years. These are going to be agreed by governments around the world, much as the climate change targets were recently discussed and agreed,” Spaull said.
“So it is a good time to be talking about all these issues and how they fit into people’s lives because it’s not just academic, it vital for us all.”
Graffiti on a wall in Benghazi, Libya, calls for elections and democracy. Credit: The United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL)
By Anas El Gomati
TRIPOLI, Libia, Feb 17 2022 (IPS)
Libya was supposed to hold elections early this year. Instead, it now has two rival political administrations — a return of the divisions of the past.
Libya is entering a new cycle of its political crisis. In December 2021, a mere 48 hours before polls were supposed to open, the elections were postponed. Emad Sayah, the head of Libya’s High National Election Committee (HNEC), declared it to be a case of force majeure. He then proposed to Libya’s parliament, the House of Representatives (HoR), to reschedule the elections for 24 January 2022.
This deadline has now also passed. But rather than resolve and reschedule elections, the HoR appointed a new rival Prime Minister Fathi Bashagha on 10 February, dividing Libya between two rival political administrations.
Libya’s now faces a dangerous new reality, as rival factions cling to power returning the country to the political divisions of the past, whilst proposing future election roadmaps designed to bring about the demise of their political rivals while guaranteeing their own political survival.
The tactical moves on the part of rival factions go back at least twelve months. Since then, Libya’s constitution, election law, and judiciary have become weapons in a new battle over Libya’s electoral roadmap as political actors attempt to either stall or re-sequence elections to push a rival out of power, whilst preserving one’s own institutional power indefinitely.
The crisis began shortly after the Libyan Political Dialogue Forum (LPDF), a United Nations appointed body of 75 members, was tasked with appointing a new interim unity government and establishing a political roadmap to culminate with democratic elections.
The LPDF made early progress in appointing an interim Government of National Unity (GNU) to be led by Abdulhamid Dbeibah that took office in March 2021 and in agreeing to schedule simultaneous presidential and parliamentary elections for 24 December.
Libya’s political deadlock
Since last summer, however, the LPDF faced internal political deadlock over how to proceed with the legal framework, namely a constitutional basis for elections. Libya has had a draft constitution since 2017, but it has faced criticism for its lack of inclusivity.
Anas El Gomati
At the same time, it became clear that the widespread threat of a boycott of the referendum would almost certainly lead to further delays to the political transition – especially if the constitution were rejected at a pre-election referendum.The debate over how to establish a constitutional basis before the elections swiftly became a reality check over how long Libya’s political transition would last, as factions within the LPDF alleged this would stall the transition and extend the GNU’s interim mandate beyond 24 December.
In the LPDF’s stalemate, the HoR’s chief speaker Aguila Saleh captured an opportunity to reshape the political roadmap to remove the GNU from power whilst preserving his own power in parliament. In September, Saleh illegally bypassed a parliamentary vote and issued a presidential elections law by decree.
The law rescheduled the LPDF roadmap by sequencing presidential elections before parliamentary elections instead of holding them simultaneously, a move designed to ensure an end to the GNU’s eight-month political tenure whilst extending Saleh’s eight years of institutional control over parliament.
Moreover, the law sidestepped the constitutional referendum and used Libya’s rump 2011 constitutional declaration that offers weak legal restraints and limits on the power of Libya’s first elected president, increasing the prospects of a winner-takes-all outcome at the polls.
The law also faced criticism by the GNU’s prime minister Abdelhamid Dbeiba for including conditions to block his candidacy, whilst being tailored to allow Saleh and one of his key allies responsible for Libya’s civil war, Khalifa Haftar, the self-styled leader of the Libyan Arab Armed Forces (LAAF), to run on the presidential ballot, but return to their positions in parliament and the LAAF should they lose.
Saleh’s law sparked outrage from parliamentarians and members of the LPDF, but was accepted by former UN Special Envoy to Libya, Jan Kubis, who – rather than reject the law and mediate – decided to accept Saleh’s law to expediate the process to hold one (but not both) elections by any means on 24 December.
When Kubis resigned one month before the elections and was replaced by his predecessor Stephanie Williams as UN Special Advisor, it became clear that confidence was lost in the UN mediation and election process under his custodianship. However, it was left to HNEC, the body responsible for administering elections, to announce the news – without compromising their apolitical standing.
The future of parliamentary and presidential elections remains unclear under the HoR’s new political roadmap but what comes next is certain to be a deeper political crisis and potential delays to full elections by years. The international community have already ruled out recognising a replacement for the GNU before elections.
The appointment of a new parallel administration is thus a cynical attempt at a power grab in the knowledge it returns Libya to the tense years of political divisions between East and West that legitimised Haftar’s war on Tripoli in 2019. Secondly it is a major setback for the UN’s Berlin process that will require the UN to reverse course on its democratic roadmap to address the present elite power struggle before future elections can be rescheduled.
Finally, the HoR’s roadmap remains weaponised to include milestones to extend the political life by years, and in the process sparking new legal disputes that will drag Libya into a new complex crisis. Saleh has passed a motion to allow the HoR to draft a new constitution rather than pass a referendum on the current draft prior to elections.
Saleh’s own constitutional process is designed to allow him to delay parliamentary elections until the HoR’s work on a new constitution is completed.
Given the 2017 constitution was drafted by a democratically elected assembly in 2014, Saleh’s proposed constitution lacks an elected mandate to replace it and would open so many further legal disputes and political challenges prior to parliamentary elections that the HoR’s new roadmap could delay parliamentary elections and extend the HoR’s mandate by years not months.
Today’s crisis is in large part based on the assumption that individuals responsible for Libya’s political crisis and wars will demonstrate self-sacrifice and willingly give up the political institutions and military power they have clung to for years through an electoral roadmap of their own design.
The UN’s Berlin roadmap offered the international community an opportunity to erode the power of spoilers by dismantling the political and military institutions responsible for war into a unified neutral state rather than reward the figures at their helm with an opportunity to revive their political fortunes through elections.
Now it’s high time for the UN to demonstrate bold leadership and resuscitate the aims of the Berlin Process, and sequence a neutral political roadmap, setting sober election milestones based on substantive compromise and institutional reform, rather than stick to dates and timelines for political expedience that disguise conflict and reward spoilers with custodianship over Libya’s future.
Anas El Gomati is the founder and current Director General of the Tripoli-based Sadeq Institute, the first public policy think tank in Libya’s history established in August 2011.
Source: International Politics and Society is published by the Global and European Policy Unit of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Hiroshimastrasse 28, D-10785 Berlin.
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
The world should, with urgency, remove the barriers to education for crisis-affected children with disabilities, says Education Cannot Wait Director Yasmine Sherif. Here she is pictured in Lebanon speaking to a young child at an ECW-supported facility. Credit: Education Cannot Wait (ECW)
By Joyce Chimbi
Nairobi, Kenya, Feb 16 2022 (IPS)
Unable to walk, see or hear, and without assistance, the multiple barriers between 240 million children with disabilities and the education system mean nearly half are likely never to have attended school.
“We must reach these children with the fierce urgency of now,” says Yasmine Sherif, Director, Education Cannot Wait, speaking at the Global Disability Summit.
UNICEF research paints a dire picture for millions of children with disabilities worldwide. Forty-nine percent were more likely to have never attended school; 47 percent were more likely to be out of primary school. One-third are likely to be out of lower secondary school, and 27 percent are likely to be out of upper secondary school.
In emergencies and protracted crises in countries like Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Chad, Lebanon, Syria, and many more, Sherif says, “No one is left furthest behind and more vulnerable than a refugee or forcibly displaced child with disabilities.”
At the Global Disability Summit, hosted by the International Disability Alliance (IDA) and the governments of Norway and Ghana, on February 16-17, 2022, Sherif spoke about the harsh reality challenges faced on a daily basis by crisis-affected children with disabilities within current education systems and the urgent need to intervene.
She urged the global community to be concrete in action and not abstract in thinking, calling for a collective response for children with disabilities caught in armed conflicts, forced displacement, climate-induced disasters, and protracted crises. Their inclusion in response and protection interventions need to be systemized through legal frameworks and leveraging on pooled funding.
“Being the only global fund for education in emergencies and protracted crises, ECW cannot accomplish its mission unless all children with disabilities can learn in an inclusive and protected setting along with their peers,” she says.
“Nor will we collectively ensure the right to inclusive, equitable, and quality education for every child if children with disabilities remain behind.”
ECW commits to ensuring that its partners and grantees embed inclusion standards in their investments and act upon them.
“More specifically, ensuring that families of children with disabilities and organizations of persons with disabilities are engaged throughout each programme cycle with adequate budgetary allocation to support and sustain participation. This includes enhancing accountability to the affected population,” she says.
For disability rights groups, activists, experts, and supporters, the ongoing Summit is key in highlighting that the time to make education in emergency and protracted crises settings inclusive is now.
The Summit is pivotal in ensuring that governments, UN entities, and civil society back their commitments to persons with disabilities with adequate resources to implement them.
Sherif spoke in a high-level panel discussion of experts including Gerard Quinn, UN Special Rapporteur on Persons with Disabilities; Peter Maurer, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross; Gillian Triggs, Assistant High Commissioner for Protection, UNHCR and Nadia Hadad, European Disability Forum.
Also in attendance were Johanna Sumuvuori, State Secretary Minister for Foreign Affairs of Finland, and Nujeen Mustafa, a UNHCR Supporter who, at 16, traveled 3,500 miles from Syria to Germany in a steel wheelchair; her compelling story captured in the book ‘Nujeen, One Girl’s Incredible Journey from War-Torn Syria in a Wheelchair’.
Hadad opened with astounding statistics indicating that 41 million people with disabilities would need humanitarian assistance in 2022.
Against this backdrop, Triggs emphasized respect for those displaced by conflict, including internally displaced persons and refugees. She affirmed that disability inclusion remains a priority for UNHCR and that the UN Refugee Agency is firmly committed to doing more to achieve it.
Maurer confirmed that the International Committee of the Red Cross is seriously taking on board the philosophy of inclusion in their humanitarian work, and more so, in conflict situations.
Nujeen Mustafa, a UNHCR Supporter who, at 16, traveled 3,500 miles from Syria to Germany in a steel wheelchair says active participation of children with disabilities is “not a favor but a right”.
Credit: Education Cannot Wait
Mustafa explained she was born with cerebral palsy in Syria, and as a result, society saw a girl without a future. She said conflict situations further exposed the lack of infrastructure, support, and protection for people with disabilities.
Sumuvuori expressed Finland’s commitment to champion the rights and inclusions of persons with disabilities “with a special focus on the rights of women and girls with disabilities. Building on our existing efforts in humanitarian assistance, Finland commits to promoting meaningful participation of persons with disabilities.”
Quinn called for increased visibility for persons with disability, saying that war is not a thing of the past because conflicts were very much alive.
The character of conflict was changing, but it has not gone away. It has become more lethal for those with disabilities, Quinn says.
“This leaves people with disabilities at even greater risk of violence and discrimination. Demand for active and meaningful participation is not a favor but a right for all people living with disabilities,” Mustafa told a community of global participants.
Sherif noted that disability inclusion for children in emergencies and protracted crises requires the removal of economic barriers.
Sherif stresses that families of children with disabilities bear extra costs to send them to school, including transportation and assistive devices.
“Families, therefore, may not afford to send their children to school or may not see the need for it because of widely shared negative attitudes toward children with disabilities and their potential,” Sherif says.
Once children with disabilities in emergencies and protracted crises go to school, says Sherif, they often must overcome inaccessible pathways and navigate schools and temporary learning spaces that are not accessible. Accessible transportation and assistive devices are usually not provided in these contexts.
Without training and support for teachers to adapt the teaching and learning environment to the special needs of vulnerable learners, children with disability struggle to learn the basics. More often than not, few enter higher learning and training.
Sherif says that quality and safety start with inclusion, ensuring that children with disabilities learn along with their peers.
“Ensuring quality education in an inclusive setting necessitates knowledge and capacities, adapted curricula, and targeted interventions such as the provision of specialized material and equipment,” Sherif emphasizes.
“In emergencies and protracted crises, where resources are often scarce, it is fundamental to leverage local resources through partnerships between school personnel and families.”
Sherif concluded by saying it is possible to intervene and maintain educational systems even in the aftermath of conflict to ensure that future generations can escape the cycle of poverty.
While most health care workers in the wealthy world were vaccinated early in 2021, only a quarter of Africa’s health workers had received their Covid-19 jabs at the end of last year. Credit: UNICEF/Nahom Tesfaye
By Akshaya Kumar
NEW YORK, Feb 16 2022 (IPS)
Efforts to combat the vast global inequity in access to Covid-19 vaccines just got a boost. A Cape Town company claims it successfully made a vaccine that mimics Moderna’s messenger RNA vaccine—without any help from Moderna. This copycat will still need to undergo clinical trials, but the effort could yield Africa’s first Covid-19 vaccine.
So far, African factories have been cut out of the effort to manufacture Covid-19 vaccines and largely limited to filling and labelling bottles with the drug substance manufactured elsewhere. As a result, when vaccines were in short supply globally, Africans were forced to wait. When they did arrive, vaccines were often dumped on overburdened public health systems with very short notice, in some cases, close to their expiration date.
Strive Masiyiwa, the African Union Special Envoy to the African Vaccine Acquisition Task Team and a prominent businessman, described his experience seeking to buy vaccines on behalf of the continent, “I met all the manufacturers in December (2020), and said, we would like to buy some vaccines. We had money, we were willing to pay up front in cash. We were not asking for donations, and they said all capacity for 2021 has been sold…. the people who bought the vaccines knew there would be nothing (left) for us.”
To date, 10 billion doses of Covid-19 vaccines have been administered globally, including up to four doses per person in some places. But in the world’s least developed countries, just 10 percent of people have accessed even a single dose.
While most health care workers in the wealthy world were vaccinated early in 2021, a study by the World Health Organization found that only a quarter of Africa’s health workers had received their Covid-19 jabs at the end of last year. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Chad, even today, less than 1 percent of the population is vaccinated.
To date, 10 billion doses of Covid-19 vaccines have been administered globally, including up to four doses per person in some places. But in the world’s least developed countries, just 10 percent of people have accessed even a single dose
The South African company working on the copycat, Afrigen Biologics and Vaccines, hopes to shift these dynamics by building greater manufacturing capacity on the continent. If all goes to plan, Afrigen will begin its clinical trials in 2023. That’s still a long way off. It’s worth noting that experts agree, it didn’t have to be this way. If Afrigen had been able to get a technology transfer, it says, it could have produced a vaccine suitable for trials months ago.
If, for example, the United States and German governments had used their influence to press Moderna, Pfizer and BioNTech to share their Covid-19 vaccine recipes and know-how, Afrigen and a lot of other potential manufacturers in Africa, Latin America and Asia would have already been able to join the global effort to make enough doses for everyone, everywhere.
But when Human Rights Watch asked Moderna about its approach to technology transfers more broadly, representatives replied that the company was “not aware of any idle mRNA manufacturing capacity,” and that transferring their technology “requires significant time from a limited pool of experienced personnel with the requisite expertise.”
Instead, Moderna has promised “investment in a state-of-the-art mRNA manufacturing facility in Africa,” of its own which it claims will eventually manufacture up to 500 million doses annually, estimating three years to get a plant up and running.
In contrast, Afrigen hopes to eventually transfer the skills and technology for its vaccine to factories across Africa and even train companies in Argentina and Brazil too. Experts have already identified over 100 facilities that could be manufacturing mRNA vaccines right now. Eight of them are on the African continent
Moderna has yet to comment on Afrigen’s breakthrough. The WHO technology transfer hub catalyzing the effort does not intend to “infringe” on patents. For their part, Afrigen’s managing director has said, “this is not Moderna’s vaccine, it is the Afrigen mRNA hub vaccine.”
They also point to a commitment from Moderna that it will not enforce its Covid-19 related patents against those making vaccines intended to combat the pandemic. But MSF Access Campaign has expressed concerns that Moderna retains the right to decide when it thinks the pandemic is over and its patent enforcement will resume.
Afrigen’s leap forward comes amid renewed attention to India and South Africa’s plea to waive some intellectual property rights until everyone everywhere has access to vaccines. The African Union has thrown its weight behind the proposal and the Biden administration backed the idea, at least for vaccines, in 2021.
Talks remain stalled at the World Trade Organization due to short-sighted opposition from the European Union. If a waiver is adopted this month, as some diplomats hope, it could help shield Afrigen’s vaccine, and make it easier to make more of the Covid-19 treatments, tests and vaccines that we all need.
Afrigen’s success spotlights a failure of global solidarity. Africa’s scientists shouldn’t have to go it alone. Companies behind the name brand Covid-19 vaccines, Pfizer, Moderna and BioNTech should share their technology more widely, or governments will need to make it happen.
Excerpt:
Akshaya Kumar is the crisis advocacy director at Human Rights Watch.Greenpeace activists fly a giant turtle kite outside the United Nations headquarters in New York as countries gathered to begin negotiations towards a treaty covering all oceans outside of national borders. September 2018 Credit: Greenpeace
By Will McCallum
LONDON, Feb 16 2022 (IPS)
Over the past two weeks, a petition signed by almost five million people globally was handed in to governments around the world. It called for a Global Ocean Treaty to help rescue our oceans.
Yet with governments gathering next month to discuss the fate of half our planet, civil society is being shut out. The climate crisis and industrial fishing are pushing our oceans to the brink. Wildlife populations are collapsing, our oceans are heating and their very chemistry is changing.
World leaders will meet at the so-called BBNJ negotiations from 7-18 March to attempt to reckon with the scale of the crisis facing one of our planet’s key life support systems. But, as NGOs found out in a closed-door briefing call yesterday, the meeting will not allow for proper participation from civil society.
This is effectively closing the door to organisations which represent millions of people worldwide, many of whom rely on the ocean for their lives and livelihoods, and all of whom depend on the ocean for the oxygen it gives us.
It is worth noting that without years of campaigning by organisations like Greenpeace and many others, this treaty process would not even be happening: civil society has played a crucial role in getting us to this stage.
It contributes expertise and information, facilitates policy development and provides a network of connections and experts, as well as a platform for frontline communities facing these issues day in, day out.
The extremely limited participation at this meeting simply does not represent the urgency with which we need a rescue plan for our oceans: a Global Ocean Treaty that allows us to cover at least a third of international waters with ocean sanctuaries – areas free from harmful human activity like destructive fishing.
As COVID-19 continues to impact on all of our lives, we all recognise and appreciate the seriousness of health measures around large international conferences. But there has to be a way to also ensure that the vital voices which civil society represents are heard in a safe and meaningful way, particularly during a time when not only our global health, but our planetary health, is in jeopardy.
Closing the doors to civil society – and even restricting government participation so severely – should be unthinkable and sets a worrying precedent for democratic engagement at the UN. What possible justification can there be to deny civil society the right to speak on video screens?
It hampers the important role that civil society has played, and continues to play, in the Global Ocean Treaty negotiations, as well as other UN processes. Two years into the COVID-19 pandemic, innovative hybrid models and flexible health measures have shown that effective and safe participation is possible, and a failure to embrace this approach at the UN – especially as we face critical decisions that affect us all – is simply untenable.
Almost 5 million people globally are demanding urgent action to tackle the ocean crisis. Over 100 governments claim to back ocean protection. Organisations amplifying the voices of millions of people worldwide must be represented as decisions are made.
These negotiations are simply too important to avoid proper scrutiny: the UN should review its decision and work to ensure that civil society can participate in Global Ocean Treaty negotiations in a safe and meaningful way.
This means allowing in-person representation from NGOs during the deliberations, timely access to information prior to and during the meeting, and the opportunity to provide interventions and written submissions.
This isn’t simply a matter of transparency and accountability: ocean protection is a scientific imperative and governments are not acting fast enough. We know that for the three billion people who depend on the oceans for their food and livelihood, for the wildlife that call the ocean home and for the fight against climate breakdown, we need a network of ocean sanctuaries across at least a third of the world’s oceans by 2030.
To do that we first need to win an ambitious Global Ocean Treaty at the UN that gives us the tools we need to meet that target in the vast majority of the oceans beyond national boundaries.
The pandemic has pressed the pause button on so many things, but not for our natural world. From the melting Arctic to the plundered Pacific, the climate and nature crises are accelerating. Political momentum for a network of ocean sanctuaries across our oceans is gathering pace, but governments need to act like our lives depend on it, because they do.
Out on the water, while we delay, destructive fishing companies are operating out of sight and beyond the rule of law, stripping the oceans of life. This plunder of the seas is pushing wildlife populations towards collapse and leaving nothing for the coastal communities who rely on artisanal fishing to survive.
Pollution, oil drilling and the emerging threat of deep-sea mining, are poisoning marine life and making the climate crisis worse by killing off vital ecosystems.
Our oceans connect us all and what happens there will impact the future of life on Earth. Ocean sanctuaries can give wildlife space to recover and, in turn, help to cycle carbon and avoid the worst effects of the climate crisis. We need to protect at least 30% of the oceans by 2030, not the paltry 1% of the global ocean that is currently protected.
We desperately need progress at this meeting: governments were expected to conclude the treaty at these negotiations, and so it is vital that every effort is made to ensure the maximum participation possible, so that essential negotiations can take place.
To do that, we need civil society organisations in the room.
Will McCallum runs Greenpeace’s Protect the Oceans campaign and is head of oceans at Greenpeace UK
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau