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
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers