Caribbean Leaders and Civil Society Prepare for Global Push on Fossil Fuel Phase-Out

Posted on by admin

Aid, Caribbean Climate Wire, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Conferences, Development & Aid, Environment, Headlines, Humanitarian Emergencies, Latin America & the Caribbean, Small Island Developing States, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Climate Change

Civil society representatives in discussion during the first day of the Caribbean convening organised by the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS

Civil society representatives in discussion during the first day of the Caribbean convening organised by the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS

SAINT LUCIA, Mar 27 2026 (IPS) – As the world edges closer to breaching key climate thresholds, Caribbean policymakers, scientists and civil society leaders gathered in Saint Lucia this month to coordinate the region’s position ahead of a landmark global meeting on transitioning away from fossil fuels.

The two-day convening, held on 2–3 March, brought together civil society representatives and government officials under the umbrella of the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative to discuss the Caribbean’s priorities for the upcoming First International Conference on the Phase-Out of Fossil Fuels in Colombia.

The conference, scheduled for late April in Santa Marta and co-hosted by Colombia, The Netherlands, and Tuvalu, is expected to examine strategies for a unified global transition away from fossil fuels, including financing, governance, and legal structures.

For Caribbean nations reeling from climate impacts, the discussions are far from theoretical.

“Our exposure to climate impacts is acute,” said Dr James Fletcher, climate envoy for CARICOM, in opening remarks to the gathering. “The transition is both an existential necessity and a structural transformation challenge.”

Preparing the Region’s voice

The Saint Lucia meeting was structured across two days: the first dedicated to civil society organisations and the second to government technical officials.

Organisers said the goal was to ensure both groups enter the Santa Marta conference with clear priorities and a coordinated regional position.

The Caribbean has historically played an outsized role in global climate diplomacy. Small island states were instrumental in securing the 1.5°C temperature target within the landmark Paris Agreement, despite contributing only a fraction of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Yet that goal now appears increasingly fragile.

“We will overshoot 1.5 degrees Celsius — at least temporarily,” Fletcher told participants. “The question we now have to grapple with is for how long and by how much.”

Scientists warn that without deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions, global warming could approach or exceed 2°C by the end of the century. For low-lying island states, that difference could mean the loss of ecosystems, infrastructure and territory.

A Push for Global Coordination

A key focus of the discussions was the proposal for a global fossil fuel treaty. It is an idea that is gaining traction among a coalition of countries and civil society organisations.

The treaty proposal seeks to create an international framework that would manage the decline of fossil fuel production in a coordinated and equitable way.

“The proposal came into the world because many civil society organisations realised that simply saying ‘end fossil fuels’ was not enough,” said Alex Rafalowicz, executive director of the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative.

“If we are truly going to address the question of fossil fuels, we have to move beyond rhetoric and get into the details,” he said. “Those details require coordination and cooperation between countries.”

Eighteen countries are currently participating in discussions on the idea, including several small island states such as Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas and Saint Kitts and Nevis.

The Science Behind the Urgency

Scientific evidence presented at the Saint Lucia meeting reinforced the sense of urgency.

Professor Tannecia Stephenson, a climate scientist at the University of the West Indies, warned that the world is already experiencing “widespread, unprecedented, rapid and intensified climate change”.

Unless there are “immediate, rapid and sustained large-scale reductions in greenhouse gas emissions”, she told the convening, the goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C will slip out of reach.

The Caribbean, she noted, faces a convergence of climate hazards, stronger hurricanes, rising sea levels and more severe droughts that threaten key sectors such as tourism, agriculture, and water security.

“How does a small island really prepare for a Category 5 storm of the strength and magnitude that we are now seeing?” she asked.

The answer, many participants argued, lies partly in addressing the root cause of climate change, that is, the continued expansion and use of fossil fuels.

Balancing Transition and Reality

Despite the urgency, the transition away from fossil fuels presents complex challenges for the Caribbean.

Many countries remain heavily dependent on imported oil and gas for electricity generation, transport and industry. Others rely on fossil-fuel-related revenues.

At the same time, the region faces chronic fiscal constraints and rising debt levels, often exacerbated by repeated climate disasters.

“Many of our countries are carrying high debt burdens,” Fletcher said. “Why? Because they continuously have to borrow money to recover from the last extreme weather event.”

This financial pressure complicates the transition to renewable energy and climate-resilient infrastructure.

To address this, discussions during the government officials’ session explored potential financing mechanisms linked to a fossil fuel treaty, including proposals for a climate-related debt resolution facility and international transition funds.

Advocates argue that such mechanisms could help ensure that poorer and more vulnerable countries are not left behind as the world shifts toward cleaner energy systems.

Civil Society Demands

The first day of the Saint Lucia convening focused on civil society perspectives, including community organisations and environmental groups from across the Caribbean.

Participants worked in groups to identify priorities and “red lines” for the region ahead of the Santa Marta meeting.

Among the themes raised were the need for stronger international commitments to phase out fossil fuel production, greater financial support for climate-vulnerable countries and protections for workers and communities affected by the energy transition.

Organisers also discussed plans for civil society mobilisation around the Santa Marta conference, including a people’s summit intended to amplify grassroots voices.

A Diplomatic Opening

While the Santa Marta conference is not formally part of the United Nations climate negotiations, many observers see it as an important diplomatic opportunity.

Fletcher described it as a “space outside the formal structure” of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to explore new governance options and political alignments.

Its significance was underscored when it was referenced during the closing plenary of the COP30 climate summit in Belém, Brazil.

For the Caribbean, preparing a coordinated position is essential, Fletcher said.

“Caribbean leadership is most effective when it is coordinated — when we move as a bloc,” he told participants.

Punching Above Their Weight

Small island states have long leveraged their moral authority in climate negotiations, drawing attention to the disproportionate impacts they face despite contributing little to global emissions.

Fletcher reminded the audience that Caribbean countries helped secure the 1.5°C target in the Paris Agreement and have been at the forefront of campaigns on climate justice, loss and damage financing and reform of the global financial system.

“We do not lead because we are powerful,” he said. “We lead because we are principled. We lead because we are credible.”

But leadership, he added, must be matched with strategy and unity.

As delegates left the Saint Lucia meeting, the message was clear: the Santa Marta conference could represent an important step toward building global momentum for a managed phase-out of fossil fuels.

For the Caribbean, however, the stakes could hardly be higher.

“The Caribbean has often been the moral compass of global climate diplomacy,” Fletcher said. “We must continue to lead strategically, coherently and decisively.”

 

EXCLUSIVE: Water Laureate Kaveh Madani on Arrest, Exile and Fight for Science

Posted on by admin

Aid, Civil Society, Climate Change, Combating Desertification and Drought, Conservation, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Water & Sanitation

Environment

It was hope that kept me going. – Professor Kaveh Madani 

Kaveh Madani, Director of the UN University’s Institute for Water, Environment and Health and lead author of the report entitled “Global Water Bankruptcy: Living Beyond Our Hydrological Means in the Post-Crisis Era” briefs reporters at UN Headquarters. Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider

Kaveh Madani, Director of the UN University’s Institute for Water,
Environment and Health and lead author of the report entitled “Global Water
Bankruptcy: Living Beyond Our Hydrological Means in the Post-Crisis Era” briefs reporters at UN
Headquarters.
Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider

UNITED NATIONS, Mar 25 2026 (IPS) – Professor Kaveh Madani of Iran has been named the 2026 Stockholm Water Prize laureate. The award will be formally presented by King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden in August during World Water Week in Stockholm.

The Stockholm Water Prize is widely regarded as the highest global honour in water science and policy. Often called the Nobel Prize for water, it recognises individuals and institutions for exceptional contributions to the sustainable use and protection of water resources. This year’s selection stands out for both scientific impact and the extraordinary personal journey of the laureate.

At 44, Madani is the first Muslim and the youngest recipient in the prize’s 35 year history. He is also the first United Nations official and the first former politician to receive the award.

Madani currently serves as Director of the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health. Once a senior official in Iran’s government, he later faced arrest, interrogation, and a sustained smear campaign that forced him to leave his country.

Born in Tehran in 1981, Madani grew up in a family deeply connected to Iran’s water sector. His early exposure to the country’s mounting water challenges shaped his academic direction. He studied civil engineering at the University of Tabriz before moving to Sweden to pursue a master’s degree in water resources at Lund University. He later earned a PhD from the University of California, Davis, followed by postdoctoral research at the University of California, Riverside.

By his early 30s, Madani had established himself as a leading systems analyst. He joined Imperial College, London, where his work focused on the mathematical modelling of complex human water systems. His research combined hydrology, economics, and decision sciences to improve policymaking in water management.

In 2017, he made a decisive move. Leaving a prestigious academic career in London, he returned to Iran to serve as Deputy Vice President and Deputy Head of the Department of Environment. Many viewed his appointment as a signal of reform and a bridge between Iran and its scientific diaspora.

During his tenure, Madani pushed for transparency and structural reforms in water governance. He used innovative public campaigns to raise awareness about environmental degradation. However, his efforts challenged entrenched interests.

State-aligned media accused him of espionage and labelled him a “water terrorist” and “bioterrorist”. Conspiracy theories circulated, linking him to foreign intelligence agencies and even to alleged weather manipulation schemes. His advocacy for international environmental agreements further intensified opposition.

In early 2018, a broader crackdown on environmental experts began. Madani was detained and interrogated multiple times. Several of his colleagues were arrested. One of them, Kavous Seyed Emami, died in custody under contested circumstances.

Facing mounting pressure, Madani left Iran and entered a period of exile. He joined Yale University, where he continued his research and advocacy. He began to focus more on bridging science and policy at the global level.

Madani’s academic contributions have been widely recognised. He is known for integrating game theory into water resource management. His work challenged traditional models that assumed cooperation among stakeholders. He demonstrated that individual incentives often lead to uncooperative behaviour, which makes many engineering solutions ineffective in practice.

This approach provided new tools to understand conflicts over shared water resources. It has been applied to transboundary water disputes and to policy design in regions with limited trust among stakeholders.

One of his most influential contributions is “water bankruptcy.” He introduced the term to describe a condition where water systems can no longer recover to their historical levels. Unlike a crisis, which implies a temporary disruption, water bankruptcy signals a long-term structural failure.

In a recent United Nations report, Madani argued that the world entered an era of global water bankruptcy in January 2026. The report highlighted that many river basins and aquifers have lost their capacity to regenerate. This framing has sparked debate among policymakers and researchers.

Madani uses simple financial language to explain complex ecological realities. He argues that humanity is no longer living off renewable water flows but is depleting long-term reserves. This framing has made the concept widely accessible and influential.

Beyond academia, Madani has built a strong public presence. With a large following on social media, he has used digital platforms to communicate scientific findings in accessible ways. His work includes documentaries and public campaigns aimed at increasing awareness and accountability.

He has also played key roles in international diplomacy. As Iran’s lead environmental diplomat, he participated in global negotiations and served as Vice President of the UN Environment Assembly Bureau in 2017. At the COP23 climate conference in Bonn, he called for greater attention to water in global climate agreements.

Today, as head of the United Nations water think tank, he continues to advocate for integrating water into climate and development policies. He has particularly focused on the Global South, where water stress closely links with food insecurity, migration, and conflict.

The Stockholm Water Prize Committee cited his “unique combination of groundbreaking research, policy engagement, diplomacy, and global outreach, often under personal risk” in awarding him the 2026 prize.

In an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service, Madani recalled the intense pressure and fear that defined his final days in Iran. He described repeated interrogations, surveillance, and a growing sense that his work had placed him in direct confrontation with powerful institutions.

Here are edited excerpts from the interview: 

IPS: You introduced the idea of “water bankruptcy.” How does this change how governments must act today?

Madani: Water bankruptcy is defined as a post-crisis state of failure in which the system is suffering from insolvency, meaning that water use has been more than the available water for an extended period, and also irreversibility, meaning that there are some damages to the ecosystem and the machinery of water production that are irreversible and cannot be fixed.

What that means is that some of the things that used to be just anomalies and abnormal conditions are now the new normal, and we’re no longer experiencing only a temporary deviation from what we are used to, but we have a situation that we have to get used to. Crisis management is about mitigation.

Bankruptcy management is about mitigating what can still be mitigated and adapting to new realities with more restrictions. Bankruptcy management calls for an honest confession, the admission of a confession that a mistake has been made, and the current business model is not working, so it calls for honestly admitting to the mistakes made and transforming the business model, that calls for a fresh new start and a change of course.

It is bitter. Bankruptcy is not a pleasant condition but admitting to it helps us prevent further irreversible damages and enables a future that is less catastrophic.

IPS: You faced arrest, exile, and serious accusations in Iran. What kept you going during that period?

Professor Madani: Hope. Hope is what kept me going because I had gone back there to help and at least at the start, I was trying to take what was happening to me as part of the job and as part of the adventure because I was there to make a positive impact, and if I had given up too quickly, then that would not have matched my essential motivation to help.

I knew that it would not be a very smooth path, but it turned out to be much more bumpy than what I had anticipated, and I think many also, you know, those who made that situation bumpy for me, also regret that today, but by the time they realised mistakes were made, it was too late to do anything about it.

Can you recall your arrest and interrogation? What do you remember most from that experience, and how did it affect you personally?

I think arrests and interrogations are very frustrating, especially when you haven’t done anything wrong.

What kills you is constantly worrying about what others think of you and coming up with different scenarios and conspiracy theories. Dealing with conspiracy theories and proving them wrong is not easy. Those were very hard times for me, but as you know, my background is in behaviour analysis. I was trying to put myself in the shoes of those who were suspicious of me, understand their concerns, and address them so I could help my homeland.

IPS: Many countries still treat water stress as a temporary crisis. What are the biggest policy mistakes they continue to make?

Madani: Yes, crisis management is all about mitigation. Those who deny the crisis and enter the bankruptcy state continue to borrow more from nature, build more infrastructure, dig deeper wells, add additional reservoirs and storage capacity, implement more water transfer projects and build more, and construct more desalination plants. Continuing to add to their supply, on the other hand, they think things would be temporary, and through some sort of rationing, things would be solved, but the continuation of that behaviour and the denial of that reality makes the problem worse.

They get drained into a deepening problem, and again, like the financial world, if your business model is not working and you’re in denial, you continue taking more loans and your expenses and your debt become higher and higher. By the time that people realise that there is no way out of that chaos and that failure, the cost is much, much higher. Remaining in denial would result in major significant irreversible damages that generations would have to pay for.

IPS: You combined science with diplomacy and public outreach. Which of these has had the most real impact on decision-making?

Professor Madani: It’s very hard to really say which one has the most impact, because they’re very complementary. The science is very good, but it’s not enough for decision-making. You still have to understand what the real world looks like and how incentives shape behaviour and actions and how interests promote conflicts and cooperation to be able to act.

Science, of course, opens doors and puts more solutions on the table, but still, without understanding the politics or navigating through politics, it would not work. Diplomacy is another one when it comes to the international scale; even when it comes to negotiating with stakeholders, that’s a skill that would be extremely helpful. So, in a way, these are the things that you need.

And on top of these, public outreach educates you about perceptions, how people and societies understand problems, how they judge different situations, and how their emotions and their perceptions shape their beliefs, and that tells you what you need to do when it comes to communicating your science better, changing their opinion, impacting their opinion, and even negotiating with them or convincing them that things might be different or a different pathway is required. I think they all help you create a recipe for something that might work.

IPS: Your work focuses on human behaviour in water management. Why do technical solutions alone often fail?

Madani: A lot of times, technical solutions developed by our computer models or in our labs don’t take into account the full elements of reality. When humans are involved, we deal with different motives, incentives, emotions, and psychologies, and that makes – that creates – some essentially unexpected realities that might tweak things. Simply put, a lot of times when it comes to developing a solution for a water problem or an environmental solution or a sustainability solution, we think that everyone agrees to making short-term sacrifices for the sake of long-term resilience, but that is not the case in reality because different stakeholders, different groups, farmers, urban users, and industrial users also have short-term goals.

They maximise profit, make sure that the quality of life is not impacted, and so on, which makes them non-cooperative to an extent. And if you miss this reality, then you think that the solution, the optimal solution, is very practical and everyone would cooperate, but then you get very disappointed.

Yet, you can take that into account to the extent possible, try to understand the behavioural element and incorporate those into your assessment and projections to be able to align those incentives and motives with the long-term interest to offer a solution that is more attractive and win-win.

IPS: You now advise governments globally. What is the one urgent action every water-stressed country must take in the next five years?

Madani: I think that by now, countries must understand the importance of water as an essential resource for establishing peace, national security, justice, prosperity, and development. I mean, it supports human development, health, and long-term resilience in society. So, countries must not take it for granted and understand that technological solutions would not be sufficient to address shortages.

They must revisit their practices. They must do a proper accounting to understand what, what’s, and how water is currently being spent and if it’s strategic – strategically speaking, that is the right way of doing things when it comes to matters of national security and long-term resilience. Bankruptcy management starts with accounting and transparency.

That’s something that is missing in many water-stressed and non-water-stressed countries, and I think that’s something that we can focus on, put the lens of science on, and not be afraid of accounting and measuring and monitoring what is happening in the system because that knowledge is required if you want to make improvements.

IPS: Thank you very much for taking the time and speaking to IPS  and congratulations again for the well-deserved award.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Oil Shocks, Political Upheaval and the One Solution Governments Keep Ignoring

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Crime & Justice, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Energy, Environment, Featured, Financial Crisis, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Natural Resources, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Oil Shocks, Political Upheaval and the One Solution Governments Keep Ignoring

Credit: Marcelo Del Pozo/Reuters via Gallo Images

LONDON, Mar 16 2026 (IPS) – Once again, global oil prices are spiking, driven by the Israeli-US war against Iran. With Iran retaliating by attacking infrastructure and transport hubs and blocking the Strait of Hormuz, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil passes, oil supplies from the region are being choked, pushing up prices. The cost of a barrel of Brent crude – the international benchmark for oil prices – stood at US$73 before the conflict but has surged beyond US$100 since. It could go higher still as war continues.

The impacts are already being felt when drivers fill up their petrol- and diesel-powered vehicles. But they go much wider. Bigger household energy bills will likely result, while businesses will pass on their increased costs in the form of higher prices. Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine sent oil prices soaring and sparked a global cost-of-living crisis, and now, as many economies seemed to be recovering, the war in the Gulf has brought another shock. Impacts could be political as well as financial: in numerous countries, the cost-of-living crisis helped drive voters towards right-wing populist and nationalist politicians. Recent years have seen Gen Z-led protests erupt in countries around the world, fuelled in part by young people’s anger at failing economies.

In a world increasingly characterised by conflict and with powerful states tearing up the international rulebook in pursuit of material interests, more oil shocks and big economic and political impacts seem inevitable. Governments typically react with economic policies that fail to protect those with the least, and by meeting political unrest with repression. They should consider another way.

The world will remain vulnerable to oil price shocks only for as long as it stays dependent on oil. The climate crisis compels a rapid move away from fossil fuel dependency to abate the worst impacts of global heating. Increasingly, this should also be seen as a matter of economic and political security.

Some steps have been taken in the right direction. Renewables now provide over 30 per cent of global electricity. Investments in renewables more than double those in fossil fuels. But fossil fuel companies have immense power and are determined not to give it up. That was reflected in the fact that 1,600 fossil fuel lobbyists attended the latest global climate summit, COP30 in Brazil, and succeeded in preventing any new commitment to end fossil fuel extraction. Their power is shown in the lawsuit an oil company brought against Greenpeace, leading to a widely criticised trial in North Dakota, USA, with the campaigning organisation facing a punitive US$345 million damages bill. Their influence was reaffirmed by Donald Trump’s election win, after a campaign in which fossil fuel companies gave US$450 million in donations to Trump and his allies – and they were rewarded by US intervention in Venezuela.

Fossil fuel companies are determined to hold back the tide of renewables for as long as possible, because every day of delay is another day of profit, even though every fraction of a degree of temperature rise means avoidable suffering for millions of people. Delay is the new climate denial.

As the latest State of Civil Society Report points out, civil society’s working to make the difference, urging governments to hasten the transition and calling on global north states to make funding available for global south states to decarbonise and adapt to climate impacts. Civil society is exposing the environmental devastation caused by extraction and the complicity of fossil fuel companies in human rights abuses. Its strategies include advocacy, public campaigning, protests, direct action and, increasingly, litigation.

In 2025, climate litigation scored some big successes. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an unprecedented advisory opinion, ruling that states have a legal duty to prevent environmental harm, which requires them to mitigate emissions and adapt to climate change. This victory originated in civil society: in 2019, student groups from eight countries formed the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change network to persuade their governments to seek an ICJ ruling.

Following extensive civil society engagement, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued a similar ruling. The African Court for Human and Peoples’ Rights is set to issue its advisory opinion following a petition brought by the African Climate Platform, a civil society coalition.

These rulings can seem symbolic, but they strengthen national-level efforts to hold states and corporations accountable. These have paid off recently too. In 2025, two South African groups stopped an offshore oil project after a court found its environmental assessments were deeply flawed. More litigation is coming, including in New Zealand, where civil society has filed a lawsuit after the government weakened its emissions reduction plan.

But civil society faces a backlash. Around the world, climate and environmental activists and their allies, Indigenous and land rights defenders, experience severe state and corporate repression.

Last year in Uganda, authorities arrested 11 activists for protesting against the construction of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline. In Peru, police used teargas and non-lethal weapons against people blocking a road to protest against a mine. In Cambodia, five young activists from the Mother Nature environmental group have been in jail since July 2024.

The French government has repeatedly vilified environmental campaigners and deployed police violence against protests, while last year the German government launched an inquiry into public funding of environmental groups and the Dutch parliament adopted a motion condemning Extinction Rebellion and urging the removal of its tax-exempt status.

As the latest oil price shocks reverberate around the global economy, governments should learn the lessons. As economies deteriorate, the temptation will be to say that transition is a luxury, something that can be put off even further. This is the wrong lesson: recent research in the UK suggests that the cost of achieving net zero will be about the same as the cost of another oil price crisis. Economic and political security lies in ending fossil fuel dependency as quickly as possible. To learn the right lessons, governments should stop repressing climate activism and instead listen to and work with civil society.

Andrew Firmin isCIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

  Source

Housing as Climate Resilience in Asia-Pacific Cities

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Climate Change, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Humanitarian Emergencies, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Housing as Climate Resilience in Asia-Pacific Cities

A woman looking at the flooding and landslides in Panauti Muncipality of central Nepal in October 2024. Housing resilience is essential in preventing urban loss and saving lives. Credit: UNICEF/ Rabik Upadhayay

BANGKOK, Thailand, Mar 16 2026 (IPS) – Access to adequate housing is a foundation of resilient cities. Safe and affordable homes provide stability, allow residents to access essential services, and enhance the capacity for communities to withstand and recover from shocks. Yet housing is often treated as a downstream outcome of urban development or disaster recovery rather than as a strategic investment in resilience.

The Asia and the Pacific SDG Progress Report 2026 delivers a stark warning. The region is not on track to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, and 88 per cent of measurable targets are projected to be missed by 2030 at the current pace. Progress across SDG 11 indicators reflects mixed trends. While some indicators show improvement, disaster losses and infrastructure damage continue to rise.

This widening gap between policy commitments and real-world outcomes exposes a growing resilience deficit in urban systems. Accelerating progress on SDG Target 11.1, which calls for access to adequate, safe and affordable housing and the upgrading of informal settlements, will be critical to reducing urban vulnerability across Asia and the Pacific.

Regional dialogue increasingly reflects this shift toward translating policy commitments into concrete action that reduces urban vulnerability. Discussions at the 13th Asia-Pacific Forum on Sustainable Development in 2026 and statements at the eighty-first session of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, held under the theme resilient and sustainable urban development for regional cooperation, highlighted housing affordability, informal settlements and climate-resilient housing as growing policy priorities requiring stronger action at the city level.

Across Asia and the Pacific, around 700 million people, nearly one-third of the region’s urban population, live in informal settlements – many located in hazard-prone areas exposed to flooding, extreme heat, landslides and sea-level rise.

Urban informality reflects deeper structural weaknesses in urban systems, such as gaps in land governance, planning frameworks and service delivery, concentrating climate risks in the same neighbourhoods where housing conditions are most fragile.

Urban vulnerability is shaped by the way cities are built and governed. Unplanned development, weak land-use systems and inadequate housing expose millions of urban residents to climate hazards and disaster risks. In informal settlements, these risks intensify through substandard construction, overcrowding, and limited access to water and sanitation.

Climate change further amplifies these vulnerabilities as flooding, extreme heat, water insecurity, land subsidence and air pollution interact through fragile urban systems.

Evidence also shows that improving housing conditions generates broad development gains. Habitat for Humanity’s research indicates that large-scale upgrading of informal settlements could raise GDP per capita by up to 10 per cent and increase life expectancy by four percent.

Within just one year, housing improvements could prevent more than 20 million illnesses, avert nearly 43 million incidents of gender-based violence, and avoid around 80,000 deaths. These findings highlight that expanding affordable housing and upgrading informal settlements are critical investments in climate adaptation, public health and inclusive development.

A shared but differentiated responsibility

To realign SDG trajectories and move the region closer to a resilient urban future, housing must be understood as a core component of the urban system. Achieving this requires coordinated action across governments, the private sector and civil society.

Governments: From pilot projects to systemic guarantees

Governments must anchor climate-resilient and adequate housing as a national priority, embedding secure tenure, resilient housing and informal settlement upgrading within urban development, climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction strategies. Regulatory frameworks should enable participatory and in-situ upgrading and community-led tenure solutions that allow residents to invest in climate-resilient housing improvements.

Private sector: From speculative value to resilient value

The private sector can help scale resilient housing solutions by mobilizing blended finance that combines guarantees, concessional capital and private investment. These mechanisms can support incremental home improvements, affordable rental supply and climate-resilient retrofits. Companies can also prioritize locally sourced, low-carbon materials and passive design solutions such as cool roofs, insulation and cross-ventilation suited to tropical cities.

Civil society and academia: From isolated initiatives to knowledge-powered coalitions

Civil society and academic institutions play an essential role in co-producing evidence and solutions with communities. This includes exploring nature-based approaches in informal settlements and ensuring policies reflect lived realities on the ground. They also help hold institutions accountable to SDG 11 and climate justice by tracking progress on Target 11.1 and ensuring policies and investments prioritize the most vulnerable.

Housing will shape the region’s urban resilience

The future of urban resilience in Asia and the Pacific will largely be determined in its informal neighbourhoods. If current trends continue, millions more families will be pushed into precarious and hazard-exposed housing. Aligning housing policy with climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction and inclusive urban governance therefore offers one of the most powerful pathways to accelerate SDG 11 and strengthen resilience across the region.

Sanjeevani Singh is Economic Affairs Officer, ESCAP; Enid Madarcos is Associate Director for Urban, Land and Policy, Habitat for Humanity International (Asia-Pacific)

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

The Architecture of Hope Under Siege: One Year of Global Aid Dismantling

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Climate Change, Development & Aid, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

The Architecture of Hope Under Siege: One Year of Global Aid Dismantling

Civil society organizations (CSOs) are non-state, not-for-profit, voluntary entities formed by people to address social, political, or environmental issues.

BOGOTA, Colombia, Mar 4 2026 (IPS) – A year has passed since a 90-day freeze on U.S. foreign assistance signaled the deepening of a structural dismantling of international solidarity. Today, the “existential threat” to the freedom of association I warned of in my report to last year’s General Assembly (A/80/219) is no longer a warning; it is a lived reality.

Thousands of civil society organizations (CSOs) worldwide have been reduced to their minimum or are completely vanishing, while others are forced into transformations that compromise their core missions. This is not only creating more victims of human rights violations but has also left prior victims alone.

For the freedom of association, the impact is devastating. The dismantling of USAID, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL), and other dedicated funds from other countries has cut the lifelines for NGOs that served as democratic watchdogs worldwide (Refugees International).

Therefore, this is not merely a budgetary shift but a coordinated attack on the infrastructure of dissent. In the U.S., for example, foundations and nonprofits are facing “three overlapping crises” (Maecenata Stiftung, Refugees International, other):

    • Policy Threats: Executive Orders targeting DEI and redefining “charitable” status to strip tax exemptions.

    • Organizational Targeting: Explicit vilification of networks like the Open Society Foundations and investigative letters targeting major funders like the Gates and Ford Foundations.

    • Mass Closings: Organizations are laying off up to 95% of staff, leading to a “generational funding collapse” of the humanitarian system.

In the meantime, worldwide we also see ultra-conservative anti-rights groups and autocratic regimes rushing to fill the vacuum left by established aid agencies. These groups are, among others, reshaping the global health landscape with actions that restrict reproductive rights and LGBTQI+ protections (The Guardian). In the Asia-Pacific region alone, 240 million young girls are facing a “coordinated global backlash” as programs focused on education and gender equality are the first to be cut (Women’s Agenda).

As I reported to the UN General Assembly last year, the right to association is an integral part of human nature. When states vilify aid as “criminal” or “corrupt,” they dismantle the lifelines that keep civic space alive (United Nations). We must restore a sustainable aid architecture that serves human dignity and the planet rather than private profit or political control.

But the impact on communities and individuals is far too grave. The data emerging in early 2026 is devastating. Since the 2025 freeze, researchers estimate the dismantling of U.S. foreign aid alone has already caused 750,000 deaths, over 60% of whom are children—a rate of 88 preventable deaths every hour (different sources).

Projections indicate that without restoration, 22.6 million people could die from preventable causes by 2030 (The Guardian).

The “hammer” thrown at the aid system has undone decades of progress:

    • Access to justice: Deeply affected by terminated grants funding for community violence intervention programs, legal assistance for crime victims from underserved communities, court-appointed advocates for children in cases of abuse or neglect, services for victims of hate crimes, shutting down the safety net for domestic violence survivors and closing of shelters and hotlines, etc. (CIJ, LLF).

    • Democracy and rule of law: Crisis in independent media and civil society reduces the critical voices that speak truth to the power and weakens checks and balances in democracies and hybrid regimes, while in authoritarian context the constraints of dissenting voices increases repression, especially against the most vulnerable groups (Global Democracy Coalition).

    • Human rights: global and regional mechanisms of human rights protections have seen drastic cuts of funding, which jeopardize the human rights protections worldwide. The OHCHR received a 16% cut of its budget for 2026 and several Human Rights Council mandates are also being defunded, many tied to HHRR violations investigations in authoritarian states (ISHR).

    • Global Health: Access to PrEP and life-saving HIV drugs has been halved for 80% of community organizations. Cholera deaths in the DRC alone surged by 361% in 2025 after essential water projects were halted (Oxfam).

    • Education: The abrupt cancellation of nearly 400 USAID-funded education programs in 58 countries risks leaving millions of children—predominantly girls and refugees—without access to quality learning (ETF).

    • Food Security: In West and Central Africa, 55 million people are expected to endure crisis levels of hunger, or worse by the end of the first semester of 2026, including over 13 million children are also expected to suffer from malnutrition during the year 2026 (WFP). In Afghanistan, monthly reach for emergency food aid plummeted from 5.6 million people to just 1 million (Refugees International).

Perhaps most alarming is the collapse of data collection systems. As USAID programs disappeared, so did the reporting requirements that tracked disease, death, and human rights violations (The Japan Times). We are entering a period where the true scale of suffering and needs may never be fully known (Refugees International).

Besides the cut of funding, the existential threat is also related to the reduction of possibilities of civil society organizations to collect new funding due to the increase of mis/disinformation about CSO work that lead to lack of trust in communities and therefore increases the shrinking civic space, already heavily affected by anti-NGO laws and persecution (Global aid freeze tracker).

We cannot allow a world without civil society. It is a world without hope, where the most vulnerable are left alone to face the most pressing human crises and wars. The international community must move beyond “business as usual” to restore a sustainable and just aid architecture that empowers civic engagement rather than advancing its suppression.

Gina Romero is UN Special Rapporteur, Freedom of Assembly and of Association.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

As Biodiversity Loss Grows, Rome Talks Urge Nations to Step Up Action

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Climate Change, Conferences, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Europe, Featured, Global, Green Economy, Headlines, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Biodiversity

A red panda – labelled ‘endangered’ by the IUCN – at an animal sanctuary in the Indian state of West Bengal. As biodiversity loss accelerates, UNCBD is asking countries to take greater action to protect it. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

A red panda – labelled ‘endangered’ by the IUCN – at an animal sanctuary in the Indian state of West Bengal. As biodiversity loss accelerates, UNCBD is asking countries to take greater action to protect it. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

ROME & NEW DELHI, Feb 23 2026 (IPS) – Governments meeting in Rome last week acknowledged that global efforts to protect nature are still not moving fast enough, even as biodiversity loss continues to affect ecosystems, livelihoods, and economies worldwide.

The warning came as the sixth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI-6) under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) concluded after four days of negotiations focused on how countries are putting global biodiversity commitments into practice.

Held at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the meeting is the first major checkpoint in a year of intensive talks leading to the United Nations Biodiversity Conference (COP17) in October in Yerevan, Armenia. There, governments will carry out the first global review of progress under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

From Promises to Practice

At the centre of discussions in Rome was the challenge of turning global promises into action on the ground. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), adopted in 2022, sets out 23 targets to be achieved by 2030, including protecting and restoring ecosystems, reducing pollution, cutting harmful subsidies, and ensuring fair sharing of benefits from genetic resources.

While most governments have formally endorsed the framework, SBI-6 revealed that implementation remains uneven. Negotiators worked through recommendations on biodiversity finance, national planning, gender equality, capacity-building, international cooperation, and access and benefit-sharing. Many of these were adopted without brackets, suggesting broad agreement.

“This has been a long week for all,” said Clarissa Souza Della Nina, Chair of the meeting, as she closed the afternoon plenary and announced that delegates would meet again in the evening. She noted that turning global ambitions into real action on the ground requires strong systems and institutions, and that this is not an easy process.

“The conclusion of SBI-6 marks an important early milestone in a very demanding year,” said Souza Della Nina, highlighting the efforts made by countries to work together and find common ground.

But behind the consensus language, discussions repeatedly returned to the same concern: global ambition is not yet being matched by national action.

SBI 6 Chair Clarissa Souza Della Nina, Brazil; Asad Naqvi, SBI 6 Secretary; and CBD Executive Secretary Astrid Schomaker celebrating the first conference room paper being approved. Credit: IISD/ENB, Mike Muzurakis

SBI 6 Chair Clarissa Souza Della Nina, Brazil; Asad Naqvi, SBI 6 Secretary; and CBD Executive Secretary Astrid Schomaker celebrate the first conference room paper being approved. Credit: IISD/ENB, Mike Muzurakis

National Plans Show Mixed Progress

A key input to the Rome meeting was an analysis by the CBD Secretariat of national biodiversity strategies and targets submitted so far. These national plans are the main way countries translate the global framework into domestic policies.

The analysis covered 51 National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) and 130 sets of national targets. It found that while progress is being made, many plans fall short of the scale of change required.

About 75 percent of Parties have submitted national targets, but fewer have updated their full national strategies. Even among submitted plans, several global targets are only partially addressed. Social and economic aspects of biodiversity loss — including links to livelihoods, equity, and development — tend to receive less attention than conservation measures.

“These findings show clearly where we stand,” said Astrid Schomaker, Executive Secretary of the CBD. “They also show that countries still have the opportunity to raise ambition and speed up action before the global review.”

The first global review of progress under the KMGBF will take place at COP17. A major source of information for that review will be the seventh National Reports, which countries are required to submit by 28 February 2026.

By the end of SBI-6, the European Union, Lesotho, Uganda, and Switzerland had submitted their reports. Several other countries said they were close to completion, while others cited difficulties related to limited staff, technical challenges, or delays in accessing funds.

Delegates stressed that timely reporting is essential, not only for transparency but also to ensure that the global review reflects the realities faced by countries at different levels of development.

Gender and Inclusion Lag Behind

Another issue that drew attention in Rome was the limited integration of gender equality into biodiversity action. Under the global framework, countries have committed to ensuring the full and meaningful participation of women and girls, including those from indigenous peoples and local communities.

Yet the Secretariat’s analysis showed that only around 40 percent of national targets refer to gender-related issues, and only about 20 percent address women’s rights to land and natural resources. Even fewer countries reported involving women’s organisations in the preparation of national biodiversity plans.

For many participants, this gap was a reminder that biodiversity loss is not only an environmental issue but also a social one.

“Without addressing inequality, we will not succeed in protecting nature,” said Gillian Guthrie, a delegate from Jamaica, during the discussions, urging governments still updating their plans to take a more inclusive approach.

Money and Capacity Remain Major Hurdles

Financing biodiversity action was another recurring theme. Although the most detailed negotiations on biodiversity finance are scheduled for later this year, talks in Rome were informed by new studies on funding needs, the relationship between debt and biodiversity spending, and opportunities to better align biodiversity and climate finance.

Developing countries repeatedly pointed to limited financial resources, lack of access to technology, and institutional constraints as barriers to implementation. These challenges were reflected in the meeting itself, where several delegations consisted of a single representative struggling to follow multiple negotiating tracks.

The CBD Secretariat thanked donor countries that contributed to a special trust fund to support participation and called on others to do the same. Without broader support, delegates warned, global biodiversity decision-making risks leaving some voices unheard.

A decisive year ahead

The recommendations adopted at SBI-6 will now be forwarded to COP17, where governments will assess whether collective action so far is enough to meet the biodiversity targets set for 2030.

For many participants, the Rome meeting served as both a progress report and a warning. While cooperation is improving and more countries are engaging with the global framework, biodiversity loss continues to affect food systems, health, and economic stability, particularly in the Global South.

As delegates left Rome, the message was clear: the coming months will be critical. Whether the world can move from commitments to meaningful action will be tested in Yerevan, Armenia — and the stakes, many warned, could not be higher.

Below are some of the highlights of the 4-day meeting:

  • The sixth meeting of the Subsidiary Body (SBI-6) on Implementation under the Convention on Biological Diversity began the first global review of how countries are acting to protect nature.
  • An official analysis of national biodiversity plans showed progress but also revealed wide gaps between global goals and what many countries have committed to do at home.
  • Around three-quarters of countries have submitted national biodiversity targets, but far fewer have updated full national strategies or addressed social and economic aspects of biodiversity loss.
  • Gender equality and the participation of women, Indigenous Peoples, and local communities remain weak in many national plans, despite being central to the global biodiversity agreement.
  • Developing countries highlighted ongoing challenges linked to limited funding, lack of technical capacity, and difficulty accessing resources needed to implement biodiversity actions.
  • The outcomes from Rome will shape how global progress on biodiversity is measured and reviewed, setting the tone for accountability and action in the run-up to 2030.

IPS UN Bureau Report