Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

Fast fashion consumes vast resources, often polluting and devastating the natural world. Pictured here are garment workers in Bangladesh. Credit: Obaidul Arif/IPS

By Samira Sadeque
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 28 2020 (IPS)

Racism “keeps the global north oblivious to the effect of fast fashion addiction on the global south” say environmental and gender justice experts.

Organisers and activists came together last week to discuss how the fast fashion industry sits at the intersection of environmental and gender justice. The industry, which discriminates against women from the production cycle to the consumption of it, contributes to environmental degradation as two million tonnes of textile are discarded every year.

Beyond that, fashion also plays a crucial role for people of different genders to express themselves, panelists said at the United Nations General Assembly event “Subversive Catwalk: Women, Fast Fashion & Climate Justice”.

“We hoped to encourage people to look at the connection between women’s oppression – the pressure to look good, to be fashionable, that their bodies are not good enough – and the oppression of women worldwide in the garment sweatshops of the world,” Su Edwards, organiser of the panel, told IPS.

“We wanted to raise awareness of the vast resources consumed by fast fashion and the resulting pollution and devastation of the natural world,” she added.

The panel shed light on the importance of women from the global north creating a bridge to work in solidarity with women in the global south.

“We are very keen to emphasise the unity between groups that are often seen as having divergent interests,” Edwards said. “Fashion is a good place for women to find common interests and to begin to understand that their life choices may impact on their sisters in other places.”

The panel, however, lacked the presence of any Bangladeshi representative on the conversation of the 2013 Rana Plaza factory collapse in Bangladesh that killed more than 1,100 garment workers. Scores of garment workers were injured in the disaster, sparking off a massive global conversation on garment workers’ rights.

The only representative invited to speak about the issue was Sumedha Shivdas, a fashion designer  from India.

“We wanted to include at least one woman from the global south in our panel and Sumedha is part of our organisation,” Edwards said when this issue was addressed. “The point was that she had heard about the Rana Plaza disaster but was numb about it.”

On environment, panelists stated that it takes 12 years to get rid of waste that fast fashion makes in 24 hours.

Beyond environmental concerns, fashion also has a large role to play in one’s identity. One of the highlights of the panel was Josephine Carter, a queer artist-activist and panel member who spoke about the role fashion plays on the intersection of environmental justice, human rights, and identity. 

For Carter, identity is at the center of her activism. She is currently working on a poetry project honouring black men for Black History month in the United Kingdom.

“This work feels deeply relevant at the moment, as we’re once again reminded of how endangered black lives are, and of the particular forces of white supremacy which work to endanger black men particularly,” she told IPS.

This relevance is further deepened by the environmental concerns around the world.

“I am thinking, writing and working my way towards climate activism, and finding a way to make this inextricable with the activism work I already do, on race, gender, sex and class,” she said.

For the panel talk, her aim was to have her message reach women and have them engaged in the conversation on climate crisis, and for them to realise how urgent and relevant it is to their lives.
Another goal for her, as well as that of the workshop’s, was to convey the message that for activists, their emotions are very intricately linked with doing the work of climate justice. Understanding that link, and figuring out which measures work and what needs improvement, can help unlock opportunities for climate justice initiatives that are effective.

Excerpts from the interview follow.

Inter Press Service (IPS): What role has fashion played for you in your identity?

Josephine Carter (JC): As a queer woman of colour, I got to explore how people with my identities get pushed in two different directions – to use fashion and dress as self-expression, or to use fashion and dress as a way to conform to a heteronormative and cisnormative society. Not only do big feelings about ourselves and our bodies come up as a result, there are also real-world consequences to conforming or not conforming.

IPS: The intersection of fast fashion, environment and the queer community aren’t usually examined together. What does this intersection tell society?

JC: The reality is that over consuming fast fashion clothing, either to stand out or to fit in, doesn’t come without environmental consequences. Once we accept that the ecologically degrading and exploitative fast fashion industry can’t be allowed to continue, for the sake of the planet and its people, we then have to reconsider our relationship to clothes and reckon more closely with the presence of homophobia and transphobia in our lives.

As mentioned in the workshop, a part of the work of achieving climate justice is the elimination of all oppressions. Bringing together the topics of fashion, environment and queerness (or other identities) shows that the climate crisis actually permeates all areas of our lives and experiences, even areas that might seem unrelated at first glance. It goes, I hope, a little way towards demonstrating that there are a thousand reasons for every person alive to be active in the fight for climate justice, including people who usually get left out of the climate movement.

IPS: What role do you believe fashion plays a role for queer and gender non-conforming communities?

JC: Experiences with fashion in queer and gender non-conforming communities are as diverse as the communities themselves. While I can’t speak for these communities as a whole – especially as a cisgender queer woman – I notice that fashion provides an opportunity for self-creation, for queer and trans people to reclaim their bodies from oppression and dysphoria. Because clothing is so gendered, it can be a useful tool for exploring and subverting the gender binary. It can also be an outlet for creativity, self-expression and sheer joy in queer lives which are so often marred by interpersonal and systematic homophobia and transphobia – from workplace discrimination to homelessness, from medical mistreatment to hate-motivated violence.

IPS: What other roles does fashion play in this conversation?

JC: Conversely, fashion can also play a role in keeping queer and trans identities hidden, especially when individuals have to conform to heteronormative and cisnormative gender roles because of an oppressive family environment, community or government. The necessity to stay hidden and the harshness of the punishment of visibly queer and trans people increases as homophobia and transphobia overlap with other systems of discrimination such as race, class and disability.

IPS: How has your identity as a queer person shaped your relationship with fashion?

JC: I use clothing to announce my queer identity and to hide it. Some of the pressure that is put on heterosexual women to look “feminine” and attractive according to our culture’s norms actually passes me by, and I love putting myself out in public as a weird, fat, butch, boxy, short, black queer woman when I wear dungarees, Doc Martens, men’s clothing, and the rainbow flag. It works as a way to signal to other people in the LBGTQ community that I’m here, that we see each other, that I stand in solidarity with a queer aesthetic and heritage.

I also sometimes get slurs yelled at me on the street, have disparaging comments made about my body by strangers, and am generally made aware that I don’t look how a woman “should” look. It’s interesting that the defining aesthetic categories for queer women, butch and femme, separate us out into who “looks like a woman” and who doesn’t. I remember many occasions as a teenager and young adult where I have tried and failed to look feminine, attractive and acceptable.

I use fashion as a way of constructing my queer identity, and fashion constantly reminds me that society’s idea of what’s acceptable for women’s lives is still very narrow.

Related Articles

• Bangladesh’s Garment Industry Boom Leaving Workers Behind
• Taking the Lead in Fight Against Climate Change

The post Q&A: How Fast Fashion Sits at the Crucial Intersection of Environmental & Gender Justice appeared first on Inter Press Service.

A suicide survivor shares her story of how an online community helped her overcome anxiety and depression. Credit: Unsplash / Dan M

By Fairuz Ahmed
NEW YORK, Sep 28 2020 (IPS)

Romana Hoque had it all, a comfortable life, a happy family. Despite this, the 43-year-old second-generation immigrant from Indonesia living in the United States was depressed enough to contemplate suicide.

Hoque, in an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service (IPS), said despite her comfortable life, not being able to conceive resulted in her feeling so depressed that she tried to take her own life. She shared her story during September – set aside as a month for creating awareness of suicide prevention.

“For me, it was a blur. I studied at a top university in Singapore and had a beautiful life. But job stress and not being able to conceive a child used to burden me,” Hoque says.

“One attempt after another, and the hormone therapy led me to try to end my life. The cycle was brutal and vicious.”

She said she tried reaching out to family and friends, but many dismissed her concerns saying she would be alright.

“I had to put up a face that everything is going alright and act accordingly. I had no way of expressing myself. One night the pain was unbearable, and I decided to give up.”

Depression and mental health issues are linked to suicide. Globally, 79 percent of suicides occur in low- and middle-income countries; however, high-income countries have the highest rates of suicide. It proves that triggers can be varied, and having a successful life dreamt by many does not guarantee peace of mind. Societal pressure, judgement, and constant pressure could create triggers.

Also, men are three times more likely to commit suicide than women in wealthier countries, but in emerging countries, the rate is equal. With the need for a better, successful life, comes the need to prove and achieve. This paves the road for self-loathing and destructive behaviour among many. However, there is no specific pattern in suicides – just as there no pattern to mental health.

Someone, very close to you may seem fine, but deep inside there may lie a silent pain killing the person’s spirit, she says.

Hoque was admitted to the hospital for trying to end her life after taking sleeping pills in 2018. After a week in the hospital, she sought therapy. It took her a year of therapy and monitoring to finally let go of the negative thoughts and move forward.

“I had it all, money, a good job, and a loving family. But I think unless someone really understands what is going in inside, no one wants to talk about depression and triggers. I used to get asked on a regular basis when I will conceive and why I don’t have a child,” she said. “This was my struggle, and I was feeling less of a woman for not giving birth. I used to get paranoid that my husband will leave me for being barren.”

Finding support is crucial to overcome suicide triggers. Credit: UnSplash / Kai P

Social stigma, cultural norms, and expectations are a few factors that could push a person to the breaking point. Her support system and coping mechanism included extensive therapy, and she found surprising support online platforms. Social media was a crucial factor in helping her to recuperate and open-up.

Hoque started to read articles and people’s stories in various suicide prevention groups. After a few months, she found two online writing platforms called Fuzia and Medium. Later she joined a writers’ forum called Writers of Fuzia on Facebook.

Finally, after a long time, she could voice her thoughts. She could open up and be herself. She felt liberated.

“Sometimes the people who don’t know us are the best therapists,” she said with a smile. “I could write anything I want to. I could be silly. I could be open, and I could be myself. I joined countless discussions and even made friends with girls half my age. No one judged me; no one wanted anything from me. I felt free. I felt happy.”

For her recovery and mental healing, Hoque gives credit to Fuzia.

Another critical factor in the process of self-expression was anonymity. She used a fake name and a generic picture. She felt comfortable sharing with unknown people because she found that thousands of girls were experiencing the same feelings.

She was highly motivated to learn more about how people connect and how they are triggered. The piece of the puzzle that was missing was a place to vent.

Here, in Fuzia, no one really knew each other but still, they felt like sisters, like family. And they felt of belonging somewhere. There is a global audience of 4 million and opinions varied, as did perspectives. But somehow everyone connected and felt each other’s pain.

Her experience with Fuzia and having a group to relate to she later launched her own company helping youth and women become aware of the patterns and identify triggers for suicide. A little know-how and compassion can help others share their trauma and anguish. The inspiration for judgment-free sharing and listening gave her the backdrop to give back to society.

Married, unmarried, single, widowed, or single mothers, gays, lesbians, or bisexuals, young and old: all were equals in the social media platforms. In Fuzia, the online community’s tolerance was crucial, and there was no divide on religion or geographical identity. People were treated with dignity and respect.

The United Nations and partners have drawn attention to different aspects of mental health concerning children, the workplace, stigmatization of issues, and psychological first aid or ways in which to lend support to the distressed.

The link between suicide and mental health is well established in high-income countries; however, “many suicides happen impulsively in moments of crisis”, according to the World Health Organization.

“Experiencing conflict, disaster, violence, abuse or loss and a sense of isolation are strongly associated with suicidal behaviour,” WHO outlines in its list of key facts.

 

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 post Judgment Free Online Platform Key to Helping Suicidal People, Says Survivor appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Civil society protest during the 3rd UN Financing for Development Summit in Addis Ababa in 2015. Credit: Civil Society FfD Group

By Tove Maria Ryding, Pooja Rangaprasad and Emilia Reyes
NEW YORK, Sep 28 2020 (IPS)

On 29 September, the world’s heads of state will come together (virtually) at an extraordinary meeting to discuss financing for development during the 75th UN general assembly. This will be crucial in the battle to address the Coronavirus crisis.

Our leaders will need to ask themselves this question: can we tackle a global recession while ensuring that basic human rights are protected, and the fight against poverty and environmental destruction are not completely run off the tracks?

The simple but harsh answer at this point in time, is that we cannot. The necessary global mechanisms and agreements are not in place, and unless governments urgently start working together to plug the gaps in the system, billions of people are likely to be heavily impacted by the Coronavirus crisis for years to come.

While the crisis is threatening up to half a billion people with poverty, the fortunes of the ultrawealthy are skyrocketing. Meanwhile, existing inequalities and discrimination, including those related to gender and race, are being reinforced by the Coronavirus crisis. National action is vital, but no country can address the global challenges alone.

Ahead of the heads of state meeting, a ‘menu of options’ for action has been published which includes key recommendations on debt, illicit financial flows, global liquidity and financial stability, among others. The heads of state must move from talk to action by agreeing to implement some of these recommendations and kickstart real intergovernmental negotiations to deliver new international frameworks and agreements.

At the top of the intergovernmental to-do list has to be debt resolution. The coronavirus crisis is creating a high risk of debt crises, especially in the Global South. And while the G20 response – to offer a standstill on bilateral debt to the poorest countries – has delayed the problem, it has done nothing to actually resolve it.

Even before the pandemic, there were clear warning signs that new debt crises were looming. This was alarming in light of the fact that we currently do not have an international mechanism to ensure that debt crises are resolved without undermining basic human rights of the people living in the impacted countries.

The good news is that the ‘menu of options’ includes concrete proposals for solutions, such as debt cancellations and an international UN debt workout mechanism. Now is high time for governments to get to work on these proposals.

Another top priority ought to be addressing tax havens, international tax dodging and other illicit financial flows. This problem has been causing a continuous bleeding of hundreds of billions of dollars annually from public budgets in both the Global North and South.

A core reason for this disaster is a deeply broken and outdated international corporate tax system. But here too, a clear and concrete proposal for a UN tax convention is part of the ‘menu of options’. Such a convention could pave the way towards new international tax and transparency rules to combat tax dodging. What is missing is an international alliance of progressive countries that can increase international pressure for progress and action.

A third, and related, top priority for governments should be to address the broader economic problems, which are exacerbating the impacts of the crisis. Governments ought to agree a date and preparation process for a crisis summit under the UN’s Financing for Development process, to be held at heads of state level as soon as practically possible.

The summit should follow up on previous commitments, which started with the Monterrey Consensus in 2002. Originally, governments had actually agreed to discuss a follow-up conference in 2019, but up to now have procrastinated and postponed the decision.

The sad reason for these delays is an old fight about control over economic decision-making processes. Countries in the Global South have been pushing for negotiations to start under the auspices of the UN, where all countries participate on an equal footing.

However, the countries in the Global North have blocked this and instead insisted that all decisions must be kept in opaque forums where they dominate the decision-making, including G20, IMF, the Paris Club and the OECD.

In 2014, when countries in the Global South wanted to start working on a UN debt resolution mechanism, constructive forces within the EU were drowned out by a small group of hardliners – and in particular the UK and Germany, and the EU ended up boycotting the process.

During a Financing for Development (FfD) summit in 2015 a group of countries in the Global North –with the UK and US in leading roles – put all their political muscle into blocking a proposal for a UN intergovernmental tax process put forward by the Global South countries.

This behavior has not only led to secret negotiations and unfair decisions that disregard the interests of the Global South, it has also led to a complete failure to develop effective solutions. By getting engulfed in a dirty fight to keep a large part of the world’s countries out of decision-making processes, many otherwise progressive European countries acted against the interests of their own people, including by increasing the influence of some of the most obstructive powers.

This includes the Trump administration, but also some of the OECD countries that are very aggressive tax havens. But the coronavirus crisis seems to be causing some governments to crawl out of the trenches, and the high-level meeting this month provide an important opportunity.

75 years ago, the UN was set up to “achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character”. In reality, the UN became the place where global agreements on human rights, sustainable development, peace and environmental protection are negotiated.

However, on economic issues, power-hungry developed countries have blocked UN cooperation. Unless we find fair and effective solutions to address economic and financial crises, it will not only undermine all the other UN objectives and agreements. It will also make the coronavirus crisis much longer and more disastrous than it has to be.

 

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 post No More Excuses – Time for Global Economic Solutions appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Tove Maria Ryding is Tax Justice Coordinator, European Network on Debt and Development (Eurodad); Pooja Rangaprasad is Policy Director, FfD, Society for International Development (SID) and Emilia Reyes is Co-convener of the Women’s Working Group on FfD

The post No More Excuses – Time for Global Economic Solutions appeared first on Inter Press Service.

One of the largest photovoltaic installations in Central America, with 320,000 solar panels, located in the center of El Salvador. Latin American countries are betting on solar energy as the central pillar of the energy transition, reinforced by the commitments made in the Paris Agreement on climate change. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS.

By Emilio Godoy
MEXICO CITY, Sep 25 2020 (IPS)

The economic recovery after the covid-19 pandemic, renewable energy, the gas situation, regulations and investment; mobility and transport, as well as new technologies and the progress of the Paris Agreement will be discussed at the Madrid Energy Conference from 28 September to 2 October.

Jeremy Martin, vice-president of the non-governmental Institute of the Americas (IoA), told IPS from its headquarters in the U.S. coastal town of La Jolla, California, that the second Madrid Energy Conference had to adjust its format to a virtual one, as all the meetings have done since March.

“But the goals and objectives are the same: to address the way energy is generated, distributed and consumed, as well as the investment needed in Latin America to drive the energy transition and its link to Europe,” explained the vice-president of the Institute organizing the conference.

The dialogue, the first edition of which was held in the Spanish capital in 2019, will bring together ministers and deputy ministers from various Latin American and Caribbean countries, as well as 20 company presidents and more than 400 delegates from international bodies, such as the intergovernmental International Energy Agency and the Latin American Energy Organization, and experts from both continents.

"Without a doubt, the pandemic and the crisis it has triggered have led to growing attention and calls to redouble efforts towards an energy transition that will help the world reduce CO2 emissions"
Jeremy Martin


The first day of discussions will focus on the relevance of the Paris Agreement, signed in 2015; the climate crisis in the context of the pandemic; and the situation of renewable energy in Latin America.

The second day will focus on financing the post-Covid recovery and the energy transition towards lower carbon models and mergers and acquisitions in the energy sector.

The third day will focus on energy storage in batteries and electricity transmission networks; mobility, transport and energy transition and intelligent transmission networks.

In the fourth group of sessions, speakers will discuss gas, the perspective of oil corporations and the role and impact of regulations on hydrocarbon companies.

The closing of the virtual conference will deal with energy digitization and artificial intelligence, carbon capture and storage (CCS), the gas generated by human activities responsible for global warming, and methane, whose polluting power is greater than that of CO, and the situation of hydrogen, seen as an alternative to fossil fuels, in Latin America and Europe.

As a result of the coronavirus pandemic which appeared in China at the end of 2019 and has spread rapidly throughout the world, nations have suffered economic recession, a fall in energy consumption and tourism, as well as thousands of deaths and job losses.

In response, countries have implemented packages of social and economic measures with different degrees of depth.

For Leonardo Beltrán, a Mexican non-associated researcher at the Institute of the Americas and a participant in the forum, the conference attracts the most relevant actors to consolidate the energy dialogue.

“There are opinion leaders, company executives who develop business and technology, and officials. The forum allows for the exchange of ideas, and a new vision can be developed, thus consolidating energy integration for the region,” he told IPS in Mexico City.

 

Domestic gas and its role in the energy transition will be one of the topics to be debated at the Madrid Energy Conference, which will virtually bring together senior representatives of governments, intergovernmental organizations, business and civil society organizations. In the picture, gas charge for residential consumption in a southern neighborhood of Mexico City. Credit: Emilio Godoy / IPS

 

It will also allow us to analyze the progress of the Paris Agreement on climate change, signed in 2015, which for Beltran is crucial “now more than ever”, because of the consequences of the pandemic, such as the sharp slowdown in the global economy, the reduction in energy consumption, the contraction in tourism and the disruption of trade.

“Forced by the pandemic, we are seeing the effects of highly polluting industries, which have a large carbon footprint, and so the magnifying glass is being put on these sectors. The source of these emissions is fossil combustion,” he said.

The also former Undersecretary of Energy recalled that the Paris Agreement is linked to the efforts that its participating governments have to make and whose progress will be the subject of dialogue during the Conference. “Everyone has committed to reducing their footprint with short, medium and long term goals,” he said.

Beltrán considered that in global terms, Latin America can exhibit “ample room for maneuver” at the Conference due to its low carbon footprint and a clean energy matrix at increasing levels.

In addition, the European Union’s (EU) “Next Generation EU” plan, announced in June and worth $830 billion, can serve as a model for Latin America, with more than a third going to projects to increase energy efficiency, reduce dependence on fossil fuels and preserve nature. Financing will be subject to environmental requirements.

Martin agreed with the existence of the European alternatives from which the Latin American region can take upon.

“Again this year we will look at developments in Europe with a view to how they can contribute to policy and investment frameworks in Latin America”, he said.

“Without a doubt, the pandemic and the crisis it has triggered have led to growing attention and calls to redouble efforts towards an energy transition that will help the world reduce CO2 emissions,” Martin added.

The specialist stressed that in many Latin American countries the focus has been on how to manage hydrocarbons, with the lens on the energy transition.

European energy companies are investing heavily in the region, and the EU has set up lines of cooperation to help in the face of the pandemic.

Mechthild Wörsdörfer, director of Sustainability, Technology and Outlooks at the International Energy Agency (IEA) and a speaker at the conference, told IPS that “having a set of pre-existing policy objectives, programmes and delivery channels for financial services can help countries implement recovery measures more quickly.”

The official from the energy coordinating body of the major industrial countries said from Paris, the headquarters of the IEA, that they can also help ensure that these measures “are consistent with national objectives for medium- and long-term sustainability.”

Wörsdörfer also considered that the recovery plans for the economic crisis caused by the covid can be linked to the Paris Agreement through the measures that countries adopt to comply with the treaty, “to help select recovery measures that also allow climate and other sustainability objectives to be met.”

All of this will be discussed in this virtual edition of the second Madrid Energy Conference, which will analyze the challenges that the pandemic and post-pandemic have placed on a sector that was already subject to the special challenges of a historic transition in its sources, matrix and consumption.

Related Articles

• Crisis Hits Oil Industry and Energy Transition Alike

The post Intercontinental Energy Forum to Discuss Post-Covid Challenges appeared first on Inter Press Service.

A letter from Roberto Savio to his friends
 
The creation of a Palestinian State remains a pipe-dream

By Roberto Savio
ROME, Sep 25 2020 (IPS)

After the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WWI, The League of Nations mandated that Britain administer Palestine. The London administration was quite ineffective, in part, due to the contradictory promises which were made to the Arabs, to the Zionists and to France, the other colonial power which divided the territory with Britain.

Roberto Savio

But the conflict is much more ancient. It has now been thirty centuries since the first confrontations between the Philistines and the Hebrews, and the peace agreement promoted by US President Donald Trump between Israel and two ancient small Gulf monarchical dictatorships will certainly not resolve this millennial rivalry.

The Philistines settled in the region around 1200 BC. Toward the end of the 11th century BC, the Israelites succeeded in driving them out of much of their territory, but they remained independent along the coastal region. And although they never completely dominated the whole area, the demonym of this people comes precisely from the word peleset (Philistine) and hence the territory Filasṭin, Falasṭn or Filisṭin (Palestine).

Three thousand years later, the conflict seems to lack resolution. The Israelis have never accepted the existence of a Palestinian State.

For their part Palestinian leaders continue to employ inviable rhetoric, which has led to their losing many opportunities. The corruption of which they are accused, is based in reality, but Israel has a relatively dark history.

Arab Sultans and Sheikhs are people with a medieval mindset, those for whom religious fanaticism and money is uniquely important. Trump likes them, because in some ways they resemble him. The Israelis have worked out how to take advantage of all this so as to eliminate the possibility of a Palestinian state.

Result: Palestinians will have to live under Israeli control. They will be second-class citizens, and the internal arrangement of Israel will change as the ultra-orthodox Haredin have a higher population growth rate than Arabs or other Jewish factions.

Arabs are 20% of the population, while Haredin jewish sect already constitutes twelve percent of the population. At the time of the creation of the State of Israel, the Haredin were only 0.2%. These are medieval clans living in a special world. For example, they have won the right to not attend school, as they only study holy scriptures. They do not do military service and by law they do not work; they’re basically maintained by the State.

Benjamin Netanyahu survives thanks to the ultra-orthodox parties. The future of Israel is not a peaceful future. It is a country that is going to turn more and more toward the right, which will have to continue to use force against the Palestinians, who will become an exclusively internal problem, as they will be abandoned by other Arabs. They are going to live under appalling social and economic conditions, and we are going to see how Israel increasingly takes the apartheid path.

Netanyahu’s recent victories portend a dark future. One has visited the region too often now to offer a positive prognosis. Through all this, Trump motivates alliances with the Sunni religious fundamentalists led by Saudi Arabia, united against the Shiites, led by Iran.

Iran, the ancient Persian civilisation, is much more tolerant than the Sunnis. The problem is that it has been captured by a group of fanatics who took advantage of the unpopularity of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, leading to them seizing power from the Shah in 1979. They are unpopular, but they are holding their ground.

It should be remembered that the theocratic regime was installed with decisive help from the West.

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile in France to Iran on a plane provided by the conservative government of French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing. Iran is another mistake made by the United States, a country whose foreign policy is always short-term, again failing to understand the reality on the ground.

Triggering an escalation to remove the Shah, employing the clergy, created a regime that eventually turned against the US, something Reza Pahlaví would have never done. It is the same mistake committed in Afghanistan, when they financed a movement against the Russian occupation, creating phenomena such as Bin Laden, which ended up turning in another direction.

By the way, this is the same mistake made by Israel when it supported Al Fatah at first, so as to weaken Yasser Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).

The Mullahs are not at all popular, but they are maintained by the support of the peasants and by a powerful repressive apparatus. No doubt at some point they will be taken out in a bloody internal crisis, and Iran will return to normality.

In this respect I wish to stress three points:

a) Iran has top-level universities, great films, excellent architecture and a high level of scientific prowess:
none of which can be found in the Sunni world.
b) In Teheran there are synagogues and christian churches,
something that is lacking in the Sunni world.
c) Of all the terrorist attacks that have taken place to date in Europe and in the United States,
there has not been a single Shiite terrorist.
And we should bear in mind that Iran has been under sanctions for 40 years.

Moral: the political disaster which is the Middle East is one of governance, in which the ‘West’ and Trump carry many responsibilities. So too the Europeans who installed Kings, Princes, Emirs and Sheiks when they divided up the Ottoman Empire.

And Trump, with his son-in-law, who, despite being Jewish, is capable of reasoning in Arab terms, by reinforcing this World of petrodollars and of medieval thought.

Throughout this panorama the Palestinians remain a people without a homeland who lack nationality, and the Israelis have their answer prepared: they don’t accept the peace plan, and then do not have leaders who seek peace.

However, persisting in maintaining millions of people resentful and poor is not an intelligent play. It is also clear that in both intellectual and artistic circles there is little Israel support for such a formula.

Falling into this trap is best explained by Netanyahu’s efforts to maintain power at any cost, and so selling his soul to the far-right, also accompanied by a left which has become a merely symbolic force…

Publisher of OtherNews, Italian-Argentine Roberto Savio is an economist, journalist, communication expert, political commentator, activist for social and climate justice and advocate of an anti neoliberal global governance. Director for international relations of the European Center for Peace and Development.. He is co-founder of Inter Press Service (IPS) news agency and its President Emeritus.

 

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 post Peace in the Middle East appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

A letter from Roberto Savio to his friends

 
The creation of a Palestinian State remains a pipe-dream

The post Peace in the Middle East appeared first on Inter Press Service.

How inclusive is activism and discussions on climate change? Most environmental movements and organisations in the United States and Europe are primarily white and middle class, and hold vast amount of resources and set the agenda for policy work and ecosystem recovery. This dated photo shows a landslide in central Kenya that resulted after intense rainfall - one of the consequences of climate change. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

By Samira Sadeque
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 25 2020 (IPS)

Wrapping up Climate Week at the United Nations General Assembly, global leaders called for climate action that may be “ambitious but achievable” and called for climate measures that would “leave no one behind”. But some climate activists remain concerned about how this can be achieved.

“The environmental movements in the United States and Europe are primarily white and primarily middle class,” Tara Villalba, a Filipino climate activist in the U.S., told IPS. “These mainstream environmental organisations hold vast amounts of resources (in the form of land, money, other property, and influence), and they are in charge of how those resources are used in ecosystem recovery and in policy work: our solutions are not taken seriously.”

Villalba spoke to IPS following Thursday’s Climate Change Roundtable hosted by the U.N. Secretary-General, in the same week as a significant pledge made by China to achieve “carbon neutrality” by 2060.

“But the climate emergency is fully upon us, and we have no time to waste,” U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said in his speech, as he also called for climate action efforts to “leave no one behind”.

While leaders, including the United Kingdom’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson, applauded this effort by China, they also reminded listeners of the grave situation the world is in currently — at the meeting point of a climate crisis and a global pandemic.

“Most people did not imagine that the world would be afflicted in the way we have…we were woefully underprepared,” Guterres said regarding the pandemic. “But for climate change, nobody can say that we have not been warned, nobody can say that we’re not, now, capable of  making the preparation.”

European Union President Ursula von der Leyen shared how the pandemic has only highlighted the glaring holes in how we live and build.

“[The] corona pandemic has not lowered the threat of climate change,” she said. “On the contrary, it has made us aware of the fragility of our life on this planet.”

She added that recovery from this moment will require “substantial investment” to ensure that economies are moving forward.

“It will require a determined action to leave no one behind,” she said,  announcing the EU’s agreement to make Europe the first climate neutral continent in the world by 2050.

“The European leaders have decided to set up the next generation EU: this is a €750 billion recover and resilience fund that will invest in Europe’s green and digital transition for building a resilient and competitive economy,” she said. At least €275 billion has been budgeted for environmental and climate goals.

Despite these big promises and gestures, there are some who believe that a lot more work needs to be done to ensure those at the grassroots level are being included in the conversation.

“Our solutions are not taken seriously,” Villalba, who has worked in the climate movement for 15 years, told IPS. “Racism makes white people think that they are the best people to decide how to use those resources. Classism makes wealthy people decide they are the best decision makers and that power should be theirs. They want to “help” people like us but charity is not what’s needed. Power and wealth need to be redistributed so that we can all be less at-risk.”

She also painted a comprehensive, all-encompassing picture of how different social issues are intricately linked with climate justice concerns.

At the center of racism, and classism, she says is “an oppressive system that distributes resources.”

“Poor people and people of colour live with pollution. Poor countries have become the trash dumps of rich countries,” she said, drawing a parallel to a food chain where something as vast as climate change can trickle down to affect people on an individual level.

“Our work wears down our bodies faster because we cannot regenerate when we can’t sleep, eat, and live properly. But the people, communities and ecosystems that are being most severely impacted are where people of colour and poor people live and work and play,” she added.

Villalba, a single mother, is raising three children and is an organiser for housing justice: all factors that she says play into, or add to, the climate crisis.

“Many environmental activists assume people like me are not interested in climate activism. But we are. We have the most to lose – we lose our livelihoods and our families face risks first in ANY crisis – whether it is the COVID crisis or the climate crisis,” she said. “Fight because climate solutions MUST come from people like me. People who can barely make ends meet, and people who cannot meet all their needs to be able to live.”

Related Articles

• Scientists Draw up Guidelines to Help Agri-food Companies Align with 2030 Agenda
• ‘Waste is only Waste when you Waste it’ – Could Ecobricks be the Solution to Uganda’s Housing and Pollution Problem?
• Amazon ‘Women Warriors’ Show Gender Equality, Forest Conservation Go Hand in Hand

The post ‘Leave No one Behind’: How Inclusive is World Leaders’ Call to Climate Action? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Credit: Forus International

By Pénélope Hubert
PARIS, Sep 25 2020 (IPS)

The year 2020 will most certainly mark a critical moment for the planet and future mobilizations. In a society shaken by Covid-19, people are gathering, regrouping and acting collectively for a sustainable world, an egalitarian future, and for global awareness on the climate emergency.

Activists and human rights defenders are sounding the alarm on the resurgence of forms of violence and poverty. It’s time for a turning point.

“Working for a global network means promoting a horizontal approach. From the fight for equality to climate justice, we are witnessing the rise of strong movements. Networks, grassroots organizations and citizens are redesigning the world for present and future generations”, says Sarah Strack, Director of Forus International, an innovative network empowering civil society for effective social change.

“We are at a crossroad. Are we going to adapt to a visibly changed world, or are we going to shut our eyes to what is happening? The time has come to promote new narratives, to think larger and to give visibility to collective solutions that bring the voices of communities to the forefront.”

The Global Week to Act4SDGS held on September 18-26, during the 75th General Assembly of the United Nations, called on people around the world to think about solutions to some of the world’s most pressing issues. This year, the #TurnItAround movement calls on individuals to shape priorities.

The basic question people are encouraged to think of is: what should change? What would you like to see more or less of? Every action counts: from public demonstrations for peace, to online campaigns on gender equality, to beach cleanups, museum exhibits and school art projects on sustainability topics.

“In Argentina, where we are used to protesting in the streets, the global pandemic has reshuffled the way we make our voices heard,” says Rolando Kandel, Director of the Argentinian platform for NGOs Red Encuentro (EENGD).

According to Red Encuentro, the pandemic has highlighted the importance of coordination between civil society organizations and governments, to respond dynamically to the needs of different communities which are facing new rights violations alongside an exacerbation of existing ones. As a result, they have launched a cycle of online conversations to impact public policies.

“Now that public space is largely off-limits, it’s important to use digital environments as a way to enhance, rather than curtail democracy,” says Rolando Kandel.

Online activism and virtual mobilization seem to be the new normal, but the risks are that vulnerable populations with little access to the internet can be left further behind. In Bolivia, in a tense political and social context ahead of the elections scheduled for October, Red Unitas tells us that violence against women persists.

“The situation of women in the context of the pandemic in Bolivia is extremely hard,” says Iris Baptista from Red Unitas. “Indigenous women are protesting the lack of healthcare in their communities and continue to fight for their rights. Now that we have been forced to shift our work online, it is not easy to reach all indigenous communities, we are adapting – resources are being sent by post, and we use telephones to maintain contact”.

Bolivia, like many countries, has struggled to combat gender-based violence and discrimination for years. Attacks against women have risen during the quarantine in Bolivia, where on average seven in 10 women say they have suffered some type of violence inflicted by a partner.

Bolivia has one of South America’s highest rates of women being killed because of their gender. The year 2020 was declared the Year of Fight against Femicide and Infanticide in Bolivia, even so, no effective prevention measures have been taken.

“During the quarantine the slogan “Stay at Home” was widely used. For many women and girls who are victims of violence that actually meant a very dangerous “Cállate en casa” (shut up at home),” Iris explained.

“The Unitas Network created the campaign “SIN VIOLENCIA ES MEJOR” (Better Without Violence), to raise awareness about the fact that women are doing most of the work during the pandemic, to fulfill their role as mother, wife and worker, yet they continue to face violence at home. We developed a series of creative videos for digital platforms called “The diary of a man in quarantine” which are reflections on violence against women and the distribution of domestic tasks across genders during Covid -19.”

Whether it’s about peace, gender, social justice or equality, your voice matters and your stories are relevant. Share them, invite your friends, create movement and mobilize so that you make your needs visible. Everyone’s future is the planet’s future, and it’s time to make your voice heard, so that history becomes collective rather than individual.

“We are resolved that civil society organisations, social movements and volunteers have a critical role to play in supporting community action and ensuring that those who are most often marginalized are not left behind through this challenging time,” states Action for Sustainable Development.

As part of the United Nations General Assembly, a SDG Action Zone provided space for deep conversations on inclusion, technology, urban and rural realities. From young climate activists to women leaders, sessions were built from the insights of local community activists, individuals and organizations working at the frontlines, often facing intersecting challenges.

If digital technology allows the dissemination of a message on a large scale, it is important to realize that this tool is not the only way to mobilize yourself, and to mobilize others around you. The current crisis is taking place beyond our screens, where realities are often shaped and presented according to individual interests, creating so-called “filter bubbles”.

In a world where governments can easily shape an image that meets your consumer or ideological criteria, it’s important to realize that you have a role to play in shifting conversations in the analog world.

“The pandemic has opened our eyes to the fact that we live on one planet. There is an increasing need for global solidarity and stronger collaborations,” says Adriana Aralica, from the Slovenian NGO platform, SLOGA. “Only together we can address upcoming challenges and ensure that everyone has a seat at the decision table.”

Let’s #TurnItAround !
For more information: communication.support@forus-international.org

 

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 post #TurnItAround: One Week to Mobilize for the Future appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Pénélope Hubert is part of the communications team at Forus International, described as an innovative global network empowering civil society for effective social change.

The post #TurnItAround: One Week to Mobilize for the Future appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Forest restoration and rewilding must take centre stage, through programmes that also provide for community incomes. | Picture courtesy: Balipara Foundation

By Ranjit Barthakur
GUWAHATI, India, Sep 25 2020 (IPS)

We usually think of livelihoods and lives separately, however, it is now time to imagine a more integrated approach.

Consider these statistics:

• The 2019 UN-IPBES report—the most recent attempt to holistically assess the major threats to the world’s biodiversity, internationally and across stakeholders—estimates natural disasters caused by biodiversity loss and climate change cost the planet approximately USD 300 billion annually.
• In India, one-third of our GDP depends on nature, and another third is fairly dependent on nature—that’s more than 60 percent of the country’s GDP.
• Fifty-seven percent of our rural communities depend on forest ecosystems for their livelihoods

In essence, ecology is economy. Multiple studies have told us that ecological degradation will spur more droughts, desertification of once fertile soil, water and food insecurity, mass displacement of people, reduced crop yields, and more.

Livelihoods have an interdependent relationship with natural assets such as land, energy, waste, water, air, and carbon. In many cases, they require the use of these assets; on the other hand, protecting and enhancing these assets can increase the earning potential for livelihoods

In our work at Balipara Foundation, we are already witnessing what an ecologically degraded, climate unstable future might look like. When we resumed fieldwork in April—after a month-long lockdown due to COVID-19—our communities along the Bhutan-Assam-Arunachal Pradesh border told us story after story about how families were unable to buy seeds or had missed out on crucial planting windows for crops, because of the lockdown. A few months later, the agroforestry plots we had set up were partially swept away in fierce floods, the likes of which had not been witnessed by the local community in the past three decades.

Non-existent crops, fallow fields, sudden and destructive flooding, and subsequently dried up jobs, are effects that are likely to be amplified in the next decade, whether through climate change or emerging pandemics.

 

If we can build our ecology, we can build our economy

1. Livelihoods is no longer a matter of just creating jobs

Instead, it has to include managing our ecosystems. Natural resource use has historically been limited to extraction and use as material for consumption, or in other industries (eg, timber, food, fuel, building material, paper, clothing), rather than recognising nature as a service provider (eg, oxygen and carbon cycles, water and climate regulation, pollination, soil restoration). Rethinking how we use this ‘natural capital’ can help achieve a balance between ecology and economy. And, if we can build our ecology, we can build our economy.

Livelihoods have an interdependent relationship with natural assets such as land, energy, waste, water, air, and carbon. In many cases, they require the use of these assets; on the other hand, protecting and enhancing these assets can increase the earning potential for livelihoods. In practical terms, this means deriving our food and water needs through regenerative land and water resource management, satisfying our energy needs through hydrogen and solar-based fuels instead of fossil fuels, and satisfying our ever-increasing appetite for materials through reuse and recycling, instead of extraction.

2. Transitioning to an economy in tune with ecology is also good for business

Globally, we are looking at an employment opportunity of up to 395 million new jobs by 2030, if we invest in the sustainable use of degraded aquatic and terrestrial habitats, move to complete renewable energy use, and upgrade our infrastructure to minimise inefficiencies and emissions. Of this, using our lands and oceans (farming, fishing, forestry, and allied industries) more sustainably and regeneratively, in a way that enhances ecosystems, can create 191 million jobs globally and generate business opportunities worth USD 3.6 trillion.

Meeting emissions targets for both the 1.5 and 2-degree rise will also increase India’s net income by up to 25 times over the next few decades, both through minimising spending on climate-related damage (eg, repairing cyclone and flood damage, rehabilitating displaced people) and by reducing climate-driven loss in earnings of nature-dependent sectors (agriculture, forestry, and allied industries).

Well-designed agroforestry, adapted to local conditions and needs, can improve yields for farmers by up to 64 percent in developing countries while putting nutrients into the soil, stabilising water tables, and improving overall biodiversity.

3. It’s becoming a question of survival

Apart from the business case, moving to an integrated ecology-economy approach is a matter of survival in an increasingly uncertain future. Whether this is extreme weather events like flooding, fires, supercyclones, desertification, or water and food insecurity, an integrated approach will enhance resilience for rural communities, who are already experiencing the early waves of these losses.

For example, biodiversity loss in both pollinator species and crop varieties has led to increased vulnerability in agriculture globally, as well as India. Preserving local pollinator species (eg, indigenous bee species vs introducing the Western European honeybee) as well as heirloom seeds and wild varieties of crops can help farmers adapt more effectively to rising temperatures and changing growing conditions through a greater variety in crop options. This can help improve productivity while maintaining their income streams.

 

What can businesses do?

1. Build alternate livelihoods that invest in restoring natural assets

Livelihood programmes must move beyond the traditional focus on agriculture and livestock to include sustainable forestry, carbon sequestration, and payment for ecosystems services programmes (i.e. payment to communities or local stakeholders to protect/maintain at-risk ecosystems). This should be led by businesses whose value chains are heavily exposed to environmental or biodiversity-related risks, for example, agribusiness, mining, and construction, among others.

Forest restoration and rewilding must take centre stage, through programmes that also provide for community incomes—whether through direct payment for restoration and management of forests, or through establishing agroforestry in forest buffer zones, which communities can sustainably harvest.

2. Invest in nature-based solutions

Consumer businesses in India have the opportunity to invest in agroforestry and sustainable farming practices. Declines in crop yields due to soil nutrient depletion is a growing problem. Businesses that depend heavily on agricultural produce will see greater and longer-term pay-offs from investments in natural solutions, including organic farming and agroforestry models. Organic or sustainably grown produce also fetch greater prices in global markets, where conscious consumers are willing to pay more for produce that minimises their environmental impact.

3. Integrate ecological measures in corporate accounting

The time is ripe for a transformation in accounting systems, which integrates the full scope of profits and losses; not just financial gains, but environmental and social impact as well. Understanding the full value of what we stand to gain and lose is critical in encouraging effective changes in government policies and business practices. Including these measures will integrate previously externalised environmental costs into chains and reveal the ‘real’ cost of our current economic growth.

In doing so, practices that generate environmental and social instability will be rendered less financially attractive to investors. Measures correlating social, ecological, and economic indicators will help evaluate how sustainable a country’s or business’ growth is. It will also identify where losses are likely to occur and enable better policy and practice to minimise those losses.

 

What can the government do?

1. Draw up a green recovery plan

Countries around the world are debating their versions of the green new deal. India must break from carbon-centric Keynesian economics and adapt to the 21st-century net-zero vision for carbon neutrality: Investments in its rural communities for forest restoration coupled with agroforestry, sustainable fisheries and horticulture, organic and low-carbon handicrafts, recycling and upcycling industries, green jobs through renewable energy, and energy-efficient green infrastructure.

It should also look to upgrade existing infrastructure both to reduce energy inefficiencies and the environmental damage caused by these assets as they degrade over time.

2. Ensure that communities benefit from the afforestation schemes

While on paper India’s joint forest management and compensatory afforestation schemes empower communities to benefit monetarily from planting forests, in practice the profit-sharing pipeline is porous and ineffective, with communities involved in planting rarely benefitting.

Streamlining this through transparent, accountable processes and standards for compensation, as well as providing stronger protection to communities to leverage these programmes is critical in both incentivising forest restoration, and creating nature-centric socio-economic mobility among rural communities. Youth from these communities, in particular, could benefit from nature-centred opportunities at home, through technical training for afforestation and biodiversity management.

3. Implement standardised agroforestry policies across states

India took a step forward when it became the first country to introduce an agroforestry policy in 2014. Since then, however, few states appear to have benefited from this policy, if at all—information about the policy’s implementation on the ground is scanty. Formally implementing its policies for capacity building, decentralisation to community-level institutions such as Joint Forest Management Committees, streamlining regulations on harvesting, and transporting produce across states, will ease the transition from monoculture cultivation towards biodiversity-friendly agriculture. This must be incorporated in addition to India’s 33 percent commitment for forest restoration under the Paris Agreement and the Draft National Forest Policy 2018.

4. Integrate policies for a nature-centred policy

The World Economic Forum’s 2020 report on Global Risks indicates that biodiversity and climate-related risks are now widely acknowledged to be the risks with the highest likelihood and impact. India can no longer afford to have an isolated climate policy, or one that places business interests over environmental concerns—as the draft Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification 2020 does.

Perhaps the greatest and most immediate change we can make is a mindset shift: Nature is no obstacle to the goal of development. Rather, it is the underpinning powerhouse of our economy—and unlike other finite resources, can be regenerated to sustain futures. An integrated, interdependent approach that recognises ecology is economy is the most critical step we can take towards making nature, rural livelihoods, and our economy self-sustaining.

 

Ranjit Barthakur is the founder of the Balipara Foundation, where he drives community-based conservation and livelihoods in the Eastern Himalayas through cutting edge proprietary concepts such as Naturenomics and Rural Futures for sustainable social change and thriving habitats. He is a social entrepreneur with more than 40 years of experience in both the public and private sector in the areas of IT, hospitality, FMCGs, sports, and mainstreaming sustainability practices in organisations.

 

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

The post Ecology is Economy – ‘We Need an Integrated Approach Between Lives and Livelihoods’ appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Jens Martens
BONN, Sep 25 2020 (IPS)

Governments have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic with unprecedented intensity. They have taken far-reaching regulatory measures to contain the pandemic and mobilized financial resources on an enormous scale.

They have thus demonstrated that they are capable of action and need not leave the driver’s seat to the markets and the private sector if the political will is there.

In countless statements most governments have also affirmed that a return to business-as-usual after the crisis is not an option. Instead, the UN call to “build back better” has become a leitmotif of the multilateral responses to the COVID-19 crisis.

But does “building back” really lead to the urgently needed systemic change?

In the first phase, many COVID-19 emergency programmes contained certain social components that aimed to provide (more or less targeted) support for families in need, prevent unemployment and keep small businesses and companies financially afloat.

But aside from the fact that even these altogether huge amounts of money could not prevent the global rise in unemployment, poverty, and corporate bankruptcies, the temporary measures produced at best a flash in the pan effect that will quickly evaporate when the support ends.

The social catastrophe then comes only with a delay. Environmental considerations, on the other hand, played hardly any role in the first phase of COVID-19 responses. Most economic relief packages have been ecologically blind and ignored the structural causes and the interdependencies of the multiple crises.

It is therefore all the more important that now, in the second phase of policy responses, longer-term stimulus packages not only support economic recovery, but also promote necessary structural change, such as strengthened public social security systems, improved remuneration and rights of workers in the care economy, and the transition to circular economies, which seek to decouple growth from consumption of finite resources.

If used in the right way, such policies could offer the chance to become engines of the urgently needed socio-ecological transformation proclaimed in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

In response to the COVID-19 crisis, the World Economic Forum calls for “The Great Reset” to enable “stakeholder capitalism.” But pushing the reset button just restarts the game, without changing the rules of the game – or even the game itself.

The reset button clears the memory and reboots the (old) system, a system that has proven that it could not prevent the current crises, but rather has caused them.

Our Spotlight on Sustainable Development Report 2020 offers as an alternative an “8 R”-agenda for systemic change.

The eight sections do not provide a comprehensive reform programme. Rather, they illustrate in a nutshell eight issue areas where not only policy and governance reforms but also changes in the underlying narrative are long overdue:

1. Re-value the importance of care in societies: The pandemic has revitalized the idea that essential jobs exist. Care-giving jobs are at the top of that list, even though historically they have been hardly recognized, socially devalued and badly paid, with little or no benefits or protection.

A recognition of the essentiality of care should foster a process of transformation in the way in which it is socially addressed.

Democratically expanding horizons of equal care arrangements, allocating public resources to building care infrastructure and recognizing and strengthening community care arrangements are essential elements in any process of building a different way out of the current global crisis.

2. Re-empower public services: Around the world, frontline public service workers continue to receive praise and support for their vital role in responding to the COVID-19 crisis. Yet, these underfunded public services and brutal working conditions are not inevitable. They are the result of decades of deliberate erosion of our public services through budget cuts, privatization and understaffing.

We must make sure these services are well financed. We need a better global tax system to ensure corporations and the very wealthy pay their fair share and do not use their economic power to exercise undue influence over public policy. The remarkable wave of re-municipalization in more than 2,400 cities in 58 countries shows how possible – and popular – it is to bring services back into public control.

3. Re-balance global and local value chains: The COVID-19 pandemic exposed once again the vulnerabilities generated by commodity dependence and overreliance on global value chains. They reflect the dominant model of a global division of labour which disregards the massive externalities related to resource exploitation, environmental degradation, displacement of communities, and the violation of human rights and labour rights.

The current crisis offers the opportunity to rethink and remodel these unbalanced export-driven development strategies, shift the centre of gravity away from the global economy and take bold public policy and investment decisions to strengthen domestic circular economies.

Three cornerstones of the necessary economic transformation are the strengthening of sustainable local food systems, enhanced regional (or subregional) cooperation to overcome the constraints of limited domestic demand, and systemic reforms in international trade and investment regimes to widen the national policy space for transformation.

4. Reinforce the shift towards climate justice: Against the backdrop of increasing climate change impacts that inordinately affect the poor, especially in the global South, and a potential deepening of the development gap and global inequality as a result of these and other crises, a more just and equitable approach to addressing climate change has to be undertaken.

In particular, countries of the global North should start phasing out and shifting subsidies and investments away from fossil fuel exploration, extraction and production immediately and commit to transition rapidly to a 100 percent use of clean and renewable energy by 2030. They should scale up the provision of climate financing to at least US$ 100 billion by the end of 2020 and increase that rapidly between 2020 and 2030.

5. Re-distribute economic power and resources: The relief and recovery packages being put in place by governments and international institutions are a critical means for tackling the structural inequalities exposed and perpetuated by COVID-19. In designing and implementing these packages, governments have the chance to start disrupting the status quo and breaking up the concentration of corporate and elite power at the root of these inequalities.

However, most governments are currently failing to take this opportunity. Redistribution is absolutely crucial for a just recovery from COVID-19, for realizing human rights for all, and for achieving the SDGs. But on its own, redistribution is not enough – we also have to think about how we create wealth, resources and power in the first place. Crucial “pre-distributive” policy areas in this regard include labour and wage policies and financial and corporate regulation.

6. Re-regulate global finance: The coronavirus crisis and resulting economic lockdown have made clear that fundamental steps need to be taken in financial regulation and reform of the international financial architecture. At least to some extent, they have also created new political impetus for such steps. One essential element would be a sovereign debt workout mechanism.

This requires an institution that makes independent and binding decisions on sovereign debt restructurings based on objective criteria and is able to enforce it in an impartial manner. To address the problems of tax dodging facilitated by financial secrecy jurisdictions and an unfair global tax system, an intergovernmental tax body – with universal membership and a strong mandate– should be created under the auspices of the United Nations.

7. Re-invent multilateral solidarity: Mobilizing support for international cooperation and for the UN must start with bending the arc of governance back again – from viewing people as shareholders – to stakeholders – to rights holders. There are many global standards and benchmarks that could be developed to measure this progression. These should be at the forefront of pursuing substantive, rights-based multilateralism and distinguishing it from multilateralism in name only. The UN should be the standard bearer at the global level, not a neutral convenor of public and private engagement.

This requires predictable and sustainable public resources, currently undermined by tax evasion and illicit financial flows and detoured to servicing undeserved debt burdens. The necessary but not sufficient condition for multilateral solidarity, the fuel to change direction, is a new funding compact at national level and to finance an impartial, value-based and effective UN system.

8. Re-define the measures of development and progress: SDG target 17.19 of the 2030 Agenda urged the international community “to develop measurements of progress on sustainable development that complement GDP”. COVID-19 shows that this is not a statistical subtlety but a matter of life and death.

The example of the Global Health Security Index (GHSI), an analytical tool intended to identify gaps in epidemic and pandemic preparedness, shows that largely ignoring the social and environmental determinants of health and concentrating instead on the infrastructure, advanced technologies and liberalized regulatory frameworks, can lead to misinterpretations and misguided policy conclusions.

The still dominant development paradigm’s main message is that countries need to get richer, not more sustainable, and that to climb the ladder and become “developed” they should follow the advice—and example– of their richer peers. This mindset must be overcome once and for all.

The Spotlight Report is published by the Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND), the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR), Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era (DAWN), Global Policy Forum (GPF), Public Services International (PSI), Social Watch, Society for International Development (SID), and Third World Network (TWN), supported by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

Spotlight on Sustainable Development 2020
Shifting policies for systemic change – Lessons from the global COVID-19 crisis
Global Civil Society Report on the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs
Beirut/Bonn/Ferney-Voltaire/Montevideo/New York/Penang/Rome/Suva, September 2020
www.2030spotlight.org

 

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 post Pushing the Reset Button will not Change the Game appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Key messages of the Spotlight on Sustainable Development Report 2020 as September 25 is the 5th anniversary of the adoption of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs.

 
Jens Martens is Director, Global Policy Forum, Bonn

The post Pushing the Reset Button will not Change the Game appeared first on Inter Press Service.

US President Donald Trump (on screen), addresses the General Assembly’s seventy-fifth session on September 22. But Trump was missing in action (MIA) during the 75th commemorative meeting on September 21. Credit: United Nations

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 24 2020 (IPS)

With more than 20,000 civilians killed last year in conflicts in 10 countries — including Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen– UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres reiterated his call for a “global cease-fire”: a proposal which failed to generate a positive response since he first announced it last March.

But with the UN’s most powerful body remaining deadlocked– and facing a bloodless confrontation between two major powers– the United Nations now seems to be in need of a “political cease-fire” at its very doorstep: inside its own 15-member Security Council (UNSC).

On the opening day of the annual high-level debate in the General Assembly September 22, the US and China, two veto-armed members, battled it out with accusations and counter-accusations.

The public confrontation between the two countries is likely to bring the UNSC to a standstill – perhaps with a worse-case scenario of the US and China vetoing each other’s resolutions—proving the Security Council has outlived its usefulness.

Dr Richard J. Ponzio, Director, Just Security 2020 and Senior Fellow at the Washington-based Stimson Center, told IPS that beginning in March, the U.S. blocked passage of a UNSC resolution (until July) endorsing Secretary-General Guterres’ call for a global cease-fire, to ensure that during the pandemic, life-saving assistance can reach the most vulnerable.

Similar to its rationale then, he said, President Trump’s main emphasis in his annual General Assembly address was to pin the blame on China for the spread of the coronavirus.

In both tone and substance, Dr Ponzio pointed out, President Trump’s UNGA speech contrasted with his contemporaries, including Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and French President Emmanuel Macron.

“Whereas President Trump elected in his brief remarks to mainly attack China for spreading COVID-19 and other transgressions, the other world leaders spoke at length about the need for global cooperation and a rules-based international order to better cope with global threats and challenges,” he noted.

President Xi Jinping (on screen) of the People’s Republic of China addresses the general debate of the General Assembly’s seventy-fifth session. Credit: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe

Trump intensified his long running battle with China, including an acrimonious bilateral trade war, when he launched a blistering attack on Beijing, during his address to the General Assembly.

While singing the praises of his own achievements, he blamed Beijing for COVID-19: “We must hold accountable the nation which unleashed this plague onto the world: China”.

Trump also accused China of “controlling” the World Health Organization (WHO) and dumping millions and millions of tons of plastic and trash into the oceans, overfishing other countries’ waters, destroying vast swaths of coral reef, and emitting more toxic mercury into the atmosphere than any country anywhere in the world.

One news site ran a fitting headline which read: “Trump at the UN: America is good, China is bad”.

Taking a passing shot at Trump’s unilateralism, Chinese President Xi Jinping told the Assembly “humanity will win this battle” against the virus, and “any attempt of politicizing the issue, or stigmatization, must be rejected”.

COVID-19 reminds us that economic globalization is an indisputable reality and a historical trend, he said.

“Burying one’s head in the sand like an ostrich, in the face of economic globalization, or trying to fight it with Don Quixote’s lance, goes against the trend of history,” he noted.

China has “no intention to fight either a Cold War or a hot one with any country” “Let this be clear: The world will never return to isolation, and no one can sever the ties between countries,” Xi said, pointing out that China will not “engage in zero sum game.”

In his 75th anniversary speech, Xi was equally hard-hitting: “No country has the right to dominate global affairs, control the destiny of others, or keep advantages in development all to itself. Even less should one be allowed to do whatever it likes and be the hegemon, bully or boss of the world. Unilateralism is a dead end.”

Meanwhile, as the UN commemorates its 75th anniversary, one of the most widespread criticisms against the world body is focused largely on the Security Council where member states have failed, over the last 25 years, in their longstanding efforts to reform and expand it.

Perhaps the harshest criticism is its inability—and its monumental failure — to resolve long-outstanding military conflicts and political problems: including finding a homeland for the Palestinians.

Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics at the University of San Francisco, who has written extensively on the politics of the Security Council, told IPS it is noteworthy that the majority of vetoes in the Security Council in recent decades have been in regard to resolutions addressing violations of international humanitarian law.

“Both the United States and Russia have repeatedly abused their veto power to protect allied governments from accountability. This does even include the dozens of other initiatives that were tabled or otherwise prevented from coming up to a vote”.

Virtually all of these resolutions were under Chapter VI of the UN Charter, so these were simply about recognizing and deploring such violations and did include military intervention, sanctions, or anything else, but they were still blocked from being passed, in most cases by a single negative vote, he pointed out.

Both Moscow and Washington have essentially sent a message that their allies, such as Syria and Israel respectively, can act with impunity.”

“In 2002, I wrote this article (link below) in response to the Bush administration’s effort to justify its planned invasion of Iraq by emphasizing the importance of enforcing UN Security Council resolutions”.

https://fpif.org/united_nations_security_council_resolutions_currently_being_violated_by_countries_other_than_iraq/

However, in addition to the dozen or so resolutions they alleged were being violated by Iraq, a conservative estimate reveals that there are an additional 88 Security Council resolutions about countries other than Iraq that were also then being violated, said Zunes.

“This raised serious questions regarding the Bush administration’s insistence that it is motivated by a duty to preserve the credibility of the United Nations, particularly since the vast majority of the governments violating these resolutions were close allies of the United States, which blocked the Security Council from enforcing them”.

The total now is closer to 100, said Zunes.

Dr Courtney B. Smith, Acting Dean, School of Diplomacy at the Seton Hall University in New Jersey, told IPS the UNSC balance sheet at 75 is decidedly mixed.

On high-profile issues and structural reform, the Council repeatedly falls short of hopes and expectations due to the continued willingness of members states, in particular the permanent five (the US, UK, France, China and Russia), to view the Council through the lens of nationalism and patriotism, extolling the virtues of putting their domestic interests and audiences first.

“This is most vividly demonstrated in the recent posturing of the US and China across a number of Council issues”, said Dr. Smith who has interviewed over one hundred UN delegates and staff members for his research on the organization and its members.

He said an alternate “silver lining” view of the Council is rooted in the sometimes-significant innovations in how the Council conducts its work.

An expanding agenda in the post-Cold War period has been joined by informal procedural innovations designed to make the Council more transparent to non-members without compromising efficiency and effectiveness, he noted.

“These developments are certainly helpful because they provide the Council with the opportunity to gather more diverse information from a wider range of viewpoints, which in turn can result in better decisions.”

However, these changes do not necessarily make it any easier to make these decisions, and therein lies the cloud hovering over the Council’s political dynamics, said Dr Smith author of Politics and Process at the United Nations: The Global Dance, published by Lynne Rienner in 2006.

Assessing these efforts, he argued, reveals “a tale of two Councils,” one that is developing new working methods to facilitate shared interests and another that is clouded by great power disagreement.

While an anniversary celebration might present an occasion to push beyond these contradictions, the current reality is that the two Councils remain firmly intertwined and that future performance will remain uneven, he added.

“The ultimate result will be a Council that tries desperately to remain relevant while all too often showing its age, which will cause moments of both hope and despair for all of us who yearn for a more robust and effective Council in the years to come,” declared Dr Smith

Dr Ponzio said expanding the composition of the Security Council to align with present-day political realities and to modify the use of the Permanent-Five’s (P-5) veto authority in cases involving mass atrocity prevention is long-overdue.

It is a shame, therefore, that the new UN75 Declaration’s only contribution on the matter is to simply “commit to instill new life in the discussions on the reform of the Security Council …” he said.

Perhaps the last real (albeit unsuccessful) attempt at serious Security Council reconfiguration was in 2005 (UN60).

If the global political conditions remain inadequate today for meaningful change, a transitional compromise may merit consideration.

For example, by amending Article 23 of the Charter, he said, major non-permanent members could be allowed to seek election for consecutive terms on the Council (thereby able to pursue a kind of de facto permanent status).

Moreover, the P-5 could be made more accountable by having to publicly defend their no votes on resolutions pertaining to the implementation of the Responsibility to Protect principle.

The post What UN Needs is a Cease-Fire Inside its own Security Council appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Women are Heads of State and Government in only 21 countries, despite the strong case that their leadership makes for more inclusive decision-making and more representative governance, even during this pandemic. Credit: UN Women

By External Source
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 24 2020 (IPS)

The question has never been whether women can lead as capably as men. Women have always led, and women will always lead, especially when the times are hard, and their communities are in need. The question that we need to ask is, why is women’s leadership invisible? Why is their potential and their power stifled?

In the midst of a global pandemic, we find women on the front lines everywhere, as heads of government, legislators, healthcare workers, community leaders, and more. Although women’s organizations and community groups shoulder much of the responsibility of preventing the spread of the virus and serving those in greatest need, they are perennially left out of decision-making processes.

Today, women are Heads of State and Government in only 21 countries, despite the strong case that their leadership makes for more inclusive decision-making and more representative governance, even during this pandemic. Men are still 75 per cent of parliamentarians and hold 73 per cent of managerial positions. Most negotiators in formal peace processes are also men.

This year, International Day of Democracy comes as a reminder that unlocking the full breadth of perspectives, experiences and leadership of women is vital for building back better from this pandemic.

How women lead for the wellbeing of all, in just five stories that you may have missed.

 

Her Excellency Vjosa Osmani is a Doctor of Legal Sciences, former professor and mother of two girls. Photo: Office of the Assembly President

 

1. Demonstrating strong women’s leadership in the pandemic

From Germany to New Zealand and Denmark to Iceland, women leaders have shown clarity, empathy, and strong communication in their decisions and policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Vjosa Osmanu, the first woman assembly president in Kosovo, is among the many women leaders praised for their leadership during the crisis.

A former professor and mother of two girls, Osmanu is an outspoken advocate for women’s representation in politics. “When women participate in high-ranking political and state level [positions], they contribute to more balanced, gender-sensitive, environmentally considerate and forward-looking policies,” she says.

During the pandemic, women in Kosovo have faced high levels of vulnerability. Like many countries, Kosovo has seen a rise in domestic violence cases since lockdown measures were introduced. “I am consistently raising my voice about the pandemic’s gender dimensions, sharing relevant facts and information, while closely monitoring all government actions,” says Osmani.

Working to protect vulnerable populations from threats related to the COVID-19 crisis, she has joined the UN Women Kosovo campaign against domestic violence and has worked closely with UNICEF on issues related to children’s health and families’ wellbeing.

“A limited number of women hold leadership positions globally and the same applies to Kosovo. Social productivity cannot be reached while people are marginalized, discriminated and face gender-based barriers,” she shares, adding that both men and women need to contribute to efforts that put more women in decision-making positions.

 

Women at Peace Village in Jetis, Central Java. Women’s groups’ members have been taking central roles as community volunteers in stepping up to stop the spread of COVID-19. Photo courtesy of Wahid Foundation.

 

2. Fighting food insecurity on the front lines

Democratic principles are at the heart of the GUYUB project, an initiative providing essential support to women in Indonesia during the COVID-19 crisis. Guyub in Indonesian means “getting along” or “in togetherness”. It’s a philosophy that connects communities even as physical distancing and lockdown measures have disrupted social lives.

Jointly implemented by UN Women, UNODC and UNDP, the project provided recently distributed food and hygiene packages to families in ten Peace Villages across Java. Upon arriving in the villages, the packages were distributed by a women-led task force, in partnership with the Indonesian NGO Wahid Foundation.

“Large-scale social restrictions that were imposed in our city created a challenge for us… to buy, prepare and distribute food packages and hygiene kits,” says Siti Yulaikha, Task Force Member from Sidomulyo, Batu City, East Java. However, the women leaders made use of a facility that had previously served as a food bank, and although movement was limited, they managed to distribute the packages to community members most in need.

“The residents are thankful for the food packages as many shops and markets are closed. They also used the hygiene kits, such as disinfectant and soap, not only at home, but at public spaces, such as the village security post,” says Yulaikha.

To protect the health of their villages, task force members took up other important virus prevention roles as well, disinfecting public spaces, producing and distributing masks, and spreading awareness about health protocols. They have also set up a centre for coronavirus data collection, contact tracing, and health checks.

Their agile adaptation to the challenging circumstances doesn’t stop there; when many women saw dips in earnings due to closed markets and lost business opportunities, they recalled learnings from prior entrepreneurship training and created a WhatsApp group to serve as an online marketplace.

“Food stall owners utilized WhatsApp to arrange takeaway food orders and home delivery. These efforts have helped them with vital, sustained income during the pandemic,” Yulaikha says.

 

Women peacebuilders are using their mobile phones to support COVID-19 response efforts in Libya. Photos: Courtesy of Libyan Women’s Network for Peacebuilding.

 

3. Leading virus prevention efforts across Libya

A step ahead of much of the working world, the 36 women involved in the Libyan Women’s Network for Peacebuilding were accustomed to connecting via phones and computers well before the pandemic hit. Separated by their country’s divisions, the women leaders who come from diverse social, generational, and geographic backgrounds, have been communicating over WhatsApp and Zoom since July 2019 to discuss peacebuilding strategies.

“We believe that we should be one Libya,” says a member of the Network, created with support from UN Women. The members are experienced activists; each is linked to her own regional network of activists that work to support their community. When the threat of the pandemic became known, the women quickly adapted their online activism to respond to the situation.

They shared vital information about the virus and how it spreads on national and local radios, provided cleaning and sanitizing products to low-income households, and disseminated gender-based violence hotline numbers. They partnered with other organizations to distribute masks and gloves in prisons and detention centres and called for the release of prisoners who are either on a short sentence or near to completing their sentence, particularly those who are elderly or ill.

Because the network of women spans the country, they have valuable insights into regional needs and have been instrumental in highlighting population-specific humanitarian issues.

Despite their vital role in managing conflicts and making peace in families and communities, Libyan women are rarely allowed to enter male-dominated decision-making and negotiation spaces. Fighting against multiple issues at once – coronavirus threats as well as marginalization of women in peace processes – these women leaders continue to push for a safer, healthier, more peaceful Libya.

“Libyan women are at the forefront of response to problems; from COVID 19 to the horrific consequences of a conflict that has divided their country and inflicted unimaginable suffering on their communities,” says Begoña Lasagabaster, UN Women Representative in Libya. “It is high time that they had their rightful place in peace talks and their say on the future of Libya.”

 

Waleska López Canú. Photo Courtesy Waleska López Canú

 

4. Breaking down barriers to health services and information for indigenous communities

Dr. Waleska López Canú, Medical Director of Wuqu’ Kawoq or Maya Health Alliance, is proud to be Maya Kaqchikel. Her indigenous identity informs much of the work she does with Maya Health Alliance which provides medical services in the most impoverished communities in Guatemala.

Since the onset of the pandemic, López has coordinated telemedicine treatment for severe and chronic malnutrition, sexual and reproductive health, and complex and chronic illnesses so that patients can continue receiving life-saving care despite lockdown measures. Maya Health Alliance has also distributed food aid to more than 900 families.

In addition to providing treatment and aid, the organization seeks to reduce barriers to healthcare so that it can be accessed by all. In the ongoing fight against COVID-19, López has witnessed how language can be a barrier to communicating about virus prevention in indigenous communities. To better serve these marginalized groups, Maya Health Alliance, together with associated institutions, has created a series of videos, audios, and radio programmes, tailored to rural and indigenous contexts, to be distributed in seven Mayan languages, as well as Spanish.

With López as Medical Director, Maya Health Alliance has taken on several other vital roles in COVID-19 response: the organization facilitates the sharing of prevention measures among health professionals through a WhatsApp group of more than 180 members from more than 100 community-based organizations. They also provide personal protective equipment to students in their last year of medical school who offer services in the rural areas, and online assessment and training to medical professionals.

“The crisis caused by the pandemic has made visual our harsh reality, which has historically been neglected,” says López. “Indigenous women, little by little, are becoming conscious of our true role in the family and in society. We have much to contribute, from our life experiences and the knowledge of who we are and [what] we want, as well as the knowledge of the real needs of the community itself.”

 

Martha Achok raises awareness on how to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in Uganda. Photo: UN Women /Aidah Nanyonjo

 

5. Preventing the spread of COVID-19 in refugee settlements in Uganda

In the Bidibidi settlement for refugees and displaced persons in the Yumbe District of Uganda, Joyce Maka waits at the water collection point. The mother of three is a refugee from Sudan, arriving in Uganda after her husband was killed by rebels, and she is one of 12 women peace mediators in Zone B of the settlement now leading the fight against COVID-19.

Maka waits at the water station because, despite lockdown measures, people (usually women and girls) still need to frequent this spot in order to collect their water, making it a strategic point to pass on life-saving information. Since the onset of the pandemic, disseminating information about the virus has been challenging as most are confined to their homes.

“We encourage them to stay at least two metres away from each other; we also encourage them to wash their hands before and after pumping water,” Maka explains. In their role as peace mediators, Maka and others typically mediate community disputes, including issues of domestic violence, early marriage, and land rights. However, when the pandemic hit, the mediators transitioned to leading COVID-19 prevention measures.

The women have learned the importance of hand washing, physical distancing, wearing masks, testing, and quarantining, and they share this information with the wider community, through songs that they’ve composed in local dialect.

Gaining the trust and cooperation of the community is key to preventing the spread of COVID-19, so it’s important that the health information come from trusted community members, like the mediators. Their leadership and commitment to the wellbeing of all has never been more crucial.

 

This article was originally published by UN Women

The post Why Is Women’s Leadership Not in the Headlines? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Across power, industry and transport, State-Owned Enterprises emit in the aggregate over 6.2 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent annually, which is more than any other country except China. Credit: Bigstock.

By Philippe Benoit and Alex Clark
WASHINGTON, Sep 24 2020 (IPS)

President Xi Jinping announced on Tuesday China’s aim to become carbon neutral before 2060. Achieving this goal will require the support and engagement of China’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs), as they currently generate more than half of the country’s energy sector emissions. SOEs are major drivers of greenhouse gas emissions globally, particularly in emerging economies. 

Across power, industry and transport, these companies emit in the aggregate over 6.2 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent annually, which is more than any other country except China.

SOEs are also major providers of low-carbon alternatives (over half of the world’s zero-carbon utility-scale power generation capacity is state-owned).  SOEs’ major role in driving emissions means that there will be no climate success without them.

Government officials and climate stakeholders currently meeting in New York (virtually) at the United Nations and for Climate Week need to give greater attention to engaging these SOEs on climate.

In this article, we present several tools that governments can use to prompt their SOEs to take climate action. We also describe the independent capacity of these enterprises to lead on low-carbon action, as well as their ability to resist government pressure to advance the climate effort.

Finally, we discuss one of the most important hurdles to effective engagement by most SOEs: what has often been too modest climate ambition from their government shareholder.

An oft-overlooked feature of SOEs is that the same governments that signed the Paris Agreement hold direct ownership over these enterprises (particularly in large, emerging economies such as China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia and Saudi Arabia).

Arguably, the most important determinant of how much an SOE engages in the low-carbon transition is the extent to which its government shareholder prioritizes climate goals. Even the most powerful SOEs respond to the preferences and directions of their country’s ultimate leadership

Ownership provides a government with several distinctive tools to “push” SOE climate action that are more direct than the legislative and regulatory instruments largely used to influence private sector behavior. A government can, as shareholder, issue directives to its SOE though the company’s board of directors.

It can also appoint and remove senior executives (both through the board and often even directly). Selecting appropriate executive leadership with the commitment and managerial capacity to implement low-carbon programs can be decisive in driving effective SOE action on climate.

Governments also provide direction to SOEs through more informal exchanges between public officials and the company’s CEO and board members.  Lastly, governments can work to incentivize low-carbon action by middle managers (frequently the critical decision-makers in larger SOEs) by directing the company to adopt climate-friendly personnel and evaluation policies.

Governments can also deploy financial and bureaucratic resources to “pull” SOEs towards low-carbon action. For example, they can direct public funding to low-carbon investments (and away from high-carbon ones). State-owned commercial and development banks are often mobilized to deliver this climate-targeted financing, typically on preferential terms designed to accelerate uptake.

Governments also catalyze low-carbon investments by providing critical complementary infrastructure, such as the construction (often by another state-owned company) of a transmission line to an SOE’s remote renewable generation site. In addition, government funding for research and development can reduce costs for low-carbon projects, making them more attractive to SOEs (as well as the private sector).  Governments have even created new specialized SOEs to deploy specific low-carbon technologies. 

Government policies which pressure markets broadly, referred to herein as “press” tools, will also influence SOEs.

These include carbon taxes and emissions trading systems (ETS), which continue to dominate the policy discourse on emissions reduction strategies.  Although the two instruments are considered among the most effective for reducing emissions,  their impact on SOEs is likely to be more muted than on private sector companies, in part because SOEs often face multiple mandates beyond financial returns and profits.

For example, power sector SOEs are often required by their government shareholders to prioritize reliable electricity supply at low cost, as well as support other economic, social and political goals, such as employment, access expansion or using specific state-owned suppliers.

These factors lessen the responsiveness of SOEs to market-based instruments that make low-carbon alternatives more attractive in financial terms. Because costs and profitability do remain important considerations for SOEs even in the face of non-financial mandates, market-based instruments can still be useful climate tools to influence their operational and investment choices (such as the national ETS being considered for China).

These instruments, however, are unlikely to result in the same degree of meaningful decarbonization by SOEs foreseen for the private sector unless they are accompanied by some of the other measures described in this article.

Of course, an SOE might also simply decide to pursue low-carbon goals to serve its own corporate objectives, even in the absence of explicit government pressure. SOEs are often major corporations with substantial assets, financial resources, commercial know-how and technical capacity, enabling them to develop and implement robust low-carbon programs.

Motivating an SOE to act on climate in furtherance of its own corporate interests can be a highly effective way to advance low-carbon company action. A powerful SOE, however, is also able to exercise economic and political clout to resist government initiatives, including low-carbon ones.

Undertaking a strategic planning exercise to identify the corporate-level benefits of low-carbon action can help motivate an SOE to pursue climate goals (just as these benefits are increasingly influencing private sector companies).

Arguably, the most important determinant of how much an SOE engages in the low-carbon transition is the extent to which its government shareholder prioritizes climate goals. Even the most powerful SOEs respond to the preferences and directions of their country’s ultimate leadership.

To date, unfortunately, governments have exhibited only a modest commitment to these goals, especially relative to the perceived short-term economic and political gains generated by incumbent high-carbon assets.

The result has been tepid policies, programs and overall government signals on climate that have failed to produce the low-carbon actions needed from SOEs (and the private sector) to meet the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement.

Although there is some room for optimism given recent governmental pronouncements targeting carbon neutrality, a deeper understanding and appreciation among national stakeholders of how the low-carbon transition will best serve economic growth, poverty alleviation and social improvement objectives is needed to strengthen domestic resolve on climate and the government’s interest in using SOEs to this end.

For deep global emissions reductions to be achievable, SOEs must play a leading role in China and other countries where these enterprises are major actors in energy production and consumption.

Government ownership presents an under-explored avenue to engage these companies in advancing the climate effort.  A combination of “push”, “pull” and “press” measures will be needed.  In addition, a self-motivated SOE will further help to advance climate action.

As we move on from Climate Week into the lead-up to COP26 next year, governments and the climate community need to focus on developing initiatives that promote SOE engagement in low-carbon action.

 

Philippe Benoit is Adjunct Senior Research Scholar for Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.  He was previously the Head of the Energy Environment Division at the International Energy Agency and Energy Sector Manager for Latin America at the World Bank.

Alex Clark is a Ph.D. Researcher at the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University of Oxford, and former director of the GeoAsset Project under the Oxford Sustainable Finance Programme.

The views expressed are the authors’.

 

Related Articles

• State-Owned Companies Are Key to Climate Success in Developing Countries, but Are Often Overlooked in the International Dialogue

The post Making State-Owned Enterprises Work for Climate in China and Beyond appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Celebrating the 75th Anniversary of The United Nations. Credit: United Nations

By Robert W. Sandford
HAMILTON, Canada, Sep 24 2020 (IPS)

As we reflect on this week and celebrate the United Nations’ rise in the war-ravaged world some 75 years ago, humanity is again being asked to lay the foundation for a new world.

As in 1945, we are asked to envision the world that emerges from a global catastrophe. Similarly, as well, in our post-pandemic world we will need to make not a partial but a full transformation, one in which human self-interest again aligns with planetary realities.

Such a global reset can produce universal benefits in the form of a healthier, more just, safer, kinder and more spirituality connected society.

As UN historian Paul Kennedy noted, it is difficult today to recapture the optimism and high spirits of those who, in the latter days of the most devasting war in history, thought that a new world order was possible, or had already arrived.

Of course, these visionaries were overly optimistic. All who roll boulders uphill are.

The lesson and inspiration for us is that they were able to look at a world reduced to rubble and see in it a transformational moment for all. If they did that then, surely, we can also do so today.

In 1945, the UN inherited the same challenges faced by an earlier experiment in global cooperation, the League of Nations. For every voice favouring the creation of institutions committed to global cooperation, there was another warning against the erosion of national sovereignty. This fierce debate continues today.

Meanwhile, the UN remains unable to escape the fundamental paradox of all international bodies. It only performs as well as its member nations.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Richard Holbrooke expressed it famously: “Blaming the UN for a crisis is like blaming Madison Square Gardens when the New York Knicks play badly. You are blaming a building.”

And, by virtue of its founding charter conditions, action against rogue states cannot be pursued if a Great Power – that is one of the five countries possessing the veto in the Security Council – is opposed.

It is impossible to understand the history of the United Nations without understanding that this tension was baked into the system at the time of its birth.

That said, even with this structural limitation, the UN has made enormous progress in domains in which individual nations could not adequately or satisfactorily act alone.

And the UN is unlikely to ever collapse because of the growing range of world issues such as climate change that cannot be addressed alone by even the most powerful member states. As is often claimed, despite its many failings “if the UN didn’t exist, we would have to invent it.”

We live on a different planet than we did in 1945. How could it be otherwise when, in the span of a single lifetime, Earth’s human population has swelled almost four-fold to nearly eight billion in 2020 — and total global production has grown from $4 trillion to more than $140 trillion in the same period, with many consequences.

It is important to acknowledge that our current global situation is not all bad. There is, for example, the growing power of international opinion to expose human rights abuses and cause even the most recalcitrant and repressive regimes to consider the consequences of their crimes. We cannot allow that pressure to let up.

If the Great Pause imposed on us by COVID-19 is to become a transformational moment, the level of change has to emerge from the hearts and collective conscience of humanity.

At minimum, that change has to manifest itself in action in the form of implementation of the UN’s existing framework for creating a more just and more sustainable world: the UN’s 2030 Transforming Our World global sustainable development agenda.

Difficult as the UN’s sustainable development goals may appear to be, and distracted as we presently are by the pandemic, we cannot afford to lose sight of what this agenda can do for humanity.

This agenda, if implemented now, may well be seen in time as the greatest gift the United Nations has given humanity.

The problems facing the UN as a world body 75 years into its mandate have not and will not deter it from trying “to save generations from the scourge of war,” “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights,” and to promote “social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.”

Those ambitions in the original Preamble to the founding Charter of the United Nations had it right. The question now – in this new transformational moment – is, can we finally do it? And the answer is yes, we can.

The boulder is still only half way up the mountain. To advance it further, to create the future we want and the UN we need, much effort is needed.

Just as in 1945, this truly is a transformational moment — for the UN certainly, but also for the entire world.

*The UN University Institute for Water, Environment and Health in Hamilton, Canada, is supported by the Government of Canada and hosted by McMaster University

 

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 post The Future We Want, The UN We Need appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Robert W. Sandford is the Global Water Futures Chair, UN University Institute for Water*, Environment and Health in Hamilton, Canada.

The post The Future We Want, The UN We Need appeared first on Inter Press Service.

President of the General Assembly opens 75th General Debate. Credit: United Nations

By Abby Maxman
NEW YORK, Sep 23 2020 (IPS)

President Trump took the UN stage to settle scores and shift blame as he sought to spin an alternate version of his administration’s response to the pandemic.

He condemned the ‘one-sided’ Paris Agreement as the US battles devastating wildfires, bragged about promoting peace while federal agents attack protestors in US streets, touted women’s rights while slashing longstanding US support for women’s health programs, and extolled his COVID-19 response as the US surpasses a death toll of 200,000.

President Trump also pitched his vision of a global order driven by narrow, competing national interests – one at odds with the UN Charter agreed 75 years ago to pick up the pieces from the Second World War.

The UN was founded to remind us that no matter our differences, we’re all on the same side when it comes to global problems like COVID-19 and the climate crisis. When humanity is faced with challenges that ignore national borders, there are no one-sided deals.

As this global pandemic has only reinforced, America can only be great – and safe – when we work with others to solve the problems facing humanity. An effective COVID-19 response must be founded on scientific evidence, cooperation, and meeting the needs of the most vulnerable in society.

But President Trump prioritizes the health of the markets over people and political spin instead of scientific information, deferring to the wealthiest 1% instead of the rest of us. His lack of leadership has cost American lives and delays the much-needed recovery.

While a safe and effective vaccine can be a way out of this nightmare, and researchers funded by the US government are racing to find it, making sure vaccines are available and affordable to everyone is equally important. COVID-19 anywhere is COVID-19 everywhere.

The Trump administration claims to have great pride for its leadership at the UN and as an agent of peace and human rights around the globe, while simultaneously undermining some of its most vital tenets and goals.

Indeed, the world listens closely, but what they have heard from the Trump administration has undermined our role as a leader and albeit flawed, proponent of peace in the world. Peace stems not from strength but from mutual respect and a shared commitment to rules that benefit everyone.

Solutions to the poverty, inequality, and injustice so many are experiencing both here in the United States and around the world can only be found by working together for shared progress, not by turning inward or trying to make gains at the expense of families and communities elsewhere.

We will prosper together, or suffer apart.

Meanwhile, Trump in his address said: It is my profound honor to address the United Nations General Assembly. 75 years after the end of World War Two and the founding of the United Nations, we are once again engaged in a great global struggle.

We have waged a fierce battle against the invisible enemy — the China Virus — which has claimed countless lives in 188 countries. In the United States, we launched the most aggressive mobilization since the Second World War.

We rapidly produced a record supply of ventilators — creating a surplus that allowed us to share them with friends and partners all around the globe. We pioneered life-saving treatments, reducing our fatality rate 85 percent since April.

Thanks to our efforts, 3 vaccines are in the final stage of clinical trials. We are mass producing them in advance so they can be delivered immediately upon arrival. We will distribute a vaccine, we will defeat the virus, we will end the pandemic, and we will enter a new era of unprecedented prosperity, cooperation and peace.

As we pursue this bright future, we must hold accountable the nation which unleashed this plague onto the world: China.

In the earliest days of the virus, China locked down travel domestically while allowing flights to leave China and infect the world. China condemned my travel ban on their country, even as they cancelled domestic flights and locked citizens in their homes.

The Chinese government, and the World Health Organization — which is virtually controlled by China — falsely declared that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission. Later, they falsely said people without symptoms would not spread the disease.

The United Nations must hold China accountable for their actions. In addition, every year China dumps millions and millions of tons of plastic and trash into the oceans, overfishes other countries’ waters, destroys vast swaths of coral reef, and emits more toxic mercury into the atmosphere than any country anywhere in the world.

China’s carbon emissions are nearly twice what the U.S. has, and it’s rising fast. By contrast, after I withdrew from the one-sided Paris Climate Accord, last year America reduced its carbon emissions by more than any country in the agreement.

Those who attack America’s exceptional environmental record while ignoring China’s rampant pollution are not interested in the environment. They only want to punish America and I will not stand for it.

If the United Nations is to be an effective organization, it must focus on the real problems of the world. This includes terrorism, the oppression of women, forced labor, drug trafficking, human and sex trafficking, religious persecution, and the ethnic cleansing of religious minorities.

America will always be a leader in human rights. My administration is advancing religious liberty, opportunity for women, the decriminalization of homosexuality, combatting human trafficking, and protecting unborn children.

We also know that American prosperity is the bedrock of freedom and security all over the world. In three short years, we built the greatest economy in history — and we are quickly doing it again. Our military has increased substantially in size. We spent $2.5 trillion over the last 4 years on our military. We have the most powerful military anywhere in the world, and it’s not even close.

We stood up to decades of China’s trade abuses. We revitalized the NATO Alliance where other countries are now paying a much more fair share. We forged historic partnerships with Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador to stop human smuggling.

We are standing with the people of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela in their righteous struggle for freedom. We withdrew from the terrible Iran Nuclear Deal and imposed crippling sanctions on the world’s leading state sponsor of terror. We obliterated the ISIS caliphate 100 percent, killed its founder and leader, Al-Baghdadi, and eliminated the world’s top terrorist, Qasem Soleimani.

This month we achieved a peace deal between Serbia and Kosovo. We reached a landmark breakthrough with two Peace Deals in the Middle East — after decades of no progress.

Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain all signed a historic peace agreement at the White House, with many other Middle Eastern countries to come. They are coming fast and they know it’s great for them, and it’s great for the world.

These groundbreaking peace deals are the dawn of the new Middle East. By taking a different approach, we have achieved different outcomes. Far superior outcomes. We took an approach and the approach worked. We intend to deliver more peace agreements shortly, and I have never been more optimistic for the future of the region.

There is no blood in the sand. Those days are hopefully over. As we speak, the United States is also working to end the war in Afghanistan — and we are bringing our troops home. America is fulfilling our destiny as peacemaker. But it is peace through strength.

We are stronger now than ever before, our weapons are at an advanced level like we’ve never had before, like frankly we’ve never even thought of having before, and I only pray to God that we never have to use them. For decades, the same tired voices proposed the same failed solutions, pursuing global ambitions at the expense of their own people.

But only when you take care of your own citizens, will you find a true basis for cooperation. As President, I have rejected the failed approaches of the past — and I am proudly putting America First, just as you should be putting your countries first.

That’s okay, that’s what you should be doing. I am supremely confident that next year, when we gather in person, we will be in the midst of one of the greatest years in our history and frankly, hopefully, in the history of the world.

 

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 post Trump Pitched his Vision of a Global Order — at Odds with the UN Charter appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Abby Maxman, in a response to President Donald Trump’s UN General Debate remarks.

 
Abby Maxman is President & CEO of Oxfam America

The post Trump Pitched his Vision of a Global Order — at Odds with the UN Charter appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Dominic Kimara, the farm manager at an agri-food company, stands in a rice field grown using conservation agriculture technique. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

By Isaiah Esipisu
AMURU, Uganda/NAIROBI, Kenya, Sep 23 2020 (IPS)

In Amuru district, 47 kilometres from Gulu town in northwestern Uganda, the Omer Farming Company has proven that it is possible to farm on thousands of acres of land using methods that conserve the environment and its biodiversity.

On a 5,000 acre piece of land, the company is growing upland rice with a yield of up to 3.5 metric tons per acre, using the conservation agriculture method.

“We do not plough the field, and we do not use fertilisers,” Dominic Kimara, the farm manager at the company, told IPS. “Instead, we grow a leguminous crop known as sunn hemp, and when it is 50 percent flowering, we roll it on the ground so that it can decompose and form green manure,” he explained.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, this type of farming technique has several advantages for the environment because it reduces the use of farm machineries (which often emit carbon), sequesters carbon, and is cost effective and beneficial to the soil.

According to the report ‘Fixing the Business of Food initiative‘ by the Barilla Center for Food and Nutrition Foundation (BCFN), agri-food companies must consider the environmental and social impacts of business operations, including their production processes and other internal processes, with a focus on issues such as resource use (land, water, energy) and emissions, respect for human rights, diversity and inclusion, and decent work conditions that improve livelihoods of employees and their families.

The report, which was released on Sept. 22 alongside the 75th session of the U.N. General Assembly in partnership with the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN), the Santa Chiara Lab (SCL) and the Columbia Center for Sustainable Investment (CCSI), identifies a four pillar framework for alignment of the food and agriculture sector with the Sustainable Development Goals.

“Indeed the four pillar framework is a sort of instruction manual to guide our efforts towards the active engagement of the private sector in the implementation of the 2030 agenda,” said Mariangela Zappia, ambassador and permanent representative of the Permanent Mission of Italy to the U.N. in New York.

However, the experts observed that despite a steady increase in investments in sustainable development and climate action, only eight percent of public climate finance is directed to the agri-food sector.

“There is one big risk: that a lot of our colleagues, a lot of other actors in the world of business feel the danger, but they do not have the courage to really take actions within their company to make these very difficult decisions,” said Guido Barilla, chair of Barilla Group and the BCFN Foundation, noting that the Barilla Group had to take a tough decision to stop the use of palm oil, which is the cheapest source of fat, but contributes to deforestation.

“We are late in the 2030 Agenda, we are losing time in completing the sustainability goals and to really rationalise the dangers and lower the dangers on climate change and on sustainability issues. It’s unaffordable. We need to make a call to action,” he said during a virtual launch of the report.

The report further points out that the shift towards more sustainable and healthier diets is a strong leverage to improve both planetary and human health.

This comes after a warning by another study about India that projects levels of undersupply and consequent malnutrition will significantly increase in 2030 and 2050 scenarios.

“Policy incentives in Indian agriculture since the Green Revolution have predominantly been focused on achieving caloric food security through increased production of cereals (wheat and rice),” wrote the researchers in a study titled ‘Sustainable food security in India—Domestic production and macronutrient availability’.

This, according to the scientists, has resulted in a heavy carbohydrate-based diet (65–70 percent of total energy intake) which may be significantly lacking in adequate diversity for the provision of other important nutrients.

The BCFN report points out that there is need for a radical transformation in order to cope with the environmental, social, and economic challenges of agri-food systems at global and local levels. “In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated global development challenges especially for the most vulnerable communities around the globe,” it reads in part.

So far, the European Union is already promoting such transformation through the European Green Deal and the ‘Farm to Fork’ Strategy, aiming to make European food ‘the global standard for sustainability’.

The authors explored the main gaps in aligning practices and strategies to sustainability principles through a deep qualitative analysis of sustainability reports for 2018 and 2019 published by 12 global companies with high reputations in terms of sustainability.

The other pillars include contribution to healthy and sustainable dietary patterns through its products and strategies, and the impact and influence of companies beyond the perimeter of their direct and outsourced operations. The report notes that in some contexts, companies have co-responsibility for enhanced sustainability throughout their supply chains, value chains and within the ecosystems in which they operate.

The last pillar considers companies’ external strategies and engagement: both with the communities where they operate and with the rules that govern them.

“We must generate partnerships between the private sector and the public sector so that everyone in the world has access to healthy diets that are produced sustainably,” said Rachel Kyte, the Dean, at the Fletcher School at Tufts University.

Related Articles

• COVID-19 Worsens Mozambique’s Hunger
• Preserving Food Security in Africa’s Urban Areas
• How Women-led Agribusinesses are Boosting Nutrition in Africa

The post Scientists Draw up Guidelines to Help Agri-food Companies Align with 2030 Agenda appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Waorani women from Alianza Ceibo march for the protection of their forest in Ecuador’s capital Quito. Credit: Mateo Barriga, Amazon Frontlines.

By Jamison Ervin
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 23 2020 (IPS)

A spate of reports on biodiversity – the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystems, the Living Planet Report, the Global Forest Resources Assessment Report and the Global Biodiversity Outlook– paint a stark picture for the world’s biodiversity.

All point in the same direction: we are on track to lose more than a million species by mid-century, we lost 68% of all wildlife populations since 1970, we lost more than 11 million hectares of primary forest last year, and we have failed to meet almost all of the conservation targets in the decade-long Strategic Plan for Biodiversity.

Failure to halt the loss of biodiversity, let alone reverse historic trends, has grave consequences for all of humanity. The livelihoods, food, water security and safety of billions of people are at risk.

The stability of our climate is at risk. Half of global GDP is at risk. Buffers against the next pandemic are at risk. Indeed, the very future of humanity is at risk. Halting biodiversity loss and restoring the health of the planet requires several profound and systemic transformations.

We must place nature at the heart of sustainable development. Because nature plays such as fundamental role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, all nations must take a closer look at how to integrate the protection, restoration and sustainable management of biodiversity and ecosystems into their national climate, health, water, security and development plans.

We must tackle the root causes of biodiversity loss – the unchecked economic and market forces that fail to account for nature’s values. Our current economic system favors short-term gain over long-term stewardship of nature.

Governments must find ways to ensure that their national expenditures align, and do not countermand, their national development goals, especially those goals that depend on healthy ecosystems.

At the same time, we must ensure that corporations and finance institutions place nature at the center of financial decision-making by holding them accountable to the impacts of their decisions on the health of biodiversity and ecosystems.

We must invest in nature protection and recovery. While the cost of inaction on nature is profound, the economic cost of investing in nature is not. We currently spend less than $100 billion a year on nature — about what we spend on pet food globally.

We only need an additional $700 billion annually to achieve ambitious biodiversity goals for 2030 – that’s less than 1% of global GDP, and only a fraction of the $5.2 trillion that we spend on fossil fuel subsidies every year.

We must increase our global ambition for immediate action on nature. We are facing a complex and interacting planetary emergency – a nature crisis, a biodiversity crisis, a health crisis and an inequality crisis all at once.

To fully respond to this emergency, we need bold ambition, commitment and action at all levels, from local to global. We must commit to creating a nature-based planetary safety net, in response to our planetary emergency.

One way to do that is through greening Covid-19 economic recovery and stimulus packages a step many countries have yet to take.

We must transform global production and consumption. For example, global appetites for beef are responsible for as much as half of forest cover loss worldwide, while unsustainable agricultural practices are responsible for nearly a quarter of our global greenhouse gas emissions.

We must increase global commitment and accountability for deforestation-free commodities, though initiatives such as the New York Declaration on Forests.

We must promote, celebrate and accelerate local action on nature if we are to tackle our planetary emergency – we need an all-of-society approach. Examples such as UNDP’s Equator Initiative showcase how the world is witnessing action on nature by youth, Indigenous peoples and local communities in every country and in thousands of communities.

By protecting, restoring and sustainably managing biodiversity, local actors can realize direct and tangible development dividends. To support local efforts, we must also strengthen governance and rule of law, especially for the 90 percent of Indigenous peoples who lack title for their lands, and who face murder, persecution and intimidation, often by multi-national corporations.

We must raise awareness of all levels of society of the value of nature, and of the risks inherent in biodiversity loss. In September, a campaign to promote the hashtag #NatureForLife has already garnered more than 50 million views.

But we must do more to raise global awareness. On the margins of the UN General Assembly, marking the 75th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, UNDP is convening more than 40 partners to create a virtual “Nature for Life Hub,” involving more than 300 speakers from every walk of life.

Join us, either during or after the event, and help us strengthen global resolve to bend the curve on biodiversity loss – for nature, and for life.

 

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 post Bending the Curve on Biodiversity Loss Requires Nothing Less than Transformational Change appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

The UN will be hosting the first-ever Biodiversity Summit – remotely – on September 30.

 
Jamison Ervin is Manager, Nature for Development Global Programme, UNDP, New York

The post Bending the Curve on Biodiversity Loss Requires Nothing Less than Transformational Change appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Million Belay and Timothy A. Wise
STOCKHOLM, CAMBRIDGE (US), Sep 23 2020 (IPS)

As COVID-19 threatens farming communities across Africa already struggling with climate change, the continent is at a crossroads. Will its people and their governments continue trying to replicate industrial farming models promoted by developed countries? Or will they move boldly into the uncertain future, embracing ecological agriculture?

Million Belay

It is time to choose. Africa is projected to overtake South Asia by 2030 as the region with the greatest number of hungry people. An alarming 250 million people in Africa now suffer from “undernourishment,” the U.N. term for chronic hunger. If policies do not change, experts project that number to soar to 433 million in 2030.

The evidence is now convincing that the Green Revolution model of agriculture, with its commercial seeds and synthetic fertilizers, has failed to bring progress for Africa’s farmers. Since 2006, under the banner of the billion-dollar Alliance for a Green Revolution for Africa (AGRA), that strategy has had an unprecedented opportunity to generate improved productivity, incomes, and food security for small-scale farmers. African governments have spent billions of dollars subsidizing and promoting the adoption of these imported technologies.

According to a recent report, “False Promises.” evidence from AGRA’s 13 countries indicates that it is taking Africa in the wrong direction. Productivity has improved marginally, and only for a few chosen crops such as maize. Others have withered in a drought of neglect from donor agencies and government leaders. In AGRA’s 13 focus countries, the production of millet, a hearty, nutritious and climate-resilient grain, fell 24% while yields declined 21%. This leaves poor farmers with less crop diversity in their fields and less nutritious food on their children’s plates.

Small-scale farming households, the intended beneficiaries of Green Revolution programs, seem scarcely better off. Poverty remains high, and severe food insecurity has increased 31% across AGRA’s 13 countries, as measured by the United Nations.

Rwanda, the home country of AGRA’s president, Agnes Kalibata, is held up as an example of AGRA’s success. After all, maize production increased fourfold since AGRA began in 2006 under Kalibata’s leadership as Agriculture Minister. The “False Promises” report refers to Rwanda as “AGRA’s hungry poster child.” All that maize apparently did not benefit the rural poor. Other crops went into decline and the number of undernourished Rwandans increased 41% since 2006, according to the most recent U.N. figures.

Timothy A. Wise

Green Revolution proponents have had 14 years to demonstrate they can lead Africa into a food-secure future. Billions of dollars later, they have failed. AGRA wrapped up its annual Green Revolution Forum September 11 without providing any substantive responses to the findings.

With a pandemic threatening to disrupt what climate change does not, Africa needs to take a different path, one that focuses on ecological farm management using low-cost, low-input methods that rely on a diversity of crops to improve soils and diets.

Many farmers are already blazing that trail, and some governments are following with bold steps to change course.

In fact, two of the three AGRA countries that have reduced both the number and share of undernourished people – Ethiopia and Mali – have done so in part due to policies that support ecological agriculture.

Ethiopia, which has reduced the incidence of undernourishment from 37% to 20% since 2006, has built on a 25-year effort in the northern Tigray Region to promote compost, not just chemical fertilizer, along with soil and water conservation practices, and biological control of pests. In field trials, such practices have proven more effective than Green Revolution approaches. The program was so successful it has become a national program and is currently being implemented in at least five regions.

Mali is the AGRA country that showed the greatest success in reducing the incidence of hunger (from 14% to 5% since 2006). According to a case study in the “False Promises” report, progress came not because of AGRA but because the government and farmers’ organizations actively resisted its implementation. Land and seed laws guarantee farmers’ rights to choose their crops and farming practices, and government programs promote not just maize but a wide variety of food crops.

Mali is part of a growing regional effort in West Africa to promote agroecology. According to a recent report by the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has developed an Agroecology Transition Support Program to promote the shift away from Green Revolution practices. The work is supported by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) as part of its “Scaling Up Agroecology” program.

In Burkina Faso, Mali, and Senegal, farmers’ organizations are working with their governments to promote agroecology, including the subsidization of biofertilizers and other natural inputs as alternatives to synthetic fertilizers.

In the drylands of West Africa, farmers in Burkina Faso, Senegal, Ghana and Niger are leading “another kind of green revolution.” They are regenerating tree growth and diversifying production as part of agro-forestry initiatives increasingly supported by national governments. This restores soil fertility, increases water retention, and has been shown to increase yields 40%-100% within five years while increasing farmer incomes and food security. It runs counter to AGRA’s approach of agricultural intensification.

Senegal, which cut the incidence of severe hunger from 17% to 9% since 2006, is one of the regional leaders. Papa Abdoulaye Seck, Senegal’s Ambassador to the FAO, summarized the reasons the government is so committed to the agroecological transition in a foreword to the IPES report:

“We have seen agroecological practices improve the fertility of soils degraded by drought and chemical input use. We have seen producers’ incomes increase thanks to the diversification of their crop production and the establishment of new distribution channels. We have seen local knowledge enriched by modern science to develop techniques inspired by lived experience, with the capacity to reduce the impacts of climate change. And we have seen these results increase tenfold when they are supported by favorable policy frameworks, which place the protection of natural resources, customary land rights, and family farms at the heart of their action.”

Those “favorable policy frameworks” are exactly what African farmers need from their governments as climate change and COVID-19 threaten food security. It is time for African governments to step back from the failing Green Revolution and chart a new food system that respects local cultures and communities by promoting low-cost, low-input ecological agriculture.

Million Belay is coordinator of the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa.
Timothy A. Wise is researcher and writer with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy and Tufts University, and the author of the recent book Eating Tomorrow: Agribusiness, Family Farmers, and the Battle for the Future of Food. His background paper contributed to the “False Promises” report.

 

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 post Africa at the Crossroads: Time to Abandon Failing Green Revolution appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By External Source
Sep 23 2020 (IPS-Partners)

 
On the eve of the United Nations Summit on Biodiversity, Dr. Anne Larigauderie calls on everyone to make ambitious commitments to protect #biodiversity and #nature.

 

The post Anne Larigauderie UN Biodiversity Summit #ForNature Video appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Itaipu, the largest hydroelectric power station in the Americas, shared by Brazil and Paraguay on their Paraná river border. Credit: Mario Osava / IPS

By Rene Roger Tissot
VERNON, Canada, Sep 22 2020 (IPS)

Can the “energy transition” in Latin America help address the risks caused by greenhouse gases (GHG) on the climate, and the economic depression caused by the pandemic?

Energy transition refers to the shift from fossil-based systems of energy production and consumption — including oil, natural gas, and coal — to renewable energy (RE) sources like wind and solar, etc. Proponents of investments in RE highlight investments’ impacts on jobs and industrialization opportunities.

RE deployment implies a trade-off between the objectives of energy and industrial policies: The energy policy would seek the reliable supply of electricity at low cost while industrial policy would pursue an expansion and diversification of manufacturing capabilities impacting production costs.

Local Content Requirement Concept

Local content requirements (LCR) is a policy tool used to promote industrial development. The justification of LCR is based on the expectation that it increases economic linkages with local businesses resulting in more jobs locally. Any investment would have a “natural” level of local content, defined by the share of local procurement and jobs the investor would contract in the absence of LCR.

Latin America could achieve lower levels of GHG while also keeping electricity generation costs low by connecting regions with renewable energy surplus potential to demand nodes through transnational grids
That investment would generate a certain level of spillovers and learnings with the local businesses. Those spillovers can be expanded by requiring the initial level of investment to increase its local procurement level above its natural level.

However, there is an optimal level of LCR in which those linkages are maximized, beyond that point the costs of LCR would results in lower output or investment delays. If the gains from the linkages in terms of local procurement and job creation expected from LCR are higher thant the negative effects caused by their higher production costs, then LCR would be justifiable.

Most jobs in RE value chain are in the manufacturing of components. In the European Union, manufacturing accounts for 55% of all the jobs of the value chain. (Sooriyaarachchi, et al. 2015). Manufacturing of RE components requires the use of complex technologies and a skilled workforce.

 

Latin America’s experience.

Latin America’s GHG emissions from electricity generation are lower than world averages due to the reliance on hydroelectricity. But the region’s electricity generation matrix hides significant differences between countries.

Brazil, Colombia, or Costa Rica for example relied on hydroelectricity, while fossil fuels are the main source of electricity generation in the Caribbean, Chile, Argentina, Bolivia, or Mexico. However, Latin America’s supply of hydroelectricity is becoming less reliable due to changing weather patterns, requiring an increasing use of fossil fuels to meet growing demand.

Moreover, hydroelectric projects encounter increasing communities’ opposition and environmental challenges. RE expansion would then have to consider both levels of dependency (hydro and fossil fuels) while keeping prices low and ensuring that intermittence challenges from RE are addressed. Until recently most of the growth of RE was on biofuels, then wind power and more recently solar energy.

Latin America could achieve lower levels of GHG while also keeping electricity generation costs low by connecting regions with RE surplus potential to demand nodes through transnational grids. Regional integration is believed to lessen the need for national investments while reducing overall GHG and electricity generation costs (Guimaraes 2020).

However, efforts of regional electricity interconnection have not always provided the expected results. Large cost overruns, expensive cost of capital, construction delays, and the tendency for governments to protect their own markets makes regional electricity integration and unlikely alternative.

RE deployment in Latin America has prioritized the expansion of installed capacity at the lowest cost over local manufacturing development.

 

Employees work on the solar panels of the El Romero plant, with a capacity of 196 megawatts, in the desert region of Atacama in northern Chile. CREDIT: Acciona

 

Market driven instruments such as auctions have been the preferred option for RE deployment since they tend to achieve lower prices by stimulating competition. Auctions have not included LCR clauses, but Mexico and Brazil adopted other mechanism promoting LCR in their RE deployment efforts.

Brazil’s LCR operated indirectly by offering companies that complied with the stringent local content access to preferential loans from Brazil’s National Development Bank (BNDES). Securing low cost of capital was an important competitive advantage during the auction process, encouraging companies to comply with the LCR.

The measurement of LCR was based on weight. Since a tower represents approximately 80% of the total weight of a wind turbine, it implied that developers would have to build in Brazil or acquire the towers from a local manufacturer the towers.

Manufacturing towers locally increased production costs since Brazilian steel was about 70% more expensive than imported one (Kuntze and Moerenhout 2012). The use of weight as a measurement for LCR helped to expand the manufacturing base, but it benefitted mostly a well-established industry (steel) as opposed to the development of new and more complex activities.

Mexico RE policy objectives were multiple but emphasis was given on capacity expansion and low cost of supply (Tyeler and Schmidt 2019). The government also opted for the use of auctions, but the development of a local value chain was not explicitly included in the design of the auctions.

Auctions attracted strong interest from large foreign RE firms. Smaller local developers struggled competing with foreign firms which had access to lower cost of finances from their home countries. Local manufacturers also had difficulty adapting to the discipline foreign buyers brought in terms of market competition and due diligence skills.

Many companies grew used to work through non-competitive procurement processes with CFE. Wary of the risks of entering a new market, foreign power generators opted to reduce risks by controlling what they could control such as their own supply chain.

Mexico meets several conditions for the expansion of solar power generation and the use of LCR to expand its manufacturing activities: The country’s photovoltaic and solar thermal resources are among the world’s best, it has a large market potential, and a strong industrial base. Since 2013 it developed a regulatory framework that, based on market response, was successful at attracting investments.

Even more, Mexico is well positioned to benefit from US re-localization of value chains. However, following the election of President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (2018-2024) the outlook for RE expansion looks uncertain. The elected president preferred to support oil and gas activities, and protect the commercial interest of Pemex, even if that implied selling fuel oil to CFE although the power utility had already started to use RE sources as a viable source of energy. (Grustein 2020).

The government’s decision creates significant regulatory uncertainty, questioning the future of the entire RE deployment strategy, and the expansion of a local value chain.

Contrary to electricity generation, the main source of GHG emission in Latin Americas are from agriculture, forestry, and land use (AFOLU). This is where the region should focus its efforts (Guimaraes 2020).

The use of LCR in RE to expand manufacturing jobs of RE components has been modest. Most of the job opportunities from RE expansion would be on construction, operation, and maintenance.

As such, Latin America’s energy transition in electricity generation is unlikely to be the main solution to reduce GHG, nor will it be a significant source of jobs in the manufacturing of components if the priority is – as it should be- to ensure a supply of electricity at competitive prices.

This, however, does not mean RE deployment should be ignored. On the contrary, efforts should be on strengthening the stability of the regulatory environment on RE electricity generation to reduce dependency on hydroelectricity and fossil fuels.

To capture more jobs, focus should be on improving and expanding workforce’s technical skills on RE activities. As such, universities, and technical centers working in coordination with RE power generators and EPC companies should develop proper certification programs according to the expected market potential of each country.

 

Rene Roger Tissot, Energy Fellow Institute of the Americas, PhD Student University of British Columbia Okanagan, expert on energy economics and local content development programs. M.A. Economics, MBA, CMA.

The post Looking for Jobs in Latin America – Can the Energy Transition Help? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Trafficking survivor Devendra Kumar Mulayam, who hails from Shahapur in the Chandouli district of Uttar Pradesh, had to begin working at age 12 to help pay off the two loans his father had taken out. Credit: Rina Mukherji/IPS

By Rina Mukherji
PUNE, India, Sep 22 2020 (IPS)

One of the worst fallouts of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the closure of industries in India, which caused thousands of migrant labourers to return home to villages in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Bengal. In a region where the poorest have always been subjected to bonded labour, child labour and slave trafficking, it has meant revisiting the past.

“Uttar Pradesh has seen 35 lakh [3.5 million] workers return home. Azamgarh district alone has seen 1.65 lakh [165,000] returnees. Of these, only 10,000 people could be given employment under MNREGA [Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act],” activist and Rural Organisation for Social Advancement chief functionary, Mushtaque Ahmed, told IPS

• MNREGA guarantees 100 days of wage employment to a rural household where the adults are willing to undertake unskilled labour.

Of late, as the country has progressed into a loosening of COVID-19 restrictions, and some workers — who comprised the bulk of the skilled labour in industrial belts — have returned to work.

Bonded labour – formally illegal but still continues

Bonded labour formally ended in India with the passing of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.

• The  Act seeks to end forced labour in all its forms, and is supported by other legislation, namely the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, the Contract Labour ( Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970, and the Inter-State Migrant Workmen ( Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service ) Act, 1979.

But in the underdeveloped districts of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, where feudal lords exploited the lower castes and had them work for free on their lands in the past, it continues to exist in invisible forms, drawing sustenance from within the casteist social structure that has confined Dalits and Mahadalits to illiteracy and grinding poverty. 

The Mahadalits, are especially vulnerable, with their abjectly low literacy of 9 percent, as compared to the Dalit literacy level of 28 percent. First-generation learners for the most part, the Dalits and Mahadalits are generally unable to access government schemes that guarantee a better future. Often, the inability to pay back a small loan of Rs 5,000 ($68) or Rs 2,000 ($27) sees entire families being bound into slave or bonded labour in brick kilns, or farms owned by the person they are indebted to for generations.

Children also at risk

At times, families are forced to pledge a minor child to work for an unscrupulous trafficker, according to the Freedom Fund. 

The health infrastructure in eastern Uttar Pradesh and in Bihar districts along the Nepal border has always been wanting.

While the COVID-19 pandemic may have worsened the situation but matters become compounded as many villages in Bihar faced the fury of unprecedented floods last month, which saw almost 8.4 million people affected.  Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) centres in Bihar have collapsed, with the unprecedented floods straining them to the hilt.

• The ICDS  is a nationwide government programme under which children under six and their mothers are cared for through nutrition, education, immunisation, health checkup and referral services. The programme has managed to stem anaemia and other health problems mothers face in underprivileged, rural communities all over India.

Children are more at risk because of the current circumstances than previously.

Human trafficking for slave or bonded labour may either see a child being sent to a place thousands of kilometres away from home, or across the border into Nepal. Within India, the modus operandi involves sending children from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar or Bengal to a southern state where unfamiliarity with the local language prevents the child labourer from escaping or negotiating a way out and returning home.

With so few options, parents are sometimes lured with a lump sum of Rs 5,000 ($68) to Rs. 10,000 ($136) paid in advance, as Manav Sansadhan Evam Mahila Vikas Sansthan ( MSEMVS) executive director Dr. Bhanuja Sharan Lal told IPS. MSEMVS is an NGO that focuses on the eradication of child labour.

No option but to make children work

But the stories many of the survivors have to relate are harsh.

Wage labourer Umesh Mari from Mayurba village in Sitamarhi district in Bihar, had to take a loan of Rs 300,000 ($4,080) for his wife’s medical treatment.

Since Sitamarhi lacks healthcare facilities needed for serious medical problems, the family had to admit her to a hospital in the adjoining district of Muzaffarpur.

Unable to repay the loan, the family, comprising of four children and son-in-law, had no option but to look for additional, better-paying jobs.

It is how 13-year-old Ramavatar and his brother-in-law Kesari were recruited for a tile fitting job across the border, in Malangwa in neighbouring Nepal. The job promised a wage of Rs 300 ($4) per day. Once there, they found that the conditions entailed working from 9 am until 7 pm with just a half-hour break. It was bonded labour.

There was little food, and erratic or no payment for months. The recent COVID-19 lockdown helped Ramavtar escape and return to his village, as IPS found. However, the family remains worried on account of their unpaid loan. Chances are, Ramavatar may find it hard to resist the trafficking mafiosi, and may have to return to an enslaved existence in bonded labour in another factory once again.

Take the case of Devendra Kumar Mulayam, who hails from Shahapur in the Chandouli district of Uttar Pradesh. The second among five siblings of a landless Dalit family, Mulayam  told IPS how the family became desperate for a source of income following two loans that his father had to take — one was for the marriage of his elder sister marriage and second following an accident that resulted in this elder sister sustaining a sever head injury, which occurred after her wedding.

As the eldest son in the family, 12-year-old Mulayam had to drop out of school and start looking for a job, while his younger siblings had to forgo their education.

Courtesy of a recruiter, Mulayam soon found his way to a textile factory in Coimbatore, where he was hired as a loader, at Rs 150 ($2) per day in 2010.

He was made to work for 12-15 hours each day, and the payments were erratic. Worse still, he had to pay for his own treatment wherever he was injured during work. 

Mulayam and his fellow-workers remained closely guarded and were never allowed to move away from either their workplace or living quarters.

Any breach of “discipline” or error at work invited severe beatings. In 2011, when things became unbearable, Mulayam and 18 other fellow workers decided to protest. Theirs was one of the worst forms of bonded labour.

Recounting the horror, Mulayam told IPS, “We were heavily assaulted, and thrown out. Scared of being rounded up by the police and sent back to the clutches of our tormentors, we kept hiding in the forested tracts adjoining the town, for five days. Thankfully, I could manage to tell my family members back home of my plight. They sought the help of a local NGO, which managed to secure my release and arrange for my  return.”

Despite the pandemic, children are still being bonded.

“We recently rescued nine children from Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh who were trafficked to a panipuri [an Indian snack]   factory in Telangana after their parents were paid an advance of Rs 10,000 each.  Once there, they were made to work from 2 am every morning to 4 pm in the evening. They were only given their meals, and had to work for free. Similar circumstances had driven eight children from Azamgarh (in Uttar Pradesh) to a textile factory in Gujarat where they were used as slave labour,” Lal told IPS.

• This is the first in a two-part series on bonded labour in India. Next week IPS will look at the government initiatives and impediments  in overcoming the problem.

 

This is part of a series of features from across the globe on human trafficking. IPS coverage is supported by the Airways Aviation Group.

The Global Sustainability Network ( GSN ) is pursuing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal number 8 with a special emphasis on Goal 8.7 which ‘takes immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms’.

The origins of the GSN come from the endeavours of the Joint Declaration of Religious Leaders signed on 2 December 2014. Religious leaders of various faiths, gathered to work together “to defend the dignity and freedom of the human being against the extreme forms of the globalisation of indifference, such us exploitation, forced labour, prostitution, human trafficking” and so forth.

 

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

• The Exploitative System that Traps Nigerian Women as Slaves in Lebanon
• No ‘Business as Usual’ for Children Post-COVID-19, say Laureates & Leaders
• xclusive: Kailash Satyarthi Warns over a Million Children Could Die Because of COVID-19 Economic Crisis

The post Fighting India’s Bonded Labour During the COVID-19 Pandemic – Part 1 appeared first on Inter Press Service.