Shweta S Banerjee, Country Lead for India, and Syed M Hashemi, Country Advisor for India at BRAC Ultra-Poor Graduation Initiative, joined members of the Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society, including CEO Rahul Kumar, to sign the MoU in Patna, India. Credit: BRAC UPGI
by IPS Correspondent (patna, india)
Inter Press Service
PATNA, India, Apr 10 (IPS) – Under the Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society, Bihar’s government announced the development of a new Program for Immersion and Learning Exchange (ILE) to be headquartered in Patna.
The Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society, locally known as JEEVIKA, is the implementing agency of Satat Jeevikoparjan Yojana (SJY), a government-led poverty alleviation program in Bihar that has reached over 150,000 households as of early 2023 and is still expanding.
SJY aims to boost the human capital of people living in extreme poverty and the most excluded households through the Graduation approach, an evidence-based, multifaceted, sequenced set of interventions that includes support of consumption, livelihoods, savings, and training. A rigorous study of Graduation in West Bengal by Nobel Laureates Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo demonstrates that Graduation provides people with the resources and skills needed to break the poverty trap.
“This a new beginning,” said Rahul Kumar, CEO of JEEVIKA. “JEEVIKA will function as an Immersion and Learning Centre for delegates outside state and country to understand our Graduation Program.”
Drawing on vast experience in supporting the design, delivery, and evaluation of Graduation programs worldwide for more than 20 years, BRAC International will serve as a technical partner for the ILE.
“BRAC International is honored to partner with the Bihar state government to launch an Immersion and Learning Exchange program at JEEVIKA so many more can learn from the Government of Bihar’s experience building inclusive livelihoods for marginalized women,” said Gregory Chen, Managing Director of BRAC Ultra-Poor Graduation Initiative (UPGI), a flagship program of BRAC International.
Rahul Kumar, CEO of Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society, signs an MoU with BRAC International to facilitate South-South knowledge sharing around the Graduation approach through a new Program for Immersion and Learning Exchange.
Since 2002, BRAC’s Graduation program in Bangladesh has reached more than 2.1 million households (approximately 9 million people) and supported the expansion of Graduation in 16 additional countries through direct implementation, technical assistance, and advisory services for implementing partners and governments. BRAC is committed to further advancing the expansion of Graduation by scaling it through governments across Africa and Asia to achieve maximum impact.
Learning and knowledge exchange has played a critical role in supporting adaptation and expansion efforts of the Graduation approach for various poverty contexts since it was pioneered in 2002. To date, more than 100 organizations in nearly 50 countries have adopted Graduation, according to the World Bank’s Partnership for Economic Inclusion.
Through immersion visits and learning exchange facilitated by JEEVIKA’s ILE, insights around the design, implementation, and evaluation of Graduation will be more accessible to other state governments in India and national governments throughout the Global South looking to enhance existing poverty alleviation efforts and enable millions more people around the world to escape the poverty trap.
Anna Ikeda. Credit: Soka University of America Photography
Opinion by Anna Ikeda (new york)
Inter Press Service
NEW YORK, Apr 10 (IPS) – The current war in Ukraine has shown that nuclear deterrence is deeply flawed. It relies on the assumption of “rational actors” in power and credibility of threats, which we know are far from reality, especially in times of conflicts.
Beyond their potential use, nuclear weapons continue to threaten us through their mere presence. For instance, resources spent on those weapons hinder the advancement towards achieving the SDGs and building the post-pandemic world. Therefore, they tangibly affect other priority areas to be addressed at the G7 summit.
Thus, this year’s G7 summit presents an opportunity to seriously rethink our understanding of security and international peace.
The 2022 SGI Peace Proposal, authored by our international president Daisaku Ikeda, urges that we must “detoxify” ourselves from current nuclear-dependent security doctrines. Based on this, I offer some recommendations on controlling nuclear weapons:
1. Adopt a No First Use policy
To reduce current tensions and create a way toward resolving the Ukraine crisis, the nuclear-weapon states must urgently initiate action to reduce nuclear risks. With nuclear arsenals in a continuing state of high alert, there is a considerably heightened risk of unintentional nuclear weapon use.
For this reason, SGI has renewed its commitment to advocate for the principle of No First Use to be universalized as the security policy of all states possessing nuclear weapons as well as nuclear-dependent states.
We believe that adopting the doctrine of No First Use by nuclear-armed states would significantly stabilize the global security climate and help create a much needed space for bilateral and multilateral dialogue toward ending the conflict.
A No First Use policy would also operationalize the recent statement by the G20 leaders that the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible, as well as the statement by the P-5 countries in January 2022 that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”
Certainly, such declaratory policy must be accompanied by changes in actual postures and policies, such as taking all nuclear forces off hair-triggered alert, in order to build mutual trust.
Overall, No First Use would be a critical step toward reducing the role of nuclear weapons in national security and serve as an impetus to advance nuclear disarmament. We therefore urge G7 leaders to seize the opportunity to discuss and announce strategies of risk reduction, de-escalation, and disarmament, particularly by declaring the policy of No First Use.
2. Engage productively in multilateral disarmament discussions and take bold leadership
It is critically important that G7 leaders take bold leadership and renew their commitment to fulfill obligations for disarmament stipulated under Article VI of the NPT.
Equally important would be to further explore the complementarity between the NPT and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). We especially hope Japan will fulfill its commitment as a bridge-builder by engaging productively in the TPNW discussions, recognizing that, despite divergent approaches, all countries share grave concerns about the potential use of nuclear weapons.
We strongly urge G7 countries to work cooperatively with the TPNW States Parties by committing to attend meetings of states parties to the treaty in the future.
3. Commit to work towards the elimination of nuclear weapons
It is often said that a world without nuclear weapons is the “ultimate goal.” However, we have to be sure this goal is achieved before nuclear weapons destroy our world. There have been some calls by experts to set the year 2045 as the absolute deadline for the elimination of nuclear weapons. At the Hiroshima Summit, G7 leaders could possibly agree on setting such a timeline and determine to begin negotiations accordingly.
4. Support disarmament and nonproliferation education initiatives
Lastly, we call on G7 leaders to demonstrate their support for educational initiatives at every level. We strongly hope that they set an example by visiting the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum and meeting the atomic bomb survivors, to directly hear from them, and learn from their experiences.
To shift the current security paradigm, we must transform the way people think about peace and security, and challenge the dominant narrative that nuclear weapons keep us safe. We need to raise the public’s awareness that the surest way to avoid a nuclear war is by eliminating these catastrophic weapons.
A 2009 nuclear abolition proposal by the SGI president states that, if we are to put the era of nuclear terror behind us, we must confront the ways of thinking that justify nuclear weapons; the readiness to annihilate others when they are seen as a threat or as a hindrance to the realization of our objectives.
For this reason, we ask for the G7 leaders’ commitment to make available the opportunity for everyone, especially but not limited to young people, to learn about the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons.
We welcome Prime Minister Kishida’s initiative for the Hiroshima Action Plan, and establishing a “Youth Leader Fund for a world without nuclear weapons.” We hope Japan will exercise its leadership to affirm that the purpose of such initiatives is not to provide only the education about disarmament, but education for disarmament.
To close, the current tensions and uncertainties in the global security climate elevates, not undermines, the value and role of dialogue and diplomacy. Forums like the G7 and the United Nations serve more important functions than ever.
Anna Ikeda is representative to the United Nations of Soka Gakkai International (SGI), and the program coordinator for disarmament of the SGI Office for UN Affairs, where her work focuses on nuclear abolition and stopping killer robots. This is a slightly shortened transcript of her paper presented to the conference on ‘Advancing Security and Sustainability at the G7 Hiroshima Summit‘ at Soka University, Tokyo on March 29, 2023.
Technology increasingly sits at the intersection of many aspects of our lives: how we work and learn, how we interact with the people in our lives and the world around us, and how we access and consume the products and services we use every day. Diversity in engineering and technology is critical to ensuring different perspectives are considered when we identify and solve problems with technology and results in more creative solutions. Credit: United Nations
Opinion by Padmini Sharma (milan, italy)
Inter Press Service
MILAN, Italy, Apr 10 (IPS) – Excessive reliance on algorithmic management has raised concerns regarding its opaque decision-making mechanisms and implication for workers.
In less than a decade, digital platforms have evolved from a niche market to engulf diverse industries and services across the globe, in developed and developing nations alike.
Defined as online mechanisms that enable exchanging goods, services, or information between different actors, these include the likes of Amazon, eBay, Uber, Deliveroo and Airbnb.
In India, both location-dependent jobs like ride-hailing, food delivery and caregiving to location-independent jobs like crowd work have grown due to the high demand for these services in the market, coupled with huge labour reserves comprising both local and migrant labour forces.
As more than 88 per cent of the total employees in India is engaged in the informal economy, some considered the rise in the platform economy to hold significant potential in addressing existing economic and social disparities.
The term ‘platform economy’ encompasses the growing digital platforms, the models of which are gaining significance over other traditional setups as they offer the possibility to save significantly on structural and labour costs, reduce transaction costs and eliminate barriers.
These have constrained labour force participation across disadvantaged groups and ensure a high degree of autonomy for workers to decide about their workload, work portfolio, time and place of work.
Thus, many workers consider these platforms to extend viable opportunities for earning a living, whether at home or abroad. However, despite these advantages, these platforms have raised concerns over deteriorating working conditions.
Pitfalls of algorithmic management
These platforms depend on algorithmic management to mediate labour relations. In practice this means that algorithms manage labour through certain practices like assigning orders to specific workers, optimising delivery routes, calculating income and incentives, and monitoring and evaluating the performances of workers.
Initially, algorithmic management was seen as a positive development for workers due to its comparison with previous job experiences. Most workers found it to be less stressful, offering them more autonomy and flexibility and above all the belief that the algorithm is more ‘reliable’ in allocating tasks or calculating their income.
Compared to dealing with humans as managers, dealing with apps was a more rewarding experience in the pre-Covid19 era. Undoubtedly, introducing algorithms has its advantages.
When extracting and using massive real-time data, algorithms can execute faster and make more accurate decisions, therefore enhancing workers’ productivity and efficiency while reducing transaction costs.
The use of algorithmic management is seen to have indirect negative implications on the physical and mental health of the workers, which, to meet the targets, are working 14 to 17 hours per day.
Positive as it may seem at first glance, algorithmic management has also introduced certain risks. Although most workers are aware that platforms such as Uber Eats and Deliveroo are strategically leveraging workers’ data to calculate remuneration or assess performances, many workers find it hard to understand the functioning of these apps, in particular the techniques that go into the programming.
This lack of understanding results in doubts about the claimed ‘logical’ and ‘unbiased’ mechanisms of these apps;
‘It does not understand what problems we face on the road like when we go to deliver the order to the customer, if there is any problem on the way like a bike accident or anything, then that is not considered the company does not understand that if I have taken the order, it means I have to deliver it and if I am not being able to deliver it, then the app will directly deduct the amount of the order or even its double from the pay-out’, explains a Mumbai delivery worker.
The excessive reliance on algorithmic management has raised concerns regarding these opaque decision-making mechanisms, their implications for workers, their random and inscrutable logic that leaves less room for human comprehension and for workers to contest as well as the high potential for them to propagate existing biases and discrimination.
In addition to this, the use of algorithmic management is also seen to have indirect negative implications on the physical and mental health of the workers, which, to meet the targets, are working 14 to 17 hours per day on average — severely disrupting their work-life balance.
Linking the delivery time to ratings, moreover, makes workers jump traffic signals and ride at high speed, often ignoring the risks associated with such decisions. The assignment of tasks based on several often ‘beyond controllable’ factors by the algorithm increases stress among workers.
These highly controlled unilateral relations with the app are further seen to be disrupting the social relations among the workers which restricts their potential to engage in collective resistance.
Many platform workers are thus moving towards individualistic approaches such as waiting at specific locations or maintaining good terms with the team leaders to make themselves more visible to possibly secure higher orders and income.
Even when some workers are resorting to digital means in uniting, it is not clear whether such mechanisms can contribute towards arousing significant pro-working-class consciousness among the workers.
The challenge of regulating platforms
At the EU level, with multiple cases coming up against algorithmic manipulation and discrimination, and the inaccessibility of data, significant attention is devoted to regulating the rights and interests of platform workers by introducing new governing mechanisms.
As platform workers, with or without support from unions, have brought up several cases against these platforms relating to algorithmic functioning. For example, in Italy, based on the cases filed against app-based delivery platforms, the Courts of Palermo and Courts of Bologna have agreed that the work in these platforms is highly managed via algorithms, the deliveries are assigned based on criteria that are not related to the workers’ preferences or their general interests and that it runs on principles that violate Italian law prohibiting discrimination against employees or self-employed.
The debate in India has mostly centred around including platform workers under the proposed Code on Social Security to ensure more uniform coverage for workers engaged across different platforms.
However, unlike in the European context, the Judiciary in India has not been able to extend recommendations to protect and regulate the interests of the platform or the gig workers. Instead, the debate has mostly centred around including platform workers under the proposed Code on Social Security to ensure more uniform coverage for workers engaged across different platforms.
However, this Code is criticised on several grounds, as it does not solve the main issues concerning workers’ classification and minimum wages and because of its approach to social security, which is still not enough to address existing concerns.
The Code also does not mention any timelines to implement the schemes, thereby adding to the uncertainties of workers. Lastly, the division of powers is also a problem since there is no clear demarcation of responsibilities between the central and state government on labour issues.
A further attempt at regulation in the Motor Vehicles Act of 2020 has sought to place obligations on platforms to maintain transparency over the ‘functioning of the app algorithm’, however, it has not incorporated the ‘right to explanation’, meaning that workers still do not have access to understanding the mechanisms that go into calculating their income, allocating tasks or evaluating their performances.
As workers are coming up with multiple complaints concerning threats to personal data, a lack of transparency, unaccountable algorithmic programming, as well as algorithmic manipulation, there is a strong need to create a more robust governing structure that ensures platform workers greater access to data and to the mechanisms involved in designing their work practices.
Padmini Sharma is a PhD Candidate in Economic Sociology and Labour Studies at the Universita Degli Studi di Milano.
Source: International Politics and Society (IPS), published by the Global and European Policy Unit of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Hiroshimastrasse 28, D-10785 Berlin.
A nurse walks into a hospital ward in Janakpur in Dhanusha District in southern Nepal. Credit: UNICEF/Rupadhayay
Opinion by Roopa Dhatt, Susannah Schaefer (washington dc / new york)
Inter Press Service
WASHINGTON DC / NEW YORK, Apr 07 (IPS) – As World Health Worker Week draws to a close on April 7, health organizations from around the world have been celebrating women’s vital role in the health workforce and sharing stories about the enormous value they bring to all areas of health and care.
But platitudes are not enough. It’s time for global health leaders to step up and turn these words into action.
Globally, women make up almost 70% of the global health workforce and 90% of the frontline health workforce, contributing over $3 trillion to global health each year. The health systems in which they work play a significant role in remote and marginalized groups’ access to health, especially in times of crisis. Despite this, the challenges faced by community health workers (CHWs) are frequently overlooked.
CHWs play a critical role in providing care to vulnerable populations, but they are undervalued and accorded lower status in the “informal” workforce. Upwards of six million women are estimated to be either unpaid or grossly underpaid despite working in core health systems roles and just 14% of CHWs in Africa are salaried.
It is unjust that global health systems rely on the labor of unpaid women who are creating social and economic value that is uncounted and unrewarded. Unpaid work reduces women’s economic security and increases their lifetime poverty.
It also weakens health systems. The pandemic has demonstrated the need for strong and resilient health systems, but there can be no global health security while health systems are subsidized by some of the world’s poorest women.
Women health workers continue to make huge sacrifices to work on the frontlines. They went door-to-door educating households on the COVID-19 virus, tracing contacts, and delivering vaccines.
At last year’s World Health Assembly, India’s one million women community health workers known as accredited social health activists (ASHAs) were honored for successfully protecting the health of millions of people during the pandemic.
At the start of the pandemic, however, reports were coming out of India about the unacceptable risk faced by ASHA workers who were being sent into communities without lack of infection controls and facing stigma and abuse as perceived vectors of the virus.
In 2020, they launched widespread street protests and strikes to demand better pay, protection, and working conditions. ASHA workers may have been acknowledged as global health leaders, but they continue to be underpaid with small performance-based honorariums. They are still fighting for a fair and regular salary and the benefits that come with formal sector roles.
Pre-pandemic the World Health Organization (WHO) projected a global shortage of 10 million health workers by 2030, which COVID-19 now has deepened. Health workers lost their lives to the virus and significant numbers are unable to work, affected by ‘long-COVID’. There have been increased reports of violence towards women health workers during the pandemic–from colleagues as well as patients and their families.
In a 2018 report on health policy and system support to optimize CHW programs, one of the primary WHO recommendations included fair remuneration for CHWs, but this is still far from the norm. When CHWs are compensated, it often fails to align with WHO recommendations, which call for financial packages that are commensurate with the demands of the job, the level of complexity, the training required, and the hours worked.
This World Health Workers Week, we come together with our partners to call on global health leaders, governments and policy makers to disrupt the status quo. We believe that every person, regardless of gender, should have access to quality health and care and opportunities to thrive.
We know a fairly-compensated health workforce–alongside training, supervision, and safe working environments–leads to improved productivity, wider access to healthcare, and better patient outcomes.
The gender pay gap in health of 24% is one of the largest of any sector. We are calling on leaders to take measures to close that gap. We stand with our partners in calling for and focusing on transformative change, including gender-equal leadership in global health and a new social contract for women health workers centered on the need for fair and equal pay and safe and decent work.
There is increasing urgency in both high-income and low- and-middle income countries to prioritize changes in guidelines, funding, and policies. After three years of COVID-19, women health workers, who have been the majority in patient-facing roles, are burned out and traumatized.
Understandably, women are leaving the health sector at all levels in a ‘Great Resignation,’ which threatens to deepen the global health worker shortage crisis.
Addressing these injustices is a moral obligation and an economic necessity. Investing in health workers is a win-win proposition and will send a message that we recognize and value them as professionals.
Not only can we restore justice to neglected global health systems, but we can improve the working conditions and pay of health workers, unleashing broader economic benefits.
We would like to send a clear message that as heads of global health organizations we are committed to building stronger health systems and a more equitable world. Achieving true health equity includes quality care for all–including health workers.
Dr Roopa Dhatt is Executive Director and Co-Founder Women in Global Health, a fast- growing women-led movement with 47 chapters worldwide.
Susannah (“Susie”) Schaefer is Executive Vice Chair, President, and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Smile Train, the world’s largest cleft-focused organization with a sustainable and local model of supporting surgery and other forms of comprehensive cleft care.
NEW YORK, Apr 06 (IPS) – With schools now reopened around the world, countries are called to take transformative action on education financing to recover and accelerate learning for all children, especially the poorest and most marginalized.
Findings from our recent study, however, reveal that we have yet to overcome hurdles to equitable education financing: in far too many countries, the poorest children often benefit the least from public education funding.
To transform education for every child, governments must address all three aspects of education financing: adequacy, efficiency, and equity. Our analysis covering 102 countries zeroed in on the equity challenge in education.
Many dimensions of equity are important to address, as vulnerable children can face simultaneous disadvantages related to poverty, disability, gender, location and more.
However, our study focuses on the poorest children, often hit the hardest by multiple, compounding barriers to quality education and learning.
Unfortunately, children from the poorest households often benefit the least from public education spending. On average, the poorest learners receive only 16 per cent of public funding for education, while the richest learners receive 28 per cent.
In 1 out of every 10 countries, learners from the richest 20 per cent of households receive four or more times the amount of public education spending than the poorest.
In Guinea, Mali and Chad, the richest learners benefit from over six times the amount of public education spending compared to the poorest learners.
Evidence from 46 countries indicates that public education spending has become more inequitable in 4 out of every 10 countries. The data speaks for itself: the poorest learners are not receiving their fair share of public education funding, and we must intensify efforts to address these inequities.
Equitable education spending is critical and can reverse the effects of the global learning crisis before an entire generation loses its future. Our analysis shows that if public education spending stagnates, a one percentage point increase in the allocation of public education resources to the poorest 20 per cent is associated with a 2.6 to 4.7 percentage point reduction in learning poverty rates – translating to up to 35 million primary school-aged children that could be pulled out of learning poverty.
How can we address the equity challenge and ensure education funding reaches the poorest? One way is to ensure public funding prioritises lower education levels.
This financing principle refers to ‘progressive universalism’, by which resource allocation initially prioritises lower levels of education, where poor and marginalized children tend to be more represented. These first few years of learning lay the groundwork for children to acquire basic foundational skills. Then, when coverage at lower levels is near universal, resource allocation is gradually increased to higher levels, with a continued focus on the poorest and most marginalized.
Finally, it is important to note that inequity issues exist not only in domestic education financing, but also in international aid to education.
For instance, over the past decade, official development assistance (ODA) to education allocated to the least developed countries (LDCs) has never exceeded 30 per cent, far from the 50 per cent benchmark set forth by the Addis Ababa Action Agenda.
Moreover, appeals for education in emergencies often receive just 10 to 30 per cent of the amounts needed, with significant disparities across countries and regions. On average, the education sector receives less than 3 per cent of humanitarian aid.
The global community must come together to ensure that children living in the poorest countries and in emergencies can benefit from equitable education financing.
To respond to the equity challenge in education, we call on governments and key stakeholders to take the following key actions:
• Most critically, unlock pro-equity public financing to education through broader coverage and volume of decentralized allocations, resources to schools, resources to students of disadvantaged backgrounds (by education and social protection ministries), and strengthened resource allocation monitoring.
• Prioritize public funding to foundational learning by securing funding for all in pre-primary and primary education and targeting the poor and marginalized at higher levels of education.
• Monitor and ensure equitable education aid allocation in developmental and humanitarian contexts between and within countries, including sub-sector levels, when applicable.
• Invest in innovative ways of delivering education to complement gaps in existing public funding through multiple and flexible pathways, including quality digital learning.
We cannot hope to end the learning crisis if we invest the least in children who need it the most.
We must act now to ensure education resources reach all learners and progress towards achieving the goal of inclusive and quality education for all – allowing every child and young person a fair chance to succeed.
Source: UNICEF Blog
The UNICEF Blog promotes children’s rights and well-being, and ideas about ways to improve their lives and the lives of their families. It brings insights and opinions from the world’s leading child rights experts and accounts from UNICEF’s staff on the ground in more than 190 countries and territories. The opinions expressed on the UNICEF Blog are those of the author(s) and may not necessarily reflect UNICEF’s official position.
The Abortion Dream Team (from left to right Natalia Broniarczyk, Justyna Wydrzynska, Kinga Jelinska) outside the Warsaw court after Wydrzynska’s conviction. Credit: Abortion Dream Team
by Ed Holt (bratislava)
Inter Press Service
BRATISLAVA, Apr 05 (IPS) – “People want the abortion laws here liberalised. Society has changed; even the politicians can see it,” Kinga Jelinska, a Polish reproductive rights activist, says. “In four or five years, I believe, the abortion laws here will be liberalised, because it’s what the people support.”
Jelinska, a member of the Abortion Dream Team (ADT) collective, which provides assistance to women in Poland who need an abortion, spoke to IPS not long after her fellow activist and ADT co-founder Justyna Wydrzynska had been sentenced to eight months community service for giving abortion pills to another woman.
She is disappointed by the ruling but, like her colleague, remains defiant and determined to carry on her work.
“We’re just going to keep going. The court claimed Justyna was ‘guilty of helping’ someone have an abortion. Well, we have to help each other in cases where people are being systematically denied access to care. Without people like Justyna, women are left to take their own decisions , and they may take an unsafe option,” Kinga says.
Wydrzynska’s trial and conviction have, activists such as Jelinska say, highlighted problems connected with abortion access in Poland and the risks women needing the procedure – and those they turn to for advice – often face.
Poland has some of the world’s strictest abortion laws – terminations are only permitted where the pregnancy threatens the mother’s life or health, or if it results from a criminal act, such as rape or incest – and while not illegal to have an abortion, it is illegal to help someone do so.
Many women in Poland who want an abortion self-administer pills bought online from abroad or travel to neighbouring countries with less restrictive legislation, such as Germany and the Czech Republic, for terminations. Some contact groups like ADT for help. It is not illegal to give out information about abortions, including advice on how to buy pills online.
In February 2020, at the start of the Covid pandemic in Poland, ADT had been contacted by a woman, named Anya*, who was 12 weeks pregnant and desperate. She said she was a victim of domestic violence and was considering going abroad to terminate her pregnancy as the pills she had ordered online were taking too long to arrive.
Wydrzynska decided to give Anya her own pills, but the package she sent was intercepted by Anya’s partner, who reported what had happened to police. Anna later miscarried.
Wydrzynska was convicted of “aiding an abortion” – a crime under Polish law which carries a maximum sentence of three years in prison – by a Warsaw court in March 2023 in what is believed to be the first time in Europe that a women’s health advocate has gone on trial for aiding an abortion.
The conviction was immediately condemned by both local and international activists who said the case should never have been brought to court.
“We were disappointed that Justyna was convicted. We are happy that she is not going to jail, but her trial has dragged on for a year, in which time a lot of international organisations, including gynaecologists, said the case should be dropped. It should never have come to trial, and this would never have happened in another country,“ Mara Clarke, co-founder of Supporting Abortions for Everyone, told IPS.
Amnesty International described the court’s ruling as “a depressing low in the repression of reproductive rights in Poland”.
“This ruling is going to have a chilling effect and we are already seeing women who are worried about what they should do if they found themselves in the situation that they need an abortion,” Mikolaj Czerwinski, Senior Campaigner at Amnesty International, told IPS.
Others believe the trial was part of a wider campaign to crackdown on women’s rights and those of the minorities such as the LGBTQI community, by the right-wing government and its conservative religious allies.
“The case against Justyna was politically motivated,” said Clarke, pointing out that the judge in the case was promoted on the same as she handed down the verdict, and that the Christian fundamentalist group Ordo Iuris was allowed a role in the trial helping the prosecution.
“Who knows what will come up with next?” she added.
The ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party has long been accused by critics in Poland and abroad of systematically suppressing women’s rights, and it was instrumental in pushing through a tightening of abortion laws in 2021 which banned abortions even in cases where the foetus was diagnosed with a severe birth defect.
Meanwhile, the European Commission (EC) has raised serious concerns over judicial independence in the country under the PiS with some judicial bodies seen as being under the control of the ruling party.
Czerwinski said that following the trial there were now “questions over the independence of the judiciary in Poland and what impact that might have on women’s rights, and human rights in general, in Poland”.
But while anger remains at Wydrzynska’s conviction, activists such as Jelinska and Clarke believe that the trial has only highlighted how out of touch Poland’s government is with society on abortion laws.
Since the abortion laws was tightened even further in 2021 – a move which was met with massive street protests – surveys have shown strong support for liberalisation of abortion laws. In one poll last November, 70% of respondents backed allowing terminations on demand up to 12 weeks.
“People want access to abortions, public surveys have shown that. We see it too in the work we do every day,” she says, adding that during Wydrzynska’s trial “public opinion was overwhelmingly pro-Justyna.”
In a public opinion poll carried out in February for Amnesty International, 47% of respondents said they would have done the same as Wydrzynska. The survey also found that people were overwhelmingly against punishment for helping to access an abortion in Poland.
Meanwhile, some opposition politicians have suggested they would introduce legislation which would allow for abortion on demand if they get into power, pointing to public support for such a measure.
It is this public support which, Kinga believes, may have stopped the court handing down a jail sentence to the activist.
“This is an election year, and the government knows it would be political suicide to give her a harsher sentence with so many people in favour of liberalising access to abortion,” she explains.
It may also be behind Polish parliament’s rejection in early March of a bill, proposed by an anti-abortion group as a citizen’s legislative initiative under a special parliamentary procedure, which would have criminalised even providing information about abortions. Government MPs voted against it with some reportedly saying they did back it for fear of fuelling protests just months away from elections.
“Even they know that would have been going too far,” said Czerwisnki.
The trial, which was reported extensively in Poland and widely in international media, has also helped raise awareness of the work of groups like ADT and others with some organisations, including the Abortions Without Borders network which has a Polish helpline reporting a three-fold rise in calls since the trial began.
“Justyna’s case put even more focus on the issue and the ways women can access abortion services,” says Kinga.
If the conviction was designed to put activists off their work, it seems to have backfired, said Czerwinski.
“A lot of activists have been re-energised by this because they have seen Justyna and her response to the ruling,” he said. “They are aware of the risks, but at the same time will not stop helping women.”
Wydrzynska has appealed her conviction and insists that she has done nothing wrong. She has also vowed to continue her activism.
Speaking on public radio after her trial, she said: “Even if I should leave the country, I will never stop. In the same way, I know that there are thousands of people who’d do the same for me.”
Financing is vital for growth. Credit: Unsplash / Towfiqu Barbhuiya
Opinion by Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana (bangkok, thailand)
Inter Press Service
The writer is UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)
BANGKOK, Thailand, Apr 04 (IPS) – The unprecedented fiscal firepower used to protect the vulnerable from the harsh socio-economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting economic contraction have pushed the average government debt level in the Asia-Pacific region to its highest since 2008.
Public debt distress is expected to worsen amid the global economic slowdown, record high inflation and rising interest rates, and uncertainty induced by the war in Ukraine.
And surging debt service payments are expected to put public debt sustainability of several developing Asia-Pacific economies at risk. Most concerning, debt distress risk is highest for countries with the highest development finance needs, including small island developing States.
Public debt is a powerful development tool in need of a major rethink
Yet, a higher debt level is not necessarily a bad thing, according to this year’s edition of the Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific. Current policy debates on public debt sustainability do not take into account the long-term positive socio-economic and environmental impact of public investments in laying the foundations of inclusive, resilient and sustainable prosperity.
Indeed, left unaddressed, development deficits and climate risks hurt economic prospects and public debt sustainability itself. Our analysis shows that social spending cuts increase poverty and inequality and undermine economic productivity in the long term.
Conversely, investing in healthcare, education, social protection and climate action is good economics.
Multilateral lenders and credit rating agencies focus excessively on keeping debt sustainable in the short term. Such perceived optimal debt levels are too low and lead to suboptimal development outcomes.
Revisiting current debt sustainability norms has also become necessary with the emergence of major non-traditional bilateral creditors and a drastic fall in concessional development lending to Asian and Pacific countries over the past decade.
It is time for a bold shift in thinking about public debt sustainability. We propose an augmented approach that assesses public debt viability that takes into account a country’s SDG investment needs, government structural development policies aiming to boost economic competitiveness, and national SDG financing strategies.
It is time for creditors, international financial institutions and credit rating agencies to consider the positive long-term economic, social and environmental outcomes of investing in the SDGs, while assessing public debt sustainability.
Our research finds that public debt is found to decline over the long term when the socio-economic and environmental benefits of public investments are incorporated.
Rather than penalizing bold fiscal support for people and the environment, international creditors should consider if such spending would boost economic productivity.
Lenders and credit rating agencies should see debt relief as helping support the fiscal outlook, rather than as a sign of an upcoming debt default.
Developing countries should also strive to balance investing in the SDGs with ensuring debt sustainability. Governments should not feel deterred from borrowing for essential, high-impact sustainable development spending; rather, funds should be used efficiently and effectively.
Public coffers should also be boosted by resource mobilization strategies designed to generate social and/or environmental benefits, such as through progressive taxation.
Effective public debt management reduces fiscal risks and borrowing costs, with several examples of good public debt management practices in the Asia-Pacific region. At the same time, countries with high debt distress levels may need pre-emptive, swift and adequate sovereign debt restructuring, while efforts towards common international debt resolution mechanisms and restructuring frameworks needs to be accelerated.
We are in the fourth year of the Decade of Action to accelerate progress towards the SDGs with not much to show in gains. It is time for Asia and the Pacific to rise to the challenge of mobilizing the financial resources to realise the dream of resilient and sustainable prosperity for all.
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 03 (IPS) – As signs of a new Cold War are fast emerging at the United Nations, the US continues its war of words with the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
The rivalry, which extends from Russia and Taiwan to Iran and Myanmar – where the UN’s two permanent members are on opposite sides of ongoing political or military conflicts– has now triggered a battle on semantics.
Is China, described as the world’s second largest economy ranking next to the US, really a “developing nation”?
The US House of Representative unanimously passed a bill March 27 directing the Secretary of State Antony Blinken to strip the PRC of its “developing country” status in international organizations
Titled “PRC Is Not a Developing Country Act” — the bill cleared the House in an overwhelming 415-0 vote. The legislation reads: “It should be the policy of the United States—
(1) to oppose the labeling or treatment of the People’s Republic of China as a developing country in any treaty or other international agreement to which the United States is a party;
(2) to oppose the labeling or treatment of the People’s Republic of China as a developing country in each international organization of which the United States is a member; and
(3) to pursue the labeling or treatment of the People’s Republic of China as an upper middle-income country, high income country, or developed country in each international organization of which the United States is a member”.
At the United Nations, China is closely allied with the 137-member Group of 77 (G77), the largest single coalition of “developing countries” (a group created in 1964 with 77 members).
Since China is not a formal member of the G77, the group describes itself either as “The G77 and China” or “The G77 plus China.”
Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury, a former Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to the UN and a former UN Under-Secretary-General, told IPS the defining of a developing country is a complex challenge.
“There is no established framework or charter for defining a “developing country,” he noted
According to well-respected economist Jeffrey Sachs, the current divide between the developed and developing world is largely a phenomenon of the 20th century. Some economists emphasize that the binary labeling of countries is “neither descriptive nor explanatory”.
For the UN system, the G77, which provides the collective negotiating platform of the countries of the South, is in reality synonymous with nations which are identified as “developing countries, least developed countries (LDCs), landlocked developing countries and small island developing states” (SIDS).
“They are all sub-groupings of developing countries and belong to the G-77, he pointed out.
Outlining the group’s history, he said, the G-77 was established in 1964 by seventy-seven developing countries, signatories of the “Joint Declaration” issued at the end of the first session of the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in Geneva.
Although members of the G-77 have increased to 134 countries, the original name was retained due to its historic significance. Developing countries tend to have some characteristics in common, often due to their histories or geographies, said Ambassador Chowdhury, Chairman of the Administrative and Budgetary Committee (Fifth Committee) of the UN General Assembly in 1997-98 and Chair of the Group of 27, working group of G-77, in 1982-83.
In October 1997, he said, China joined the G-77 while keeping its special identity by proposing the nomenclature as “G-77 and China”. China aligns its positions on the global economic and social issues with G-77 positions for negotiating purposes.
Being the largest negotiating group in the United Nations, and in view of the mutuality of their common concerns, G-77 is not expected to agree to separate China from the current collaborative arrangements.
“And more so, if the pressure comes from the US delegation, in view of the recent resolution of the House of Representatives of the US Congress, to take away the categorization of China as a developing country”, declared Ambassador Chowdhury.
In a World Bank Data Blog, Tariq Khokhar, Global Data Editor & Senior Data Scientist and Umar Serajuddin, Manager, Development Data Group, at the World Bank, point out that the IMF, in the “World Economic Outlook (WEO)” currently classify 37 countries as “Advanced Economies” and all others are considered “Emerging Market and Developing Economies” according to the WEO Statistical Annex.”
The institution notes that “this classification is not based on strict criteria, economic or otherwise” and that it’s done in order to “facilitate analysis by providing a reasonably meaningful method of organizing data.”
The United Nations has no formal definition of developing countries, but still uses the term for monitoring purposes and classifies as many as 159 countries as developing, the authors argue.
The UN maintains a list of “Least Developed Countries” which are defined by accounting for GNI per capita as well as measures of human capital and economic vulnerability.
“While we can’t find the first instance of “developing world” being used, what it colloquially refers to — the group of countries that fare relatively and similarly poorly in social and economic measures — hasn’t been consistently or precisely defined, and this “definition” hasn’t been updated.”
“The World Bank has for many years referred to “low and middle income countries” as “developing countries” for convenience in publications, but even if this definition was reasonable in the past, it’s worth asking if it has remained so and if a more granular definition is warranted.”
In its legislation, the US House of Representatives says “not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report identifying all current treaty negotiations in which—
(a) Any international organization of which the United States and the People’s Republic of China are both current member states, the Secretary, in coordination with the heads of other Federal agencies and departments as needed, shall pursue—
(1) changing the status of the People’s Republic of China from developing country to upper middle income country, high income country, or developed country if a mechanism exists in such organization to make such a change in status;
(2) proposing the development of a mechanism described in paragraph (1) to change the status of the People’s Republic of China in such organization from developing country to developed country; or
(3) regardless of efforts made pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2), working to ensure that the People’s Republic of China does not receive preferential treatment or assistance within the organization as a result of it having the status of a developing country.
(b) The President may waive the application of subsection (a) with respect to any international organization if the President notifies the appropriate committees of Congress, not later than 10 days before the date on which the waiver shall take effect, that such a waiver is in the national interests of the United States.
Speaking during the debate, Representative Young Kim (Republican of California) said: “The People’s Republic of China is the world’s second largest economy, accounting for 18.6 percent of the global economy.”
“Their economy is second only to that of the United States. The United States is treated as a developed country, so should PRC,” Kim said. “And is also treated as a high-income country in treaties and international organizations, so China should also be treated as a developed country.”
“However, the PRC is classified as a developing country, and they’re using this status to game the system and hurt countries that are truly in need,” she added.
Elaborating further, Ambassador Chowdhury said the World Bank, as a part of the Bretton Woods institutions, classifies the world’s economies into four groups, based on gross national income per capita: high, upper-middle, lower-middle, and low income countries.
In 2015, the World Bank declared that the “developing/developed world categorization” had become less relevant and that they will phase out the use of that descriptor.
Instead, their reports will present data aggregations for regions and income groups.
The World Trade Organisation (WTO) accepts any country’s claim of itself being “developing”.
He said certain countries that have become “developed” in the last 20 years by almost all economic metrics, still wants to be classified as “developing country”, as it entitles them to a preferential treatment at the WTO – countries such as Brunei, Kuwait, Qatar, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates.
The term “Global South“, used by some as an alternative term to developing countries, began to be mentioned more widely since about 2004.
The Global South refers to these countries’ interconnected histories of colonialism, neo-imperialism, and differential economic and social change through which large inequalities in living standards, life expectancy, and access to resources are maintained.
“Most of humanity resides in the Global South,” declared Ambassador Chowdhury.
The cumulative needs of injured patients from the war have created a medical crisis. Credit: James Jeffrey/IPS
Opinion by Abdo Husen (addis ababa)
Inter Press Service
ADDIS ABABA, Mar 30 (IPS) – There are about 5 billion people globally who cannot access surgery. In Ethiopia, for every 5,000 needed surgeries per 100,000 people, the country’s health system can only provide 192. Yet, this is Africa’s second largest population, with over 120 million people.
The statistics are worrying. This is further exacerbated by a recently ended two-year war in the northern part of the country that devastated among others, the health sector. There is however an opportunity to build back better as the government institutes post-war reconstruction. This is possible through prioritizing access to surgical care as part of restoring the country’s health system in post-war reconstruction efforts.
Armed conflict increases the demand for health services yet hampers the system’s ability to deliver these services as it disrupts the supply chain, results in direct damage to health facilities, and forces health workers to flee their duty stations. In Ethiopia, unofficial estimates put the proportion of health workers who fled their duty stations at over 90% of the pre-conflict numbers.
The cumulative needs of injured patients from the war have created a medical crisis. It is a vicious cycle whose victims are innocent civilians. Take for instance patients with open fractures and bullet wounds who require some form of reconstructive surgery. This service is largely unavailable in affected regions, particularly in Tigray. If left untreated, these injuries can result in infections, amputation, permanent disability, or even death.
This was the case for 17-year-old Hakeem* (not his real name). He suffered bone and nerve damages as a casualty of the war. Hakeem was facing the threat of disability from abnormal bone healing and wrist-drop, which is paralysis of the muscles that enable hand function.
Fortunately, he received surgical care that allowed him to return to his daily activities with reduced physical challenges. Not many people have been as lucky. Reports show that over 100,000 people died from lack of access to medical care in war time. This includes lack of access to surgical care.
Additionally, the influx of surgical patients owing to the war has slowed down the already strained health system’s ability to provide non-emergency surgical care. Although not life threatening, these surgical needs have a major impact on improving the quality of life of those in need.
These include cleft lip and cleft palate, which are birth defects that occur when a baby’s lip or mouth do not form properly during pregnancy. Failure to correct this, often results in social and economic exclusion of patients who are often ostracized by their communities for allegations based on false and harmful cultural and religious beliefs including their participation in witchcraft.
To restore all social service infrastructure- including health facilities damaged by conflicts in the country, the government has allocated 20 billion ETB into the capital budget for the current fiscal year. This is way below the requisite threshold to rebuild the health services alone.
There is indeed urgent need to prioritize surgical care at the forefront of rehabilitation efforts. The Ministry of Health must provide health workers – including specialist surgical and anesthesia workforce with monetary and non-monetary incentives to return to their pre-war duty stations to fill the gaping vacuum in human resourcing.
The federal government must allocate resources towards the rehabilitation and equipping of all health facilities including surgical theatres in northern Ethiopia. This budgetary allocation must be included in the 2023/2024 budget cycle (2016 Ethiopian fiscal year). Critics could argue that there is simply not enough money to this end.
While the government could be cash-strapped to rebuild different sectors of the economy; it is its ultimate responsibility to ensure the life and health of its citizens. It must therefore seek innovative ways to fund reconstruction efforts. One such way could be through leveraging public private partnerships.
Not only will this provide the necessary funds but has the prospect of being an accountability mechanism to ensure lasting peace as a condition of the disbursement of funds or gifts in kind. These would be tangible steps towards reconstruction, alleviating the suffering of Ethiopians who without these services, continue to suffer preventable medical conditions and deaths.
Abdo Husen is a public health specialist by training, Program Lead at Operation Smile Ethiopia, and a 2023 Global Surgery Advocacy Fellow
A man collects his ration at one of the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) collection points. The project, however, has resulted in deaths and injuries as people flocked to the collection points. Credit: Ashfaq Yusufzai/IPS
by Ashfaq Yusufzai (peshawar)
Inter Press Service
PESHAWAR, Mar 29 (IPS) – The free Atta (flour) distribution scheme launched by the government to assist the inflation-hit communities during the holy month of Ramzan has left at least ten dead and over 100 injured as would-be beneficiaries rush to claim their 10-kilogram bags.
“We have been waiting in long queues to get a bag of flour since morning but to no avail, as the police resorted to baton charging the would-be beneficiaries. At least 20 people, including seven women, sustained injuries because police baton-charged the crowd,” Abdul Wali, 35, a daily wager, told IPS.
A resident of Mardan district in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Wali said that he had no money to purchase flour and other items for daily use and had pinned his hopes on the free flour scheme. But owing to the rush of people, he didn’t get it. Instead, the injured man was rushed to the hospital.
Wali, a street vendor, said he received first aid at the hospital, where his wounds were bandaged, but he has been forced to rest until he recovers.
On March 8, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced the government would provide 100 million people with 10kg of free flour during Ramzan in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) provinces. He said it would cost Rs73 billion (about USD 257 million) to the national exchequer.
Since the beginning of flour distribution at the designated points, ten people, including two women, have died in their effort to get free bags under the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP).
Pakistanis, hit by price-hikes, rush to the points each day, but half of them return empty-handed in the evening due to the number of people trying to claim their food parcels. Stampedes have a problem, especially in KP, where the poverty ratio is higher than in any other province.
“My father stood in a row to get the flour, but meanwhile, stampede started, and he died instantly,” Ghufran Khan, a daily wager in Charsadda district, told IPS. His father, Wakil Khan, 55, an asthmatic, lost his life before he could get his flour ration.
Mismanagement at the distribution places is keeping the elderly and sick people away from points where the young and healthy people get the flour, he said.
On March 26, a tribal Jirga banned women from visiting the distribution points in Bara Khyber District in KP.
“Our women are getting harsh treatment, and therefore, we have decided that only male members of the deserving families would collect the bags,” Shahid Khan Shinwari, a member of the Jirga, said.
According to him, the government should give cash amounts through banks to avoid maltreatment of the beneficiaries.
“As per local traditions, our women don’t venture out in public, but poverty has hit the people hard, forcing them even to resort to begging. Government should take pity on poor people who have no option but to wait in the scorching sun to get flour,” Shinwari said.
The situation in tribal districts located along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border is very precarious because of the poverty, he said.
Thousands throng the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) collection points.
Nasreen Bibi, a resident of Peshawar, the capital of KP, is angry about the distribution mechanism.
“For the last three days, I have been visiting the point, but there was no chance of getting the stuff due to the massive crowd. I am scared and have stopped going there now,” Bibi, a housewife, told IPS. A widow, she has to feed her six children. All are unemployed, and her oldest son, a mason, lost his job because the construction activities have come to a complete halt due to Ramzan, she said.
Young people are climbing over trucks loaded with flour and take away bags while the women are forced to be silent spectators, she explained.
Sharif visited several cities after reports of deaths and injuries, but there has been no improvement as the mechanism is problematic. On March 27, he inspected several places in Islamabad, but there have been no improvements so far.
Human rights activists are concerned.
“It is a gross violation of human rights. People are fighting for flour without caring for their well-being and health. I recommend that the government adopt the mechanism of former Prime Minister Imran Khan during Covid-19, where people received Rs12,000 through banks,” Muhammad Uzair, a human rights activist, said.
On rainy days, the situation worsens when the people get wet flour that cannot be used, he said.
“We appeal to the government to realize the gravity of the situation and revert to cash assistance to save the women, children and elderly people from disrespect,” he said.
He said that if the government didn’t pay attention, the crisis may increase, and many people could lose their lives.
Even in Islamabad, the capital city of Pakistan, people throng the distribution points early in the morning, but many lose hope and return to their homes.
“The government has enrolled 150,000 families in Islamabad, but the pace of distribution is at snail’s pace, and police have had to intervene time and again to ensure order,” Shah Afzal, 59, said.
Afzal, a dishwasher in a restaurant, lost his job during Ramzan. He said the flour distribution gave the impoverished community hope, but the system is faulty and aged people cannot continue to put their lives at risk.
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.
