Beyond Lives Saved: Why Early Warning Systems Are a Smart Investment

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Climate Change, Development & Aid, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, International Justice, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

Opinion

A buoy in a sea of Vladivostok, Russia is tracking movement of waves. Early warning system is vital for effective disaster management. Credit: Unsplash/Ant Rozetsky

BANGKOK, Thailand, Aug 8 2025 (IPS) – Significant progress has been made globally in implementing national and local disaster risk reduction strategies. Yet, the impact of disasters on lives and economies persists and disaster resilience is one of the most regressed areas in Sustainable Development Goal implementation.

Moreover, climate change is intensifying the frequency and severity of disasters. Under a 1.5°C warming scenario, average annualized losses could reach 2.4 per cent of GDP.

Traditionally, early warning systems (EWS) have focused on saving lives. While reasonable, this narrow framing often leaves potential co-benefits untapped. Given today’s strained economic and political context, investments in resilience must also generate broader economic and developmental benefits.

This potential payoff is no myth, latest studies show that every US$1 invested in adaptation is expected to yield over $10.50 in benefits over a 10 year period.

The Triple Dividend of Resilience model offers a comprehensive rationale for investment, emphasizing three interconnected benefits:

1: Saving lives and avoiding losses

The 2024 Global status on MHEWS found that countries with less comprehensive multi-hazard early warning systems (MHEWS) have a disaster-related mortality ratio that is nearly six times higher than that of countries with ‘substantial’ to ‘comprehensive’ MHEWS. Moreover, providing just 24 hours’ notice of an impending storm can reduce potential damage by 30 per cent.

For small island developing states, this potential can be higher – one study found that over 80 per cent of Cyclone Evans’ economic destruction in Samoa, amounting to 28 per cent of the country’s GDP, could have been avoided through efficient EWS.

Largely untapped, heat early warning systems also have proven benefits, from saving lives (see Ahmedabad’s Heat Action plan, which averts an estimated 1,190 heat-related deaths annually) to demonstrating clear economic benefits (for example, Adelaide’s Heat Health Warning System with a benefit-cost ratio of 2.0–3.3 by reducing heat-related hospital admissions and ambulance callouts).

2. Resource Management and Optimization

EWS enhance decision-making across sectors such as agriculture, water management, and energy, providing reliable, timely forecasts to support more efficient and sustainable operations. Crop advisory services boost yields by an estimated $4 billion and $7.7 billion annually in India and China, respectively. Some studies demonstrating that a 1 per cent increase in forecast accuracy results in 0.34 per cent increase in crop yields.

Similarly, fisherfolk earnings can be optimised when supported by Fishing Zone advisories that take into account the changing climate (in the same study, India’s fisherfolk are reported to earn Rs.17,820 more each trip when using the Potential Fishing Zone advisory of INCOIS).

3. Unlocking Co-Benefits

In disaster-prone regions, the constant threat of extreme weather creates persistent uncertainty that discourages long-term investments, limits entrepreneurship, and shortens planning horizons. By improving hazard detection and forecasting, EWS boosts confidence for both local and foreign investments. Beyond economic gains, the third dividend also delivers social and environmental co-benefits, regardless of whether disasters occur.

When EWSs are developed with active community involvement, social cohesion often follows (Viet Nam’s community-based early warning demonstrate this intangible benefit clearly).

Regional collaboration is a pathway to unlocking the triple dividend of resilience.

A key outcome of the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4) in Seville reaffirmed the importance of multilateralism as a framework for addressing global challenges.

Initiatives like ESCAP’s multi-donor Trust Fund for Tsunami, Disaster and Climate Preparedness, has proven the success of pooled investments in regional early warning solutions. A recent Cost Benefit Analysis funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, reviewed 20 years of Trust Fund investments and found that each dollar invested had generated equivalent 3.7-5.5 dollars in benefits (see Figure below).

Source: ESCAP Authors

Established by the Trust Fund is an example of reduced DRR costs maximising benefits: the Regional Integrated Multi-Hazard Early Warning System (RIMES) has developed into a fit-for-purpose operational hub, now supporting 62 countries across Asia, Africa and the Pacific with advances and interoperable early warning solutions.

Through shared infrastructure, forecasting data, and governance mechanisms, these partnerships help countries lower individual costs, improve transboundary risk monitoring, and attract more sustained technical and financial support.

These regional disaster risk management approaches go beyond saving lives and deliver social, economic, and environmental co-benefits, unlocking a cycle of development and risk reduction. As disasters are turning more complex with compounding and cascading impacts, our shared early warning should remain agile, sustained and leverage the advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning.

Looking ahead, the pay-off from preparedness will be realised when policy and financial environments are reframed to truly optimise the return on investment of sustained DRM efforts at all levels.

As the UNDRR Global Assessment Report 2025 highlights, disaster and climate risks must be embedded at the heart of financial decisions and policy frameworks, not simply as crises to respond to. To do this, dedicated financing mechanisms are required to ensure sustained and predictable support for regional DRM initiatives. Of equal importance is national governments support for the integration of EWS into national and regional development planning.

ESCAP is uniquely placed to support this shift by scaling multi-hazard early warning systems that deliver the triple dividend of resilience., The upcoming ESCAP Committee on Disaster Risk Reduction provides a timely opportunity for countries to endorse a forward-looking agenda that reinforces early warning as essential infrastructure.

In today’s climate-uncertain world, the policy case for investing in disaster resilience is clear. DRM is crucial not only for lifesaving but also a driver of sustainable growth.

Temily Baker is Programme Management Officer, Disaster Risk Reduction Section (DRS); Morgan Schmeising Barnes is Intern, DRS; and Sanjay Srivastava is Retired, Former Chief DRS.
SDGs 1, 13, 17

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Embracing the Innovation Imperative: Tech-Governance at a Crossroads

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Against the backdrop of disruptive global forces that create new challenges, risks, and opportunities for development, security, and the global order itself, the need for effective “tech-governance” – including the engagement of all countries, big and small, through existing global institutions – has never been more urgent

Technological change is unleashing a new era in productivity and creativity with far-reaching implications for global development and security. But, beyond adopting new, non-binding normative frameworks, all UN member states must come together to improve the management of new and emerging technologies to better leverage their many benefits, while mitigating multiple risks. Credit: istock

DOHA / WASHINGTON, DC, Aug 6 2025 (IPS) – Technological progress and the course of human history have moved forward together; more recent technological innovations have emerged with unprecedented speed and reach, deeply influencing many areas of human activity.

Advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning (consisting of neural networks), for instance, enable machines to process new information in real-time. As federated learning becomes more widespread, machine learning models can collaborate without the need to share sensitive data, thereby enhancing privacy and security.

These and other recent technological developments will find applications in sectors such as healthcare, where advanced algorithms can support personalized diagnosis and treatment. New and emerging technologies, including nanotechnology and human enhancement technology, have implications for international peace and security too.

Amidst the highest number of armed conflicts since 1946, military technologies are evolving rapidly in both damage potential and distribution.

Artificial intelligence and other technologies are fast expanding the autonomous capabilities of weapons and accelerating the spread of digital dis- and misinformation. At the same time, if present trends persist, only a few countries may dominate this space, in terms of both technological innovation and “setting-the-rules” for their governance.

Against the backdrop of disruptive global forces that create new challenges, risks, and opportunities for development, security, and the global order itself, the need for effective “tech-governance” – including the engagement of all countries, big and small, through existing global institutions – has never been more urgent.

In short, effective tech-governance helps countries to employ common principles (including safety and transparency), codes of practice, and regulation to implement shared values and protect basic human rights.

Successful governance of new and emerging technologies at the global level will require the UN’s 193 member states to not only adopt new, non-binding normative frameworks (such as the recently endorsed Global Digital Compact), but also to build upon them by pursuing targeted innovations in global governance.

In the Future of International Cooperation Report 2024, produced by the Doha Forum, the Stimson Center, and the Global Institute for Strategic Research, we call for assembling an International Scientific Panel on AI (ISPAI) that extends beyond the Global Digital Compact’s limited description focused on promoting “scientific understanding through evidence-based impact, risk and opportunity assessments.”

Feeding into current intergovernmental deliberations in New York co-facilitated by the Governments of Spain and Costa Rica, we believe the ISPAI should be tasked with producing knowledge products and increasing awareness of AI risk, principles, and regulations for policy-makers.

Modeled on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the ISPAI’s ultimate objective could be to understand and address the impact of emerging digital information technologies on the world’s social, economic, political, and natural systems.

The extraordinary pace of AI innovation requires an agile and fast-paced approach to scientific assessment by continually evaluating the technology’s evolving capabilities and ramifications.

A community of practice through an AI Frontier Collaborative would further assist the ISPAI with a new international public-private partnership for expanding access to – as well as investing in – AI technology from leading private sector AI developers, where much of the innovation happens outside the public realm.

Such an initiative would build upon public-private conversations at the recent AI Action Summit in Paris and complement the Global Digital Compact’s commitment to stand-up a Global Dialogue on AI Governance, designed to engage the 118 UN Member States (primarily from the Global South) that do not belong to any of the current seven major international AI governance initiatives.

Additionally, the International Scientific Panel on AI could function as a subsidiary of, and with direct administrative support from, an International Artificial Intelligence Agency (IA2), as elaborated in this forum.

Advising the UN General Assembly and Security Council, the IA2 would boost visibility, advocacy, and resource-mobilization for global AI regulation, while monitoring, evaluation, and reporting on AI industry safeguards. It could further help countries to combat AI-enabled disinformation and the resulting misinformation that can fuel violence and aid terrorist and criminal organizations.

Critically, a scientific panel (like the ISPAI) requires an agile policy platform (like the IA2), as a chief beneficiary of ISPAI’s analysis and recommendations. This will help to ensure its policy relevance and impact, as well as to serve as a central coordination mechanism for AI and related cybertech expertise across the UN system.

Artificial intelligence and other new and emerging technologies make possible powerful new tools for problem-solving. But they also raise serious governance challenges, including in the spheres of global development and security. Effective regulation to maximize their benefits and minimize risks requires the astute combination of advanced knowledge, multistakeholder approaches, and an agile policy interface.

To prevent unbridled competition – dominated by only a select few large companies backed-up by equally large and powerful countries – from leaving everyone worse off, let alone precipitating a serious lose-lose confrontation, we must continuously update global governance tools and mechanisms to keep pace with technological advances.

Improving their effective global management will continue to usher in benefits for potentially billions of people worldwide while, simultaneously, mitigating technological risks.

Mubarak Al-Kuwari is Executive Director of the Doha Forum; Richard Ponzio is Director of the Global Governance, Justice, and Security Program and a senior fellow at the Stimson Center;

Mohamed Ali Chihi is Executive Director of the Global Institute for Strategic Research.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Roma’s Long Standing Exclusion Compounded As Ukraine War Continues

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Disaster Management, Editors’ Choice, Europe, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Armed Conflicts

The home of Oksana Serhienko, Merefa village, near Kharkiv, Ukraine. Credit: Akos Stiller

The home of Oksana Serhienko, Merefa village, near Kharkiv, Ukraine. Credit: Akos Stiller

BRATISLAVA, Aug 6 2025 (IPS) – As Russian forces continue to lay waste to civilian areas of towns and cities across Ukraine, Roma in the country are struggling to access compensation to help them rebuild their damaged homes.

Russia’s relentless bombing has, according to the World Bank, left 13 percent of Ukraine’s housing damaged or destroyed, affecting over 2.5 million households.

Despite this, many Ukrainians, including Roma, have refused to leave their homes in the face of relentless bombing and instead are determined to carry on living in sometimes severely damaged homes to keep their communities alive.

But a new report has shown that many Roma—one of the most vulnerable communities in Ukraine—have been unable to access state property damage compensation: only 4 percent of Roma households surveyed successfully secured compensation for war damage, despite suffering widespread destruction.

This is because requirements for applicants mean the Roma population, whose lives were already precarious long before the war began, are being disproportionately excluded from the scheme, according to the Roma Foundation for Europe (RFE), which was behind the report.

“Many of the issues we identify [in our report] affect non-Roma applicants too—particularly in occupied or frontline areas… [but] what makes the situation more severe for Roma is the combination of these factors with long-standing exclusion and economic precarity,” Neda Korunovska, Vice President for Analytics and Results at RFE, told IPS.

As in many countries in Europe, the Roma community in Ukraine has long faced social exclusion and, many claim, systemic discrimination at societal and institutional levels.

But like the rest of Ukrainian society, they have felt the full effects of Russia’s brutal full-scale invasion over the last three and half years and many have seen their homes damaged or even destroyed.

State compensation for property damage caused by the fighting is available, but experts say there are significant barriers for claimants, some of which are specifically greater for Roma people.

These include requirements such as possession of official property documents and proof of ownership—both sometimes difficult for Roma from communities where informal housing and disputed property rights are not uncommon—as well as a need for a level of digital literacy, which can be a problem for communities where levels of digital exclusion are high, according to RFE.

The group’s analysis, based on cases across four Ukrainian regions, including Zaporizhzhia, Kryvyi Rih, Odessa and Kharkiv, shows that deeply entrenched legal, administrative, and digital hurdles are blocking Roma communities from accessing aid intended for rebuilding homes and lives, the group claims.

Zeljko Jovanovic, RFE president, said that current compensation systems, although designed for order and efficiency, often overlook those with fewer resources but no less damage, and that they lack “…the required flexibility for the complex realities of pre-war informality of homes, displacement, and occupation.”

“Many affected families cannot afford the property registration fees or the costs associated with inheritance procedures. The average damage of 2,816 Euros represents several months of pre-war salary,” he added.

RFE points out that in regions like Odesa, more than half (54 percent) of Roma families lack formal property registration, while in Kryvyi Rih, not a single claim from the surveyed households has been submitted to the state registry due to legal limbo over inheritance, missing paperwork, and lack of resources to navigate the system. Even in Zaporizhzhia, where property records are strongest, low application rates point to deep mistrust in institutions, amplified by experiences of discrimination.

Some Roma contacted for the survey said they had not even bothered to apply for compensation for fear that the government might later come and demand the money back from them.

“This is a reflection of deep institutional mistrust,” said Korunovska. “This mistrust isn’t unfounded—it’s rooted in long-standing patterns of discrimination. In previous research we have undertaken, many Roma respondents have described negative treatment by public officials when seeking housing or services. Surveys consistently show high levels of social distance between Roma and the broader population in Ukraine, which reinforces these feelings of exclusion.”

RFE points out that nationally, around 61% of submitted claims have been approved, but that among Roma, the figure was only 28%—and the vast majority (86%) of people surveyed for its report never submitted claims at all due to systemic barriers.

Liubov Serhienko, 69, has lived in her home in Merefa, near Kharkiv, for the last forty years. But it has suffered severe damage from bombings by Russian forces—during one attack the roof and some ceilings collapsed and one room is now entirely uninhabitable. During a short evacuation from the house, thieves stole her boiler, fridge, and furniture.

Her daughter, Oksana, describes how the family—three generations all living under the same roof, including Oksana and her children—is forced to use blankets to try to retain whatever heat they can in rooms now largely completely exposed to the outside because walls are no longer standing. In winter, snow blows straight into the home, she says.

While neighbors have helped with some repairs, resources are limited and the building remains in disrepair. Relying solely on her pension of 3,000 UAH (around €70) to support the household—the war has taken away all job opportunities for her and members of her family—she says all she wants is the state to help fix the roof and ceiling, as she no longer has the physical strength or finances to do it herself.

In testimony to RFE, which was passed on to IPS, Serhienko said, “What I want most right now is for my family to have a roof over their heads.”

Oksana criticizes the lack of help from the state for them and other Roma in similar situations.

“The government doesn’t care. They’ve done nothing,” she said.

Her mother goes even further, explicitly linking her experience to deliberate discrimination by authorities.

“[Just] Gypsies, they say. As if we’re not people. Maybe they don’t see us as people.”

Andriy Poliakov has stayed in his home in Andriivka in the Kharkiv region since the start of the full-scale invasion, despite the severe damage the dwelling has suffered in Russian attacks.

Windows are broken and there are cracks in the walls, as he has suffered several damages to their house, windows were broken, and there are cracks in the walls, as his house has shifted structurally due to bomb blasts. Poliakov, 45, refuses to leave his home, as he is a sole caregiver for some members of his family, even though he is disabled himself, but he says life is difficult, as they have no gas or other reliable heating source and rely on a makeshift stove he built from stone and bricks.

As with almost all of those surveyed in the RFE report, Poliakov has had no help from the state with any of the damage to his home. One of the reasons so many Roma choose not to even attempt to apply for compensation is the distrust of authorities that is widespread among communities—a distrust Poliakov shares.

“They don’t care. Even though I’m disabled and it’s on paper that I’m disabled… It doesn’t matter to them,” he said.

In the wake of its findings, RFE is calling on the Ukrainian government to integrate urgent reforms into reconstruction planning, including accepting alternative proof of ownership such as utility bills or community testimony, waiving registration fees for war-affected families, and introducing temporary ownership certificates to ensure displaced or undocumented Roma have access to compensation.

RFE says it is hoping to present its findings to government representatives in the coming weeks.

“We hope this data will serve as a constructive basis for reform, especially in light of Ukraine’s broader efforts to align with European values of fairness and accountability,” said Korunovska.

Jovanovic added that “even if full compensation isn’t possible now, temporary support is essential. Roma living in damaged homes are part of Ukraine’s strength and its resistance.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

UN Chief Hails Turkmenistan’s Quiet Diplomacy as Launchpad for Landlocked Solidarity

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Conferences, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Featured, Global, Headlines, Humanitarian Emergencies, Inequality, Landlocked Developing Countries, Least Developed Countries, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

Volunteers at the Third United Nations Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs). Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS

Volunteers at the Third United Nations Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs). Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS

AWAZA, Turkmenistan , Aug 6 2025 (IPS) – In the glass-panelled hallway straddling Buildings 2 and 3 at the Awaza Congress Centre, two smartly dressed young Turkmens stood behind an ornate national pavilion—anxious, alert, and surprisingly eloquent.

Their broad smiles visibly grabbed wide-eyed delegates attending the Third United Nations Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs). With a confidence far beyond their age, the volunteers clearly explained to visitors the kernel of Turkmenistan’s national identity—entangled by culture as politics.

“This is a dutar,” said one, gesturing toward a glass-encased replica of a traditional two-stringed musical instrument. “It is played during weddings and celebrations. It carries the stories of our people.”

His colleague pointed to a smaller display nearby, where a miniature replica of the monumental Neutrality Monument stood—the golden effigy of Saparmurat Niyazov, the country’s founding president, glinting under gallery lights. “This represents our neutrality,” she said proudly. “We are a peaceful nation. We do not choose sides.”

As visitors flocked to the pavilion, the two young guides continued their patient explanations—this time describing a replica of Akhal-Teke horses, symbols of national pride, bred for endurance and elegance.

“Just like the horses,” one said with a grin, “Our country is strong, swift, and steady. But we also don’t race just because others are running.”

In this resort city, hospitality is a powerful expression of national pride.

As you move around the streets, women in long traditional gowns greet you with a graceful nod and a soft “Hoş geldiňiz”—welcome.” Dressed in embroidered velvet dresses that sweep the floor and crowned with intricate headscarves, these women are the gentle face of Turkmenistan’s long-held tradition of welcoming strangers with dignity and warmth.

“It is in our blood to treat foreigners with great care and concern.”

In a world increasingly divided, the warmth of Turkmenistan’s people, cloaked in simple gestures of kindness, stands as a symbol of diplomacy—one that speaks not through declarations, but through hospitality that lingers long after the meetings are over.

A Doctrine of Distance

Since 1995, when the UN General Assembly unanimously recognized Turkmenistan’s neutrality, the Central Asian nation has embraced a foreign policy of non-alignment, eschewing military alliances, foreign bases, and entanglements in regional conflicts. The policy, enshrined in the national constitution, is described by government officials as a model of “positive neutrality”—a means of building peace through equidistance and sovereignty.

A Fortress Amid Fires

Bordered by Iran, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and the Caspian Sea, Turkmenistan occupies a strategically sensitive patch of Eurasia. Yet it has remained almost impervious to the turmoil around it. When war engulfed Afghanistan, Turkmenistan kept its embassies open. It offered humanitarian aid—but not political commentary.

Unlike other Central Asian states, it refrained from joining Moscow-led security blocs like the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and even kept Beijing at a careful diplomatic bay despite deepening energy ties.

Turkmenistan’s hosting of the LLDC conference carried both symbolic and practical significance. It is one of the few LLDCs that has successfully leveraged its location by investing heavily in cross-border energy and transport infrastructure.

“Your hosting of this important global gathering is a testament to the country’s commitment to international cooperation and sustainable development,” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres.

A Landmark Moment for Landlocked Nations

On the shores of the Caspian Sea, in the resort town of Awaza, limousines ferried dignitaries past pine-lined boulevards and marble buildings as world leaders gathered for the momentous talk.

The Awaza gathering brought together representatives from 32 landlocked developing countries—home to nearly 600 million people across Africa, Asia, Europe, and South America—to chart a new course under the Awaza Programme of Action, a 10-year strategy aimed at reversing structural disadvantages stemming from geographical isolation.

Awaza’s gleaming hotels and high-tech halls stood in contrast to Burundi’s rugged highlands thousands of kilometers away—but in both, a digital transformation is underway.

The stakes could not be higher. LLDCs account for just over 1 percent of global trade and economic output, despite housing 7 percent of the global population. They face steep transport costs, limited access to global markets, unreliable infrastructure, and acute climate vulnerabilities.

A Moment for Multilateralism

As the 3rd LLDC conference convened in the windswept coastal town of Awaza, all eyes turned to Turkmenistan—not for bold pronouncements, but for the quiet power of its example. With its longstanding policy of neutrality, the Central Asian nation has carved a distinct identity rooted in non-alignment and peaceful engagement, making it an ideal host for a summit aimed at fostering regional solidarity and global support for countries isolated by geography.

Secretary-General António Guterres, in a rousing address, held up Turkmenistan’s model of diplomacy and inclusion as a guiding light for other landlocked nations struggling with marginalization. Against a backdrop of rising global fragmentation, Awaza became more than a meeting ground—it emerged as a bridge between continents and between aspiration and action.

Speaking at a high-level press conference Tuesday, Guterres issued a passionate appeal for justice, equity, and renewed international solidarity, reminding the world that “geography should never define destiny.”

“This conference reflects a new era of cooperation taking shape across Central Asia,” said Guterres, “grounded in mutual trust, shared priorities, and growing regional solidarity. At a time when multilateralism is being tested, this spirit of partnership is more essential than ever.”

A Plea for Dignity and Inclusion

Guterres’s remarks were peppered with humanistic language rarely heard at geopolitical conferences. “This is not only a matter of development,” he told journalists. “It’s a matter of dignity and justice.”

Responding to a question from Euronews, he drew a distinction between landlocked developed nations like Switzerland or Austria and their developing counterparts. “They have free access to harbors and integrated markets. But for landlocked developing countries, being far from ports and trade hubs is a real disadvantage,” he said.

He praised Turkmenistan’s multilateral diplomacy and recalled the country’s remarkable feat of granting citizenship to all stateless persons left behind after the collapse of the Soviet Union. “This was almost unique in the world—a symbol of generosity I never forgot,” he said.

Four Pillars of Action

The Awaza Programme of Action is a comprehensive development framework aligned with the UN 2030 Agenda. It charts an ambitious, multi-sectoral path forward, structured around four priorities:

1. Unlocking Economic Potential

Guterres called for bold investment in infrastructure, education, digital connectivity, and innovation.

“The countries represented here have the talent and the ideas,” he said. “They need the tools and support.”

2. Connecting to the World

“Trade corridors, transit systems, and regional integration are not technical issues—they are lifelines,” Guterres said.

He urged countries and institutions to invest in both the “hardware” and “software” of trade—resilient transport infrastructure, harmonized customs procedures, and smart logistics platforms.

3. Confronting the Climate Crisis

Though LLDCs contribute less than 3 percent to global emissions, they are among the hardest hit by climate disasters.

Guterres called on rich nations to fulfill their pledges to double adaptation finance, support green industries in LLDCs, and provide early warning systems.

4. Reforming Global Finance

Guterres described the global financial system as “unfit for the realities of today.” He called for tripling the lending capacity of development banks, expanding concessional finance, and reforming sovereign debt architecture.

Global Responsibility and Shared Future

Though the conference was set against a backdrop of regional cooperation in Central Asia, its implications reverberate far beyond.

“When LLDCs thrive, entire regions benefit.” Guterres said

Global Call for Justice, Not Charity

Though spread across four continents—from the Sahel to the Himalayas, and from Central Asia to South America—LLDCs face a strikingly similar plight: crippling transport costs, technological isolation, and rising debt burdens.

“Landlocked developing countries don’t want charity. They want justice,” Guterres told reporters. “They want equitable access.”

Digital Lifelines for a Disconnected World

One of the most pressing themes in Awaza was the digital divide that has left millions in LLDCs without access to online education, health services, or global markets.

“Digital transformation must be central to our effort,” Guterres said.

He pledged to present a report on innovative financing to support AI capacity-building and called for robust public-private partnerships.

Connecting Landlocked Economies to the World

Guterres also emphasized infrastructure investment and seamless cross-border trade as keys to transformation.

“We must cut red tape, digitize border operations, and modernize transport networks,” he said.

Building Bridges Across Borders

In an interview with IPS, Aygul Rahimova, a resident of Turkmenistan, underlined the importance of the LLDC conference for regional connectivity.

“Although we are technically landlocked, Turkmenistan borders the Caspian Sea, which offers us a unique opportunity to serve as a transport and logistics bridge between Asia and Europe,” she said.

“I hope this conference becomes a catalyst for deeper cooperation… Turkmenistan is ready to play a key role in building bridges—through the Caspian, through trade, through diplomacy.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

‘After Decades of Making Huge Profits, Companies Shouldn’t Be Allowed to Leave Behind a Toxic Legacy’

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Africa, Civil Society, Climate Change, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Energy, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Headlines, Health, TerraViva United Nations

Jul 29 2025 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS speaks with Matthew Renshaw, a partner at a UK law firm that represents Nigerian communities taking legal action against Shell over environmental damage caused by its operations in the Niger Delta.

Matthew Renshaw

Two Nigerian communities, Bille and Ogale, are suing Shell in the UK over decades of oil spills in the Niger Delta that have devastated their land, water and way of life. The High Court has ruled that Shell and its former Nigerian subsidiary can be held liable for ongoing environmental damage, even if caused by oil theft or sabotage, and regardless of how long ago the spills occurred. The decision builds on a 2021 Supreme Court ruling that allowed UK-based parent companies to be sued for harm abroad. A full trial is set for March 2027.

How has oil pollution affected these communities?

Each of the three communities we represent in the Niger Delta have been affected by Shell’s operations in different ways.

The Bodo community endured two major oil spills from Shell pipelines in 2008 that released over half a million barrels of oil, causing the largest devastation of mangrove habitat in history. Families who once depended on fishing can no longer provide for themselves. Even swimming in the waterways is dangerous due to oil contamination. Despite bringing the case before UK courts in 2011, the community is still demanding a proper cleanup that they say has never materialised.

As for the Bille and Ogale communities, they brought their cases against Shell in the UK in 2015. The Ogale community depends primarily on farming and fishing, but since the 1980s, Shell has recorded around 100 spills in and around the area that have resulted in serious contamination of the drinking water. The United Nations conducted tests in 2011 and declared a public health emergency, but very little was done in response. Shell briefly provided safe water to residents, but that ended years ago. With no alternative sources available, many people have been forced to use visibly polluted water to drink and bathe their children.

The Bille community lives on islands in a riverine area where residents depend heavily on fishing and harvesting shellfish. A major pipeline runs directly through the community, very close to where people live. Between 2011 and 2013, multiple oil spills from Shell destroyed mangrove habitats. As with the Bodo community, fishing has become impossible for many people, forcing some to abandon their homes and communities entirely.

Why sue in the UK rather than Nigeria?

The decision to sue Shell in the UK came from our clients. While Shell operates in Nigeria through a local subsidiary, the parent company is based in the UK and has profited immensely from its Niger Delta operations, so our clients view it as equally responsible for the pollution in their communities.

They also believe they can’t get justice in Nigeria. The Nigerian legal system is notoriously slow: cases can take decades to reach judgement due to automatic rights of appeal. Many people won’t live to see justice. Bringing this type of case before Nigerian courts is also prohibitively expensive, because it requires extensive expert evidence that’s inaccessible to most affected communities.

In contrast, UK funding mechanisms make it far more feasible for our clients to pursue justice. They also trust they’ll receive a fairer hearing in London. This approach has already shown results: in the Bodo case, Shell finally brought in international experts to attempt cleanup. International litigation generates meaningful outcomes that wouldn’t happen otherwise.

Even when Shell argued that the case should be heard in Nigeria, in 2021 the UK Supreme Court ruled that because Shell PLC may share responsibility with its subsidiary, the case could proceed in London.

How is Shell defending itself?

Shell claims that most Niger Delta pollution stems from oil theft by local criminals, commonly known as ‘bunkering’. According to Shell, these criminals steal oil from pipelines to sell directly or refine into fuel. The company insists its operations are clean and criminals are to blame, arguing it’s doing its best to stop theft and therefore shouldn’t be held responsible.

This defence is fundamentally flawed. While oil theft is certainly a significant problem in Nigeria, Shell’s claims are overstated. Numerous spills have nothing to do with theft. They’re caused simply by poorly maintained infrastructure and decades-old pipelines that are not fit for purpose. This stands in stark contrast to other countries where maintenance is taken far more seriously.

Even accepting Shell’s argument, our clients contend that Shell should have taken reasonable precautions to prevent foreseeable theft. In other countries, pipelines are buried, fitted with detection systems and monitored closely to detect intrusion attempts or spills. Our clients contend that Shell has failed to implement these basic measures in the Niger Delta.

What did the recent court ruling say, and what do you hope to achieve?

The High Court sided with our position, ruling that if Shell failed to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm, it can be liable for pollution caused by bunkering. Significantly, the court also rejected Shell’s claims that it couldn’t be held liable for spills older than five years, ruling that if a spill has still not been cleaned up – even if it happened decades ago – the company can still be held accountable.

This ruling has far-reaching implications. It’s particularly significant for the Ogale case where pollution dates back to the 1980s, and it opens the door for many other Niger Delta communities affected by legacy spills dating to the 1970s or earlier. Beyond Nigeria, the ruling sends a warning to multinational companies attempting to divest from polluting operations without accepting responsibility for the damage left behind.

Our clients seek three main outcomes from the 2027 trial: proper cleanup and environmental remediation of their polluted lands, emergency provisions such as access to clean drinking water and compensation for lost livelihoods and damaged property.

A pressing concern is Shell’s recent divestment from its onshore operations in Nigeria. The company has sold its assets to a consortium and is attempting to walk away from decades of pollution. While the communities we represent have at least secured court proceedings, many others have been left behind with no cleanup and no accountability.

We’re determined to prevent Shell and other multinational companies from abandoning polluted sites without taking responsibility. Success in holding Shell accountable, including for decades-old spills, could establish crucial legal precedents. Legally, it would confirm that companies remain responsible for long-term environmental damage. Morally, it’s about basic fairness: after decades of extracting resources and making huge profits, companies shouldn’t be allowed to leave behind a toxic legacy.

While our case won’t create internationally binding precedents, it could significantly influence how similar claims are litigated in other countries, particularly in common law jurisdictions.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Twitter
YouTube

SEE ALSO
Business and Human Rights Treaty: a decade of struggle for corporate accountability CIVICUS Lens 08.Mar.2025
Chiquita verdict offers hope for corporate accountability CIVICUS Lens 29.Jul.2024
Peru’s oil spill raises corporate accountability questions CIVICUS Lens 01.Apr.2022

  Source

Protect Women’s Rights, Especially in a Time of Equality Backlash, Say Activists

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Civil Society, Conferences, Development & Aid, Featured, Gender, Gender Violence, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Population, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Women & Economy, Women in Politics

Gender

UN Women's Executive Director Sima Bahous at a 2025 UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development side event. Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

UN Women’s Executive Director, Sima Bahous, at a 2025 UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development side event. Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

UNITED NATIONS, Jul 21 2025 (IPS) – Discriminatory laws and the absence of legal protections impact more than 2.5 billion women and girls worldwide in various ways. Legal reform is paramount to securing gender equality, and the world cannot afford to roll back on decades of progress in women’s rights.

On the sidelines of the 2025 High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development on July 17, Equality Now and UN Women, with their partners the International Development Law Organization (IDLO), the Global Campaign for Equality in Family Law, the Global Campaign for Equal Nationality Rights (GCENR), Inter-parliamentary Union (IPU), hosted an official side event, “Accelerating Law Reform to Keep the Promise of Beijing, the SDGs, and the Pact for the Future.”

The purpose of the event was to spotlight the success in ending discrimination through the passing of robust, inclusive legislation and acknowledging the work that remains in combatting legal discrimination against women and girls. Bringing together stakeholders across the public sector and nongovernmental organizations, the event highlighted the relevance of global agreements that center on sustainable development and uphold international law, Equality Now Executive Director Mona Sinha pointed out.

“It is ever more urgent in these times of backlash against gender equality that the right to equality on the basis of sex as a fundamental human right is protected and promoted by States and the international community,” said Sinha.

“At UN Women, we are proud to lead a global strategy to achieve equality in law for women and girls by 2030 with our partners… We are racing against time to repeal discriminatory laws and to replace them with protections rooted in dignity and equality,” said UN-Women Executive Director Sima Bahous.

The event coincided with the launch of a joint publication from Equality Now and GCENR  ‘Select Draft Articles on Nationality Rights to Ensure Gender Equality.’

The publication is intended to be used by policymakers as guidelines for drafting inclusive policies that enshrine protections for nationality rights for women and their children and partners. This was spotlighted as a persistent form of discrimination that restricts certain rights by virtue of their identity.

Panelists at the Equality Now side event at the 2025 UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development. Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

Panelists at the Equality Now side event at the 2025 UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development. Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

Catherine Harrington, Campaign Manager of the Global Campaign for Equal Nationality Rights, remarked on the “utter injustice” that men should have the “inherent right” to pass down nationality to their child or spouse, but women are not granted the same.

There are 24 countries where women legally cannot pass down their citizenship to their child, and at least 40 countries where women cannot confer the rights of citizenship to a non-citizen spouse. Such restrictions prevent impacted people from exercising other fundamental rights, including access to education, healthcare and even the right to enter the country they were born in or consider home.

The fight over equal nationality rights is emblematic of the broader issue of gender equality, as it demonstrates how a lack of legal protections can leave people vulnerable to having their rights denied or exploited.

“What does it say about women’s status as citizens and their equality in the family when the law that establishes the very foundation of political personhood, citizenship, holds that men naturally have the right to pass citizenship as full citizens and women do not and are not deserving of the same?” said Harrington. “What does it mean to be committed to combating gender-based violence when we know that gender discriminatory laws are linked with multiple forms of GBV and contribute to the root cause of gender-based violence, which is women’s unequal status in society?”

Women’s participation in public spaces, including politics, is also a measure of gender equality and a step toward sustainable development. A report from UN Women stated that while there was a boost in the proportion of women in parliament, as countries had taken steps to boost women’s participation in national and local legislatures, such as with gender quotas, three out of four parliamentarians were still men. These environments need to be created to be gender-inclusive and safe to ensure women’s participation. As long as the institutions that are meant to represent the people are shaped by laws that only benefit a select few, there is no room for equality.

“Democracy cannot be credible or effective if it does not reflect the diversity of people,” said Paddy Torsney, Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) Permanent Observer to the UN. Tornsey remarked that fostering inclusive political environments allows women the “power, protection and the platform to lead.” These environments can be created through inclusive policies and a zero tolerance for gender-based violence in all forms.

Effective, inclusive legislation can only be driven by “reliable data,” according to Hikaru Yamagishi from the World Bank. Yamagishi added that through the Women, Business and Law Project, the World Bank has provided “comprehensive, comparable data” on how laws affect women’s jobs to lawmakers across 190 economies.

Among their findings was that although women have 64 percent of the rights of men, economies have less than 40 percent of the systems in place needed to implement those rights in practice. This indicates a ‘significant’ implementation gap, Yamagishi said, between formal legislation and what women actually experience in real life.

“This implementation gap must be tracked alongside legal [gaps]. The Women Business and Law report evidences the importance of legal reforms like banning discrimination… but it also shows that those reforms only go so far without supportive policies,” she added.

The event brought together representatives from member states to share how their countries dealt with eliminating discrimination through legal reform. In the Kyrgyz Republic, steps were taken to reform the labor code, including 400 professions that were previously restricted from women.

Bakyt Sydykov, Minister of Economy and Commerce of the Kyrgyz Republic, remarked on federal programs that boosted employment opportunities for women living in rural areas. Along with civil society and trade unions, international partners like UN Women and the International Labour Organization (ILO) consulted the country’s legislative reform in ensuring equal employment opportunities.

“We believe that Kyrgyzstan’s experience can offer a useful reference point for other countries where similar challenges arise,” said Sydykov. “Our approach shows that when reforms stem from nationwide dialogue and international standards, implemented in partnership with all segments of society, they can succeed.”

“As a country that has elected two women to the highest position in the government, the Philippines can confidently say that gender equality is robust and highly needed in our society. However, there are still areas for improvement along the way,” said Noel Mangaoang Novicio, Minister, Permanent Mission of the Philippines to the UN. Novice cited his country’s Magna Carta of Women, adopted in 2009, a comprehensive human rights law for women that is based on the principles of international law.

These examples demonstrate that widespread gender equality is achievable. Nevertheless, no country has achieved true gender parity, so it remains an ongoing effort. This also shows the importance of partnerships across multiple sectors and stakeholders. Governments can enforce legal reforms on a wide scale, the private sector can advocate for reforms and lead by example, and multinational organizations such as the UN and the World Bank have the resources to provide evidence of where change is needed and bring stakeholders together.

“When we work together to make legal equality a reality, it unlocks economic potential and fuels inclusive progress,” said Yamagishi.

The event, which included youth advocates and representatives from around the world among its attendees, demonstrated one of the UN’s roles in a microcosm: a convening body that brings together governments, civil society and experts on a global stage to drive forward shared commitments.

Antonia Kirkland, Equality Now’s Global Lead, Legal Equality and Justice, remarked that this makes the UN “an indispensable force in pushing for transformative, rights-based legal reforms worldwide.”

“By amplifying the voices of women’s rights advocates, particularly those from the Global South, UN platforms provide an opportunity to elevate grassroots demands to the international level, to influence legal and policy change. The UN provides an essential space for peer accountability, shared learning, and collective pressure that no single organization or government could generate alone,” said Kirkland.

Kirkland explained to IPS the ‘uniquely powerful’ role the UN and its agencies play in promoting legal reforms for gender equality. The UN has helped to set international legal standards, and its treaties and special mechanisms provide the frameworks to hold members accountable and call them out on legal discrimination.

With that said, the UN must continue its support and wield its influence amidst increasing attacks from anti-rights movements that threaten to reverse the progress on women’s legal rights.

Kirkland told IPS that anti-gender equality and anti-rights movements have been working to “erase or dilute the concept of ‘gender’ from UN documents, negotiations, and frameworks.” Erasing gender-inclusive language risks undermining international human rights standards and further weakening accountability for gender-based violence and discrimination and marginalizing the diverse experiences of women and girls.

Therefore, the UN needs to strengthen its monitoring and enforcement mechanisms for international commitments such as CEDAW and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and use its platforms to publicly track progress in legal reform. This will also require the support of member states through reaffirming their international commitments and through sustained funding to the UN.

“At a time of rising authoritarianism and anti-rights backlash, a strong, well-resourced UN is essential. Governments also need to enhance and defend the UN’s legitimacy in multilateral forums and resist political efforts to weaken its role in protecting rights and holding states accountable,” Kirkland said.

“Let us invest in feminist leadership. Let us enshrine equality, not only in our speeches, but in our statutes and in our actions,” Bahous said in her closing remarks. “The law must not be a tool of oppression. It must be the first guarantee of justice. Only when we achieve equality for all women and girls under the law can we get back on track to the SDGs, and SDG 5 [Gender Equality] remains our docking station upon which all SDGs depend.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source