Complete Wellness

Mar 26 2020 – The international community is developing policy measures and actions to help the people most vulnerable to drought to take early action to avoid loss of life, and the heavy and growing losses of livelihoods and damage to property and ecosystems following droughts.

The (IWG) that is leading this initiative is convening for the first time on 26 March through virtual meetings involving four task teams. The outcomes of the initiative could become effective as early as 2022.

The importance of early warning followed by early action for the most vulnerable people and ecosystems as well as the need for preparedness to respond fast, cannot be over-emphasized.

The IWG’s virtual meeting is taking place after the Group’s first face-to-face meeting, scheduled for 25-27 March in Brussels, Belgium, was suspended following the outbreak and global spread the corona virus, COVID-19.

“Over 70 countries worldwide are affected by drought, and the droughts are spreading to new areas, recurring more often and lasting longer, sometimes stretching over a few years or even decades in some regions. The impacts of these new drought patterns on people, property, infrastructure and ecosystems are unprecedented and are a growing concern for both developed and developing countries,” says Ibrahim Thiaw, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, which is facilitating the work of the IWG.

“Half of the global land is projected to be drylands and may be more prone to drought by 2050. The increase in drought disasters is a wake-up call to this threat, especially because some avoidable impacts occur due to late action, and at worst, inaction. The possibility created by the IWG to share experiences and learn from the best examples of mitigating drought is a big step forward,” he adds.

Millions of people are dealing with the prospect of drought at the moment.

In just a few months (April), in a situation reminiscent of the 2015 to 2017 drought, a record 45 million people in Southern Africa may be food insecure, partly due to drought. The needed 489 million United States dollars by February 2020 to help the 8.3 million people that were already food insecure in the region, but had yet to raise half of the required sum.

Droughts destroy food that could feed 81 million people – a population the size of Germany – every day, for a year, according to a recent . Drought is also one of the most cited reasons by young people leaving their homes in search of better lives elsewhere, including those migrating to Europe, according to of migration patterns in Morocco.

“I cannot emphasize enough the importance of this new inter-governmental initiative. Its value goes beyond the immediate outcomes of saving lives, livestock, rangelands and livelihoods in case of drought. It will improve security in some of the world’s most fragile areas,” Jarso Ibrahim Gollole, a pastoralist and natural resource advisor with says about the results expected from the IWG.

“The conflicts that arise among communities living across borders – but also within borders – as they compete, in times of drought, over few and shrinking pastures would be minimized. Also, the influx of communities from neighboring countries seeking to take advantage of the government services set aside for affected communities in Kenya, where drought responses are better, even if they are not perfect, would decrease. A collective approach to managing drought is far better than what we have today,” he added.

Drought and drought impacts are also addressed under the and processes of the United Nations. But the policy focus on drought is only one among many other disasters, that are more noticeable and get stronger policy actions, especially due to the dramatic nature of their arrival.

Droughts, by contrast, set in slowly and wreak havoc on some of the world’s poorest populations. By focusing only on drought, the IWG is expected to develop concrete, feasible and appropriate global options to address its socio-economic impacts effectively.

“Another world is possible. Drought resilience for countries at varying levels of economic development is possible. Witness the resilience of Ethiopia’s Tigray region to the 2014-2016 drought, the famous water harvesting scheme in Brazil’s north-east region, the Australian drought trust fund that helps farmers and the drought management approach of United States where a Presidential decree is issued early. How drought is managed must change fundamentally,” Thiaw said.

“Drought knows no boundaries, political or sectoral. It is a connector. The work of the IWG can bring much-needed coordination among stakeholders at all levels and rally affected countries to act and work together,” says Daniel Tsegai, the UNCCD’s drought expert in charge of the IWG process.

“Interest in the work of the IWG is already high. Governments, international and non-governmental organizations and other actors have sent close to 100 submissions for consideration. The submissions deal with issues such as collaboration among institutions, the barriers and challenges to drought response and recovery, the opportunities and measures for action as well as the lessons learned from successful cases,” he said.

The IWG was established in September 2019 following intense negotiations by governments during the 14th session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification.

Its outcomes, which include recommendations for action, will be presented to policy makers at the 15th COP session in Fall 2021.

Notes to Editors
See the for background information about the Intergovernmental Working Group on Drought. For more information about the IWG meetings and processes, contact Daniel Tsegai, or visit

Attached is a list of potential interviewees.

1. Mr. Daniel Tsegai
Programme Officer
UNCCD secretariat
E-mail:
2. Dr. Caroline King-Okumu
International Development Opportunities Manager
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology
E-mail:
3. Mr. Jarso Ibrahim Gollole
Natural Resource Advisor and Pastoralist
MercyCorps, Kenya
E-mail:

For media-related questions contact:

Women farmers in rural Nepal. Credit: IFAD/Anwar Hossain

KATHMANDU, Nepal, May 26 2020 (IPS) – In an interview*, Bina Pradhan, an independent researcher, focuses on gender, macroeconomics and emerging issues of inequality.

She is affiliated with the Federation of Business and Professional Women, Nepal (FBPWN), and has been working on the promotion and advancement of women in enterprise development and trade, post-earthquake community reconstruction, and rebuilding people’s lives and livelihoods with a focus on sustainability.

In this interview, Ms. Pradhan shares her views on the socio-economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically on women and excluded groups in Nepal.

Q: As a feminist economist, what is your assessment of the COVID pandemic in Nepal?

A: COVID-19 is as much of a human and economic crisis as it a health crisis and we are beginning to see its socio- economic impacts in Nepal.

With the announcement of the lockdown and other restrictive measures, we see that both the demand and supply side have been affected; and sectors such as hospitality and tourism severely impacted. We are likely to see a significant rise in unemployment and poverty. Households that depend on remittances will be hit the hardest.

In Nepal, over the years, the primary and secondary sectors have not been contributing much to the economy as the tertiary sector. However, with the ongoing crisis, this sector is going to plummet resulting in serious setbacks to the progress that we have made in poverty reduction, income, health, education and living standards in the last 20-30 years.

Q: Do you think that women especially those from the excluded groups will be disproportionately affected by this pandemic? What is the emerging evidence pointing to?

A: Women are often an after-thought in a humanitarian crisis. In Nepal, we do not yet have data on how the pandemic is affecting women health-wise.

Our experience from the past humanitarian crisis – the 2015 earthquake in particular showed that whether the crisis is natural or manmade, women will be impacted more because of prevalent gender roles, their subordinate position in society and the patriarchal structure of our society.

Bina Pradhan

Women act as shock-absorbers of the household – when there is a shortage of food, women reduce their own consumption, so that there is more food for other household members, especially their children. In such situations, women’s unpaid work burden also goes up substantially, as women strategize their time to compensate for whatever is lost in the households.

When they are in paid employment, women are likely to be the first to be evicted during an economic crisis. We also need to recognize that due to prevalent occupational segregation, more than 70 per cent of health workers, social sector workers or care- givers are women. Therefore, on all fronts, women are much more vulnerable and are likely to be disproportionately affected.

Therefore, this crisis, whether in terms of health or violence or just the ability of households to sustain or recover their livelihoods will be substantially borne by women.

Q: What are your views on the Government of Nepal’s response to COVID thus far? What are some of the challenges that the Government is likely to face in rolling out these relief measures in the current federal context?

A: The relief package is announced but we are yet to see how it is rolled. There must be proper food aid and how it rolled out is important. There should be an orientation on the process to be followed in distribution or there will be no seriousness.

A message has to go to the most marginalized group of people, and it would be good to see a larger increase in relief for that group of women. There should be the implementing mechanism and the government s commitment to take it seriously., but the delivery of this package will be a challenge.

Q: From a feminist lens, what should be the core elements of the policy response?

A: It is important to recognize that households are not just consumers but also as producers. In our analysis, we need to bring in a sharper focus on women’s work especially their unpaid and domestic work which includes their vital work in care and subsistence.

For this, we need a much more inclusive structure of development – which is not based on the dichotomy of paid and unpaid care work, but instead on a recognition of women’s unpaid work, and its contribution to the national economy.

Q: Given the far-reaching impact of COVID – what are the long-term measures that the Government needs to adopt?

A: I think the ongoing crisis is an opportunity for the Government to act considering the short and long-term impacts of these actions. The top priorities could be:

• The households as economic unit of production and consumption will be hit hardest by the ongoing crisis. Women were managing the remittance sent to households which resulted in improvements in development indicators like health and education. In this crisis too, they will continue to shoulder the burden of paid and unpaid work to recuperate households’ economy. So, it is important to consider household level cash transfer, especially to women.
• We need to focus on addressing the problem of unemployment, which has contributed to increased migration. With the ongoing crisis and its impact on the world economy, the Government should focus on sectors such as infrastructure to generate jobs that can absorb returnee migrants. Emphasis should be on tapping the different capacities and skills of the returnee migrants. This could also mean giving a financial stimulus through investment capital to migrant laborers; to help them establish start-up ventures in Nepal.
• Given the significant numbers of women in MSME (micro, small and medium enterprises, there is need for to financial packages to address the specific challenges of women in this sector. Further there should be continued focus on skill development and upgradation (including technical and managerial skills and non-traditional skills) to help them move their businesses from the micro-scale to small scale.
• The Government should engage with feminist economists or economists and ensure models of development are inclusive (of households); and create spaces for diverse voices and perspectives to be reflected in the planning and budgeting process.

*This was originally published in UN Women’s Weekly News Update

NAIROBI, Apr 10 2020 (IPS) – As of April 8, there have been 1.5 million reported cases of coronavirus and over 83,000 deaths. . Italy, for example, has so far had 71 percent of all case deaths attributed to men while Spain, another major global hotspot, has seen 65 percent of all deaths being men.

While the mortality rates for men are higher, women are disproportionally affected by the social and economic impacts of the pandemic. Indeed, there is evidence that pandemics affect men and women in different ways, and COVID19 is no different.

Women comprise seven out of ten health and social care workers and contribute US$ 3 trillion annually to global health, half in the form of unpaid care work. Health workers continue to be exposed to the virus due to lack of basic protective equipment

Women are facing higher risks of infection compared to men due to their large numbers in the health sector. The health and social sector, with its 234 million workers, is one of the biggest and fastest growing employers in the world, particularly of women.

seven out of ten health and social care workers and contribute US$ 3 trillion annually to global health, half in the form of unpaid care work. Health workers continue to be exposed to the virus due to lack of basic protective equipment.

The care work burden which disproportionality falls on women has increased with the pandemic. In addition to women making up most of health-care workers, .

As schools have closed, as COVID 19 measures, which require services and activities mainly done by women, such as requirement for water, women have found themselves with a bigger workload.

Gender based violence has increased as families find themselves in lockdowns with low economic security and feeling of helplessness. For example in France, during the lockdown, while calls to the went up by 25%.

New research has shown the between pandemics and gender based violence. Recently, UN chief António Guterres called for measures to address a directed towards women and girls linked to lockdowns.

The economic impact of COVID-19 has , as more women work in low-paying, insecure and informal jobs. Disruptions, including movement restrictions, are likely to compromise women’s ability to make a living and meet their families’ basic needs, and access much needed sexual and reproductive health and maternal health services.

In addition to understanding these kinds of gender differences at times of pandemics like COVID-19, research can play a much more long-term role.

Indeed, it can play a critical part in documenting and studying the long-term impacts of the pandemic and suggesting ways to ensure that systems protect women and girls during pandemics. This is how.

First, research can help understand, test and scale interventions that build the economic and social resilience of women and girls, as well as provide evidence on how programs can be designed to cope with and minimise the gendered impacts of future pandemics.

For example, by targeting women are likely to be important design features for reducing gender based intimate partner violence. While these have been studies out of pandemics, research during pandemics can help understand the impacts and potential adaptations of these programs.

Second, while the focus with COVID 19 has been on the on women’s workloads  and women’s rights, pandemics can bring much desired shifts in gender roles and responsibilities.

The key question is how to sustain these changes long after the pandemic has passed.  Understanding how short-term pandemic-induced changes in gender roles and responsibilities can be sustained over a long time can generate evidence on pathways to equitable role sharing within households.

For example, the Spanish flu disproportionately affected young men, which in combination with World War I, created a , entrenching women’s right to work.

Third, research can provide insights that inform a more gender sensitive and effective response to epidemics. While there has been a focus on the role of social sciences in , there has not been enough application of a gender lens to this research.

For example, understanding how men and will be affected in different ways before pandemics occur, how proposed management and response measures will affect them and can be designed to have positive outcomes, and even understanding the power dynamics and how they will affect response are all key areas of research.

And finally, research and researchers can play a role in ensuring the collection and analysis of age and sex disaggregated data both so that the needs and realities of men and boys, women and girls women’s do not fall through the cracks.

As we address the very immediate needs of different groups in the pandemic, let us also invest in long term gender research that ensures there is no disproportionate impact of pandemics, especially on women and girls and that their voices are heard.

Dr Jemimah Njuki is an Aspen News Voices Fellow and writes on gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. Follow her @jemimah_njuki

OSCE Special Representative for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings offers recommendations to governments on short-term responses to COVID-19:
“Without urgent and targeted action, this health and economic crisis can become a human trafficking crisis, putting many more lives and the cohesion of our societies at risk.”
“Human trafficking feeds off vulnerability. It is precisely when our global community is shaken by a crisis of this magnitude that our obligation to combat the exploitation of vulnerable people becomes most acute.”

VIENNA, Apr 30 2020 – How to address the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic for the most vulnerable in our societies, especially for human trafficking victims and survivors, is the focus of a set of recommendations to governments published by the OSCE Special Representative and Co-ordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings Valiant Richey today.

Building on his earlier statement, Richey alerted governments to the risk that, without urgent and targeted action, this health and economic crisis becomes a human trafficking crisis, putting many more lives and the cohesion of our societies at risk. “The impact of the COVID-19 crisis on trafficking in human beings is deeply concerning. Our recommendations aim to support the 57 OSCE participating States in combating trafficking in human beings during and following the current crisis, as vulnerabilities will compound in the weeks and months to come,” he said.

Human trafficking feeds off vulnerability —in particular, gender and economic inequality — and it is a symptom of frailty in our society. Richey stated: “It is precisely when our global community is shaken by a crisis of this magnitude that our obligation to combat the exploitation of vulnerable people becomes most acute. Combating human trafficking is not just a law enforcement responsibility. It is a human, societal, and security imperative and an urgent priority.”

“With the necessary attention, adequate resources, and the right programmes, we can start today to build a better and safer tomorrow for all.” Said the Special Representative who stands ready to provide further support to participating States, including through tailored technical assistance for the development and implementation of anti-trafficking action plans and other legislative or policy efforts.

Recommendations:

Prevention

1. Ensure universal access to essential economic and social welfare services, including unemployment aid, for all those who need them, regardless of their recent employment history. This will help prevent those affected by the economic impact of the crisis, including millions of unregistered domestic workers, from falling into the hands of traffickers.

2. Grant or extend temporary resident permits to migrants and asylum seekers, regardless of their legal status. This will increase their resilience by facilitating access to healthcare and other welfare services and will also help States’ authorities and social services promptly identify presumed victims of trafficking and better prevent future episodes of exploitation.

3. Prioritize resources for exit services in high-risk sectors such as the prostitution industry. With purchasing of commercial sex artificially suppressed as a result of the lockdown, inclusive programmes ensuring support can be a powerful tool to break the cycle of exploitation and strengthen exit pathways, giving a real alternative to those in need.

Protection

4. Provide victims of trafficking with access to safe and immediate accommodation, health care and psychological assistance, to assist in their exit from trafficking and protect them from revictimization. Temporary quarantine accommodation prior to shelter placement has been identified as a promising practice to ensure compliance with COVID-19 prevention measures.

5. Extend for at least six months all protection and assistance measures for all victims of trafficking, including work permits and access to services, to ensure continuity in their social inclusion process beyond the current health crisis. Continue investments in rehabilitation programmes, as the risk of ‘losing’ those survivors who are already in transition is now particularly high due to the adverse economic situation. Provide online support to victims of trafficking inside and outside shelters. Psychological counselling, legal support as well as educational and training activities are examples of the services which might be temporarily provided remotely to ensure the continuity of victim’s support and to prevent re-trafficking.

6. Establish or strengthen hotlines for human trafficking, domestic violence and child abuse (including online) reporting, and broadly promote their services as a tool for the identification of presumed cases of human trafficking.

Prosecution

7. Ensure high alert among law enforcement and other first line responders to recognize and detect human trafficking. With traffickers likely to pivot to online exploitation, and with police, labour inspectors, social workers, healthcare professionals, educators and NGOs currently dramatically limited in their anti-trafficking efforts, detection and suppression efforts will have to adapt to a changing environment.

8. Ensure the continuity of the justice system to investigate and prosecute traffickers even in times of lockdown. For example, holding court via video or teleconferencing should be considered and actively pursued whenever possible as a tool to ensure timely justice and avoid re-traumatizing victims.

9. Investigators should be prepared as traffickers change their modus operandi, increasing online enforcement presence and employing advanced investigative instruments, including financial investigation tools to detect human trafficking in financial flows due to an increase in non-cash payments.

10. Plan systemic labour inspections of high-risk industries immediately after business operations resume. Agriculture, due to the summer harvest, is a prime example of an area to monitor with particular attention.

11. Once lockdown measures are lifted, keep a high law enforcement alert on forms of trafficking that are likely to increase in the near future, such as online exploitation and forced begging.

Partnership

12. Incentivize or mandate technology companies to identify and eradicate risks of human trafficking on their platforms, including by identifying and stopping distribution of child sexual abuse material online. Establish or strengthen law enforcement and judicial co-operation, including at the pre-trial stage, with countries of origin and destination in cases of online exploitation, especially of children.

Looking ahead

13. Plan ahead to ensure that the anti-trafficking community can respond adequately to another possible Coronavirus outbreak. The forecast for a second COVID-19 wave later this year highlights the need to ensure that assistance facilities, protection programmes, investigations and courts continue functioning during possible future lockdown measures.

Media Contact:

Lilia Rotoloni
Public Information Officer

+33 (0)628340397
@osce_cthb

Dr Simi Mehta is the CEO and Editorial Director of Impact and Policy Research Institute (IMPRI), New Delhi. She can be reached at .

Handover ceremony at UN compound in Beijing for donation of critical medical supplies to the Chinese government. Credit: UNDP China

NEW DELHI, May 20 2020 (IPS) – Coronavirus outbreaks in China and later across the globe have been unprecedented in both its scale and impacts. In the era of changing world order, this pandemic has drawn the global attention towards the threats posed by the non-traditional security challenges.

All military prowess and records of economic progress have been rendered impotent vis-à-vis the coronavirus disease. With a total of around 5 million cases worldwide (and only about 83,000 in China), the wheels of power display of major powers like the US, China, Russia, Spain, France, Germany, Italy have come to a grinding halt.

The objectives of national health policy, health security of the countries, including the concept of collective health security of the World Health Organization (WHO), and the United Nations have raised questions on their seriousness, claimed efficacy and efficiency.

Regarding the origins of the virus, there have been different narratives. This article analyses the discourse claiming that research and development programmes for medicine, vaccines, and treatment for health risks and planning and investment for intensive research on bioweapons by major powers led to the creation of the dangerous strand of contagion called the novel coronavirus.

Allegations on China

There is no denying that the place where it all originated was in Wuhan, China. Thousands of people began to suffer with a respiratory illness that could not be cured. The WHO has coronavirus as part of the family of viruses, which ranges from the common cold to Middle East Respiratory Syndromes (MERS) and SARS.

It has the capability to transmit between animals and humans. Very soon, a school of thought contrary to the claims of the Chinese government that it was in the wet market selling exotic and wild animals- including bats, that was the cause of this pandemic, began to emerge.

However, counter-claims posit that The Wuhan Institute of Virology National Biosafety Laboratory in the vicinity of the wet market had deliberately created this virus. What raises arguments in favour of the counter-claims include: China did not raise an alarm globally about the existence, leave aside spread of the virus until major outbreaks were reported from late January 2020 onwards.

Various have been circulating that this virus was made to escape the laboratory as bio-weapons either by accident or design. Some have also claimed that this virus was originally stolen by Chinese agents from Canadian laboratory in July 2019, which has level 4 of biosafety- dealing with the most dangerous pathogens for which there are few available vaccines or treatments, similar to that possessed by the Wuhan laboratory.

Further, it has rejected international fact-finding mission into its country. Newspapers like the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times and the Washington Post have suffered collateral damage and some of their in the country.

Even academic on coronavirus has borne the brunt by the gag-order of the Chinese authorities to intervene in the independence of the scientific process. Those research articles focusing on the COVID-19 have to now undergo extra vetting before they are submitted for publication.

As a result, the initial global empathy for the Chinese suffering from the wrath of this virus steadily turned into suspicion and panic. This culminated into pent up anger seeking reparations from China for being culpable for the origin and spread of COVID-19.

Unfazed by Chinese criticism, US President Donald Trump eloquently named the coronavirus as the Chinese virus. He has also accused the WHO of siding with China in hiding the facts and suspended its contribution to the multi-lateral body and said that the WHO “should be ashamed of themselves because they are like the public-relations agency for China.”.

Calls for an international investigation to know the ‘truth’ behind the origin and spread of the virus have become intense. With its one-party authoritarian system, China was initially on the defensive and flagrantly refused all such calls; which, in effect added to the case in point that there is ‘something’ that it wanted to hide from the rest of the world.

However, with growing international pressures and the most recent led by Australia and the EU and supported by 122 countries at the World Health Assembly of WHO, finally relented and agreed to the call for a “comprehensive review” of COVID-19 pandemic in an “objective and impartial manner”.

It is even pointing to the proactive help it is providing to several countries, in terms of sending protective gears, face masks, gloves, etc. However, have been raised as several of these have malfunctioned and/or were .

Conclusion

In 1919 1 wrote that the deadly Spanish Flu pandemic that swept around the earth was without any precedents, and that there had been no such catastrophe ‘so sudden, so devastating and so universal’. He remarked that, “The most astonishing thing about the pandemic was the complete mystery which surrounded it. Nobody seemed to know what the disease was, where it came from or how to stop it. Anxious minds are inquiring today whether another wave of it will come again”.

With close to , the coronavirus has compelled people to draw parallels with the history of lethal viruses like the 1918 Spanish flu.

This great human tragedy created by COVID-19 is compounded because of the and/or a vaccine. Experts opine that it would be possible only by the first quarter of 2021. The prevailing obscurity in China with respect to the causes of origin and global spread of the virus has led to conspiracy theories to emanate from various parts of the international community. Demands have begun to be made to hold China accountable for the health crisis and that it should pay the countries of the world for their health and economic hardships.

Trump has that the US has begun its investigations to claim ‘substantial’ damages from China as the ‘whole situation could have been stopped at the source’. The champion of having China included in the world system- Henry Kissinger warned that .

Even a veteran Cabinet Minister of Government of India, stated in an interview to a private news channel that the coronavirus is ‘not a natural virus, rather it emerged from a lab’.

This, perhaps explains India’s cautious next steps of charging its northern neighbour China as the country responsible for the manufacture of the virus that has brought incredible and unprecedented mayhem in the lives, livelihoods and economies around the world.

Therefore, it would be in the best interests of China to ensure transparency and allow international investigations into the disease, as it is totally unbecoming of permanent member of the UN Security Council wielding veto powers.

The worldwide panic created by the prevailing health insecurity would redefine the meaning, definition and practical implications for programmes and policy of all countries of the world. Putting it into perspective, the global health management body- the WHO needs to be reformed, and so should the UN Security Council.

It remains to be seen how the world navigates through the crisis and whether comprehensive public health would figure in their national security agendas in the post-COVID-19 world order. Nonetheless, it is time that the multilateral agencies take suo moto cognizance of the havoc created by China and act as per the norms of international law for ensuring collective security.

1 Major George A. Soper was Sanitation Engineer with Department of Health, USA. His area of specialty included study of typhoid fever epidemics. He was also the managing director of American Cancer Society from 1923 to 1928.

Frankfurt / Nairobi, Jun 10 2020 – As COVID-19 hits the fossil fuel industry, a new report shows that renewable energy is more cost-effective than ever providing an opportunity to prioritize clean energy in economic recovery packages and bring the world closer to meeting the Paris Agreement goals.

Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2020 report from the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), the Frankfurt School-UNEP Collaborating Centre and BloombergNEF (BNEF), available at analyzes 2019 investment trends, and clean energy commitments made by countries and corporations for the next decade.

It finds commitments equivalent to 826 GW of new non-hydro renewable power capacity, at a likely cost of around USD 1 trillion, by 2030. (1GW is similar to the capacity of a nuclear reactor). Getting on track to limiting global temperature rise to under 2 degrees Celsius the main goal of the Paris Agreement would require the addition of around 3,000GW by 2030, the exact amount depending on the technology mix chosen. The planned investments also fall far below the USD 2.7 trillion committed to renewables during the last decade.

However, the report shows that the cost of installing renewable energy has hit new lows, meaning future investments will deliver far more capacity. Renewable energy capacity, excluding large hydro-electric dams of more than 50 MW, grew by 184 gigawatts (GW) in 2019. This highest-ever annual addition was 20 GW, or 12 percent, more than the new capacity commissioned in 2018. Yet the dollar investment in 2019 was just 1 per cent higher than the previous year, at USD 282.2 billion.

The all-in, or levelized, cost of electricity continues to fall for wind and solar, thanks to technology improvements, economies of scale and fierce competition in auctions. Costs for electricity from new solar photovoltaic plants in the second half of 2019 were 83 per cent lower than a decade earlier.

The chorus of voices calling on governments to use their COVID-19 recovery packages to create sustainable economies is growing, said Inger Andersen, Executive Director of UNEP. This research shows that renewable energy is one of the smartest, most cost-effective investments they can make in these packages.

If governments take advantage of the ever-falling price tag of renewables to put clean energy at the heart of COVID-19 economic recovery, they can take a big step towards a healthy natural world, which is the best insurance policy against global pandemics, Andersen said.

Renewable energy has been eating away at fossil fuels dominant share of electricity generation over the last decade. Nearly 78 per cent of the net new GW of generating capacity added globally in 2019 was in wind, solar, biomass and waste, geothermal and small hydro. Investment in renewables, excluding large hydro, was more than three times that in new fossil fuel plants.

Renewables such as wind and solar power already account for almost 80 per cent of newly built capacity for electricity generation, said Svenja Schulze, Minister of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Germany. Investors and markets are convinced of their reliability and competitiveness.

The promotion of renewables can be a powerful engine for the recovery of the economy after the Coronavirus crisis, creating new and secure jobs, she added. At the same time, renewables improve air quality thus protecting public health. By promoting renewable energies within the framework of Coronavirus economic stimulus packages, we have the opportunity to invest in future prosperity, health and climate protection.

2019 marked many other records, the report finds:

• The highest solar power capacity additions in one year, at 118 GW.
• The highest investment in offshore wind in one year, at USD 29.9 billion, up 19 per cent year-on-year.
• The largest financing ever for a solar project, at USD 4.3 billion for Al Maktoum IV in the United Arab Emirates.
• The highest volume of renewable energy corporate power purchase agreements, at 19.5GW worldwide.
• The highest capacity awarded in renewable energy auctions, at 78.5GW worldwide.
• The highest renewables investment ever in developing economies other than China and India, at USD 59.5 billion.
• A broadening investment, with a record 21 countries and territories investing more than USD 2 billion in renewables.

Nils Stieglitz, President of Frankfurt School of Finance Management, said: We see the energy transition is in full swing, with the highest capacity of renewables financed ever. Meanwhile, the fossil fuel sector has been hit hard by the COVID-19 crisis with demand for coal- and gas-fired electricity down in many countries, and oil prices slumping.

The climate and COVID-19 crises despite their different natures are both disruptions that command attention from policy makers and managers alike. Both crises demonstrate the need to increase climate ambition and shift the world s energy supply towards renewables.

The 2019 investment brought the share of renewables, excluding large hydro, in global generation to 13.4 per cent, up from 12.4 per cent in 2018 and 5.9 per cent in 2009. This means that in 2019, renewable power plants prevented the emission of an estimated 2.1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide, a substantial saving given global power sector emissions of approximately 13.5 gigatonnes in 2019.

Clean energy finds itself at a crossroads in 2020, said Jon Moore, Chief Executive of BloombergNEF. The last decade produced huge progress, but official targets for 2030 are far short of what is required to address climate change. When the current crisis eases, governments will need to strengthen their ambitions not just on renewable power, but also on the decarbonization of transport, buildings and industry.
UNEP:
Frankfurt School of Finance and Management:
BloombergNEF:

The wall at a Community Mental Health Movement in Brazil. Credit: Mario Osava/IPS

UNITED NATIONS, Jun 26 2020 (IPS) – The current pandemic is not only heightening mental health concerns, but might also put many at risk of becoming institutionalised or being neglected by the system.

This is according to Dainius Pūras, the United Nations special rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.

Pūras recently voiced his concerns about the “historical neglect of dignified mental health care,” that has been even more heightened under the pandemic.

“Before the pandemic, I critically addressed the current status quo of global mental health, and now with this pandemic my position is: even more I would recommend to rethink how we invest in mental health,” Pūras, a medical doctor with notable expertise in mental health and children s health, told IPS.

He added that there are two principles used when addressing mental health: a human rights and evidence-based approach. Currently, under the pandemic, the latter has come under attack with a massive amount of misinformation and false news spreading, which he says can affect mental health of people and their communities. 

Excerpts of the interview with Pūras follow. Some of the answers have been paraphrased for clarity.

Inter Press Service (IPS): In what ways has the pandemic affected mental health of people?

Dainius Pūras (DP): During a pandemic, there are risks that if a person has a mental health condition, he or she might be hospitalised by force. Also, because of the virus, there might be suspicions that this person may spread the virus, which poses an additional risk factor for discriminating against people with mental health concerns. 

There should be more research done but there are many insights and preliminary observations that this pandemic will probably have a serious impact on the mental health of individuals and societies. 

There are several reasons for this: the spread of the virus and requirements for distancing and isolation, plus economic and social [effects] and employment also increase different forms of violence for example domestic violence. All these will fuel mental distress, anxiety, fear, all these feelings of uncertainty about the future 

I should highlight another serious risk factor is that we witness massive amounts of fake news, disinformation, conspiracy theories around the virus, the origin of the virus and around statistics. This is not good for mental health. 

When children are not going to school, they’re missing out on very important aspects of socialisation. For many children, it s their only way to get a meal physical and mental health are interrelated in these ways.  

IPS: What is one of the current challenges of addressing mental health issues, especially under the pandemic? 

DP: I don’t support the narrative that this pandemic fuels mental distress, fear, anxiety, and the narrative that more mental illnesses will come. It’s not about producing more mental illness it makes people anxious and scared but that s a part of normal life, I do not want to medicalise that.  

We need to work against pathologisation and medicalisation. Because if we say millions of people are now more anxious than before, does it mean we will go on globally with medicalisation? Does it mean we will suggest  psychological medication to all these people including children and adults? 

I’m not against medication but when I analyse global situations, for sure this has gone too far. Feelings have been medicalised. I am warning that with this pandemic there would be a next wave of medicalisation. That when people are anxious and not happy, there might be an attempt to “medicalise them even more than before”. We have to be creative and to think of some innovative forms of support and cure, not necessarily medicalise. 

IPS: What are the risks involved for those with mental health at this time?

DP: More and more people are diagnosed. But then because of this diagnosis they’re discriminated against. And also because of that, in many parts of the world, many suffer from institutionalisation: sometimes that can be lifelong. 

Sometimes that’s because of a lack of services in the community and [as a result] they live in institutions but now we know these institutions are hotspots for the virus. As for many countries, the closed spaces, such as prisons or psychiatric institutions are now making it worse given how dangerous it can be for residents and staff because the virus can spread.
IPS: Are there certain communities more vulnerable to facing mental health risks in this pandemic?

DP: Many people who were already left behind will suffer disproportionately So, in many parts of the world, LGBT people are discriminated against, people with disabilities other than psycho-social ones we discussed, and those with physical disability, indigenous people, migrants and refugees in difficult situations, and also the prison population these people are at more risk. 

IPS: The issue of mental health appears to have multiple layers of barriers: financial means and social stigma. How do you navigate both financial concern as well as social stigma of this issue?

DP: My approach is that we always have to keep in mind the principles and then we will not be lost when it’s concrete. We should follow non-discrimination, empowerment, accountability and other principles. 

The problem is all these global mental health [responses] are based on discriminatory approaches; for example, if a person is diagnosed with a mental health condition or illness they could be discriminated against by mental health law in their country. 

Next week, I will be presenting many arguments to the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) about the need for a shift in paradigm instead of making small changes. A shift is needed. There is too much: the biomedical model is overused; its okay but when it’s overused, it s harmful. 

 IPS: What’re your hopes going forward? 

DP: With this pandemic what I m emphasising in my statement; now we should be finally convinced that we need to move ahead with reducing the number of these [mental health] institutions, with a final goal of abandoning this legacy.  

Unless diversity is accepted and inclusion becomes everyone’s business, it will be impossible to achieve the goal of universal health coverage because 15% of the global population who have some form of disability will be left behind. Credit: Bigstock.

Jul 30 2020 (IPS) – Over the next seven years,  to improve technology, health and education, according to CEO Sundar Pichai. This is unprecedented and could be a game changer that could improve health, education and economic empowerment. 

While Google should be commended for such foresight, it is also pertinent to note that there was no mention of how this investment would benefit India’s 26 million persons living with disabilities. Without a doubt, investments in the Indian economy must be all-inclusive. This means including persons living with disabilities, particularly women and children.

For long, disability has been neglected to the detriment of millions of Indians who live with various forms of it. The plight of persons living with disabilities in India is not unique. In the global south, efforts to improve the health and wellbeing of persons with disabilities are usually led by individuals with disabilities, civil society and disabled persons organisations.

In the global south, efforts to improve the health and wellbeing of persons with disabilities are usually led by individuals with disabilities, civil society and disabled persons organisations

Unless diversity is accepted and inclusion becomes everyone’s business, it will be impossible to achieve the goal of universal health coverage because of the global population who have some form of disability will be left behind.

Indeed,  have been magnified at this time of COVID-19. These challenges include unprecedented number of deaths, lack of access to finances, people-centered healthcare, home based caregivers etc. Furthermore, closure of intervention centres and special schools, have  for children with developmental disabilities.

Education is also a major challenge as most schools turned online, without working on accessibility and barriers to inclusion, and so .

There are many non-profits and government organisations in India that provide services to persons with disabilities, and most have been closed since April 2020, but staff are working overtime to provide the best services through online mediums thereby avoiding disruption of services and ensuring continued developmental progress in children.

So far, feedback from families are varied: from increased involvement of parents to no progress because such parents do not have access to digital technology.

This is the time to  as its key feature in India. However, to realise this, the private sector must play a key role as a funder and incubator of ideas.

These are five ways Google could ensure that its $10 billion investment in India is inclusive of persons living with disabilities.

First, involve persons living with disabilities in any plans to discuss the investment. This involvement must be from the beginning when plans are developed to when impact is evaluated. New initiatives must actively seek inputs from persons living with disabilities with different kinds of impairment. If this diverse representation is pursued, the inputs would be inclusive and could mitigate some challenges that may arise.

Second, ensure at least 20% of all roles are reserved for persons living with disabilities, to be well distributed along gender and age groups. Women are needed in leadership positions as the impact they make are phenomenal, with valuable indices like empathy, wellbeing and happiness. Also, children living with disabilities should not be left out.

Third, improve healthcare delivery by training health workers on providing care that is respectful and meets the needs of persons living with disabilities. Health facilities must be obligated to provide services without discrimination.

To achieve this, the investment should include partnerships with schools where health workers are trained to make the curriculum disability-friendly. Health workers already in service should also be trained and retrained on disability-centered care.  adopted by medical schools in India, should be used to train students, as well as train and retrain health professionals.

Fourth, ensure provision of social determinants of health such access to education, economic empowerment, access to clean water and sanitation for persons living with disabilities. For instance, access to clean water and sanitation helps reduce the incidence of infectious diseases.

Indeed, one of the most important public health interventions to reduce the spread of COVID-19 is frequent hand washing with soap under running water. Moreover, the more educated people are, the better their health-seeking behaviours.

Also, providing economic empowerment interventions would empower persons living with disabilities to pay for their healthcare themselves when the need arises.

Lastly, such a huge investment requires regular monitoring and evaluation. Persons living with disabilities should be included in monitoring teams. No one better than persons living with disabilities can evaluate the impact and the influence of programs that create change and transformation to improve the quality of life of members of the community. Also, lessons learnt can help others know how to cater for the needs of persons living with disabilities.

To be sure, Google is a private business and is entitled to deploy its corporate social responsibility however it deems fit. However, as one of its biggest markets, India is deserving of this investment.

It would amount to perpetuating gross inequities in India if persons living with disabilities are left behind again.

Dr Shubha Nagesh is a medical doctor and works with the Latika Roy Foundation, Dehradun India

Dr. Ifeanyi M. Nsofor, is a medical doctor, a graduate of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, the CEO of EpiAFRIC and Director of Policy and Advocacy at Nigeria Health Watch. He is a Senior Atlantic Fellow for Health Equity at George Washington University, a Senior New Voices Fellow at the Aspen Institute and a 2006 International Ford Fellow. 

Photo by cottonbro from Pexels.

Sep 9 2020 (IPS) – Once safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines are available, tough choices will need to be made about who gets the first shots.

A committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine – at the behest of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Health – has proposed an .

They recommend first responders and health care workers take top priority. Older adults in congregate living situations would also be part of a first vaccination phase, according to the plan.

We are faculty at Johns Hopkins University and the University of Southern California who have spent decades studying . One of us is a member of the National Academy of Medicine.

Having seen firsthand , we disagree with some of the recommendations. Asymptomatic spread is and threatening surrounding communities.

We argue that this pandemic requires a different model for making vaccination choices. After taking care of essential workers, vaccinations should be given to the biggest transmitters of the virus – mostly the young – and only then to the most vulnerable.

Lessons from 2009 flu epidemic

The textbook vaccine model goes out the window when novel viruses emerge.

Some lessons can be drawn from the , which killed an estimated 500,000 people around the world. In the U.S, President Barack Obama declared the spread a national emergency.

Optimally, older people will drive down deaths by staying home in large numbers, and younger people will drive down infections by getting vaccinated in even larger numbers. It all works if the vaccine is effective and enough people take it

A vaccine was developed as early as the fall of 2009. However, only . The CDC was required to make some difficult decisions about allocation. Some states requested 10 times the amount they were allocated.

In the end, the CDC allocated the vaccine strictly in proportion to a state’s population – that is, on a per capita basis. States then allocated them, often with priority to infants and the elderly, along with people at high risk.

This priority – to protect the most frail – has been public policy since at least the .

Later studies, however, have shown that a was to control , which often has meant vaccinating school-age children early.

One of the lessons from these past pandemics is that early can avert multiple infections with others.

The superspreaders

The experience of the past few months has shown how important it is to check transmission with COVID-19. found that as few as 10% of those infected lead to 80% of the infection cases. What has made it more difficult is that up to at all.

Very few of the COVID-19 are elderly. It is the younger people who have a much greater propensity to resume social lives at schools and in other venues.

Among the young are a subset of highly social people with wide circles of friends who become the most fertile ground for the spread of COVID-19. These young people also have a much lower risk of death or even severe symptoms, which also means they are more likely to infect others.

Cases have been spiking in the 15- to 25-year-old age group, that they are propelling the spread of the virus. A recent outbreak on the infected at least 40 people.

The American Academy of Pediatrics and that at least 338,000 children have tested positive for the virus through July 30, with more than a quarter of that number having tested positive in just the last two weeks of that month.

More broadly, younger residents in the virus hot spot of Los Angeles County . In California, young people between 18 to 34 years of age account for .

Young versus old

Anticipating that young people will engage in activities that spread the virus, many universities . Some that decided to go after as little as a week on campus.

With or without a vaccine, , especially those with underlying medical conditions, is avoiding contact with potential carriers.

Optimally, older people will drive down deaths by staying home in large numbers, and younger people will drive down infections by getting vaccinated in even larger numbers. It all works if the vaccine is effective and enough people take it.

We predict the pressures and politics around prioritizing vaccine distribution will be intense. We argue that the key will be to take the most beneficial route, not the most obvious one. With a full-scale public health campaign behind it, that will mean prioritizing those who are driving transmission, not those who are most vulnerable.

As counterintuitive as such a strategy may appear, plenty of evidence shows this would be the right approach.

, Leonard D. Schaeffer Chair and Distinguished Professor of Public Policy, Pharmacy, and Economics, ; , Professor of Preventive Medicine and Associate Director for Data Science Integration, , and , Bloomberg Distinguished Professor of Economics and Business, Director of JHU s 21st Century Cities Initiative,

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

SYDNEY and KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 2 2020 (IPS) – US third quarter GDP numbers released two weeks ago delighted stock markets and President Trump. Output had picked up by 7.4%, annualised as 33.1%, the largest quarterly economic growth on record, almost double the old record of 3.9% (annualised as 16.7%) in the first quarter of 1950, seven decades ago.

Anis Chowdhury

Spinning numbers
This news could not have come at a better time for Trump, who is struggling for re-election, as his Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) declared that this affirmed , “we’re coming back, and we’re coming back strong”. The CEA spun the White House press release accordingly, “The Great American Recovery: Third Quarter GDP Blows Past Expectations”.

The CEA the record to “the strong foundation of the pre-pandemic economy and the efficacy of the Trump Administration”, portraying it as “a testament to the fortitude and resilience of America’s workers and families”.

Meanwhile, new US COVID-19 cases on the very same day reached a record high, and still rising, with total cases , with deaths four times the total American death toll during the two decade long Vietnam War, and fast approaching a quarter million.

Glass half full/empty
As COVID-19 rages unchecked, economic activity remained its pre-pandemic peak. According to the ‘’ of Moody’s Analytics and CNN Business, the economy was only 82% of what it was in early March, with 10.7 million jobs lost since February!

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in early October show that more than 12.6 million Americans were out of work while lasting job losses rose, with 36% of the jobless deemed permanently unemployed.

Those permanently laid-off ballooned , and the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) increased by 781,000 to 2.4 million. This number is still rising fast, threatening extreme hardship for many more households.

Prospects for those losing jobs may be bleak as US job recovery appears to be . After adding 4.8 million jobs in June, job gains slowed to 1.8 million in July, 1.5 million in August and only . As time passes and job growth continues to slow, it will take years to bring employment back to pre-pandemic levels.

Exaggerating trends
Annualising a quarterly or monthly rate tells us how much the economy would expand or shrink if the rate of change is maintained for a full year. But this can be misleading, by making mountains out of molehills. Undoubtedly, the second quarter’s massive collapse was followed by a large gain in the third.

But the third quarter recovery of 33% after the second quarter contraction of 33% does not mean the economy is back to where it was. If 100 drops 33% to 67, and then regains 33%, it gets to 89 (from 67) still 11 short of the original 100.

Rapid growth in one quarter does not mean the economy has gained strong momentum. The collapse in the previous quarter had set a low baseline. Hence, any rebound from that depressed base would generate a huge growth rate.

Hours worked are often a for employment and economic recovery. Average hours worked in the first quarter were 5.1 million, dropping to 4.5 million in the second, before recovering to 4.8 million in the third, still below pre-COVID levels.

that the economy has been slowing. For example, consumption growth was slower every month from June to August than in the month before.

Similarly, retail sales slowed over mid-2020, before a slight rebound in September. The Chicago Federal Reserve National Economic Activity Index indicated that August growth was the slowest since recovery began in May.

Disparities widen
The prestigious has observed, “COVID-19 exacerbating inequalities”, as the pandemic various US disparities already growing for decades. As 45 million Americans lost their jobs, .

Meanwhile, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show hospitalization rates for Blacks and Latinos 4.5 times that for non-Hispanic whites. A US National Academy of Sciences also found age-adjusted COVID deaths more than 2.5 times higher for Blacks than for Whites.

US income and wealth inequalities since the early 1970s. The share of total income earned by the top decile (10%) from around 31% in the 1970s to about half in 2015, while the top 1% or percentile’s share rose from 8% to 20%.

Much of this increase among the top 10% came at in the bottom half of the distribution whose share of total income halved from 20% in the 1970s as median US workers’ from 1973.

Over the past three decades, the wealth share of those in the top decile (10%) of household income rose from 61% to 70%, while that of the top 1% went .

Jobless rates for were higher than the national average, even before the pandemic. Disproportionately employed in low paying occupations, they have due to the pandemic.

, e.g., as 617,000 women, compared to 78,000 men, dropped out of the labour force in September. Half of these women were between 35 and 44, the prime working age.

Omitting the important things in life
The pandemic can even augment GDP, which includes all COVID-related expenses, including those for treatments and funerals, plus the trillions that governments – federal, state, municipal – spend to tackle the crisis.

Perhaps, it is fitting to recall Robert Kennedy from over half a century ago:

“Too much and for too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our Gross National Product… counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage.

“It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl.

“It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman’s rifle and Speck’s knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.

“Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials.

“It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.

“And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.”