UN Ocean Conference Closes with Historic Commitments, But Activists Demand Action Beyond Words

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change Justice, Conservation, Economy & Trade, Environment, Europe, Featured, Global, Headlines, Ocean Health, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Ocean Health

Greenpeace banner sign against deep sea mining at UNOC3 in Nice on June 11, 2025. Credit: Greenpeace

Greenpeace banner sign against deep sea mining at UNOC3 in Nice on June 11, 2025.
Credit: Greenpeace

NICE, France, Jun 13 2025 (IPS) – The third United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC3) concluded today in Nice with an urgent call for governments to translate bold words into concrete action to protect the world’s oceans. Co-hosted by France and Costa Rica, the summit brought together more than 15,000 participants, including 50 heads of state and government, civil society leaders, scientists, youth, and Indigenous communities in an 11-day event hailed as both a milestone for ocean diplomacy and a test of global resolve.

“This conference has been a resounding success,” said Olivier Poivre d’Arvor, France’s Special Envoy for the Ocean. “We close not just with hope, but with concrete commitments, clear direction, and undeniable momentum.”

Costa Rica’s Foreign Minister Arnoldo André Tinoco emphasized the breadth of participation and the centrality of science in shaping decisions. “Together with France, we worked toward an action-oriented conference where all actors are represented and where finance and science go hand in hand,” he said.

Under-Secretary-General Li Chunhua, the Secretary-General of the conference, stressed the need for implementation: “The real test is not what we said here but what we do next. The wave of change has formed. Now, it is our collective responsibility to propel it forward.”

Key Outcomes and Announcements

One of the most anticipated achievements of the conference was progress on the High Seas Treaty—officially known as the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement. With 51 ratifications confirmed and 60 needed for entry into force, the treaty promises to enable the creation of marine protected areas in international waters, a crucial tool to achieving the goal of protecting 30% of the world’s ocean by 2030.

Additionally, 800 new voluntary commitments were registered across the 10 multi-stakeholder Ocean Action Panels, addressing issues from marine pollution and deep-sea ecosystems to ocean finance and the role of Indigenous peoples.

New and strengthened initiatives launched at UNOC3 include:

The One Ocean Finance Facility is aimed at closing the multi-billion-dollar funding gap for ocean conservation.

The European Ocean Pact, which reinforces regional cooperation for sustainable ocean management.

The Ocean Rise and Coastal Resilience Coalition, supporting vulnerable communities on the frontlines of sea-level rise.

The conference also saw mounting support for a moratorium on deep-sea mining, with four more nations joining the call, bringing the total to 37. “More and more countries are listening to science and the demands of youth for their common heritage over commercial interests,” Tinoco noted.

Civil Society: ‘Fine Words Must Now Translate into Action’

Despite these commitments, environmental groups expressed frustration that the conference stopped short of stronger legally binding decisions, especially on deep-sea mining.

“We’ve heard lots of fine words here in Nice, but these need to turn into tangible action,” said Megan Randles, head of Greenpeace’s delegation. “Countries must be brave and make history by committing to a moratorium on deep-sea mining at next month’s International Seabed Authority (ISA) meeting.”

Randles welcomed the ratification progress of the High Seas Treaty but said governments “missed the moment” to take firmer steps against industries threatening marine ecosystems. “The deep sea should not become the wild west,” she added, referencing UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ recent remarks.

Activists also stressed the importance of upcoming negotiations for a Global Plastics Treaty, resuming in Geneva this August. Ninety-five governments signed the “Nice Call for an Ambitious Plastics Treaty,” but concerns remain that lobbying from oil and petrochemical interests could water down the deal.

“The world cannot afford a weak treaty dictated by oil-soaked obstructionists,” said John Hocevar, Oceans Campaign Director at Greenpeace USA. “Governments need to show that multilateralism still works for people and the planet, not the profits of a greedy few.”

Indigenous Voices and Ocean Justice

Coastal and Indigenous communities were visibly present throughout the conference, particularly in the “Green Zone” in La Valette, which welcomed more than 100,000 visitors and hosted grassroots events, youth forums, and artistic exhibitions.

Nichanan Thantanwit, Project Leader at the Ocean Justice Project, highlighted the continued marginalization of traditional ocean custodians: “There is no ocean protection without the people who have protected it all along. Governments must recognize small-scale fishers and Indigenous peoples as rights-holders and secure their role in ocean governance.”

She also called for an end to destructive industrial practices like bottom trawling and harmful aquaculture, which she said “drive ecological collapse and human rights violations.”

Mixed Reviews for France’s Leadership

While French President Emmanuel Macron reiterated his call for a deep-sea mining moratorium—calling it “an international necessity”—some ”conservationists argued that France failed to fully lead by example.

“This was France’s moment, but instead of making a splash, its impact was more of a ripple,” said Enric Sala, National Geographic Explorer in Residence and founder of Pristine Seas. “We heard many policymakers speak about what needs to be done—yet few took the bold steps necessary to protect the ocean.”

Sala did praise governments that announced new fully protected marine areas but said the conference was “heavy on rhetoric, light on resolve.”

What to expect

The anticipated “Nice Ocean Action Plan,” a political declaration accompanied by voluntary commitments, will be released later today. Although non-binding, it is expected to influence key decisions at the ISA meeting in July and the Global Plastics Treaty talks in August.

Chunhua announced that South Korea and Chile have expressed readiness to host the next UN Ocean Conference. “We want the positive momentum generated in Nice to amplify even further in UNOC4,” he said.

As UNOC3 closes, the spirit of the event remains optimistic—but its legacy will depend on what happens next.

As Greenpeace’s Randles put it, “This must not be where it ends. It must be where it truly begins.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Oceans at Risk: Report Warns Global Fossil Fuel Expansion Threatens Marine Biodiversity

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Climate Action, Climate Change, Conferences, Conservation, COP30, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Europe, Featured, Global, Headlines, Natural Resources, Ocean Health, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

Ocean Health

A report documents the impact of unchecked oil and gas projects in biologically rich and ecologically sensitive environments. Credit Credit: Spencer Thomas

A report documents the impact of unchecked oil and gas projects in biologically rich and ecologically sensitive environments. Credit: Spencer Thomas

SACRAMENTO, US & NEW DELHI, India:, Jun 9 2025 (IPS) – A newly released report by Earth Insight in collaboration with 16 environmental organizations has sounded a global alarm on the unchecked expansion of offshore oil and gas projects into some of the most biologically rich and ecologically sensitive marine environments on the planet.

Titled Ocean Frontiers at Risk: Fossil Fuel Expansion Threats to Biodiversity Hotspots and Climate Stability, the report documents how 2.7 million square kilometers of ocean territory—an area nearly the size of India—has been opened to oil and gas exploration, much of it within or adjacent to protected areas and biodiversity hotspots.

The findings are based on a detailed spatial analysis of 11 case study regions, with data drawn from government ministries, investor briefings, and independent mapping efforts. The report was released ahead of the 3rd UN Ocean Conference (UNOC3) taking place in Nice, France, this week.

Tyson Miller, Executive Director of Earth Insight, described the process in an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service (IPS).

“Our research unit selected 11 frontier regions out of many and built a dataset with a mix of publicly available data and digitized information where government data was lacking,” Miller said. “It was shocking to see the scale of planned oil and gas expansion and LNG development, knowing that fossil fuel expansion shouldn’t be happening—let alone in some of the world’s most sensitive ecosystems.”

‘Overlap between oil blocks and critical habitats deeply troubling’

The report warns of massive ecological consequences as oil and gas activities encroach on coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass meadows, and Important Marine Mammal Areas (IMMA). Many of these zones fall within existing or proposed Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), which the international community has pledged to safeguard under initiatives like the 30×30 goal—protecting 30% of land and sea by 2030.

“Expanding marine protected areas is essential,” said Miller. “Safeguarding protected areas from oil and gas expansion and industrial development should go without saying. Yet, the extent of overlap between oil blocks and critical habitats is deeply troubling.”

In regions like the Gulf of California—also known as “the world’s aquarium”—LNG projects are already threatening a marine ecosystem that supports 39 percent of all marine mammal species and sustains hundreds of millions of dollars in fisheries. Despite local opposition and delayed environmental impact assessments, the area remains under active threat from fossil fuel expansion.

Meanwhile, off the coasts of Seychelles and Mauritius, the Saya de Malha Bank—a massive seagrass meadow that stores up to 10 percent of the ocean’s annual carbon despite covering just 0.2 percent of its surface—is now 98 percent overlapped by oil and gas blocks.

“There are important efforts underway to support the creation of a Marine Protected Area in the region—and if an exclusion of oil and gas and industrial activity in the area accompanied that, that would be a real positive step in the right direction,” Miller said.

Another key theme of the report is the outsized pressure placed on countries in the Global South to become new frontiers for fossil fuel extraction, even as they face increasing debt and climate vulnerability. Governments facing financial strain are often courted by foreign energy firms with promises of investment, job creation, and energy independence. However, the long-term consequences—both ecological and financial—are far more complex.

“Many countries in the Global South face high external debt and economic development pressures,” Miller explained. “Perhaps debt relief and payments for ecosystem services can become effective levers to help safeguard coastlines. Without this support, elected officials may greenlight projects that ultimately cost far more in the form of pollution, habitat destruction, and cleanup efforts.”

Indeed, the Ocean Protection Gap Report, also referenced in Earth Insight’s study, identifies billions of dollars in promised—but yet to be delivered—financing for marine conservation and climate resilience in low-income nations.

Incredible Work by Frontline and Indigenous Communities

Despite facing immense challenges, Indigenous and coastal communities are leading grassroots resistance movements in many of the threatened regions. In Mexico’s Gulf of California, local activism has successfully delayed LNG terminal approvals due to the absence of proper environmental reviews. In the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Mozambique, and elsewhere, community-led campaigns continue to demand transparency, ecological justice, and a halt to extractive projects.

“Frontline and Indigenous communities are doing incredible work to oppose fossil fuel expansion, often with limited resources and at great personal risk,” said Miller. “They need more direct support and more visible platforms to champion their vision for the future.”

Yet these communities, according to the report, are frequently up against entrenched corporate and political interests, making their fight not just environmental but also a struggle for democratic participation, land rights, and long-term sovereignty over natural resources.

Policy Roadmap

The report has pitched a policy roadmap for global leaders, particularly in the lead-up to high-stakes forums like COP and the UN Ocean Conference (UNOC). These include:

  • Halting all new coastal and offshore fossil fuel developments, especially in environmentally sensitive regions.
  • Removing unassigned oil and gas blocks and stopping the approval of new exploration licenses and permits.
  • Ending financial support—including investments, insurance, and financing—for planned offshore fossil fuel projects.
  • Shifting public and private capital to renewable energy, including offshore wind and solar.
  • Ensuring a just transition that includes full decommissioning of abandoned offshore infrastructure and stakeholder inclusion.
  • Undertaking habitat restoration where damage from fossil fuel operations has already occurred.
  • Strengthening global legal frameworks, including support for treaties like the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty to prevent new coastal and offshore oil expansion.

“It’s time for global leaders to take bold, enforceable actions,” said Miller. “If the UN Ocean Conference wants to be taken seriously, it must directly address the growing threat of fossil fuel industrialization on coastlines and oceans.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

UN Ocean Decade vs. Coastal Reality: ‘They Took Our Sea,’ Say Vizhinjam Fishworkers

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Biodiversity, Civil Society, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Ocean Health, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

Ocean Health

Vizhinjam Port—Inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 2 May 2025, as India’s first deep-water container transshipment hub—has been criticized for displacing fishers and disrupting the sensitive ocean biodiversity. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS

Vizhinjam Port—Inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 2 May 2025, as India’s first deep-water container transshipment hub—has been criticized for displacing fishers and disrupting the sensitive ocean biodiversity. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, India, Jun 8 2025 (IPS) – As the UN Ocean Conference (UNOC) approaches, bringing renewed attention to SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and the rights of ocean-dependent communities, India’s Vizhinjam coast highlights the environmental injustice and human cost of unchecked coastal development.

Kerala’s traditional fishworkers—communities historically rooted to the sea—are now facing irreversible disruption due to the controversial Vizhinjam Port project.

Despite repeated rejections by multiple expert appraisal committees over severe environmental concerns, the Vizhinjam Port—Inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 2 May 2025, as India’s first deep-water container transshipment hub—was approved under questionable circumstances.

Experts have raised serious concerns about the compromised Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process for the Vizhinjam Port, calling it a “cut-copy-paste” job lifted from unrelated projects. The port’s viability studies were manipulated to overlook ecological threats and suppress dissenting community voices.

According to Vijayan M.J., Director of the Participatory Action Research Coalition—India, “The first viability study by Ernst & Young clearly said the port was not feasible—environmentally or economically. So did the second. But both were dismissed, and a third study was commissioned with the clear expectation that it would declare the project viable. They didn’t even put the E&Y logo on the final report—just the names of the two researchers. That tells you something.”

Breaking the Coast: Ecological Damage and Fisher Exclusion

In spite of these warnings, the Vizhinjam Port project moved forward in a coastal region already burdened by extensive human intervention. As of 2022, Kerala’s 590-kilometer coastline hosted a major port at Kochi and intermediate ports in Thiruvananthapuram, Alappuzha, Kozhikode, and Thalassery. The shoreline was further segmented by 25 fishing harbors, multiple breakwaters, and 106 groynes. Nearly 310 kilometers of this coastline had already been transformed into artificial stretches.

These cumulative constructions had already disrupted the natural rhythms of the coast, causing severe erosion in some areas and sediment build-up in others—ultimately leading to the loss of accessible beaches. To mitigate these impacts, the state installed additional seawalls and groynes, which only further interfered with the marine ecosystem and traditional fishing practices.

For Kerala’s fishworkers, this pattern of exclusion and ecological damage is not new.

The situation intensified with the onset of Vizhinjam Port’s construction, when hundreds of local fishers were abruptly informed that they could no longer fish near their home shores due to the imposition of shipping lanes and designated no-fishing zones.

This pattern of exclusion deepened when the state government handed over large portions of the Thiruvananthapuram coast, including Vizhinjam, to the Adani Group.

Amid rising protests in places like Perumathura and Muthalappozhi—where heavy siltation and repeated fisher deaths had triggered alarm—the government assured that Adani’s involvement would provide solutions, including constructing embankments and regularly dredging the estuary to keep it navigable. However, these promises quickly fell apart.

As Vipin Das, a fishworker from Kerala, recalls, “Adani took over the entire beach and built an office complex. Now, even stepping onto the shore requires his office’s permission.”

According to local accounts, the company’s first move was to dismantle the southern embankment to allow barge access to the port. This action disrupted natural sediment flows and caused a severe blockage of the estuary. “When floodwaters began threatening nearby homes, a JCB was rushed in to reopen the embankment—but it was already too late,” Vipin adds. “Adani’s entry didn’t solve anything—it only worsened the crisis and destroyed our coastline.”

From Biodiversity Hotspot to Danger Zone

Once a biodiversity hotspot, Vizhinjam’s marine ecosystem boasted 12 reef systems and one of the world’s 20 rare ‘wedge banks’—a critical oceanic zone near Kanyakumari where hundreds of fish species fed and reproduced. Fishers remember it as a “harbor of procreation,” teeming with over 200 varieties of fish and more than 60 aquatic species.

However, intense dredging, altered wave patterns, and ongoing port operations have severely damaged this fragile marine ecosystem. In 2020, Kerala recorded a 15 percent decline in fish catch, and the numbers have continued to fall in the years since—threatening both biodiversity and the livelihoods that depend on it.

The state’s response has been displacement disguised as compensation, offering ₹10 lakh (USD 12,000) as a one-time payment to those willing to leave their homes instead of addressing systemic erosion and disaster risks, said Vijayan.

The situation further took a catastrophic turn on May 24, 2025, when a massive shipwreck occurred off the Vizhinjam coast.

While authorities framed it as an isolated incident, environmentalists and coastal communities argue it was a disaster waiting to happen—fueled by years of unregulated dredging and reckless port expansion.

“The sea is poisoned; people are saying not to eat fish,” shared Vipin. “But it’s not just rumors—there are chemicals, plastics, and fuel. And we, who had nothing to do with this, are the first to suffer.”

With livelihoods already battered by monsoon storms and port restrictions, fishers now face public panic, polluted waters, and a poisoned food chain. “This isn’t just an accident—it’s a man-made disaster,” Vipin added. “The state must act swiftly to hold the company accountable and compensate the coastal communities who are paying the highest price.”

However, earlier this year Vizhinjam International Seaport Ltd. told the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre that  “Environment Clearance accorded to Vizhinjam Port has stood the test of legal scrutiny, having gone through litigation before the National Green Tribunal, New Delhi.”

It continued, “The Port operations and fishing/ancillary activities coexist all over the world and both activities are continuing as per the rules and regulations prevailing in the democratic country of India. It may also be noted that Vizhinjam port construction has been carried out with best practices, including stakeholder engagement, taking the community into confidence.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Portugal: No Longer an Exception to Europe’s Far-right Rise

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Europe, Featured, Financial Crisis, Gender, Headlines, LGBTQ, Migration & Refugees, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Zed Jameson/Anadolu via Getty Images

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Jun 5 2025 (IPS) – For decades, Portugal stood as a beacon of democratic stability in an increasingly unsettled Europe. While neighbours grappled with political fragmentation and the rise of far-right movements, Portugal maintained its two-party system, a testament to the enduring legacy of the 1974 Carnation Revolution that peacefully transitioned the country from dictatorship to democracy. It was long believed that Portugal’s extensive pre-revolution experience of repressive right-wing rule had effectively inoculated it against far-right politics, but that assumption is now demonstrable outdated. An era of exceptionalism ended on 18 May, when the far-right Chega party secured 22.8 per cent of the vote and 60 parliamentary seats, becoming the country’s main opposition force.

This represents more than an electoral upset; it marks the collapse of five decades of democratic consensus and Portugal’s reluctant entry into the European mainstream of political polarisation. Chega could hold the balance of power. The centre-right Democratic Alliance, led by Prime Minister Luís Montenegro, won the most parliamentary seats, but fell far short of the 116 needed for a majority. Meanwhile, the Socialist Party, which governed from 2015 to 2024, suffered its worst defeat since the 1980s, relegated to third place by a party that’s only six years old.

Chega’s meteoric rise from just 1.3 per cent of the vote and one seat in 2019 to its role as today’s main opposition demonstrates how quickly political landscapes can shift when mainstream parties fail to address people’s fundamental concerns. The roots of the transformation lie in a toxic combination of economic pressure and political failure that has systematically eroded public confidence in the political establishment.

Portugal has endured three elections in under four years, a sign of its novel state of chronic instability. The immediate trigger for the latest election was the collapse of Montenegro’s government following a confidence vote, with opposition parties citing concerns over potential conflicts of interest involving his family business. This followed the previous Socialist government’s fall in November 2023 amid corruption investigations, creating a recurring cycle of scandal, government crisis and electoral upheaval.

The political turmoil unfolds against a backdrop of mounting social challenges that mainstream parties have failed to adequately address. Despite its economy growing by 1.9 per cent in 2024, well above the European Union average, Portugal faces a severe housing crisis that has become the defining issue for many voters, particularly those from younger generations. Portugal now has the worst housing access rates of all 38 OECD countries, with house prices more than doubling over the past decade.

In Lisbon, rents have jumped by 65 per cent since 2015, making the capital the world’s third least financially viable city due to its punishing combination of soaring housing costs and traditionally low wages. This crisis, driven by tourism, foreign investment and short-term rentals, has pushed property ownership beyond most people’s reach, creating widespread frustration with governments perceived as ineffective or indifferent to everyday struggles.

Immigration has provided another flashpoint. The number of legal migrants tripled from under half a million in 2018 to over 1.5 million in 2025. This rapid demographic change has fuelled populist narratives about uncontrolled migration and its alleged impact on housing and employment markets. It was precisely these grievances that Chega, led by former TV commentator André Ventura, expertly exploited.

As an outsider party untainted by association with the cycle of scandals and governmental collapses, Chega positioned itself as the defender of ‘western civilisation’ and channelled anti-establishment anger into electoral success. It combines promises to combat corruption and limit immigration with a defence of what it characterises as traditional Portuguese values, including through extreme criminal justice policies such as chemical castration for repeat sexual offenders.

Despite Ventura’s insistence that Chega simply advocates equal treatment without ‘special privileges’, the party’s ranks include white supremacists and admirers of former dictator António Salazar. Its openly racist approach to immigration and hostility towards women, LGBTQI+ people, Muslims and Roma people reflects a familiar far-right playbook that has proven successful across Europe. Chega has cultivated significant connections with Marine Le Pen’s National Rally in France, Germany’s Alternative for Germany, and Spain’s Vox party, and Ventura was among the European far-right leaders invited to Donald Trump’s inauguration.

Montenegro has so far refused to work with Chega, which he has publicly characterised as demagogic, racist and xenophobic – a rejection that may have inadvertently strengthened Chega’s anti-establishment credentials. However, the arithmetic of Portugal’s fractured parliament suggests that any significant policy initiatives will require either Socialist abstention or, more controversially, Chega support, creating new opportunities for far-right influence, particularly on criminal justice and immigration policies.

Portugal’s experience offers sobering evidence that far-right influence should no longer be viewed as a passing fad but rather as an established feature of contemporary European politics. The speed of the shift offers a stark reminder that no democracy is immune to the populist pressures reshaping the continent.

The question now is whether Portugal’s institutions can adapt to govern effectively in this new fractured landscape while preserving democratic values. Portugal’s civil society has an increasingly vital part to play in holding newly influential far-right politicians to account and offering collective responses to populist challenges.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Senior Research Specialist, 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

‘We Are Witnessing Ecocide in West Papua, One of the World’s Richest Biodiversity Centres’

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Asia-Pacific, Biodiversity, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Economy & Trade, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Headlines, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, TerraViva United Nations

May 29 2025 (IPS) – CIVICUS discusses the devastating impact of palm oil extraction in West Papua with Tigor Hutapea, legal representative of Pusaka Bentala Rakyat, an organisation campaigning for Indigenous Papuan people’s rights to manage their customary lands and forests.

Tigor Hutapea

In West Papua, Indigenous communities are boycotting palm oil products, accusing major corporations of profiting from environmental devastation and human rights abuses. Beyond environmental damage, Indigenous leaders are fighting what they describe as an existential threat to their cultural survival. Large-scale deforestation has destroyed ancestral lands and livelihoods, with Indonesian authorities enabling this destruction by issuing permits on contested Indigenous territories. Local activists characterise this situation as ecocide and are building international coalitions to hold companies and government officials accountable.

What are the problems with palm oil?

In West Papua, one of the world’s richest biodiversity centres, oil palm plantation expansion is causing what we call ecocide. By 2019, the government had issued permits for plantations covering 1.57 million hectares of Indigenous forest land to 58 major companies, all without the free, prior and informed consent of affected communities.

The environmental damage is already devastating, despite only 15 per cent of the permitted area having been developed so far. Palm oil plantations have fundamentally altered water systems in regions such as Merauke, causing the Bian, Kumbe and Maro rivers to overflow during rainy seasons because plantations cannot absorb heavy rainfall. Indigenous communities have lost access to forests that provided food and medicine and sustained cultural practices, while monoculture crops have replaced biodiverse ecosystems, leading to the disappearance of endemic animal species.

How are authorities circumventing legal protections?

There’s unmistakable collusion between government officials and palm oil companies. In 2023, we supported the Awyu Indigenous people in a landmark legal case against a Malaysian-owned company. The court found the government had issued permits without community consent, directly violating West Papua’s special autonomy laws that require Indigenous approval for land use changes.

These actions contravene national regulations and international law, including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which guarantees the right to free, prior and informed consent. Yet despite clear legal violations, authorities continue defending these projects by citing tax revenue and economic growth. They are clearly prioritising corporate profits over Indigenous rights and environmental protection.

The government’s response to opposition is particularly troubling. There is a systematic pattern of human rights violations against people defending their lands. When communities protest against developments, they face arbitrary arrests, police intimidation and violence. Police frequently disperse demonstrations by force, and community leaders are threatened with imprisonment or falsely accused of disrupting development. In some cases, they are labelled as separatists or anti-government to delegitimise their activism and justify repression.

What tactics are proving effective for civil society?

Indigenous communities are employing both traditional and modern resistance approaches. Many communities have performed customary rituals to symbolically reject plantations, imposing cultural sanctions that carry significant spiritual weight in their societies. Simultaneously, they’re engaging with legal systems to challenge permit violations.

Civil society organisations like ours support these efforts through environmental impact assessments, legal advocacy and public awareness campaigns. This multi-pronged approach has gained significant traction: in 2023, our Change.org petition gathered 258,178 signatures, while the #AllEyesOnPapua social media campaign went viral, demonstrating growing international concern.

Despite these successes, we face an uphill battle. The government continues pushing ahead with new agribusiness plans, including sugarcane and rice plantations covering over two million additional hectares of forest. This threatens further environmental destruction and Indigenous rights violations. Supporters of our movement are increasingly highlighting the global climate implications of continued deforestation in this critical carbon sink region.

What specific international actions would help protect West Papua?

Consumer power represents one of our strongest allies. International consumers can pressure their governments to enforce laws that prevent the import of products linked to human rights abuses and deforestation. They should also demand companies divest from harmful plantation projects that violate Indigenous rights.

At the diplomatic level, we need consistent international pressure on Indonesia to halt large-scale agribusiness expansion in West Papua and uphold Indigenous rights as defined in national and international laws. Foreign governments with trade relationships must make human rights and environmental protection central to their engagement with Indonesia, not peripheral concerns.
Without concerted international action, West Papua’s irreplaceable forests and the Indigenous communities who have sustainably managed them for generations face an existential threat. This isn’t just a local issue: the destruction of one of the world’s most biodiverse regions affects us all.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Instagram
Twitter

SEE ALSO
Indonesia: ‘The transmigration plan threatens Papua’s autonomy and indigenous ways of life’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Budi Hernawan 03.Feb.2025
Indonesia: ‘The international community should help amplify the voices of Indonesians standing up to corrupt elites’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Alvin Nicola 28.Sep.2024
Indonesia’s election spells trouble for civil society CIVICUS Lens 13.Mar.2024

  Source

The 2025 World Social Summit Must Not Be a Missed Opportunity

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Climate Change, Conferences, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Gender, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Inequality, Labour, Poverty & SDGs, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

GENEVA / NEW YORK, May 29 2025 (IPS) – Rumors circulating at UN Headquarters suggest there is little appetite for ambition at the Second World Summit for Social Development, set to take place in Doha on 4-6 November 2025. Diplomats and insiders whisper of “summit fatigue” after a packed calendar of global gatherings—the 2023 SDG Summit, the 2024 Summit of the Future, and the upcoming June 2025 Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development. Compounding this fatigue is the chilling rise of anti-rights rhetoric and political resistance from some governments, casting a shadow over multilateral efforts. For some, just getting any multilateral agreement is good enough. As a result, the Zero Draft of the Social Summit Political Declaration lacks the ambition required to confront the multiple social crises our world faces.

Isabel Ortiz

Many have raised the alarm: we need more than vague recommitments—we need a strong plan to bring people back to the center of the policy agenda. The stakes could not be higher. The world has changed dramatically since the historic 1995 first Social Summit in Copenhagen. Then, world leaders recognized the need for human-centered development. Today, the urgency has grown exponentially in our fractured and volatile world. People face multiple overlapping crises — a post pandemic poly-crisis, a cost-of-living crisis pushing millions into poverty, corporate welfare prioritized over people’s welfare, a rapid erosion of democracy leading to staggering disparities, an escalating climate emergency, a prolonged jobs crisis that is poised to dramatically worsen by the use of artificial intelligence (AI). Trust in governments and multilateral institutions is eroding, social discontent and protests are multiplying, and inequalities—within and between countries—have reached grotesque levels. A timid declaration would be a betrayal of the people who look to the United Nations as a beacon of fairness and human dignity.

The Summit is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for governments and the UN to remedy the grievous social malaise and lead a global recommitment to social justice and equity. For this, the Social Summit Declaration must offer more than aspirational language; it must define binding action with explicit commitments to build societies that work for everyone and bring prosperity for all, in areas such as:

    • Reducing income and wealth inequalities, which deeply erode social cohesion, democratic governance, and sustainable development;

    Odile Frank

    • Making gender justice a pillar of the Declaration: a Social Summit that fails to prioritize gender equality will fail half of the world population and fail in its mission to deliver on human rights, dignity, and sustainable development;
    • Delivering universal, quality public services by committing to publicly funded and delivered systems, with a clear focus on protecting public sector workers and eliminating barriers to quality services, in the context of robust public investment, grounded in fairer financing, reversing austerity cuts and aid cuts;
    • Ringfencing social development from budget cuts, privatization and blended finance, reversing the harmful impacts of austerity cuts, privatization/PPPs and commodification of public services, particularly their negative impact on affordability, accessibility, quality and equity of public services;
    • Addressing rising income precarity by investing in decent work with labor rights/standards and universal social protection systems and floors;
    • Regulating and taxing technology equitably. While AI is generating unprecedented private wealth, it is estimated that 40% of jobs could be lost to AI by 2030, with administrative roles (predominantly held by women) facing nearly triple the risk of displacement; governments need to redress the negative social impacts of IA such as job displacement and wealth concentration, providing adequate social protection measures for those affected by job losses and taxation of AI-driven profits to redistribute benefits back to societies;

    Gabriele Koehler

    • Promoting a care economy supportive of women that prioritizes well-being over GDP growth;
    • Moving beyond GDP growth, recognizing the limitations of growth-centric paradigms and committing to policies that promote ecological sustainability and equitable development;
    • Systematically assessing the social impacts and distributional effects of economic policies, including disaggregated data by, at least, gender and income group; if analysis reveals that the majority of people are not the primary beneficiaries or that social outcomes and human rights are undermined, policies must be revised to ensure equitable development;
    • Ensuring fair and sustainable resource mobilization, committing to progressive taxation, eliminating/reducing illegitimate debt, fighting illicit financial flows, collecting adequate social security contributions from corporations, and other feasible financing options;
    • Pushing back against anti-rights and anti-gender movements, reaffirming global commitments to human rights and democracy.

Us make this summit the moment we choose dignity and social justice over apathy and mediocrity. We know we must strive for more ambitious commitments. The 2025 World Social Summit must not be a missed opportunity.

Isabel Ortiz, Director, Global Social Justice, was Director at the International Labor Organization (ILO) and UNICEF, and a senior official at the UN and the Asian Development Bank.

Odile Frank, Executive Secretary, Global Social Justice, was Director, Social Integration at the UN and senior official at the OECD, ILO and the World Health Organization (WHO).

Gabriele Koehler, Board Member of Global Social Justice and of Women Engage for a Common Future (WECF), was a senior official at UN-ESCAP, UNCTAD, UNDP and UNICEF.

IPS UN Bureau