ReportWire

Tag: Population

  • Illegal Immigration: A Mounting Global Crisis

    Illegal Immigration: A Mounting Global Crisis

    [ad_1]

    Credit: UNOHCR.
    • Opinion by Joseph Chamie (portland, usa)
    • Inter Press Service

    Migrant destination countries are facing record high numbers of unlawful border crossings and unauthorized arrivals at their shores, thousands of visa overstayers, and millions of men, women and children residing unlawfully within their countries.

    In many of those countries illegal migration is viewed as a threat to national sovereignty. It is seen as undermining cultural integrity. Illegal migration is also creating financial drains on public funds.

    Some officials as well as much of the public in those countries have described the continuing illegal immigration to their borders and shores as an “invasion”, a “battle situation” and a “security threat”. And some have called on their governments to “send’em straight back”.

    In addition, illegal immigration is also undermining the rule of law, threatening regional cooperation, challenging law enforcement agencies, eroding public support for legal migration, altering political equilibrium and adding to nativism and xenophobia. In addition, the public’s concerns about immigration are reflected in the growing influence of far-right political parties in such countries as Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Sweden and the United States.

    Multinational migrant-smuggling networks are also contributing to the mounting illegal immigration crisis as well as generating substantial profits for criminal organizations. Those networks exploit migrants seeking to leave their countries, offering various services, including transportation, accommodations and critical information.

    Government programs and plans to counter migrant smuggling networks have achieved limited success. Also, international attempts to address illegal immigration, such as the Global Compact on International Migration of 2018, have not diminished illegal immigration nor the activities of smuggling networks.

    A major factor behind the rise of illegal immigration is the large and growing supply of men, women and children in sending countries who want to migrate to another country and by any means possible, including illegal immigration. The number of people in the world wanting to migrate to another country is estimated at nearly 1.2 billion.

    The billion plus people wanting to migrate represents about 15 percent of the world’s population. That number of people wanting to migrate is also more than four times the size of the estimated total number immigrants worldwide in 2020, which was 281 million (Figure 1).

    The country with the largest number of immigrants is the United States with almost 48 million foreign-born residents in 2022, or approximately 14 percent of its population. About one quarter of those immigrants, or approximately 11.4 million, are estimated to be illegal immigrants.

    While an estimate of the total number of immigrants in the world is readily available, the number of illegal immigrants is a very different matter with few reliable estimates available on a global scale.

    Nearly two decades ago it was estimated that perhaps 20 percent of the immigrants were unauthorized migrants. Applying that proportion to the current total number of immigrants of 281 million yields an estimate of about 56 million unauthorized migrants. If the U.S. proportion of illegal immigrants is applied to the total global immigrant population, the resulting estimated number of illegal immigrants in the world is approximately 70 million.

    The widely recognized human rights regarding international migration are relatively straightforward. Articles 13 and 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights respectively state, “Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country”, and “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution”.

    Importantly, however, everyone does not have the right to enter nor remain in another country. The unlawful entry into a country and overstaying a temporary visit are clearly not recognized human rights. Moreover, to be granted asylum, an individual needs to meet the internationally recognized definition of a refugee.

    According to the United Nations 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol, a refugee is a person who is unable or unwilling to return to his or her home country due to past persecution or a well-founded fear of being persecuted in the future “on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.”

    Difficult living conditions, such as unemployment, poverty, inadequate housing, lack of health care, marital discord and political unrest, do not qualify an individual for the internationally recognized refugee status nor to a legitimate claim for asylum.

    Nevertheless, in the absence of a right to migrate to another country, people wanting to do so are increasingly turning to illegal immigration. And upon arriving at the destination country, many are claiming the right to seek asylum.

    Once inside the country, the legal determination of an asylum claim often takes years, permitting claimants time to establish households, find employment and integrate into accepting communities, such as sanctuary cities. Also, many of the unauthorized migrants believe, based on the experiences of millions before them, that government authorities will not repatriate them even if their asylum claim is rejected, which is typically the case.

    The mounting illegal immigration crisis is complicated by 103 million people who are estimated to have been forcibly displaced worldwide by mid-2022. That number is a record high for forcibly displaced people and is expected to grow in the coming years.

    Approximately 50 percent of those forcibly displaced were displaced internally and 5 percent were people in need of international protection. In addition, the number of refugees has reached a record high of nearly 33 million worldwide and the estimate for asylum seekers is close to 5 million (Figure 2).

    The worldwide numbers of forcibly displaced people, internally displaced people and refugees have increased substantially since the start of the 21st century. For example, over the past two decades the numbers of displaced people increased from 38 million to nearly 86 million (Figure 3).

    Many of those people have been displaced by weather-related events. UNHCR estimates that an annual average of nearly 22 million people have been forcibly displaced by events related to weather, such as wildfires, floods, and extreme heat temperatures.

    Moreover, the numbers of displaced people are expected to increase substantially over the coming decades. Some estimate that by midcentury more than one billion people, largely from less developed countries, could be displaced due to climate and environmental changes and civil unrest.

    By third decade of the 21st century, the following major trends contributing to the mounting global illegal migration crisis have become abundantly clear:

    1. Powerful forces worldwide are fueling illegal immigration, including demographics, poverty, smuggling networks, civil unrest and increasingly climate change, which is creating “climate refugees”.
    2. Those potent forces are resulting in large and increasing numbers of men, women and even unaccompanied children arriving at borders and landing on shores of destination countries without authorization.
    3. Unauthorized migrants, as well as visa overstayers, seek to settle in those destination countries by any means available and are not prepared to return to their countries of origin.
    4. Most of the large and growing numbers of unauthorized migrants now residing unlawfully within countries are not likely to be repatriated.

    Finally, it is also clear that neither governments nor international agencies have yet been able to come up with effective policies and programs to address the mounting global illegal immigration crisis.

    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 (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Digital Human Rights Need to be Enshrined in Law

    Digital Human Rights Need to be Enshrined in Law

    [ad_1]

    The 17th Internet Governance Forum (IGF), to be hosted by the Government of Ethiopia with the support of UN ECA and UN DESA, will take place from 28 November to 2 December 2022 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, under the overarching theme “Resilient Internet for a Shared Sustainable and Common Future”. There are five themes that guide the agenda of the meeting, drawn from the Global Digital Compact found in the UN Secretary-General’s report on “Our Common Agenda”. Credit: United Nations
    • Opinion by Emma Gibson (addis ababa, ethiopia)
    • Inter Press Service

    The United Nations has proposed a Global Digital Compact, a set of shared principles for our digital future, which is scheduled to be agreed upon by Member States in September 2024. The Compact is expected to “outline shared principles for an open, free and secure digital future for all”, and the consultation being conducted by the UN Secretary-General’s Envoy on Technology presents a unique opportunity to ensure that these principles are rooted in human rights law and underpinned by an intersectional feminist, anti-discrimination analysis.

    This is not the first time a range of countries have contributed to a document articulating a better way forward in the digital world. The Declaration for the Future of the Internet lays out priorities for an “open, free, global, interoperable, reliable, and secure” Internet, and establishes a code of practice for how nation-states should act in the digital sphere. Sixty-one countries have signed on, and while this is a welcome step, it underscores how the world’s current patchwork of laws and policies are failing to adequately protect and promote human rights online.

    The Declaration envisions a well-governed digital domain in which human rights and democracy are defended, privacy is protected, freedom of expression is upheld, and censorship condemned.

    But all this cannot be achieved simply by making a statement of intent. Our human rights apply in the digital world too and our digital rights have to be protected in law.

    The Internet – a tool for great good and huge harm

    Early predictions on how the Internet would remove barriers and usher in freedoms, connect people globally, and help achieve liberty, democracy, and equality, have only partially been realized.

    While the Internet has been a conduit for much good, it has also become a powerful tool to commit harm, including facilitating the proliferation of disinformation, surveillance, and polarization, alongside an explosion in online crime, harassment, and abuse.

    Digital dividends do not benefit people in the way they should, and the facade of the digital world that most people see conceals the rife existence of exploitative and often low-paid work.

    The application of uneven regulations across jurisdictions, and the continuing use of standards and principles that are voluntary for the private sector, has resulted in multinational tech companies largely regulating themselves. But they have failed to stem the rising tide of harmful narratives, hate speech, and disinformation that is poisoning our digital ecosystem.

    We need to rethink how we ensure that the Internet and digital technologies are available, safe and accessible to all.

    The call for universal digital rights

    To achieve a well-governed digital realm, international women’s rights organizations Equality Now and Women Leading in AI are calling for universal digital rights, rooted in human rights law and underpinned by an intersectional, feminist informed and anti-discrimination analysis. Clearly articulating how human rights apply in cyberspace would ensure accountability on the part of governments and companies.

    Some laws and regulations exist, particularly around data privacy and freedom of expression. However, what is needed is an agreed understanding of fundamental digital rights.

    Providing clarity on what constitutes universal digital rights would address the current critical failings arising from the misuse of the Internet and digital technology. It would protect people from human rights violations that are outside the framing of current laws, such as how the law applies in the virtual world of the Metaverse. And it would foster an inclusive digital landscape, including by promoting equitable and affordable access to the Internet and digital technology.

    Clarity on universal digital rights would respond to existing challenges around protection of a person’s “digital twin” — their digital representation. It would ensure trustworthy Artificial Intelligence, and address the current uneven and ineffective regulation of the Internet.

    Human rights apply in the digital world too and our digital rights must be protected in law

    Achieving universal digital rights is ambitious in scope but the only way to truly guarantee an equitable Internet and use of digital technologies is through international, multi-sectoral cooperation. Just as the efforts of individual nations alone can never solve a worldwide environmental crisis, nor can we rely on separate national laws and policies to guide, regulate, and care for our global digital ecosystem.

    The fact that over five dozen countries have signed up to the Declaration for the Future of the Internet is a sign that, even in these times of geopolitical instabililty, there is still an appetite to rally behind an ideal of how the digital world should function. The Digital Global Compact provides an opportunity for realization of this ideal at the global level.

    Diverse voices need to be heard and contribute to global and multi-stakeholder discussions on how we will achieve universal digital rights This is why Equality Now and Women Leading in AI are taking part in the 2022 Internet Governance Forum in Addis Ababa and are excited to connect with others who want to co-create legal, ethical, and technical solutions to address current and future harms in the digital realm.

    We want to make sure that the perspectives of women, girls, and other discriminated-against groups from every part of the world are fed into the consultation on the Global Digital Compact so that the Internet and digital technology works in everyone’s interests, not against them.

    Emma Gibson is the Campaign Lead, Universal Digital Rights, for Equality Now.

    For media inquiries please contact: Tara Carey, Equality Now Global Head of Media, E: [email protected]; M: +447971556340 (WhatsApp)

    Equality Now is a feminist organization using the law to protect and promote the human rights of all women and girls. Since 1992, an international network of lawyers, activists, and supporters have held governments responsible for ending legal inequality, sexual exploitation, sexual violence, and harmful practices.

    For more details go to www.equalitynow.org, Facebook @equalitynoworg, LinkedIn Equality Now, and Twitter @equalitynow.

    IPS UN Bureau

    © Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Giriraj Singh seeks for population control bill, says defaulters won’t get govt benefits

    Giriraj Singh seeks for population control bill, says defaulters won’t get govt benefits

    [ad_1]

    Union minister Giriraj Singh, on Sunday, stressed on the need to implement a tough population control law in India and said that it’s crucial as the country has limited resources. The minister further added that the Population Control Bill should be implemented irrespective of their religion or the section of society they belong to and defaulters should be revoked of their voting rights.

    As per the news agency ANI, Singh said, “Population control bill is crucial, we’ve limited resources. China implemented ‘one child policy’, controlled population and achieved development. China has 10 children born a minute while India has 30 children born a minute, how’ll we compete with China.”

    “The bill should be implemented on everybody irrespective of religion or sect and those who don’t follow shouldn’t be given government benefits. Their voting rights should also be taken,” the minister added.

    Meanwhile, Singh has also launched a month-long campaign ‘Nai Chetna’, envisioned as a ‘Jan Andolan’ (people’s movement), to mark International Day for Elimination of Violence Against Women and Girls on Friday.

    Singh, in his address at the event, said that women often do not raise their voice against violence and are silent even after being a victim as they fear what people will think about them.

    “People today discuss (various issues) in the world of television. But, it is unfortunate for India’s polity that daughters’ pain is assessed on the basis of their religion,” the minister for rural development and panchayati raj said.

    “I am witnessing today that some women speak up (against gender-based violence) while others do not because people make political remarks (on their sufferings) based on the religion of these didis (elder sisters),” he said.

    Stressing on ending violence against women, Singh called upon women not to tolerate violence and expressed his government’s commitment towards ending gender-based discrimination.

    “(The Narendra) Modi government is committed to women empowerment just as it is dedicated to development. Under the Modi government women have been included in the army as well,” Singh said.

    The minister also suggested that women should be provided martial arts training for self-defence.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The World Cup of Opportunity

    The World Cup of Opportunity

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Myles Benham (doha, qatar)
    • Inter Press Service

    On route to the office, I stop to get a coffee and the barista is from Gambia, the server from Uganda and the cashier from Nigeria. They all smile and greet me as I travel through the line. As I enter the office, I am greeted by the Indian and Bangladeshi security guards and then pass the Filipino, Togolese and Algerian cleaning staff who are preparing for the rush of staff on what will undoubtedly be a busy morning.

    The world’s real melting pot is not London, Melbourne or Los Angeles. It’s here in the Middle East. The representation of cultures here in Doha dwarfs anything outside of the Arab Gulf and many are here for the prospect of work and the opportunity brought about by the ongoing FIFA World Cup in Qatar.

    Qatar’s open door

    As an underlying groundswell of xenophobia has permeated through much of the world – the Global West has shut its borders, limited migration and made the process of entering, let alone working, more difficult – Qatar has opened its doors. The people working here are searching for a way to improve the situation for their families.

    Many are from some of the poorest places on the planet where the people are most in need. The media have filled newspapers and TV screens with negative stories about Qatar, a country they have never visited and a culture they have never experienced.

    When the majority have turned their backs on these poorer countries, could the conversation surrounding workers for this World Cup not have been about opportunity? About the incredible impact and lasting legacy, the jobs generated here will have on families and communities across the globe? About the dissemination of wealth back to the areas and communities who really need it?

    For decades the world has shifted industry towards regions that can provide cheaper labour. The movement of whole sectors to Asia and the sub-continent have kept many organizations afloat. This was seen as a creative way to save money, drive higher dividends for shareholders and keep prices low for consumers despite the effect it would have on local jobs.

    This paradigm is alive and well. Salaries and wages are much lower in Eastern European countries like Poland, Hungary or Bulgaria than in countries like Germany, Austria or France. In many cases, this has led companies based in Western Europe to build subsidiaries in Eastern Europe to take advantage of lower labour costs. Western European economies heavily depend on working migrants from the East earning low wages and working in poor, unregulated conditions. That isn’t particularly controversial in Europe.

    The same can be said for Eastern European countries who replace the workforce that has departed with workers from Central Asian countries such as Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. So, for all the outrage and condemnation that has been aimed at Qatar, a quick google search would show the very thing they are advocating against is happening under their own nose.

    Uniting instead of dividing

    However, hypocrisy is not limited to Europe. Australia, for example, became the first 2022 World Cup team to release a collective statement against Qatar’s human rights record, compiling a video message critiquing the World Cup host’s treatment of migrant workers. It may surprise those individuals to learn that Australia’s track record on human rights is not exactly squeaky clean.

    More than 40 nations at the UN Human Right Council, including Germany, South Korea and the USA, have questioned Australia’s policies toward asylum seekers and refugees. Among the issues raised are Australia’s continued use of offshore processing and prolonged detention for asylum seekers.

    The council accuses the Australian government of not following through on some of its key past pledges and of still subjecting refugees to immense harm.

    The World Cup in Qatar is the 22nd iteration of the international tournament which was first held in Uruguay in 1930. In the 92 years since, the ‘world game’ – despite its interest across the globe – has held 15 out of 20 World Cups in Europe and South America.

    Five nations have already hosted the event on more than one occasion. An incredible concentration given the participation and interest. This time things are different. The world game is branching out and reaching a new audience.

    The World Cup in Qatar represents the first major sporting event in the Arab and Muslim world. The impact will not just be felt amongst the 2.7 million population of Qatar, or even across the 475 million people who call the Middle East home. This event will resonate with the 1.9 billion Muslims across the globe.

    From Indonesia to Morocco, the Maldives to Egypt, roughly one quarter of the world’s population, who in almost 100 years of World Cup football have been in the background, will be front and centre.

    If the focus of the next four weeks can be the incredible football played on the pitch, the generosity and kind-hearted nature of the hosts and the collective joy that bringing cultures, religions and people together – not just those from Europe and South America – this World Cup may end up being a turning point for a truly world game.

    They say that World Cups are a life-changing experience for the players and teams that compete in them, and even more so for the winner. However, for this World Cup, for the first time in history, the real winners won’t be on the pitch at Lusail Stadium on December 18.

    They’ll be behind the scenes, in the Ubers, coffee shops and security points across the country, taking the opportunity, the generational-altering opportunity, only the World Cup in Qatar was offering them.

    Myles Benham is a Freelance Event Manager with 15 years’ experience working in Global Mega Events and is currently in Doha for the World Cup.

    Read more on the debate around the FIFA World Cup.

    Source: International Politics and Society, Brussels, Belgium

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Balancing Diversity and Meritocracy

    Balancing Diversity and Meritocracy

    [ad_1]

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

    In a growing number of areas, including politics, employment, careers, education, armed forces, immigration, the judicial system, entertainment and sports, countries are making far-reaching decisions regarding when to strive for diversity and when to stress meritocracy.

    Some may consider the goals of diversity and meritocracy to be noncontradictory. In practice, however, the two goals are often difficult to reconcile, especially with imprecise definitions, differing concepts and lack of reliable measures.

    Promoting diversity certainly poses a variety of challenges for societies. However, the pursuit of meritocracy also faces unrecognized risks and biases as well as discrimination behind efforts to reward merit.

    The rewards ascribed to meritocracy are often simply the result of privilege, legacy and entitlement. In addition, some have argued that the pursuit of meritocracy actually produces inequality, stifles social mobility and increases unhappiness.

    Admittedly, diversity and meritocracy across country populations are varied and differ considerably globally. Nevertheless, useful insight may be gained from considering the experience of a country that exemplifies a nation attempting to find the appropriate balance between diversity and meritocracy: the United States.

    U.S laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race. At the same, however, policies and practices, such as affirmative action, aim at countering discrimination against certain racial groups by increasing their chances for employment, promotion, higher education and other opportunities.

    Since the first U.S. census in 1790, the U.S. Census Bureau has been tasked to gather information on the racial composition of America’s population. In the 1790 census an estimated 81 percent of the U.S. population was identified as white with the remaining 19 percent enumerated as black, with 92 percent of them being slaves.

    The white proportion of the U.S. population rose to 90 percent in 1920, where it remained until 1950 when it began declining and reached 80 percent in 1990. At the start of the 21st century the proportion white declined further to approximately 75 percent where it has remained. The proportion white is projected to continue declining, reaching 68 percent of the U.S. population by 2060 (Figure 1).

    The methods employed by the Census Bureau to collect race data over the past 230 years have evolved, reflecting changes in American society. Based on the 1997 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) standards on race, the Census Bureau gathers self-identified responses to the race question, with respondents permitted to select more than one race.

    OMB requires five minimum categories: White, Black or African American, Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. Those categories reflect a social definition of race and do not define race biologically, anthropologically, or genetically.

    The race categories and their proportions of America’s 2021 population of 332 million are: White at 75.8 percent, Black or African American at 13.6 percent, Asian at 6.1 percent, American Indian or Alaska Native at 1.3 percent, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander at 0.3 percent, and two or more races at 2.9 percent (Figure 2).

    Reviewing a number of examples from different areas of life in the United States is useful in illustrating the various aspects of the country’s efforts to balance racial diversity and meritocracy.

    In professional basketball African Americans represented 20 percent of league players in 1960. Today African Americans account for approximately 75 percent of basketball players in the National Basketball Association.

    Among the country’s orchestras, in contrast, African Americans account for less than 2 percent of the players. Nearly a half century ago, the selection of musicians for orchestras was changed to blind auditions in which candidates performed behind a curtain. As blind auditions have not led to making orchestras more diverse, some have called for ending blind auditions and taking race into account so orchestras reflect the communities they serve.

    In professional football African Americans represent 58 percent of the players. However, they account for 9 percent of the head coaches, or five head coaches in the 32-team league of the National Football League (NFL).

    Nearly 20 years ago after accusations of discriminatory head coach hiring practices, the NFL team owners agreed to policy changes to address those accusations. Among those changes was the so-called Rooney Rule, which said, “Any club seeking to hire a head coach will interview one or more minority applicants for that position.”

    In the armed services, African Americans make up 23 percent of enlisted soldiers, which is approaching nearly double their proportion of the U.S. population. Among officers, however, the percentage of African Americans is considerably lower at 11 percent.

    The U.S. military has taken a number of initiatives to promote racial diversity at the higher ranks. The Army, for example, has removed photos of officers from personnel files so promotion boards are less aware of race and they have more minority officers choosing combat assignments, which is a critical stepping stone to high-star officer ranks.

    With respect to higher education, the racially conscious admissions practices of Harvard University and the University of North Carolina are being challenged in cases currently before the Supreme Court. The court is being asked to consider the constitutionality of racial preference in college admissions of those two universities.

    Asian Americans admissions to Harvard University and the University of North Carolina are 25 and 22 percent, respectively. Those percentages are approximately four times the proportion of Asian Americans in the U.S. population.

    Nevertheless, the racially conscious admissions practices of those two universities are being considered by the court. After its initial hearing of the cases on 31 October, the Supreme Court appeared ready based on its questioning and comments to rule that the admissions programs of Harvard and the University of North Carolina were unlawful.

    Those admission practices, which allegedly discriminate against Asian Americans and effectively cap Asian matriculation numbers, have drawn comparison to the past efforts by Harvard and other elite universities to limit the enrollment of Jewish Americans. If only academics were considered, internal research by Harvard University suggests that Asian Americans would make up 43 percent of an admitted class.

    In four Gallup polls from 2003to 2016, at least two-thirds of Americans saidcollege admissions should be solely on the basis of merit. A more recent national Washington Post survey in October found a majority of Americans, 63 percent, supported a ban on the consideration of race in college admissions. At the same time, however, a majority in that survey, 64 percent, endorsed programs to boost racial diversity on campuses.

    Imbalances in achieving racial diversity are also reflected in the composition of America’s professions. For example, while Asian Americans represent 17 percent of active physicians, the proportion for African Americans is 5 percent.

    Similarly in science and engineering occupations, the proportions for Asian Americans and African Americans are 21 and 5 percent, respectively. Among U.S. lawyers, the proportions are relatively low for both Asian Americans and African Americans at 2 and 5 percent, respectively.

    The personal views of Americans concerning workplace diversity also reflect the difficulties in balancing racial diversity and meritocracy. One national PEW survey in 2019 found that a majority, 75 percent, value workplace diversity. However, a majority in that survey, 74 percent, also felt that only the qualifications and not an applicant’s race should be taken into account in hiring and promotions even if it results in less diversity.

    The issue of how best to balance diversity and meritocracy remains a major challenge for America as well as for many other countries. That challenge has become more difficult in the United States. with the puzzling and prejudicial use of racial, ethnic, linguistic, ancestry and origin categories that increasingly make little sense.

    In sum, with a growing world population of eight billion, the shifting demographic landscapes of national populations and the fundamental need to ensure human rights for all, the challenge of how to balance diversity and meritocracy can be expected to become even more critical and consequential for countries in the years ahead.

    Joseph Chamie is a 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 (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • As the Worlds Population Hits 8 Billion People, UN Calls for Solidarity in Advancing Sustainable Development for All

    As the Worlds Population Hits 8 Billion People, UN Calls for Solidarity in Advancing Sustainable Development for All

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion  united nations
    • Inter Press Service

    “Unless we bridge the yawning chasm between the global haves and have-nots, we are setting ourselves up for an 8-billion-strong world filled with tensions and mistrust, crisis and conflict,” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres.

    A more demographically diverse world than ever before

    While the world’s population will continue to grow to around 10.4 billion in the 2080s, the overall rate of growth is slowing down. The world is more demographically diverse than ever before, with countries facing starkly different population trends ranging from growth to decline.

    Today, two-thirds of the global population lives in a low fertility context, where the lifetime fertility is below 2.1 births per woman. At the same time, population growth has become increasingly concentrated among the world’s poorest countries, most of which are in sub-Saharan Africa.

    Against this backdrop, the global community must ensure that all countries, regardless of whether their populations are growing or shrinking, are equipped to provide a good quality of life for their populations and can lift up and empower their most marginalised people.

    “A world of 8 billion is a milestone for humanity – the result of longer lifespans, reductions in poverty, and declining maternal and childhood mortality. Yet, focusing on numbers alone distracts us from the real challenge we face: securing a world in which progress can be enjoyed equally and sustainably,” said UNFPA Executive Director Dr. Natalia Kanem. “We cannot rely on one-size-fits-all solutions in a world in which the median age is 41 in Europe compared to 17 in sub-Saharan Africa. To succeed, all population policies must have reproductive rights at their core, invest in people and planet, and be based on solid data.”

    Complex linkages between population, sustainable development and climate change

    While the Day of 8 Billion represents a success story for humanity, it also raises concerns about links between population growth, poverty, climate change and the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. The relationship between population growth and sustainable development is complex.

    Rapid population growth makes eradicating poverty, combatting hunger and malnutrition, and increasing the coverage of health and education systems more difficult. Conversely, achieving the SDGs, especially those related to health, education and gender equality, will contribute to slowing global population growth.

    Relatedly, although slower population growth–if maintained over several decades–could help to mitigate environmental degradation, conflating population growth with a rise in greenhouse gas emissions ignores that countries with the highest consumption and emissions rates are those where population growth is already slow or even negative.

    Meanwhile, the majority of the world’s population growth is concentrated among the poorest countries, which have significantly lower emissions rates but are likely to suffer disproportionately from the effects of climate change.

    “We must accelerate our efforts to meet the objectives of the Paris Agreement as well as achieve the SDGs,” said Li Junhua, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs. “We need a rapid decoupling of economic activity from the current over-reliance on fossil-fuel energy, as well as greater efficiency in the use of those resources, and we need to make this a just and inclusive transition that supports those left furthest behind.”

    The need for a sustainable future built on rights and choices

    In order to usher in a world in which all 8 billion people can thrive, we must look to proven and effective solutions to mitigate our world’s challenges and achieve the SDGs, while prioritising human rights. In order to pursue these solutions, increased investment from member states and donor governments is needed in policies and programmes that work to make the world safer, more sustainable and more inclusive.

    Key facts and figures at a glance

    ? It took about 12 years for the world population to grow from 7 to 8 billion, but the next billion is expected to take approx 14.5 years (2037), reflecting the slowdown in global growth. World population is projected to reach a peak of around 10.4 billion people during the 2080s and to remain at that level until 2100.
    ? For the increase from 7 to 8 billion, around 70 per cent of the added population was in low-income and lower-middle-income countries. For the increase from 8 to 9 billion, these two groups of countries are expected to account for more than 90 per cent of global growth.
    ? Between now and 2050, the global increase in the population under age 65 will occur entirely in low income and lower-middle-income countries, since population growth in high-income and upper-middle income countries will occur only among those aged 65 years or over.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • A World of 8 Billion: Population Growth Will Continue But its Slowing Down

    A World of 8 Billion: Population Growth Will Continue But its Slowing Down

    [ad_1]

    Kathleen Mogelgaard
    • Opinion by Kathleen Mogelgaard (washington dc)
    • Inter Press Service

    With hashtags like #8billionstrong, the discourse around adding another billion people to the world’s population since 2011 seems heavy on positive spin. Some economists and pundits argue population growth (or “superabundance” as one new book frames it) is a good thing for the economy and innovation.

    UN Secretary General António Guterres called it “an occasion to celebrate diversity and advancement.” UN Population Fund (UNFPA) Executive Director Dr. Natalia Kanem said, “People are the solution, not the problem….A resilient world of 8 billion…offers infinite possibilities.”

    But it’s more complicated than that.

    While reaching 8 billion doesn’t mean we are fated to keep adding a billion people to the population every decade — UN projections indicate population growth will level off later in this century – continued population growth is not without its challenges.

    Optimistic media takes on the 8 billion milestone tend to gloss over how continued growth could adversely affect people and the planet, including the climate and environment, food security, water, health, civil conflict, refugees, displacement, and widening global inequity.

    3. Growth won’t be uniform; some places will experience much more than others

    Demographically speaking, the world is becoming increasingly polarized. In some countries, especially wealthier ones, population growth rates are already low and will fall fast. For example, according to UN projections, over 30 countries in Europe and parts of Asia will reach a median age of 46 or older by 2040. That would lead to further declines in birth rates.

    Future population growth will be more and more concentrated in other countries with higher fertility rates and more youthful age structures. The UN projects sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia will retain their young demographics in 2040, with more than half of their populations under the age of 25.

    That will drive higher population growth in certain areas, for example in the Sahel region of Africa, the Philippines, and among marginalized communities across the globe.

    This is a deep equity issue. Younger age structures, higher fertility rates, and more population growth profoundly impact societies, economies, and governments, and limits their capacity to meet people’s needs.

    4. Early child-bearing raises fertility rates

    Average family size is shrinking globally, but in parts of sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and southern Asia, lifetime fertility rates have stalled or are declining very slowly, portending larger families. In many places, this is a function of early child-bearing. For example, in Niger where the average lifetime fertility rate is about seven births per woman, more than three quarters of girls are married before age 18. Across Sub-Saharan Africa, each year more than 10% of adolescent females bear a child.

    5. Youthful age structures will drive growth in the first half of this century

    A “youth bulge” or large proportion of young people in a national population today creates momentum which all but guarantees the number people of reproductive age will grow through 2050. UN demographers project that this will drive about two-thirds of global population growth over the next two decades.

    6. Projections are not predictions

    None of this is set in stone. UN projections do not account for many variables that could affect the population growth curve, from wealth to warfare. What governments and the international donor community choose to invest in may change variables that could profoundly influence outcomes.

    Suppose they focus on countries and regions with high population growth, and invest in programs which help girls stay in school, ensure greater access to family planning services, and help women exercise their rights and reproductive autonomy.

    Not only are these important objectives in their own right, we also know from experience they encourage delayed childbirth, smaller families, and lower fertility rates, which would drive population growth down.

    By itself, population growth won’t determine whether we can achieve a sustainable future. But it will be a significant factor, and it’s one we can influence positively. In that sense, the population passing 8 billion is an opportunity.

    It’s a chance to finish the work of upholding rights and reproductive autonomy for women and girls, and reduce the stresses higher growth would place on our climate, environment, health, food, water, and security.

    It illustrates the need to shift disproportionate impacts of high growth on poor countries toward greater equity, helping stabilize some of the world’s most precarious places, which in turn strengthens global stability.

    If we determine to do these things now, then the Day of 8 Billion could be cause for celebration.

    Kathleen Mogelgaard is the president and CEO of the Population Institute. On November 15 she will participate in “Toward Peak Population” a free online dialog on population growth with experts and officials from around the world, hosted by Foreign Policy Magazine.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • World Population after 8,000,000,000

    World Population after 8,000,000,000

    [ad_1]

    Source: United Nations.
    • Opinion by Joseph Chamie (portland, usa)
    • Inter Press Service

    Moreover, that fancied collapse of world population is neither the biggest problem facing the world nor is that false notion a much bigger risk to civilization than climate change, which is certainly humanity’s greatest challenge.

    According to recent projections, the world’s population is expected to continue increasing over the coming decades. Hundreds of millions of more people are projected to be added to the planet, but at a slower pace than during the recent past.

    The expected slowdown in the growth of world population does not constitute a problem. The global demographic slowdown clearly signals social, economic, environmental and climatic successes and benefits for human life on planet Earth.

    Many of those calling for increased rates of population growth through higher birth rates and more immigration are simply promoting Ponzi demography. The underlying strategy of Ponzi demography is to privatize the profits and socialize the costs incurred from increased population growth.

    World population reached the 1 billion milestone in 1804. World population doubled to 2 billion in 1927, doubled again to 4 billion in 1974, and then doubled a third time to 8 billion in 2022 (Figure 1).

    Throughout the many centuries of human history, the 20th century was an exceptional record-breaking period demographically.

    World population nearly quadrupled from 1.6 billion in 1900 to 6.1 billion by the close of the century. In addition, the world’s population annual growth rate peaked at 2.3 percent in 1963 and the annual increase reached a record high of 93 million in 1990.

    Since the start of the 21st century, the world’s population has increased by nearly 2 billion people, from 6.1 billion in 2000 to 8 billion in 2022. Over that time period, the world’s annual rate of population growth declined from 1.3 percent to 0.8 percent, with the world’s annual demographic increase going from 82 million to 67 million today.

    While mortality continues to play an important role in the growth of the world’s population, as witnessed recently with the COVID-19 pandemic, fertility is expected to be the major determinant of the future size of world population.

    The world’s average fertility rate of approximately 2.3 births per woman in 2020 is less than half the average fertility rates during the 1950s and 1960s.

    The United Nations medium variant population projection assumes fertility rates will continue to decline. By the century’s close the total fertility rate is expected to decline to a global average of 1.8 births per woman, which is one-third the rate of the early 1960s and well below the fertility replacement level.

    The medium variant projection results in an increasing world population that reaches 9 billion by 2037, 10 billion by 2058 and 10.3 billion by 2100.

    Alternative population projections include the high and low variants, which assume approximately a half child above and below the medium variant, respectively. Accordingly, world population by 2100 ends up being substantially larger in the high variant at 14.8 billion and substantially smaller in the low variant at 7.0 billion (Figure 2).

    Another alternative population projection, which is unlikely but instructive, is the constant variant. That projection variant assumes the current fertility rates of countries remain unchanged or constant at their current levels throughout the remainder of the 21st century. The constant variant results in a projected world population at the close of the century that is more than double its current size, 19.2 versus 8.0 billion.

    Although world population is projected to continue increasing over the coming decades, considerable diversity exists in the future population growth of countries.

    The populations of some 50 countries, including China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, South Korea and Spain, are expected to decline in size by midcentury due to low fertility rates. At the same time, the populations of about two dozen other countries, including Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Niger, Somalia and Sudan, are expected to increase substantially due to their comparatively high fertility rates.

    A comparison of the growth of the populations according to the medium variant for the four projected largest countries by midcentury, i.e., China, India, Nigeria, and the United States, highlights the diversity of population growth expected during the 21st century.

    China’s current population size is estimated to be near its peak at approximately 1.4 billion. Due to its fertility rate of 1.16 births per woman, which is close to half the replacement level and is assumed to remain relatively low over the coming decades, the Chinese population is expected to decline to 1.3 billion by 2050 and decline further to 0.8 billion by 2100.

    In contrast, India’s population, which has an estimated fertility rate of 2.0 births per woman that is expected to decline further, is continuing to increase in size. As a result of that demographic growth, India’s population will likely overtake China’s population by 2023. By 2060 India’s population is projected to peak at 1.7 billion and decline to 1.5 billion by 2100 (Figure 3).

    The population of the United States, currently the third world’s largest population after China and India, is expected to continue increasing in size largely due to immigration. By 2050 the U.S. population is projected to reach 375 million and be close to 400 million by the century’s close.

    Nigeria’s rapidly growing population, which more than doubled over the past 30 years from 100 million in 1992 to 219 million in 2022, is expected to continue its rapid demographic growth for the remainder of the century. The population of Nigeria is expected to be larger than the U.S. population by 2050, when it reaches 377 million, and then increase to 500 mil1ion in 2077 and 546 million by the century’s close.

    Admittedly, the future size of the world’s population remains uncertain. Demographic conditions, especially mortality levels as recently witnessed with the COVID-19 pandemic, could change markedly and future fertility rates may also follow different patterns from those being assumed in the most recent population projections.

    Nevertheless, it appears that the world’s current population of 8 billion will continue increasing over the coming decades, likely gaining an additional 2 billion people by around midcentury.

    The expected demographic growth of the world’s population of 8 billion during the 21st century poses daunting challenges. Prominent among those challenges are dire concerns about food, water and energy supplies, natural resources, biodiversity, pollution, the environment, and of course climate change, considered by most, including the world’s scientists, to be humanity’s greatest challenge.

    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 (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • A Tale of Cities

    A Tale of Cities

    [ad_1]

    Credit: United Nations
    • Opinion by Haoliang Xu (united nations)
    • Inter Press Service

    Every day she hesitates to go to school, tries different routes on the public bus, walks miles in the hot sun, to avoid the sexual harassment that has become a daily occurrence in public spaces.

    Or if you are a restaurant worker or coffee shop server you worry after a late-night shift about the dark alleys and the steps down to the subway station not knowing if you will face an attacker tonight.

    Or delay repeatedly going to the free Covid-19 vaccine clinic because it is far away from home, because of long lines, but most importantly because there are no public toilets there. For women and girls across the world, that is often their reality.

    Barriers and vulnerabilities have worsened due to the global drivers of change such as climate change, rapid urbanisation, and conflict.

    Approximately 4.5 billion people, or 55% of the world population, live in urban areas, and 50% of the world’s population is made up of women and girls.

    The design and layout of cities and infrastructure have a significant impact on women’s life experiences and opportunities they can access.

    In a world filled with multiple challenges it is easy to push this issue aside and say this is a problem only of a handful of cities, it doesn’t impact me. But data says otherwise. For instance, in New York City, women spend an average $26 to $50 extra on transport per month for safety reasons.

    A study of 28 global cities found that women were 10% more likely than men to feel unsafe in metros, and 6% more likely to feel unsafe on buses. In Ireland, 55% of women feel unsafe in public transport after dark and in the UK, 97% of young women have reported sexual harassment in public spaces.

    In Jordan, 47% of women surveyed had turned down a job opportunity citing affordability and availability of public transport, and public sexual harassment as key reasons. And evidence shows that during the pandemic, urban spaces became even more hostile for women and girls.

    However, this is not inevitable; cities can become a welcoming, safe and equal playing field for all. That is why the new report Cities Alive: Designing Cities that Work for Women’ released last week is such a timely intervention.

    Co-authored by UNDP, along with our partners Arup and the University of Liverpool it outlines a strong blueprint on how to remove the gender bias built into cities and improve women’s safety, their health, education and employment.

    Drawing on the voices and experiences of women globally, as well as prevalent data and research, the new report focuses on four critical themes:

    Safety and security
    Creating safer streets, providing safer mobility, and incorporating violence prevention laws and raising awareness.
    Justice and equity
    Ensuring gender-responsive planning in national laws, supporting the collection of gender disaggregated data, supporting women participating in urban governance at all levels.
    Health and wellbeing
    Creating inclusive public and green areas, enhancing access to water, hygiene and sanitation facilities, increasing access to physical and mental healthcare and nutrition facilities and providing adequate accommodation and housing models.
    Enrichment and fulfilment
    Providing accessible and inclusive workplaces and schools, providing safe and inclusive leisure and cultural spaces, designing for diverse and flexible use of public spaces and using the built environment to uplift women and recognize their history.

    Focused on solutions, the report outlines to decision makers and urban practitioners the tools they need to move beyond dialogue to actively involving women at every stage of city design and planning – from inception to delivery.

    Importantly, the report shows how increasing the participation of women in urban governance at all levels is a prerequisite for better functioning cities, with case studies of what is working from Bogota to Nairobi to San Francisco.

    We know that achieving gender equity is pivotal to all the Sustainable Development Goals, agreed by world leaders in 2015. With a rapidly approaching deadline of 2030 for the Global Goals, ensuring our cities work for women and girls is a giant step forward in that direction.

    Haoliang Xu is UN Assistant-Secretary-General and Director of UNDP’s Bureau for Policy and Programme Support

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • U.S. Political Divides on Demographic Issues

    U.S. Political Divides on Demographic Issues

    [ad_1]

    Republicans in general favor less immigration than Democrats. For example, a national Gallup poll in July 2022 found that the proportion saying immigration to America should be decreased was 69 percent among Republicans versus 17 percent among Democrats. Credit: Guillermo Arias / IPS
    • Opinion by Joseph Chamie (portland, usa)
    • Inter Press Service

    On virtually every major demographic issue, including reproduction, mortality, immigration, ethnic composition, gender, marriage and population ageing, significant divides exist between the Democrats and Republicans (Figure 1). Those divides have significant consequences and implications for current and future government policies and programs.

    Those divides on vital demographic matters, which have become increasingly politicized by the two major parties, are reinforcing political polarization and partisan antipathy across the country and hindering the economic, social and cultural development of the United States.

    With respect to reproduction, while most Democrats are in favor of a woman’s legal access to abortion, most Republicans are not. For example, a March 2022 PEW national survey found that proportion of Democrats saying abortion should be legal in all or most cases was more than twice that of Republicans, i.e., 80 versus 38 percent.

    Also, Gallup polls indicate a widening gap since the late 1980s between Democrats and Republicans on the circumstances permitting abortion. By 2022, for example, the proportions of Democrats and Republicans saying abortions should be legal under any circumstances were 57 and 10 percent, respectively (Figure 2).

    A similar difference on abortion is evident among members of Congress and justices of the Supreme Court. While Congressional Democrats are largely in favor codifying access to abortion and safeguards to the right to travel across state lines to undergo the procedure, Congressional Republicans are opposed to such access and safeguards. And the recent Supreme Court abortion decision ending the right to abortion reflects the divides in the views of justices appointed by Republican and Democrat administrations.

    Concerning access to birth control methods, the vote on the recently passed bill by the House of Representatives was mostly along party lines. All but eight Republicans opposed the bill that aims to ensure access to contraception. In the Senate, the birth control measure is expected to fail as most Republicans are likely to be against it.

    On mortality and morbidity issues, Congressional Democratic and Republican leaders are also divided. A notable example of that divide has been the sustained Republican opposition to the Affordable Care Act enacted by Democrats more than a decade ago.

    Recent research has also found that more premature deaths occur in Republican-leaning counties than in Democratic-leaning counties. The policies adopted by Democratic-leaning states compared to those in Republican states are believed to have contributed to the greater divide in mortality outcomes. Those policies include Medicaid expansion, health care access, minimum wage legislation, tobacco control, gun legislation, and drug addiction treatment.

    The early responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, which was transformed from a public health concern into a major political issue, also reflect the divide in mortality outcomes between Democrats and Republicans. While mask wearing, social distancing, and related preventive measures were often stressed by most Democratic officials, many Republican leaders resisted such measures and downplayed the risks of the coronavirus.

    Those partisan differences concerning the COVID-19 pandemic were reflected in the behavior and attitudes of Republicans and Democrats across the country. As a result of those attitudinal and behavioral differences, Republican-leaning counties have had higher COVID-19 death rates than Democrat-leaning counties.

    With respect to immigration, Republicans in general favor less immigration than Democrats. For example, a national Gallup poll in July 2022 found that the proportion saying immigration to America should be decreased was 69 percent among Republicans versus 17 percent among Democrats. The rise for decreased immigration during the past several years is primarily due to Republicans, whose desire for reducing immigration increased by 21 points since June 2020 compared to an increase of 4 points among Democrats (Figure 3).

    To address immigration levels, the former Republican administration advocated building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and limiting the granting of asylum claims. In contrast, most Democratic leaders have not been in favor of erecting a border wall. Also, the current Democratic administration has been removing obstacles to granting asylum claims, including ending the former administration’s “Remain in Mexico” policy.

    Concerning the more than 11 million illegal immigrants residing in the country, the former Republican administration wanted to ban counting them in the 2020 census. The desired exclusion of undocumented migrants in the census enumeration was aimed at not including them when determining Congressional representation. The current Democratic administration, in contrast, includes undocumented migrants in the census count and determining Congressional representation.

    On whether to offer an amnesty to immigrants living unlawfully in the country, a wide divide exists between the two major political parties. While Democrats are largely in favor of offering illegal immigrants a path to U.S. citizenship, many Republicans oppose granting an amnesty to those who are unlawfully resident in the country. A PEW survey in August 2022, for example, found the proportion in favor of a path to U.S. citizenship among Democrats was more than double the level among the Republicans, 80 versus 37 percent, respectively.

    Regarding the changing ethnic composition of the U.S. population, Democrats tend to view the changes more favorably than Republicans. For example, one national PEW survey found Democrats three times more likely than Republicans to say a majority nonwhite population will strengthen America’s customs and values, i.e., 42 and 13 percent, respectively.

    Similar divides between Democrats and Republicans were found with respect to interracial marriage and same-sex marriage. The growth of interracial marriage is considered to be a good thing for the country by a majority of Democrats and a minority of Republicans, 61 and 33 percent, respectively. Also, Democrats have been consistently more likely than Republicans to say that same-sex marriages should recognized by the law as valid, with the proportions in 2022 at 83 and 55 percent, respectively (Figure 4).

    Democrats and Republicans also differ in their views about gender identity. While a national PEW survey found 80 percent of Republicans saying that whether someone is a man or a woman is determined by the sex assigned at birth, 64 percent of Democrats took the opposite view, believing that a person’s gender can be different from the sex assigned at birth.

    Moreover, the majority of Republicans, 57 percent, say that society has gone too far in accepting people who are transgender, compared to 12 percent of Democrats.

    On the issue of population ageing, noteworthy policy differences with program implications exist between Democrats and Republicans. In general, Republican leaders have resisted government entitlement programs established by Democrats, such as Social Security and Medicare, preferring reliance on the private sector, freedom of choice and individual responsibility.

    Republican leaders have proposed replacing those major programs for older Americans with private investment accounts and a voucher system for health insurance. In addition, some Republicans recommend eliminating Social Security and Medicare as federal entitlement programs and have them become programs approved by Congress annually as discretionary spending.

    A similar political divide exists among Americans concerning the provision of long-term care that the elderly may need. One national PEW survey in 2019 reported that while two-thirds of Democrats say the government should be mostly responsible for paying for that care for the elderly, 40 percent of Republicans have that view.

    In sum, significant divides currently exist between Democrats and Republicans on nearly every major demographic issue facing the United States. Those divides are being politicized by the two parties, reinforcing political polarization and partisan antipathy across the country, which in turn are affecting domestic legislation and foreign policy as well as hampering America’s progress in the 21st century.

    Joseph Chamie is a 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 (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Time is Running Out for Decisions on Debt Relief as Countries Face Escalating Development Crisis

    Time is Running Out for Decisions on Debt Relief as Countries Face Escalating Development Crisis

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Lars Jensen, George Gray Molina (united nations)
    • Inter Press Service

    All of which is contributing to a rapid deterioration of an already damaging debt crisis which is, as ever, hitting the most vulnerable the hardest.

    In new research released by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 54 developing (low- and middle-income) economies are identified as suffering from severe debt problems, equal to 40 percent of all developing economies. 1

    Providing this group of countries with the debt relief they need should be a manageable task for the international economy as the group only accounts for little more than 3% of the world economy. Failing to do so, however, could result in catastrophic development setbacks as the group of 54 accounts for more than 50 percent of the world’s extreme poor and 28 of the world’s top-50 most climate vulnerable countries.

    Countries are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They cannot spend what is required to protect their citizens and safeguard their development prospects while continuing to also service their fast-rising debt burdens.

    Time is running out. Without an urgent step-up of debt relief efforts from the international community, many more defaults will follow, and the debt crisis will turn into an entrenched development crisis as history has taught us.

    Contrary to the advice given in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, in the face of high interest rates, inflation, and debt levels, the International Monetary Fund is now urging countries to reign in fiscal spending while providing targeted and time-bound support to vulnerable populations.

    But many developing economies cannot easily shift to effective and targeted social transfers or quickly increase tax revenues, – as the administrative capacity to do so takes years to build up.

    Without a viable alternative in the form of access to orderly and comprehensive debt restructuring, and additional liquidity support from the international community, countries will have to choose between a string of messy and costly defaults and/or abrupt spending cuts with disastrous consequences for low-income and vulnerable populations and development prospects at large.

    Furthermore, both options greatly increase the risk of political and social unrest threatening further setbacks and a deepening crisis.

    We must also remember that these things are happening against the backdrop of an intensifying climate crisis which we can only combat together as a global community. Without a rethink on debt relief the global climate transition will be delayed, the economic costs of the transition will rise, and developing economies, who have contributed the least to the problem, will continue to bear a disproportionate size of the costs.

    Developing economies must be allowed sufficient fiscal space to undertake ambitious sustainable development plans – including the undertaking of much-needed climate adaptation and mitigation investments.

    Debt relief is one of several crucial components of providing it. The G20’s Common Framework for Debt Treatments, under which countries with debt distress can seek a restructuring, will have to be reformed, including a shift in focus towards comprehensive debt restructurings in return for sustainable development objectives.

    This will require a change in attitude and sense of urgency, especially among major official creditors, as well as full debt transparency from both debtors and creditors. In our latest paper we discuss possible ways forward for the Common Framework focusing on country eligibility, debt sustainability analyses, official creditor coordination, private creditor participation, policy conditionalities and the use of debt clauses that target future economic and fiscal resilience.

    Decisions on debt relief can no longer wait.

    Nineteen developing economies – more than one-third of developing economies issuing dollar debt in international markets – have now lost markets access on account of skyrocketing interest rates, more than doubling from 9 countries at the beginning of 2022.

    Similarly, credit ratings have been sliding with 27 countries – close to one-third of credit-rated developing economies – rated either ‘substantial risk, extremely speculative, or default’, up from 10 countries at the beginning of 2020.

    Hard-won development gains achieved in the global south over decades are now being eroded by the intertwined cost-of-living and debt crises. Not only will a deepening development crisis result in great human suffering, but the cost of regaining whatever development gains are lost will increase substantially the longer we wait.

    It is inconceivable, both morally and economically, that we would allow a development crisis to escalate when the international community has the resources needed to stop it now.

    Lars Jensen is Economist at UNDP Strategic Policy Engagement Unit.; George Gray Molina is Head of Strategic Engagement and Chief Economist at UNDP

    1https://www.undp.org/publications/avoiding-too-little-too-late-international-debt-relief

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • With Planning Aging Population Could Result in a Silver Dividend

    With Planning Aging Population Could Result in a Silver Dividend

    [ad_1]

    Maldives Minister for Gender, Family, and Social Services, Aishath Mohamed Didi, in her keynote address said her island country faced unique development challenges and is vulnerable to economic shocks and climate change.
    • by Cecilia Russell (johannesburg)
    • Inter Press Service

    Two National Transfer Account (NTA) experts told the session that with good planning and policy, it was possible to change the trajectory so that those in retirement were not only reliant on the state.

    NTAs provide a coherent accounting framework of economic flows from one age group or generation to another.

    UNFPA’s short video outlined the impact of an aging population in Thailand. Currently, adults take care of three elders and two children, but with the aging population in 2025, this will increase to four elders and three children, but by 2035, the number of dependents will increase to six elders and three children.

    Professor Sang-Hyop Lee of the East-West Center and the University of Hawaii, succinctly in an “elevator pitch,” explained his interests in population. These included “looking at how a changing population structure affects society and economy, current and future,” and “what public policies could be pursued to influence the outcome.”

    Lee said that using NTA tools with disaggregated data, including consumption (both private and public sector) and other variables like income and savings, could assist with policy development.

    By 2080, he said, the whole Asia Pacific region would have an aging population – and public policy could change the outcomes by including evidence and knowledge-based policy to influence labor patterns of the female, youth, and elderly labor force; increasing productivity through effective education, health investments, training and finally to improve the work-to-retirement transition.

    Eduardo Klein, Regional Representative of HelpAge International, who chaired the session, commented that the key takeaway was that the NTAs were a crucial tool for developing strategies to adapt to population aging.

    In her keynote address, Maldives Minister for Gender, Family, and Social Services, Aishath Mohamed Didi, said that her country, which was a small island state the country, faced “unique development challenges and is vulnerable to economic shocks and climate change.”

    The population is about 500 000 people, 70% of whom are Maldivians and the rest foreigners; 64% are working age, and more than 37% are under 25; those 65 and older account for 3.4% of the population.

    “The Maldives entered the window of opportunity in 2010 when the majority of the population was working, and it’s estimated that the democratic transition will be completed by 2030,” Didi said. “Due to a rapid fertility decline and increased life expectancy, it’s estimated it will become an aging population by 2030.”

    She outlined various policy changes in the Maldives, including addressing the investment in children, which was lower than in other economies with similar fertility or development levels. The country had included free basic education from ages four to 16 and also spent US$ 30 million supporting 15,000 students to achieve their first degrees. This has been expanded to include zero-interest rate loans. In the past two to three years, the Maldives had spent over US$ 64 million to support about 2000 students studying abroad in 31 countries. Other efforts to improve education included investing in technical and vocational education and providing skill development opportunities for youth, including apprenticeship programmes, particularly in the outer regions away from the capital or the central areas.

    Didi said the Maldives depended highly on tourism, but foreign workers (primarily men) comprised 60% of the workforce. Women only play a small role in the industry and hold the most informal sector jobs.

    “Young people are required to become skilled and equipped to compete with foreign workers in the domestic economy,” Didi said, adding that the demographic dividend transition was expected to create both opportunities and challenges. “The aggregate public spending on healthcare and other social protection needs to grow by more than 2 percent per year until 2050 to maintain the same level of service enjoyed by the population in 2022 – even with per capita benefits, the government’s budget needs to grow substantially.”

    Klein noted that Didi’s overview showed how the Maldives was in the demographic dividend and was investing in the future and that investment had a “return in improved health and a better educated, more productive, more engaged, and a healthier population living in a harmonious society.”

    Rikiya Matsukura, Associate Professor at Nihon University, noted that opportunities arose with planning and strategic policymaking. While an aging population was “inevitable” and “wasn’t curable,” policymakers played a crucial role in changing the trajectory.

    Matsukura outlined four demographic dividends: The first demographic was achieved through the expansion of the workforce. The second demographic dividend is achieved through investing in human capital – leading to higher productivity. The third demographic dividend, which he termed the “longevity dividend” or “silver dividend,” was achieved through investing in longevity and longer working life. Finally, the fourth dividend would be achieved by investing in education, especially in the STEM fields.

    While people aged 55 to 70 may not be working, if they are healthy, they could work, Matsukura said, that this could create an additional workforce.

    “In the case of Japan, the income generated by additional elderly workers could correspond to 3.2 to 6 percent of Japan’s real GDP,” he noted.

    This elderly workforce could be assisted by technology – artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics and the economy could grow by 35% if technology could make housework easier.

    Lee noted that there was no easy answer but what was required was short and long-term planning which took into account crises. This aging population issue will not go away.

    Klein too, noted said future planning was complex. For example, India (among other countries) had invested in education, but because of the COVID-19 pandemic, children could not attend school for two years, which would have consequences for the future workforce. Climate change, in addition to aging, would need to be planned for in Bangladesh.

    During the discussion, parliamentarians were concerned about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr Jetn Sirathranont, an MP from Thailand, noted that policymakers needed to use the NTA tools, but post-pandemic, every country, including Thailand, was experiencing a situation where there was “less income and less revenue but high expenses.”

    Sirathranont asked how one could apply NTA tools in these circumstances.

    While Klein quipped that this was a million-dollar question, Lee said what was required was short and long-term planning which took into account crises like the pandemic. However, he noted, “this aging population issue will not go away.”

    IPS UN Bureau Report


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Population Growth Diversity Continuing in the 21st Century

    Population Growth Diversity Continuing in the 21st Century

    [ad_1]

    China, the world’s most populous country is expected to be overtaken by India in 2023. Moreover, by 2060 India’s population is projected to be nearly a half billion more than China’s. Picture: Mumbai, India. Credit: Sthitaprajna Jena (CC BY-SA 2.0).
    • Opinion by Joseph Chamie (portland, usa)
    • Inter Press Service

    At one extreme are some 50 countries, accounting for close to 30 percent of today’s world population, whose populations are expected to decline over the coming decades.

    By 2060, for example, those projected population declines include 9 percent in Germany, 11 percent in Russia, 13 percent in Spain, 15 percent in China, 17 percent in Poland, 18 percent in Italy, 21 percent in South Korea, 22 percent in Japan, and 31 percent in Bulgaria (Figure 1).

    In terms of the size of those population declines, the largest is in China with a projected decline of 218 million by 2060. Following China are population declines in Japan and Russia of 27 million and 16 million, respectively.

    At the other extreme, the population of 25 countries, accounting for nearly 10 percent of the world’s population, are expected to more than double by 2060. Those projected population increases by 2060 include 106 percent in Afghanistan, 109 percent in Sudan, 113 percent in Uganda, 136 percent in Tanzania, 142 percent in Angola, 147 percent in Somalia, 167 percent in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and 227 percent in Niger (Figure 2).

    With respect to the size of the populations that are projected to more than double, the largest is in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) with a projected increase of 165 million by 2060. DRC is followed by population increases in Tanzania and Niger of 89 million and 60 million, respectively.

    In between the extremes of declining and doubling populations are 120 intermediate growth countries. They account for about 60 percent of today’s world population and are projected to have larger populations by 2060 to varying degrees.

    Those projected increases in population size include 13 percent in the United States, 17 percent New Zealand, 20 percent in India, 24 percent in Canada, 29 percent in Australia, 38 percent Saudi Arabia, 58 percent Israel, 95 percent in Nigeria, and 98 percent in Ethiopia (Figure 3).

    Among the intermediate growth countries, the largest expected population growth is in India with a projected increase of 278 million by 2060. India is followed by Nigeria and Ethiopia with population increases of 208 million and 121 million, respectively.

    The continuing significant differences in the rates demographic growth are resulting in a noteworthy reordering of countries by population size.

    For example, while in 1980 about half of the 15 largest country populations were developed countries, by 2020 that number declined to one country, the United States. Also, Nigeria, which was eleventh largest population in 1980, was the seventh largest in 2020 and is projected to be the third largest population in 2060 with the United States moving to fourth place (Table 1).

    In addition, China, the world’s most populous country is expected to be overtaken by India in 2023. Moreover, by 2060 India’s population is projected to be nearly a half billion more than China’s, 1.7 billion versus 1.2 billion, respectively.

    The major explanation behind the diversity in population growth rates is differing fertility levels. While the countries whose populations are projected to at least double by 2060 have fertility rates of four to six births per woman, those whose populations are projected to decline have fertility rates below two births per woman.

    About two-thirds of the world’s population of 8 billion live in a country, including the three most populous China, India and the United States, where the fertility rate has fallen below the replacement level of 2.1 births per woman. In addition, most of those populations have experienced low fertility rates for decades.

    Also, many countries are experiencing fertility rates that are approximately half the replacement level or less. For example, the total fertility rate declined to 1.2 births per woman for China and Italy, 1.3 for Japan and Spain, with South Korea reaching a record low of 0.8 births per woman.

    The population of some countries with below replacement fertility, such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States, are projected to continue growing due to international migration. However, if international migration to those countries stopped, their populations would begin declining in a few decades just like other countries with below replacement fertility levels.

    In hopes of avoiding population decline, many countries are seeking to raise their fertility rates back to at least the replacement level. Among the countries with below replacement fertility close to two-thirds have adopted policies to increase their rates, including baby bonuses, family allowances, parental leave, tax incentives, and flexible work schedules.

    Most recently, China announced new measures to raise its below replacement fertility rate by making it easier to work and raise a family. Those measures include flexible working arrangements and preferential housing policies for families, as well as support on education, employment, and taxes to encourage childbearing.

    Despite the desires, policies, and programs of governments to raise fertility levels, returning to replacement level fertility is not envisaged for the foreseeable future.

    The world’s average total fertility rate of 2.4 births per woman in 2020, which is about half the levels during the 1950s and 1960s, is projected to decline to the replacement level by midcentury and to 1.8 births per woman by the end of the 21st century. Consequently, by 2050 some 50 countries are expected to have smaller populations than today, and that number is projected to rise to 72 countries by 2100.

    As many of those countries are in Europe, that continent’s current population of 744 million is expected to decline to 703 million by midcentury. By the century’s close Europe’s population is projected to be a fifth smaller than it is today, i.e., from 744 million to 585 million.

    In contrast, the populations of roughly three dozen countries with current fertility levels of more than four births per woman are expected to continue growing throughout the century.

    As most of those countries are in Africa, that continent’s population is projected to double by around midcentury. Moreover, by close of the 21st century Africa’s population is projected to be triple its current size, i.e., from 1.3 billion to 3.9 billion.

    In sum, considerable diversity in the growth of populations is expected to continue throughout the 21st century. While the populations of many countries are projected to decline, the populations of many others are projected to increase. The net result of that diversity is the world’s current population of 8 billion is expected to increase to 10 billion around midcentury.

    Joseph Chamie is a 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 (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link