Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 7 2021 (IPS)

A hilarious anecdote, recounted in the New York Times years ago, related to the widespread corruption embedded in the political culture of a Southeast Asian country where crooked politicians were willing to provide receipts every time they received a bribe—big time bribes.

And in Africa, the late Mobutu Sese Seko, president of former Zaire (now Democratic Republic of the Congo), was often described as one of “the world’s most corrupt leaders”.

Asked at a press conference whether he was the world’s second wealthiest political leader, a seemingly outraged Mobutu shouted back: “It’s a lie. It’s a lie,” and then added with a straight face, “I am only the fourth richest.”

In an October 1991 report, the Washington Post quoted Mobutu as laying down one of the basic principles of corruption: “If you want to steal, steal a little cleverly, in a nice way. Only if you steal so much as to become rich overnight, you will be caught.”

A former UN Secretary-General, the outspoken Kofi Annan of Ghana, once said that “billions of dollars of public funds continue to be stashed away by some African leaders — even while roads are crumbling, health systems are failing, school children have neither books nor desks nor teachers, and phones do not work.”

And, when the UN General Assembly held its first-ever, three-day special session against corruption last week (June 2-4)—over 120 were listed as speakers, including multiple foreign ministers, three deputy prime ministers and 10 heads of state and government, mostly addressing via video messages to a world body locked down by the pandemic.

But one of the questions posed at the UN’s daily press briefing was subtle but right on target.

Asked what the President of the General Assembly (GA) Volkan Bozkir of Turkey hoped to achieve when “so many Heads of State who talked this morning are corrupt”, his Spokesperson, Brenden Varma, told reporters the President’s goal was always to create a forum where member states could come together –- to discuss topics that mattered to the world and share with each other ideas, best practices and lessons learned”.

The GA President’s ultimate aim, the Spokesperson said, was to move forward in the global fight against corruption and see progress in that regard.

Bozkir told delegates that corruption corrodes public trust, weakens the rule of law, seeds conflict, destabilizes peacebuilding efforts, undermines human rights, impedes progress on gender equality and hinders efforts to achieve the targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. “It also hits the poor, the marginalized and the most vulnerable the hardest,” he added.

The outcome of the special session is reflected in the text of an action-oriented political declaration adopted by consensus. But history has shown that the fight against corruption is a long-drawn-out losing battle with no end in sight.

In July 2019, Transparency International compiled a list of 25 of “the biggest corruption scandals that shook the world and inspired widespread public condemnation, toppled governments and sent people to prison”—extending from Azerbaijan to Peru and from Nigeria to Equatorial Guinea.

These scandals involved “politicians across political parties and from the highest reaches of government, staggering amounts of bribes and money laundering of epic proportions,” Transparency International said.

The degree of corruption– both in the developing and the industrialized world—is so vast, particularly among politicians and heads of government, that a cynic might be right in declaring: if there is no corruption, there would be no politicians.

In the industrialized world, bribery is euphemistically called “kickbacks”, mostly on multi-million-dollar deals, largely for commercial aircraft and weapons systems.

According to one published report, some of the world’s most corrupt leaders included: Sani Abacha (Nigeria); Mobutu Sese Seko (Zaire); Ferdinand Marcos (Philippines) and Suharto (Indonesia).

In a televised debate on the New York city Mayoral elections last week, one candidate publicly reminded one of his rivals of multiple corruption charges he had once faced.

“We all know that you’ve been investigated for corruption everywhere you’ve gone— in a trifecta of corruption investigations. Is that what we really want in the next Mayor?”

The UN, which says that corruption is criminal, immoral and the ultimate betrayal of public trust, welcomed the new anti-corruption network, as ‘important step’ to build trust, promote justice. Credit: UN News/Daniel Dickinson

Mandeep S. Tiwana, Chief Programmes Officer at CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance, told IPS it’s great that the General Assembly organised a session on fighting corruption which is major scourge on our societies and a driver of inequality.

However, any meaningful debate on corruption would be incomplete without an interrogation of how the present emphasis on market-oriented policies is creating avenues for corruption on a grand scale by enabling the siphoning off of public resources to private companies, he argued.

As part of the dominant market discourse, he pointed out, states are being encouraged to retreat from public services and cede space to profit driven private entities.

“A lot of corruption thereby emanates from inappropriate awards of government tenders to cronies of political elites and the so-called incentivizing of certain businesses through backroom deals on tax breaks and privileged concessions to certain politically connected businesses,” he noted.

“Illicit financial flows and money laundering are all part of the mix and need to be addressed through emphasis on transparency and accountability supported by vibrant civil societies and media watchdogs”, Tiwana said.

Addressing delegates last week, Ambassador Munir Akram of Pakistan, and current President of the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), said corruption, which leads to massive outflows of illicit finance, is among the main reasons for the economic underperformance of developing countries and for rising inequalities across the world.

Stressing that corruption stifles opportunities for the poor, while condemning them to a life of misery and inequity, he said an estimated $2.6 trillion — or 5 per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP) — is lost annually to such behaviour.

Developing countries lose $1.26 trillion — nine times all official development assistance (ODA), he noted.

US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told delegates the administration of President Joe Biden is committed to taking special aim at corruption.

And that starts with building on the U.S. government’s existing anti-corruption tools, obligations, and commitments, including steps to vigorously enforce the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which strengthens business environments around the world by prohibiting U.S. persons from bribing foreign officials.

It also means strengthening the U.S. Department of Justice’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative, she said.

Since 2019 alone, U.S. asset recovery efforts have led to the transfer of more than $1.5 billion to countries harmed by corruption, she added.

Tiwana of CIVICUS said a debate on corruption should logically include focus on creating enabling environments for civil society organisations and independent media entities to shine a spotlight on corrupt practices and collusion between political and economic elites.

“Our research at CIVICUS shows that 87 per cent of the world’s population live in countries with serious restrictions on the civic freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression”.

He said civil society activists and journalists are being attacked on a colossal scale across the globe.

“If governments in the Global North and South are truly serious about tackling corruption, they should take action on reversing civic space restrictions and ending persecution of activists and journalists,” he declared.

In a joint statement released last week the G7 ministers (of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, US, and the High Representative of the European Union), said they recognize that corruption is a pressing global challenge.

As the UN Convention against Corruption notes, corruption threatens the stability and security of societies, undermining the institutions and values of democracy, ethical values and justice, and jeopardizing sustainable development and the rule of law.

The ministers said corruption presents serious threats for individuals and societies and often enables other forms of crime, including organized crime and economic crime, including money laundering. These threats have been heightened by COVID-19.

“As the world continues to recover, it is critical that we do not let corruption threaten our efforts to build back better and address global challenges especially the achievement of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals”.

“We are looking forward to the G7 ministerial meeting in September this year, where there will be a discussion on our joint efforts to address corruption”, the ministers declared.

Meanwhile, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres welcomed the creation of the Global Operational Network of Anti-Corruption Law Enforcement Authorities – or GlobE Network – as a step in the right direction.

He said the Network will enable law enforcement authorities to navigate legal processes through informal cooperation across borders, helping to build trust and bring those guilty of corruption to justice.

*This article contains extracts from a newly-released book on the United Nations titled “No Comment – and Don’t Quote Me on That.” Authored by Thalif Deen, Senior Editor, Inter Press Service (IPS) news agency, the book is peppered with scores of anecdotes– from the serious to the hilarious– and is available on Amazon worldwide and at bookshops in Sri Lanka. The links follow: https://www.rodericgrigson.com/no-comment-by-thalif-deen/ https://www.vijithayapa.com/

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Dr. Ameenah Gurib-Fakim

By Sania Farooqui
NEW DELHI, India, Jun 7 2021 (IPS)

What is the first thing that comes to your mind when you read the words, women and power? The accepted wisdom is that women can be powerful, but not without the constant reference to their gender – which is often based on a set of unconscious biases towards them. Is she competent enough, effective, articulate without being too assertive or too aggressive. Is she a straightjacket, is she too emotional, will her family life impact her work or vice versa. Is she smart enough to camouflage her intelligence, is she ready for a key position, is it worth making her powerful?

Across the world we do see powerful women, but ‘women in power’, remain significantly underrepresented across a variety of professional fields, in business, academic, politics and media. The goal is to challenge the perception of fixed gender roles, which is often internalized.

“We need more women in power,” says Dr. Ameenah Gurib-Fakim, 6th and First Female President of Mauritius and Biodiversity Scientist in an interview given to me.

“We need women in political positions because when an important decision is taken it is usually bent towards better equity in the family and society. This can happen when women are there and that’s why we make a case for women to be in that position of power,” says Dr. Gurib-Fakim.

During the recent Covid-19 crisis, multiple reports and studies stated that women were doing a better job in running their country through the crisis, including the number of cases and deaths, which were systematically better in countries led by women.

The United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) calls for women’s equal participation and leadership in political and public life which it states as an essential to achieving the SDG goals by 2030.

However, according to this report by UN Women, women serve as Heads of State or Government in only 22 countries, and 119 countries have never had a woman leader. Just 10 countries have a woman Head of State, and 13 countries have a woman Head of Government. Data from 133 countries shows that women constitute 2.18 million (36 percent) of elected members in local deliberative bodies. “At the current rate of progress, gender parity in national legislative bodies will not be achieved before 2063,” the report states.

It has been 26 years since the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995, called the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. 189 governments committed to the most progressive blueprint ever for advancing women’s rights, including women in power and decision-making, women and the economy and women and poverty.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said: “Progress towards equal power and equal rights for women remains elusive.” Women need to have a more prominent role, in power and decision-making, states this report by the United Nations.

In one of my earlier pieces for IPS News, I wrote, power is the ability to influence the behaviour of others to get what you want. Power distribution is usually visible in most societies when there is a clear and obvious division between the roles of the men and expectations from women.

The power construct is often created keeping the roles of the men in mind, and not women. Studies have shown and proven the potential of women and their leadership style, yet despite that women are still minority groups when it comes to holding powerful positions. Men are often hired or placed in top positions based on their potential, and women based on a check list. Constituents don’t trust female politicians that are too “ambitious,” and powerful women are “unlikeable,” a few explanations for the astounding gender gap we see in politics.

This study by the Council on Foreign Relations states that “holding political office is just the first step to wielding political power, in many countries, institutional structures and political systems still limit women’s ability to influence policy. Being the first woman elected to a leadership position often means navigating previously male-dominated structures, which can translate into political caution rather than policy change. Regardless of outcome, as the number of women leaders increases, more women will likely be inspired to become politically engaged.”

Looking into women’s participation in political and public life – there are multiple barriers that hold them back, including cultural biases and traditional gender stereotypes. Gender inequality lives and breathes in the 21st century, and needs to be addressed in order to get more women in politics or in positions of power.

“The political arena is very brutal and women, very often, don’t have self-confidence. Society puts a lot of pressure on women and they tend to conform. By conforming, they do themselves a very big injustice and do not take the risk,” says Dr. Gurib-Fakim.

Dr. Gurib-Fakim has been amongst the few Muslim women who shattered multiple glass ceilings and challenged stereotypes by becoming the first woman to serve as president of Mauritius and one of only four women presidents in Africa. Along with this, Dr. Ameenah is also a scientist who has been a dedicated advocate for engaging women and girls in STEM innovation.

Nothing is more powerful than your influence when it is led by purpose. As seen in the case of Dr. Ameenah, it takes a lot of grit, resilience, courage and responsibility to be a ‘woman in power’. “We don’t provide sufficient role models for women who have made it as an entrepreneur, scientist, even as a Nobel prize winner. There are a lot of stereotypes that need to be addressed.”

“For me, the journey all the way through the Statehouse was a message to that girl growing up in my village. That she can wake up one day and say I too can make it because someone else has done it through hard work and through taking risks. Women have to dream big and they have to sustain the vision, goal and passion,” said Dr. Gurib-Fakim.

The author is a journalist and filmmaker based out of New Delhi. She hosts a weekly online show called The Sania Farooqui Show where Muslim women from around the world are invited to share their views.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

The UN commemorates World Oceans Day on Tuesday June 8. And on June 5, the UN commemorated the International Day for the “Fight Against Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing”. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing activities represent up to 26 million tonnes of fish caught annually. Credit: Creative Common License C00

By Coty Perry
SCRANTON, USA, Jun 7 2021 (IPS)

You don’t have to look too hard to find some news network or media outlet talking about water pollution, plastic waste, CO2 emissions, and climate change.

Yes, of course, our plastic bottles are blowing into the ocean and it’s all our fault. We need to start using paper straws and paper cups because we’re to blame for our polluted and uninhabitable waters.

The reason you see and hear about these factors all the time is because it puts it on your back. Media tells you, it’s your fault, you need to do better, you need to make a change.

While I sit here casting my ultralight spinning reel, they’re pumping billions of dollars down the throats of commercial fishermen all over the world.

The biggest threat to our oceans is the very people put in place to protect them. It’s believed that globally, more than $30 billion goes to the commercial fishing industry per year.

This money is intended to offset the costs of operating their megaships and paying their deckhands in an industry that has been hit hard by climate change and regulation.

But, what does that money actually do? It supports overfishing by giving the large ships the ability to outfish the little guy. The offshore communities that rely on fish for commerce and food can’t keep up with the mega ships that have advanced technology, massive trawling nets, and a team of 25 people aboard.

Some might say that this is just a natural reaction to the need for more fish. We’re consuming nearly twice as many fish as we were 50 years ago, so it’s classic supply and demand paired with the dog eat dog nature of commercial fishing.

I say that it’s not all about the fishing and even the communities that rely on it, it’s about the quality of our oceans and the impact overfishing has on them. The reason you don’t hear about these types of things is because it’s the governments of the world fanning the flames behind the scenes.

More than 60% of the world’s fish stocks are fished out of existence. That’s 60% of our fish population, completely gone, never to return. How can you recover from something like that? Once it’s gone, it’s gone.

That said, while I have spoken primarily of the United States as the main offender, they pale in comparison to the People’s Republic of China. China is above and beyond the biggest culprit of overfishing in the East and the West.

Many times, overfishing, water pollution, and plastic waste are all seen as a lapse of judgment or a “miscalculation.”

This isn’t the case with China. They’re not simply failing to control their fishermen, they’re promoting overfishing and spending an astronomical sum of money to make it happen. In fact, in 2018, they spent $7.2 billion to support the crime of overfishing. This country alone makes up 21% of the entire world’s subsidies.

This country and many others are fishing at biologically unsustainable levels. Take the Pacific bluefin tuna for example. This species alone has seen a 97% drop in population. You’re probably thinking, “who cares if that tuna population dies off, what’s the big deal”?

It’s not just about the fish population, it’s about the landscape of the sea as a whole. Overfishing causes a ripple effect that impacts not only the water but everyone who feeds off the water.

China has as many as 800,000 fishing vessels fishing illegally all over the world. Who is likely fishing on these ships? I doubt they’re paying living wages and providing comfortable conditions and accommodations for the people onboard.

They’re likely living in extremely cramped quarters, being fed the bare minimum, and forced to work around the clock for next to no money.

But I digress, it’s not all about China and it’s not all about the United States either. It’s not all about politics and not everyone is out to fish the waters into extinction. In many cases, it’s policy and procedure. There are additional specific reasons behind overfishing:

Regulation – Many countries including the United States have regulations in place to prevent overfishing. The problem is, these regulations are loosely put together and don’t apply across international borders so other countries can come into our water and fish however they please. Even with the regulations, the agencies put in place to enforce them don’t have the time, money, or resources to do so.

Unreported Fishing – Fishing is not an easy industry and it gets more and more difficult for commercial fishermen to make a living. As a result, they do what I would probably do as well. They fudge the numbers and cook the books to turn a profit. This happens most frequently in developing nations and among small fishing communities.

Mobile Processing – A large portion of fish go in a can to be preserved and shelved for years. This process actually happens at sea which means that the fish will never even see land. It’s difficult for enforcement agencies to identify the amount of fish caught because of this process.

So, what are the solutions or alternatives? What can be done to stop overfishing so we can save marine life from extinction? Awareness comes at a premium when the media controls everything you see and hear.

The good news is that there are plenty of organizations out there putting technology in place to help combat overfishing. Fishtek Marine is a great example of this. Bycatch is a huge issue as well which happens when fish and sea mammals are caught in giant mile long trawling nets that commercial fishermen use to save time and money.

Dolphins, seals, and other creatures get caught in the net and many of them will die trying to get out.

Fishtek created a small device that is placed in fishing nets. The device emits a sound that only larger sea mammals can hear so it deters them from swimming near the nets. This is such a simple concept with the potential to make a tremendous difference.

Shared catch is a strategy with potential. The way fishing seasons are structured now promotes rushing and corruption because it’s like an all you can eat buffet for a certain amount of months.

Instead, putting catch limits in place and sharing the water based on seasonal fishing will provide more structure while limiting the need to chase as many fish as possible in a short amount of time.

An American/British Columbian study focused on this and noted that shared catch actually increased the total catch while reducing bycatch by 66%. This will reduce the amount of waste and even though fishermen are catching more fish, it won’t have an adverse effect on the ocean.

There are many opinions in the overfishing debate and with more than three billion people relying on fish as their primary protein source, it’s a discussion we need to have. No one country is to blame and no specific agency is to blame but awareness is key. We need to do something before it’s too late.

The best way to solve the problem is by getting as many people as possible talking about it.

Coty Perry is Editor-In-Chief of YourBassGuy.com. As a third-generation angler, he has a plethora of knowledge and experience on the water, and loves sharing what he knows.
https://yourbassguy.com/author/coty/

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

An SOP to vaccinate vulnerable groups without access to any kind of ID card is a much needed step, and one in the right direction. | Picture courtesy: Flickr

By External Source
MUMBAI, India, Jun 7 2021 (IPS)

In May, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) uploaded a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) related to ‘COVID-19 Vaccination of Persons without prescribed Identity Cards through CoWIN’ on its website.

The SOP reiterates that the recipient of the vaccine must register on the Co-WIN portal and that the vaccinator must verify the recipient with one of seven prescribed photo identity cards:

• Aadhaar card
• Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC)–Voter ID
• Passport
• Driving License
• PAN Card
• National Population Register (NPR) Smart Card
• Pension document with photograph

This article aims to unpack the SOP, and argues how the government’s efforts, though a step in the right direction, are grossly inadequate to help the most vulnerable.

Key issues with the clauses outlined in the document:

 

Vulnerable populations seem to be an afterthought, at best

The system of vaccination assumes universal access to the internet, smartphones, Aadhaar, OTP, English, and digital literacy. The reality is that in 2020, smartphone penetration rate in India was only around 42 percent, while the internet was accessible to 45 percent

According to the 2011 Census, India has 400,000 houseless families, and 17,73,040 homeless people. Civil society estimates that this number could be much higher, as high as 3,000,000. While the SOP does identify certain vulnerable groups such as ‘nomads, prison inmates, inmates in mental health institutions, citizens in old age homes, roadside beggars, people residing in rehabilitation centres, or camps’ (sic), it does not set any date or timeline for its operations to help these populations, which is intriguing, given the current threat of the pandemic and the extent of vulnerability of the identified groups.1

Doing so sets the narrative that these groups are often an afterthought, which was evident even earlier when 16 states that account for 40 percent of the total homeless, did not feature that in their relief circulars last year during the lockdown.

While the SOP acknowledges that it received several representations from various state and governments and organisations, the timing of the release of the SOP leaves much to be desired. As of May 25th, 2021, there are more than 2,500,000 active cases in the country.

 

The scale of exclusion must not be ignored

Even going by the 2011 Census figures, which are a decade old and have a net omission rate of 2.3 percent, 0.15 percent of the country’s population are categorised as homeless. In addition, it is estimated that there are more than 11 million street children and about half a million transpeople in India. In all, considering the estimated population growth trajectory, today we could be talking about people in excess of 31 million,2 if not more, who do not exist in the government registers.

Just to get a sense of that number, let’s consider this: One hundred and forty-nine countries in the world have a population which is less than 31 million. That is the size of the population missing from our radar today, and this includes semi-nomadic tribes, de-notified groups, transpersons, and migrants, among others. Imagine the significance of this omission in the context of COVID-19.

There is little clarity on the ID cards too. Of the seven photo IDs prescribed for the Co-WIN registration and vaccination, Aadhaar is comfortably the most ubiquitous. As of February 2020, the government said that more than 90.1 percent of the country had been issued Aadhaar cards. However, the State of Aadhaar 2019 report said that among the homeless, the percentage of people not having Aadhaar is as high as 30 percent. There is no clarity as to how the rest are supposed to access vaccines.

 

No clear budgetary allocations

While there are some provisions in the SOP for people without the prescribed ID cards, the document falls short on many levels; importantly, there are no budgetary allocations for the tasks outlined. For instance, according to the SOP, a District Task Force should identify vulnerable groups locally, so they may be vaccinated even without having any of the seven prescribed cards. However, there are no mentions of any budgetary allocation for this process.

This leads to questions such as: Who will take up the task of identifying these groups? How and when will this be done? How will the exercise of identifying, mobilising, and ensuring vaccination for people without ID cards, be carried out without the allocation of any monetary resources? Where will this sit among the priorities of state governments needing to carry out vaccinations for all their people?

Perhaps most strangely, the SOP is completely silent on follow-ups that need to be done with the ‘cohort’—a term used in the SOP but not defined—that are essential to ensure both rounds of the vaccination process are conducted. Given the risk of forced displacement due to their homelessness, how will the District Task Force ensure full vaccination for all people without ID cards?

 

The Co-WIN System

The decision of the government to centralise vaccine registration on a single portal has received enough criticism already. The process of booking a vaccine slot has become as difficult as winning a lottery; the Ministry should be taking all efforts to simplify this process.

The details about the creation of additional features on Co-WIN is shrouded in technical legalese (‘subject to the limit of session capacity’) and makes no commitments on timeline of delivery.

The system of vaccination assumes universal access to the internet, smartphones, Aadhaar, OTP, English, and digital literacy. The reality is that in 2020, smartphone penetration rate in India was only around 42 percent, while the internet was accessible to 45 percent.

The Co-WIN portal was launched in January 2021, to coincide with the rollout of the vaccine. However, it is only now in May, that the Ministry seems to have woken up to the idea of making the portal accessible in other Indian languages.

The last bullet point of this section of the SOP reads like a cruel joke. It says digital vaccination certificates will be provided to recipients, preferably at the vaccination centre itself. The Ministry might do well to recognise that if people had the capacity to receive digital certificates on smartphones, they probably wouldn’t need to be beneficiaries of this SOP in the first place.

An SOP to vaccinate vulnerable groups without access to any kind of ID cards is a much-needed step, and one in the right direction. However, the manner in which it has been conceptualised makes it seem more like a half-step than a full one. It attempts to locate the recipients but not the context in which they live in society; it urges them to get vaccinated but does not make any firm commitments; it delegates responsibility but does not accept any accountability. The social sector also seems to be completely consumed by the prevailing medical narratives, ie, lack of oxygen, ventilators, plasma, and so on. It is sadly yet to articulate the concerns of those on the margins. ­­

Footnotes:

1. In West Bengal, the government has decided to vaccinate groups that are “forcibly exposed to public mingling” on a priority basis. This includes transgender people and sex workers. While this a welcome move, it still leaves a significant proportion of the homeless and the vulnerable out of this exercise.
2. In 2011, 2.3 percent was the net omission rate of the Census. Assuming the same omission rate if Census happened in 2021, the number of unenumerated people would amount to at least 31 million.

 

 

Raghunandan Hegde works with Apnalaya as the director of impact. With more than a decade and a half of experience across programme strategy, operations, and monitoring and evaluation, Raghu’s current interest lies at the intersection of technology and social justice, and it’s potential to challenge structural inequity.

Arun Kumar has worked with social purpose organisations for more than two decades. Through the lens of social justice and non-violence, Arun has engaged with issues of marginalisation, both, in urban and rural spaces. He develops programmes and strengthens organisations invested in holistic development of communities on the margins. A student of Historical-Sociology, Arun obtained his doctorate from Binghamton University, USA; has authored three books and several articles. He writes stories for children and poems for adults, and makes documentary films.

 

This story was originally published by India Development Review (IDR)

Brazil's infrastructure minister, Tarcísio de Freitas, speaks during a videoconference with foreign correspondents, co-organised by IPS, during which he detailed plans to improve roads, ports and airports, build new railways and interconnect them, using private investors in the face of domestic fiscal constraints. CREDIT: Mario Osava/IPS

By Mario Osava
RÍO DE JANEIRO, Jun 4 2021 (IPS)

Health, fiscal, environmental and political crises have not prevented Brazil from attracting private capital to expand infrastructure, according to the sector’s minister, Tarcísio de Freitas.

Concessions for airports, highways, railways and port terminals, auctioned in the last two years, total 14 billion dollars in investments, the infrastructure minister announced at a press conference with some twenty foreign correspondents, in which other leaders from the areas of trade and transport also took part.

Accelerating this process from July will allow the country to raise the total investment to 200 billion dollars over the next five years, if resources and services under the management of other ministries, such as power plants and sanitation, are included, he projected.

“It is the largest infrastructure concession programme in our history,” Freitas said in a Jun. 2 video conference with foreign correspondents.

The COVID-19 pandemic contributed to Brazil’s success in drawing international capital, contrary to what might have been expected.

“We forged ahead when many countries pulled back and stopped offering their assets due to the uncertainties of the economic situation,” said Freitas. “We decided to bet on investors’ long-term vision and seek out the excess capital available in the world, as unique sellers.”

The operation of 22 airports was privatised on Apr. 7 for a sum equivalent to 17 times the minimum price set, despite the air transport crisis caused by the pandemic. A French company acquired the 30-year concession for a block of seven airports in northern Brazil. The others are now in the hands of a Brazilian consortium.

The success was due to “Brazil’s tradition of respecting contracts,” the large portfolio of projects and their excellent profitability, said the minister at the virtual press conference, promoted by IPS in partnership with the Association of Foreign Media Correspondents, the National Confederation of Commerce and the Federation of Chambers of Foreign Trade.

Attracting national and international private capital is the way to cover the infrastructure deficit in Brazil, given the “delicate fiscal situation” that limits public investment, the infrastructure minister said.

A passenger train meets a freight train on the Carajás Railway, built for the export of iron ore in northern Brazil. Railways in Brazil are mainly used to transport grains and minerals, accentuating the weight of commodities in the economy. CREDIT: Mario Osava/IPS

“The Ministry of Transport had 20 billion reais (about 7.5 billion dollars at the time) for investments in 2014 when it was only in charge of land transport; today the Ministry of Infrastructure has six billion reais (1.2 billion dollars) and oversees ports, airports, roads and railways,” he pointed out, to underscore the need for private capital.

Brazil invested 2.2 percent of its GDP in infrastructure from 2001 to 2014 and “should invest four to five percent to overcome its historical deficiencies,” said José Tadros, president of the National Confederation of Commerce.

That is much less than neighbouring countries such as Chile and Peru invest in infrastructure, and the consequence is high costs, “bad roads and ports, and lack of railways and intermodal connections,” he lamented.

But “it’s a virtuous moment” in the railway sector, with a strong rise in investments expected after the renewal of existing concessions and the future construction of two new major lines, said Fernando Paes, executive director of the National Railway Transport Agency.

The Ministry of Infrastructure’s National Logistics Plan sets a target for railways to carry 36 percent of national freight by 2035, an increase of 70 percent from the current share.

Ferrogrão (part of the plan) is the “most important project in Brazil,” according to Freitas. The 933-kilometre route will mainly serve the export of soy and maize from the mid-north of the state of Mato Grosso, the country’s largest producer of these exports, accounting for 27 percent of the total. The northern Amazonian route will be used instead of the more distant southern ports.

A view of the Brazilian BR-163 highway before its final northern section was paved in 2020. It is mainly used to export soy from the state of Mato Grosso. Now the plan is to build a railway next to it in order to make grain transport cheaper. CREDIT: Fabiana Frayssinet/IPS

Exports are currently transported via the BR-163 highway, the paving of which was only completed in February 2020, after decades of soybean-laden trucks getting stuck in the mud while crossing more than 900 kilometres of Amazon rainforest to reach the port of Miritituba on the Tapajós River, before the soy is carried over 1,100 kilometres down the river to the Atlantic ports.

The railway serves the interests of the multinational corporations that dominate these Brazilian exports and the global agricultural trade, such as the U.S. companies ADM, Bunge Limited and Cargill.

But Ferrogrão will make transporting these exports cheaper and will help reduce freight costs across the country, by expanding the scale of agricultural exports throughout northern Brazil and establishing a logistical hub between the heart of the Amazon and central Brazil, the infrastructure minister hopes.

Products from the Manaus Free Trade Zone, an industrial park in the capital of the state of Amazonas, will reach major national markets via waterways and the railway, he predicted.

He also said its construction will have beneficial environmental effects by cutting greenhouse gas emissions by trucks and curbing the more intense deforestation provoked by roads.

But environmentalists and indigenous rights advocates disagree.

“It will stimulate the expansion of the agricultural frontier in the Amazon rainforest, where there is a lack of governance, which results in deforestation,” said Sergio Guimarães, executive secretary of the Infrastructure Working Group, in an interview with IPS by telephone from Brasilia after the press conference.

The environmental assessment does not include the indirect impacts of the project over an area wider than the railway route and its margins, he said. Cheaper, largescale transport tends to expand the area of production in a region already affected by huge monocultures on the edges of the Amazon rainforest.

A road in the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso, with an endless line of trucks transporting soy beans and maize for export. The plan is that by 2035 at least 36 percent of freight transport in this continental-sized country will be by rail. CREDIT: Mario Osava/IPS

In addition, more supply and demand studies and comparative analyses of alternatives are needed, the activist said.

Three railway projects have been presented to transport exports of soy and maize from the mid-north of Mato Grosso, which currently stand at 70 million tons per year and will increase to 120 million tons in the near future, according to Freitas.

In addition to Ferrogrão, an isolated line to the north, the Central-West Integration Railway (Fico) will run from the east, connecting to the North-South Railway which is already in operation and has access to ports in the Northeast and Southeast of Brazil.

The third alternative is a proposal by the Rumo company to extend its Northern Network, which now reaches the south of Mato Grosso, to the centre of the soy-producing region. This network has the advantage of connecting to railways with access to Santos, Brazil’s main export port, and crossing the state of São Paulo, the most economically productive and populous state.

But “there is not enough freight to make the three railways viable,” said Guimarães, who is calling for comparative studies on the Ministry of Infrastructure’s Logistics Plan’s other projects and concessions.

Other risks identified by Guimarães regarding the Ferrogrão are the possibility of overloading and accidents on the Tapajós-Amazonas waterway, if most of Mato Grosso’s production is exported via this route, and variations in river flows due to climate change.

Another railway, the West-East Integration line (Fiol), which crosses the northeastern state of Bahia and had a 537-kilometre stretch granted to a mining company controlled by Kazakhstan’s Eurasian Resources Group, also faces environmental opposition for threatening local biodiversity, especially in the area where a port is to be built.

Ports, which were a “bottleneck” for exports, are also undergoing improvements and extensive privatisation, the minister announced.

And waterways, an undervalued resource in Brazil, are also included in the transformations his ministry intends to make. But this is where the effects of climate change are being felt most even now with a severe drought in midwestern and southeastern Brazil. Navigation on the Tietê river, which crosses the state of São Paulo in southeastern Brazil, is expected to be suspended.

The following article is part of a series to commemorate World Environment Day June 5

By Heike Kuhn
BONN, Jun 4 2021 (IPS)

You want to breathe fresh air and have access to clean water? I guess you do, just like all of us. As populations in the so-called developed countries, we love to go for holidays in places where on high mountains you get to breathe deeply and enjoy the fresh air, where the oceans or lakes are clean and refreshing. And how do we arrive there? Mostly by airplanes or cars, polluting the air whilst travelling to the desired destinations, causing harm to people and the planet. Interestingly, many people today, calculate their flight’s CO2 footprint and pay a certain amount of money to invest in renewable energy projects, in order to feel better about their travelling and to receive tax deductibility (depending on regulations of their country).

Dr. Heike Kuhn

Why do I focus today on fresh air and clean water? It is the moment of the World Environment Day. Since 1974, once a year we commemorate this. This year, 2021, the United Nations General Assembly is proclaiming the UN Decade in Ecosystem Restoration (2021-2030), referring to the achievement of the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. The United Nations Environmental Programme proclaims: 10 years to heal the planet. But will this really happen? Will commemorating, talking, uttering concerns, meeting in conferences and setting deadlines be enough to ultimately restore the endangered ecosystem? Until today, I do not believe in it yet. Why? From my point of view, words will have to be transformed in actions in order to ignite change.

I am writing this short article on June 3rd 2021, just having studied the press release of the Court of Justice of the European Union on a judgment with respect to environmental questions, focussing on clean air. The Court ruled that “between 2010 and 2016, Germany systematically and persistently exceeded the limit values for nitrogen dioxide (NO2)”, infringing “its obligation to adopt appropriate measures in good time to ensure that the exceedance period is kept as short as possible in the 26 zones concerned”. The Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe Air has not been respected, providing in respect of nitrogen dioxide an annual average limit value of 40 µg/m3 and an hourly average limit value of 200 µg/m3 as from 1 January 2010, allowing the limit to be exceeded less than 18 times a calendar year.

What happened, where and why? The underlying basis of this European directive is the idea that air, being a natural resource, is a global common good. We share the air on this planet, every human being, living and breathing, every animal, every plant. Air, being easily available to all individuals, animals and plants, can and is being polluted by some individuals in an excessive manner, causing harm to others, be it mankind or species. Therefore, there is a common responsibility for all of us on how to use this natural resource. For Europe, the relevant institutions have acknowledged this fact and imposed on European member states the task to protect the air by means of a directive, giving space to implement the provisions in national law within a certain timeframe.

But what happened in Germany instead? Lawgiving had taken place on a high level, but the law was not respected, implementation (the task of the national government) did not occur on time. Especially car drivers using harmful diesel were still circulating in the cities and regions which should have been protected, e.g., Stuttgart, Berlin and Frankfurt. These few drivers did affect many pedestrians, which could have been elderly people, parents with little children, cyclists or simply me and you, walking around on the streets, not emitting any damaging gases. And these emissions were dangerous for animals and plants, too.

To put it clearly: I am not asking not to drive in a city. However, the well-being of those persons not emitting dangerous gases should be protected first, as these persons and their lives matter. The use of fossil fuels should come to an end if it threatens others so much and if new technologies such as green electricity or hydrogen could be used instead. It is the responsibility of leaders in our governments to offer the incentives to energy consumers, taking into account the consequences of using the global common resources that all species need for survival. Governments have acknowledged this responsibility many times: We have laws and resolutions, high-ranking individuals advocating for ecological correct behaviour, you name it. But, in reality, we do see that progress comes quite slowly.

The COVID 19-crisis, as bad as it is on a global scale with millions of victims, is asking us to change life-styles in a sustainable way. This could be a chance for global common resources, e.g., the air as the most prominent one. Less pollution by traffic, less flights, less travelling, investments in green technologies and using digitization in intelligent ways could help to “build back better”, respecting the needs of all people and the planet. And the principle that the polluter is liable for the damages must be respected, finally.

Leaders in governments, civil society and businesses are challenged now – less air pollution is a powerful start, because air is our basis for ecological restoration, needed every moment that humans or animals breathe or photosynthesis takes place. Let us all push to adopt a sustainable lifestyle to protect the needs of current and future generations. The momentum is there!

Dr Heike Kuhn is Head of Division 413 – Education
BMZ, Germany

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Excerpt:

The following article is part of a series to commemorate World Environment Day June 5

By Mario Arvelo
ROME, Jun 4 2021 (IPS)

Requiring in-person voting to elect the governing bodies of UN agencies may exclude the countries most affected by travel restrictions derived from the pandemic

The United Nations were conceived to correct the design and management mistakes of the League of Nations, which could not prevent the Second World War. This is how, in 1945, the UN was born with the purpose of preserving peace. It was no coincidence that the first institution of the new international architecture specialized in issues of food and agriculture. The then West German leader Willy Brandt would summarize that decision in a 1973 speech to the UN General Assembly: “Where there is hunger, there is no peace.”

Mario Arvelo

Hunger casts a shadow over the human condition. Consequently, the governments of the world decided to place the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, better known as FAO, at the forefront of global efforts towards the eradication of hunger.

As a knowledge and technical research entity, FAO reproduces the work areas that Ministries of Agriculture cover in each country, from identifying the fastest growing and most fertile seeds to reducing post-harvest losses, caring for the soil, water management, or the fight against pathogens that threaten plant, fishery, and livestock production.

It is at FAO where country delegates find a neutral platform to examine scientific studies on nutritious and healthy diets, protection of ecosystems and biodiversity, or the benefits of agroecology, among many other topics. The organization’s technical staff identifies good practices, provide advice, and create local capacities to increase productivity in sustainable ways, especially in the face of challenges brought by climate change, as I expressed at the VI World Rural Forum held in Bilbao in March 2019 as Chairman of the Committee on World Food Security.

In the halls of FAO, nowadays transferred to virtual media as a result of the pandemic, we debate, negotiate, and agree by consensus policy recommendations for implementing quality standards and promoting inclusive rural development, so that men, women, and young farmers may remain in their communities and achieve their financial aspirations there.

My country, the Dominican Republic, which shares a small Caribbean island with the Republic of Haiti, is a founding member of the UN, and was the third country to ratify its Charter. From Santo Domingo, where I was born in 1970, the government of President Luis Abinader prioritizes, together with the fight against the pandemic, all links of the agri-food chain.

In this context, my name arises along with other ambassadors as a possible successor to Pakistani Khalid Mehboob in the presidency of the FAO Council, the command post of the agency from which 49 countries from all continents debate, harmonize and drive the organization’s strategic course. Based on these agreements, the Director-General (Chinese Qu Dongyu, who in 2019 succeeded Brazilian José Graziano da Silva) is in charge of managing the organization.

The other two candidates to chair the Council are my old friends, Hungarian Zoltán Kálmán and Dutch Hans Hoogeveen. The European Union could not agree on presenting a single candidacy, and I am honored to be the only candidate from the developing world, with a platform of inclusion, transparency, and sensitivity to the political, social, and cultural differences of Member States. I aspire to seek consensus decisions that strengthen the institution for the benefit of all.

Those who follow the Latin American political scene might be surprised to learn that the Dominican candidacy draws support from a wide ideological range: from Havana to Brasilia, passing through Caracas, Buenos Aires, San Salvador, and Bogotá. Countries of the Sahel, sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and Oceania are joining our proposal.

But why should the reader be interested in the ins and outs of an internal election at a UN agency?

Going back to the beginning, and to the will of the United Nations to correct past mistakes: the “One country, one vote” method that governs the UN tempers the power dynamics that have characterized international relations. Therefore, the votes of Tuvalu, Nauru, and Palau, three Pacific island countries that add up to 40,000 citizens in an area equal to 70 football fields, are worth the same as those of China, India, and the United States, countries that host 40 per cent of humanity and whose combined territory is twice the size of Europe.

However, in this election, an obstacle could alter this egalitarian approach among countries which encourages negotiations and striving for consensus. At the biennial FAO Conference, to be held from 14 to 18 June, it will be decided whether or not to allow electronic voting. Some delegations demand that the vote can only be exercised in person in Rome, at the FAO headquarters, without considering the travel restrictions derived from the fight against covid-19 —which affect countries to a greater extent further afield— expressly rejecting delegates’ participation in decision-making from the relative safety of their capitals.

The presidency of the FAO Council provides an opportunity to build bridges, foster inclusive dialogue, and seek consensus on the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development under the slogan “Leave no one behind”. That is why we ask that the countries most affected by the pandemic and those with the least options for traveling not be left without a voice. Strengthening FAO for the benefit of all —all— its members is the only way to eradicate hunger and all forms of malnutrition. It is one of the moral obligations of our time because, as long as hunger persists, there will be no peace.

Mario Arvelo, Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic to the Rome-based agencies of the United Nations, is a candidate for presiding the FAO Council.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Nordic Talk moderator Katja Iversen shown here with Natasha Wang Mwansa, Emi Mahmoud, Dr Natalia Kanem and Flemming Møller Mortensen during a recent Nordic Talks webinar. Credit: Shuprova Tasneem

By Shuprova Tasneem and Nayema Nusrat
DHAKA and NEW YORK, Jun 4 2021 (IPS)

Every two minutes, a girl or woman dies from pregnancy or childbirth-related complications, including unsafe abortions. Every year, around 12 million girls are married while in their childhoods. An additional 10 million are now at risk of child marriage due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

In this context, the most recent Nordic Talk—a high-level debate on bodily autonomy and sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) as a cornerstone of gender equality, aptly titled “Let’s Talk About Sex” — could not have come at a better time.

Moderator Katja Iversen, Dane of the Year (2018) and former CEO of Women Deliver, kicked off the discussion by focusing on the close link between bodily autonomy, gender equality, economic growth, and a healthy planet.

In an exclusive interview with IPS, Iversen said it was clear that “bodily autonomy for girls and women—in all their rich diversity—is political, social, economic and health-related.”

Women needed to have power and agency over their “bodies, fertility, and future, living a life free of violence and coercion in both the private and public sphere. It ties into norms, structure, systems – and if we want equity and health for all, we need to address all of it.”

Emi Mahmoud, two-time World Champion Poet and Goodwill Ambassador for the UNHCR, set the tone for the Nordic Talk with her emotive poetry reflecting women’s experiences in patriarchal societies, asking: “What survivor hasn’t had her struggle made spectacle?”

The three other panellists agreed that the right to control their bodies was a fundamental aspect of women’s rights and that gender equality was an essential part of the sustainable development agenda.

As Dr Natalia Kanem, Executive Director of the UNFPA, explained that “(women’s) freedom over her own body means freedom of choice”, and that all the data points towards how investment in SRHR could be the first step to empowering women to “ultimately contribute to sustainable development.”

It was critical that SRHR was adequately resourced – but warned these would be in short supply because of the COVID pandemic recovery plans.

“Part of the financing challenge is what we abbreviate as political will. It actually does not cost a lot for the agenda for SRHR to be a reality by 2030. It would take $26 billion a year to end the unmet need for contraception and to stop mothers dying at birth, many of whom were too young to be pregnant, but resources are going to be a challenge now with Covid having affected the world economies.”

While Flemming Møller Mortensen, Danish Minister for International and Nordic Development and Nordic Cooperation, expressed optimism regarding resources for SRHR now that “the US is back on track” and the global gag rule had been revoked. He was worried about a growing conservatism and pushback against women’s rights, particularly in the pandemic’s wake.

Iversen told IPS the cuts in various countries could be devastating.

“UNFPA estimates that with the $180 million the UK wants to withdraw from the Supplies Partnership, UNFPA could have helped prevent around 250,000 maternal and child deaths, 14.6 million unintended pregnancies and 4.3 million unsafe abortions. We will need foundations and other donor countries to step up, and we will need national government step up and step in and ensure that their national budgets reflect and fill the SRHR needs.”

She expressed concern that women on COVID-19 decision-making bodies were unrepresented.

“Less than 25% of national COVID-19 decision-making bodies have women included. It is too easy to cut resources from people who are not at the decision-making tables,” she said. “We urgently need to get a lot more women into leadership, including of the COVID-19 response and recovery efforts. All evidence shows that when more women are included in decision-making, there is a more holistic approach and both societies and people fare better.”

This call for inclusivity, not just for women but for the youth, was strongly echoed by adolescent sexual and reproductive health rights expert Natasha Wang Mwansa.

“So many commitments have been made by so many countries, yet there is no meaningful progress or accountability, and young people are not involved when making these decisions,” Mwansa said. “Young people are here as partners, but we are also here to take charge. From making choices over our own bodies to choices on our national budgets, we are ready to be part of these decisions.”

To deal with challenges in providing access to SRHR, Kanem stressed the importance of gender-disaggregated data for planning. She added that despite the hurdles, she was hopeful about the future because “young people and women are not waiting to make the case and show solidarity and understanding when it comes to racism or issues of discrimination and equity that divide us.”

Iversen echoed this optimism in her IPS interview.

“It gives me hope that comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services are included in the roadmap for Universal Health Coverage, in the Global Action Plan for Healthy Lives and Well-being, and latest in the Generation Equality Forum blueprint,” she said.

“Civil society has played a key role in ensuring this with good arguments, data and a lot of tenacity. But words in the big global documents about Health For All is one thing; gender equality and women’s rights, if it has to matter, it has to manifest in concrete action.”

The conversation rounded off with recommendations and commitments from the panellists: Mwansa stressed more investments in youth-run organisations and more social accountability from decision-makers; Mortensen asked for governments to be held accountable and for youth voices to be heard; and Kanem reaffirmed the UNFPA’s goal to put family planning in the hands of women as a means of empowerment, to end preventable deaths in pregnant women and girls, and change fundamental attitudes to end gender-based violence.

In her final comments to IPS, Iversen also stressed the importance of SRHR as a means of empowerment.

“Study after study shows that it pays to invest in girls, women and SRHR – socially, economically and health-wise. But we cannot look at SRHR alone; we need a full gender lens to the COVID response and recovery and development in general,” she said.

“And if we want to see positive change, we have to put girls and women front and centre of coronavirus response and recovery efforts, just as we, in general, need to see many more women in political and economic leadership.”

The Nordic Council of Ministers supports the Nordic Talks, and “Let’s Talk about Sex” was organised in partnership with UNFPA, the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Generation Equality, the Danish Family Planning Association, and Mind your Business, as a lead up to the Paris Generation Equality Forum.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

By External Source
Jun 4 2021 (IPS-Partners)

Kevin Watkins is the Chief Executive of Save the Children UK. Kevin joined Save the Children in September 2016, after spending three years as Executive Director of the Overseas Development Institute.

Previously, he held a senior academic role at the Brookings Institution, and acted as an adviser to the UN Special Envoy for Education, before which he spent seven years at the United Nations, as director and lead author of UNESCO’s Education for All Global Monitoring Report and UNDP’s Human Development Report.

He is a senior visiting research fellow at Oxford University’s Centre for Global Economic Governance and a Visiting Professor of International Development at the London School of Economics.

ECW: We’ve witnessed a horrifying spike in attacks on schools in recent months, undermining both the Safe Schools Declaration and breaching International Humanitarian Law. How can we keep children and youth caught in emergencies and protracted crises safe from these terrible attacks and achieve the goals outlined in the Safe Schools Declaration?

Kevin Watkins: I’m torn on this one because on the one hand it’s very complicated – we recently released an academic and legal report on this that ran to 148 pages because law and policy and practice around protecting children have built up over time with lots of different provisions and instruments, some of which overlap and some of which don’t and we wanted to get to the bottom of what’s really working to keep children safe. We found structural barriers to justice for children, like how attacks against them are prioritized for prosecution and how few experts there are who are qualified to investigate and document crimes against children.

On the other hand, this isn’t very complicated at all. Children being caught up in attacks on civilians is unbearable but attacking them at school or, in other words, attacking children because they are children is unspeakable. All of us at Save the Children are so glad to see increased attention across the world to stop attacks on children’s education, with 108 countries now having signed the Safe Schools Declaration. This October, the world will again meet in the 4th International conference on Safe Schools, in Nigeria and digitally, to strengthen this commitment. Our data indicates that the Declaration has led to change for children, reducing the number of attacks in some countries in conflict who have endorsed it.

In the end the thing that will keep children safe is collective revulsion about the destruction of the hopes of a generation.

ECW: Save the Children is providing children and youth caught in some of the world’s most complex crises and emergencies with the safety, hope and opportunity of an education through Education Cannot Wait-financed first emergency response and multi-year resilience programmes. You were one of the founders of Education Cannot Wait. How do you see the progress from the first ODI report in which you were involved, and where ECW is today?

Kevin Watkins: The first thing to say is congratulations to everyone at ECW for what has been achieved since your formation. It’s hard to believe, looking back, that there was a time when the world felt it was okay to leave children out of school for huge periods of time during emergencies as long as their basic needs for food, shelter and medicine were met. It was particularly infuriating for those of us who conducted research with children and families, knowing that they consistently put education top of their wish list for what they needed after being caught up in an emergency. As with so many things, we should listen to children!

So I think you should be hugely proud of what is being delivered by your partners, of the lives changed by your support and that of the donors who fund ECW. Even more than that, you’ve won the argument and won it forever – I don’t think anybody will ever again be able to say with any credibility that providing education in emergencies is either not necessary or not possible. You’ve broken open the imagination of the global system and given everyone the confidence to think they can do this – now that’s proven we can’t ever go back.

ECW: ECW’s multi-year resilience programmes are built to bridge the humanitarian-development-peace nexus. How can we ensure whole-of-child education responses meet whole-of-society challenges, provide children with the mental health and psychosocial support they need to recover from displacement and violence, and build back better from the COVID-19 pandemic?

Kevin Watkins: The whole challenge around mental health provision strikes me as similar to what we were talking about before. It’s not enough for everyone to decide it would be good to support children with mental health programmes, or to investigate it when appalling crimes have been committed, we need to have decided it far enough in advance that the qualified people are there to do the work.

At Save the Children we’ve been working in Jordan to develop something called the Child & Adolescent MHPSS Diploma to help skill up mental health professionals in Syria, Iraq and Yemen, because we know there is a pre-existing regional shortage of mental health professionals, particularly for paediatric care.

We’ve also been working with Imperial College London on a toolkit for treating blast injuries in children and one thing the lead researcher on that always says to me is ‘remember children aren’t little adults’. In other words what you need to do to treat a child’s shattered skeleton or shattered heart for that matter is different to how you’d do it for an older person, and we always need to design and invest in services and programmes that are specifically for children. I would love to see more investment in mental health and psychosocial support across the board, but I’ll always argue for it being targeted and tailored if we want it to work for a whole generation of children who in some cases have known nothing but war and exile.

ECW: ECW celebrated its 5th anniversary on 24 May 2021. We’ve reached close to 5 million children and youth left furthest behind in crisis with quality education, and an additional 10 million children and youth in response to COVID-19. Yet, much more needs to be done now. What message do you have for current and potential new public and private sector donors to ensure we leave no child behind?

Kevin Watkins: Happy birthday! What’s been achieved to date is fantastic. We’re very proud to be partnering with you and would definitely recommend ECW to others. This work is vital, urgent and we’ve got the stories and data to show that it works, so come and join us!

ECW: Climate-induced disasters are impacting the education of more children every year. This year the United Kingdom hosts both the G7 and the global climate talks (COP26). How can education in climate change-related disasters and crises contexts be leveraged more effectively to build more sustainable development pathways and support achievement of the Paris Agreement targets?

Kevin Watkins: One of the strange things that’s happening at the moment is a tendency to pitch one issue against another – so should we prioritize action on climate change or COVID-19 or education? When you put children at the center and start from their perspective, this is even stranger. All these things matter to a child, and they are heavily interlinked. By educating a child today, you are helping to set them up for a more secure future, with more chance of a decent livelihood and better health so they will be less vulnerable when crises hit in future. This is even more important for children living in areas that are already vulnerable to climate risks like floods or droughts, or children from disadvantaged backgrounds. It’s vital that we do more to help vulnerable communities to build their resilience and adapt to what’s to come and education is a vital part of that.

It’s also worth noting that it’s young people around the world, including school children, who are showing the most leadership right now on the climate emergency. They know their future is at stake and are rightly calling on us, as the ‘grown ups’ to get on with it.

ECW: ECW puts girls first in everything we do, and girls represent 50% of those we reach, with our affirmative action targeting 60% girls. How does Save the Children support girls’ education, and education for other vulnerable populations such as children with disabilities, and what more needs to be done?

Kevin Watkins: Save the Children is a child rights organization, founded over 100 years ago to fight for the rights of children – especially those who are being left behind because of inequality and discrimination, wherever they are in the world. This commitment applies across all our work, which is focused on three ‘breakthrough’ ambitions: that more children survive, get the chance of a quality education and are protected from violence, underpinned by action to tackle child poverty and defend child rights.

I’m proud that in 2020, across our global movement, we supported 14.7 million people through our education interventions, including many women teachers and nearly 6 million girls. We know that education is one of the best investments out there and girls’ education stands out as particularly transformative – for the girl, her family and wider community.

We’re also stepping up our focus on children with disabilities as an area that needs far more attention. We did a global survey with children and their parents on the pandemic and this brought out clearly the extra challenges faced by children with disabilities, including in education.

This work must be grounded in the local context, working with local partners and families. For example, Save the Children’s partnership with UWEZO in Rwanda works with 137 youth volunteers with disabilities in a project called ‘Mureke Dusome’. This is helping the parents of more than 2,200 children with disabilities to support their children’s reading. In Kosovo, since the Covid pandemic started, Save the Children has supported 69 families with disabilities to access the internet, including by providing 250 children with tablets and 308 children who’ve been giving education toolkits so they can keep learning even when school is not open.

ECW: We’d love to learn a bit more about you on a personal level. Could you tell us what are the three books that have influenced you the most personally and/or professionally, and why you’d recommend these books to other people?

Kevin Watkins: Last year Save the Children’s Executive Leadership Team committed to regular learning and reflection days on diversity and inclusion, so I’ve been reading up (and acting on) issues of allyship and anti-racism. I would recommend anything by Layla Saad, Reni Eddo Lodge or Ta-Nehisi Coates, who are all brilliant and insightful writers.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

The implications of Colombo’s foreign policy shift under Sri Lanka President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, from a time-honoured adherence to non-alignment to a clear affiliation with Beijing. Former minister Dr Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe said Colombo Port City (above) might turn out to be a ‘colony’ of China.

By Neville de Silva
LONDON, Jun 4 2021 (IPS)

June 4, 2021 marks 30 years since the killings of an undisclosed number of Chinese protestors at Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. For many years, the Chinese government and its ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP), with characteristic understatement, called it the ‘June Fourth incident’.

It was the hardliners in the CCP who forced the ouster of its general secretary Hu Yaobang, a party moderate who had encouraged democratic reform, and eventually ordered the military crackdown on the protestors at Tiananmen – perhaps the blackest day in the history of post-revolutionary China.

Sri Lankans should recall the central role of the Chinese Communist Party in turning Tiananmen Square into a horrendous killing field that provoked an unprecedented outpouring of public grief and condemnation from neighbouring Hong Kong, in light of the apparent reverence that Sri Lanka’s President Gotabaya Rajapaksa appears to pay to the CCP’s style of governance.

And he has done so more than once, even telling China’s Defence Minister Wei Fenghe, during his visit to Colombo in April, that he hoped to ‘learn from the governance experience’ of the CCP in poverty alleviation and rural revitalisation.

While the CCP’s role in poverty alleviation might be conceded, the same cannot be said of corruption elimination. It was growing corruption among those in the Chinese government and Communist Party that triggered the massive student protest, which demanded an end to the burgeoning graft and lack of accountability by officialdom, and collectively called for democratic reform in China’s politically regimented society.

Critics say Sri Lanka’s foreign policy of neutrality and its ‘India First’ declaration are mere geopolitical window dressing.

While President Rajapaksa, who has been invited to China, might pick up a thing or two about the success of the CCP in alleviating poverty, there is little he could learn about ridding society of other malaise prevalent in China – a pity, as such knowledge might help to eliminate Sri Lanka’s own political viruses that are causing serious concern, not only in Sri Lankan society but also in the region.

From the early years of Sri Lanka’s independence from British rule, Ceylon (as it was then known) had followed a policy of peaceful co-existence, articulated earlier by India’s Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru as the five principles of ‘Panchaseela’, deriving from Buddhist Thought.

It was this Nehruvian Panchaseela that eventually formed the bedrock of the foreign policy of most newly independent states in Asia, Africa and Latin America, under the banner of non-alignment.

Under Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike, the world’s first woman prime minister, Ceylon was among founding members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) when 25 countries met in Belgrade at NAM’s first summit in 1961

It was a foreign policy that most Ceylon/Sri Lanka governments were wedded to, except perhaps the pro-western United National Party (UNP) government under President Junius Richard Jayewardene, who cynically told me there were only two non-aligned countries in the world: the USA and the USSR.  

This was in 1979 and, ironically, he was then the Chairman of NAM having taken over the chairmanship from Sirimavo Bandaranaike who lost the 1977 general election having hosted the NAM summit in Colombo in 1976.

President Jayewardene was very much pro-American. Still, he went to Communist Cuba, an arch enemy of the US to pass on the baton to President Fidel Castro who was hosting the next NAM summit in Havana in 1979.

Then, with the advent of another Rajapaksa, Gotabaya, as president, Sri Lankan foreign policy was redefined. He said at his inauguration in November 2019 that it was now one of ‘neutrality’, dropping any reference to the long-standing policy of non-alignment.

Though never clearly defined, to Rajapaksa junior this meant staying aloof from Big Power conflicts. By that time, the Indian Ocean had perceptibly turned into a conflict zone as China’s push into this vital maritime international sea route led to counter responses from other major powers, namely the US, Japan, Australia and India.

Moreover, New Delhi saw the growing Chinese naval and economic presence in the region under China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Maritime Silk Route as an intrusion into its sphere of influence, raising strategic security concerns.

So, there was a congruence of interest among other major powers and users of the Indian Ocean in challenging what was perceived as Beijing’s expansionism, that is, asserting its own presence in the region and the freedom of navigation for all.

Shortly after Narendra Modi became India’s prime minister in 2014, he made a dramatic shift in India’s own foreign policy, turning from a ‘Look East’ policy to an ‘Act East’ one. This implied a more conscious and determined involvement in South East Asia, particularly ASEAN.

If Modi enunciated a ‘Neighbourhood First’ doctrine, Gotabaya Rajapaksa claimed his to be ‘India First’, perhaps in an attempt to balance the elder Rajapaksa, Mahinda’s, pro-China predilections as president. It was during Mahinda’s nine years at the helm, from 2005, that bilateral relations were at their strongest, perhaps not without cause.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa, with brother Gotabaya as his defence secretary, was at war with the ruthless separatist Liberation Tigers of Eelam (LTTE), popularly known as the Tamil Tigers.

The only country at the time ready to help the Rajapaksas defeat the separatists, with substantial finance and arms aid, was China, which it did in May 2009.

Mahinda returned the favour by contracting China for some major infrastructure projects, including the new Hambantota port in the deep south some 15 nautical miles or so from vital international sea lanes. This port, which is now on a 99-year lease to China because Sri Lanka could not meet its loan repayments, has turned out to be a serious strategic concern to India and other major trading nations.

Last month another major Chinese project Colombo Port City (CPC), some 270 hectares of land reclaimed from the sea close to the capital’s principal port, came alive after the Supreme Court approved the Bill to set up the managing commission after the Court called for several changes to clauses that were inconsistent with the constitution.

The CPC, in which the Chinese development holds 43 per cent of the land (also for 99 years) is intended to be a huge investment and business centre for foreign investors. This made the US ambassador in Colombo, among others, reach for the panic button for fear that the CPC could be a source of money laundering and other ‘dirty’ money.

A former minister in the previous government and a member of the ruling party, Dr Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, even warned that the Port City might well turn out to be a ‘colony’ of China, given the exclusion of Sri Lankan entrepreneurs from investing there, even if they had foreign currency to do so.

Critics of the Rajapaksa government’s policies – including the militarisation of the civil administration and the handling of the Covid-19 pandemic that is still surging in the country – say that Sri Lanka’s foreign policy of neutrality and its ‘India First’ declaration are nothing more than geopolitical window dressing.

They claim it is unsupported by fact and is meant to cover the government’s strong pro-China commitments. They also point to a media release by the Chinese Embassy in Colombo, following Defence Minister Wei Fenghe’s April visit, in which President Rajapaksa is quoted as telling the visiting minister that Sri Lanka ‘has prioritised developing relations with China and firmly supports China’s positions on issues concerning its core issues’.

If, by jettisoning non-alignment and embracing ‘neutrality’, Sri Lanka means it is following an equidistant foreign policy, it has not shown so by its actions. China obviously knows best. In its statement on the defence minister’s visit, the Chinese embassy says: ‘China appreciates Sri Lanka’s independent and non-aligned foreign policy.’

Scant wonder many are puzzled by the nomenclature.

Source: Asian Affairs

Neville de Silva is a veteran Sri Lankan journalist who held senior roles in Hong Kong at The Standard and worked in London for Gemini News Service. He has been a correspondent for foreign media including the New York Times and Le Monde. More recently he was Sri Lanka’s deputy high commissioner in London

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Restoring natural habitats as pictured here in Cuba will help to slow down climate change. A new UN-backed study released May 27 says annual investments in nature-based solutions will have to triple by 2030, and increase four-fold by 2050, if the world is to successfully tackle the triple threat of climate, biodiversity and land degradation crises. Credit: UNDP

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 4 2021 (IPS)

The United Nations has been in the forefront of an ongoing battle against the growing hazards of climate change, including the destruction of different species of plants and animals, the danger of rising sea-levels threatening the very existence of small island developing states (SIDS), and the risks of oceans reaching record temperatures endangering aquatic resources.

But that battle was temporarily undermined last year by a devastating pandemic which brought the world to a virtual standstill.

“The COVID-19 pandemic put paid to many plans, including the UN’s ambitious plan to make 2020 the “super year” for buttressing the natural world”, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned last month.

That ambition, he pointed out, has now been shifted to 2021, and will involve a number of major climate-related international commitments, including a plan to halt the biodiversity crisis; an Oceans Conference to protect marine environments; a global sustainable transport conference; and the first Food Systems Summit, aimed at transforming global food production and consumption.

“The fallout of the assault on our planet is impeding our efforts to eliminate poverty and imperiling food security,” Guterres declared.

Professor Luca Montanarella

In an interview with IPS, Professor Luca Montanarella, co-Chair of the 2018 Assessment Report on Land Degradation and Restoration sponsored by the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), told IPS the current hazards are well known, and the extent of the destruction is by now fully documented in many independent scientific assessments from the major science-policy interfaces, like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), IPBES and others.

https://www.ipbes.net/assessment-reports/ldr

The devastating effects and the close interlinkages with human health, he argued, “are now fully understood and visible to all of us following the COVID-19 pandemic. It is now time to act.”

He said the UN’s thematic plans to “Reimagine, Recreate and Restore” degraded ecosystems is the key solution, but it needs to be implemented consequently. There is a high risk to fall back to business-as- usual solutions that will be not solve the problem, he declared.

The young generation is the one that can save this planet, if properly empowered to do so. Are we ready to transfer some of the decision power to them?, he asked

The first signals from the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic are going in the opposite direction. The highest increases in unemployment rates are among women and young workers, he noted.

Mirna Inés Fernández, a member of the Steering Committee of the Global Youth Biodiversity Network (GYBN) and co-founder of its Bolivian chapter, Kaaijayu-GYBN, told IPS the continued degradation of the global environment has been so devastating to the earth’s ecosystems “that our generation has seen the birth of concepts as the Anthropocene and the Planetary Boundaries”.

“Children and youth are the ones to face the biggest mental health impacts related to ecological grief and anxiety, because we realize that the loss of species and ecosystems have reached levels that threaten the biosphere integrity and our life support systems”.

“And we don’t see enough political will to reverse this situation,” she warned.

The world is ready and in desperate need for a real transformative change, “one that allows us to live in equitable and sustainable systems for all”.

What is missing, she said, is political will, adequate allocation of resources and an inclusive decision-making process that will lead to change the status quo that took us to this point.

“We need our world leaders to address the root causes of the multiple ecological crises that we face today: the UNSUSTAINABLE way we extract, produce, consume, and dispose of things, and the UNEQUAL way the benefits and damages of all these economic activities are distributed, as cited in the Youth Manifesto #ForNature”.

“As young people, we can play multiple roles in this global campaign: by spreading the word and getting more people to join and support this global youth movement, by demanding bold actions from our decision makers, or by leading the change by example, making use of the potential that young people have to bring innovative solutions to the table as transformative education and promotion of intergenerational equity”, she declared.

 

 
Excerpts from the interview:

IPS: The UN points out its Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021-2030) aims to prevent, halt and reverse the degradation of ecosystems on every continent and in every ocean while it can help to end poverty, combat climate change and prevent a mass extinction. How feasible is this goal? What would prevent the UN from helping the world reach this goal?

Montanarella: Ecosystem restoration needs to go hand in hand with a large social inclusion programmes that will assure employment and sustainable livelihoods to the global population. Otherwise, it will be doomed to failure.

Fernandez: The goal of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration is quite ambitious and will be very difficult to be reached in only one decade because effective and complete ecosystem restoration is a process that can take various decades.

But it is very important that we have this goal that will guide the efforts to avoid further ecosystem degradation and start restoration efforts of already degraded ecosystems.

I think that one of the most important risks that could prevent the UN helping the world reach this goal is the misuse of restoration related concepts, such as offsetting, net zero/no net loss approaches, and Nature-based solutions.

Without appropriately defined safeguards for biodiversity and human rights, the wrong implementation of ecosystem restoration strategies can promote further perverse monoculture, offsetting and greenwashing schemes.

Countries and companies who want to be considered implementers of the Decade should follow strong safeguards to ensure that the quality of the restoration efforts matches the quantity in the area within the restoration policies and projects

IPS: What are your thoughts on the findings of the Land Degradation and Restoration Assessment (https://www.ipbes.net/assessment-reports/ldr) by IPBES?

Montanarella: The Land Degradation and Restoration Assessment of IPBES, that I had the honour to co-chair jointly with my dear colleague and friend Prof. Robert Scholes who sadly passed away few days ago, clearly indicates the way forward and especially highlights the social and participatory dimension of land degradation.

Land is the basis of our existence on this planet and needs to be protected accordingly. Consumption habits and micro- as well as macroeconomic developments are the key drivers of land degradation and therefore need to be addressed if we want to reverse the current negative trend.

We can do a lot, starting from our individual lifestyles and dietary habits.

Fernandez: I consider that the IPBES Assessment Report on Land Degradation and Restoration a key tool for policy makers and stakeholders to understand the extent and complexity of land degradation worldwide and take informed, appropriate action to address the drivers of land degradation and develop restoration strategies.

The key messages in the assessment, as well as the proposed ambitions and strategies for addressing land degradation, and possible actions and pathways, should be reflected in the outcomes of the Post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework and on the implementation of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration.

They should also be taken into account in the development of national targets and commitments related to combating land degradation and restoring ecosystems. I come from Bolivia, a country that has lost more than 5 million ha of an endemic ecoregion “The Chiquitano Forest” due to forest fires in 2019.

After these fires, different actors have developed various approaches to restore the devastated ecosystems. Sadly, many of these initiatives lack a solid scientific basis and could do more harm than good, including introducing invasive species, making space for monoculture plantations or changing the structure of the forest.

This is why efforts like this assessment, that provides the best available science and expertise on land degradation and restoration, are crucial to be shared among the implementers of land restoration strategies and the ones combating land degradation at the national levels.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Excerpt:

The following article is part of a series to commemorate World Environment Day June 5

Women working in government-owned nurseries in Haripur, in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, Pakistan. Pakistan has launched one of the largest reforestation initiatives in the world — the Ten Billion Tree Tsunami Programme. Credit: Zofeen T. Ebrahim/IPS

By Zofeen Ebrahim
KARACHI, Jun 4 2021 (IPS)

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan has been making sure that all foreign dignitaries visiting the country get their hands dirty. With a shovel and a watering can, they are invited to plant a tree for one of the largest reforestation initiatives in the world — the Ten Billion Tree Tsunami Programme or TBTTP.

The TBTTP is part of a series of “nature-based solutions” to fight the climate change crisis. Other initiatives include increasing the share of renewables in the energy mix to 60 percent by 2030 and to helping preserve the environment of national parks. In addition, Pakistan has provided over 85,000 green jobs (to be increased to 100,000 by the end of the year) through a Green Stimulus Package following COVID-19.

These strategies fit perfectly with this year’s World Environment Day (WED) theme of ecosystem restoration (ER) as Pakistan readies to host, in partnership with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the event tomorrow, Jun. 5.

“This WED is of global significance as it kicks off the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 2021–2030 with focus on reversing the loss to natural ecosystems to fight the climate crises,” Malik Amin Aslam, Minister for Climate Change and special assistant to the Prime Minister on climate change, told IPS.

“We hope to lead the world towards climate mitigation as well as restoration of ecosystems, ” Aslam said via What’s App.

“Pakistan’s agenda on environment has been validated and our role in ecosystem restoration has been accepted,” a pleased Muhammad Irfan Tariq, Director General of environment and climate change at Pakistan’s Ministry of Climate Change (MoCC), told IPS by phone from Islamabad. He was referring to the TBTTP, which aims to target one million hectares of forest restoration by 2023.  

“We are not doing this for show,” said Prime Minister Khan, referring to the TBTTP. “We are doing this so that we can leave behind a better country for our future generations. The biggest impact of climate change is that it will affect our future generation,” he said while addressing a TBTTP programme last week.

Incidentally, Pakistan contributes less than one percent to global emissions, yet it is among the top 10 most vulnerable countries to climate change.

Pakistan has world’s seventh-largest mangrove forest in Sindh, located along the Arabian Sea coastline in the Indus deltaic swamps, and comprising some 667,000 hectares. These mangroves are in Kakapir village, located around 15 kilometres to the west of Karachi, along the Indus delta. Credit: Zofeen T. Ebrahim/IPS

Building a relationship with nature

Environmentalist Vaqar Zakaria, however, remained wary of the methods employed by the government saying “greenwashing done in the name of restoration” cannot bring the “bees and the birds” back.

But there must be something right about the TBTTP as Saudi Arabia recently announced its intention of planting 10 billion trees in the coming decades to reduce carbon emissions and combat pollution and land degradation. 

Still, Zakaria favours protecting over restoration.

“It is better to protect because nature will heal itself back,” he said, explaining that restoration required sophisticated techniques and should be carried out with caution. “The right trees must be grown at the right place,” Zakaria, who spends hours in nature re-establishing his “connection to nature”, told IPS via phone from Islamabad. He believes that only after spending time outdoors, will “our hearts be in it and will be able to guide our future decisions”.   

Perhaps that is why the government is carrying out the Protected Areas Initiative (PAI), for “rebalancing” mankind’s relationship with nature as Aslam pointed out with plans to increase Pakistan’s terrestrial and marine protected area to 15 percent and 10 percent by 2023 respectively.

“Already our national parks have increased from 30 to 45 in number,” said the minister.

Recharging aquifers

Recharge Pakistan is a project where the government, in collaboration with the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)-Pakistan, is building water storage that aims to benefit 10 million people.

“The focus is on building Pakistan’s resilience to climate change in water-stressed areas,” explained Hammad Naqi Khan, Director General, WWF-Pakistan. Along with increasing the water storage capacity, the project aims to restore the wetland ecosystem.

“But most importantly, it will benefit more than 10 million people (or five percent) of Pakistan’s population directly and 20 million people across 50 vulnerable districts of Pakistan indirectly,” Khan told IPS.

Minister Aslam emphasised these were not mere plans but are actually being implemented with “solid performance to show on the ground”.

Simi Kamal, chair and CEO of Karachi-based think tank Hisaar Foundation that looks at water, food and livelihood security, said: it was “still too early to see results” in the project but that it would have to “be a huge programme to make visible impact”.

Fortunately, the one-year project preparation phase has been approved by the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and Pakistan will be able to conduct site feasibility studies and prepare a detailed proposal.

“Going beyond the currently underfunded GCF, there is an urgent need for developed countries to establish a truly ambitious climate reparations financing mechanism to provide assistance for adaptation projects and building resilience in many developing regions faced with potentially serious impacts of climate change,” A. Karim Ahmed, a board member of the Washington D.C- based Global Council for Science and the Environment, told IPS via email.

Blue Carbon

Another feather in Pakistan’s cap is a comprehensive assessment on blue carbon (carbon stored in coastal and marine ecosystems) that was recently completed.

“Conservation, rehabilitation, and management of blue carbon ecosystems can provide one-third of the economic mitigation needed until 2030,” climate change expert Hadika Jamshaid told IPS via What’s App.

Among the coastal wetlands, mangroves provide a huge potential to sequestering carbon. “Pakistan has done tremendously well in expanding its mangrove plantation,” said Tariq, Director General of environment and climate change at MoCC.

Pakistan has world’s seventh-largest mangrove forest in Sindh, located along the Arabian Sea coastline in the Indus deltaic swamps, and comprising some 667,000 hectares.

But in the absence of data, this blue carbon remains precluded from both the reported mitigation potential and fiscal benefits for Pakistan.

“Protection of these forests can help Pakistan achieve the country’s NDCs [nationally determined contributions],” said Jamshaid, expressing his support of the MoCC in the revision and implementation process of its NDC document. 

Meanwhile, under the TBTTP the central government will plant mangroves over 40,000 hectares, of which 15,000 hectares have already been planted, Riaz Wagan, chief conservator of forests in Sindh province, told IPS.

In addition, the Sindh government, under a public-private partnership model, is doing its own bit to restore ecosystems. It has signed an agreement with Indus Delta Capital Private Limited under the Delta Blue Carbon to plant and protect mangroves over 350,000 hectares, said Wagan, who is also leading the this Indus Delta Mangroves REDD+ Project.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• Life Below Water – the UN Calls for Action on Ocean Protection
• Is Sharing More than Water the Key to Transboundary Governance in the Meghna River Basin?
• Tired with Tokenism, Youth Launch ‘Stronger Campaign’ for UN Biodiversity Day

Excerpt:

On Saturday Jun. 5, Pakistan is hosting World Environment Day in partnership with the United Nations Environment Programme. IPS takes a look at the country’s progress in ecosystem restoration, which is this year’s theme of World Environment Day

Stop Islamophobia

By Mariya Salim
NEW DELHI, India, Jun 3 2021 (IPS)

A Muslim call centre operator at a COVID-19 ‘war room’, who once saw himself a COVID-warrior, is now unemployed after being falsely branded by a top politician as a key member of a bed-for-bribe scam. He is a victim of the rise in Islamophobia in India as the country grapples with the COVID-19 pandemic – with scant evidence of condemnation from the authorities, say activists.

Early in May, a member of Parliament for the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Tejasvi Surya, stormed into a COVID-19 ‘war room’ ostensibly to expose an alleged bed-for-bribe scam.

In a video live streamed on his social media and later repeatedly shown by many media houses, he read out 16 names, cherry-picked out of the 205 municipal helpline operators. All the 16 names were Muslims.

In the video, BJP member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) and Surya’s uncle, Ravi Subramanya, asks: “Have you appointed them to some sort of a madrasa (Islamic school) or a corporation?”.

The ‘war room’ is a Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) South zone COVID-19 war room with 400 lines and receives about 3 000 calls from citizens across the city every day, according to reports.

What followed were WhatsApp texts with the names listed by Surya – with the named employees labelled as “terrorists”. The viral messages on social media claimed this “team of terrorists” were scamming patients by offering Intensive Care Unit (ICU) beds at exorbitant fees and even reserving those beds for those in the Muslim community.

According to reports, the 16 were fired. IPS reached out to one of the named call centre operators who spoke to us on condition of anonymity.

“In April this year, I would proudly call myself a ‘COVID warrior’, helping those who needed urgent information related to the disease,” Faiz Akhtar (name changed) said in an exclusive interview. “My heart sank when I saw the term ‘terrorist’ written next to my name in WhatsApp messages soon after the MP called my name out in public alleging corruption against me.”

He told IPS he was taken in a van, like a common criminal, to the police station and had his pictures taken as if he had committed a crime. “Having a Muslim name perhaps was my crime,” he said.

Faiz, who is the sole supporter of his family, said that despite there being no evidence against him and the other 16 people named, he is yet to be reinstated into his job. This despite assurances from the BBMP south zone management.

While India was (and is) reeling under the second wave of Covid-19, which at its height recorded more than 300 000 cases a day, the blatant Islamophobia around the pandemic and misinformation around Indian Muslims and their link to the virus continues.

The past year saw Muslims labelled as ‘corona spreaders’, and this trend has not stopped.

Dr Zafarul Islam Khan, Delhi Minorities Commission former chairperson, in an exclusive interview to IPS, said when the national lockdown was declared in India last year, the Tableeghi Jamaat people were removed from their centre by the police “like they were criminals”.

The Tableeghi Jamaat are an international group of Muslims who gather in Delhi each year for a religious congregation.

The eviction and arrests received significant live media coverage.

The group had already started its annual conference at its centre in the Nizamuddin area in Delhi before the official lockdown was announced.

“They were taken to various ‘quarantine centres’ across Delhi. But these ‘quarantine centres’ were like jails where they were locked up with little care, untimely food, no medicine or doctors,” Khan said.

As the Delhi Minorities Commission chairperson at the time, he relentlessly lobbied authorities in the Delhi government until the conditions of the inmates improved.

Reports indicate that the centre continued to be targeted by police after the COVID-19 emergency was declared.

Later the courts criticized the scapegoating of the congregation, many of whom were foreigners, for the pandemic.

“This was a golden opportunity for the godi (lapdog) media which started a narrative saying that Muslims were executing a heinous and planned conspiracy to spread the coronavirus in the country, and the term “Corona Jihad” was coined to describe this so-called conspiracy,” Khan added.

What aids and abets a stereotype is when it appears to get government sanction and when those seemingly liberal and anti-communal use their position of privilege to further the witch-hunt that a community is facing. There are significant indications that this is the case in India.

Surya’s open pronouncement of select Muslim employees allegedly involved in the bed scam in Bangalore and the Delhi State Government and the Central Government giving separate figures of Tablighi Jamaat related COVID-19 patients in their daily press briefings has made life very difficult for the Muslim minority in India.

Khan wrote a letter to the Health Minister of Delhi saying that it was unfair that the Jamaat cases were mentioned separately – when no other religious communities’ figures were singled out.

“The health minister conceded to my request, and two days later, separate mention of the Jamaat in daily briefings was stopped. A day later, the central government also stopped this questionable practice,” said Khan.

Prateek Sinha, one of the co-founders of a leading fact-checking platform called Altnews, told IPS how communal information had been the mainstay of the Indian misinformation scene right since they started their platform.

“We saw a deliberate attempt to show Muslims in a bad light, trying to ascribe blame for different things that are happening in the country to Muslims,” said Sinha.

During the pandemic, there had been misinformation of all kinds. However, the way Muslims have been made scapegoats by the media, by political parties and liberals alike had been a worrying trend.

From being called Corona Jihadi (a term used to falsely ascribe the spread of the disease by Muslims as a conspiracy to kill non-Muslims) to being singled out in alleged scams without any substantiated evidence, India’s largest minority continues to face a pandemic of discrimination and scapegoating, within the larger pandemic that the world is facing.

Mariya Salim is a fellow at IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

By External Source
Jun 3 2021 (IPS-Partners)

Facing the triple threat of climate change, loss of nature and pollution, the world must deliver on its commitment to restore at least one billion degraded hectares of land in the next decade – an area about the size of China. Countries also need to add similar commitments for oceans, according to a new report by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO), launched as the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 2021-2030 gets underway.

The report, #GenerationRestoration: Ecosystem restoration for People, Nature and Climate, highlights that humanity is using about 1.6 times the amount of services that nature can provide sustainably.

That means conservation efforts alone are insufficient to prevent large-scale ecosystem collapse and biodiversity loss. Global terrestrial restoration costs – not including costs of restoring marine ecosystems – are estimated to be at least USD 200 billion per year by 2030. The report outlines that every 1 USD invested in restoration creates up to USD 30 in economic benefits.

Ecosystems requiring urgent restoration include farmlands, forests, grasslands and savannahs, mountains, peatlands, urban areas, freshwaters, and oceans.
Communities living across almost two billion of degraded hectares of land include some of the world’s poorest and marginalized.

“This report presents the case for why we must all throw our weight behind a global restoration effort. Drawing on the latest scientific evidence, it sets out the crucial role played by ecosystems, from forests and farmland to rivers and oceans, and it charts the losses that result from a poor stewardship of the planet,” UNEP Executive Director, Inger Andersen, and FAO Director-General, QU Dongyu, wrote in the report’s foreword.

“Degradation is already affecting the well-being of an estimated 3.2 billion people – that is 40 percent of the world’s population. Every single year we lose ecosystem services worth more than 10 percent of our global economic output,” they added, stressing that “massive gains await us” by reversing these trends.

Ecosystem restoration is the process of halting and overturning degradation, resulting in cleaner air and water, extreme weather mitigation, better human health, and recovered biodiversity, including improved pollination of plants. Restoration encompasses a wide continuum of practices, from reforestation to re-wetting peatlands and coral rehabilitation.

It contributes to the realization of multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including health, clean water, and peace and security, and to the objectives of the three ‘Rio Conventions’ on Climate, Biodiversity, and Desertification.

Actions that prevent, halt and reverse degradation are necessary to meet the Paris Agreement target of keeping global temperature rise well below 2 degrees Celsius.
Restoration, if combined with stopping further conversion of natural ecosystems, may help avoid 60 percent of expected biodiversity extinctions.

It can be highly efficient in producing multiple economic, social and ecological benefits concurrently – for example, agroforestry alone has the potential to increase food security for 1.3 billion people, while investments in agriculture, mangrove protection and water management will help adapt to climate change, with benefits around four times the original investment.

Reliable monitoring of restoration efforts is essential, both to track progress and to attract private and public investments. In support of this effort, FAO and UNEP also launch today the Digital Hub for the UN Decade, which includes the Framework for Ecosystem Restoration Monitoring.

The Framework enables countries and communities to measure the progress of restoration projects across key ecosystems, helping to build ownership and trust in restoration efforts. It also incorporates the Drylands Restoration Initiatives Platform, which collects and analyses data, shares lessons and assists in the design of drylands restoration projects, and an interactive geospatial mapping tool to assess the best locations for forest restoration.

Restoration must involve all stakeholders including individuals, businesses, associations, and governments. Crucially, it must respect the needs and rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, and incorporate their knowledge, experience and capacities to ensure restoration plans are implemented and sustained.

*******

The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 2021-2030 is a rallying call for the protection and revival of ecosystems all around the world, for the benefit of people and nature. It aims to halt the degradation of ecosystems and restore them to achieve global goals. The United Nations General Assembly has proclaimed the UN Decade and it is led by the United Nations Environment Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The UN Decade is building a strong, broad-based global movement to ramp up restoration and put the world on track for a sustainable future. That will include building political momentum for restoration as well as thousands of initiatives on the ground.

About the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)
UNEP is the leading global voice on the environment. It provides leadership and encourages partnership in caring for the environment by inspiring, informing and enabling nations and peoples to improve their quality of life without compromising that of future generations.

About the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO)
The FAO is a specialized agency of the United Nations that leads international efforts to defeat hunger and transform agri-food systems, making them more resilient, sustainable and inclusive. Our goal is to achieve food security for all and make sure that people have regular access to enough high-quality food to lead active, healthy lives. With over 194 Members, FAO works in over 130 countries worldwide.

Excerpt:

Launching the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, UN calls on countries to meet commitments to restore 1 billion hectares of land

A young Sudanese girl holding a baby in the Al Salam internally displaced persons camp. Credit: Sven Torfinn/CC By 2.0

By External Source
NAIROBI, Jun 3 2021 (IPS)

The number of girls who marry before their 15th birthday has remained unchanged for 20 years in most countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The region has the highest rate of child marriage, with nearly four in 10 girls married before age 18. In Niger, for example, over 77% of girls are married before the age of 18.

This is despite efforts by governments, developmental partners and civil society organisations to end the practice. There are many reasons why it continues. These include inequitable gender norms, laws that permit children to be married in some settings in sub-Saharan Africa, inadequate investment in girls’ education, poverty and unintended pregnancy. In addition, child marriage is backed and justified by culture and religion.

The effects of child marriage on the health and wellbeing of girls are far-reaching and lifelong. It harms their overall health and socioeconomic wellbeing, the survival of their children, and the prosperity of their family and community. Because child marriage harms girls’ physical health and socioeconomic wellbeing, it is considered a human right violation

The effects of child marriage on the health and wellbeing of girls are far-reaching and lifelong. It harms their overall health and socioeconomic wellbeing, the survival of their children, and the prosperity of their family and community. Because child marriage harms girls’ physical health and socioeconomic wellbeing, it is considered a human right violation.

The health consequences of child marriage have received significant attention. But only a few studies have examined the relationship between child marriage and intimate partner violence. One study done in Vietnam in 2013 found that there was a link between the two.

Our study examined the relationship between child marriage and intimate violence in sub-Saharan Africa. We analysed the most recent demographic and health survey data of over 28,000 young women in 16 countries in the region. The survey data encompasses several health and wellbeing indicators including domestic violence. We extracted relevant information about domestic violence as well as the background characteristics of the respondents.

We found that girls aged 20-24 years who married before they turned 18 were 20% more likely to experience intimate partner violence than those who married as adults.

 

Our research

Our principal aim was to assess the association between child marriage and intimate partner violence – physical, sexual or emotional – from a partner. We also compared the rate of intimate partner violence between those who married as adults and those who married as children in the past 12 months.

We analysed data of countries from all four sub-regions within sub-Saharan Africa. In Central Africa, we included Angola, Cameroon and Chad. From West Africa we included Benin, Mali and Nigeria and from the east Burundi, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. Within Southern Africa, Malawi, Mozambique, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe were selected.

Countries were selected on the basis of the availability of recent survey datasets.

The demographic and health survey had questions to measure each of the indicators. These questions relate to the experience of:

• Physical violence: women had been asked whether their partners had ever pushed, shaken or thrown something at them, slapped or punched them, kicked or dragged them.
• Emotional violence: women had been asked if their partner ever humiliated them, threatened them with harm, insulted or made them feel bad.
• Sexual violence: questions had included whether the partner ever physically forced the respondent into unwanted sexual acts.

Our analysis of the demographic and health survey data showed that child marriage prevalence ranged from 13.5% in Rwanda to 77% in Chad. Intimate partner violence ranged from 17.5% in Mozambique to 42% in Uganda.

Past year experience of intimate partner violence was higher among young women who married or began cohabiting before the age of 18 (36.9%) than those who did at age 18 or more (32.5%).

This result was consistent for all forms of violence: physical violence (22.7% vs 19.7%), emotional violence (25.3% vs 21.9%), and sexual violence (12% vs 10.4%).

After accounting for the contributions of important socio-demographic characteristics such as educational level, place of residence, wealth status and exposure to mass media, we found that child marriage had a higher association with intimate partner violence than marriage at adulthood.

 

Ways forward

Overall, our findings reaffirm the link between child marriage and intimate partner violence. We found that there was a higher likelihood of intimate partner violence in 14 of the 16 countries. Angola and Chad stood out as exceptions.

As our results show, child marriage is associated with a higher likelihood of intimate partner violence in most sub-Saharan African countries. This suggests that ending child marriage would result in a substantial reduction.

There is therefore a need to institute policies to support and protect women who marry as children from abusive relationship.

Fighting cultural norms that make men unaccountable is critical to ending both child marriage and intimate partner violence. And this can be done through the creation of strict laws. Currently, 43 of the 55 African Union member states have legal frameworks that put the minimum age of marriage at 18 years old or above for both boys and girls. However, 27 of these states allow child marriage with parental or guardian consent and the approval of a judge, court or state. Ten countries allow for the marriage of girls as young as 10. One, the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic, has no law against child marriage.

All countries should have laws. And these should be strictly enforced.

Community sensitisation on the damaging effects of both child marriage and intimate partner violence is equally critical. This could be implemented with the involvement of various stakeholders, including community and religious leaders.

Anthony Idowu Ajayi, Associate research scientist, African Population and Health Research Center

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Credit: World Food Programme WFP

By Lauren Baker
TORONTO, Canada, Jun 3 2021 (IPS)

This week*, the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) is expected to endorse recommendations on agroecological and other innovative approaches for sustainable food systems, after an intense period of negotiation involving governments, UN agencies and institutions, Indigenous People’s organizations, civil society, and the private sector.

As they do so, they must also take a stance against the creeping co-option and “greenwashing” of agroecology and uphold the social and political foundations of agroecology. It is these inherent characteristics that are so crucial for the deep structural transformation of global food systems that we so urgently need.

As a vital science, practice, and movement, with inextricably linked ecological, social, and political elements, agroecology is gaining more acceptance globally. From our work convening food systems actors working in agroecology, regenerative agriculture, and Indigenous foodways, coupled with the launch of recent studies on the need for investment in agroecology and this review on agroecology’s contribution to food security and nutrition, we know the evidence clearly supports it as a transformative approach.

In particular, agroecology combines ecological principles of diversity, resilience and recycling (for example) and the co-creation of knowledge, contextual factors like culture and tradition with responsible governance and the importance of circular and solidarity economies.

Yet, there is an emerging and real risk that agroecological messages, approaches, and methods are being cherry-picked and absorbed into the public narrative without recognition of the deeply transformative elements that define agroecology and how they lead to a healthy and sustainable future of food for all.

COVID-19 has been a brutal demonstration of what goes wrong when we do not recognize the deep interconnections between human, animal, and ecological health. It has disrupted food systems — and subsequently people’s livelihoods and health — on a global scale and, unlike anything before, has called into question the unsustainable and vulnerable industrialized food systems currently at play.

Support for the industrialized model of food and agriculture — which is premised on a mindset that commodifies food, externalizes its true environmental and social costs and is upheld by short-term, unambitious policies and funding streams — needs to change.

The industrial model marginalizes the world’s majority food producers — smallholder farmers, food provisioners and workers, Indigenous Peoples, and their innovative solutions, while causing far-reaching and detrimental environmental impacts. It is estimated that food systems account for approximately 30% of global emissions.

The pandemic recovery moment cannot be left to pass and instead must be harnessed as a moment for real change.

There is a growing diversity of voices and communities from around the world laying claim to agroecology’s transformative effects: 600,000 farmers in Andhra Pradesh, India, are transitioning to natural farming with support from the state government working in partnership with civil society organizations, while other countries like Costa Rica, Senegal, and Germany are setting meaningful targets and transitioning their support towards agroecology and organic agriculture.

There are increasing numbers of local, regional, and global farmers’ networks advocating for this approach. This is all happening even in spite of the fact that most agriculture and food subsidies, policies and programs, and donor activity, are still geared towards shoring up an industrialized model of food production.

With the UN Food Systems Summit and COP26 just a matter of months away, it’s never been more important to embrace systems-based approaches and protect all that they stand for. In order to unlock the real benefits of agroecology, we need to see adapted policies, public investments, institutions, and research that promote a whole-systems approach and the advancement of agroecological and regenerative approaches that embed social and political principles.

Decision-makers must, from the get-go: acknowledge the strong role that local institutions and communities have; protect and expand rights, investment in infrastructure; and, embrace the central role of smallholder farmers, Indigenous Peoples, and women.

Crucially, this will involve actively resisting the rise of so-called “junk agroecology” and, concurrently, widening the frame of the evidence used to influence and inform decision-making.

A narrow focus just on scientific evidence (though critically necessary) at the expense of other types of evidence, diverse perspectives, and ways of knowing will only continue to jeopardize our understanding of the interconnected challenges we face and hold us back from mobilizing around the transformative opportunities across our food systems that are readily available — and within reach.

This is an urgent call to action.

*The Special Session of the 48th Plenary of CFS will take place virtually on Friday, 4 June 2021 to endorse the CFS Policy Recommendations on Agroecological and Other Innovative Approaches. The endorsement of the Policy Recommendations was moved from CFS 47 (held in February 2021) as their negotiations and completion was delayed due to COVID-19.

Dr Lauren Baker, PhD, is Senior Director of Programs at the Global Alliance for the Future of Food. She has more than 20 years of experience facilitating cross-sectoral research, policy and advocacy for sustainable food systems in non-profit, academic, business, policy and philanthropic contexts. Previously, she led the Toronto Food Policy Council, a citizen advisory group embedded within the City of Toronto’s Public Health Division, and was the Founding Director of Sustain Ontario — the Alliance for Healthy Food and Farming. Lauren teaches in the Global Food Equity program at the University of Toronto, and is a research associate with Ryerson University’s Centre for Studies in Food Security.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

There is no health without mental health. Credit: Unsplash /Melanie Wasser.

By Ifeanyi Nsofor
ABUJA, Jun 2 2021 (IPS)

Recently, Naomi Osaka, the number 2 ranked women’s tennis player in the world, said she would not participate in the press conference at the French Open (Rolland-Garros) because she wanted to protect her mental health.

The organizers of the tournament were incensed, imposed a fine on her and threatened to disqualify her.  Would the organizers have reacted differently if Naomi Osaka said she could not participate in the tournament’s press briefing because of a physical illness, such as abdominal pain? Your guess is as good as mine, but I believe the organizers would have been more empathetic and would have provided her with the best medical treatment. The same should happen for mental health.

Osaka was stigmatized because people do not understand mental health and feel she should “man up” and attend a press conference. Further, athletes like her are all too often viewed as superhuman and incapable of showing weakness

It is wrong for the organizers to impose a fine of $15,000 on Osaka and threaten to suspend her for missing the press conference. Such reactions contribute to why mental health is still so widely misunderstood, shrouded in mystery and stigmatized.

There is no other way to put this. Osaka was stigmatized because people do not understand mental health and feel she should “man up” and attend a press conference. Further, athletes like her are all too often viewed as superhuman and incapable of showing weakness.

Due to the backlash, Osaka has withdrawn from the French Open, apologized and the French Tennis Federation President has also apologized for the way this episode was handled. However, as regrettable as the events are, it can serve as a teachable moment for everyone.

Here are five ways to ensure mental health illnesses receives the same prominence as physical illnesses.

First, there is no health without mental health. The World Health Organization defines mental health as a state of well-being in which an individual realises his or her own abilities, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and is able to make a contribution to his or her community.

Surely, from this definition, Osaka could not handle the stress which comes with participating in press conferences. She said so. She mentioned her experience with depression. Participating in the tournament press conference could have worsened her health and well-being. She was right to have withdrawn from the press conference and the tournament. Her health trumps all other concerns.

Second, revealing one’s mental health challenge is a strength and not a weakness. This wrong perception of mental health is ubiquitous.

For instance, EpiAFRIC and Africa Polling Institute interviewed more than 5,000 in a nationwide mental health survey in Nigeria. Some respondents said they will use force and other extreme measures on sufferers of mental health illness.

For example, 4% said they would lock up the sufferer while 2% said they will beat the disease out of the person. The way the French Open organizers responded to Osaka’s cry for help is wrong and must be condemned by all. It is great to see the support extended to Osaka by other Black elite athletes, Serena Williams and Stephen Curry.

Third, sports tournaments must develop a comprehensive mental health support policy for athletes. This is not the first time a major athlete cried out for help in dealing with a mental health challenge.

Naomi Osaka October 28th 2020 during the semi-final match of the women’s Cincinnati Masters played at the USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center’s Grandstand court. Credit: AndrewHenkelman / Creative Commons.

According to Athletes for Hope, 35% of elite professional athletes suffer from a mental health crisis which may manifest as stress, eating disorders, burnout, or depression and anxiety. Too many athletes are suffering in silence.

Due to their achievements and celebrity status, they are being shamed into silence. To help deal with this silent pandemic, sports tournaments must develop comprehensive mental health support policy. Elite athletes such as Osaka should have mental health counsellors as part of their medical teams. No athlete should have to suffer in silence because the consequences of that could be fatal.

Fourth, we must stop viewing Black women as having higher pain threshold. It is a common misconception for Blacks to be seen to tolerate pain better than other races. According to Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, 40% of first- and second-year medical students were of the belief that “Black people’s skin is thicker than white people’s.”

Even at childbirth, Black women are sometimes refused pain medications because of this wrong belief. This leads to verbal and physical abuse of someone dealing with a debilitating health condition. When Osaka said speaking at the press conference would negatively impact her mental health, she should have been believed. She is dealing with the pain of depression and needs all the support she can get.

Finally, media outlets must train reporters on writing about mental health with empathy. The Daily Mail UK article, in which the writer accused Osaka for “cynical exploitation of mental health to silence the media” is harsh and not the way to describe someone who is dealing with depression. Such articles worsen Osaka’s battle with depression and discourages other athletes from speaking out about mental health challenges they face.

Osaka is 23 years old. At such a young age, she should be celebrated for her boldness in confronting depression and being vocal about it. I hope she gets all the recuperation she needs. I pray she becomes stronger and can play in her next tennis tournament.

 

Dr. Ifeanyi McWilliams Nsofor is a graduate of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine. He is a Senior New Voices Fellow at the Aspen Institute and a Senior Atlantic Fellow for Health Equity at George Washington University. Ifeanyi is the Director Policy and Advocacy at Nigeria Health Watch.

Beachfront hotels and yachts at Pigeon Point, Saint Lucia. The ocean supports a myriad of livelihoods on the small island states of the OECS – amounting to 30% of the labour force in some countries. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS

By Alison Kentish
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 2 2021 (IPS)

President of the United Nations General Assembly Volkan Bozkir has told a high-level debate on oceans that the world cannot afford to delay action on ocean protection. “There is simply no scenario wherein we live on a planet without an ocean,” he said.

The debate, which focused on the ocean and Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14: Life Below Water, took place on Jun. 1 at the UN Headquarters in New York.

It comes ahead of the Jun. 8 observance of World Oceans Day and against the backdrop of the pandemic-related postponement of the 2nd UN Ocean Conference – a major international gathering which seeks science-based solutions to sustainable ocean use.

The high-level debate was billed as a ‘drumbeat’ to maintain momentum ahead of the conference, now expected to take place in Lisbon next year.

The General Assembly President said the pandemic has revealed an “appetite for change” among people who do not want to live in a world of “one crisis after the next”. He said this change is possible.

“As our understanding of the true benefit of a healthy planet grows, policymakers are increasingly aware of how central a healthy ocean is to a healthy economy,” he said.

“We have seen this in countries and cities that prioritised coastal and marine areas over-tourism, we have seen this in protected wetlands, we have seen this in efforts to address illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, and regulate shipping and resource extraction. Why then can we not combine and scale up our efforts?”

The UN has been at the forefront of efforts to mobilise financial, scientific, volunteer and community support for oceans, through initiatives such as the 2021-2030 Decade of Ocean Science.

The high-level debate builds on those ocean conservation and sustainable use measures.

Pigeon Point, Saint Lucia. With 97 percent of the water on the earth’s surface, the ocean is vast. It serves as a source of food and energy, while facilitating commerce, transportation and communication. Sustainable Development Goal 14 lists specific targets to reduce pollution, protect marine ecosystems, tackle illegal and over-fishing and oversee sustainable resource use. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS

Special Envoy of the Secretary-General on Oceans Peter Thomson told the forum that while there have been improvements on this front, including increased marine protected area coverage and a better understanding of the issues that impact the ocean, progress has not been adequate to address the ocean crisis.

“How can we claim success when a third of assessed global fish stocks are being overfished? When with no tangible end in sight, we have dumped around 150 million metric tons of accumulating plastic waste, microplastics and discarded fishing gear into the ocean? And while the rates of ocean acidification, deoxygenation and warmth are all continuing to head in the wrong direction?”

With 97 percent of the water on the earth’s surface, the ocean is vast. It serves as a source of food and energy, while facilitating commerce, transportation and communication. Sustainable Development Goal 14 lists specific targets to reduce pollution, protect marine ecosystems, tackle illegal and over-fishing and oversee sustainable resource use.

One region taking action to address ocean issues and achieve SDG 14 is the Eastern Caribbean.

In 2012, the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) established an Oceans Governance Team, a regional body that oversees work on oceans governance. The team helped to develop the Eastern Caribbean Regional Ocean Policy (ECROP) which articulates the countries’ vision for the ocean and principles of ocean governance.

One of the major ECROP initiatives is the Caribbean Regional Oceanscape Project, known as CROP. Through a partnership with the World Bank, CROP, with its tagline ‘championing resilient oceans for prosperity,’ is helping the Caribbean transition to a blue economy.

“We focus on economic growth, but we also ensure that we are conserving the resources, so that we are not damaging them and impairing our future benefits. It’s really the same sustainable development agenda, focusing on the economics, the environment and the social aspects relating to the oceans,” Susanna Debeauville-Scott, Project Manager in the Ocean Governance and Fisheries Unit at the OECS Secretariat, based in Saint Lucia, told IPS.

For the Caribbean, the goal is to propel discussion on ocean issues and action for the protection and sustainable use of its resources. The Unit is overseeing initiatives like Building Resilience in the Eastern Caribbean through a Reduction in Marine Pollution (ReMLit) to tackle marine waste.

A ‘tag an artiste’ drive based on the theme ‘more than just islands’ hopes to get entertainers in the region singing about oceans and promoting the islands’ blue space as ideal for a thriving blue economy.

The unit is hoping to highlight the critical importance of oceans and get journalists onboard through a special journalism challenge.

Debeauville-Scott told IPS that the Unit is gearing up for a virtual event on Jun. 8th – World Oceans Day. That activity will focus on mapping ocean wealth and marine spatial planning data and tools for improved decision-making in the Caribbean.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• Q&A: All Sustainable Development Goals Relate in Some Way to the Oceans
• Is Sharing More than Water the Key to Transboundary Governance in the Meghna River Basin?
• Latin America & the Caribbean Assess Climate Ambition and Action Ahead of COP26

Excerpt:

Ahead of World Oceans Day 2021 and the second UN Ocean Conference next year, UN officials stressed the need for ‘clear, transformative and actionable’ solutions to the ocean crisis.

Sunrise in the Ebro Delta in Spain's Catalonia region. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said last month there was a 40% chance of the watershed global warming mark being met during the time frame, and these odds are increasing with time. Credit: WMO/Agusti Descarrega Sola

By Simone Galimberti
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Jun 2 2021 (IPS)

With the climate negotiations getting more and more intense in the light of ensuring meaningful achievements in the upcoming COP- 26 summit in Edinburgh, an event that is key to move forward the pathway towards a net zero future started in Paris, this year World Environment Day on June 5 assumes an even more emblematic meaning.

While the ongoing climate negotiations have finally found relevance not only among policymakers but also among the masses thanks to new level of civic mobilization that is instrumental in creating a new global consciousness about the real perils of climate change, we are at risk of overlooking an equal important issue that is connected to the core of the climate challenge.

Fortunately, the World Environment Day 2021 could not choose a better topic to bring remedy here, finally highlighting the linkages between the dangers of a world economy driven by carbon fossils and the repercussions that emissions stemming from them and other types of human activities are having on the planet’s biodiversity.

To stress the new sense of urgency, that with “Ecosystem Restoration” as theme, World Environment Day is launching the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration that will be focusing on restoring, supporting and enhancing the planet’s different habitats in which life, of different forms and species, should supposedly abound and thrive rather than being at risk of extinction.

Restoring ecosystems should be therefore seen as a rallying cry, a call for action to ensure that biodiversity claims its due visibility in the broader call for a sustainable future under the banner of the Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Policy makers are right now under pressure to come up with bolder and stronger emission targets and it is encouraging how a global leadership movement is emerging to tackle climate change.

If the Petersberg Climate Dialogue has now become a traditional forum, many other leaders from parts of the world’s previously less engaged on climate action, are stepping up.

Just days ago, the P4G Seoul Summit 2021 was held showing a new commitment from the Government of South Korea to become a trailblazer in matter of climate actions.

Yet, with so much discussions on climate change going on, the hope is not just that global leaders will muster the foresight and determination to truly lay out a long term “build forward better” vision of their countries but will also be able to bridge the gap that separate discussions on climate change from those focused on the planet’s endangered biodiversity.

Worryingly enough, the public opinion and consequentially the world leaders did not yet broaden their focus yet from the COP 26 discussions, enlarging their horizons to include another strategic summit that will be held from 11 to 24 of October in Kunming, formally the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Unfortunately, the global governance mechanisms do not facilitate cross cutting thematic linkages and therefore so far Edinburgh got much higher levels of attention than Kunming.

Yet, the same consensus existing now that new ambitious carbon emissions targets are essential for our survival, should also imply an acknowledgement on the need to elevate biodiversity to the same levels of attention and urgency that climate now musters.

The ninth Trondheim Conference on Biodiversity held in 2019 could not make a better case for such recognition.

“Scientists warn that we are heading for fundamental change in Earth systems as a result of changes in the biosphere” while stressing that “there are close links between the biodiversity and climate agendas, and it is well understood that a temperature rise of 1.5˚C will have impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem function and services”.

With such high stakes at play it is baffling how we tend to neglect the importance of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets that were endorsed during the Tenth meeting of the Conference to the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity held Nagoya, Japan, 18-29 October 2010

Kunming is even more important because it will adopt a post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework that will be considered as “a steppingstone towards the 2050 vision of living in harmony with nature, where by 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and widely used, maintaining ecosystem services sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essentials for all people”.

The vision of a “2050 living in harmony” was agreed in Nagoya but it needs an urgent rebooting and this is what Kunming should deliver, a new ambitious agenda that is able to be mainstreamed across the policy spectrum.

Indeed, mainstreaming is one of the biggest issues being discussed in the preparations to the Kunming summit.

In the regional consultation workshop on the post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework for Asia and Pacific, participants highlighted the missing linkages between work in the field of biodiversity, climate change and the overall SDGs framework.

“With the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, there is a need to consider how future biodiversity targets will relate to or compliment the Sustainable Development Goals. Similarly, the need to link future biodiversity targets to the climate change agenda was also noted”, the report of the workshop explains.

Fortunately, there are some good news for us.

In the last official review of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, Protected Planet Report, there have been good progress in the extension of lands and oceans being protected but “a third of key biodiversity areas lack any coverage, and less than 8% of land is both protected and connected”.

In addition, the overall “quality” of such protected areas remains a question that must be addressed urgently, a concern well highlighted by Naville Ash with UNEP:

An interesting though much unexplored linkage between efforts on biodiversity and climate action is the “importance of nature-based solutions for climate change mitigation and adaptation” and this is a huge area open for a global brainstorming and ideation process, reimagining different, more biodiverse and sustainable living settings.

These days the third session of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI-3) of the Convention on Biological Diversity is taking place virtually in order to make the next biodiversity framework more effective, more streamlined and better relevant to the discussions taking in place around climate change.

We need to formulate a new narrative about biodiversity because at the end of the day it is a different side of the same coin and policy makers must be educated on strong linkages between climate change and biodiversity loss.

It is not surprising that resources needed for such “coupling” approach are going to be huge. According to the State of Finance for Nature report, released on the 27th of May, making a much-needed contribution in linking the two areas of biodiversity and climate, a total investment in nature of USD 8.1 trillion is required between now and 2050.

As you can see this year World Environment Day is not like any previous one.

There are two questions that this day should help reflect over: Will the celebrations ensure that the new UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration is going to be aligned with climate change discussions and Agenda 2030?

And will it help create a new sense of awareness and urgency that tackling climate change requires the protection and expansion of our wealth expressed in biodiversity and, at the same time, gigantic resources?

Answering these two questions in the right way will determine the odds human beings will have to truly thrive in the decades ahead.

The Author, is the Co-Founder of ENGAGE, a not for profit in Nepal. He writes on volunteerism, social inclusion, youth development and regional integration as an engine to improve people’s lives. He can be reached at simone_engage@yahoo.com

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

Excerpt:

The following Oped is part of a series of articles to commemorate World Environment Day June 5

On May 28, Zimbabwean and IPS journalist Jeffrey Moyo was arrested for allegedly violating Section 36 of the Zimbabwe’s Immigration Act.

By Busani Bafana
BULAWAYO, Zimbabwe, Jun 1 2021 (IPS)

As international correspondent Jeffrey Moyo was denied bail for allegedly breaching a section of the Zimbabwe Immigration Act by helping two foreign journalists work in the country without proper media accreditation, local organisations have called for his release and for him to be accorded a fair trial.

Moyo (37), a correspondent for Inter Press Service (IPS), the New York Times and other media, was arrested in Harare on May 27 and is being detained at Bulawayo Prison.

Bulawayo Magistrate Rachel Mkanga denied Moyo’s bail application yesterday, May 31, stating that Moyo was deemed a threat to national security and that the sovereignty of Zimbabwe was at stake.

Moyo has been charged with violating Section 36 of the Immigration Act, which is essentially based on an allegation that he made a false representation to immigration officials. This pertains to the accreditation of two of his colleagues, Christina Goldbaum and Joao Silva from the New York Times.

Goldbaum and Silva arrived in Zimbabwe on May 5 and were subsequently deported on May 8 for not having proper accreditation with the Zimbabwe Media Commission (ZMC), the media regulatory body in the country.

“The state’s case is weak and they know it, that is why they deported the key witnesses and want to deal with the locals and set him as an example [for others] not to compromise security-related issues,” Tabani Moyo, the Executive Director of the Media Institute of Southern Africa –Zimbabwe, told IPS.

“Jeff must be given a fair trial so that we do not have a situation where the law is used a weapon against the media,” Tabani Moyo said, adding “we are not surprised with the turn of events as the state uses multiple strategies to intimidate depending on how it is irritated not with the media but with its international relations.”

In a statement released on Friday, May 28, the ZMC said it learnt of the deportation from Zimbabwe of “a man and a woman claiming to be New York Times reporters and carrying forged accreditation cards and receipts which they reportedly said had been obtained on their behalf by Jeffrey Moyo, at the time a properly accredited local reporter for the same New York Times”.

The ZMC said the New York Times journalists had not visited the ZMC offices though they had written to the relevant authorities to seek the prior clearance papers required before one can work locally as a journalist on temporary assignment. The relevant authorities had denied Goldbaum and Silva prior clearance.

The state media body also alleged that Moyo had recognised irregularities in the accreditation and reportedly “privately approached a ZMC staffer who also allegedly agreed to collude with Moyo and his now deported colleagues.” The ZMC staffer was also arrested.

The Media Institute of Southern Africa –Zimbabwe said Jeffrey Moyo must be given a fair trial and that his case should not be an instance where the law is used “as a weapon against the media”. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

Award-wining, internationally acclaimed journalist and documentary film maker Hopewell Chin’ono told IPS via What’s app that Moyo’s arrest was an abuse of state institutions.

“The arrest of Jeffery is again an abuse of state institutions because the person who committed the crime is person working for the ZMC and not Jeffrey, who was a recipient of something that had been done incorrectly and at the very least he should be  a state witness but he is the one being incarcerated,” Chin’ono told IPS. He was referring to a ZMC staffer.

Over the course of 2020 and early this year, Chin’ono, a critic of the current government, was arrested three times by Zimbabwe police. His arrest made international headlines.

“There is no freedom of speech to practise journalism in Zimbabwe as long as you report against the political elite and Zanu PF is in power….Zanu PF as long as it is in power will continue to use state institutions to persecute journalists and  other citizens for simply doing what is constitutional.”

Meanwhile, Moyo’s lawyer said they would appeal the bail hearing.

“We strongly disagree with those and all the grounds on which the court relied for denying him bail and we are currently preparing an appeal which will be filed as soon as we are able to obtain the record of proceedings from the Magistrate’s court,” Moyo’s lawyer Doug Coltart told IPS by telephone yesterday.

“The main grounds the court relied on was that he was a flight risk and likely to abscond trial and this funny ground that does not have any basis in law that he is a threat to national security and that the sovereignty of Zimbabwe is at stake because the international journalists interviewed Zimbabwean people without the Ministry of Information knowing about it,” Coltart said.

Coltart further said Moyo’s wife wasn’t allowed to visit him and that his prison conditions were deplorable.

“He is ok any and still mentally strong [but] the conditions in prison are still bad,” Coltart said, emphasising that Moyo had to share a blanket with one of the other inmates and was prevented to accessing reading materials.

“They have denied him access to his wife and most concerning of all he was actually slapped, I believe by one of the medical staff at the prison. We intend to make a complaint on that,” said Coltart.

“We are focusing on getting him out with the bail appeal but certainly intend to make a complaint about the inhumane conditions in the prison.”

If convicted, Moyo could face up to 10 years in jail.

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• Q&A: If China had a Free Press COVID-19 Pandemic ‘May not Have been so Severe’
• How Technology Reproduces & Amplifies Harassment & Abuse of Women Journalists
• “In Zimbabwe there is Freedom of Speech, but no Freedom After the Speech”