More
    Home Blog Page 7

    The World Bank used to cause untold harm – but 30 years ago it started reforming. What went right

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    Danny Bradlow, SARCHI Professor of International Development Law and African Economic Relations, University of Pretoria

     

    Development projects can have profound impacts on their societies. There are many benefits that flow from building new roads and power plants, and from modernising agricultural practices. But they can also have permanent negative consequences.

    For example, communities may be involuntarily relocated to make way for roads or power plants. These projects can change the way natural resources are used in a particular area, making it difficult or impossible for communities to continue their traditional agricultural practices. The job opportunities that they create can challenge traditional values and ways of living.

    Historically, many of these projects have been owned or sponsored by governments, eager to bring the benefits of modernisation to their citizens. They have often been funded by multilateral institutions like the World Bank, which was established in 1944 to fund the reconstruction and development of its member states.

    These institutions were not unaware of the environmental and social impacts of the projects they funded. However, they maintained that each state had to decide for itself how it wished to manage these impacts. They would argue that they were merely the funders, and so should defer to the government on how to manage them. It would be an affront to the state’s sovereignty for them to interfere with the government’s decisions on these aspects of the project.

    The World Bank’s confidence in its ability to avoid responsibility for its project related decisions and actions was bolstered by the fact that it was immune from being sued in any national court.

    The result was that the bank supported some projects that were environmentally and socially damaging. As a result, during the 1980s the World Bank was the target of sustained protests by affected communities and their allies around the world.

    To its credit, 30 years ago the bank, following an international campaign in which this author participated, recognised that its position was untenable. In 1993 it established the world’s first citizen driven independent accountability mechanism, the World Bank Inspection Panel.

    This article argues that the panel’s 30th anniversary is a moment to celebrate its accomplishments. The panel has significant limitations. Nevertheless, its impact on development and the international development financing institutions has been profound.

    Accomplishments

    The three-member panel is independent of the World Bank’s management. It receives and investigates complaints from communities who allege that they have been harmed or threatened with harm because of the World Bank’s failure to comply with its own policies and procedures in funding a particular project. In other words, the panel’s focus is exclusively on the conduct and decisions of the Bank’s staff and management.

    It sends its findings to the bank’s board. In cases of noncompliance, the bank’s management is expected to submit an action plan to the board that explains how it will correct the noncompliance and its consequences. Both the report and the action plan are made public.

    Since it was established, the panel’s investigations have resulted in some relief for affected communities. For example, 70,000 people, previously ignored by the World Bank, received compensation for their losses in a bridge project in Bangladesh. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, a forestry project was revised to provide greater protection to indigenous communities who had not been adequately consulted about the project.

    The panel has also succeeded in establishing the principle that international financial organisations must be accountable for their own actions to the communities whose lives are affected by the projects and policies they finance.

    Since its establishment, over 25 multilateral and national development banks and institutions have established their own independent accountability mechanisms. In total, these mechanisms have received 1,634 complaints, of which about 330 have been from 27 countries in Africa. Forty-five of the African cases have resulted in findings on compliance or noncompliance.

    All findings of noncompliance have led to management action plans intended to correct the noncompliance.

    The reports of these mechanisms are used both by their own institutions to improve their performance in development projects and to reduce the risk that they repeat old mistakes. They can also help ensure that they are held accountable when they do repeat these mistakes.

    Many of these mechanisms now offer dispute resolution services in addition to compliance reviews. Many of them now also publish reports documenting the lessons they have learned about specific aspects of development projects.

    It is important to note that many of the issues that arise in these cases also arise in private sector projects. This means that the reports provide guidance and help develop good practice standards for all development projects. They are also used to develop best practice in regard to the human rights and environmental responsibilities of business.

    Challenges

    To be sure, independent accountability mechanisms face significant challenges.

    The first is that bringing cases to the mechanisms is not simple. Many of the successful cases have required communities to obtain the assistance of technical experts. This means that the cases that are brought come from communities that have access to sophisticated NGOs and advisers rather than because they are the most urgent cases.

    Second, they cannot make binding decisions or determine that the communities should be given a remedy. There have been cases in which those who have been harmed by the action of the banks have been compensated. But this is not the norm. In fact, there is only one case in Africa in which a panel investigation led to victims receiving monetary compensation. The panel’s report in a case in Uganda resulted in the World Bank developing a new policy on gender-based violence and establishing a trust fund to compensate, and support the girls and women who were the victims of this violence.

    Designing and funding remedies that can be used in all similarly situated cases is politically and technically complicated. But it is not acceptable that those who have been harmed by the Bank’s own failures do not receive an effective remedy that compensates them for their loss.

    Third, the bravery required to bring complaints to these mechanisms must be noted. They require the complainants to go to an international forum in opposition to their own governments or powerful interests in their own countries who support the projects the banks are funding. It is therefore inevitable that in some cases, the supporters of the project will retaliate against the complainants. This suggests that the mechanisms and the banks have a responsibility to take action to protect the complainants.

    To their credit, the banks and the mechanisms have foreseen this problem and do allow for confidential complaints. But the procedures that seek to protect the complainants from reprisals have not always been fully effective.

    It is now standard practice for multilateral financing institutions like the World Bank to have an independent citizen driven accountability mechanism that focuses exclusively on the responsibilities of the institution. The only exception to this general rule is the International Monetary Fund.

    The mechanisms have also demonstrated that they can evolve and adapt to new challenges. While their limitations have also become clear, we should celebrate the Inspection Panel’s 30th anniversary.The Conversation

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Main photo of David Malpass, President World Bank Group by World Bank Photo Collection on Flickr(Creative Commons)

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

    Chagos: There’s more to a deal than meets the eye

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    Dennis Hardy, Research Professor with the James R. Mancham Peace and Diplomacy Research Institute at the University of Seychelles, and Editor of the Seychelles Research Journal           

     

    The saga of the grand-sounding but remarkably hollow British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), more commonly known as Chagos, might soon be coming to an end. Well, not entirely, as it will leave in place the enduring presence of the American-controlled military base on the largest island in the disputed archipelago, Diego Garcia. That apart, all the signs are that the BIOT will be dissolved and sovereignty of the islands will pass to Mauritius. After years of legal wrangling, this outcome will not only favour the new host nation but it also reflects the wishes of most of the international community. The debacle of some inept territorial reshuffling six decades ago will at last be consigned to history.

    Ironically, it was Britain’s shortest-serving prime minister, Liz Truss, who in November 2022, asked her foreign secretary to end what she saw as a needless distraction. At the present time, negotiations to achieve an agreed deal are still ongoing, the only certainty being that the US will not be leaving Diego Garcia in the foreseeable future. But, even with this important exception, the return of the rest of Chagos to Mauritius is already heralded in that country and more widely as a geopolitical triumph, seen as a confirmation that former colonial powers can no longer hold sway in distant parts of the world.

    It was, in fact, another colonial power, France, which in 1793 took possession of the previously uninhabited islands, until Napoleon over-reached himself and, in 1814, the archipelago was ceded to Britain as part of the combined territory of Mauritius and Seychelles [1]. The history of the region might have taken a very different course had France retained control. Unlike Britain, it has been meticulous in keeping hold of numerous remote islands across the world, taking the view that one day, they might provide useful landing points, as well as offering valuable fisheries across their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ). Britain, on the other hand, from the start of this episode to its impending finish, has not shown the same long-term perspective; it has been more opportunist, with the risk (as now shown) of losing everything if the main plank of its strategy fails.

    The present issue has its origins in the 1960s, when Britain sought to use the remote island of Aldabra (an outer island within the then colony of Seychelles) to boost its military presence in the region. When that attempt failed, opposed by an international lobby which already recognized the unique environmental value of the atoll, it looked, instead, to Chagos, renamed in 1965 the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). At the behest of the Americans, Britain was soon to expel all of the islanders (believed to number between 1400 and 1700), relocating them in Mauritius, Seychelles and Britain. That was so obviously a public relations disaster waiting to happen and, sure, enough, it has plagued the very mention of Chagos for half a century.

    Renaming the islands, as if they had become a different domain, was hardly going to fool anyone. And the very name of Chagos became synonymous with a questionable decision about sovereignty coupled with an abuse of human rights. It might well be that few, if any, of the original families and their descendants would now choose to settle permanently where their forebears worked as landless contract employees on the copra plantations. For all the emotion involved, the remoteness of Chagos, and the very limited area open to settlement, is not an attractive proposition, especially for those younger generations who have grown up elsewhere. The 58 islands together cover only 56 square kilometres and, of that, Diego Garcia occupies 32.5; the second-largest island is barely more than 3.1 square kilometres. The exiles have since made new lives for themselves in their adoptive homelands and, in any case, it is hardly feasible to think that a decent infrastructure will be provided for so few.

    Human rights will continue to colour the issue but Mauritius will be quietly celebrating the expected deal for three more tangible reasons, each offering the prospect of significant economic gain. Firstly, in spite of the neighbouring military base, with its attendant noise and military traffic, the rest of the islands will surely become a new venue for exclusive, long-haul tourism. Access will be difficult for conventional aircraft but the idea of a tropical paradise that has escaped development for more than half a century will create niche opportunities for a unique experience. Its undisturbed outer islands will quickly find themselves on the global tourism map, leading to a predictable pattern of high-end resorts. The sea will be the star attraction, with its abundant fish, clear waters and exceptional biodiversity. Mauritius is well-versed in managing tourism and will be quick to make the most of this virgin territory.

    A second reason why Mauritius will stand to gain from a transfer of sovereign rights is that the sea around the archipelago offers attractive opportunities for commercial fishing. Over the years, there have been regular visits to Chagos to allow parties of exiles to visit their lost homeland, and one thing commonly reported is that, as the islands are approached, the waters are teeming with marine life. It was this natural resource that Britain argued should be protected in the form of a vast (640,000 square kilometres) Marine Protected Area that would have extended well beyond the Exclusive Economic Zone boundaries (BIOT Marine Protected Area). The idea was proposed in 2010 but it was by then too enmeshed in the Chagos territorial dispute to be accepted by the international community. After five years, the proposal was formally withdrawn. In fact, as an environmental measure, it was itself well founded and the reserve would have made a significant contribution to the global aim of protecting 30% of the ocean in this way. Geopolitics, however, accounted for its demise.

    Finally, there is the early prospect of seabed mining in the surrounding waters. Deep-ocean mining is a contentious topic and currently licenses awarded by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) are restricted to exploration in the high seas. Within EEZ boundaries, however, extraction can go ahead, subject only to domestic laws. Most international interest in this new form of mining is in the Pacific but the central Indian Ocean (close to and including Chagos) is attracting growing attention as a rich source of rare earth metals and minerals. Mauritius is already preparing domestic legislation to provide a framework for mining, and will probably need to partner with a larger nation like India to enable the substantial investment required to exploit its new reserves. So long as Britain retained sovereignty of the archipelago, Mauritius was precluded from direct involvement; but all that will now change. The question is whether deep-sea mining will be approached with sensitivity, given that so little is known about the ecological implications, or whether (as environmentalists fear) it will take on the characteristics of a traditional gold rush.

    For each of the above reasons, assuming a deal will soon be struck, Mauritius will undoubtedly be the main economic beneficiary. It is a responsible nation and will do what is best for its people, including the small Chagossian minority. But it is to be hoped that the bitter history that has clouded the newly-gained territory, with its sharp focus on sovereignty and human rights, will not prevent consideration of global interests too. There is a case for at least part of this unique environment to be designated as an international reserve. It would be sad if the potential economic value of tourism, fishing and mining were allowed to dominate decisions without reference, at the same time, to a wider, common good in the form of a sustainable ocean. The recent UN treaty for the biodiversity of the high seas adds to the case for making a gesture of this sort.

    [1] William McAteer (1991), Rivals in Eden. Sussex, England: The Book Guild.

    Main photo by NASA Johnson on Flickr (Creative Commons).

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

     

    The macaque monkeys of Mauritius: an invasive alien species, and a major export for research

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    Vincent Florens, Associate Professor, Department of Biosciences at Faculty of Science, University of Mauritius

     

    Macaque monkeys live as both captive and wild animals on the island of Mauritius. The wild population number is estimated at between 25,000 and 35,000 animals, it’s uncertain how many exist in captivity, but the figure is in the tens of thousands. The reason for a high captive number is that Mauritius is one of the world’s largest exporters of monkeys for the global research industry – primarily, to the US and Europe. Up to 10,000 primates are exported by Mauritius each year. Ecologist Vincent Florens provides insights into how the animals first came to Mauritius and how their presence has affected the island’s natural environment.

    How long has Mauritius been involved?

    The macaques originally came from Southeast Asia and were introduced almost certainly as pets to Mauritius by the Dutch around 1602.

    In 1985, a private company, Bioculture, started to breed the macaques for research. The government didn’t object. Macaques are closely related to humans and can help to provide data into medical issues. For instance, experimental trials in macaques have led researchers to understand the efficacy of novel drugs and vaccines against several infectious diseases, such as AIDS, influenza, smallpox, and hepatitis.

    Macaques were first exported from Mauritius for research in 1985. Initially, feral animals had to be caught to supply research. These were typically caught in the islands’ forested areas, in the national parks, nature reserves, on mountains and in woods along rivers.

    Today they are both caught from the wild and bred in captivity for research. In 2020, 10,827 macaques were exported from the country.

    Wild macaques are needed to support captive breeding, an intake of at least a few thousand females each year. This is to preclude problems of genetic inbreeding that may happen in captive populations. And because captive bred animals’ breeding capacity tends to drop, and other issues like ageing of breeding animals.

    How does the trade affect their numbers?**

    The intensity of trapping feral animals may vary through time depending on the needs of the breeding programs. In times of low to no trapping the feral macaque population generally grows gradually, something I’ve observed when carrying out research on vegetation dynamics in Mauritius over about 20 years. There are more frequent calls and sightings of animals during visits to forested areas, and also by the sizes of the groups seen.

    Conversely, there have been times of intensive trapping, like when several companies were given permits to operate several years back. This led to a very marked drop in encounters where macaques were previously abundant.

    What impact do macaques have on the natural environment?

    To appreciate the impact of macaques on Mauritius’ natural environment, one must first remember that they were introduced by humans to the island. Macaques are not part of the natural environment of Mauritius, they are like rats in that respect.

    The macaque is what is termed an ‘alien species’ in Mauritius. This means that the many native, and often unique, animals and plants of Mauritius – which occur in one of the world’s biodiversity hotspots – had no previous exposure to animals like macaques. This means the plants and animals that lived there, the endemic species, have developed no evolutionary feature that would protect them from the alien monkeys.

    Mauritius already has one of the highest extinction rates of endemic species worldwide. They are among the most threatened worldwide. For example, last year, the Botanical Gardens Conservation International ranked Mauritius as the second worst country worldwide in terms of proportion of tree species threatened with extinction. Massive deforestation is the most direct and immediate driver of biodiversity loss, removing 95.6% of the original native ecosystem.

    Macaques have, and continue to, play a pivotal role in this situation. They are formidable predators capable of raiding bird nests to eat eggs and chicks. Macaques also chew on the soft heart of many plants like orchids, especially the larger species, killing them. Today, orchids are the plant family that have sustained the highest extinction rate – 20 of the 91 known species appear to have gone extinct since 1769 in Mauritius. Many of the macaque-vulnerable orchids now cling to survival in tiny numbers in places like steep cliffs, which are least accessible to macaques.

    Macaques destroy the fruits of many native trees before they mature. This kills the seeds within, like those of the ‘Dodo-tree’ and many ebony species. This has made forests less hospitable for native frugivores such as the endangered flying fox.

    Macaques also destroy flowers of many species, breaking branches, and chewing on seedlings. Their activities deprive native fauna of their natural foods, which in turn contribute to their further decline. For example, macaques have destroyed about 95% of fruits of certain endemic trees before the Mascarene endemic flying fox has a chance to feed on these fruits. This, in turn, pushes the flying fox to seek food elsewhere, including on commercial trees in gardens and orchards. Sadly, this resulted in the government of Mauritius taking action against flying foxes – killing them by the thousands. This has worsened the conservation status of the flying fox to Endangered on the Red List of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

    How can they be better managed?

    Feral macaques in Mauritius are a formidably harmful invasive alien species, destructive to many animal and plant species which are heading towards extinction in part because of the macaques.

    The ideal management in such a situation is eradication, just like goats and rabbits were eradicated from Round Island in the 1970s and 1980s. This saved its highly threatened flora and fauna from extinction.

    However, macaque eradication may be difficult in Mauritius’ remaining forests, which are sizeable, covering 80 km2. It may be more feasible in the short run to eradicate them from isolated pockets of habitats or to control their numbers to far below what they are now.

    This may be done through intensive trapping or construction of macaque proof fencing, particularly in and around the most biodiversity important areas respectively.

    Each of the monkeys that are exported annually for research is subjected to a US$125 levy that contributes to raising funds for biodiversity conservation. However, more species will continue to go extinct if the level of conservation management is not seriously increased to face the threats, including those posed by the macaques.The Conversation

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Main photo of Mauritian Macaques by Evgenii on Flickr. 

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

    Direction d’entreprise : les femmes perdent du terrain. Elles doivent être stratégiques, mais la culture doit aussi changer

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    Louise Champoux-Paillé, Cadre en exercice, John Molson School of Business, Concordia University, Canada

    Anne-Marie Croteau, Dean, John Molson School of Business, Concordia University, Canada

     

    Récemment, le cabinet McKinsey publiait sa huitième étude sur l’avancement des femmes dans le monde des entreprises (Women in the Workplace 2022). Bien que portant sur les grandes entreprises états-uniennes, elle comporte de nombreux constats qui laissent présager un avenir où la représentation des femmes au sein des postes de haute direction se fera de plus en plus rare et exigera des femmes davantage d’endurance, de persévérance et de combativité pour y demeurer.

    Qui y perdra : les femmes, les hommes ainsi que la société dans son ensemble.

    Certains constats de l’étude sont préoccupants :

        1. Au cours de la dernière année, les femmes leaders ont quitté leur emploi à un rythme plus élevé que leurs collègues masculins et cet écart est le plus important depuis les cinq dernières années ;
        2. Une représentation moins forte des femmes dans les postes d’ingénierie et de technologie comparativement à 2018 fait en sorte qu’aujourd’hui, comparativement à cette dernière année de référence, les hommes y sont 2,5 fois davantage représentés qu’en 2018. Un résultat hautement préoccupant puisque ce secteur est celui qui connaît la plus forte croissance et où on retrouve les emplois les mieux rémunérés.

    Respectivement doyenne de l’École de gestion John Molson et experte depuis plusieurs décennies de la place des femmes dans les hautes sphères du milieu des affaires, nous sommes préoccupées par cette régression.

    Le malaise va au-delà de la conciliation travail-famille

    Quelles sont les raisons qui conduisent ces femmes à se retirer du marché du travail après avoir atteint des postes de leadership ou à chercher un nouvel emploi davantage respectueux de leurs priorités et valeurs ?

    Les difficultés à concilier travail-famille et vie personnelle sont certes présentes, mais d’autres raisons méritent d’être mentionnées et relèvent davantage de la qualité du milieu de travail comparativement aux hommes :

        1. Le manque de reconnaissance : 37 % des femmes leaders voient leurs bonnes idées être reprises au crédit d’autres collègues, alors que ce phénomène de mauvaise appropriation arrive à 27 % des hommes ;
        2. La remise en question fréquente de leurs décisions par leurs collègues masculins sous prétexte qu’elles ne disposent pas des compétences appropriées pour les prendre ;
        3. Un accès plus difficile à des promotions en raison de leur sexe ou de leurs responsabilités familiales ;
        4. Les microagressions
        5. Le manque d’engagement de l’entreprise en regard de la diversité, de l’inclusion et de l’équité (DEI)

    Accéder aux plus hautes fonctions, mais pas à n’importe quel prix

    Un élément important à souligner est l’évolution des besoins des femmes au cours des deux dernières années en regard de leur milieu de travail.

    Tant les femmes leaders que celles qui ont moins 30 ans disent que les possibilités d’avancement sont l’élément qui les préoccupent le plus. Les plus jeunes accordent en sus une priorité plus forte à la flexibilité et l’engagement des entreprises vers le bien-être au travail et les programmes DEI.

    De plus, les jeunes femmes disent qu’elles seraient davantage intéressées à devenir leader si elles pouvaient avoir comme modèle un plus grand nombre de femmes dirigeantes parvenant à atteindre l’équilibre travail-famille qu’elles souhaitent.

    De tels constats sont préoccupants, puisque la rétention des femmes dans des postes de direction et le maintien d’un vivier riche en potentiel féminin seront sûrement freinés dans l’avenir par la qualité de vie au travail et au bien-être des employés.

    La récente étude de Viviane de Beaufort, professeure à l’ESSEC, menée auprès de 295 femmes françaises dirigeantes sur leurs aspirations professionnelles permet d’aller plus loin dans ces constats : les femmes veulent bien accéder aux plus hautes fonctions mais pas à n’importe quel prix. Cette étude ajoute des éléments explicatifs fort intéressants à cette grande désillusion féminine : le décalage du discours, la gouvernance non éthique, l’entre-soi persistant, la non-exemplarité des dirigeants et le manque de confiance dans les collaborateurs.

    Le marché du travail va-t-il se masculiniser à nouveau?

    On peut penser que si cette tendance se poursuit, ce pas de côté, comme le dit si bien Viviane de Beaufort, se traduira, au cours des prochaines années, par des lieux de pouvoir qui redeviendront davantage masculins.

    Cette tendance pourrait être même accentuée par un autre phénomène, le travail à la maison, privilégié par les femmes afin de leur assurer un meilleur équilibre de vie. Comme dit le proverbe, loin des yeux, loin du cœur. Ainsi, le manque de contacts et de visibilité sur les lieux du travail pourrait faire en sorte que moins de femmes pourraient être promues à des postes de direction ou considérées sur la liste des candidats pour des postes de direction.

    Une tendance à une raréfaction des nominations féminines à des postes de direction créera à nouveau un marché du travail à dominance masculine, lequel est peu propice à l’inclusion et au développement du leadership féminin. De plus, cette raréfaction diminuera la possibilité pour les jeunes aspirantes leaders de rencontrer d’autres femmes d’expérience qui pourraient leur servir de rôle modèle. Le réseau de soutien féminin au sein des entreprises diminuera et par conséquent, limitera le nombre de sponsores et mentores auxquelles ces jeunes décideuses en devenir ont tant besoin.

    Un autre phénomène qui émerge suite à la pandémie est l’augmentation des difficultés d’apprentissage chez certains enfants. Ce sont souvent aux femmes que revient la tâche d’aide. Cette responsabilité additionnelle élève donc une autre barrière à l’avancement de carrière des jeunes femmes.

    Des compétences nouvelles

    Comme nous en discutions dans un article précédent, le cheminement de carrière au sein des moyennes et grandes organisations est plutôt linéaire. Il repose sur les connaissances, les expériences, les relations développées au fil du temps et le pouvoir progressivement acquis au fur et à mesure que les échelons sont franchis.

    Cette progression plutôt typique ne tient pas compte de la vision périphérique qu’il est maintenant nécessaire d’acquérir afin de créer de la valeur autant financière qu’extrafinancière pour l’organisation. En effet, les attentes envers les organisations pour qu’elles contribuent à la protection de l’environnement, aux besoins de la société et d’une meilleure gouvernance (ESG) demandent des compétences nouvelles, souvent moins traditionnelles : des connaissances approfondies en développement durable, en politiques publiques ou encore en sciences de l’environnement. Ces disciplines sont davantage populaires auprès des femmes que des hommes, de sorte que cela ouvre la voie à une nouvelle forme de promotion pour les femmes.

    Un monde du travail à réinventer

    Nous avons également pris conscience de l’importance de réimaginer le travail dans une perspective de mieux-être et d’équilibre. Cet élément constitue désormais une priorité des hauts dirigeants, selon les conclusions d’une étude récente de la firme Deloitte. Les organisations doivent offrir plus d’un parcours professionnel prometteur à leurs employés, favorisant une excellence inclusive où les mesures de performance sont repensées à la lumière des principes de DEI et de ESG.

    L’acquisition de nouveaux talents et la rétention du personnel constitueront les plus grands défis de l’avenir en matière de gestion des risques des ressources humaines. Une nouvelle façon d’imaginer le travail et la progression des ressources humaines au sein de l’organisation devra en émerger et favoriser une meilleure harmonisation des exigences d’une vie familiale, professionnelle et personnelle.

    Les femmes sont ambitieuses et veulent évoluer au sein de leur organisation et de la société. Il est donc de notre responsabilité collective de réajuster nos façons de faire, de rester à l’affût de nos biais inconscients tout en restant rigoureux et clair sur les objectifs corporatifs à atteindre. Cet objectif à atteindre est certes ambitieux, mais ce sera le pilier d’une meilleure équité dans le monde du travail pour les femmes et les hommes.The Conversation

    Cet article est republié à partir de The Conversation sous licence Creative Commons. Lire l’article original.

    Main photo by Christina @ wocintechchat.com on Unsplash.

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

    Evidence for Equity

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    Atiya Anis, Salzburg Global Fellow, former senior manager of the ‘Initiative for What Works to Advance Women and Girls in the Economy.’

     

    NEW DELHI – “What gets measured gets done.” It is a well-worn maxim, attributed to everyone from management guru Peter Drucker to physicist Lord Kelvin. Regardless of who said it first, the point is a crucial one: if there are no data illustrating a problem or imbalance, it is unlikely to be a consideration, let alone a priority, for those in a position to address it. And solutions, if they are attempted, are unlikely to be well targeted or efficient. This is certainly the case for gender equality.

    One might assume that, in today’s world of information overload, policymakers have ample data with which to diagnose problems, devise innovative solutions, monitor implementation, and adjust policies to maximize their impact. But even in an age of big data, policymakers often lack accurate, consistent, timely, and representative information. As a result, they are working with an incomplete picture of socioeconomic conditions.

    For example, data show that female labor-force participation in India has been declining since 2005. Reversing this trend, and achieving gender equality, could add $770 billion to India’s GDP by 2025, according to McKinsey Global Institute. But effective solutions would need to be informed by comprehensive data that capture the complex relationship between women’s labor-force participation and various social, political, and economic forces, and they would need to link gender equality to broader development outcomes.

    In any effort to boost gender equality, both sex-disaggregated data and reporting on issues that primarily affect women and girls are crucial. Consider gender-based violence: according to the World Bank, one in three girls or women aged 15-49 has experienced physical and/or sexual violence.

    As Data2x has documented, the collection of data on violence against boys and girls in Tanzania led to effective government interventions, which brought about long-term, multisectoral change. Similarly, the World Bank reports that Vietnam used data from demographic and health surveys to boost protections for women and girls, such as by adopting legislation banning domestic violence.

    Beyond informing policy, the data sparked debate in Vietnam about gender-based violence, leading to the creation of the National Strategy on Gender Equality. Women facing violence in their homes now have greater access to counseling, health, legal, and shelter services.

    But producing comprehensive data is no easy feat. Any tiny statistical error or hint of measurement bias, at any stage of collection and production, can render data unrepresentative, as can prejudice by respondents, who are often primarily men.

    Before the COVID-19 crisis, the world broadly adopted the most representative method for collecting household data: surveys. But the pandemic forced a shift toward phone-based surveys, which are less likely to represent women and other groups with reduced access to mobile phones. Weak leadership, a lack of political will, and poor resource allocation have been mentioned as crucial impediments to the collection of sex-disaggregated statistics.

    One way to overcome these constraints is to improve the integration of data at the national, regional, and international levels. Moreover, more effort must be devoted to enhancing the capacity of women to contribute and use data. Increased female leadership within open-data organizations can help spur progress toward new, more inclusive approaches to data collection.

    Such efforts should, of course, be guided by existing best practices. Norway, for example, has been publishing national gender-equity indicators – including gender distribution in total income, the workforce, business, the public sector, education, and leadership – since 2008. Sweden, for its part, requires that all public agencies present sex-disaggregated statistics in their annual reports. These are models worth emulating.

    Engagement by civil-society and multilateral organizations can also make a big difference. As part of its Strengthening Gender Statistics project, the World Bank – with support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation – is already providing technical assistance to 12 International Development Association countries, in order to improve the scope and quality of their gender-related statistics. Replicating and expanding this initiative can go a long way toward enabling governments to make evidence-based policy decisions that improve the lives and livelihoods of their citizens.

    To be sure, data collection and analysis are just the beginning. Improved dissemination and uptake of gender-related data for policymaking is also needed. Defining useful and consistent indicators is crucial, because it enables comparison across regions and assessment of progress over time.

    Finally, the role of data in bolstering accountability and improving governance must not be overlooked. Just as high-quality, timely, and comprehensive data enable us to devise targeted policies and allocate resources more efficiently, they also enable us to measure those policies’ impact – and the government’s performance.

    Improving data collection will require some investment. But, by enabling more efficient, better tailored, and more cost-effective policies, that investment will ultimately ease the strain on government budgets. And, as countries make progress toward gender equality, the social, economic, and development benefits will continue to multiply.

     

    Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2023.
    www.project-syndicate.org

    Main photo by fauxels on Pexels.

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

    Gender quotas can work but it depends on how employees feel about them

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    Edwin Ip, Researcher, The University of Melbourne

     

    If you think your boss is in her position only because of a gender quota and not because of merit, it could affect the work you do for her.

    Gender quotas may be effective in fixing an imbalance of men and women in the workplace but whether they are good or bad for organisations depends on how people feel about them, our study shows.

    Gender quotas are controversial. Opponents of gender quotas have long argued that they are unfair because it often means the best candidates do not get the positions they deserve.

    Proponents of gender quotas often argue that, among other reasons, women have to go the extra mile in order to get the same recognition because of various disadvantages such as discrimination and societal pressure. As a result, gender quotas are required to correct for such unfair disadvantages.

    Both of these arguments revolve around the idea of whether the best person gets the job. However, whether gender quotas reward those who are talented actually depends on the perception of the labour market environment, which depends on the profession.

    We surveyed 1,011 respondents in the US and asked them whether they agreed with the use of gender quotas to reserve leadership positions for women. Without providing any context, opinions were divided – roughly the same number of people agreed and disagreed with the use of quotas.

    However, when we provided some context about the labour market environments, there was a lot more consensus. When told that there was a gender skill gap (where women are on average worse than men at a certain job), only around 20% of the respondents agreed with the use of quotas.

    When told that there was no skill gap, close to 30% of the respondents agreed with the use of quotas. However, when told that there was a bias against women in the selection process, more than 70% of the respondents agreed with the use of quotas.

    We found that whether gender quotas are good or bad for an organisation’s performance is reflected in these attitudes towards gender quotas. If gender quotas are applied in industries where women are thought to be discriminated against, they can enhance the productivity of managers and workers. However, if they are applied in industries where discrimination against women is thought not to be a problem, then the organisation’s performance can deteriorate significantly.

    Our experiments on gender quotas

    To test how implementing gender quotas affects an organisation’s performance, we conducted an experiment with 516 students.

    In the experiment, managers were chosen based on their score in a five-minute arithmetic task that they performed prior to the experiment. If a quota was not implemented, then the students with the highest observed scores were chosen as managers. If a quota was implemented, then a proportion of the manager positions were reserved for the highest scoring female students, and the best of the rest filled up the remaining manager positions. All other students were assigned the role of worker.

    Each manager was then paired with a worker. Each manager started with an endowment and decided how much wage they would offer the paired worker. The worker, after receiving the wage, decided how much effort they put in for the manager. Participants were paid for taking part in the experiment. The manager’s pay depended on the worker’s effort and the wage offered to the worker. The worker’s pay depended on the wage received and the cost of effort.

    This experiment was designed so that the more effort the workers put in, the better the organisational performance. We tested whether or not managers offered different wages and the workers put in different effort level, when a gender quota was implemented under the three different environments.

    In the first environment, we generated a perceived gender skill gap by telling participants that women solved 20% fewer sums in the arithmetic task. In the second environment, we told participants that there was no gender difference in the arithmetic task. In the third environment, students were told that there was no gender difference. However, in that environment we only counted the the score from the first four minutes of the five-minute task for female participants, creating a bias against women in the selection procedure.

    We found that when there was no skill gap or bias against women, implementing gender quotas substantially reduced the wages that the managers offered and the effort that the workers provide. The result was even worse when there was a skill gap. However, when there was a bias against women in the selection procedure, we observed the opposite: managers offered higher wages and the workers put in more effort.

    What these results mean for quotas

    Our results show that gender quotas should not be blindly implemented. When there is a perceived bias against women in an industry, implementing gender quotas can enhance an organisation’s performance. However, when there is no perceived bias against women in an industry, implementing gender quotas can damage an organisation’s performance and harm the people who are meant to benefit from the quotas.

    It is therefore important to know how people perceive the labour market environment in each industry. In our survey, we asked respondents about their perception of skill gap and bias against women in their profession.

    White collar workers tended to think that there was no skill gap or bias against women and blue collar workers tended to think there was a bias against women. On the other hand, architecture, healthcare and “pink collar” workers tended to think that women were better than men at the job and that there may be a bias in favour of women.

    While how people perceive gender skill gap and discrimination may not be accurate, it is what matters. So if your organisation wants to impose gender quotas then they should first educate their employees about whether any gender skill gap in the field is actually justified in the first place, and whether there is gender discrimination in the sector. Otherwise, without this understanding, implementing gender quotas could backfire.The Conversation

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Main photo from International Women’s Day 2023 website.

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

    Big tech, regulators and conservationists must unite to tackle online wildlife trade

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    Rowan O. Martin, Research Associate, Fitzpatrick Institute of African Ornithology, University of Cape Town, South Africa

    Amy Hinsley, Senior Research Fellow, University of Oxford, United Kingdom

    Ana Nuno, Research Fellow, Nova School of Business and Economics, Portugal

     

    Every month, Facebook attracts 2.89 billion active users. Every minute, there are hundreds of thousands of comments and status updates. Each could be discussing anything, including extremist views, or the sale of endangered wildlife across continents.

    Social media platforms have enabled wildlife traders to connect as never before. Some operate legally, within the boundaries of international laws. Others are less scrupulous. Illegal traders use private chats and groups to bypass middlemen and exchange information on how to evade law enforcement. They use the ecosystem of public and private channels on social media platforms to sell wildlife as pets or luxury artefacts. Public posts enable traders to connect with a potentially vast global customer base, but arrangements for payments and shipping, and conversations about what else may be available, can be quickly directed to private messaging services.

    Some platforms have introduced strong community standards prohibiting attempts to buy or sell endangered wildlife and private sales of live animals. But it takes only seconds to find, for example, endangered parrots for sale. Dig a little deeper and you can find posts featuring wholesale quantities of parrots captured from the wild for export, in what would be clear violations of international laws.

    Tackling this is critical: the wildlife trade poses a major threat to global biodiversity. It can also contribute to the spread of infectious zoonotic (passed from animal to human) diseases.

    In a recent study published in the journal ‘Conservation Biology’, we examined the online behaviour of wildlife traders based in West Africa. We wanted to explore how researchers and moderators can use information scattered across different parts of social media platforms to detect posts selling wild birds.

    Some of the trade we studied is permitted under international agreements. But its scale and scope, which is discussed in a forthcoming parallel study, has conservationists concerned. Trade in wild parrots from West Africa has also been linked to the global spread of infectious diseases. Some of the exporting countries in this study, Mali, Côte d’Ivoire and Senegal among them, are working to contain highly pathogenic strains of avian influenza.

    Analysing the data

    Working with ornithologists, conservationists and legal analysts, we were able to identify over 80 different species in trade, some of which are highly threatened and prohibited from commercial trade under international law. Species ranged from parrots and hornbills to songbirds and doves.

    We detected 400 social media posts made by known bird traders featuring or promoting birds in trade.

    The majority (80%) did not contain explicit text that could be used to determine that the posts were intended to facilitate the sale of wildlife, violating platform community standards.

    The application of simple algorithms searching for words such as “for sale”, or the names of target species, would help detect some of this activity. But admins in some closed Facebook groups have advised their members to avoid using certain key words. This means a significant amount of trade would pass under the radar of key word algorithms.

    However, our research found that the triangulation of information available elsewhere both within and beyond social media platforms could be used to make powerful inferences about how posts facilitate trade, violate platform standards and signpost illicit activity. Such information may be found in elements such as images, profile descriptions or comments. This is why it is important that experts be involved in monitoring social media for potentially illegal trade: they have the knowledge to identify the species involved and contextualise the activity within international and domestic regulations.

    Different wildlife “products” are bought and sold in different locations online and in different ways. There is no “one size fits all” solution for detecting wildlife traded online, let alone all illicit and harmful goods.

    Our study, however, establishes a framework for thinking about how different sectors of illicit or harmful activity can be understood and monitored and moderated more effectively. Careful analyses, led by experts in specific fields, can help in the design of algorithms and approaches to moderation tailored to the situation.

    Regulatory approaches

    Our study happened against the backdrop of major global discussions about how best to regulate social media platforms. New regulatory legislation is being planned or coming into play in major economies including China, the US, the EU, Australia and the UK, aimed at cajoling and coercing big tech to do more to protect users from harmful content.

    Regulators are mindful of the need to balance the harms and benefits of the brave new world ushered in by social media. Designing moderation practices that make a meaningful impact on the vast amount of wildlife traded on the internet is no trivial undertaking. But it is clear that greater action is needed.

    We propose that the solutions lie with tech firms working closely with subject matter experts to design moderation practices tailored to the trade in different species across regions. Regulators, tasked with determining if tech firms are fulfilling their duty of care (as proposed in the UK’s draft Online Safety Bill), should similarly engage with subject matter experts to ensure that tech firms’ approaches are fit for purpose.

    Carefully designed algorithms that can intelligently triangulate across multiple data sources will be part of the solution. Manual analysis will also be critical. In our study, knowing which species were in trade and the relevant local legislation was critical for understanding legality. But such tasks lie beyond the abilities of artificial intelligence and machine learning.

    Collaborations and partnerships between tech firms and subject matter experts remain in their infancy. But cleverly designed legislation, savvy regulators and investment from tech firms are needed to drive solutions forward at pace.

    Alisa Davies, a wildlife trade specialist at the World Parrot Trust, contributed to this article and was a co-author of the research it is based on. The Conversation

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Main photo of Mauritian Aldabra giant tortoise by john willis on Flickr.

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

    The Role of Small Island States in the Geopolitics of the Indian Ocean

    By
    Anil Sooklal
    -
    0

     

    Ambassador (Prof) Anil Sooklal, Ambassador-at-Large: Asia and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) at the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, and South Africa’s BRICS Sherpa, IBSA (India-Brazil-South Africa) Sherpa and Focal Point for IORA (Indian Ocean Rim Association).

     

    Introduction

    The Indian Ocean and its littoral states are increasingly at the epicentre of the evolving global geopolitical architecture. Since the emergence of the Indo-Pacific as the main theatre of major power competition and contestation, the Indian Ocean has come to occupy strategic importance within the Indo-Pacific. The Indian Ocean is home to one third of the world population, twenty five percent of its land mass and forty percent of the world’s oil and gas reserves. The Indian Ocean is increasingly characterised by growing strategic competition involving both external powers and territorial states.

    The Small Island States (SIS) of the Indian Ocean are increasingly courted by the major powers as well as newly emerging powers of the Global South. The key six SIS of the Indian Ocean, viz Madagascar, Seychelles, Comoros, Maldives, Mauritius and Sri Lanka, are assuming critical strategic importance for a variety of reasons, ranging from the geographic, political, security, economic, developmental, and environmental domain’s, among others. The SIS have become the key focus and attention of major power competition and rivalry in the region seeking to pull them into other respective spheres of influence. The rivalry for influence and “control” of the SIS creates a dilemma for these states as it presents both opportunities as well as threats to their sovereignty, development, stability, and progress. One of the major recourses of these states is to reinforce their commitment and adherence to a rules-based order underpinned by international law and the United Nations Charter within a multipolar world.

    The role of regional and sub-regional organisations of which the SIS are members can also serve as important platforms in strengthening their sovereignty and independence and addressing the challenges of the SIS. In this regard, it is important to note that all the SIS are member states of the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA). This also provides an opportunity to engage all the major role players of the Indian Ocean who are either member states or dialogue partners of IORA in addressing the key challenges and opportunities as it impacts especially on the SIS of the region.

    This paper will seek to discuss the strategic geopolitical significance of the SIS of the Indian Ocean and their increasingly significant role in the accelerated evolution of the geopolitical dynamics of the region. It will also seek to explore the role of IORA as it pertains to the SIS in the Indian Ocean region.

    Small but not powerless

    The Small Island States are vulnerable, but not powerless. Abdullah Shahid, the Maldives Minister of Foreign Affairs and President of the 76th Session of the United Nations General Assembly noted that “we cannot deny that Small Island Developing States are exceptionally vulnerable, but I don’t believe that we are powerless.” He further notes that the peace and security of the Indian Ocean is dependent on the continued stability of small islands.

    All the six Indian Ocean Island nations (Madagascar, Seychelles, Comoros, Maldives, Mauritius and Sri Lanka) have in recent times entertained the importance of their geography and their identity as islands against the backdrop of major power rivalry and competition in the Indian Ocean. These island states have recognised the potential of linking their security needs, economic growth, their development agenda, and their role in the region and globally to their geography. The SIS of the Indian Ocean are all located near key transit routes providing access and influence over important chokepoints and transportation corridors, hence, their key geographies have the potential to impact geopolitical competition. Major powers are increasingly alert to this fact, and this has been one of the determining factors influencing their increasing interaction and sphere of influence regarding the strategic value of these island states.

    These vital global shipping routes and choke points of the Indian Ocean includes the Strait of Hormuz, Strait of Malacca, Bab al Mandeb, the Sunda and Lombok straits, the Mozambique channel, and the Cape of Good Hope. However, despite the strategic geographical location of the SIS, they all share similar challenges and vulnerabilities. These states differ in population size, geographical spread, economic development, as well as development programmes. The SIS are highly vulnerable developing countries for a number of reasons. This includes high exposure to natural disasters, climate change, global economic shocks, low economic diversification with small or unstable domestic revenues, increasingly limited borrowing opportunities and declining levels of development assistance. All of these factors represent a disproportionate threat to the SIS.

    In addition to the above challenges, the SIS have been thrust into the forefront of global geopolitics in recent times. Foremost amongst these are the challenges of climate change, major power competition and its impact on the SIS, the increasing importance of the oceans and seas, and in this instance, the Indian Ocean as a theatre of geo-political and geo-economic contestation and competition.

    The emergence of the Indo-Pacific as one of the most dynamic geopolitical regions of the world in recent times, has resulted in shifting power dynamics in the Indian Ocean region.  The increasing rivalry between the USA and China is also manifesting itself within the Indian Ocean. Escalating maritime disputes are increasing concerns about trade, security, military, and geopolitical dynamics within the region. Major and emerging powers are seeking to wield influence over the SIS, leading to tensions within the region and posing challenges to the stability and security of the Indian Ocean.

    The Indian Ocean has become central to the geopolitical aspirations of both the major as well as emerging powers with vested interest in the region. States, which include the P5 members viz. USA, Russia, UK, France, China, as well as Japan, India, and the EU, have all enhanced their engagement by strengthening economic, security, military, development and political ties with the region. The major powers have intensified engagement with all six of the SIS, seeing them as important and valuable role players in the region. However, given the numerous vulnerabilities of the SIS, most of the major powers tend to view these countries as pawns in the geopolitical competition rather than critical stakeholders in the security and stability of the region.

    Strategic competition, which has been on the margins of the Indian Ocean region, has now come to the forefront of global geopolitics. Today, the Indian Ocean is perceived by many as the emerging centre of gravity in the strategic world. The rivalry for power and influence on the global stage between the USA and China is intensifying within the Indian Ocean region and the SIS are a major focus of the USA, China, and other traditional and emerging powers. China sees itself as a global power and increasingly seeks global leadership and is steadily working to create a new global order defined by its own set of rules, norms, and values. The geo-strategic rivalry has intensified as a result of the perceived overstretch and erosion of US influence in the region.

    The transition, from both a bipolar and unipolar world towards a multipolar global order, has seen other major players seeking primacy in the region together with China and the USA. An often-overlooked factor in this geopolitical rivalry is the role of SIS, which has a direct bearing on the region as a whole. The large regional and extra regional countries need to take cognisance of the geopolitical importance of the SIS. The evolving great power contestation in the Indian Ocean provides new opportunities for growth and expansion. It gives choices in addressing their development and security needs, not previously offered from amongst a variety of role players courting their allegiance and support.

    However, these new opportunities come with a “cost factor.” Some of the SIS are hesitant to fully engage and align with a particular country as they are careful not to be entangled in great power politics and would prefer to remain strategically neutral and maintain good relations with all. Strategic autonomy is becoming increasingly challenging and difficult to maintain. The numerous development programmes, touted by major powers, provides the SIS with choices and give them leverage to negotiate their choices, based on their national interests.

    China’s Belt and Road Initiative

    China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is beginning to alter the balance of power in the Indian Ocean and some view the BRI as the Chinese blueprint for global hegemony, including in the Indian Ocean region. One may recall the words of the maritime strategist Alfred Mahan who stated that “whoever controls the Indian Ocean, will dominate Africa, the destiny of the world will be decided on its waters.

    All the SIS have embraced China’s BRI, resulting in China having active development cooperation programmes in all of the countries, either under the banner of the BRI or through bilateral agreements. China’s generous loans to some of the SIS, especially for infrastructure projects, have led some countries, especially from the Global North, to describe the Belt and Road as “Debt Trap Diplomacy.”  This accusation was sparked by projects such as the Hambantota Port development in Sri Lanka. Although the port benefits Chinese interests in the Indian Ocean, it is important to note the misconduct and corruption of the ruling elite in Sri Lanka also played a crucial role in its failure.

    India and the Indian Ocean

    The Indian Government considers the Indian Ocean as a key strategic economic theatre, critical for its diplomatic, military, security, economic and regional engagements. India’s recent initiatives and policies towards the region has cemented its role as a key geo-political player. In 2016, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) set up a new division focusing on the Indian Ocean, which looks at the region more holistically and as one theatre, primarily through the SIS. Since assuming power in 2014, Prime Minister Modi has prioritised relations with the six SIS and has paid state visits to nearly all of the SIS. India has bolstered its development cooperation and capacity building efforts in the region. India encapsulates its Indian Ocean policy through “SAGAR”, an acronym for “Security and Growth for All in the Region.”

    The USA and the Indian Ocean

    In recent times, there has been several calls within the echelons of power in the USA for the country to prioritise the “Indo” within the “Indo-Pacific”. The Indian Ocean region matters a great deal to the USA for several strategic reasons. However, in the absence of an Indian Ocean Strategy and its effective execution, the USA risks becoming a junior player in the region. The Biden administration has taken note of these calls and has increased interaction with the region, including the SIS. In addition to China, India and the USA, several countries from within and outside the Indian Ocean region have increased their interactions with the SIS, including Australia, France, the UK, and Germany.

    IORA and Small Island States

    It is important for all stakeholders in the Indian Ocean region to cooperate and advance the collective interests of security and stability of all, including the SIS. IORA is in a unique position to bring together both the major and emerging powers in helping to shape the Indian Ocean Region, underpinned by cooperation and development, rather than contestation and containment.

    All the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are represented in IORA, with France being a full member, and the others as dialogue partners. IORA can become a platform in addressing both the challenges and opportunities pertaining to the Indian Ocean region, including that of the SIS. The SIS of IORA have been instrumental in advancing the growth and development of IORA as the apex body of the Region. Three of the SIS, viz. Mauritius, Madagascar and Sri Lanka, are founding members of IORA. Mauritius is the host country of the Secretariat. Both Mauritius and Sri Lank have served as past IORA Chairs.

    It was at the request of Sri Lanka that the UN General Assembly in 1971 for the first time included on its agenda the question of establishing a zone of peace in the Indian Ocean. As a result of this initiative, the General Assembly adopted resolution 2832 by which the Indian Ocean was designated as a Zone of Peace (UN Library UN Yearbook of Disarmament Affairs, 1983). The provisions of this resolution were further endorsed in the IORA Jakarta Concord adopted by the IORA Leaders’ Summit in March 2017. All of the SIS are critical to the successful and integral functioning and advancement of the mandate of IORA. It is, therefore, important that IORA serves to address and advance the peace, stability, security, and prosperity of the SIS.

    Conclusion

    It is critical, given the current challenges to the global geo-political security architecture, that the Indian Ocean remains a zone of peace. It should not become a political theatre at the centre of major power rivalry. The littoral states of the Indian Ocean region as well as the global community must work in a cooperative spirit, in spite of differences, to ensure that the Indian Ocean is not “captured” by a few who seek to control and shape the region in a divisive manner rather than ensuring that it is inclusive, open, and free.

    The SIS are critical to the peace and security of the region.  They need to act both individually and collectively to promote and protect their interests. They should not become political pawns of the powerful in their quest for global hegemony. As countries of the region wedded to the values of multilateralism as enshrined in the UN Charter, and underpinned by international law, we must cooperate and take collective action in preserving the peace, security and sustainable development of all in the region, including the SIS.

    Main photo by © Charles Telfair Centre.

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

     

     

    Oceans and their largest inhabitants could be the key to storing our carbon emissions

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    David King, Founder of Centre for Climate Repair at Cambridge and Chair of Climate Crisis Advisory Group (CCAG), University of Cambridge

    Jane Lichtenstein, Associate Researcher, Climate Crisis Advisory Group (CCAG), University of Cambridge

     

    While global governments have agreed to work towards limiting global temperature increase to 1.5°C, little in their behaviour suggests they are taking the challenge seriously, as emissions continue to rise year after year. The most recent climate analysis report by the IPCC, published on April 4, warns that this pattern is set to continue – with a projected global rise of 3.2°C or more by 2100 – if emissions aren’t drastically reduced and excess CO₂ removed from the atmosphere.

    It’s time to turn to our oceans for help, an approach consistent with the IPCC’s climate objectives, yet which remains relatively overlooked. Current research at the Centre for Climate Repair at Cambridge University tackles how we can reinvigorate the world’s largest potential carbon sinks, which cover more than 70% of our planet’s surface, and have already been working to remove CO₂ from our atmosphere for millions of years.

    At just 1.3°C above pre-industrial levels, the world is currently struggling to cope. Unprecedented droughts, wildfire, floods, storms and heatwaves batter the planet. SwissRe, one of the world’s largest insurance companies, has estimated that natural disasters cost the world US$190 billion (£146 billion) in 2020.

    Each incremental temperature rise brings more unpredictable conditions. By 2050, coastal cities such as Jakarta and Kolkata could be unliveable due to rising sea levels causing floods and storm surges.

    The IPCC report makes clear that cutting down on the use of fossil fuels is crucial to reducing emissions. Technical innovations to help us make this transition – alongside wind, solar and tidal power – include using methane from landfill sites to heat buildings (something already successfully implemented in Sweden) and building clean mass transportation systems that free up pavements and public spaces (as demonstrated in Bogota). Wealthy nations must step up to make these changes, at the same time funding poorer nations’ plans to sidestep fossil fuel reliance.

    But although this is clearly a necessary plan of action, politics and policy are still responding slowly, with governments failing to align their efforts with the required scale and urgency of solutions.

    Capturing carbon

    An equally key part of bringing CO₂ levels down is putting atmospheric carbon back where it came from. Carbon capture and storage technology is a vital tool in sectors where CO₂ emissions are essentially unavoidable, such as in heavy industrial processes like steel works. But its high costs and energy usage make it an imperfect solution.

    Using nature to store carbon on a large scale is more promising. The IPCC report puts faith in the farming industry unrolling dramatic changes to help sequester more carbon in soil over the next decade. Yet although methods of doing this have been successfully trialled across the world, policy hasn’t caught up, and vested interests in current farming methods also create inertia.

    Extensive tree planting also offers scope for increasing carbon sinks, as do peatland preservation, mangrove reforestation and rewilding. But using land alone won’t be enough to sufficiently reduce greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. This is where oceans come in.

    Storing carbon in the sea

    Much of the deep ocean that’s now desertified thanks to human activity was once a thriving aquatic ecosystem. Our current research explores how whales form an important part of rebuilding that system, acting as “biological pumps” that circulate nutrients from the depths of the ocean to its surface through their feeding and excreting behaviours.

    What’s more, CCRC experiments are exploring the potential for regenerating ocean biomass as a way to store more carbon. Ocean biomass refers to communities of plants, fish and mammals that thrive near the surface, but send their shells, bones and decomposing vegetation permanently to the deep ocean, locking huge amounts of carbon into the seabed. Expanding their numbers could bolster biodiversity, shore up fish stocks and provide income opportunities for marginalised communities across the world – as well as capturing tens of billions of tons of CO₂ from the atmosphere.

    A third aspect of tackling the climate crisis involves fixing parts of the climate system that have already passed their “tipping point”: starting by refreezing the Arctic. Rapid Arctic melting has already caused many of the extreme weather events we’ve seen recently, from snow in Texas to floods in China, thanks to its distorting effects on the polar jet stream. Reversing this process – for example by artificially increasing cloud cover over the region to reflect more sunlight away from Arctic ice – would allow the jet stream to return to normal, buying us more time to work on reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas levels.

    The challenges of reducing emissions by switching away from fossil fuels are largely political, not technical. The almost-immediate benefits of cleaner air, better health and new jobs for millions in the alternative energy sector should outweigh short-term fears. Meanwhile, we must also use our greatest natural resource to remove the excess carbon already released into the atmosphere if we are to create a manageable future for humanity.

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Main Photo by Mike Doherty on Unsplash.

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

    Seychelles is becoming overwhelmed by marine plastic – we now know where it comes from

    By
    Charles Telfair Centre
    -
    0

     

    Noam Vogt-Vincent, DPhil Candidate in Earth Sciences, University of Oxford

    April Burt, Research Associate, University of Oxford

     

    More than 1,000km southwest of Mahé, the main inhabited island in Seychelles, lies a ring of coral islands called the Aldabra Atoll. The islands are a UNESCO World Heritage Site and support a huge diversity of marine species including manta rays and tiger sharks. The atoll is also a breeding site for endangered green turtles.

    Aldabra has long been protected from threats to its biodiversity by its remoteness. But now plastic debris is strewn across Aldabra’s coastlines, threatening nearby marine ecosystems. Research finds the likelihood of coral disease increases from 4% to 89% when coral are in contact with plastic.

    The Seychelles Islands Foundation, who are responsible for managing Aldabra, conducted a plastic clean-up operation in partnership with Oxford University in 2019. Roughly 25 tonnes of plastic waste were removed from the islands.

    A new study that we co-authored modelled the flow of plastic debris in the Indian Ocean between 1993 and 2019 and traced it to its source. We found that none of the plastic that washes up on Aldabra comes from the islands themselves.

    Simulating plastic flow

    Using data on plastic waste generation and fishing activity, we generated hundreds of billions of virtual plastic particles entering the Indian ocean. We then simulated their movement based on ocean currents, waves and winds.

    Bottle caps and other low-buoyancy items sink fast and plastic loses buoyancy as it fragments or becomes covered in waterborne organisms. Items that remain buoyant for longer are transported further distances. To reach Aldabra from the eastern Indian Ocean, our model estimates that debris must be floating for at least six months.

    We determined the likelihood that this debris would wash up on the coast by analysing the rate at which scientific “drifters” (instruments that record ocean currents) and GPS-tracked floating fishing devices become “beached”. Free-floating instruments such as these behave well as proxies for floating plastic. These observations indicate that around 3% of the debris that is within 10km of a coast beach each day.

    Four-year simulation of highly buoyant marine debris transport in the Indian Ocean.

    Island under siege

    Our model predicts that Indonesia is responsible for most of the plastic debris, including as flip-flops and plastic packaging, that beaches across Seychelles. Various other countries including India, Sri Lanka and the Philippines are also major sources.

    But Seychelles is also contaminated with plastic waste from other places.

    Almost half of the plastic bottles found on Aldabra during the initial clean-up had been manufactured in China. But ocean currents do not flow directly between China and the western Indian Ocean. It is thus unlikely that a large number of bottles could float from China to Seychelles.

    But Seychelles is close to a major shipping lane that connects southeast Asia to the Atlantic. If bottles were discarded from ships crossing the Indian Ocean then they would likely beach across Seychelles.

    Research that we conducted in 2020 estimated that the fishing industry was responsible for 83% of the plastic waste on Aldabra. Most of the fishing gear abandoned by “purse seine” fisheries (a method of fishing that employs large nets to catch tuna) likely relates to regional fishing activity around Seychelles. But abandoned gear from longline fisheries may have drifted in from as far afield as western Australia.

    Perhaps most importantly, our modelling also suggests that the rates at which plastic debris will beach in the Indian Ocean will follow strong seasonal cycles.

    Winds tend to have a southerly (northward) component during the Indian Ocean’s summer monsoon season. But major debris sources such as Indonesia and India share similar, or more northerly, latitudes with Seychelles. During this period, debris from these sources tends to miss Seychelles and is transported further north.

    By contrast, the winds reverse during the winter monsoons and transport debris directly towards Seychelles. We expect plastic debris accumulation to peak in Seychelles shortly after the winter monsoons (February to April). In the southernmost islands, almost all of the debris that beaches will do so at this point.

    Planning effective mitigation

    Seychelles is not responsible for generating this waste but face mounting environmental and economic costs. For example, 500 tonnes of litter remained following the initial clean-up of Aldabra’s coasts, which may cost up to US$5 million (£4 million) to remove.

    The United Nations last year agreed to establish a global plastic treaty that will tackle plastic pollution at its roots. But negotiations only began recently and it may be a long time before the treaty has any meaningful impact.

    Until then our modelling may help to establish other strategies to reduce the accumulation of plastic debris in Seychelles.

    We identified fishing gear and shipping as being responsible for the majority of plastic pollution on Seychelles. Better enforcement of existing laws such as the 1983 ban on the disposal of plastic into the sea under the Marpol Convention should reduce the amount of plastic entering the Indian Ocean.

    Predicting the peak of plastic accumulation in Seychelles will also maximise the effectiveness of beach clean-ups. Removing litter shortly after its arrival will minimise the time debris spends being broken down into unmanageable fragments.

    Remote Indian Ocean islands are increasingly affected by plastic waste generated overseas. But by modelling the flow of plastic debris, we now have the chance to develop more effective strategies to reduce plastic accumulation and strengthen demands for stronger commitments under the global plastic treaty.

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Main Photo by Naja Bertolt Jensen on Unsplash.

    Charles Telfair Centre is an independent nonpartisan not for profit organisation and does not take specific positions. All views, positions, and conclusions expressed in our publications are solely those of the author(s).

    1...678...20Page 7 of 20