FFD4 Must Deliver for the World’s Most Vulnerable Nations

Aid, Climate Action, Climate Change, Conferences, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Education, Environment, Global, Headlines, Health, Poverty & SDGs, Sustainability, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

OHRLLS Office Banner. Credit: OHRLLS

UNITED NATIONS, Jul 1 2025 (IPS) – Five years from the 2030 deadline for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), we face a development emergency. The promise to eradicate poverty, combat climate change, and build a sustainable future for all is slipping away. The SDG financing gap has ballooned to over $4 trillion annually—a crisis compounded by declining aid, rising trade barriers, and a fragile global economy.


At the heart of this crisis is a systemic failure: the world’s most vulnerable nations—Least Developed Countries (LDCs), Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs), and Small Island Developing States (SIDS)—are being left behind. The Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) in Seville is a historic chance to correct course.

We must seize it.

LDCs: Progress Stalled, Financing Denied

Three years into the Doha Programme of Action, LDCs are lagging precariously. Growth averages just 4.1%, far below the 7% target. FDI remains stagnant at a meager 2.5% of global flows, while ODA to LDCs fell by 3% in 2024. Worse, 29 LDCs now spend more on debt than health, and eight spend more on debt than education.

USG Rabab Fatima

These numbers demand action: scaled-up concessional finance, deep debt relief, and innovative tools like blended finance to unlock private investment. Without urgent measures, the 2030 Agenda will fail its most marginalized beneficiaries.

LLDCs: Trapped by Geography, Strangled by Finances

Six months after adopting the ambitious Awaza Programme of Action, LLDCs remain hamstrung by structural barriers. Despite hosting 7% of the world’s people, they account for just 1.2% of global trade, with export costs 74% higher than coastal nations. FDI has plummeted from $36 billion in 2011 to $23 billion in 2024, while ODA continues its downward spiral. Official Development Assistance (ODA) has also declined significantly from $38.1 billion in 2020 to $32 billion in 2023, with projections indicating continued downward trends.

The Awaza Programme outlines solutions—trade facilitation, infrastructure, and resilience—but these will remain empty promises without financing. FFD4 must align with its priorities, ensuring LLDCs get the investment they need to transform their economies.

I seize the opportunity to warmly invite all of you to continue these critical discussions at the Third United Nations Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDC3), to be held in Awaza, Turkmenistan, from 5 to 8 August 2025 under the theme “Driving Progress through Partnerships”.

SIDS: Debt, Disasters, and a Broken System

For SIDS, the crisis is existential. Over 40% are in or near debt distress; 70% exceed sustainable debt thresholds. Between 2016 and 2020, they paid 18 times more in debt servicing than they received in climate finance. This is unconscionable. Countries on the frontlines of the climate crisis should not be left on the margins of global finance. Nations drowning in rising sea level – which they did not contribute to – should not be drowning in debt.

We can continue patching over cracks in a broken system. Or we can build a more equitable foundation for sustainable development, and for that addressing debt sustainability is not only an economic necessity, but also a development imperative. No country should be forced to choose between servicing debt and protecting its future.

The Way Forward: Solidarity in Action

FFD4 must deliver:

    1. Debt relief and restructuring for LDCs, LLDCs, and SIDS to free up resources for development.
    2. Scaling up concessional finance and honoring ODA commitments.
    3. Mobilizing private capital through de-risking instruments and blended finance.
    4. Climate finance justice, ensuring SIDS and LDCs receive grants and concessional finance, not loans, to build resilience.

The moral case is clear, but so is the strategic one: A world where billions are left in poverty and instability, should be a world of shared risks and responsibilities. FFD4 must be the moment we choose a different path—one of equity, urgency, and action. The time for excuses is over. The agreement on the Compromiso de Sevilla is the start – the real test will be its implementation.

As we move forward on those important responsibilities s and necessary actions, my Office, UN-OHRLLS, is with you every step of the way.

Rabab Fatima, UN Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries, and Small Island Developing States

IPS UN Bureau

 

‘Enabling Machines to Make Life and Death Decisions Is Morally Unjustifiable’

Active Citizens, Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Global, Global Geopolitics, Headlines, Human Rights, TerraViva United Nations

Jun 27 2025 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses autonomous weapons systems and the campaign for regulation with Nicole van Rooijen, Executive Director of Stop Killer Robots, a global civil society coalition of over 270 organisations that campaigns for a new international treaty on autonomous weapons systems.


Nicole van Rooijen

In May, United Nations (UN) member states convened in New York for the first time to confront the challenge of regulating autonomous weapons systems, which can select and engage targets without human intervention. These ‘killer robots’ pose unprecedented ethical, humanitarian and legal risks, and civil society warns they could trigger a global arms race while undermining international law. With weapons that have some autonomy already deployed in conflicts from Gaza to Ukraine, UN Secretary-General António Guterres has set a 2026 deadline for a legally binding treaty.

What are autonomous weapons systems and why do they pose unprecedented challenges?

Autonomous weapons systems, or ‘killer robots’, are weapons that, once activated by a human, can select and engage targets without further human intervention. These systems make independent decisions – without the intervention of a human operator – about when, how, where and against whom to use force, processing sensor data or following pre-programmed ‘target profiles’. Rather than using the term ‘lethal autonomous weapons systems’, our campaign refers to ‘autonomous weapons systems’ to emphasise that any such system, lethal or not, can inflict serious harm.

The implications are staggering. These weapons could operate across all domains – air, land, sea and space – during armed conflicts and law enforcement or border control operations. They raise numerous ethical, humanitarian, legal and security concerns.

The most troubling variant involves anti-personnel systems triggered by human presence or individuals or groups who meet pre-programmed target profiles. By reducing people to data points for algorithmic targeting, these weapons are dehumanising. They strip away our inherent rights and dignity, dramatically increasing the risk of unjust harm or death. No machine, computer or algorithm can recognise a human as a human being, nor respect humans as inherent bearers of rights and dignity. Autonomous weapons cannot comprehend what it means to be in a state of war, much less what it means to have – or to end – a human life. Enabling machines to make life and death decisions is morally unjustifiable.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has noted it is ‘difficult to envisage’ scenarios where autonomous weapons wouldn’t pose significant risks of violating international humanitarian law, given the inevitable presence of civilians and non-combatants in conflict zones.

Currently, no international law governs these weapons’ development or use. As the technology advances rapidly, this legal vacuum creates a dangerous environment where autonomous weapons could be deployed in ways that violate existing international law while escalating conflicts, enabling unaccountable violence and harming civilians. This is what prompted the UN Secretary-General and the ICRC president to jointly call for urgent negotiations on a legally binding international instrument on autonomous weapons systems by 2026.

How have recent consultations advanced the regulatory agenda?

The informal consultations held in New York in May, mandated by UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 79/62, focused on issues raised in the UN Secretary-General’s 2024 report on autonomous weapons systems. They sought to broaden awareness among the diplomatic community and complement the work around the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), emphasising risks that extend far beyond international humanitarian law.

The UNGA offers a crucial advantage: universal participation. Unlike the CCW process in Geneva, it includes all states. This is particularly important for global south states, many of which are not a party to the CCW.

Over two days, states and civil society explored human rights implications, humanitarian consequences, ethical dilemmas, technological risks and security threats. Rich discussions emerged around regional dynamics and practical scenarios, examining how these weapons might be used in policing, border control and by non-state actors or criminal groups. While time constraints prevented exhaustive exploration of all issues, the breadth of engagement was unprecedented.

The Stop Killer Robots campaign found these consultations energising and strategically valuable. They demonstrated how UN processes in Geneva and New York can reinforce each other: while one forum provides detailed technical groundwork, particularly in developing treaty language, the other fosters inclusive political leadership and momentum. Both forums should work in tandem to maximise global efforts to achieve an international legally binding instrument on autonomous weapons systems.

What explains the global divide on regulation?

The vast majority of states support a legally binding treaty on autonomous weapons systems, favouring a two-tier approach that combines prohibitions with positive obligations.

However, roughly a dozen states oppose any form of regulation. Among them are some of the world’s most heavily militarised states and the primary developers, producers and likely users of autonomous weapons systems. Their resistance likely stems from the desire to preserve military superiority and protect economic interests, and the belief in inflated claims about these weapons’ supposed benefits promoted by big tech and arms industries. Or perhaps they simply favour force over diplomacy.

Whatever their motivations, this opposition underscores the urgent need for the international community to reinforce a rules-based global order that prioritises dialogue, multilateralism and responsible governance over unchecked technological ambition.

How do geopolitical tensions and corporate influence complicate international regulation efforts?

It is undeniable that geopolitical tensions and corporate influence are challenging the development of regulations for emerging technologies.

A handful of powerful states are prioritising narrow military and economic advantages over collective security, undermining the multilateral cooperation that has traditionally governed arms control. Equally troubling is the expanding influence of the private sector, particularly large tech companies that operate largely outside established accountability frameworks while wielding significant sway over political leaders.

This dual pressure is undermining the international rules-based order precisely when we most need stronger multilateral governance. Without robust regulatory frameworks that can withstand these pressures, development of autonomous weapons risks accelerating unchecked, with profound implications for global security and human rights.

How is civil society shaping this debate and advocating for regulation?

Anticipating the challenges autonomous weapons systems would pose, leading human rights organisations and humanitarian disarmament experts founded the Stop Killer Robots campaign in 2012. Today, our coalition spans over 270 organisations across more than 70 countries, working at national, regional and global levels to build political support for legally binding regulation.

We’ve played a leading role in shaping global discourse by highlighting the wide-ranging risks these technologies pose and producing timely research on weapons systems evolution and shifting state positions.

Our multi-level strategy targets all decision-makers who can influence this agenda, at local, regional and global levels. It’s crucial that political leaders understand how autonomous weapons might be used in warfare and other contexts, enabling them to advocate effectively within their spheres of influence for the treaty we urgently need.

Public pressure is key to our approach. Recent years have seen growing weapons systems autonomy and military applications, particularly in ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, alongside rising use of technologies such as facial recognition in civilian contexts. Public concern about the dehumanising nature of these technologies and the lack of regulation has grown online and offline. We frame these concerns along the whole spectrum of automated harm, with autonomous weapons representing the extreme, and highlight the critical need to close the gap between innovation and regulation.

We also collaborate with experts from arms, military and technology sectors to bring real-world knowledge and credibility to our treaty advocacy. It is crucial to involve those who develop and deploy autonomous weapons to demonstrate the gravity of current circumstances and the urgent need for regulation.

We encourage people to take action by signing our petition, asking their local political representatives to sign our Parliamentary Pledge or just spreading the word about our campaign on social media. This ultimately puts pressure on diplomats and other decision-makers to advance the legal safeguards we desperately need.

GET IN TOUCH
Bluesky
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Twitter
Nicole/Bluesky
Nicole/LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
Facial recognition: the latest weapon against civil society CIVICUS Lens 23.May.2025
Weaponised surveillance: how spyware targets civil society CIVICUS Lens 24. Apr.2025
Technology: Human perils of digital power CIVICUS | 2025 State of Civil Society Report

  Source

Time to Redesign Global Development Finance

Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Conferences, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Education, Environment, Financial Crisis, Food and Agriculture, Gender, Global, Headlines, Health, Inequality, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Sarah Strack, Forus Director and Christelle Kalhoule, Forus Chair

Farmer in Colombia. Credit: Both Nomads/Forus

SEVILLE, Spain , Jun 23 2025 (IPS) – Can the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) be a turning point? The stakes are high. The international financial system—so important to each and every one of us—feels out of reach and resistant to change, because it is deeply entrenched in unjust power imbalances that keep it in place. We deserve better.


Under its current form, the Compromiso de Sevilla – the outcome document of FFD4 adopted on June 17 ahead of the conference – reads like a mildly improved version of business as usual with weak commitments. To avoid being derailed, decision-makers at FFD4 must act with clarity and courage, and here’s why.

With predatory interest rates, the international financial system is pushing hundreds of millions into misery as several nations continue to be shackled by a deepening debt crisis. While millions struggle without adequate food, healthcare, or education – basic services and rights – their governments must funnel billions to creditors.

Shockingly, 3.3 billion people – almost half of humanity – disproportionately in Global South nations, live in countries where debt interest payments outstrip education, health budgets and urgent climate action. This imbalance is particularly pernicious toward women, who bear the brunt of the failure of the gender-blind global financial architecture. This system fails to acknowledge and redistribute care and social reproduction responsibilities, resulting in women, especially those located in the Global South, lacking access to adequate essential services and decent jobs.

“The current model of international cooperation is not working, and its financing is also not working while we are facing a series of interconnected crises,” says Mafalda Infante, Advocacy and Communications Officer at the Portuguese Platform of Development NGOs, sharing their recently released Civil Society Manifesto for Global Justice calling for change and a restoration of fairness at FFD4 and beyond.

“Gender equality perspectives are absolutely central to how we understand global justice and financial reform, because let’s be clear: the current system isn’t neutral. It produces and reinforces inequalities, including gender-based ones. The debt crisis and climate emergency disproportionately affect women and girls, especially in the global south. We’ve seen it again and again when public services are cut, when healthcare is underfunded or when food systems collapse, it’s women who carry the heaviest burden. But at the same time, feminist economics also offer solutions. They challenge the idea that GDP growth is the ultimate goal. They prioritise care, sustainability and community well-being. They demand that financing should be people-centered and rights-based and accountable as well. So the role of civil society has been to bring these ideas into the FFD4 space to connect macroeconomic reform with everyday realities and to insist that justice – economic, climate, racial, gender justice – is indivisible,” Infante adds.

FFD4 offers an opportunity to reimagine a financial architecture that can be just, inclusive, and rights-based. This is not a technical summit for experts alone. It is the only global forum where governments, international institutions, civil society organisations, community representatives and the private sector sit together to shape the future of global finance, and it’s happening after 10 years since the latest edition in Addis Ababa.

But there are realities that decision-makers just can’t shy away from. While some powerful countries borrow at rock-bottom rates, other nations face interest charges nearly four times higher. We must thus ask ourselves: is this really a pathway to truly sustainable development or a continuation of profound financial injustices through something akin to “financial colonialism” ?

“Many countries like us in the South, are totally concerned that there can be no development with the current debt situation not discussed. The issue of debt vis-a-vis taxes is vitally important. The money that countries are collecting from the domestic mobilization of resources is all channeled to self-debt servicing. And debt handcuffs social policy. Without these resources, these countries cannot deliver on public services like health and education. There can be no way of improving people’s social indicators without addressing the question of debt stress,” says Moses Isooba , Executive Director of the Uganda National NGO Forum (UNNGOF).

Forus is attending FFD4 as a global civil society network with one clear message: the current model must change.

We call for a radical transformation of global finance that moves away from a system that enables “tax abuse” and outsized influence from a powerful few.

A crucial step for transformation is creating a UN Convention on Sovereign Debt to fairly and transparently restructure and cancel illegitimate debt, as many countries spend more on debt than on essential services.

In today’s context of shrinking development aid, the role of public development banks is ever more important in support of Agenda 2030 and the Paris Agreement on climate change. Forus therefore calls on public development banks to work in partnership with civil society and community representatives through a formal global coalition and local engagement to ensure development finance is locally-led and reflects the real needs of people, rooted in consent and mutual trust.

Official development assistance (ODA) must be protected and increased, reversing harmful aid cuts that damage civil society as well as urgent and basic services. The UN has warned that aid funding for dozens of crises around the world has dropped by a third, largely due to the decrease in US funding slashed US funding and announced cuts from other nations.

Finally, governments should support a new UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, adopting gender-responsive, environmentally sustainable fiscal policies while disincentivizing polluters and extractive industries.

“Development financing must not perpetuate cycles of debt, austerity, and dependency. Instead, it must be grounded in democratic governance, fair taxation, climate justice, and respect for human rights. It’s also crucial to promote inclusive decision-making by strengthening the role of the United Nations in global economic governance, countering the dominance of informal and exclusive clubs such as the OECD,” says Henrique Frota, Executive Director of the Brazilian Association of NGOs (ABONG) and former C20 Brazil Chair.

FFD4 must ensure that there is a genuine space for civil society engagement, where all voices are heard and can influence financial decision making, to strengthen accountability and transparency, and to promote greater inclusion.

“The voices of the communities most affected should be included, otherwise large-scale development projects are not sustainable. Local communities and local civil society are the point of contact to make implementation more inclusive,” says Pallavi Rekhi, Programmes Lead at Voluntary Action Network India (VANI), reinforcing that FFD4 must shift from vague aspirations to binding, systemic reforms that rebalance power and serve justice.

“Don’t take stock of what has been done. Instead, look at what has not yet been done at this conference and you will see the immense challenges that lie ahead for the future of our planet,” says Marcelline Mensah-Pierucci, President of FONGTO, the national platform of civil society organisations in Togo.

“The continuous cycle of unfairness and social inequality must come to an end. The time to act is now,” adds Zia ur Rehman, Chairperson of Pakistan Development Alliance.

For many, the road to Sevilla has been long and hard and still, the world’s majority are left behind on this journey. The hard work continues after FFD4 on the need for bold leadership, real action and transformative change that can lead to a more effective and responsive global financial architecture.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Time to Rethink Health Financing: It’s Not Just a Public Sector Concern

Civil Society, Economy & Trade, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Parents and caregivers line up with their children at an immunization centre in Janakpur, southern Nepal. Meanwhile recent funding cuts have caused “severe disruptions” to health services in almost three-quarters of all countries, according to the head of the UN World Health Organization (WHO), Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. April 2025. Credit: UNICEF

LONDON, Jun 19 2025 (IPS) – As G7 leaders of the world’s wealthiest nations wrapped up their summit in Kananaskis June 16, a critical issue was absent from the agenda: the future of global health financing.


Amid escalating geopolitical tensions, trade conflicts and cuts to development aid, health has been sidelined – less than five years since COVID-19 devastated lives, health systems and economies.

With the fiscal space for health shrinking in over 69 countries, it’s time to recognise that health financing is no longer solely a public sector concern; it is a fundamental pillar of economic productivity, stability, and resilience.

A glimmer of hope has emerged from South Africa, the current G20 Presidency host, and from the World Health Organization (WHO). A landmark health financing resolution, adopted at last month’s World Health Assembly calls on countries to take ownership of their health funding and increase domestic investment.

While this is a promising step, the prevailing discourse continues to rely on outdated solutions which are often slow to implement and fall short of what is needed.

Invest Smarter, Not Just More, in Health

Recent trends among G20 countries show that annual healthcare expenditure is actually declining across member states. In 2022, health expenditure dropped in 18 out of 20 G20 nations, leading to increased out-of-pocket expenses for citizens.

While countries like Japan, Australia, and Canada demonstrate a direct correlation between higher per capita health expenditure and increased life expectancy, others, such as Russia, India, and South Africa, show the opposite.

This disparity underscores a crucial point: the quality and efficiency of investment matters more than quantity. Smart investment encompasses efficient resource allocation, equitable access to affordable care, effective disease prevention and management, and broader determinants of health like lifestyle, education, and environmental factors.

Achieving positive outcomes hinges on balancing health funding – the operational costs – with sustainable health financing – the capital costs.

Private capital is already moving into health, what’s missing is coordination and strategic alignment

Despite the surge in healthcare private equity reaching USD 480 billion between 2020 and 2024, many in the sector remain unaware of this significant shift. Recent G20 efforts have focused on innovative financing tools, but what’s truly needed are systemic reforms that reframe health as a core pillar of financial stability, economic resilience, and geopolitical security, not just a public service.

This year’s annual Health20 Summit at the WHO, supporting the G20 Health and Finance Ministers Meetings, addresses this need by launching a new compass for health financing: a groundbreaking report on the “Health Taxonomy – A Common Investment Toolkit to Scale Up Future Investments in Health.”

Why do we need an investment map for health?

The answer is simple: since the first ever G20 global health discussions under Germany’s G20 Presidency in 2017, there has been no consistent effort to rethink or coordinate investments. G20 countries still lack a strategic dialogue between governments, health and finance ministries, investors and the private sector.

Market-Driven, Government-Incentivised: The Path Forward

Building on the European Union’s Green Taxonomy, the health taxonomy aims to foster a shared understanding and common language among governments, companies, and investors to drive sustainable health financing. Investors, Asset Managers, Venture Capitalists, G20 Ministries of Health and Finance, Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs), and International Organisations broadly agree that a market-driven taxonomy is both credible and practical.

Governments can have greater confidence knowing it has been tested with investors and is grounded in market realities.

The Health Taxonomy report identifies a key barrier to progress: the fundamental confusion between health funding and health financing: Health financing refers to the system that manages health investments, such as raising revenue, pooling resources and purchasing services. In contrast, health funding refers to the actual sources of money.

Increasing health funding alone will not improve health outcomes if the financing system is poorly designed. Conversely, a well-developed health financing framework won’t succeed without sufficient funding. Both are essential and must work together.

The health taxonomy has the potential to serve as a vital tool for policy planning sessions, strategic boardroom discussions and investment committees, thereby enabling health to be readily integrated into existing portfolios and strategies. It could also support more systematic assessments of health-related risks and economic impacts, including through existing processes like the IMF’s Article IV consultations and other macroeconomic surveillance frameworks.

The report urges leading G20 health and finance ministers to rethink and align on joint principles for health funding and financing.

The next pandemic could be more severe, more persistent, and more costly. Failure to invest adequately in health before the next crisis is a systemic risk our leaders can no longer afford to ignore.

Hatice Beton is Co-Founder, H20Summit; Roberto Durán-Fernández; PhD, is Tec de Monterrey School of Government, Former Member of the WHO’s Economic Council; Dennis Ostwald is Founder & CEO, WifOR Institute (Germany); Rifat Atun is Professor of Global Health Systems, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Tanzania Champions Aquatic Foods at UN Ocean Conference in Nice

Africa, Climate Action, Climate Change, Conferences, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Europe, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition, Food Sustainability, Global, Headlines, Ocean Health, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Ocean Health

Fishermen gliding on a canoe off the coast of Dar es Salaam. Photo by Kizito Makoye

Fishermen gliding on a canoe off the coast of Dar es Salaam. Photo by Kizito Makoye

NICE, France, Jun 17 2025 (IPS) – With less than six harvest seasons left to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the urgency to find transformative solutions to end hunger, protect the oceans, and build climate resilience dominated the ninth panel session at the 2025 United Nations Ocean Conference in Nice, France.


In a moment emblematic of growing African leadership in ocean sustainability, Tanzania took center stage during the panel titled “Promoting the Role of Sustainable Food from the Ocean for Poverty Eradication and Food Security.” The panel offered not only a scientific and policy-rich exchange of ideas but also a rare glimpse into how countries like Tanzania are positioning aquatic foods as engines of economic recovery, public health, and ecological sustainability.

A Defining Voice From the Swahili Coast

Co-chairing the session, Shaaban Ali Othman, Minister for Blue Economy and Fisheries of Zanzibar, part of the United Republic of Tanzania, laid out his country’s blueprint for harnessing ocean resources without compromising marine ecosystems.

“Our survival is intimately tied to the ocean. It feeds us, it employs our people, and it holds the promise to lift millions out of poverty,” Othman said, advocating for a redefinition of how the world views aquatic food systems. “But this can only happen if we manage them responsibly.”

He emphasized that for Tanzania, the blue economy is not a buzzword—it is a foundational strategy woven into national development planning. As climate change intensifies and traditional farming struggles under erratic rainfall, coastal and inland aquatic foods offer a viable, nutrient-dense alternative for the country’s growing population.

“Communities in Zanzibar and along the Tanzanian coastline have fished for generations, but now we must ensure those practices are not just traditional, but also sustainable and inclusive,” Othman said.

He pointed to Zanzibar’s push to increase seaweed farming, particularly among women, as a double dividend for nutrition and gender equity. He also highlighted new investments in cold storage and fish processing facilities aimed at reducing post-harvest losses—currently among the highest in the region.

The Global Science Backs Tanzania’s Approach

His remarks resonated with the scientific panelists, particularly Jörn Schmidt, Science Director for Sustainable Aquatic Food Systems at WorldFish, who urged countries to bring aquatic foods “from the margins to the mainstream.”

“Aquatic foods are one of the few tools that can simultaneously tackle poverty, hunger, and climate risk,” said Schmidt. “But they are often left off the table—both literally and figuratively.”

Schmidt called for urgent action on three fronts: nutrition, production, and equity. He cited research showing that even modest increases in aquatic food consumption in the first 1,000 days of life could significantly reduce stunting and improve cognitive development. For production, he recommended low-impact, high-return systems such as seaweed and bivalves. On equity, he urged secure tenure for small-scale fishers, gender inclusion, and expanded social protections.

Barange noted that in 2023 alone, global fish production hit 189 million tons, delivering about 21 kilograms of aquatic animal protein per capita. However, an alarming 23.8 million tons—almost 15 percent—was lost or wasted due to poor handling and inefficient distribution systems.

“These losses are not just about food—they are lost nutrition, lost income, and lost opportunity,” said Barange, adding that if properly managed, aquatic foods could be the backbone of a global “blue transformation.”

Tanzania’s Call for Equity and Innovation

Othman used the opportunity to underline that the success of aquatic food systems must also address inequality—particularly the role of women and youth in the sector.

“Across Tanzania, from Kigamboni to Kilwa, women are drying fish, farming seaweed, and selling aquatic produce in markets. But they need access to capital, to better technology, and most importantly, to decision-making spaces,” he said.

To that end, Tanzania has begun piloting aquatic food training centres aimed at equipping youth with climate-smart aquaculture skills, including sustainable pond farming and low-carbon feed techniques.

“This is how we move from potential to prosperity,” Othman said.

A Blueprint for Global Action

The panel also featured a range of high-level contributions aimed at linking aquatic foods to broader development frameworks. Rhea Moss-Christian, Executive Director of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, underscored the economic lifeline that tuna fisheries represent for small island developing states. She emphasized that tuna is not just a food source, but a pillar of public finance, especially in the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia.

“Let’s be clear,” she said. “In some Pacific nations, tuna revenue funds schools, hospitals and roads. A healthy tuna fishery is existential.”

Her message echoed Tanzania’s own struggle to balance economic imperatives with conservation, especially in the face of illegal fishing and weak monitoring infrastructure. Minister Othman called for stronger regional cooperation in fighting these threats, including shared surveillance and satellite-based monitoring systems.

CGIAR and the Seaweed Solution

Adding another layer of urgency, Dr. Shakuntala Haraksingh Thilsted of CGIAR warned that the world is “falling behind on SDG 2 and SDG 14.” She championed seaweed as a sustainable aquatic superfood with enormous potential, particularly for South Asia and Africa.

“Tanzania, with its long coastline and established seaweed culture, is ideally placed to lead in this domain,” she said.

She called for more public and private investment to scale innovations, support local entrepreneurs, and integrate aquatic foods into school feeding and public procurement programmes.

“Let us not miss this opportunity,” she added. “The sea can feed us—if we let it.”

Resilience in the Face of Crisis

Ciyong Zou, Deputy Director-General of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), highlighted the broader resilience benefits of aquatic food systems. He noted that aquatic foods support over 3 billion people globally, yet post-harvest losses—up to 30 percent in developing countries—undermine their potential.

He offered case studies from Cambodia and Sudan, where targeted investments in processing and training led to higher incomes and improved child nutrition. He announced UNIDO’s voluntary commitment to expand technical support to 10 additional coastal nations by 2030.

“For countries like Tanzania, this could mean new tools, cleaner production methods, and more resilient livelihoods,” Zou said.

Call to Action

As the panel drew to a close, one theme stood out: aquatic food systems are not merely about fish or seaweed—they are about dignity, sovereignty, and survival.

“We need to democratize access to data, empower communities, and ensure that small-scale fishers, especially women, are not left behind,” Othman insisted.

Back in Tanzania, the ripple effects of such commitments are already being felt. In Kisiwa Panza, a small island in Pemba, a women-led seaweed cooperative recently began exporting to Europe, thanks to technical support from local NGOs and government backing. “It’s a new life,” said Asha Mzee, one of the cooperative’s founders. “Before, we fished only what we needed. Now, we grow for the world.”

With nations like Tanzania stepping forward, the ocean—so long exploited—is being reimagined as a source of renewal. But the clock is ticking.

“In 2030, we’ll be asked what we did with these six remaining harvests,” Othman said in his final remarks. “Let’s ensure our answer is-we used them to feed people, protect our planet, and leave no one behind.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

France Rallies World Leaders to Seal Ocean Protection Deal at UN Conference in Nice

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Conservation, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Ocean Health

Li Junhua, Conference Secretary-General, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, Arnoldo Andre Tinoco, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Costa Rica and Olivier Poivre D'Arvor, Special Envoy of the French Republic for UN Ocean Conference address the final press briefing of UNOC3. Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS

Li Junhua, Conference Secretary-General, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, Arnoldo Andre Tinoco, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Costa Rica and Olivier Poivre D’Arvor, Special Envoy of the French Republic for UN Ocean Conference address the final press briefing of UNOC3. Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS

NICE, France, Jun 13 2025 (IPS) – With the future of the world’s oceans hanging in the balance, global leaders, scientists, and activists gathered in the French Riviera city of Nice this week for the historic UN Ocean Conference, where France declared a new era of high seas governance and marine protection.


At a press briefing on Thursday, Olivier Poivre d’Arvor, France’s Special Envoy for the UN Ocean Conference, said the global gathering marks a turning point for ocean conservation, with 174 delegations and 64 heads of state rallying behind a common goal—to transform the world’s oceans from a lawless expanse into a protected global commons governed by science, cooperation, and binding treaties.

“The high seas are no longer a playground. They are now a protected space,” d’Arvor told reporters, announcing that the UN’s landmark treaty on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) will officially enter into force by early January 2026.

Dubbed the “Treaty of Nice,” the pact seeks to place nearly two-thirds of the world’s ocean under international governance, a move hailed by conservationists as the biggest step forward for marine protection in decades. With 56 countries having ratified the treaty and 14 more expected to follow before the ceremonial launch in New York on September 23, the agreement meets the 60-country threshold required for it to become law.

“This is a foundational moment,” said d’Arvor. “Nice could become for ocean governance what Rio was for climate and biodiversity.”

The treaty, negotiated over 15 years, aims to regulate the high seas—areas beyond national jurisdiction that have long been vulnerable to overfishing, pollution, and unregulated extraction. It also lays the groundwork for the first-ever Ocean COP, expected by the end of 2026, where signatory countries will finalize implementation protocols, establish a permanent secretariat, and begin real enforcement through satellites, naval fleets, and drones.

Despite tensions in multilateral diplomacy, France—with co-host Costa Rica and the UN—has managed to galvanize widespread support. In a strong show of unity, even geopolitical rivals such as China, India, and the European Union endorsed the treaty, while Argentina’s President Javier Milei and Indonesia ratified it during the summit.

D’Arvor also used the occasion to caution against a renewed push for deep-sea mining, particularly in light of a recent U.S. executive order authorizing a preliminary exploration mission. “The deep sea is not for sale—no more than Antarctica or Greenland,” he warned, pledging that a coalition of 40 countries would continue to block any attempt to adopt a mining code without consensus under the International Seabed Authority (ISA).

“Those who hoped the code would be adopted at Kingston this July have lost the battle. I hope they’ve lost the war,” he added.

In parallel with the treaty’s legal strides, the conference saw the launch of the European Ocean Pact, a collaborative ocean exploration initiative unveiled by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The pact, backed by countries including India and China, aims to correct the stark imbalance in research funding—currently, ocean exploration receives 250 times less funding than space programs.

By bringing together oceanographic institutes, space agencies, and private sector players, the initiative promises to generate a shared global database to help map and understand the ocean in unprecedented detail. “In 15 years, we aim to fully understand the ocean—or at least enough to truly protect it,” said d’Arvor.

He stressed that science—not political posturing—will be the new compass for ocean policy. “This is the victory of science. The ocean has long been a victim of exploitation and ignorance. But now, it can become a platform for cooperation and peace.”

Yet challenges remain. While Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) are relatively well managed, questions linger about compliance and enforcement. The true test, observers say, will be translating high-level pledges into measurable progress.

Still, the momentum in Nice has brought renewed hope for ocean defenders around the globe. “We are not there yet,” said d’Arvor. “But for the first time, we are truly moving forward—and there is no turning back.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source