UNCCD COP16 Raises Hopes for Ambitious Global Land Action

Posted on by admin

Combating Desertification and Drought, Conferences, Conservation, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Gender, Global, Headlines, Humanitarian Emergencies, Migration & Refugees, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Women & Climate Change, Women & Economy

Combating Desertification and Drought

Announcement of Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh Drought Resilience Partnership Initiative. Photo credit: Anastasia Rodopoulou/IISD/ENB|

Announcement of Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh Drought Resilience Partnership Initiative. Credit: Anastasia Rodopoulou/IISD/ENB|

RIYADH & HYDERABAD, Dec 6 2024 (IPS) – While many delegates at the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD COP16) hope that this could be the convention’s own Paris moment—referring to the historic Paris agreement inked by UNFCCC signatories—however, this hedges heavily on the UN parties’ seriousness to combat drought, desertification and land degradation.

UNCCD COP 16, themed “Our Land and Our Future,” is currently underway in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

One of the biggest expectations from the conference is a landmark decision on achieving a complete halt to land degradation by 2030. The other expectations are mobilizing enough resources to restore all degraded land and achieve total resilience against droughts.

Global Land Degradation at COP

Degradation affects 2 billion hectares of land globally. This is more than the total land area of Russia, the largest country on earth. This affects 3.2 billion people—twice the population of entire Africa. The degraded land area is also continuously expanding as each year an additional 100 million ha get degraded—mostly due to the impacts of climate change such as a drought and desertification. With a business-as-usual approach, by 2050, 6 billion ha will be degraded, warns UNCCD, which is urging the parties of the ongoing COP to take urgent action to halt this.

“Every second, somewhere in the world, we lose an equivalent of four football fields to land degradation. We must act now to restore our lands. They are the foundation of everything. For the first time, through our UNCCD reporting, we have evidence-based estimates of the alarming state of land degradation. COP16 is about our reliance on lands, but also our resilience,” said Ibrahim Thiaw, the Executive Secretary of UNCCD, at the opening ceremony of the COP.

“The scientific evidence is unambiguous: the way we manage our land today will directly determine our future on earth. Land restoration is the first and foremost foundation of our economy, security and humanity. We must restore our land now,” Thiaw said to an audience of party delegates, civil society groups, women’s rights organizations, business and finance experts, members of other UN agencies and youths.

Responding to the UN call, Saudi Arabia, the COP16 host, has promised to deliver strong action.

On Wednesday, December 4, the COP observed “Land Day.” Speaking at the event, Abdulrahman Abdulmohsen AlFadley, UNCCD COP16 President and Saudi Arabia Minister of Environment, Water, and Agriculture, said, “Through our Presidency of COP16, we will work to make this COP a launchpad to strengthen public and private partnerships and create a roadmap to rehabilitate 1.5 billion hectares of land by 2030.”

Finance Gap: Common Challenges of all UN COPs

On Dec 3, the second day of COP, the UNCCD released its financial needs assessment report, detailing the latest funding requirements to address land degradation, drought and desertification. The findings revealed a sizeable funding gap for international land restoration efforts. Based on UNCCD targets, the required annual investments for 2025–2030 are estimated at USD 355 billion. However, the projected investments for the same period amount to only USD 77 billion per year, leaving USD 278 billion that requires mobilization to meet the UNCCD objectives.

In the past, UNCCD’s finance mobilization efforts included the creation of a Land Degradation Neutrality Fund (LDN Fund), a financial mechanism to support the achievement of Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN)—a target under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 15.3). But, similar to the climate change COPs and the biodiversity COPs, UNCCD’s LDN fund is underfunded and has only received USD 208 million.

However, on the second day of COP16, the Arab Coordination Group pledged USD 10 billion to combat land degradation, desertification and drought. The donation would go to the Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership, an initiative launched by Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has also already announced a donation of USD 150 million to operationalize the initiative. The additional backing took place during the Ministerial Dialogue on Finance, part of the high-level segment at COP16 in Riyadh, aimed at unlocking international funding from the private and public sectors.

The Missing Private Sector Investment

The Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership will also focus on unlocking new financial mechanisms, such as credit, equity financing, insurance products, and grants, to enhance drought resilience.

With over USD 12 billion pledged for major land restoration and drought resilience initiatives in just the first two days, COP16 in Riyadh is already bringing more hopes than the biodiversity (UNCBD) and climate change (UNFCCC) COPs.

Dr. Osama Faqeeha, Deputy Minister for Environment, Ministry of Environment, Water and Agriculture, and Advisor to the UNCCD COP16 Presidency, said: “I hope this is just the beginning, and over the coming days and weeks, we see further contributions from international private and public sector partners that further amplify the impact of vital drought resilience and land restoration initiatives.”

However, the convention has still not been able to unlock any significant private funding, which has been identified by many as a huge challenge in the path of achieving total land restoration. According to the COP Presidency, only 6 percent of the private investors and businesses have invested in land-related initiatives and the funding gap in the UNCCD is a ‘worrying blackhole.”

“If the international community is to deliver land restoration at the scale required, then the private sector simply must ramp up investment. As the latest UNCCD findings show, there remains a worrying blackhole in the funds needed to combat land degradation, desertification and drought,” said Faqeeha.

A Gender-Just Financing Solution: Can COP16 Deliver?

Following a series of events this year at the UN General Assembly, the CBD COP16 in Cali, Colombia and COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the ‘Rio Convention Synergies’ dialogue also took place on Land Day, highlighting developments made during the 2024 Rio Trio events. The event discussed the interconnected issues driving land degradation, biodiversity loss and climate change and how to find common solutions.

Most participants highlighted the disproportionate impact of drought and land degradation on women and their urgent requirement for access to finance.

Women’s Leadership for Sustainable Land Management, Tarja Halonen, UNCCD Land Ambassador and Co-Chair of the UNCCD Gender Caucus, said, “Women and girls in rural communities bear the greatest burden of desertification, land degradation, and drought (DLDD), and their empowerment is crucial for addressing urgent land challenges.”

AlFadley noted that women’s empowerment enhances sustainable land management (SLM) and the preservation of ecosystems, as well as long-term resilience against DLDD.

Recognizing the challenges women face to mobilize resources for their own land restoration initiatives often due to lack of capacity and connections, Neema Lugangira, Member of Parliament, Tanzania, advised the COP16 Gender Caucus to connect with parliamentarians in the global climate finance chapter of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund’s parliamentary network.

“It will be good if the UNCCD can have a land restoration parliamentary group,” she said.

Speaking at a high-level interactive dialogue, Odontuya Saldan, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Mongolia, which will host COP17 in 2026, proposed establishing a global coalition of future rangelands and pastoralism solutions focused on gender equality and the role of youth, children, and women. She said Mongolia would make gender a priority at COP17, where the key theme will be rangelands and pastoralism.

What decisions COP16 makes to provide women land restorers and drought warriors with greater access to land finance is still up in the air.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

‘Quilombola Communities Live in Fear Because the Laws That Are Supposed to Protect Them Are Ignored’

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Education, Featured, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Latin America & the Caribbean, TerraViva United Nations

Dec 4 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses threats to the security, rights and ancestral lands of Brazil’s quilombola communities with Wellington Gabriel de Jesus dos Santos, leader and activist of the Pitanga dos Palmares Quilombola community in Bahia state.

Founded by formerly enslaved Africans, quilombola communities represent a legacy of resilience and freedom. But their way of life is increasingly disrupted by harmful infrastructure projects and their members face constant threats from land grabbers and speculators. Community leaders demanding justice and reparations are met with intimidation and violence while public institutions look the other way. The National Coordination of Rural Black Quilombola Communities urges the Brazilian government to grant them protection and ensure accountability.

Wellington Gabriel de Jesus dos Santos

What are quilombola communities, and what’s the focus of their struggle?

Quilombola communities were born out of resistance to slavery. My community, Quilombo Pitanga, was founded by the descendants of those who fought for freedom when slavery was officially abolished in 1888. Even after slavery ended, the struggles continued because former slave owners and landowners continued to exploit and persecute our people.

Today, quilombola communities continue to fight for our land and culture. It’s important to us to preserve our heritage for future generations because it’s a testament to the strength of our ancestors, our survival and our resilience.

We advocate for justice and land rights through a combination of local and international strategies. We work with organisations such as the National Articulation of Quilombola Communities, which brings together quilombo leaders from across Brazil. We also hold protests, develop public awareness campaigns and work with international organisations to draw attention to our struggles.

What threats does your community face and who’s responsible?

My community faces significant threats, particularly from drug traffickers and powerful business interests. These threats became very real when my great-grandmother, María Bernadete Pacífico, was murdered by drug traffickers last year. She fought for the preservation of our culture and the wellbeing of younger generations, and I believe that’s what got her killed. She was part of a human rights protection programme, but the promised protection failed when she needed it most. My father was also murdered in 2017, during a battle against the construction of a landfill near our territory.

After my great-grandmother was killed, I haven’t been able to visit my family or enter the community. I live in constant fear, watching over the community and its heritage from afar.

Our community also faces institutional racism, reflected in the fact that the state built a prison on our land but fails to provide basic services such as schools and hospitals. We lack any public security, as a result of which some believe they can act with impunity. The prison, which was inaugurated in 2007, was supposed to be a shoe factory that would bring prosperity to the community. Suddenly, it was announced that it would be a prison, and it brought rising criminality and contamination of water resources and wetlands. Quilombo Pitanga dos Palmares hasn’t been the same since.

The bigger problem is that many quilombola communities, including ours, own valuable land. My community has a large territory, so we’ve been targeted by powerful interests that view our land as prime real estate for expansion. In 2012 we fought against the construction of an industrial road that would have cut through our land. There were large corporations involved, which made this fight particularly hard.

How do authorities respond?

The state not only turns a blind eye, leaving us vulnerable to exploitation, but it’s also complicit in these attacks because it protects the interests of big business rather than people. INEMA, the agency responsible for granting environmental licences to companies, has been investigated for corruption that has led to the approval of projects that harm communities like ours.

The authorities say they care about our safety, but the reality is different. The laws that are supposed to protect us are ignored and often the government is either unconcerned or in collusion with those causing harm.

What support do quilombola communities need?

Several issues need immediate attention, including securing our land rights, gaining access to basic services such as health and education and preserving our cultural heritage. A practical issue that needs attention is the toll we are forced to pay to enter the city, which constitutes arbitrary discrimination and isolates us from the wider community.

We are fighting the prison built on our land and the expansion of harmful companies that threaten our environment. We need more than words; we need tangible action, including stronger laws to protect us.

We need international support because local and national authorities often ignore or dismiss our struggles. Financial support is crucial, particularly for community leaders under threat. Many of us, including myself, face death threats. Our lives are far from normal and we need resources to ensure the safety of our families and communities.

United Nations human rights agencies could play a vital role in protecting our rights and securing the support we need. Unfortunately, despite local efforts to raise awareness, we often feel isolated in our struggles.

GET IN TOUCH
Instagram

SEE ALSO
Brazil: a step forward for Indigenous peoples’ rights CIVICUS Lens 20.Oct.2023
Brazil back on the green track CIVICUS Lens 21.Jul.2023
Brazil: ‘If Bolsonaro continues as president, it is a threat to the Amazon and therefore to humanity’ Interview with Daniela Silva 21.Sep.2022

  Source

COP29 Falls Short on Finance

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, COP29, Economy & Trade, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Inequality, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Murad Sezer/Reuters via Gallo Images

LONDON, Dec 2 2024 (IPS) – COP29, the latest annual climate summit, had one job: to strike a deal to provide the money needed to respond to climate change. It failed.

This was the first climate summit dedicated to finance. Global south countries estimate they need a combined US$1.3 trillion a year to transition to low-carbon economies and adapt to the impacts of climate change. But the last-minute offer made by global north states was for only US$300 billion a year.

The agreement leaves vague how much of the promised target, to be met by 2035, will be in the form of direct grants, as opposed to other means such as loans, and how much will come directly from states. As for the US$1 trillion annual funding gap, covering it remains an aspiration, with all potential sources encouraged to step up their efforts. The hope seems to be that the private sector will invest where it hasn’t already, and that innovations such as new levies and taxes will be explored, which many powerful states and industry lobbyists are sure to resist.

Some global north states are talking up the deal, pointing out that it triples the previous target of US$100 billion a year, promised at COP15 in 2009 and officially reached in 2022, although how much was provided in reality remains a matter of debate. Some say this deal is all they can afford, given economic and political constraints.

But global north states hardly engaged constructively. They delayed making an offer for so long that the day before talks were due to end, the draft text of the agreement contained no numbers. Then they made a lowball offer of US$250 billion a year.

Many representatives from global south states took this as an insult. Talks threatened to collapse without an agreement. Amid scenes of chaos and confusion, the summit’s president, Mukhtar Babayev of Azerbaijan, was accused of weakness and lack of leadership. By the time global north states offered US$300 billion, negotiations had gone past the deadline, and many saw this as a take-it-or-leave it offer.

The negotiating style of global north states spoke of a fundamental inequality in climate change. Global north countries have historically contributed the bulk of cumulative greenhouse gas emissions due to their industrialisation. But it’s global south countries that are most affected by climate change impacts such as extreme weather and rising sea levels. What’s more, they’re being asked to take a different development path to fossil fuel-powered industrialisation – but without adequate financial support to do so.

These evident injustices led some states, angered by Babayev bringing talks to an abrupt end, to believe that no deal would have been better than what was agreed. For others, waiting another year for COP30 would have been a luxury they couldn’t afford, given the ever-increasing impacts of climate change.

Financing on the agenda

Far from being settled, the conversation around climate financing should be regarded as only just having begun. The figures involved – whether it’s US$300 billion or US$1.3 trillion a year – seem huge, but in global terms they’re tiny. The US$1.3 trillion needed is less than one per cent of global GDP, which stands at around US$110 trillion. It’s a little more than the amount invested in fossil fuels this year, and far less than annual global military spending, which has risen for nine years running and now stands at around US$2.3 trillion a year.

If the money isn’t forthcoming, the sums needed will be eclipsed by the costs of cleaning up the disasters caused by climate change, and dealing with rising insecurity, conflict and economic disruption. For example, devastating floods in Valencia, Spain, in October caused at least 217 deaths and economic losses of around US$10.6 billion. Research suggests that each degree of warming would slash the world’s GDP by 12 per cent. Investing in a transition that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and enables communities to adapt isn’t just the right thing to do – it’s also the economically prudent option.

The same problems arose at another recent summit on a related issue – COP16 of the Biodiversity Convention, hosted by Colombia in October. This broke up with no agreement on how to meet the funding commitments agreed at its previous meeting. The international community, having forged agreements to address climate change and protect the environment, is stuck when it comes to finding the funding to realise them.

What’s largely missing is discussion of how wealth might be better shared for the benefit of humanity. Over the past decade, as the world has grown hotter, inequality has soared, with the world’s richest one per cent adding a further US$42 trillion to their fortunes – less than needed to adequately respond to climate change. The G20’s recent meeting said little on climate change, but leaders at least agreed that ultra-wealthy people should be properly taxed. The battle should now be on to ensure this happens – and that revenues are used to tackle climate change.

When it comes to corporations, few are richer than the fossil fuel industry. But the ‘polluter pays’ principle – that those who cause environmental damage pay to clean it up – seems missing from climate negotiations. The fossil fuel industry is the single biggest contributor to climate change, responsible for over 75 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions. It’s grown incredibly rich thanks to its destructive trade.

Over the past five decades, the oil and gas sector has made profits averaging US$2.8 billion a day. Only a small fraction of those revenues have been invested in alternatives, and oil and gas companies plan to extract more: since COP28, around US$250 billion has been committed to developing new oil and gas fields. The industry’s wealth should make it a natural target for paying to fix the mess it’s made. A proposed levy on extractions could raise US$900 billion by 2030.

Progress is needed, and fast. COP30 now has the huge task of compensating for the failings of COP29. Pressure must be kept up for adequate financing combined with concerted action to cut emissions. Next year, states are due to present their updated plans to cut emissions and adapt to climate change. Civil society will push for these to show the ambition needed – and for money to be mobilised at the scale required.

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

  Source

Bangladesh Bans Polythene Bags Again, Sparking Hopes for the Eco-Friendly ‘Sonali Bag’

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Conservation, Development & Aid, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Natural Resources, Sustainability, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Environment

Female workers sort out plastic bottles for recycling in a factory in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Credit: Abir Abdullah/Climate Visuals Countdown

Female workers sort out plastic bottles for recycling in a factory in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Credit: Abir Abdullah/Climate Visuals Countdown

DHAKA, Nov 27 2024 (IPS) – After Bangladesh’s interim government banned polyethene bags, a new sense of hope has emerged for the Sonali bag—a jute-based, eco-friendly alternative developed in 2017 by Bangladeshi scientist Dr. Mubarak Ahmed Khan. Sonali bag, or the golden bag, is named after the golden fiber of jute from which it is made.

Despite its promises, the project has struggled to make significant progress due to a lack of funding. However, following the announcement of the polythene bag ban, Mubarak is now facing pressure to supply his Sonali bag to a market eager for sustainable alternatives.

“Since the government banned polythene bags, we have faced immense pressure of orders that we cannot meet—people are coming in with requests at an overwhelming rate,” Mubarak Ahmed Khan told the IPS.

The latest ban, which came into effect on October 1 for superstores and traditional markets on November 1, isn’t the first time Bangladesh has imposed a ban on polythene bags.

In 2002, the country became the first in the world to outlaw them, as plastic waste was severely clogging city drainage systems and exacerbating its waterlogging crisis, with Dhaka alone consuming an estimated 410 million polybags each month. But the ban gradually lost effectiveness over the years, largely due to a lack of affordable and practical alternatives and inadequate enforcement from regulatory authorities.

Dr. Mubarak Ahmed Khan in his office holding a Sonali Bag. Credit: Masum Billah/IPS

Dr. Mubarak Ahmed Khan in his office holding a Sonali Bag. Credit: Masum Billah/IPS

Polyethene bags, although cheaper, are harmful to the environment as they are non-biodegradable and their decomposition takes at least 400 years. Sonali Bag as an alternative, on the other hand, is regarded as a game-changer because it is biodegradable, capable of decomposing in three months.

The ban comes as the UN Plastics Treaty Negotiations are underway in Busan, South Korea. The UN Environment Programme estimates that around the world, one million plastic bottles are purchased every minute.

“In total, half of all plastic produced is designed for single-use purposes—used just once and then thrown away.”

Without an agreement, the OECD estimates that annual plastic production, use, and waste are predicted to increase by 70 percent in 2040 compared to 2020. This on a planet already choking on plastic waste.

The talks have in the past stalled over a disagreement over how to manage waste, with some countries favouring introducing a cap on plastic production and others supporting circularity with use, reuse, and recycling as the main objectives.

The plastics treaty talks will run from 25 November 2024 to 1 December 2024.

However, despite its environmental benefits and higher demands, in Bangladesh the Sonali Bag project still remains within the pilot phase.

A late start for funding crisis

After Mubarak’s invention made headlines, the country’s state-owned Bangladesh Jute Mills Corporation launched a pilot project, setting up a jute-polymer unit at the Latif Bawani Jute Mill to produce Sonali Bag.

Mubarak said they have been asking for government funds, as the project has been operating under the Ministry of Textiles and Jute. However, the basic funding that kept the pilot project running expired last December, and the previous government—which was toppled in August in a mass uprising—had discontinued the project.

“There had been assurances that we might receive Tk100 crore (about USD 8 million) in funding from the government by July. But then came political unrest and a change in government,” Mubarak said.

After the new government took charge, they renewed the pledges to fund the Sonali Bag project.

“The interim government told us that we will get the money in January. If that happens, we will be able to produce five tons of bags per day,” Mubarak said. “Five tons may not be a lot, but it will give us the chance to demonstrate our work to private investors, boosting their confidence to engage with us.”

According to Mubarak, one kilogram of Sonali bags amounts to around 100 pieces of small bags. Based on this estimate, five tons could produce around 15 million bags per month.

Bangladesh’s current adviser to the Ministry of Textiles and Jute, Md. Sakhawat Hossain, told IPS that they are seriously considering funding the Sonali Bag project this January, although he acknowledged that his ministry is currently facing a funding crisis.

“The work will begin in full scale after the fund is provided,” Sakhawat Hossain said. When asked if Mubarak would receive the funds by January, he replied, “We hope so.”

A ban without adequate alternatives at hand

Mubarak Ahmed Khan regards the government’s decision to ban polythene bags as a “praiseworthy” initiative. However, he emphasized that sustainable and affordable alternatives to the polythene bags should come soon.

Mubarak is not alone in his concerns. Sharif Jamil, founder of Waterkeepers Bangladesh, an organization dedicated to protecting water bodies, shares skepticism about the effectiveness of the ban this time, citing the lack of sustainable alternatives in the market.

“The announcement of this ban is an important and timely step. However, it must also be noted that our previous ban was not enforced. Without addressing the underlying issues that led to nonenforcement of the previous ban, the new polythene ban will not resolve the existing problems. It is crucial to tackle the challenges that allowed polythene to remain in the market,” Sharif Jamil told IPS.

“If you don’t provide people with an alternative and simply remove polythene from the markets, the ban won’t be effective,” he added.

Sharif noted that the existing alternatives in the market are not affordable, with some selling alternative jute bags at Tk25 in supermarkets, while polythene bags are often offered at a price that is essentially free.

“Alternatives need to be more affordable and accessible to the public,” he said.

Mubarak stated that his Sonali bag currently costs Tk10 per piece, but he anticipates lowering the price with increased production and demand.

The pursuit of competition in sustainable alternatives

Sharif Jamil, however, wants competition in the sustainable alternatives market.

“It is not only about incentivizing Dr. Mubarak’s project,” Sharif said.

This technology has to be incentivized and recognized, but the government also has to ensure two other things, he said.

“If the government can make it accessible to people at a lower price, it will reach them. Secondly, if the alternative remains solely with Mubarak, it will create a monopoly again,” he said.

It must undergo competition, he recommended. Bangladesh has a competition commission to ensure that other existing sustainable green solutions on the market are also incentivized and recognized.

“Besides facilitating and upgrading Mubarak’s project, the government should ensure fair competition so that people can access it at a lower price,” he added.

For the sake of environment

Adviser Shakhawat Hossain said that they are optimistic about the success of Sonali Bag.

“Already the ambassadors of various countries are meeting me about this. Some buying houses too have been created for this. It seems it will be a sustainable development,” he said.

Mubarak said that if they get the funding soon, Sonali Bag will have a market not only in Bangladesh but all over the world.

He said the private investors should come forward not just because the government has banned polythene bags, but out of a moral obligation to address the negative impact these bags have on the environment.

“With this, I believe we can create a polythene-free environment,” Mubarak said, acknowledging, “It is not easy to introduce this to the market solely because it is a new product. We are up against an USD 3.5 trillion single-use plastic market.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Explainer: Why COP29 Baku Outcome is a Bad Deal for Poor, Vulnerable Nations

Posted on by admin

Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Climate Change Justice, Conferences, COP29, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Humanitarian Emergencies, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals | Analysis

COP29

COP 29/CMP 19/CMA 6 closing plenary Credit: Vugar Ibadov/UNFCC

COP 29/CMP 19/CMA 6 closing plenary
Credit: Vugar Ibadov/UNFCC

NAIROBI & BAKU, Nov 26 2024 (IPS) – The culmination of bitter, difficult, and challenging climate negotiations concluded with an announcement from the COP29 Presidency of Azerbaijan of the “agreement of the Baku Finance Goal—a new commitment to channel USD1.3 trillion of climate finance to the developing world each year by 2035.” This is on top of the USD 300 billion that the developed world is to extend to developing nations annually by 2035.

Developed nations appear perturbed by the outrage from the Global South as the COP29 Presidency big-up what is for all intents and purposes a bad deal for vulnerable nations on the frontlines of climate change. Once an annual inflation rate of 6 percent is factored into the new goal, USD 300 billion is not the tripling of funds that is being made out to be.

The Baku deal indicates that “developed countries will lead a new climate finance goal of at least USD 300 billion per annum by 2035 from all sources, as part of a total quantum of at least USD 1.3 trillion per annum by 2035 from all actors, with a roadmap developed in 2025.”

Ambiguous Climate Finance Promises

The promise of a USD 1.3 trillion of climate finance in line with what developing countries wanted rings hollow, for the text does not lay out the road map for how the funds are to be raised, postponing the issue to 2025. Even more concerning, Baku seems to have set things in motion for wealthy nations to distance themselves from their financial responsibility to vulnerable nations in the jaws of a vicious climate crisis.

COP29 text “calls for all actors to work together to enable the scaling up of financing to developing country Parties for climate action from all public and private sources to at least USD1.3 trillion per year by 2035.”

In this, there is a mixture of loans, grants, and private financing. Essentially, the Baku agreement reaffirms that developing nations should be paid to finance their climate actions, but it is vague on who should pay.

Baku to Belém Road Map

For finer details, there is a new road map in place now known as the “Baku to Belém Road Map to 1.3T.” COP29 text indicates that the “Baku to Belém, Brazil’ roadmap is about scaling up climate finance to USD 1.3 trillion before COP30 and that this is to be achieved through financial instruments such as grants, concessional as well as non-debt-creating instruments. In other words, the roadmap is about making everything clear in the coming months.

In climate finance, concessionals are loans. Only that they are a type of financial assistance that offers more favourable terms than the market, such as lower interest rates or grace periods. This is exactly what developing nations are against—being straddled with loans they cannot afford over a crisis they did not cause.

Article 6 of Paris Agreement: Carbon Markets

Beyond climate finance, there are other concerns with the final text. Although it has taken nearly a decade of debate over carbon trading and markets, COP29 Article 6 is complex and could cause more harm than good. On paper, the carbon markets agreements will “help countries deliver their climate plans more quickly and cheaply and make faster progress in halving global emissions this decade, as required by science.”

Although a UN-backed global carbon market with a clear pathway is a good deal, it falls short on the “transparency provision” as the agreement does not address the trust crises compromising current carbon markets. Countries will not be required to release information about their deals before trading and that carbon trading could derail efforts by the industrialized world to reduce emissions as they can continue to pay for polluting, and this will be credited as a “climate action.”

Climate Funds Fall Short

The Loss and Damage Fund seeks to offer financial assistance to countries greatly affected by climate change. There is nonetheless delayed operationalisation and uncertain funding, as COP29 did not define who pays into the fund and who is eligible to claim and draw from the fund.

The Adaptation Fund was set up to help developing countries build resilience and adapt to climate change. Every year, the fund seeks to raise at least USD 300 million but only receives USD 61 million, which is only a small fraction—about one-sixth—of what is required.

Final Text Quiet on Fossil Fuels

The final COP29 text does not mention fossil fuels and makes no reference to the historic COP28 deal to ‘transition away from fossil fuels’. Climate change mitigation means avoiding and reducing emissions of harmful gases into the atmosphere.

Fossil fuels are responsible for the climate crises, but the COP29 text on mitigation is silent on the issue of fossil fuels and does not therefore strengthen the previous COP28 UAE deal. Saudi Arabia was accused of watering down the text by ensuring that “fossil fuels” do not appear in the final agreement. They were successful, as the final text states, “Transitional fuels can play a role in facilitating the energy transition.”

Earlier, while welcoming delegates to COP29, Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev left no one in doubt about his stand on fossil fuels, saying that oil and gas are a “gift from God,” praising the use of natural resources including oil and gas, and castigating the West for condemning fossil fuels while still buying the country’s oil and gas.

Against this backdrop, COP29 negotiations were never going to be easy, and although the Summit overran by about 30 hours more than expected, it was certainly not the longest COP, and it will certainly not be the most difficult as Baku has successfully entrenched bitter divisions and mistrust between the developed and developing world.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Ensuring Violence-Free Homes for Sri Lankan Women

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Gender, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

The AKASA safe house is seen in Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. August 2023. Credit: UN Women/Ravindra Rohana

NEW YORK, Nov 25 2024 (IPS) – A woman’s right to live free from violence is upheld by international agreements like the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the 1993 UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women.

The International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, observed on November 25th, 2024, serves as a significant platform to raise awareness about gender-based violence. Globally, one in three women experiences physical or sexual violence, mostly by an intimate partner.

In his message for the 2024 International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated, “The epidemic of violence against women and girls shames humanity. Every day, on average, 140 women and girls are killed by someone in their own family.

Around one in three women still experience physical or sexual violence. Almost 30 years since the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action promised to prevent and eliminate violence against women and girls — it’s beyond time to deliver”.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health and human rights concern and affects millions of women worldwide, often remaining underreported and behind closed doors. IPV is particularly acute in South Asia where 35% of ever-partnered women reported experiencing IPV in their lifetime, compared to 20% in Western Europe and 21% in high-income Asia Pacific.

The reasons are complex and include a combination of socio-economic structures, patriarchal attitudes, and prevalent social norms that define gender roles. IPV remains a largely hidden and stigmatized issue, with many women suffering in silence in South Asia.

IPV in Sri Lanka is a significant and pervasive issue. An estimated 40% of women aged 15 years or older reported experiencing physical, sexual, emotional, and/or economic violence or controlling behaviors by a partner in their lifetime. Disturbingly, 21% of the population, or about 4.6 million women, are affected by IPV, given that women constitute 52% of Sri Lanka’s 23.1 million population.

These figures reflect reported cases, but IPV is significantly underreported due to fear of stigma, lack of awareness about available support services, and reluctance to involve authorities in family matters. Many women fear retaliation from their abusers or social ostracism if they speak out.

The Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA), passed in 2005, provides legal protection for victims of domestic violence in Sri Lanka, allowing them to obtain protection orders against their abusers. The PDVA defines domestic violence as “physical or emotional harm done by a spouse, ex-spouse, or cohabiting partner.” However, its effectiveness has been criticized due to issues with enforcement and limited awareness among both victims and law enforcement.

Despite high levels of educational attainment, 73.5 per cent of Sri Lankan women of working age are out of the labor force, compared to just 26.5% of men. This is mainly due to their engagement in household duties, including care work. Aggravating this situation, women on average earn 27 per cent less than men for one hour of work.

Consequently, many women economically depend on their partners, making it hard to leave abusive relationships. Especially in rural areas, they may lack financial resources or social support to escape violence. This financial vulnerability is a key barrier to addressing IPV in Sri Lanka. Empowering women economically and socially can reduce their dependency on abusive partners.

Among Sri Lankan faith-based communities such as Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, and Christians, religious leaders are influential authorities on behavior and sources of guidance on proper conduct in relationships, including family and marriage. Therefore, they can play a crucial role in motivating men to cede power and reduce IPV.

This approach, guided more by principles of peace and social justice than by a rights agenda, cannot replace rights-based solutions to end IPV. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage and promote collaboration between faith-based and rights-based organizations to address and end violence against women and girls in Sri Lanka.

Various research shows that the ethnic dimensions of the civil war and the continuing ethnic tensions post-war have worsened the situation for Tamil and Muslim women in Sri Lanka, creating conditions that are likely to keep them entrapped in abusive relationships.

There are also strong associations between IPV and suicidal behavior in Sri Lanka, signaling the need to prioritize violence reduction both on its own and within national suicide prevention strategies.

Empowering women, educating communities, and involving men in the conversation are essential steps toward reducing IPV in Sri Lanka. NGOs like the Women’s Education and Research Centre and international organizations run awareness campaigns to educate people about IPV, its harmful effects, legal rights, and available support services.

These campaigns also engage men and boys in discussions about gender equality and the unacceptability of IPV. The goal is to change societal attitudes that contribute to IPV and make men active partners in promoting non-violent relationships.

In Sri Lanka, several support systems are in place for victims of IPV. Various community organizations and NGOs provide localized support, including shelters and legal aid. The Ministry of Women and Child Affairs operates a toll-free helpline (Dial 1938) that offers counselling and legal support to victims of violence.

Health-sector responses to support women experiencing IPV in Sri Lanka are evolving and currently include two models of integration: GBV desks with facility-level integration, and Mithuru Piyasa, a modified One-Stop Crisis Centre model with some system-wide integration. Additionally, the Ministry of Health has implemented training programs for public health midwives to improve their ability to identify and assist IPV victims.

IPV remains a critical issue in Sri Lanka, influenced by socio-cultural, economic, and legal factors. An effective coordination and information sharing mechanism among the ministries of Health, Women and Child Affairs, and Public Security, at both state and local levels is essential to provide immediate support and empower women experiencing IPV.

Traditional cultural norms in Sri Lanka often view gender roles as rigid, expecting women to be submissive and take on domestic responsibilities. These norms can contribute to the normalization of IPV and limit women’s ability to seek help.

IPV is often seen as a private matter, with victims frequently facing pressure to stay silent. By tackling the economic, political, social, cultural, and other systemic factors that enable IPV, we can create a safer and more equitable environment for all women in Sri Lanka.

Sri Lankan women deserve the fundamental right to a violence-free home life. Achieving this necessitates a unified approach to challenge and transform harmful social norms, enhance the availability and accessibility of support services, and rigorously enforce existing laws.

Only through these coordinated efforts can we create a safer and more equitable society for all women in Sri Lanka.

Shihana Mohamed, a Sri Lankan national, is a founding member and Coordinator of the United Nations Asia Network for Diversity and Inclusion (UN-ANDI) and a US Public Voices Fellow with The OpEd Project and Equality Now on Advancing the Rights of Women and Girls. She is a dedicated human rights activist and a strong advocate for gender equality and the advancement of women.

The author expresses her views in this article in an entirely unofficial, private, and personal capacity. These views do not reflect those of any organization.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source