In September, I traveled from my home country, Uganda, to Turkana County in Kenya, which is suffering from a historic drought. One morning, I met a boy in a hospital where doctors see patients with the worst cases of severe acute malnutrition. His family had not been able to access the treatment he needed in time. By the time the sun set that evening, he had died.
The boy was one of 37 million people facing starvation in the Horn of Africa. After four failed rainy seasons, Kenya faces the acute risk of widespread famine.
This suffering is set to get worse: Experts predict that drought-stricken areas in Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia could receive significantly below normal rainfall for the rest of the year.
Illustration: Constance Chou
The entire continent of Africa is responsible for less than 4 percent of historic global emissions, yet African people are bearing the brunt of the climate crisis. It is experiencing profound damage to its societies, economies and people.
The same injustice is also crippling other lower-income parts of the world. In Pakistan earlier this year, extreme flooding submerged one-third of the entire country, killing more than 1,700 people. The World Bank estimates that the total economic damage to Pakistan sits at over US$30 billion. Reconstruction would cost another US$16 billion.
Pakistan has contributed only 0.3 percent of global emissions, yet — like Kenya and Somalia — it is having to pay, literally, for the greenhouse gases released by other countries.
Furthermore, these countries do not have the resources to pay for the damage being inflicted upon them. When Germany experienced terrible flooding last year, the government was able to instantly mobilize US$30 billion to rebuild the towns and infrastructure that had been decimated by the flood.
In contrast, Pakistan has had to rely on an UN emergency appeal that is only covers 34 percent of the cost.
Mozambique was forced to take out an IMF loan to help pay for damage following Cyclone Idai in 2019, pushing the country further into debt distress.
The legacy of colonial extraction and plundering by rich countries has left countries such as Pakistan, Kenya and Mozambique without enough resources to cope in the face of extreme climate change.
Without the money to recover from extreme weather events, there is little hope for countries like mine to survive the next few decades.
At the COP27 climate summit this week and next week, the countries most vulnerable to the effects of the climate crisis are bringing a solution to the table. They are asking those who have largely caused this crisis to help pay for the damage they have created.
This is called “loss and damage finance” in UN language. It has already dominated the talks and kept negotiators wrangling late into the night.
Pacific nation Vanuatu, among the most climate-vulnerable countries in the world, first proposed such financial support in 1991.
However, the issue has been tied down in technical UN negotiations for years. That has allowed rich countries to delay any progress in getting money to people who need it to recover and rebuild. The issue of loss and damage is finally becoming unavoidable. People across the world are starting to understand why it is needed.
Some might say that such finance is still unlikely amid the energy and cost-of-living crises.
However, when talking about who is to blame, one culprit stands out: the fossil fuel industry.
A report by the Loss and Damage Collaboration found that in the first half of this year, six fossil fuel companies made enough money to cover the total costs of extreme weather and climate-related events in developing countries around the world — and still had almost US$70 billion left in profit.
Even the UN secretary-general has called for windfall taxes on fossil fuel giants to fund loss and damage payments.
Others argue that how the money is used cannot be controlled — governments that receive it might not pass it on to the people in need, instead spending it on their own projects.
However, a report released last week by the Stockholm Environment Institute found that the most effective way to get money to the people who need it is by giving them money directly.
Such direct transfers could happen in the form of small and accessible grants to communities in urgent need. What is still lacking is the political will to make this happen.
However, as climate disasters pile up, loss and damage is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore. People have described COP27 as the “African COP.” It can only live up to that name if world leaders are prepared to deal with the needs of people suffering from a crisis they have played little role in creating.
To the leaders gathering in Sharm el-Sheikh: You cannot adapt to starvation. Stop wasting time. Start getting funds to those who need them most.
Vanessa Nakate is a climate activist, UNICEF goodwill ambassador and author of A Bigger Picture.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry