By Alison Kentish
DOMINICA, May 22 2025 – The United Nations Development Programme’s 2025 Human Development Report (HDR) says crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic have contributed to ‘the flatlining of decades of progress in the Human Development Index,’ with Latin America and the Caribbean facing unique challenges and opportunities.

Despite these challenges, the document, titled “A matter of choice: People and Possibilities in the age of AI,” states that artificial intelligence (AI) is a powerful tool to improve lives and close persistent gaps.

Lead author Pedro Conceiçāo described a ‘triple development squeeze’ affecting many countries.

“Difficulties accessing external financing, shrinking job creation opportunities and increased trade volatility,” he explained. “The opportunities of many countries to export to international markets, which is an important driver of development or has historically been, those opportunities are also narrow.”

Amid these pressures, AI emerges as a double-edged sword. According to a recent UNDP survey, “Up to two-thirds of people in low, medium, and high HDI countries expect artificial intelligence to become an important part of their lives within the next year—in health, education, and standard of living,” Conceição noted. He said the report and survey emphasize that “what matters less is the technology and more the choices that are made to ensure that AI advances human development.”

The report’s recommendations are clear:

• Build a complementary economy where AI empowers, not replaces, people.
• Drive innovation with intent, using AI to boost creativity and scientific progress.
• Invest in digital capabilities so everyone can thrive in an AI-driven world.

The Latin America and the Caribbean Situation

UNDP Regional Director for Latin America and the Caribbean Michelle Muschett outlined the region’s progress and pressure points.

“Latin America and the Caribbean consolidated its second year of recovery after the pandemic, moving from 0.783 in 2022 to 0.8 in the Human Development Index regionally in 2023,” she said. However, she cautioned, “Progress continues, but it remains slower than before the pandemic.”

The region stands out for its high human development scores—19 countries are classified as high, and 10 as very high. But Muschett warns, “Both development and democracy are under probably unprecedented pressure in the history of development of our region.”

She said this should serve as both a warning and a call to action.

“It’s a clear call to thinking and rethinking those institutions, public policies, processes, and the tools we have so that that pressure can become a positive force that moves us along the line of progress and shared prosperity.”

Muschett is candid about the region’s digital disparities. “We see already today the deep difference in terms of coverage when we compare rural areas with urban areas in Latin America and the Caribbean,” she says. “The highest quintile in terms of income has more than twice the access to AI than the lowest quintile. So we have a warning signal that is very important.”

To address digital gaps, the report calls for closing connectivity gaps, especially in rural and low-income areas; investment in digital literacy and lifelong learning; and ensuring that data is reliable and free from bias through strong, inclusive governance frameworks.

“This has to be a central priority of public policies,” Muschett urges. “Strategic alliances with other sectors of society—academia, private sector—become absolutely essential.”

A Resilient Future

Muschett says the UNDP is preparing to launch an “atlas of AI focused on human development,” offering policymakers tools to make informed, inclusive choices.

The message is clear: While the region faces significant challenges, deliberate action can shift the view of AI as a pressure point into a powerful driver of progress.

“The difference between one and the other is precisely in the deliberate decision we make as a region… whether it’s a huge threat or an unprecedented opportunity,” she said.

The message is clear: by fostering innovation, empowering individuals, and putting inclusion at the forefront, Latin America and the Caribbean have the potential to transform current obstacles into future possibilities—and become a worldwide model for leveraging technology to benefit all.

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 Benson Kunchezera
LILONGWE, May 22 2025 – Women in fishing communities in Malawi’s lakeshore districts of Nkhotakota and Mangochi are frequently targets of sexual exploitation for fish, a practice commonly known as ‘sex for fish.’ A recent report by the Malawi Human Rights Commission (MHRC) has unearthed disturbing accounts of women being coerced into transactional sex to access fish from male boat owners, exposing a widespread violation of their rights.

The MHRC inquiry, which focused on fishing hubs along Lake Malawi, reveals how deeply entrenched the practice is, with minimal intervention from authorities to address the systemic abuse. According to the report, the lack of targeted policies and enforcement mechanisms within fishing communities has created an environment where women are vulnerable to sexual exploitation and left without recourse when faced with unwanted pregnancies or abuse.

“The women are often left to shoulder the burden alone, while the men deny responsibility for the pregnancies or disappear altogether,” reads part of the report. “There is a need for coordinated efforts to end these abuses and protect women who are vital players in the fish trade.”

One of the women who shared her story is 42-year-old Joyce Issa, a seasoned fish trader from Mangochi. Having been in the business for over 15 years, Joyce recounts how she was coerced into sex several times just to be able to purchase fish.

“There were times when the only way to buy fish was by giving in to their demands,” Joyce told IPS. “It was humiliating, but the pressure to feed my family and keep my business running left me with no choice.”

Issa adds that scarcity of fish has worsened the situation, as competition among traders grows. “Business is much slower than in previous years. Fish is difficult to come by, and when it is available, the prices are high—and for women, the price often includes sex,” she explained.

However, she acknowledged that the situation has seen some slight improvements recently, particularly due to the efforts of the HeForShe campaign—a global solidarity movement for gender equality that has begun to gain ground in the region.

“The HeForShe initiative has helped in reducing some of these abuses. Now we can report cases, and there are people who will follow up,” Joyce added.

Authorities Respond

Laston Chikopa, the Assistant Gender Officer for Mangochi district, confirms that “sex for fish” is a well-known and persistent issue in the area. He says their office is working closely with local fishermen and community members to encourage reporting and protect women involved in the trade.

“In Mangochi alone, we receive over 15 cases annually of women being denied access to fish because they refused to engage in sexual acts with the fishermen,” Chikopa said. “These figures are likely just the tip of the iceberg since many cases go unreported due to fear of retaliation or stigma.

To combat the problem, the district gender office has introduced confidential reporting mechanisms, including two toll-free numbers—116 and 5600—that victims can use to report abuse or discrimination.

“These lines allow victims to share their experiences discreetly, and we work with law enforcement and other stakeholders to ensure justice is served,” Chikopa emphasized.

MHRC to Monitor Action

The MHRC report highlights the problem and proposes concrete steps forward. The Commission plans to engage relevant authorities, including the Malawi Police Service, to investigate the findings and take immediate action against the perpetrators.

“After three months, we will review how well the relevant authorities have responded to the inquiry,” the Commission’s report states. “If there’s no visible progress, we will escalate the matter to ensure accountability.”

The MHRC also recommends that the government and its partners develop gender-sensitive policies that specifically address the vulnerabilities of women in fishing communities. These include the creation of women-led fishing cooperatives, alternative economic opportunities, and public awareness campaigns that denounce gender-based exploitation.

A Broader Issue

The “sex for fish” phenomenon is not unique to Malawi. Similar cases have been reported across various parts of sub-Saharan Africa, especially around major lakes where fishing is a dominant economic activity. However, Malawi’s case underscores the urgency of addressing the structural imbalances that leave women at the mercy of more powerful men in resource-dependent communities.

“This is about power and survival,” said a local gender rights activist in Mangochi, who asked to remain anonymous. “When women lack bargaining power and the state fails to protect them, these abuses become normalized.”

The activist called on the government to ensure that policies are not just written but also enforced. “We need more women in leadership roles within these communities, and we need the law to work for them.”

Hope Amid Hardship

Despite the grim realities, stories like Issa’s offer a glimmer of hope. Women are increasingly speaking out, and initiatives like HeForShe are beginning to create safe spaces for dialogue and action. With increased public attention and stronger institutional backing, there is growing momentum to dismantle the system that has for too long exploited the vulnerability of women in Malawi’s fishing communities.

But as the MHRC emphasized, real change will require sustained commitment—from local leaders, law enforcement, policymakers, and the communities themselves. Only then can the women of the lakeshore truly reclaim their dignity and safety.

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 Andrew Firmin
LONDON, May 22 2025 – The new pope, the latest in a line dating back almost 2,000 years, was quickly subjected to a very modern phenomenon: no sooner had Pope Leo XIV delivered his first address than people started trawling his social media history for clues about his views. In the context of an ongoing culture war, the fact that far-right grievance entrepreneurs were quick to decry the new pope as ‘woke’ seemed reason enough for progressives to welcome him. But for civil society and the global human rights community, it’s how Leo acts that matters.

The numbers alone make Leo’s appointment an event of global significance: Catholics make up over 17 per cent of the planet’s population, and they live predominantly in the global south. Catholicism remains overwhelmingly the dominant religion in Latin America, while the faith continues to grow, particularly in Africa.

This gives the pope great moral influence, which he can use for good – such as by urging climate action and mobilising compassion for migrants and refugees – or for ill, including by maintaining restrictions on women’s and LGBTQI+ rights. The pope is unquestionably a global leader. In an era dominated by right-wing populist and nationalist politicians who are attacking human rights, the pope’s voice can offer a vital counterweight.

Pope Francis’s progressive legacy

Pope Francis broke significant new ground. The first Latin American pope, the Argentinian lived modestly. He didn’t shy away from controversy, speaking out to defend the rights of migrants and refugees. He criticised right-wing populism, neoliberal economics and Israel’s assault on Gaza. He urged action on climate change and made moves to enable women to play a greater role in the church and open up the possibility of blessing for people in same-sex relationships.

ON his watch, the papal office became that of an international diplomat, helping negotiate a Cuba-US rapprochement, later reversed. Critics however pointed to his apparent reluctance to call out Vladimir Putin’s aggression as he sought to help negotiate peace between Russia and Ukraine. He also maintained the church’s opposition to ‘gender ideology’, a term routinely used to undermine demands for women’s and LGBTQI+ rights, particularly trans rights.

Though Francis took many progressive positions, that offered no guarantee his successor would follow suit. Historically a pope seen as liberal is often followed by a more conservative one. Francis however moved to make this less likely, appointing 163 cardinals from 76 countries. Many were from global south countries, including several that had never received such recognition, such as El Salvador, Mali and Timor-Leste. He appointed the first Indigenous Latin American cardinal, and the first from India’s excluded Dalit community.

Francis chose 79 per cent of cardinals aged under 80, eligible to vote on the new pope – including Leo, elevated in 2023. For the first time, the conclave had a non-European majority, with Europeans comprising only 52 of the 133 electors.

Francis’s re-engineering may have foreclosed the prospect of a particularly regressive choice. The result was another piece of history, with Leo the first pope from the USA, while his dual citizenship of Peru makes him the first Peruvian one as well. Known as an ally of Francis but a less outspoken figure, he may have emerged as a compromise choice.

Early days: promise and controversy

Leo’s nationality had been assumed to count against him: with the USA being the dominant global power, received wisdom held that the pope should come from elsewhere. In this Trump-dominated era, it’s hard to avoid the feeling that some who picked a US pope were trying to send a message – although time will tell whether it’s one of flattery or defiance.

US right-wingers, many of whom embrace conservative Catholicism – as Vice President JD Vance exemplifies – made clear they knew what the message was, reacting with anger. Another conservative Catholic, Trump’s former strategist Steve Bannon – who routinely vilified Pope Francis – had aggressively lobbied for a conservative appointment, such as Hungarian hardliner Péter Erdő. Trump supporters allegedly promised huge donations if the conclave selected a pope to their liking, then quickly mobilised outrage about the selection of their fellow citizen, vilifying him as a ‘Marxist pope’.

Among the pre-papacy actions they deemed controversial was Leo’s sharing on Twitter/X of a link to a comment piece that disagreed with Vance, who’d argued that Christians should prioritise their love for their immediate community over those who come from elsewhere. Leo had also shared a post criticising Trump and El Salvador’s hardline leader Nayib Bukele over the illegal deportation of migrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

In other past posts, he’d supported climate action and appeared to back gun control, defended undocumented migrants and shown solidarity with George Floyd, the Black man whose murder by a police officer in 2020 triggered the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement. Leo’s choice of name also appears to indicate a reformist intent. But on the other side of the ledger, a history of anti-LGBTQI+ comments quickly came to light. Leo is also accused of mishandling past sexual abuse allegations against priests under his supervision.

A moral voice in turbulent times

For civil society, what Leo does next matters more than his social media history. There are some encouraging early signs. Leo has signalled a more sympathetic approach to Ukraine and called for the release of jailed journalists.

The likelihood, if Leo’s career so far is anything to go by, is that he’ll be less outspoken than his predecessor, and more inclined towards negotiation and compromise. But the papacy offers a very different platform to that of a cardinal. Leo should take account of the fact that he’s assumed office at a time of enormous conflict, polarisation and turmoil, where many of the established assumptions about how politics and governance should be conducted are being torn up, and when global institutions and the idea of a rules-based order are coming under unprecedented strain. There’s a moral leadership vacuum in the world right now. He should help fill it.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact [email protected]

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 Megan Matthews
CHAMPAIGN, Illinois, May 22 2025 – When pioneering agronomist and father of the “Green Revolution” Norman Borlaug set out to breed a disease-resistant, high-yielding variety of wheat, he spent years laboriously planting and pollinating different specimens by hand. He manually catalogued every outcome until he landed on the variety that would transform farming and avert famine. The result was even greater than expected: it is estimated that he saved more than a billion people worldwide from starvation.

Megan Matthews

Today, computational tools like modeling can be used to inform and anticipate the expected outcomes of early-stage experiments, helping to prioritize which strategies to pursue and cutting down the time needed to achieve the same goal.

With the world facing the same existential need as during Borlaug’s time to transform agriculture to sustainably feed the global population, more efficient technologies and processes are critical. Computational biology and modeling offer tools that can guide scientists towards the most promising areas of emerging research and accelerate the breakthrough discoveries needed to make farming more equitable and sustainable. Combining data analysis, computer science and modelling, computational biology brings together these techniques to better understand biological systems.

An exciting possibility on the horizon for crop science is the early progress towards engineering cereal crops to source their own nutrients and reduce the need for fertilizer. Legumes like beans, peas and lentils already have this ability, but improving nutrient uptake and growth in non-legume plants would have a transformative impact on yields and sustainability.

Researchers, including those involved in the Engineering Nutrient Symbioses in Agriculture (ENSA) project working with funders like Gates Agricultural Innovations, are investigating plant interactions with a soil bacteria called rhizobia, as well as arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), which provide the plant with nitrogen and phosphorus through biological processes.

Harnessing this ability would reduce the need for inorganic fertilizers to provide these key nutrients, ensuring multiple benefits. For one, fertilizer is often a big expense for farmers, especially given price volatility over the last several years. This can be a prohibitive cost for farmers in low-income countries or communities.

Furthermore, the overuse of fertilizers can cause negative environmental impacts. Nitrogen fertilizer production and use accounts for around five percent of greenhouse gas emissions and the nitrous oxide produced is 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Fertilizer run-off also causes dangerous algal blooms that develop in waterways, killing off aquatic biodiversity.

While the benefits of giving more plants the ability to source nutrients biologically are evident, it has not been clear until now what the exact effect of these nutrient symbioses would be on plants. More specifically, scientists know the interactions between soil bacteria or fungi and plants impact growth, but not by how much.

Recent research by my group has examined this for the first time using a metabolic model for maize. It analyzed the hypothetical growth rate of maize if it were to acquire the ability to interact with rhizobia, which it does not currently have. The model also assessed the growth rate when maize is associated with AMF.

Rhizobia aids in nitrogen fixation, pulling nitrogen from the air and sharing it with plants in exchange for carbon. AMF, instead, help plants access more nutrients in the soil beyond what can be accessed by their roots alone. The findings suggest that stacking these traits to allow for interactions with both rhizobia and AMF could more than double maize growth rates in nutrient-limited conditions. While the model does not predict changes in yield, it is reasonable to expect that higher growth rates under these conditions would also lead to higher yields.

The results of the modelling are particularly significant given the global importance of maize as a food security crop. For example, maize is one of the most important crops in sub-Saharan Africa, providing a third of all consumed calories, yet the region experiences chronically lower maize yields than other parts of the world. For an average smallholder maize farmer in sub-Saharan Africa with a two-hectare plot, doubling maize yields would equate to an additional $1000 each year.

Using a model that was developed and validated with experimental data, we were able to quantitatively highlight the potential of combining these two approaches, which may not have been prioritized otherwise. Without modeling, this kind of analysis would take years to collect, evaluate and classify, on top of the time needed to successfully engineer nitrogen-fixing maize, which does not currently exist.

Too often, modeling and experimental science are treated as separate and distinct from one another. And yet, when combined, the two offer enormous potential to accelerate crop science for the public good.

It does not take a vivid imagination to consider the many ways in which modeling can help validate and justify research priorities.

By uniting scientists across these disciplines at the Society of Experimental Biology’s annual conference later this year, I hope to ignite a conversation about how modeling can support and enhance translational experimental science. And by working together, we can compound the advances we are making towards more sustainable food systems for all.

Megan Matthews, a principal investigator with the Enabling Nutrient Symbioses in Agriculture (ENSA) project and Assistant Professor at the University of Illinois

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 Eric Bebernitz
NEW YORK, May 22 2025 – In January 2025, President Trump signed an executive order that upended humanitarian efforts globally, leaving millions of vulnerable people without lifesaving services. The administration’s decision to slash American international aid by 83% is creating daily tragedies in the world’s most fragile regions.

The United States was previously the largest humanitarian donor globally, providing an estimated $64 billion in 2024 – approximately 42% of all humanitarian aid worldwide. Now, nearly 5,800 grants have been canceled, leaving only about 500 programs operational.

Even prior to the aid cuts, a child died due to hunger-related causes every 11 seconds. Now, unthinkably, things are getting worse. According to the 2025 Global Report on Food Crises released earlier this month, more than 295 million people faced acute hunger last year, the sixth consecutive annual increase, driven by conflict, displacement, and climate extremes.

Meager rations are being cut in refugee camps, pregnant women are losing access to medical care, and entire communities are without clean water as cholera cases surge.

The Human Cost to the World

In Afghanistan, therapeutic nutrition units at public hospitals in Kabul and Badakhshan have faced the heartbreaking task of turning away children in need of lifesaving care after being forced to close in March. Fortunately, with assistance from the European Union, these facilities have recently reopened, at least for a few months.

Since the halting of US funding, more than 396 nutrition sites have closed across the country, as well as more than 400 health facilities. More than 29,400 people have lost emergency monetary and food aid amid growing food insecurity.

In Madagascar, after four consecutive years of drought, mobile clinics treating malnourished children have closed. We’ve had to let go 200 staff and close two centers in the south. Roughly 3,000 children with severe acute malnutrition – the deadliest and most urgent form of hunger – no longer receive treatment. Sadly, that number is likely to grow, since 35,000 people have lost essential food aid.

In Mozambique’s Cabo Delgado province, already traumatized by eight years of armed conflict and recently hit by three cyclones, the sudden interruption of funding has led to more than 30 staff members losing their contracts, considerably reducing our capacity in areas where we were the only humanitarian presence. More than 17,000 people no longer receive food aid or the support they need to access clean water.

In the Democratic Republic of Congo, US funding accounted for 70% of the world’s total humanitarian response to deep poverty and worsening conflict that has displaced more than seven million people – roughly equivalent to the population of Tennessee. Stretched thin, health centers there are now charging fees that many families cannot afford. The DRC has one of the highest maternal mortality rates globally—three women die every hour from pregnancy-related complications. US budget cuts leave us unable to help.

False Savings, Greater Long-Term Costs

The US administration justifies these cuts under “fiscal responsibility” and “America First” policies. Yet international aid represents just 1% of the federal budget, while the long-term benefits of aid far outweigh any short-term savings.

Studies show that every dollar invested in preventing undernutrition delivers up to $81 in return through GDP gains that can benefit the global economic system. Early warning systems – such as the now-shuttered Famine Early Warning Systems Network inspired by President Reagan – saved money by identifying potential crises before they required massive intervention.

Even Marco Rubio, US Secretary of State and briefly the Acting Administrator of USAID, once acknowledged that the U.S. invests in aid “because we’re a compassionate people, but we also do it because it’s in our national interest. Because perhaps more than any other nation on Earth, we understand that a world that is freer, more just, more peaceful and more prosperous poses less of a threat.”

In other words, in our increasingly interconnected world, strategic foreign assistance isn’t charity—it’s a necessary investment in our shared prosperity and security over the long term. It is also strikingly effective. Over the past 45 years, humanitarian assistance has contributed to a 60% drop in children dying from hunger’s deadly effects. This remarkable progress is now at risk.

Eroding Trust and Contradictory Messages

For humanitarian organizations, the administration’s approach has created an impossible situation with a devastating lack of clarity. Where exemptions were supposed to be granted for “life-saving” activities, the promised funds have not materialized, forcing organizations to deplete their reserves or shut down vital programs entirely.

The impact reaches far beyond individual organizations to affect the entire humanitarian ecosystem. Thousands of field staff positions have been eliminated across multiple countries, leaving critical gaps in service delivery.

This funding crisis comes at a time when more than 300 million people worldwide need humanitarian aid. Nearly 733 million people—almost 10% of the world’s population—suffer from hunger, and one in three people globally don’t know where their next meal is coming from.

It will take an estimated $44.7 billion in 2025 to begin to meet these basic needs. So, the sudden disappearance of US funding leaves a catastrophic gap that other donors simply cannot fill.

A Call to Renew American Leadership

We’ve seen the power of American leadership before. The Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe after World War II. Plan Colombia changed the trajectory of that nation. America’s rapid response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak prevented a global pandemic.

As global citizens, we must recognize that hunger anywhere threatens stability everywhere. Food insecurity drives migration, fuels extremism, and exacerbates conflicts.

Congress is currently laying out a budget for next year that includes funding levels for foreign assistance. We are urging Members of Congress to support funding levels that are equal to or above the foreign assistance funding levels they agreed to last year, with guarantees that the Administration will spend these Congressionally appropriated funds.

America has always been greatest when we are at our most generous. As the richest and most powerful nation in the world, we should be thinking bolder, not smaller.

We have the ability to end chronic hunger for everyone, for good.

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’);  

Excerpt:

Eric Bebernitz is Director, External Relations, Action Against Hunger

By Palitha Kohona
COLOMBO, Sri Lanka, May 22 2025 – The UN is going through another exercise in reforming itself under immense pressure from the US, its main funder. This time US President Donald Trump has expressed himself much more forcefully and seems determined to pare down US contributions and demand further curtailing of UN expenses, while some other donors, reluctant to show their own hands, are quietly cheering on the US.

To emphasise that it means business, and to the cheers of its cabal of domestic supporters, the US has withdrawn from the UN Human Rights Council, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and the World Health Organization (WHO).

In addition, it has pulled out of the Paris Climate Accords. On previous occasions, the US had also withheld its contributions forcing then Secretaries-General, Kofi Annan and Ban ki-Moon to undertake reform exercises. That the US should now adopt a more ruthless approach to the UN after having been a catalytic force in its creation, is a sad commentary on the changes that have impacted on the original idealism.

It would seem that the UN goes through the ritual of trying to reform itself every time the US withholds funding, usually when the Republicans assume power in Washington DC. At the time, many senior UN staffers cynically believed that the US would come up with the funds that it owed sooner or later and treated the reform ritual with supercilious indifference. (This was what I experienced during my time at the UN).

This time round, the UN reform exercise may have to be more meaningful if the Trump Administration is to refrain from going through with its threats to curtail funding. In any, event, many would agree that the UN needs reform, both within the organisation as well as in its political bodies.

Reassuringly and to the relief of many, the US appears to be still committed to the UN. The Acting Permanent Representative of the US to the UN, Dorothy Shea has said, “The United Nations remains essential to resolving complex international challenges, first among them maintaining international peace and security, and addressing the causes of armed conflict. The UN must return to its principal purpose and the Secretary-General is uniquely positioned as the Chief Administrative Officer to lead this endeavor.”

At a time when many governments are facing budget reductions and reprioritization, the United Nations must refocus on effective delivery of its core purposes. This includes better delivery where it matters most: at the country-level”. It would seem that the US commitment to the UN remains positive despite worries to the contrary articulated by some. However, the message of the Acting PR is abundantly clear — the UN must re-focus on its key goals.

One of the irksome issues to address is the plethora of activities for which the UN has assumed responsibility. Over the years, the Organization has taken upon tasks, mostly at the behest of Member States, that may fall broadly within its mandate, but which are not necessarily consistent with its core functions.

Although many such tasks could be brought within the broad scope of its Charter mandated responsibilities, critics would argue that they do not fall within its core mandates. The funding in many cases came from the core budget, and the support structure is provided by the Organization, and some activities may even be funded by special contributions from Member States.

This has enabled certain Member States to facilitate UN activities which they themselves have funded but, in most likelihood, which respond to the agenda of their own domestic pressure groups. Human Rights and the Environment, especially climate change, likely fall into this category.

Over the years, the UN has thus taken on the role of responding to the domestic pressures of individual states, especially the rich states, leaving doubts in the minds of some as to whether these functions really fall within the core responsibilities of the Organization.

Added to the problem is the persistent shortfall of funds to realise the range of functions now being undertaken by the Organisation. By April 30, 2025, unpaid “assessments” (money owed to the UN by individual countries) stood at US$2.4 billion, with the US owing $1.5 billion, China around $600 million, and Russia more than $70 million.

On top of that, the peacekeeping budget was $2.7 billion in arrears. In 2024, 41 countries did not pay their mandated contributions. While non payers could lose their right to vote, this has never proved an adequate deterrent to those intent on delaying their dues.

In March 2025, UN Secretary-General António Guterres launched “UN80”, a review that seeks to make sure the institution continues to be fit-for-purpose as it looks towards a financially straightened future. The threatened funding cuts by the US, has helped to focus the attention of the Organization.

This exercise of the Secretary-General, reminiscent of the experience of both previous Secretaries-General, Kofi Annan and Ban Ki-moon, who also launched similar exercises but which petered out in time as much of the organization returned to the comfort zone of existing work methods and practices. Some things changed but not much.

UN reform, to be convincing, should be an ongoing process and not simply a response to US threats to withhold funding. The Department of Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance (DMSPC) and the UNGA Fifth Committee perform useful functions in this respect, but the UNGA 5TH Committee is subject to too much pressure from Member States.

Managers must not only be technically competent but also be modern executives who believe in continuing change, upskilling and upgrading. Training to upgrade skills and the commitment of staff to the core goals of the organization should be a regular feature. Those appointed to the highest levels by the Secretary-General, must possess superior managerial skills, especially those presented for appointment by influential states.

The organization must adapt to changing circumstances, embrace modern work methods and attitudes, seek to produce the best with available resources, and, very importantly, be committed to producing value for money. The world must feel that the world organization is producing results commensurate with what the international community is spending on it and, especially its staff.

Many staff have resigned to marking time in NY or Geneva while not producing much of value for the organization or the international community.

UN 80 has identified areas that could be improved immediately. But many of these proposals could run into staff resistance. For example, it recognized outdated working methods leading to inefficiencies within the organization as a key problem, while intergovernmental meetings are not making use of modern tools and technologies.

These were problems identified even during the tenures of Kofi Annan and Ban Ki-moon. A complex range of solutions were implemented. UN staff are on better than average benefits packages. Those considered redundant were encouraged to take a golden handshake and leave. Staff training was a priority.

Staff assessment methods were modernized. I remember the training and team building sessions we attended at Glen Cove with specialized external trainers. Automation happened quickly. Kofi Annan initiated the award of a UN 21 Pin to superior performers in management. (I was one of the early awardees of the Pin). But the initiative petered out largely because many of the senior political appointees who came from outside the organization could not relate to the innovations.

One solution to this would be to require nominees for such appointments possess superior management experience. Better still, countries that make such nominations, provide the secretariat with multiple names. The leadership of a unit or a division plays a crucial role in making the unit dynamic and productive.

It is to be remembered many managers who originated in developing countries, such as India and China, now lead cutting edge corporations and occupy senior government positions in the West, especially in the US. These changes, properly implemented, would very likely improve delivery.

Without doubt, UN meetings can be organised differently. All meetings need not take place in New York or Geneva with the participation of delegations from capitals. These meetings are expensive to organise, costly to the participants and unlikely to have the best representatives from poorer countries due to the costs involved.

If participation could be arranged from capitals, using modern technology which is now freely available, results would most likely be better. Where in the rare case that a country cannot organise such distant participation using modern technology, the UN office in the capital could assist in providing the necessary facilities.

Some countries might consider this a cost-effective option even for meetings of the UN Committees and even the UNGA. (This was tried out during the Covid lock downs).

The UN has been asked to consider moving some of its offices to more cost-effective locations. Nairobi already hosts, inter alia, UNEP, and UN Habitat and numerous environment related conferences. It would also make sense to bring together all UN ocean related offices under one roof in Jamica where the Commission on the Continental Shelf is located.

The use of NY for ocean related offices and meetings seems incongruous given that the US is not even a party to the Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC). A rigorous rationalisation of LOSC activities and moving them to Jamaica or some other similarly cost-effective location would seem desirable.

Given the close connection between the oceans and climate change, we could even consider moving all LOS activities to Bonn where the Climate Change secretariat is located. In addition to the cost advantages, access to cutting edge academic and dedicated research institutions in Europe would be an added advantage to both. The two institutions could feed from each other and thrive in a supportive environment. Moving UNDP and UNICEF out of NY should also be considered.

Over-lapping agendas of units such as between ECOSOC and its functional commissions and expert bodies, and those of the General Assembly and its Second and Third Committees, leading to duplication of efforts should be subjected to a rationalization review. Their own managerial bodies should undertake such reviews in the first instance.

A serious review must be undertaken of whether all those Under-Secretaries-General (USG), Assistant Secretaries-General (ASG) and Directors (D) are required. Many positions could be terminated, others consolidated. In implementing the reform, rigor must be exercised.

Otherwise, the current reform is also likely to go the same way as the previous ones.

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’);  

Excerpt:

Dr Palitha Kohona is former Head, UN Treaties, a one-time Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN & until recently, Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China.

By Kizito Makoye
DAR ES SALAAM, Tanzania, May 22 2025 – As delegates prepare for the third United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC) in Nice, France, momentum is building around ocean governance, finance for marine conservation, and an urgent shift toward a regenerative blue economy. Ocean advocates say the world is at a critical juncture—and the next few weeks could shape the future of marine protection for decades.

“Oceans sustain all life on Earth,” said Rita El Zaghloul, Senior Programme Manager at the High Ambition Coalition for Nature and People. “Protecting our ocean is fundamental for our food security, our cultural heritage, and our economies and livelihoods.”

El Zaghloul cited new data from the OECD showing that the ocean economy, if treated as a single country, would have ranked as the world’s fifth-largest economy in 2019. It provides food for 3.2 billion people and contributes $2.6 trillion to global GDP each year.

Despite this, only 8.4 percent of the ocean is currently under formal protection. Advocates say that figure must rise to at least 30% by 2030—a goal enshrined in the Global Biodiversity Framework and reaffirmed by the 2023 High Seas Treaty, also known as the BBNJ (Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction) Treaty.

“Let us not forget that discussions on this treaty started eight years ago,” El Zaghloul said. “To enter into force, we need at least 60 ratifications. So far, we have only 21. UNOC represents a key milestone to change that.”

From Pledges to Action

Activists and policymakers alike are calling for a clear shift from pledges to implementation.

“We are only five years away from 2030,” warned El Zaghloul. “We must move beyond rhetoric.”

Examples of effective action are emerging across the globe. El Zaghloul highlighted several: the Eastern Tropical Pacific Marine Corridor—a collaborative effort between Ecuador, Costa Rica, Colombia, and Panama—has connected five marine protected areas to strengthen ecosystem management. The Marshall Islands has designated a marine area larger than Switzerland as a no-fishing zone. And in 2024, Australia expanded a marine reserve to cover over 52 percent of its national waters.

“These examples show that progress is possible—regardless of income level,” El Zaghloul said. “But of course, much more is needed.”

Financing the Ocean’s Future

One major hurdle remains: funding.

“We really need to make sure that finance is directly reaching the coastal communities that are working to safeguard our oceans,” said El Zaghloul. “From the HAC perspective, we’ve launched a rapid deployment mechanism offering small grants between USD 25,000 and USD 50,000 as seed funding. But of course, that’s only a start.”

Kristin Rechberger, CEO of Dynamic Planet and co-organizer of Monaco’s Blue Economy Finance Forum (BEFF), echoed the need to rethink the role of private finance in ocean conservation.

“For too long, extraction and pollution have been the business model, with little investment in protection or regeneration,” Rechberger said. “We need to create a new regenerative ocean economy that puts conservation at its heart.”

Rechberger said a new study shows that to achieve the 30×30 goal, 190,000 small marine protected areas must be established within the next five years—just within territorial waters.

“That requires smart programming, investment products, and scalable initiatives that restore marine life and generate returns,” she said. “This isn’t just an environmental issue—it’s an economic opportunity.”

Rechberger’s initiative, Revive Our Ocean, brings together proven partners working to demonstrate that marine protection can lead to coastal prosperity. She also pointed to the upcoming Ocean, Coastal Resilience, and Risk conference in Nice—slated to bring mayors and governors into the conversation.

“Some local leaders are already protecting coastlines and reaping the benefits through increased climate resilience and tourism,” she said. “We hope many more follow.”

France’s Role and the Path Ahead

France, the host of the upcoming UNOC, has pledged strong support. The French government, backed by HAC and other organizations, is pushing for new marine protected area announcements at the conference.

“We’re working to move from 8.4% to something closer to 30%,” said El Zaghloul. “But it’s not just about expanding coverage—we need to make sure these areas are effectively managed, inclusive, and resilient.”

El Zaghloul concluded with a call for unity: “We must ensure ministers and technical experts are aligned to push for more ambition. We need to quadruple ocean protection—and do so inclusively and effectively.”

Filimon Manoni, the Pacific Ocean Commissioner, has underscored the region’s unwavering commitment to ocean governance and climate resilience. Despite being home to small island nations, the Pacific has long been a global leader in marine protection, from advancing Sustainable Development Goal 14 to spearheading community-led marine conservation efforts.

“We take this opportunity very seriously,” Manoni said, emphasizing that the conference provides a rare platform for Pacific nations to voice their ocean-climate concerns, which are often sidelined at global climate talks.

At the heart of the Pacific’s agenda is the urgent call for the ratification of the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement, a crucial step toward ending lawlessness in the high seas. Manoni warned that ongoing inaction could jeopardize years of marine conservation within national waters. He also called for a binding global plastics treaty and a reevaluation of global trade systems that continue to fuel ocean pollution.

“We, the small island developing states, continue to carry the burden of plastic waste,” he said, pointing to the need for systemic changes in international commerce to curb marine degradation.

The UNOC in Nice promises to be a pivotal moment. Whether it succeeds will depend not only on bold declarations but on the tangible steps taken afterward. For the world’s oceans—and the billions who depend on them—the stakes could not be higher.

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’);