Feed aggregator

Ademola Lookman says he is "never satisfied" despite his performances for Nigeria and Atalanta earning him a nomination for the Ballon d'Or.

Credit: World Meteorological Organization/Muhammad Amdad Hossain

By Selahattin Selsah Pasali and Selim Raihan
BANGKOK, Thailand, Oct 25 2024 (IPS)

In the coming decades, the Asia-Pacific region faces a series of challenges that threaten to exacerbate poverty. Among these, climate change, demographic shifts, particularly population ageing and the rise of digital technologies stand out as three interconnected global megatrends.

A recent technical paper supporting the Social Outlook for Asia and the Pacific 2024 explores various scenarios on how climate change, demographic shifts and digitalization could impact poverty. It reveals that 266 million people could be at risk of falling into poverty by 2040.

This underscores the urgent need to strengthen and finance social protection systems across the region, as addressing these issues proactively is far more cost-effective than reacting to them later.

Understanding the megatrends

Climate change is increasingly evident, with rising temperatures, extreme weather and disrupted ecosystems impacting both the environment and economies. This poses a direct threat to livelihoods, especially for those dependent on agriculture and natural resources.

Population ageing is another significant trend. While longer life expectancy is positive, it strains social services, healthcare and pension systems. Without integrated policies to address these pressures, public resources, already strained by debt, could face further strain, risking economic instability.

Digital technologies advance rapidly, offering growth and efficiency benefits but also posing challenges. Job displacement and increased inequality are potential risks if these technologies are not managed inclusively. Balancing their benefits and risks is crucial for equitable progress.

The Impact on Poverty

Using the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model to project 2040 scenarios, varying degrees of climate change, demographic shifts, and digitalization show a stark contrast between optimistic and pessimistic outcomes, highlighting the crucial need to enhance social protection expenditures. Two scenarios are considered in the model with results presented in Figure 1:

• Optimistic scenario: This scenario assumes a 1.5-degree Celsius increase in global temperatures, that populations age in a healthy manner, and significant improvements are made by countries in ICT productive capacity by 2040. Under this scenario, the projected increase in poverty by 2040 is 199.8 million people or 6.5 per cent of the total population in the Asia-Pacific region.
• Pessimistic scenario: In contrast, the pessimistic scenario assumes a 2.0-degree Celsius increase in global temperatures, no progress in healthy ageing and insufficient advancements in ICT productivity. Here, the poverty headcount is projected to increase by 266.1 million people or 8.7 per cent of the total population.

Source: ESCAP elaborations based on GTAP model and household income and expenditure surveys from 27 countries available in ESCAP SPOT Simulator. Note: As per table 5.1, three global megatrends including climate change, demographic shifts, including ageing, and digitalization are introduced in the GTAP model as shocks.
 
The pessimistic scenario presumes a 2-degree Celsius rise in temperature, populations ageing in an unhealthy manner and countries slowly improving their ICT Productive Capacity. The optimistic scenario presumes a 1.5-degree Celsius rise in temperature, populations ageing in a healthy manner with less health expenditures needed and countries making significant improvements in their ICT Productive Capacity.

The difference between these scenarios illustrates the profound impact of each megatrend. Climate change is a major driver of increased poverty. For instance, under a pessimistic scenario, Kiribati, Nepal and Tonga could see their poverty rates rise by over 15 percentage points relative to the baseline.

Even with just a 1.5°C warming, the regional average poverty rate could increase by 2.8 percentage points, highlighting climate change’s significant impact on poverty. Population ageing is also a critical factor.

Without healthy ageing, an additional 10 million people might fall into poverty due to rising healthcare costs, with countries like Armenia, Kiribati, Maldives and Mongolia being especially vulnerable. Digitalization, though less impactful overall, has notable effects in specific countries like Türkiye, Viet Nam and Vanuatu, influencing differences between optimistic and pessimistic scenarios.

The urgent need for action

If social protection expenditures are not increased, the cost of mitigating the rise in poverty could be substantial. To counteract the projected poverty increases, approximately 6.2 per cent of GDP would need to be mobilized under the optimistic scenario.

The total cost would increase to 8.7 per cent of GDP in 2040 under the pessimistic scenario. These are lower-bound estimates as they assume governments could directly target affected households and seamlessly provide cash transfers.

The projected rise in poverty and associated costs underscore the urgent need for government action which necessitates stronger political will to match the associated investment needs. Empirical analysis supports several key policy recommendations.

Governments should implement policies for a just transition, which includes effective climate action to mitigate the economic and social impacts of both sudden and gradual disasters and to support the shift towards a net-zero emissions economy.

Additionally, strategies for healthy ageing and investing in healthcare infrastructure, such as universal social health protection, can ease the financial strain of an ageing population, ensuring social stability and economic prosperity.

At the same time, policymakers should also focus on fostering inclusive digital economies, providing opportunities for all, including those at risk of being left behind. Investments in digital literacy and skills training are crucial to counteract digital disruption’s negative effects.

Overall, expanding social protection coverage and increasing benefit levels are essential. This includes implementing social protection floors and gradually enhancing multi-pillared systems to cover more individuals and increase benefits, ensuring no one is excluded from protection against life cycle contingencies and shocks.

Originally published as an opinion piece by Nikkei Asia.

Selahattin Selsah Pasali is Social Affairs Officer, Social Development Division, ESCAP; Selim Raihan is Professor, Department of Economics, University of Dhaka and Executive Director of South Asian Network on Economic Modeling (SANEM)

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');  

Les rivières ont été polluées et les forêts détruites à une échelle choquante par les chercheurs d'or illégaux.

Die schwedische Regierung und ihr rechtspopulistischer Partner, die Schwedendemokraten, planen, die Entwicklungshilfe stärker zur Einschränkung der Migration einzusetzen. Gezielte Projekte sollen motivieren, in den Heimatländern zu bleiben.

TASHKENT, 25 October 2024 – International observers will hold a press conference to present their preliminary conclusions following the parliamentary elections in Uzbekistan.

What:

• A press conference of the international election observation mission for the parliamentary elections in Uzbekistan
• The press conference can be attended in person or via Zoom (details below)
• You can also follow the livestream at https://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/uzbekistan/573727

Who:

• Mr. Azay Guliyev, Special Co-ordinator and leader of the short-term OSCE observers
• Mr. Sargis Khandanyan, Head of the delegation from the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA)
• Mr. Douglas Wake, Head of the election observation mission from the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OIDHR)

When:

• 15:00 local time  (GMT +5), on 28 October 2024

Where:

• The Le Grand Plaza Hotel,  2 Uzbekistan Ovozi Street, Tashkent

Registration:

• No registration is necessary if you are attending the press conference in person, but only questions from journalists will be taken

To take part via Zoom, please register with Thomas Rymer, ODIHR election observation mission press adviser, thomas.rymer@odihr-uzbekistan.org, and, Pietro Tesfamariam, media analyst, pietro.Tesfamariam@odihr-uzbekistan.org, by 11:00 local time on 28 October.

For further information, contact:

• Thomas Rymer, press adviser, ODIHR election observation mission, thomas.rymer@odihr-uzbekistan.org
• Anzhelika Ivanishcheva, media officer, OSCE PA, anzhelika.ivanishcheva@oscepa.dk

Bulgarische Energieexperten zweifeln an der Realisierbarkeit der von Bulgarien, Rumänien und Griechenland geforderten EU-Entschädigungen für hohe Strompreise. Während die drei Staaten Brüssel um Maßnahmen bitten, sehen Analysten kaum Chancen auf Unterstützung und warnen vor Hürden.

Georgien steht vor einem möglichen Wendepunkt: Gewinnt die vereinigte Opposition die Parlamentswahlen am Samstag, könnten bereits bis Sommer 2025 EU-Beitrittsgespräche beginnen, erklärte Präsidentin Salome Surabischwili.

Als die EU-Kommission im November empfahl, Georgien zum Beitrittskandidaten zu machen, feierten tausende Georgier in Tbilisi mit der Europahymne. Ein Jahr später – vor den Parlamentswahlen am Samstag – scheint die EU-Mitgliedschaft in weiter Ferne.

Am Samstag (26. Oktober) finden in Georgien Parlamentswahlen statt. Die Abstimmung wird weithin als Test dafür angesehen, ob das Land weiterhin eine pro-westliche Ausrichtung verfolgt oder zunehmend in den Einflussbereich Russlands gerät.

A selection of the week's best photos from across the African continent and beyond.

A Gázai övezetben kialakult feszültségek közepette újabb fordulatot vett az orosz-palesztin kapcsolat. A Hamász politikai irodájának helyettes vezetője, Musa Abu Marzouk Moszkvában járt, ahol tárgyalt a két ország közötti együttműködés lehetőségeiről. A látogatás középpontjában a Gázai övezetben fogva tartott két orosz állampolgár sorsa állt.

Abu Marzouk kijelentette, hogy a Hamász prioritásként kezeli a túszok szabadon engedését, de csak egy Izraellel kötött csereüzlet részeként. Az orosz külügyminisztérium is megerősítette, hogy a tárgyalások során kiemelt figyelmet fordítottak az orosz állampolgárok mielőbbi szabadon bocsátására.

A látogatás azonban nemcsak a túszdrámáról szólt. Abu Marzouk felhívta Oroszország figyelmét a Gázai övezetben kialakult humanitárius válságra, és kért humanitárius segítséget, valamint támogatást az ENSZ Biztonsági Tanácsában. A Hamász vezetője emellett arra kérte Moszkvát, hogy gyakoroljon nyomást a Palesztinai Felszabadítási Szervezetre (PLO) az egységkormány kialakítása érdekében.

Az orosz-palesztin kapcsolatok új fejezete azonban számos kérdést vet fel. Egyrészt, az oroszok nyíltan támogatják a Hamászt, amelyet számos ország terrorszervezetnek minősít. Másrészt, a túszdráma és a humanitárius válság hátterében álló konfliktusnak nincs egyszerű megoldása. Izrael és a Hamász között hosszú ideje tartó ellenségeskedés folyik, és a felek között nincs bizalom.

Az orosz-palesztin együttműködésnek számos következménye lehet a térségre nézve. Egyrészt, erősítheti Oroszország befolyását a Közel-Keleten, másrészt újabb feszültségeket szülhet Izrael és a palesztinok között. A helyzet tovább bonyolódik azzal, hogy az Egyesült Államok és a nyugati szövetségesek elítélik az orosz-palesztin együttműködést.

A Gázai övezetben kialakult helyzet egyre instabilabbá válik, és a térség jövője bizonytalan. Az orosz-palesztin kapcsolatok alakulása kulcsfontosságú szerepet játszhat a konfliktus rendezésében, vagy annak eszkalációjában.

The post Moszkva és a Hamász: Túszok, fegyverszünet és az orosz érdekek a Közel-Keleten appeared first on Biztonságpiac.

Aleksandar Vučić ne s'est pas rendu au Sommet des Brics à Kazan, mais il avait envoyé quatre représentants dont le ministre de la Défense, Bratislav Gašić. Une manière de signifier que Belgrade continue d'entretenir des liens privilégiés avec Moscou, mais que ses intérêts se trouveraient plutôt à Bruxelles ?

- Le fil de l'Info / Relations internationales, Poutine et les Balkans, Ukraine, Serbie, Radio Slobodna Evropa, Questions européennes

Americas Hydronalix won a $42 million contract for assets and technical support services of specialized technology supporting the Littoral Explosive Ordnance Neutralization program of record, a component of Force Design 2030, which aims to improve integrated warfighting capabilities using unmanned vehicles. The period of performance of the base award is October 24, 2024, through October 23, 2029. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. This contract was awarded as a sole-source acquisition pursuant to 15 US Code 638(r)(4). Naval Information Warfare Center Pacific, San Diego, California, is the contracting activity. The US military carried out a significant airfield seizure exercise on the island of Palau as part of the Joint Pacific Multinational Readiness Center 25-01. The exercise, which took place from Oct. 10–11, involved the airfield seizure of Roman Tmetuchl International Airport in Palau. Phase I saw the 75th Rangers Regiment securing the airfield, a crucial first step in establishing a strategic foothold. Phase II brought the deployment of the High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) operated by the 17th Field Artillery Brigade. Middle East & Africa Italian firm Fincantieri has signed a memorandum of understanding with Qatari Barzan Holdings to jointly develop a short-range anti-drone radar. Dubbed […]

Event Video 
Photos

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-ovepff").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-ovepff").fadeIn(300);});});

IPI in partnership with Sasakawa Peace Foundation USA, cohosted a policy forum on “National Action Plans for National Challenges: Addressing Environmental Crises through the WPS Agenda” on October 24th.

The women, peace, and security (WPS) agenda has recently expanded to include issues outside of “traditional conflict,” such as climate change and environmental disasters. As the agenda has evolved, this expansion has become a key part of contextualizing and applying WPS principles and priorities in different countries. However, despite recognizing that preparing for disasters and climate emergencies are gendered processes, few national action plans (NAPs) on WPS incorporate specific language about disasters. Incorporating disaster preparedness and climate considerations into NAPs is an important way to consider peace through a feminist viewpoint and define it as more than just the absence of violent conflict. NAPs should be tailored to a specific country’s context and integrating disaster risk reduction (DRR) or climate dynamics more broadly can be a powerful way to make an NAP relevant to a country’s internal dynamics. Panelists at the event explored how the WPS agenda has been expanded to include climate and environmental concerns and how different member states contextualize these issues within their NAPs.

Welcoming Remarks:
Adam Lupel, Vice President and COO, International Peace Institute

Opening Remarks:
Shanti Shoji, Director of Programs, Sasakawa Peace Foundation USA
Irene Fellin, Special Representative for Women, Peace and Security, NATO 

Speakers:
Sho Ono, Minister, Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs, Permanent Mission of Japan to the UN
Katrina Fotovat, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Global Women’s Issues, US Department of State
Japhet Eichel, Associate Expert, Climate, Peace and Security, UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs
Maryruth Belsey-Priebe, Co-Founder, aXXelerate
Harriette Williams Bright, WPS Humanitarian Action Compact Lead, UN Women

Interventions from the floor:
Miwako Kitamura, Researcher (specially appointed), International Research Institute of Disaster Science, Tohoku University
Dalal El Taher, Board Member at Syria Civil Defence, The White Helmets (Virtual)

Moderator:
Phoebe Donnelly, Senior Fellow and Head of Women, Peace and Security, International Peace Institute

The post National Action Plans for National Challenges: Addressing Environmental Crises through the WPS Agenda appeared first on International Peace Institute.

By Melek Zahine
PARIS, Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

Nobody should be fooled by President Biden’s recent warning to Israel that the U.S. may level consequences if it doesn’t do more to surge humanitarian aid into Gaza within the next 30 days. Biden’s warning, along with Anthony Blinken’s 11th trip to Israel and the region to try and revive ceasefire talks, is nothing more than cynical double talk designed to appease domestic audiences and buy time for Israel to deepen its genocidal aims against the Palestinian people and brutally punish those who support their liberation.

Melek Zahine

Israel knows that Washington’s warnings aren’t serious. Despite independently documented evidence of Israel’s genocidal actions and war crimes in Gaza, the West Bank and now Lebonon, billions of dollars in offensive arms transfer, intelligence and military support from the United States continue unabated. Israel also knows that the U.S. government has consistently operated in their favor in breach of domestic U.S. laws not only for the past year but for decades. U.S. National Security Memorandum 20 and the Leahy Laws both stipulate that the United States cannot provide any form of assistance, especially military aid, to a country that is restricting the delivery of U.S.-funded humanitarian assistance.

It’s no surprise that Israel’s immediate response to Biden’s warning and Blinken’s shuttle diplomacy this week has been to escalate the humanitarian blockade and military offensive on Gaza’s already besieged civilian population, especially in famine-stricken Northern Gaza, where tens of thousands of unarmed and starved men, women and children are now being trapped, corralled, and slaughtered like animals by Israeli political elites who have an endless supply of lethal U.S.- weapons and Biden’s iron-clad loyalty on their side.

As Israel prevents humanitarian aid from reaching beleaguered and displaced Palestinian civilians throughout the Gaza Strip, hospitals are now faced with dwindling medical supplies amidst the growing numbers of injured and ill. Healthcare providers and first responders, who themselves are struggling to survive, now have little more than their compassion to offer the sick and the dying. Unless President Biden uses his singularly unique leverage to take decisive, immediate action, tens of thousands more Palestinians will be killed in the next thirty days, 75% of which will be women and children.

As a U.S. citizen who has worked in the field of humanitarian assistance for more than 30 years, I have both witnessed and paid keen attention to the devastating human toll on civilian lives that my government has consistently chosen to unleash since 9/11 in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Libya, Yemen and now Gaza and Lebanon. Rather than work to de-escalate during times of crisis through earnest, mature diplomacy, the United States, irrespective of which political party is in power, has all too often chosen to pursue extreme military force as the cornerstone of its foreign policy, benefitting narrow special interest groups in Washington at the expense of innocent populations abroad, U.S. soldiers and average U.S. taxpayers at home.

During my career, I’ve also had the privilege of witnessing those rare moments when the United States has chosen to mitigate harm by using its powerful foreign policy tools to de-escalate conflicts and secure humanitarian spaces. In 1991, in Northern Iraq, the U.S. led a multi-nation coalition of NATO and U.N. partners to deliver emergency aid and protection to Iraqi Kurdish refugees fleeing gas attacks by Saddam Hussein. Also, in the 90s, the United States helped deliver C5 Galaxy loads of lifesaving emergency supplies to besieged civilians in Sarajevo and worked with NATO and U.N. partners to enforce a no-fly zone over the former Yugoslavia. This decision helped lessen the level of violence between the various warring sides and protect civilians and U.N. personnel. During earthquakes, such as the ones that hit Turkiye in 1999 and 2023, the United States sent search and rescue teams, often being the first to reach people trapped under tons of concrete and metal with specialized equipment and dogs. Biden’s decision to leave Palestinian civilians and civil defense workers to desperately try and rescue people under destroyed homes and shelters caused by U.S. bombs, with nothing but their bare hands says everything one needs to know about the emptiness of his latest warnings, red lines, and shuttle diplomacy. Biden’s foreign policy is nothing but a cruel and unusual punishment that the U.S. Constitution’s 8th Amendment warns Americans against inflicting on others.

If President Biden were actually serious about addressing the humanitarian catastrophe facing Palestinians and now the Lebanese, he wouldn’t need to wait 30 days. All he would need to do is immediately emulate past American administrations and execute his executive powers, enforce an immediate no-fly zone over Gaza and Lebanon, and authorize an immediate arms embargo on Israel. This combined approach would immediately improve conditions for a lasting cease-fire, unimpeded humanitarian access and prevent a further escalation of regional tensions. Rather than use his remaining days in office to buy time for Israel to cause more human suffering, President Biden must buy time for those who won’t live to see another day without a more humane U.S. foreign policy intervention. Imagine being the most powerful leader in the world and choosing anything less.

The author is a humanitarian affairs and disaster response specialist.

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');  

Anne Olhoff, Chief Climate Advisor at UNEP

By Umar Manzoor Shah
COPENHAGEN & SRINAGAR , Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

Anne Olhoff, Chief Climate Advisor at UNEP, underlined the urgent need for accelerated climate action ahead of COP29 in an exclusive interview with IPS. “The next six years are crucial—without accelerated action, we will miss the chance to limit warming to 1.5°C,” she warned.

Olhoff stressed that while ambition is essential, “What we need most is immediate action.”

Olhoff also termed the role of the Emissions Gap Report as a bridge between science and policy, advocating for financial and technical support to ensure a just transition for developing countries.

As Chief Climate Advisor and as part of the UNEP Copenhagen Climate Centre management, Olhoff provides climate science-policy advice and supports climate strategy development and implementation in the UNEP Copenhagen Climate Centre and UNEP.

Olhoff has worked with UNEP throughout her career and has more than 25 years’ experience in international science-policy advice, technical assistance and research on climate change mitigation and adaptation in the context of sustainable development.

Since 2012, Olhoff has led the annual UNEP flagship report on climate change mitigation—the Emissions Gap Report—guiding and coordinating the work of more than 70 scientists from at least 35 institutions across more than 25 countries in addition to being the chief scientific editor of the report.

On the eve of the publication of the 2024 emissions report entitled ‘No more hot air … please’ Olhoff gave an exclusive interview to IPS.

Here are excerpts from the interview.

Inter Press Service (IPS): What do you expect from COP29? How do you think it will help on the ground?

Anne Olhoff: That’s a tricky question. The Emissions Gap Report doesn’t dive deeply into COP29 specifically, but we aim to guide discussions during COP29 and the preparation for the next Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which countries will submit before COP30. The report highlights where we stand now and what needs to happen in the short term and with the next NDCs. Hopefully, this will provide useful insights for the discussions in Baku as well.

IPS: How do you see the role of science-policy advice in climate action, especially with the rise of net-zero targets?

Olhoff: That’s an excellent question. Through the Emissions Gap Report, we aim to contribute to this effort. Our goal is to provide science-based yet timely and relevant information for international discussions. Unlike IPCC reports, which are published every six years, the Emissions Gap Report offers an annual, tailored update.

What’s reassuring is that the report has been well received. Surveys show that 75-83 percent of national delegations use it during climate negotiations or in their submissions to the UNFCCC. This suggests we are filling a gap by offering valuable information between IPCC cycles.

IPS: After leading the Emissions Gap Report for several years, what are your key takeaways, and how have its findings influenced global strategies?

Olhoff: It’s hard to pinpoint specific changes directly resulting from the report, but it has certainly shed light on critical issues—both on where we’re headed and where we need to be. Importantly, this year’s report highlights solutions across all sectors, focusing on ways to accelerate emission reductions across the economy.

IPS: From your experience with both adaptation and mitigation, which areas need immediate attention, and where do you see the biggest gaps?

Olhoff: There’s a lot of potential for synergies between adaptation, mitigation, and development goals. Agriculture and forestry offer some of the greatest opportunities, but energy systems are equally critical. Access to electricity for cooling, for instance, is essential to building climate resilience.

It’s important to note that mitigation must come first. If emissions aren’t reduced, no amount of adaptation will prevent severe impacts and losses. Reducing emissions minimizes the future burden on adaptation efforts.

IPS: How has UNEP’s approach to climate change evolved over the years, and what recent developments excite you the most?

Olhoff: This is the 15th edition of the report, which we’ve been producing since 2010. Back then, temperature projections based on existing policies were about half a degree higher than they are now. This shows that we’ve made some progress, although it’s not enough.

One exciting development is the advancement of renewable energy, especially in terms of cost reductions and deployment. However, we need to ensure these breakthroughs benefit all countries, not just a select few. There’s a strong need to improve investment flows to developing economies, especially outside China.

IPS: Coordinating with scientists from over 25 countries must be challenging. How do you maintain alignment and quality control?

Olhoff: We follow a process similar to the IPCC. We have author teams, a steering committee involving IPCC representatives and UNFCCC experts, and rigorous external reviews.

Additionally, we send draft reports to countries mentioned in the report to allow for feedback and ensure we aren’t missing important perspectives. It’s a tightly managed process to maintain high scientific standards.

IPS: What trends or innovations do you think will play a pivotal role in climate transparency and reporting in the coming decade?

Olhoff: One major development will be the biennial transparency reports, which countries will submit by the end of this year. These reports will help track progress more accurately and offer opportunities to learn from each other’s experiences.

While we have many of the technologies needed to achieve steep reductions, investing in research and development for new mitigation options will be essential moving forward. Improved transparency will also help ensure accountability.

IPS: With your experience in advisory roles, how important is interdisciplinary collaboration in shaping climate policies, particularly at the intersection of health, disaster management, and climate resilience?

Olhoff: It’s absolutely critical. Often, experts focus on isolated components—like the energy system—without considering how everything connects. Interdisciplinary approaches help us understand the complex relationships and address flaws in narrower frameworks. This has been a key focus in my work.

IPS: How do you manage the tension between political agendas and scientific evidence when advising on climate strategies?

Olhoff: We stick to scientific principles. Of course, we consider political sensitivities, but we aim to provide unbiased and credible analysis. Engaging with authors from around the world and including extensive peer reviews helps ensure we capture different perspectives.

When we encounter differences of opinion, we stay grounded in science to maintain credibility. The goal is to provide sound, defensible analysis.

IPS: Transitioning away from fossil fuels is challenging, especially for countries with fossil reserves. How can a just transition happen for developing countries without jeopardizing their economies?

Olhoff: That’s a tough question, but an important one. Renewable energy is already cost-competitive in many parts of the world. However, countries need financial and technical support to transition away from fossil fuels.

For countries with large untapped fossil fuel reserves, compensation mechanisms may be necessary to encourage them not to exploit these resources. The next round of NDCs offers an opportunity for these countries to present investment-ready plans that outline what support they need to pursue ambitious climate goals.

IPS: Do you see COP29 as a now-or-never opportunity for climate action?

Olhoff: I wouldn’t say COP29 alone is the deciding moment, but the next six years are crucial. If we continue on the current path, we will miss the chance to limit global warming to 1.5°C by 2030.

The real focus should be on accelerating country-level actions. While increased ambition in the next NDCs is essential, it won’t mean much without immediate action. As the Emissions Gap Report emphasizes, every delay increases the risks of costly and irreversible impacts.

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

• UNEP’s 2024 Emissions Gap Report Warns: ‘No More Hot Air, Please’

Ratcliffe-on-Soar Power Station from an aeroplane. Credit: Matt Buck/Climate Visuals

By Umar Manzoor Shah
COPENHAGEN, Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

The United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) Emissions Gap Report 2024 delivered a stark reminder that the world is still far from meeting its climate commitments.

The report, released today, October 24, highlights the widening gap between climate rhetoric and reality as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reach 57.1 gigatons of CO2 equivalent (GtCO₂) in 2023—a record high that undermines the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.

Addressing the press conference while releasing the report, titled “No More Hot Air …please,” United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres issued a warning to the world. With current greenhouse gas emissions at record highs, Guterres said that humanity is “teetering on a planetary tightrope,” with catastrophic consequences looming unless countries act decisively to close the emissions gap.

 

The cover of UNEP’s Emissions Gap Report 2024 ‘No more hot air… please.’ Credit: UNEP

“Either leaders bridge the emissions gap, or we plunge headlong into climate disaster—with the poorest and most vulnerable suffering the most,” Guterres said during a video address from the report’s launch event in Nairobi.

According to the Emissions Gap Report 2024, global greenhouse gas emissions rose 1.3 percent in 2023 to their highest levels in history. At the current pace, the world is on track for a 3.1°C temperature rise by the end of the century—well above the limits set by the Paris Agreement.

Guterres emphasized that limiting global warming to 1.5°C remains technically feasible, but only if emissions fall by 9 percent annually until 2030. Without swift intervention, the UN chief warned of more frequent and extreme weather events.

“Record emissions mean record sea temperatures, supercharging monster hurricanes; record heat is turning forests into tinderboxes and cities into saunas; record rains are resulting in biblical floods,” he said.

Guterres termed the COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, as a pivotal moment for global climate policy. The Secretary-General outlined two major areas where urgent progress is essential. One, he said, is National Climate Action Plans (NDCs).

“COP29 starts the clock for countries to deliver new national climate action plans—NDCs—by next year,” Guterres said.
Governments are expected to align these plans with the 1.5°C target by driving down emissions across all sectors and phasing out fossil fuels swiftly and equitably.

Guterres urged countries to commit to reversing deforestation and accelerating the deployment of renewable energy. Another area, according to the Secretary General, that merits immediate concern is climate finance.

Guterres said that the success of the clean energy transition depends heavily on financial support for developing countries, which are already struggling with climate-induced disasters.

“COP29 must agree to a new finance goal that unlocks the trillions of dollars they need and provides confidence it will be delivered,” he said.

The Secretary-General urged significant increases in concessional public financing, along with cutting-edge techniques like levies on fossil fuel extraction. He also urged reforms in multilateral development banks to enhance their role in climate financing.

The Secretary-General emphasized that climate action is not just a matter of environmental responsibility but also of economic foresight. He stressed that the cost of inaction far exceeds the cost of action.

As the largest emitters, G20 nations, responsible for 80 percent of global emissions, must take the lead in closing the emissions gap. Guterres challenged the wealthiest countries to act first. “I urge first-movers to come forward. We need leadership now more than ever,” he said.

Guterres echoed the UNEP report’s urgent message that “people and the planet cannot afford more hot air.” The time for empty promises has passed, and concrete steps are required to meet the climate goals. “Today’s Emissions Gap report is clear: we’re playing with fire, but there can be no more playing for time. We’re out of time,” he said.

The latest Emissions Gap Report 2024 by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has sounded a dire alarm on the disconnect between political commitments and the reality of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

In stark language, the report urges governments to close the widening gap between rhetoric and action.

“The transformation to net-zero economies must happen, and the sooner this global transformation begins, the better. Every fraction of a degree avoided counts in terms of lives saved, economies protected, damages avoided, biodiversity conserved, and the ability to rapidly bring down any temperature overshoot,” reads the report.

UNEP warned that the current trajectory leaves the world on a path toward 2.6°C warming this century, far beyond the Paris Agreement targets. The report calls for a “quantum leap” in ambition and urgent action from governments, particularly ahead of the next round of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) due in early 2025.

Here are some highlights:

G20 Nations Hold the Key to Global Emission Reductions

The report has highlighted that G20 countries, responsible for 77 percent of global emissions, must take the lead in closing the emissions gap. While these countries have set net-zero goals, their current policies fall short of aligning with the necessary emission reductions. Without significant improvements, the G20 is projected to miss its NDC targets for 2030 by at least 1 GtCO₂e.

Required Cuts: 42 percent Reduction by 2030 for 1.5°C Target

To achieve the 1.5°C pathway, global emissions must decrease by 42 percent by 2030 compared to 2019 levels—equivalent to an annual reduction of 7.5 percent. The report highlights the severe consequences of delayed action, warning that any further postponement would necessitate doubling the rate of emissions cuts after 2030.

Sectoral Solutions: Renewables and Reforestation Offer Hope

The report has identified solar and wind energy as key contributors to bridging the emissions gap. Together, these technologies could deliver 27 percent of the total emission reduction potential by 2030. Forest-related measures, including reforestation and reducing deforestation, offer another 20% potential. However, achieving these targets requires massive increases in investment—at least six times the current levels—and rapid deployment of policies across sectors.

NDCs and Climate Finance: Critical Areas for Focus

It has also stressed the importance of the upcoming NDC submissions.  According to the report, these commitments, due before February 2025, must reflect higher ambitions, concrete plans, and robust financial backing to make meaningful progress toward net-zero emissions. Developing countries, in particular, require international support and reformed financial systems to meet their climate goals.

Urgency and Cooperation are Paramount

UNEP has underlined the need for a whole-of-government approach and stronger public-private partnerships to accelerate progress. “We are running out of time,” the report warns. “The transformation to net-zero economies is inevitable, and the sooner we act, the more lives, ecosystems, and economies we can save.”

The report has identified the COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, as a crucial time for nations to align their policies with 1.5°C pathways. Without immediate, ambitious actions, UNEP cautions that 2°C—once the backup target—could soon become unreachable.

“With the clock ticking down to 2030 and 2035, the message is unequivocal: ambition without action is meaningless. Governments must move from pledges to policies and ensure that commitments are backed by robust implementation plans,” says the report.

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');  

 

Excerpt:

"We’re playing with fire, but there can be no more playing for time. We’re out of time," says UN Secretary General António Guterres

The two White House hopefuls debated on ABC television on September 10, 2024, but their mentions of Latin America were mainly dedicated to the issue of migration. Credit: Michael Le Brecht II / ABC

By Humberto Márquez
CARACAS, Oct 24 2024 (IPS)

Migration, trade, the defence of democracy, the confrontation with China and the collapse of multilateralism are issues that shed more doubts than certainties on Latin America’s expectations of the imminent presidential elections in the United States.

Interest and tension have grown after dozens of polls and bookmakers have shown similar chances of victory for Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump, particularly in a few decisive states.“After Washington's retreat from the wars it got into in the Middle East, there is resistance among people to getting involved in the world's problems, which weakens the liberal democratic order”: Vilma Petrash.

Latin America has been treated by many US administrations as its ‘backyard’, but it is now commonplace that Washington’s international priority lies far from the region.

Nevertheless, “we should not underestimate the ways in which Democrats and Republicans are different”, warned Tullo Vigevani, former professor of international relations at Brazil’s Paulista State University.

“For example, their proposals and policies are very different on the environment, in general and in relation to Latin America; on renewable energy and biofuels – particularly in the case of Brazil – and regarding human rights and some authoritarian trends in the region”, Vigevani told IPS from Sao Paulo.

Even if some governments are more sympathetic to Harris or Trump, Vigevani believes that both Washington and the region’s capitals will seek understandings and a relationship as normal as possible, after the 5 November election.

Migrants in the Mexican border city of Tijuana approach the barrier that closes access to the United States. Credit: Alejandro Cartagena / IOM

Migration rules

Among the campaign issues, such as economy and employment, taxes, health, wars in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, and the opposing personalities of both candidates, migration stands out, with Latin American countries being the main expellers of migrants to the United States.

“It is a sensitive issue for Americans, whether they are Democrats, Republicans or independents. It affects the immigrant population, the millions of refugees, and therefore the countries of Latin America,” Vilma Petrash, a Venezuelan professor of political science and international relations at Miami Dade College, told IPS.

Of the 336 million people living in the United States, 46.2 million were of foreign origin in 2022, according to the non-governmental Pew Research Center; 49% are already U.S. citizens, 24% are legal permanent residents, and the rest, more than 11 million people, are unauthorised immigrants, eight million of whom are from Latin American and Caribbean countries.

In fact, the United States is currently home to 65 million ‘Hispanics’, as Latin Americans are called in the country, according to different reports, and they have become a desired prize for the two candidates.

Trump, who pushed for the construction of a wall on the southern border during his presidency (2017-2021), now offers massive deportations of illegals – one million immediately, according to his vice-presidential candidate, James Vance -, and to contain irregular border immigration even by using the military.

They are “the enemy within”, Trump has said, and has stigmatised migrants: he said that criminals from Venezuela have left their country for the United States, “leaving Caracas as one of the safest cities in the world”, or that Haitians “are eating the pets” in the northern industrial state of Ohio.

Harris, who is the current vice-president and lead programmes with which president Joe Biden also tried to address causes of migration, such as poverty in Central America, has said that the immigration system “needs reform”, without going into details.

Whichever side wins, the controls will predictably increase, and Washington’s announcement that it will not renew in 2025 the temporary stay permits (parole), which allow Venezuelans, Haitians, Cubans and Nicaraguans to enter and remain in the United States for two years, was a warning sign.

The US aircraft carrier USS Nimitz sails through the Arabian Gulf. Credit: US Army

The United States isolates itself

The migration issue shows the United States’ willingness to isolate itself, to withdraw, instead of taking a proactive approach, as a great global power, to solving problems in the region and the world.

According to Petrash, “after Washington’s retreat from the wars it got into in the Middle East, there is resistance among people to getting involved in the world’s problems, which weakens the liberal democratic order. Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ policies are a case in point”.

The expert said from Miami, in the southeastern state of Florida, that there is also a lack of consensus over foreign policy, and in general over governance, to the point that a part of the population still, countering evidence, supports the version that it was Trump and not Biden who won the election four years ago.

While Biden has consistently supported Ukraine in the war against Russia, and Israel’s current military offensive in the Middle East, his political action in favour of democracy in Latin America has been weaker, and Harris would continue this, although with revisions, according to Petrash.

This is despite the certainty that, for example, among the alternatives for containing regional migration, in which the exodus of more than seven million Venezuelans in the last decade stands out, is to promote a solution to the democratic crisis in that country.

As a result of its policies and omissions, its polarised political confrontation and doubts about its electoral system, and the rise of isolationism, the United States “would have to regain the moral stature necessary to help stem democratic backsliding in the region”, says Petrash.

These setbacks are expressed in left-wing governments with authoritarian tendencies, such as those in Nicaragua and Venezuela, but also in sectors that have backed right-wing presidencies such as those of Jair Bolsonaro (2019-2022) in Brazil and the current administrations of Javier Milei in Argentina and Nayib Bukele in El Salvador.

Bolsonaro, Milei and Bukele have openly identified with Trump, whose sector harbours a far-right conservative current. For Petrash, this could favour a rapprochement with Latin American countries where there is a democratic backlash.

Unloading wind turbines from China at the port of Bahía Blanca, Argentina. It shows China’s penetration into the renewable energy sector in the Southern Cone, where it is already a major trading partner. Credit: Port of Bahía Blanca

China moves forward

Petrash points out that the United States’s international retreat was acute in Latin America, “its natural strategic zone”, after the failure of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) initiative in 2005. “It abandoned its vision of free trade in the region and let China move forward with its enclaves,” she said.

China, “an economic, political and ideological rival, has sold itself as successful authoritarianism, and has taken advantage of Washington’s absences in Latin America to advance its quiet, pragmatic diplomacy,” says Petrash.

Trade between China and Latin America reached US$480 billion in 2023 after increasing 35-fold in 2000-2022, while the region’s total trade with the world increased four-fold, according to the  Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). Nevertheless, trade with the Asian giant is still far from the region’s trade with the United States, which in the same year amounted to US$1.14 trillion.

Relations between Latin America and China “have grown and even strengthened in strategic areas such as new materials for energy production, lithium batteries -South America has large reserves of the mineral-, or artificial intelligence”, Vigevani states.

Certification of Brazilian meat for export. Brazil is the largest exporter of beef and poultry, and very active in the World Trade Organization. Credit: Abrafrigo

Brazil and Mexico

Meanwhile, Brazil is concerned about Washington’s disdain – which will be evident if Trump wins – for multilateral institutions, starting with the United Nations and the proposed renewal of its Security Council in order to make it effective.

For Vigevani, this distancing from multilateralism is illustrated by the blockade, which Washington has maintained since 2020, on the appointment of new members to the dispute settlement body of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), initiated by Trump and continued by Biden.

“Even if relations with Brazil and Latin America in general look normal, this United States refusal raises doubts for the future, because it is saying it is not interested in multilateral organisations,” said Vigevani.

In the case of a Trump victory, the Brazilian professor points out, there are also unanswered questions about what his war and peace policies will be.

An example is the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Trump has said that “ending this war quickly is in the best interest of the United States” and that he can achieve “a peace agreement in one day”, without offering further details, said Vigevani.

“It is important because, despite the war, Brazil has a strong relationship with Russia, and a very active participation in the Brics group (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa),” Vigevani recalled.

According to Petrash, with Trump’s international policy, “the great power can be the bull in the china shop, and even more, the bull isolating itself in the china shop”.

At the other end of the region is Mexico, a partner of Canada and the United States in the trade agreement known as USMCA, which replaced in 2020 the North American Free Trade Agreement that has existed since 1994.

Along with maintaining the 3150-kilometre southern border of the United States, a destination for hundreds of thousands of migrants who cross the region each year, Mexico faces the campaign promise from both Harris and Trump that they intend to revise the USMCA as soon as they reach the White House.

Trump is expected to introduce tariffs and protectionist barriers, for example on Mexican production involving Chinese parts or technologies, and Harris is expected to increase environmental and labour requirements that favour industries with United States labour.

Whichever side wins, “with the new American policy of bringing companies back to the United States or to its partners in the USMCA, possibly the biggest issue now is the end of globalisation and the return to a developmentalist nationalism”, summarised Vigevani.

A delegation of Parliament’s Employment and Social Affairs committee will visit Poland on 28 and 29 October.
Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2024 - EP

A delegation of Parliament’s Employment and Social Affairs committee will visit Poland on 28 and 29 October.
Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2024 - EP