Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

The Artificial Intelligence for Inclusion:Strengthening Workforce Participation for Persons with Disabilities side event, held at the United Nations Headquarters. Credit: UN Web TV

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 11 2025 (IPS)

On June 10, the United Nations (UN) held a conference titled Artificial Intelligence for Inclusion: Strengthening Workforce Participation for Persons with Disabilities. This conference, which was organized by the Permanent Mission of Canada to the UN, featured a discussion by a panel of experts from various sectors, looking to shed light on the ways AI tools can be used to create inclusive workforces that maximize fairness and accessibility.

Since the mainstream adoption of generative AI systems in the early 2020s, many industries have been restructured. For many workers around the world, the implementation of AI tools have streamlined work processes, making once tedious tasks easier than ever before. Efficiency has been revolutionized, with many human workers being pushed to higher-level positions and creating a host of new jobs across numerous industries.

Despite these benefits, AI systems produce risks of unintentional bias and discrimination, particularly during the hiring process, limiting inclusivity and merit-based employment in the workforce. Additionally, AI systems that have been designed for able-bodied users have effectively shut out members of the disabled community.

Throughout this conference, the panel of experts discussed the methods through which AI systems can be transformed to benefit disabled individuals who have been disproportionately affected by job displacement and discrimination. Due to AI tools being a relatively new development in the global workforce, many industries lack the necessary structures to keep them from compromising a fair and equitable work environment.

“AI is transforming the way that we live, not just how we do business. Because of its rapid arrival to users, because of its regulation, free space is posing huge questions around inclusion, ethics, privacy, and some of our most fundamental institutions,” said Patty Hajdu, Canada’s Minister of Jobs and Families.

According to Dr. Jutta Treviranus, the Director and Professor at Inclusive Design Research Centre, OCAD University, the majority of AI tools used in the workforce use algorithms that create biases for those that are considered different from the vast majority. Treviranus states that roughly 90 percent of U.S. organizations rely on AI tools to hire and determine disciplinary action for employees. These systems are often trained to detect individuals who are perceived as outliers and cast them aside, creating “organizational monocultures” which harm the disabled community.

“Bias toward optimal patterns means bias towards difference. As AI gets better and better, it gets better at discrimination. Many of you are using programs that help with efficiency and help produce systems that eliminate anyone that is not optima,” said Treviranus. “We have created an international community that hopes to address statistical inequality and cumulative harm. In U.S.risk and impact assessments, anything that happens to an outlier is deemed to be statistically insignificant. We are facing statistical discrimination with these protections as well.”

Additionally, AI systems that are designed to support disabled individuals often only account for physical disabilities while neglecting individuals with intellectual disabilities. Disabled women are also disproportionately affected by data bias. Without considering these groups, AI systems are effectively working against promoting a diverse array of perspectives in the workplace, which in turn, hurt decision-making processes and innovation.

“AI can be a powerful equalizer and tool, only if it is developed with intentionality,” said A.H. Monjurul Kabir, the Senior Global Adviser and Team Leader at Gender Equality and Disability Inclusion at UN Women. “It is critical that (AI) does not deepen existing stigma, discrimination, and inequalities, especially for women and girls who face compounded layers of discrimination.”

“The unfortunate thing is that even if proportional representation was possible, AI will still rule against outliers and small minorities. It’s extremely difficult to get cluster analysis in disability…We need to look at what is done with that data and how it’s analyzed. Privacy protections do not work if you are highly unique. Differential privacy removes the pieces of data that are helpful to create AI data that will serve you,” added Treviranus.

Furthermore, disabled individuals around the world lack adequate access to AI-powered assistive technologies. With AI tools being implemented in all major sectors of industry, it is imperative that disabled workers are supplied with tools that streamline their work processes and keep their physical and/or intellectual conditions in mind.

“To some extent, addictive tech is a broken business model. The weight of the costs is on disabled individuals and public service…People with disabilities are paying far more for access that works poorly and is often broken,” said Treviranus. “AI using these life changing technologies usually work the least from people who need them the most. The farther you are from the average, the less it works. If the products you have are in a different language or your environment is poor, it will not work well,” she added.

According to Jürgen Dusel, theFederal Government Commissioner for Matters relating to Persons with Disabilities for Germany, workers with intellectual disabilities are currently receiving tablets that help them navigate their daily responsibilities in hotel jobs. Additionally, Hajdu states that in many parts of the world, disabled individuals face limited access to breathing technologies due to a lack of electricity in their environments.

To create comprehensive systems that benefit a wide spectrum of individuals, AI technology must be accessible for the most underserved communities. With disabled individuals persisting in every corner of the world, there must be reforms in accessibility to ensure that all people are afforded a fair chance to survive and succeed in their fields.

“The unexplored knowledge terrain is that entire area that faces intersectional barriers…..If you work with individuals who experience greatest barriers you will create a much more adaptive system with less need for help. In the long term, you are saving money and you don’t need to engage so many people. …I think there is an imperative to do this work we need to ensure these people creating this intelligence actually act intelligent,” said Treviranus.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Government of Vanuatu, including Ralph Regenvanu, Minister of Climate Change; Director General of the Pacific Community Dr. Stuart Minchin; Vishal Prasad, Director of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change; and Julian Aguon, Director of Blue Ocean Law, briefs journalists at UNOC3.

By Cecilia Russell
NICE, France, Jun 11 2025 (IPS)

To the outside world, a sea level rise of 34 cm (or slightly longer than a child’s ruler) may not seem dramatic, but it’s an existential threat to the Pacific island state of Vanuatu.

Vanuatu, in support of a youth movement, the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, has approached the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on how existing international laws can be applied to strengthen action on climate change and protect people and the environment. The opinion is expected later this year.

Already there has been some success in the international campaign Vanuatu has led on behalf of the Pacific states and territories and a 2024 advisory opinion from the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea confirmed states’ obligations to prevent climate-related harm, including from non-state actors, like fossil fuel corporations under signatory states’ control.

“So, this opinion is significant. It has provided crucial certainty that protecting our oceans from climate change is international law. It’s not optional,” said Ralph Regenvanu, Minister of Climate Change, Vanuatu, emphasizing these obligations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. He was speaking at a press briefing held today (June 11, 2025) at the 3rd UN Ocean Conference underway in Nice, France.

In the case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Vanuatu has made a broad case that goes beyond climate conventions and includes human rights law and customary international rules, said Julian Aguon, Director, Blue Ocean Law.

Speakers at the conference emphasized the need for ambitious climate action, noting that the Pacific contributes less than 0.01 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions but faces severe impacts.

The case before the ICJ was crucial because its outcome could “essentially turn the page on business-as-usual and actually embark on a new course, a new era of climate change reparations,” said Aguon and the opinion, which will hopefully elaborate on the legal consequences of the breach of obligations, will mean “stepping into a new era of climate accountability.”

Vishal Prasad, Director, Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, added that communities on the frontlines of the effects of climate change should not have to pay the costs of rebuilding—whether this is seawall construction or mangrove regeneration—and bear the burdens of a group of historical polluters who fail to grasp their responsibility in exacerbating the climate crisis.

Asked by IPS about the increased reliance on fossil fuels and the poor response to reparations financing, as in the Loss and Damage Fund, Aguion said the opinion would mean countries would no longer be able to hide from their obligations.

“This will, once and for all, decisively dispel the legal ambiguity that has long hobbled the ability of the international community to respond effectively to the climate crisis.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Plastic has worked its way into every corner of the food system. Credit: Giorgio Cosulich / FAO

By Kaveh Zahedi
ROME, Jun 11 2025 (IPS)

Each year, more than 12.5 million tonnes of plastic are used in agriculture alone, and another 37 million tonnes become food packaging. Very little gets recycled.

You don’t have to look far to see how plastic has worked its way into every corner of the food system. Seedling trays, mulch films, irrigation tubing, shipping crates, cling wrap. And that’s before it even hits the shelves. It’s efficient, cheap, and convenient, helping to protect crops and reduce food losses—but it lingers.

Plastic waste doesn’t disappear. It breaks down, over years, into particles too small to see.FAO’s research confirms that even tiny amounts of plastics can affect water retention, microbial activity, and plant growth. It also finds evidence that microplastics and plastic-associated chemicals can be absorbed by crops, potentially reaching edible parts

Plastic waste doesn’t disappear. It breaks down, over years, into particles too small to see.
FAO’s research confirms that even tiny amounts of plastics can affect water retention, microbial activity, and plant growth. It also finds evidence that microplastics and plastic-associated chemicals can be absorbed by crops, potentially reaching edible parts. These findings – due to be published later in 2025 – reinforce the need for immediate action to reduce plastic inputs in agriculture and protect the health of soils, crops, and consumers.

The Food and Agriculture Organization is helping governments, farmers, and industries cut down on plastic waste—through smarter use, better alternatives, and practical changes on the ground that bring better production, better nutrition, better environment and better lives and don’t compromise the bottom line for farmers.

As part of the response, FAO’s Provisional Voluntary Code of Conduct built through consultations with governments, scientists, producers, and private companies can guide the sustainable use of plastics in agriculture. It offers clear, actionable advice: reduce where possible, reuse when practical, recycle when safe. It points towards a gradual transition away from short-lived plastics, without putting food security or farmer’s incomes at risk.

One promising frontier is the shift toward bio-based and biodegradable materials—drawn from agricultural residues, organic matter, and natural polymers. FAO supports innovation through bioeconomy to help farmers replace conventional plastics with options that break down safely and support soil health.

Consider the banana sector. Plastic bags, twine, and wraps have long been standard in large plantations. FAO’s World Banana Forum has been working with producers and researchers to change that. By sharing practical guidance and exploring alternatives, farmers are beginning to cut down on plastic use and reduce the waste leaking into surrounding environments.

Then there’s the issue of pesticide containers. Too often, these are burned or tossed into fields, releasing toxic residue into the soil and air. FAO is piloting safer disposal methods—like the triple-rinse technique—and helping countries establish collection and recycling systems.

Together with the International Atomic Energy Agency, FAO is leading research on microplastic detection in soil. They’re using advanced isotopic techniques and working to develop standardized testing methods so countries can measure the problem and respond effectively.

Concerns don’t end with the soil. Microplastics have been found in water, salt, fish, and even some vegetables. FAO has conducted scientific reviews on how these particles move through food systems, and what they might mean for human health. Research is ongoing, especially around effects on the gut microbiome, but efforts are already underway to improve testing and keep consumers informed.

National programs are starting to shift practices in real time. In Sri Lanka, FAO’s CIRCULAR project, funded by the European Union, is helping reduce single-use packaging and improve retail design. In Kenya and Uruguay, FAO is helping develop greener policies through the Financing Agrochemical Reduction and Management” (FARM) project, funded by the Global Environment Facility. The programme combines technical support, farmer outreach, and policy reform to shrink the plastic footprint of agriculture.

The Global Soil Partnership, hosted by FAO, includes the Global Soil Doctors programme—farmer-to-farmer training focused on practical tools to manage soil pollution. Knowledge moves across borders, one field at a time.

Plastic pollution doesn’t stop at the shoreline. Fishing gear—lost, abandoned, or discarded—chokes marine ecosystems and threatens coastal economies. FAO has issued guidelines on marking fishing gear to make it traceable and recoverable. Through the GloLitter Partnerships, implemented by IMO in collaboration with FAO, 30 countries are improving waste management in ports, testing cleaner vessel technologies, and tracking sources of marine litter.

Reducing plastic in agrifood systems isn’t a single solution—it’s a process of rethinking how we grow, move, and consume food in ways that protect people, soils, and oceans alike. Step by step, FAO is working to help countries move toward more sustainable and resilient food systems—ones that don’t rely on plastics to hold them together.

Excerpt:

Kaveh Zahedi is the Director of the Office of Climate Change, Biodiversity and Environment at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

Chumbe Island Coral Park is an example of a successful Marine Protected Area. Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS

By Kizito Makoye
NICE, France, Jun 11 2025 (IPS)

Under the surface of Tanzania’s turquoise waters, a miracle unfolds quietly every day.

Just off the coast of Zanzibar, in the Chumbe Island Coral Park, reef fish glitter like scattered gemstones, weaving between coral gardens that pulse with life. The air is heavy with salt, and the silence underwater is only broken by the rhythmic clicks of snapping shrimp and the steady heartbeat of the sea itself. Sea turtles slither over hard corals. Butterflyfish dart like flashes of sunlight. It’s a living display—one of the most pristine marine ecosystems in East Africa.

And it might have been a thing of the past…

Three decades ago, this vibrant reef was on the verge of collapse. Unregulated fishing, reef blasting, and coral bleaching were turning once-vibrant habitats into underwater graveyards. But today, Chumbe stands as a glimmer of hope—a thriving marine sanctuary wholly managed by a private conservation initiative and proof of the power of local stewardship in a world waking up too slowly to an unfolding ocean crisis.

“If we save the sea, we save our world,” Sir David Attenborough whispers in the final scene of Ocean, his swan song to marine life. A humpback whale glides across the screen, her calf pressing gently against her side. “The ocean still has the power to heal,” he says. “All it asks of us is to let it breathe.”

At the recent UN Ocean Conference in Nice, Tanzania’s ocean story drew quiet admiration in global hallways increasingly crowded with diplomatic speeches and pledges. As policymakers debated the legal frameworks for deep-sea mining and delegates exchanged notes on 30×30 goals, one African nation presented a blueprint that blends science, law, and community with palpable urgency.

Chumbe: A Living Laboratory of Hope

Chumbe Island Coral Park, established in the mid-1990s, was one of the first marine protected areas (MPAs) in the region to be managed privately, without government funding. Its genesis was simple but bold: protect what remains before it’s gone. No fishing. No anchor damage. No pollution. No greenwashing.

The result? A thriving marine habitat where coral cover reaches over 90 percent—unheard of in many parts of the Indian Ocean. Rare species like giant groupers, humphead wrasses, and endangered hawksbill turtles breed undisturbed. Underwater, it feels like a lost world—alive, balanced, and breathing.

“Chumbe is proof that conservation isn’t a luxury—it’s survival,” says Rukia Hassan, a local marine guide trained by the park. “Our ocean is our life. Without it, we have nothing.”

And the reef gives back. The protected area replenishes nearby fishing zones through the spillover effect. Local communities, once skeptical, are now stewards and beneficiaries. Through ecotourism, jobs have been created, schools funded, and marine education embedded into Zanzibar’s youth culture.

“People thought banning fishing here would starve us,” says fisherman Salum Juma from nearby Mbweni village. “But now we see more fish than ever—on the reef and in our nets.”

Tanzania’s Ocean Strategy: Beyond Promises

While many nations arrive at global summits armed with pledges, Tanzania has quietly built its marine protection framework from the seafloor up. The National Marine Ecosystem Management Strategy outlines ambitious conservation targets across its 1,400-kilometer coastline, with a growing network of MPAs.

Leading the charge is Danstan Johnny Shimbo, Director of Legal Services at the Vice President’s Office. At the Ocean Summit, his message was clear: “We don’t govern the ocean for the sake of it. We do it because our survival depends on it.”

Under his leadership, Tanzania has ratified a suite of international marine agreements and is drafting regulations for deep-sea mining, balancing economic potential with ecological limits.

“Yes, we have minerals on our seabed,” Shimbo told IPS in an exclusive interview. “But we’re not going to destroy the ocean to get them.”

Tanzania has also cracked down on blast fishing, once rampant in mainland and island coastal zones. Enforcement teams now collaborate with local communities to report violations and restore reefs. Education campaigns are working: destructive fishing is no longer seen as an act of desperation but as an attack on future generations.

“It used to be about catching more fish,” says Fatuma Ali, a mother of three from Bagamoyo. “Now we talk about catching fish next year and the year after that.”

The Global View: A Race Against Time

Yet, the ocean is in peril. At the Nice summit, Dr. Enric Sala, National Geographic Explorer and marine ecologist, delivered a haunting truth: only 3 percent of the global ocean is highly protected. To meet the 30×30 target—protecting 30 percent by 2030—85 new MPAs would need to be established every single day.

“What we’re doing right now is not enough,” Sala said. “The ocean needs courage, not half-measures.”

Countries like Sweden and Greece pledged to ban bottom trawling in MPAs. Others, like France, offered softer reforms. But in small island nations and community-led zones like Zanzibar’s Chumbe, the real conservation work is already happening.

“We’ve had enough conferences,” said Sala. “It’s time to act.”

A New Ocean Economy

What may finally turn the tide is money.

According to a recent study by National Geographic’s Pristine Seas and Dynamic Planet, every USD 1 invested in a well-managed MPA yields USD 10 in returns—from tourism and fisheries to storm protection. That economic logic is already bearing fruit in Chumbe, where ecotourism helps finance education, conservation, and livelihoods.

“MPAs aren’t a burden—they’re the smartest investment we can make,” said Kristin Rechberger, CEO of Dynamic Planet.

Tanzania’s strategy increasingly frames the ocean not just as an environmental issue but as an economic one. From fish exports to blue carbon markets and nature-based tourism, the sea is now seen as a bank—not to be emptied, but replenished.

Can Tanzania Inspire the World?

For Shimbo and others, the challenge ahead is massive. The rising pressure of climate change, industrial development, and plastic pollution threatens to undo years of progress. But Chumbe, Mafia Island Marine Park, and other MPAs remain shining examples of what’s possible.

“If a country like Tanzania, with limited resources, can do this,” said marine scientist  Grace Mwakalukwa from the Institute of Resources Assessment of the University of Dar es Salaam, “then rich nations have no excuse.”

As the world wrestles with how to fund ocean protection, Tanzania is proving that community, courage, and clear rules can go further than big speeches.

A Final Plea from the Reef

Back on Chumbe, a reef shark circles  a coral head  while a green turtle rests in a sandy lagoon. Above, schoolchildren visit the island’s Eco-Education Center, learning  how  sea cucumbers  filter water and parrotfish create  sand. They sketch fish, laugh at hermit crabs, and speak of the ocean  not as a problem but as a promise.

“We tell the children this is your inheritance,” says Rukia, the marine guide. “Protect it like you would your own home.”

The lesson is painfully clear: the world is running out of time to conserve unique marine biodiversity but not out of hope.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• Waves of Change: From the Glittering Shores of Nice to Struggling Seaweed Farmers in Zanzibar
• Pacific States, Territories Gift the World its ‘Largest Conservation Project’

Pacific Island leaders speak at a press conference at the 3rd UN Ocean Conference in Nice. Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

By Naureen Hossain
NICE, France, Jun 11 2025 (IPS)

“There is no climate action without ocean action,” President Hilda Heine of the Marshall Islands told reporters, as she and other representatives of Pacific island states reiterated that countries must honor their climate action agreements.

“The ocean is bearing the brunt of our failure to address climate change and transition away from fossil fuels.”

Heine remarked that countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) must include how they will transition toward renewable energy sources in line with the 1.5 degree limit under the Paris Agreement.

President Surangel Whipps Jr. of Palau remarked that protecting the oceans requires countries to deliver on 1.5-aligned NDCs. He called on all countries, including major emitters from the G20 to deliver on them by September this year. “We need to adapt to shield our oceans from further harm. And that means, plain and simple, money—and money that we can use,” said Whipps Jr.

On the second day of the UN Ocean Conference, leaders and representatives from Pacific island states spoke to reporters following the Pacific-France Summit with President Emmanuel Macron. The leaders sat down with Macron to discuss the role that France could play in supporting climate resilience in the Pacific islands. They hoped that he would be an advocate for the Pacific island states and climate action within the European Union (EU), the G20 and the G7. Heine acknowledged that their meeting was not a “formal negotiating venue.” Rather, it was an opportunity to share concerns from the Pacific island states.

Whipps Jr. said that he invited Macron to invest in the Blue Pacific Prosperity Initiative and Pacific Resilience Fund. “The gap between what we need and what we have is growing dangerously wide,” said Whipps Jr. Macron was said to have committed to investing in climate financing in the region, as Whipps stressed that financing should reach the communities that would benefit from it the most without it taking months or even years to reach them.

“In the Pacific, our security depends on climate action,” said Ralph Regenvanu, Minister of Climate Change Adaptation, Meteorology and Geo-Hazards, Energy, Environment and Disaster Management, Vanuatu. “Without climate action, we face a very dangerous future.”

Venues such as the Ocean Conference provide opportunities for underrepresented communities  and smaller countries to bring global attention to their challenges with the hope of effecting forward momentum, even as the process can be slow-moving.

“A lot of these changes that happen at the International level, when they do happen, are a result of these coalitions of the willing,” said Regenvanu, pointing to how nearly 50 countries have ratified the Agreement on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) and that 37 countries have issued a moratorium on seabed mining.

“It’s the way you get to change—building support.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• Pacific States, Territories Gift the World its ‘Largest Conservation Project’
• Waves of Change: From the Glittering Shores of Nice to Struggling Seaweed Farmers in Zanzibar
• Oceans at Risk: Report Warns Global Fossil Fuel Expansion Threatens Marine Biodiversity

Gaza children under rubble. Credit: Mohammad Ibrahim

By Melek Zahine
BORDEAUX, France, Jun 11 2025 (IPS)

During President Trump’s tour of Gulf monarchies last month, he mentioned Gaza only two times. The first time was in Doha, when he expressed his desire to make Gaza a “freedom zone.” Gaza’s 2.1 million residents, nearly half of whom are children, would like that, too.

Just as the Israeli hostages being held by Hamas in violation of the Geneva Convention have the right to immediate and unconditional freedom, Gazans also have the right to live free of the inhumane and illegal collective punishment they’ve been forced to endure for more than 600 days.

Melek Zahine

They would like freedom from the brutal bombardment, starvation, forced displacement, siege, and blockade of Gaza. They would also like the freedom to safely collect food and basic humanitarian supplies from the UN and other legitimate and experienced aid providers, the freedom to return to their communities to search for and bury their dead with dignity, and the freedom to rebuild Gaza even if it takes a generation.

The survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Dresden, Stalingrad, and Le Havre, were free to rebuild their cities. Why should this freedom be denied to Gazans?

When President Trump mentioned Gaza for the second time during his Gulf tour, he was in Abu Dhabi, where he briefly acknowledged the humanitarian crisis. He said, “We’re looking at Gaza. A lot of people are starving.”

The world now knows that President Trump’s words were nothing more than a virtue-signaling smoke screen. He wasn’t actually seeing the scale of the human suffering in Gaza, which the United States helped create.

Instead, he was talking about the so-called Gaza “Humanitarian Foundation,” a cynical and deadly tool designed by Israeli and U.S. officials to replace an established, functioning, independent, and credible international aid system in order to accelerate the ethnic cleansing and annexation of Gaza.

Since its launch ten days after Trump made his comments in Abu Dhabi, the G.H.F. has delivered more death than food and proven itself to be anything but humanitarian.

It’s just another lethal weapon in Israel’s vast Western-subsidized war arsenal and a way to appease Israel’s patrons in the U.S. Congress. How, after all, can “Hamas tunnels” and fighters hide beneath the emaciated, dying, and dead bodies of Gaza’s starved children?

Aftermath of a 6 May Israeli airstrike on an UNRWA school turned-shelter in Gaza where dozens of people were reportedly killed, including women and children. Credit: UNRWA

President Trump had a real chance to prove that his concerns for Gaza and his persistent claims of being a peacemaker were genuine during the 4 June U.N. Security Council resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire and full, unhindered humanitarian access.

Like President Biden before him, President Trump instructed his Acting U.N. Ambassador to cast the lone, shameful vote against a resolution meant to prevent the further loss of life in Gaza, including for the remaining Israeli hostages whose families have been pleading for a lasting ceasefire every day since November 2023.

This U.N. resolution wasn’t a political call for sanctions or an arms embargo against Israel. Nor was it a call to recognize the State of Palestine. It was simply a call for humanitarian action in order to get life-saving aid into Gaza at scale and to get the hostages out of captivity.

The political wisdom and courage to vote in favor of this ceasefire was the bare minimum President Trump and his administration could have offered. More importantly, it’s what a majority of American citizens have wanted for some time now, including those who voted for President Trump.

According to a March 2025 AP-NORC poll, 60% of Republicans now believe that “it’s essential” for the U.S. to “facilitate a permanent ceasefire in Gaza,” and in May, a Data for Progress poll showed that 76% of Americans across political lines are in favor of an immediate ceasefire and would like to see the U.S. do its part to de-escalate the crisis in Gaza.

By voting against the ceasefire and providing numerous misleading reasons for doing so afterward, President Trump ignored the views of a majority of Americans towards the increasingly desperate situation faced by Gaza’s besieged and starving population.

The urgent question now is whether the 14 sovereign states that voted in favor of the resolution will quickly honor their votes with meaningful action. There’s so much that can be done, from pausing trade talks and relations to arms embargoes and sanctions, but the following three measures will send a strong, immediate message that there’s serious determination behind the condemnation.

European, U.K., Turkish, and regional Arab States should join forces to provide a no-fly zone over Gaza. This action is the fastest way to stop Israel from prosecuting its deadly daily air strikes. I witnessed how it saved lives and paved the way to peace when NATO enforced a No Fly Zone over Bosnia for a thousand days between 1993 and 1995.

A no-fly zone over Gaza will help calm tensions in the region and build a political and humanitarian space for more seasoned mediators to ensure the safe release of the Israeli hostages and for legitimate humanitarian aid actors to resume operations through the Karem Shalom, Erez, and other crossings into Gaza.

Simultaneously, the deployment of French, Turkish, British, and Russian naval hospital ships already in or near the Mediterranean should sail to Gaza immediately, especially towards the North of the strip where no fully functioning hospitals remain and where people are dying for lack of basic medical supplies and infrastructure.

This action will help save lives and lift the burden from Gaza’s devastated healthcare system until it’s given a chance to recover. Furthermore, the governments that voted in favor of the resolution must pressure Israel to facilitate immediate access for international journalists into Gaza.

If a small sailboat in the Mediterranean and the thousands of ordinary citizens from 32 countries presently marching towards Gaza through Egypt can try to break Israel’s unlawful siege and blockade, surely the most powerful governments and navies from the Eurasian continent can do their part.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Excerpt:

Melek Zahine is an international humanitarian affairs and disaster response expert.

Credit: WHO/Christopher Black

By Samuel King
BRUSSELS, Belgium, Jun 11 2025 (IPS)

When the next pandemic strikes, the world should be better prepared. At least, that’s the promise states made at the World Health Organization’s (WHO) World Health Assembly on 19 May when they adopted the first global pandemic treaty. This milestone in international health cooperation emerged from three years of difficult negotiations, informed by the harsh lessons learned from COVID-19’s devastating global impacts.

Yet this step forward in multilateralism comes at a deeply difficult moment. The WHO, as the organisation tasked with implementing the agreement, faces its starkest ever financial crisis following the withdrawal of the USA, its biggest donor. Meanwhile, disagreements between states threaten to undermine the treaty’s aspirations. Some of the big decisions that would make the experience of the next pandemic a more equitable one for the world’s majority are still to be negotiated.

A treaty born from COVID-19’s failures

Processes to negotiate the Pandemic Agreement came as a response to the disjointed international reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic. When the virus spread across borders, global north countries hoarded vaccines for their populations but left much of the world unprotected – an approach that as well as being manifestly unfair enabled the virus to further mutate. The treaty’s text emphasises the need for proper pandemic prevention, preparedness and response in all states, with the potential to enhance multilateral cooperation during health crises.

With 124 countries voting in favour, 11 abstaining and none voting against, many diplomats presented the agreement’s finalisation as a victory for global cooperation. It comes at a time when multilateralism is being severely tested, with powerful governments tearing up international rules, pulling out of international bodies and slashing funding. The window of opportunity to reach some kind of agreement was rapidly closing.

A major absence loomed large over the final negotiations. Upon his inauguration in January, President Trump announced the USA would withdraw from the WHO and halt all funding. The withdrawal of a superpower like the USA harms the WHO’s legitimacy and sends a signal to other populist governments that withdrawal is an option. Argentina is following its lead and Hungary may too.

Funding crisis

US withdrawal will leave an enormous funding gap. In the pre-Trump era, the USA was the WHO’s biggest contributor: it provided US$1.28 billion in 2022-2023, amounting to 12 per cent of the WHO’s approved budget and roughly 15 per cent of its actual budget.

As the treaty was agreed, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus painted a disturbing picture of the organisation’s financial situation. Its 2022-2023 budget showed a US$2 billion shortfall and its current salary gap is over US$500 million. The proposed budget for 2026-2027 has already been slashed by 21 per cent, and this reduced budget is expected to receive only around 60 per cent of the funding needed. The WHO will likely have to cut staff and close offices in many countries.

This reflects a lack of political will: states are making the choice of cutting down on global cooperation while boosting their defence spending. The current WHO funding gap of US$2.1 billion is the equivalent of just eight hours of global military expenditure.

Big issues kicked down the road

Deteriorating political realities made it crucial to reach an agreement as soon as possible, even if this meant kicking some difficult decisions down the road. As a result, the text of the agreement has severe weaknesses.

The treaty lacks dedicated funding and robust enforcement mechanisms, which means the blatant inequalities that defined the global response to COVID-19 are likely to remain unconfronted. It doesn’t tackle the most critical and contested issues, including the international sharing of pathogens and vaccine access.

The treaty will open for ratification following the negotiation of an annex on a pathogen access and benefit-sharing system, a process that could take a further two years. This means implementation is likely still a long way away.

The current impasse reflects an enduring faultline between global south states that need better access to affordable health products and technologies, and global north states siding with powerful pharmaceutical corporations that want their assets protected. Wealthy governments are making their decisions safe in the knowledge they’ll be at the front of the line when the next pandemic starts, while the world’s poorest people will again face the brunt of the devastation.

Political will needed

The Pandemic Agreement is a step forward at a time when international cooperation faces increasing attacks. That 124 countries demonstrated their commitment to multilateral action on global health threats offers hope. But substantial work remains if the treaty is to enable a truly global and fair response to the next health crisis.

For that to happen, the world’s wealthiest states need to put narrow self-interest calculations aside. States also need to address the issue of long-term funding. Right now, global leaders have agreed on the need for coordinated pandemic preparedness, but the institution meant to lead this doesn’t have the resources needed to put goals into action.

The next pandemic will test not just scientific capabilities, but also collective commitment to the shared global values the treaty is supposed to represent. Political will and funding are needed to turn lofty aspirations into meaningful action.

Samuel King is a researcher with the Horizon Europe-funded research project ENSURED: Shaping Cooperation for a World in Transition at CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

 

A handcrafted tapa with a map of the Blue Pacific was unveiled at the launch of Unlocking Blue Pacific Prosperity (UBPP). Credit: SPC

By Cecilia Russell
NICE, France, Jun 10 2025 (IPS)

While the island states in the Pacific may be modest, the ocean that surrounds them represents a huge oceanic state—an area equivalent to the entire European Continent.

And for the first time, 22 Pacific Island countries and territories have pledged to manage 100 percent of the Blue Pacific Continent sustainably and protect at least 30 percent by 2030, Director General of the Pacific Community Dr. Stuart Minchin told a packed-to-capacity crowd at a launch held on June 10 at the 3rd UN Ocean Conference (UNOC3) currently underway in Nice, France.

“That kind of commitment sends a clear message the Pacific is not waiting on the world,” Minchin said of the project known as the Unlocking Blue Pacific Prosperity (UBPP).

Elaborating on the project, speakers said this initiative, dubbed the largest conservation project in the world, meant that the countries and territories have shifted from short-term regional projects to long-term, Pacific-led solutions over donor-driven models.

The commitment aims to support healthy oceans, strong communities, and blue economies, integrating traditional wisdom and indigenous practices.

Hon. Maina Vakafua, Minister of Climate Change, Tuvalu, described the project as a “gift from the Pacific to the world in support of global goals for biodiversity, climate action, and sustainable development.”

“We are moving away from small, one-time projects to more coordinated, long-term programs that support healthy oceans, strong communities, and blue economies.”

With it, Vakafua said, came blended finance tools that would fit the needs of the Pacific countries—especially in a region where, despite being on the frontlines of climate change, less than 1 percent of global climate finance reaches the region, representing 4.6 percent allocated to the Asia-Pacific and less than 7 percent of the assessed climate finance needs.

“We are protecting our ocean, and we are helping to create a better future for everyone, especially those who depend on the oceans for their daily survival. We invite partners, donors, and friends of the ocean to join us,” Vakafua said.

UBPP’s goals include 100 percent conservation, robust food systems, and fit-for-purpose financing. Financing mechanisms include grants, payments for ecosystem services, and loans. The initiative aims to create a regenerative blue economy, supporting marine protected areas, coastal stewardship, and nature-positive businesses.

Karena Lyons, Director of Partnerships, Integration, and Resource Mobilization, explained that the Pacific leaders came together because they recognized the need for a region-led initiative to take ocean stewardship to the next level.

“They saw how climate change is impacting our peoples, putting food security, water access, and livelihoods at risk, so the EBPP represents our intention to shift the paradigm.”

“This will be the largest coordinated ocean conservation effort in the history of the world. This is an area the size of the European continent. What’s different is that we want to build it with investors and strategic partners so that we can align capital with climate, conservation, and community outcomes.”

The launch ended with an unveiling of a handcrafted tapa, adorned with a map of the Blue Pacific, made and designed in Fiji. The tapa symbolizes unity and a shared vision for ocean protection and will travel around the Pacific, collecting stories of ocean advocacy and action—in the end It will be auctioned to support ocean conservation efforts.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• Waves of Change: From the Glittering Shores of Nice to Struggling Seaweed Farmers in Zanzibar
• UN Pushes for 10,000 Ships To Track Ocean Changes

“10,000 Ships for the Ocean," launched at the UNOC3 in Nice, aims to build the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) by collaborating with the maritime industry to collect data. Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS

By Kizito Makoye
NICE, France, Jun 10 2025 (IPS)

A groundbreaking initiative to revolutionize global ocean observation is being launched this week at the UN Ocean Conference side event, aiming to enlist 10,000 commercial ships to collect and transmit vital ocean and weather data by 2035.

Known as “10,000 Ships for the Ocean,” the ambitious program seeks to vastly expand the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) by collaborating with the maritime industry to install state-of-the-art automated sensors aboard vessels that crisscross the globe’s waters.

“Ships have been observing the ocean for centuries, but today, we are scaling up with purpose and urgency,” said Joanna Post, Director of the Global Ocean Observing System at UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), at a press conference. “What we want to do now is to create a win-win model for the shipping industry and the planet—providing useful data for forecasting and resilience, while helping optimize shipping routes and reduce risks.”

The initiative, backed by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), France, and major shipping players, comes at a pivotal time as climate-driven disasters increasingly wreak havoc on vulnerable coastal communities. Observations from the ocean surface—ranging from temperature to salinity to atmospheric conditions—are critical for weather forecasts, early warning systems, climate models, and maritime safety.

A Critical Infrastructure for Humanity

“Ocean observations are not just a scientific endeavor. They are critical infrastructure for society,” said Post. “We need this data to understand climate change, predict extreme weather events, and respond to disasters. Yet the ocean remains vastly under-observed.”

Currently, only around 1,000 ships regularly collect and share data with scientific networks. The initiative aims to increase this number tenfold, mobilizing 10,000 vessels to provide near real-time ocean data that can be used to power the UN’s Early Warnings for All initiative, support the Global Greenhouse Gas Watch, and advance the goals of the UN Ocean Decade.

Mathieu Belbéoch, Manager of OceanOPS—run jointly by WMO and IOC—described the system as a “complex infrastructure of systems” composed of some 10,000 elements, including satellites, buoys, and ships. “If you want to make any prediction, you need observation,” he said. “Commercial vessels are the missing link in helping us build a more complete picture of what is happening at sea.”

Belbéoch emphasized that over a century of maritime observation provides a strong foundation, but the data gaps remain vast. “This initiative is about making use of the ships already out there. The ocean is our blind spot, and yet it drives our climate.”

A Smart Business Move for Sustainability

The campaign invites shipping companies to voluntarily join the program by installing standardized, automated observation equipment on board. “It’s a smart business move,” said Post, “because in addition to serving the common good, it helps the industry reduce fuel costs, increase safety, and meet sustainability goals.”

In response to a question raised by IPS on how developing countries with limited merchant fleets can participate in the initiative, Post explained, “This is where partnership becomes crucial. Even if countries don’t have large commercial fleets, they can benefit from the data and engage through science, policy, or by hosting data centers. Inclusivity is key to making this a truly global system.”

Strong Political Momentum

The launch of the 10,000 Ships initiative comes just as momentum builds around the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ), also known as the High Seas Treaty. With 136 signatories and now 16 ratifications, the treaty is edging closer to the 60 ratifications needed to enter into force.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres called the agreement a “historic step towards protecting vast areas of the ocean,” urging nations to ratify quickly.

The joint declaration unveiled at the conference called for concrete commitments by 2030 and 2035, aligning the 10,000 Ships program with broader Sustainable Development Goals and the UN Ocean Decade’s Challenge 7: expanding the Global Ocean Observing System.

“The ocean has long given to us,” said Ambassador Peter Thomson, the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for the Ocean. “It’s time we give back—through action, technology, and partnerships. 10,000 ships is not a dream. It’s an imperative.”

As oceans warm, sea levels rise, and extreme weather intensifies, the launch of this initiative signals a critical move toward a more informed, prepared, and cooperative global response. The sea may be vast, but with the right tools and partnerships, it need not be unknown.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• Waves of Change: From the Glittering Shores of Nice to Struggling Seaweed Farmers in Zanzibar
• Global Push to Protect Oceans Gains Momentum Ahead of UN Conference in Nice

The late afternoon sun sparkles on the waters of the French Riviera as yachts dock at the Port of Nice with mechanical grace. A tram glides past palm-lined boulevards, where joggers, drenched in sweat, huff past leisurely strollers and sunbathers. Just beside the promenade, a crowd gathers around a young girl. With braided hair bouncing […]

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres speaks to reporters at the 2025 UN Ocean Conference in Nice, France. Credit: Naureen Hossain

By Naureen Hossain
NICE, France, Jun 10 2025 (IPS)

“When we poison the ocean, we poison ourselves,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres told reporters on the second day of the UN Ocean Conference (UNOC3).

“There’s a tipping point approaching—beyond which recovery may become impossible. And let us be clear: Powerful interests are pushing us towards that brink. We are facing a hard battle against a clear enemy. Its name is greed.”

Guterres made the comments in a press briefing where he relayed his priorities for the conference and the need for urgent action toward ocean conservation and sustainability.

He remarked on the “clear link” between climate change, biodiversity, and marine protection, and that without timely and effective intervention, both the ocean and humanity would be irreversibly impacted.

Guterres called for increased “financial and technological support” to developing countries, including coastal communities and small-island nations, so that they are in a position to protect themselves from extreme weather and natural disasters.

As overfishing threatens marine biodiversity, countries must work together to enforce stronger measures against illegal fishing and expand protected areas in order to safeguard marine life. To that end, Guterres called for countries to deliver on the target to conserve at least 30 percent of marine and coastal areas by 2030.

Scientists have said that the 1.5 degree threshold to mitigate the worst of global warming is still achievable. Yet as Guterres pointed out, they have been “unanimous” in saying that the international community is “on the brink of the tipping point that might make it impossible.” As the ocean absorbs carbon emissions, this has contributed to the imbalances in its biodiversity, such as extremely high temperatures and coral reef bleaching.

There is not “enough urgency, enough spirit” towards an energy transition to renewable sources. Guterres urged countries to formulate and present Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) for COP30 in Brazil. These NDCs or climate action plans should be “fully compatible” with the 1.5 degree threshold and that will work towards “dramatic reductions” in emissions by 2035. “We must accelerate our transition, and this is for me the most important objective of the next COP.”

Guterres noted positively the significant turnout from governments, civil society, business leaders, Indigenous groups, and the science community for this year’s Ocean Conference. This is a clear show of “momentum and enthusiasm” on the issue of ocean conservation and sustainability. He added that in the two years since the Agreement on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) was first adopted in 2023, 134 countries have signed it and 50 have ratified it, including 15 new signatories and ratifications since the start of the conference. The BBNJ may soon come into effect once it has received 60 ratifications or acceptances.

The spirit of solidarity that has brought groups from all corners of the world to participate in UNOC must be carried right to its end and beyond. “I urge everyone to step forward with decisive commitments and tangible funding. The ocean has given us so much. It is time we returned the favor. Our health, our climate, and our future depend on it,” Guterres said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• UNOC3: World Leaders Recognize Urgent Need for Ocean Action
• UNOC3: Bringing Ocean Education and Science to the Global Agenda

Additional years of life in old age certainly offer positive news for older men and women and for their families, friends, and communities. However, those additional years of life for older individuals also raise noteworthy challenges. Credit: Shutterstock

By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, Jun 10 2025 (IPS)

Older men and women are now living longer than ever before. Across the globe, individuals who reach old age can expect to have more years of life ahead of them than in previous generations. However, these additional years of life, coupled with the disparities among and within countries, including variations between older men and women, present substantial economic, social, and political challenges for societies.

 

Global Trends

In 1950, the world’s average life expectancies for men and women at age 65 were about 11 and 12 additional years, respectively. By 2025, those average life expectancies at age 65 increased by over 50%, reaching about 16 additional years of life for men and 19 additional years for women.

The trend of living longer at age 65 is expected to continue throughout the rest of the 21st century. By 2100, for example, the world’s average life expectancies for men and women at age 65 are projected to be 21 and 23 additional years, respectively, which are double the numbers of additional years of remaining life in 1950 (Figure 1).

 

Source: United Nations.

 

The good news about older men and women living longer is also clear at age 80. In 1950, the world’s average life expectancies for men and women at age 80 were approximately 5 years. By 2025, that average life expectancy is estimated to have increased by approximately 50%, reaching close to 8 additional years for men and 9 years for women.

The largest gains and highest levels of life expectancy at older ages are among wealthier, more developed countries. While less developed countries have also gained additional years of life at older ages, their increases have been substantially less than those of the more developed countries, which has contributed to widening the gap between them

As at age 65, the trend of men and women living longer at age 80 is also expected to continue throughout the rest of the 21st century. By 2100, for example, the world’s life expectancies at age 80 for men and women are projected to be approximately 11 and 12 years, respectively.

The gains in longevity at older ages have also increased the differences between men and women. Not only do women live longer than men, but differences in additional years of life at older ages between them have increased during the past seventy-five years.

 

Country Trends

The largest gains and highest levels of life expectancy at older ages are among wealthier, more developed countries. While less developed countries have also gained additional years of life at older ages, their increases have been substantially less than those of the more developed countries, which has contributed to widening the gap between them.

In Japan and Italy, for example, the current additional years of life for men and women aged 65 are approximately 20 years and 24 years, respectively, or nearly double the levels in 1950. A similar pattern of increase in additional years of life for those two countries took place for men and women at age 80.

In contrast, the current additional years of life of men and women aged 65 in Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are about 13 years, which are only several years more than they were in 1950. Also, the improvements in additional years of life for men and women at age 80 since 1950 are relatively modest, typically only a single year of increase (Table 1).

 

Source: United Nations.

 

Regarding the future, the additional years of life of older persons among countries are expected to continue increasing worldwide throughout the 21st century. In Japan and Italy, for example, men and women aged 65 years at the end of the century can expect to live approximately 28 and 32 additional years, respectively.

Again, in contrast, the corresponding gains in additional years of life for men and women aged 65 in Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are considerably lower. By the end of the century, the additional years of life for men and women aged 65 years in those two countries are around 15 years.

Besides variations across countries, the additional years of life of older individuals also vary significantly within countries.

For example, in the United States, life expectancies of older individuals vary among the country’s fifty states. These variations are mainly because of differences in socioeconomic status, access to healthcare, public health policies, lifestyle factors, and political policies.

In 2021, the highest life expectancies for those 65 years and older were approximately 18 years for males and 21 years for females in Hawaii, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and New York. In contrast, the lowest life expectancies at age 65 were about 15 years for males and 18 years for females in Mississippi, West Virginia, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Kentucky (Figure 2).

 

Source: US National Vital Statistics Reports.

 

Challenges

Additional years of life in old age certainly offer positive news for older men and women and for their families, friends, and communities. Longer lives for older men and women provide them with additional time for learning, adventure, recreation, development, work, and contributions.

However, those additional years of life for older individuals also raise noteworthy challenges.

For example, challenges will arise for public health, housing, work and retirement, healthcare, and elder care. Also, the increased life expectancies for older men and women raise the risks of multiple morbidity, disability, dementia, and degenerative diseases.

At the same time that older people are living longer, fertility rates are declining worldwide, with many countries experiencing below replacement fertility. And because of those low fertility rates, countries are entering uncharted territories of population decline and demographic ageing.

One important consequence of those uncharted territories is declining potential support ratios, i.e., declining numbers of persons aged 20 to 64 years per person aged 65 years or older.

Whereas the world’s potential support ratio was 10 in 1950, it declined to 8.6 by 1975 and declined further to 5.0 by 2025. By 2050, the ratio is expected to be 3.0 (Table 2).

 

Source: United Nations.

The declining potential support ratios, which are occurring worldwide but are the lowest in more developed countries, raise the important issue of the age for retirement.

Ageing populations, decreasing fertility rates, and declining potential support ratios are impacting the financial sustainability of pension systems. As a result, a common policy strategy of many countries that aims to address the financial viability of their pension systems is to raise their current retirement ages.

As French President Emmanuel Macron has said, “vivre plus longtemps, travailler plus longtemps” (“live longer, work longer”). China is also gradually raising the retirement age to address its shrinking workforce relative to its growing older population.

As with government pension programs, the increasing longevity and growing proportions of older persons are also impacting the affordability and financial sustainability of government healthcare systems.

In particular, the rising prevalence of chronic diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes, and cancer, as well as the need for long-term care services, like nursing homes and assisted living facilities, are rapidly increasing healthcare costs for the growing population of older men and women who are living longer lives.

 

Conclusions

In conclusion, there are several important points that need to be emphasized. First, older men and women are now living longer than ever before, and this trend of increased longevity is expected to continue throughout the 21st century.

Second, the additional years of life expectancy among older individuals have widened the gap between more developed and less developed countries. While gains in life expectancies for older individuals have occurred worldwide, the largest gains have been seen in the wealthier, more developed countries.

Besides differences among countries, the gains in longevity at older ages also vary within countries. Variations within countries arise mainly because of differences in socioeconomic status, access to healthcare, public health policies, lifestyle factors, and political policies.

Third, the gains in life expectancy at older ages have also increased the differences between men and women. Not only do women live longer than men, but the gap in additional years of life at older ages between them has increased in recent years, particularly in more developed countries.

Finally, the additional years of life for older men and women, combined with population decline and demographic ageing, present important economic, social, and political challenges for governments and their citizens. Challenges will arise in the areas of public health, housing, work and retirement, healthcare, and elder care.

 

Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division, and author of many publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and Differentials”.

A car drives through flood waters during the monsoon season in Kolkata, India. Climate change has impacted local economies' activities. Credit: Pexels/Dibakar Roy

By Michał Podolski
BANGKOK, Thailand, Jun 10 2025 (IPS)

Year by year researchers improve and deepen our understanding of economic activity. The primary example, and probably the most commonly used, is the detailed data and analysis available on gross domestic product (GDP).

Yet, it is merely one of several measures of economic activity and development used by researchers, economists and policymakers. As no one would describe the weather solely by temperature when a storm is developing, focusing solely on GDP when analysing the economic impact of climate change and climate action would be far from adequate.

And this is where many of us, whether policymakers, researchers or citizens who care about the economic impacts of climate change, must wonder: what are the other macroeconomic indicators to use?

This is also what ESCAP’s Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific 2025 report sheds more light on.

There is plenty of reliable information on different economic sectors and spheres of economic activity. Productivity, employment, technological adoption or capital investment are just some most looked at. Besides economic performance, these indicators also can reveal how climate change affects economies at the grassroots level – where people work and businesses operate.

However, this information is often hidden and difficult to notice due to the complexity and vastness of climate-economy impact channels.

For instance, economy-wide productivity tends to rise until we reach certain temperature level. The “optimal level” is currently estimated at around 13°C on average during a year. Why? The impact of too low or high temperatures is not just that people work less efficiently in extreme cold or heat.

For example, in agriculture, higher temperatures impact plant growth, therefore agricultural productivity. As temperatures shift, farmers need to adopt new crops or farming techniques, but they are often lacking the skills or financial resources to adapt to new reality.

Rising temperatures also facilitate the spread of diseases, such as dengue, which is now appearing further towards North than before.

Once ill, people are unable to work. With higher temperatures, children may miss school or struggle to concentrate and learn. The effects of worse education may not be clearly visible in today’s productivity data but will manifest in decades to come.

Similarly, extreme weather events, driven by rising temperatures, not only cause significant infrastructure damage but also reduce productivity through seemingly trivial issues like traffic jams. Even a 15-minute delay becomes significant when it occurs regularly to millions of people.

Such disruptions increase transportation costs, necessitate larger inventories and reduce capital productivity, particularly in manufacturing. Hotter, more humid conditions also cause machinery to fail more frequently.

The hidden and less intuitive impact channels extend far beyond the already simplified yet still complex overview shared above. For example, lower productivity reduces wages and household incomes, which in turn limits households’ ability to save.

Smaller domestic savings hold back business expansion and job creation, as well as push up borrowing costs. At the end, securing a mortgage may become more challenging while house construction itself is more costly – all just because of some hotter or wetter conditions.

Although the above impact channels are well-documented, reasonable and logical, there are still massive research gaps on their exact scale, intensity, and local impact. For example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its climate report compiled by hundreds of researchers spanning climate science, biology, geography, economics and social sciences in 2022, concluded, “Projected estimates of global aggregate net economic damages generally increase non-linearly with global warming levels. The wide range of global estimates, and the lack of comparability between methodologies, does not allow for identification of a robust range of estimates. (…) Economic damages, including both those represented and those not represented in economic markets, are projected to be lower at 1.5°C than at 3°C or higher global warming levels.”

To put it simply: we know that climate change negatively impacts economies, and we know that the impact worsens with greater warming. However, we cannot yet determine whether the economic impact of climate change will be mild, severe or catastrophic – this requires further research, in particular on localized impact.

Those who view the climate change impact channels described above as remote from everyday concerns and assume that their effects are negligible, may wonder about their long-term aggregate impact: losing even a small amount of money every day, by everyone, for decades or even centuries to come adds up to tremendous amounts.

Therefore, even if with climate change, we all lose, informed policy action can lower these loses, and macroeconomic indicators are one of the tools that help and still have lots of potential to improve climate action.

Given the above considerations, as ESCAP’s Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific 2025 report argues, we need not only a more comprehensive understanding of climate change and economy nexus but broader and more common use of the current macroeconomic findings.

The report contributes to this conversation by examining how the economic impacts of climate change and climate action are reflected in macroeconomic indicators, outlining what can and should be done to better navigate the climate storm.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Excerpt:

Michal Podolski is Associate Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres speaking at the opening of the 2025 UN Ocean Conference. Credit: UNDESA

By Naureen Hossain
NICE, France, Jun 9 2025 (IPS)

The world has converged along the Mediterranean Sea to affirm their commitments to the sustainable use and protection of the ocean.

June 9 marked the first day of the 2025 United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC3), which is being held in Nice, France. The overarching theme of this year’s conference is “Accelerating action and mobilizing all actors to conserve and sustainably use the ocean,” which will see global stakeholders take urgent steps towards conserving the oceans, seas, and marine resources.

Over 50 heads of government and state, along with thousands of scientists, non-governmental organizations, business leaders, Indigenous people, and civil society groups, are participating in the conference.

In his opening remarks, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called on countries to make “bold pledges” toward conserving the ocean.

“We must also strengthen maritime security as a pillar of sustainable development. And we must embed ocean priorities across climate, food systems, and sustainable finance.”

Guterres remarked on ongoing negotiations on global agreements, such as the World Trade Organization’s agreement on fisheries and the International Maritime Organization’s commitment to reach net zero emissions from shipping by 2050.

“This proves multilateralism works—but only if we match words with action. By developing concrete national plans aligned with global targets; by harnessing science, driving innovation, and ensuring fair access to technology; by empowering fishers, Indigenous peoples, and youth; and above all, by investing.”

This conference will focus on a range of concerns on ocean conservation and governance. The impacts of global warming and climate change have had dramatic effects on the ocean’s systems. Extreme heating has put greater pressure on the ocean’s food systems and ecosystems. The Blue Economy – the systems of trade and industry that rely on the oceans and seas – needs to be strengthened and more inclusive. Plastic pollution is a particularly pervasive issue, as over 23 million tons enter the ocean as waste.

President Emmanuel Macron of France remarked on the consensus that has made the conference possible as a “victory against indifference.” He noted, however, that this was a “fragile victory,” adding that it “requires rapid action, and we cannot afford to move backwards… we know what is at stake.”

“We need to revitalize multilateralism behind the UN Secretary General,” said Macron, adding, “the only way to meet that challenge is to mobilize all actors, heads of state and government speaking here, but also scientists.”

President Rodrigo Chaves Robles of Costa Rica stated the Ocean Conference “must be remembered as the time when the world understood that looking after the ocean is not simply an option. Rather, it is a moral and economic issue, and indeed we need minimum protection.”

“Let’s leave behind this indifference. Let’s build together a new contract… so that nobody exploits anything on other people’s backs.”

Countries were encouraged to ratify the UN Agreement on Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ), which was first adopted in 2023. At present, fifty countries have committed to the BBNJ.

The conference is expected to see the adoption of the Nice Ocean Action Plan, a set of outcomes based on an intergovernmentally negotiated political declaration and voluntary commitments from member states. This Action Plan is expected to include outcomes that will catalyze urgent, inclusive, and science-based actions to safeguard the ocean for generations to come.

The commitments made during the conference and beyond should be done with the consideration and perspective of developing countries, especially small-island developing states (SIDs). During the first plenary session, President of Palau Surangel Whipps Jr. remarked that from the beginning, island nations have always been “the voice for the ocean” and have been at the forefront of global marine regulatory and development frameworks, including the BBNJ, which Palau was one of the first states to ratify.

“The ocean ecosystems don’t follow national boundaries… we need a governance framework that reflects that reality,” said Whipps.

Hilda Heine, president of the Marshall Islands, remarked that the world’s responsibility to the ocean is “not just environmental stewardship” but also a “fusion of traditional wisdom and modern science, where conservation is driven by community, not just compliance.”

“As a frontline [state], our call today is not of privilege or abundance, but of moral obligation and generational responsibility. We speak not from the comfort of distance but from immediacy of experience,” said Heine.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• Oceans at Risk: Report Warns Global Fossil Fuel Expansion Threatens Marine Biodiversity
• UNOC3: Bringing Ocean Education and Science to the Global Agenda
• Global Push to Protect Oceans Gains Momentum Ahead of UN Conference in Nice

By CIVICUS
Jun 9 2025 (IPS)

 
CIVICUS discusses Nicaragua’s withdrawal from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and other international organisations with Wisthon Noguera, an activist, student and deputy coordinator of the National Youth Platform of Nicaragua.

Wisthon Noguera

In May, the Nicaraguan government announced its withdrawal from UNESCO after the organisation awarded the World Press Freedom Prize to La Prensa, a Nicaraguan newspaper operating in exile. The regime branded the newspaper a traitor and accused it of inciting foreign interference. The government’s move comes as part of a systematic offensive against press freedom and means a further loss of international space for Nicaraguan civil society.

Why did Nicaragua withdraw from UNESCO?

This departure is the latest episode in a strategy of isolation that began in early 2025. The regime has systematically abandoned United Nations agencies that have questioned its rule. First came the Food and Agriculture Organization in February, after it ranked Nicaragua among the countries with the highest levels of hunger in the world. President Daniel Ortega denounced ‘interventionist tendencies’ and closed the agency’s offices.

This was followed by a symbolic withdrawal from the Human Rights Council after its experts recommended that the state be brought before the International Court of Justice for stripping over 450 people of their nationality. And in late February, Nicaragua also left the International Labour Organization and the International Organization for Migration after receiving reform recommendations from them. This pattern repeated in May with the departure from UNESCO.

The logic is simple: the regime rejects any body that questions it, seeking to consolidate absolute control by eliminating all external oversight.

What does this decision reveal about the regime’s repressive strategy?

Its strategy of international isolation reinforces internal control, which intensified after the crackdown on 2018 protests. Since then, the regime has launched a relentless offensive against civil society organisations, independent media and universities.

Journalists have paid the highest price. Notable cases such as the murder of Ángel Gahona and the enforced disappearance of Fabiola Tercero illustrate the dangers of exercising freedom of expression. The result is devastating: 283 journalists have been forced into exile, media outlets such as La Prensa operate from abroad with enormous limitations, and a climate of fear and self-censorship now prevails within Nicaragua.

The education sector is also suffering the consequences. UNESCO’s departure weakens educational programmes just as the regime has expropriated universities, eliminated public funding and revoked the legal status of at least 37 educational institutions, including the emblematic Central American University.

Meanwhile, the regime has carried out constitutional changes to legalise authoritarianism, further weakening the separation of powers and closing the few remaining spaces for democratic participation. Its aim is to eliminate any form of internal or external oversight and silence all critical voices, including those resisting from exile.

Are other countries in the region on the same trajectory?

Nicaragua is part of a worrying regional authoritarian trend. In El Salvador, President Nayib Bukele has also restricted civil society organisations through legislation such as the Foreign Agents Law, which imposes a 30 per cent tax on foreign donations. Both governments use similar strategies to restrict freedom of association and the funding of independent media and organisations.

They are even collaborating with US immigration policies for profit: while El Salvador negotiates the reception of deportees from the USA in exchange for funding for its prisons, Nicaragua receives them in secret. This underlines the urgent need to strengthen regional civil society networks and develop common strategies against authoritarianism.

How is Nicaraguan civil society resisting?

Repression has decimated civil society, but has not eliminated it entirely. Since 2018, over 5,600 organisations have been dissolved, resulting in the almost total dismantling of the national civic fabric. The few remaining organisations operate under strict state supervision and have no real autonomy.

Internal resistance is virtually non-existent due to the enormous risks involved, but the diaspora keeps international condemnation alive in exile. Exiled organisations document the consequences of authoritarianism and urge host governments to take stronger measures against the regime.

However, resistance requires more than declarations. Civil society needs effective protection mechanisms for at-risk activists and journalists, as well as sustainable funding to enable them to continue operating from exile. International commitment to democracy and human rights in Nicaragua must translate into tangible actions of solidarity that strengthen civic resistance, inside and outside the country.

GET IN TOUCH
Instagram
Threads
Twitter

SEE ALSO
Nicaragua: ‘The regime counts on the disappearance of civil society, but people will always look for ways to organise themselves’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Amaru Ruiz 24.Feb.2025
Nicaragua: a dynasty in the making CIVICUS Lens 17.Feb.2025
135 political prisoners expelled from Nicaragua; closure of 1,500 CSOs within one month CIVICUS Monitor 15.Nov.2024

 

Credit: IMF Photo/Ebunoluwa Akinbo

By Wenjie Chen, Michele Fornino, Hamza Mighri and Can Sever
WASHINGTON DC, Jun 9 2025 (IPS)

More than half of sub-Saharan Africa’s population lives in fragile and conflict-affected states (FCS)—economies that face profound challenges such as stagnant economic growth, weak institutions, inadequate public services, extreme poverty, war, and forced internal displacement.

Some countries have transitioned out of extreme fragility by implementing sound macroeconomic policies, diversifying the economy, and strengthening institutions. However, as we explain in our analytical note in the IMF’s Regional Economic Outlook for sub-Saharan Africa, recovering from the successive shocks of recent years is likely to be difficult for many FCS, faced with erratic growth, political instability, exposure to natural disasters, and heavy resource dependency.

Fragility carries a stark human cost. With strained budgets, vast development needs, and insufficient funding, fragile states in the region consistently rank at the bottom of global development indicators.

Life expectancy lingers at 60 years, poverty rates are twice as high as in non-FCS in the region, and elementary school completion rates remain among the lowest globally. If current trends continue, by 2030 two-thirds of the world’s extreme poor will live in fragile states, with sub-Saharan Africa at the epicenter.

Many fragile states struggle to sustain the bursts of faster growth needed to escape poverty. As the Chart of the Week shows, while non-FCS economies in sub-Saharan Africa managed to keep growing after the pandemic—albeit more slowly than previously forecast—fragile states in the region haven’t been able to regain lost ground, with inflation-adjusted income per person still, on average, below its 2019 level.

When FCS suffer a downturn, they lose revenue and have limited access to affordable financing, forcing them to cut expenditures more sharply than in non-FCS. This results in a relatively longer and deeper fiscal contraction, exacerbating the initial shock, as shown in a recent IMF working paper.

Fragility is more than a lack of institutional capability and armed conflict: it often reflects deeper political and economic forces that make recovery elusive. Restricted access to international financial markets, weaker institutions, and limited entrepreneurship in fragile states result in significantly smaller private sector contributions to the economy and fewer employment opportunities compared with other countries.

However, some fragile states have managed to break free by focusing on participatory governance, institutional reform, and economic diversification. Countries that curb corruption, strengthen institutions, and promote political participation are more likely to mitigate fragility, according to our analysis of past cases based on a machine learning approach.

Indeed, past lessons offer hope. After its 2002 civil war, Sierra Leone sought to prioritize rebuilding infrastructure and public services in education and health care, while Liberia, after four years of civil war ended in 2003, strengthened core institutions and reduced reliance on extractive industries. Both nations used pivotal moments to reset societal expectations, rebuild trust, and set a new course.

Employment and income

FCS in the region are simultaneously major sources of refugees and key hosts. Despite the acute challenges and constraints, several FCS (Cameroon, Chad, Ethiopia, Niger, among others) have implemented innovative refugee policies, such as granting refugees free movement, work permits, and access to public services.

While these measures require up-front investments and administrative capacity, well-designed refugee integration strategies can boost employment and income for both the host country and the refugees.

The transition toward sustained growth and resilience is a long-term process requiring perseverance and adaptability, not a quick fix. No single policy guarantees success. Instead, states that focus on a package of measures to build inclusive institutions, maintain economic stability, and seize key opportunities for reform are far more likely to succeed.

In line with the Fund’s Strategy for Fragile and Conflict-Affected States (FCS), our policy recommendations include:

• Restoring macroeconomic stability by strengthening fiscal institutions and improving public financial management.
• Rebuilding trust by improving governance and ensuring that revenues—particularly from natural resources—are managed responsibly.
• Creating opportunities for broader public engagement and ensuring a fairer allocation of resources to ultimately strengthen social unity and resilience.
• Forming long-term partnerships with international partners, including donors, can help support capacity building, financing social programs, and mitigating the impact of economic shocks— ensuring that fragility does not escalate into a global crisis.

This blog is based on an analytical note for the IMF’s Regional Economic Outlook for Sub-Saharan Africa authored by Wenjie Chen, Michele Fornino, Vidhi Maheshwari, Hamza Mighri, Annalaura Sacco, and Can Sever.

For more, see the IMF’s strategy for fragile and conflict-affected states.

IPS UN Bureau

 

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 9 2025 (IPS)

As the Trump administration continues its battle against the United Nations– over war crimes, human rights, and the climate treaty, among others — they also remain sharply divided over Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex. (LGBTI) rights.

The US has taken several actions, some by Executive Order, related to transgender people, including restricting Access to Gender-Affirming Care, banning Transgender Individuals from Military Service, rescinding Protections for Transgender Students and ending Federal Funding for gender Ideology.

But in contrast, the United Nations recognizes transgender people and their rights, affirming the human right of transgender individuals to legal recognition of their gender identity, including the right to change their gender on official documents like birth certificates.

The UN also works to protect transgender people from discrimination and violence, and advocates for their inclusion and equality.

As the campaign for a female UN secretary-general (UNSG) continues to accelerate, there was a proposal, circulating in the corridors of the UN last week, that a member state should be prompted to sponsor a token transgender candidate for UNSG.

Perhaps it may not be a political reality in the long run but it could well be a symbolical act of defiance against the Trump administration, one Asian diplomat told IPS.

Asked for her comments, Sanam Anderlini, founder and CEO of the International Civil Society Action Network, told IPS: “We don’t have time for symbolism or gimmicks or performative issues. The UN is a serious matter, needing serious experienced leadership”.

In principle, the sex of the candidates or a nominee should not matter. It should be about their experience. “But we have seen that for 80 years, member states have persisted in selecting men,” she pointed out.

So, they have made female representation an issue.

“As I said before, we need a woman — we have plenty of extraordinary potential candidates. If there is a qualified transgender candidate, perhaps they’d like to throw their hat in the ring.”

But to suggest that a transgender candidate should be named ‘symbolically’ is, I believe, a denigration of the trans community, the UN and women., she declared.

According to a report in Cable News Network (CNN) last week, June is “Pride Month”, when the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer communities celebrate the freedom to be themselves.

“Yet, those who identify as LGBTQ — especially transgender people — are still fighting battles for the right to exist without prejudice.”

Fearing reprisals from right-wing customers and the Trump administration, 39% of consumer brands are scaling back their Pride Month engagements this year.

President Trump has threatened to cut funding for California because one transgender high school athlete participated in the state’s track and field championships over the weekend.

The Education Department has ordered the University of Pennsylvania to ban transgender athletes from participating on women’s teams. The Pentagon is forcing transgender service members to leave the military and has banned them from enlisting.

And the Department of Health and Human Services has told health care providers to stop providing gender-affirming care for minors, said CNN

Meanwhile, the US-UN conflicts include US withdrawals from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Human Rights Council (HRC), and threats against the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the UN Relief Works Agency (UNRWA)—perhaps with more to come.

Dr James E. Jennings, President Conscience International, told IPS “tyrants, autocrats, and oligarchs are always the ones who want to take people’s rights away, preferring a stratified society with themselves on top to an egalitarian one”.

However, the founding documents of the United States proclaim the opposite–affirming liberty and justice for all and intended to promote the general welfare by protecting the individual rather than the state, he said.

“We are entitled to ask, “Which is it? Are human rights truly to be democratized or not?” If so, we can learn to manage our society equally by caring for each and every person in it”, he asked.

Even though issues of societal mores and human sexuality are difficult to put into a code of laws because attitudes and practices change over time, the law itself changes from generation to generation.

The principle of human freedom trumps Trump and his MAGA minions, declared Dr Jennings.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has taken several actions related to transgender people including:

• Treatment of Transgender Individuals in Federal Prisons: Policies have been put in place to treat transgender individuals in federal prisons according to their sex assigned at birth, potentially leading to harmful housing arrangements.
• Elimination of Gender from Federal Websites: Information related to “gender ideology” has been removed from federal websites, and the term “gender” has been replaced with “sex” in some instances.
• Denial of Passport Gender Markers: Requests for passports with gender markers other than male or female, and requests to change gender markers between male and female, are being denied.

But many of these policies have faced legal challenges, according to published reports.

• The Supreme Court has allowed the ban on transgender military service to take effect for now, but litigation is ongoing.
• The administration’s actions have drawn criticism from LGBTQ+ advocates who argue that they are discriminatory and harmful.

According to the UN, LGBTQI+ people are discriminated against in the labour market, in schools and in hospitals, mistreated and disowned by their own families. They are singled out for physical attack – beaten, sexually assaulted, tortured and killed.

Discrimination and hate-motivated violence against LGBTQI+ people is widespread, brutal, and often perpetrated with impunity, and it is even worse for those belonging to racialized communities. They are also victims of torture and ill treatment, including in custody, clinics and hospitals.

In some 77 countries, discriminatory laws criminalize private, consensual same-sex relationships – exposing individuals to the risk of arrest, prosecution, imprisonment — even, in at least five countries, the death penalty.

Since 2010, according to Outright International, transgender people in the United States have been able to change their gender markers on their passports.

In 2021, the US State Department aligned this policy with international best practices by removing requirements for physician certification to do so, and in 2022 it began offering the option of an “X” gender marker on passports for nonbinary people.

In reversing these policies, the Trump Administration undermines trans, nonbinary, and intersex people’s ability to have their gender identity recognized and respected, directly conflicting with the principles of self-determination and autonomy.

Requiring people to carry identity documents that do not reflect their gender expression also exposes them to an increased risk of violence and restricts their freedom of movement, a right protected under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The policy could pose an immediate risk to members of the armed services and other US government personnel who are currently deployed or working abroad on passports that reflect their gender identity, said Outright International.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/withdrawing-the-united-states-from-and-ending-funding-to-certain-united-nations-organizations-and-reviewing-united-states-support-to-all-international-organizations/

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

A report documents the impact of unchecked oil and gas projects in biologically rich and ecologically sensitive environments. Credit: Spencer Thomas

By Umar Manzoor Shah
SACRAMENTO, US & NEW DELHI, India:, Jun 9 2025 (IPS)

A newly released report by Earth Insight in collaboration with 16 environmental organizations has sounded a global alarm on the unchecked expansion of offshore oil and gas projects into some of the most biologically rich and ecologically sensitive marine environments on the planet.

Titled Ocean Frontiers at Risk: Fossil Fuel Expansion Threats to Biodiversity Hotspots and Climate Stability, the report documents how 2.7 million square kilometers of ocean territory—an area nearly the size of India—has been opened to oil and gas exploration, much of it within or adjacent to protected areas and biodiversity hotspots.

The findings are based on a detailed spatial analysis of 11 case study regions, with data drawn from government ministries, investor briefings, and independent mapping efforts. The report was released ahead of the 3rd UN Ocean Conference (UNOC3) taking place in Nice, France, this week.

Tyson Miller, Executive Director of Earth Insight, described the process in an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service (IPS).

“Our research unit selected 11 frontier regions out of many and built a dataset with a mix of publicly available data and digitized information where government data was lacking,” Miller said. “It was shocking to see the scale of planned oil and gas expansion and LNG development, knowing that fossil fuel expansion shouldn’t be happening—let alone in some of the world’s most sensitive ecosystems.”

‘Overlap between oil blocks and critical habitats deeply troubling’

The report warns of massive ecological consequences as oil and gas activities encroach on coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass meadows, and Important Marine Mammal Areas (IMMA). Many of these zones fall within existing or proposed Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), which the international community has pledged to safeguard under initiatives like the 30×30 goal—protecting 30% of land and sea by 2030.

“Expanding marine protected areas is essential,” said Miller. “Safeguarding protected areas from oil and gas expansion and industrial development should go without saying. Yet, the extent of overlap between oil blocks and critical habitats is deeply troubling.”

In regions like the Gulf of California—also known as “the world’s aquarium”—LNG projects are already threatening a marine ecosystem that supports 39 percent of all marine mammal species and sustains hundreds of millions of dollars in fisheries. Despite local opposition and delayed environmental impact assessments, the area remains under active threat from fossil fuel expansion.

Meanwhile, off the coasts of Seychelles and Mauritius, the Saya de Malha Bank—a massive seagrass meadow that stores up to 10 percent of the ocean’s annual carbon despite covering just 0.2 percent of its surface—is now 98 percent overlapped by oil and gas blocks.

“There are important efforts underway to support the creation of a Marine Protected Area in the region—and if an exclusion of oil and gas and industrial activity in the area accompanied that, that would be a real positive step in the right direction,” Miller said.

Another key theme of the report is the outsized pressure placed on countries in the Global South to become new frontiers for fossil fuel extraction, even as they face increasing debt and climate vulnerability. Governments facing financial strain are often courted by foreign energy firms with promises of investment, job creation, and energy independence. However, the long-term consequences—both ecological and financial—are far more complex.

“Many countries in the Global South face high external debt and economic development pressures,” Miller explained. “Perhaps debt relief and payments for ecosystem services can become effective levers to help safeguard coastlines. Without this support, elected officials may greenlight projects that ultimately cost far more in the form of pollution, habitat destruction, and cleanup efforts.”

Indeed, the Ocean Protection Gap Report, also referenced in Earth Insight’s study, identifies billions of dollars in promised—but yet to be delivered—financing for marine conservation and climate resilience in low-income nations.

Incredible Work by Frontline and Indigenous Communities

Despite facing immense challenges, Indigenous and coastal communities are leading grassroots resistance movements in many of the threatened regions. In Mexico’s Gulf of California, local activism has successfully delayed LNG terminal approvals due to the absence of proper environmental reviews. In the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Mozambique, and elsewhere, community-led campaigns continue to demand transparency, ecological justice, and a halt to extractive projects.

“Frontline and Indigenous communities are doing incredible work to oppose fossil fuel expansion, often with limited resources and at great personal risk,” said Miller. “They need more direct support and more visible platforms to champion their vision for the future.”

Yet these communities, according to the report, are frequently up against entrenched corporate and political interests, making their fight not just environmental but also a struggle for democratic participation, land rights, and long-term sovereignty over natural resources.

Policy Roadmap

The report has pitched a policy roadmap for global leaders, particularly in the lead-up to high-stakes forums like COP and the UN Ocean Conference (UNOC). These include:

• Halting all new coastal and offshore fossil fuel developments, especially in environmentally sensitive regions.
• Removing unassigned oil and gas blocks and stopping the approval of new exploration licenses and permits.
• Ending financial support—including investments, insurance, and financing—for planned offshore fossil fuel projects.
• Shifting public and private capital to renewable energy, including offshore wind and solar.
• Ensuring a just transition that includes full decommissioning of abandoned offshore infrastructure and stakeholder inclusion.
• Undertaking habitat restoration where damage from fossil fuel operations has already occurred.
• Strengthening global legal frameworks, including support for treaties like the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty to prevent new coastal and offshore oil expansion.

“It’s time for global leaders to take bold, enforceable actions,” said Miller. “If the UN Ocean Conference wants to be taken seriously, it must directly address the growing threat of fossil fuel industrialization on coastlines and oceans.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• South-West Pacific Communities Threatened by Ocean Heat, Sea-Level Rise
• UNOC3: Bringing Ocean Education and Science to the Global Agenda
• Global Push to Protect Oceans Gains Momentum Ahead of UN Conference in Nice

Vizhinjam Port—Inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 2 May 2025, as India’s first deep-water container transshipment hub—has been criticized for displacing fishers and disrupting the sensitive ocean biodiversity. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS

By Aishwarya Bajpai
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, India, Jun 8 2025 (IPS)

As the UN Ocean Conference (UNOC) approaches, bringing renewed attention to SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and the rights of ocean-dependent communities, India’s Vizhinjam coast highlights the environmental injustice and human cost of unchecked coastal development.

Kerala’s traditional fishworkers—communities historically rooted to the sea—are now facing irreversible disruption due to the controversial Vizhinjam Port project.

Despite repeated rejections by multiple expert appraisal committees over severe environmental concerns, the Vizhinjam Port—Inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 2 May 2025, as India’s first deep-water container transshipment hub—was approved under questionable circumstances.

Experts have raised serious concerns about the compromised Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process for the Vizhinjam Port, calling it a “cut-copy-paste” job lifted from unrelated projects. The port’s viability studies were manipulated to overlook ecological threats and suppress dissenting community voices.

According to Vijayan M.J., Director of the Participatory Action Research Coalition—India, “The first viability study by Ernst & Young clearly said the port was not feasible—environmentally or economically. So did the second. But both were dismissed, and a third study was commissioned with the clear expectation that it would declare the project viable. They didn’t even put the E&Y logo on the final report—just the names of the two researchers. That tells you something.”

Breaking the Coast: Ecological Damage and Fisher Exclusion

In spite of these warnings, the Vizhinjam Port project moved forward in a coastal region already burdened by extensive human intervention. As of 2022, Kerala’s 590-kilometer coastline hosted a major port at Kochi and intermediate ports in Thiruvananthapuram, Alappuzha, Kozhikode, and Thalassery. The shoreline was further segmented by 25 fishing harbors, multiple breakwaters, and 106 groynes. Nearly 310 kilometers of this coastline had already been transformed into artificial stretches.

These cumulative constructions had already disrupted the natural rhythms of the coast, causing severe erosion in some areas and sediment build-up in others—ultimately leading to the loss of accessible beaches. To mitigate these impacts, the state installed additional seawalls and groynes, which only further interfered with the marine ecosystem and traditional fishing practices.

For Kerala’s fishworkers, this pattern of exclusion and ecological damage is not new.

The situation intensified with the onset of Vizhinjam Port’s construction, when hundreds of local fishers were abruptly informed that they could no longer fish near their home shores due to the imposition of shipping lanes and designated no-fishing zones.

This pattern of exclusion deepened when the state government handed over large portions of the Thiruvananthapuram coast, including Vizhinjam, to the Adani Group.

Amid rising protests in places like Perumathura and Muthalappozhi—where heavy siltation and repeated fisher deaths had triggered alarm—the government assured that Adani’s involvement would provide solutions, including constructing embankments and regularly dredging the estuary to keep it navigable. However, these promises quickly fell apart.

As Vipin Das, a fishworker from Kerala, recalls, “Adani took over the entire beach and built an office complex. Now, even stepping onto the shore requires his office’s permission.”

According to local accounts, the company’s first move was to dismantle the southern embankment to allow barge access to the port. This action disrupted natural sediment flows and caused a severe blockage of the estuary. “When floodwaters began threatening nearby homes, a JCB was rushed in to reopen the embankment—but it was already too late,” Vipin adds. “Adani’s entry didn’t solve anything—it only worsened the crisis and destroyed our coastline.”

From Biodiversity Hotspot to Danger Zone

Once a biodiversity hotspot, Vizhinjam’s marine ecosystem boasted 12 reef systems and one of the world’s 20 rare ‘wedge banks’—a critical oceanic zone near Kanyakumari where hundreds of fish species fed and reproduced. Fishers remember it as a “harbor of procreation,” teeming with over 200 varieties of fish and more than 60 aquatic species.

However, intense dredging, altered wave patterns, and ongoing port operations have severely damaged this fragile marine ecosystem. In 2020, Kerala recorded a 15 percent decline in fish catch, and the numbers have continued to fall in the years since—threatening both biodiversity and the livelihoods that depend on it.

The state’s response has been displacement disguised as compensation, offering ₹10 lakh (USD 12,000) as a one-time payment to those willing to leave their homes instead of addressing systemic erosion and disaster risks, said Vijayan.

The situation further took a catastrophic turn on May 24, 2025, when a massive shipwreck occurred off the Vizhinjam coast.

While authorities framed it as an isolated incident, environmentalists and coastal communities argue it was a disaster waiting to happen—fueled by years of unregulated dredging and reckless port expansion.

“The sea is poisoned; people are saying not to eat fish,” shared Vipin. “But it’s not just rumors—there are chemicals, plastics, and fuel. And we, who had nothing to do with this, are the first to suffer.”

With livelihoods already battered by monsoon storms and port restrictions, fishers now face public panic, polluted waters, and a poisoned food chain. “This isn’t just an accident—it’s a man-made disaster,” Vipin added. “The state must act swiftly to hold the company accountable and compensate the coastal communities who are paying the highest price.”

However, earlier this year Vizhinjam International Seaport Ltd. told the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre that  “Environment Clearance accorded to Vizhinjam Port has stood the test of legal scrutiny, having gone through litigation before the National Green Tribunal, New Delhi.”

It continued, “The Port operations and fishing/ancillary activities coexist all over the world and both activities are continuing as per the rules and regulations prevailing in the democratic country of India. It may also be noted that Vizhinjam port construction has been carried out with best practices, including stakeholder engagement, taking the community into confidence.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Related Articles

• South-West Pacific Communities Threatened by Ocean Heat, Sea-Level Rise
• Can These Prehistoric Sea Creatures Survive Climate Change?
• Global Push to Protect Oceans Gains Momentum Ahead of UN Conference in Nice

More than 30 solar panels power the pumping plant in the village of El Mozote, in eastern El Salvador, providing water to around 360 families. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

By Edgardo Ayala
EL MOZOTE, El Salvador , Jun 6 2025 (IPS)

The worst massacre of civilians in Latin America occurred in the Salvadoran village of El Mozote, where environmental projects are beginning to emerge, slowly fostering awareness about protecting the natural resources of this deeply symbolic site, embedded in the country’s historical memory.

Since early 2024, a small photovoltaic plant has been operating in El Mozote, in the district of Meanguera, eastern El Salvador, powering a municipal water system designed to supply around 360 families in the village and nearby areas.“We used to wash clothes in those communal wells, which were built after the war, in ’94.” — Otilia Chicas

“The project’s goal was to minimize environmental impacts in the area by seeking cleaner energy sources, and with that in mind, the solar panel system was implemented,” Rosendo Ramos, the Morazán representative of the Salvadoran Health Promotion Association (ASPS), the NGO behind the project, explained to IPS.

The Spanish organization Solidaridad Internacional Andalucía also participated in launching the initiative.

El Mozote is located in the department of Morazán, a mountainous region in eastern El Salvador. During the civil war (1980-1992), the area was the scene of brutal clashes between leftist guerrillas and the army.

In December 1981, over several days, military units massacred around 1,000 peasants in the village and neighboring communities—including pregnant women and children—accusing them of being a support base for the rebels.

The conflict is estimated to have left more than 75,000 dead and 8,000 disappeared.

The photovoltaic system installed in El Mozote, eastern El Salvador, operates alongside the national distribution grid, so on cloudy days with low solar generation, the conventional power grid is activated. Credit: Courtesy of ASPS

Sunlight to Distribute Water

The solar project consists of 32 panels capable of generating a total of 15 kilowatts—enough to power the equipment, primarily the 60-horsepower pump that pushes water up to the tank installed atop La Cruz mountain. From there, water flows down to households by gravity.

The photovoltaic system operates alongside the national power grid, so on cloudy days with low solar output, the conventional grid kicks in—though the goal is obviously to reduce reliance on it.

The project, costing US$28,000, was funded by the European Union as part of a larger environmental initiative that also included two nearby municipalities, Arambala and Jocoaitique, focusing on protecting the La Joya Pueblo micro-watershed.

Key aspects of the broader program include reducing the use of agrochemicals, plastic, and other disposable materials; and promoting rainwater harvesting.

The overall program reached 1,317 people (706 women and 611 men) across three municipalities and six communities, involving NGOs, schools, and local governments.

“The aim is to consume less energy from the national grid, thereby lowering pumping costs,” explained Ramos.

However, this cost reduction doesn’t necessarily translate into lower water bills for families in El Mozote and surrounding areas. That’s because the water system is municipally managed, and tariffs are set by local ordinances, making adjustments difficult—unlike community-run projects where residents and leaders can more easily agree on changes.

One benefit of the new system is that lower energy costs for the municipality free up funds to expand and improve other basic services—not just in Meanguera but also in places like El Mozote, Dennis Morel, the district director, told IPS.

The plaza of El Mozote, the iconic village in eastern El Salvador, was renovated, but local residents complain that the government-led construction work was not agreed upon with the community. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

Water in the postwar era

Otilia Chicas, a native of El Mozote, recalled what life was like in the village when there was no piped water service—back in the days following the end of the civil war in 1992, when people began returning to the area.

“We used to wash clothes in those communal wells. They were built after the war, in ’94,” said Chicas, pointing toward one of those now-empty wells, about 20 meters away from where she stood, inside a kiosk selling handicrafts, books, and T-shirts in El Mozote’s central plaza.

Next to the plaza is the mural bearing the names of the hundreds of people killed by the army—specifically, by units of the Atlacatl Battalion, trained in counterinsurgency by the United States.

“We used to fetch water from there and bathe there, but since these wells weren’t enough, we’d go to a spring, to ‘El Zanjo,’ as we called it,” she recounted.

She added that the drinking water project arrived between 2005 and 2006, finally bringing the resource directly into people’s homes.

“The community had to pitch in, and the hours people worked were counted as payment, as their contribution,” she noted while weaving colorful thread bracelets.

There is uncertainty over whether the kiosk in the village plaza will be removed. Several women from the El Mozote Historical Committee sell handicrafts and work as tour guides there. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

 Almost No One Was Spared 

Chicas, 45, was born in 1980, a year before the massacre. Now, she helps run the kiosk and works as a tour guide alongside other local women from the El Mozote Historical Committee, explaining to visitors the horrific events that took place in December 1981.

The artisan shared that her family lost several relatives in the 1981 massacre, as did nearly everyone here. The victims’ mural is filled with dozens of people bearing the last names Chicas, Márquez, Claros, and Argueta, among many others.

“My grandmother lost four of her children and 17 grandchildren,” she recalled.

Chicas’ father, in an attempt to save their lives, moved his family out of El Mozote before the massacre and resettled in Lourdes Colón, in the western part of the country. But the military ended up killing him in 1983 after discovering he was originally from Morazán and linking him to rebel groups.

“The National Guard came for him and two uncles—they saw they were from Morazán, a guerrilla zone,” she emphasized. “Before killing them, they forced them to dig their own graves. They were left by the roadside, in a place called El Tigre,” she explained.

The military operation that culminated in the massacre was planned and executed by the Salvadoran Army’s High Command, with support from Honduran soldiers and covered up by United States government officials, revealed Stanford University scholar Terry Karl in April 2021.

Karl testified as an expert witness during a hearing on the case held that April in San Francisco Gotera, the capital of Morazán.

Dormant in El Salvador’s judicial system since 1993, the case was reopened in September 2016. Among the accused are 15 soldiers—seven of them high-ranking Salvadoran officers—,the only surviving defendants from the original list of 33 military personnel.

The trial is currently in the investigative phase, where evidence is being gathered and examined before the judge decides whether to proceed to a full public trial.

A mural on the side of El Mozote’s plaza displays the names of the hundreds of people killed by the Salvadoran army in December 1981, marking the largest massacre of civilians in Latin America. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

Times of Uncertainty 

El Mozote’s central plaza has been renovated over the past three years as part of the government’s effort to give it a more orderly and modern appearance—a promise made by President Nayib Bukele when he visited the site in February 2021.

The town is also nearing completion of a Urban Center for Well-being and Opportunities (CUBO)—a government-sponsored community center designed to provide youth with access to reading materials, art, culture, and information and communication technologies.

However, some residents told IPS that these projects are being carried out without prior consultation or agreement with the community, in violation of the 2012 ruling by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which called for justice, truth, and reparations for the victims.

The reconstruction work demolished the bandstand, a space highly valued by the community as a gathering place for meetings and collective organizing.

Despite this, Chicas said she supports the plaza’s renovations, as they have made it more inviting for young people to spend time there. Still, she noted that the remodeling affected her personally.

The construction forced her to dismantle her small food stall, made of corrugated metal sheets, where she used to make and sell pupusas—El Salvador’s most iconic dish, made of corn and stuffed with beans, cheese, or pork.

Chicas also mentioned the ongoing uncertainty about whether the kiosk where she and other women craft and sell their handicrafts will be removed.

“We’re left in limbo—we don’t know what’s going to happen,” she said.