By George Conway and Stefanos Fotiou
MOGADISHU / ROME, Oct 31 2025 – Food has always been political. It decides whether families thrive or fall into poverty, whether young people see a future of opportunity or despair, whether communities feel included or pushed aside. Food is also a basic human right – one recognized in international law but too often unrealized in practice. Guaranteeing that right requires viewing food not as a form of emergency relief, but as the cornerstone of sustainable social development.

Despite this, food systems rarely feature in discussions of social policy, even though they underpin the same goals world leaders will take up at the World Social Summit in Doha this November: eradicating poverty, securing decent work, and advancing inclusion.

Food as social infrastructure

Food is often treated as a humanitarian issue, a matter for relief in times of drought or war. But look closer, and it is the ultimate social policy.

Food systems mirror our societies – where women bear the greatest burden of unpaid work, where child labour denies children education, and where Indigenous and marginalized communities are excluded

Food systems sustain half the world’s population – around 3.8 billion people – through farming, processing, transport, and retail, most of it informal and rural. They determine how families spend their income, who can afford a healthy diet, who learns and thrives in school, and who is left behind. Food systems mirror our societies – where women bear the greatest burden of unpaid work, where child labour denies children education, and where Indigenous and marginalized communities are excluded.

Seen through this lens, food is social infrastructure: the invisible system that underpins poverty reduction, livelihoods, and inclusion. When it functions, societies grow more equal and resilient. When it falters, inequality and exclusion deepen.

Pathways out of poverty

Across low-income countries, agriculture and food processing remain the single largest source of livelihoods. National food systems transformations are showing that targeted investments here can have outsized effects on poverty reduction.

In Rwanda, investment in farmer cooperatives and value chains has enabled smallholders to capture more of the value of their crops, lifting entire communities. In Brazil, school feeding programs that source from family farmers have created stable markets for the rural poor while improving child nutrition.

And in Somalia, the work of the UN Food Systems Coordination Hub with the Resident Coordinator’s Office and national partners is helping to strengthen pastoralist value chains and improve access to markets. By connecting local producers with regional buyers and embedding resilience into social protection systems, Somalia is charting a path out of chronic vulnerability toward sustainable livelihoods.

This approach combines food systems transformation with climate-smart social protection – linking producers and markets with safety nets that improve nutrition, boost inclusion, and attract investment. It is a model built on social and economic partnerships between government, civil society, and the UN, and is designed for lasting impact.

These examples highlight a simple truth: inclusive, resilient, and sustainable food systems can be among the most powerful anti-poverty tools available.

Work that is productive – and dignified

Food systems already employ one in three workers worldwide. But too many of these jobs are precarious, low-paid, and unsafe. The transformation now underway is beginning to change that.

Digital and market innovations are linking small producers to buyers directly, bypassing exploitative middlemen. Climate-resilient practices are reducing the boom-and-bust cycles that devastate rural incomes.

In Somalia, where livelihoods are often informal and climate shocks are frequent, strengthening food systems can expand opportunity and stability. By linking pastoralist value chains to markets and building skills for youth in food production and trade, food systems can turn subsistence into sustainable, resilient futures.

This shift matters: food systems can and must become a primary engine of decent, dignified employment in the global economy – particularly for women and youth.

Food as inclusion

Food is also identity and belonging. Policies that make nutritious diets affordable, protect Indigenous knowledge, and integrate marginalized producers into value chains are acts of social inclusion. In many countries, universal school meal programs have emerged as one of the most powerful equalizers. They reduce child hunger, keep girls in school, and support local farmers. A single meal can nourish, educate, and empower all at once.

Another powerful tool for inclusion, resilience, and sustainability are the social safety nets designed to enable smallholder producers to shift towards more nutrition-sensitive and climate-smart production. Thanks to support from the UN system – directed through the Food Systems Window of the Joint SDG Fund, jointly coordinated by the UN Food Systems Coordination Hub and the Fund Secretariat – Somalia is strengthening its delivery of basic social services by linking Early Warning Systems to the Unified Social Registry, and accompanying its cash transfers with livelihood graduation pathways involving microinsurance companies. This effectively transforms producers from beneficiaries into agents of change.

However, to be impactful, at scale, and long-lasting, food system interventions must be guided by strong political vision and coordinated through inclusive governance – bringing women, youth, and marginalized groups into decision-making. When communities most affected by policies help shape them, the results are more effective and more enduring.

In Somalia, the Council on Food, Climate Change, and Nutrition is taking shape thanks to the Joint SDG Fund Programme and the leadership of the Office of the Resident Coordinator, FAO, and WFP. Hosted under the Office of the Prime Minister and steered jointly by the OPM and the Ministry of Agriculture, the Council will bring together 11 ministries and oversee the implementation of the Somali National Pathway.

The case for Doha

Why does this matter for the World Social Summit? Because food systems provide a bridge across its three pillars. They are a direct lever for eradicating poverty, creating decent work, and advancing inclusion – in practice, not just in principle.

Yet food often remains on the margins of social policy. Ministries of labor and finance overlook it. Social protection debates focus on cash transfers and safety nets, rarely on food systems, markets, or rural cooperatives. The Doha Summit is the moment to change this.

Leaders should recognize food systems as core social infrastructure – as important as schools, hospitals, and roads. This means embedding food in national social policies, scaling financing for inclusive programs, and protecting food from the cycle of neglect that follows each crisis.

A new way of thinking

What if we reimagined the role of food in social policy? Instead of responding to food crises as humanitarian emergencies, we could invest in food systems as the foundation of long-term social development.

Progress should be measured not only by GDP or employment rates, but by whether every child eats a healthy meal each day, whether rural youth see farming as a path to prosperity, and whether no mother has to choose between buying medicine or buying bread – feeding her family today or tomorrow.

That is the lens the World Social Summit needs. Because poverty, unemployment, and exclusion are experienced daily through empty plates, insecure jobs, and the quiet despair of being shut out of opportunity.

The way forward

Food systems are already delivering – in farmers’ cooperatives, women- and youth-led businesses, and in national efforts like Somalia’s to link food transformation with social protection and employment. But they remain under-recognized in the social development agenda.

Doha offers the chance to correct that. If leaders are serious about eradicating poverty, creating decent work, and advancing inclusion, they should start with food. It is the system that connects households to hope, work to dignity, and communities to resilience.

George Conway, UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator, and Deputy Special Representative to the UN Secretary General, Somalia 

Stefanos Fotiou, Director of the Office of Sustainable Development Goals at the Food and Agriculture Organization, and Director of the UN Food Systems Coordination Hub

By Busani Bafana
BULAWAYO & BANGKOK, Oct 31 2025 – From the streets of Bangkok to power corridors in Washington, the civil society space for dissent is fast shrinking. Authoritarian regimes are silencing opposition but indirectly fueling corruption and widening inequality, according to a leading global civil society alliance.

The warning is from Mandeep Tiwana, Secretary General of CIVICUS Global Alliance, who points to a troubling trend: civil society is increasingly considered a threat to those in power.

That is a sobering assessment from CIVICUS, which reports that a wave of repression by authoritarian regimes is directly fueling corruption and exploding inequality.

“The quality of democracy on hand around the world is very poor at the moment,” Tiwana tells IPS in an exclusive interview. “That is why civil society organizations are seen as a threat by authoritative leaders and the negative impact of attacking civil society means there is a rise in corruption, there is less inclusion, there is less transparency in public life and more inequality in society.”

His comments come ahead of the 16th International Civil Society Week (ICSW) from 1–5 November 2025 convened by CIVICUS and the Asia Democracy Network. The ICSW will bring together more than 1,300 delegates comprising activists, civil society groups, academics, and human rights advocates to empower citizen action and build powerful alliances. ICSW pays tribute to activists, movements, and civil society achieving significant progress, defending civic freedoms, and showing remarkable resilience despite the many challenges.

The ICSW takes place against a bleak backdrop. According to the CIVICUS Monitor, a research partnership between CIVICUS and over 20 organizations tracking civic freedoms, civil society is under attack in 116 of 198 countries and territories. The fundamental freedoms of expression, association, and peaceful assembly face significant deterrents worldwide.

Protests at COP27 in Egypt. Mandeep Tiwana, Secretary General of CIVICUS Global Alliance, is hopeful that COP30, in Belém, Brazil, will be more inclusive. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

“It is becoming increasingly dangerous to be a civil society activist and to be the leader of a civil society organization,” Tiwana tells IPS. “Many organizations have been defunded because governments don’t like what they do to ensure transparency or because they speak out against some very powerful people. It is a challenging environment for civil society.”

Research by CIVICUS categorizes civic freedom in five dimensions: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed, and closed. Alarmingly, over 70 percent of the world’s population now lives in countries rated in the two worst categories: ‘repressed’ and ‘closed.’

“This marks a regression in democratic values, rights, and accountability,” Tiwana noted, adding that even in the remaining 30% of nations, restrictions on civic freedoms remain.

Repression Tools in Tow

The ICSW, being held under the theme ‘Celebrating citizen action: reimagining democracy, rights, and inclusion for today’s world,’ convenes against this backdrop.

Multifaceted tools are used by governments to stifle dissent. Governments are introducing laws to block civil society organizations from receiving international funding while simultaneously restricting domestic resources. Besides, laws have also been enacted in some countries to restrict the independence of civil society organizations that scrutinize governments and promote transparency.

For civil society activists, the consequences are sobering.

“If you speak truth to power, uncover high-level corruption and try to seek transformative change in society, whether it’s on gender equality or inclusion of minorities you  can be subjected to severe forms of persecution,” Tiwana explained. “This includes stigmatization, intimidation,  imprisonment for long periods, physical attacks, and death.”

Multilateralism Tumbles, Unilateralism Rises

Tiwana said there is an increasing breakdown in multilateralism and respect for international laws from which civil society draws its rights.

This erosion of civic space is reflected in the breakdown of the international system. Tiwana identified a surge in unilateralism and a disregard for the international laws that have historically safeguarded the rights of civil society.

“If you look at what’s happening around the world, whether with regard to conflicts in Palestine, in the Congo, in Sudan, in Myanmar, in Ukraine, in Cameroon, and elsewhere, governments are not respecting international norms,” he observed, remarking that authoritarian regimes were abusing the sovereignty of other countries, ignoring the Geneva conventions, and legalizing attacks on civilians, torturing and persecuting civilians.

This collapse of multilateralism has enabled a form of transactional diplomacy, where narrowly defined national interests trump human rights. Powerful states now collude to manipulate public policy, enhancing their wealth and power. When civil society attempts to expose these corrupt relationships, it becomes a target.

“They are colluding to game public policy to suit their interests and to enhance their wealth.  The offshoot of this is that civil society is attacked when it tries to expose these corrupt relationships,” said Tiwana, expressing concern  about the rise in state capture by oligarchs who now own vast swathes of the media and technology landscapes.

Citing countries like China and Rwanda, which, while they have different ways of functioning, Tiwana said both are powerful authoritarian states engaging in transactional diplomacy and are opposed to the civil society’s power to hold them to account.

The election of Donald Trump as US President in 2025 has shattered the foundation of the US as a democracy, Tiwana noted. The country no longer supports democratic values internationally and is at home with  attacks on the media and defunding of civil society.

The action by the US has negative impacts, as some leaders around the world are taking their cue from Trump in muzzling civil society and media freedoms, he said, pointing to how the US has created common cause with authoritarian governments in El Salvador, Israel,  Argentina, and Hungary.

The fight Goes On

Despite facing repression and threats, civil society continues to resist authoritarian regimes. From massive street protests against corruption in Nepal, and Guatemala  to pro-democracy movements that have removed  governments in Bangladesh  and Madagascar,

“People need to have courage to stand up for what they believe and to speak out when their neighbors are persecuted,” Tiwana told IPS. “People still need to continue to speak the truth and come out in the streets in peaceful protest against the injustice that is happening. They should not lose hope.”

On the curtailing of civil society participation in climate change negotiations, Tiwana said the upcoming COP30 in Brazil offered hope. The host government believes in democratic values and including civil society at the table.

“Past COPs have been held in petro states—Azerbaijan, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt—which are all authoritarian states where civil society has been attacked, crushed, and persecuted,” he said. “We are hopeful that there will be greater inclusion of voices and the commitments that will be made to reduce emissions will be ambitious but the question is really going to be after the COP and if those commitments will be from governments that really don’t care about civil society demands or about the well-being of their people.”

Young people, Tiwana said, have shown the way. Movements like Fridays for Future  and the Black Lives Matter have demonstrated the power of solidarity and unified action.

But, given the massive protests, has this resistance led to change of a similar scale?

“Unfortunately, we are seeing a rise in military dictatorships around the world,” Tiwana admitted, attributing this to a fraying appetite by the international community to uphold human rights and democratic values.

“Conflict, environmental degradation, extreme wealth accumulation, and high-level corruption are interlinked because it’s people who want to possess more than they need.”

Tiwana illustrated what he means by global priorities.

“We have USD 2.7 trillion in military spending year-on-year nowadays, whereas 700 million people go to bed hungry every night.”

“As civil society, we are trying to expose these corrupt relationships that exist. So the fight for equality, the struggle to create better, more peaceful, more just societies—something CIVICUS supports very much—are some of the conversations that we will be looking to have at the International Civil Society Week.”

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 Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 31 2025 – The United States, the largest single contributor to the UN budget, is using its financial clout to threaten the United Nations by cutting off funds and withdrawing from several UN agencies.

In an interview with Breitbart News U.S. Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Mike Waltz said last week “a quarter of everything the UN does, the United States pays for”.

“Is there money being well spent? I’d say right now, no, because it’s being spent on all of these other woke projects, rather than what it was originally intended to do, what President Trump wants it to do, and what I want it to do, which is focus on peace.”

Historically, the United States has been the largest financial contributor, typically covering around 22% of the UN’s regular budget and up to 28% of the peacekeeping budget.

Still, ironically, the US is also the biggest defaulter. According to the UN’s Administrative and Budgetar Committee, member states currently owe $1.87 billion of the $3.5 billion in mandatory contributions for the current budget cycle.

And the US accounts for $1.5 billion of the outstanding balance.

Speaking to reporters in Kuala Lumpur last week, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said: “We are not reforming the UN because of the liquidity crisis that is largely due to the reduction of payments from one main contributor, the United States”.

“What we are doing is recognizing that we can improve, that we can be more efficient, more cost-effective, more able to provide in full respect of our mandates to the people we care for in a more efficient way”.

“We are doing a number of reforms, making the Organization leaner but more effective. And that is the reason why there will be a number of reductions of positions in the Secretariat, but not the same everywhere.”

“And in particular, everything that relates to support to developing countries on the field in order for them to be able to overcome the present difficulties will not be reduced, on the contrary, will be increased,” he pointed out.

Mandeep S. Tiwana, Secretary General CIVICUS, a global civil society alliance, told IPS funding modalities for the UN need to be made simpler and also brought into the 21st century.

The present process, he pointed out, is too complicated and not easy to comprehend. Formulations for assessed and voluntary contributions are confusing and bureaucratic with some countries paying too much and others too little.

A simpler and fairer way would be assessed contributions be based on small percentage of a country’s Gross National Income. This would also allow formulations to be transparent and understandable by people around the world for whom the UN is exists,” declared Tiwana.

https://www.un.org/en/ga/contributions/honourroll.shtml

The five biggest funders of the UN, based on mandatory assessed contributions for the regular and peacekeeping budgets, are the United States, China, Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom. These countries are responsible for a majority of the UN’s funding and are among the largest economies in the world.

United States: Pays the largest share, at around 22% for the regular budget and over 26% for peacekeeping.
China: The second-largest contributor, responsible for about 20% of the regular budget and nearly 19% of peacekeeping contributions.
Japan: Contributes approximately 7% to the regular budget and over 8% to peacekeeping.
Germany: Pays about 6% of the regular budget and 6% of the peacekeeping budget.
United Kingdom: Accounts for roughly 5% of both the regular and peacekeeping budgets.

Referring to the latest financial contribution, UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told reporters October 30, “We thank our friends in Beijing for their full payment to the Regular Budget. China’s payment brings the number of fully paid-up Member States to 142,” (out of 193)

Asked how that money would help UN navigate through these difficult times, Haq said: “To be honest, any payments are helpful, but this is a very large payment– of more than $685 million– so it’s well appreciated.”

“And certainly, we thank the government in Beijing. But of course, we also stress that all governments need to pay their dues in full. You’ve seen the sort of financial pressures we’ve been under, and we do need full payments from all Member States,” he declared.

Kul Gautam, a former UN assistant secretary-general (ASG) and deputy director of UNICEF, pointed out that in 1985, Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme proposed a simple remedy: no single country should pay—or be allowed to pay—more than 10% of the UN’s budget.

That, he said, would reduce dependence on any one donor while requiring modest increases from others. Ironically, Washington opposed it, fearing it might lose influence.

Asked for a clarification, he told IPS “it is my understanding that the assessed contributions to the UN regular budget are negotiated and approved by the UN General Assembly based on the recommendations of the GA’s Committee on Contributions, which determines a scale of assessments every three years based on a country’s “capacity to pay.”

The Committee on Contributions recommends assessment levels based on gross national income and other economic data, with a minimum assessment of 0.001% and a maximum assessment of 22%.

The scale of assessment of the UN regular budget does not need the approval of the Security Council, nor is it subject to veto by the P-5.

In the case of the UN’s peacekeeping budget, he said, the scale of assessment is based on a modification of the UN regular budget scale, with the P-5 countries assessed at a higher level than for the regular budget due to their role in authorizing and renewing peacekeeping missions.

Historically, the Security Council has authorized the UN General Assembly to create a separate assessed account for each peacekeeping operation. Thus, the Security Council definitely has a say in determining the peacekeeping budget.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2019/10/wanted-bold-leadership-antonio-guterres-sustainable-funding-united-nations/

In his interview with Breitbart News US Ambassador Mike Waltz also said: “And I would say to those who say, why don’t we just shut this thing down and walk away?”

“Well, I think we need it to be reformed in line with its potential that President Trump sees. And I think my answer would be: we need one place in the world where everybody can talk”.
President Trump is a president of peace, he said. He wants to keep us out of war. He wants to put diplomacy first. He wants to create deals.

“Well, there’s one place in the world, and that’s right here at the UN that the Chinese, the Russians, the Europeans, developing countries all over the world can come and do their best to hash things out,” declared.

In an October 17 statement, Guterres said: “My proposed programme budget for 2026 of 3.715 billion US dollars is slightly below the 2025 approved budget – excluding post re-costing and major construction projects in Nairobi and under the Strategic Heritage Plan.

This figure includes funding for 37 Special Political Missions – reflecting a net decrease due to the liquidation of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq and the planned drawdown of the United Nations Transitional Assistance Mission in Somalia.

The proposed budget provides for 14,275 posts – and reflects our commitment to advance the three pillars of our work – peace and security, development, and human rights – in a balanced manner.

“We propose to continue supporting the Resident Coordinator System with a 53 million US dollars commitment authority for 2026 – identical to 2025.”

The 50 million US dollars grant for the Peacebuilding Fund is also maintained, he said..

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 Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 31 2025 – The lingering after-effects of nuclear tests by the world’s nuclear powers have left a devastating impact on hundreds and thousands of victims world-wide.

The history of nuclear testing, according to the United Nations, began 16 July 1945 at a desert test site in Alamogordo, New Mexico when the United States exploded its first atomic bomb.

In the five decades, between 1945 and the opening for signature of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996, over 2,000 nuclear tests were carried out all over the world.

• The United States conducted 1,032 tests between 1945 and 1992.
• The Soviet Union carried out 715 tests between 1949 and 1990.
• The United Kingdom carried out 45 tests between 1952 and 1991.
• France carried out 210 tests between 1960 and 1996.
• China carried out 45 tests between 1964 and 1996.
• India carried out 1 test in 1974.

Since the CTBT was opened for signature in September 1996, 10 nuclear tests have been conducted:

• India conducted two tests in 1998.
• Pakistan conducted two tests in 1998.
• The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea conducted nuclear tests in 2006, 2009, 2013, 2016, and 2017.

On October 30, President Donald Ttrump, just ahead of his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, announced on social media, that the US will resume testing nuclear weapons for the first time in over 30 years.

But this time on an “equal basis” with Russia and China.

The main former US nuclear test sites were the Nevada Test Site (now the Nevada National Security Site) and the Pacific Proving Grounds in the Marshall Islands and near Kiritimati (Christmas) Island. Other tests also occurred in various locations across the United States, including New Mexico, Colorado, Alaska, and Mississippi.

The Nevada test site, located in Nye County, Nevada, was the most active, with over 1,000 tests conducted between 1951 and 1992.

Speaking at a meeting, September 26, on The International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons,” UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned “nuclear testing threats are returning, while nuclear saber rattling is louder than in past decades.”

Meanwhile, a New York Times story October 29, headlined “China is Racing to Lead World in Nuclear Power,” harks back to the 45 nuclear tests by China between 1964 and 1996.

According to one report, nuclear test survivors in China, particularly ethnic Uyghurs in Xinjiang, face a situation where their health issues from radiation exposure are largely unrecognized, and their voices are systematically silenced by the government.

“The Chinese state has actively suppressed information about the devastating consequences of its nuclear testing program on the local population”.

According to an AI generated overview, China’s tests included both atmospheric and underground tests, which included 22 atmospheric detonations, which exposed the local population to significant radioactive fallout.

The Chinese government claimed the test site was a “barren and isolated” area with no permanent residents. In reality, Uyghur herders and farmers had lived there for centuries.

Independent research and anecdotal evidence paint a grim picture of the human and environmental costs.

Medical experts have documented a disproportionate increase in cancers, birth defects, leukemia, and degenerative disorders in Xinjiang compared to the rest of China.

Alice Slater, who serves on the boards of World BEYOND War and the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, and is a UN NGO Representative for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, told IPS regardless of China ‘s unfair treatment of downwinders at Lop Nor, is it any more egregious than the treatment of the downwinders in Nevada, Kazakhstan, and the Marshall Islands, who suffered the effects of US, Russian and French tests?

What can we LEARN from China during these terrible times if imminent nuclear annihilation?

They just reissued their joint appeal with Russia to negotiate treaties to ban weapons in space and war in space and pledged never to be the first to use or place weapons in space. Unlike the US and Russia which keep their nuclear bombs on missiles poised and ready to fire, China separates their warheads from their missiles, she said.

The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons DID enter into force when 50 countries ratified it, she pointed out. Although many more than 50 have now signed and ratified it, NONE of the nuclear weapons states or any of the US allies harboring under the US nuclear “umbrella” have signed., said Slater.

Tariq Rauf, Former Head of Verification and Security Policy, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told IPS: Is the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty a Flawed Treaty?

The objective of a comprehensive ban on nuclear testing originally had been truly comprehensive: non-proliferation and disarmament, but the CTBT lacks substantive link to nuclear disarmament, he pointed out.

“Throughout the treaty negotiations, the purpose of a ban on all forms of testing became progressively de-linked from the ultimate objective of the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

In the final text, non-nuclear-weapon States were barely able to establish a relationship between the exhortations for disarmament in the preamble and the operative text.

The CTBT even permits non-explosive forms of testing, which, with advances in technology, may today be used to refine nuclear weapons and to design new ones. Nuclear test sites remain active in China, Russia, US (DPRK, India, Pakistan ??). France is the only NWS to have decommissioned its test site.

China, Egypt, Iran, Russia and the US need to ratify, but there is no pressure exerted on these NPT States in NPT meetings. And the same goes for non-signatories, DPRK, India, Israel and Pakistan, he said.

“It seems that the CTBT will never enter into force, but hopefully the moratoria on nuclear testing would continue?”

Kazakhstan and the Marshall Islands are leading efforts to set up an international trust fund for victims of nuclear testing, under the aegis of Article 6 of the TNPW. The CTBT lacks any provision on assistance to victims of testing, Rauf said.

According to the United Nations, The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty bans nuclear testing everywhere on the planet — surface, atmosphere, underwater and underground.

The Treaty takes on significance as it also aims to obstruct the development of nuclear weapons: both the initial development of nuclear weapons as well as their substantial improvement (e.g. the advent of thermonuclear weapons) necessitate real nuclear testing.

The CTBT makes it almost impossible for countries that do not yet have nuclear weapons to develop them. And it makes it almost impossible for countries that have nuclear weapons to develop new or more advanced weapons. It also helps prevent the damage caused by nuclear testing to humans and the environment.

Reacting to Trump’s announcement, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (Democrat -Rhode Island), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said: “Once again, President Trump has it wrong when it comes to nuclear weapons policy.”

This time, he seems to have ordered the Pentagon to resume nuclear explosive weapons testing. This confusing directive reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of our nuclear enterprise—it is the Department of Energy, not the Department of Defense, that manages our nuclear weapons complex and any testing activities.

“Breaking the explosive testing moratorium that the United States, Russia, and China have maintained since the 1990s would be strategically reckless, inevitably prompting Moscow and Beijing to resume their own testing programs”.

Further, he said, American explosive testing would provide justification for Pakistan, India, and North Korea to expand their own testing regimes, destabilizing an already fragile global nonproliferation architecture at precisely the moment we can least afford it.

“The United States would gain very little from such testing, and we would sacrifice decades of hard-won progress in preventing nuclear proliferation.”

This article is brought to you by INPS Japan in collaboration with Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

INPS Japan

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’);  

Best intentions to create a green wall to capture millions of tons of carbon while tackling desertification are up against a lack of funding and banditry in Jigawa State, northwestern Nigeria.

By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 30 2025 – In 2024, the climate crisis has disrupted schooling for millions of students worldwide, weakening workforces and hindering social development on a massive scale. With extreme weather patterns preventing students from accessing a safe, and effective learning environment, the United Nations (UN) and the Geneva Global Hub for Education in Emergencies (EiE Hub) continue to urge the international community to assist the most climate-sensitive areas in building resilient education systems that empower both students and educators.

On October 28, members of the EiE Hub released a statement that calls on stakeholders and world leaders to center children’s education at the forefront of global discussions at COP30 to be held in Belém, Brazil in November. It is projected that without urgent intervention, tens of millions of children are at risk of falling behind on their education, which threatens long-term economic development and stability.

“Children are more vulnerable to the impacts of weather-related crises, including stronger and more frequent heatwaves, storms, droughts and flooding,” said Catherine Russell, Executive-Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), in January. “Children cannot concentrate in classrooms that offer no respite from sweltering heat, and they cannot get to school if the path is flooded, or if schools are washed away. Last year, severe weather kept one in seven students out of class, threatening their health and safety, and impacting their long-term education.”

According to figures from UNICEF, approximately half of the world’s school-aged children receive access to quality education, with an estimated 1 billion children residing in countries that are described as “extremely high-risk” to climate shocks and natural disasters. Members of the EiE Hub estimate that at least 242 million students experienced disruptions to their education in 2024 due to climate-related events, with more than 118 million affected by heatwaves in May alone. Beyond hindering learning quality and teachers’ ability to effectively instruct, climate-induced disasters and shocks also increase the risk of school dropouts and expose children to heightened protection risks.

These risks are especially severe in communities across the Global South, where the impacts of climate-induced disasters are most pronounced. Frequent climate shocks devastate local economies, undermine adaptation efforts, and exacerbate pre-existing inequalities. Women, girls, displaced persons, and individuals with disabilities are disproportionately affected—facing higher risks of violence, adverse health impacts, loss of livelihood opportunities, and increased rates of child, early, and forced marriage.

In August, a report published by UNICEF and the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) found that roughly 5.9 million children and adolescents in Latin America and the Caribbean could be pushed into poverty by 2030 due to loss of education as a result of climate change if governments do not intervene soon. This represents the most optimistic scenario as the projected number of young people pushed into poverty could be as high as 17.9 million.

According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the Asia-Pacific region is considered to be the most climate-sensitive environment in the world, in which communities in coastal and low-lying areas are disproportionately impacted by rising sea levels and extreme weather patterns. Additionally, these communities rely on fisheries and agriculture, which are climate-sensitive economies, putting them at further risk.

A World Bank report titled Gender Dimensions of Disaster Risk and Resilience highlights the heightened vulnerability of boys and girls during climate-related shocks and how this impacts them differently. In Fiji, numerous households that lost one or both parents to natural disasters intensified by climate change, underscoring the link between families who experienced the loss of a parent and increased rates of school dropouts and child labor.

The report also found that girls who lost both parents were 26 percent less likely than boys to join the workforce within five years of a disaster and were 62 percent more likely to be married during the same period. In Uganda, the World Bank recorded that the likelihood of engaging in child labor often increases for both boys and girls following a natural disaster.

“If children and young people don’t have the resources to meet their basic needs and develop their potential, and if adequate social protection systems are not in place, the region’s inequalities will only be perpetuated,” said Roberto Benes, UNICEF Regional Director for Latin America and the Caribbean.

Despite this, education systems receive only a small percentage of available climate and government funding. From 2006 to March 2023, it is estimated that only 2.4 percent of funding from multilateral climate action budgets go toward climate-resilience programs for schools. According to EiE Hub, during the last cycle of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs 2.0), less than half of the NDCs met the standards for being child-sensitive, and have therefore been largely overlooked by governments.

EiE Hub calls on governments, donors, and civil society groups to make education a key part of climate action dialogue going forward, particularly in discussions at COP30. The organization highlights the importance of increased investment in climate-resilient education systems—especially in vulnerable and conflict-affected areas—as every USD $1 a government invests in education, national GDP can increase by approximately USD 20.

Additionally, the organization also stresses the need to involve children and youth in climate policymaking and to invest in resilient school infrastructure and climate education. By integrating green skills and climate learning into curriculum, education can become a powerful tool for resilience and climate action.

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 Mavalow Christelle Kalhoule
BRUSSELS, Belgium, Oct 30 2025 – Thirty years ago, world leaders gathered in Copenhagen and made a promise: people would be at the center of development. This November, Heads of State and Government will meet again in Doha, Qatar, for the Second World Summit for Social Development or WSSD2.

For civil society, the Second World Summit for Social Development is a call to action to reshape social contracts, rebuild trust, and mobilise for implementation and accountability so that “leave no one behind” becomes more than a slogan. And civil society can help make that happen, not as bystanders, but as solution providers and accountability partners.

At the same time, governments also expect the private sector to share and take up responsibilities, not only by creating jobs, but by driving social development more rapidly and on a larger scale

“Solutions” are already here, in the form of community-rooted “fixes” and strategies.

Civil society and movements are working hard: from expanding social protection for informal workers, to youth alliances linking skills training with decent, safe jobs. Investments in the care economy are creating fair work, easing the burden on women, and improving childhood and support for older people. Civic groups are making local budgets transparent, while digital inclusion programs are designed with persons with disabilities and rural communities.

These ideas have been adopted and funded. What they need now is political will, stable support, and true collaboration between governments, civil society, and communities.

From slogans to systems: a practical agenda for Doha and beyond

To move from aspiration to action, we propose five concrete steps that governments, United Nations agencies, and civil society can take together starting in Doha.

1) Set up a national platform for social development in every country by mid-2026.
Give it a public mandate, a diverse membership, and a simple job: translate the declaration’s three pillars into a country plan with milestones, budget linkages, and annual public reviews. Include unions, employers, women’s rights groups, youth networks and Older People’s Associations, organisations of persons with disabilities, faith groups, and local authorities. Build in independent monitoring and a public dashboard so people can see progress and gaps.

2) Protect and expand social protection with a focus on those most often left out.
Adopt or update a national social protection strategy that commits to at least a two-percentage-point annual increase in coverage until universal floors are reached, as the declaration encourages. Prioritise universal child benefits, disability-inclusive schemes, and lifecycle guarantees for older persons. Publish grievance mechanisms and coverage maps down to district level.

3) Link promises to money.
Ask finance and planning ministries to table, within 12 months, a “social spending compact” that identifies protected budget lines for health, education, and social protection, lays out debt management measures that shield social spending, and commits to transparent tax reforms to broaden fiscal space fairly. Invite multilateral banks to align country frameworks and provide concessional windows for social policy, as the declaration urges.

4) Close the digital divide as a social policy priority, not a tech afterthought.
Treat access to affordable internet, digital assistive technologies, and digital public infrastructures and assistance as an enabler of social rights. Co-design digital inclusion targets with communities and invest in last-mile connectivity, inclusive ID systems, and digital literacy, while safeguarding rights and privacy.

5) Build accountability into the calendar.
Use the UN Commission for Social Development in early 2026 as the first checkpoint: each government should present its national platform’s workplan, spending compact outline, and coverage targets. Regionally, UN commissions can convene mid-year stock-takes. Civil society will publish parallel reports that track delivery, spotlight gaps, and lift up solutions that can be scaled.

The promise — and the gaps — of Doha

The already agreed Doha Political Declaration restates the three pillars of social development and links them explicitly to human rights and non-discrimination. It nods to today’s realities: deepening inequalities; demographic shifts; and the digital divide that keeps billions offline.

There is progress to welcome. For the first time, the text recognises the rights of older persons. It commits to universal social protection, including “social protection floors” that guarantee basic income security and essential services throughout the life course.

But the text is cautious where courage is needed. Financing is the missing bridge. The declaration references recent global financing discussions (including the Seville outcomes under the Financing for Development track), yet stops short of specifying how countries will protect social spending while tackling debt, or how multilateral banks will resource social policy at scale.

It says little about crisis settings: places where conflict, disasters, or displacement make social development both hardest and most urgent.

Universal health coverage appears, but without the strength advocates for sexual and reproductive health and rights or for non-communicable diseases hoped for.

And while the declaration acknowledges digital transformation, it does not spell out practical steps to close the divides that map so closely onto poverty, geography, gender, and disability.

None of that should deter us. As Essi Lindstedt of Fingo in Finland, reminds us “This is not only the time for declarations, it’s the time for delivery”.

The negotiation window may be closed, but the implementation window is wide open. The real work begins in capitals, municipalities, and communities, channeling the urgency and hope of citizens for dignity and wellbeing. “Poverty should not be seen as natural. Social policy can end poverty. Therefore, social policy should be managed as a global investment that enables every person, community and country to chart their own course to thriving.”

“We must go to the grassroots. Since Copenhagen, in the Sahel and particularly in Chad, our communities continue to struggle for access to water, to the land, healthcare, education, food, and essential infrastructure. We are facing security challenges, the simple fact of living together. All of these challenges are deeply interconnected and addressing them means putting human dignity at the center of development. Across the whole chain of actors — economic, social, and political — we must never lose sight of the most vulnerable,” says Jacques Ngarassal, of CILONG, the civil society network in Tchad.

“We need to ensure social cohesion”.

From closed negotiations to open implementation

That is where civil society comes in. National coalitions and grassroots organisations are already demonstrating that social progress is possible when communities lead.

The declaration invites this by calling for “multi-stakeholder engagement” and stronger national coordination to avoid policy silos. We should take that invitation literally, insisting on inclusion while modeling it: intergenerational, gender-responsive, disability-inclusive, locally led.

The next stage must therefore shift the focus from consultation to co-creation. Governments cannot deliver on the declaration alone. When it comes to financing what matters – civil society can connect those dots domestically.

As Carlos Arana of the Asociación Nacional de Centros (ANC) in Peru noted, many countries face “policy incoherence”: ambitious social plans undermined by debt pressures and austerity. Others are excluded from concessional finance because they have crossed an arbitrary income threshold, even where inequalities remain deep.

“We see two realities today. On one hand, our societies have moved toward greater equality; yet on the other, deep inequalities persist. We can say we have made some progress, but at this moment, what matters most is not to go backward. Around the world, there is growing concern about the weakening of democracies as conservative forces regain strength. This rollback is most visible in social policies and in the shrinking spaces for participation that many of our countries opened decades ago,” adds Josefina Huamán, Executive Secretary of ANC which is also the secretary of la Mesa de Articulación de Asociaciones Nacionales y Redes de ONGs de América Latina y el Caribe.

“In my own country, for example, spaces created 20 years ago to build consensus between the State, civil society, and political parties have eroded. They have weakened because a ruling class, empowered elites who perhaps never truly disappeared, have reclaimed hegemony. What is vanishing is that participatory spirit — the affirmation of men and women of all ages and backgrounds as active subjects in democracy. This conservative, or even neoconservative, resurgence is something we are witnessing clearly in Latin America — in Bolivia, in Argentina, in Peru — and it should deeply concern us all.”

The solution is to rethink how we measure and resource progress. Moving “beyond GDP” means judging success by well-being, equity, and sustainability. It also means linking Doha’s commitments to the broader Financing for Development agenda and to reforms of the international financial architecture.

Civil society is already leading: generating citizen data, advocating tax justice, and pressing for transparency in public spending. Governments and donors must now back these efforts with coherent policy and long-term, flexible funding.

The Doha Declaration closes one chapter and opens another. Civil society is ready. Open the door, and we will help carry this agenda from the conference hall to the places where it matters most: the neighborhoods, villages, and city blocks where trust is rebuilt and futures are made.

As Zia ur Rehman, Executive Director of the Pakistan Development Alliance and Chair of the Asia Development Alliance, reminds us:

“The true legacy of the Second World Summit for Social Development will not be the text agreed in Doha, but the accountability and hope we build afterwards. Civil society has shown we are ready. The question now is whether leaders are willing to meet us halfway.”

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:

Mavalow Christelle Kalhoule is Forus Chair

By Edgardo Ayala
SAN LUIS JILOTEPEQUE, Guatemala, Oct 30 2025 – Water scarcity that relentlessly hits the rural communities in eastern Guatemala, located in the so-called Central American Dry Corridor, is a constant threat due to the challenges in producing food, year after year. But it is also an incentive to strive to overcome adversities.

The peasant families living in this region struggle to counter hopelessness and, with the help of international cooperation, manage to confront water scarcity. With great effort, they produce food, aware of the importance of caring for and protecting the area’s micro-watersheds.”Unfortunately, last year the rainy season also ended in September and we harvested almost nothing, there was no rainy season, there was no water. So it’s difficult for us here, that’s why they call it the Dry Corridor, because we don’t have water” –Ricardo Ramirez.

“We are in the Dry Corridor, and it’s hard to produce the plants here, even if you’ve tried to produce them, because due to the lack of water (the fruits) don’t reach their proper weight,” Merlyn Sandoval, head of one of the families benefiting from a project that seeks to provide the necessary tools and knowledge for people to overcome water insecurity and produce their own food, told IPS.

Sandoval is a native of the village of San Jose Las Pilas, in the municipality of San Luis Jilotepeque, in the department of Jalapa, in eastern Guatemala. Her community has been included in the program, funded by Sweden and implemented by several organizations, such as the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), together with the Guatemalan government.

The initiative, which began in 2022 and ends this December, reaches 7,000 families living around the micro-watersheds of seven municipalities in the departments of Chiquimula and Jalapa, in eastern Guatemala. These towns are Jocotan, Camotan, Olopa, San Juan Ermita, Chiquimula, San Luis Jilotepeque, and San Pedro Pinula.

The project focuses on creating the conditions to promote food and nutritional security and the resilience of the population, prioritizing water security that allows for food production.

“The strength of the (project’s) goals lies in the training and the action of the micro-watershed concept… people were trained depending on whether they were upstream, downstream, or in the middle of the watershed,” Rafael Zavala, FAO representative in Guatemala, told IPS.

He added: “The area is highly expulsive of labor due to migration, and this causes women to be the heads of households.”

The San Jose River basin is one of the watersheds being targeted for protection and preservation due to its importance for the water security of the towns in San Luis Jilotepeque, in eastern Guatemala. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

Drought and poverty

A report from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) indicates that the area included in the program shows a significant deterioration of livelihoods and a scarcity of economic opportunities.

It adds that in the department of Chiquimula, 70.6% of the population lives in poverty, while in Jalapa, the figure reaches 67.2%.

The Central American Dry Corridor, which is 1,600 kilometers long, covers 35% of Central America and is home to more than 10.5 million people.

In this belt, over 73% of the rural population lives in poverty and 7.1 million people suffer from severe food insecurity, according to FAO data.

Central America is a region of seven nations, with 50 million inhabitants, of which 18.5 million live in Guatemala, the most populous country, with high inequality and where a large part of poor families are indigenous.

In the home of Merlyn Sandoval’s family in San Jose Las Pilas, the granary for storing the corn and beans, which are so difficult to produce due to the lack of water in the area of eastern Guatemala, is never missing. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

Learning to Harvest Rainwater

As part of the project, the young Sandoval has learned the key points about micro-watershed management and has developed actions to harvest rainwater on her plot, in the backyard of her house. There, she has set up a circular tank, whose base is lined with an impermeable polyethylene geo-membrane, with a capacity of 16 cubic meters.

When it rains, water runs down from the roof and, through a PVC pipe, reaches the tank they call a “harvester,” which collects the resource to water the small garden and the fruit trees, and to provide water during the dry season, from November to May.

In the garden, Sandoval and her family of 10, harvest celery, cucumber, cilantro, chives, tomatoes, and green chili. In fruits, they harvest bananas, mangoes, and jocotes, among others.

Next to the rainwater harvester is the fish pond where 500 tilapia fingerlings are growing. The structure, also with a polyethylene geo-membrane at its base, is eight meters long, six meters wide, and one meter deep.

When the fish reach a weight of half a kilo, they can be sold in the community.

“The harvesters fill up with what is collected from the rains, and that helps to give a water change for the tilapia and also to give water to the fruit trees,” said Sandoval, 27.

The young woman also produces corn and beans, on another nearby plot, of approximately half a hectare. These plantings, more extensive than the garden and fruit trees in the backyard, cannot be covered by irrigation from the tank.

Ricardo Ramirez shows the inside of the macro-tunnel (a small greenhouse) where he has managed to harvest cucumbers, tomatoes, and green chilies, and where the plants of the new tomato planting can already be seen, on his small farm in eastern Guatemala. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

As a result, these crops, in this region of the Dry Corridor, are always vulnerable to climatic fluctuations: they can be ruined both by lack of rain and by excess rain during the same rainy season, from May to November.

Sandoval has already lost 50% of her harvest due to excess rain, she stated, with a hint of sadness.

This has also happened to Ricardo Ramirez, another resident of San Jose Las Pilas, who has experienced these fluctuations of lack and excess of water in his crop of corn and beans, staples in the Central American diet.

“Unfortunately, last year the rainy season also ended in September and we harvested almost nothing, there was no rainy season, there was no water. So it’s difficult for us here, that’s why they call it the Dry Corridor, because we don’t have water,” said Ramirez, 59, referring to his bean crop, planted on two plots totaling half a hectare, of which he has lost roughly half.

From the rainwater collection tank, Ricardo Ramirez manages to drip-irrigate the crops in the macro-tunnel, as this type of greenhouse is called. The system has allowed him to harvest produce despite water insecurity in eastern Guatemala. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

Green Hope

However, the support from the program driven with Swedish cooperation funds has been vital for Ramirez, not only to stay afloat economically as a farmer, but also to bet, with hope and enthusiasm, on the land where he was born.

Through this international initiative, Ramirez was also able to set up a rainwater collection tank with a capacity of 16 cubic meters, as well as an agricultural macro-tunnel: a kind of small greenhouse, with a modular structure covered by a mesh that protects the crops from pests and other bugs.

Inside the macro-tunnel, he planted cucumbers, tomatoes, and green chili, among others, and watered them by drip irrigation through a hose that carried water from the tank, just three meters away.

“From one row I got 950 cucumbers, and 450 pounds (204 kilos) of tomatoes, and the chili, it just keeps producing. But it was because there was water in the harvester and I just opened the little valve, gave it just half an hour, by drip, and the soil got wet,” Ramirez told IPS, while checking a bunch of bananas or guineos, as they are known in Central America.

All of that generated sufficient income for him to save 2,000 quetzales (about 160 dollars), with which he was able to install electricity on his plot and also buy an electric generator to pump water from a spring within the property, for when the collection tank runs out in about two months.

In this way, Ramirez will be able to maintain irrigation and production.

San José Las Pilas has a community water system, supplied by a spring located nearby. The tank is installed in the high area of the village so that water flows down by gravity, but the resource is rationed to just a few hours a day, given the scarcity.

Nicolas Gomez still has to walk two hours, like many others, to get water from a river when his collection tank runs out during the dry season in eastern Guatemala. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

Long Walks to Obtain Water

However, not everyone is as lucky as Ramirez, to have a water spring on their property and to irrigate gardens when the collection tank runs out.

When that happens, Nicolas Gomez has to walk almost two hours to reach the San Jose River, the closest one, and carry water from there, loading it on his shoulder in containers, to meet basic hygiene and cooking needs.

“So now, in the rainy season, we have water stored in this tank. But for the dry season we have nothing, we go to the river to fetch water, to a spring that is quite far, about a two-hour walk, that’s how hard it is for us to obtain it,” said Gomez, a 66-year-old farmer who has also suffered the climate onslaughts of drought and excess water on his corn crops.

Gomez lives in Los Magueyes, a rural settlement, also within San Luis Jilotepeque. Poverty here is more acute and visible than in San Jose Las Pilas. There is no community water system or electricity, and families have to light themselves with candles at night.

“Life here is hard,” stated Gomez, amidst the smoke produced by the wood-fired stove he was using to cook a meal when IPS visited on October 21.

By Cecilia Russell
NAIROBI & JOHANNESBURG, Oct 29 2025 – Hurricane Melissa made landfall in Jamaica yesterday—the strongest hurricane to impact the island on record since 1851—with expectations of tens of thousands of people being displaced and devastating damage to infrastructure. The tropical storm, slightly downgraded but nevertheless devastating, made landfall in Cuba today as UNEP’s newly released Adaptation Gap Report 2025: Running on Empty shows that the finance needed for developing countries to adapt to the climate crisis is falling far behind their needs.

The report estimates the adaptation finance needs of developing countries will range from between USD 310 billion to USD 365 billion per year by 2035.

But international public adaptation finance from developed to developing countries fell from USD 28 billion in 2022 to USD 26 billion in 2023. The data for 2024 and 2025 is not yet available.

“This leaves an adaptation finance gap of USD 284-339 billion per year—12 to 14 times as much as current flows,” the report released ahead of COP30 in Belém, Brazil, says.

However, adaptation finance plays a crucial role in countries and communities coping with the impacts of the climate crisis.

“Climate impacts are accelerating. Yet adaptation finance is not keeping pace, leaving the world’s most vulnerable exposed to rising seas, deadly storms, and searing heat,” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres in his message on the report. “Adaptation is not a cost—it is a lifeline. Closing the adaptation gap is how we protect lives, deliver climate justice, and build a safer, more sustainable world. Let us not waste another moment.”

Inger Andersen, Executive Director of UNEP, at the launch of Adaptation Gap Report 2025: Running on Empty. Credit: IPS

Yet investments in climate action far outweigh the costs of inaction, the report points out. For instance, every USD 1 spent on coastal protection avoids the equivalent of USD 14 in damages; urban nature-based solutions reduce ambient temperatures by over 1°C on average, a significant improvement during the summer heat; and health-related capacity-building can further reduce symptoms of heat stress.

“Every person on this planet is living with the impacts of climate change: wildfires, heatwaves, desertification, floods, rising costs and more,” said Inger Andersen, Executive Director of UNEP. “As action to cut greenhouse gas emissions continues to lag, these impacts will only get worse, harming more people and causing significant economic damage.

The report finds:

• The adaptation finance needs of developing countries by 2035 are at least 12 times as much as current international public adaptation finance flows.
• The Glasgow Climate Pact goal of doubling 2019 USD 40 billion will be missed if current trends continue.
• The new collective quantified goal for climate finance (NCQG) is insufficient to meet developing countries’ adaptation finance needs in 2035.
• There is evidence of improving adaptation planning and implementation, but it is limited.

The Brazilian COP 30 Presidency has called for a global “effort”—mutirão global—to implement ambitious climate action in response to accelerating climate impacts. This includes bridging the finance gap and requiring both public and private finance to increase their contributions.

When asked at a press conference how Jamaica will fare in terms of adaptation, Anderson said, “The reality is that in the sort of low-income bracket of developing countries, no one is prepared, unless they are on very high ground and have no tendency for fires, landslides, floods, etc.

“The reality is also that those who are the small island developing states exposed to high winds, those who are with
front towards the ocean, or those that have lots of human population in exposed areas are obviously the most at risk, and so when we are looking at countries like Jamaica or other small island developing states, clearly they stand to be very, very hard hit, as we are seeing; some are losing territory due to sea level rise, others are being hit again and again and again by these storms.”

She called for a broad discussion on adaptation at COP30.

While the report reflects on the opportunities presented by the Baku to Belém Roadmap to achieve 1.3 trillion, clear evidence of accelerating climate impacts, along with geopolitical priorities and increasing fiscal constraints, is making it more challenging to mobilize the necessary resources for climate mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage.

The adaptation report also notes that the New Collective Quantified Goal for climate finance, agreed at COP29, which called for developed nations to provide at least USD 300 billion for climate action in developing countries per year by 2035, would be insufficient to close the finance gap.

• Projected inflation rates extended to 2035 the estimated adaptation finance needed by developing countries goes from USD 310-365 billion per year in 2023 prices to USD 440-520 billion per year.
• The USD 300 billion target is for both mitigation and adaptation, meaning that adaptation would receive a lower share.

The report also warns that while the Baku to Belém Roadmap to raise USD 1.3 trillion by 2035 could make a huge difference, care must be taken not to increase the vulnerabilities of developing nations. Grants and concessional and non-debt-creating instruments are essential to avoid increasing indebtedness, which would make it harder for vulnerable countries to invest in adaptation.

The private sector is urged to contribute more to closing the gap. Private flows estimated at USD 5 billion per year could reach USD 50 billion—but this would require “targeted policy action and blended finance solutions, with concessionary public finance used to de-risk and scale-up private investment.”

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’);  

Excerpt:

UNEP’s Adaptation Gap Report 2025: Running on Empty puts the adaptation finance gap at about USD 284-339 billion per year—12 to 14 times as much as current flows.

By I. R. King
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 29 2025 – In June 2025, the international community celebrated the 80th anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Charter. On October 24, we celebrated UN Day, commemorating its ratification. This is an opportune moment to reflect on how far we have come, and the ground we have yet to traverse.

Countries of the Global South particularly find themselves at a critical juncture, as we experience firsthand the shifts of the multilateral system and bear the brunt of its effects.

The UN Charter, as the foundational document of the United Nations (UN), affirmed belief in a multilateral system and formally established an international organization aimed at curtailing future suffering in a post-World War context. The UN’s Security Council, one of the principal organs created by the Charter, which is primarily tasked with the maintenance of peace, became the cornerstone of the international peace and security framework.

Comprised of five permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) with veto power, and 10 non-permanent members elected for two-year terms, the Council has locked into place a power imbalance, which perpetuates the historical injustices of a bygone era.

Today, the world is not as it was in 1945. We are witnessing escalating conflicts in real time – from Ukraine to Gaza to Sudan, unprecedented global security threats, and rapidly shifting geopolitics – all challenging the lofty ideals and aspirations that underpinned the UN’s founding.

In light of the critical mandate of the UN Security Council, and the far-reaching consequences of its decisions, (and its paralysis), it is necessary to ask: is the United Nations Security Council currently equipped to meet these evolving challenges and retain its legitimacy?

There may be varied views on the way forward, but for a majority the short answer to this question is “No.” It is not equipped in its current form.

The L.69, a diverse pro-reform coalition of developing countries from Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacific, views reform as both urgent and essential. Our group is united by the call for comprehensive reform of the Security Council, specifically by expanding the membership in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership.

We believe that we must confront the reality that developing countries, which are home to the majority of the world’s population and are often on the frontlines of global crises, remain unrepresented and underrepresented on the Council.

The power to influence war and peace, to enforce international law, to decide where injustice is condemned or overlooked, and where humanitarian aid is delivered, should not continue to rest in the hands of a few powers, which includes those with a colonial past, who once held dominion over the very nations now seeking representation.

The exclusion of the perspective of those populations most affected by the conflicts is not only unjust, but also dangerous.

There is now a kind of ennui around the discussions on Security Council reform, which may be inevitable in a conversation that has been ongoing in various forms for decades. However, though the road to reform may be difficult we cannot afford to give up. The cost of inaction for the peoples of the world is a weighty matter that states will have to answer for.

There are pathways that have been identified for how the United Nations can go forward. The process can build on the only successful reform achieved in 1965, when the Council, in response to the growth of the UN membership, expanded from 11 to 15 members with the addition of four non-permanent seats.

The case is simple. Just as the world has changed, so too must the Security Council evolve. This is not only necessary to reflect today’s geopolitical realities, but to create a world where every voice counts. Security Council reform is about the global community fulfilling their commitment to the foundational promise of the United Nations: to uphold peace, dignity, and equality. Time is running out.

The question is not whether the Security Council will be reformed, but whether it will be reformed in time to remain relevant.

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:

Ambassador I.R. King is Permanent Representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Chair of the UN Security Council Reform Group L69