Africa

In 2023, the United Nations released a report revealing that extreme weather disasters had incurred economic losses totaling $4 trillion, with significant impacts felt across various sectors, notably agriculture. Credit: Miriet Abrego / IPS

By Esther Ngumbi
URBANA, Illinois, US, Apr 10 2024 (IPS)

Recently, the United Nations in collaboration with the World Meteorological Organization released a report that highlighted the impacts of climate change including on agriculture.

Additionally, the report highlighted the economic losses and other impacts extreme weather events such as floods, droughts, heatwaves, and tropical cyclones have on agriculture.

Indeed, globally, and in the United States, record-breaking, extreme weather disaster events, such as flooding, storms, and droughts, have become extremely costly and excessively too common.

In dealing with record-breaking extreme weather events that directly and indirectly impact the agricultural sector, we must choose to launch multipronged solutions that leverage data, incorporate newly available climate solutions and innovations, and create incentives to amplify the adoptions of these solutions

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 377 events have resulted in losses of over $2.6 trillion have been documented. In 2023, the United Nations released a report showing that extreme weather disasters have resulted in economic losses worth $4 trillion, including in the agricultural sector.

Undoubtedly, this should worry all since the agricultural sector is vital for meeting our food and nutrition security needs. In the United States, for example, agriculture, food, and related industries contribute approximately $1.4 trillion to the gross domestic product.

In Asia, Africa, and many other continents, the agricultural sector is equally important, and further serves as a source of employment, and thus a poverty-reducing sector. According to UN FAO, agriculture accounts for over 35 percent of Africa’s GDP.

Emerging, therefore is the need for multipronged efforts to help to mitigate the impacts these climate change associated disasters have on agriculture.

 

First. Inform agricultural sector stakeholders including farmers about newly launched technologies and most recent science-backed climate solutions.

Researchers, entrepreneurs, and innovators continue to bring to life novel technologies, climate solutions, and innovations that can be deployed to help to mitigate climate change impacts.

From artificial intelligence powered prediction models that can reliably forecast when disasters are going to happen, prompting stakeholders to act, to climate resilient crops, to regenerative agricultural practices such as cover cropping, mulching, and digging trenches that can help mitigate the impacts of drought and flooding to indoor agriculture that cushions agricultural crops from weather, pests and water and space limitations.

To make sure that this information is available, governments or innovators could keep a tab or have an inventory of all recent climate solutions. This can be a one stop database that carries the most recent info.  It could be in the form of a climate solutions dashboard.

Complementing information is the need to create incentives to accelerate the adoption of these newer climate solutions, technologies, and strategies. Monetary incentives, for example, could go a long way in facilitating the rapid adoption of research backed climate solutions for agriculture. For example, in Illinois, farmers who are practicing regenerative practices such as cover cropping are eligible for a three-year contract payment of $50 per acre.

Moreover, there is a need to actively engage the next generation of farmers. Programs such as the recently launched US Department of Agriculture climate corps, a program that will mobilize over 100 young people to help advance sustainable agriculture, is a move in the right direction.

 

Second. Continue to invest in research, entrepreneurs, agencies, and programs dedicated to climate research. 

Research continues to be central in helping to generate new solutions. As such, there is need to keep funding researchers that are actively engaged in research aimed at generating newer solutions or understanding the direct and indirect impacts of climate change associated disasters.

As an example, in 2023, USDA invested over $46M in the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program that funds research that has over the years resulted in the development of climate-smart solutions. In the same year, The Rockefeller Foundation committed $1billion to advance climate solutions.

 

Third. Take good data before, during, and after climate disasters.

Good data can be leveraged to help address climate change impacts to agriculture including being used in machine learning, to help to create predictive models that are continuing to revolutionize our ability to predict disaster events and act. Moreover, data can be used to introduce real-time solutions while helping to accurately capture solutions that are working.

Certainly, data driven solutions will continue to be important now and in the future and should continue to be leveraged.

At the core of preventing direct impacts of weather events on the agricultural sector should be a respect for nature and biodiversity.

Indeed, we live in a biodiverse world, that has other creatures in our ecosystem. For example, the soil matrix is home to earthworms and microbes that underpin agricultural productivity. As such, strategies, solutions, and interventions rolled out should also protect these invisible friends.

In dealing with record-breaking extreme weather events that directly and indirectly impact the agricultural sector, we must choose to launch multipronged solutions that leverage data, incorporate newly available climate solutions and innovations, and create incentives to amplify the adoptions of these solutions. A functioning agricultural sector will continue to be important as we strive to meet our food and nutrition security needs.

Esther Ngumbi, PhD is Assistant Professor, Department of Entomology, African American Studies Department, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Analysts say the film Oppenheimer would have benefitted from showing the impact on those the bombs were unleashed upon. Credit: The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN)

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 10 2024 (IPS)

The award-winning Hollywood movie Oppenheimer portrays the life of J. Robert Oppenheimer, who helped create the atomic bomb, which claimed the lives of an estimated 140,000 to 226,000 people and devastated the two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

The tragedy was best described as a humanitarian disaster of Biblical proportions. But the film focuses on the creation of the bombs, not the devastation it caused.

In a Time magazine piece last February, Jeffrey Kluger recounts a meeting at the White House between US President Harry S. Truman and Oppenheimer, aptly describing it as “the man who built the bombs and the man who dropped the bombs.”

Suffering from an unforgivable guilt, Oppenheimer reportedly told Truman, “Mr. President, I feel I have blood on my hands.”

But history recalls just what happened next differently, says Time.

Truman apparently said, “Never mind, it’ll come out in the wash.”

Or another story, where an unrepentant Truman hands a handkerchief to Oppenheimer and says, “Well here, would you like to wipe your hand?”

In the film, Truman merely brandishes the handkerchief.

A former Hiroshima mayor, Takashi Hiraoka, who spoke at a preview event for the film, was more critical of what was omitted from the movie.

He was quoted as saying: “From Hiroshima’s standpoint, the horror of nuclear weapons was not sufficiently depicted. The film was made in a way to validate the conclusion that the atomic bomb was used to save the lives of Americans.”

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) said the release of the Oppenheimer film, and the wave of (media) attention surrounding it, creates an opportunity to spark public attention on the risks of nuclear weapons and invite new audiences to get involved in the movement to abolish nuclear weapons.

“We can educate about the risks, and share a much-needed message of hope and resistance: Oppenheimer is about how nuclear weapons began, the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) is how we end them.”

Speaking of the historical perspective, Dr Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), told IPS that the Manhattan Project, which was spearheaded by Oppenheimer to develop a nuclear weapon, started while the Second World War was raging and Germany had been on the march, conquering one country after another in Europe.

However, by the time the nuclear weapon was developed, Germany had surrendered, but Japan continued to fight. Based on documented historical accounts, Japanese forces were fighting in every trench, in every front, to the last soldier, and the word’surrender’ was not in their vocabulary, he said.

General Marshall, who was Chief of Staff of the US Army, provided counsel to President Truman at the time that if the war were to continue for another one to two years, hundreds of thousands of American soldiers and perhaps more than a million Japanese would be killed.

When Truman asked what he would suggest, General Marshall and others indicated that bombing one or even two sites in Japan with a nuclear weapon could bring the war to a swift conclusion and save the lives of millions from both sides.

Truman was finally persuaded that this may be the only solution, specifically given that the Japanese were determined to fight until the bitter end, said Ben-Meir, who taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies for over 20 years.

“Once the bombs were dropped and Oppenheimer realized the extent of the damage and death that occurred in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he felt personally responsible for the catastrophic impact of the bomb, stating to President Truman that he felt that he had blood on his hands because of what happened.”

Truman then told Oppenheimer that although he was behind the development of the nuclear weapon, the decision to use it was his own, and Oppenheimer bore no responsibility whatsoever.

President Truman allegedly handed Oppenheimer his handkerchief to presumably wipe his hands off the bloodstains. Nevertheless, Oppenheimer left the president’s office completely distraught, said Ben-Meir.

“The Japanese do not believe that Truman was concerned about the potential loss of Japanese lives had the war continued, but was mainly concerned about American lives. This sadly remains a point of contention but was mostly overcome due to the strong alliance that was subsequently developed between the US and Japan.”

Of course, what compounded Oppenheimer’s profound despair over what happened was that he was subsequently accused of being a member of the Communist Party and had his security clearance revoked, ending his work with the US government (he was posthumously exonerated), declared Ben-Meir.

Broadly, though, according to National Public Radio (NPR), many Japanese viewers expressed discomfort with Oppenheimer’s storytelling and felt the portrayal was incomplete.

“The film was only about the side that dropped the A-bomb,” Tsuyuko Iwanai, a Nagasaki resident, told NPR. “I wish they had included the side it was dropped on.”

Upon witnessing the first successful nuclear test, Oppenheimer reportedly quoted from the Hindu scripture Bhagavad Gita: “Now I am Death: the destroyer of the worlds,” according to UNFOLD ZERO, a platform for UN focused initiatives and actions for the achievement of a nuclear weapons-free world.

“Indeed, Oppenheimer was so impacted by the potential of the nuclear bomb to destroy the world that, following the end of the Second World War, he became deeply involved in international nuclear weapons control, peace and the promotion of world governance”.

“The movie should remind us of how important and relevant these ideas are today—as wars are raging, tensions between nuclear armed States are increasing and the threat of nuclear war is as high as it has ever been,” said UNFOLD ZERO.

“The thinking, passion and commitment of Oppenheimer regarding these issues is barely touched upon in the movie, despite it being so important today for re-awakening our collective understanding of the nature of nuclear deterrence, the risks of nationalism and the importance to strengthen the rule of law, prevent nuclear war and achieve peace through global governance.”

Addressing the UN Security Council on March 18, Secretary-General António Guterres referred to the movie, which won seven Oscars at the Hollywood Academy Awards ceremony on March 10, including the four major awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor.

“The Doomsday Clock is ticking loudly enough for all to hear. From academics and civil society groups, calling for an end to the nuclear madness,” he said.

“To Pope Francis, who calls the possession of nuclear arms ‘immoral’. To young people across the globe worried about their future, demanding change. To the Hibakusha, the brave survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki—among our greatest living examples of speaking truth to power—delivering their timeless message of peace.”

Humanity cannot survive a sequel to Oppenheimer, Guterres warned.

This article is brought to you by IPS Noram, in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with UN ECOSOC.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• UN Security Council Holds Rare Nuclear Disarmament Debate
• Nuclear Disarmament: A Natural Buddhist-Catholic Alliance, says Japanese Leader
• FEATURED TRANSLATION – ITALIAN

Natalia Kanem, Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund, gives the keynote address at the 8th International Parliamentarians’ Conference on the Implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action (ICPD). Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

By Naureen Hossain
OSLO, Apr 10 2024 (IPS)

Gearing up for the 30th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), the world’s parliamentarians and ministers are meeting in Oslo to determine the course of action needed to promote sexual and reproductive human rights (SRHR).

Over 170 parliamentarians from more than 110 countries, UN experts, civil society leaders, and other stakeholders are expected at the 8th International Parliamentarians’ Conference on the Implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action. 

The IPCI conference, which starts today (April 10, 2024), will facilitate dialogue and cooperation to improve parliamentarians’ capacity to improve sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) across the world. It is grounded in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, leading up to the 2024 Summit of the Future this September. This year’s conference is organized by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights (EPF). The conference is hosted by APPG Norway and its secretariat, Sex og Politikk, Norway’s parliamentary group dedicated to sexual and reproductive health rights.

In recent years, many countries have seen a regression of SRHR across the spectrum, from banning family planning options such as legal abortions to suppressing or attacking women’s presence in national policy and the continued practice of female genital mutilation.

Lubna Jaffery, Minister of Culture and Equality of Norway, addresses the 8th International Parliamentarians’ Conference on the Implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action (ICPD). Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

 

Minister of International Development of Norway, Anne Beathe Tvinnereim, addresses the 8th International Parliamentarians’ Conference on the Implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action (ICPD). Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

Governments have passed legislation that limits reproductive rights and access to basic services, which impact the general population and, more often, vulnerable or underrepresented communities such as refugees, internally displaced people, and LGBTQ+ groups. It speaks to a spread of fundamentalist viewpoints influencing public policy and opinion and the strengthening of anti-human rights parties, according to EPF President Petra Bayr.

If these developments—or regressions—in global SRHR are to be challenged, then they could be countered through evidence of the impact of comprehensive SRHR and the belief that self-determining one’s body, reproductive, and sexual life is a realization of fundamental human rights, according to Bayr.

She told IPS by email, enforcing this will take hard work that, among others, “lies in the hands of many committed MPs who believe in the universality of human rights.”

“Fundamental human rights issues must never be dependent on ideology and religion.”

During Wednesday’s opening ceremony, UNFPA Executive Director Dr. Natalie Kanem addressed the conference by remarking on the role that parliamentarians play and the influence they can wield when working across the political spectrum to advance a shared vision of rights for women.

“Parliamentarians around the world have been instrumental in the achievements of the past three decades, speaking up for those whose voices often go unheard and passing legislation to protect women and girls at home and abroad,” she said.

Despite the setbacks in achieving universal access to SRHR, the strides should not be forgotten. The ICPD Programme of Action, first adopted in 1994 and then extended in 2010, remains a critical guideline for its goals in population and a keystone for sustainable development.

As Bayr notes, the ICPD made reference to people’s needs in humanitarian settings and the diversity of family dynamics, concepts that remain relevant in the present day. “The focus on the impact of population policies on the environment, sustainability, and fair distribution of economic values is even more pressing than it was 30 years ago,” she said.

“There is still a lot to do and we have to consider very carefully how we invest our potential. We will need energy to defend what we already have, but we still need enough power to make relevant steps towards all these goals we haven’t met yet.”

This year, IPCI will focus on three common themes from the ICPD agenda. These themes will be observed through their impact on and ability to achieve universal access to SRHR:

• Converging megatrends, such as demographic diversity and the climate crisis.
• Digital technology, more specifically the forms of violence employed online or through technology, which UNFPA refers to as technology-facilitated gender-based violence.
• The funding landscape of SRHR in a time where governments’ priorities are threatened by security concerns

 

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

 

Related Articles

• Has the World Progressed or Regressed, 30 Years After a Landmark Population Conference?
• WHO Calls for More Data on Violence Against Older Women and Women With Disabilities
• Building Resilience and Mental Health Capacity of Youth

Credit: United Nations

By Palitha Kohona
COLOMBO, Sri Lanka, Apr 10 2024 (IPS)

Unfortunately, a rivalry that should not exist and did not exist historically between China and India is being stoked by the media and some policy makers, especially in the West. It is not too difficult to discern the Machiavellian geo-strategic objectives of this complex game plan.

Most policymakers in the West find it difficult to accept that a non-European and non-white Asian nation which the West has been used to exploit and treat with disdain has risen so rapidly that it is now in a position to offer an alternative social, economic and political model to development and progress.

China has not only risen from the depths but is challenging the West in many respects, including economically, technologically, socially and even militarily. The China led the Belt and Road Initiative, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the Global Development Initiative, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the BRICS Bank, etc, have posed a real challenge to the established world economic order dominated by the West.

The BRI has resulted in the investment of over USD one trillion in the countries of the region and beyond making a tangible contribution to the development of many countries and has pricked the hitherto somnolent West also to participate positively in the development of those countries.

The calculated statements of EA Minister of India, Jaishankar, while emphasising India’s obvious strategic interests, have not overly endorsed the Western approach to China. China has attracted many admirers.

China has risen in a very short period to the position of an economic super power and to become the second largest economy in the world. It is expected to overtake the US economically by the end of this decade. It is also the main source foreign investments in the world, not to mention tourists.

It is also the biggest source in the global supply chain and the most lucrative multi billion dollar consumer market. All this is causing serious discomfort to those countries in the West, giving rise to damaging efforts at delinking, which were so used to dominating the world unchallenged. China’s technological advancement is nothing short of spectacular.

There could even be racist undertones to the criticisms being directed at China, a poor Asian country formerly dominated and exploited willy nilly by the West and to the reluctance to accept its new status and its own model of development. (One recalls that in the 1980s, a resurgent Japan experienced a similar process of vicious containment resulting in twenty years of stagflation).

China, for its part, has not articulated any desire to dominate or influence its economic partners and others or impose its political and economic model on anyone else. On the contrary, it has consistently expressed a desire to achieve a common future and a goal of shared prosperity, without domination. To judge Chinese intentions through the prism of the West’s own historical experience is patently wrong.

Both India and China are over dependent on Indian Ocean sea routes for the transport of their energy needs. While both would want to ensure the safety and security of Indian Ocean sea routes, both should also take adequate measures to prevent competition from blowing into confrontations of unmanageable proportions.

China has never expressed interest in establishing bases in the Indian Ocean region or acquiring territory. Its only military base in the region is in Djibouti established as part of a multinational effort to counter pirates.

The West which has been dominating the region since 1500 AD tends ascribe similar motives to China against the background of its own past record. (The situation with regard to Hambantota which has crept in the West’s narrative requres a longer explanation).

Sri Lanka’s initiative in the 1970s to establish an Indian Ocean Zone of Peace, although designed to contain the then prevalent super power rivalry in the Indian Ocean, may become relevant again in the contemporary context.

The situation in the Maldives should NOT be viewed purely from the Western lens and characterised as a simple case of China – India rivalry for regional influence. The domestic Islamic political imperatives and the resulting political pressures on the Maldivian leadership are important factors.

It is a fact that Chinese companies have been proactive in developing infrastructure in Maldives for sometime and their work is of good quality. India’s official reaction to the Maldivian measures has been measured. China has signed a number of bilateral agreements with the Maldives and Maldives readily agreed to accept a ship visit from a Chinese research vessel which was denied access to Sri Lankan ports due to Indian pressure.

Some critics argue that Chinese investments in Sri Lanka are part of a larger geopolitical strategy by China to expand its influence in the region.

This assertion needs to be stripped of its polemical outer layer to appreciate its essential shallowness. To begin with, it is mainly raised by commentators from countries which had rapaciously exploited vast swathes of the non white world through conquest and colonialism for centuries and continuing economic domination, conveniently ignoring their ongoing depradations.

Sri Lanka, which desperately needs development funding, has welcomed the China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) at the highest levels. It has not sought to exclude anyone else from participating in our development process. We have steadfastly asserted our non-aligned status and our neutrality.

In fact, our President has characterized the AUKUS alliance, which is designed to contain China, as a mistake. The Sri Lankan Prime Minister visited China this week and was received at the highest levels.

China has already invested around USD one trillion in the countries that joined the BRI, and more is forthcoming. Sri Lanka needs to develop fast and has no option but to welcome investment funding from all sources.

As a sovereign and independent state, Sri Lanka must be free to select its own development partners and its own development model. In the process, it has not sought to exclude anyone nor posed a threat to anyone, directly or indirectly. Sri Lanka has welcomed all friendly countries to participate in its development process.

I would not characterise Sri Lanka’s approach to development as a balancing act. It is not. Sri Lanka must work with all countries to achieve its own development objectives which should not be held hostage to the unfounded sensitivities of any other party.

Dr Palitha Kohona is also a former Sri Lanka Foreign Secretary, Head of the UN Treaty Section, chairman, UN Indian Ocean Committee and Chairman of the UN’s Sixth Committee.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Excerpt:

The writer is former Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN and, until recently, Ambassador to China

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Apr 9 2024 (IPS)

Carbon dioxide emission taxes, prices and markets have been touted as key to stopping global heating. However, carbon markets have failed mainly because they favour the rich and powerful.

Market solutions better?
Mainstream economists believe the best way to check global heating is to tax greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Equivalent ‘carbon prices’ have been set for the other significant GHGs. But many have been revised due to their moot, varied and unstable, arguably incomparable nature.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

High carbon prices for GHG emissions are expected to persuade emitters to switch to ‘cleaner’ energy sources. Higher prices for energy-intensive goods and services are supposed to get consumers to buy less energy-intensive alternatives.

Positive carbon prices tax fossil fuels, GHG emissions, and products according to their energy intensity. Hence, when carbon prices fall, they deter fossil fuel use less effectively.

Developed countries have set up ‘carbon trading’ systems ostensibly to deter GHG emissions. Firms wanting to emit more than their assigned quotas must buy emission permits from others who commit to emit under quota.

Getting prices right?
Conventional economists believe carbon prices should cover the ‘social costs’ of GHG emissions, but disagree on how to estimate them. But policymakers believe it necessary to discount these prices to gain broad acceptance for carbon markets.

A recent International Monetary Fund paper acknowledged, “Differences between efficient prices and retail fuel prices are large and pervasive”. But such distortions undermine the very purpose of carbon pricing.

Gro Intelligence estimated the social cost of carbon emissions at $4.08 per metric tonne in 2022, which is used by the influential Gro-Kepos Carbon Barometer. But Resources for the Future estimated it at $185/tonne, over forty times higher!

While carbon prices are meant to tax fossil fuels, low prices reduce their deterrent effect. Fossil fuel subsidies lower carbon prices, which can even become negative. Such price subsidies undermine carbon markets’ intended effects.

Whenever carbon prices are discounted or deliberately kept low, they are much less effective in deterring GHG emissions. They also distort the price system with many other unintended, but perverse consequences.

Writing in the New York Times, Peter Coy noted the carbon price rose from under $4 per metric tonne in 2012 to almost $20/tonne in 2020 before dropping sharply to around $4/tonne in 2022!

Incredibly, he still concluded carbon prices were “headed in the right direction” since 2012. How low and volatile carbon prices are supposed to discourage fossil fuel use and accelerate renewable energy investments must be self-evident to him alone?

Western fossil fuel subsidies
Carbon prices shot up when fossil fuel energy prices spiked after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. But they soon collapsed as European governments intervened to subsidise energy prices.

As the rich nations’ Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development noted, “government support for fossil fuels almost doubled in 2022” to over $1.4 trillion!

State subsidies rise with prices when governments try to mitigate rising fossil fuel prices. Such subsidies negate the purpose of carbon pricing, and can lower them so much as to become negative!

Such subsidies were deemed necessary to retain public support for NATO’s Ukraine war effort and to drive down Russian fossil fuel export prices. Thus, such ‘geopolitical’ interventions have undermined carbon taxes, prices and markets.

Carbon prices dropped sharply worldwide, from $18.97/tonne in 2021 to $4.08 in 2022. In 2022, nine of the 26 countries in the Barometer had negative prices, with only six – not the US – above $25.

Oil and natural gas prices have since fallen from their 2022 peaks, with consumer subsidies declining correspondingly. Hence, carbon prices for GHG emissions have recovered.

Such price subsidies and volatility do not help enterprises plan and invest their energy use – crucial to accelerate needed ‘carbon transitions’.

Unsurprisingly, after over a decade, there is little evidence that carbon markets have effectively cut GHG emissions to avert climate catastrophe. Clearly, they cannot be counted upon to cut them sufficiently.

China, market conformist!
Significantly, after China began its emissions trading system in 2021, its carbon price rose to a level higher than the US price in 2022. As its per capita income is much lower than in the West, its higher carbon price is probably a more significant deterrent to fossil fuel use.

China is now the world’s largest carbon emitter, so its $19/tonne price in 2022 significantly raised the international weighted average. Nevertheless, thanks to the subsidies, the weighted average for all other countries was negative at -$4.50/tonne in 2022!

Despite much rich nation rhetoric demanding carbon prices and markets for the whole world, their own commitment to this problematic approach to mitigating GHG emissions has been much more compromised than China’s!

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

Alleged gang members are transferred to the Terrorism Confinement Center, a mega-prison built by the government of Nayib Bukele in El Salvador to house 40,000 detainees accused of belonging to organized crime. CREDIT: Presidency of El Salvador

By Juanita Goebertus Estrada
BOGOTÁ, Apr 9 2024 (IPS)

Two years since President Nayib Bukele announced a “war against gangs” in El Salvador, the country has gone through rapid change.

Agustín, not his real name, was 16 when Bukele made the announcement. When Human Rights Watch researchers met him a year-and-a-half later he had already personally experienced the country’s quick turn from being gang-ridden to, increasingly, a police state.

Agustín first suffered from gang violence in Cuscatancingo, a few kilometers north of the capital. As in many areas in El Salvador, gangs controlled his neighborhood, and many aspects of his family’s lives. “It was suffocating,” his mother told us. “You had to think about what to say, how to walk and what to wear. They saw everything. It was like being with your enemy 24 hours.”

As with most of the 78,000 people detained during the “war against gangs,” prosecutors accused him of “unlawful association,” the crime of belonging to a gang, which does not require proving the defendant has committed a violent or other unlawful act. The crime is defined so broadly under El Salvador’s law that anyone who has interacted with gang members, willingly or not, may be prosecuted

The MS-13, one of El Salvador’s most prominent gangs, tried to recruit her son when he was 12. Five adolescent gang members promised him better shoes, clothing, and cigars. Many boys from the neighborhood joined, he said, but he refused.

The gangs have recruited thousands of children. Studies show mostly join these criminal groups between ages 12 and 15. A lack of educational and economic opportunities makes it easier for gangs to recruit them, even in exchange for shoes and cigars.

Violence took a turn for the worse for Agustín in June 2021. MS-13 gang members beat his stepfather and threatened to kill his mother, a community leader, after she helped police distribute food during the Covid-19 pandemic. “Talking to the police or a soldier was like a death sentence,” she said.

The violence forced the family to flee to Mejicanos, a city near San Salvador. They escaped the immediate threat but did not find safety. The 18th Street gang, the country’s second largest, controlled their new neighborhood. A few months later, they threatened to kill Agustín’s mother, forcing the family to leave again.

In January 2022 they tried to find peace in San José Guayabal, a small town largely untouched by gang presence. They even became hopeful about their country when in March, President Bukele launched his “war against gangs” and his supporters in the Legislative Assembly declared a state of emergency, suspending basic rights.

Yet a few months later, police officers and soldiers appeared at his house to arrest Agustín and his stepfather. Officers did not provide a warrant or a reason for the arrest. They said they were taking him, then 16, to a police station to “investigate him.”

He is one of 2,800 children sent to jail since the state of emergency began. What followed for him, as in many other cases human rights groups in El Salvador documented during the emergency, was a harrowing sequence of abuses.

He told us that soldiers simulated his execution on a deserted road as they were transferring him between police stations. One soldier laughed, as he triggered a gun to his head, he said. Then they reportedly told him to run away, with his feet cuffed.

He said he was held, for several days, in an overcrowded cell, where 70 children shared three beds. He recalls being forced to sleep on the floor. Guards did nothing when other detainees kicked him, virtually every day, while they counted the seconds out loud, always up to 13—an apparent reference to the MS-13.

As with most of the 78,000 people detained during the “war against gangs,” prosecutors accused him of “unlawful association,” the crime of belonging to a gang, which does not require proving the defendant has committed a violent or other unlawful act. The crime is defined so broadly under El Salvador’s law that anyone who has interacted with gang members, willingly or not, may be prosecuted.

The judge in his case found no evidence against him and released Agustín after 12 days. But police and soldiers, who have overbroad powers and little to no oversight in El Salvador, kept insisting that he was a gang member. Some harassed him in the local park, beating him and threatening to arrest him again.

He left school and took a construction job in another city. When Human Rights Watch met him, the gangs that had long tormented his family were no longer his biggest concern. Homicides in the country have dropped significantly and gangs appear to be weakened, for now. But as his mother told us, he “now cries every time he sees soldiers or police.”

Salvadorans should not be forced to choose between living in fear of gangs or of security forces. They should be offered a brighter future, one in which the government protects children from violence and abuse and minimizes the risk of gang recruitment by ensuring children have the educational and other support they need. One in which law enforcement conducts meaningful investigations to identify real gang members—and dismantle their groups—instead of relying on arbitrary arrests and abusive treatment.

“We want to leave El Salvador,” his mother told us. “I want my child to forget everything.”

 

Excerpt:

Juanita Goebertus Estrada is the Americas director at Human Rights Watch.

The bus was travelling to Nairobi when it was swept off the road.

Destruction of a residential block in the Al-Shaboura neighborhood in the city of Rafah, south of the Gaza Strip. Credit: UN News/Ziad Taleb

By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, Apr 9 2024 (IPS)

While the international consensus and world public opinion are resoundingly clear in demanding an immediate cease-fire to the Hamas-Israel war, it remains uncertain whether a cease-fire will be observed.

On 7 October 2023, Hamas attacked Israel resulting in approximately 1,200 deaths and 240 hostages taken. Nearly ten weeks after the attack with thousands of Palestinian civilians killed in Gaza, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution on 12 December 2023 aimed at addressing the Hamas-Israel war.

The resolution demanded an immediate humanitarian cease-fire in Gaza, parties’ compliance with international law and the release of all hostages taken by Hamas. The vote was 153 countries in favor to 23 abstentions and 10 against (Table 1).

 

Source: United Nations.

 

Several months after the UN General Assembly cease-fire resolution and nearly six months after the 7 October 2023 attack, the United Nations Security Council adopted after several failed attempts its first cease-fire resolution on 25 March 2024, which many world leaders welcomed. All 14 council members voted for Security Council Resolution 2728 (2024) with the United States abstaining.

The resolution demands an immediate cease-fire to come into effect for the month of Ramadan, which is from 11 March to 9 April 2024. The resolution also calls for the unconditional release of all hostages and ensuring humanitarian access with urgent need to expand the flow of aid into Gaza.

World opinion on the Hamas-Israel war and the need for an immediate cease-fire are clearly reflected in the UN General Assembly vote on 12 December 2023. The proportion of countries in favor of that UN resolution was 82 percent, representing 90 percent of the world’s population. The proportion of the countries opposed to the resolution was 5 percent, representing 5 percent of the world’s population but 0.9 percent of the world’s population when the United States was excluded

On 28 March, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an order calling on Israel to allow unimpeded access for humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip, which the United Nations warned was on the verge of famine. With malnutrition among children soaring, the World Food Programme (WFP) said Israel needed to “surge” humanitarian relief into Gaza or there would be starvation.

The ICJ acknowledged that Israel has engineered a famine in Gaza. The judges unanimously delivered a legally binding ruling that Israel should “take all necessary and effective measures to ensure, without delay … the unhindered provision … of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance” in Gaza. The ICJ’s ruling is part of the increasing worldwide pressure pushing Israel to do more to address the humanitarian crisis and looming famine in Gaza.

The order of the ICJ came following a case brought by South Africa that accuses Israel of state-stationed genocide in Gaza. Consistent with the ICJ decision, a Federal Court in the United States has also ruled that Israel’s military campaign in Gaza may amount to genocide.

Earlier, on 24 January 2024, various international organizations demanded an immediate cease-fire to the Hamas-Israel war. Among those organizations were humanitarian agencies, human rights groups, faith-based groups, and United Nations officials, including Amnesty International, Christian Aid, Médecins du Monde International Network, Mennonite Central Committee, Oxfam and Save the Children.

Those organizations also called on all states to halt the transfer of weapons that can be employed to commit violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.

The Palestinian group Hamas is reported to have welcomed the Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. In a statement, Hamas said that it was committed to the conditions of the resolution.

Hamas added that it affirms readiness to engage in immediate prisoner swaps on both sides and noted that Israel must be held accountable in adhering to the Security Council resolution. Also, a Hamas official stressed the necessity of reaching a permanent ceasefire that would lead to a return of the displaced and Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza.

The Israeli government condemned the recent Security Council vote and said the resolution undermines the efforts to secure the release of captives in Gaza. Senior Israeli officials indicated that they would ignore the call for a cease-fire and have set their aim of “total victory”.

Also, Israel’s foreign minister said that despite the Security Council resolution, Israel will not cease fire in the Gaza Strip. He added that Israel aims to destroy Hamas and intends to continue fighting until all the hostages taken on 7 October are returned to their homes.

In addition, Israel’s prime minister stated that the army would press ahead with its offensive against Rafah, the city in southern tip of Gaza where approximately 1.5 million displaced Palestinians are estimated to be sheltering.

Also recently at an Israeli cabinet meeting, the prime minister declared that Israel is “one step away from victory” in winning the war with Hamas and vowed that there would be no truce until Hamas frees all hostages.

Many countries, including the United States, have warned Israel about its proposed large-scale ground offensive in Rafah due to its severe humanitarian consequences and concerns about safeguarding innocent Palestinians seeking refuge there.

World opinion on the Hamas-Israel war and the need for an immediate cease-fire are clearly reflected in the UN General Assembly vote on 12 December 2023. The proportion of countries in favor of that UN resolution was 82 percent, representing 90 percent of the world’s population. The proportion of the countries opposed to the resolution was 5 percent, representing 5 percent of the world’s population but 0.9 percent of the world’s population when the United States was excluded (Figure 1).

 

Source: United Nations.

 

Moreover, a Eurotrack survey conducted in November 2023 across seven Western European countries – Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK – reported that most Europeans, between 55 to 73 percent, thought that Israel should stop its military campaign and call a ceasefire. In Germany, for example, nearly 70 percent of Germans surveyed felt that Israel’s military actions were not justifiable.

Also importantly, a March national poll in the United States found a solid majority of Americans, 55 percent, disapprove of Israel’s military actions. An earlier national survey in November reported that the majority of Americans, 68 percent, thought that Israel should call a cease-fire and try to negotiate the Hamas-Israel war, which has ballooned into a humanitarian crisis. That proportion, two-thirds of US voters, continued to hold in a national survey in February.

Despite the opposition by the majority of Americans to Israel’s war actions and calls for a cease-fire, the Biden administration has “quietly” authorized arms shipments to Israel. Those shipments include more than 1,800 MK84 2,000-pound bombs and 500 MK82 500-pound bombs, as well as 25 F-35A fighter jets and engines worth approximately $2.5 billion.

Biden’s critics believe he has been too closely aligned with the Israeli government. They are troubled by America’s complicity in the moral issue surrounding the war, which has left the US administration morally compromised and upholding a blatant double standard on human rights.

Moreover, they criticized the US president for not taking stronger steps to promote a cease-fire and to assist the Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

Mainly due Israel’s intense aerial bombardment, more than 70 percent of the homes in Gaza have been destroyed and more than 33,000 Palestinians have been killed, two-thirds of them women and children. In addition, more than 75,000 Palestinians have been wounded and most Palestinians living in Gaza have been displaced and are living in squalid camps with little food, water and fuel.

Those vocal criticisms of US policies have created difficulties for Biden in protest votes in a number of state primaries across the country as well as posing risks for his reelection campaign.

Even within Israel, growing numbers of Israelis are saying that a cease-fire is the best way to save Israeli captives being held by Hamas. Some also don’t believe that the goals of the war can be achieved and feel that the killing of innocent Palestinian civilians in Gaza jeopardizes Israel’s long-term security.

In a recent development following the adoption of the UN Security Council’s cease-fire resolution, the United States played down the resolution, asserting that it is not legally binding. Consequently, according to the Biden administration, the resolution has no impact on Israel’s ability to continue its war with Hamas and the US will continue its flows of weapons and arms to Israel.

However, many countries as well as international law experts have affirmed that all Security Council resolutions are binding and mandatory. Also, the United Nations has said that all resolutions of the Security Council are international law and therefore are binding as international laws. The UN Secretary-General remarked that the resolution must be implemented and failure would be unforgivable.

As the Hamas-Israel war enters its seventh month, some in Israel, including officials in the current Israeli government, which is a right-wing coalition including religious nationalists, believe that it will be a long slog of ongoing warfare ahead.

However, anti-government protests across Israeli cities are urging the government to reach a cease-fire deal to free all the hostages held in Gaza by Hamas and to hold early elections. Many of the protesting families of hostages believe time is running out for the hostages taken on 7 October and are expressing their displeasure with the prime minister’s handling of the war after six months in Gaza.

In a recent development relating to news reporting on the war, the Israeli prime minister, with overwhelming support in the Knesset, said that he plans to “act immediately” on a new Israeli law that gives senior government officials power to shutter foreign news networks located in Israel for national security purposes. Press freedom experts warned that the shuttering of Al Jazeera could set a dangerous precedent in Israel.

The Hamas-Israel war has now entered its seventh month. Tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians have been killed, injured, displaced and scores of hostages remain held captive in Gaza.

Also, one week after the adoption of the UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire, release of hostages and expanded aid into Gaza, Israeli military strikes on an approved aid convoy run by the charity group World Central Kitchen (WCK) killed seven of its employees in Gaza.

Since the 7 October 2023 attack on Israel, Gaza has been the deadliest place for aid workers with a total of 224 humanitarian aid workers killed in the Hamas-Israel war.

The most recent attack on the WCK convoy is also setting back attempts by various countries and aid groups to address the hunger crisis of Palestinians in Gaza. The deadly incident on the food aid convoy has also contributed to Israel’s mounting international isolation.

Many countries, including Australia, Britain and the United States, condemned the attack on the WCK food aid convoy that resulted in the deaths of seven of its workers and demanded explanations from Israel with some Western leaders joining WCK in calling for an independent investigation because they believe “the perpetrator cannot be investigating himself.”

Also, in a recent television interview aired in the US, the distressed head of WCK said, “This doesn’t seem anymore a war about defending Israel. This really, at this point, seems it’s a war against humanity itself.”

US President Biden was reported to be “outraged” by the attack on the WCK food aid convoy calling it “unacceptable”. He said that Israel has not done enough to protect civilians in Gaza, emphasized the need for an immediate cease-fire and for the Israeli government to conclude a deal without delay to bring the hostages home.

In addition, in a recent phone conversation with the Israeli prime minister, the American president indicated that if Israel doesn’t change course in Gaza, “we won’t be able to support you”.

One result of that exchange was Israel’s decision to open the port of Ashdod and the Erez crossing in northern Gaza. However, Israel has yet to indicate when and what kind of aid will be permitted into Gaza.

The international consensus and world public opinion regarding the Hamas-Israel war, which has become one of the most destructive, deadly and intractable conflicts of the 21st century, are abundantly clear.

Nevertheless, whether the UN Security Council Resolution 2728 on the Hamas-Israel war will achieve its primary aims of an immediate cease-fire, the unconditional release of all hostages and the urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza, remains an open question but with some hopeful signs.

 

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

 

Russ Cook, nicknamed "Hardest Geezer", has finished his challenge of running the length of Africa.

The BBC's Victoria Uwonkunda speaks to survivors of the Rwanda genocide violence 30 years after she fled.

Bassirou Diomaye Faye, Senegal's fifth president, has been sworn into office at a ceremony in the capital, Dakar.

Goalposts used by children on a beach in Somalia's capital are posts set up for firing squad executions.

Wheelchair user says he felt less than human after he was told to leave the branch at Lagos airport.

He was unhurt after a drunk driver collided with his armoured vehicle, police say.

An eight-year-old girl is the only survivor after a bus carrying Easter pilgrims plunges into a ravine.

Older women and women with disabilities are underrepresented in global data on violence against women. Credit: WHO/Kiana Hayeri

By Naureen Hossain
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 29 2024 (IPS)

Older women and women with disabilities experience abuse that is unique to their demographics, yet they are underrepresented in national and global databases, according to findings shared by the World Health Organization (WHO).

On Wednesday, WHO and UN-Women released two new briefs, the first in a series that will discuss neglected forms of violence, including gender-based violence. The two briefs, titled Measuring violence against older women and Measuring violence against women with disability, investigate the types of violence that these groups face through the data available. Through reviewing existing studies into violence against women, the research team was able to synthesize the information available on this topic and its scope across different countries.

As was noted by Dr. Lynnmarie Sardinha, Technical Officer at WHO and the UN Special Programme on Human Reproduction (HRP) for Violence against Women Data and Measurement, and author of the briefs. The limited data on older women and women with disabilities undermines the ability of programmes to meet their needs. “Understanding how diverse women and girls are differently affected, and if and how they are accessing services, is critical to ending violence in all its forms.”

One in three women is affected by gender-based violence in these forms. For older women—aged 60 years and over—and women with disabilities, they are also subjected to other forms of abuse and neglect, usually at the hands of caregivers, family members, or healthcare institutions such as nursing homes. Examples of this include controlling behaviors such as withholding medicine and assistive devices, and financial abuse. Though these forms of neglect and abuse have been observed, the studies that the briefs reviewed seemed to focus more on intimate partner violence through physical and sexual abuse. The briefs acknowledge, however, that violence against women should not only be exemplified by intimate partner violence. The prevalence of this example hints at further nuances that are not sufficiently captured in the studies due to their limitations.

Violence against older women can manifest in other ways as they and their partners/perpetrators age. Although women aged 15–49 are at higher risk of intimate partner and sexual violence, older women are still likely to experience it, and this can shift towards other forms of abuse, such as neglect, economic abuse, and psychological abuse. The brief on older women reveals, however, that there is limited data to definitively state its prevalence. This is particularly the case for low- and middle-income countries; the data that was compiled for this brief comes largely from high-income countries, a gap that the reports are aware of. Older women are represented in only ten percent of the data on violence against women.

Only 6 percent of the studies reviewed for women with disabilities included measures of violence specific to this group. The lack of questions specific to this demographic indicates that they are, perhaps unconsciously, unaccounted for when measuring the scale of violence against women. Data collection procedures may not be designed to accommodate women with disabilities or prevent them from self-reporting, such as deaf or hard-of-hearing women who are unable to participate in surveys conducted through the telephone.

The briefs also suggest that women who live with lifelong disrespect and neglect may not recognize the specific forms of violence, which could account for fewer instances being reported. This could also apply to older women, where surveying and reporting mechanisms are geared towards women of reproductive age, especially in low- and middle-income countries.

This may also speak of socio-cultural attitudes towards violence against older women that are steeped in ageism, harmful stereotypes, and discriminatory cultural norms that prevent them from sharing their experiences.

The WHO briefs make several recommendations to address the evidence gaps. Among them are extending the age limit for survey participation and incorporating questions that relate to different types of violence. Data collection should also account for cultural-specific contexts of violence and abuse across different countries. Women with disabilities should be consulted in research at every stage when designing surveys targeted at them, which will allow for a broader spectrum of disabilities to be accounted for.

Read the briefs on women with disability and older women.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

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

• UN Security Council’s Ceasefire Resolution in Gaza Welcomed
• Women’s Land Rights in Farming Need Further Recognition
• ECW Announces New Grant Funding for Ukraine’s Education Programs for Children Impacted by War

Regenerative farming is seen as a climate solution, with advocates saying that it is the most straightforward way to benefit the planet's health and ensure food security. It is growing in popularity in both India and Pakistan, as this cross-border feature highlights.

A boy sifts through the rubble of his earthquake-hit home in Rukum (West), Nepal, in November 2023. Credit: UNICEF/ Laxmi Prasad Ngakhus

By Simone Galimberti
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Mar 29 2024 (IPS)

If there is a place where the interlinkages and dependencies between the effects of climate warming and biodiversity loss are clearly at display, it’s Nepal. There is clear evidence on the impact of climate change on the country’s ecosystem considering the fact that Nepal is an important biodiversity hotspot.

Climate change and biodiversity loss, if unchecked, can activate mutually devastating loops of devastation that hardly can be offset by any plan and strategy. The only solution is a much stronger level of coordination and policy alignment, not only within countries like Nepal but also regionally.

This is one of the reasons why scientists and experts working on the upcoming IPBES Next Assessment that attempts to study the interlinkages among biodiversity, water, food and health with actions to achieve the Agenda 2030 while combating climate change, chose Kathmandu for their latest summit.

The linkages between climate warming and biodiversity loss were also one of the key hallmarks of COP 28 in the UAE where, for the first time, biodiversity preservation was recognized as a paramount factor to fight climate change.

In the first Global Stocktake, the main outcome document of the COP 28, there has been a strong reference to the implementation of Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF).

In practice, for nations, it means to work hard to converge the climate and biodiversity agendas as the new cycle of Nationally Determined Contributions, the key mitigations plans prepared by each nation party to the Paris Agreement, will also have to include elements related to biodiversity.

This can be proved to be challenging considering also the efforts that a country like Nepal must also put to implement its adaptation plans.

Coordination and alignment between the mitigation and adaptation is at least provided in what should be as the country’s “master plan” to fight climate change, its National Climate Change Policy whose latest iteration was approved in 2019.

It is a document that identified 12 areas, from agriculture and food security to forests, biodiversity and watershed conservation to water resources and energies to rural and urban settlement, tourism and transportation, just to mention few.

Yet ensuring such policy level harmonization is going to be daunting, considering the traditional fragmentations that characterize policy making in Nepal.

At governance level, there are two key mechanisms that have not been fully harnessed.
The first one is the apex body in matter of climate action, the Climate Change Council that is chaired by the Prime Minister.

Its convenings have been not only rare but also mostly symbolic and devoid of substantial decisions. If you think about the challenges faced by Nepal, this should be the most important bureaucratic body at policy level but you seldom hear news about it.

The second instrument at disposal is the Multistakeholder Climate Change Initiative Coordination Committee that should bring together the best minds in the field. So far, what potentially could be a great platform for dialogue has been wasted.

The fact that the Government has formally included the Nepalese Youth for Climate Action as a constituency, does not absolve the authorities from being lacking in terms of proactively enabling and putting in place a structured and formal mechanism in matter of climate.

Coordination is indeed held indispensable, considering the gravity of what is unfolding.
The latest IPBES Global Biodiversity Report, published in 2019, confirmed, once again, that unequivocally “nature and its vital contributions to people, which together embody biodiversity and ecosystem, functions and services, are deteriorating worldwide”.

“Nature across most of the globe has now been significantly altered by multiple human drivers, with the great majority of indicators of ecosystems and biodiversity showing rapid decline”.

The latest report by the World Meteorological Organization could not be even more daunting, once again, proving we are living in the hottest times ever. The key message from the IPBES Next Assessment’s meeting held in Kathmandu was equally daunting and unequivocal, declaring that the whole Hindu Kush Himalaya’s biosphere is “on the brink’.

Another event organized by ICIMOD, the international conference on Climate and Environmental Change Impacts on the Indus Basin Waters, stressed out the essentiality of coordination.

Highlighting key findings of a series of new reports focused on ensuring effective “integrated river basin management”, this gathering underlined how climate change becomes the “urgent catalyst for collaboration over three key river basins in Asia, the Indus, the Ganga, and the Brahmaputra”.

In a press release issued by ICIMOD, Alan Nicol from the International Water Management Institute that collaborated in the writing of the reports, affirmed that the “level of challenges facing the Indus Basin call for collective action across the basin”.

How can such coordination be turned into reality within Nepal and within the whole South Asia?

At national level, climate action should permeate and be embedded in each sphere of policy making. Mechanisms like Climate Change Council and Multistakeholder Climate Change Initiative Coordination Committee must be seriously and meaningfully activated and empowered.

Considering the deep connections between climate and biodiversity, the latter, normally overshadowed by the former domain, should also be included or at least taken into account when the decision makers deliberate on climate related issues.

Enhancing coordination exponentially must be a priority but not only at central level especially in a federal country like Nepal.

Though federalism is still very much a work in progress and where the seven provinces still lack powers and real autonomy, it remains paramount to empower local bodies as well.

Imagine the immense work that must be done in the field of mitigation and adaptation, the two key areas of action within the climate agenda alone. Only in relation to adaptation, the National Adaptation Plan 2021- 2050 aims to mobilize the staggering figure of US$ 47.4 billion of which Nepal will only contribute US$ 1.5 billion.

In the recent “National Dialogue on Climate Change” organized by Municipality Association of Nepal made it clear that local bodies must necessarily be empowered to fight climate change.

A case study prepared by Prakriti Resource Center, one of the most renown climate focused organizations in Nepal, revealed the failure in effectively implementing the Local Adaptation Plans for Actions (LAPA), despite being revised 2019 to reflect the new federal governance of the country.

Local governments should also be at the vanguard of mitigation efforts but reality tells us a different story.

A limited and distorted focus of mitigation mainly in terms of production of hydropower energy, a federal competence, compounded by lack of resources, is currently disempowering local governments from taking action.

Frustrating and disappointing remains the work in the field of biodiversity. Both centrally and locally, there is a lack of urgency here even though the country can count with some success story in local forest preservations by local communities.

Yet, also on this case, Nepal is at risk of falling into a complacence trap without additional strategic thinking.

There is the need not only of coming up with a new, revamped national strategy but it is also essential to evaluate the implementation of the latest National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2014 -2020, especially in relation to design and execution of Local Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans.

But, as we know, coordination and alignment by overcoming silos approaches, should not stop within the national borders.

Here there is an opportunity to put together some sort of regional cooperative framework that, as we saw, are strongly encouraged by the experts. New synergetic impetus at national level in both climate and biodiversity areas could spur the country to also take the initiative regionally.

It can happen in a way that could, at least revamp and give some scope to the almost defuncted South Asia Association of Regional Cooperation, SAARC. Cooperation in South Asia in a novel integrated fashion that links and combines climate efforts and biodiversity preservation, is a must.

Geopolitical rivalries cannot impede it even if, it means, in practice, effectively sidelining the SAARC.

What all this could mean for Nepal?

A joint, combined approach to preserve nature and fight climate warming, together with a revamped attention on pollution and sustainable consumption habits, other two essential aspects that must be tackled in the years to come with urgency, could bring about not only a better and more effective forms of governance in the country.

It could also enable Nepal to become a trailblazer in revamping regional cooperation, pragmatically in areas where traditional rivalries must be set aside for the sake of South Asian citizens’ common good.

A good way to start is to at least to get the “homework” well done in the country, preparing itself on how integrating biodiversity in its negotiations for the next climate COP 29 in Azerbaijan but also be serious about the upcoming biodiversity COP 16 in Colombia.

Simone Galimberti is co-founder of Engage a local NGO promoting partnership and cooperation for youth living in disability and of The Good Leadership, a new initiative promoting character leadership and expertise among youth.

IPS UN Bureau

 

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

A selection of the best photos from across the African continent this week.

South Africa's ex-president has backed a new party seeking to take on the governing ANC.