Capacity Building Is Key to Africa’s Digital Sequencing Success Story

Africa, Biodiversity, Conferences, COP16, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition, Food Sustainability, Headlines, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Biodiversity

The International Livestock Research Institute is using genomics to breed livestock suited to local conditions and production systems to meet community needs. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

The International Livestock Research Institute is using genomics to breed livestock suited to local conditions and production systems to meet community needs. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

BULAWAYO, Oct 22 2024 (IPS) – Christian Tiambo has always wished to uplift local farmers’ communities through cutting-edge science.


As climate change wreaked havoc on local agriculture, Tiambo, a livestock scientist at the Centre for Tropical Livestock Genetics and Health (CTLGH) and at the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), focused on conserving and developing livestock that could withstand environmental stress.

Genomics, a Game Changer

Tiambo’s research took an exciting turn when part of his PhD studies was to characterize and establish local poultry populations with interesting resilience potential. Yet, the need for local access to advanced genomic tools was a barrier to fully unlocking this potential.

Today, the power of digital data and sequencing information is transformative. It is driving the discovery of genes and innovation in agriculture through the identification and deep characterization of pathogens in plants and animals. That is helping scientists to breed livestock suited to local conditions and production systems, thereby benefiting local communities that have been custodians of genetic resources for generations.

But there is a catch: Africa, like other parts of the global south, is a genetic goldmine but has not fully capitalized on the digital sequencing information (DSI) derived from its genetic heritage. DSI is a tool that provides information for the precise identification of living organisms and allows the development of diagnosis tools and technologies for conservation in animals and plants. Besides, DSI is also used in investigating the relationships within and between species and in plant and animal breeding to predict their breeding value and potential contribution to their future generations.

Tiambo said DSI can be used to adjust the genotypes and produce animals with desired traits, adapted to local conditions but which have higher productivity.

A promising innovation has been the development of surrogate technologies in poultry, small ruminants, cattle or pigs—giving opportunity to local and locally adapted and resilient breeds to carry and disseminate semen from improved breeds in challenging environments.

“Farmers would not need to keep requesting inseminators and semen from outside their village,” Tiambo explained, noting that this shift could dramatically improve livestock breeding, dissemination of elite genetics, boost food security and alleviate poverty in remote rural areas of Africa.

Global cooperation among stakeholders of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework is key to establishing international guidelines on benefit-sharing from animal genetics resources and their associated information, including DSI.

Christian Tiambo, a livestock scientist at the Centre for Tropical Livestock Genetics and Health. Credit: ILRI

Christian Tiambo, a livestock scientist at the Centre for Tropical Livestock Genetics and Health. Credit: ILRI

Using genetics and associated traditional knowledge includes adapting specific livestock to specific environments. This contributes to the development of improved and elite tropical animal breeds with particular traits that meet community needs to improve livelihoods, he said.

“Local livestock is not just for food but is our heritage, culture and social value,” said Tiambo, adding that conserving livestock is conserving local culture, social ethics and inclusion, with gender aspects being considered. For example, the Muturu cattle and the Bakosi cattle in Nigeria and Cameroon are animals used in dowry, The Bamileke cattle remain sacred and maintain the ecosystem of sacred forest in part of the western highlands of Cameroon.

“I have never seen any traditional ceremony done with exotic chicken in any African village,” he said.

Genetics and DSI, according to Tiambo, are “game changers” in breeding livestock with desired traits faster. What used to take five to seven years or more, he says, can now be done in just three or four cycles with the help of genomics.

ILRI has been working with the Roslin Institute, the Kenyan Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization and collaborating with the African Union-InterAfrican Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR), the National Biosafety Authority, farmer communities, and National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) in Africa and Southeast Asia in the conservation and development of improved local chicken using stem cell technologies.

Bridging the Capacity Gap

DSI needs infrastructure and human resources. “A lot of infrastructure, equipment and skills are coming from outside Africa, but how can we also generate DSI and use it locally?” Tiambo asked. He worries that without developing local capacity to harness DSI, “a lot of helicopter research will still be happening in Africa where people fly in, just pick what they want, fly out, and no scientists in Africa are involved in generating and using DSI.”

Technologically advanced countries have often exploited these genetic resources, developing commercial products and services without clear mechanisms for sharing the monetary and non-monetary benefits with local communities as ethics and common sense would require—an injustice that needs urgent correction.

The use of DSI on genetic resources is one of the four goals of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted in 2022 with the aim of stopping global biodiversity loss by 2030.

ThankGod Ebenezer, bioinformatician and co-founder of the African BioGenome Project, argues that Africa must seize this moment to build and strengthen local capacity to produce and use DSI from genetic resources.

“The establishment of a benefit-sharing mechanism for DSI is a first step in the right direction and Africa needs to maximise even this first step by putting in a framework to generate and make use of DSI locally,” Ebenezer told IPS, explaining that Africa needs to be able to do genetic sequencing on the ground with local scientists having the capacity to translate and use it.

The Africa BioGenome Project, of which Tiambo is also a founding member, is a continental biodiversity conservation initiative that has laid out a roadmap for how Africa can benefit from DSI and the planned multilateral fund.

“The main benefit comes from being able to use DSI and ultimately share it with the global community in line with the national and international rules and regulations,” said Ebenezer. “Because if you cannot use DSI yourself, you will always feel like a supplier, like someone who gets crude oil from the ground and asks someone else to add value to it and gets several products.”

“The multilateral fund is key,” Ebenezer stresses. “If someone converts DSI into revenue, for instance, they’re only looking at paying 1% back into the fund. Is that enough for the communities that hold this biodiversity?”

At COP16 in Colombia (Oct 21-Nov 1, 2024), world leaders will discuss mechanisms for fair and equitable sharing of DSI benefits, a critical step for Africa and other biodiversity-rich regions. For example, Africa hosts eight of the 34 biodiversity hotspots in the world, according to the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).

“In terms of the negotiation, we would like the DSI fund to be approved so that it’s ready for implementation because this is an implementation COP,” Susana Muhamad, Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development of Colombia and COP16 President-designate, told a press briefing ahead of COP16.

“We would like the decision of the parties to give the COP the teeth for implementation. One is the DSI,” Muhamad said.

Astrid Schomaker, Executive Secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, is hopeful that COP16 will operationalize the multilateral mechanism for the sharing of benefits from the use of digital sequencing information in genetic research.

“We are going to look at that. And I think it’s a very complex term and issue, but it is ultimately about how those industries, sectors and companies that use digital sequence information on genetic resources that are often located in the global south, but not exclusively, how they use it and how they pay for using it,” said Schomaker, noting that COP15 agreed to establish a multilateral mechanism and a Fund for DSI.

The fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the use of genetic resources is one of the three objectives of the CDB, including the conservation of biological diversity and sustainable use of its components. Target 18 of the CBD seeks to reduce harmful incentives by at least USD 500 billion per year by 2030, money that could be channelled to halting biodiversity loss.

The World Resources Institute (WRI), in a position paper, has urged COP16 to provide more finance and incentives to support nature and biodiversity goals.

There is currently a USD 700 billion gap between annual funding for nature and what’s needed by 2030 to protect and restore ecosystems, the WRI said, noting that “many of the world’s most biodiverse ecosystems—and biggest carbon sinks—are in developing countries that cannot save them without far more financial support.”

The WRI commented that bringing in more private sector finance will require incentives, which can come from policy and regulation as well as market-based strategies to make investments in nature more attractive.

But this should not substitute for shifting harmful subsidies and delivering international public finance to the countries that need it most, WRI argued.

As the world scrambles to stop biodiversity loss by 2030, the upcoming COP16 discussions could be pivotal in ensuring that Africa finally benefits from its own genetic wealth.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

The Future of Food Security Lies Beyond COP29’s Negotiation Tables

Biodiversity, Climate Action, Climate Change, Climate Change Justice, Conferences, COP29, Economy & Trade, Environment, Food and Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition, Food Sustainability, Global, Green Economy, Headlines, Natural Resources, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion



 

ASUNCION, Paraguay, Oct 21 2024 (IPS) – Climate change has thrown our food systems into chaos. Extreme weather events and dramatic climate variations are hammering food production and supply chains across the world. As global leaders gear up for COP29, there’s plenty of buzz about climate action. But can we really expect these slow-moving, bureaucratic negotiations to deliver tangible and swift results to decarbonize and insulate our agri-food systems? Most likely not. But do not despair. While the COP29 talks unfold, crucial climate solutions for transforming food systems are already taking root on the ground.


Jesus Quintana

In the exhilarating, Oscar-winning movie “Everything Everywhere All at Once”, the leading characters are surrounded by overwhelming chaos and complexity. Yet, within this confusion, small actions, and the determination of people behind them, spark powerful change. In stunning similarity, the climate crisis —particularly in food systems— feels like an insurmountable challenge with everything, droughts, floods, storms, hunger and other interlocked crises, striking everywhere, and all at once.

Urgent action is needed. Where do we turn? COP 29 will likely be stuck in slow-paced discussions. Meanwhile, transformative solutions are taking shape on the ground. Across the globe, communities, farmers, sponsors and innovators are quietly building resilience in their food systems, demonstrating that true progress often emerges from the margins, not the center of chaos. Just like in the metaphoric film, finding purpose and action amid disorder is where meaningful change begins.

Grassroots solutions for climate-resilient food systems

While world leaders talk and officials try to turn decisions into workable policies, local communities are already acting. Across the Global South, where the effects of climate change are being felt most acutely, smallholder farmers and grassroots organizations are implementing innovative practices that build resilience to climate shocks.

In regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Latin America, agroecology is gaining traction as a powerful tool for both mitigating and adapting to climate change. This farming approach, which draws on traditional knowledge and emphasizes sustainable, low-emission methods, is helping communities adapt to changing weather patterns while improving food security. Agroecology promotes biodiversity, improves soil health, and reduces dependency on chemical inputs, all of which enhance the resilience of agricultural systems to climate impacts and helps decarbonize them.

The private sector’s role in transforming food systems

Community movements and local governments are playing a vital role, but the private sector is also increasingly driving climate solutions in food systems. Market forces are pushing companies to innovate in ways that reduce agriculture’s climate footprint. The plant-based food revolution is an example of how the private sector is responding to the need for more sustainable diets that lower greenhouse gas emissions. Similarly, alternative protein food-tech startups are leading the way towards a sustainable and tasty food future. These unconventional substitutes for traditional livestock farming offer a glimpse of how innovation can drive systemic changes in food production.

In addition to product innovation, there is growing corporate investment in regenerative agriculture—a practice that rebuilds soil health, captures carbon, and improves biodiversity. Large food companies, driven by consumer demand for sustainable products, are making commitments to source ingredients from regenerative farms, contributing to both climate mitigation and long-term food security.

Climate finance outside the COP processes

One of the most significant barriers to transforming food systems in the face of climate change is the lack of adequate financing. While COPs have made important commitments, such as the creation of the Green Climate Fund, the flow of funds has been slow and insufficient to meet the needs of vulnerable communities. In response, philanthropy and private finance are stepping in.

Some patrons and foundations are funding initiatives that help smallholder farmers adapt to climate change, while impact investors are supporting agri-tech innovations that boost productivity in a sustainable way. These efforts, although outside the COP framework, are critical in scaling climate-resilient food systems and achieving global net-zero targets.

Real solutions are happening now

While COP29 will no doubt produce important global agreements, the truth is that many of the solutions to the climate crisis—especially when it comes to food—are already in motion. Farmers, local communities, philanthropies and private companies are building a food system that is more resilient, sustainable, and low-carbon.

Global leaders must take notice. Yes, we need ambitious targets and international commitments. But we also need to support and scale the grassroots movements and private-sector innovations that are already leading the way. Real food security in a climate-challenged world will not be achieved through top-down solutions alone—it will come from empowering those on the frontlines.

As COP29 approaches, let’s not lose sight of what is happening beyond the negotiation tables. The future of food security depends on action today, led by those who can’t afford to wait.

Jesus Quintana is Senior Advisor on Sustainable Food Systems and former Director General, CIAT

IPS UN Bureau

 

Civil Society Fights Against Budget Cuts Amid Calls for “Aid” Reform

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Climate Change, Conferences, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Financial Crisis, Global, Headlines, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Sarah Strack is Forus Director

“Woman crosses a local business in the streets of Kathmandu, Nepal” (Both Nomads)

NEW YORK, Oct 16 2024 (IPS) – Multiple conflicts, the climate emergency and other crises are destabilising many parts of the world and intensifying the strain on the resources needed to finance the global sustainable development agenda. Amid these challenges, data from 2023, shows that Official Development Assistance (ODA) reached a record-breaking US$223.7 billion, up from US$211 billion the previous year, according to Eurodad.


However, if one looks beyond the mere figures, worrying trends are emerging. Major donors like Germany and France are reducing their development budget and several countries are already announcing cuts for 2025.

This trend has prompted debate over the direction and quality of global aid, especially at a time when ODA is more crucial than ever in addressing global crises.

In France, with the campaign #StopàlabaisseAPD (#StoptheODACuts), NGOs are mobilising against further reductions in the 2025 budget, warning that such cuts could undermine international solidarity efforts and hit hardest those who are already left behind.

Coordination SUD, a coalition of 180 French NGOs, is raising the alarm over the potential impact of these cuts, which follow a 13% reduction in 2024, and which is seeing ODA funds slashed again by over 20% in 2025, as per the finance bill presented this Thursday

The first victims of this measure will be the most vulnerable populations. “ODA enables local and international NGOs to work daily with and alongside the most fragile communities,” reminds Olivier Bruyeron, President of Coordination SUD.

“Official development assistance has been used as a political football over recent years,” says Bond, the national platform of NGOs in the UK.

As a national civil society platform, they work to ensure UK aid reaches the communities “that need it most”.

“ODA is being used as a geopolitical tool with national interests in focus, when it should be a mechanism for redistributive justice,” said Alex Farley of Bond in a recent global event during the Summit of the Future hosted by the global civil society network Forus.

This debate is part of a larger global conversation on the future of ODA.

While the traditional 0.7% Gross National Income (GNI) target remains a key benchmark for donor countries, experts argue that ODA must evolve to better address the real needs of recipient communities, particularly in the Global South. As Oyebisi Oluseyi of the Nigerian Network of NGOs (NNNGO) points out, “While this target remains important, it’s no longer enough.”

Critics are calling for a redefinition of ODA that shifts powers toward recipient countries and communities. Zia ur Rehman, Coordinator of the Asia Development Alliance – a regional platform of NGOs, emphasizes the need for local actors to have more say in how funds are used.

Providing a perspective from the Pacific Islands, Emeline Siale from the civil society regional coalition PIANGO, echoes the need for local actors to play a leading role in ODA decision-making, “not merely as participants but as leaders”.

“Community participation itself is a healing process, and it’s become a central topic in many civil society discussions,” Siale explains.

As key international summits on development financing approach, the future of ODA—and its ability to meet the needs of the most vulnerable—hangs in the balance.

“The upcoming Fourth United Nations International Conference on Financing for Development presents a key opportunity for the development community to align with development effectiveness principles, rather than allowing them to be further diluted. Now, more than ever, civil society must play its role, shifting power and pushing for a new global governance of international aid that is more representative, democratic, inclusive, and transparent,” says civil society leader in Burkina Faso Mavalow Christelle Kalhoule and President of Forus, a global civil society network representing over 24,000 NGOs across the globe.

IPS UN Bureau

 

IPBES Calls for Holistic Solutions, Transformative Change in Tackling Biodiversity Loss

Biodiversity, Climate Change, Conferences, Conservation, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Sustainability, Global, Headlines, Health, Natural Resources, TerraViva United Nations

Biodiversity

Biodiversity is key to food security and nutrition. IPBES has warned that loss of biodiversity is accelerating around the world, with 1 million animal and plant species threatened with extinction. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

Biodiversity is key to food security and nutrition. IPBES has warned that loss of biodiversity is accelerating around the world, with 1 million animal and plant species threatened with extinction. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

BULAWAYO, Oct 11 2024 (IPS) – A holistic approach and transformative change of systems are needed to tackle biodiversity loss and to put the world on a sustainable path, an assessment by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has recommended.


The world is facing an interconnected crisis of unprecedented biodiversity loss, food insecurity, and environmental degradation that can no longer be tackled through fragmented and piecemeal solutions, a forthcoming assessment by IPBES will show, calling for holistic approaches instead. 

IPBES is set to launch two scientific assessments, the  Nexus Assessment and Transformative Change Assessment, in December 2024, which recommend holistic solutions to tackling the connected and converging crises of biodiversity, water, food, health, and climate change because’ “siloed” approaches are proving unsuccessful.’

In addition, the assessment calls for urgent “transformative change” by intergovernmental bodies, private sector organizations and civil society to respond to the nature and climate crises.

IPBES is an intergovernmental organization established to improve the interface between science and policy on issues of biodiversity and ecosystem services.

The historic IPBES Global Assessment Report of 2019 found that meeting global sustainability targets for 2030 and beyond requires a fundamental, system-wide reorganization, including new paradigms.

IPBES Head of Communications, Rob Spaull, said the assessments represent the best science evidence for critical action to tackle biodiversity loss available to policymakers.

“This is the most ambitious science report we have done because these five issues by themselves are complex and this assessment  pulls them together,” Spaull said in a pre-report launch media briefing this week.

The Nexus Assessment identifies important trade-offs and opportunities within the multi-dimensional polycrisis: To what extent do efforts to address one crisis add to others? And which policy options and actions would produce the greatest benefits across the board? The report will offer an unprecedented range of responses to move decisions and actions beyond single-issue silos. The report was produced over three years by 101 experts in 42 countries.

“Global crises in biodiversity, water, food, health and climate change often intensify each other when addressed separately and should therefore be tackled together,” said Paula Harrison, co-chair of the IPBES Nexus Assessment report, in a statement.

“The Nexus Assessment is among the most ambitious work ever undertaken by the IPBES community, offering an unprecedented range of response options to move decisions and actions beyond single issue silos.”

The Transformative Change Assessment looks at the underlying causes of biodiversity loss, determinants of transformative change and options for achieving the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity. The report also assesses the determinants of transformative change, the biggest obstacles it faces and how it occurs. It also identifies achievable options to foster, accelerate and maintain transformative change towards a sustainable world and the steps to achieve global visions for transformative change.

A statement by IPBES notes that the Transformative Change Report will provide decision-makers, including policymakers, with “the best available evidence, analysis and options for actions leading to transformative change and build an understanding of the implications of the underlying causes of biodiversity loss for achieving the Paris Climate Agreement, global biodiversity targets under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the Sustainable Development Goals and other major international development objectives.”

The 11th session of the IPBES Plenary, the first ever to take place in Africa from December 10 to 16, will discuss and approve the reports. IPBES represents nearly 150 governments and seeks to strengthen the science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Spaull said the assessments underline the need to find holistic solutions to addressing biodiversity loss.

“The assessments are looking at how when you try and fix one part of the system you have unintended consequences in other parts of the system; for instance, in many countries there is a big push to plant trees to mitigate climate change and for carbon sequestration and with (unintended) consequences for biodiversity. For example, planting one kind of tree may be damaging to the ecology or water supply and also have an impact on health, so it means there is a need to find a balance.”

He said the reports also highlight responding to issues simultaneously, which is also the emphasis on meeting the SDGs, which have to be addressed systematically rather than in silos.

“For example, there has been a big increase in the volume of food production in past decades and an increase in caloric output that has helped global health but on the other hand, this has resulted in biodiversity loss because the massive food production has been done through intensive agriculture methods that deplete water and have massive gas emissions,” said Spaull.

Furthermore, IPBES has influenced and shaped national and international biodiversity policy through providing policymakers with clear, scientifically based recommendations and helping governments make informed decisions about conservation, sustainable development, and environmental protection.

Through its assessments, IPBES highlights the interconnectedness of biodiversity, human health, economic stability, and environmental sustainability, making it a critical player in the global response to the biodiversity crisis.

Spaull noted that IPBES work has been instrumental in informing progress assessments on biodiversity-related SDGs.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Nepal’s Deadly Flash Floods: What Went Wrong?

Asia-Pacific, Climate Change, Conferences, COP29, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

COP29

Kathmandu under water because of heavy rainfall, which claimed more than 225 lives in last week of September. Photo: Barsha Shah/IPS

Kathmandu under water because of heavy rainfall, which claimed more than 225 lives in last week of September. Photo: Barsha Shah/IPS

KATHMANDU, Oct 3 2024 (IPS) – Nepal is trying to recover from recent flash floods and landslides caused by heavy rainfall over the last weekend of September, which claimed at least 226 lives. The mid- and eastern parts of the country, including the capital, Kathmandu, experienced the heaviest monsoon rains in two decades from September 26-28, leaving many parts of Kathmandu underwater. Experts say this is one of the deadliest and worst flash floods that impacted thousands of people in decades.


The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority (NDRRMA)—facing intense backlash for its inability to act effectively to minimize losses—reported by Tuesday (October 1) that at least 25 people were still stranded or missing, while more than 150 were injured.

On September 28, the country’s 25 weather stations in 14 districts recorded new precipitation records within 24-hours. Kathmandu airport stations recorded 239.7 millimeters of rain. Before that, on July 23, 2002, it had recorded 177 mm of rainfall. Flash floods caused by extreme rainfall within a short period washed away entire neighborhoods, roads, and bridges in Kathmandu and surrounding areas.

The heavy rains caused rivers in Kathmandu, including the Bagmati, which runs through the city, to swell more than 2 meters above the safe level. Senior journalist Yubaraj Ghimire—whose house was also submerged—wrote, “The disastrous hours of terror further confirmed the state’s incompetence in times of need.”

Outside of Kathmandu villages like Roshi in Kavre district are impacted by flood and landslides. Photo: Barsha Shah/IPS

Outside of Kathmandu villages like Roshi in Kavre district are impacted by flood and landslides. Photo: Barsha Shah/IPS

Early warnings were there, but lives were lost!

Frustration is growing, not only because of its failure in conducting effective rescue operations but also for not acting on the information that was available beforehand about the forthcoming disaster.

The Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM) issued a special weather bulletin at least five days prior, alerting the public to impending heavy rainfall that could result in flooding and landslides.

In the bulletin, the DHM labeled districts with red, orange, yellow, and green, urging “Take Action,” “Be Prepared,” “Be Updated,” and “No Warning,” respectively.

Again, on September 25, the DHM issued another “special weather bulletin,” this time labeling most parts of the country in red, or the “Take Action” category.

As predicted, heavy rain started pouring—rivers began flowing with water levels higher than the safe limit.

“The information was there, but it doesn’t seem like it was taken seriously to be prepared,” Dr. Ngamindra Dahal, who works on climate change-induced disaster risk reduction, said. “To minimize consequences, we need to take action according to the information we have, but that was not the case in most parts.”

Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli acknowledged that the government was not prepared for a disaster of this scale. In a press conference on Tuesday, Oli said, “Our preparedness was not for this kind of circumstance. We were not expecting this scale of rains, landslides, and human and infrastructure losses.”

But the weather agency, DHM, had been warning and urging appropriate action through multiple notices. Government agencies admit they were not able to communicate disaster-related information effectively.

Why was NDRRMA not able to act quickly?

This time, the weather information was accurate in most parts, but avoidable incidents still claimed lives.

“I was traveling, and what I can say is that even though there was information beforehand, it was not transformed into action,” Dahal added. “I do think NDRRMA and other stakeholders could have done better to reduce casualties.”

But the agency responsible for disaster risk reduction and management—NDRRMA—claims that it was due to their collaborative effort with other stakeholders that human casualties were lower.

“That information did help, and it is because of us that things are not worse than this,” Dr. Dijan Bhattrai, spokesperson for NDRRMA, said.

“In the case of Kathmandu, our urban setting is not capable of handling this kind of disaster, and in other parts of the country, it was a combination of intense rain and fragmented geological conditions due to the 2015 earthquake.”

Stakeholders have publicly acknowledged the role of river encroachment and unplanned settlement in Kathmandu, and this problem is well-known. However, for this recent disaster, people are angry because they noticed a clear gap between the information and the preparedness effort.

“It’s true we were not well-equipped to deal with this kind of situation in terms of resources and trained manpower,” Bhattrai claimed. “We did our part, doing what we could within our capacity.”

Is it exacerbated by climate change?

In recent years, scientists have said that climate change is altering the amount and timing of rainfall across Asia. However, the impact of floods has increased due to the built environment, including unplanned construction, especially on floodplains, which leaves insufficient areas for water retention and drainage.

A recent report published in Nature Communications states that Asia’s exposure to extreme rain and flood risk will grow by 2030.

“Definitely, there is much to do in terms of effective disaster communication and actionable preparedness, but it is also a fact that these kinds of events are becoming more frequent because of climate change,” Bhattrai said. “We are planning to lay our case at the upcoming UN climate conference (COP29) to secure more resources to deal with future disasters.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Activists Call on World to ‘Imagine’ Peace, End Nuclear Arms

Active Citizens, Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Conferences, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Nuclear Disarmament, Peace, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Peace

The panel for the session on “Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Imagining a World without Nuclear Weapons.” Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

The panel for the session on “Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Imagining a World without Nuclear Weapons.” Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

PARIS, Sep 27 2024 (IPS) – In any discussion of world peace and the future of humanity, the issue of nuclear arms must be addressed, and now.


That was the message from a range of delegates at the “Imaginer la Paix / Imagine Peace” conference, held in Paris September 22 to 24, and organized by the Sant’Egidio Community, a Christian organization founded in Rome in 1968 and now based in 70 countries.

Describing its tenets as “Prayer, service to the Poor and work for Peace,” the community has hosted 38 international, multi-faith peace meetings, bringing together activists from around the world. This is the first time the conference has been held in Paris, with hundreds traveling to France, itself a nuclear-weapon state.

Occurring against the backdrop of brutal, on-going conflicts in different regions and a new race by some countries to “upgrade” their arsenal, the gathering had a sense of urgency, with growing fears that nuclear weapons might be used by warlords. Participants highlighted current and past atrocities and called upon world leaders to learn from the past.

“After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we have been blessed with many who have said ‘no’—’no’ a million times, creating movements and treaties, (and) awareness… that the only reasonable insight to learn from the conception and use of nuclear weapons is to say ‘no’,” said Andrea Bartoli, president of the Sant’Egidio Foundation for Peace and Dialogue, based in New York.

Participating in a conference forum Monday titled “Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Imagining a World Without Nuclear Weapons,”  Bartoli and other speakers drew stark pictures of what living in a world with nuclear weapons entails, and they highlighted developments since World War II.

“After the two bombs were used against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, humans built more than 70,000 nuclear weapons and performed more than 2,000 tests. Still today we have more than 12,500, each of them with power greatly superior to the two used in August 1945,” Bartoli said.

Despite awareness of the catastrophic potential of these weapons and despite a UN treaty prohibiting their use, some governments argue that possessing nuclear arms is a deterrent—an argument that is deceptive, according to the forum speakers.

Anna Ikeda, program coordinator tor disarmament at the UN Office of Soka Gakkai International. Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

Anna Ikeda, program coordinator for disarmament at the UN Office of Soka Gakkai International. Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

Jean-Marie Collin, director of ICAN (the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, a movement launched in the early 2000s in Australia and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017), said that leaders who cite deterrence “accept the possibility of violating” international human rights.

“Nuclear weapons are designed to destroy cities and kill and maim entire populations, which means that all presidents and heads of government who implement a defense policy based on nuclear deterrence and who are therefore responsible for giving this order, are aware of this,” Collin told the forum.

ICAN campaigned for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons that was adopted at the United Nations in 2017, entering into force in 2021. The adoption came nearly five decades after the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which entered into force in 1970.

The terms of the NPT consider five countries to be nuclear weapons states: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China. Four other countries also possess nuclear weapons: India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel.

According to a 2024 ICAN report, these nine states jointly spent €85 billion (USD 94,6 billion) on their atomic weapon arsenals last year, an expenditure ICAN has called “obscene” and “unacceptable.” France, whose president Emmanuel Macron spoke about peace in broad, general terms at the opening of the conference, spent around €5,3 billion (about USD 5,9 billion) in 2023 on its nuclear weapons, said the report.

The policy of “deterrence” and “reciprocity,”  which essentially means “we’ll get rid of our weapons if you get rid of yours,”  has been slammed by ICAN and fellow disarmament activists.

“With the constant flow of information, we often tend to lose sight of the reality of figures,” Collin said at the peace conference. “I hope this one will hold your attention: it is estimated that more than 38,000 children were killed in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Children!”

All those killed—an estimated 210,000 people by the end of 1945—died in horrific ways, as survivors and others have testified. Delegates said that this knowledge should be the real “deterrent.”

At the forum, Anna Ikeda, program coordinator for disarmament at the UN Office of Soka Gakkai International, a global Buddhist movement, described testimony from a Hiroshima a-bomb survivor, Reiko Yamada, as one she would never forget.

“She (Yamada) stated, ‘A good friend of mine in the neighbourhood was waiting for her mother to return home with her four brothers and sisters. Later, she told me that on the second day after the bombing, a moving black lump crawled into the house. They first thought it was a black dog, but they soon realized it was their mother; she collapsed and died when she finally got to her children. They cremated her body in the yard,” Ikeda told the audience with emotion.

“Who deserves to die such a death? Nobody!” she continued. “Yet our world continues to spend billions of dollars to upkeep our nuclear arsenals, and our leaders at times imply readiness to use them. It is utterly unacceptable.”

Ikeda said that survivors, known as the “hibakusha” in Japan, have a fundamental answer to why nuclear weapons must be abolished—it is that “no one else should ever suffer what we did.”

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

IPS UN Bureau Report