Children from marginalised ethnic, language and religious groups, from 22 low and middle-income countries which were analysed, lag far behind their peers in reading skills. Credit: Brian Moonga/IPS
by Baher Kamal (madrid)
Inter Press Service
MADRID, Nov 21 (IPS) – An indisputable truth is that no child has ever chosen where to be born, which colour of skin to have, which ethnic community to belong to, what religion to practice and language to speak, or how safe or dangerous the context to grow up in. A child is the most innocent and defenceless human being.
Nevertheless, children fall easy prey to all kinds of brutalities, everywhere and every single day. See how.
Racism and discrimination against children based on their ethnicity, language and religion, are rife in countries across the world, stated the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) ahead of this year’s World Children’s Day on 20 November.
In its report: Rights denied: The impact of discrimination on children, the world’s largest body defending the rights of children, reveals the staggering impact of discrimination on children and the extent to which racism and discrimination affect their education, health, access to a registered birth, and to a fair and equal justice system.
It also highlights widespread disparities among minority and ethnic groups.
A lifetime of pain: “Systemic racism and discrimination put children at risk of deprivation and exclusion that can last a lifetime,” said UNICEF Executive Director, Catherine Russell. “This hurts us all.”
Ethnicity, language, religion: The report shows that children from marginalised ethnic, language and religious groups, from 22 low and middle-income countries which were analysed, lag far behind their peers in reading skills.
Lagging behind: On average, students aged seven to 14 from the most advantaged group are more than twice as likely to have foundational reading skills than those from the least advantaged group.
A UNICEF analysis of data on the level of children registered at birth – a prerequisite for access to basic rights – found significant disparities among children of different religious and ethnic groups.
“The unresolved legacies of trade and trafficking in enslaved Africans, as well as colonialism, post-colonial apartheid and segregation, continue to harm these children today.”
Deprivation: Discrimination and exclusion deepen inter-generational deprivation and poverty, and result in poorer health, nutrition and learning outcomes for children, a higher likelihood of incarceration, higher rates of pregnancy among adolescent girls, and lower employment rates and earnings in adulthood.
“People are stereotyped and discriminated against purely because they are poor. This is frankly sickening and a stain on our society.”
No Need to add that children are among the most hurt by impoverishment, humiliation and stigmatisation.
No immunisation: While COVID-19 exposed deep injustices and discrimination across the world, and the impacts of climate change and conflict continue to reveal inequities in many countries, UNICEF highlights how discrimination and exclusion have long persisted for millions of children from ethnic and minority groups, including access to immunisation, water and sanitation services,
In addition to all the already reported brutalities committed against the most innocent and defenceless humans–the children, many more crimes continue to be perpetrated amidst worldwide impunity.
The following are just some tragic examples.
One billion children experience some form of emotional, physical or sexual violence every single year.
One child dies from violence… every seven minutes.
Millions of children are displaced by armed conflict. These children are at a high risk of grave violations in and around camps, and other areas of refuge.
Drowned, abandoned, stranded: Children are often forced to migrate with their parents to flee armed conflicts, severe droughts, floods and landslides they have not caused. In their voyage to hell, children are drowned, and those who survive are often separated from their families and abandoned at borders.
Violence without frontiers: violence against children knows no boundaries of culture, class or education. It takes place against children in institutions, in schools, and at home. Peer violence is also a concern, as is the growth in cyberbullying.
Isolation, loneliness, fear: Children exposed to violence live in isolation, loneliness and fear, not knowing where to turn for help, especially when the perpetrator is someone close.
Hunted in refugee camps: Criminal groups trading with the lives of the weakest humans go to refugee camps to hunt defenceless children and youth for trafficking, smuggling, enslavement, and making money from selling their organs.
Slavery: Millions of children are pushed into forced labour, carrying out extremely hazardous work. And 70% of boys and girls living in rural areas are workers.
Impunity
All these crimes against innocent children are being committed. And go unpunished.
No wonder, the world is so busy talking about weapons, wars, oil, gas, carbon, the concentration of food markets, more technology, and how to further expand the digitalisation of all aspects of life.
UNITED NATIONS, Nov 21 (IPS) – The United States, which recently laid down a set of guidelines to monitor sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) by US citizens in international organizations, including the United Nations and its agencies worldwide, has implicitly accused the UN of faltering on a high-profile case last month.
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York sentenced Karim Elkorany, an American citizen and a former UN employee, to 15 years in prison for the drugging and sexual assault of one victim and making false statements to cover up another sexual assault.
As part of the federal investigation, Elkorany admitted that he had drugged and/or sexually assaulted 17 additional victims between 2002 and 2016.
Ambassador Chris Lu, U.S. Representative for UN Management and Reform at the US Mission to the United Nations, said that consistent with State Department policies, “we have referred this matter to the Office of Inspector General for review to ensure a culture of accountability”
“We also call on the United Nations to undertake a similar review that includes a comprehensive examination of the handling of any sexual exploitation and abuse or sexual harassment (SEAH) allegations against Mr. Elkorany during his employment with the United Nations”.
The investigation, he said, should examine whether UN officials were aware of Elkorany’s misconduct and failed to take appropriate action, including ensuring the availability and accessibility of assistance to survivors.
In line with the “Principles on Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse and Sexual Harassment (SEAH) for U.S. Government Engagement with International Organizations”, the United States said it is committed to preventing and responding to sexual exploitation and abuse and sexual harassment in the UN system.
“We strongly support the United Nations’ zero tolerance policy and the Secretary-General’s efforts to strengthen its implementation”.
“Protection from SEAH is the responsibility of leadership and managers at every level who have a duty to take action in response to allegations of SEAH and ensure implementation of governance policies and delivery of services in a manner that respects the rights and dignity of all personnel and communities served by our institutions.”
The critical stand against the UN comes amid “16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence”, beginning November 25, and billed as an opportunity to call for prevention and elimination of violence against women and girls.
Meanwhile, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has established a Chief Executive Board Task Force to review policies to prevent sexual harassment and develop improved and consistent approaches across the UN, including a review of how the UN defines sexual harassment.
Tsitsi Matekaire, the Global Lead on Equality Now’s End Sexual Exploitation Programme based in the UK, told IPS the publication of these principles by the US government is a welcome development.
They echo similar positive initiatives by countries such as Australia and the UK, which have introduced measures following highly publicized scandals in recent years within the international aid sector.
“It is good to see more organizations introducing and extending safeguarding policies, but words must be underpinned by effective action and we need more evidence about the impact of these commitments. It is no good having protection strategies and procedures in place if they are not being well implemented and abuse continues unchecked”, said Matekaire.
“We don’t know the true scale of the problem, but we do know from frequent revelations that sexual harassment, sexual exploitation and abuse remain a widespread problem inside the United Nations system and within other international development organizations”.
In September 2022, she pointed out, a media investigation disclosed sexual abuse by humanitarian workers at an UN-run camp in South Sudan. It was reported that abuse occurred “on a daily basis” over a number of years and aid officials were aware as early as 2015.
Although the UN did take some action, it faced criticism for failing to introduce effective strategies to end the problem, and an external review cited a lack of victim support, she noted.
“The UN and all international development agencies must enforce a zero-tolerance approach to sexual abuse and harassment directed at, and perpetrated by, staff. This must apply to everyone, regardless of what level their position is”.
“All staff should receive training, with policies and procedures well communicated. Reports of abuse should be taken seriously, investigations carried out swiftly and effectively, and perpetrators held fully to account”.
She also said that aid workers and other whistle-blowers need to be well protected so they are able to disclose allegations of abuses without fear of negative repercussions, including retaliation or sidelining.
And safeguarding and reporting mechanisms need to ensure sexual predators are not able to evade punishment or move to different jobs where they are able to commit further offences.”
And here is the link to the article about the South Sudan story referenced above.
Meanwhile, a Reuters report of November 1 said the World Health Organization (WHO) has suspended a senior manager at its Geneva headquarters after a British doctor publicly alleged she was sexually assaulted at a health conference last month, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
Rosie James, a 26-year-old junior doctor working for England’s National Health Service tweeted last month that the assault occurred at the World Health Summit in Berlin. The event, which took place from Oct. 16-18, was jointly organized by the WHO. James said at the time that she planned to report the incident.
“The alleged perpetrator is on leave and the investigation is on-going,” a WHO spokesperson said in an emailed response to Reuters about James’s statements, without naming him.
The set of “Government Engagement Principles on Protection from Sexual Exploitation Abuse and Sexual Harassment within International Organizations, laid down by the US includes six key components:
Zero Tolerance
The United States will continue to promote the full implementation of policies of zero tolerance for sexual exploitation and abuse and sexual harassment, including zero tolerance for inaction in response to allegations, across the United Nations and other International Organizations.
This includes support for policies that prioritize prevention and mitigation efforts, monitor the effectiveness of such efforts, ensure safe access to confidential SEAH reporting mechanisms and appropriate survivor support, and embed survivor-centered principles across all actions in response to reported allegations – including investigations.
The United States recognizes that an absence of reporting does not mean incidents are not being perpetrated, nor does it indicate that zero tolerance policies are being fully implemented.
A Survivor-centered Approach
The United States expects all allegations or incidents of sexual exploitation and abuse and sexual harassment to be reviewed and addressed, while respecting principles of due process.
In its engagement with the United Nations and other International Organizations, the United States will continue to advocate for the use of survivor-centered principles and standards – an approach that recognizes and empowers survivors as individuals with agency and unique needs, safeguarding their dignity and wellbeing.
Prevention and Risk Mitigation
The United States will work with the United Nations and other International Organizations to institutionalize prevention and mitigation measures that go beyond basic awareness-raising, training, capacity-building or dissemination of codes of conduct, and include a commitment to promote adequate funding, dedicated technical staff, and meaningful risk analysis and mitigation.
The United States will hold the United Nations and other International Organizations to the highest standard, including from the onset of a crisis, conflict or emergency, to mitigate against such risk, especially with highly vulnerable populations.
Accountability and Transparency
The United States expects the leadership of the United Nations and other International Organizations to take meaningful action to support accountability and transparency through, among others, the following: the conduct of timely and survivor-centered investigations; response efforts driven by the needs, experiences, and resiliencies of those most at risk of SEAH; clear reporting and response systems, including to inform Member States of allegations or incidents; and accountability measures, including termination of employment or involvement of law enforcement, as needed.
Organizational Culture Change
The United States will work to advocate for the development by the United Nations and other International Organizations of evidence-based metrics and standards of practice in the implementation of zero tolerance policies, promote holistic approaches, empower women and girls, and reinforce leadership and organizational accountability.
Policies, statements, and training are essential, but alone are insufficient to produce lasting positive change. Systems-level change requires a shift in organizational culture, behavior, and the underlying processes and mechanisms to deliver assistance and promote internal accountability.
Empowerment of Local Communities
The United States will prioritize, in partnership with the leadership of the United Nations and other International Organizations, the critical importance of locally-led efforts, particularly those led by women and girls, who, when meaningfully supported and engaged, can inform the measures that may mitigate risks and promote safer foreign assistance programming.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry, chair of COP27, reads the nine-page Sharm El Sheikh Implementation Plan, the document that concluded the climate summit on Sunday Nov. 20, to an exhausted audience after tough and lengthy negotiations that finally reached an agreement to create a fund for loss and damage, a demand of the global South. CREDIT: Kiara Worth/UN
by Daniel Gutman (sharm el sheikh)
Inter Press Service
SHARM EL SHEIKh, Nov 20 (IPS) – They were on the brink of shipwreck and did not leave happy, but did feel satisfied that they got the best they could. The countries of the global South achieved something decisive at COP27: the creation of a special fund to address the damage and loss caused by climate change in the most vulnerable nations.
The fund, according to the Sharm El Sheikh Implementation Plan, the official document approved at dawn on Sunday Nov. 20 in this Egyptian city, should enable “rehabilitation, recovery and reconstruction” following extreme weather events in these vulnerable countries.
Decisions on who will provide the money, which countries will benefit and how it will be disbursed were left pending for a special committee to define. But the fund was approved despite the fact that the issue was not even on the official agenda of the summit negotiations, although it was at the center of the public debate before the conference itself.
“We are satisfied that the developed countries have accepted the need to create the Fund. Of course, there is much to discuss for implementation, but it was difficult to ask for more at this COP,” Ulises Lovera, Paraguay’s climate change director, told IPS, weary from a longer-than-expected negotiation, early Sunday morning at the Sharm El Sheikh airport.
“This COP has taken an important step towards justice. I welcome the decision to establish a loss and damage fund and to operationalize it in the coming period,” said U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres. He also described as an achievement that a “red line” was not crossed, that would take the rise in global temperature above the 1.5-degree limit.
More than 35,000 people from nearly 200 countries participated in the 27th Conference of the Parties (COP27) on Climate Change in Sharm El Sheikh, an Egyptian seaside resort on the Red Sea, where the critical dimension of global warming in the different regions of the world was on display, sometimes dramatically.
Practically everything that has to do with the future of the modes of production and life of humanity – starting with energy and food – was discussed at a mega-event that far exceeded the official delegations of the countries and the great leaders present, such as U.S. President Joe Biden and the Brazilian president-elect, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
Hundreds of social organizations, international agencies and private sector stakeholders came here to showcase their work, seek funding, forge alliances, try to influence negotiations, defend their interests or simply be on a stage that seemed to provide a space for all kinds of initiatives and businesses.
At the gigantic Sharm El Sheikh International Convention Center there was also a global fair with non-stop activities from morning to night in the various pavilions, in stands with auditoriums of between 20 and 200 seats, where there was a flurried program of presentations, lectures and debates, not to mention the more or less crowded demonstrations of activists outside the venue.
In addition, government delegates negotiated on the crux of the summit: how to move forward with the implementation of the Paris Agreement, which at COP21 in 2015 set global climate change mitigation and adaptation targets.
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres (3rd-R) walks hurriedly through the Sharm El Sheikh Convention Center during the last intense hours of the COP27 negotiations, when there were moments when it seemed that there would be no agreement and the climate summit would end in failure. CREDIT: Daniel Gutman/IPS
On the brink of failure
Once again, the nine-page Sharm El Sheikh Implementation Plan did not include in any of its pages a reference to the need to abandon fossil fuels, but only coal.
The document was the result of a negotiation that should have ended on Friday Nov. 18, but dragged on till Sunday, as usually happens at COPs. What was different on this occasion was a very tough discussion and threats of a walkout by some negotiators, including those of the European Union.
But in the end, the goal of limiting the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius, established in the Paris Agreement, was maintained, although several countries tried to make it more flexible up to 2.0 degrees, which would have been a setback with dramatic effects for the planet and humanity, according to experts and climate activists.
“Rapid, deep and sustained reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions (are) required – lowering global net greenhouse gas emissions by 43 percent by 2030 relative to the 2019 level – to limit global warming to 1.5°C target,” reads the text, although no mention is made of oil and gas, the fossil fuels most responsible for those emissions, in one of the usual COP compromises, since agreements are reached by consensus.
The Bolivian delegation in Sharm El Sheikh, which included officials as well as leaders of indigenous communities from the South American country, take part in a meeting with journalists at COP27 to demand more ambitious action. CREDIT: Daniel Gutman/IPS
The priorities of the South
Developing countries, however, focused throughout the COP on the Loss and Damage Fund and other financing mechanisms to address the impacts of rising temperatures and mitigation actions.
“We need financing because we cannot deal with the environmental crisis alone. That is why we are asking that, in order to solve the problem they have caused, the rich nations take responsibility,” Diego Pacheco, head of the Bolivian delegation to Sharm El Sheikh, told IPS.
Environmental organizations, which showed their power in Egypt with the presence of thousands of activists, also lobbied throughout COP27 for greater commitments, including mitigation actions.
“This conference cannot be considered an implementation conference because there is no implementation without phasing out all fossil fuels,” the main cause of the climate crisis, said Zeina Khalil Hajj of the international environmental organization 350.org.
“Together for implementation” was precisely the slogan of COP27, calling for a shift from commitments to action.
“A text that does not stop fossil fuel expansion, that does not provide progress from the already weak Glasgow Pact (from COP26) makes a mockery of the millions of people living with the impacts of climate change,” said Khalil Hajj, head of global campaigning at 350.org.
One of the demonstrations by climate activists at COP27 held in Egypt Nov. 6-20, demanding more ambitious climate action by governments, as well as greater justice and equity in tackling the climate crisis. CREDIT: Busani Bafana/IPS
The crises that came together
Humanity – as recognized by the States Parties in the final document – is living through a dramatic time.
It faces a number of overlapping crises: food, energy, geopolitical, financial and economic, combined with more frequent natural disasters due to climate change. And developing nations are hit especially hard.
The demand for financing voiced by countries of the global South thus takes on greater relevance.
Cecilia Nicolini, Argentina’s climate change secretary, told IPS that it is the industrialized countries, because of their greater responsibility for climate change, that should finance developing countries, and lamented that “the problem is that the rules are made by the powerful.”
However, 80 percent of the money now being spent worldwide on climate change action is invested in the developed world, according to the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the world’s largest funder of climate action, which has contributed 121 billion dollars to 163 countries over the past 30 years, according to its own figures.
In this context, the issue of Loss and Damage goes one step further than adaptation to climate change, because it involves reparations for the specific impacts of climate change that have already occurred, such as destruction caused by droughts, floods or forest fires.
“Those who are bearing the burden of climate change are the most vulnerable households and communities. That is why the Loss and Damage Fund must be established without delay, with new funds coming from developed countries,” said Javier Canal Albán, Colombia’s vice minister of environmental land planning.
“It is a moral and climate justice imperative,” added Canal Albán, who spoke at a press conference on behalf of AILAC, a negotiating bloc that brings together several Latin American and Caribbean countries.
But the text of the outcome document itself acknowledges that there is a widening gap between what developing countries need and what they actually receive.
The financing needs of these countries for climate action until 2030 were estimated at 5.6 trillion dollars, but developed countries – as the document recognized – have not even fulfilled their commitment to provide 100 billion dollars per year, committed since 2009, at COP15 in Copenhagen, and ratified in 2015, at COP21 which adopted the Paris Agreement.
It was the absence of any reference to the need to accelerate the move away from oil and natural gas that frustrated several of the leaders at the COP. “We believe that if we don’t phase out fossil fuels there will be no Fund that can pay for the loss and damage caused by climate change,” Susana Muhamad, Colombia’s environment minister, who was at the two-week conference in Sharm El Sheikh held Nov. 6-20, told IPS.
“We have to put the victims first in order to make an orderly and just transition,” she said, expressing the sentiments of the governments and societies of the South at COP27.
The G20 summit motto was “Recovering Together, Recovering Stronger” yet the Joint Declaration failed to deliver any alternatives to the wave of austerity engulfing the world. It ignored the option of raising enough tax revenues from large corporations, taxing the wealthy and tacking illicit financial flows and tax abuses which alone accounts for over US$200 billion of tax revenue lost per year due to profit shifting in the global South.
For one, the summit blocked any progress towards the negotiations of a UN Tax Convention that would address the issues of corporate tax abuses and illicit financial flows, as denounced in an open letter from the Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD).
In an open letter denouncing this inaction to tackle corporate tax abuses and IFFs, delivered to embassies of Indonesia, India and Brazil, Lidy Nacpil from the Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD) said that the summit blocked “any progress towards the negotiations of a UN Tax Convention that would address the issues of corporate tax abuses and illicit financial flows,” but there was no reaction.
Making matters worse, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) failed to deliver on mandates to publish country-by-country reporting before the summit. This would have allowed to monitor the performance of mechanisms to prevent for example multinational companies shifting profits to tax havens and avoid paying taxes.
The data was only published on 17 November, a day after the summit, which was too late to hold the G20 leaders accountable. According to Alex Cobham, Director at the Tax Justice Network, “without the transparency data, neither the Tax Justice Network nor any other independent research can evaluate how much each government is losing to multinationals’ corporate tax abuse, or any progress made to curb tax losses in recent years.”
But that is not everything since the summit did not confront the hidden offshore wealth and kleptocracy problem. Maira Martini from Transparency International said that the G20 members “in recent years have dragged their feet, unable to agree on key measures and failing to implement even those to which they had already committed. In the meantime, the corrupt have consolidated wealth and power, allowing them to attack everything from sustainable development to global security to democracy.”
In an open letter released ahead of the Bali summit, Transparency International representatives from across G20 countries called on their governments to take immediate action against cross-border corruption. The Joint Declaration stated its support towards implementing Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendations for improved financial transparency, but does not say that beneficial ownership registries should be public, a critical element to enable stakeholders and the authorities to uncover hidden assets.
Also the declaration included regional efforts related to signing of the Asia Initiative Declaration in July 2022 on tax and financial transparency in Asia. However, it did not specify whether this initiative would create a stronger standard than the current OECD transparency standard, or simply implement an OECD standard in the Asian regional context.
Between 75 and 95 million people are expected to be thrown into extreme poverty this year as a result of the pandemic and the effects of rising inflation and the war in Ukraine, according to the UN. Many other are struggling to make a living and feed themselves as governments around the world are resorting to painful austerity measures.
The G20 had an opportunity to offer solutions to these crises and a lifeline to struggling nations. Unfortunately for all of us, they have failed.
Matti Kohonen is executive director, Financial Transparency Coalition.
Recognizing that innovation cannot be delivered by government alone, Singapore is focusing on building baseline adoption of digital tools in the private sector.
Image: Shutterstock
Opinion by Riad Meddeb, William Tan (new york)
Inter Press Service
NEW YORK, Nov 17 (IPS) – Small states take the path less travelled. They face challenges unfamiliar to many: scarce resources, smaller economies and the real impact of climate change.
However, small states are also able to leverage assets in ways that large states often cannot. As an example, Singapore has learned how innovation and digital can accelerate development.
Small states are not passive actors in traditional development or innovation trajectories. They have exciting power and agency to steer innovation in new directions.
This includes forging a new age of global innovation leadership – defining and setting global standards and innovation priorities, and shaping a small states comparative advantage in the context of innovation.
Technological innovation is founded on policy innovation
Innovation does not operate in a vacuum, and governance is a key catalyst. This includes exploring how governance structures and processes can identify, implement and scale innovation.
There is a growing need to craft systems, cultures, and infrastructure that not only embrace innovation but become part of it. Governments can ensure that new technologies engage with local priorities — and shape global solutions which fill these gaps.
Governance needs to be responsive to the constant evolution of technologies. Some examples of such agile governance include regulatory sandboxes, outcome-based regulations, and testbeds for global innovators (though small states must not ‘just’ test innovations but co-design them too).
Agility also comes from data-driven innovating and data innovation. Here, governments can shape both foundational data infrastructure, but also leverage data to accelerate innovation – through initiatives such as the UNDP SIDS Data Platform. Such insights can then become part of ‘feedback loops’ to inform policy and service design.
Small states share unique challenges which do not necessarily respond to established technological ‘answers’, and there are wider positive multipliers which emerge when innovating for these challenges.
Small states again have the advantage of size; coordination can be faster, and enterprises may more easily work in tandem with governments to harmonize innovation priorities.
Particularly important is indeed recognizing that innovation cannot be delivered by government alone. The private sector plays a particularly fundamental role – including the smaller enterprises.
The COVID-19 pandemic has turbocharged digitalization and many entities now recognize that they can no longer do business in the traditional way.
In Singapore, this shift has been accompanied by a focus on building baseline adoption of digital tools through the ‘CTO-as-a-service’ platform under the ‘SMEs Go Digital Programme’. Since 2017, over 80,000 small and medium-sized enterprises have adopted digital solutions under the programme.
We need to build and strengthen local efforts and small state capacity
Innovation must be led and owned by local people — and this begins with human capital development. Brain drain is an immense struggle for small states, and tackling this is an imperative for governments.
Small states should look to shape robust curricula across local schools for young people, as well as develop advanced STEM offerings to encourage innovators to contribute to their home countries.
For example, Singapore’s TechSkills Accelerator Initiative has supported over 7,000 companies to hire, train and retain technology talent. It has placed more than 12,000 Singaporeans in technology roles, whilst an accompanying framework supports businesses in hiring global talent with in-demand skills.
At the same time, innovation is not a product of financial investment or discrete initiatives alone; it emerges out of complex interactions between the public and private sector, shaped by institutional frameworks to go with the above human capacity development, research and development, and business support.
Singapore’s national platform for digital innovation, the Open Innovation Platform, provides professional consultancy support to help companies diagnose business challenges, define problem statements and crowdsource solutions from 12,000 solution providers from the private sector.
The government also plays an active role to support startups in their growth stage. Through the [email protected] and SGD Spark programmes, organizations are provided third-party assurance on a startup’s ability to deliver on their products and outcomes, as well as connecting them to government and business demand.
Innovation is not optional for small states
The challenges faced by small states are matched by the potential that innovation and digital technology can offer. And part of this is the role and importance of learning from each other.
The Singapore Cooperation Programme (SCP) extends technical assistance and shares Singapore’s development experience with fellow developing countries. In its 30th year in 2022, the SCP has welcomed close to 150,000 foreign government officials to its programmes.
In 2021, Singapore launched the “FOSS for Good” technical assistance package to address small states’ unique development priorities – including digital transformation in the areas of health, education and public governance. UNDP has been an important partner in this programme.
Such shared learning and collaboration opportunities, combined with the wide-ranging support of initiatives such as the UNDP Global SIDS Offer, will be crucial to ensure that small states build and sustain global innovation leadership.
Both in the face of continued shocks and crises, but also to leverage opportunities where innovation can positively change lives and livelihoods.
William Tan, Director-General, Technical Cooperation Directorate, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Singapore & Riad Meddeb is Interim Director, UNDP Global Centre for Technology, Innovation and Sustainable Development
One of the many activities held on Energy Day (Nov. 15) at COP27, where discussions are taking place for two weeks on how to make further progress on global climate action. The consensus among observers is that the energy transition away from fossil fuels will accelerate in the wake of the war in Ukraine and its impact on oil and gas supply and prices. CREDIT: Daniel Gutman/IPS
by Daniel Gutman (sharm el sheikh, egypt)
Inter Press Service
SHARM EL SHEIKH, Egypt, Nov 16 (IPS) – COP27 is unlikely to produce new commitments to reduce emissions of climate-changing gases, but the global energy crisis will eventually prompt more action by countries to move away from fossil fuels. That is the positive feeling that many observers are taking away from the annual climate summit being held in Egypt.
“The rise in energy prices due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine set back many countries in the transition to renewable energies in 2022,” Manuel Pulgar Vidal, global leader of Climate & Energy at WWF, told IPS. “But this is not going to last, because developed nations have proven that the best path to energy security is to accelerate the abandonment of fossil fuels.”
The issue is seen from the same point of view in some countries of the developing South.
Costa Rica’s Minister of Environment and Energy Franz Tattenbach Capra was emphatic in an interview with IPS: “Countries like ours, which don’t have oil or gas, are appalled by the price increases. This will lead us to try to become less dependent on imports.”
This link goes far beyond the negotiations between the 193 States Parties on climate change mitigation and adaptation, which this year focuses on climate action, as highlighted by the summit’s slogan: “Together for Implementation”.
A demonstration is held at the Sharm El Sheikh International Convention Center at COP27 to remind the world of the importance of the Sustainable Development Goals aimed at boosting global peace and prosperity, fighting climate change and making the transition to clean energy by 2030. CREDIT: Daniel Gutman/IPS
Global fair
COP27 is very much like a trade fair and a multitudinous meeting place, with an overwhelming number of talks, activities and document sharing, where the task of choosing where to be is very difficult and everyone constantly feels they are missing out on something more interesting happening at the same time.
While world leaders give speeches and technical officials discuss the next steps for climate action, countries, organizations and companies seek and offer financing, in public and private meetings, for all kinds of projects, ranging from energy, agriculture and infrastructure to the empowerment of indigenous communities.
“This process has been very skillful in connecting climate change and economics. We all know that countries that do not act responsibly with regard to the climate are going to slide backwards in the coming years,” said Pulgar Vidal, who co-organized and chaired COP20, held in Lima in 2014, when he was Peru’s environment minister.
The energy sector is definitely the master key to finding solutions to climate change, as it is responsible for more than three-quarters of global greenhouse gas emissions and is still primarily fossil-fuel based.
According to a report presented here by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), only 29 percent of generation comes from alternative sources and carbon emissions continue to rise.
And the past year “frankly, has been a year of climate procrastination,” said United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) executive director Inger Andersen on Nov. 15, the day dedicated to energy in the never-ending agenda of side events taking place at the Sharm el-Sheikh International Convention Center.
In the official negotiations, however, the energy discussion appears to be in the background, behind the debate on the creation of a fund to compensate for loss and damage in the countries of the South that have suffered the most from droughts, floods, hurricanes, forest fires and other phenomena that have accelerated in recent years.
COP26, held a year ago in Glasgow, Scotland, ended with a bitter taste with respect to energy when, following an intervention by India, a commitment was made to reduce, rather than eliminate, the use of coal, the most polluting fossil fuel.
For now, there is no indication that this summit will end with a better agreement in this area.
Manuel Pulgar Vidal, a former Peruvian environment minister and the chair of COP20 on climate change, held in Lima in 2014, poses for photos in one of the corridors of COP27 at the Sharm El Sheikh International Convention Center in Egypt, where he is participating as global leader of Climate & Energy at WWF. CREDIT: WWF
Effects of the war
Carlos Manuel Rodríguez, chair of the largest multilateral fund for financing climate action in developing countries, is also convinced that the energy crisis generated by the war in Ukraine will, in the medium and long term, trigger a faster transition.
“The conflict made many people understand how vulnerable the global energy system is and how harmful dependence on fossil fuels is,” the CEO of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) told IPS in one of the wide corridors of the Sharm El Sheikh International Convention Center, where the heavy traffic of people does not stop between 8:00 AM and 9:00 PM.
Rodríguez, the former Costa Rican environment minister, said that “With an energy mix based more on renewable sources, there would have been more resilience to the impact of the events in Ukraine. European countries have already understood this and I am confident that they are understanding it in other regions.”
Reports circulating in Sharm El Sheikh support the theory that the impact of the crisis could be beneficial for the energy transition in the long run.
In the four largest emitters – China, the United States, the European Union and India – public and private investment in transport electrification and renewable energy is growing due to market mechanisms and concerns about energy security, says a paper presented by the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), an independent advisory organization based in the United Kingdom.
“The pace at which the green transition is speeding up…is remarkable….no-one who genuinely understands the interconnected crises facing the world believes that more oil and gas represent anything more than a very short-term solution,” Gareth Redmond-King, international lead at the ECIU, said at the climate summit.
Harjeet Singh, of the Climate Action Network International, which brings together more than 1,800 environmental organizations, takes part in a demonstration at the Sharm El Sheikh International Convention Center. The demand is to ensure that the necessary efforts are made so that global temperature does not increase beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. CREDIT: Daniel Gutman/IPS
Pressure from civil society
A broad spectrum of organizations are taking part in COP27, aiming to influence the negotiation process and seek funding.
Harjeet Singh of the Climate Action Network International (CAN-I), an umbrella group of more than 1,800 organizations in 130 countries, told IPS that “the war in Ukraine shifted the focus of many developed countries from climate action to energy security.”
Singh has called for a commitment to halt the expansion of fossil fuels to be included in the outcome document of COP27, which is due to end on Nov. 18 if it is not extended by one day as is customary at these summits.
At the same time, he lamented that, because of the impact of the war, “we see the fossil fuel industry taking advantage of this space to sell itself as sustainable, which is unacceptable.”
Evidence of the need to appear as part of the oil sector’s climate action is everywhere in this gigantic Convention Center, where the organization Global Witness denounced that 636 lobbyists for oil interests and companies are registered as participants.
One of the hundreds of organizations with booths at Sharm El Sheikh is the OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) Fund for International Development.
“We came here to make ourselves visible, as we want to contribute to making the energy transition in all countries inclusive,” Nadia Benamara, Head of Outreach & Multimedia for the Vienna-based Fund, told IPS.
Benamara said the Fund pledged 24 billion dollars up to 2030 to finance climate action because “oil producing and exporting countries are also victims of climate change and want to contribute to the solution.”
In 2021, the world experienced four mega weather events that each cost $20+ billion in economic loss: Hurricane Ida, flooding in Europe, flooding in China and unprecedented winter weather in Texas and parts of Mexico. Credit: Patricia Grogg/IPS
Opinion by Peter Schlosser, Michael Dorsey (sharm el-sheikh)
Inter Press Service
SHARM EL-SHEIKH, Nov 16 (IPS) – Climate change is an existential threat to humans and our ability to thrive on a healthy planet. But when it comes to rising temperatures, the inability of humankind to slow emissions and limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius isn’t because we lack knowledge or need new technologies.
Consider: Humans have been warned for more than a century about the dangers of a warming climate and its adverse impact on human health and planetary systems, including but not limited to loss of biodiversity, decreased soil and ocean health, increased sea-ice melt and corresponding sea-level rise, and amplified disasters such as hurricanes, floods, heat waves and droughts.
Fifty years ago, “The Limits to Growth” warned humans of the serious need to live in balance with Earth’s systems. The science is settled. Likewise, technologies that drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions are available and increasingly cost-competitive–particularly in energy production and transportation, two of the most significant contributors to global emissions.
What is missing? This is not a difficult physics equation. While we live in a complex world, the laggards in this area are observable: money and societal will.
As countries enter the second week of the global negotiations at the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, typically referred to as COP27, success will depend on the ability of the negotiators to mobilize investments and advance policy at the conference to accelerate opportunities for progress in altering the trajectory of climate change.
Even discussions on “loss and damage”–a signature issue of this conference that is historically neglected–are defined by these two needs. Underlying the issues of loss and damage are questions about processes for addressing loss (policy) and determinations of who is financially responsible (investment).
The price tag to address climate change is not small, but viewed in the right frame, it is a bargain. Take climate-enhanced disasters. In 2021, the world experienced four mega weather events that each cost $20+ billion in economic loss: Hurricane Ida, flooding in Europe, flooding in China and unprecedented winter weather in Texas and parts of Mexico.
These types of human-induced disasters are now increasingly frequent, occurring at more places and at higher amplitudes, and are more costly without considerable investment to curtail rising greenhouse gas emissions. The 5th High Level Ministerial Dialogue on Climate Finance takes place during the second week of COP27, where ministers will discuss achieving the annual $100 billion support mark for lower-income countries, a total those countries already note as too little, too late. The real need is in trillions of dollars, not billions.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that globally, $1.6-3.8 trillion (USD) must be invested every year through public and private climate-related finance to keep warming well below warming beyond 2 degrees Celsius. For comparison, the International Monetary Fund reports that fossil-fuel subsidies in 2020 were $5.9 trillion (USD) when summing up explicit and implicit subsidies.
Combining policy with public investment can dramatically amplify results. The U.S. Inflation Reduction Act, the country’s most dramatic attempt to reorient its infrastructure and electricity production to lower emissions, could spend as much as $800 billion (USD) in tax credits, spurring on private investment to the tune of $1.7 trillion (USD) over the next decade, according to a Credit Suisse review of the policy.
The same report estimates that with the manufacturing and consumer tax credits, the cost of solar electricity could fall below one U.S. cent, possibly as soon as 2025. The investment bank declared that the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act “definitively changes the narrative from risk mitigation to opportunity capture” for corporations to take advantage of the law’s positive impact on the economy.
We have fallen behind the timeline set by the Paris Climate Accords and the 1.5 degrees Celsius target no longer seems to be achievable. The international negotiations must push the agenda to define aggressive mitigation policies, with incentives and disincentives, to scale known solutions on the fastest timescales possible for manufacturing and distribution throughout the world.
This needs real investments, private as well as public, for a chance to prevent the worst impacts of climate change. The time is now to show the most marginalized countries the money.
Peter Schlosser is one of the world’s leading earth scientists, with expertise in the Earth’s hydrosphere and how humans affect the planet’s natural state. He is the vice president and vice provost of the Julie Ann Wrigley Global Futures at Arizona State University.
Michael Dorsey is a globally recognized expert on sustainability, finance, renewable energy and environment matters. He is the chair of the Rob and Melani Walton Sustainability Solutions Service at Arizona State University.
STOCKHOLM, Nov 16 (IPS) – The past is never dead. It’s not even past.
William FaulknerLike most armed conflicts the Ukrainian war intends to establish hegemony over a certain area, in rivalry with other usurpers. Russian propaganda pinpoints the US and EU as Russia’s main adversaries, while Ukraine is portrayed as a pawn in these nations’ international yearnings. Such a scenario is not new.
The Great Game was a political and diplomatic confrontation between British – and Russian Empires, which continued for most of the 19th and parts of the 20th centuries. Britain’s role was eventually taken over by the US. The Great Game mainly affected Mesopotamia (Iraq), Persia (Iran), and Afghanistan, though it had, and still has, repercussions on a wide range of neighboring territories.
Britain originally feared that the Russian Empire’s ultimate goal was to dominate Central Asia and reach the Indian Ocean through Persia, thus threatening Britain’s Asian trade links and its domination of India.
Britain posed as the World’s first free society, declaring its adherence to Christian values, respect for private property, and democratic institutions. Claims bolstered by an advanced industry, fueled by steam power and iron, as well as an ever increasing use of oil. English leaders assumed their nation had a God-given task to spread “civilization” and that such a worthy cause permitted them to exploit the earth’s natural resources, as well as the world’s labor force. Similarly to the Brits, the Russians, the Yankees, and the French considered themselves to be “civilizing forces”.
The quest for dominion was carried out in a traditional manner – pitching internal fractions against each other and let them do most of the fighting. Nevertheless, this strategy eventually led to direct clashes between “world powers”. Britain strived to convince the Russian army that it did not have a chance against the British war machine. The UK, France and Italy felt threatened by a growing influence of Germany and the Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires. Accordingly, these nations supported an increasingly weakened Ottoman Empire, intending it to remain a buffer zone blocking Russia’s expanding war fleet from the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean.
As part of this policy, Britain and France provided arms and money to anti-Russian insurgents in Chechnya, thus contributing to an enduring tradition of Chechen terrorism against Russia. After a minor scuffle between the Russian – and Ottoman Empires, Russia occupied the Principate of Wallachia (Romania), prompting France and Great Britain to attack Crimea with a huge military force.
The Crimean War (1853-56) proved that the Tsar’s army was no match for the allied forces. Russia was humiliated and its expansion towards the European mainland and meddling in Persia and Afghanistan were halted. Instead people living on the steppes of Central Asia and Siberia continued to be subdued and forced to join the Russian Tsardom.
The Crimean disaster had exposed the shortcomings of every institution in Russia – not just the corruption and incompetence of the military command, the technological backwardness of the army and navy, or the inadequate roads and lack of railways that accounted for the chronic problems of supply, but the poor condition and illiteracy of the serfs who made up the armed forces, the inability of the serf economy to sustain a state of war against industrial powers, and the failures of autocracy itself.
The meddling of imperialists in other nations’ affairs was gradually worsened by efforts to secure fossil fuels for their own benefit. Refined petrol was originally used to fuel kerosene lamps and became increasingly important when street lighting was introduced. After 1857, oil wells drilled in Wallachia became very profitable, inspiring a search for new oilfields in the east. In 1873, the Swede Robert Nobel established an oil refinery in Azerbaijan, adding Russia’s first pipeline system, pumping stations, storage depots, and railway tank cars. At the same time, Calouste Gulbenkian assisted the Ottoman government to establish the oil industry in Mesopotamia. Gulbenkian eventually became the world’s wealthiest man.
Profit from these endeavors increased through assembly-line mass production of motor vehicles, introduced by Henry Ford in 1914. However, the main reason for gaining control of oil was belligerent. The English First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill, realized that if the British navy was fuelled by oil, instead of coal, it would be irresistible: “We must become the owners or at any rate the controllers at the source of at least a proportion of the supply of natural oil which we require.” In 1914, Churchill feared that this could be too late – the Germans were already on their way to conquer the Middle Eastern oil fields. Together with the Ottomans they were finishing the Berlin-Baghdad railway line, which would it make possible for the German army to transport troops to the Persian Gulf and onwards to Persian oilfields.
Germany and its allied Ottoman Empire lost World War I and the Berlin-Baghdad railway never reached the Persian Gulf. In accordance with the so-called Sykes-Picot Agreement Arab territories of the former Ottoman Empire were divided into French and British “spheres of influence”. In 1929, the newly formed Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC), a joint endeavor of British, French and American oil interests, brokered by Gulbenkian, received a 75-year concession to exploit crude oil reserves in Iraq and Persia, and eventually in what would become the United Emirates.
Access to oil continued to be a major factor in World War II. The German invasion of USSR included the goal to capture the Baku oilfields, which had been nationalized during the Bolshevik Revolution. However, the German Army was defeated before it reached the oil fields.
The Germans had pursued a relatively benign policy towards the USSR’s Muslim population of Caucasus and neighboring areas. This was after the war taken as an excuse for Stalin’s treatment of “treacherous ethnic elements”. Forced internal migration had begun already before the war and eventually affected at least 6 million people. Among them 1.8 million kulaks, mainly from Ukraine, who were deported from 1930 to 1931, one million peasants and ethnic minorities were driven from Caucasus between 1932 to 1939, and from 1940 to 1952, a further 3.5 million ethnic minorities were resettled.
Nearly 8,000 Crimean Tatars died during these deportations, while tens of thousands perished subsequently due to the harsh exile conditions. The Crimean Tatar deportations resulted in the abandonment of 80,000 households and 360,000 acres of land. From 1967 to 1978, some 15,000 Tatars succeeded in returning legally to Crimea, less than 2 percent of the pre-war Tatar population. This remission was followed by a ban on further Tatar settlements.
In 1944, almost all Chechens were deported to the Kazakh and Kirgiz Soviet republics. Accordingly, the Russian presence in Caucasus and Ukraine increased and so was Russian control of these areas’ natural resources, including wheat, coal, oil and gas.
After World War I, Britain had first tried to halt the Bolshevik penetration of Iran and did in 1921 support a coup d’état placing the UK-friendly general Reza Shah as leader of the nation. When Britain and USSR eventually became allies against Nazi Germany they did together attack Iran and replaced Reza Shah with his son Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Reza Shah had become “far too Nazi-friendly.”
Following a 1950 election, Mohammad Mosaddegh became president of Iran. He was committed to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, AIOC (successor of the IPC mentioned above). In a joint effort the Secret Intelligence Services of the UK and the US, MI6 and CIA, organized and paid for a “popular” uprising against Mosaddegh, though it backfired and their co-conspirator, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, fled the country. However, he did after a brief exile return and this time a coup d’état was successful. The deposed Mosaddegh was arrested and condemned to life in internal exile.
Mosaddegh’s internally popular effort to remove oil revenues from foreign claws inspired other Middle East leaders to oppose Britain and France. In 1956, the Egyptian president Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal Company, primarily owned by British and French shareholders. An ensuing invasion by Israel, followed by UK and France, aimed at regaining control of the Canal, ended in a humiliating withdrawal by the three invaders, signifying the end of UK’s role as one of the world’s major powers. The same year, USSR was emboldened to invade Hungary, quenching a popular uprising.
In 1960, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was founded in Baghdad. This was a turning point toward national sovereignty over natural resources. The US Iranian protégé, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, eventually came to play a leading role in OPEC where he promoted increased prices, proclaiming that the West’s “wealth based on cheap oil is finished.” The US was losing its ability to influence Iranian foreign and economic policy and discretely began to support the religous extremist Khomeini, who initially claimed that American presence was necessary as a counterbalance to Soviet influence. However, after coming to power in 1979 Khomeini revealed himself as a fierce opponent to the US. The US and some European governments thus ended up supporting the brutal Saddam Hussein’s war on Iran. The Iraqui leader, heavily financed by Arab Gulf states, suddenly became a ”defender of the Arab world against a revolutionary Iran.” The war ended in a stalemate,with approximately 500,000 killed.
Ukraine is one last example of how a country has ended up in a siutaion where a superpower use its military force to impose its will upon it, while implying that other nations have similar intentions. Times are constantly changing and hopefully Russia will realise, like the UK once did, that it cannot maintain its might and strength through armed invasions, but instead have to rely on diplomacy and peaceful negotiations.
Russia seems to be stuck in a time capsule where foreign greed and meddling in other nations’ internal affairs resulted in ruthless wars and immense human suffering. As the German philosopher Hegel stated in 1832:
What experience and history teach is this — that people and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it.
Yamide Dagnet, director for Climate Justice at Open Society Foundations, says climate change is impacting the most vulnerable and blended solutions are needed to tackle it and uphold human rights. Credit: TJ Kirkpatrick, Open Society Foundations
by Busani Bafana (sharm el sheikh)
Inter Press Service
SHARM EL SHEIKH, Nov 16 (IPS) – Climate change is worsening injustice globally, and the poor and vulnerable communities are the most affected. It is time the world acted on fulfilling human rights and building a liveable planet, says Yamide Dagnet, director for Climate Justice at Open Society Foundations.
“We are so slow to take climate change seriously,” she told IPS in an exclusive interview on the sidelines of the COP27 conference in Sharm El Sheikh, in which she speculated that greed and doubts have crept in about solutions.
“The solutions are there,” Dagnet says. “But we need to organise ourselves and create blended solutions in tackling climate change and upholding human rights.”
COP27 is in its final week to hammer agreements on saving the world from climate change doom.
Injustice is a key factor needing addressing because climate change is crippling the most vulnerable communities and countries that contribute the least to the problem.
“This is injustice. In every country of the world, the social justice sentiment is that the most marginalised communities are suffering the most. You also have the intergenerational aspect, which means that the youth will pay the consequences for what is happening now,” says Dagnet, who co-founded and launched Allied for Climate Transformation by 2025, a consortium that amplifies the voice and priorities of vulnerable countries and communities.
Climate change activists at COP27, currently underway in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS
Excerpts of the interview:
IPS: You are advocating for climate justice. Does climate change have anything to do with human rights?
YD: We need to understand why vulnerable nations and communities are frustrated and demanding legitimate social justice from the Paris Agreement and climate talks. One of the objectives of the UNFCCC is to first stabilise global temperatures. We have obviously failed to do that. Temperatures have increased.
Another objective is to protect the most vulnerable. Over the past decades, there has been a focus on how to stabilise and reduce emissions and maximise the means that were to be provided to populations dealing with the impacts of climate change.
If you reduce emissions, you reduce the impacts of climate change. But we failed. We have even slid backwards since the Glasgow COP, which goes against human rights.
At this COP in Sharm El Sheikh, frustration is at its highest because, as science has it, there has not been a lot of reduction in emissions at all. Even if we were taking the radical step now to reduce emissions, we would still have to deal with a changing climate and have intensified and more frequent disasters.
You have everywhere the notion that the delays and prioritisation of some issues over others and the neglect of the priorities in developing countries and communities exacerbate vulnerability resulting in losses and damages. Now there is an effect on livelihoods as some (communities) are displaced and can’t rely on their water sources, like in Chad. (This results in) conflict between pastoralists. Or (in the Pacific) atoll nations that know that unless something radical is done, they will be underwater – (and ask) what will happen to their cultural heritage. You have so much at stake beyond economic damage.
IPS: Are human rights and justice at stake at the COP27 talks?
YD: Absolutely. Everything is at stake. Every human does not need to (just) survive. Human beings have a right to thrive and be protected. Another human rights issue is that some of our most unsung heroes, protecting our forests, and demanding justice from global corporations, are the most affected. The number of environmental defenders being killed is increasing. This is a human rights issue too.
IPS: Would you say climate change laid bare the inequalities in the world today?
YD: Yes. It is a vicious loop. Unfortunately, inequalities in the world (and) within each country will be exacerbated because of climate change. The impact of climate change will affect the most vulnerable populations from class and gender, with intergenerational impact and from a race point of view. All aspects of inequality will be amplified.
When you do not even have the issue of inequality, you will see that climate change and security are going to be exacerbated because climate change is a threat multiplier when it comes to security and economic vulnerability. For example, a country can do everything that the International Monetary Fund asks it to do to reduce debt and have a good GDP, and within eight hours of a hurricane (hitting), it can lose 200 percent of its GDP. The victims are the people and their livelihoods, which are changed in eight hours.
IPS: On the agenda of the COP27 talks is the issue of loss and damage, with developing countries seeking support from developed countries for the damage they have suffered due to climate change. Do you think the current negotiations can unlock funding crucial for developing countries to get help?
YD: We have already made history. Thirty years ago, the small islands brought up the issue of losses and damages, but nothing was done. They were told to reduce emissions first, and then there was no compensation liability. All progress was hindered because of the fear developed countries had of (paying) compensation and liability when developing countries were asking first and foremost for solidarity. (The developed world) promised to help them be more resilient and reduce emissions, but none of those commitments was fulfilled. This is now why the issue of reparations is coming. They have been asking for space to discuss this issue and how to finance those different losses and damage. The type of finance you need to deal with a disaster like a hurricane or a drought is very different from what you need when a whole nation (displaced and needs to) deal with the loss of cultural heritage.
Vulnerable countries are fighting hard to get a financial mechanism, but we need to figure out how to resource this mechanism. We know that trillions are needed. Look at (one country like) Pakistan; we are talking of billions. We have failed since 2009 to mobilise $100 billion a year when we know we need trillions. The more we wait it will be difficult to achieve, and we need to think pragmatically and forcefully not only to create the fund but also about how it will be replenished.
What will it come to? Should developing countries go to the International Court and have developed countries tried for climate crimes against humanity, or can we wait for COP200 for a solution?
Vanuatu has not waited to start. (They’re) saying: Hey! Enough is enough, and we need to take this to the International Court of Justice. So, whether this will result in a country, or seven countries being sued for not doing what they promised to do and taking action and providing reparations remains to be seen. We know this is creating a lot of anxiety because developed countries do not want any liability or (pay) compensation. The other aspect is that the polluters who need to pay are not just the governments but also the corporate sector. Fossil fuel companies are profiting the most from the current energy crisis, for example, so this is why there are discussions about a windfall tax and how to use such a tax on fossil fuel companies to compensate for loss and damage.
IPS: Are the voices of those suffering the most from the impacts of climate change being heard by COPs?
YD: I think at COP27, the UNFCCC is putting on one of the most inclusive COPs, but there is still a lot of work to make it more inclusive and effective. This is why philanthropies like us also have a responsibility and can use catalytic funding to really support and protect the movement of those voices that need to be heard. The supporting accountability mechanism outside the countries is to empower civil society to hold their governments and companies accountable, to use naming and shaming, and litigation is important, but it is also important for international platforms like the UNFCCC to have the right accountability mechanism to create the pressure.
Climate adaptation – adapting to already existing climate change and anticipating future changes in long-term planning – has been an increasing focus of attention in recent years as the current level of global warming is already causing extreme weather events to multiply and intensify. It is one of the core themes of COP27.
The EBRD is a leader on climate finance but its business model, with a focus on the private sector, means that it has done more mitigation than adaptation, which is often publicly financed.
The EBRD Climate Adaptation Action Plan brings together a number of elements to strengthen the Bank’s adaptation work: integrating adaptation into project and policy design, building partnerships, developing business and mobilising private finance.
“We don’t have one single answer on adaptation; our response is a combination of a number of different tools and approaches,” said Harry Boyd-Carpenter, EBRD Managing Director, Climate Strategy and Delivery. “We increasingly see adaptation not as a cost but rather as an investment that protect economic development and preserve the competitiveness of our clients.”
At last year’s climate summit, COP26, the Glasgow Climate Pact included a commitment from developed countries to at least double – from the 2019 levels of US$ 20 billion – the collective adaptation finance to developing countries by 2025. Increased adaptation finance is particularly important to address the climate vulnerability of EBRD regions
Several EBRD countries – especially those in the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean (SEMED) and Central Asia – are extremely vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Between 2008 and 2018, insured losses to extreme weather events in EBRD economies totalled US$ 25 billion.
Chronic water stress has already changed the landscape, and warming in the region is expected to exceed the global average. In the face of these risks, the EBRD is building new partnerships to identify and support opportunities for investing in greater resilience.
Over the past decade, the EBRD has financed over 350 climate resilience investments with a business volume of more than €10 billion and adaptation finance exceeding €2.8 billion.
Since issuing the world’s first dedicated climate resilience bond in 2019, the EBRD has also prepared the Guide for Issuers on Green Bonds for Climate Resilience, together with the Global Center on Adaptation (GCA) and the Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI), to provide practical guidance to sovereigns, sub-sovereigns, financial institutions and corporates on raising capital in the green bond market to invest in climate adaptation and resilience.
At the forefront of climate finance, the EBRD has committed to make more than half of its investment green by 2025 and to align all its operations with the goals of the Paris Agreement by 1 January 2023. In preparation, the Bank now screens every project for its climate resilience and systematically identify adaptation opportunities.
Footnote: The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) was established to help build a new, post-Cold War era in Central and Eastern Europe. It has since played a historic role and gained unique expertise in fostering change in the region – and beyond – investing €170 billion in more than 6,400 projects.
At COP27, the EBRD launched its Climate Adaptation Action Plan to boost adaptation finance. The plan involves integrating climate resilience into project design, building new and enhanced partnerships, and mobilising private finance. Adaptation finance is deemed crucial to address climate vulnerability of EBRD regions.
Vanora Bennett is EBRD green spokeswoman / Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, Georgia and Armenia
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
