By A.H. Monjurul Kabir
NEW YORK, Dec 20 2022 – Promoting innovation and technology to promote inclusive development means using new technologies to enhance equal access to services, eliminate discrimination, increase transparency, and create a stable and just future for all – especially the most vulnerable and marginalized.

Obviously, the rule of law is a key driver of inclusive, equitable, and sustainable development, and empowers people from all strata of life to seek and obtain justice. Doing more with less is posing a challenge here. We are operating in an increasingly connected yet complex global and national settings and fiscally fragile environment.

Our traditional structures, systems and processes are proving to be inadequate to deal with new developmental challenges, pandemics, inaccessibility and exclusions, conflicts, and humanitarian crisis. Our governance and justice systems are not the most transparent and data friendly domain. Bringing that information to light is no easy task.

Barriers to Governance and Rule of Law

As indicated before, there are many barriers to accessing public services and ensuring accessible public health, rule of law, especially where there are high levels of poverty, marginalization, and insecurity. Governance institutions – formal and informal – may be biased or discriminatory. Public governance systems may be ineffective, slow, and untrustworthy.

In the last 3 years of pandemic, we also realized our public health system is often crippled by lack of investment, inclusive and accessible initiatives, and innovation. Discriminatory decision making and exclusivity further complicated the situation at all levels. People may lack knowledge about their rights.

Often legal assistance and consumer protection are out of reach, leaving people with little recourse to formal mechanisms for protection and empowerment. There may be a culture of impunity for criminal acts, unacceptable level of tolerance for exclusionary practices.

Other discriminations, injustices, and abuses in the family, or through deprivation and labour exploitation, may go unaddressed. Despite all these, more can be done to ensure that they benefit from the inclusive governance and public health work, and, rule of law practices, which expand their opportunities and choices.

Quest for New Ideas …

Despite all these, more can be done to ensure that the most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups benefit from inclusive public health, legal empowerment, and access to justice, which expand their opportunities and choices.

We need fresh ideas, resources, and unconventional ways of collecting and analyzing data, such as using micro-narratives or innovative, accessible public hearings, targeted consultations, to complement traditional mechanisms including surveys. But innovation is rapidly becoming the new buzzword, so I would be careful in applying it here:

• Innovation is not cost-free and takes time so it should be mainstreamed:
• Innovation is both science and arts. And it should be seen as a standalone practice. one of the biggest problems that public sector innovation faces today is that governments have de facto created a ‘class of innovators,’ rather than making innovation an inclusive process that is open to anyone who has the motivation and capacity to influence change. This must change.
• Repackaging or reproduction is not innovation unless it caters to the specific needs of vulnerable and marginalized communities which are not supported by existing mechanisms and services.
• What is innovative in Bangladesh, Turkey, and Tanzania may not be so in India, Turkmenistan, Senegal, or Mexico;
• Big data is important but harnessing it for the right cause should be central consideration. Linking it with better evidence base is of critical significance. The COVID-19 challenges amply demonstrated it.
• Going beyond social networking is key – while Facebook, Twitter and other Social Media outlets play an admirable role in connecting people, these are not enough to solving a protracted problem and sustaining a solution. We must also be mindful of the recent trend of using social media to silence public defenders, journalists, and whistle blowers. The twitter is a case in point (December 2022).
• Innovative ideas, while refreshing, need to be pragmatic so that they can be implemented. They mast be part of a solution, not the overall problem.
• Evidence of impact is more important than the novelty factor.

Innovation and New Technologies for Solutions

My own take is that ideas do not need to be always transformational or revolutionary. Our platforms can replicate or even recycle what already works by introducing successful models to new actors and environments.

Even seemingly ordinary things can become innovative in different terms, approaches, or settings. linking inclusion to innovation is not only about looking at how it can advance policies and create better impact for governments, but also about giving people, public servants, and citizens alike, the self-efficacy, power, and freedom to direct change in the way they see necessary. This contributes directly to the making of inclusive development.

New technologies are changing the lives of people around the world. In the same way that they make daily tasks simpler, they can make official and routine interactions with government institutions, service providers easier and can provide innovative solutions to a host of public sector governance, public health, and rule of law challenges.

Technology has an immense untapped potential to strengthen inclusive practices for governance including public health governance, and the rule of law. Technological innovation must provide equal access to services, help to eliminate discrimination, and assure more transparency and accountability. They must not be used to silence voices, deny human rights, or create justifications for maladministration, inaccessibility, and exclusions.

As we are approaching 2023 in a few days, let us hope for a more inclusive and diverse public sector governance rooted in human rights values and practices.

Dr. A.H. Monjurul Kabir, currently UN System Coordination Adviser and Global Team Leader for Gender Equality, Disability Inclusion/Intersectionality at UN Women HQ in New York, is a thought leader, political scientist and senior policy and legal analyst on global issues and regional trends. For policy and academic purpose, he can be contacted at monjurulkabir@yahoo.com. He can be followed in twitter at mkabir2011

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Stella Paul
Montreal, Dec 20 2022 – In a landmark agreement, all parties of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) adopted the draft Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) to protect at least 30% of the world’s lands and water by 2030.

Led by China and facilitated by the CBD, the parties of the convention adopted the draft very late on Sunday night, after 12 days of intense negotiations over 23 targets that, put together, make the framework for biodiversity protection until 2030.

The Old vs. New GBF

When COP15 negotiations began on December 7, the GBF had 22 targets. However, on December 19, the final day of the COP, there were 23 targets in the adopted document. There have not been any new additions, but Target 19 – focused on finance – has been divided into two targets: Target 19 and Target 20. Target 20, therefore, is now Target 21, Target 21 is Target 22, and Target 22 is now Target 23.

The adopted document looks leaner and shorter compared to the version presented before the parties on December 7. However, the new version – presented by China on Saturday and adopted later by all parties – has all the text considered crucial.

For example, on Target 3 – widely considered as the lifeline of the GBF and equivalent to the Climate Change COP’s goal of keeping global warming to 1.5 degrees – the old text was long and somewhat vague, with too many details but no indication of action.

In Target 19.1, focusing on resource mobilization, the draft framework proposed to increase financial resources progressively and annually from all sources by reaching at least $200 billion by 2030.

The adopted framework has a more straightforward but detailed language: “Raise international financial flows from developed to developing countries … to at least US$ 20 billion per year by 2025, and at least US$ 30 billion per year by 2030.”

In Target 22, the draft version read: “Ensure women and girls equitable access and benefits from conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, as well as their informed and effective participation at all levels of policy and decision making related to biodiversity.”

The adopted version of this target has a language that is richer and more action-oriented:  “Ensure gender equality in the implementation of the framework through a gender-responsive approach where all women and girls have equal opportunity and capacity to contribute to the three objectives of the Convention, including by recognizing their equal rights and access to land and natural resources and their full, equitable, meaningful and informed participation and leadership at all levels of action, engagement, policy, and decision-making related to biodiversity.”

The Big Decisions

In addition to the GBF, the parties at COP15 have approved a series of related agreements on the framework’s implementation, including planning, monitoring, reporting, and review; resource mobilization; helping nations to build their capacity to meet the obligations; and digital sequence information on genetic resources.

For example, digital sequence information (DSI) on genetic resources – a dominant topic at COP15 – has many commercial and non-commercial applications, including pharmaceutical product development, improved crop breeding, taxonomy, and monitoring invasive species.

Francis Ogwal and Basile Van Havre, co-chairs of the Global Biodiversity Framework, at a press meeting after the framework was adopted. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

COP15 delegates agreed to establish a multilateral fund for the equal sharing of benefits between providers and users of DSI within the GBF.

Another big decision was to create a specific fund for biodiversity within the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) – the nodal agency that receives, channelizes and distributes all funds for environmental protection in the world. Reacting to the decision, Carlos Manuel Rodriguez, GEF CEO and Chairperson, called GBF a significant breakthrough and supported the creation of the fund.”

“Resource mobilization has been a central theme here in Montreal over the last two weeks, both to reach an ambitious agreement, and to ensure it is implemented. I am therefore honored and extremely pleased that the Conference of the Parties has requested the GEF to establish a Global Biodiversity Fund as soon as possible, to complement existing support and scale up financing to ensure the timely implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework,” Rodriguez said in a press statement.

A Good Compromise

Jennifer Corpuz of Indigenous People’s Forum for Biodiversity (IPFB), an umbrella of over 10 thousand indigenous organizations across the world, had been lobbying intensely to ensure mainstreaming of indigenous peoples’ rights in the GBF, called the adopted document, a “good compromise” and “a good start.”

According to Corpuz, the GBF – now known as “The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework,” contains strong language on all targets that concern indigenous peoples and local communities. The language is very strong, especially in the areas of spatial planning (Target 1), area-based conservation (Target 3), customary sustainable use (Targets 5 and 9), traditional knowledge (Goal C, Targets 13 and 21), and participation and respect for the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities to lands, territories, and resources (Target 22).

“The Framework should be celebrated as a historic step towards transforming how we approach biodiversity conservation. The text provides a strong basis for countries to walk hand in hand with Indigenous peoples in addressing the biodiversity crisis and in ensuring that the negative legacy of conservation on Indigenous peoples will be corrected,” Corpuz told IPS.

Basile Van Havre – the co-chair of the framework, appeared to agree with Corpuz. Answering a question on the implications and meaning of various terms such as “equitable governance” in the GBF, Havre told IPS, “it would help local governments to create a mechanism for working together with different sections of the populations, especially the Indigenous peoples.”

On the adoption of a gender target (Target 23) and the adoption of the Gender Action Plan, the CBD Women’s Caucus expressed their gratitude to various parties for their support. A group of women also broke out in a jubilant dance – an expression of their joy and relief after years of persuasion to include Gender as a stand-alone target in the GBF.

The next steps and challenges ahead

According to experts, the success of the GBF will heavily lie on two factors: 1) Adopting and operationalizing GBF indicators relevant to each target and 2) Creating a mechanism quickly for those decisions that involve a multilateral system.

For example, under the new GBF, finances for biodiversity will come from rich and developed nations and private investors. But the pathways and mechanisms for these are yet to be decided, and the sooner these are done, the better it will be for all parties to begin implementing the framework.

A lot will also depend on how quickly the countries can revise their current National Biodiversity Action Plans to make ways for implanting new decisions under the GBF, according to Francis Ogwal, CBD co-chair of the GBF.

Others have also cautioned that if countries are not able to make necessary policy changes, there is a risk that the GBF could fail.

“The agreement represents a major milestone for the conservation of our natural world, and biodiversity has never been so high on the political and business agenda, but it can be undermined by slow implementation and failure to mobilize the promised resources. Governments have chosen the right side of history in Montreal, but history will judge all of us if we don’t deliver on the promise made today,” warned Marco Lambertini, Director General of WWF International.

The agreement also obligates countries to monitor and report on a large set of “headlines” and other indicators related to progress against the GBF’s goals and targets every five years or less. Headline indicators include the percent of land and seas effectively conserved, the number of companies disclosing their impacts and dependencies on biodiversity, and many others.

The CBD will combine national information submitted by late February 2026 and late June 2029 into global trends and progress reports.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Luis Brizuela
CANDELARIA, Cuba, Dec 20 2022 – Mayra Rojas is one of a small but growing number of people in Cuba benefiting from the production of biogas, a renewable energy source still little used in a country highly dependent on fossil fuels.

The biodigester in the back of her house in the rural community of Carambola, Candelaria municipality in the province of Artemisa, 80 kilometers west of Havana, brings Rojas the benefits of not using firewood and electricity for cooking, with the consequent reduction in electric bills and cooking time.

It was built in 2011 with the help of her husband Edegni Puche, who worked in the installation of the gas pipes and other aspects.

Rojas and Puche, who raise pigs and grow fruits and vegetables on their small family farm, were advised by specialists from the Cuban Society for the Promotion of Renewable Energy Sources and Respect for the Environment (Cubasolar) and the Movement of Biogas Users (MUB).

Rojas also received materials from the municipal government and the local pig company to build the small-scale Chinese-type fixed-dome biodigester of about six cubic meters in size.

She estimates that the total cost of the project ranged between 500 and 600 dollars at the exchange rate at the time.

Construction costs depend on the size, type and thickness of the material, as well as the characteristics of the site.

However, experts estimate that the average minimum cost for the construction of a small-scale biodigester – which more than covers the cooking needs of a household – currently stands at around 1,000 dollars in a country with an average monthly salary equivalent to 160 dollars at the official exchange rate.

Rojas says that “before, when we cleaned the pens, the manure, urine and waste from the pigs’ food piled up in the open air, in a corner of the yard. It stank and there were a lot of flies.”

The organic matter is now decomposed anaerobically by bacteria, but in a closed, non-polluting environment that provides methane gas as an energy resource, instead of releasing it into the atmosphere.

Thanks to the alternative energy source Rojas can also keep her nails painted and her hair clean for longer.

It also helped her husband and two young children become more involved in household chores, cleaning the yard and taking care of the animals on the family farm, “and created greater awareness of environmental care.”

In addition, biogas technology provides biol and biosol – liquid effluent and sludge, respectively – which are ideal for fertilizing and restoring soils, “as well as watering and keeping plants green,” says Rojas, who has a lush garden where she grows varieties of exotic orchids.

Her biodigester has also proven useful to the community, because when there are blackouts due to tropical cyclones that frequently affect the island, “neighbors have come to heat up water and cook their food,” she adds.

There are an estimated 5,000 biodigesters in Cuba, with the potential to expand the network to 20,000 units, at least the small-scale ones, according to conservative estimates by experts.

More than 90 percent of Cuba’s electricity comes from burning fossil fuels in aging thermoelectric plants and diesel and fuel oil engines, in a nation where a significant percentage of the 3.9 million homes use electric power as the main energy source for cooking and heating water for bathing.

By Emilio Godoy
MONTREAL, Dec 19 2022 – The pillar coral (Dendrogyra cylindrus), which takes its name from its shape, is found throughout the Caribbean Sea, but its population has declined by more than 80 percent since 1990. As a result, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has listed it as “critically endangered” due to the effects of the human-induced climate crisis.

Its fate now depends on the new Kunming-Montreal Global Framework on Biodiversity, which was agreed by the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP15) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) on Monday Dec. 19, at the end of the summit held since Dec. 7 at the Palais des Congrès in Montreal.

Now, the world’s countries must translate the results into national biodiversity strategies, to comply with the new accord. In this regard, David Ainsworth, spokesman for the CBD, in force since 1993 and based in Montreal, announced the creation of a global accelerator for the drafting of national plans, with the support of U.N. agencies.

COP15 of the Convention on Biological Diversity approved a new program to protect the world’s natural heritage for the next 10 years during the summit held in the Canadian city of Montreal. The picture shows a statue of a polar bear, whose species is threatened by melting ice and habitat loss, on a street in Montreal. CREDIT: Emilio Godoy/IPS

The menu of agreements

COP15, whose theme was “Ecological Civilization: Building a shared future for all life on earth”, approved four objectives on improving the status of biodiversity, reducing species extinction, fair and appropriate sharing of benefits from access to and use of genetic resources, and means of implementation of the agreement.

In addition, the plenary of the summit, which brought together some 15,000 people representing governments, non-governmental organizations, academia, international bodies and companies, agreed on 23 goals within the Global Framework, for the conservation and management of 30 percent of terrestrial areas and 30 percent of marine areas by 2030, in what is known in U.N. jargon as the 30×30.

This includes the complete or partial restoration of at least 30 percent of degraded terrestrial and marine ecosystems, as well as the reduction of the loss of areas of high biological importance to almost zero.

Likewise, the agreement reached by the 196 States Parties at COP15 includes the halving of food waste, the elimination or reform of at least 500 billion dollars a year in subsidies harmful to biodiversity, and at least 200 billion dollars in funding for biodiversity by 2030 from public and private sources.

It also endorsed increasing financial transfers from countries of the industrialized North to nations of the developing South by at least 20 billion dollars by 2025 and 30 billion dollars by 2030, and the voluntary publication by companies for monitoring, evaluation and disclosure of the impact of their activities on biodiversity.

The Global Environment Facility (GEF) will manage a new fund, whose operation will be defined by the countries over the next two years.

With regard to digital sequence information (DSI) on genetic resources, the Global Framework stipulates the establishment of a multilateral fund for benefit-sharing between providers and users of genetic resources and states that governments will define the final figure at COP16 in Turkey in 2024.

The Global Framework also contains gender and youth perspectives, two strong demands of the process that was initially scheduled to end in the city of Kunming, China, in 2020. But because that country was unable to host mass meetings due to its zero-tolerance policy towards COVID-19, a first virtual chapter was held there and another later in person, and the final one now took place in Montreal.

The states parties are required to report at least every five years on their national compliance with the Global Framework. The CBD will include national information submitted in February 2026 and June 2029 in its status and trend reports.

With some differences, civil society organizations and indigenous peoples gave a nod to the Global Framework, but issued warnings. Viviana Figueroa, representative of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity, and Simone Lovera, policy director of the Global Forest Coalition, applauded the agreement in conversations with IPS, while pointing out its risks.

“It’s a good step forward, because it recognizes the role of indigenous peoples, the use of biodiversity and the role of traditional knowledge,” said Figueroa, an Omaguaca indigenous lawyer from Argentina whose organization brings together indigenous groups from around the world to present their positions at international environmental meetings.

“It has been a long process, to which native peoples have contributed and have made proposals. The most important aspects that we proposed have been recognized and we hope to work together with the countries,” she added.

But, she remarked, “the most important thing will be the implementation.”

Goal C and targets one, three, five, nine, 13, 21 and 22 of the Global Framework relate to respect for the rights of native and local communities.

Lovera, whose organization brings together NGOs and indigenous groups, said the accord “recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, and of women. It also includes a recommendation to withdraw subsidies and reduce public and private investments in destructive activities, such as large-scale cattle ranching and oil palm monoculture.”

But indigenous and human rights organizations have questioned the 30×30 approach on the grounds that it undermines ancestral rights, blocks access to aboriginal territories, and requires consultation and unpressured, informed consent for protected areas prior to any decision on the future of those areas.

Discussions at the Convention on Biological Diversity summit intensified in the last few days of COP15 and ran late into the night, as in this session on health and biodiversity. But in the end, agreement was reached on a new Global Framework on Biodiversity, which will be binding on the 196 states parties. CREDIT: IISD/ENB

Major challenge

While the Global Framework has indicators and monitoring mechanisms and is legally binding, it has no actual teeth, and the precedent of the failed Aichi Targets casts a shadow over its future, especially with the world’s poor track record on international agreements.

The Aichi Biodiversity Targets, adopted in 2010 in that Japanese city during the CBD’s COP10 and which its 196 states parties failed to meet in 2020, included the creation of terrestrial and marine protected areas; the fight against pollution and invasive species; respect for indigenous knowledge; and the restoration of damaged ecosystems.

Several estimates put the amount needed to protect biological heritage at 700 billion dollars, which means there is still an enormous gap to be closed.

In more than 30 years, the GEF has disbursed over 22 billion dollars and helped transfer another 120 billion dollars to more than 5,000 regional and national projects. For the new period starting in 2023, the fund is counting on some five billion dollars in financing.

In addition, the Small Grants Program has supported around 27,000 community initiatives in developing countries.

“There is little public funding, more is needed,” Lovera said. “It’s sad that they say the private sector must fund biodiversity. In indigenous territories money is needed. They can do much more than governments with less money. Direct support can be more effective and they will meet the commitments.”

The activist also criticized the use of offsets, a mechanism whereby one area can be destroyed and another can be restored elsewhere – already used in countries such as Chile, Colombia and Mexico.

“This system allows us to destroy 70 percent of the planet while preserving the other 30 percent,” Lovera said. “It is madness. For indigenous peoples and local communities, it is very negative, because they lose their own biodiversity and the compensation is of no use to them, because it happens somewhere else.”

Figueroa said institutions that already manage funds could create direct mechanisms for indigenous peoples, as is the case with the Small Grants Program.

Of the 609 commitments that organizations, companies and individuals have already made voluntarily at COP15, 303 are aimed at the conservation and restoration of terrestrial ecosystems, 188 at alliances, and 159 at adaptation to climate change and reduction of polluting emissions.

The summit also coincided with the 10th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the 4th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits from their Utilization, both components of the CBD.

Images of the planet’s sixth mass extinction reflect the size of the challenge. More than a quarter of some 150,000 species on the IUCN Red List are threatened with extinction.

The “Living Planet Report 2022: Building a nature-positive society”, prepared by the WWF and the Institute of Zoology in London, shows that Latin America and the Caribbean has experienced the largest decline in monitored wildlife populations worldwide, with an average decline of 94 percent between 1970 and 2018.

With a decade to act, each passing day represents more biological wealth lost.

IPS produced this article with support from Internews‘ Earth Journalism Network.

By Baher Kamal
MADRID, Dec 19 2022 – When tens of thousands of Europeans had to flee the horrors of two born-in-Europe devastating armed conflicts that attracted other powers: the World Wars I and II, they migrated to the Americas and other Western countries in search of safe haven.

Upon their arrival at their destination, they were checked at the border and admitted to enter as useful workforce.

Seldom, if ever, anybody classified them as “illegal” migrants. Those human beings were fleeing the horrors of those wars.

Due to persistent lack of safe and regular migration pathways, millions continue to take perilous journeys each year. Since 2014 more than 50,000 migrants have lost their lives on migratory routes across the world

Now that millions of people are forced to flee the horrors not only of wars but also of additional waves of devastation, from a climate emergency they did not create to a train of world’s financial crisis originated in and by the world’s most industrialised -and richest- powers, these migrants are classified as “illegal.”

There have been different approaches to get around what the right to far-right political parties in Europe, the United States, Australia, among several others, call “invasion,” a “threat to our civilisation,” “our democracy,” and “our religion,” let alone that they represent a “high risk of terrorism.”

Here, there is an open message from the rich West to these poor migrants: ‘don’t you dare come here, unless….’

• Unless you bring money: in the aftermath of the 2008 world financial crisis, several industrialised countries followed the example of the by then United Kingdom’s government, i.e., migrants were admitted provided they have money enough to buy a property and open a sound bank account;
• Unless you are highly skilled: another criteria used to admit migrants depends on their professional, useful capacity;
• And unless you are “like us”: such is the case of the tens of thousands of human beings attempting to escape the horrors of another, absolutely condemnable war, the European proxy war unfolding in Ukraine. Hungarian President, Viktor Orban, referred to Ukrainians as “they look like us… they are like us.”

If migrants do not enjoy these conditions, they are immediately called “illegal,” and thus non-admitted. And those who had already arrived are being sweept away from the US and Europe.

Why such a race to expel migrants?

The trend to expel migrants has steadily increased in this year 2022, coincidently –or not– proxy war in Ukraine started in February, pushing millions of Ukrainian citizens to flee the horrors of this condemnable armed conflict.

All Western countries, in particular Europe, have opened their doors to those millions of migrants and refugees, to whom all sorts of humanitarian assistance are rightly provided.

In contrast, millions of other human beings are fleeing horror, looking for ways to survive and a job that allows their families and themselves to stay alive.

Migrants workers “dehumanised”

“Migrant workers are often dehumanised”, said the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Volker Türk, reminding that “they are human beings entitled to human rights and full protection of their human dignity”.

No one should have to surrender their human right to migrate in order to find a living wage, the UN human rights office, OHCHR said in a new report published on 16 December 2022, highlighting the importance of temporary migratory labour programmes.

The report, We wanted workers, but human beings came, published just two days ahead of the International Migrants Day, zeroes-in on schemes in operation across the Asia-Pacific region – the largest single migrant-producing region in the world.

The report points to just some of the abuse, discrimination, and inhuman treatment of migrants: as part of some seasonal schemes, migrants are expected to work on Saturdays and Sundays, leaving them no time to attend religious services.

Migrant domestic workers in other States have reported being told they would be fired, if they prayed or fasted while at work.

Some migrant construction workers report receiving sub-standard medical care in clinics provided by their employers.

Enforced disappearances

Migrants are particularly at risk during what are often arduous journeys just trying to reach their destination, warn UN-appointed independent human rights experts.

The experts stressed that States must coordinate in “preventing the yearly disappearances of thousands of migrants en route.”

Citing International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates, they said that over 35,000 migrants have died or disappeared since 2014.

“However, there are no exact figures on the proportion of enforced disappearances in cases involving State agents or people acting with the authorisation, support or acquiescence of countries.”

But information indicates that most disappearances occur “during detention or deportation proceedings or because of migrant smuggling or trafficking,” said the UN-appointed human rights experts.

Blanket refusals, detention, expulsions

They blamed States’ rigid border management and migration policies for many disappearances, citing policies that include “blanket refusals of entry; criminalization of migration; and mandatory, automatic, or extensive use of immigration detention; and arbitrary expulsions.”

“These factors encourage migrants to take more dangerous routes, to put their lives in the hands of smugglers and to expose themselves to a higher risk of human rights violations and enforced disappearance”, the experts spelt out.

Misleading promises

Every year, millions leave their countries under temporary labour migration programmes that promise economic benefits for destination countries and development dividends to countries of origin.

The report details how in many cases temporary work schemes impose a range of “unacceptable human rights restrictions.”

It highlights how migrant workers are “often forced to live in overcrowded and unsanitary housing, unable to afford nutritious food, denied adequate healthcare, and face prolonged and sometimes mandatory separation from their families.”

Moreover, policies that exclude them from government support in some countries put migrants at a disproportionate risk of COVID-19 infection, the report says.

“They should not be expected to give up their rights in return for being able to migrate for work, however crucial it is for them and their families, and for the economies of their countries of origin and destination”, Türk underscored.

Are all the “other migrants” illegal?

One day a year –18 December–, the world is expected to observe the International Migrants Day.

On it, the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, stated that today, over 80% of the world’s migrants cross borders in a safe and orderly fashion.

On this International Migrants Day, “we reflect on the lives of the over 280 million people who left their country in the universal pursuit of opportunity, dignity, freedom, and a better life,” he said.

“Today, over 80 per cent of the world’s migrants cross borders in a safe and orderly fashion.” This migration is a powerful driver of economic growth, dynamism, and understanding.

Over the past eight years, at least 51,000 migrants have died – and thousands more have disappeared. Behind each number is a human being – a sister, brother, daughter, son, mother, or father.

“Migrant rights are human rights” the United Nations chief reminded. “They must be respected without discrimination – and irrespective of whether their movement is forced, voluntary, or formally authorised.”

Is there a ‘migration crisis’?

Guterres also highlighted the urgent need to expand and diversify rights-based pathways for migration – to advance the Sustainable Development Goals and address labour market shortages.

“There is no migration crisis; there is a crisis of solidarity.” Today and every day, let us safeguard our common humanity and secure the rights and dignity of all.”

How many migrants?

In recent years, conflict, insecurity, and the effects of climate change, war and conflict have heavily contributed to the forced movement whether within countries or across borders.

In 2020 over 281 million people were international migrants while over 59 million people were internally displaced by the end of 2021.

The UN underlines that regardless of the reasons that compel people to move, migrants and displaced people represent some of the most vulnerable and marginalised groups in society…,

… and they are often exposed to abuse and exploitation, have limited access to essential services including healthcare, and are faced with xenophobic attacks and stigma fueled by misinformation.

On the other hand, many migrant workers are often in temporary, informal, or unprotected jobs, which exposes them to a greater risk of insecurity, layoffs, and poor working conditions.

“Due to persistent lack of safe and regular migration pathways, millions continue to take perilous journeys each year. Since 2014 more than 50,000 migrants have lost their lives on migratory routes across the world.”

Despite all the above, and of all World and International conventions, declarations, and commitments which have been adopted by all States, reality shows that some migrants are more equal –and human– than others.

By Roopa Dhatt, David Bryden and Gill Adynski
WASHINGTON DC/ CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA/ GENEVA, Dec 19 2022 – Health services don’t deliver themselves. It is the nurse who triages in the emergency department, the midwife who delivers babies and cares for mothers, the community health worker who gives babies vaccines, the care assistant who bathes someone at home, the surgeon who performs the operation, the anesthetist who blocks the pain, the pharmacist who matches the script to the medication, and the physiotherapist who restores movement.

With Universal Health Coverage Day (December 12) just behind us, it is critical to recognize the contribution of health workers, most of whom are women, and call for political leaders to urgently recognize and address the escalating resignations, shortfalls, and staff movements putting health security at all levels, from local to global at risk.

Listening to organizations who represent frontline health workers, community health workers, nurses, family doctors, and health professionals, we hear that after nearly three years of a pandemic there is worker burnout, staff shortages, migration of health workers, increasing reports of danger and violence at work, and rising mental health concerns.

Taken together, there are four alarming trends currently affecting health workers’ ability to deliver health services for all and hindering our advancement towards UHC.

Global shortage of health workers

WHO figures released in April this year estimated a projected global shortage of 10 million health workers in 2030 based on current trends (mostly depicting a pre-COVID-19 situation). Since then, in the US alone, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics now estimates that more than 200,000 registered nurse positions are projected to be vacant annually over the next decade and WHO points out the largest shortages will be in Africa and Southeast Asia.

Globally, burnout levels among doctors and nurses have been estimated at 66 percent, a figure that doesn’t bode well for future health worker retention or indeed the ability to attract new recruits. Lack of available health workers, particularly in the global south where disease burden is higher, was the biggest obstacle to maintaining health services and delivering vaccines during COVID-19, according to WHO.

Protection of health workers

The pandemic stretched already understaffed and under-resourced health systems, increasing pressure and danger. Too often women were issued medical personal protective equipment (PPE) designed for male bodies that left them at risk. Health workers were sent door-to-door to enforce lockdowns or do contact tracing or give vaccines with no added protection, facing angry, confused, or frightened people.

They worked extra shifts under horrendous conditions, many with little or no extra pay. It is no wonder that the International Council of Nurses described the COVID-19 effect as a “mass traumatization of the world’s nurses.” The average prevalence of PTSD among global health workers is estimated to be around 17 percent, but this figure is much higher for women frontline workers, at 31 percent.

Advocates for health equity have a responsibility too, to bring the same passion that we see, for instance, in the global struggle for access to COVID vaccines, to the cause of equity and fairness for health workers who deliver these vaccines.

The problem of pay

A June 2022 Women in Global Health report estimated that upwards of six million women health workers worldwide were either underpaid or not paid at all despite working in core health system roles. Just 14 percent of community health workers on the African continent are salaried. WHO figures reveal that women earn 24 percent less than men doing the same job.

Women are disadvantaged in promotions too: despite 70 percent of health workers and 90 percent of frontline health workers being women, men hold around three quarters of the leadership positions. Historically female professions, like nursing and midwifery, have workers of all genders but they face difficulties advancing into leadership positions due to historical biases against them as caring and nurturing professions, where they are not seen as leaders.

The “Great Resignation” in health

Unsurprisingly, there is a Great Resignation in health–worldwide we see a flood of women health professionals who are planning to or have already left their jobs. In the summer of 2021, in the UK alone, more than 27,000 staff voluntarily resigned from the NHS amid burnout caused by a combination of pandemic pressures and staff shortages. In Ghana, most health workers experienced high levels of stress (68 percent) and burnout (67 percent) citing lack of preparedness as a key factor.

A billboard on a Nairobi freeway advertises for nurses to move to Germany. On Facebook pages, we find hundreds of advertisements for health workers to move to the UK. The incentive for international moves is fast-track visas and better pay. And why wouldn’t health workers give serious consideration to moving somewhere with better pay or more training or the chance to earn enough to send money back to their families?

There are serious implications as nurses from low-income countries leave their health systems to prop up others in wealthier countries that have failed to train health workers of their own. It is estimated that this Great Migration of health workers costs LMICs an estimated $15.85 billion annually in excess mortality.

While any individual has the right to migrate freely, recruiting companies actively recruit nurses while violating the Global Code of Practice on International Recruitment of Health Personnel, further exacerbating health worker shortages in areas that need health workers most.

Africa has only four percent of all health workers in the world, but more than 50 percent of the 10 million health workforce shortage is in Africa. With the Great Resignation and the Great Migration, these are serious concerns and were pointed out by Heads of State at the U.S.-Africa Leader’s Summit last week.

Universal health coverage should not just be about individuals and communities getting better and more affordable health services, it should also be about recognising health workers, their roles, and their needs. Health workers need safe working environments free of violence and harassment that give them all the resources they need to do their jobs well.

Appreciation isn’t just about applause. It’s about governments, which are responsible for the health of their citizens, ensuring systems are properly resourced–from hospitals to home aid. From guaranteeing equity in pay to properly paid work. From provision of proper PPE to safety at work in all conditions. And making sure that career choices and promotions are open to all, regardless of gender.

If global leaders are serious, then it’s time they do more, as they have promised, and accelerate their efforts to achieve universal health coverage and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Working for Health 2022-2030 Action Plan sets out how countries can support each other to build and strengthen their health and care workforce.

Our overburdened health workers have signaled that they have had enough. They have continued to protect us despite the shortages, lack of protection and problems related to pay, but they are burnt out. It is time we moved from applause to action and begin finally, to address the known problems plaguing global health systems.

Dr. Roopa Dhatt is Executive Director and Co-Founder of Women in Global Health (Washington, DC); David Bryden is Director of Frontline Health Workers Coalition and Senior Policy and Advocacy Advisor at IntraHealth International (Chapel Hill, NC.); Dr. Gill Adynski is Nursing and Health Policy Analyst at the International Council of Nurses (Geneva, Switzerland).

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);