The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
LISBON, Portugal, Nov 11 2025 (IPS) - I have been working on climate policy since the late 1990s. I was in the room when Europe’s early carbon market discussions were shaping the architecture that would eventually underpin the Kyoto Protocol.
That framework—built around international cooperation and market-based mechanisms—was born at a time when climate change was understood as a global problem requiring global solutions. For all its flaws, it carried an underlying logic: collective action was indispensable, and market-based tools could harness efficiency and scale.
Today, the mood has shifted. Public budgets are shrinking, geopolitical tensions are rising, and climate impacts are accelerating. Yet in the midst of this urgency, we are witnessing a troubling rise in what can only be called irrationality: a willingness to hold two or three contradictory ideas at once, even when the stakes are so high.
Take, for example, the persistent claim that carbon “offsetting” is no longer possible under the Paris Agreement. The argument goes like this: because countries now have emissions caps under Paris, offsetting somehow ceases to exist. But that is a fundamental misunderstanding. The very logic of cap-and-trade—whether under the EU Emissions Trading System or international markets—rests on offsetting, i.e. compensating emissions reductions elsewhere rather than reducing at home.
Offsetting is perfectly possible and even desirable, from an economic perspective, within a capped environment. The problem has never been with the principle. It has been with the credibility of particular credits, the uneven quality of oversight, and the lack of transparency in certain corners of the market.
These challenges are real. But the rational response is not to walk away from these challenges. It is to double down on the hard work: strengthen guidance and regulation, demand better data, increase transparency, expose bad behavior, and install integrity across the value chain. High-integrity markets are not easy, but they are possible—and they are already delivering results.
What’s more, evidence shows that international cooperation on carbon markets reduces costs in every modeled region compared to countries acting alone, with potential savings of as much as $250 billion by 2030. Walking away from these benefits would be an act of self-sabotage.
The irrationality extends beyond markets. Policymakers readily admit that public coffers are stretched thin, that development aid budgets are shrinking, and that climate is often being downgraded as a priority in national spending. Yet, in almost the same breath, some suggest that international mitigation can and should be financed primarily through public money rather than carbon markets.
Where is this money supposed to come from?
The data are stark: the world needs $8.4 trillion in climate finance annually by 2030, yet just $1.3 trillion was provided in 2021–2022. That leaves a $7.1 trillion gap today, still projected at nearly $4 trillion in 2030 even under business-as-usual scenarios. Magical thinking does not decommission coal plants, stop deforestation, or scale carbon removal.
Private finance is not just helpful, it is essential. External private finance for climate remains around $30 billion per year today. By 2030, that must rise to between $450 and $500 billion annually—an increase of 15 to 18 times.
There is no plausible pathway to close the gap without mobilizing capital at this scale, and high-integrity carbon markets are one of the few tools available right now that can channel such flows directly into mitigation.
What is needed is not purity, but pragmatism. We need the full suite of solutions—a portfolio approach for climate policy. Deep emissions cuts must continue at home. Rapid removals are essential to balance the carbon budget. And massive flows of capital to a wide range of solutions must scale together.
None of these tools alone will solve the climate crisis. There are no silver bullets. But rejecting viable tools because they are imperfect guarantees failure. Delay, not imperfection, is the greater risk.
Of course, criticism plays an essential role. Constructive critique strengthens systems, exposes weaknesses, and pushes for improvement. But when critique tips into absolutism—when markets are dismissed outright, or international cooperation is brushed aside in favor of isolation—it becomes self-defeating. At a time when geopolitical instability makes cooperation harder, walking away from available mechanisms is the height of irrationality.
I do not claim to have the full prescription for restoring rationality to climate policy. But I do know this: cynicism is not a strategy, and delay is not an option. Markets, when well-governed, remain one of the fastest ways to mobilize capital at scale for climate action. Public finance, though limited, must be directed strategically.
And international cooperation, however unfashionable, is indispensable. The future will not be won by choosing one path and discarding the others. It will be won by using every tool in the toolbox—and refusing to let irrationality steer us toward inaction.
Pedro Barata is Associate Vice President, Environmental Defense Fund
IPS UN Bureau
Climate change is the result of the same dynamics that, over centuries, have broken our societies and split our societies between rich and poor and split the world between developed countries and developing countries— President of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva
Bruce Douglas, CEO of the Global Renewables Alliance, argues that there is a real appetite in countries around the world to decarbonize at pace, but most developing country NDCs are conditional on financing. This is the crucial challenge to address.
WASHINGTON DC, Nov 11 2025 (IPS) - My recent visit to Brazil coincided partly with the Conference of the Parties (COP) 30, the 30th United Nations Climate Conference in Belém. Although I did not attend COP 30, I was very fortunate to visit the Amazon.
It was both awe-inspiring and humbling to experience —even briefly—the mystery and stillness of nature, and the ebb and flow of life in the Amazon: the largest tropical rainforest in the world, sustained by the ever-flowing Amazon River, the largest and widest river on Earth.
The magnificent forest, the river, and its tributaries, such as the black-water Rio Negro, teem with countless interdependent species. The great Samaúma—the “tree of life,” or giant kapok tree—stands tall above innumerable other trees, vines, and plants.
Many trees provide homes for birds and other animals that build their nests high among the branches or near the roots. Sloths do not build nests; instead, they spend their entire lives in the forest canopy, hanging upside down from branches while resting or sleeping.
In contrast, capuchin and squirrel monkeys leap from tree to tree in search of food, while birds—from the tiniest short-tailed pygmy tyrant to the colorful red-crested, green, and black Amazon kingfishers—flit from branch to branch, each awaiting its own prey. As night falls, the beautiful white owl-like great potoo emerges and sits patiently, seemingly forever, waiting for its turn to hunt.
In the river, silvery flying fish—sometimes in droves—leap from the water to catch insects, while gray and pink dolphins bob up and down, chasing fish or simply playing. Along the banks, proud egrets and fierce spectacled and black caimans lie in wait for their prey. Overhead, flocks of birds, including parakeets, fill the sky with song as vultures descend to feed on the remains of fallen animals below.
Humans have also lived in the Amazon for tens of thousands of years, in close symbiosis with other species, hunting in the forest and fishing in the river for their survival. Petroglyphs—carvings of human and animal figures, along with abstract shapes etched into rocks along the Amazon River—speak of their deep respect for nature and their ways of communicating with one another.
Even today, many of the indigenous communities who inhabit the Amazon remain devoted to protecting Mother Earth, upholding their eco-centric values and traditional ways of life.
There are also the river people (ribeirinhos), many of mixed indigenous and Portuguese descent, living along the Amazon River—often in floating homes or houses built on stilts. Their livelihoods and cultures are deeply intertwined with the river and forest, making the protection of the Amazon essential to their survival.
The Amazon lost an estimated 54.2 million hectares of forest—over 9% of its total area—between 2001 and 2020, an expanse roughly the size of France. The Brazilian Amazon, which makes up 62% of the rainforest’s territory, was the most affected, followed by Bolivia, Peru, and Colombia. Along with deforestation, the Amazon is estimated to lose 4,000 to 6,000 plant and animal species each year.
COP 30
At the opening of the COP 30 Conference in Belém last week, Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva, the President of Brazil pointed out that concrete climate action is possible and that deforestation in the Amazon has been halved just in the past two years. He declared that the “era of fine speeches and good intentions is over” and that Brazil’s COP 30 will be a ‘COP of Truth and Action’, “COPs cannot be mere showcases of good ideas or annual gatherings for negotiators. They must be moments of contact with reality and of effective action to tackle climate change.”
President da Silva also emphasized that Brazil is a global leader in biofuel production—renewable energy derived from organic materials such as plants, algae, and waste—stressing that “a growth model based on fossil fuels cannot last.” Indeed, at COP 30, the future of the world’s tropical forests, vital ecosystems, and the shared climate of humanity and other species is at stake.
“Truth and Action”
Notwithstanding President da Silva’s optimistic pronouncements at Belém, troubling developments continue on the climate front in Brazil and around the world. In preparation for COP 30, the Brazilian government—along with India, Italy, and Japan—launched an ambitious initiative in October 2025: the “Belém 4x” pledge, which aims to quadruple global sustainable fuel use by 2035. This goal is projected to more than double current biofuel consumption.
However, environmentalists have expressed concern that a massive expansion of biofuel production, if undertaken without strong safeguards, could accelerate deforestation, degrade land and water resources, harm ecosystems, and threaten food security—particularly as crops such as soy, sugarcane, and palm oil compete for land between energy and food production.
Just days before COP30, the Brazilian government granted the state-run oil company Petrobras a license to drill for oil near the mouth of the Amazon River. The government, including Minister for the Environment Marina da Silva, has defended the move, claiming that the project would help finance Brazil’s energy transition and help achieve its economic development goals.
Environmentalists have criticized the decision, accusing the government of promoting fossil fuel expansion and worsening global warming. They warn that drilling off the coast of the world’s largest tropical rainforest—a crucial carbon sink—poses a serious threat to biodiversity and indigenous communities in the Amazon region.
According to environmental activists, in the Amazon, “31 million hectares of Indigenous Peoples’ territories are already overlapped by oil and gas blocks, with an additional 9.8 million hectares threatened by mining concessions.”
Moreover, a controversial four-lane highway, Avenida Liberdade, built in Belém in preparation for the COP30 climate summit, is being defended by the Brazilian government as necessary infrastructure for the city’s growing population. Environmentalists and some locals are alarmed that clearing more than 100 hectares of protected Amazon Rainforest to build the road will accelerate deforestation, harm wildlife, and undermine the climate goals of the COP summit.
The onus of protecting the Amazon Rainforest—often called “the lungs of the planet”— cannot rest on Brazil alone; it is a shared responsibility of all humanity. Numerous studies show that the world can thrive without fossil and biofuels by adopting alternative renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power.
The global order, led by the United States and other Western nations, bears primary responsibility for the climate and environmental crises, as well as for deepening global inequality. Emerging powers from the Global South—particularly the BRICS nations, including Brazil—are now called to move beyond rhetoric and take concrete action. As President Lula da Silva himself has stated, COP 30 presents a critical opportunity to move decisively in that direction.
Negotiators and policymakers at COP 30 must take firm, principled moral action—resisting pressure from the fossil fuel lobby and prioritizing the interests of the planet and its people over short-term, profit-driven growth.
Dr Asoka Bandarage is the author of Women, Population and Global Crisis: A Politico-Economic Analysis (Zed Books, 1997), Sustainability and Well-Being: The Middle Path to Environment, Society and the Economy (Palgrave MacMillan, 2013) and numerous other publications on global political economy and the environment including “The Climate Emergency And Urgency of System Change” (2023) and ‘Existential Crisis, Mindfulness and the Middle Path to Social Action’ (2025). She serves on the Steering Committee of the Interfaith Moral Action on Climate.
IPS UN Bureau
MANILA, Philippines, Nov 11 2025 (IPS) - US President Trump’s economic strategy for his second term aims to get the rest of the world, especially its wealthy allies with greater means, to pay more to help strengthen the US economy.
Jomo Kwame Sundaram
De-dollarisation distraction
Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff recently observed, “We are absolutely at the biggest inflection point in the global currency system since the Nixon shock to end the last vestige of the gold standard.”
After the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, the gold price was set at $35 per ounce. In August 1971, US President Richard Nixon ended this gold-dollar parity.
De-dollarisation has gradually continued since, with occasional brief spurts and reversals. For example, capital flows abroad rose following the 2008-09 global financial crisis.
Growing weaponisation of economic relations has probably accelerated de-dollarisation. Rogoff observed, “this was happening for a decade before Trump. Trump is an accelerant.”
Governments, central banks and BRICS countries have been de-dollarising. Even US dollar hegemony advocates no longer deny alternatives to the dollar’s role as global reserve currency.
Meanwhile, private foreign investors, including foreign asset managers, investment banks and pension funds, do not want to be left behind.
Investment fund managers are increasingly ‘de-risking’ by cutting exposure to dollar-denominated assets.
Mar-a-Lago plan
Economist Stephen Miran has proposed a new Trump initiative to require other governments to pay the US for services purportedly rendered.
First appointed chair of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers, Miran has since been appointed to the US Federal Reserve Board.
A few days after Trump announced his Liberation Day tariffs on April 2, Miran articulated five expectations. These expect other nations to pay the US for ‘public goods’ services it ostensibly provides the world.
Allies will be expected to pay the US more for the ‘security umbrella’ it provides to NATO and other allies. The US also expects those buying Treasury bonds to pay more for the ‘privilege’
In November 2024, Miran’s A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System proposed the Mar-A-Lago accord, named for Trump’s exclusive Florida island resort and residence.
He also referred to the Plaza Accord, which the Reagan administration imposed on its G5 allies in September 1985. Then, the US forced Japan and Germany to appreciate their currencies against the dollar.
The yen’s appreciation fuelled a massive Japanese asset price bubble that burst with devastating consequences in 1989, ending its post-war boom.
Trump now seeks the appreciation of other major currencies. Already, he has succeeded in getting his European allies to agree.
However, it seems unlikely that Trump will get China and other BRICS economies to do so, as they are aware of how the Plaza Accord affected Japan.
Century bonds
Other national monetary authorities buying US Treasury bonds to stabilise their own currencies have long caused dollar appreciation.
They are now expected to help depreciate the dollar. Miran has proposed that the US issue century, i.e., 100-year bonds, at very low interest rates, well below the current rates for US Treasury securities.
Miran wants foreign central bank reserve currency managers to sell off their dollar-denominated assets. They should “term out” their “remaining reserve holdings” and refinance short-term debt with long-term borrowings.
Miran is explicit: “The US Treasury can effectively buy duration back from the market and replace that borrowing with century bonds sold to the foreign official sector.”
His plan thus intends to force foreign holders of US government debt (‘Treasuries’) to extend the duration of their loans.
Very low interest rates for century bonds will ensure that foreign bondholders effectively pay the US more for the ‘privilege’ of borrowing dollars.
For Miran, the appreciation of other currencies against the dollar will also strengthen the American economy. US manufacturing will strengthen as its exports become more competitive.
Thus, his Mar-A-Lago accord plan expects other nations to pay more to strengthen the world’s largest and richest economy.
Miran’s Mar-A-Lago plan is not yet official US policy. However, this can change with Miran’s likely appointment as the next Fed chair, replacing Trump 1.0 appointee Jerome Powell.
BRICS de-dollarisation?
However, Miran’s declared plan to strengthen the US economy by depreciating the dollar against other major currencies has also accelerated de-dollarisation.
In recent years, the BRICS have been accused of conspiring to accelerate de-dollarisation worldwide, but this is certainly not a shared ambition.
Lacking significant trade surpluses, Brazil and South Africa have long advocated de-dollarisation. But Russia’s complaints have more to do with recent NATO weaponisation of financial instruments against it.
There is no comparable enthusiasm among other BRICS member states, which have much healthier trade surpluses and more dollar assets.
Its recent membership expansion will make an official BRICS de-dollarisation stance even more unlikely.
Nevertheless, Trump’s leadership relies on the American public believing the rest of the world is conspiring against them.
IPS UN Bureau
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 10 2025 (IPS) - As the world prepares for the next COP30 summit, a quieter battle is raging in courtrooms. Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are the fossil-fuel industry’s new favourite weapon, turning justice systems into instruments of intimidation.
“Speak out, and you’ll pay for it”
On a humid morning in August 2025, two small environmental groups in Panama — Centro de Incidencia Ambiental and Adopta Bosque Panamá — found out through social media that they were being sued for “slander” and “crimes against the national economy.” Their offence? Criticising a port project on the country’s Pacific coast.
A few days later, across the border in Costa Rica, two environmental content creators woke up to find their bank accounts frozen and salaries withheld. Their “crime” was posting videos about a tourism project they said was damaging Playa Panamá’s fragile coastline.
In both cases, the message was straightforward: speak out, and you’ll pay for it.
These are part of a growing global trend that is particularly ominous as climate activists, Indigenous defenders, and journalists push their demands upon the upcoming COP30 negotiations. The battle to protect the planet increasingly comes with an additional cost: defending yourself in court.
SLAPPs: Lawsuits Designed to Scare, Not Win
The acronym sounds almost trivial — SLAPP — but its impact is anything but. SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, a term coined decades ago to describe legal actions intended not to win on merit but to intimidate, exhaust, and silence those who speak out on matters of public interest.
According to Transparency International, “SLAPPs are also known as frivolous lawsuits or gag lawsuits, as they silence journalists, activists, whistleblowers, NGOs and anyone who brings facts to light in the public interest.”
These are not just lawsuits; they are in fact strategy. They don’t need to win, they just need to drain your time, your money, and your hope.
The claimants are usually powerful, ranging from corporations, politicians, or investors.
In the Costa Rican case, the company linked to the Playa Panama tourism project did not even allege material harm. Yet the court imposed “precautionary embargoes,” blocking credit cards, freezing wages, even restricting property rights, punishing through the process.
In Panama, the developers of the Puerto Barú port project filed a criminal complaint against environmental NGOs who had challenged the project’s environmental impact assessment before the Supreme Court. Those challenges are still pending. Rather than waiting for the judiciary’s ruling, the company launched a separate legal attack, accusing those NGOs of harming the national economy.
Observers call it “judicial intimidation.” The case triggered several alerts across the EU SEE Early Warning Mechanism, warning of a “chilling effect on civic participation.”
‘Unfortunately, in Panama, judicial harassment of journalists and activists by politicians and businesspeople is already common practice because criminal law allows it. Reform is needed in relation to so-called crimes against honour and the grounds for seizure of assets. International organisations such as the Inter-American Press Association have warned about this,’ says Olga de Obaldía, executive director of Transparency International – Panama Chapter, a national member of the EU SEE network.
In Costa Rica, the embargoes imposed on content creators Juan Bautista Alfaro and Javier Adelfang sparked outrage. Within days, 72 organisations and more than 3,000 individuals — from academics to Indigenous leaders — signed an open letter condemning the action as “an assault on public interest advocacy.”
The backlash worked: members of the Frente Amplio Party introduced a bill to restrict the use of preventive embargoes in cases involving public interest speech.
But for those already targeted, the damage – emotional, financial and reputational – has already been done.
We do not just see SLAPPs deployed in Latin America. Examples of SLAPPs as a means of lawfare by the rich and powerful have been around for a long time across the globe.
In Thailand, Thammakaset sued several members of the NGO Fortify Rights and other activists for denouncing abusive working conditions. Still today content posted by communities or NGOs, or even comments under local government posts, are often picked up and turned into criminal defamation cases.
Despite the existence of anti-SLAPP provisions in the Criminal Procedure Code, experiences indicate that they are largely ineffective. The constant threat of facing litigation based on online content disrupts CSO work and chills free speech.
Climate Activism Under Pressure
As the world heads toward another global climate summit in Brazil – where journalist Amanda Miranda faces a SLAPP by government officials for uncovering corruption – we face a paradox: while governments make promises about protecting the environment, environmental defenders are being prosecuted for holding them accountable.
Brazil’s baseline snapshot on an enabling environment also highlights a related trend: environmental defenders are frequently framed as “anti-development,” a narrative used to delegitimise their work and undermine public support. SLAPPs reinforce this strategy. Beyond draining time and resources, these lawsuits inflict reputational harm, serving as tools in broader campaigns to discredit and silence critics.
According to research from the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, the highest number of SLAPPs – almost half of them – took place in Latin America, followed by Asia and the Pacific (25%), Europe & Central Asia (18%), Africa (8.5%), and North America (9%). Nearly three-quarters of cases were brought in countries in the Global South and 63% of cases involved criminal charges. Furthermore, most individuals and groups facing SLAPPs raised concerns about projects in four sectors: mining, agriculture and livestock, logging and lumber, and finally palm oil.
In an International Center for Non-Profit law – ICNL – study on over 80 cases of SLAPPs across the Global South, out of them “91% were brought by private companies or company officials(…) 41% brought by mining companies and (…) 34% brought by companies associated with agriculture.”
According to data from the CASE Coalition, SLAPP cases have risen sharply in recent years: from 570 cases in 2022 to over 820 in 2023 in Europe alone. Around half of those targeted climate, land, and labor rights defenders. Fossil fuel and extractive industries remain the most frequent initiators.
It is important to remember that those numbers under-represent the extent of SLAPP use, they are based on reported legal cases and can’t include the many cases in which the mere threat of a lawsuit was enough to silence before filing a complaint
The Business & Human Rights Resource Centre has documented that companies linked to mining, tourism, and large infrastructure projects are increasingly using SLAPPs to paralyse critics ahead of international events like COP, when scrutiny intensifies.
The danger of SLAPPs lies in their quietness. They happen behind closed doors, in legal language, far from the marches and hashtags. The trials often do not even end up in lawsuits. Yet their effect is profound. Every frozen bank account, every unpaid legal fee, every public apology extracted under duress weakens the collective courage needed to hold power to account.
Across regions, SLAPPs follow the same playbook: identify outspoken defenders, sue them on vague charges like “defamation” or “economic harm”, drag the process out for years, win by exhausting, not convincing.
Of course, the specific tactics vary by legal context. In some countries, certain charges carry strategic advantages. For example, in the Philippines, authorities frequently rely on serious, non-bailable allegations — including charges like illegal possession of firearms — to keep activists detained for extended periods.
The Philippines remains the most dangerous country in Asia for land and environmental defenders with frequent attacks linked to mining, agribusiness, and water projects.
Political repression persists and civil society groups continue to face “red-tagging” and SLAPPs, further enabled by the passage of the Anti-Terrorism Act, the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001, and the Terrorism Financing Prevention and Suppression Act of 2012.
Authorities have also used fabricated firearms and explosives charges to target activists, journalists, and community leaders, often accompanied by asset freezes, surveillance, and prolonged detention. In these settings, SLAPPs can “weaponise” the criminal justice system itself to remove critics from public life entirely.
SLAPPs have become the invisible front of the climate struggle, a slow-motion suppression campaign that rarely makes headlines.
Tactics to Fight Back
In early 2024, the European Union adopted its first-ever Anti-SLAPP Directive, a milestone achievement after years of campaigning by journalists and civil society. It sets out minimum standards to prevent abusive lawsuits and protect public participation.
But implementation remains uncertain. The Vice-President of the European Commission, Vera Jourova, called the Directive “Daphne’s law,” in memory of the Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was killed in 2017 while she was the victim of numerous legal proceedings against her, and whose tragic story helped raise awareness of the issue.
Beyond the European context, similar efforts to counter SLAPPs have emerged elsewhere, for example in Colombia with the Guerra v. Ruiz-Navarro case. This case illustrates the importance of investigating sexual violence and abuse of power, recognising it as a matter of public interest that warrants protection. This ruling sets a strong precedent against the misuse of courts to silence the press by influential figures and underscores that defending victims and informing the public are acts of defending human rights.
In Indonesia, another country where SLAPPs are being deployed, civil society groups continue to advocate for stronger legal protections, including legislation to protect from SLAPPs. A small step forward came in September 2024, when the Ministry of Environment and Forestry issued Regulation No. 10/2024, on legal protection for environmental defenders.
“While the Ministry of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. 10/2024 represents an initial step toward safeguarding environmental defenders, civil society organisations expect its effective implementation, coupled with broader anti-SLAPP legislation, to ensure comprehensive protection against retaliatory lawsuits and foster a secure environment for public participation in environmental governance,” says Intan Kusumaning Tiyas of INFID, national civil society platform in Indonesia.
Civil society groups are calling for action on immediate priorities.
These include stronger legal safeguards by enacting robust national anti-SLAPP laws that allow for early case dismissal, ensure defendants can recover legal costs, and penalise those who file abusive lawsuits.
Setting up solidarity and support through regional and global networks can quickly mobilise legal assistance, mental health support, and emergency funding for those targeted.
Finally, actions around visibility and accountability are needed to bring SLAPPs into the public eye and raise awareness. SLAPPs need to be framed not as ordinary legal conflicts, but as violations of human rights that weaken an enabling environment for civil society, democratic participation and obstruct climate justice.
At COP30, negotiators will debate carbon credits and transition funds. But the real test of climate commitment may lie in whether states protect the people defending rivers, forests, and coastlines from powerful interests.
Civil society hopes to push a bold message into COP30 discussions: defending the environment requires defending those who defend it and supporting an enabling environment for civil society.
This article was written with the support of the Forus team, particularly Lena Muhs, and members of the EU SEE network.
IPS UN Bureau
BRATISLAVA, Nov 10 2025 (IPS) - Food security and livelihoods in southern Lebanon are under severe threat as the repercussions of Israeli bombing continue to be felt across the region, a report released today (NOV 10) has warned.
Almost a year since a ceasefire was agreed, many farmers in Southern Lebanon are still denied access to their land due to displacement, ongoing Israeli attacks, and soil contamination, a joint report from Action Against Hunger, Oxfam and Insecurity Insight has found.
The impacts of the war, coupled with regular Israeli attacks and occupation, have wiped out farmland and destroyed crops and essential food infrastructure, threatening food security and livelihoods in some of the country’s most fertile and productive areas, according to the report.
“Food insecurity is a huge concern in Lebanon, affecting around a fifth of its population, and this report shows how damage and displacement are devastating production in some of its most fertile lands. As winter approaches, more and more families face hunger and poverty,” Suzanne Takkenberg, Action Against Hunger Country Director, told IPS.
The report, “’We Lost Everything’: The Impact of Conflict on Farmers and Food Security in Lebanon,” lays bare the effects of repeated and ongoing attacks by Israeli forces on Lebanese agricultural land and food production.
It highlights the lasting disruption to the agricultural sector and damage to the rural economy as seeds, fuel and other items necessary to plant and harvest, such as fertilizer and fuel, fodder, workers, and equipment, have become harder to obtain, while damaged roads mean transporting goods can sometimes be impossible.
Displacement and continued lack of access to land are among the major problems farmers are facing.
Almost half of the farmers interviewed for the report had been internally displaced and nearly a year on since the ceasefire was agreed, approximately 82,000 people remain unable to go home due to ongoing Israeli occupation and armed violence.
The ongoing presence of Israeli troops in southern Lebanon, despite a February 2025 deadline for their withdrawal, is also preventing people from accessing land to farm.
“Agricultural losses are not only caused by shelling or burning. When farmers cannot reach their land because of displacement or military presence, the outcome is the same: fields go unplanted, and food disappears,” Christina Wille, Director of Insecurity Insight, told IPS.
The five areas in southern Lebanon remaining under Israeli occupation as of September 2025.
Credit: Map: Insecurity Insight. Base Map: UN OCHA
But farmers have also complained of another serious effect of the bombings – contamination with/from explosive remnants of war (ERW) and white phosphorus.
White phosphorus can have detrimental effects on soil fertility and plant growth, which affects farmers’ ability to grow and harvest crops – with a knock-on effect for food security.
“ERW also poses a serious risk, as not only can these weapons degrade over time and contaminate water and soil, but they can also lead to serious injury and even death if unexploded ordnance detonates unexpectedly,” explained Wille.
“Explosive contamination freezes life in place. It keeps people displaced, fields uncultivated, and entire communities in limbo. Farmers told us that the war didn’t just destroy their crops but also their confidence. Food security is not only about seeds and soil. It is also about whether people feel safe enough to work the land,” she added.
The scale of the losses farmers have endured since the start of the conflict is immense.
“Our findings show that around 90% of farmers we interviewed have seen their food production drop since October 2023. That is a systemic collapse, not a seasonal shock,” Drew East, Researcher at Insecurity Insight, told IPS.
The food production of several farmers in Khiam, Bodai, Saaideh, Baalbek and Aitaroun has completely stopped, depriving them of their main income sources.
Meanwhile, farmers in areas of southern Lebanon and Bekaa that have seen some of the worst conflict incidents have seen losses not just of land but of homes, livestock, and agricultural assets.
But it is not just the livelihoods of farmers that have been ruined.
“Some farmers have lost everything and this will have devastating repercussions not just for them and their families, but also for the communities they help to feed,” said Wille.
The ongoing threat of violence and the levels of destruction witnessed throughout the conflict have also had a profound impact on the physical and psychological well-being of affected communities, according to the report.
“Farmers across Lebanon are already in crisis as historically low rainfall has led to the worst drought on record. This climate stress is being exacerbated by the ongoing effects of the conflict, including contamination of the land, restricted access and disruption to supply chains. Urgent action is needed to restore hope for farmers and communities who rely on them,” said Takkenberg.
Farmers also warned of the need for urgent assistance to address worsening hunger and poverty among communities.
Experts believe that until the ceasefire agreed upon one year ago is fully adhered to, affected farmers will not be able to recover fully.
“The repeated attacks on farmland in South Lebanon and Bekaa are not only destroying livelihoods but undermining Lebanon’s food security. There must be an immediate end to these violations and the full withdrawal of Israeli forces so that farmers can safely return to their land and rebuild their lives,” Oxfam in Lebanon Country Director Bachir Ayoub said.
“Three key elements farmers identified that would enable them to end the negative cycle afflicting southern Lebanon and fully resume food production were financial assistance, a complete cessation of hostilities, and the clearance of ERW-contaminated land,” added Wille.
The report comes just months after the same groups warned at least 150,000 people had been left without running water across the south of Lebanon after Israeli attacks had damaged and destroyed swathes of water sanitation and hygiene (WASH) facilities since the beginning of the conflict.
A report detailed how repeated attacks on Lebanese water infrastructure between October 2023 and April 2025 had led to long-term disruption to supplies of fresh water and caused losses estimated at USD171 million across the water, wastewater and irrigation sectors.
Meanwhile, a severe rainfall shortage had exacerbated the problem, increasing risks of outbreaks of waterborne diseases.
In the latest report, its authors point out that all parties to the conflict have clear obligations under International Humanitarian Law to protect objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, including foodstuffs, agricultural areas, crops and livestock.
And they have issued a call for urgent action to push for more humanitarian and development material support and funding to help with the situation and have stressed the need for a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanese territory as part of the ceasefire.
“The most urgent call could be to help people to safely return home and to work and address food insecurity as soon as possible,” said Wille.
“This is not last year’s conflict. The report tells the story of communities that are not just struggling to recover but under ongoing attack- as we’ve seen most intensely in the last few days,” said Takkenberg.
“Our teams are operating in this highly volatile environment to support those in need – rebuilding greenhouses, restoring roads, distributing cash and providing essential agricultural inputs. Working side by side with local authorities and communities, we are doing what we can to repair livelihoods and create space for renewal. But ultimately, this won’t be possible until we have lasting peace,” she added.
IPS UN Bureau Report
BANGKOK, Thailand, Nov 10 2025 (IPS) - The Second World Summit for Social Development, held in Qatar earlier this month, marked an important moment for global efforts to advance inclusive, equitable and sustainable development. Throughout the Summit, contributions from the Asia-Pacific region demonstrated that diversity is not a barrier but a strength in crafting people-centred solutions.
Countries showcased innovative and scalable approaches to social protection, intergenerational solidarity, care economy transformation and poverty reduction. These efforts, rooted in local realities and scaled through regional cooperation supported by ESCAP, offer valuable lessons for the world.
Climate resilient and inclusive social protection
Social protection is a powerful tool for reducing poverty and inequality. With the right investments and reforms, it has even greater potential to drive inclusive and equitable development in the future as countries face added risks due to climate change.
Indonesia’s large household cash transfer programme, Program Keluarga Harapan, has helped improve households’ livelihood capital and coping capacities in the face of climate change events, especially those relying on climate-sensitive sectors such as food systems or other natural resource-dependent activities.
Public work programmes, such as the Fiji for Jobs 2.0 or Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, help rural households adapt to climate shocks and improve livelihoods while creating climate resilient community infrastructure. For many countries in the region, top-ups to non-contributory cash transfers are often used to swiftly extend emergency relief to large numbers of households.
In Nepal, forecast-based financing allows the release of funding for pre-defined early actions, including social protection transfers, before a disaster occurs. This reduces the impact on vulnerable communities.
Intergenerational solidarity
Demographic shifts are reshaping societies across Asia and the Pacific. Ageing populations, youth, migration and changing family structures demand new approaches to social cohesion and equity.
The Maldives, in partnership with ESCAP, marked a major milestone in addressing population ageing by launching its National Policy in September 2025, presenting a comprehensive framework to promote active and healthy ageing.
The Lao People’s Democratic Republic also recently adopted a decree and a policy on ageing and is now working to put them into practice. These recent developments demonstrate the commitment of countries in Asia and the Pacific in recognizing that today’s youth are tomorrow’s older persons, that ageing should be viewed over the life course and that intergenerational solidarity benefits all. The ESCAP repository of policies on ageing and related database of good practice support countries in sharing experiences, and contribute to more effective regional cooperation.
Transforming the care economy
Valuing unpaid care and domestic work and investing in the care economy are central to building inclusive, resilient economies and achieving sustainable development. Malaysia’s Selangor state became the country’s first state to adopt a comprehensive care economy policy in November 2024, addressing the entire care ecosystem.
From training home-based caregivers to childcare subsidies, the policy demonstrates how subnational governments can transform care through integrated multi-stakeholder action. The Philippines offers a strong example of embedding care into local budgets to reach the most vulnerable women at the community level.
Municipalities have pioneered local care ordinances that mandate an annual allocation for care programmes, mainstreamed into social welfare and gender initiatives. This approach is now being replicated by thirty local government units.
The Republic of Korea expanded its parental leave system in 2024 with the “6+6 scheme,” providing enhanced wage compensation for the first six months when both parents take leave within the child’s first year of life, encouraging fathers’ participation and shared caregiving responsibility.
Regional collaboration: scaling solutions across borders
One of the most powerful messages from the Summit was the importance of regional cooperation. As the examples show, the Asia-Pacific region’s diversity has not hindered progress, rather, it has enriched it. Frameworks such as the Action Plan to Strengthen Regional Collaboration on Social Protection have facilitated resource mobilization and knowledge exchange.
The Doha Political Declaration proposes a regional mechanism to monitor commitments made at the Summit, ensuring accountability and continuous learning. The region’s emphasis on multilateralism and solidarity offers a model for global cooperation in tackling shared challenges.
ESCAP is fully committed to supporting the regional follow-up of the Declaration. Building on its established platforms, including the Committee on Social Development and the Asia-Pacific Forum on Sustainable Development, ESCAP will continue to provide inclusive spaces for dialogue, review and policy coherence aligned with the 2030 Agenda and reflecting regional priorities, including on leaving no one behind, gender equality, decent work, social protection and intergenerational solidarity.
ESCAP will also continue to strengthen regional capacity to collect disaggregated social development data and support national statistical systems to monitor progress and inform policy, helping ensure that progress toward the 2030 Agenda is accurately tracked and gaps are identified.
The Asia-Pacific region leading the way on social development
This region has shown that sustainable and inclusive social development is not a distant goal. Rather, it is achievable through inclusive, locally grounded, regionally coordinated and forward-looking action. From care to climate, from youth to ageing, the region’s solutions are shaping a future where no one is left behind.
As the world reflects on the outcomes of the Second World Summit for Social Development, Asian and Pacific contributions stand out not only for their innovation but for their deep commitment to equity, resilience and human dignity. The journey continues, led by a region that understands that development must be for all, by all.
IPS UN Bureau
Excerpt:
Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)
SRINAGAR, India & BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 8 2025 (IPS) - A report by the Global Alliance of Territorial Communities (GATC) and Earth Insight paints a stark picture of how extractive industries, deforestation, and climate change are converging to endanger the world’s last intact tropical forests and the Indigenous Peoples who protect them.
The report, ‘Indigenous Territories and Local Communities on the Frontlines,’ combines geospatial analysis and community data to show that nearly one billion hectares of forests are under Indigenous stewardship, yet face growing industrial threats that could upend global climate and biodiversity goals.
Despite representing less than five percent of the world’s population, Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPs and LCs) safeguard more than half of all remaining intact forests and 43 percent of global biodiversity hotspots.
These territories store vast amounts of carbon, regulate ecosystems, and preserve cultures and languages that have sustained humanity’s relationship with nature for millennia. But the report warns that governments and corporations are undermining this stewardship through unrestrained extraction of resources in the name of economic growth or even “green transition.”
One of the main report authors, Florencia Librizzi, who is also a Deputy Director at Earth Insight, told IPS that the perspectives and stories from each region are grounded in the lived realities of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and come directly from the organizations from each of the regions that the report focuses on in Mesoamerica, Amazonia, the Congo Basin, and Indonesia.
Across four critical regions—the Amazon, Congo Basin, Indonesia, and Mesoamerica—extractive industries overlap with millions of hectares of ancestral land. In the Amazon, oil and gas blocks cover 31 million hectares of Indigenous territories, while mining concessions sprawl across another 9.8 million.
In the Congo Basin, 38 percent of community forests are under oil and gas threat, endangering peatlands that store immense quantities of carbon. Indonesia’s Indigenous territories face 18 percent overlap with timber concessions, while in Mesoamerica, 19 million hectares—17 percent of Indigenous land—are claimed for mining, alongside rampant narcotrafficking and colonization.
These intrusions have turned Indigenous territories into sacrifice zones. From nickel extraction in Indonesia to oil drilling in Ecuador and illegal logging in the Democratic Republic of Congo, corporate incursions threaten lives, livelihoods, and ecosystems. Between 2012 and 2024, 1,692 environmental defenders were killed or disappeared across GATC countries, with 208 deaths linked to extractive industries and 131 to logging. The report calls this violence “the paradox of protection”—the act of defending nature now puts those defenders at deadly risk.
Yet the report also documents extraordinary resilience. In Guatemala’s Maya Biosphere Reserve, Indigenous forest communities have achieved near-zero deforestation—only 1.5 percent forest loss between 2014 and 2024, compared to 11 percent in adjacent areas. In Colombia, Indigenous Territorial Entities maintain over 99 percent of their forests intact.
The O’Hongana Manyawa of Indonesia continue to defend their lands against nickel mining, while the Guna people of Panama manage autonomous governance systems that integrate culture, tourism, and ecology.
In the Congo, the 2022 “Pygmy Law” has begun recognizing community rights to forest governance, a historic step toward justice.
The report’s findings were released ahead of the 30th UN Climate Conference (COP30), emphasizing the urgency of aligning international climate and biodiversity frameworks with Indigenous rights.
The 2025 Brazzaville Declaration, adopted at the First Global Congress of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities from the Forest Basins, provides a roadmap for such alignment.
Signed by leaders from 24 countries representing 35 million people, it calls for five key commitments: secure land rights, free and informed consent, direct financing to communities, protection of life, and recognition of traditional knowledge.
These “Five Demands” are the cornerstone of what the GATC calls a shift “from extraction to regeneration.”
They demand an end to the violence and criminalization of Indigenous leaders and insist that global climate finance reach local hands.
The report notes that, despite the 2021 COP26 pledge of 1.7 billion dollars for forest protection, only 7.6 percent of that money reached Indigenous communities directly.
“Without financing that strengthens territorial governance, all global commitments will remain symbolic,” said the GATC in a joint statement.
Reacting to the announcement of the The Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) announced on the first day of the COP Leaders’ Summit and touted as a “new and innovative financing mechanism” that would see forest countries paid every single year in perpetuity for keeping forests standing, Juan Carlos Jintiach, Executive Secretary of the Global Alliance of Territorial Communities (GATC) said, “Even if the TFFF does not reach all its fundraising goals, the message it conveys is already powerful: climate and forest finance cannot happen without us Indigenous Peoples and local leadership at its core.
“This COP offers a crucial opportunity to amplify that message, especially as it takes place in the heart of the Amazon. We hope the focus remains on the communities who live there, those of us who have protected the forests for generations. What we need most from this COP is political will to guarantee our rights, to be recognized as partners rather than beneficiaries, to ensure transparency and justice in climate finance, and to channel resources directly to those defending the land, despite growing risks and violence.”
Deforestation in Acre State, Brazil. Credit: Victor Moriyama / Climate Visuals
Jintiach, who is also the report’s author, told IPS the Global Alliance has proposed establishing clear mechanisms to ensure that climate finance reaches Indigenous Peoples’ and local communities’ initiatives directly, not through layers of external actors.
“That’s why we have established our Shandia Platform, a global Indigenous-led mechanism designed to channel direct, predictable, and effective climate finance to our territories. Through the Shandia Funds Network, we ensure that funding is managed according to our priorities, governance systems, and traditional knowledge. The platform also includes a transparent system to track and monitor funding flows, with a specific indicator for direct finance to Indigenous Peoples and local communities,” he said.
The report also warns that global conservation goals such as the “30×30” biodiversity target—protecting 30 percent of Earth’s land and sea by 2030—cannot succeed without Indigenous participation. Policies under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the Paris Agreement must, it says, embed Indigenous governance and knowledge at their core. Otherwise, climate strategies risk reinforcing historical injustices by excluding those who have sustained these ecosystems for centuries.
Jintiach said that based on his experience at GATC, Indigenous Peoples’ and local communities’-led conservation models are not only vital but also deeply effective.
“In our territories, it is our peoples and communities who are conserving both nature and culture, protecting the forests, waters, and biodiversity that sustain all of us,” he said.
He added, “Multiple studies confirm what we already know from experience: Indigenous and local community lands have lower rates of deforestation and higher biodiversity than those managed under state or private models. Our success is rooted in ancestral knowledge, collective governance, and a deep spiritual connection to the land, principles that ensure true, lasting conservation.”
According to Jintiach, the GATC 5 demands and the Brazzaville Declaration are critical global reference points and we are encouraged by the level of interest and engagement displayed by political leaders in the lead-up to COP 30.
Map highlighting extractive threats faced by Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities across the Amazon basin. Credit: GATC
“We are hopeful that these principles will be uplifted and championed at COP 30, the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, CBD COP 17 and on the long road ahead,” he said.
When asked about the rising violence against environmental defenders, Jintiach said that the Brazzaville Declaration calls for a global convention to protect Environmental Human Rights Defenders, including Indigenous Peoples and local community leaders.
According to him, the governments must urgently tackle the corruption and impunity fueling threats and violence while supporting collective protection and preventing rollback of rights.
“This also means upholding and strengthening the Escazú Agreement and UNDRIP, and ensuring long-term protection through Indigenous Peoples and local communities-led governance, secure land tenure, and accountability for human rights violations.”
Earth Insight’s Executive Director Tyson Miller described the collaboration as a call to action rather than another policy document. “Without urgent recognition of territorial rights, respect for consent, and protection of ecosystems, global climate and biodiversity goals cannot be achieved,” he said. “This report is both a warning and an invitation—to act with courage and stand in solidarity.”
The case studies highlight how Indigenous governance models already offer proven solutions to the climate crisis. In the Brazilian Amazon, Indigenous organizations have proposed a self-determined Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to reduce emissions through territorial protection. Their slogan, “Demarcation is Mitigation,” underlines how securing Indigenous land rights directly supports the Paris Agreement’s goals. Similarly, in Central Africa, communities have pioneered decolonized conservation approaches that integrate Indigenous leadership into national park management, reversing exclusionary models imposed since colonial times.
In Mesoamerica, the Muskitia region—known as “Little Amazon”—illustrates both crisis and hope. It faces deforestation from drug trafficking and illegal logging, yet community-based reforestation and forest monitoring are restoring ecosystems and livelihoods. Women and youth play leading roles in governance, showing how inclusive leadership strengthens resilience.
The report’s conclusion is unequivocal: where Indigenous rights are recognized, ecosystems thrive; where they are ignored, destruction follows. It argues that the fight for land is inseparable from the fight against climate change. Indigenous territories are not just sources of raw materials; they are “living systems of governance, culture, and biodiversity” essential to humanity’s survival.
The Brazzaville Declaration urges governments to ratify international human rights conventions, end deforestation by 2030, and integrate Indigenous territories into national biodiversity and climate plans. It also calls for a global convention to protect environmental human rights defenders, whose safety is central to planetary stability.
For GATC’s leaders, the message is deeply personal. “Our traditional knowledge is the language of Mother Earth,” said Joseph Itongwa, GATC Co-Chair from the Congo Basin. “We cannot protect the planet if our territories, our identity, and our livelihoods remain under threat.”
This feature is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.
IPS UN Bureau Report
IPS UN Bureau, IPS UN Bureau Report,
Excerpt:
A new report, 'Indigenous Territories and Local Communities on the Frontlines,' calls for secure land rights, free and informed consent, direct financing to communities, protection of life, and recognition of traditional knowledge.