Green Earth Africa

Sir David Attenborough voices an animated short film highlighting the value and importance of the world’s forests to mark World Environment Day on Sunday 5 June, organised by theUN Environment Programme

A UN report outlines path to kickstart economic growth after the recession, without generating a rise in emissions

The UN proposes to spend $362bn on developing renewable forms of energy. Photograph: Graham Turner

The United Nations has set out its blueprint of how to green the world’s economy, in order to kickstart economic growth after the recession, without generating an accompanying rise in greenhouse gas emissions.

As I reported last night, the UN estimates that about $1.3 trillion, equivalent to about 2% of global GDP, will need to be invested overall.

Now that the details are published, here’s how that figure breaks down:

• $362bn (£223bn) for energy, to develop renewable forms of power and help to increase energy efficiency.

• $194bn on transport, including the development of cleaner and greener forms of transport, the provision of more public transport infrastructure and ways to better design cities.

• $134bn on buildings – to be spent equipping buildings better for future stresses, including through insulation and improved weather-proofing.

• $134bn on tourism – greening tourism could give many countries access to a vibrant, growing sector of the economy, as well as reducing the damage that travel does currently.

• $108bn for agriculture, in order to raise productivity, make the most of scarce water supplies, and preserve soil fertility.

• $108bn on fishing, to better manage declining fish stocks. Much of the money may have to go on compensating fishermen, because the UN calculates that the world’s fishing fleet should be halved.

• $108bn on waste and recycling, to cut the amount of waste going to landfills by about 70% within two decades.

• $108bn on water and sanitation, to help preserve existing water supplies, prevent the wasteful use of irrigation, and give millions of people access to safe water supplies and decent sewage treatment.

• $76bn for industry to improve efficiency and cut down on the wasteful use of natural resources.

• $15bn to halve deforestation in the next 20 years.

Gases continued to build in 2009 despite economic slowdown, says UN weather agency

A coal-fired power station. Photograph: John Giles/PA

Concentrations of the main greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have reached their highest level since pre-industrial times, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) said today.

Concentrations of the gases continued to build up in 2009 – the latest year of observations – despite the economic slowdown, the UN weather agency said in its latest Greenhouse Gas Bulletin.

Rises in the amount of greenhouse gases increase radiation in the atmosphere, warming the surface of the Earth and causing climate change.

“The main long-lived greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have reached their highest recorded levels since the beginning of the industrial age, and this despite the recent economic slowdown,” said WMO deputy secretary-general Jeremiah Lengoasa.

The findings will be studied at a UN meeting in Cancún, Mexico, from 29 November to 10 December to discuss climate change.

Total radiative forcing of all long-lived greenhouse gases – the balance between radiation coming into the atmosphere and radiation going out – increased by 1% in 2009 and rose by 27.5% from 1990 to 2009, the WMO said.

The growth rates for carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide were smaller than in 2008, but this had only a marginal impact on the long-lasting concentrations.

It would take about 100 years for carbon dioxide to disappear from the atmosphere if emissions stopped completely.

Carbon dioxide is the single most important greenhouse gas caused by human activity, contributing 63.5% of total radiative forcing. Its concentration has increased by 38% since 1750, mainly because of emissions from burning fossil fuels, deforestation and changes in land use, the WMO said.

Natural emissions of methane due for example to the melting of the Arctic icecap or increased rainfall on wetlands – themselves caused by global warming – are becoming more significant, it said.

This could create a “feedback loop” in which global warming releases large quantities of methane into the atmosphere which then contribute to further global warming.

These natural emissions could be the reason why methane has increased in the atmosphere over the past three years after nearly a decade of no growth, the WMO said.

Human activities such as cattle-rearing, rice planting, fossil-fuel exploitation and landfills account for 60% of methane emissions, with natural sources accounting for the rest.

Pioneering report equates biodiversity to cash in hope of encouraging conservation

ALAMY

£19bn-£109bn, Coral reefs: Home to an estimated three million species. Thirty million people in coastal and island communities are reliant on reef-based resources

Nature and the services it provides are worth trillions of dollars annually to human society, and governments and businesses must formally recognise this to halt the continuing degradation of the natural world, a groundbreaking UN report said yesterday.

 The enormous economic value of forests, freshwater, soils and coral reefs, as well as the social and economic consequences of their loss, must be factored into political and economic policies in all countries, according to the new study of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (Teeb).

It suggests, for example, that the value of human welfare benefits provided by coral reefs is between $30bn (£19bn) and $172bn annually. The destruction of coral reefs is not only damaging to marine life but also poses risks to communities, the report says. Some 30 million people around the world rely on reef-based resources for food production, and for their livelihoods.

Related articles

• Dr Raghunandan Singh Chundawat: Even this novel approach may not be enough to save the tiger
• Search the news archive for more stories

In another example, the report reveals that the economic value of insect pollinators in global crop production is worth €153bn (£134bn) every year.

On the other hand, damage to natural capital including forests, wetlands and grasslands is valued at between $2trn and $4.5trn annually, but the figure is not included in economic data such as GDP, or in corporate accounts.

Released at the UN biodiversity conference in Nagoya, Japan, the report is likely to mark a turning point in how the world deals with the growing global biodiversity crisis, with wildlife and ecosystems everywhere under mounting threat of extinction and destruction – a scenario highlighted by the fact that the international community has failed to meet the agreed target of halting the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010.

It is hoped that by underlining its economic value to people, the report will transform the understanding of biodiversity and its disappearance, just as the 2006 Stern Report widened the appreciation of the threat of climate change by stating how much it would cost, and stressing that acting to tackle it would be far cheaper than doing nothing.

Seen by many as the Stern Report for biodiversity, the Teeb report puts cash figures on the value of nature, disclosing that ecosystems such as freshwater, coral reefs and forests account for between 47 and 89 per cent of what the UN calls “the GDP of the poor”, meaning the source of livelihood for the rural and forest-dwelling poor.

“This economic invisibility of nature is a problem,” said Pavan Sukhdev, the Indian banker who led the Teeb study. “The invisibility needs to change, so steps can be taken to save these threatened ecosystems that are a vital source of food, water and income.

“Unfortunately, the lack of an economic lens to reflect these realities has meant that we have treated these matters lightly, that they are not centre stage when it comes to policy discussions, nor centre stage when it comes to business discussions,” he said.

The report in numbers…

£31bn: Overfishing

The report says that £31bn a year is lost due to overfishing. It says that poor regulation and weak enforcement of existing regulations allow industrial fishing fleets to plunder valuable fish stocks without regard for sustainability, thus reducing the potential income from fishing.

£134bn: Insect pollination

The value of insects pollinating crops and flowers can be estimated at £134bn a year, according to the UN. The figure represents 9.5 per cent of all agricultural output used for human food.

£19bn–£109bn: Coral reefs

Home to an estimated three million species. Thirty million people in coastal and island communities are reliant on reef-based resources as their primary means of food production, income and livelihood. The UN report values coral reefs at between £19bn and £109bn annually.

50

Millionaires that have been made in the Hiware Bazaar district of India after 70 hectares of forest were regenerated, leading to the number of wells in the area doubling and grass production increasing. Income from agriculture increased too.

Poor harvests and demand from developing countries could push cost of weekly shop up by 10%

Global wheat harvest this year has been hit by droughts and floods.

 Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian

Two years after the last food crisis, when prices surged by nearly 15% in the UK, food inflation is back. Soaring global food prices have prompted City and food industry experts to warn that the cost of the weekly shop is set to rise by up to 10% in the coming months.

As in 2008, rocketing prices are the result of rising demand and supply shortages caused by freak weather and poor harvests. Moreover, these conditions are exacerbated by speculation on commodity markets and changing diets in fast-growing Asian countries.

Last week, the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) called an emergency meeting for 24 September to discuss the food crisis. In Mozambique, riots broke out following the government’s decision to raise bread prices by 30%, leaving seven people dead and hundreds injured. At the same time the Russian government extended its export ban on wheat by another 12 months as it battles drought, shortages and inflation at home, which threatens to push up prices further. European wheat prices hit more than €231 (£192) a tonne last week, just below last month’s two-year high of €236 but still 60% higher than a year ago in sterling terms. Corn prices are at their highest level since June 2009 while sugar has been on a rollercoaster ride after hitting a 29-year peak in February.

FAO economist Abdolreza Abbassian raises the prospect of further civil unrest in less developed countries if the price of basic food continues to rise: “Russia’s move is another unfortunate development that will prolong upward pressure on grain prices and contribute to higher price instability in world markets. Rioting may reappear in poor districts around the world if prices of basic foodstuff commodities continue to rise further. ”

Surging wheat prices, along with higher sugar and oil-seed costs, drove the FAO’s international food price index up 5% last month, the biggest rise since last November. The organisation estimates this year’s wheat crop at 646m tonnes – down 5% from last year – while world barley production, also hit by bad weather in the former Soviet Union and the EU, is forecast to drop by 22% to a 30-year low of 129m tonnes. Last month global meat prices hit a 20-year high.

In the UK, Premier Foods, owner of the Hovis brand, has warned the global shortage of wheat could push up the cost of bread by at least 5p a loaf, while other food brands such as McDougalls flour and Mr Kipling cakes will also cost more.

A leading UK supplier of flour, Rank Hovis, is to increase its prices from 6 September. Soaring barley prices mean that the pub price of a pint of beer could top £4 this time next year.

Experts fear that UK food price inflation, which was running at an annual rate of 3.4% in July, could now rise to 10% – depending on whether costs continue to climb and to what extent food manufacturers absorb the increases.

The Grocer‘s food and drink editor Alex Beckett reckons that if prices for commodities such as wheat, sugar, cocoa and palm oil remain at current levels, by January the weekly shop could cost 10% more than 12 months previously.

Philip Shaw, chief economist at Investec, said: “If the current rise in prices is sustained, food price inflation might climb to 7-8% by mid-2011.” And Philip Rush, at Nomura, sees food prices going higher over the next year, tipping back up to above 5% year-on-year growth.

Meat

Global meat prices have risen sharply as a drop in production from exporters such as Argentina and the US has coincided with rising demand from China, where consumers are eating more meat than they used to. The FAO’s index of meat prices in August climbed to its highest level since it started compiling the index in 1990, up 16% over the past year. Lamb prices are at a 37-year high, beef prices are at their highest level in two years and pork and poultry have also become dearer.

Mark Topliff at Eblex, which represents the English beef and sheep industry, explains that in recent years, falling cattle prices have led to fewer farmers keeping cows in major exporting nations like Argentina, Brazil and the US, the world’s biggest beef producer. The removal of EU subsidies under the common agricultural policy for British and European sheep farmers has also led to a decline in sheep numbers.

Wheat

The European flour milling association has highlighted the role of speculators in driving up wheat prices, although the global shortage appears to be the main factor. The main culprit is the weather – wheat prices have been going up since the summer when crops were hit by a drought and wildfires in Russia and dry weather in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, compounded by unusually wet weather in Canada and the floods in Pakistan.

Russia, the world’s fourth-biggest wheat producer, has imposed an export ban on grain amid its worst drought in at least 50 years, and prime minister Vladimir Putin warned last Thursday that the ban could stay in place until after the 2011 harvest, forcing importers in the Middle East and North Africa to turn to Europe and the US for supplies.

“This has completely changed the complexion of the market,” said Sudakshina Unnikrishnan, a commodities analyst at Barclays Capital. “We see further upside for corn and wheat prices. Consuming countries are scrambling to gain access to supplies,” she warns.

Britain’s wheat crop is expected to be close to average this year, but Germany, which had more rain in August, could become reliant on wheat imports for the first time in 10 years. The winter wheat harvest will be 9% lower this year than last, according to the German farmers’ association, forcing Germany to import grain from France and the US.Bad weather has also affected the quality of the wheat, which suffers when it stands too long in the rain. Lower-quality wheat is used as animal feed.

The premium for high-quality milling wheat used in bread, cereals and biscuits, which now costs about £195 a tonne, has climbed to £30-£40 from the typical £10-£15.

“If we don’t get a bumper harvest from the southern hemisphere, namely Argentina and Australia [due at Christmas], the wheat price could continue to stay where it is,” said Guy Gagen, chief arable adviser at the National Farmers’ Union. The Northern hemisphere – the US, Canada, Russia and northern Europe – produces 80% of the world’s wheat supply.

Experts note, however, that the market is not in the same position as it was in 2007/08, when global wheat stocks were very low, as there have been two seasons of replenishment. The problem is that many countries will not release their surplus stocks to the market but are hoarding them, says Alexander Waugh, director general of the National Association of British and Irish Millers.

On a brighter note, he adds: “High prices tend to encourage farmers to plant more crops. The situation may be uncomfortable but it’s not out of control or unmanageable.”

Cocoa

In mid-July, a US commodities trading company, Armajaro, attempted to corner the market in cocoa by taking delivery of 7% of the world’s supply at a time when prices were at a 32-year high of $3,200 per tonne (£2,077) – a $1bn bet. The fear was Armajaro would squeeze the market, forcing prices even higher. In the event prices have gone into reverse, falling by more than 25% as fears have receded that supplies from Ivory Coast, which produces 40% of the world’s cocoa, would be hit by bad weather.

However, last week Barry Callebaut – the world’s biggest chocolate company, which supplies confectioners such as Nestlé – said prices would stay high.

“Retailers do not want to accept higher prices at the moment in spite of higher raw material costs,” said the company’s chief executive. “But pressures will rise, prices will just have to increase.”

Sugar

Sugar prices hit a 29-year high in February, but then fell back sharply. However, last week Brazil – the world’s biggest sugar producer – warned crops may be lower than expected as a result of dry weather and the price climbed back to its highest level since March.

Coffee

Coffee prices are at a 12-year high and global stocks at their lowest level for a decade. Several coffee bars have started to push through price rises, although Starbucks said last week that it would not raise prices.

Peatlands now seem to have a firm footing in REDD.  Russia’s wildfires dramatically highlighted the importance of these ecosystems and the devastating costs of peatland degradation.  And while the haze slowly receded over Russia, the wind was at the Voluntary Carbon Standard’s back as their first REDD methodology targeting the soggy swamps went live this month.  

From carbon payments for helping re-wet drained peatlands to aligning economic incentives to prevent their degradation in the first place, Ecosystem Marketplace digs in to peatlands with two recent articles exploring both the Russian wildfires and the potential for carbon finance in light of the new VCS REDD methodology.  

Moving past peat, but still stuck in the muck, corruption and challenges to REDD transparency surfaced from a variety of sources this month.  The billions of dollars just starting to be funneled into REDD programs are being eyed suspiciously and efforts to ensure transparency may be a hard sell.  

First, the Interim REDD+ Partnership is stepping in to provide its first official attempt at surveying the landscape of REDD+ activities — in the timespan of two weeks — as part of its stated desire to produce a transparent global registry.  In Indonesia and Brazil, renewed concerns over corrupt officials siphoning off money from nascent deals with Norway emerged in the press.  And finally, the announcement of a forest carbon deal between an Australian firm and the entire country of the Democratic Republic of Congo is raising eyebrows as the information on such a vast deal remains shrouded in mystery.  This, in the wake of a agreement (covered in our last newsletter) the company says it signed with Malaysian tribes to pursue REDD projects that is also being contested.

On firmer footing, Australia signaled a new move to get its forest owners out of the carbon market mire.  Stranded by the government’s abandonment of the operational Greenhouse Friendly program and failure to follow through with a nationwide trading scheme, Aussie forest spirits may be up again as a new proposal to allow forest owners to generate carbon credits emerges and kindles new interest from neighboring New Zealand as well.

Nepalese government has paid a Norwegian consultancy €150,000 (£123,000) to get UN certification for biogas projects

A woman sits on her land near the river. The Nepalese government subsidises farmers to install equipment that turns animal and human waste into methane cooking fuel, using less firewood.

Photograph: Graeme Robertson for the Guardian

The UN-certified scheme that allows developed nations to pay for carbon reductions abroad instead of making domestic cuts has come under fire for paying high fees to consultants from rich countries.

The Guardian has learned that the Nepalese government has so far paid a Norwegian company €150,000 to verify a greenhouse gas reduction programme for which it is seeking carbon credits. That sum would pay for 340 of the small-scale carbon cutting projects the government is trying to set up.

Seperately, the conservation charity WWF pays €20,000 (£16,000) per verification visit for a smaller project using the same technology, but under a different scheme.

Kyle Ash, a Greenpeace official in Washington DC called the fees “exorbitant” and questioned the entire UN-administered cap and trade system. “It doesn’t seem like a good investment especially when there are other ways to reduce emissions,” he said.

“We need to restrict global warming pollution [in industrialised countries],” he said. “And we need to finance clean development in third world countries. But the two things aren’t connected.”

Stein Jensen, a spokesman for the Oslo-based consulting company used by the Nepalese government, Det Norske Veritas (DNV), said that there is such competition to provide consultancy services that the fees reflect the market rate. He added: “for small projects the transaction costs are high.”

The UN says verification is necessary to ensure that schemes attracting carbon credits really do lead to reductions in CO₂, but it has currently approved only 33 companies worldwide to evaluate carbon offset projects.

Samir Thapa, an official with the Nepalese government’s Alternative Energy Promotion Centre, said the demand for evaluators outstrips the number of companies available. “You may have to wait to validate your project for six months or one year,” he said. “Economically, that’s not very viable for the project, especially in terms of smaller projects like ours.”

The Nepalese government has been working since 2006 to receive UN certification to sell carbon offsets for two biogas projects. The government subsidises farmers to install equipment that turns animal and human waste into methane cooking fuel. Under the scheme, local people will use less firewood and other fuels, thereby reducing carbon emissions.

The government paid DNV €150,000 (£123,000) for initial site visits and related services. It will have to pay €50,000 (£41,000) for subsequent annual visits. Nepal hopes to complete the UN-administered certification process by the end of this year and ultimately wants to build 200,000 biogas installations. It expects to earn $400,000 (£259,000) per year in carbon credits.

The biogas equipment currently costs $575 (£372) per household, a significant sum for farmers earning under $1,500 (£971) per year. The government offers partial subsidies, but farmers must spend some of their savings and take out microcredit loans to pay for the rest.

Villager Sabitri Dairi said the scheme had brought environmental benefits. “It’s harmful to the forest and the environment to cut firewood down. There could be landslides and floods.”

WWF helped finance the biogas for people in Badreni, a village in the south of the country near Chitwan national park. In a project separate from the Nepalese government’s, WWF hopes to raise $1m for a microcredit fund by participating in the voluntary carbon offset market. Voluntary credits are not recognised by the UN as meeting a country’s carbon reduction goals under the Kyoto protocol. But participants such as WWF must go through a similar validation and verification process as those who do.

WWF will get credit for each tonne of carbon not produced as a result of using biogas. It sells the credits to the Zurich-based NGO Myclimate, which in turn provides offsets to individuals, airlines and other European companies seeking to reduce their carbon footprints.

Thomas Finsterwald, project manager with Myclimate, admitted that the high fees make “it difficult to do small projects.” He said inspection fees might eat up 40% of income for some other projects. “This is really a problem.”

Tim Boyle is one of three UN coordinators for the UN REDD Asia Pacific Region. Tim is based in Thailand and is engaged across a number of countries across the region supporting the development of REDD.

You can find out more about UN REDD on their website here.

Tim Boyle presents the UN REDD program from Katoomba Group on Vimeo.

Target:	Pledged:	Planted:
12,000,000,000	11,784,111,417	10,177,175,289

The Plant for the Planet: Billion Tree Campaign is a worldwide tree planting initiative facilitated by the United Nations Environment Programme. People, communities, businesses, industry, civil society organizations and governments are encouraged to enter tree planting pledges on-line . The campaign strongly encourages the planting of indigenous trees and trees that are appropriate to the local environment.

By the end of 2009, more than 7.4 billion trees had been planted under this campaign – far in excess of the year-end target of 7 billion – by participants in 170 countries. With this success continuing into 2010, the Billion Tree Campaign will make a substantial contribution to the 2010 International Year of Biodiversity, raising awareness of the importance of biodiversity for our well-being. Trees play a crucial role as fundamental components of the biodiversity that forms the foundation of the living networks and systems that provide us all with health, wealth, food, fuel and vital ecosystem services our lives depend on. They help provide breathable air, drinkable water, fertile soils and a stable climate. The billions of trees planted by the collective efforts of participants of the Billion Tree Campaign from all parts of society will contribute to biodiversity across the planet.

More than 200 researchers and policymakers came together in Helsinki in mid-May to celebrate the 25th anniversary of United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research ( UNU-WIDER), as well as to discuss the ‘Triple Crisis’ of finance, food and climate change and its implications for poverty, inequality and human development. Energetic debate, from a wide range of perspectives, took place over 13–15 May.

This is at a time when the global economy is passing through a period of profound change. How to interpret that change, and what it means for the next 25 years of UNU-WIDER research and training, was central to the Triple Crisis conference. How economics as a discipline refocuses itself on the really important dangers facing humanity was also an issue that ran throughout the three days of debate.

The financial crisis

The immediate concern is the global financial crisis, which has reverberated across the world for the last two years — with commentary switching regularly between optimism and pessimism. While the crisis originated in the under-regulated financial systems of the North, it hit the South. And while the South has performed better than initially expected — helped by continued growth in the emerging economies — the financial crisis has placed a major strain on the fiscal position of the world’s richer countries. At some point, the massive dose of Keynesian medicine that rich countries put in place after the onset of the financial crisis will be reversed, and we do not know how the global economy will respond to this tightening of fiscal and monetary policy after their unprecedented easing.

No country, rich or poor, is unaffected by contagion across financial markets.

The UNU-WIDER conference saw much debate on what the developing world should do next to offset likely future shocks.

This is in a world where developing countries have had to self-insure — through the accumulation of large foreign-exchange reserves — given the continuing weaknesses in the international support available to meet shocks. There has not been a repeat of past currency crises in the South, which generally entered the global economic slowdown in better shape than before. Africa, especially, has gained some room to manoeuvre after its hard-won battles to build policy capacity, although the region remains much too dependent on the fortunes of world commodity markets.

No country, rich or poor, is unaffected by contagion across financial markets, and the UNU-WIDER conference took place amidst much turbulence in the euro-zone — reinforcing the message that the global economy is not yet ‘post-crisis’.

The climate change crisis

Simultaneously, climate change remains unchecked. NASA is predicting that climate change and? the El Niño system will make 2010 the warmest year on record. The global economic slowdown took a bite out of greenhouse gas emissions, but too little action came out of the UN climate change conference (COP15) in December 2009. Climate is therefore the second, but most far-reaching, crisis.

The present global growth model is environmentally unsustainable, and the UNU-WIDER conference saw much discussion of how to reform it. The poor are the main victims of environmental stress and, with unchecked climate change being an increasing driver of poverty in future years, the international system must radically step up its help to developing countries for adaption and mitigation. But to get the right investments and policies in place, we need to know much more about the country level and regional impacts of drought and flood. This was a key issue in the discussion at the UNU-WIDER conference of the research challenges for development economics inherent in climate change.

Underlying this crisis is a global failure to invest in sustainable energy research, especially in technologies suitable for poor countries.

Underlying this crisis is a global failure to invest in sustainable energy research, especially in technologies suitable for poor countries. While this has begun to grow again after decades of decline, massive public and private investments are required. The financial crisis hit venture capital funding and public funds, but the world is neglecting energy investment at our peril. Underinvestment has left the world with a very narrow menu of non-fossil fuel energy sources.

Participants at the UNU-WIDER conference reminded us of how turbulence in the price and availability of energy have shocked the global economy before, and how energy waste underlies the unsustainable nature of the present global growth path. These issues can only intensify as the economies of the rich world move towards recovery, leading to more pressure on fossil fuel sources — a competition for energy that is also a creator of conflict.

The food crisis

The third dimension of the Triple Crisis, and certainly not the least, is that of malnutrition and hunger, which are on the rise again. The poor were hit hard by the fall-off in remittances and trade volumes that occurred at the start of the global recession.

With the increase in food demand that follows from rising prosperity in the emerging economies and the switch of more crop land to biofuels, the world — and especially the poor — will certainly confront more food-price shocks in the future.

Equally worrying has been the upward march of food prices in recent years, with a sharp spike in the price of basic staples over 2007-08 before falling back, somewhat, as global growth slowed. But with more than half the planet’s population now urbanized, the increase in food demand that follows from rising prosperity in the emerging economies and the switch of more crop land to biofuels, the world — and especially the poor — will certainly confront more food-price shocks in the future.

Surplus countries will wish to protect their domestic consumers first, and severe disruption to global food markets — upon which food-deficit countries depend — cannot be ruled out. UNU-WIDER’s 25th anniversary conference benefited greatly from the participation of national and international policymakers and researchers in seeking answers to this urgent policy challenge.

Social protection, especially, will need to be put in place in far more countries, and it must address the challenges of climate change and global economic shocks as well. There is much to be learnt from the experiences of countries, such as Brazil and Mexico, that have successfully stepped up social protection over the last decade. The immediate task is to get these lessons adopted in programmes for the poorer world, especially in Africa, where a combination of domestic finance (especially in the region’s resource-rich countries) and foreign aid, must be mobilized to fund social protection.

Foreign aid and the Triple Crisis

Over the past half century, the world of foreign aid has expanded to create a complex web of donors and recipients. This complexity has several dimensions: the number of bilateral and multilateral donors; the variety of old and new delivery mechanisms for aid funds; the multiplicity of objectives for aid; and the ‘transactions’ costs (in approval, implementation, and monitoring) for donors and recipients. At the same time, the effectiveness of aid is subject to intense scrutiny.

The Triple Crisis is at the core of that bigger picture, along with its implications — and those of other threats—for peace and security, a key concern for the United Nations system.

We need to examine the bigger picture that sets the framework, but also the challenges, for foreign aid. The Triple Crisis is at the core of that bigger picture, along with its implications — and those of other threats—for peace and security, a key concern for the United Nations system. The role for aid, how to improve its impact, and how to mobilize more private capital, were debated throughout the three days of the UNU-WIDER conference.

The task ahead

Twenty-five years on from the commencement of UNU-WIDER’s operations, the need for thorough, rigorous, and policy-focused research and training is as pressing today as it was then. International governance remains under pressure from multiple crises. Our focus on the Triple Crisis does not imply that other issues are ignored — the task of improving human health and well-being, including tackling HIV/AIDS, remains urgent. So too, does the need to prevent and end conflict.

From UNU-WIDER’s home in Helsinki, and with the support of the host country and other donors, we have been able to build an international network of researchers and policymakers committed to delivering research and training that makes a difference. Our 25th anniversary conference celebrated that achievement, but it also reminded us of the daily fate of the many hundreds of millions of people, who continue to live in poverty. We must take on this challenge in a concerted and decisive way. Hard work lies ahead — in which we must all engage.