As preparations for this year’s UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow, Scotland, intensify, attention is focused on efforts to prevent a future catastrophe.
However, real-time climate catastrophes are already playing out in the lives of millions of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people. What will COP26 offer them?
Stick a pin in a map of global humanitarian emergencies and you will most likely land on a crisis that has been caused or aggravated by droughts, floods and storms.
In 2019, extreme weather events pushed more than 34 million people into hunger and food insecurity. In the 55 countries with food-insecurity crises, 75 million children under the age of five are chronically undernourished and face higher risks of diarrhea, pneumonia and other potentially fatal diseases that accompany droughts and floods.
Save the Children is responding to these emergencies. In the Horn of Africa, our nutrition programs are treating the children of farming families devastated by successive droughts, floods and the worst desert locust infestation in a generation. In the Sahel region, we are working with communities hit by drought and displaced by increasingly deadly conflicts over water.
However, humanitarian efforts are overwhelmed by the scale of the crisis — and worse is to come.
COP26 is one of our last opportunities to lock in the measures needed to keep temperatures within the 1.5°C to 2°C ceiling set in 2015 by the Paris climate agreement.
However, even 1.5°C of warming would have disastrous implications for poverty and malnutrition in the poorest countries. The evidence from climate science points overwhelmingly toward less predictable rainfall, more extreme, frequent and protracted droughts, and more destructive storms.
Meanwhile, the World Meteorological Association anticipates a long-term decline in food productivity in Africa, the world’s most food-insecure region.
Rich countries are already investing heavily in adapting to climate change threats. When disasters strike, their citizens can fall back on elaborate safety nets, well-financed health systems, and insurance policies covering loss and damage to assets.
Flood defenses are being increased across Europe, and the US farm bill includes a US$39 billion insurance program to protect heavily subsidized producers against crop losses.
Contrast that with the situation facing Africa’s farmers: When extreme weather events destroy crops, kill livestock and drive up food prices, families cope by cutting meals, and reducing spending on health and education.
Lacking insurance and savings, the poorest households are forced to sell off productive assets, including livestock, effectively closing their route to recovery.
Livestock losses during Somalia’s 2016 drought cost the country’s farmers an estimated US$2 billion — an extraordinary loss for some of the world’s poorest people.
The international community’s prefered first-line response to climate disaster is to provide humanitarian aid. That aid saves lives, but the current system invariably delivers too little, too late.
Last year, donors provided only half of the funding requested by the UN — a record gap. Much of the aid arrived long after the most vulnerable families had already been forced to cut food consumption, withdraw children from school and sell assets.
There is a better way to support the world’s most vulnerable populations. Three years ago, I met female pastoral farmers in Wajir County, an arid area in northern Kenya, in the aftermath of a devastating drought.
They had managed to avoid cutting meals for children or selling their livestock because they were receiving cash through the Kenyan Hunger Safety Net Programme. As soon as the drought struck, early payments were automatically triggered, based on rainfall data.
Well-designed safety nets succeed where humanitarian aid often fails, because they catch vulnerable people as soon as they start to fall, instead of waiting until they hit the ground; thus, they provide a springboard for recovery.
There is abundant evidence from the Sahel, the Horn of Africa and other regions that small cash transfers improve nutrition, increase investment and boost crop production, especially when targeted to women.
These programs can respond rapidly to a crisis. During the 2017 drought, Ethiopia’s safety net was extended to reach an additional 3 million people.
Early action is key to rapid recovery. Every US dollar invested in recovery during the first few weeks of a drought in the Horn of Africa can save poor farmers US$50 in lost income and assets four months later.
When linked to early-warning systems, safety nets can also provide a platform for crisis prevention.
In Bangladesh, vulnerable households were provided grants ahead of anticipated flooding, enabling them to relocate. Beyond saving lives and protecting assets, the program reached twice as many people as a previous humanitarian response, and at half the cost.
Targeted safety-net programs could offer an efficient and equitable way to build resilience against climate change.
Unfortunately, they are currently weakest where they are most urgently needed.
Fewer than one in five people in low-income countries are covered; and in Africa, safety nets are chronically under-financed, fragmented and poorly equipped to address the critical challenge of responding to child poverty and malnutrition.
At COP26, world leaders should task the World Bank and the UN with developing a strategy to reach the 155 million people facing food-insecurity crises and to prioritize children in safety-net design.
Increased finance will be crucial, especially given the post-COVID-19 pandemic fiscal constraints that many developing countries face.
The G7 has already agreed in principle to authorize a new allocation of the IMF’s reserve asset, special drawing rights. Reallocating these funds to the poorest countries would go a long way toward creating the fiscal space to invest in safety nets. So, too, would additional debt relief and the US$25 billion in new funding proposed by the World Bank’s International Development Association.
As the host of COP26, the British government should focus its climate-adaptation efforts on galvanizing support for safety nets. Reversing a decision from November last year to cut the UK’s foreign aid budget by one-third would be a good starting point.
Slashing support for nutrition programs and climate-related humanitarian responses in regions like the Sahel and the Horn of Africa is a short-sighted dereliction of leadership and an embarrassing retreat from multilateralism.
Safety nets are not an antidote for climate injustice, but, linked to decisive action to achieve net zero emissions by the middle of this century, they could limit the harm to those who bear the least responsibility for the climate crisis.
We must seize that opportunity at COP26.
Kevin Watkins is CEO of Save the Children UK.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In September 2013, the armed wing of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) quietly released an internal document entitled, “Coursebook on the Military Geography of the Taiwan Strait.” This sensitive, “military-use-only” coursebook explains why it is strategically vital that China “reunify” (annex) Taiwan. It then methodically analyzes various locations of interest to People’s Liberation Army (PLA) war planners. The coursebook highlights one future battlefield in particular: Fulong Beach, in New Taipei City’s Gongliao District, which it describes as “3,000 meters long, flat, and straight,” and located at “the head of Taiwan.” A black and white picture of Fulong’s sandy coastline occupies the
Early last month, China’s rubber-stamp legislature, the National People’s Congress (NPC), officially approved the country’s 14th Five-Year Plan. The strategy was supposed to demonstrate that China has a long-term economic vision that would enable it to thrive, despite its geopolitical contest with the US. However, before the ink on the NPC’s stamp could dry, China had already begun sabotaging the plan’s chances of success. The new plan’s centerpiece is the “dual-circulation” strategy, according to which China would aim to foster growth based on domestic demand and technological self-sufficiency. This would not only reduce China’s reliance on external demand; it would also
Interrupting the assimilation of Xinjiang’s Uighur population would result in an unmanageable national security threat to China. Numerous governments and civil society organizations around the world have accused China of massive human rights abuses in Xinjiang, and labeled Beijing’s inhumane and aggressive social re-engineering efforts in the region as “cultural genocide.” Extensive evidence shows that China’s forceful ethnic assimilation policies in Xinjiang are aimed at replacing Uighur ethnic and religious identity with a so-called scientific communist dogma and Han Chinese culture. The total assimilation of Uighurs into the larger “Chinese family” is also Beijing’s official, central purpose of its ethnic policies
In studies of Taiwan’s demographic changes, the Institute of Sociology at Academia Sinica has found that a mere 36.5 percent of men and 19.6 percent of women think getting married is an important life event. The institute also found that the government spending money or amending laws and regulations in order to encourage families to have children is having no impact on the birthrate. Opinions differ on whether this kind of change is a matter of national security, as Japan faces a similar situation, without having a negative impact on its economic strength. Fewer women are willing to marry and the divorce