ReportWire

Tag: Opinion

  • Wagner Mutiny Could Push a Weak Russia Closer to Iran

    Wagner Mutiny Could Push a Weak Russia Closer to Iran

    [ad_1]

    A weaker Russia needs Iran more; on the other hand, a weaker Russia threatens both countries’ authoritarian model of governance.
    • Opinion by Emil Avdaliani (tbilisi, georgia)
    • Inter Press Service

    TBILISI, Georgia, Jul 21 (IPS) – Iran is not interested in a highly powerful Russia that could block Iranian ambitions in the South Caucasus and Middle East. At the same time, a too weak Russia would constitute a dangerous development paving the way for greater Western influence along Iran’s northern border and potentially even leading to the reversal of Moscow’s dependence on Tehran.

    When a mutiny led by one-time Vladimir Putin ally and Wagner Group chief Evgeny Prigozhin began on June 24, 2023, Iranian officials were uneasy. The sudden unrest came at a time of unprecedented alignment between Tehran and Moscow and caught the Iranian regime off-guard.

    Iranian media reacted to the events in a variety of ways. Hard-line Fars News Agency published numerous articles on the unfolding events and explained the reasons for the mutiny, essentially parroting information provided by Russian news outlets.

    Fars also criticized Western media for double standards for its apparent approval of a revolt led by someone equally if not more brutal than Putin.

    The Nour Agency was more explicit in accusing the West of purposefully fomenting Putin’s downfall. The same agency, however, also published more restrained versions such as one noting that threats to the West would multiply if Prigozhin was able to take control of Russia’s nuclear arsenal.

    The Tasnim Agency featured a series of articles as well as analyses that also blamed the West for exacerbating Russia’s difficult position. Hardline Kayhan newspaper predictably accused the West of direct involvement in internal Russian affairs.

    Other analysts were more nuanced, and many blamed the mutiny on Moscow’s failure to meet its military goals in Ukraine. The former head of the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Relations Committee, Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh, argued that Putin emerged weaker from the mutiny.

    On the official level, Iran openly supported its northern neighbor. Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman spoke of the rule of law, while Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian expressed hopes that Russia would prevail. President Ebrahim Raisi called Putin two days after the revolt ended to convey his “full support.”

    Iran’s official support for the Russian government and its leader was not surprising. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, China, and many other countries expressed the same view. What matters is that despite a seemingly careful management of the crisis, uncertainty about Russia’s geopolitical power and, most of all, Putin’s ability to control the situation lingers for Iran.

    The stakes are high. The two have been lukewarm partners despite a spurt of activity since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Historical grievances as well as conflicting regional ambitions have often prevented the expansion of cooperation since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.

    The war in Ukraine marked a notable break from the previous era. Pressured by the West, Russia openly shifted toward Asia and the Islamic Republic. Expanding trade through the North-South corridor as well as growing military cooperation have increased the stakes for Iran over how well Russia fares both in Ukraine and domestically.

    In many ways, the present alignment is exceptional; such cooperation has not been seen since the late 16th century when both Russia and Persia feared the expanding Ottoman Empire.

    A Goldilocks approach: Russia should neither be too strong nor too weak

    Yet modern Iran is not interested in a highly powerful Russia that could block Iranian ambitions in the South Caucasus and Middle East. At the same time, a weak Russia would constitute a dangerous development, paving the way for greater Western influence along Iran’s northern border and potentially even leading to the reversal of Moscow’s dependence on Tehran.

    Russia’s internal destabilization would also reverberate badly for Iran since the latter has had its own share of internal disturbances since the death in police custody of Mahsa Amini in 2022.

    Wagner’s success would have shaken the very foundation on which the Eurasian states have been building a new order: a strong security apparatus that uses modern technologies to control dissent.

    Until recently, Eurasian powers had seemed to show that they had harnessed modernity and that the concept was no longer solely associated with the West. The Wagner mutiny, however, exposed that this order is vulnerable and that a modern authoritarian state can easily fall into disarray.

    On one level, however, Prigozhin’s failure to achieve whatever his goals were presents an ideal scenario for Iran. Russia is weakened, but not too much and the longer this state of affairs continues, the better for Iran.

    Indeed, Moscow serves as a linchpin in the Islamic Republic’s efforts to divert Western attention from the Middle East and gain further momentum in terms of regional influence and its nuclear program. Given the likelihood of Russia continuing the war in Ukraine, this trend could further solidify in coming years.

    The mutiny and the ensuing reported purge in the military ranks revealed cracks in the Russian elite, but also provides the Islamic Republic with opportunities to advance its position in bilateral ties.

    Putin cannot afford to lose friends, which means greater avenues for Iran to act. Tehran might become more emboldened in the South Caucasus, where it has grasped an emerging vacuum as a result of Moscow’s distraction and pushed for closer ties with Armenia, Russia’s long-time ally.

    Another area is the nuclear negotiations where Russia might even lend further support to Iran not to reach a consensus with the West. In Syria, Russia could be more vocal against Israeli strikes against Iranian positions.

    Perhaps the biggest opportunity for Iran lies in space and military cooperation. In other trade, Iran might achieve a preferential agreement with the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union by the end of this year. Another area for growth could be in Russian investments in Iran.

    Under a recently signed agreement, Moscow agreed to finance a railway link for a new transport corridor. This could be a precursor for investment in other sectors of Iran’s embattled economy.

    Longer term, Iranian elites recognize that Russia is unlikely to win the Ukraine war, at least not decisively enough, and that the present stalemate is the best that the Kremlin can expect. This dire picture for Russia means its push toward Asia will only grow, feeding into Iran’s own “Look East” agenda, which has encountered some pushback recently over failed attempts to attract investments from China, India, and other Asian actors.

    Emil Avdaliani is a professor of international relations at European University in Tbilisi, Georgia, and a scholar of silk roads.

    Source: Stimson Center, Washington DC

    IPS UN Bureau

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Transforming Africas Food Systems: Challenges & Opportunities

    Transforming Africas Food Systems: Challenges & Opportunities

    [ad_1]

    Ibrahim Mayaki, Africa Union Special Envoy for Food Systems
    • Opinion by Kingsley Ighobor (united nations)
    • Inter Press Service

    UNITED NATIONS, Jul 20 (IPS) –
     

    Q: As the African Union Special Envoy for Food Systems, what is the scope of your mandate and what should Africans expect from you?

    The role of special envoys of the AU is primarily to tackle a critical issue for which the AU needs support. A special envoy does not seek to replace or take over the responsibilities of the AU or the AU Commission (AUC). Instead, their role is to support and enhance their work by bringing additional value.

    This is the first time the AU is designating a Special Envoy specifically dedicated to food systems. Previously, notable individuals such as Rwanda’s Donald Kaberuka served as Special Envoy for Financing and Michel Sidibé from Mali as Special Envoy for the African Medicines Agency.

    Ibrahim Mayaki, Africa Union Special Envoy for Food SystemsThere are three main reasons behind this decision to designate a special envoy for food systems. These issues were thoroughly discussed when I accepted the designation.

    Firstly, we could enter a post-Ukraine war era that will be characterised by a crisis in food systems.

    Leaders must not only establish the food systems but should also ensure their effectiveness in achieving desired outcomes

    The market has witnessed an unfavourable evolution, and African countries are suffering the consequences of that war. We have observed shortages of vital resources such as fertilisers, seeds, wheat, etc. The crisis and our response to it have revealed a lack of co-ordinated efforts.

    Hence, the first reason for appointing a Special Envoy is to ensure preparedness for such a crisis, even as we anticipate more crises in the future.

    The second reason relates to the many initiatives addressing food systems issues in Africa. We have some complexity in terms of initiatives, and this complexity necessitates better management and coherence.

    Without proper co-ordination, Member States and their stakeholders may struggle to comprehend the direction we are heading in. Therefore, the appointment aims to foster preparedness and enhance coherence among these initiatives.

    The third reason, closely linked to the previous two, pertains to resource mobilisation. Specifically, it refers to the need to mobilise domestic resources to address the challenges faced in food systems.

    We also have the resources of multilateral development banks and other institutions that can support Africa’s endeavours in transforming its food systems.

    Q: Apart from the Ukraine crisis, what other factors are jeopardising Africa’s food systems?

    I will start by unpacking the concept of food systems. Previously, and still now, we talked about agriculture, agricultural production, rural economy, diversification, agricultural productivity, food security and insecurity.

    We are talking about food systems now because it embraces the entire spectrum, in an integrated manner, of processes, from the farmer to the consumer, and, in-between, the numerous actors and sectors.

    Kingsley IghoborEvidently, food systems are about production, nutrition, roads and other infrastructure, markets, and trade. It’s about connecting farmers to markets, about education and entrepreneurship, enabling small-scale farmers to become micro and small entrepreneurs. It’s about agribusiness.

    Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of providing consumers with essential information and addressing the impacts of climate change, particularly in regions like Africa that suffer greatly despite being net zero emitters.

    If we look at Africa today, it’s true that we have reduced extreme poverty in the past 20 to 25 years, but at the same time there is an increase in malnutrition.

    Our food import bill is still very high, beyond $60 billion a year. The small-scale farmers who produce 80 per cent of the food we eat also suffer from malnutrition and food insecurity, which is abnormal.

    We have utilised frameworks such as CAADP and the Malabo Declaration to address agricultural development. The Malabo Declaration is considered a precursor to food systems because it opened agriculture to other sectors.

    It is a kind of CAADP phase two, and it has been well implemented with over 40 countries adopting national agricultural investment plans. The African Development Bank has started to develop compacts at the national levels to enable countries have frameworks that will attract financing.

    So, we have the frameworks, but we need two radical things to occur.

    The first one is to have a whole-of-government approach toward food systems transformation and not leave it to the agriculture or the environment ministries.

    Secondly, we need to invest more in food systems to reduce food insecurity. I said at the Ibrahim Governance Weekend that food insecurity is not a question of production; it’s a question of poverty. At the end of the day the main aim is to tackle poverty.

    FACT BOX
    Africa’s food import bill is beyond $60 billion a year.
    Africa will have approximately 2.5 billion people by 2050

    We need a moonshot for Africa’s land restoration movement

    The COP26 Africa needs

    Now is the time to sprint if we want to end hunger, achieve other SDGs. Regarding CAADP, we see that many countries are still not meeting their commitment to invest 10 per cent of national budgets in agriculture and rural development?

    You are right. Only around 10 to 12 countries out of the 50-plus have managed to reach the target of investing 10 per cent of their national budgets in agriculture.

    However, some countries claim to meet the 10 percent threshold, but their expenditures include items that are not directly linked to food systems or the transformation of agriculture through a sound integrated plan.

    When you have a head of state who prioritises agricultural transformation and provides the drive that leads to results and impact, that transformation happens. So, the issue of leadership is critical.

    Technically, we know what needs to be done—agricultural techniques, access to market and finance, and increasing yields—but we need the political solution and determination to move forward.

    Sometimes you have leadership but lack the necessary systems. Leaders must not only establish the systems but also ensure their effectiveness in achieving desired outcomes.

    Q: How do you anticipate the AfCFTA’s potential to strengthen Africa’s food systems, considering the complexities and the need for an integrated approach?

    The AfCFTA aims to resolve the issues of tariff and non-tariff barriers and to facilitate the flows of goods and services. These require working on normative issues such as rules and regulations.

    But it’s not the AfCFTA by itself that will facilitate production. The success of the AfCFTA in enhancing our food systems transformation is contingent upon the availability of robust infrastructure such as roads, railways, and storage facilities.

    So, the AfCFTA is an important instrument, but it must be complemented by sound policies and well-developed infrastructure.

    Food insecurity is not a question of production; it’s a question of poverty. At the end of the day the main aim is to tackle poverty

    Can that be done?

    Again, I emphasize the importance of effective national leadership in addressing our prevailing challenges, as many of them necessitate solutions at the national level. While regional solutions are crucial, national governments need to embrace and implement these regional solutions.

    Furthermore, it is vital to ensure coherence among all our initiatives. We should not adopt disparate approaches from various institutions, as this would create a landscape of competing initiatives. Instead, we must assert our strategic frameworks and urge our partners to align with these frameworks.

    These frameworks include CAADP, the Malabo Declaration, and the African Common Position on Food Systems, which was developed through inclusive national dialogues involving over 50 countries.

    Q: How does the Africa Common Position on Food Systems inform your preparation and participation in the upcoming UN Food Systems Stocktaking Moment?

    At the UN Food Systems and Stocktaking exercise, each region of the world will present a position. Africa’s position will revolve around three key issues.

    The first one is financing food systems transformation. It should be a priority for our partners that our capacity to mobilise domestic resources is not undermined.

    The second is climate, which will need to be looked at in a very realistic manner. Despite commitments made at the various COPS, many of them remain unfulfilled. If these commitments cannot be respected, we must explore alternative approaches to climate finance.

    The third is about our small-scale farmers. The farmers are a part of a private sector we are talking about. The private sector is not only agribusiness; it also includes small-scale farmers who have the capacity and knowledge to transform our food systems. They need to be supported, as it is done in the US and Europe.

    At the stocktaking exercise, what will also be looked at is how far we have gone in implementing the conclusions of the 2021 Food Systems Summit and what lessons each region can learn from the others.

    Q: With Africa’s projected population reaching approximately 2.5 billion by 2050, coupled with the existing challenge of over 250 million malnourished Africans, is there a sense of heightened concern among policymakers and stakeholders?

    This question is extremely pertinent because Africa’s population is set to double by 2050. The most critical concern is the challenge of feeding over 1 billion additional people. Failure to address this issue with the necessary capacity and solutions will not only strain our existing governance systems but also heighten social fragility.

    Given our demographic situation, the risk of encountering numerous political crises becomes imminent.

    Urgency is paramount, necessitating an alarmist approach and accelerating the implementation of solutions, especially considering that a significant portion of the projected population growth already exists today.

    This acceleration must be achieved through the appropriate policies and political determination.

    Source: Africa Renewal, United Nations

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Leveraging Africa’s Renewable Energy Potential: A Call for Global Partnership

    Leveraging Africa’s Renewable Energy Potential: A Call for Global Partnership

    [ad_1]

    Over half the people in Africa still don’t have electricity access — a major contributor to persistent poverty. Credit: Energy 4 Impact Senegal
    • Opinion by Philippe Benoit, David Sandalow (washington dc)
    • Inter Press Service

    WASHINGTON DC, Jul 19 (IPS) – Africa is caught in the crosshairs of climate change. Despite contributing just 3-5% of global carbon dioxide emissions, the continent will endure climate change’s destructive impact, including more severe storms, rising temperatures and erratic rainfall in the years ahead that threaten the well-being of hundreds of millions of people.

    Renewable energy is an important part of the solution – and Africa enjoys an enormous potential in this regard. With some of the world’s highest levels of solar irradiance, vast expanses of land with favorable wind conditions and powerful rivers with immense hydroelectric potential, Africa is teeming with renewable energy resources. However the continent’s progress in tapping into this potential lags, leaving a huge energy access challenge as well as a power generation deficit that is stunting business and other drivers of inclusive economic growth.

    As the world gears up for the 28th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP28) to be held in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the need to address Africa’s energy needs sustainably is all too apparent. Doing so will require rethinking the approach and reshaping policies to dramatically grow Africa’s energy system.

    This will require big and bold actions, including massive investments in large-scale infrastructure. It will also require investment in information and other soft assets.  And, significantly, it will also necessitate  small and micro-scale grassroots initiatives which are particularly important to ensure that local populations remain active participants in the process.

    The shortage of energy in Africa is a pressing problem. Over half the people in Africa still don’t have electricity access — a major contributor to persistent poverty.  This gap drives households to rely on inefficient and polluting energy sources like charcoal, wood, and kerosene. This pervasive energy deficit, highlighted in the ‘Tracking SDG7: The energy progress report for 2022’ has profound implications for health, education, and sustainable development across the continent.

    An even larger portion of the population lacks access to clean cooking technologies, a crisis disproportionately affecting women and girls, and exposing them to harmful household air pollution that was responsible in 2019 for approximately 700,000 deaths across Africa. Rather than diminishing, the number of people without access is projected to potentially rise from 923 milion in 2020 to 1.1 billion in 2030.

    But Africa’s energy problem extends beyond the lack of access to electricity and clean cooking targeted by SDG#7.  In too many places across the continent, there is a lack of sufficient and reliable electricity to power businesses that are the backbone of Africa’s growth drive.  The result is a combination of inadequate supply or expensive generators acquired to compensate for the inefficiencies.  Fundamentally, Africa’s ability to stimulate local entrepreneurs or attract international developers and capital is too often being undermined by a weak electricity network.

    The shift in focus to renewables provides an opportunity to change the narrative and realities of Africa’s power system.  The large amounts of financing being discussed for climate (including in the lead-up to and at COP 28) – amounts which tend to exceed the levels of funding traditionally mobilized for poverty alleviation – provide an important opportunity for the continent.

    Mobilizing funding to harness Africa’s bountiful renewable energy would not only help to meet its current and increasingly large future energy needs, but also contribute to global efforts to avoid prospective greenhouse gas emissions.

    Moreover, Africa’s renewables are large enough to both meet domestic needs, and also help to power green development abroad, including through the export of green electricity to Europe or even, eventually, hydrogen generated from its massive hydropower resources.

    Unlocking Africa’s renewable potential will require supportive policies, robust regulations, technological innovation, and substantial investment. Strong, sound and predictable regulatory frameworks and institutions are key.

    Better information is also key. For example, the African Energy Commission has established the Strategic Framework on the African Bioenergy Data Management  that seeks to raise awareness of the potential of the bioenergy sector, reflecting the specificities of the reality on the ground in the region.

    Given Africa’s limited financial resource base, any solution requires reaching beyond Africa’s borders.  Wealthy nations can bring capital, expertise, and adapted technologies to the continent. South-South cooperation can encourage peer learning, the dissemination of technological solutions adapted to local climatic conditions and the developing country economic context, and support the deployment of the increasing financial capacities of emerging economies to support Africa’s renewables.

    Multilateral development banks, development finance institutions, export credit agencies and private capital should also all do more.

    The hosting of COP28 in the UAE provides an opportunity to mobilize funding for Africa from a broader set of actors and countries, moving beyond the traditional North/South divide.  In fact, climate finance has been identified by the COP28 host as one of the key goals of this COP. As COP28 President Sultan Al-Jaber said at last month’s climate finance summit held in Paris, “For countries that have done the least to cause climate change, climate finance remains unaccessible, unavailable and unaffordable….” Can COP 28, with UAE leadership, deliver for Africa on this potential?

    One UAE initiative – the Zayed Sustainability Prize – has already helped promote local action in addressing these challenges.  (One of the authors is a member of the Selection Committee for the Prize.) Over the years, the Zayed Sustainability Prize has supported sustainable change around the world by recognising and rewarding innovative and impactful organizations working to overcome development barriers, including limited access to reliable power, clean water, quality healthcare, and healthy food.

    For example, M-KOPA, which won in the Energy category in 2015, uses digital technology to help its customers make micropayments towards essential products and services, such as smartphones, refrigerators, solar panels, even bank loans and health insurance. Last month, it closed US $250 million in new funding to expand its fintech services to underbanked consumers in Kenya, Nigeria, and more recently, Ghana.

    Another winner was the Starehe Girls Centre which empowers disadvantaged girls by providing them access to quality education. The school won the Prize in 2017 in the Global High Schools category in recognition of its efforts to reduce its utility bills through the installation of solar panels and more efficient lighting. These financial savings have allowed it to admit more girls from disadvantaged backgrounds.

    Generating local action is a critical input to ensure that massive investment programs translate into a just transition for households. To this end, large-scale infrastructure must be accompanied by people-centric programs.

    Africa’s renewable energy potential could both help drive enormous economic growth in the region while also helping the world address the challenge of climate change. The potential is there, and it will require action …  in ways big and small.

    (Article first published in Nation (Kenya edition) on July 3, 2023)

    Philippe Benoit is research director for Global Infrastructure Analytics and Sustainability 2050. He previously held management positions at the World Bank and the International Energy Agency and has over 20 years of experience working on Africa.

    David Sandalow is Inaugural Fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia University, and a member of the Selection Committee of the Zayed Sustainability Prize.

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Climate Justice – Is Litigation a Good Way Forward?

    Climate Justice – Is Litigation a Good Way Forward?

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Kwan Soo-Chen, David McCoy (kuala lumpur, malaysia)
    • Inter Press Service

    KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Jul 19 (IPS) – For years, the concept of climate justice has been built on the understanding that countries and communities contributing the least to global warming are disproportionately bearing the impacts of climate change.

    For example, developing countries have been more affected by climate events due to their existing vulnerabilities and limited capacities to respond – eight out of the top ten countries most affected by climate extreme events from 2000 to 2019 were developing countries, where six were located in Asia.

    Based on the principle of equity, climate justice was embedded in the UN Climate Convention in 1992 through principles of “polluter pays” and “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities”, placing responsibilities to combat climate change on the richer nations.

    However, the lack of effective mechanism to operationalize these principles remains an issue to this day. Discussion on “loss and damage” was revived in COP27 in reaction to the failure of developed countries to fulfil their pledge to climate financing to help vulnerable states with climate actions.

    While there is currently no clear definition for “loss and damage”, the term essentially refers to the much-contested obligations of countries that have historically benefited from fossil fuel investment to pay for the residual consequences and permanent damage caused by climate change to nature and human societies, predominantly in the developing countries.

    Loss and damage encompass both economic and non-economic losses. While economic losses cover damage to resources, physical assets and services; tangible or intangible non-economic losses hold a larger share of the loss and damage, including the impact on individuals (loss of life and health, mobility), societies (loss of cultural heritage, identity, indigenous knowledge), and environment (loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services).

    Climate justice and the right to health

    Health is the most essential asset of human beings. However, population health, particularly of poor communities in developing countries, is increasingly threatened by the environmental and social changes brought by climate change. This brings in a different outlook on climate justice through the human rights lens.

    As health is underpinned by various social and environmental determinants, such as air, water, food, housing and development, the impacts of climate change on those determinants are infringing the fundamental human right to health.

    While the Constitution of the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1946 emphasizes the entitlements to equal opportunities to enjoy the “highest attainable standard of health” without discrimination to “race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition”, climate change is exacerbating the existing health inequity and vulnerabilities across the structural social hierarchies, making the progressive realization of the highest attainable standard of health increasingly difficult. This is particularly true among the traditionally discriminated and marginalized communities.

    For example, while climate change affects everyone, the health of Indigenous communities is especially vulnerable to climate change due to their close relationships with nature (many Indigenous peoples still rely directly on nature for their basic necessities) and their social and economic marginalization.

    In addition, there is emerging evidence showing mental distress among indigenous communities due to the threats upon their culture, identity and sovereignty as they lose or are forced to migrate from their traditional territories due to environmental changes.

    Along the same lines, while men and women are affected differently by climate change, women face greater health risks and vulnerabilities due to their particular health needs (e.g. in maternal and reproductive health), household and caregiver roles (e.g. water and food preparation), and underlying gender gaps in access to supports such as resources and critical information that affect their capacity to respond effectively to climate variability, especially in rural and remote areas.

    Children and the elderly are also disproportionately affected by the direct and indirect impacts of climate variability on temperature, air quality and food sources due to their unique physiology.

    Marginalized groups such as indigenous people and women have often been excluded in decision-making processes concerning climate actions that could affect their health and well-being. Nonetheless, they could be important agents of change while promoting health equity in climate mitigation and adaptation.

    For instance, indigenous knowledge on sustainable management and conservation of the environment is a valuable resource. While gender equity in climate actions are increasingly recognized and incorporated in climate finance, youths are at the forefront of climate advocacy fighting for the intergenerational rights to their future well-being.

    Climate litigation – a way forward?

    On this front, various efforts have been made to call for the acceleration of climate actions around the world. In the past years, advocacy campaigns, strikes, public demonstrations, and activists’ protests have been increasingly reported across media platforms, lobbying for countries to fulfil their climate pledges. Although some progress has been made, they are not enough to catch up with the fast-rising global temperature.

    Increasingly individuals and non-governmental organizations are turning to climate litigation as part of the social movements, using human rights law as a strategic instrument to enforce climate actions.

    Since the Paris Agreement in 2015, the number of climate change-related lawsuits has doubled from just over 800 cases (1986 -2014) to over 1,200 cases (2015 – 2022), with most cases based in the Global North (particularly in the US) and a growing number of cases from the Global South.

    Human rights law offers strong grounds for litigation against states as states hold the primary responsibility and duty to protect human rights. At the European Court of Human Rights, three climate cases are pending before the Grand Chamber of the Court.

    Among others, the climate cases were made on the grounds of the human rights violations of the right to life (Article 2), and the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8) as enshrined in the European Convention of Human Rights.

    Across Southeast Asia, increasing number of environmental conflicts leading to lawsuits have been documented, prominently in countries like Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines. Plaintiffs were often communities, non-governmental organizations and civil societies, with cases grounded on state governments’ failure to fulfil treaty obligations (Paris Agreement) and reduce carbon emissions; and corporations’ environmental destructive activities such as illegal logging and peatland burning that violate the human rights to life and healthy environment.

    At the local level, government agencies have been sued over their failure to perform duties in ensuring environmental and social protections through governance mechanisms, such as the lack of transparency of environmental impact assessments for project development and inadequacy of environmental standards (e.g. air pollution standards) in protecting citizens’ health.

    However, there remain issues of enforcement and jurisdictional limits within the international politics to be dealt with in climate litigations. Besides, lawsuits against governments could be counter-productive if states have limited capacity to respond. Nonetheless, a court proceeding is a catalyst to bring up the longtime debate on climate justice and enforce actions among those held accountable.

    Interestingly, a recent study found that these litigation processes are posing financial risks to the polluting carbon majors companies as their market share prices fell after lawsuits.

    In addition, the recent advancements on the recognition of human rights in the context of climate change look promising. In June 2022, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution recognizing the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, and in March 2023, another UN resolution, led by Vanuatu, was passed to secure a legal opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on states’ accountability and consequences for inaction in the first attempt to establish climate action obligations under international law.

    As the establishment of international legal rules are influential on judges and governments, it is hopeful that these efforts will build the momentum in countries’ commitments to climate actions in all member states. The role of civil societies as climate watchdogs remains fundamental in ensuring effective actions are followed through in the quest for climate justice.

    Kwan Soo-Chen is a Postdoctoral Fellow and David McCoy is a Research Lead at the United Nations University International Institute for Global Health (UNU-IIGH)

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • ‘I was outraged’: Our restaurant bill was $35 each, but our friend wanted to pay $22 for a gluten-free dish. Who’s right?

    ‘I was outraged’: Our restaurant bill was $35 each, but our friend wanted to pay $22 for a gluten-free dish. Who’s right?

    [ad_1]

    Dear Quentin,

    I went for dinner with six friends last weekend, and we each ordered entrees and desserts, and some side orders. One of our group only eats gluten-free food, so he ordered two starters. We split the bill, and it worked out at $36 each. But our gluten-free friend cried foul, and asked for a separate check to pay $22 for his gluten-free dish. I was outraged — and almost felt physically sick. I kicked my husband under the table, and said under my breath, “Can you believe that?’

    Can you believe it? Do you think he should have just paid the $35 instead of asking for a separate check? Adding insult to injury, he left the waiter a $10 tip. Why not just pay $35 like everyone else? I told my husband I was never going for dinner with him again. Don’t you think he should have just paid $35 like everyone else? It was a big crowd. If everyone did that, you’d need a forensic accountant to figure out how many breadsticks someone ate. 

    We otherwise had a nice evening, and it was a bring-your-own-bottle restaurant. I work as a teacher and my husband works in tech. We own a home together and have three kids. Our gluten-free friend is a freelance consultant, and is divorced with two kids. He had a very privileged upbringing. I worked hard for everything I have. I’m not saying any of us are rich, but when we go out to eat, we like to share and share alike, and split the bill down the middle. 

    When did eating out become so full of these cringeworthy moments?

    Equal Bill Splitter

    Dear Equal,

    I’m sorry to say that the most cringeworthy moment here happened when you kicked your husband under the table. I’m not a big fan of under-table communication in a group, and while we could debate the pros and cons of asking for a separate check for a $13 difference, I don’t think there’s much of a gray area when it comes to calling someone out at the dinner table, especially when your eye-rolling and disapproval could be picked up by the other guests.

    As far as your friend is concerned, $13 is a lot of money to pay when you did not eat all the food that was ordered by the table. Maybe it doesn’t seem like it to you or anyone reading this column, but your friend is divorced with two kids, and works as a freelancer — so let’s assume his income is not always stable. Could he have just split it down the middle and paid $35 and another 15% or 20% for a tip? Sure. But he has good financial boundaries. I applaud him.

    The real issue here may go back to your respective upbringings, and could explain your dramatic — and I would argue disproportionate reaction — to your friend asking for a separate $22 check. You’ve worked hard, and maybe your friend had an easier start in life, but that doesn’t mean he’s not entitled to pay for what he ate, and watch every dollar. Divorce is like a recession. You can end up struggling to get back on your financial feet for years.

    Perhaps your friend had always intended to pay $22 for his gluten-free dish, and tip the server 50%, or perhaps he has a well-trained side eye and caught your reaction to his paying for his own order, and he decided to pay closer to what everyone else had paid. But ordering separate checks, I suspect, will become more common as prices continue to rise, even at a slower pace, and people feel uncertain about spending money in restaurants. 

    You believe in equality of bill splitting. I suggest you apply that equality to all dinner guests, regardless of upbringing and dietary restrictions, and allow them to make their own choices about what they pay for at dinner. People often have problems — financial or otherwise — that we are not aware of, so try to leave space for that. And if your friend did see your eye-rolling and under-the-table antics? I’d like to think he made space for your behavior too.

    Readers write to me with all sorts of dilemmas. 

    By emailing your questions, you agree to have them published anonymously on MarketWatch. By submitting your story to Dow Jones & Co., the publisher of MarketWatch, you understand and agree that we may use your story, or versions of it, in all media and platforms, including via third parties.

    The Moneyist regrets he cannot reply to questions individually.

    More from Quentin Fottrell:

    I had a date with a great guy. I didn’t drink, but his wine added $36 to our bill. We split the check evenly. Should I have spoken up?

    ‘I’m living paycheck to paycheck and I feel drained’: My fiancé said he would pay half of the mortgage. Guess what happened next?

    ‘We live in purgatory’: My wife has a multimillion-dollar trust fund, but my mother-in-law controls it. We earn $400,000 and spend beyond our means.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Seizing the Moment for a More Resilient Asia & the Pacific

    Seizing the Moment for a More Resilient Asia & the Pacific

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana (bangkok, thailand)
    • Inter Press Service

    BANGKOK, Thailand, Jul 18 (IPS) – The world faces a disaster emergency, yet nowhere is the threat more immediate than in Asia and the Pacific. Ours is a region where climate change-induced disasters are becoming more frequent and intense. Since 1970, two million people have lost their lives to disasters.

    Tragically, but all too predictably, the poorest in the least developed countries (LDCs) are worst affected. They will find themselves in the eye of the storm as temperatures rise, new disaster hotspots appear and existing risks increase.

    Unless we fundamentally change our approach to building resilience to disaster risk, temperature rises of 1.5°C or 2°C will make adaptation to the threat of disasters unfeasible. Disaster risk could soon outpace resilience in Asia and the Pacific.

    It is worth pondering what this would mean. The grim tally of disaster-related deaths would inevitably rise, as would the annual cost of disaster-related losses, forecast to increase to almost $1 trillion, or 3 per cent of regional GDP, under 2°C warming ¬ up from $924 billion today, or 2.9 per cent of regional GDP.

    The deadly combination of disasters and extreme weather would undermine productivity and imperil sustainable development. In the poorest parts of our region, such as the Pacific small island developing States, disasters would become a major driver of inequality.

    Losses would be particularly devasting in the agriculture and energy sectors, disrupting food systems and undermining food security as well as jeopardizing energy supply and production. Environmental degradation and biodiversity loss would be remorseless, leading to climate change-driven extinctions and further increasing disaster risk.

    To avoid this exponential growth of disaster risk, there is a narrow window of opportunity to increase resilience and protect hard-won development gains. To seize it, bold decisions are needed to deliver transformative adaption. They can no longer be postponed.

    Next week, countries meeting during our Committee on Disaster Risk Reduction will consider key questions such as prioritizing greater investment in early warning systems. Expanding coverage in least developed countries is the most effective way to reduce the number of people killed.

    Early warning systems can shield people living in multi-hazard hotspots and reduce disaster losses everywhere by up to 60 per cent. They provide a tenfold return on investment. To protect food systems and reduce the exposure of the energy infrastructure – the backbone of our economies – sector-specific coverage is needed.

    Investments at the local level to improve communities’ response to early warning alerts, delivered through expanded global satellite data use and embedded in comprehensive risk management policies, must all be part of our approach.

    Nature-based solutions should be at the heart of adaptation strategies. They support the sustainable management, protection and restoration of degraded environments while reducing disaster risk. The evidence is unequivocal: preserving functional ecosystems in good ecological condition strengthens disaster risk reduction.

    This means preserving wetlands, flood plains and forests to guard against natural hazards, and mangroves and coral reefs to reduce coastal flooding. Forest restoration and sustainable agriculture are essential. In our urban centers, nature-based solutions can mitigate urban flooding and contribute to future urban resilience, including by reducing heat island effects.

    Beyond these priorities, only transformative adaption can deliver the systemic change needed to leave no one behind in multi-hazard risk hotspots. Such change will cut across policy areas. It means aligning social protection and climate change interventions to enable poor and climate-vulnerable households to adapt and protect their assets and livelihoods.

    Disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation must become complementary to make food and energy systems more resilient, particularly in disaster-prone arid areas and coastlines. Technologies, such as the Internet of Things and artificial intelligence, can improve the accuracy of real-time weather predictions and how disaster warnings are communicated.

    Yet to make this happen, disaster risk financing needs to be dramatically increased and financing mechanisms scaled up. In a constrained fiscal context, we must remember that investments made upstream are far more cost-effective than spending after a disaster.

    The current level of adaptation finance falls well short of the $144.74 billion needed for transformative adaptation. We must tap innovative financing mechanisms to close the gap. Thematic bonds, debt for adaptation and ecosystem adaptation finance can help attract private investment, reduce risk and create new markets.

    These instruments should complement official development assistance (ODA) , while digital technologies improve the efficiency, transparency and accessibility of adaptation financing.

    Now is the time to work together, to build on innovation and scientific breakthroughs to accelerate transformative adaptation across the region. A regional strategy that supports early warnings for all is needed to strengthen cooperation through the well-established United Nations mechanisms and in partnership with subregional intergovernmental organizations.

    At ESCAP, we stand ready to support this process every step of the way because sharing best practices and pooling resources can improve our region’s collective resilience and response to climate-related hazards. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development can only be achieved if we ensure disaster resilience is never outpaced by disaster risk. Let us seize the moment and protect our future in Asia and the Pacific.

    Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is Under-Secretary-General of the UN and Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • The Race Question in Americas Population Census

    The Race Question in Americas Population Census

    [ad_1]

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
    • Opinion by Joseph Chamie (portland, usa)
    • Inter Press Service

    PORTLAND, USA, Jul 17 (IPS) – With preparations for America’s 2030 population census underway and the Census Bureau encouraging additional public input, it’s time to seriously evaluate the continued inclusion of the race question in the U.S. population census.

    Not only is the census race question confusing, an arbitrary classification of unscientific distinctions and conceptually problematic, the continuing collection of race data in the decennial census is divisive, alienating and inconsistent with America’s motto “e pluribus unum”, out of many, one.

    The collection of population race data is a controversial matter. Some countries, agencies and organizations, including the UN Council for Human Rights, contend that the collection and compilation of race data are necessary to ensure equality, address systemic racism and guide appropriate public policy decisions. They believe that governments should collect and make publicly available comprehensive demographic data disaggregated by race.

    Others, however, maintain that the collection of race data is estranging, promotes adverse stereotypes and contributes to the establishment of discretionary social differences. They also fear that the collection and compilation of population race data may be used by government authorities and others to benefit or sanction certain groups. Moreover, they note that despite religious discrimination in the U.S., the decennial population census does not have a question on religious affiliation.

    The large majority of OECD countries, including France, Germany, Italy and Japan, do not collect data on the racial identity of their inhabitants. Only about a fifth of the 38 OECD countries, including Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States, collect racial data on their respective populations (Figure 1).

    Source: OECD.

    In some countries, such as France, the collection of data on race is considered divisive and accordingly governments avoid considering their citizens in racial categories. Also, in many European countries as well as elsewhere, the collection of race data remains a highly sensitive matter given the recent history of authorities using demographic data to harass, oppress, persecute and even exterminate certain groups of people.

    In the United States, beyond the basic enumeration of its population required by the U.S. Constitution for determining representation in Congress, the questions included in its decennial census is basically a political matter. Topics to be included or excluded in America’s population census are often in response to politics and political lobbying.

    Questions about age and place of residence typically raise few objections. In contrast, the collection of other information, such as religious affiliation, citizenship, sexual orientation, gender identity, ethnicity, political affiliation and immigration status, are often contentious and some are not included in the census.

    Since the first U.S. census in 1790, when some data on race as well as categories differentiating between free white people, other free people and enslaved people were collected, the government has changed its definitions of racial categories more than 10 times. Also, in many past censuses, individuals who were both white and another race, no matter how small the percentage, were counted as the nonwhite race, largely on the basis of the one drop rule.

    The U.S. Census Bureau currently collects race data in accordance with the 1997 Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity directed by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Based largely on continent or country of origin, OMB’s minimum five categories for data on race are: American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and White.

    Beginning in the 1960 census, race was no longer determined by the decisions of census enumerators but relied on the individual’s interpretation to select the appropriate racial category. In addition, the self-reporting of more than one race began with the 2000 census.

    The Census Bureau defines race as a person’s self-identification with one or more social groups. The Bureau repeatedly stresses that the racial categories in the census questionnaire generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in the country and not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically or genetically.

    Anyone who has filled out a recent decennial U.S. census questionnaire is faced with the question of race. There are a lot of people who don’t understand how best to answer that question because it doesn’t match the way they understand race.

    With the choice of one or more “racial categories” in the recent 2020 census, an individual could select White, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, nearly a dozen Asian or Pacific Island countries as well as the ubiquitous “Some Other Race” category, with national or ethnic origins to be specified in the write-in areas (Figure 2).

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau.

    The U.S. census race question has been met with dissatisfaction and frustration among some groups and individuals. In addition to the limited choices, the census race categories are increasingly failing to reflect how people see themselves, are out of step with the reality of their personal experiences and are often confused with people’s ethnic identity, especially Hispanic.

    In the 2020 census, close to 50 million U.S. residents, or approximately 15 percent of the country’s population, checked a box for “Some Other Race” in the question on race. The proportion of the U.S. population choosing the category “Some Other Race” in 2020 is double the percentage from a decade earlier and triple the percentage from two decades earlier (Figure 3).

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Among the proposed reforms being considered to the race question for the 2030 census is the inclusion of a new checkbox for “Middle Eastern or North African” (MENA). Under the current standards set by the Office of Management and Budget, Americans with roots in the Middle East or North Africa are considered white.

    Advocates for Arab Americans and other MENA groups have long campaigned for their own checkbox in the race question. Based on their daily life experiences, many people of MENA descent do not identify as white people.

    Besides the addition of a new checkbox to the census racial question, the proposed reform to the race question would change the government’s definition of “White” as it would no longer include people with MENA origins. As a result, the change could decrease the proportion of people who identify as white among the U.S, population, which has become a salient part of American politics, especially among the political right.

    Families across America are becoming more racially diverse. Part of the rise is the result of the growing diversity of the U.S. population due to immigration and increasing intermarriage among America’s racial and ethnic groups.

    Since 2010, the number of people in the U.S. who identify themselves as multiracial has changed substantially. From 9 million people in 2010, the number increased to 33.8 million people in 2020 and now represents about 10 percent of the U.S. population.

    Race in America remains a problematic concept, an arbitrary classification of unscientific distinctions and an incoherent stereotype as well as being difficult to define objectively and unambiguously. Also, since 1960 the U.S. Census Bureau has relied on self-identification by the individual to determine a person’s race.

    In sum, the population census race question is not required to determine Congressional representation and, very importantly, the race question is contributing to the entrenchment of spurious divisions across the country that are unnecessary, confusing and inimical to the inherent principles of the nation. Accordingly, serious consideration should be given to evaluating the inclusion of the race question in America’s 2030 population census.

    Joseph Chamie is an independent consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division and author of numerous publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Births, Deaths, Migrations and Other Important Population Matters.”

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Most UN Agencies Lack Access to Information Policies, Survey Finds

    Most UN Agencies Lack Access to Information Policies, Survey Finds

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Toby McIntosh (washington dc)
    • Inter Press Service

    WASHINGTON DC, Jul 17 (IPS) – Less than half of United Nations agencies have access to information policies, according to a survey by Eye on Global Transparency.

    Of 27 UN bodies surveyed, 13 have access policies. So, 14 UN agencies lack access policies. Setting a poor example, the UN Secretariat still lacks an access to information policy.

    Other prominent UN agencies without access policies include the Food and Agriculture Organization, the International Civil Aviation Organization, the International Organization for Migration, the World Trade Organization and the World Intellectual Property Organization.

    Two UN institutions created access policies in 2021. One was the International Maritime Organization. The other was the UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). Ironically, UNIDO’s policy went undisclosed until very recently. UN Women is developing a policy, according to a spokesperson.

    Otherwise, the UN bodies without access policies show no signs of planning to create them, including at the Secretariat level. Access policies establish the procedures for requesting information and set the standards for what will and won’t be provided.

    Despite Hint, No Action by the UN Secretariat

    In 2018, there was a hint of a possible pro-transparency move by the UN Secretariat, but nothing materialized.

    The top UN communications official at the time said the Secretariat would like to create a “rigorous” access to information policy. However, a year later, the Secretariat said in a statement that it had no such plans. The UN press office did not reply to a recent request for comment.

    Access to information is considered an integral part of the right of freedom of expression, as recognized in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    The fact that the UN Secretariat and other UN bodies don’t apply this standard to themselves prompted a rebuke from a UN Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights. “For the central global political institution, one that serves the public interest across a range of subject matters, this is intolerable,” began a 2017 report.

    UN agencies were encouraged to create access policies in a 2018 UN Human Rights Council resolution and a 2020 report by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

    UNESCO Urged to Be Advocate

    Pressure for more transparency at UN agencies is minimal. One potential advocate, the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), supports creation of access laws at the national level. But UNESCO but does encourage UN agencies to adopt access policies, despite calls for it to do so.

    While national adoption and implementation of access laws is one of the UN‘s Sustainable Development Goals, with UNESCO as the monitor, there is no UN goal for UN access policies.

    At a UNESCO-sponsored International Day for Universal Access to Information meeting held in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, in 2022, the participants approved a declaration calling on intergovernmental bodies to adopt access polices.

    Setting a less-than-stellar example itself, UNESCO recently amended its own access policy without announcing its intentions or inviting public comment. (See EYE article.) Nor did UNESCO follow substantive advice it gives to countries, to have an independent oversight bodies to handle appeals.

    Independent appeals panels are uncommon at UN agencies. Most, like UNESCO, handle appeals with internal review panels. By contrast, the existence of independent appeals panel is more frequent at international financial institutions (IFIs), almost all of which have access polices. (See EYE 2023 story)

    Difficulties with Opacity

    Getting information from agencies without policies can be problematical. A nongovernmental organization in Nigeria learned this when it asked the International Organization for Migration (IMO) about a program to help returning migrants. (See EYE article.)

    There was no detail on IOM’s website and an IOM official denied having “any information” about the $324,000 project or a pineapple processing factory spawned by the effort. The IOM has no access policy through which to make a formal request.

    When policies do exist, the processing of requests can be time-consuming. This author has a pending appeal with the UN Environment Programme, submitted March 8, four months ago. UNEP has not met its goal of issuing decisions within 60 working days.

    Veteran UN journalist Thalif Deen, writing for Inter Press Service, called the UN “one of most opaque institutions, where transparency is never the norm.”

    https://www.ipsnews.net/2023/05/proposal-un-freedom-information-act-never-got-off-ground/

    UNIDO Discloses Previously Nonpublic Access Policy

    The UNIDO website doesn’t indicate the presence of an access policy, but after EYE contacted the agency the one-and-a-half year old policy was forwarded.

    The UNIDO policy, like most access polices, begins with strong commitments to openness (“maximum access”) and then moves on to “limited” exemptions.

    However, the UNIDO exemptions, like those in many national and international access policies are quite protective. For example, confidential treatment is guaranteed for documents submitted by governments and third parties.

    Unusually, UNIDO’s policy says that “imitations may apply with regard to the types of requestors to whom such information will be disclosed.” Access policies typically do not discriminate on who may apply, although some national policies forbid applications from non-citizens. Also rare is a UNIDO requirement that requesters must pay in advance to cover the estimated cost of handling their request.

    So, there are two hurdles: getting access policies in the first place and getting good access policies.

    Toby McIntosh has reported for several decades on transparency at international institutions and on freedom for information issues world-wide. During a journalistic career in Washington, he covered the White House, Congress and many regulatory agencies. View all posts by Toby McIntosh

    IPS UN Bureau

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Should Twitter have rejected Musk’s offer and remained publicly traded?

    Should Twitter have rejected Musk’s offer and remained publicly traded?

    [ad_1]

    Would Twitter have been better off to remain a public company rather than be taken private by Elon Musk?

    We’ll never know for sure, of course. But it’s hard to imagine that it would have performed any worse. Twitter as a private company is hemorrhaging advertisers, and according to a recent Fidelity analysis its market value is down nearly two-thirds from the $44 billion Musk paid for it.

    Grading Twitter’s performance as a private company is more than an idle armchair exercise. It goes to the heart of an age-old debate over whether companies can be more profitably managed when private rather than public. The private equity (PE) industry not surprisingly claims that its approach is superior, and much of Wall Street agrees since many PE firms have produced impressive long-term returns.

    The industry’s claims are not devoid of dissenters. Consider a recent study from Verdad Capital entitled “Private Equity Operational Improvements.” It was conducted by Minje Kwun of Dartmouth College and Lila Alloula of Yale University.

    In order to overcome the otherwise insuperable obstacle of being unable to measure how private companies are performing, the researchers focused on a subset of leveraged buyouts (LBOs) from 1996 to 2021 in which the private equity firms issued public debt. In order to sell debt to the public, of course, the PE firms had to issue financial statements publicly, and that enabled the researchers to analyze the LBOs’ performance after going private, relative to public companies in the same industry sector.

    Kwun and Alloula focused on six indicators of financial performance: Revenue growth, EBITDA margin, capital expenditures as a percentage of sales, and the ratios of gross profit to total assets, EBITDA to total assets, and debt to EBITDA. (EBITDA, of course, refers to Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization.)

    Relative to public companies in the same sector over the three years after going private, LBOs on average did not show any operational improvement along these six dimensions. The researchers conclude: “The [private equity] industry mythology of savvy and efficient operators streamlining operations and directing strategy to increase growth just isn’t supported by data.”

    Their results are consistent with those of a near-decade ago study by Jonathan Cohn and Lillian Mills of the University of Texas and Erin Towery of the University of Georgia. They used a different technique to access the otherwise inaccessible financial data of newly-private companies: Their tax returns. The professors focused on the operating performance of a sample of companies that had gone private between 1995 and 2007, comparing them to otherwise-similar companies that remained public. On average over the three years after going private, the researchers found, the private companies performed no better than the public ones.

    The source of PE’s industry high returns

    What, then, is the source of the increased return that the private equity industry often produces? The answer appears to be increased leverage. Leverage increases returns on the upside, even if it magnifies losses on the downside. Leverage has worked to the PE industry’s advantage over the last several decades since public markets have on balance have risen significantly.

    Notice that increasing leverage requires no particular management expertise or shrewd strategic planning. In principle it’s no more difficult than you or me purchasing stock on margin.

    These studies are not the final word on the subject. Some other studies, using alternate methodologies, have found some operational improvement at companies after being taken private. If different methodologies can reach such different conclusions, however, that would suggest that the benefits of going private are not as obvious and overwhelming as the private equity industry would have us believe.

    At a minimum, Kwun and Alloula argue, we should be skeptical “of any claims of operational improvements being a major contributor to PE’s performance relative to public markets.”

    Mark Hulbert is a regular contributor to MarketWatch. His Hulbert Ratings tracks investment newsletters that pay a flat fee to be audited. He can be reached at mark@hulbertratings.com

    More: These 5 fast-growing stocks pay generous dividends you can count on

    Also read: Top investment newsletters are down on tech, Tesla and Meta Platforms. Here’s what they like.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Gold should be dead, but somehow it’s still adding value

    Gold should be dead, but somehow it’s still adding value

    [ad_1]

    Why isn’t gold dead yet?

    It hasn’t served a vital economic function since the government stopped treating it as money back in 1971. Actually, you could argue it stopped being necessary long before that.

    Yes, some people prefer it in jewelry. It is used in some technological equipment, and sometimes, still, in dentistry. But so what? According to authoritative data from the World Gold Council, even all those uses only account for about half of the world’s supply each year. Logically, this should mean that there is a gigantic glut of gold and that its price would be in free fall.

    But it isn’t. Gold is beating U.S. stocks and bonds this month. And this isn’t even a rarity. I’ve run some numbers and have found a couple of things that could be very important to retirees, and for all of us suckers saving for retirement.

    Even though, according to traditional financial theory, they really make no sense at all.

    Don’t miss: Gold headed for best week since March after U.S. inflation reports

    Also see: Why gold will beat the stock market in the coming weeks

    The first thing is that over the past century including some gold in your portfolio alongside stocks and bonds has genuinely added value. It has produced higher average returns, less volatility and fewer of those disastrous “lost decades” where your portfolio ended up whistling Dixie.

    The second thing is that this peculiarity has been showing no signs of letting up in recent years or decades — even though, if anything, gold makes even less sense today than it used to.

    Let me explain.

    As usual, I’ve tapped the excellent database maintained by the NYU Stern School of Business, which tracks asset values going back to 1928.

    Over that period, a conventional so-called balanced portfolio invested 60% in the S&P 500
    SPY,
    -0.06%
    index of large-company stocks and 40% in U.S. 10-year Treasury bonds
    TMUBMUSD10Y,
    3.832%
    has generated an average return of 4.9% a year in “real” terms, meaning above inflation.

    A portfolio that’s 60% invested in the S&P 500, 30% in the bonds and 10% in gold
    GC00,
    -0.26%
    earned a slightly higher average, 5.1% a year in real terms. But the volatility was lower: The portfolio that included the gold had a lower standard deviation of returns, and a much higher “median” return, meaning the middlemost return if you ranked all the years from best to worst. The portfolio including gold beat the traditional one by five full percentage points in total over the typical 10-year period, and failed to keep up with inflation for 10 years on only five occasions — half as often as the portfolio consisting exclusively of stocks and bonds.

    Nor is this just about olden times. The portfolio including 10% gold has beaten the traditional 60/40 by an average of 0.4 percentage point a year since President Richard Nixon finally killed the gold standard in 1971. And it has beaten the traditional portfolio by the same amount, an average of four-tenths of a percentage point, so far this millennium. (The 60/40 portfolio has done better if you start measuring only in 1980, as that ignores the golden 1970s but includes the long bear market for gold of the 1980s and 1990s.)

    And gold has added value in five of the last seven years (while in the other two it was effectively a tie).

    It’s not so much that gold is a great long-term investment on its own. It’s that gold has seemed to shine when others, specifically stocks and bonds, have failed. And it still does. It held up during the crash of 1929-32. But it also held up during the crash in 2002. And in 2008. And 2020.

    A financial expert told me this was “hindsight bias.” But so is most financial analysis.

    When your financial adviser tells you what you might reasonably expect from large stocks, small stocks, international stocks, real estate and so forth in the decades ahead, he or she is basing that on history. (In some cases this has been downright hilarious, as when advisers said you should still expect “average” historical returns of 5% a year from Treasurys, even when they had only a 2% yield.)

    I’m danged if I know why. But so far this year, once again, you’ve been better off in a portfolio of 60% stocks, 30% bonds and 10% gold than in just 60% stocks and 40% bonds. Make of it what you will.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What a World 1.5 degrees Hotter Would Look Like

    What a World 1.5 degrees Hotter Would Look Like

    [ad_1]

    To mitigate the worst climate change impacts, we need to consider implementing climate solutions outside of the free economic market.
    • Opinion by Michael Davies-Venn (amsterdam)
    • Inter Press Service

    AMSTERDAM, Jul 14 (IPS) – The dangerous state of global climate has reached a new low as a World Metrological Organisation (WMO) analysis reveals. It confirms a known obvious: human activities continue to worsen conditions that have changed our planet’s climate.

    Most distressing is that ‘there is a 66 per cent likelihood that the annual average near-surface global temperature between 2023 and 2027 will be more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels for at least one year.’

    With under five years before the much dreaded 1.5 degrees set by the Paris Agreement becomes a reality – and with it ‘a 98 per cent likelihood that at least one of the next five years, and the five-year period as a whole, will be the warmest on record’ – politicians and policy-makers have received the loudest definitive clarion call that should induce urgent and fundamental changes in approaches to mitigating and adapting to climate change impacts.

    It had been known for decades that the African continent is highly vulnerable to such impacts as drought, flooding and heatwaves. What remains unknown but can be reasonably discerned is the scale of human catastrophe and its resulting global impacts that are certain to happen should – so far unsuccessful – climate governance approaches remain unchanged.

    Already observed impacts of climate change

    It is now reasonable to conclude that climate actions that should have been undertaken at a continental scale will not be completed within five years to avert climate change impacts. Over decades, predictions in earlier International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports have already become a reality.

    Its latest special report – focused on the 1.5 degrees threshold – details climate impacts that have claimed lives and livelihoods among Africans who contributed the least to climate change. Six climate impacts assessed between ‘medium, high and very high confidence’ such as displacement, heat and losses in agriculture and crop production, are no longer just predictions — and are certain to further increase within the next five years.

    A certain outcome of this will be increases in false solutions, such as techno-scientific babble to spray silver iodide into the atmosphere to create rain, as well as inflame nationalistic policy responses, such as the British government’s current inhumane policy to return a growing number of people fleeing from the most vulnerable continent to climate change impacts.

    Any effort, worthy of being considered serious, to avert further callous suffering and wanton waste of lives across Africa during the next five years, must aim at implementing climate mitigation and adaptation projects at a scope, continental scale and rate that surpasses the frequency of recent environmental disasters.

    Before the onset of these WMO’s predictions, those most responsible for climate change saw and mostly ignored as distant problems, the starvation in Ethiopia, catastrophic drought in Kenya and cyclone in Zimbabwe that affected millions, killed thousands and, since 2021, displaced some 1.5 million searching for food and water in Somalia.

    But such a short-sighted understanding of cascading impacts resulting from extreme weather and environmental conditions induced by a changed global climate will only worsen the situation. Further, beyond five years, social outcomes across Africa would, in the long-term, represent persistent social pressures, including from those with the courage to maintain a moral sting on the conscience of politicians in developed countries.

    A most certain of those is the changing demography of Africa, as ‘more than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa.’ In sub-Saharan Africa, the population is projected to grow from 258 million in 1984 to over 1.6 bn in the next seven years. It would be a natural outcome that these lives will relentlessly escape barren farmlands and flood communities that no longer sustain their lives for those in Europe and elsewhere.

    Reports of thousands of lives lost at sea should signal to politicians that risks faced by those seeking refuge by crossing the Mediterranean Sea, using over-crowded and rickety boats, are not sufficient deterrence to outweigh their perceptions of protection in developed countries that are comparably more adapted to climate change impacts and with mitigation solutions.

    Another reason for urgent changes to addressing climate change is that assistance to developing countries to aid humanitarian disasters are constrained by inflation in developed economies, the political climate in donor countries and unforeseen developments, such as the recent Covid19 pandemic.

    And so, within the next five years, the resulting environmental disasters from a world warmed to 1.5 degrees, coupled with national economic pressures in developed countries such as inflation, which reduces foreign aid, inconsistent national policy-making from short-term political cycles and misplaced national priorities on overseas development assistance (ODA) – such that saw Somalia ranked tenth on a list of top-ten recipients of gross ODA between 2020 and 2021, during the same period the country was experiencing a profound humanitarian crisis – will contribute to creating a global humanitarian catastrophe perhaps not seen since the end of the Second World War.

    The need for large-scale transformations

    Unlike Western Europe, which was rebuilt on the Marshall Plan, a similar plan may be unnecessary for Africa, had developed countries honoured promises on climate change assistance. But climate finance promises to honour yet more broken promises have not stopped African countries’ from increasing their resilience and reducing the continent’s high vulnerability to climate change impacts.

    They continue to play by UNFCCC rules and have deposited plans, including plans to implement plans, to mitigate and adapt to climate change. But as the UNFCCC has found, virtually all National Determined Contributions, from some 100 countries, ‘need international support for technology development and transfer to implement.’

    Since as many countries have been waiting for decades for such support, it is reasonable to suspect the finance needed will not arrive in less than five years. And so, national efforts to protect lives across Africa have largely come to nought, while emissions outside the continent continue to rise, while ironically, the premature death of ‘King Coal’ still makes headline news in the foreign press.

    Keeping that failure in mind, if the Paris Agreement could still be lauded as the greatest achievement on climate change, then the accord’s approach to implementing its solutions is its weakest. Whether it’s implementing mitigation and adaptation projects or transferring technologies from developed to developing countries, the inflated role and relevance of money to realise these solutions reduce the accord’s potential from a practical instrument to a simple conceptual document.

    Its finance framework contributes to gestate and birth a marketplace of climate finance funds, greenwashing scams and initiatives informed by neoclassical free-market logic that, as yet, have failed to reduce global emissions. But where the framework should matter most – to stimulate climate finance flows to developing countries – remains an unmet need.

    Yet, Africa’s persistent high vulnerability to climate change impacts isn’t for lack of climate finance, but one of access to money. One has only to observe that Africa has historically been at the bottom rung of recipients of public and private sector finance, such as foreign direct investments and overseas development assistance.

    Climate finance, which must freely flow to fund renewable energy and climate-resilient projects, has followed suit. Until 2050, the continent would need, yearly, $240 bn to implement climate mitigation and adaptation measures, but received $15.7 bn in loans in 2020. It is more critical now than ever to understand that private financial markets are unsuitable for solving public problems.

    Economic power has historically been centralised in developed countries and climate change impacts will not honour this historic disparity.

    Decarbonising African economies implies societal, sectoral and infrastructural transformations at a scale unknown to human history. Yet, knowledge and technologies exist today to make this transformation a reality. But this evidently provides no assurance for their use, mainly because of the insistence that such transformation should be accomplished on the basis of neoclassical market logic.

    Aside from such reasoning reflecting a certain measure of cognitive dissonance, it also suggests a wilful and callous condemnation of vulnerable lives to more death and unnecessary suffering. A practical and perhaps only option now is to consider implementing climate solutions outside the free economic market.

    The second is to socialise these solutions. This henceforth should mean that decisions on how to provide electricity to hundreds of millions who’ve been living in perpetual darkness at sunset for generations, provide drought-resistant crops to those in barren farmlands and supply early warning systems to prevent deaths from extreme weather, must no longer be informed by neoclassical economic dictates. By orienting climate solutions towards social goals, human societies may minimally survive in a world warmed up to 1.5 degrees.

    Michael Davies-Venn is a public policy analyst and communication expert. He works on global environmental governance with focus on climate mitigation and climate adaptation measures between developing and developed regions. He is Junior Fellow at Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.

    Source: International Politics and Society, published by the Global and European Policy Unit of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Hiroshimastrasse 28, D-10785 Berlin.

    IPS UN Bureau

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Impatience as a Virtue

    Impatience as a Virtue

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Yasmine Sherif (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Jul 14 (IPS) – We all know and agree that patience is a virtue. It is indeed. With one exception.

    In the face of a child’s suffering, impatience is the highest virtue. Or as we say in the spirit of Education Cannot Wait: “We must be unapologetically impatient” in our collective goal to reach 224 million crisis-affected children and adolescents with quality education.

    Over the past few months, we have met with refugee children, teachers, parents, community leaders, implementing partners, strategic donors and government officials in Colombia, South Sudan and Chad. Time and again we have seen first-hand how climate change, armed conflict and forced displacement severely disrupt lives, destroy hope and dramatically impede progress toward our global promise of inclusive quality education for all.

    As stressed by United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Chad, Violet Kenyana Kakyomya, in this month’s ECW high-level interview: “Refugees have been exposed to trauma due to the violence they witnessed and experienced, which for children can have short- and long-term negative effects on their physical, mental, cognitive and emotional development.” In this context, access to education is a crucial protection measure.

    Unless we act now as a global community, we will lose an entire generation of children and, with them, future generations. We will leave behind a legacy of broken promises, denial of opportunity and loss of hope. The most effective way to counter this is to empower today’s generation with the academic, social-emotional learning, mental health, self-confidence, empathy skills and tools to reverse and mitigate the avalanche of despair and destruction and to build back better.

    Above all, we need to #EmpowerHer – namely the millions of crisis-affected girls who are among the furthest left behind and yet who have so much to contribute in changing the world for the better.

    Education is the most powerful means to break cycles of violence – committed on both human beings and mother nature. Education is the best pathway to end conflicts and climate disasters. Because the world needs profoundly educated people who can both think and feel; and, who know how to put this vision into action. None of this can wait.

    The task is daunting, urgent and requires immediate action. Our recent global estimates study provides a clearer picture than ever of the growing challenges. In all, the new estimates indicate as many as 224 million crisis-impacted children are in urgent need of a quality education.

    As we reflect on our progress in advance of this year’s UN SDG Summit, UN General Assembly, Climate Talks (COP28), and Global Refugee Forum, we must unite with a sense of urgency, impatience and concrete action to ensure Education Cannot Wait and our global strategic partners receive the financing required to deliver an inclusive and continued quality education. Our shared goal is to make more than #222MillionDreams come true.

    With more funding, we can deliver faster and further, together.

    In June, we launched new investments in South Sudan, Central African Republic and Somalia. Our proven results-focused strategy exists. The political will is there. The systems and processes for coordination of joint programming are in place. The missing link is financing. We need fully funded joint programmes across sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia.

    It is possible to do: together, we continue our global advocacy efforts to urgently mobilize more than US$1.5 billion to realize ECW’s goal of reaching 20 million children and adolescents over the next four years of our strategic plan.

    This is not only a very realistic and logical goal. It is an existential imperative requiring action now – not waiting for better financial prospects or until the world is a better place.

    As the late UN Secretary-General, Dag Hammarskjold, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

    We can’t play it safe. If there is any virtue we all need today, it is to be unapologetically impatient.

    Yasmine Sherif is Director of Education Cannot Wait.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Twenty-five Years After the Creation of the International Criminal Court

    Twenty-five Years After the Creation of the International Criminal Court

    [ad_1]

    Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi
    • Opinion by Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi (the hague, netherlands)
    • Inter Press Service

    THE HAGUE, Netherlands, Jul 13 (IPS) – On the night of 17 July 1998, the outcome of the Diplomatic Conference convened to create the International Criminal Court was still uncertain. Hundreds of state representatives and civil society organizations assembled in the FAO headquarters in Rome, holding their breath in anticipation.

    Finally, after midnight, euphoric delegations could applaud the outcome of the vote: 120 states in favour, 7 against and 21 abstentions. A long-standing dream was to become reality: the creation of a permanent criminal court to investigate and try perpetrators of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

    The crime of aggression was also included, but only in a programmatic way pending agreement about its definition and the conditions under which the Court could exercise jurisdiction. These questions were only resolved 12 years later in the first review conference held in Kampala, Uganda in 2010.

    In the 25 years that followed the adoption of the Statute, successive judges and prosecutors contributed to operationalizing this Court, simultaneously desired and feared by different actors of the international community. States and civil society expected much of this unparalleled institution and its potential to impact positively on conflict resolution.

    The creation of an international court with jurisdiction over international crimes was not in and of itself something new. The International Criminal Court followed the steps of the post-war Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals, as well as those created by the United Nations Security Council 50 years later for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

    Silvia Fernandez de GurmendiHowever, the establishment of the first permanent international criminal jurisdiction, represented a key paradigm shift. Contrary to special tribunals, the International Criminal Court was not created to exercise jurisdiction solely in predetermined situations but to decide for itself, fully independently, where to investigate and who to prosecute. The ability to select situations in the world where to intervene gave it powers never previously granted to any other court.

    To counterbalance this ambitious mandate, the Court was conceived as a complementary institution of last resort, with the power to act only in those cases of inaction or lack of genuine action by national systems.

    Furthermore, despite its global vocation, the International Criminal Court was not granted universal jurisdiction. Unless the United Nations Security Council requests the Court to act, the Court may only investigate and prosecute in situations in which the states in whose territories the crime are committed or the states of nationality of the perpetrators are parties to the Rome Statute.

    In its 25 years of operations and within the parameters set by its constituent treaty, the Court has demonstrated its capacity to investigate and prosecute in multiple situations of extremely grave crimes in Africa, Asia, America and Europe. It has also demonstrated the possibility of involving the victims of those crimes in its proceedings and of repairing the harm suffered by hundreds of thousands of them, either directly and indirectly.

    For the first time, the Rome Statute introduced elements of reparative justice which allow victims to participate in the proceedings to make observations and to request reparation. These elements were later incorporated by the legal frameworks of other international courts and today form an integral part of international criminal justice.

    The Court has achieved significant accomplishments, but has also suffered difficulties in its functioning. Currently, the Assembly of States Parties is undertaking, together with the Court and civil society, a holistic review to strengthen of the Rome Statute system by accelerating proceedings and improving the performance, governance, and work culture of the Court.

    This review also seeks to strengthen cooperation by states and to design suitable strategies to increase political support and protect the institution and everyone who collaborate with it against threats and attacks.

    Today, the Rome Statute has 123 state parties. This is a significant number that comprises two thirds of states in the international community. However, it is still insufficient to achieve the Court’s global aspirations.

    Broadening the universality of the Court is of crucial importance. Today the world needs more justice than ever. The atrocities of the twentieth century that led to the creation of the Court have not ceased and there is a growing erosion of multilateralism and the rule of law.

    Despite current circumstances, there is cause for hope. The international community has redoubled its demand for justice and multiplied the initiatives to make it a reality. The establishment of the Court reaffirmed the obligation to investigate and prosecute and contributed to consolidate the concept that justice is an indispensable component of sustainable peace.

    In addition to proceedings by the International Criminal Court and other international tribunals, more states are willing to exercise universal jurisdiction over international crimes. New mechanisms are being created to ensure the collection and preservation of evidence that may assist these international or national efforts.

    We are seeing the emergence of a global justice system, or a justice “eco-system”, within which international and national courts have a role to play – sometimes a central role, sometimes a complementary or supporting one.

    In July 1998, the Court was an idea yet to be realized. Twenty-five years after its creation, the hope is that more states will join this historical effort to maximize its potential to impart justice in our tumultuous world.

    Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi is President of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute; Former Judge and former President of the International Criminal Court.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • As food prices rise in June, analysts warn of a ‘tipping point’ for Americans

    As food prices rise in June, analysts warn of a ‘tipping point’ for Americans

    [ad_1]

    Food prices grew at a slower pace in June, but economists remain concerned that prices will reach a level where consumers will make dramatic changes in their behavior.

    Food prices rose 3% in June compared to a year ago, according to the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. After a year of price hikes, consumers continued to see food prices rise, but at a slower rate.

    Grocery prices were 5.7% higher in June compared to a year ago, and dining out was 7.7% more expensive. That’s significantly lower than the 13.5% peak inflation for grocery prices last August and the 8.8% peak inflation for dining out.

    “Overall, there continues to be a similar narrative of extended upward pressure on food prices as we try to discern whether this stress has led to a tipping point where consumers are struggling to buy the foods that they want,” said Jayson Lusk, the head and distinguished professor of Agricultural Economics at Purdue University.

    Reported food insecurity across households of different income levels reached 17% in June, the highest level since March 2022, according to the monthly Consumer Food Insights Report from Purdue University. Although it didn’t deviate too much from the normal range — food insecurity hovered at 14% two months ago — Lusk said the increase is concerning given the amount of pressure on more financially vulnerable consumers. 

    “Reported food insecurity across households of different income levels reached 17% in June, the highest level since March 2022, according to Purdue University. ”

    The pandemic-era expansion of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program ended in March, meaning SNAP recipients are now receiving $90 less on average every month, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a progressive policy think tank based in Washington, D.C. 

    The recent rise in food insecurity could be a lag from households adjusting to the policy change, Lusk said. On average, consumers are spending about $120 per week on groceries and $70 per week on dining out or takeout, the report found. 

    Middle-income households earning $50,000 to $100,000 a year and low-income households earning less than $50,000 a year cut weekly spending on groceries and dining out by about $10 a week, Purdue found. The average weekly grocery expenditure for low-income households was $103 in June; for middle-income households, it was $118. Households earning more than $100,000 a year spent $141 a week on groceries in June.

    Around 47% of low-income households — those earning less than $50,000 a year — said they relied on SNAP benefits in May, up from roughly 40% in February, according to a recent Morning Consult report.

    For low-income households, rising food insecurity is often coupled with juggling bills such as utilities and rent, which has also led to rising eviction rates in recent months, according to Propel, an app that aims to help low-income Americans improve their financial health. Propel surveys SNAP users on insecurity around food, finance and their housing situation. 

    Nearly half of the survey respondents said they cannot afford the food they want. “We were unable to pay bills because we had to buy food. We’re about to lose our home,” a South Carolina user named Anna told the Propel survey. 

    The share of surveyed households that paid their utilities late rose 11% from May to June, and only 27% of respondents paid their utility bills on time and in full, according to Propel’s June survey.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Invisible Women in Energy: Millions of Household Biomass Producers

    Invisible Women in Energy: Millions of Household Biomass Producers

    [ad_1]

    While India decreased its population without access to clean cooking fuels by about 30 percent from 2010 to 2020, Africa has seen an increase of more than 50 percent over the same period, driven by a rising number of poor, tepid government policies to address this issue, and overarching poverty challenges. Credit: Zofeen Ebrahim/IPS
    • Opinion by Philippe Benoit, Alexandra Peek (washington dc)
    • Inter Press Service

    WASHINGTON DC, Jul 12 (IPS) – An estimated 2.4 billion people currently lack access to clean cooking fuels, with the majority relying on biomass (firewood, charcoal, dung) to meet household cooking needs. This is only a slight decrease from 2017, when 2.5 billion people lacked access to clean cooking fuels.

    Of those who continue to lack this access, the majority—923 million—live in sub-Saharan Africa, followed by 490 million in India. While India decreased its population without access by about 30 percent from 2010 to 2020, Africa has seen an increase of more than 50 percent over the same period, driven by a rising number of poor, tepid government policies to address this issue, and overarching poverty challenges.

    These figures are likely to remain persistently high at about 2.2 billion over the next decade, roughly split between India and other parts of developing Asia on the one hand, and sub-Saharan Africa on the other.

    Hidden behind these figures are the people who produce the biomass that powers most of this energy use: often it’s women and girls who are tasked with this labor. In this article, the authors discuss why it’s important to see these women and girls—potentially the largest segment of the energy labor force today and in the foreseeable future—as producers and workers.

    In understanding them as a formidable workforce of biomass producers, their knowledge and experience can inform ongoing efforts of electrification, clean cooking alternatives, gender rights, and overall poverty alleviation. It is also equally important to recognize this workforce in order to improve its working conditions on the path to building a more inclusive energy workforce toward net zero emissions.

    While the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal #7 (SDG 7) draws attention to the need to eliminate the use of non-clean cooking techniques that kill millions each year, the working conditions under which women toil today to produce biomass also merits greater attention.

    As the World Bank reported recently, “across most of Sub-Saharan Africa and in parts of China, women are the primary fuel wood collectors,” which is also the case in areas of South Asia. This is time-consuming and physically demanding work that can involve “collecting and carrying loads of wood that weigh as much as 25-50 kilogrammes” and can “take up to 20 or more hours per week.”

    Estimating the Size of this Workforce

    Just how many women are working in this area? A preliminary estimate—based on data regarding the number of households relying on biomass for cooking and the rate of participation of women in this labor—puts the number at over 300 million. Overall, while there is reliable data on lack of access to clean cooking, reliance on biomass, and deforestation trends, there is a gap in knowledge about the (wo)man power it takes to produce biomass.

    This gap may stem from the way issues around biomass are often discussed in the SDG 7 context. For example, data on the lack of access to clean cooking primarily informs solutions to shift cooking norms and electrification pathways and efforts to obviate the need for women to labor in producing biomass, while data on biomass reliance feeds into conservation and land use efforts.

    Such efforts, however, tend to overlook women as an energy workforce, even though across sub-Saharan Africa, India, parts of China, and Latin America, women and young girls collect and make the biomass necessary to power their homes, including for heating.

    Organizations focused on gender parity, such as SEforAll, come closer to recognizing the work of these women and girls, but they, too, frame their efforts in line with clean cooking initiatives rather than labor conditions or rights. For instance, research on the number of hours spent collecting firewood and preparing meals is used to discuss cultural and gender roles that lead to systemic disadvantages for women and girls.

    A missing link in all of these narratives and frameworks is understanding the size and importance of this workforce and how it might inform different strategies.

    Embracing a Worker-Producer Narrative

    Calculating the number of women and girls in their capacity as biomass producers reframes the perception of them as passive consumers (i.e., cooks) to active self-producers of the household energy sector. This framework can bolster efforts mentioned above in the following ways:

    First, it reframes biomass—from an issue singularly belonging to the clean cooking initiative— and places it more broadly in the context of workers’ rights. Despite numerous clean cooking campaigns, poor women and girls will continue to produce biomass for their families for the foreseeable future. As important as it is to make access to clean cooking technologies universally available, what can be done for those producing their own energy in the meantime?

    For example, these could be solutions such as creating wood stalls in more accessible areas to reduce collection times, or developing more ergonomic harnesses for carrying the wood to reduce the physical burden of the work. In addition, can more income-generating opportunities be created to help reduce the poverty of these women and girls?

    Second, it informs policies around building an inclusive energy workforce. Recognizing that there is already a female-run and -operated energy workforce across the developing world has implications for workforce policies governing the energy transition. For example, when it comes to the ability to tap into this existing labor force, does reskilling apply to this workforce as it does to coal miners?

    Moreover, by focusing on improving the labor conditions of women and girl biomass producers, this framework intersects with SDG 5: achieve gender equality and empower all women and girl. Organizations such as the Clean Cooking Alliance that aim to “increase the role of women in the clean cooking sector” and collect data on the number of hours required for biomass production could benefit from such a framework.

    Third,research that intentionally includes groups underserved and underrepresented in data can inform policies for a just energy transition. Capturing the number of women and girls producing biomass can lead to important discoveries for improving their lives while informing the energy transition. For instance, surveys and fieldwork to collect the amount of biomass producers could also be used to track energy consumption and production trends that inform electrification efforts.

    Many biomass collectors live on the margins or in rural areas, and research geared toward their energy needs can inform, for example, decentralized renewable energy projects and help anticipate their consumption patterns.

    This energy workforce comprises some of the poorest people in the world—women, girls, and people of color—and that may partly explain why their labor and working conditions have received relatively less attention.

    The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report and other research puts the world on a tight timeline for lowering emissions. Existing frameworks for achieving a clean energy transition can be strengthened through approaches that recognize and acknowledge the agency of biomass energy producers made up of millions of women and girls.

    Alexandra Peek is a research associate with Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.

    Philippe Benoit is an adjunct senior research scholar with Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy and is also research director forGlobal Infrastructure Analytics and Sustainability 2050.

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Private and Public Spheres: Sweden and Mugabe

    Private and Public Spheres: Sweden and Mugabe

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Jan Lundius (stockholm, sweden)
    • Inter Press Service

    STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Jul 12 (IPS) – The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

                                      Proverb of unknown originThe war in Ukraine continues unabated; young men are sacrificed on battlefields, towns laid waste by aerial attacks, the threat of nuclear disasters is looming. People within an often formerly friendly inclined Europe are now wondering if Vladimir Putin has gone insane. The war in Ukraine is generally called “Putin’s war” and in April 2021 Putin signed a legislation providing him the right to run for two more consecutive terms, thus he could stay in power till 2036.

    Nazi Germany was equalled with Hitler, the Soviet Union with Stalin, Communist China with Mao, and now Russia with Putin. Another example of the identification of an entire nation with a totalitarian ruler was Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe. A president who apart from participating in the invasion of a neighbouring country led his nation into a bloody civil war.

    When I in the year 2000 was working for the Swedish International Development Cooperation (Sida) it was questioned why the Swedish Government every year granted SEK 140 million (USD 15 million) in development aid to Zimbabwe, a country governed by a scorned Robert Mugabe. At that time, Zimbabwe’s GNI had in one year shrunk by 13 percent, among other things due to unbudgeted expenses for the country’s participation in a war in the DR Congo (from 1998 to 2003 Zimbabwe’s participation in this war cost USD 1 million a day). A badly managed land reform had drastically reduced agricultural production. Even before the crisis 75 percent of the population was unable to meet necessary needs of food, clothing, schooling, health care and housing. Unemployment was over 60 percent, while 25 percent of the adult population was infected with HIV/AIDS.

    Misery was blamed on Mugabe’s misrule, but Swedish support to Zimbabwe continued during his reign. Since Swedish aid was initiated in the early1980s Zimbabwe had by the year 2000 received SEK 5 billion (approximately USD 460 million). Economic support currently amounts to USD 28 million per year.

    Swedish relations with Robert Mugabe indicate difficulties opinion leaders face while analysing the power game of other nations. For fear of being seen as harbouring neo-colonial attitudes “experts” often withheld critical judgment and were apt to name various leaders as ”hopes for Africa”. Unfortunately personal benefits from supremacy may prove to be a fatal temptation , several heroes of yesterday have after their seizure of power turn into despots.

    In the case of Zimbabwe (which at the time was “Rhodesia” governed by a white minority party, the Rhodesian Front) it was reasonable to oppose a regime that kept the majority of a nation’s population out of power because of the colour of their skin. Swedish debate has often been characterized by two different worldviews, either that the world consists of democracies and dictatorships, with the former being on the good side, or that an enduring conflict subsists between the “West” and the “Rest”, where “West” is seen as the villain. According to the latter understanding , it did not matter if Zanu (PF), the party of Robert Mugabe, actually pursued one-party rule, any opposition towards the “ancient colonial world order” was OK.

    It was thus more justifiable to support an armed struggle than the democratic consensus policy proclaimed by another Zimbabwean liberation group, Zapu, headed by Joshua Nkomo. The influential Pierre Schori, international secretary of the Swedish Social Democratic Party and close assistant to Prime Minister Olof Palme, supported the “eloquent and radical” Mugabe:

      I think that it had to do with personal contacts. In the case of Zimbabwe, we did not choose between Zapu and Zanu, but I think that when Joshua Nkomo came to Sweden it was often through the churches, while Robert Mugabe was more of a pure freedom fighter.

    Mugabe spoke fluent English, with an “exquisite” Oxford accent. He liked “open conversations and intellectual debates”, and in spite of an aversion to English colonialism he was an admirer of “Anglophone culture” and a fan of cricket, attesting that it “civilizes people and creates good gentlemen.”

    Mugabe had been arrested in 1963 and was after 1966 transferred to a cell he shared with Zanu’s leader Ndabaningi Sithole. Mugabe remained in custody for a further eight years, devoting his time to studies. He gained a masters in economics, a bachelor of administration, and two law degrees from the University of London. Amnesty International’s Swedish Group 34 had as its lot to support the imprisoned freedom fighter. One member of the group later stated;

    – He took advantage of the opportunity to study in prison and asked us to get literature. So we members shared the expenses and sent books to him. At that time, Mugabe was considered as a good guy. He was very fond of children and always remembered all our children’s names and greeted them in his letters. In addition to the books, Mugabe also asked for help with items such as a pair of pyjamas and tubes of toothpaste. Before his release, I and Eva Moberg , who had started the group, went and bought a suitcase, which we sent to him with his wife Sally.

    In 1958, Mugabe had moved to Ghana to gain a teacher’s certificate at the Achimota College where he met his first wife, Sally Hafton. During Mugabe’s imprisonment Sally first moved to London, where she taught at the Africa Centre. She also lived for several years in Sweden, mostly in the village of Heby, north of the university town of Uppsala. She kept close contact with the members of Amnesty Group 34. Mugabe appreciated that Sally was staying in Sweden, which he considered to be a “safe country”. Sally worked as a nanny, learned Swedish and campaigned for Zimbabwe’s freedom struggle, both in Sweden and England. In Sweden, she became a frequently seen and well-liked person.

    Mugabe was released in 1974 and resolved to leave Rhodesia for Moçambique. However, Samora Machel, who in 1975 became Moçambique’s president, was suspicious of Mugabe, whom he considered to be immature and belligerent. Furthermore, Machel suspected that Mugabe’s quick rise to power was due to machinations to get rid of Sithole as head of Zanu, a “prison coup” that might have been supported by Rhodesia’s white leader, Ian Smith. Machel put Mugabe under house arrest in Quelimane, far from the Zimbabwean guerrilla camps. It was rumoured that Machel was jealous of Mugabe’s intellectual achievements, preferring more down-to-earth men, especially the Zimbabwean guerrilla commander Josiah Tongogara. Contrary to Machel, Mugabe had never been an active fighter. When Machel in 1980 attended Mugabe’s inauguration as Zimbabwe’s president, he was well aware of Mugabe’s intention to form a one-party government, giving his Shona supporters absolute power. Machel addressed Mugabe:

      To ensure national unity, there must be no Shonas in Zimbabwe, there must be no Ndebeles in Zimbabwe, there must be Zimbabweans. Some people are proud of their tribalism. But we call tribalists reactionary agents of the enemy. Zimbabwe is the jewel of Africa. Don’t tarnish it!

    Some of Mugabe’s Swedish acquaintances were suspicious of him:

      He considered himself to be a superior teacher, a professor. He had six different degrees, he was a learned and well-read man. Therefore, he believed that he was right in everything, and if he was opposed, he went mad.

    Politicians and journalists declared that Mugabe could be charming and nice, but it was also alleged that he was a loner; admittedly a hard-working man, a voracious reader and not much given to laughter, but above all – a single-minded and extremely complex person, not easily captured by conventional categories. Some even claimed they considered him to be devoid of ordinary warmth and humanity; emotionally immature, homophobic and xenophobic. The last time a Swedish friend met with him, Mugabe told him:

      When we are elected presidents, we suddenly get enormous power in accordance with the constitution that we took over from the colonial power. We can fill positions for relatives, friends and party sympathizers. We live well and have a different life than the vast majority of our citizens. But when we leave the presidential palace, we have nothing, there are no presidential pensions.

    Mugabe coveted absolute power and when he obtained it, he hold on to it. Zanu came to act as yesterday’s colonial rulers. Even if power relations had changed, perceptions of power were the same. The Swedish Government did not lack documentation warning about Mugabe’s ambitions, nevertheless its conclusion was that he was Zimbabwe’s strongest leader and moreover “pro-Sweden”, accordingly Swedish aid could not be terminated, and even had to be increased.

    Already in 1977, Mugabe declared that “any man who maliciously plants contradictions within our ranks will be struck by the Zanu axe” and he was even more ruthless towards his former brothers in arms – Zapu, and its leader Joshua Nkomo.

    Zanu’s power base was among the Shona people, while Zapu found its strongest support among the Ndebeles in Matabeleland. Furthermore, the Cold War was reflected in the two parties’ relations to the outside world. Zapu received Soviet support, while Zanu relied on China, which wanted to undermine Soviet influence in Africa.

    In early 1983, the North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade, a unit subordinated to the presidency, began a crackdown on dissidents in Matabeleland. Over the following two years, thousands of Ndebele and Kalanga were accused of being “Zapu-traitors”, detained, marched to “re-education camps”, tortured, raped and/or summarily executed. Although there are different estimates, the consensus of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) is that more than 20,000 people were killed.

    Swedish aid workers were knowledgeable about these atrocities. Nevertheless, Swedish aid continued to be delivered to Zanu-controlled Zimbabwe. The former head of Sida’s aid office in Harare played down the events, declaring that “the civilian population in Matabeleland has been stuck between warring factions.” He advised against using aid as a means of pressure to get Mugabe to stop the mass killing.

    After the 93 years old Mugabe finally was removed from power, Zimbabwe continued to spiral down the abyss, while Swedish support is uninterrupted. The country is now ruled by Emmerson Mnangagwa, who once was a close ally to Mugabe. A brutal man who in 1983 described Government opponents as “cockroaches and bugs requiring DDT to be removed.” In 1998, Mnangagwa was put in charge of Zimbabwe’s intervention in the DR Congo wars and accused of “swapping Zimbabwean soldiers’ lives for mining contracts.” Mnangagwa does not further human rights, instead his government has deepened Zimbabwe’s economic struggles, enabled endemic corruption, fuelled instability, and targeted human rights activists and journalists. It is estimated that Zimbabwe may lose up to half the value of its annual GDP of USD 21.4 billion due to corrupt economic activities. Money laundering is among the murky deals said to be carried out under Mnangagwa’s aegis. Under diplomatic cover, criminals send unaccounted cash in exchange of equivalent amounts in Zimbabwean gold, and then sell it for seemingly legitimate money.

    Swedish support to Mugabe and his successor might be considered as an effort to alleviate the plight of Zimbabwe’s citizens, but it might also be interpreted as being based on simplifications of a complicated reality and furthermore relying on one man’s power. When Mugabe’s abuse of sovereignty led to massacres, they were minimalized by those of those who had bet on him and the misrule of his successor is hardly noticed.

    The world is now wondering whether the majority of Russia’s population will continue to support its strong man. If Putin’s nation will be weaken or strengthened by such encouragement. The stakes are high and predictions are generally gloomy.

    Main sources: Yap, Katri P. (2001). Uprooting the weeds: Power, ethnicity and violence in the Matabeleland conflict. Ph.D Thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam and various Swedish newspaper articles.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • After Microsoft defeat, ‘toothless’ FTC needs to pick better battles if it wants to rein in Big Tech

    After Microsoft defeat, ‘toothless’ FTC needs to pick better battles if it wants to rein in Big Tech

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s defeat as it sought to block Microsoft Corp.’s acquisition of videogame maker Activision Blizzard is yet another setback for an increasingly toothless regulator that needs to pick better battles with Big Tech.

    On Tuesday morning, a federal judge denied the FTC’s injunction that was seeking to block the software giant’s proposed $69 billion acquisition of Activision
    ATVI,
    +10.02%    ,
    best known for its hit videogame “Call of Duty.” The FTC argued that Microsoft
    MSFT,
    +0.19%
    could withhold “Call of Duty” and other Activision games from rival console platforms such as Sony’s PlayStation, and keep the games on its Xbox only.

    Microsoft, in a show of faith, committed in writing to keep “Call of Duty” on PlayStation on parity with Xbox for 10 years, agreed with Nintendo
    7974,
    +1.10%
    to bring “Call of Duty” to Switch and entered into several pacts to bring Activision content to several cloud gaming services, U.S. District Court Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley noted in her decision.

    “With these 10-year contracts that Microsoft made across the board with so many vendors, Nvidia
    NVDA,
    +0.53%    ,
    Nintendo and others, 10 years is a really long time, in my opinion,” said Sarah Hindlian-Bowler, an analyst at Macquarie Equity Research, in an interview Tuesday. “It is long enough to cover the arrival and maturity of the cloud gaming market….She understands  that 10 years is a very long long time to make a guarantee of this kind.”

    Also read: Regulators face an antitrust dilemma after Meta launches Threads

    Hindlian-Bowler said that she had been in the minority of Wall Street analysts in not believing the U.S. government would be able to block this deal.

    “The assumption that this somehow decreases the market is going to prove to be wildly incorrect,” she said, adding that she does not believe that the U.K.’s  Competition and Markets Authority will be able to block the deal either.

    The latest upset at the FTC was also not too surprising to other Capitol Hill watchers, especially in the light of other high-profile setbacks by the agency and its once-heralded commissioner, Lina Khan. When she was sworn in as chair of the FTC in mid-2021, Khan was hailed as the sheriff who would rein in Big Tech.

    “It’s hard to say I am surprised by the ruling because Khan has had a fairly unsuccessful track record,” said Owen Tedford, a senior research analyst at Beacon Policy Advisors. “The regulators are pushing the boundaries, deals that previously would have gone unchallenged have now gone challenged. And they are breaking precedent because Khan and company have expressed a dislike of settlements.”

    The FTC’s attempts to sue Meta Platforms Inc.
    META,
    +1.42%
    have had some defeats so far. In February, a California judge denied the FTC’s attempts to block Meta from buying a virtual-reality startup called Within Unlimited. The FTC’s suit to reverse Meta’s acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram, filed in 2021, is still plodding along.

    Additionally, the FTC recently filed a suit against Amazon.com Inc.
    AMZN,
    +1.30%    ,
    alleging that it is too difficult for consumers to cancel their Prime accounts, and the agency is reportedly also mulling another far-reaching suit against Amazon alleging that the e-commerce giant punishes merchants who do not use its logistics services. One analyst has already made a case that the FTC will lose that fight too.

    “I think that the FTC is in need of some change, in need of some refreshing and in need of doing a much better job of picking their battles,” said Hindlian-Bowler. “This does feel toothless, a lot of the fights they are picking are toothless. And unfortunately, they are missing the real battle. They are missing TikTok, they are missing the real fights where we actually have national security at risk.”

    In February, one of the Republican commissioners on the FTC resigned, and wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal accusing Khan of disregarding the rule of law and due process.

    Compared to the European Union, which has had far more success implementing regulation to rein in Big Tech, the U.S. is still much weaker. “The EU seems to be having somewhat more success, levying big fines, getting these companies to change,” said Beacon’s Tedford. “The EU has passed these bills, but the U.S., despite these efforts, has not gotten there and is not going to get there for the next two years.”

    Money spent by Big Tech to lobby Congress in a huge part of the problem, whereas in Europe, “those lawmakers feel less beholden,” he added.

    More than a century ago, President Teddy Roosevelt, known for his “speak softly and carry a big stick” foreign policy, also used his bully pulpit to bust industrial monopolies.

    If Khan and her staff want to follow his lead and rein in Big Tech, they need to start picking their future battles more carefully — and carry bigger sticks.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Worried that stocks are too expensive? This value approach can highlight bargains.

    Worried that stocks are too expensive? This value approach can highlight bargains.

    [ad_1]

    At a time when many investors seem euphoric, others are warning that stock valuations have once again turned frothy. It may pay to take a look back at valuation and performance and consider your own risk tolerance.

    A value-based approach that offers lower volatility and good long-term returns can be expected to be less flashy than one focused on the hottest technology stocks. But depending on how much it bothers you when the stock market gyrates, it may be a better way for you to invest. Lower volatility might help you to avoid the type of emotional reaction that can lead to selling into a declining market or attempting to time the market, both of which tend to be losing strategies.

    Aaron Dunn is a co-head of the value equity team at Eaton Vance, which is based in Boston and is a unit of Morgan Stanley. During an interview, he explained how he and Brad Galko, who co-heads the team, select stocks for the Eaton Vance Focused Value Opportunities Fund. The fund’s performance benchmark is the Russell 1000 Value Index
    RLV,
    +1.08%    .

    First, let’s take a broad look at how aggregate forward price-to-earnings ratios have moved for exchange-traded funds tracking several broad indexes over the past 10 years:


    FactSet

    The valuations are lower than their 2020 peaks. But for all but one, the valuations still appear to be high when compared with their 10-year averages:

    ETF

    		 Ticker

    		 Current forward P/E

    		 10-year average forward P/E

    		 Current valuation to 10-year average
    SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust

    		 SPY,
    +0.64%         		19.06

    		 15.93

    		 120%
    iShares Russell 1000 ETF

    		 IWB,
    +0.80%         		18.94

    		 16.02

    		 118%
    iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF

    		 IWD,
    +1.07%         		14.33

    		 13.94

    		 103%
    iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF

    		 IWF,
    +0.50%         		26.63

    		 19.00

    		 140%
    Source: FactSet

    All of the listed ETFs listed here are trading well above their 10-year average P/E valuations except the iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF, which is only slightly higher. These numbers back the notion that the broad market is expensive and that a value approach may be more reasonable. It is also worth keeping in mind that during 2022, when the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust
    SPY,
    +0.64%
    declined 18.2% and the iShares Russell 1000 ETF
    IWB,
    +0.80%
    fell 19.2%, the iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF
    IWD,
    +1.07%
    pulled back 7.7% and the Eaton Vance Focused Value Opportunity Fund’s Class I shares were down only 3.3%, all with dividends reinvested.

    If we look at 10-year total returns, the nonvalue indexes, so heavily weighted to the largest technology-oriented companies, have been excellent performers for investors who could remain committed through thick and thin:


    FactSet

    Fund

    		 Ticker

    		 3-year average annual return

    		 5-year average annual return

    		 10-year average annual return
    SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust

    		 SPY,
    +0.64%         		13.2%

    		 11.4%

    		 12.3%
    iShares Russell 1000 ETF

    		 IWB,
    +0.80%         		12.5%

    		 11.0%

    		 12.1%
    iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF

    		 IWF,
    +0.50%         		11.2%

    		 14.0%

    		 15.0%
    iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF

    		 IWD,
    +1.07%         		13.7%

    		 7.3%

    		 8.7%
    Eaton Vance Value Opportunities Fund – Class I

    		 EIFVX,
    +0.92%         		14.8%

    		 8.7%

    		 9.7%
    Source: FactSet

    For five and 10 years, the growth-oriented approaches have shined. But for three years, which includes the 2022 disruption, the Eaton Vance Value Opportunities Fund has fared best, even outperforming its benchmark.

    A selective approach to value

    The Eaton Vance Focused Value Opportunity Fund’s Class I
    EIFVX,
    +0.92%
    shares are rated four stars (out of five) within Morningstar’s Large Value fund category. The fund’s Class A
    EAFVX,
    +0.93%
    shares are rated three stars. The difference is that the Class I shares, which are typically distributed through investment advisers, have annual expenses of 0.74% of assets under management, while the Class A shares have an expense ratio of 0.99%. You can purchase Class I shares directly through brokerage platforms for a $50 fee.

    Dunn said that when selecting stocks for the fund, he and Galko take a bottom-up approach to identify quality companies. The want to see high returns on invested capital (ROIC) over the long term, as well as a “good competitive position” for a company and a strong management team.

    They also prefer companies with low debt. “We do not want to buy overlevered companies and be in a situation where we are diluting through equity raises and putting capital at risk,” he said.

    Dunn added that he and Galko look closely at free cash flow generation. A company’s free cash flow is its remaining cash flow after capital expenditures. This is money that can be used to fund expansion, acquisitions, dividend increases or share buybacks, or for other corporate purposes.

    “Philosophically, what this results in is that we hold up well in markets such as last year’s. And we find upside in stocks trading below intrinsic value,” he said.

    “We focus on finding ideas where there is a good skew for upside relative to downside,” he added.

    According to Morningstar, the fund’s active share when compared with IWD is high, at 91.45%. Active share is a measure of how much an actively managed fund differs in investment exposure from its benchmark index. If you are paying more for active management than you would to invest in an index fund, active share is something to consider. If it is low, you might be overpaying for a “closet indexer.” You can read about how Morningstar assesses active shares here.

    The fund is concentrated, typically holding between 25 and 45 companies.

    According to Morningstar’s most recent data, these were the fund’s top 10 holdings (out of 28 stocks) as of May 31:

    Company

    		 Ticker

    		 % of Eaton Vance Focused Value Opportunity Fund

    		 Forward P/E

    		 2023 total return
    Alphabet Inc. Class A

    		 GOOGL,
    +0.59%         		5.0%

    		 19.6

    		 32%
    Micron Technology Inc.

    		 MU,
    +1.79%         		4.8%

    		 N/A

    		 25%
    American International Group Inc.

    		 AIG,
    +1.15%         		4.3%

    		 8.1

    		 -7%
    Reinsurance Group of America Inc.

    		 RGA,
    -0.34%         		4.2%

    		 8.0

    		 1%
    Bristol Myers Squibb Co.

    		 BMY,
    +0.50%         		4.1%

    		 7.7

    		 -11%
    Wells Fargo & Co.

    		 WFC,
    +0.99%         		4.0%

    		 8.9

    		 4%
    ConocoPhillips

    		 COP,
    +2.96%         		4.0%

    		 10.5

    		 -10%
    Constellation Brands Inc. Class A

    		 STZ,
    +0.30%         		3.9%

    		 20.4

    		 9%
    NextEra Energy Inc.

    		 NEE,
    +0.67%         		3.8%

    		 21.9

    		 -13%
    Charles Schwab Corp.

    		 SCHW,
    -0.43%         		3.8%

    		 16.0

    		 -30%
    Source: FactSet

    Click the tickers for more about each company, fund or index.

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

    There is no forward price-to-earnings ratio for Micron Technology Inc.
    MU,
    +1.79%    ,
    because the company’s combined EPS for the next 12 months are expected to be negative.

    Micron is a company in transition, caught up in diplomatic conflict between the U.S. and China, whose government directed some manufacturers in May to stop purchasing memory chips made by the company. Then again, in June, Micron highlighted its “commitment to China” when announcing a new investment in its plant in Xi’an.

    Read: Micron recovery debated by analysts as bottom is called in memory-chip market

    Dunn said downside for Micron’s stock was “mitigated” because of the company’s relatively low debt. He also said that as companies continue to adopt more cloud services and deploy artificial-intelligence technology, demand for memory chips will increase.

    While there is no current forward P/E for Micron, the stock always trades at low valuations relative to most other large tech companies. Dunn touted Micron’s strong cash flow and said the stock was “underappreciated” and remained “an interesting play on cloud and AI.”

    While it is not among the top 10 holdings listed above, Dunn highlighted Dollar Tree Inc.
    DLTR,
    +1.80%
    as an example of the type of value stock he favors. The company “was not well run” following its acquisition of Family Dollar in 2015. But he has been impressed with its more recent turnaround efforts, including improvements in how products are shipped to stores, better efficiency and “a lot of work going on with culture, how they operate, how they treat employees [and] adding some shelf space to move more product.”

    It is interesting to see NextEra Energy Inc.
    NEE,
    +0.67%
    among the fund’s largest holdings. This has been quite a strong grower over the past 10 years, with a total return of 346% as the owner of Florida Power & Light has grown along with its customer base and has become a leader in the build-out of solar-power generation.

    Dunn said the company is “still growing in the mid-single digits. For a utility company, that is a strong profile.”

    When discussing Alphabet Inc.
    GOOGL,
    +0.59%    ,
    the fund’s largest holding as of May 31, Dunn said that “it is really an advertising business with other businesses around it” and that its P/E valuation was “not extremely taxing.” He said Alphabet had been “less aggressive with cost cutting” than other technology giants and added that the company’s “targeted search” through Google and other properties, such as YouTube, “probably provides a better return on investment than broadcast advertising, and that really is the key.”

    Don’t miss: This stock investing strategy has blown away the S&P 500. Here’s a way to refine it for quality.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Water a Weapon of War or a Tool for Peace?

    Water a Weapon of War or a Tool for Peace?

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Maria Skold, Martina Klimes (stockholm, sweden)
    • Inter Press Service

    STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Jul 11 (IPS) – The role of water in conflicts is changing, with more attacks against environmental and civilian infrastructure. Dr Martina Klimes of the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) recently held a lecture describing the shifting security landscape and how water can be both a weapon and a victim of war – and sometimes a tool for peace.

    The Kakhovka dam disaster in Ukraine on 6 June is a painful reminder of how collapsing water infrastructure can cause enormous suffering in times of war, sometimes with consequences that last for generations. Ukraine accuses Russia of destroying the dam and using it as a weapon of war.

    “That would be in direct conflict with the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions which protects civilians in times of war,” says Dr Martina Klimes who is Advisor Water and Peace at SIWI.

    On 14 June, she participated in a breakfast meeting at the Swedish parliament together with other representatives from the Stockholm Hub on Environment, Climate and Security of which SIWI is a founding member.

    Klimes’ presentation outlined the different roles of water in war:

      • Direct impact – where water and attacks on water infrastructure are used as a weapon of war.
      • Indirect impact – where military operations harm the environment, for example poisoning water sources or contaminating soil.
      • Transboundary impact – where the consequences are felt also in other countries.

    During the war in Ukraine, all three dimensions are carefully monitored by local and international organizations to an extent rarely seen in other wars. Already before the Kakhovka dam disaster, Ukrainian authorities estimated the cost of the environmental impacts of the war to be approximately 50 billion euros.

    Rivers, groundwater, and soil are polluted, and many national parks are impacted in the country which is described as the most biodiverse in Europe. In 2022, 16 million Ukrainians needed water, sanitation, and hygiene assistance.

    By tracking the environmental consequences of the war so closely, the Ukrainian government hopes not just to facilitate reconstruction. Another aim is to collect evidence that could be used in a future war tribunal against Russia.

    President Zelensky has said that charges could include ecocide, in addition to the four types of crimes currently covered by the International Criminal Court (ICC). In recent years, the idea of making ecocide a fifth crime enshrined in the Rome Statute of the ICC has started to gain traction.

    The parliament of the European Union recently voted to make ecocide part of EU law.

    At the United Nations, a commission has assessed gaps in existing international law and presented a set of more far-reaching draft principles on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts.

    But researchers who have studied Yemen, Libya, and Syria say that attacks on civilian and environmental infrastructure have become more common in the past decade.

    “This causes immense suffering for local populations and the impact often goes beyond national borders. We also know that environmental degradation is a risk multiplier that can trigger social instability and violence,” Klimes says.

    Meanwhile, a landmark report on the topic – Environment of Peace – was presented last year by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), another partner of the Stockholm Hub on Environment, Climate and Security.

    At the same time, countries and regions can reduce tensions by strengthening the resilience of ecosystems and humans. Collaborating around for example shared waters can also foster cooperation and peace.

    To raise awareness of these complex interlinkages, SIWI works actively to bring together actors with different types of competencies. One example is the Shared Waters Partnership Programme to strengthen transboundary water cooperation.

    Every year, SIWI also hosts a high-level panel during World Water Week on water-related security issues. This year the event will take place on 23 August at 11am CET with the theme Innovative Approaches to Support Peace and Conflict Prevention.

    Maria Sköld, is Senior Manager, Communications.
    Martina Klimes, PhD, is Advisor, Water and Peace, and Transboundary Water Cooperation.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Shielding the Vulnerable: The Potential Role of Insurance in Protecting the Most Vulnerable

    Shielding the Vulnerable: The Potential Role of Insurance in Protecting the Most Vulnerable

    [ad_1]

    Experts continue to debate where insurance belongs in climate financing. Credit: Peter Richards/IPS
    • Opinion by Jamie Cummings (chapel hill, nc, usa)
    • Inter Press Service

    The 2023 Climate Conference COP27 in Sharm put loss and damage clearly on the political agenda with the agreement to set up a Transitional Committee to seek to establish a fund for Loss and Damage and to look at other ways to help countries and people address disasters.

    Today the conversations around insurance in regard to loss and damage have shifted. Some argue that insurance comes up short when addressing loss and damage. For example, one idea of an insurance fund would require all parties, including those from the Global South, who have contributed the least to global emissions, to buy in and share the risk burden.

    This idea negates the historical responsibility of the Global North as leading polluters. Experts continue to debate where insurance belongs in climate financing and this article intends to highlight some critical thinkers in the space.

    Paul Hudson, a lecturer of Environmental Economics at the University of York and frequent contributor to the International Science Council, contends that insurance can still be a useful tool for addressing natural hazards and climate impacts if its function in the private or public sector is previously determined.

    “In order for society to have a great degree of adaptive capacity we still need to work out what is the actual role we expect insurance to achieve,” Hudson said.

    According to Hudson, the ideas of insurance in the public and private sectors are in contention. In discussions around insurance, people often use the language of private responsibility in relation to a compensation fund but what may be more necessary is for people to simply have an accessible and affordable means of compensation, which is the role of a public good.

    An additional fear is that countries fall back on the private insurance sector too often when they have yet to provide the funding for adaptation and mitigation, which puts the commitment to losses and damages in question. Still, perhaps there is a role for the private and public insurance sector despite its shortcomings.

    Experts are considering ways to integrate both private and public solutions so the most vulnerable populations are protected from climate-induced losses and damages.

    Raghuveer Vinukollu, Senior Vice President and Climate Resilience and Solutions Lead at Munich Reinsurance America, Inc., argues that an integrated approach could provide a sustainable and affordable solution to the question of insurance. Vinukollu supports a bottom-up and top-down process to address resiliency.

    Resilience from both angles aims to mitigate the protection gap caused by high costs. Such a model underscores the importance of community resilience as well as risk prevention, promoting the whole of society’s safety from risk rather than the few who can afford a premium.

    Again, prevention is critical but fails to address the question of losses and damages which have already occurred. If vulnerable communities are faced with climate disasters, they must have community resilience (i.e., resources), which can be secured through accessible insurance.

    Waterfront Alliance is a company that strives to build community resilience in part through education. Joseph Sutkowi, the group’s Chief Waterfront Design Officer, explains that it is critical to standardize aspects of design and make such knowledge accessible.

    In this way, architects and engineers from around the world can create infrastructure built for the community and will be resilient in the face of natural disasters. Additionally, spreading awareness about flood risk–or other climate hazards–can in turn raise awareness around purchasing insurance that could be critical to forming communities that can recover from disasters.

    The crucial piece of this argument on the implementation of insurance mechanisms is that they must not exclude the most vulnerable groups, including low-income communities. Here, Mathieu Verougstraete, Lead on Disaster Risk Reduction Financing and Infrastructure Resilience for UNDRR, suggests countries from the Global North have a role to play.

    Verougstraete asserts that international cooperation would allow donor countries to step in and provide a mechanism to ensure that insurance remains affordable and still provides the protection the vulnerable countries need.

    Brandon Mathews works directly with these vulnerable nations to meet their needs. Mathews is the head of the Vulnerable 20 (V20) Sustainable Insurance Facility within the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The facility funds insurance for micro, small, and medium enterprises which are the “cornerstone of economies.”

    Aligning with vulnerable groups means giving them ownership. Oda Henriksen, Climate Risk Manager for Food Security as a Financing Advisor at United Nations World Food Program (UN WFP), has highlighted ownership as a key finding based on case studies in Belize and Nicaragua with insurance programs.

    UN WFP argues that local government and private sector contributions, as well as consumer empowerment, are essential for a sustainable approach to insurance in disaster risk reduction.

    Held on June 1st the Insurance Development Forum signed an agreement to advance the Global Resilience Index with the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) to “help countries, financial institutions and investors, map and quantify their current and future climate and disaster risks and demonstrate the benefits of investing in resilience.”

    With Loss and Damage now near the center of the political preparations for the upcoming Climate Summit COP28 in Dubai in December then a menu of approaches will be explored. Within this menu perhaps there is a role for the insurance sector (in either a private or public sector capacity) if done the right way.

    A strong insurance system should examine all of the stipulations raised by experts in the field. The system must also be continuously revised to meet the evolving demands of vulnerable climate communities. With livelihoods at risk, potential solutions must be critiqued and considered from all angles.

    Jamie Cummings is part of a Belmont Forum-funded grant, Re-Energize Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience for Sustainable Development. She was the climate change focal point for the recent UNFCCC Bonn Climate Conference for the Sendai Stakeholder Engagement Mechanism. With additional support from Rene Marker-Katz and Cameron Mcbroom-Fitterer, Associate Researchers with Re-Energize DR3.

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link