By Esther Ngumbi
URBANA, Illinois, US, Apr 10 2024 – Recently, the United Nations in collaboration with the World Meteorological Organization released a report that highlighted the impacts of climate change including on agriculture.

Additionally, the report highlighted the economic losses and other impacts extreme weather events such as floods, droughts, heatwaves, and tropical cyclones have on agriculture.

Indeed, globally, and in the United States, record-breaking, extreme weather disaster events, such as flooding, storms, and droughts, have become extremely costly and excessively too common.

In dealing with record-breaking extreme weather events that directly and indirectly impact the agricultural sector, we must choose to launch multipronged solutions that leverage data, incorporate newly available climate solutions and innovations, and create incentives to amplify the adoptions of these solutions

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 377 events have resulted in losses of over $2.6 trillion have been documented. In 2023, the United Nations released a report showing that extreme weather disasters have resulted in economic losses worth $4 trillion, including in the agricultural sector.

Undoubtedly, this should worry all since the agricultural sector is vital for meeting our food and nutrition security needs. In the United States, for example, agriculture, food, and related industries contribute approximately $1.4 trillion to the gross domestic product.

In Asia, Africa, and many other continents, the agricultural sector is equally important, and further serves as a source of employment, and thus a poverty-reducing sector. According to UN FAO, agriculture accounts for over 35 percent of Africa’s GDP.

Emerging, therefore is the need for multipronged efforts to help to mitigate the impacts these climate change associated disasters have on agriculture.

First. Inform agricultural sector stakeholders including farmers about newly launched technologies and most recent science-backed climate solutions.

Researchers, entrepreneurs, and innovators continue to bring to life novel technologies, climate solutions, and innovations that can be deployed to help to mitigate climate change impacts.

From artificial intelligence powered prediction models that can reliably forecast when disasters are going to happen, prompting stakeholders to act, to climate resilient crops, to regenerative agricultural practices such as cover cropping, mulching, and digging trenches that can help mitigate the impacts of drought and flooding to indoor agriculture that cushions agricultural crops from weather, pests and water and space limitations.

To make sure that this information is available, governments or innovators could keep a tab or have an inventory of all recent climate solutions. This can be a one stop database that carries the most recent info.  It could be in the form of a climate solutions dashboard.

Complementing information is the need to create incentives to accelerate the adoption of these newer climate solutions, technologies, and strategies. Monetary incentives, for example, could go a long way in facilitating the rapid adoption of research backed climate solutions for agriculture. For example, in Illinois, farmers who are practicing regenerative practices such as cover cropping are eligible for a three-year contract payment of $50 per acre.

Moreover, there is a need to actively engage the next generation of farmers. Programs such as the recently launched US Department of Agriculture climate corps, a program that will mobilize over 100 young people to help advance sustainable agriculture, is a move in the right direction.

Second. Continue to invest in research, entrepreneurs, agencies, and programs dedicated to climate research. 

Research continues to be central in helping to generate new solutions. As such, there is need to keep funding researchers that are actively engaged in research aimed at generating newer solutions or understanding the direct and indirect impacts of climate change associated disasters.

As an example, in 2023, USDA invested over $46M in the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program that funds research that has over the years resulted in the development of climate-smart solutions. In the same year, The Rockefeller Foundation committed $1billion to advance climate solutions.

Third. Take good data before, during, and after climate disasters.

Good data can be leveraged to help address climate change impacts to agriculture including being used in machine learning, to help to create predictive models that are continuing to revolutionize our ability to predict disaster events and act. Moreover, data can be used to introduce real-time solutions while helping to accurately capture solutions that are working.

Certainly, data driven solutions will continue to be important now and in the future and should continue to be leveraged.

At the core of preventing direct impacts of weather events on the agricultural sector should be a respect for nature and biodiversity.

Indeed, we live in a biodiverse world, that has other creatures in our ecosystem. For example, the soil matrix is home to earthworms and microbes that underpin agricultural productivity. As such, strategies, solutions, and interventions rolled out should also protect these invisible friends.

In dealing with record-breaking extreme weather events that directly and indirectly impact the agricultural sector, we must choose to launch multipronged solutions that leverage data, incorporate newly available climate solutions and innovations, and create incentives to amplify the adoptions of these solutions. A functioning agricultural sector will continue to be important as we strive to meet our food and nutrition security needs.

Esther Ngumbi, PhD is Assistant Professor, Department of Entomology, African American Studies Department, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 10 2024 – The award-winning Hollywood movie Oppenheimer portrays the life of J. Robert Oppenheimer, who helped create the atomic bomb, which claimed the lives of an estimated 140,000 to 226,000 people and devastated the two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

The tragedy was best described as a humanitarian disaster of Biblical proportions. But the film focuses on the creation of the bombs, not the devastation it caused.

In a Time magazine piece last February, Jeffrey Kluger recounts a meeting at the White House between US President Harry S. Truman and Oppenheimer, aptly describing it as “the man who built the bombs and the man who dropped the bombs.”

Suffering from an unforgivable guilt, Oppenheimer reportedly told Truman, “Mr. President, I feel I have blood on my hands.”

But history recalls just what happened next differently, says Time.

Truman apparently said, “Never mind, it’ll come out in the wash.”

Or another story, where an unrepentant Truman hands a handkerchief to Oppenheimer and says, “Well here, would you like to wipe your hand?”

In the film, Truman merely brandishes the handkerchief.

A former Hiroshima mayor, Takashi Hiraoka, who spoke at a preview event for the film, was more critical of what was omitted from the movie.

He was quoted as saying: “From Hiroshima’s standpoint, the horror of nuclear weapons was not sufficiently depicted. The film was made in a way to validate the conclusion that the atomic bomb was used to save the lives of Americans.”

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) said the release of the Oppenheimer film, and the wave of (media) attention surrounding it, creates an opportunity to spark public attention on the risks of nuclear weapons and invite new audiences to get involved in the movement to abolish nuclear weapons.

“We can educate about the risks, and share a much-needed message of hope and resistance: Oppenheimer is about how nuclear weapons began, the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) is how we end them.”

Speaking of the historical perspective, Dr Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), told IPS that the Manhattan Project, which was spearheaded by Oppenheimer to develop a nuclear weapon, started while the Second World War was raging and Germany had been on the march, conquering one country after another in Europe.

However, by the time the nuclear weapon was developed, Germany had surrendered, but Japan continued to fight. Based on documented historical accounts, Japanese forces were fighting in every trench, in every front, to the last soldier, and the word’surrender’ was not in their vocabulary, he said.

General Marshall, who was Chief of Staff of the US Army, provided counsel to President Truman at the time that if the war were to continue for another one to two years, hundreds of thousands of American soldiers and perhaps more than a million Japanese would be killed.

When Truman asked what he would suggest, General Marshall and others indicated that bombing one or even two sites in Japan with a nuclear weapon could bring the war to a swift conclusion and save the lives of millions from both sides.

Truman was finally persuaded that this may be the only solution, specifically given that the Japanese were determined to fight until the bitter end, said Ben-Meir, who taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies for over 20 years.

“Once the bombs were dropped and Oppenheimer realized the extent of the damage and death that occurred in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he felt personally responsible for the catastrophic impact of the bomb, stating to President Truman that he felt that he had blood on his hands because of what happened.”

Truman then told Oppenheimer that although he was behind the development of the nuclear weapon, the decision to use it was his own, and Oppenheimer bore no responsibility whatsoever.

President Truman allegedly handed Oppenheimer his handkerchief to presumably wipe his hands off the bloodstains. Nevertheless, Oppenheimer left the president’s office completely distraught, said Ben-Meir.

“The Japanese do not believe that Truman was concerned about the potential loss of Japanese lives had the war continued, but was mainly concerned about American lives. This sadly remains a point of contention but was mostly overcome due to the strong alliance that was subsequently developed between the US and Japan.”

Of course, what compounded Oppenheimer’s profound despair over what happened was that he was subsequently accused of being a member of the Communist Party and had his security clearance revoked, ending his work with the US government (he was posthumously exonerated), declared Ben-Meir.

Broadly, though, according to National Public Radio (NPR), many Japanese viewers expressed discomfort with Oppenheimer’s storytelling and felt the portrayal was incomplete.

“The film was only about the side that dropped the A-bomb,” Tsuyuko Iwanai, a Nagasaki resident, told NPR. “I wish they had included the side it was dropped on.”

Upon witnessing the first successful nuclear test, Oppenheimer reportedly quoted from the Hindu scripture Bhagavad Gita: “Now I am Death: the destroyer of the worlds,” according to UNFOLD ZERO, a platform for UN focused initiatives and actions for the achievement of a nuclear weapons-free world.

“Indeed, Oppenheimer was so impacted by the potential of the nuclear bomb to destroy the world that, following the end of the Second World War, he became deeply involved in international nuclear weapons control, peace and the promotion of world governance”.

“The movie should remind us of how important and relevant these ideas are today—as wars are raging, tensions between nuclear armed States are increasing and the threat of nuclear war is as high as it has ever been,” said UNFOLD ZERO.

“The thinking, passion and commitment of Oppenheimer regarding these issues is barely touched upon in the movie, despite it being so important today for re-awakening our collective understanding of the nature of nuclear deterrence, the risks of nationalism and the importance to strengthen the rule of law, prevent nuclear war and achieve peace through global governance.”

Addressing the UN Security Council on March 18, Secretary-General António Guterres referred to the movie, which won seven Oscars at the Hollywood Academy Awards ceremony on March 10, including the four major awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor.

“The Doomsday Clock is ticking loudly enough for all to hear. From academics and civil society groups, calling for an end to the nuclear madness,” he said.

“To Pope Francis, who calls the possession of nuclear arms ‘immoral’. To young people across the globe worried about their future, demanding change. To the Hibakusha, the brave survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki—among our greatest living examples of speaking truth to power—delivering their timeless message of peace.”

Humanity cannot survive a sequel to Oppenheimer, Guterres warned.

This article is brought to you by IPS Noram, in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with UN ECOSOC.

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 Naureen Hossain
OSLO, Apr 10 2024 – Gearing up for the 30^th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), the world’s parliamentarians and ministers are meeting in Oslo to determine the course of action needed to promote sexual and reproductive human rights (SRHR).

Over 170 parliamentarians from more than 110 countries, UN experts, civil society leaders, and other stakeholders are expected at the 8th International Parliamentarians’ Conference on the Implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action. 

The IPCI conference, which starts today (April 10, 2024), will facilitate dialogue and cooperation to improve parliamentarians’ capacity to improve sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) across the world. It is grounded in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, leading up to the 2024 Summit of the Future this September. This year’s conference is organized by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights (EPF). The conference is hosted by APPG Norway and its secretariat, Sex og Politikk, Norway’s parliamentary group dedicated to sexual and reproductive health rights.

In recent years, many countries have seen a regression of SRHR across the spectrum, from banning family planning options such as legal abortions to suppressing or attacking women’s presence in national policy and the continued practice of female genital mutilation.

Lubna Jaffery, Minister of Culture and Equality of Norway, addresses the 8th International Parliamentarians’ Conference on the Implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action (ICPD). Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

Minister of International Development of Norway, Anne Beathe Tvinnereim, addresses the 8th International Parliamentarians’ Conference on the Implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action (ICPD). Credit: Naureen Hossain/IPS

Governments have passed legislation that limits reproductive rights and access to basic services, which impact the general population and, more often, vulnerable or underrepresented communities such as refugees, internally displaced people, and LGBTQ+ groups. It speaks to a spread of fundamentalist viewpoints influencing public policy and opinion and the strengthening of anti-human rights parties, according to EPF President Petra Bayr.

If these developments—or regressions—in global SRHR are to be challenged, then they could be countered through evidence of the impact of comprehensive SRHR and the belief that self-determining one’s body, reproductive, and sexual life is a realization of fundamental human rights, according to Bayr.

She told IPS by email, enforcing this will take hard work that, among others, “lies in the hands of many committed MPs who believe in the universality of human rights.”

“Fundamental human rights issues must never be dependent on ideology and religion.”

During Wednesday’s opening ceremony, UNFPA Executive Director Dr. Natalie Kanem addressed the conference by remarking on the role that parliamentarians play and the influence they can wield when working across the political spectrum to advance a shared vision of rights for women.

“Parliamentarians around the world have been instrumental in the achievements of the past three decades, speaking up for those whose voices often go unheard and passing legislation to protect women and girls at home and abroad,” she said.

Despite the setbacks in achieving universal access to SRHR, the strides should not be forgotten. The ICPD Programme of Action, first adopted in 1994 and then extended in 2010, remains a critical guideline for its goals in population and a keystone for sustainable development.

As Bayr notes, the ICPD made reference to people’s needs in humanitarian settings and the diversity of family dynamics, concepts that remain relevant in the present day. “The focus on the impact of population policies on the environment, sustainability, and fair distribution of economic values is even more pressing than it was 30 years ago,” she said.

“There is still a lot to do and we have to consider very carefully how we invest our potential. We will need energy to defend what we already have, but we still need enough power to make relevant steps towards all these goals we haven’t met yet.”

This year, IPCI will focus on three common themes from the ICPD agenda. These themes will be observed through their impact on and ability to achieve universal access to SRHR:

• Converging megatrends, such as demographic diversity and the climate crisis.
• Digital technology, more specifically the forms of violence employed online or through technology, which UNFPA refers to as technology-facilitated gender-based violence.
• The funding landscape of SRHR in a time where governments’ priorities are threatened by security concerns

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’);