31.5 C
Lagos
Saturday, May 24, 2025
Home Blog Page 1873

GMOs: Why we seek protection of food, environment, by activists

admin
-
0
GMOs: Why we seek protection of food, environment, by activists

Speaking to media executives in Abuja recently, Nnimmo Bassey (Director, Health of Mother Earth Foundation), Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour (Convener of Nigerians against GMOs), Mariann Bassey-Orovwuje (Food Sovereignty Programme, Friends of the Earth Nigeria/Africa) and Dr. Ifeyinwa Aniebo (African Health Magazine), jointly demand the protection of food and the environment via the revocation of Monsanto’s GMO permits, as well as the repeal of the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) Act of 2015

CSOs-GMOs
Minister of State for Environment, Ibrahim Jibril, (middle) with visiting CSO representatives such as Nnimmo Bassey (Director, Health of Mother Earth Foundation), Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour (Convener of Nigerians against GMOs) and Mariann Bassey-Orovwuje (Food Sovereignty Programme, Friends of the Earth Nigeria/Africa) on the issue of GMOs in Nigeria

The National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) Act of 2015 was signed into law in the dying days of the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan. In spite of the far-reaching importance of biosafety matters to citizens of Nigeria, the process that led to the passage of the Biosafety Bill and its eventual signing into law was trailed by unresolved controversies and complaints from key stakeholders including farmers, consumers and civil society groups.

Besides the lack of elegance in the drafting of the law, some provisions do not make sense at all and in some places, references are made to incorrect sections or to non-existent sections. We believe the Act requires to be repealed or at a minimum have a thorough reworking, particularly with regard to the following:

  • Access to information
  • Public consultation and participation
  • Liability and redress
  • Labelling and the right to know
  • Decision-making
  • Appeals and reviews
  • Conflict of interest: The Composition of the Governing Board is arbitrary and populated with GMOs promoters
  • The Precautionary Principle

Conflict of interest is inbuilt in the NBMA Act and raises acute red flags about the administration of biosafety in Nigeria. For example, two of the permits issued by NBMA to Monsanto Agriculture Nigeria Limited (the confined field trial of two maize varieties) were applied for by the company in partnership with one of the members of the NBMA board, the National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA). With a GMO promoter applying for a permit in partnership with a biotech company, and sitting to approve the same permit, there are obvious reasons to call the entire transaction to question.

The NBMA Act gives the agency enormous amounts of discretionary powers with not enough mandatory duties in the operational provisions to ensure that the agency performs a stewardship role to ensure that GMOs do not pose harm to human and animal health, society and the environment.

We are also concerned that NBMA approved and issued “Permit for Commercial release/Placing on Market of Cotton (MON15985) genetically modified for lepidopteran insect pest” on Sunday 1st May 2015 when government offices do not open. In fact, 2nd May 2015 was also a public holiday. In addition, it is regrettable that NBMA approved Monsanto’s proposal for Bt cotton in May 2015 despite the fact that Burkina-Faso’s cabinet on April 14, 2016 announced its discontinuation with genetically modified cotton due to the poor quality of the cotton. It is worthy of note that cotton production has improved in Burkina Faso in both quality and quantity since they reverted to non-GMOs varieties.

In our objections to the applications by Monsanto and NABDA, we raised serious concerns that would have led to the rejection of the unwarranted applications if they had been considered. We raised concerns related to health, environmental, socio-economic, technical, administrative, molecular concerns, safety assessments and environment risk assessment. We also pointed out that the applicants did not show how they would deal with secondary pests, exposure pathways and pest resistance. Safety and environmental risks and issues of liability and redress were also not adequately addressed by the applicants.

NBMA by its letter of 28th April 2016 acknowledged receipt of objection from Health of Mother Earth Foundation and other civil society groups, stated: “Your observations have been noted by the Agency… That the National Biosafety Management Agency would review the application holistically and take the best interest of Nigeria, to avoid risks to human health, biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. The socio- economic impacts would also be well considered before taking the final decision on the application.”

We consider it intriguing and suspicious that a mere one working day after this letter, NBMA issued permits to Monsanto. There is no evidence that our objections were considered. This smacks of utter disdain for opinions and positions of concerned citizens who are conscious of the devastating socio-economic and environmental impacts of the failure of these crops, especially GM cotton in neighbouring Burkina Faso as well as in India, Pakistan and elsewhere.

In this era of change we cannot cling to wrong-headed policies or cling to the wrong foot put forward by the previous government. Having a biotech policy cannot be a justification for opening up the nation’s fragile ecosystems and environment to genetically modified organisms. A biotech policy cannot erase the globally accepted Precautionary Principle on which Biosafety regulations hang. We demand that these permits be overturned and the Biosafety law itself repealed and replaced with a people/environmentally sensitive and friendly law.

We reiterate our demand for a nullification of the permits issued to Monsanto and NABDA on Sunday 1st may 2016 and call for an investigation of the process and circumstances leading to the granting of these permits by NBMA to Monsanto and NABDA in disregard to the complaints of millions of Nigerians. Nigerians should not be used as pawns and as guinea pigs in a commercial gambit to open the country to toxic technologies in furtherance of blatant commercial interests.

We also pledge our readiness to work with the media to elevate the voices of Nigerians on these sensitive and life/death matters. We and our partners will also work with the Federal Ministry of Environment and other relevant ministries and agencies to repeal the NBMA Act 2015 that is formulated to flood our country with GMOs rather than protect our biodiversity and ensure biosafety and biosecurity.

Asians share climate experiences at GCF regional dialogue

admin
-
0
Asians share climate experiences at GCF regional dialogue

The Green Climate Fund’s (GCF) first Structured Dialogue with Asia opened on Wednesday, April 26, 2017 in Denpasar, the capital city and main hub of the Indonesian province of Bali. The forum is seeking a common cause amid diversity in bringing together representatives from 24 nations, even as participants set out to share their climate experiences, and advise the GCF on how it can direct its investments in the region.

denpasar-bali
The city of Denpasar in Bali, Indonesia is hosting the Green Climate Fund’s (GCF) first Structured Dialogue with Asia

The four-day meeting is highlighting climate finance priorities in Asia. It is also providing opportunities for countries to show what progress they have made in responding to climate change.

The diverse nature of Asia means the types of climate challenges that nations in this region face vary greatly – from droughts and floods in India, caused by monsoonal variability, to obstacles in boosting renewable and energy efficiency in Mongolia, caused by outdated infrastructure.

Participating nations in the Structured Dialogue with Asia do, however, share a common purpose in their desire to seek opportunities in climate finance to build local capacities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and to adapt to global climate change.

The GCF holds Structured Dialogues in all regions to encourage a free flow of ideas about effective climate finance. The consultations gather National Designated Authorities (NDAs) and focal points, Accredited Entities, a wide group of country stakeholders, both from civil society and private sector organisations, as well as GCF specialists.

An important outcome of GCF’s Structured Dialogues is the development of regional programming roadmaps that identify trends and emerging priorities for different regions.

The Indonesian Government is hosting this Structured Dialogue in Bali where it convened other pivotal gatherings such as the 13th United Nations Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC) in 2007 which launched the Bali Road Map, an early kick starter of climate cooperation leading to the 2015 Paris Agreement. Indonesia also hosted the 6th meeting of the Green Climate Fund Board in 2014.

Several ministers from Asian countries are attending the GCF Structured Dialogue in Bali.

Transparency agency begins audit of petroleum sector

admin
-
1
Transparency agency begins audit of petroleum sector

The process for a comprehensive independent audit of the oil and gas sector by the Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) has commenced.

Waziri-Adio
Executive Secretary of NEITI, Waziri Adio

The independent audit, to be conducted in line with the principles and standards of the global Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, will cover the period 2015 and 2016 respectively.

Executive Secretary of NEITI, Waziri Adio, announced this recently in Lagos at a workshop for major oil companies and relevant government agencies expected to participate in the exercise.

Mr. Adio explained that the workshop was designed to acquaint the participants with the structure and content of the template, the kinds of questions that NEITI would ask and the answers expected to be provided by the covered entities. “This workshop is to seek your views, suggestions and inputs as well as listen to your concerns on how to make the exercise hitch-free,” Mr. Adio added.

The workshop witnessed presentations on the EITI processes, methods, principles   and standards including emerging issues on beneficial ownership and contract transparency. The benefits of implementing EITI in Nigeria also topped discussions at the interactive session.

The Executive Secretary announced that NEITI would introduce a ranking reward system to incentivise participation of covered entities. Under the ranking system, companies will be graded based on their efficiency in populating the audit templates including the quality and depth of information and data provided, quick response to set deadlines among other considerations.

He further explained that the ranking system will be shared with over 51 member countries of the global EITI and multi-lateral organisations to serve as reference points on adherence to business ethics for major investment decisions in Nigeria.

Adio stressed: “NEITI is committed to working closely with the companies under the EITI framework to create good business environment that is conducive for the inflow of more foreign direct investments into the extractive sector. For this to happen we encourage all companies to embrace transparency, accountability and corporate governance in conformity with the EITI standards.”

He however warned that NEITI would not hesitate to invoke relevant sanctions under the law on companies and other covered entities that fail to cooperate with it during the exercise.

All major international oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria were represented at the workshop. Also in attendance were relevant government agencies such as the NNPC, the FIRS, DPR, NDDC and NLNG. The event was also attended by a cross section of the media and the civil society.

While reviewing the templates, the representatives of the respective companies welcomed the objective of the workshop, describing it as a fundamental step in building partnerships and trust with NEITI in the execution of its mandate. They urged NEITI to note very carefully their observations and the issues they have raised at the workshop with a view to ensuring that the reviewed template suits the peculiar operations of the diverse covered entities slated to participate in the process.

NEITI has already commenced distribution of the templates to participating companies and government agencies. All populated templates with the required information and data are expected to be returned to NEITI on or before the 31st of May, 2017. NEITI is expected to conclude the independent audit and make its findings public by the end of the year.

The independent audit of the oil and gas sector by NEITI for the period 2015 and 2016 will examine the fiscal, physical and process issues from, within and among the companies and relevant government agencies.

The audit will therefore undertake special verification and validation of information and data on the payments made by the companies to government entities as well as government receipts. Other areas that the audit will cover will include quantities and volumes of crude produced, balances payable or receivable on certain financial transactions, taxes, royalties on project by project basis, social contributions and investment flows.

The overall goal is to ascertain if the fiscal, physical and process transactions in the  oil and gas sector during the period under review were in line with the transparency and accountability standards as well as the principles of the global extractive industries transparency initiative which NEITI is implementing in Nigeria.

NPFL advised on league management as Super Sport ends sponsorship

admin
-
0
NPFL advised on league management as Super Sport ends sponsorship

Following Super Sport’s stoppage of the sponsorship of the Nigerian Professional Football League (NPFL), the League Management Company (LMC) has been advised to look inward towards live transmission of its league matches.

Idris-Adama
Adama idris

Former Director of Marketing of the Nigerian Football Federation (NFF), Adama Idris, said it has become crucial for LMC to shift base to local stations who, according to him, should be ready to take responsibilities.

“The media organisations within Nigeria like the Nigeria Television Authority (NTA) or under the umbrella of Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria (BON), can’t they put money on the table to sponsor the league of this country as a national assets?”

Adama said sports is big business all over the world and must be seen as such by most of the domestic stations in Nigeria.

Super Sport over the weekend announced that it was withdrawing from the sponsorship of the Nigerian Premier League for alleged irregularities.

Meanwhile, former Super Eagles coach, Austin Equavoen, and goalkeeper trainer, Ike Shorunmu, were on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 unveiled as new handlers of Sunshine Stars of Akure.

They were charged to lift the team from its dwindling fortunes in the NPFL.

Team Chairman, Gbenga Elegbeleye, boasted after the unveiling the duo that Equavoen is the type of coach the Owena Waves needs now.

“He is a well learned coach and somebody with track records that would help the team from the relegation zone. I believe Equavoen has very good chance of doing the job for us,” he said.

Captain of the team, Sunday Abe, pledged his support and that of his teammates for the newly-appointed technical handlers.

Sunshine Stars is currently 18th on the league chat and has an outstanding game with Enugu Rangers of Enugu this weekend.

Arctic is shifting rapidly, unexpectedly, scientists warn

admin
-
0
Arctic is shifting rapidly, unexpectedly, scientists warn

A new scientific assessment of climate change in the Arctic, by the Arctic Council’s Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), concludes that the Arctic is shifting – rapidly and in unexpected ways – into a new state. If current trends are allowed to continue, they will have increasingly profound impacts on human health and safety, industries and economies, and ecosystems around the world.

arctic-region
Arctic region

But the assessment, an update of AMAP’s 2011 Snow, Water, Ice, and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA) report, also found cause for hope: Implementing the 2015 Paris Agreement would limit the extent to which the Arctic climate changes over the remaining decades of this century. While the Arctic environment will continue to change regardless of efforts to reduce emissions, the Paris Agreement would strongly reduce future changes in the Arctic after mid- century, compared with a business-as-usual scenario.

More than 90 scientists contributed to the new assessment, which was peer-reviewed by 28 experts. The assessment mainly covered the period 2011-2015, with updates to include observations from 2016 and early 2017.

 

What have scientists observed?

The warming of the Arctic, marked by record-setting temperatures in recent years, is leading to continued or accelerating losses in sea ice and snow, melting of glaciers and ice sheets, freshening and warming of the Arctic Ocean, thawing of permafrost, and ecological shifts. SWIPA 2017 found that the Arctic was warmer from 2011 to 2015 than at any time in the period of instrumental records beginning around 1900 in the Arctic, and the Arctic has been warming more than twice as rapidly as the world as a whole for the past 50 years. During the winters of 2015-2016 and 2016-2017, near-surface air temperature extremes were nearly double (+6°C) those of the previous maximums for these months. Intrusions of warm air delayed sea-ice freeze-up in the Chukchi and Kara Seas, in turn allowing the warm air to advance further toward the North Pole.

A record low minimum in sea ice extent occurred in 2012, and a record low maximum sea ice extent occurred in 2016. New observations from March 2017 show the lowest extent ever for this month since the start of satellite observation. Most sea ice in the Arctic is now “first year” ice that grows in autumn and winter but melts during the spring and summer. The area covered by snow during the month of June in the North American and Eurasian Arctic is now typically about half that observed before 2000.

Meltwater from Arctic glaciers, ice sheets, and ice caps accounts for more than a third of global sea level rise, according to the new assessment. Since 2000, ice on Greenland – the source of 70% of the Arctic’s contribution to sea-level rise – has released enough meltwater to raise global sea levels by more than 1 centimetre.

 

What are the projections and implications for the future?

The physical, chemical, and biological environments of the Arctic are undergoing fundamental changes, with important consequences for Arctic ecosystems and people living and working in the Arctic. The Arctic plays an important role in global climate and weather, sea level rise, and world commerce, meaning that impacts in the Arctic will resonate far south of the Arctic Circle.

Autumn and winter temperatures in the Arctic are projected to increase to 4–5°C above late 20th century values before mid-century, twice the increase for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole. The Arctic Ocean could be largely ice-free in summer by the late 2030s, earlier than projected by most climate models. Changes in sea ice affect populations of polar bears, ice-dependent species of seals and, in some areas, walrus, which rely on sea ice for survival and reproduction.

Projections for the end of the century vary widely based on assumptions about future emissions. A high-emissions scenario (business as usual) would lead to transformative changes in the Arctic, with the average winter temperature in 2100 increasing by 12°C relative to that of the late 20th century. In contrast, an emissions reductions scenario (similar to but not as stringent as that envisioned under the Paris Agreement to keep global warming well below 2°C), would produce a warming in the Arctic of around 6°C in winter.

Studies have linked the loss of land and sea ice in the Arctic, along with changes in snow cover, to changes in Northern Hemisphere storm tracks, floods, and winter weather patterns – even finding evidence that Arctic changes influence the onset and rainfall amounts of Southeast Asian monsoons. This evidence suggests that future changes in the Arctic will affect weather elsewhere in the world even more than they do today.

Another key finding of SWIPA 2017 is that the most optimistic estimates of future sea level rise (at the lowest end of the range) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change may be too low. If increases in greenhouse gas concentrations continue at current rates, the melting of Arctic land-based ice would contribute at least another 25 centimetres to sea-level rise between 2006 and 2100, potentially affecting hundreds of millions of people living along coastlines and low-lying islands.

 

What can we do?

To limit future damages, the world will need to make substantial near-term cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, greater than those currently planned by parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Achieving the targets of the Paris Agreement would cause Arctic temperatures to stabilise – at a higher level than today – in the latter half of this century, and would avoid more than 20 centimetres of additional global sea level rise compared with what would occur under a business-as-usual scenario.

Because the climate system takes time to fully respond to changes in greenhouse gas emissions, some additional climate change is inevitable regardless of efforts to reduce emissions. Changes are expected to be greatest in the Arctic, with ripple effects throughout the world. For that reason, action is also needed to help Arctic communities and global society reduce vulnerabilities to impacts such as sea-level rise, changes in the frequency and severity of extreme weather events, and changes in precipitation patterns.

The SWIPA 2017 Summary for Policymakers includes recommended action steps to reduce future climate change and its impacts on Arctic countries and nations throughout the world. These will be presented to the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Arctic States and representatives of Arctic Indigenous Peoples’ organisations at the Arctic Council meeting in Fairbanks, Alaska, on May 11, 2017.

Why world’s largest investors are taking climate action

admin
-
0
Why world’s largest investors are taking climate action

The world’s biggest investors are responding to the global commitment to tackle climate change and are rapidly scaling up action to protect their portfolios, reveals the annual benchmark report on the industry from the Asset Owners Disclosure Project (AODP).

Julian-Poulter
CEO of Asset Owners Disclosure Project (AODP), Julian Poulter

Sixty percent of the world’s 500 biggest asset owners, with funds worth $27 trillion, now recognise the financial risks of climate change and opportunities in the low carbon transition and are taking action, an 18% increase since last year, with Europe and Australia leading the way, finds the fifth Global Climate 500 Index.

This year AODP has for the first time also assessed the world’s 50 biggest asset managers, who manage $43 trillion on behalf of their clients, over 70% of global assets under management. It finds that they are taking climate risk even more seriously, with only three US funds ignoring the issue.

However, 201 asset owners with $12.5 trillion in investments show no evidence of any action on climate risk, with North America and Asia lagging furthest behind. They include 68% of institutions in Germany, 67% in China, 63% in the US, 29% in Switzerland, 26% in Japan and 24% in Canada.

AODP CEO Julian Poulter said: “The Paris Agreement sent a clear message of global commitment to tackle climate change. Institutional investors are responding by rapidly scaling up action to tackle climate risk and seize opportunities in financing the low carbon economy. This is recognised as a key issue by the Financial Stability Board and our Index enables asset owners and managers to report against the framework which will be recommended to the G20.”

But he added: “It is shocking that many pension funds and insurers are still ignoring climate risk and gambling with the savings and financial security of millions of people. As the number of these laggards falls, their exposure to market repricing grows significantly higher and a time may be approaching when it is too late to avoid portfolio losses.”

Climate risk rose further up the investor agenda in 2016. The Paris Agreement came into force, with recognition that global financial flows must be aligned with the commitment to keep climate change below 2C. The Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), set up by the international Financial Stability Board, delivered recommendations which are due to be considered by the G20 in July. The world’s first law requiring investors to disclose climate risk came into force in France, providing a model for other countries.

The independent, non-profit AODP rates asset owners and managers on three capabilities which align with the key areas highlighted by the TCFD: Governance and Strategy; Portfolio Risk Management; and Metrics and Targets. It aims to provide an effective framework for them to meet and, ideally, exceed any climate disclosure guidelines endorsed by the G20. Institutions are graded from AAA-A-rated Leaders to D-rated institutions taking their first steps on climate risk. Those providing no evidence of action are rated X and classed as Laggards.

The report finds that although asset owners are making rapid progress, asset managers are ahead on a range of key activities:

  • 90% of AMs incorporate climate change into their policy frameworks; 42% of AOs do this, almost twice as many as last year;
  • 68% of AMs have staff focused on integrating climate risk into their investment; 18% of AOs have dedicated staff, a third more than last year);
  • 20% of AMs calculate portfolio carbon emissions; 13% of AOs do this, up from 10% last year;
  • 12% of AMs assess the risk of stranded assets in their portfolio; 6% of AOs do this, up from 5% last year.

Across the Index low carbon investment by asset owners has risen 68% to $203 billion, but still represents only 0.5% of total assets under management. Low carbon investments in the US doubled to $55 billion, 0.5% of country AUM, but the Netherlands’ $47 billion represents 3.1% of country AUM. If all countries matched the Netherlands’ record it would generate an additional $1.3 trillion of investment in the low carbon economy.

 

North America and Asia lag behind Europe and Australia on managing climate risk

Europe is the global leader on managing climate risk. Its 190 asset owners are worth $15.3 trillion and achieve an average CC rating. They include 20 of the 34 Leaders rated AAA-A. No asset owners are ignoring climate risk in the Netherlands, Scandinavia or Ireland while only 5% of institutions in the UK and 3% in France are Laggards. However, in Germany 68% of asset owners are Laggards, 17 smaller funds with $382 billion of investments. In Switzerland Laggards make up 29% of asset owners with $239 billion of investments, including $151 billion insurer Swiss Life.

Europe’s 19 asset managers achieve an average B rating, and they include the ten institutions with the highest ratings overall. The only asset manager to earn a AAA rating is the Netherlands’ $441 billion APG Asset Management. The $1,140 billion Legal & General Investment Management, rated AA, comes second, one of five UK asset managers in the top ten. Asset managers are concentrated in 10 global markets and the six highest rated are all European: Netherlands, Germany, UK, France, Switzerland and Italy.

North America lags furthest behind where asset owners average a D rating. The US is highly polarised: seven of its 183 asset owners (4%) are in the Leaders group but 115 are ignoring climate risk (63%, down only 4% from last year). These include the $458 billion Thrift Savings Plan and the $239 billion New York Life. However, in Canada the proportion of asset owners ignoring climate risk has nearly halved in a year, from 44% to 24%.

US asset managers account for 27 of the top 50 and manage $30.5 trillion, 70% of Index assets, but the average rating is also D. Blackrock, the world’s largest asset manager with $4,645 billion of assets under management, and Goldman Sachs ($1,252bn AUM) are rated C, while Vanguard ($3,500bn AUM) and State Street ($2,245bn AUM) are among 18 rated D. The only asset managers in the entire top 50 ignoring climate risk are Fidelity Investments ($2,060bn AUM), Affiliated Managers Group ($611bn AUM) and New York Life Investment Management ($528bn AUM).

Across Asia the average asset owner rating is D, although there are signs of progress. A quarter (26%) of Japan’s funds are Laggards with over $1 trillion of investments, but this has more than halved from 58% a year ago. They include insurers $493 billion Mitsui Mutual and $477 billion Zenkyoren. Japan’s two asset managers also rate D. Six of China’s nine asset owners are Laggards controlling $2.6 trillion, a position at odds with the country’s leadership on green finance within the G20 and its ambitious plans to invest in renewables, suggesting that there may be significant action that is not being disclosed.

Australia and New Zealand rival Europe. Australia’s $7 billion Local Government Super tops the Global Climate 500 Index, one of six institutions in the Leaders group, and overall its 29 asset owners achieve an average B rating. One of New Zealand’s two funds is also a Leader. However, Macquarie, the sole Australian institution among the top 50 asset managers, rates D. This is a cause for concern, given that it is set to acquire the UK’s Green Investment Bank.

Julian Poulter said: “Climate change is becoming a central part of risk management around the world, and will transcend short-term political setbacks such as moves by the Trump administration in the US to roll back action on climate change. Once investors adopt prudent risk management practices they will not unlearn them.”

 

Asset owners scaling up tangible action on climate risk

The Global Climate 500 Index reveals that institutions are rapidly scaling up their action on climate risk and achieving higher ratings. Seventeen asset managers now merit a top AAA-rating, up from 12 year ago. The overall Leader group rated AAA-A has risen to 34 from 31, with new members including TIAA, the $915 billion US pension/asset manager and AXA the $601 billion French insurance giant.

There are now 112 institutions worth $10.7 trillion rated C and above taking tangible action on climate change – 22% of the Index – up from 97 worth $9.4 trillion a year ago. The group of D-rated institution taking the first steps has grown to 187 from 157. The group of X-rated Laggards has shrunk from 246 to 201.

However, 23 asset managers managing $19.7 trillion of funds are taking tangible action on climate change with a rating of C or above, twice the proportion of asset owners. A further 24 asset managers with $20.6 trillion under management are rated D.

Sovereign wealth funds in China and oil states dominate the biggest asset owner Laggards, including the $814 billion China Investment Corporation, Saudi Arabia’s $654 billion SAMA Foreign Holdings, and the $592 billion Kuwait Investment Authority. With ambitious renewable energy targets in all these countries, there is hope that their institutions will follow the example set by the UAE which disclosed climate action for the first time this year.

Indigenous Colombian Amazon forest peoples demand rights

admin
-
1
Indigenous Colombian Amazon forest peoples demand rights

Traditional authorities and elected leaders of the Uitoto, Muinane, Andoque and Nonuya peoples of the Middle Rio Caquetá region of the Colombian Amazon are in Bogotá between the 25th and 28th of April, 2017 to represent the peoples and Traditional Association of Indigenous Authorities – the Regional Indigenous Council of Middle Amazonas (CRIMA) in meetings with different State institutions and international agencies. In a message to the world, they self-identify themselves as the “People of the Centre” and heirs of the Green Territory of Life in the Amazon rainforest

Colombian-Amazon
Amazon indigenous people in Colombia having a meal

We are here to demand guarantees for our rights and to share concerns regarding forest, climate change and biodiversity projects that affect our territory, including the National Parks Department’s Heart of the Amazon Project supported by the World Bank and Global Environment Facility, and the Vision Amazonia Programme funded by the UK, Germany and Norway. We wish to express concerns that these programmes are undermining our principles of consent and participation and are applying processes that are not appropriate for our way of thinking and decision making.

 

Asserting our rights

Under our Law of Origin, and in accordance with our uses and customs, we have maintained a respectful relationship with our territory and the natural world. Before colonisation, our ancestors lived well. More than a century ago the cauchería came to exploit, enslave and displace our peoples, and almost exterminated us. We are the survivors of that genocide. We have since been reconstructing our society by building our malocas (ceremonial houses) and practising our ritual dances using the Word of Life and the wisdom of our elders. Since the 1970’s, our Cabildos (Councils) and Traditional Association of Indigenous Authorities have undertaken collective actions to legally securing our territory and to claim our rights.

 

Messages of the People of the Centre

To the Colombian government

We are not here to ask for projects. We want the national government to fully recognise our autonomy and our rights to govern our territory. We wish to see our applications for the extension of Reserves of Monochoa, Puerto Sábalo-Los Monos and Aduche properly processed and titled in favour of our communities to consolidate the Territory of Life belonging to the People of the Centre. In addition, we seek the formation and legal registration of an Indigenous Territorial Entity under our full jurisdiction in order to manage, administer and preserve our traditional territory and forests and maintain our way of life.

 

To international institutions

We inform the World Bank, the Global Environment Facility, donor governments and cooperation agencies of Germany, the United Kingdom and Norway, that they must reach agreements directly with us, as our ancestors did. They did not talk to outsiders by means of third parties. We don’t want to have the interference of intermediaries such as NGOs and environmental funds: we seek a direct relationship between programmes, international donors and our traditional authorities. We demand that we are recognised and respected as environmental authorities in our own territory, with our own indigenous system of territorial ordering. We demand that the agencies respect our rights to own, manage and control our territory. To this end, we seek formal steps to develop and implement a Safeguard Plan for our peoples.

 

To the world

These demands are not just our concerns. Many other peoples in the Amazon and the world have similar claims and proposals for protecting peoples’ rights and sustaining the forests. When we say that we manage our territory and have our own government we are not talking about nature as an object or natural resource, but rather as a space with natural beings with whom we relate guided by our Word of Life and mutual respect. We want to let the world know what “territory” means to us. This week we will share the teachings of the Muinane people about our care of territory. The Uitoto, Andoque and Nonuya peoples have been working in the same direction in documenting our ways of managing and preserving the rainforests. We want to invite all the Peoples of the Centre, America and other parts of the world to join us in this effort to defend life and territory.

Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm Conventions COPs open with GEF, Nigeria side-events

admin
-
0
Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm Conventions COPs open with GEF, Nigeria side-events

The thirteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention (BC COP-13), the eighth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Rotterdam Convention (RC COP-8) and the eighth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Stockholm Convention (SC COP-8) commenced on Monday, April 24, 2017 in Geneva, Switzerland. The meetings, which are being held back-to-back and include joint sessions on joint issues, will come to a close on Friday, May 5.

BRS-COP-2017
L-R: Ms. Abiola Olanipekun (Chief, Scientific Support Branch, Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions), Mr. Timo Seppälä (Finland), Ms. Pam Miller (IPEN Co-chair), Mr. Ricardo Barra (STAP/GEF), Prof. Babajide Alo (University of Lagos, Nigeria), and Ms. Brenda Koekkoek (Secretariat of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management), during the side event organised in collaboration with Nigeria

The meetings also feature a high-level segment, which is scheduled for the afternoon of Thursday, May 4 and the morning of Friday, May 5, 2017. The theme of the meetings and the high-level segment is: “A future detoxified: sound management of chemicals and waste”.

Indeed, 2017 is already living up to its tag as an important year for sound chemicals management.  Besides the ongoing triple COPs, the Minamata Convention on Mercury is expected to hold the first COP later in the year.  The 7th GEF Replenishment is also underway and negotiations will take place throughout the year with the new replenishment period beginning in July 2018.  Also this year, the GEF’s Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) has released the first comprehensive evaluation of the Chemicals and Waste portfolio’s performance.

In Geneva, two major side-events that held on Monday (April 24) and Tuesday (April 25) have set the tone for the two-week, three-in-one summit.

GEF-BRS-COP
The GEF side event was introduced by Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, and moderated by Leticia Reis de Carvalho, Ministry of Environment, Brazil. Panelists included Dr. Sun Yangzhao, Director of Project Management Division, MEP; Juha Uitto, Director, GEF Independent Evaluation Office; Chizuru Aoki, GEF MEA Lead; and Ricardo Barra, GEF STAP

The Global Environment Facility’s (GEF) side event, titled: “Looking Back, Looking Forward – Programing for Impact”, held on Monday, April 24. According to officials, it was an opportunity for the IEO to present the findings of the Chemicals and Waste Focal Area Study with a discussion on how to use that information for future programming for impact.  Panellists and the audience took stock of the past as the organisation embarked on an important year of change and action in the area of chemicals.

The IEO has concluded that the GEF’s strategy and programming in chemicals and waste have been largely coherent with the relevant guidance issued by the two conventions for which the GEF serves as Financial Mechanism: The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and the Minamata Convention on Mercury.

On Tuesday, April 25, Nigeria with GEF-STAP (Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel) and the BRS (Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions) secretariat hosted a side event titled “From Science to Action”.

Moderated by Ms. Brenda Koekkoek, who is of the Secretariat of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM), the lead paper was delivered by Professor Babajide Alo of the University of Lagos, who spoke on: “The need for science-policy interface”. Ms. Kei Ohno of the BRS made a presentation of the draft road map on From Science to Action.

Afterwards, a team of panellists comprising Prof Alo (Nigeria), Mr. Ricardo Barra (STAP/GEF), Ms. Pam Miller (IPEN Co-chair), Mr. Mark Trewhitt (CropLife), Mr. Robert Simon (ICCA), Mr. Timo Seppälä (Finland) and Ms. Abiola Olanipekun (Chief, Scientific Support Branch, Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions), discussed “Role of the intersessional working group, revising the draft road map and implementation.”

A major decision to be taken by the BRS COP 2017 is on the need to strengthen the science-policy interface and to consider establishing a Science to Action road map for further engaging Parties and other stakeholders in an informed dialogue for enhanced science-based action in the implementation of the triple conventions – Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions (BRS).

According to GEF, the organisation of its support for chemicals and waste has significantly evolved over time. The GEF Operational Strategy (1995) included an ozone programme, and that Strategy and the Operational Programmes served as the basis for ozone programming for GEF-1 and GEF-2. In GEF-3, the GEF introduced a dedicated program for POPs. GEF-4 marked the beginning of explicit support for sound chemicals management through a cross-cutting strategic objective.

Mercury was addressed to a limited extent in GEF-4 though one of the strategic programmes under the International Waters focal area. In GEF-5, a Chemicals Strategy offered a unifying framework for support for the POPs and ODS focal areas, as well as for sound chemicals management and mercury. For GEF-6, the GEF Fifth Assembly created a single CW Focal Area – replacing the POPs and ODS focal areas.

Destination 1.5: A non-negotiable tool for mankind’s survival

admin
-
0
Destination 1.5: A non-negotiable tool for mankind’s survival

The 4th of November 2016 is a day which I hold dear in my heart and remember vividly, this is because it was my birthday and most especially, the Paris Agreement entered into force. What a coincidence you must say, but to me it was one of the gifts I got on this special day.

Okun-Alfa
A flooded street in Okun-Alfa community in Lagos

Nigeria is one out of the 197 Parties that are signatories to the Paris Agreement and 143 to have ratified the convention, thereby committing to reducing greenhouse gas emissions unconditionally by 20% and conditionally by 45%. Nigeria is considering 30% energy efficiency in industries, homes, businesses and vehicles, and increased use of natural gas in generators and renewable energy. Although ratifying this depository is not enough, there is an urgent need to cut emissions of greenhouse gases as soon as possible with regards to the 1.5°c limit.

The president of the second-largest polluter in the world, USA, (alongside China represents 37.98% of global carbon emissions) recently signed an executive order to boost domestic energy production in the form of fossil fuels. This translates to signing an executive death warrant for millions of vulnerable people especially girls, women and children living in communities like mine in Africa who have low resilience to climate impacts and disasters. Climate change and global warming are scientifically established facts and cannot be referred to as a hoax; its impact is visible and felt globally.

Climate change poses great challenge to community development in Nigeria and Nigerians are not excluded from the threats and impacts of global warming. Nigeria lies wholly within the tropical zone and is faced by a highly variable climate, making the country more vulnerable to health risks as climate change alters rainfall and temperature patterns.  In a World Health Organisation (WHO) World Malaria Report 2015, it is reported that approximately 438,000 deaths were attributed to malaria, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, where an estimated 90% of all malaria deaths occur. In Nigeria, an estimated 100 million malaria cases with over 300,000 deaths per year occur, contributing to an estimated 11% of maternal mortality. With the rise in temperature in Nigeria, there has been an outbreak of Cerebro Spinal Meningitis claiming about 438 deaths in 19 states during the first quarter of 2017.

The extreme dry spells and prolonged drought in Northern Nigeria has made nomadic cattle rearers migrate towards the Middle Belt, South and East of the country in search of green pastures for their cattle. This has resulted in bloody onslaughts between peasant farmers and cattle rearers which have left thousands of women and children dead, potential leaders and the future of Nigeria. Climate change has impacted my community negatively, displacing hundreds of people and left communities in mourning after clashes over shrinking spaces.

In Nigeria, an estimated 20 million people live along the coastal zone with about 90% of industries located in this area; most of the economic activities that form the backbone of the country’s economy is located within the coastal zone. It is composed of a variety of ecosystems, including lagoons, deltas, mountains, wetlands, mangroves, coral reefs, and shelf zones. Climate change has adversely affected urban and rural coastal communities causing rise in sea levels, intense rainfall, storm surges resulting to flooding and erosion. The Niger Delta produces the oil wealth that accounts for the bulk of Nigeria’s foreign earnings; it is also a conflict prone area because of industrial pollution from oil spills and discharge of domestic untreated wastes which pollutes large areas of the coast, including lagoons and near-shore areas. According to Aniefiok  et al (2013), Nigeria has 123 flaring sites in the Niger Delta region of the country and  increasing exploitation of coastal resources-utilising conflicting exploitation methods-have led to coastal degradation.

So many environmental problems plague the coastal zone of the country despite the rich mineral deposits, carbon sooth covers the air and water sources as well as farm lands are polluted. This makes the area inhabitable for the people of the communities as their sources of livelihood is lost due to the impacts of climate change, agitation and violence becomes their resort to fighting back.  This area have major and rapidly expanding cities on the coast with most communities having low adaptive capacity when hit by climate disasters, for every 1 meter rise in sea level, more than three million people are at risk of being displaced and a potentially grave environmental refugee migration crisis would occur.

It is key to state that Nigeria and all signatories to the Paris Agreement must make haste to ensure that they leverage their collective power to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, to significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.

The economic, social and political cost of climate change cannot be quantified; hence 1.5°c is not negotiable. It is dire and compulsory for the survival of millions of vulnerable poor people living in communities of developing countries like Nigeria. The government of Nigeria should see to the rapid clean-up of the Niger Delta region and also take pragmatic steps in ensuring that it stops gas flaring, invest in renewable energy, climate-smart agriculture and climate-resilient development. She must also set standards for appliances, transportation vehicles, generators and buildings if it hopes to achieve the sustainable goal 13 and attain the 1.5 set target.

Yes I have a 1.5 story to tell, sorry it’s not a rosy or fairy tale. It is a story of our harsh reality and how achieving 1.5°c is instrumental to the peace, growth and sustainable development of millions of people spread across communities in Nigeria.

By John Attah (Post-graduate student, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta)

Dangote, Gates: Why we’re hopeful about improving health in Africa

admin
-
1
Dangote, Gates: Why we’re hopeful about improving health in Africa

Nigerian billionaire and owner of the Dangote Group, Aliko Dangote, and American business magnate, investor, author and philanthropist, Bill Gates, in this jointly-written opinion piece, renew hope for proper healthcare on the African continent 

gates-dangote
Bill Gates (left) with Aliko Dangote

This week, more than 138,000 vaccinators will fan out across five African countries in the Lake Chad area in a push to eliminate polio in Africa and rid the world of this terrible disease forever.

They will take boats across fast-flowing rivers, ride jeeps along sandy ravines, walk crowded street in towns and cities and navigate cramped quarters of refugee camps to ensure that every child is immunised. Traveling for hours a day, these dedicated women and men will visit children in homes, schools, train stations, and transit points across Nigeria, Niger, Chad, Cameroon, and the Central African Republic.

This also marks World Immunisation Week, a coordinated effort to make sure that people everywhere understand the importance of getting immunised to protect against vaccine-preventable diseases.

And, by coincidence, it was almost seven years ago that the two of us first met in a hotel conference room in Abuja, Nigeria’s capital. We were there as part of a diverse group – public officials, religious leaders, business people, polio survivors, and journalists – to discuss how we could work together to stop polio in Nigeria.

At the time, Nigeria had done an amazing job tackling polio – reducing reported cases by 95 percent in just one year. But it was still circulating in six Nigerian states. While 95 percent might seem like success, as long as a single child remains infected, children across Africa and around the world are at risk.

Thanks to the effort of so many, Nigeria’s Borno State is now the only place in Africa today where polio is still circulating. It will take ingenuity to end polio there, and it will take persistence to continue reaching children in the surrounding area with vaccines to protect them from the disease until it is eradicated. But we’re confident it can be done. And when that happens, Africa will celebrate one of the biggest victories ever in public health.

Since our first meeting in 2010, the two of us have worked together on a range of other projects to help improve health in Nigeria and across Africa.

We supported the establishment of emergency operations centers in Nigeria and other countries to keep polio from spreading. This turned out to be a blessing during the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa. When the disease first appeared in Nigeria – an international travel hub that is home to more than 180 million people – the staff of an emergency operations center set up in Lagos jumped into action and stopped the disease in its tracks. It’s almost unimaginable to think what would have happened without them.

In the state of Kano, we are working with the government to ensure that children can get essential childhood immunisations against tetanus, pneumonia, liver cancer and measles. And when parents bring their children into a clinic for vaccinations, health workers can address other health issues, too, like nutrition, care for pregnant mothers and newborns and malaria prevention and treatment. We have since widened the program to several other states.

Vaccines are also one of the best tools to save lives in an epidemic, such as the meningitis C outbreak happening now in Nigeria and other West African countries.

And because of the devastating impact malnutrition has on Nigeria’s children – leading to 300,000 deaths annually and causing stunted growth and development in millions more – we have expanded our partnership to include nutrition programs across 12 states.

Earlier this year, we also helped launch the End Malaria Council, a group of influential public and private sector leaders committed to ensuring that malaria eradication remains a top global priority.

Underlying all these efforts is our belief that strengthening health systems is the key to breaking the cycle of extreme poverty and disease – and kick-starting a virtuous cycle of health, productivity, and prosperity.

In our work together, we have learned a few important lessons.

First, improving the health of communities depends on a successful partnership between government, communities, religious and business leaders, volunteers, and NGOs. This ensures that everyone is rowing in the same direction. And it is essential to building trust so parents have the confidence that vaccines are safe and will protect their children from life-threatening diseases.

Second, we must keep innovating to speed up progress. This month, for example, vaccinators will test a new vaccine carrier that keeps the temperature of vaccines stable for up to five days, even in blistering heat. This breakthrough will enable vaccinators to finally reach children in extremely remote areas with life-saving vaccines.

Last, accurate and reliable data is central to any effort to improve health. Data can tell a health officer which communities are running low on vaccine supplies, where there are gaps in vaccination coverage, and which new mothers need reminders to take their babies to the health clinic to be immunised.

An Africa without polio is within reach. So is the vision of getting life-saving vaccines to every child. Success will generate more enthusiasm and support from across different sectors – government, business, civil society, the media – to tackle other killer diseases and the underlying conditions that affect people’s health, including fixing broken health systems.

We know that strengthening health systems takes time and diligence. We are optimistic that Africa can achieve the future it aspires to. That future depends on people working together – across national borders and across socioeconomic strata – to build the better world we all want.

1...1,8721,8731,874...2,226Page 1,873 of 2,226

TV Report

Archives

2025 EnviroNews Nigeria. All Rights Reserved.

×