Tag: Poverty & SDGs

Go and Tell the Hungry that Their Food Is Being Thrown in the Garbage — Global Issues

  • by Baher Kamal (madrid)
  • Inter Press Service

MADRID, Sep 28 (IPS) – These are facts, not guesses: about 1.3 billion tons of food is wasted and lost… every single year, the equivalent of one ton per each of the one billion hungry people, many of them are those who produced the food.

The findings have been reported by the World Bank, whose recent study: What a Waste 2.0 also informs that the number of wasted calories “could fill hunger gaps in the developing world.”

On this, it reports on the breakdown of the number of calories wasted per day and per person –out of the recommended 2.000– : 1.520 calories in rich North America and Oceania –of which 61% are by their consumers–, and 748 wasted calories in wealthy Europe.

With a much bigger population than Europe, a similar amount of calories is reported as wasted in industrialised Asia (746), compared to 414 in South and Southeast Asia.

Subsaharan Africa and Central Asia register 545 wasted calories per person and day, and Latin America 453, according to the World Bank’s report.

For its part, the United Nations, on the occasion of this year’s International Day of Awareness on Food Loss and Waste Reduction, on 29 September, reports that reducing food losses and waste is essential in a world where the number of people affected by hunger has been slowly on the rise since 2014, and tons and tons of edible food are lost and/or wasted … every day.

How is the food of the hungry being wasted?

Two main reasons lay behind such food waste and loss. One of them is attributed to inadequate transport and storage facilities in developing countries.

But the major one is the rules imposed by the markets.

Indeed, the dominating marketing, the profit-making technique consists of selecting part of the crops while discarding great amounts of food, just because they are “ugly,” “not nice” in the eyes of the consumers.

This way, millions of tons of potatoes, tomatoes, carrots, lemons, apples, pears, peaches, grapes… are every day left in the field or thrown in landfills, while millions of litres of milk and millions of eggs are dumped in the sea just to reduce their availability in the supermarkets, therefore raising their prices, and this way make more money.

Another market rule is to attract consumers with “special” offers, such as “buy one, take two” or more, while advertising their products as natural,” biological, grown in the field, etc. Other foods are presented as gluten and lactose-free; zero added sugar, more Omegas, more healthy… and cheaper.

Add that they fix tight “expiration date” and this way, pushing consumers to dump the extra amount of food they are induced to purchase just to take advantage of such “special” offers.

The consequences

  • Significant quantities are wasted in retail and at the consumption level, with around 14% of food produced is lost between harvest and retail.
  • An estimated 17% of total global food production is wasted: 11% in households, 5% in the food service, and 2% in retail.
  • Food that is lost and wasted accounts for 38% of total energy usage in the global food system.

 

Not only the food is wasted…

The International Day meanwhile reiterates that food loss and waste undermine the sustainability of the world’s food systems.

“When food is lost or wasted, all the resources that were used to produce this food – including water, land, energy, labour and capital – go to waste.”

In addition, the disposal of food loss and waste in landfills, leads to greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to climate change.

Food loss and waste can also negatively impact food security and food availability, and contribute to increasing the cost of food.

The world specialised body: the Food and Agriculture Oranization (FAO), reports these facts:

  • Currently, 41.9% of the global population is unable to afford a healthy diet. That’s over 3 billion people.
  • An additional 1 billion people around the world are at risk of not affording a healthy diet if a shock caused their incomes to reduce by one-third. What if there was a disaster or an economic shock?
  • Furthermore, food costs could increase for up to 845 million people if a disruption to critical transport links were to occur.

In its report, FAO recalls that as the world’s population continues to grow, “the challenge should not be how to grow more food; but reducing food loss and waste” in a sustainable manner, is an immediate need if we are to maximise the use of food produced to feed and nourish more people.

Also, prioritising the reduction of food loss and waste is critical for the transition to sustainable food systems that enhance the efficient use of natural resources, lessen planetary impacts and ensure food security and nutrition.

And that reducing food waste is one of the most impactful climate solutions.

Having reported all that, who would dare to tell the one billion poor why they and their children go to bed hungry or undernourished, every single day, while the big business pundits are dressed in silky clothes, sitting in luxury offices, cashing skyrocketing salaries, and eating exquisitely selected food?

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Aged Persons Haunted by Abuse in Zimbabwe — Global Issues

HelpAge Zimbabwe director Priscilla Gavi is concerned about the elder abuse in Zimbabwe, especially as many are reliant on their families for support. Credit: Jeffrey Moyo/IPS
  • by Jeffrey Moyo
  • Inter Press Service

Sep 28 (IPS) – At his house in Mabvuku, a high-density suburb in Harare, the Zimbabwean capital, 86-year-old Tinago Murape claims his grandchildren starve him.

Not only that, but Murape, who now walks with the support of a walking stick, said his three grandchildren – grown-up men with their wives and children living in his house, accuse him of bewitching them.

Murape’s wife, Sekai, born in 1941, died two years ago after she contracted COVID-19.

All of his three children, two sons and a daughter, succumbed to AIDS decades ago, Murape told IPS without beating about the bush as he tapped on the ground with his walking stick.

Faced with joblessness and leading lives as domestic part-time workers in the affluent suburbs of Harare, his grandchildren strongly believe their grandfather cast spells on them, resulting in them failing to get formal jobs even though they are educated.

Now the grandsons, and their wives, have reportedly slapped Murape with sanctions – denying him food as a way of punishing him for causing their economic misery, according to him.

The grandchildren have vehemently denied the accusations.

“That’s not true. It’s old age pushing him to think like that,” one of the grandchildren told IPS.

Yet, for Murape, the abuse has gone on for years as he claims well-wishers and neighbours have often fed and clothed him.

The three grandsons, 27-year-old Richard, 29-year-old Benito and 32-year-old Tamai Murape, have never been formally employed after they completed their technical courses at Harare Polytechnic College.

According to the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions, 90 percent of Zimbabweans are unemployed.

Murape’s grandsons are part of the country’s unemployed, although they blame witchcraft, which they pin on their aged grandfather, for their joblessness.

Director for HelpAge Zimbabwe, Priscilla Gavi, said: “Older people are wrongly accused of practising witchcraft, which sees them blamed for deaths, drought, floods, disease and other calamities.”

In some instances, said Gavi, older persons are set upon by community members with beatings that may be fatal or leave them with disabilities or are burnt in their houses.

But Murape has said he has learnt to make do with the abuse.

“Sometimes they shut me out of my own house on top of denying me food, knowing I have no source of income and well-wishers have become my saviours every day,” Murape told IPS.

In fact, with many aged Zimbabwean citizens like Murape putting up with abuse, the abuse of the country’s senior citizens has turned into a growing trend.

In 2021 alone, police in Zimbabwe claimed they handled 900 cases countrywide related to the abuse of aged persons.

Like Murape, many aged persons in Zimbabwe taken care of by relatives claim they have become victims of physical and emotional abuse, with some claiming even to have been sexually abused.

Aged rape victims are many, like 76-year-old Agness Murambiwa in Harare, who claimed her 22-year-old grandson raped her before he fled to neighbouring South Africa earlier this year.

Gavi said aged persons are not spared from sexual abuse.

“Cases of rape of older women by much younger men are increasing in parts of Zimbabwe. In some instances, these arise from the mistaken notion that having sex with an older woman can cure one of terminal illnesses,” Gavi told IPS.

But the wounds remain for Zimbabwe’s aged rape victims like Murambiwa.

“Earlier this year, Themba, my grandson, attacked me while I slept in my bedroom, threatened to kill me if I made any noise before he raped me. It pains me that my own blood did this to me,” Murambiwa told IPS.

Murambiwa is taken care of by her two daughters, both of whom divorced their husbands and one of whom is Themba’s mother.

The daughters are also strained taking care of their aged mother.

“It’s not easy looking after an aged parent. We have limited resources, and she always complains that we are not doing enough, yet none of us is employed. We are vendors living from hand to mouth,” 52-year-old Letiwe, one of Murambiwa’s daughters, told IPS.

But many aged Zimbabweans like Murape and Murambiwa said they could not fight off their abusers because they were in desperate need of care.

With limited resources to support its senior citizens, Zimbabwe has no social grants for the aged.

This means aged persons like Murape and Murambiwa are on their own as they bear the brunt of abuse in the twilight of their lives.

Yet the Constitution of Zimbabwe protects the elderly, defined in Section 82 of the Constitution as people over 70.

Many of Zimbabwe’s aged citizens have no money after the 2008 hyperinflation eroded their savings.

This time, a new round of inflation has not helped the country’s growing number of abused aged persons who depend on their relatives.

Inflation currently hovers above 257 percent in Zimbabwe, with food prices skyrocketing, meaning the lives of aged persons such as Murape could even worsen.

Other than inflation, for aged men – widowers that have remarried, according to HelpAge’s Gavi, abuse could be even worse.

“Some older men have also faced abuse from their younger wives who mistreat their spouses wantonly, leading to some of these men finding themselves on the streets,” said Gavi.

IPS UN Bureau Report


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

We Must Ensure That Climate Funding Reaches the Guardians of the Forests — Global Issues

While 2020 saw the highest deforestation rate in Brazil’s history, deforestation rates were up to three times lower in Indigenous territories. Credit: Mario Osava/IPS
  • Opinion by Solange Bandiaky Badji, Torbjorn Gjefsen (washington dc)
  • Inter Press Service

WASHINGTON DC, Sep 27 (IPS) – US $270 million may sound like a lot of money, especially for just one year. But it is only a small fraction—less than one percent—of all global funding for climate change adaptation and mitigation. This small fraction, however, is the annual amount that was invested in the tenure and forest management of Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPs and LCs) over the past decade.

This month we learned that the actual amount of funding that reached IPs and LCs was a small fraction of the small fraction: only 17 percent went to activities that specifically named an indigenous organization.

This figure likely overestimates the actual share that reaches these communities as intermediary institutions also have project implementation costs that are part of this funding. The discrepancy calls into question whether the $1.7 billion pledged at the UN climate change meetings to Indigenous Peoples and local communities for their land tenure and conservation initiatives will actually reach them.

The rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities are inextricably linked to the preservation of key ecosystems and the maintenance of carbon stored in tropical forests and peatlands. At least 36 percent of Key Biodiversity Areas globally are found on IP and LC lands, along with at least 25 percent of the above-ground carbon storage in tropical forests.

Efforts to reduce climate change and the loss of biodiversity depend on these landscapes remaining intact, and IP and LC forest management has proven more effective in this regard than any other. While 2020 saw the highest deforestation rate in Brazil’s history, for example, deforestation rates were up to three times lower in Indigenous territories.

The most recent United Nations climate report, embraced this point, stating: “Supporting Indigenous self-determination, recognizing Indigenous Peoples’ rights and supporting Indigenous knowledge-based adaptation are critical to reducing climate change risks and effective adaptation.”

In a report our organizations released in September, we found that between 2011 and 2020, donors disbursed approximately $2.7 billion (on average $270 million annually) for projects supporting IP and LC tenure and forest management in tropical countries. We compiled data on this funding stream and assessed the grants along different dimensions of “Fit for Purpose” criteria—meaning that funding is given in ways that are effective, relevant and appropriate for IP and LCs.

Applying the “Fit for Purpose” criteria for IP and LC funding over the past decade was educational. We found that:

  • IP and LC-led: Only 17 percent of IP and LC tenure and forest management funding between 2011 and 2020 mentioned an indigenous organization, indicating that a low share of funding is under leadership of Indigenous and community organizations.
  • Mutually Accountable: There is a lack of accountability and transparency from donors towards IPs and LCs, inhibiting IP and LC understanding and influence over donor priorities and decisions. Most private foundations, who represent the majority of the IPLC Forest Tenure Pledge donors, do not share data on their projects systematically.
  • Flexible and Long-term: Donors have increasingly been providing funding through long-term funding agreements, which provides IP and LC organizations with much-needed predictability and security. Yet, a lack of flexibility to change or adapt priorities within projects restricts IP and LC organizations in addressing diverse community needs, imminent threats or seize on windows of opportunity.
  • Gender Inclusive: Only 32 percent of IP and LC tenure and forest management funding included gender-related keywords, despite the essential role of women in IP and LC forest management and their notable exclusion from many governance structures and forest management decisions.
  • Timely and Accessible: Due to strict eligibility and administrative requirements of bilateral and multilateral donors, IP and LC organizations must overcome considerable barriers to access funding. Funding for IP and LC tenure and forest management has therefore generally relied on traditional development aid funding structures, with national and international organizations acting as intermediaries.

Securing and protecting the tenure rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities is one of the most cost-effective, equitable, and efficient means of protecting, restoring, and sustainably using tropical forestlands and the ecosystems services they provide.

Many things get in the way of funding Indigenous Peoples and local communities, but in the end we will not solve the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity extinction unless we embrace the need for more equitable partnerships. We have already pledged the funding to support them, now we have to make sure they receive it.

Solange Bandiaky-Badji, PhD, is the Coordinator of the Rights and Resources Initiative

Torbjørn Gjefsen is Senior Policy Advisor, Climate, for Rainforest Foundation Norway.

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

We Need Urgent Commitment, Resources & Action to Tackle Hunger Crisis — Global Issues

Abby Maxman speaks with Safia, a woman forced to leave her home in Somaliland amid the drought and growing hunger. Credit: Chris Hufstader/Oxfam
  • Opinion by Abby Maxman (new york)
  • Inter Press Service

NEW YORK, Sep 27 (IPS) – Last week, as world leaders gathered in New York for the 77th United Nations General Assembly, one topic came up more than most: looming famine. That’s because despite a global commitment to make famine a relic of the past, it is once again knocking at our door.

In Somaliland two weeks ago, I witnessed communities past their breaking points. Grandparents there told me they could not recall a drought like this in their lifetimes.

At UNGA, I was honored to take part in many discussions on this and other topics – in particular a panel about the urgent humanitarian needs in the Horn of Africa. The region is facing several interlinked issues, including hunger, conflict, climate, and COVID-19. As we discuss – and more importantly, respond to – the crisis, we should keep in mind three themes: the urgency of the moment, the need for more access and more funding, and the implementation of a systemic solution.

The humanitarian crisis in the Horn needs to be at the top of the international agenda, and we need commitment, resources and action urgently. We have seen the warning signs that famine is coming for quite some time – and now we have been warned that it could be declared in Somalia as soon as next month.

Often, the international community is reactionary to crises, but this time we must also be anticipatory in assessing and responding to the needs of the region. In my trip to Somaliland, I spoke to farmers, pastoralists, and visited communities impacted by conflict, climate, and COVID-19. It was my first visit back to Somaliland in more than 20 years, which offered an interesting perspective of the arc of change.

Abby Maxman speaks with Safia, a woman forced to leave her home in Somaliland amid the drought and growing hunger. Credit: Chris Hufstader/Oxfam

Their shared experience is clear: their livelihoods and way of life – and that of their ancestors – are in danger and the need for action now is more urgent than ever. It is dispiriting that these preventable tragedies continue to repeat when the world has the resources and know-how to prevent them.

I spoke with Safia, a 38-year-old divorced mother of eight children, who lost 90% of her livestock. She stayed as long as she could in her community until she felt unsafe as the weak and dead livestock attracted hyenas at night, compelling her to make the five-day journey to reach the Dur-Dur IDP (Internally Displaced Person) camp near Burao.

At Dur Dur they were welcomed with clean water, some food, and materials to build a shelter. She and her children have been there for about three months. They are struggling to get enough food and might eat one meal a day, if they can. Oxfam and others are there offering support, but it’s not nearly enough to meet their basic needs.

Safia’s experience was just one of countless more of those who are bearing the brunt of the dual global hunger and climate crises that has been brought on by distant forces who are prioritizing profits over people and planet.

Earlier this year, Oxfam’s research estimated that one person is dying from acute hunger in the region every 48 seconds. Since then, the situation has only gotten worse. We have a narrow window of opportunity to stave off hunger in the horn. It is not too late to avert disaster, but more needs to be done immediately.

We know that anticipatory action saves lives, livelihoods, and scarce aid money, and across Oxfam and with our partners we have been sounding the alarm of this slow, onset emergency at local, national, and global levels for the past two years. Yet we are witnessing a system that is failing the people who are least responsible for this crisis.

We need more access and a lot more funding that supports frontline organizations and leaders. During the panel, it was encouraging to hear Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Second Martin Griffiths put such emphasis on funding local organizations and leaders who have the knowledge, access, and courage to make real impact.

Local organizations know where the most vulnerable people are located, they can reach disaster zones quickly, and they understand the languages, cultures, geography, and political realities of the affected communities far better than outsiders.

These local leaders should be given the resources and space to make decisions to have the most effective response that will save lives now and in the long run. This may mean that international donors and organizations need to be more flexible in how they coordinate, fund, and implement a humanitarian response. The old way may not be the most effective – in fact we know it is not – especially where there are access challenges.

Finally, we must take a systemic approach in tackling these issues. We know that hunger, climate, and conflict do not happen in silos – they are inextricably linked. We must make sure we are fighting these interlinked crises, especially hunger and climate, together.

Climate change is causing more extreme weather events like droughts, floods, and heatwaves, which devastate crops and displace vulnerable communities. In fact, hunger has more than doubled in 10 of the worst climate hotspots in recent years.

Countries that have contributed the least to emissions are bearing the worst impacts of the climate crisis, while fossil fuel companies see record-breaking profits. Less than 18 days of profits from fossil fuel companies could cover the whole UN humanitarian appeal of $48.82 billion for 2022.

These conversations and convenings are important, but we must do more than raise the alarm – we must see action to follow them up. I hope that leaders recommit the political will to fulfill their moral obligation to meet this crisis in the Horn head on.

Safia is doing all she can to ensure her family’s survival – we must see leaders do all in their power, right now, to make sure she and millions more get the urgent aid they need now to survive, and see their right to a safe, healthy future recognized and realized in years to come.

Abby Maxman is President and CEO Oxfam America.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

A World of One Billion Empty Plates — Global Issues

Ten of the world’s worst climate hotspots have suffered a 123 percent rise in acute hunger over just the past six years, according to a new report from Oxfam. Credit: FAO
  • by Baher Kamal (madrid)
  • Inter Press Service

MADRID, Sep 23 (IPS) – Have you eaten today – or are sure you will? The answer depends on where you were born and where you live now. If you are Spanish or live here, you likely did or will, provided that you are not one of this European country’s 900.000 inhabitants who face some sort of hunger, malnutrition or undernourishment.

If instead, you are among the 550 million plus Africans who suffer moderate hunger (40 percent of the continent’s total population of 1.300 plus) or severe hunger (some 300 million or 24 percent of all Africans), your answer would be that you will likely –or surely– go to bed hungry… also today.

A similar dark fate is also prevailing in other ‘developing’ regions, usually defined as mid- and low-income countries. In Asia, with nearly 10 percent or about 500 million of its combined population of almost 5 billion, representing 60 percent of the whole world’s inhabitants.

In the case of Latin America and the Caribbean, the percentage of humans falling into moderate to severe hunger and food insecurity amounts to 9 percent of the region’s total population of 550 million inhabitants.

Just for the sake of comparison, such numbers barely reach 2.5 percent of the Northern American population (600 million) and Europe (750 million).

In short: it is estimated that between 702 and 828 million people in the world (corresponding to 8.9 percent and 10.5 percent of the total population, respectively) faced hunger in 2021.

Too many explanations, same consequences

These are figures, numbers. The reality is that one billion human beings are right at this moment living in the darkness of food scarcity, if ever any food at all.

For them, no matter if the mainstream media now pretends that their fate is caused by just one war or the usual exercise of speculation and greed that hikes food prices.

Many of the millions of hungry people are probably not aware that the world has been producing enough food to cover all the needs of Planet Earth’s population.

Nor that over a third of the total food production is wasted, dumped into rubbish bins, and lost in inadequate storage facilities.

No matter if the international scientific community every single day warns that climate change, severe droughts, catastrophic floods and other factors add to the sharp shortage of funds to save lives while fuelling armed conflicts and dedicating unprecedented spending on weapons of mass destruction (more than 2 trillion US dollars in 2021) See: New World Records: More Weapons than Ever. And a Hunger Crisis Like No Other

What is food insecurity?

Food security is defined as the adequate access to food in both quality and quantity.

Moderate food insecurity: People experiencing moderate food insecurity face uncertainties about their ability to obtain food, and have been forced to compromise on the quality and/or quantity of the food they consume.

Severe food insecurity: People experiencing severe food insecurity have typically run out of food and at worst, gone a day (or days) without eating.

Wrong direction

“The world is moving in the wrong direction,” confirms the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), which –among other international bodies– has just released the above-cited figures in its 2022 report: The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World.

New estimates for 2021 suggest that the prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity has remained relatively unchanged compared with 2020, reports FAO, adding that “severe food insecurity has increased, providing further evidence of a deteriorating situation mainly for those already facing serious hardships.”

“In 2021, an estimated 29.3 percent of the global population – 2.3 billion people – were moderately or severely food insecure, and 11.7 percent (923.7 million people) faced severe food insecurity.”

In other words: extreme hunger has more than doubled in 10 of the world’s worst climate hotspots over the past six years.

“Ten of the world’s worst climate hotspots – those with the highest number of UN appeals driven by extreme weather events – have suffered a 123 percent rise in acute hunger over just the past six years,” according to an Oxfam report on 16 September 2022.

Hunger discriminates

There is also a growing gender gap in food insecurity. In 2021, 31.9 percent of women in the world were moderately or severely food insecure compared to 27.6 percent of men – a gap of more than 4 percentage points, compared with 3 percentage points in 2020, according to the report.

The latest estimate for low birthweight revealed that 14.6 percent of newborns (20.5 million) were born with a low birth weight in 2015, a modest decrease from 17.5 percent (22.9 million) in 2000.

Optimal breastfeeding practices, including exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life, are critical for child survival and the promotion of health and cognitive development.

But it is not so. In fact, the world’s leading health and children specialised organisations have once again sounded the alarm bell about what they classify as “shocking, insidious, exploitative, aggressive, misleading and pervasive” marketing tricks used by the baby formula milk business with the sole aim of increasing, even more, their already high profits.

In fact, FAO reports that globally, the prevalence has risen from 37.1 percent (49.9 million) in 2012 to 43.8 percent (59.4 million) in 2020. Still, more than half of all infants under six months of age globally did not receive the protective benefits of exclusive breastfeeding, according to the report, which adds the following:

Stunting, the condition of being too short for one’s age, undermines the physical and cognitive development of children, increases their risk of dying from common infections and predisposes them to overweight and non-communicable diseases later in life.

Child wasting is a life-threatening condition caused by insufficient nutrient intake, poor nutrient absorption, and/or frequent or prolonged illness. Affected children are dangerously thin with weakened immunity and a higher risk of mortality. The prevalence of wasting among children under five years of age was 6.7 percent (45.4 million) in 2020.

Children who are overweight or obese face both immediate and potentially long-term health impacts, including a higher risk of non-communicable diseases later in life.

Globally, the prevalence of overweight among children under five years of age increased slightly from 5.4 percent (33.3 million) in 2000 to 5.7 percent (38.9 million) in 2020. Rising trends are seen in around half of the countries worldwide.

Anaemia: The prevalence of anaemia among women aged 15 to 49 years was estimated to be 29.9 percent in 2019.

The absolute number of women with anaemia has risen steadily from 493 million in 2000 to 570.8 million in 2019, which has implications for female morbidity and mortality and can lead to adverse pregnancy and newborn outcomes.

Globally, adult obesity nearly doubled in absolute value from 8.7 percent (343.1 million) in 2000 to 13.1 percent (675.7 million) in 2016.

Children in rural settings and poorer households are more vulnerable to stunting and wasting. Children and adults, particularly women, in urban areas and wealthier households are at higher risk of overweight and obesity, respectively.

Infants residing in rural areas, in poorer households, with mothers who received no formal education and female infants are more likely to be breastfed. Women with no formal education are more vulnerable to anaemia and their children to stunting and wasting.

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Why Investing in Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Pays Off — Global Issues

  • Opinion by Ruth Loftus, Michael Alexander (london / edinburg)
  • Inter Press Service

LONDON / EDINBURG, Sep 23 (IPS) – As the devastating images of flooding in Pakistan went round the world and the country declared a state of emergency, some 4,000 miles away in Stockholm, delegates had just arrived for World Water Week – an annual focal point for global water issues.

For lots of the international attendees, many of whom were from the corporate world, the headlines were a deadly reminder not only of the power and value of water, but also of the failings of the global system to manage it properly.

There can be no debate that Pakistan’s latest flooding catastrophe has been exacerbated by the climate crisis. With COP27 on the horizon in November, and the UN Water Conference taking place in March next year, business leaders, governments, and key stakeholders must propel water issues to the top of the agenda and address them beyond the boardroom and throughout supply chains.

It’s fair to say that the important role businesses have to play in securing sustainable access to water has often been overlooked. Having a safe, reliable, and resilient water supply is essential for most production processes and the health and wellbeing of employees – plus, it also makes sound financial sense.

At World Water Week, WaterAid launched its latest research ’Boosting Business: why investing in water, sanitation and hygiene pays off’ to demonstrate to companies the business benefits and potential financial returns of investing in these facilities.

This pioneering, first-of-its-kind research was funded by Diageo, Gap Inc., HSBC, Twinings and ekaterra (previously part of Unilever). Research took place over four years, in four different countries, across four different sectors – including tea production, the clothing and leather industry and smallholder farming.

The WaterAid perspective:

The quantitative aspect of our pilot is vital as it’s all about how and why investing in taps, toilets and hygiene behaviour change is good for business. We were able to not only carry out thought-provoking project work with tangible benefits for the workforce and wider communities, but we were also able to quantify how that then impacted upon productivity; how many jeans were sewn together, how much tea was picked, how much absenteeism fell, how much the companies paid on medical bills decreased and so on. We then extrapolated this data into standout figures – the return on investment (ROI).

In a nutshell installing clean water and decent sanitation facilities helps employees stay healthy. This means less absenteeism, lower medical costs, improved morale, and productivity. For every $1 invested in clean water, our research showed the apparel and leather sectors combined gained a $1.32 return on investment and the tea sector projects a $2.05 return.

To highlight the stand-out examples – one of the ready-made garment (RMG) factories in Bangladesh showed a ROI of $9 on every $1 invested in WASH, whilst in one of the Twinings’ tea estate plantations in India, there was a $5 to $1 ROI during the pilot programme.

With continued investment over a ten-year period, the returns are even greater – indeed one of the RMG factories is projected to have $30 to $1 ROI – and if companies support their employees’ communities as well, significantly more people will benefit.

It’s important to also consider that some businesses will be put off by the initial capital expenditure, and the fact that the returns are not always immediate. However, low-cost solutions can often provide big results in the long-term.

Integrated within this is hygiene, which became a topic for board-level consideration during the pandemic and the sudden attention the world gave to enhanced handwashing has provided lasting impact as the first and most cost-effective defence against infection.

The key now is to think about how to maintain that beneficial shift in behaviour. Each workplace is different, but it’s time for companies to put the wellbeing of their workforce at the heart of their business strategies and make water, sanitation and hygiene a priority.

The business perspective:

At Diageo, we strongly believe that, as access to clean water and sanitation are fundamental human rights, all efforts should be made to achieve this global goal. Access to water is central to gaining an education, sustaining health and increasing employability, and it addresses gender inequalities in communities, since women carry most of the burden of water collection.

We fully appreciate the enormous positive impact of investment in WASH and chose to be a key business partner in this ground-breaking study so we could finally prove the case for investment through solid research and data, and share the message with other businesses.

We will take the findings and incorporate them across our business strategies. The strong, quantitative evidence is what we need to support the investment in WASH facilities which play a key part of our Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) action plan: Spirit of Progress 2030, and we now have the data and evidence to accelerate this work even further.

Future-proofing supply chains

Investing in water and sanitation facilities must be considered a core business priority and part of a water stewardship strategy, rather than an act of philanthropy or corporate social responsibility. No longer to be seen as a charity gesture, or a way of green-washing the business, but as a wise and smart way to future-proof: for communities and for businesses to thrive.

Businesses must now think beyond the immediate factory fence and look to their supply chains and to their employees’ welfare within.

As more extreme weather events happen globally, and ever-growing populations mean increasing demand for water, more companies need to follow suit and have a greater presence on the global stage to address the crisis. Businesses have a vested interest in securing sustainable access to water, and now, a clear financial incentive to ensure lasting change.

If businesses, governments, and civil society rally together, important ESG criteria can be addressed, and sustainable development goals (SDGs) to achieve 100% access to safe and sustainable water, toilets and hygiene facilities by 2030, can be fulfilled.

*Ruth Loftus is Senior Private Sector Advisor at WaterAid and Michael Alexander is Global Head of Water, Environment and Agriculture Sustainability at Diageo.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

High Costs, Moot Benefits — Global Issues

  • Opinion by Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Anis Chowdhury (sydney and kuala lumpur)
  • Inter Press Service

SYDNEY and KUALA LUMPUR, Sep 20 (IPS) – Policymakers have become obsessed with achieving low inflation. Many central banks adopt inflation targeting (IT) monetary policy (MP) frameworks in various ways. Some have mandates to keep inflation at 2% over the medium term. Many believe this ensures sustained long-term prosperity.

Anis ChowdhuryThe now universal 2% inflation target “was plucked out of the air”. This was acknowledged by Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) Governor Don Brash who first adopted IT. The target was due to NZ Finance Minister Roger Douglas’ “chance remark” of achieving “genuine price stability, around 0, or 0 to 1 percent”.

IT discord
Heads of major central banks – such as the US Federal Reserve Bank (Fed), Bank of England (BoE) and German Bundesbank – committed to keep inflation at 2% soon after NZ. Although typically ‘medium-term’, IT’s high costs are portrayed as necessary, but brief. Worse, promised growth benefits have not materialized.

The Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) never endorsed any fixed inflation target. Article IV states, “each member shall: (i) endeavor to direct its economic and financial policies toward the objective of fostering orderly economic growth with reasonable price stability, with due regard to its circumstances”.

This makes clear much depends on conditions and circumstances. The sensible priority then would be to sustain prosperity with “reasonable price stability”, and not to commit to an arbitrary universal IT at any cost. Yet, many IMF officials promote the 2% target.

Jomo Kwame SundaramDuring the 2008-09 global financial crisis (GFC), the IMF Managing Director appealed for more imagination in designing monetary policy, appreciating “just how intricate the global economic and financial web had become”.

For him, “Monetary policy needs to look beyond its core focus on low and stable inflation” to promote balanced and equitable growth, while minimizing adverse spill-overs on developing economies.

An IMF chief economist even asserted low inflation and economic progress was a “divine coincidence”, and insisted a 2% inflation target was too low. After the GFC, an IMF working paper argued for a long-run inflation target of 4% for advanced countries.

A Bank of Canada working paper concluded, “the current state of economic research – both empirical and theoretical – provides little basis for believing in significant observable benefits of low inflation such as an increase in the growth rate of real GDP”.

IT benefits?
Any objective consideration of actual IT experiences would have led to its rejection long ago. IT is clearly inimical to growth and equity, let alone the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Four central bank (CB) experiences offer valuable lessons about IT’s likely consequences.

The US Fed is, by far, the most important CB globally, while the BoE has been historically important. The Bundesbank has been the most inflation averse in the post-war period, while the RBNZ was the world’s IT pioneer.

NZ’s inflation during 1961-90 averaged 9%, more than the US’s 5.1% and the UK’s 8%. Yet, the mighty Fed and the venerable BoE sought to emulate the miniscule RBNZ! Germany’s well-known inflation-phobia is attributed to its inter-war ‘hyperinflation’ and its bloody aftermath. Inflation there averaged 3.4% over 1960-90, i.e., even before IT.

None achieved sustained economic prosperity despite reaching inflation targets of 2% or less. Average per capita GDP growth declined sharply in the US, UK and Germany, while rising negligibly in NZ (Table 1).

Long-term declines in their growth rates followed declining investments (Table 2). IT advocates claim high inflation causes uncertainty, thus reducing investments, but lower inflation has clearly done worse.

As the investment rate declined with IT, so did productivity growth in the UK, Germany and NZ (Table 3). While productivity growth has risen negligibly with IT in the US, it has trended down in all four economies (Figures 1-4). US hourly output grew at only 1.4% after 2004, “half its pace in the three decades after World War II”.

Most advanced economies have experienced productivity slowdowns since the 1970s. With the European Central Bank’s strict IT framework, the euro zone also saw marked slowdowns in productivity growth during 1999-2019.

Declining productivity growth often becomes the pretext for depressing real wages and working conditions, compelling workers to work more to compensate for lost earnings. Productivity and growth slowdowns are seen as “secular stagnation”.

All this has been blamed on inflation. But lowering inflation has not reversed this trend, which has actually accelerated since the GFC. Many explanations have been offered, but the reasons for this failure remain moot.

IT, low inflation, tax cuts and market reforms are supposed to improve economic performance. Weaker investment and economic growth, due to contractionary macroeconomic policies, slowed US productivity growth.

Similarly, The Economist observed, “Drooping demand crimped incentives to invest and innovate”. It ascribed declining UK productivity growth to cuts in innovation investments due to “austerity policies” and “severe reduction in credit”, inter alia.

Concluding “no doubt … the cost … was huge”, it estimated, “Britain’s GDP per person in 2019 would have been £6,700 ($8,380) higher than it turned out to be” had productivity growth not fallen further after the GFC.

There is growing acknowledgement that widespread “unconditional” CB commitment to 2% inflation targets – in the face of the current inflationary upsurge – is likely to worsen slowdowns. This is likely to compound debt crises in many developing countries.

The adverse socio-economic impacts of recessions are well documented. Policy-induced recessions – supposedly to curb inflation – will compound the effects of pandemic, war and sanctions.

Pragmatism, not dogma
Central bankers should not be dogmatic. Instead, pragmatic approaches are urgently needed to address the current inflationary surges. This is especially necessary when inflation worldwide is mainly due to supply shocks.

Western policymakers must consider the adverse spill-over impacts on developing countries, already on the brink of debt crises due to protracted slowdowns. Government debt – with more higher cost commercial borrowings – has been rising since the GFC, Western ‘quantitative easing’ and Covid-19.

Almost all central bankers know it is almost impossible to achieve 2% inflation in current circumstances. Yet, they insist not raising interest rates now will cause much economic damage later.

But such claims clearly have no theoretical or empirical bases. Hence, it is recklessly dogmatic to enforce a 2% target by falsely claiming inaction would be even more harmful.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Full Gender Equality Almost 300 Years Away at Current Rate of Progress — Global Issues

At the current rate of progress, it will take up to 286 years to close gaps in legal protection and remove discriminatory laws, Credit: Kristin Palitza/IPS
  • by Baher Kamal (madrid)
  • Inter Press Service

MADRID, Sep 15 (IPS) – While women in rich societies are paid around 25% less than men for equal jobs, those living in impoverished countries receive by far much lower salaries, if any at all.

Here are some facts. In its report: Why the majority of the world’s poor are women, a global movement of people fighting inequality to end poverty and injustice: OXFAM, says that gender inequality is one of the oldest and ‘most pervasive’ forms of inequality in the world.

It denies women their voices, devalues their work and makes women’s position unequal to men’s, from the household to the national and global levels, says OXFAM, adding that “in no country have women achieved economic equality with men.”

Lower-paid, unpaid, undervalued

Now see these facts OXFAM has provided:

Low wages. Across the world, women are in the lowest-paid work. Globally, they earn 24% less than men and at the current rate of progress, it will take 170 years to close the gap. 700 million fewer women than men are in paid work.

Lack of decent work. 75% of women in developing regions are in the informal economy – where they are less likely to have employment contracts, legal rights or social protection, and are often not paid enough to escape poverty. 600 million are in the most insecure and precarious forms of work.

Unpaid care work. Women do at least twice as much unpaid care work, such as childcare and housework, as men – sometimes 10 times as much, often on top of their paid work. The value of this work each year is estimated at least $10.8 trillion – more than three times the size of the global tech industry.

Longer workdays. Women work longer days than men when paid and unpaid work is counted together. That means globally, a young woman today will work on average the equivalent of four years more than a man over her lifetime.

Rural women

Now take the specific case of rural women. They represent as many as a quarter of the world’s entire population. However, most women are concentrated in both unpaid care and household work and their role in subsistence farming is often unremunerated.

And less than 20% of landholders worldwide are women.

On average, women make up more than 40% of the agricultural labour force in developing countries, ranging from 20% in Latin America to 50% or more in parts of Africa and Asia, according to the United Nations.

Across the world, food systems depend on the daily work of rural women, reminds the UN Women, the United Nations’ organisation dedicated to gender equality and the empowerment of women.

They play a variety of essential roles, from raising crops and processing their harvest, to preparing food and distributing their products, ensuring that both their families and communities are nourished.

“Yet paradoxically those same women often have less access to food and a higher risk of hunger, malnutrition, undernutrition and food insecurity than their male counterparts.”

The reasons for this disconnection from their right to food include “unequal power relations and discriminatory gender norms, for example, resulting in women eating last and least in the household, as well as their disproportionate responsibility for unpaid caregiving and domestic work.”

70% of women, in poverty

“Seventy percent of women live in poverty. As we chip away at the natural world, daily tasks like securing water, food, and fuel, often done by women and girls, take longer and become harder, statedInger Andersen UN Under-secretary-general and Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) on 8 September.

They are the farmers for the world

And we all know that women are the farmers for the world but often don’t have rights to land or land titles, Anderson underlined. “Women own less than 10 percent of the land and here in Africa, four in five women lack access to a bank account or formal financial institution.”

At the current rate of progress, it may take close to 300 years to achieve full gender equality, the UN “Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG): The Gender Snapshot 2022” report shows.

The report estimates that it will take up to 286 years to close gaps in legal protection and remove discriminatory laws, 140 years for women to be represented equally in positions of power and leadership in the workplace, and at least 40 years to achieve equal representation in national parliaments.

Sima Bahous, UN Women Executive Director, said: “The data show undeniable regressions in their lives made worse by the global crises—in incomes, safety, education, and health. The longer we take to reverse this trend, the more it will cost us all.”

Some 400 million women in “extreme poverty”

At the current rate of progress, the report estimates that it will take up to 286 years to close gaps in legal protection and remove discriminatory laws, 140 years for women to be represented equally in positions of power and leadership in the workplace, and at least 40 years to achieve equal representation in national parliaments.

The report also points to a worrisome reversal on the reduction of poverty, and rising prices are likely to exacerbate this trend. By the end of 2022, around 383 million women and girls will live in extreme poverty (on less than USD 1.90 a day) compared to 368 million men and boys.

The 2022 International Equal Pay Day, on 18 September, just confirms such a shocking reality facing women: They earn 77 cents for every dollar men earn for work of equal value – with an even wider wage gap for women with children.

And women are concentrated in lower-paid, lower-skill work with greater job insecurity and under-represented in decision-making roles, “while carrying out at least two and a half times more unpaid household and care work than men.”

Add to the above another scourge: a third of all women are subjected to violence.

In fact, over 30% of women and girls have suffered physical or sexual violence in their lifetime, most frequently by an intimate partner. And more than 70% of all sold, bought and enslaved victims of human smuggling and trafficking are women and girls — 3 out of 4 of them are sexually exploited.

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Lets Fight for What Counts to End AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria — Global Issues

  • Opinion by Winnie Byanyima (geneva)
  • Inter Press Service

GENEVA, Sep 15 (IPS) – Next week, taking place alongside the UN General Assembly, President Biden hosts a financing summit in New York of such importance that it will determine if millions of people live, will shape the world around us for years to come and will set the future direction of global health. At least $18 billion is needed to fund the work of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

A successful replenishment of the Global Fund will help strengthen the fight against three of today’s deadliest diseases and build more resilient national health systems capable of withstanding tomorrow’s shocks.

The funding needs are particularly urgent in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic which caused such severe disruption to the delivery of essential healthcare, including HIV treatment, prevention and care services.

The latest data from UNAIDS has revealed a global faltering response to HIV, compounded by a continued decline in resources. Around 650 000 people died of AIDS-related illnesses last year, with tuberculosis remaining a major cause of death among people living with HIV.

There were also 1.5 million new HIV infections—over one million more than the global target set. New infections fell by only 3.6% between 2020-2021, the smallest annual decline since 2016. New infections increased in 38 countries.

Infections continue to occur disproportionately among young women and adolescent girls aged 15—24, with a new infection every two minutes. The gendered HIV impact, particularly for young African women and girls, has taken place amidst severe disruption to HIV treatment and prevention services, millions of girls forced out of school, and spikes in teenage pregnancies and gender-based violence.

In sub-Saharan Africa, adolescent girls and young women are three times as likely to acquire HIV as adolescent boys and young men. Vulnerable groups of people worldwide such as gay men and other men who have sex with men have also been disproportionately affected during service interruptions.

If we don’t more effectively prevent young people from getting HIV now, especially young women and adolescent girls, there will be millions more infections and deaths and the resources needed to end AIDS will increase further.

Stigma and discrimination that drives the epidemic among marginalized and criminalized groups of people must be tackled, including through law reform. And there must be bolder action to ensure that children living with HIV receive antiretroviral therapy as a matter of course—currently just half of HIV positive children are on life-saving treatment.

Giving young people the chance to live requires investment. But international solidarity in the fight against HIV and other global health threats has been fraying. At a time when global leadership and an increase of funding is most needed, too many high-income countries are cutting back aid, and resources for global health are under serious threat.

In 2021, international resources available for HIV were 6% lower than in 2010. Overseas development assistance for HIV from bilateral donors other than the United States of America has plummeted by 57% over the last decade. The HIV response in low- and middle-income countries is US$8 billion short of the amount needed by 2025.

Furthermore, global trade rules are obstructing low- and middle-income countries’ production of pandemic-ending medicines, including new and emerging long-acting HIV medicines, and keeping prices unaffordably high.

The United States has already pledged $6 billion to the 7th Global Fund Replenishment but this is contingent on other donors stepping up to fully achieve the $18 billion target. Since it was created in 2001, the Global Fund has saved millions of lives by reducing the impact of HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria. It must be fully funded to carry out its work—and its partners too.

Recognizing the complementarity between the work of the Global Fund and UNAIDS, the US has also raised its contribution to UNAIDS by $5 million for 2022. UNAIDS is on the ground in countries collecting the data that shapes the HIV response, helping advance the removal of harmful laws and policies and the end of HIV-related stigma and discrimination, and generating an enabling environment where investments can be most effective. Its work is key to maximizing the effectiveness of national programmes financed by the Global Fund.

Member States of the United Nations have made a commitment to achieve the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda to deliver health and well-being for all, to achieve universal health coverage, and to build a more prosperous, equitable and sustainable world.

We can end AIDS. If we succeed – and the data is clear that we can – it will save millions of lives, be a pivotal moment for a healthier, more secure planet, and be a triumph of international cooperation.

But the investment is needed today. Let’s fight for what counts.

Winnie Byanyima is Executive Director of UNAIDS and Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Footnote: US President Joe Biden will host the Global Fund’s Seventh Replenishment Conference on September 21 in New York City. Founded in 2002, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is described as a unique financing mechanism that relies on a dynamic partnership among governments, the private sector, and civil society to fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis (TB), and malaria in ways that contribute to strengthening health systems.

IPS UN Bureau


Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Pakistan Flooding Shows ‘Adapting’ to Climate Change Can Be a Dangerous Illusion — Global Issues

A flooded village in Matiari, in the Sindh province of Pakistan. Credit: UNICEF/Asad Zaidi
  • Opinion by Philippe Benoit (paris)
  • Inter Press Service

PARIS, Sep 14 (IPS) – One third of Pakistan is now under water. The scope of the destruction is difficult to fathom, not just the enormity of the devastation its people are facing today, but also the damage to its infrastructure, its buildings, and its economy that will weigh heavily on the country for months and even years to come.

While experts may debate the extent to which greenhouse gas emissions impacting Pakistan’s weather patterns may be to blame, the scale of this devastation shows the shortcomings of invoking notions of “adaptation” as a meaningful strategy to respond to climate change’s destructive force.

Pakistan is facing the type of large-scale destruction that is seen in wars — and not just any war, but total warfare that consumes entire regions and countries. This is what many countries suffered in World War II and others in more recent conflicts. In Pakistan, the cause isn’t an army, but a changing climate fueled at least in part by the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions clogging our atmosphere.

A core strategic element of the international effort to address climate change is “adaptation,” namely action “to respond to the impacts of climate change that are already happening, as well as prepare for future impacts.” This operates in tandem with “mitigation” which focuses on reducing GHG emissions.

Because our historical and future GHG emissions will produce some degree of climate change, we indeed do need to fund measures to respond to the inescapable changes in weather patterns and climate more broadly – even as, through mitigation action, we seek to lower our GHG emissions to limit how much our climate will change.

Yet, the recent events in Pakistan illustrate the shortcomings of an adaptation strategy in the face of widespread devastation. Any notion of “adapting” to these events is tragically misplaced. We cannot, just as countries cannot adapt to the destruction of war. They can resist, fight, look to recover, but the tragedy they suffer cannot be undone.

And while the number of lives lost because of climate change arguably may presently be smaller than that wrought by war, the capacity of both to destroy property, livelihoods and economies is similar.

The goals and elements proposed by the experts within the “adaptation” effort are the right ones. We must look to limit the losses generated by changes in our climate, to accelerate the recovery from extreme climate events, and even seek potential opportunities.

We must invest in climate resilient infrastructure, drought-resistant crops and other strengthened agricultural practices, better weather forecasting capacity, tools to reconnect power supply more quickly, and in a multitude of other measures. And these efforts need to be adapted to the changes in our climate. Moreover, as climate specialists and others advocate, many more resources need to go into this area.

But while technocrats and politicians of the past landed on this terminology of “adaptation”, what today’s events in Pakistan show is that you cannot truly adapt to climate change and its potential for widespread devastation — especially developing countries that do not have the financial resources to counter extreme weather events.

Even at a smaller scale across both developing and wealthier advanced economies, the rising number and severity of localized wildfires, heatwaves and floods are causing irreparable damage. People suffer loss. Although they might recover and rebuild their homes or businesses, there has still been harm and too often tragedy. People die because of climate change. Too much is lost forever.

There has been growing discussion in the international climate arena around payments for “loss and damage” caused by climate change.  This type of funding, including for additional adaptation measures, can help — but it will not remedy the problem, especially given the potentially massive magnitude of the destruction.

Pakistan cannot be expected to adapt to having one third of its country under water. Families should not be expected to adapt to the tragedy climate change can inflict.

Let’s find another term that better conveys what is truly within our reach in responding to climate change so that we can have a clearer appreciation of the climate threats we face. The global community can indeed work to reduce the loss people will suffer and do a better job at helping them to recover and rebuild. But truly “adapting” to the devastation that climate change can cause is a dangerously misleading notion.

Yes, there must be additional funding for adaptation and to help poorer countries respond to climate disasters. But what the events in Pakistan show is that so much more needs to be done to reduce GHG emissions and thereby limit the degree of climate change and accompanying destructive forces people will need to face.

Philippe Benoit has over 20 years working on international energy, climate and development issues, including management positions at the World Bank and the International Energy Agency. He is currently research director at Global Infrastructure Analytics and Sustainability 2050.

© Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Exit mobile version