ReportWire

Tag: Fertilizers

  • 10 Plant Partnerships That Will Triple Your Harvest (Gardeners Shocked!) –

    [ad_1]

    I learned that one simple gardening trick can boost harvests quickly while cutting pest numbers almost in half. The trick is companion planting: nature’s way of helping plants work better together.

    After many seasons of trial and error, this method turned my weak veggie beds into a healthy, busy garden in no time.

    No need to stress about fancy layouts. These 10 plant partners work well with little effort. Ready to match plants the easy way? Let’s go.

    Plant Partners That Work Wonders

    1. Tomatoes & Basil: A Reliable Match

    This pair isn’t just delicious on the plate. Basil’s strong smell helps keep away pests like aphids and hornworms that usually bother tomatoes.

    Growing them together can even make tomatoes taste better. (Seriously. My tomatoes tasted so much better once I planted basil beside them.)

    2. Carrots & Onions: A Simple Defense

    Carrot flies can wipe out a crop fast, but onions help block them. In return, carrots help loosen the soil for onion bulbs. They just work well together.

    3. Corn & Beans: The Old “Three Sisters” Duo

    This old planting method makes sense. Beans add nitrogen to the soil, which corn needs. The corn stalks give the beans something to climb. It’s a natural setup that works smoothly.

    4. Cucumbers & Nasturtiums: The Decoy

    Nasturtiums act like bait, pulling pests like aphids and beetles away from cucumbers. They also have pretty flowers that you can eat with a pepper-like taste.

    5. Peppers & Marigolds: Root Protectors

    A common mistake is planting peppers without help. Marigold roots release compounds that chase away nematodes that damage pepper roots.

    Some studies show that marigolds can reduce nematode populations by up to 90%. Their blooms look nice, too.

    6. Lettuce & Radishes: Soil Helpers

    Radishes break up compacted soil, allowing lettuce roots to grow deeper. This makes lettuce stronger on hot and dry days. Radishes also grow fast, so you get an early harvest while waiting for your lettuce.

    7. Squash & Borage: Bee Magnets

    Squash needs more bees, and borage attracts them. These bright blue flowers pull in loads of pollinators and help keep pests away from squash. Knowing this pairing gives you better fruit.

    8. Potatoes & Horseradish: A Surprise Team

    This pair sounds odd, but it works. Horseradish contains natural compounds that help keep potatoes strong and beetles away. Plant horseradish at the corners of the potato bed for protection.

    9. Strawberries & Thyme: Berry Guards

    Slugs love strawberries, but thyme helps stop them with its strong scent. Thyme also acts as ground cover, keeping berries off the soil and reducing fungal problems. Simple and smart.

    10. Cabbage & Dill: Friendly Bug Attractors

    Dill doesn’t chase pests. Instead, it brings in helpful insects like ladybugs and lacewings that eat cabbage worms. It’s like having tiny guards watching over your cabbages.

    Why Companion Planting Works

    Companion planting is more than old advice. It’s backed by how plants interact. They use scents and root signals to communicate with one another. The results can be big:

    • Less pest damage, fewer sprays
    • Better pollination
    • Grow more in small spaces
    • Better soil use
    • Shade where needed

    When you match plants well, everything grows better together.

    How To Start

    Try just two or three partner groups this season. Watch how plant health, pest problems, and harvest amounts change.

    Remember: it’s not just about putting plants next to each other. It’s about letting them support each other. Keep them close but not crowded; about 12–18 inches apart works for most pairs.

    With the right partners, your garden becomes a group that works together instead of single plants growing alone. That’s the goal for most of us anyway.

    [ad_2]

    Gary Antosh

    Source link

  • 10 Rose Fertilizing No No’s

    10 Rose Fertilizing No No’s

    [ad_1]

    In the spring it is easy to find info on how to fertilize roses. But what are some things you should NOT DO? Here are 10 Things not to do when fertilizing roses. Below you’ll also find a video from rose expert Paul Zimmerman with his fertilizer tips.

    10 Things No To DO When Fertilizing Roses

    Pin
    Photo Credit: @PlantCareToday.com (AI)

    Don’t Over-fertilize

    Avoid the temptation to over-fertilize, thinking more is better. Too much fertilizer can burn the roots, stress the plant, and lead to poor growth and fewer blooms.

    Don’t Fertilize Right After Planting

    Newly planted roses, especially in soil already prepared with fertilizer, shouldn’t need immediate fertilizing. Allow them to establish before starting a fertilization routine.

    salts and several pink roses with green leaves.Pin

    Don’t Ignore Soil Testing

    Before you start mixing your own fertilizers, it’s wise to perform a soil test to understand what nutrients your soil really needs. Applying the wrong balance can harm plant health.

    Don’t Use Only Synthetic Fertilizers

    Relying solely on synthetic fertilizers can deprive roses of the benefits of organic matter. Using well-rotted manure (SteerCow) or compost can improve soil structure and provide nutrients more gradually.

    Don’t Fertilize During Dormancy

    In cooler climates or when roses are dormant, they won’t benefit from fertilizing as they’re not actively growing. Wait until the first signs of new growth appear in spring.

    Colorful rose bloom, learn to what is the best rose fertilizerPin

    Don’t Apply Fertilizer to Dry Soil

    Applying fertilizer to dry soil can cause root burn. Ensure the soil is moist, or water your roses before applying fertilizer.

    Don’t Forget to Water After Fertilizing

    Watering after applying granular fertilizers helps to dissolve them and carry the nutrients down to the roots where they’re needed.

    Don’t Fertilize Late in the Season

    Avoid fertilizing roses late in the growing season. Late fertilization can encourage new growth that won’t have time to harden off before winter, leading to frost damage.

    Leaves collected for use as mulchPin

    Don’t Neglect Mulching

    While not directly related to fertilizing, failing to mulch after fertilizing can lead to moisture loss and temperature fluctuations that can stress plants. Mulch helps retain moisture and regulate soil temperature.

    Don’t Ignore Manufacturer’s Instructions

    If using commercial fertilizers, always follow the manufacturer’s recommended rates and application timings. Over- or under-application can result in poor plant health and blooming.

    Fertilizing Tips From Rose Expert Paul Zimmerman

    Rosarian expert Paul Zimmerman shares rose fertilizing tips

    Rose expert Paul Zimmerman shares his expertise on rose fertilization, along with providing professional tips and techniques for optimal rose health and blooming. Paul gives a simple and effective feeding program for garden roses and other plants. He recommends using three products: 

    • A time-release fertilizer -The time-release fertilizer is applied in the spring
    • A seaweed-based fertilizer – the seaweed-based fertilizer is used every three weeks
    • An organic rose food – the organic rose food is applied in late summer. 

    Overall, the program is easy to follow and provides great results.

    [ad_2]

    Gary Antosh

    Source link

  • Even Cloudflare's CEO says that viral firing video is 'painful' — here's what went wrong

    Even Cloudflare's CEO says that viral firing video is 'painful' — here's what went wrong

    [ad_1]

    A tech employee’s recording of the meeting firing her from a sales role at Cloudflare
    NET,
    -1.79%

    has spurred criticism of the company — and a broader conversation about the right way to let employees go.

    Viewers have called the roughly 10-minute TikTok video, which went viral this week, “sad” and a “disaster.” Even Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince responded on X (formerly Twitter) that it was “painful for me to watch.”

    In the video captioned, “POV: You’re about to get laid off,” former Cloudflare account executive Brittany Pietsch logs into a virtual meeting with an HR representative and a director at the company, both of whom she says she’s never met before. In a caption, Pietsch writes that she assumed they were meeting to let her go, because she had heard from coworkers who had been axed already.

    In the video, the company reps say that Pietsch hadn’t met performance expectations, and that Cloudflare had decided to “part ways” with her. Pietsch’s response is what has pushed this clip to be shared all over social-media newsfeeds: She asks for an explanation for why she, specifically, is being let go by the company, particularly because she’s a new employee who hasn’t heard any negative feedback. She also asks why her manager isn’t a part of this termination meeting.

    “Every single one-on-one [meeting] I’ve had with my manager, every conversation I’ve had with him — he’s been giving me nothing but ‘I am doing a great job,’” she says during the meeting. “I’m just definitely very confused and would love an explanation that makes sense.” 

    The director, who can’t be seen in the video, says he “won’t be able to go into specifics” on Pietsch’s performance. 

    In a statement to MarketWatch, a Cloudflare spokesperson clarified that the company did not conduct layoffs, and is not engaged in a reduction of force. “When we do make the decision to part ways with an employee, we base the decision on a review of an employee’s ability to meet measurable performance targets,” the Cloudflare statement said. “We regularly review team members’ performance and let go of those who aren’t right for our team. There is nothing unique about that review process or the number of people we let go after performance review this quarter.”

    Pietsch did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

    Company CEO Prince added on X, formerly known as Twitter, that the company fired 40 salespeople out of 1,500 in its go-to-market division. “That’s a normal quarter,” he wrote in his post. “When we’re doing performance management right, we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire, even during the holidays, whether they’re going to be successful or not.” 

    But he also added: “We try to fire perfectly. In this case, clearly we were far from perfect. The video is painful for me to watch. Managers should always be involved. HR should be involved, but it shouldn’t be outsourced to them … We don’t always get it right.”

    Many viewers seem to agree, as the video has drawn close to 200,000 views on TikTok and millions of views on X, along with going viral on Reddit.

    “Total disaster on both sides,” lawyer Eric Pacifici said. 

    “Totally unfair to her,” wrote Austen Allred, CEO of the online-coding bootcamp Bloom Institute of Technology. “Pretty sad across the board.” 

    On LinkedIn, Pietsch gave her own response to the social-media uproar. She said that her manager was unaware that she was being let go, and that she asked questions during the meeting not to try and save her job, but rather to get greater clarity on why she had been singled out for termination. 

    “I’ll never be able to wrap my mind around it,” she wrote in the post. “We as employees are expected to give 2 weeks notice and yet we don’t deserve even a sliver of respect when the roles are reversed?”

    What’s the right way to fire an employee? 

    It’s never easy to part ways with an employee, according to Molly, a human-resources consultant who runs the TikTok account HR Molly, which has 80,000 followers. She asked only to be identified by her first name for privacy reasons. 

    But that being said, it’s very important to treat affected employees with respect. That can include sharing as much information as possible about why the decision is being made. 

    “I tell people that even if you catch someone stealing, even that termination meeting should have a level of decency,” she said. “It seems like there’s a significant consensus that the meeting [in the viral video] lacked some dignity.”

    It’s also important to understand these kinds of conversations will be difficult for an employee no matter what, Molly added. 

    “We know this impacts people and we know this is emotional and that it’s harmful. How can we do it in a way that creates the least amount of additional harm?” she said, noting that she picked up the concept from fellow TikTok creator and diversity consultant Ciarra Jones. “Companies need to prioritize the well-being of the employee that’s impacted.” 

    As for recording your layoff or firing meeting — that can be risky, Molly said, and downright illegal in states that require you to receive consent before doing so.

    But companies and HR professionals would be wise to remind themselves that, in this day and age, it can happen, she said. And if a camera or tape recorder would change the way you handle an interaction, it’s a good sign to reevaluate.

    According to its company website, Cloudflare has dozens of job postings for open positions across the company, including sales roles.

    In her LinkedIn post, Pietsch said that she’s not very concerned about any backlash over the video that might impede her chances of getting another job. 

    “Any company that wouldn’t want to hire me because I shared a video of how a company fired me or because I asked questions as to why I was being let go is not a company I would ever want to work for anyway,” she wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • C3.ai, GameStop, UiPath, ChargePoint, Yext, BlackBerry, and More Stock Market Movers

    C3.ai, GameStop, UiPath, ChargePoint, Yext, BlackBerry, and More Stock Market Movers

    [ad_1]


    • Order Reprints

    • Print Article

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. banks and regional lenders slide across the board as S&P is latest to downgrade ratings

    U.S. banks and regional lenders slide across the board as S&P is latest to downgrade ratings

    [ad_1]

    U.S. banks and regional banks fell across the board on Tuesday, after S&P Global Ratings downgraded five smaller players after a review of risk related to funding, liquidity and asset quality with a focus on office commercial real estate.

    Adding to the gloom, Republic First Bancorp. Inc.’s stock
    FRBK,
    -41.90%

    tanked by 39%, after Nasdaq told the company that its stock would be delisted on Wednesday, after it failed to file its annual report in time.

    S&P’s move comes just days after Fitch Ratings analyst Christopher Wolfe reduced his operating environment score for U.S. banks to aa- from aa due to the unknown path of interest rate hikes and regulatory changes facing the sector.

    And Moody’s Investors Service just two weeks ago upset investors when it downgraded some lenders and said it was reviewing ratings on bigger banks, including Bank of New York Mellon
    BK,
    -1.71%
    ,
    State Street
    STT,
    -1.59%

    and Northern Trust
    NTRS,
    -1.73%
    .

    For more, see: Bank asset quality, weaker profits spark Moody’s reviews and downgrades as it weighs potential 2024 recession

    The S&P 500 Financials Sector has fallen for seven consecutive days, and is on pace for its longest losing streak since April 7, 2022, when it also fell for seven straight trading days.

    Individual bank names are also performing poorly, with Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
    GS,
    -0.94%

    and Citigroup Inc.
    C,
    -1.68%

    down for 10 of the past 11 days and Charles Schwab Corp.
    SCHW,
    -4.84%

    down 11 straight days.

    Goldman alone has fallen for seven straight days for a total loss of 6.3%. It’s the longest losing streak since Feb. 28, 2020, when it also fell for seven straight days as the pandemic was taking hold.

    The KBW Nasdaq Regional Banking Index
    KBWR
    is down for 11 straight days. and the KBW Nasdaq Bank Index
    BKX
    is down for seven straight days.

    S&P downgraded Associated Banc. Corp. 
    ASB,
    -4.20%
    ,
     Comerica Inc.
    CMA,
    -3.82%
    ,
     KeyCorp
    KEY,
    -3.58%
    ,
     UMB Financial Corp. 
    UMBF,
    -2.42%

    % and Valley National Bancorp. 
    VLY,
    -4.19%

    by one notch and said the outlook on all five is stable.

    Read also: More challenges await U.S. banks but analysts think the worst may be over for the year

    The rating agency affirmed ratings on Zions Bancorp
    ZION,
    -4.17%

     and maintained a negative outlook, meaning it could downgrade them again in the near-term. And it affirmed ratings and a stable outlook on Synovus Financial Corp. 
    SNV,
    -3.37%

     and Truist Financial Corp. 
    TFC,
    -1.36%

     “We reviewed these 10 banks because we identified them as having potential risks in multiple areas that could make them less resilient than similarly rated peers ,” S&P said in a statement.

    “For instance, some that have seen greater deterioration in funding—-as indicated by sharply higher costs or substantial dependence on wholesale funding and brokered deposits—-may also have below-peer profitability, high unrealized losses on their assets, or meaningful exposure to CRE.”

    The steep rise in interest rates orchestrated by the Federal Reserve over the past year has raised deposit costs as banks are now competing for savers seeking higher returns and that’s forced some to pay up on deposits and discourage their clients from heading to other institutions and instruments.

    The sector has been skittish this year following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and other lenders that led to a run on deposits at a number of regional lenders.

    However, S&P said about 90% of the banks it rates have stable outlooks and just 10% have negative ones. None have positive outlooks.

    The widespread stable outlooks shows that stability in the U.S. banking sector has improved significantly in recent months.

    S&P is expecting FDIC-backed banks in aggregate to earn a relatively healthy ROE of about 11% in 2023.

    KeyCorp. and Comerica both fell more than 3% on the news. Of the two, KeyCorp. has more outstanding debt and its 10-year bonds widened by about 5 to 10 basis points, according to data solutions provider BondCliq Media Services.

    As the following chart shows, the bonds have seen better selling on Wednesday with buyers emerging around midmorning.


    KeyBank net customer flow (intraday). Source: BondCliQ Media Services

    The next chart shows customer flow over the last 10 days.


    Most active KeyBank issues with net customer flow (last 10 days). Source: BondCliQ Media Services

    The next chart shows the outstanding debt of the downgraded banks, with KeyCorp. clearly the leader with almost $16 billion of bonds.


    Outstanding S&P downgraded banks debt USD by maturity bucket. Source: BondCliQ Media Services

    Don’t miss: Capital One confirms roughly $900 million sale of office loans as property sector wobbles

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • African Union calls on Russia to reinstate Ukrainian grain deal

    African Union calls on Russia to reinstate Ukrainian grain deal

    [ad_1]

    The African Union called today to urgently reinstate a United Nations-brokered deal allowing Ukraine to export millions of tons of grain that was terminated at Russia’s behest.

    “The problem of grains and fertilizers concerns everyone,” Comoros President Azali Assoumani, who heads the 55-nation African Union, told Russian state newswire RIA Novosti. He was speaking in St. Petersburg, where Russian President Vladimir Putin is hosting a summit with African leaders.

    Putin last week pulled out of the Black Sea Grain Initiative that had allowed Ukraine — one of the world’s breadbaskets — to export grains and oilseeds through three Ukrainian ports on the Black Sea: Odesa, Chornomorsk and Yuzhny/Pivdenny.

    Russia, which has waged all-out war on Ukraine for 17 months, has since launched a series of air strikes against the country’s port facilities and reimposed a maritime blockade — making countries that need to import food more reliant on Russia and increasing the risk that they will go hungry.

    “We will talk about this in St. Petersburg, we will discuss it with Putin to see how we can restart this agreement,” Assoumani added.

    Putin is meeting with 17 African leaders on Thursday and Friday, as the increasingly isolated Russian leader attempts to maintain relations with a continent with close historical ties to Moscow.

    [ad_2]

    Nicolas Camut

    Source link

  • Putin tightens grip on Africa after killing Black Sea grain deal

    Putin tightens grip on Africa after killing Black Sea grain deal

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    African leaders have long been reluctant to criticize Russia and now that President Vladimir Putin has killed off a deal to allow Ukraine to export grain, they know they are more dependent than ever on Moscow’s largesse to feed millions of people at risk of going hungry.

    Having canceled the pact on Monday, Moscow unleashed four nights of attacks on the Ukrainian ports of Odesa and Chornomorsk — two vital export facilities — damaging the infrastructure of global and Ukrainian traders and destroying 60,000 tons of grain. In the latest assault, on Thursday night, a barrage of Kalibr missiles hit the granaries of an agricultural enterprise in Odesa.

    “The decision by Russia to exit the Black Sea Grain Initiative is a stab [in] the back,” tweeted Abraham Korir Sing’Oei, a senior foreign ministry official from Kenya, one of the African countries that has received donations of Russian fertilizer in recent months.

    The resulting rise in global food prices “disproportionately impacts countries in the Horn of Africa already impacted by drought,” he added.

    Sing’Oei’s was a solitary voice, however. Rather than reproaching Moscow, African leaders have remained largely silent as they prepare to attend a summit hosted by Putin in St Petersburg next week. This follows an African mission led by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa last month to Kyiv and St Petersburg in a bid to broker peace.

    The diplomatic stakes could hardly be higher. 

    Putin had been due to make a return visit to Africa next month to attend a summit of the BRICS emerging economies in Johannesburg. That trip has been called off, however, “by mutual agreement” to avoid exposing the Kremlin chief to the risk of arrest under an indictment for war crimes issued by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

    Without the Black Sea Grain Initiative, a deal brokered a year ago by the United Nations and Turkey that enabled Ukraine to export 33 million metric tons of grains and oilseeds, many African governments now have nowhere else to turn to but Russia.

    “It’s going to be based on political alignments,” said Samuel Ramani, an Oxford-based academic and author of a book on Russia’s resurgent influence in Africa.

    Comparing Russia’s tactics to blackmail, Ramani added: “They’re going to be offering free grain to some, they’re going to be selling to others. It’s full-fledged grain diplomacy.”

    No deal

    Russia said on Monday it would no longer guarantee the safety of ships passing through a transit corridor as it announced its official withdrawal from the deal, declaring the northwestern Black Sea to be once again “temporarily dangerous.” It followed up by threatening to fire on all ships going across the Black Sea to Ukrainian ports, sparking a tit-for-tat warning from Kyiv that it would do the same to all vessels sailing to Russian-controlled Black Sea ports.

    Over the 12 months it functioned, the grain deal helped bring down global food prices by as much as 20 percent from the peak set in the aftermath of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. It also provided aid agencies with vital supplies. 

    Russia repeatedly claimed it has not seen the benefits of the three-times extended agreement, however.

    Although Western sanctions carve out exemptions for food and fertilizer the Kremlin argues that sanctions targeting Russian individuals and its state agriculture bank are hindering its own exports, thus contravening a second deal agreed last July under which the U.N. committed to facilitating these exports for a three-year period.

    The Kremlin said Wednesday that it would resume talks on the Black Sea grain deal only if the U.N. implements this part of the deal within the next three months. 

    Propaganda war

    Another of Moscow’s criticisms is that cargoes of Ukrainian grain have headed mostly to rich countries; not to those in Africa and Asia bearing the brunt of the global food crisis

    Over the last year, a quarter of all the grain and oilseeds shipped under the initiative have headed to China, the largest recipient, while some 18 percent went to Spain and 10 percent to Turkey, according to U.N. data

    This is not the whole story, however. Trade data from the World Bank shows that much of the wheat exported to Turkey is processed and re-exported, as flour, pasta and other products, to Africa and the Middle East. 

    Most importantly, all grain that flows onto global markets reduces prices, wherever it ends up, counter the U.N. and others. 

    Russia has canceled the Black Sea deal and unleashed attacks on the Ukrainian ports of Odesa and Chornomorsk | Chris McGrath/Getty Images

    “It is not a question of where the Black Sea food actually goes; it is a question of it [bringing] international prices down, so whether you are a rich country or poor country, you can benefit,” said Arif Husain, the U.N. World Food Programme’s chief economist, speaking at an event on the Black Sea Grain Initiative in Rome recently. 

    These arguments have been at the center of a months-long propaganda battle between Moscow and Kyiv over who can rightly claim to be feeding the world and who is responsible for soaring food prices.

    In the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year, the Kremlin’s narrative — that western sanctions are to blame — was quick to take hold in many parts of Africa. 

    Ukraine sought to counter this with a humanitarian food program, Grain from Ukraine, launched in November 2022, but shiploads of fertilizer donated to countries, including Malawi and Kenya, served to sweeten the Kremlin’s message.

    “A true friend knows no weather. A true friend comes to the rescue when you need them the most. And you just demonstrated that to us,” Malawi’s Agriculture Minister Sam Dalitso Kawale said upon receiving a fertilizer gift from Russian firm Uralchem in March. 

    Feeling the pinch

    Now, countries like Malawi need friends in Moscow more than ever. Not only does the end of the grain deal cut them off from flows of Ukrainian grain, leaving them dependent on Russian supplies, but it also pushes up prices. 

    Moscow’s withdrawal from the agreement is unlikely to have the same impact on prices as its full-scale invasion in February 2022. Over the last year, Ukraine has opened up alternative export routes and a slowdown in shipments moving under the initiative also meant commodity markets had been expecting Moscow to quit the deal. 

    While Ukraine can continue to export grain through alternative routes, these come with extra logistical and transport costs, squeezing prices for Ukrainian farmers, at one end, and pushing up costs for buyers, at the other. 

    For food-insecure countries in the Horn of Africa even a small increase in prices could spell disaster, said Shashwat Saraf, emergency director in East Africa for the International Rescue Committee (IRC). 

    Domestic production has dropped amid conflict and severe drought, leaving the region increasingly reliant on food imports and food aid. As such, higher food prices will hit hard, he said, adding that traders already report “feeling the pinch.” 

    With the cost of food rising, the IRC and other humanitarian organizations will be forced to either reduce the number of people they provide cash transfers or reduce the value of these themselves — and this at a time when the number of food insecure people is rising, said Saraf. “When we should be expanding our coverage, we will be actually reducing [it].”

    Slap in the face

    African leaders attending Putin’s summit next week will be silent on such issues, predicted Christopher Fomunyoh, African regional director at the U.S. National Democratic Institute for International Affairs and one of the Grain from Ukraine ambassadors appointed by Kyiv.

    But they must not return empty-handed again, he said. Russia’s discontinuation of the grain deal, following the South African-led visit to St Petersburg, is a “slap in the face,” Fomunyoh told POLITICO. “Their own credibility is now at stake. And my hope is that they will have to speak out in order to not further lose credibility with their own populations.”

    In 2022, Russia’s narrative was dominant in Africa, but that has slowly changed through the course of this year, he explained, adding that Africans were starting to see through Moscow’s propaganda.

    “There is always a time delay,” said Fomunyoh. “But my sense is that in the days and weeks to come, people are going to see very clearly [that] the destruction of infrastructure in Odessa, the destruction of stock, wheat, and grain in Chornomorsk is contributing to scarcity and the inflation in prices.”

    This story has been updated.

    [ad_2]

    Susannah Savage

    Source link

  • Moscow kills off Black Sea grain deal

    Moscow kills off Black Sea grain deal

    [ad_1]

    The Kremlin said on Monday that a U.N.-brokered deal to allow the safe passage of Ukrainian grain exports through the Black Sea is terminated, claiming that Russia’s conditions had not been met.

    “The Black Sea agreements ceased to be valid today,” Dmitry Peskov, President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary, was quoted by state news agency TASS as saying.

    “As the president of the Russian Federation said earlier, the deadline is July 17. Unfortunately, the part relating to Russia in this Black Sea agreement has not been implemented so far. Therefore, its effect is terminated,” Peskov said.

    “As soon as the Russian conditions are met, the Russian Federation will return to the implementation of the deal,” he said.

    Russia notified the other parties of its withdrawal from the initiative in a letter sent to the Istanbul-based Joint Coordination Center, set up to monitor the deal’s implementation, a U.N. official confirmed to POLITICO.  

    The Black Sea grain initiative, which was first brokered by the United Nations and Turkey a year ago in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, was last renewed on May 17 for two months. Some 33 million metric tons of grain and oilseeds have so far been exported under the deal, which has been extended three times, offering a lifeline to Ukraine’s farmers and to food-insecure countries in the Global South. 

    Dutch Foreign Minister Wopke Hoekstra blasted Moscow’s move, saying it threatens food prices and market stability. “It is utterly immoral that Russia continues to weaponise food,” Hoekstra said in a tweet.

    ‘Enough is enough’

    Moscow has repeatedly said it would not agree to a further extension, claiming that it is not seeing the benefit of the pact. “Hidden” Western sanctions, the Kremlin says, are hindering Russia’s own food and fertilizer exports and thus contravening a second deal agreed last July under which the U.N. committed to facilitate these exports for a three-year period.

    Last Tuesday, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres sent a letter to Putin putting forward a compromise proposal to meet a Kremlin demand that Russia’s state agricultural bank be readmitted to the SWIFT payments system. 

    Two days later, however, Putin reiterated that conditions required for Russia to extend the pact had not been met. “We voluntarily extended this so-called deal many times. Many times. But listen, in the end, enough is enough,” the Russian president said in a TV interview on Thursday night.

    “Russia is exporting record amounts of grain,” Ambassador Jim O’Brien, head of the State Department’s Office of Sanctions Coordination, told POLITICO ahead in an interview ahead of Monday’s announcement in Moscow. 

    “There’s no evidence that Russia is impeded in its exports,” he said, adding that the EU, the U.S., the U.K and U.N. have worked very closely with specific companies said to be facing difficulties to address their concerns.

    Last ship

    The last ship to travel under the pact left Ukraine’s Odesa port on Sunday morning, according to Reuters. In the run-up to the July 17 deadline, the number of shipments had fallen — dropping to 1.3 million metric tons in May from 4.2 million last October — while no new vessels have been registered under the initiative since the end of June.

    Kyiv, which accuses Moscow of sabotaging the deal, is readying alternative routes to export its grain and oilseed crops. 

    Aid agencies, meanwhile, are bracing for the impact of the deal’s end on global food prices, which they say will hit the world’s most vulnerable in food-insecure countries the hardest.

    Wheat prices rose 3 percent on Monday, bringing cumulative gains since the middle of last week to 12 percent, said Carlos Mera, head of agricultural commodities markets at Rabobank. Without the deal, Ukraine will have to export most of its grain and oilseeds via the Danube river, driving up transport and logistics cost and pushing down prices for farmers, who may subsequently plant less, he said.  

    “This situation means poor countries in Africa and the Middle East will be more dependent on Russian wheat,” said Mera. 

    Russia’s withdrawal from the initiative “would make it solely responsible for a devastating blow to global grain security,” said O’Brien. “President Putin is well aware that if he chooses to impede or end this arrangement, that he’ll be causing a great deal of trouble for the Global South.”

    [ad_2]

    Susannah Savage

    Source link

  • Chase working to resolve issue with accidental double payments made through Zelle

    Chase working to resolve issue with accidental double payments made through Zelle

    [ad_1]

    A spokesperson for JPMorgan Chase & Co. on Friday has confirmed statements on social media that some customers are seeing duplicate transactions and fees on their checking accounts.

    “We’re sorry,” the spokesperson said in an email to MarketWatch. “We’re working to resolve the issue and will automatically reverse any duplicates and adjust any related fees.” 

    JPMorgan Chase
    JPM,
    +2.10%

    customers on Twitter and other social-media outlets said payments made through Zelle were showing up twice.

    “PSA!!!,” said Twitter user @haunteraIIA. “Anyone waking up to duplicate zelle charges from chase, my call just went through and was told the duplicate charge should be credited within 24hours. they’re having issues with this today. i was on hold for an hour, so just in case anyone else wakes up freaked out lol.”

    Zelle is jointly owned by six banks: JPMorgan, Truist Financial Corp.
    TFC,
    +3.62%
    ,
    Capital One
    COF,
    +4.00%
    ,
    U.S. Bancorp
    USB,
    +4.00%
    ,
    PNC Financial Services Group Inc.
    PNC,
    +3.21%

    and Wells Fargo & Co.
    WFC,
    +2.95%
    .

    A spokesperson from Chase clarified that the problems are confined to its customers.

    Also Read: Banks explore reimbursing customers who send money to scam Zelle accounts

    Weston Blasi contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Right to ‘exist’: The campaign to give nature a legal status

    Right to ‘exist’: The campaign to give nature a legal status

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    Imagine a court hearing where the plaintiff is not a person, but a damaged river, lake or mountain.

    That’s the vision of a movement of conservationists — gaining traction across the Continent — that believes granting basic legal rights to nature can help protect it from threats like deforestation, biodiversity loss, chemicals pollution and climate change.

    “We usually think about nature as an object” that “serves us,” such as a swimming pool or a natural park, said Eduardo Salazar, a lawyer involved in the successful push to grant legal rights to Mar Menor, a large saltwater lagoon in Murcia in southeastern Spain polluted by the overuse of nitrogen fertilizers by nearby farmers.

    Granting an ecosystem legal status on “the same level” as individuals can help alter social attitudes to nature, he said, and give it important new protections.

    The lagoon last year became the first ecosystem on the Continent to be granted a status comparable to that of a person following a campaign backed by more than 600,000 people.

    Activists are now trying to replicate the model elsewhere.

    In Poland, a group of activists this week will complete the last leg of a 43-day-long march along the Oder River aimed at drawing attention to their campaign to grant the polluted ecosystem — which runs along the German-Polish border — the legal status of a person. 

    After a massive die-off last summer killed thousands of fish in the Oder, campaigners fear the ecosystem may be headed for another ecological disaster, pointing to Poland’s failure to rein in industrial emissions that are thought to have contributed to the incident. 

    “There is a lot of suffering going on in this river,” said Przemek Siewior, a climate activist who joined the march. Giving the fragile ecosystem legal rights is “a really good tool for people to try to save it,” he argued.

    A ‘voice’ for nature

    The so-called rights of nature movement, which originated in the United States some 50 years ago, has gained traction in recent years thanks to growing attention to the importance of protecting nature as part of combating climate change and biodiversity loss.

    A growing number of countries — including Uganda, Ecuador and New Zealand — have laws granting ecosystems legal rights, and court rulings in India and Colombia have recognized such rights and stressed the government’s duty to protect it. Just last month, Panama gave rights to sea turtles in a bid to protect them against pollution and poaching. 

    In Europe, campaigners are hoping to ride the coattails of the Mar Menor movement, with citizens’ initiatives pushing for similar recognition for the North Sea in the Netherlands and the Loire River in France, for example. 

    The Loire River bed at Loireauxence was completely dried out because of extreme heat in September 2022 | Damien Meyer/AFP via Getty Images

    At the movement’s core is a call for a fundamental rethink of the way people relate to and understand ecosystems. But more tangibly, campaigners also stress the importance of ensuring ecosystems can be represented in court.

    In New Zealand, granting legal personhood to the Whanganui River was seen as a key step to ensure the Indigenous Māori community living in its vicinity gets more say on the health of the ecosystem. 

    The Spanish law giving Mar Menor a right “to exist as an ecosystem and to evolve naturally” ensures it will be represented by a group of caretakers, made up of scientists, local politicians and citizens. 

    Inspired by the Spanish example, the Oder River movement last month published a draft law to protect the ecosystem that would include establishing a 15-person committee to represent the river. Three would be appointed by the state, four by municipalities and eight by NGOs; a group of 10 scientists would advise the committee.

    That structure would “give the Oder River a democratic representation” and a “voice that it currently just doesn’t have,” said Gaweł Andrzejewski, the coordinator of the Oder River march. 

    The process is still in its early stages: Drafted by a lawyer in collaboration with civil society, the draft bill is mostly meant to “stir and start the conversation” with politicians and NGOs, said Andrzejewski.

    Practical impact 

    Critics argue that such representation is largely symbolic and doubt it can do much to help protect and restore ecosystems. 

    Setting up committees to represent an ecosystem gives “power to particular people” to make decisions about what is or isn’t in its interest, said Michael Livermore, a professor of law at the University of Virginia who specializes in environmental law, among other topics.

    But there’s no guarantee that they’ll make the right call, or that it’ll be heeded. “I think part of the issue with a legal right is that you still run into problems, like what’s best for an ecosystem? And who’s going to make that decision?” he said.

    In Ecuador, for example, environmental activists challenged a large-scale mining project located in one of the most biodiversity-rich areas of the planet, saying it violated nature’s rights — but the court ruled against them, arguing that the government’s interests to exploit the resource were important enough to override the nature rights argument. 

    Giving ecosystems legal status also does not guarantee protection — granting the Indian Ganges River legal personhood in 2017 has not prevented it from deteriorating, for example. 

    Livermore argues there are more efficient alternatives to protecting nature, such as preserving people’s rights to organize, providing protections for environmental organizations or improving decision-making processes to give more power to Indigenous communities. 

    Companies have so far remained relatively quiet on the movement — to Livermore, that’s a sign that giving rights to nature doesn’t pose much of a challenge.

    “If it’s such a powerful tool to protect the environment, why don’t the special interests that worry about that, who would be opposed to very strong environmental protections, why aren’t they fighting it?” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Antonia Zimmermann

    Source link

  • 20 AI stocks expected to post the highest compound annual sales growth through 2025

    20 AI stocks expected to post the highest compound annual sales growth through 2025

    [ad_1]

    Things move quickly in the world of artificial intelligence. It is easy to sit back and complain about developments that could be disruptive, but sometimes investors are best served by putting emotions aside and observing new developments and how they affect markets. Could AI developments and related trends make you a lot of money?

    Below is a new screen showing a group of AI-oriented companies expected to increase their sales most rapidly through 2025, based on consensus estimates among analysts polled by FactSet. Then we show expected revenue growth rates for the largest AI-oriented companies in the screen.

    Over the long haul, many businesses might perform more efficiently by employing AI. Maybe this technology can create an economic revolution similar to the one that moved the majority of the working population away from agricultural labor during the 19th and 20th centuries.

    Back in February, we screened 96 stocks held by five exchange-traded funds focused on AI and related industries and listed the 20 that analysts thought would rise the most over the following 12 months.

    Three months is a long time for AI, and the shakeout hasn’t even started.

    Read: Congress and tech seem open to regulating AI efforts, but that doesn’t mean it will happen

    There is no way to predict how politicians will react to perceived or real threats of AI and machine learning. And the largest U.S. tech players are doing everything they can to employ the new technology and remain dominant. But that doesn’t mean they will grow more quickly than smaller AI-focused players.

    A new AI stock screen

    Once again we will begin a screen with these five ETFs:

    • The Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence ETF
      BOTZ,
      +0.97%

      BOTZ was established 2016 and has $1.8 billion in assets under management. The fund tracks an index of companies listed in developed markets that are expected to benefit from the increased utilization of robotics and AI. There are 44 stocks in the BOTZ portfolio, which is weighted by market capitalization and rebalanced once a year. Its largest holding is Intuitive Surgical Inc.
      ISRG,
      +0.53%
      ,
      which makes up 10% of the portfolio, followed by Nvidia Corp.
      NVDA,
      +3.30%

      at 9.4%.

    • The iShares Robotics and Artificial Intelligence Multisector ETF
      IRBO,
      +1.64%

      holds 116 stocks that are equal-weighted, as it tracks a global index of companies that derive at east 50% of revenue from robotics or AI, or have significant exposure to related industries. This ETF was launched in 2018 and has $304 million in assets.

    • The $246 million First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence & Robotics ETF
      ROBT,
      +1.83%

      has 107 stocks in its portfolio, with a modified weighting based on how directly companies are involved in AI or robotics. It was established in 2018.

    • The Robo Global Artificial Intelligence ETF
      THNQ,
      +1.81%

      has $26 million in assets and was established in 2020. I holds 69 stocks and isn’t concentrated. It uses a scoring system to weight its holdings by percentage of revenue derived from AI, with holdings also subject to minimum market capitalization and liquidity requirements.

    • The newest ETF on this list is the WisdomTree Artificial Intelligence and Innovation Fund
      WTAI,
      +2.42%
      ,
      which was established in December and has $13 million in assets and holds 73 stocks in an equal-weighted portfolio. According to FactSet, stocks are handpicked and selected companies “generate at least 50% of their revenue from AI and innovation activities, including those related to software, semiconductors, hardware technology, machine learning and innovative products.”

    Altogether and removing duplicates, the five ETFs hold 270 stocks of companies in 23 countries. We first narrowed the list to 197 covered by at least nine analysts and for which consensus sales estimates are available through calendar 2025. We used calendar-year estimates because some companies have fiscal years that don’t match the calendar.

    Here are the 20 screened AI-related companies expected by analysts to have the highest compound annual growth rates (CAGR) for sales from 2023 through 2025. Sales estimates are in millions of U.S. dollars. The list also shows which of the above five ETFs holds each stocks.

    Company

    Ticker

    Estimated sales – 2023 ($mil)

    Estimated sales – 2024 ($mil)

    Estimated sales – 2025 ($mil)

    Two-year estimated sales CAGR through 2025

    Held by

    BioXcel Therapeutics Inc.

    BTAI,
    -2.47%
    $5

    $39

    $121

    411.5%

    WTAI

    Luminar Technologies Inc. Class A

    LAZR,
    +8.82%
    $86

    $266

    $588

    161.0%

    ROBT, WTAI

    BlackBerry Ltd.

    BB,
    +6.01%
    $685

    $769

    $1,925

    67.6%

    ROBT

    Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd.

    CRDO,
    +10.29%
    $183

    $259

    $363

    40.9%

    IRBO

    SentinelOne Inc. Class A

    S,
    +1.05%
    $619

    $881

    $1,176

    37.9%

    WTAI

    Wolfspeed Inc.

    WOLF,
    +5.02%
    $982

    $1,323

    $1,860

    37.6%

    WTAI

    SK hynix Inc.

    000660,
    +1.66%
    $18,319

    $27,899

    $34,542

    37.3%

    WTAI

    Mobileye Global Inc. Class A

    MBLY,
    +1.67%
    $2,109

    $2,782

    $3,920

    36.3%

    ROBT, WTAI

    Snowflake Inc. Class A

    SNOW,
    +1.42%
    $2,811

    $3,863

    $5,139

    35.2%

    IRBO, THNQ, WTAI

    Lemonade Inc.

    LMND,
    +8.08%
    $395

    $471

    $712

    34.2%

    THNQ, WTAI

    Nio Inc. ADR Class A

    NIO,
    +1.39%
    $11,874

    $16,733

    $21,304

    33.9%

    ROBT

    Stem Inc.

    STEM,
    +4.88%
    $607

    $833

    $1,055

    31.8%

    WTAI

    Upstart Holdings Inc.

    UPST,
    +10.37%
    $547

    $768

    $938

    31.0%

    BOTZ, WTAI

    Cloudflare Inc. Class A

    NET,
    +5.84%
    $1,284

    $1,669

    $2,194

    30.7%

    THNQ

    Samsara Inc. Class A

    IOT,
    +1.42%
    $830

    $1,062

    $1,364

    28.2%

    THNQ

    Ambarella Inc.

    AMBA,
    +3.45%
    $287

    $355

    $472

    28.2%

    IRBO, ROBT, THNQ, WTAI

    iflytek Co. Ltd. Class A

    002230,
    -1.34%
    $3,561

    $4,582

    $5,851

    28.2%

    THNQ

    Tesla Inc.

    TSLA,
    +4.41%
    $99,558

    $128,412

    $161,061

    27.2%

    ROBT, THNQ, WTAI

    CrowdStrike Holdings Inc. Class A

    CRWD,
    +2.40%
    $2,935

    $3,793

    $4,739

    27.1%

    THNQ, WTAI

    PB Fintech Ltd.

    543390,
    +1.39%
    $358

    $462

    $573

    26.5%

    IRBO

    Source: FactSet

    Click the tickers for more about each company or ETF.

    Click here for Tomi Kilgore’s detailed guide to the wealth of information for free on the MarketWatch quote pages.

    We have screened for expected revenue growth, rather than for earnings or cash flow, because in a newer tech-oriented business area, investors are most likely to consider the top line as companies sacrifice profits to build market share.

    It is important to do your own research if you consider purchasing any individual stock, to form your own opinion about a company’s ability to remain competitive over the long term. Starting from the top of the list, BioXcel Therapeutics Inc.
    BTAI,
    -2.47%

    is expected to show exponential sales growth, but that is from a low expected baseline this year.

    What about the largest AI-related companies held by these ETFs?

    Here are the largest 20 companies in the screen by market capitalization, ranked by expected sales CAGR from 2022 through 2025. Once again the sales estimates are in millions of U.S. dollars, but the market caps are in billions.

    Company

    Ticker

    Estimated sales – 2023 ($mil)

    Estimated sales – 2024 ($mil)

    Estimated sales – 2025 $mil)

    Two-year estimated sales CAGR through 2025

    Market Cap ($bil)

    Held by

    Tesla Inc.

    TSLA,
    +4.41%
    $99,558

    $128,412

    $161,061

    27.2%

    $528

    ROBT, THNQ, WTAI

    Nvidia Corp.

    NVDA,
    +3.30%
    $29,839

    $36,877

    $46,154

    24.4%

    $722

    BOTZ, IRBO, ROBT, THNQ, WTAI

    Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ADR

    TSM,
    +5.83%
    $71,434

    $86,284

    $101,112

    19.0%

    $445

    ROBT, WTAI

    Advanced Micro Devices Inc.

    AMD,
    +2.23%
    $22,976

    $26,823

    $30,359

    15.0%

    $163

    IRBO, ROBT, THNQ, WTAI

    ASML Holding NV ADR

    ASML,
    +2.83%
    $28,974

    $32,374

    $37,796

    14.2%

    $263

    THNQ, WTAI

    Microsoft Corp.

    MSFT,
    +0.95%
    $223,438

    $251,028

    $282,397

    12.4%

    $2,318

    IRBO, ROBT, THNQ, WTAI

    Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.

    005930,
    -0.61%
    $200,595

    $227,286

    $252,129

    12.1%

    $292

    IRBO, WTAI

    Amazon.com Inc.

    AMZN,
    +1.85%
    $559,438

    $626,549

    $702,395

    12.1%

    $1,164

    IRBO, ROBT, THNQ, WTAI

    Adobe Inc.

    ADBE,
    +3.34%
    $19,470

    $21,784

    $24,276

    11.7%

    $158

    IRBO, THNQ

    Netflix Inc.

    NFLX,
    +1.86%
    $33,915

    $38,067

    $42,275

    11.6%

    $148

    IRBO, THNQ

    Tencent Holdings Ltd.

    700,
    -0.58%
    $88,727

    $99,212

    $110,556

    11.6%

    $422

    IRBO, ROBT

    Salesforce Inc.

    CRM,
    +2.37%
    $34,392

    $38,273

    $42,786

    11.5%

    $205

    IRBO, THNQ

    Alphabet Inc. Class A

    GOOGL,
    +1.11%
    $299,810

    $333,077

    $369,195

    11.0%

    $710

    IRBO, ROBT, THNQ, WTAI

    Intel Corp.

    INTC,
    -1.20%
    $51,060

    $57,799

    $62,675

    10.8%

    $122

    IRBO, ROBT

    Meta Platforms Inc. Class A

    META,
    +1.53%
    $125,901

    $139,545

    $154,259

    10.7%

    $528

    IRBO, WTAI

    Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. ADR

    BABA,
    +2.17%
    $134,140

    $148,206

    $162,199

    10.0%

    $235

    ROBT, THNQ

    Texas Instruments Inc.

    TXN,
    +1.20%
    $17,941

    $19,433

    $20,799

    7.7%

    $148

    IRBO

    Apple Inc.

    AAPL,
    +0.36%
    $390,845

    $416,761

    $445,956

    6.8%

    $2,706

    IRBO, WTAI

    Siemens Aktiengesellschaft

    SIE,
    +2.55%
    $84,681

    $89,145

    $93,925

    5.3%

    $130

    ROBT

    Johnson & Johnson

    JNJ,
    -0.20%
    $98,761

    $100,990

    $103,870

    2.6%

    $414

    ROBT

    Source: FactSet

    Tech-stock picks that are small and focused: This fund invests in unsung innovators. Here are 2 top choices.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China must act against rising global hunger, new WFP boss McCain says

    China must act against rising global hunger, new WFP boss McCain says

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    BRUSSELS — China and other powerful countries need to step up to help steer the world away from a potentially “catastrophic” hunger crisis this year, the new head of the United Nations’ World Food Programme said.

    Cindy McCain, an American diplomat and the widow of the late U.S. Senator John McCain, also told POLITICO that the EU and U.S. should see world hunger as a national security issue due to its impact on migration. She furthermore accused Russia of using hunger as a “weapon of war” by hindering exports of Ukrainian grain.

    McCain, formerly the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. food agencies, took the helm of the WFP on April 5 and begins her five-year term at a time of increasing world hunger. The number of people facing food insecurity around the world rose to a record 345 million at the end of last year, up from 282 million in 2021, according to the WFP’s figures, as Russia’s war in Ukraine deepened a food crisis driven by climate change, COVID-19 and other conflicts.

    This year could be worse still, McCain warned, with the Horn of Africa experiencing its worst drought in 40 years and Haiti facing a sharp rise in food insecurity, among other factors. “2023 is going to be catastrophic if we don’t get to work and raise the money that we need,” she said. “We need a hell of a lot more than we used to.”

    Non-Western countries, which have traditionally contributed much less to the WFP, need to step up to meet the shortfall, McCain said, pointing specifically to China and oil-rich Gulf Arab countries. China contributed just $11 million to WFP funds last year, compared to $7.2 billion donated by the U.S. 

    “There are some countries that have just basically not participated or participated in a very low fashion. I’d like to encourage our Middle Eastern friends to step up to the plate a little more; I’d like to encourage China to step up to the plate a little more,” said McCain. “Every region, every country needs to step up funding.”

    Her entreaty may fall on deaf ears, however, given rising geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and China. The WFP’s last six executive directors have been American, dating back to 1992, and Beijing may prefer to distribute aid through its own channels. Last summer, for example, China shipped food aid directly to the Horn of Africa following a drought there.

    National security

    Countries hesitant to throw more money into food aid should think about the alternative, McCain said, particularly those in Europe that are likely to bear the brunt of any new wave of migration from Africa and the Middle East.

    “Food security is a national security issue,” she said. “No refugee wants to leave their home country, but they’re forced to because they don’t have enough food, and they can’t feed their families. So it comes down to if you want a stable world, food is a major player in this.”

    The WFP is already having to make brutal decisions despite raking in a record $14.2 billion last year — more than double what it raised in 2017. In February, for instance, it said a funding shortfall was forcing it to cut food rations for Rohingya refugees living in camps in Bangladesh.

    The problem is compounded by surging costs following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year, which sent already-high food prices soaring further, as grain and oilseed exports through Ukraine’s Black Sea ports plunged from more than 5 million metric tons a month to zero.

    A U.N.-brokered deal allowing Ukrainian grain exports to pass through Russia’s blockades in the Black Sea has brought some reprieve, but Moscow’s repeated threats to withdraw from the agreement have kept prices volatile.   

    Moscow claims that “hidden” Western sanctions are hindering its fertilizer and foods exports and causing hunger in the Global South | Yasuyoshi Chiba/AFP via Getty Images

    The deal, initially brokered in July last year, was extended for 120 days last month; Russia, however, agreed to extend its side of the Black Sea grain initiative only for 60 days. Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov threatened, once again, to halt Moscow’s participation in the initiative unless obstacles to its own fertilizer and food exports are addressed.

    Moscow claims that “hidden” Western sanctions — those targeting Russia’s fertilizer oligarchs and its main agricultural bank, as well as others excluding Russian banks from the international SWIFT payments system — are hindering its fertilizer and foods exports and causing hunger in the Global South. 

    Ukraine and its Western allies have countered that Russia is deliberately holding up inspections for ships heading to and from its Black Sea ports, creating a backlog of Ukraine-bound vessels off the Turkish coast and inflating prices. 

    These delayed food cargoes are hindering the WFP’s ability to respond to humanitarian crises, said McCain, who did not hold back on the issue.

    “Let’s be very clear, there are no sanctions on [Russian] fertilizer,” she said. “It is not sanctioned and never has been sanctioned.” 

    Russia is “using hunger as a weapon of war,” said McCain. “it’s unconscionable that a country would do that — any country, not just Russia.”

    [ad_2]

    Susannah Savage

    Source link

  • First Republic gets $30 billion in deposits from 11 major U.S. banks, but stock resumes slide as it suspends dividend

    First Republic gets $30 billion in deposits from 11 major U.S. banks, but stock resumes slide as it suspends dividend

    [ad_1]

    Bank of America BAC, Citigroup C, JPMorgan Chase JPM and Wells Fargo WFC said Thursday that they are each making $5 billion in uninsured deposits into First Republic Bank FRC as part of a $30 billion backstop by 11 banks against the ravaged banking landscape of the past week.

    However, First Republic stock fell 14.7% in after-hours trading after the bank said it would suspend its dividend to conserve cash. The bank last paid a quarterly dividend of 27 cents a share on Feb. 9 to shareholders of record as of Jan. 26.

    It…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tesla is a ‘soft landing’ stock, says Goldman Sachs. Here are its picks for a gentle economic landing and stocks for a recession.

    Tesla is a ‘soft landing’ stock, says Goldman Sachs. Here are its picks for a gentle economic landing and stocks for a recession.

    [ad_1]

    Pour one out for the beleaguered economists, who for once got an important indicator, the consumer price index, right on the nose, after CPI fell 0.1% in December, while core prices rose 0.3%.

    “The 2021 surge in durable goods demand normalized, and the resulting collapse in durable goods price inflation was stunningly fast,” says Paul Donovan, chief economist of UBS Global Wealth Management.

    “The commodity wave of inflation is fading, and that leaves the profit margin expansion in focus,” he adds. What a good time for earnings season to be upon us, and what do you know, it is, kicking off with the banking sector on Friday before broadening out next week.

    Strategists at Goldman Sachs have a new note out, saying that the market is pricing in a soft landing even though the trend of earnings revisions points to a hard landing.

    They’re not that optimistic — even in the soft-landing scenario, the team led by David Kostin say the S&P 500
    SPX,
    +0.40%

    will end the year right around current levels, at 4,000. But they identify 46 stocks that could benefit — profitable, cyclical companies that are trading at price-to-earnings valuations below their 10-year median, among other factors.

    One name jumps out: Tesla
    TSLA,
    -0.94%
    ,
    which trades at 22 times forward earnings versus the 10-year median of 117 times. But the other 45 names are less flashy, ranging from Capital One
    COF,
    +1.81%

    and Carlyle Group
    CG,
    +0.54%
    ,
    to a host of industrials including 3M
    MMM,
    +0.12%
    ,
    Parker-Hannifan
    PH,
    +0.73%

    and Otis Worldwide
    OTIS,
    +0.42%
    .
    As a whole, these typically $10 billion companies are trading at 12 times earnings, versus 17 times usually.

    In the hard landing scenario, S&P 500 profit margins would shrink by 125 basis points, to 10.9% — about in line with the median peak-to-trough decline during the eight recessions since 1970, which has been 132 basis points. Consensus expectations are for a 26 basis-point margin decline.

    The Goldman team also have a 36 stock screen for a hard landing — profitable companies in defensive industries with a positive dividend yield. They’re typically food, beverage and tobacco companies as well as software and services companies — including Costco Wholesale
    COST,
    +0.58%
    ,
    Kroger
    KR,
    -0.99%
    ,
    Altria
    MO,
    +0.48%
    ,
    Tyson Foods
    TSN,
    +0.23%
    ,
    Microsoft
    MSFT,
    +0.30%
    ,
    MasterCard
    MA,
    -1.13%

    and Visa
    V,
    -0.25%
    .
    As a whole, these $37 billion companies are trading at 22 times earnings vs. a historical 24 times.

    The market

    After a 2.3% advance for the S&P 500
    SPX,
    +0.40%

    over the last three sessions, U.S. stock futures
    ES00,
    +0.39%

    NQ00,
    +0.58%

    declined on Friday.

    The yield on the Japanese 10-year bond
    TMBMKJP-10Y,
    0.511%

    exceeded 0.5%, the Bank of Japan’s yield cap, ahead of next week’s rate decision , prompting a second day of aggressive bond purchases from the central bank.

    For more market updates plus actionable trade ideas for stocks, options and crypto, subscribe to MarketDiem by Investor’s Business Daily.

    The buzz

    Fourth-quarter earnings were rolling out from Bank of America
    BAC,
    +2.20%
    ,
    JPMorgan Chase
    JPM,
    +2.52%
    ,
    Citigroup
    C,
    +1.69%

    and Wells Fargo
    WFC,
    +3.25%
    ,
    and outside of banks, Delta Air Lines
    DAL,
    -3.54%
    ,
    BlackRock
    BLK,
    +0.00%

    and UnitedHealth
    UNH,
    -1.23%
    .

    JPMorgan shares slumped after forecast-beating earnings, though investment bank revenue came in light of estimates. Delta shares also declined after topping earnings estimates.

    Tesla
    TSLA,
    -0.94%

    cut prices of Model 3 and Model Y vehicles in the U.S. and elsewhere by up to 20%. The electric vehicle maker stock dropped 6%.

    Virgin Galactic
    SPCE,
    +12.34%

    surged after saying it’s on track to launch space-tourism flights in the second quarter.

    Apple
    AAPL,
    +1.01%

    says CEO Tim Cook requested, and received, a pay cut after investor criticism.

    The University of Michigan’s consumer-sentiment index is due at 10 a.m. Eastern, and Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari and Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker are due to speak.

    Tyler Winklevoss said charges by the Securities and Exchange Commission brought about Gemini Trust for allegedly offering unregistered securities were “super lame” as it seeks to unfreeze $900 million in investor assets.

    Best of the web

    There’s a bull market in swearing on corporate earnings calls.

    The West is now preparing to send tanks to Ukraine in what could be another escalation of its conflict with Russia, which on Friday claimed victory in the eastern town of Soledar.

    A look back at photos of Lisa Marie Presley, who died at age 54.

    Top tickers

    Here were the most active stock-market tickers as of 6 a.m. Eastern.

    Ticker

    Security name

    BBBY,
    -30.15%
    Bed Bath & Beyond

    TSLA,
    -0.94%
    Tesla

    GME,
    -0.68%
    GameStop

    AMC,
    +0.80%
    AMC Entertainment

    MULN,
    -8.59%
    Mullen Automotive

    NIO,
    -0.08%
    Nio

    APE,
    -2.56%
    AMC Entertainment preferreds

    AAPL,
    +1.01%
    Apple

    SPCE,
    +12.34%
    Virgin Galactic

    AMZN,
    +2.99%
    Amazon.com

    Random reads

    Like a scene out of “Stranger Things” — there’s uproar after new restrictions on the Hasbro
    HAS,
    +0.21%

    game Dungeons & Dragons.

    Starting next month, Starbucks
    SBUX,
    +1.30%

    rewards will be less generous for most items, though iced coffee will be easier to get.

    Need to Know starts early and is updated until the opening bell, but sign up here to get it delivered once to your email box. The emailed version will be sent out at about 7:30 a.m. Eastern.

    Listen to the Best New Ideas in Money podcast with MarketWatch reporter Charles Passy and economist Stephanie Kelton.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trade partners see red over Europe’s green agenda

    Trade partners see red over Europe’s green agenda

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    The EU’s green ambitions are, for its trading partners, turning into a case of the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

    Developing nations, especially, worry that Brussels is throwing up trade barriers in its pursuit of climate neutrality and sustainable food production. To them, it looks like all the EU can export is rules that will hold back their own economic progress.

    Indonesia, for example, has warned the EU should not attempt to dictate its green standards to countries in Southeast Asia. “There must be no coercion, no more parties who always dictate and assume that my standards are better than yours,” Indonesian President Joko Widodo told European leaders at the EU-ASEAN summit last month.

    In another striking example of the anger provoked by the EU’s green agenda, Malaysia has threatened to stop exports of palm oil to the bloc over new rules aimed at fighting deforestation.

    The EU’s ambitions to become climate neutral by 2050 — its so-called Green Deal — herald a huge economic transformation for the world’s largest trading bloc. 

    Now that the Green Deal is being translated into actual legislation, developing nations are waking up with a hangover of its effects. 

    One diplomat from a third country said Brussels is mishandling the power of the EU’s single market instead of respecting the sovereignty of its trading partners.

    “We see a regulatory imperialism by the EU whereby Brussels sees itself as an exporter of rules to third countries — as the legislators of the world,” said Philippe De Baere, managing partner at law firm Van Bael & Bellis.

    The Green Deal goes beyond the so-called Brussels effect, in which multinational companies use EU rules as global standards. De Baere said Brussels had gotten “drunk on its success” and started exporting environmental objectives to developing nations, “which are unable to comply economically, or if they comply, it is with an enormous economic cost.”

    Imposing new taxes 

    The EU’s carbon border levy is the latest, and most symbolic, measure to upset the EU’s trade partners. The idea is that producers importing carbon-intensive products into the bloc will have to buy permits to account for the difference between their domestic carbon price and the price paid by EU producers.

    “There must be no coercion, no more parties who always dictate and assume that my standards are better than yours,” Indonesian President Joko Widodo told European leaders | Lauren DeCicca/Getty Images

    The goal of the levy, called the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), was to level the playing field for EU producers and avoid companies moving their production over lower climate standards — so-called carbon leakage. For Brussels, the sense of climate urgency is too high to wait for others to follow suit, or to reach a deal at the multilateral or global level. 

    But there is a difference between the intent and real-word outcomes, said Milan Elkerbout of the Centre for European Policy Studies: “If you’re not in the internal logic of the European debate, this will just look like the perfect example of the EU having a protectionist intent.”

    Brazil, South Africa, India and China have jointly expressed their “grave concern regarding the proposal for introducing trade barriers, such as unilateral carbon border adjustment, that are discriminatory.” The measure is likely to be challenged at the World Trade Organization.

    Mohammed Chahim, a Dutch MEP who helped craft the CBAM, said the measure should be offset by the delivery of tens of billions in annual public financing promised for climate projects in the developing world.

    “I think they are absolutely right in their complaints about the EU (and other developed countries) not fulfilling their pledges,” he said of these emerging economies. But it would be impossible for the EU to end protections for heavy industry at home while granting exemptions to other countries.

    Even for the poorest countries, Chahim said, an exemption “would be the wrong signal, they also have to decarbonize their industry to make it futureproof.” But under the newly minted regulation, those countries were eligible for support to comply, he added.

    Making imports harder 

    The carbon border levy is far from the only measure to make exporting to the world’s biggest trading bloc harder. 

    Brussels’ Farm to Fork strategy seeks to prioritize sustainability in agriculture by slashing pesticide risk and use in half by 2030. A plan announced last September to ban imports of products containing residues of harmful neonicotinoid insecticides from 2026 has drawn “unprecedented” criticism from other countries, according to a senior European Commission official. 

    As the Green Deal tightens rules on pesticide use in the EU, new trade barriers are going up, said Koen Dekeyser of the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM). “Certain farmers can make those investments. Other, more small-scale farmers are likely to seek other markets, for example in Asia,” said Dekeyser.

    The EU’s effort to stop deforestation is likely to have similar results. 

    Under new rules, it will be illegal to sell or export certain commodities if they’ve been produced on deforested land. 

    Brussels’ Farm to Fork strategy seeks to prioritize sustainability in agriculture by slashing pesticide risk and use in half by 2030 | Jean-François Monier/AFP via Getty Images

    One third-country diplomat said it was easy for the EU to take a stand on deforestation in the developing world, having already deforested its own land in the past.

    Countries in Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia have lobbied hard against the proposal, calling it “discriminatory and punitive in nature” and arguing in a letter to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that it will result in “trade distortion and diplomatic tensions, without benefits to the environment.” 

    In technology, where the 27-country bloc has passed a series of rules to promote its standards on privacy, online competition and social media to the wider world, other countries, too, have chafed at what they see as overly bureaucratic rules that favor well-resourced regulators within the EU. These can be difficult to implement in developing countries with less expertise and money at their disposal.

    More far-reaching legislation is still underway. The EU is also preparing a sustainable production law for companies to police their supply chains against forced labor and environmental damage. Brussels wants to hold companies responsible for abuses throughout their supply chains. 

    Same goal, different roads 

    In their deforestation letter, the group of developing countries touch on a sensitive point. While they agree with the EU’s climate goals, they regret that Brussels is imposing its own measures instead of forging an international deal.

    The Paris climate agreement is based on the logic of common, but differentiated, responsibilities. At least, that allows countries to move at their own speed and determine their policies toward the same goal.

    “Now, not only is the EU telling them what to do, but a lot of developing countries also feel they are now prohibited to do what Western countries have done for decades: industrialize without thinking about pollution and subsidizing infant industries,” said Ferdi De Ville, a professor in European political economy at the University of Ghent.

    The unilateral character of a lot of these measures is creating resentment, argues De Ville, especially given the bloc’s huge market power.

    “In Brussels, everyone looks at these measures separately,” said another diplomat from a third country. “But who looks at it together and thinks about what it means to us? CBAM, deforestation, the Farm to Fork strategy. These are all unilateral measures which are making things harder for our exporters.” 

    European officials stress, however, that Brussels is not inflicting its Green Deal on the rest of the world.

    But Brussels is also being pushed by NGOs to lead by example. “Europe is one of the major contributors to the current crises related to climate, biodiversity, energy and human rights violations around the world. Therefore we consider it the responsibility of the European Union and other countries in the Global North to urgently start tackling these crises through lawmaking,” said Jill McArdle from the NGO Friends of the Earth.

    Agreeing on new rules on the multilateral front remains the EU’s first best option. But, in the absence of a well-functioning World Trade Organization, Brussels has little choice but to go at it alone, EU officials and diplomats argue. “If we want to achieve the Paris targets, there is no time to wait,” one EU official said.

    Mark Scott contributed reporting. This story has been updated.

    [ad_2]

    Karl Mathiesen and Barbara Moens

    Source link

  • Who’s going to pay for an ethical chocolate bar?

    Who’s going to pay for an ethical chocolate bar?

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    Europe, the world’s biggest consumer of chocolate, and West Africa, the leading grower of the cocoa beans used to make it, share a common goal to make the sector sustainable.

    But they have opposing views on how to put an end to the social, economic and environmental harms caused by satisfying Europe’s sweet tooth, heralding a showdown over who will bear the costs of complying: Big Chocolate or cocoa farmers.

    The EU is finalizing regulations that seek to ensure that chocolate entering the market is free from deforestation and child labor. At the same time, Ghana and Ivory Coast, the world’s biggest cocoa producers, are demanding higher prices. That’s vital, they say, to make sustainable chocolate a possibility — and not a pipe dream.

    The stakes are high: For the EU, cocoa is a test case for how companies and producers react when the bloc tries to impose higher standards. For producers, the push to set up a cartel could drive up prices in the short term — but also risks stimulating oversupply and ultimately causing a price crash that would deepen the poverty already suffered by most cocoa farmers. Chocolate makers, facing rising costs and greater scrutiny, may reroute supply chains to other cocoa-producing countries seen as less risky.

    Doing nothing is not an option, said Alex Assanvo, who heads the joint West African initiative to support cocoa prices.

    “We are not asking to pay them more, we are asking to pay them a fair price,” Assanvo told POLITICO in an interview. “If we believe that this is going to create oversupply, well then I don’t know, maybe we should stop eating chocolate.”

    Bittersweet taste

    Chocolate may be sweet but the industry that makes it is not. Most of the beans used to produce the world’s supply are grown by impoverished West African farmers; all too often from trees planted on deforested land and harvested by children. One problem drives the others. Poverty pushes farmers to chop down forests to produce more beans and profits and to put children to work as they cannot afford to pay wages to adult laborers.

    To address this, Ghana and Ivory Coast, which produce 60 percent of the world’s cocoa, formed an export cartel in 2019 modeled on the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). They introduced a $400 per ton Living Income Differential, which aims to bring the floor price up enough to cover the cost of production.

    In public, big chocolate manufacturers and traders, including Barry Callebaut, Cargill, Ferrero, Hersey, Lindt, Mars, Mondelez and Nestlé, welcomed the initiative.

    Yet behind the scenes many of the firms — which between them account for about 90 percent of the industry’s $130 billion in annual profits — have done everything possible to avoid paying the premium and to drive prices back down, according to the Ivorian Coffee-Cocoa Council (CCC), the Ghana Cocoa Board (Cocobod) and their joint Initiative Cacao Ivory Coast-Ghana (ICCIG).

    The companies that responded to requests for comment from POLITICO said that they have paid the Living Income Differential (LID) since its introduction. The Ghanian and Ivorian trade boards and the ICCIG claim, however, that they have negated the LID’s value by forcing down a different premium, the origin differential.

    Fed up, these countries boycotted the World Cocoa Foundation Partnership Meeting at the end of October in Brussels. They then gave the companies a deadline: commit to the premiums by November 20 or the countries would ban their buyers from visiting fields to carry out harvest forecasts and suspend their Corporate Social Responsibility programs – which sell well with ethically-minded consumers.

    More harm than good?

    Another proposed remedy comes from Brussels. Cocoa is one of the products to which the new EU legislation on due diligence — Brussels speak for supply-chain oversight and compliance — would apply.

    Under this, large firms operating in the bloc will be forced to evaluate their global supply chains for human rights and environmental abuses, and compensate injured parties. In theory, this should reduce deforestation and child labor and improve the lot of farmers.

    Yet, as European ambassadors thrash out the terms — and big players like France push for them to be watered down — concerns are growing that the legislation could turn out at best to be ineffective in practice, and at worst do more harm than good.

    Cocoa farmers, and the NGOs that support them, have reason to be skeptical: Back in 2000, a BBC documentary exposed the widespread use of child labor on cocoa plantations in Ivory Coast and Ghana. The resulting media pressure led to a proposal for legislation in the United States forcing companies to certify chocolate bars free of child labor.

    Companies pushed back hard, Antonie Fountain, managing director of cocoa NGO coalition The Voice Network, told POLITICO. The proposal was dropped and companies committed instead to a voluntary plan to solve child labor, he explained: “And that turned into a two-decade failure of policy.”

    The resulting patchwork of pilot projects failed to transform the sector. Despite an initial decline, nearly 20 years after the framework was introduced 790,000 children in Ivory Coast and 770,000 in Ghana are still working in cocoa, with 95 percent of them exposed to the worst forms of child labor, according to a 2020 report.

    Deforestation has meanwhile accelerated.

    Ivory Coast has lost up to 90 percent of its forest in the last half century. Between 2000 and 2019 alone 2.4 million hectares of forest was cleared for cocoa farms, representing 45 percent of the total deforestation and forest degradation in the country, according to Trase, a data-driven transparency initiative.

    The government’s attempts to safeguard what remains are half-hearted and often undermined by corruption: In 2019 a quarter of Ivory Coast’s cocoa production was in protected areas and forest reserves, the Trase study found. This left the EU exposed to 838,000 hectares of deforestation from Ivorian cocoa. Commodity trader Cargill leads the pack, according to Trase, with its 2019 exports exposed to 183,000 hectares of deforestation.

    Over the last decade companies have proposed corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives that aim to tackle both ills. For instance, Mondelez, the maker of Cadbury and Toblerone, recently committed $600 million to tackle deforestation and forced labor in cocoa-producing countries, bringing its total funding for environmental and social issues to $1 billion since 2010.

    These sums are, however, puny by comparison with the profits earned by those firms, said Fountain. Mondelez returned $2.5 billion to investors in the first half of 2022. 

    Mondelez is “excited” about its investments, the firm said in a statement. But it is calling for more sector-wide actions and rethinking its incentive model. Cargill did not respond to a request for comment.

    Social responsibility

    The big numbers that companies cite about their CSR programs’ reach often boil down to one-off training sessions on productivity for farmers, Uwe Gneiting, senior researcher at Oxfam, told POLITICO. This was the case for 98 percent of the 400 farmers interviewed for research recently carried out by Gneiting and others from the charity into the impact of sustainability programs over the last decade in Ghana on farmers’ incomes.

    The research finds that CSR initiatives, which companies use to tout their sustainability credentials to European consumers, have not meaningfully increased farmers’ productivity or profits, pointed out Gneiting. In fact, farmers end up shouldering the associated costs, because companies offer the training but do not pay for extra labor or the fertilizer that farmers need to put it into action.

    Instead, Ghanian and Ivorian farmers have been hammered by the soaring cost of production and of living over the last three years, finds the new Oxfam research. Fertilizer costs have increased by more than 200 percent, said Gneiting, along with labor and transportation costs. That in turn has contributed to a decline in yields that have also been hurt by climate change, with weather patterns becoming increasingly unpredictable.

    All of this has meant incomes have declined close to 20 percent since 2019, said Gneiting, which for farmers already living on the poverty line is “existential.” The decline would have been much worse, he added, if it hadn’t been for the Living Income Differential. Nonetheless, 90 percent of the farmers interviewed say they are worse off than three years ago.

    Over the same period, as cocoa prices have fallen, companies have made “windfall gains,” said Isaac Gyamfi, director of Solidaridad West Africa. “The raw material became cheaper for them. But the price of chocolate didn’t change.”

    Can Brussels sort it out?

    To what extent the new due diligence directive will make a difference depends on the final text that was put to a meeting of EU trade ministers on Friday.

    When the European Commission first came up with the draft it was seen as a game changer, but subsequent wrangling over the regulation’s scope has raised doubts. Last week, ambassadors from France, Spain, Italy and some smaller countries voted down the text in the European Council, seeing the value chain and civil liability provisions as too wide and too ambitious.

    Two-thirds of Ivorian cocoa is exported to the EU and the U.K. | Issouf Sanogo/AFP via Getty Images

    A European diplomat told POLITICO that France supported the proposed directive “very strongly,” and its view that it was important to concentrate on the “upstream” part of the supply chain was shared by a majority of EU member countries.

    NGOs take the view that, while it’s positive that the EU is proposing broad legislation, there is a risk that it ends up replicating the mistakes that undermined the voluntary initiatives. One of these is the potential limitation of the companies’ due diligence obligations to “established business relations.”

    “What you’re going to get is a whole bunch of companies that are going to try to have as few established business relations as possible, which just makes supplying commodities more precarious, rather than less,” said Fountain.

    Analysis from Trase finds that 55 percent of Ivorian cocoa, two-thirds of which is exported to the EU and the U.K., comes from untraceable sources. NGOs working on cocoa and on other sectors due to be impacted by the new directive are calling for it to be applied to business relationships based on their risk rather than their duration.

    The civil liability mechanism, which should guarantee compensation for people whose rights have been violated, has also come under scrutiny. The latest compromise proposal debated in the Council, seen by POLITICO, reduces the risk of companies getting sued by stipulating that a company can only be held liable if it “intentionally or negligently” failed to comply with a due diligence obligation aimed to protect a “natural or legal person” — not a forest, for instance — and subsequently caused damage to that person’s “legal interest protected under national law.” But, it states, a company cannot be held liable “if the damage was caused only by its business partners in its chain of activities.”

    Earlier this year, the EU, Ivory Coast and Ghana and the cocoa sector all committed to a roadmap to make cocoa more sustainable, which, they agreed, includes improving farmers’ incomes. Yet it remains unclear whether this will be mentioned in the final draft of the due diligence directive.

    “Sustainability cannot exist without a living income,” said Heidi Hautala, Green MEP and chair of the European Parliament’s Responsible Business Conduct Working Group. Hautala, who is among those pushing for the reference to a living income to be included in the final text, added that responsible purchasing practices are “a prerequisite for respect of human rights, environment and climate.”

    Living income “needs to be a part of it because otherwise you’re in trouble,” agreed Fountain.

    “If you don’t look at what does a farmer need in order to comply, if you don’t make sure that a farmer actually has the right set of income, then all you’re doing is pushing the responsibility for being sustainable back to the farmer. And this is what we’ve done for the last two decades.”

    [ad_2]

    POLITICO Staff

    Source link

  • Kremlin accused of ‘weaponizing food’ in halt of Ukraine grain deal

    Kremlin accused of ‘weaponizing food’ in halt of Ukraine grain deal

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. accused Moscow of “weaponizing food” in suspending its participation in agreement allowing grain shipments to leave Ukraine’s ports.

    The U.N. and Turkey, which brokered the deal in the summer, said on Sunday that they were in talks to try to bring Russia back into the accord. Ankara said in a tweet that Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar “has been meeting with his counterparts” over the situation.

    U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres is engaged in “intense contacts” aimed at bringing Russia back to the deal, the organization said on Sunday, after the Kremlin on Saturday said it was halting the agreement for an “indefinite period,” citing an attack on a base in occupied Crimea that Russia blamed on Ukraine.

    The grain export deal, designed to make sure Ukrainian agricultural products can reach international markets, is considered critical to global food security given Ukraine’s role as a major producer of foodstuffs.

    “Any act by Russia to disrupt these critical grain exports is essentially a statement that people and families around the world should pay more for food or go hungry,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a statement late Saturday. “In suspending this arrangement, Russia is again weaponizing food in the war it started.”

    U.S. President Joe Biden called Russia’s move “purely outrageous.”

    “It’s going to increase starvation,” Biden told reporters in Delaware on Saturday.

    Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. blasted Washington on Sunday for its reaction to Moscow’s decision and reiterated unsubstantiated claims that U.K. operatives were involved in a drone attack on the Russian fleet at the Black Sea port of Sevastopol in Crimea on Saturday.

    “Washington’s reaction to the terrorist attack on the port of Sevastopol is truly outrageous,” Ambassador Anatoly Antonov said on Telegram. 

    The U.S. and the EU called on Russian President Vladimir Putin to reverse the decision on the Black Sea grain deal.

    “Russia’s decision to suspend participation in the Black Sea deal puts at risks the main export route of much needed grain and fertilizers to address the global food crisis caused by its war against Ukraine,” Josep Borrell, the EU’s top diplomat, said in a tweet.

    The Joint Coordination Center — the body established by the U.N., Turkey, Russia and Ukraine to coordinate foodstuff exports from Ukrainian ports — said it is “discussing next steps” following Moscow’s decision to halt the Black Sea agreement. At least 10 vessels, both outbound and inbound, are waiting to enter the humanitarian corridor established by the JCC, the center said late Saturday.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Moscow has been “deliberately aggravating” the food crisis since September. “This is an absolutely transparent intention of Russia to return the threat of large-scale famine to Africa and Asia,”he said.

    “From September to today, 176 vessels have already accumulated in the grain corridor,” Zelenskyy said in his nightly address Saturday. Some ships have been waiting for more than three weeks, he said.

    Zelenskyy called for a “strong international response” to the Kremlin’s move, specifying the U.N. and “in particular” the G20. “How can Russia be among the G20 if it is deliberately working for starvation on several continents? This is nonsense,” Zelenskyy said. 

    Poland called the Kremlin’s move “yet another proof that Moscow is not willing to uphold any international agreements.”

    “Poland, together with its EU partners, stands ready to work further to help Ukraine and those in need to transport essential goods,” the Polish foreign ministry said in a tweet on Sunday.

    Nahal Toosi contributed reporting from Washington.

    [ad_2]

    Jones Hayden

    Source link

  • For Long-Term Investors, It’s Time to Buy Tech Again. Here Are 20 Stocks to Look at First.

    For Long-Term Investors, It’s Time to Buy Tech Again. Here Are 20 Stocks to Look at First.

    [ad_1]

    One cruel truth the stock market confirmed this past week is that trying to pick the bottom for technology stocks is a fool’s errand. The Nasdaq Composite’s terrible September—it was down 10.5% on the month—has made the bottom-fishing that took place over the summer look ill-advised. As I’ve noted before, the first downturn in tech earlier this year was all about valuations. This new phase of the decline is all about softening earnings. When it comes to price-to-earnings ratios, the market is running into a denominator problem.

    The market downturn, the weaker economy, and the reversal of some pandemic-era trends have exposed weaknesses in the business models of companies such as


    Peloton Interactive


    (ticker: PTON),


    Zoom Video Communications


    (ZM),


    Shopify


    (SHOP),


    Affirm Holdings


    (AFRM), and


    Snap


    (SNAP), and investors have adjusted valuations accordingly. But there are still some powerful underlying secular trends that should eventually drive tech stocks higher. Investors with long time horizons and strong stomachs might consider inching into the market. I have a few ideas on where to look.

    [ad_2]

    Source link