By Hisham Allam
Sharm El Sheikh, Nov 17 2022 – The Middle East and North Africa are the world’s most water-scarce regions – with 11 of the 17 water-stressed countries on the globe.

According to UNICEF, nine out of 10 children live in areas with high or very high-water stress, resulting in significant consequences for their health, cognitive development, and future livelihoods.

Now climate change is resulting in less rain for agriculture and a decline in the quality of freshwater reserves due to saltwater transfer to fresh aquifers and increased pollution concentrations.

Maha Rashid, Middle East managing committee member for Blue Peace, which works for water cooperation among borders, sectors, and generations to foster peace, stability, and sustainable development, says the situation in the region is dire.

“More than 60% of this region’s population lives in areas of high or very high-water stress, compared to the global average of about 35%. While the Middle East and North Africa have continued to experience water scarcity for thousands of years, several interconnected challenges today threaten environmental sustainability and security for the region’s water supply.”

Water scarcity is expected to impact development in the Middle East. Credit: Hisham Allam/IPS

As COP27 negotiations continue at Sharm El Sheikh in Egypt, people in the Middle East are dealing with the impacts of climate change. Rashid explained that Iraq relies on water from Turkey and Iran, as well as rain and snow, to feed its rivers, especially in the spring. Water revenues to Iraq’s rivers, Tigris and Euphrates, dropped for the third season in succession. The current season has experienced a more severe and unprecedented fall not seen for several years, and water levels in the Euphrates and Tigris rivers declined, and drought conditions are experienced in the rivers and lakes in Diyala Governorate.

The Turkish dam system, which includes the large Ataturk and Ilisu dams, has reduced water flow to the Tigris River’s natural channel. It will result in a 10 billion cubic metre annual reduction in water flow for downstream countries – like Syria and Iraq.

Despite having large amounts of arable land, Iraq will not be able to achieve food and water security. Instead, over the long term, water will confine development, plans, and programs and not bring food or water security, says Rashid, who is also a professor at Tigris University, told IPS.

Water insecurity in the region had also impacted international relations, with tensions arising over Ethiopia’s building of the Renaissance Dam for irrigation and electricity generation without considering the significant effects on Egypt and Sudan. Now the threat of water scarcity is growing for the two countries, followed by food security and potential future natural disasters.

The Middle East is now experiencing rising temperatures, which is one of the effects of climate change. As a result, North Africa is now experiencing drought in some regions and torrential downpours in others.

According to Rashid, since 2010, which set new temperature records in 19 countries, many of which were Arab nations, countries are experiencing summertime temperatures of up to 54 degrees Celsius, including in Iraq and Morocco, where two-thirds of the oases have vanished as a result of decreased precipitation and increased evaporation. Saudi Arabia and Sudan are also experiencing fierce sandstorms.

These climatic changes are predicted to get worse unless the inhabitants and governments of the area deal with them properly and urgently over the course of the next fifty years.

Rashid contended that doing this calls for more prudent resource management as well as adjustments to sectoral and economic models, mindsets, and behaviours. While she is optimistic about the outcome of the climate negotiations, most countries have not committed to implementing the recommendations and reducing carbon emissions since the COP 26 climate summit in Scotland.

“I believe that COP27 will address climate change issues and, in the end, will insist on finding a method that works to save poor communities.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By William Tan and Riad Meddeb
NEW YORK, Nov 17 2022 – Small states take the path less travelled. They face challenges unfamiliar to many: scarce resources, smaller economies and the real impact of climate change.

However, small states are also able to leverage assets in ways that large states often cannot. As an example, Singapore has learned how innovation and digital can accelerate development.

Small states are not passive actors in traditional development or innovation trajectories. They have exciting power and agency to steer innovation in new directions.

This includes forging a new age of global innovation leadership – defining and setting global standards and innovation priorities, and shaping a small states comparative advantage in the context of innovation.

Technological innovation is founded on policy innovation

Innovation does not operate in a vacuum, and governance is a key catalyst. This includes exploring how governance structures and processes can identify, implement and scale innovation.

There is a growing need to craft systems, cultures, and infrastructure that not only embrace innovation but become part of it. Governments can ensure that new technologies engage with local priorities — and shape global solutions which fill these gaps.

This is not a destination but a journey; it is about creating environments for continued innovation.

Governance needs to be responsive to the constant evolution of technologies. Some examples of such agile governance include regulatory sandboxes, outcome-based regulations, and testbeds for global innovators (though small states must not ‘just’ test innovations but co-design them too).

Agility also comes from data-driven innovating and data innovation. Here, governments can shape both foundational data infrastructure, but also leverage data to accelerate innovation – through initiatives such as the UNDP SIDS Data Platform. Such insights can then become part of ‘feedback loops’ to inform policy and service design.

We need to focus on outcomes, not solutions

There is a need to shift priorities towards the positive outcomes of innovation – whether driven by frontier technologies or frugal innovations, communities and entrepreneurs or corporations and governments. Each configuration leads to greater success in different contexts, and reaffirms why we need to be led by problems and not solutions.

Small states share unique challenges which do not necessarily respond to established technological ‘answers’, and there are wider positive multipliers which emerge when innovating for these challenges.

Small states again have the advantage of size; coordination can be faster, and enterprises may more easily work in tandem with governments to harmonize innovation priorities.

Particularly important is indeed recognizing that innovation cannot be delivered by government alone. The private sector plays a particularly fundamental role – including the smaller enterprises.

The COVID-19 pandemic has turbocharged digitalization and many entities now recognize that they can no longer do business in the traditional way.

In Singapore, this shift has been accompanied by a focus on building baseline adoption of digital tools through the ‘CTO-as-a-service’ platform under the ‘SMEs Go Digital Programme’. Since 2017, over 80,000 small and medium-sized enterprises have adopted digital solutions under the programme.

We need to build and strengthen local efforts and small state capacity

Innovation must be led and owned by local people — and this begins with human capital development. Brain drain is an immense struggle for small states, and tackling this is an imperative for governments.

Small states should look to shape robust curricula across local schools for young people, as well as develop advanced STEM offerings to encourage innovators to contribute to their home countries.

For example, Singapore’s TechSkills Accelerator Initiative has supported over 7,000 companies to hire, train and retain technology talent. It has placed more than 12,000 Singaporeans in technology roles, whilst an accompanying framework supports businesses in hiring global talent with in-demand skills.

At the same time, innovation is not a product of financial investment or discrete initiatives alone; it emerges out of complex interactions between the public and private sector, shaped by institutional frameworks to go with the above human capacity development, research and development, and business support.

Singapore’s national platform for digital innovation, the Open Innovation Platform, provides professional consultancy support to help companies diagnose business challenges, define problem statements and crowdsource solutions from 12,000 solution providers from the private sector.

The government also plays an active role to support startups in their growth stage. Through the Accreditation@SGD and SGD Spark programmes, organizations are provided third-party assurance on a startup’s ability to deliver on their products and outcomes, as well as connecting them to government and business demand.

Innovation is not optional for small states

The challenges faced by small states are matched by the potential that innovation and digital technology can offer. And part of this is the role and importance of learning from each other.

The Singapore Cooperation Programme (SCP) extends technical assistance and shares Singapore’s development experience with fellow developing countries. In its 30th year in 2022, the SCP has welcomed close to 150,000 foreign government officials to its programmes.

In 2021, Singapore launched the “FOSS for Good” technical assistance package to address small states’ unique development priorities – including digital transformation in the areas of health, education and public governance. UNDP has been an important partner in this programme.

Such shared learning and collaboration opportunities, combined with the wide-ranging support of initiatives such as the UNDP Global SIDS Offer, will be crucial to ensure that small states build and sustain global innovation leadership.

Both in the face of continued shocks and crises, but also to leverage opportunities where innovation can positively change lives and livelihoods.

William Tan, Director-General, Technical Cooperation Directorate, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Singapore & Riad Meddeb is Interim Director, UNDP Global Centre for Technology, Innovation and Sustainable Development

Source: UNDP

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By IPS Correspondent
Sharm El-Sheikh, Nov 17 2022 – UN Secretary-General António Guterres told the negotiators at COP27 that time for talking about loss, and damage finance is over.

“We need action. No one can deny the scale of loss and damage we see around the globe. The world is burning and drowning before our eyes. I urge all parties to show that they see it – and get it.”

He echoed the words of COP27 President Sameh Shoukry, who spoke about how emergent and developing countries had not reached an agreement on loss and damage – and urged the negotiators to put in extra efforts to reach agreements here.

Guterres said it was clear that there was a breakdown in trust between North and South.

This was no time for finger-pointing.

“The world is watching and has a simple message: stand and deliver. Deliver the kind of meaningful climate action that people and the planet so desperately need,” he said.

Global emissions were at their highest level and rising, and “climate impacts are decimating economies and societies – and growing.”

He said it was not possible to deny climate justice to those who contributed least to the climate crisis and are getting hurt the most.

“The 1.5 target is not simply about keeping a goal alive – it’s about keeping people alive.”

He said the Just Energy Transition Partnerships were important pathways to accelerate the phasing out of coal and the scaling up of renewables – and should be expanded.

Guterres also said the parties should act on the crucial question of finance.

“That means delivery of the $100 billion in climate finance for developing countries.

It means clarity on how the doubling of adaptation finance will be delivered through a credible roadmap. And it means acting on the consensus to reform multilateral development banks and international financial institutions.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Aimable Twahirwa
SHARM EL SHEIKH, Nov 17 2022 – At a time when sustainable farming approaches such as agroecology have been removed from the text at ongoing global climate negotiation (COP27) taking place in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, activists are urging African governments to explore new steps to integrate agriculture into the UN climate agreement.

According to the most recent assessment of climate impacts from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), loss and damage can broadly be split into two categories: economic losses involving “income and physical assets”; and non-economic losses, which include – but are not limited to – “mortality, mobility and mental wellbeing losses”.

Million Belay, the Alliance for Food Sovereignty coordinator in Africa, says green revolution solutions have failed the continent. Credit: Aimable Twahirwa/IPS

In the agriculture sector, estimates by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) indicate that despite overall gains in food production and food security on a global scale, many countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, have failed to make progress in recent decades.

According to UN experts, the region produces less food per person today than it did three decades ago, and the number of chronically undernourished people has increased dramatically.

“This must change because many of Africa’s agricultural and food security problems have been related to misguided policies, weak institutions in the context of climate crisis,” said Million Belay, the Alliance for Food Sovereignty coordinator in Africa (AFSA).

Belay pointed out that the industrial food system is a major culprit driving climate change but is still not being taken seriously by climate talks.

“Real solutions like diverse, resilient agroecological farming are crucial for farmers [in Africa] to adapt to climate chaos, but they are being sidelined and starved of climate finance,” he told IPS on the sidelines of COP27 in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt.

While COP27 in Egypt is trying to address food systems, for the first time, new suggested solutions by multinational companies and global philanthropists by providing new technologies and systems that reward African farmers for mitigating emissions have become a new point of anxiety among climate activists.

The industrial food systems such as monocultures, high-fertilizer and chemical use are described by experts as an enormous driver of climate change in Africa, while small-scale, agroecological farming and indigenous systems comparatively have significantly less GHG emissions and can even work to sequester carbon in healthy ecosystems.

“Historically, these philanthropists and multinationals have been considering Africa as a continent facing an agriculture productivity crisis, yet the serious problem is instead related to resilience crisis,” Belay said.

As global warming patterns continue to shift and natural resources dwindle, agroecology is considered by climate experts as the best path forward for feeding the continent. Most experts agree that under current growth rates, Africa’s population will double by 2050 and then double again by 2100, eventually climbing to over 4 billion by the end of the century.

The latest estimates by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) show that feeding this growing population will require significant advancements in Africa’s food systems.

Martin Fregene, the Director of Agriculture and Agro-Industry at the African Development Bank, told delegates at COP27 that the power of agricultural technologies to raise productivity and combat malnutrition on the continent are desperately needed.

Speaking during a session that focused on major solutions for a sustainable Agriculture sector in Africa, Fregene pointed out that the inadequate public investment in agricultural research, training and infrastructure and the limited mobilization of the private sector are some major contributing factors to food insecurity affecting Africa because of Climate Change.

In May this year, the African Development Bank launched an African Emergency Food Production Facility to provide 20 million African smallholder farmers with seeds and access to fertilizers in a bid to enable them to rapidly produce 38m tons of food – a $12bn increase in production in two years.

The programme aims especially at providing direct subsidies to farmers to buy fertilizer and other inputs, as well as financing large importers of fertilizer to source supply from other regions.

While climate-induced shocks to the food system used to occur once every ten years on average in Africa, experts show that they are now happening every 2.5 years.

Estimates show by 2050, warming of just 1.2 to 1.9℃, well within the range of current IPCC projections, is likely to increase the number of malnourished in Africa by 25 to 95 percent–25 percent in central Africa, 50 percent in east Africa, 85 percent in southern Africa and 95 percent in west Africa.

Both activists and climate experts agree that the public sector in most parts of sub-Saharan Africa can do more to engage the private sector to ensure that smallholder farmers are taking ownership of established adaptation strategies.

Matthias Berninger, the senior Vice-President of Global Public and Government Affairs at Bayer, a global Life Science company with core competencies in the areas of health care and agriculture, told IPS that yet there are positive examples showing how the private sector is getting involved in agricultural adaptation to climate change in sub-Saharan Africa, there is still a long way to go.

“The continent has adaptation projects that are now demonstrating their potential, but there is still a pressing need to reshape Africa’s food system to be more resilient, productive and inclusive,” Berninger said.

A new study by researchers from Biovision, the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES-Food) and the United Kingdom-based Institute of Development Studies shows that such sustainable and regenerative farming techniques have either been neglected, ignored, or disregarded by major donors.

One of the major findings is that most governments, especially in Sub-Saharan still favour “green revolution” approaches, believing that chemical-intensive, large-scale industrial agriculture is the only way to produce sufficient food. “Green revolution solutions have failed,” said Belay.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Baher Kamal
MADRID, Nov 17 2022 – As much as wars –or even more–, climate disaster represents a great business opportunity, so don’t bother those who pour their fortunes into fueling them with talks about stopping it.

See what happens.

Investing in wars

A couple of dozens of companies involved in manufacturing the most inhuman weapons of mass destruction– the nuclear warheads, have been supported by over 150 big banks by lending them money or underwriting bonds, according to the Nobel Peace Laureate International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN).

“The world’s richest people emit huge and unsustainable amounts of carbon and, unlike ordinary people, 50% to 70% of their emissions result from their investments”

OXFAM International

Its Don’t Bank on the Bomb report also shows that another 186 institutions seek to profit from holding shares or bonds. And that altogether 338 financial institutions have made more than 685 billion US dollars available to the nuclear weapon industry since 2019.

This exercise –and the huge ‘investments’ by the world’s top rich corporations- has proved to be highly efficient.

In fact, in its report “Squandered: 2021 Global Nuclear Weapons Spending,” ICAN reveals that in 2021 –the year before the Russian invasion of Ukraine– nine nuclear-armed states spent 82.4 billion US dollars on these weapons of mass destruction, that’s more than 156,000 US dollars… per minute!

Another prestigious investigation centre: the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) recently revealed that, right now, of the total inventory of an estimated 12.705 warheads at the start of 2022, about 9.440 were in military stockpiles for potential use.

Of those, an estimated 3.732 warheads were deployed with missiles and aircraft, and around 2.000 —nearly all of which belonged to Russia or the USA— were kept in a state of “high operational alert,” SIPRI adds in its Yearbook 2022.

Investing in climate catastrophes

But there is another highly lucrative business: climate change.

“The world’s richest people emit huge and unsustainable amounts of carbon and, unlike ordinary people, 50% to 70% of their emissions result from their investments,” reveals a global movement of people who are fighting inequality to end poverty and injustice–OXFAM International.

“A billionaire emits a million times more greenhouse gases than the average person.”

Its recent major study: Carbon Billionaires: The investment emissions of the world’s richest people, reports that a new analysis of the “investments of 125 of the world’s richest billionaires shows that on average they are emitting 3 million tonnes a year, more than a million times the average for someone in the bottom 90% of humanity.”

The study also finds billionaire investments in polluting industries such as fossil fuels and cement are double the average for the Standard & Poor 500 group of companies.

“Billionaires hold extensive stakes in many of the world’s largest and most powerful corporations, which gives them the power to influence the way these companies act.”

Once destroyed, business set to make more money

In either case, wars and climate catastrophes cause vast destruction, let alone unspeakable human suffering, and death.

Both of them further sharpen the world’s unprecedented food crisis.

Also here, market lords continue to make high profits.

In fact, a ”small number of corporations exercise a high degree of influence over the global industrial food system, powered by mergers and acquisitions of one another to form giant mega-corporations, which enable further concentration horizontally and vertically, as well as influence over policy-making and governance nationally and globally,” as already reported by IPS.

On the current energy crisis, the UN chief António Guterres in mid-September 2022, stated that it is “absolutely unacceptable to see that, when people are suffering so much in different parts of the world and, namely, because of the high costs of energy and high costs of fuel, to see fossil fuel companies having the largest profits ever or at least in the recent past.”

Why not: in addition to speculating with the energy markets, these companies have been largely funded by governments. In fact, politicians have spent six trillion US dollars from taxpayers’ money to subsidise fossil fuels in just one year: 2020. And they are set to increase the figure to nearly seven trillion by 2025.

More business ‘opportunities’

Then comes the great business of reconstructing all that the money-making business has been greatly contributing. Buildings, highways, bridges, hospitals, schools, universities, etcetera, let alone in further synthetic food.. all of these are to be paid for by the victims.

But there are more business opportunities, like continue buying vast fertile lands for monoculture and intensive agriculture, a money-making practice that by the way further opens the door for high technology corporations to digitalise more and more food production, among so many others.

A production that, also, by the way, is being greatly disrupted due to both wars and climate disaster.