The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
BONN, Jun 12 2026 (IPS) - Africa contributes the least to global greenhouse gas emissions, yet it faces some of the world’s most severe climate-related health impacts. Several realities define the continent’s climate and health landscape – increased infectious diseases, air pollution, death, disruption and pressure on health systems through heatwaves, floods, droughts and storms.
Changing temperatures and, more significantly, rainfall patterns are expanding the geographical range and transmission dynamics of climate-sensitive diseases such as Malaria, Dengue fever, Cholera and other vector- and water-borne diseases.
Climate-induced droughts, floods, and changing rainfall patterns are reducing agricultural productivity and threatening food systems. This increases hunger, undernutrition, stunting among children, and vulnerability to disease. According to archive.uneca.org, malnutrition remains one of the largest climate-sensitive health risks across Africa.
Thus, as African climate negotiators intensify preparations for the 64th sessions of the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies (SB64), a clear message is emerging from Bonn: climate action without health action is no longer an option.
Over two critical days of engagement, African negotiators, health experts, technical institutions, and young climate leaders came together to strengthen Africa’s negotiating positions and place health firmly at the centre of the continent’s climate agenda.
The Climate and Health Capacity Building Workshop supported by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), and the African Group of Negotiators (AGN) Lead Coordinators Meeting collectively noted the growing recognition that climate change is not only an environmental challenge but also one of Africa’s most pressing public health threats.
For AGN Chair, Nana Dr Antwi-Boasiako Amoah, the connection is clear, and the required measures are equally urgent.
“Health is the human face of the climate crisis,” he told negotiators and partners during the opening of the capacity building workshop in Bonn. “If climate negotiations are ultimately about protecting people, then health must remain at the centre of our efforts.”
Chair of AGN, Nana Dr Antwi-Boasiako Amoah, with Dr Lynn Wagner of IISD at the Climate and Health Capacity Building Workshop. Credit: Friday Phiri
Building a Stronger African Climate and Health Voice
Building on the launch of the first-ever African Negotiators Climate and Health Curriculum in 2025, by Amref Health Africa, the climate and health capacity-building workshop brought together representatives from WHO-AFRO, Africa CDC, Amref Health Africa, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), technical experts, and young negotiators to deepen understanding of climate-health linkages and identify strategic entry points across negotiation tracks.
Participants examined ways to strengthen Africa’s position on adaptation indicators, climate-resilient health systems, early warning systems, health infrastructure, preparedness for climate-related emergencies, and financing mechanisms that can support health adaptation efforts.
“Following the adoption of the Belém Adaptation indicators and the ongoing discussions under the Baku Adaptation Roadmap, Africa has a unique opportunity to shape how adaptation is measured, financed and implemented globally,” said the AGN Chair. “We must ensure that health indicators under the global goal on adaptation are meaningful, context-specific, and responsive to Africa’s realities. We must also continue pushing for adaptation finance that enables African countries to build climate-resilient health systems, strengthen early warning systems, protect health infrastructure, and enhance preparedness for climate-related health emergencies.”
The emphasis on institutional coordination reflected a growing understanding that advancing Africa’s climate and health agenda will require sustained collaboration between negotiators, public health institutions, technical partners, and civil society.
And the WHO-Africa Regional Team Lead on Climate Change, Health and Environment pledged coordinated stakeholder support for the climate and health agenda.
“At the WHO-Regional office, we have developed Africa-specific policy and implementation frameworks in support of an Africa-wide coordinated climate and health agenda. Together with the Africa CDC and Amref Health Africa, we have offered and continue to provide technical support for the continent’s climate and health agenda. As we head to the African COP next year, we pledge continued support to the AGN, as Africa’s voice in climate negotiations, to ensure that climate and health are not left behind.”
Meanwhile, IISD Senior Director for Tracking Progress Programme, Lynn Wagner, noted the need for coordinated climate action, pointing out that “isolated action is no longer tenable as the global community faces multiple and interconnected environmental and sustainable development crises.”
IISD has been supporting the Friends of Climate and Health initiative aimed at fostering international collaboration on climate change and health.
Unity and Coordination Ahead of Critical Negotiations
While health featured prominently in discussions, the AGN Lead Coordinators’ Meeting reinforced a broader strategic priority; maintaining a unified African voice theme across all negotiating streams.
Convening lead coordinators for the various thematic streams, the meeting focused on aligning positions ahead of what is expected to be a pivotal negotiating session, ahead of COP31 in November and, ultimately, COP32 next year.
Drawing on priorities established during the AGN Strategy Meeting in Accra earlier in March this year, lead coordinators reviewed progress in implementing elements of the African Common Platform and assessed emerging issues across the negotiation tracks.
The AGN Chair called for discipline, commitment, and coordinated action.
“Our strength lies in our unity and our ability to speak with one voice,” he said, reminding negotiators that Africa’s influence in the negotiations depends on collective preparation and strategic coordination.
The discussions intensified the interconnected nature of many agenda items. Climate finance remains Africa’s foremost priority, but increasingly, negotiators are recognising how finance decisions affect the various thematic outcomes, particularly, adaptation, which has been Africa’s main agenda over the years.
Health, Finance and the Road to COP32
A recurring theme across both meetings was the need to translate recognition of climate-related health risks into tangible climate finance support for African countries.
Negotiators emphasised the importance of securing adaptation finance that enables countries to build climate-resilient health systems, strengthen disease surveillance and early warning systems, protect health infrastructure, and improve preparedness for climate-related emergencies, as espoused in the Belem Climate and Health Action Plan launched at COP30.
“Health is already recognised within the investment frameworks and result areas of major climate finance mechanisms, such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD),” said David Kaluba, a Climate Finance Lead Negotiator. “However, the challenge is not only the availability of financing windows, but the limited pipeline of country-driven health-focused proposals and investment demand. Most countries have yet to fully integrate health priorities into their national climate plans (NDCs), financing strategies, and project pipelines, resulting in significant underutilisation of available climate finance opportunities for health system resilience, adaptation, and loss and damage responses.”
Kaluba therefore notes the need to generate sufficient country-level demand through evidence generation, development of bankable climate and health investment pipelines, and strengthening of institutional capacity to access and absorb available financing.
A Defining Opportunity for Africa
For many participants, this work extends beyond SB64. It forms part of a broader trajectory towards COP31 and ultimately COP32, significantly viewed as more than a diplomatic milestone.
It represents an opportunity for the continent to shape the global climate agenda around African realities and priorities, including climate and health.
As negotiations intensify, African countries are seeking to ensure that climate action delivers meaningful benefits for people on the ground, and health offers a powerful lens through which to frame that ambition.
Therefore, as formal negotiations begin on 8th June, one message is clear: protecting the climate ultimately means protecting human health. And for Africa, this principle is becoming an increasingly powerful driver of its engagement in the global climate process.
The author is the Climate Change and Health Advocacy Lead at Amref Health Africa.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Jun 12 2026 (IPS) -
CIVICUS discusses Botswana’s decriminalisation of same-sex relations with Faith Gunda, a Botswana-based law student and human rights defender, a member of the CIVICUS Protest Lab and co-founder of Sisterhood Chain International, a solidarity initiative that supports grassroots groups and amplifies young women’s voices.
Faith Gunda
What does repeal mean for LGBTQI+ people?
The formal repeal is symbolic, but symbols matter because they tell people whether they belong. For years, criminal provisions sent a message to LGBTQI+ people in Botswana: you are criminals. Even after the courts ruled these provisions unconstitutional in 2019, they remained on the books, a constant reminder that the state saw their identities as a threat. Their removal aligns written law with constitutional values of dignity, equality, liberty and privacy. But more importantly, it says that LGBTQI+ people are not criminals.
This changes everything for young people. When the law no longer criminalises your identity, it has positive impacts on mental health, belonging and civic participation. It lets LGBTQI+ people report violence, seek healthcare and live openly without fear. People can breathe a little easier. They can imagine futures they couldn’t before.
This progress didn’t come from above. It came from years of relentless advocacy by LGBTQI+ activists, LGBTQI+ organisations such as Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana and everyday people willing to risk everything to challenge entrenched stigma. The formal repeal is not the end of a struggle. It’s a foundation for the next phase. The work continues.
Why did it take so long to remove provisions courts declared unconstitutional?
Legal victories and political change don’t move at the same pace. The courts were clear in 2019 that the law was unconstitutional. But court rulings cannot implement themselves. Colonial-era laws remain embedded in statute books because removing them takes political will and politicians fear backlash. For six years, LGBTQI+ people lived with a law the courts had already called unjust.
What finally made change happen was sustained pressure. Civil society organisations, human rights defenders and lawyers refused to let this go. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment in 2021, and activists kept speaking up, organising and demanding implementation. In March, the law finally changed. So, this is the lesson: court rulings matter, but it’s sustained civic action that turns them into real protection.
What barriers remain, and what comes next?
Decriminalisation isn’t the same as equality, but it’s the foundation for it. Real equality means marriage rights, family recognition and anti-discrimination protections. The marriage equality case due to be heard in court in July will test whether constitutional protections reach beyond private intimacy into full citizenship and whether same-sex couples can access the dignity and legal recognition marriage provides.
But legal barriers are only a part of the story. Social barriers persist too, including stigma in families, healthcare systems, schools and workplaces. Legal reform creates protection, but it cannot instantly change rooted attitudes. Young people in Botswana increasingly believe everyone should be able to live authentically without fear. They are organising, speaking openly, refusing the silence previous generations endured. This generational shift is becoming the most powerful driver of change.
The journey is not linear, but the direction is undeniable. Meaningful reform takes continuous civic engagement. This means activists documenting and defending civic space, grassroots organisations amplifying youth leadership and people refusing to accept anything less than full humanity.
Is Botswana an example for Africa?
Botswana’s progress shouldn’t be romanticised. The country still faces social conservatism and discrimination, and its gains will be vulnerable unless they are continuously defended. But it offers a model to follow.
Botswana stands out on the continent because it succeeded through civic advocacy, constitutionalism and judicial independence. This matters all the more now, when several African governments are passing harsher anti-LGBTQI+ laws and dismissing these rights as ‘un-African’, even though the laws banning same-sex relations were colonial imports.
Botswana’s path challenges that narrative. It shows that African constitutional democracies can interpret dignity, equality and liberty inclusively, without abandoning local legal traditions. For human rights defenders across the region, Botswana is proof that civic engagement, sustained advocacy and strategic litigation can produce meaningful change even in difficult political climates.
CIVICUS interviews a wide range of civil society activists, experts and leaders to gather diverse perspectives on civil society action and current issues for publication on its CIVICUS Lens platform. The views expressed in interviews are the interviewees’ and do not necessarily reflect those of CIVICUS. Publication does not imply endorsement of interviewees or the organisations they represent.
GET IN TOUCH
Instagram
LinkedIn
TikTok
SEE ALSO
Botswana: criminalisation of same-sex relations off the books CIVICUS Lens 21.May.2026
Gender rights: rollback and resistance CIVICUS | State of Civil Society Report 2026
Namibia: LGBTQI+ rights victory amid regression CIVICUS Lens 05.Jul.2024
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 12 2026 (IPS) - The global ocean economy continues its expansion, with ocean-related trade reaching USD 2.5 trillion as of 2025. Ocean services now make up the majority of the ocean trade, accounting for 58.9 percent of the composition, up from 47.8 percent in 2020.
Ocean services alone are now valued at USD 1.44 trillion dollars, an increase of USD 1.2 trillion since 2020; a rate greater than the entire global ocean trade in 2020. While 2020 was a year filled with disruptions, economies contracting, and consumer smoothing, this number is an increase of USD 476 billion dollars since 2015, a 49.5 percent growth from 2015, where the ocean services trade generated USD 961 billion.
“The ocean economy is expanding rapidly across sectors such as aquaculture, tourism, and shipping. While this growth is vital for food security, employment, and economic development, it’s increasingly constrained by the declining health of the ocean,” said Rafael González Quiroz, co-director of the United Nations ‘Third World Ocean Assessment’ and director of Spain’s Oceanographic center of Gijón (IEO-CSIC), during a press briefing held on World Ocean Day (June 8).
The UN World Ocean Assessment is a global integrated assessment of the world’s ocean following environmental, economic and social aspects, with interdisciplinary inputs from more than 650 experts to provide scientific basis for the consideration of ocean issues by governments and policy makers, among other stakeholders involved in the regulation and protection of the ocean.
Quiroz’s assessment reflect the broader expansion and changes within the ocean economy, where services have an increasingly dominant role in the global ocean economy. The strongest example of such is the recovery of marine and coastal tourism, which has turned sharply since the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic.
Credit: IPS/Maximilian Malawista
Today, marine and coastal tourism now accounts for 32 percent of global ocean trade, up from 16 percent in 2020. 32 percent representing USD 785 billion, over half of all ocean services trade. Maritime freight transport remains the second highest, at roughly USD 487 billion or 20 percent of total ocean trade. Quiroz emphasized that a “sustainable ocean economy can only exist if it’s built upon a healthy and resilient ocean”.
One of the key challenges highlighted during the briefing was marine pollution, especially plastics. Within global plastics trade, only 10 percent of all plastics are recycled. 52 million tonnes of such plastic waste every year enters the ocean, which the United Nations states is affecting at least 4,000 marine species.
In response, the international community has spent the past six years working on negotiating a “global plastics treaty”, an agreement which would put a ceiling on plastic production, and limit the USD 1.1 trillion dollar industry, ensuring waste management standards, recycling requirements, and creating market space for sustainable alternatives.
Achieving this may require changes to global trade incentives. UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD) finds that “the key barrier is an uneven national and trade policy field.”
According to UNCTAD, tariffs on plastics have fallen from 34 percent to 7.2 percent over the past 3 decades, giving plastic producers a larger incentive to keep making more plastic. While plastic tariffs have decreased, alternatives to plastics like bamboo, natural fibers, paper, and seaweed have had tariffs double to the rate of 14.4 percent. As a result of such tariffs, conventional plastics remain the cheaper option for manufacturers.
However, recent volatility in the energy markets stemming from the current Strait of Hormuz crisis has increased the cost of plastic production. Reports from UNCTAD show that because plastics are approximately 98 percent derived from fossil fuels, the cost of plastic prices has risen 70-80 percent in the European markets. This market shock could open the door for sustainable alternatives, giving real reason for companies to develop products free of polyethylene resin and other plastics, further developing the sustainable alternatives industry.
IPS UN Bureau Report
UNITED NATIONS, Jun 12 2026 (IPS) - African leaders are sharpening their focus on digital sovereignty, warning that the continent’s economic future will depend not just on connectivity, but on who controls its data—and where it is stored.
At a high-level roundtable during the 58th session of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa Conference of Ministers, held in Tangiers, Morocco, in April 2026, policymakers and technology leaders signaled a decisive shift in Africa’s digital ambitions: from being consumers of technology to becoming architects of their own digital infrastructure and data ecosystems.
Central to this shift is the idea of “sovereign data”—ensuring that African data is stored, processed and governed within the continent.
Participants emphasized that digital independence is no longer optional; it is a prerequisite for economic security and national resilience.
“Digital public infrastructure is as vital today as electricity,” said Américo Muchanga, Mozambique’s Minister of Communications and Digital Transformation. But, he added, infrastructure alone is not enough. Governments must now decide how to classify and manage their data—what remains within national borders, and what can be shared—so that its value benefits African economies.
Beyond infrastructure: entering the “age of intelligence”
For years, Africa’s digital agenda has focused on expanding connectivity—laying fiber, increasing mobile access, and building platforms for public services. While that remains essential, leaders say the conversation must evolve.
Digital public infrastructure (DPI), often described as the “rails” of the digital economy, must now carry something more valuable: intelligence.
As artificial intelligence reshapes economies globally, Africa faces a critical question—will it simply adopt external systems, or build its own?
“Africa must prioritize local data processing and systems that reflect its realities,” said Ambassador Philip Thigo, Kenya’s Special Envoy on Technology. He warned that relying on imported models risks entrenching systems that do not capture African languages, contexts or economic needs.
The solution, participants argued, lies in investing in local talent and capabilities—from data science to AI model training—so that innovation is grounded in African realities.
Building the backbone: data centres and “AI factories”
A recurring theme was the urgent need for infrastructure that can support this transition. Data centres—described as the backbone of the digital economy—remain in short supply.
“Africa needs to increase its data centre capacity tenfold,” said Adil El Youssefi, CEO of Africa Data Centres at Cassava Technologies.
Currently, the continent generates less than 1% of global data despite accounting for nearly 20% of the world’s population.
To bridge this gap, participants called for the development of “AI factories”—facilities capable of storing and processing large volumes of data locally. These would not only support AI development but also ensure that the economic value derived from data remains within Africa.
However, such investments require reliable and affordable energy, as well as long-term financing—two persistent challenges across the continent.
A new model: data embassies and regional cooperation
Among the more innovative ideas discussed was the concept of “data embassies”—shared infrastructure that allows countries to store data securely across borders while maintaining sovereignty.
This model, participants said, could help smaller economies overcome the high costs of building standalone data infrastructure, while strengthening regional integration.
It also reflects a broader push toward collaboration.
Pius Chaya, Tanzania’s Deputy Minister for Planning and Investment, stressed the need for strong public-private partnerships, underpinned by robust cybersecurity and data protection frameworks.
Without trust, he noted, digital systems cannot scale.
From policy to execution
While Africa has made strides in developing digital strategies, leaders acknowledged a familiar challenge: implementation.
Ndaba Gaolathe, Vice President and Finance Minister of Botswana, pointed to a gap between policy ambition and real-world impact. Botswana, he said, is addressing this by using a universal service fund—financed through a levy on mobile operators—to expand connectivity to underserved communities.
“The time for planning alone is over,” he said. “We must now focus on execution.”
This call for “mega execution” reflects a growing urgency to translate strategies into tangible benefits—jobs, services, and economic growth.
Inclusion and measurement
Despite progress, nearly one billion Africans remain offline, even in areas with mobile coverage. Industry representatives, including the GSMA, urged governments to remove taxes on mobile devices to make digital access more affordable.
At the same time, measuring the economic impact of digital transformation remains a challenge.
“If we cannot measure the contribution of technology to GDP, we cannot monetize it,” said Claver Gatete, UNECA’s Executive Secretary. Strengthening national statistical systems, he added, is essential for evidence-based policymaking and accountability.
A defining moment
As Africa accelerates its digital transformation, the stakes are becoming clearer. Data is no longer just a byproduct of the digital economy—it is its most valuable asset.
The discussions in Tangier point to a continent at a crossroads: one that must decide whether to remain a consumer in the global digital order, or to assert control over its data, technologies and economic destiny.
The message from leaders was unmistakable—Africa’s digital future must be built in Africa, and for Africa.
Source: Africa Renewal, United Nations
IPS UN Bureau
Excerpt:
From data embassies to AI “factories,” policymakers say control over data will define the continent’s economic future.
KABUL, Jun 11 2026 (IPS) - Afghanistan ranks 175th in the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index this year. Out of 180 countries on the list, only Iran, Syria, China, North Korea and Eritrea ranked lower than Afghanistan.
Arrests narrow opportunities for workThe Taliban’s arrests and imprisonment of journalists have further narrowed opportunities for journalism.
Several prominent journalists are currently in prison. They include Shakib Ahmad Nazari, who is reportedly being held for collaborating with international media outlets. He was arrested in 2025 and sentenced to three years in prison according to sources.
Spokespersons for government ministries and agencies are reluctant to speak to female journalists and often do not even provide basic information or short statements. In the past, we had to sit in the last row of benches at press conferences, but recently we have not even been allocated seats anymore
Hamid Farhadi, a prominent freelance journalist, was arrested in September 2024 while working for foreign media outlets and the Afghan Etilaat Roz media outlet. He was sentenced to two years in prison. According to the human rights organization Amnesty International, Farhadi was sentenced without right to legal representation.
His arrest was allegedly related to a report he made for foreign media outlets about the situation of women and girls in Afghanistan.
The media in Afghanistan is overseen by the Taliban-run Audit Commission. Journalist and former member of the commission, Bashir Hatef, was arrested in 2025 for collaborating with foreign media and sentenced to two years in prison.
Self-censorship has become a daily routineThe arrests of male journalists, however, pale in comparison to the situation of female journalists, who face professional restrictions and are subject to gender-based discrimination. Over the past four years, many have been threatened, arrested, banned from work or treated violently.
Samandar (name changed) has 13 years of experience in television and radio. According to her, journalists currently do not have the right to criticize the Taliban, officials or state institutions.
Journalists are also not able to choose their guests freely. Only experts approved by the Taliban can be invited to programs that cover politics. Regular street interviews are practically impossible.
“We are forced to self-censor or our employer gets into trouble and we are threatened with imprisonment. So we remove criticism of the Taliban from our programs,” says Samandar.
Self-censorship is also visible in practice. A well-known television channel in Kabul – whose name will not be revealed for security reasons – was planning a program on the role of women journalists in communication.
Everything was ready and guests had been invited. However, the program had to be canceled because it was feared that the discussion would cause problems for both the channel and the guests.
Female journalists face double restrictionsSalma (name changed) is a female journalist with a journalism degree and nine years of work experience. She describes how spokespersons for government ministries and agencies are reluctant to speak to female journalists and often do not even provide basic information or short statements.
Routine press conference arrangements have also changed, she says. “In the past, we had to sit in the last row of benches at press conferences, but recently we have not even been allocated seats anymore.”
According to her, separate rooms have been built for women, from where they can follow the events but not participate in them equally.
“A partition has been erected in the hall, and we are forced to sit in a separate booth. We can only listen to the speeches of officials but are not allowed to ask questions.”
Even when questions are allowed in exceptional cases, limits are placed on what can be asked. “On rare occasions, when questions are allowed, we are not allowed to ask anything critical.”
Questions can only be asked at certain events where Taliban-approved officials, such as Zabihullah Mujahid, are present. He is considered somewhat more flexible in his approach to female journalists.
According to Salma, the restrictions do not end there. Movement and work are closely monitored.
“At press conferences, officials from the Taliban’s Ministry of Virtue and Prevention of Vice demand to know who we are with and whether we have a male escort.”
Salma also criticizes news directors who favor male journalists. According to her, it is well known in newsrooms that women are practically prevented from doing normal journalistic work and that Taliban representatives do not want to talk to female journalists.
“In most media outlets, we are not treated as employees but rather as interns who are paid only for our travel expenses. The media outlets take advantage of the restrictions imposed by the Taliban on female journalists.”
According to Salma, many women accept the situation because there are few options.
“In addition to the restrictions imposed by the Taliban, we are forced to tolerate this abuse so that we are not completely excluded from editorial and media work.”
No more female journalists in many provincesDue to Taliban restrictions, female journalists are required to be accompanied by a male guardian even when they are supposed to be at work elsewhere, which is often practically impossible. Some women have left their jobs for fear that their family members could be arrested.
A writer in Kandahar, “Shazia,” uses a pseudonym. According to her, the restrictions on interviews imposed by the Taliban have significantly changed the way they work.
Male colleagues conduct the interviews, and female journalists have to rely on their recordings when writing their articles. Male colleagues are not always willing to cooperate in situations when follow-up questions or supplementary interviews are needed for a story.
Articles written by women are often published under the names of male colleagues. Women’s voices are not even allowed to be heard on the radio.
According to Reporters Without Borders, four out of five female journalists and media workers in Afghanistan lost their positions after the Taliban returned to power.
Before August 2021, there were 2,490 women working in the media, of whom only about 410 continued to work after the Taliban took power. According to the organization, there are no active female journalists in 15 of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces.
Ban on image further tightens surveillanceFreedom of speech in Afghanistan is also significantly restricted by the ban on the display of images of living beings.
According to the Afghan Journalists Center, the ban is in force in at least 23 provinces. Reports indicate that many media outlets have been forced to switch to audio-only format and at least 20 television stations have been closed.
Dwindling female journalists work in the media industryRecent data highlights the scale of decline in Afghanistan’s media workforce. According to Naeem (not real name), a member of association of media organization, there are currently 4,073 male journalists and 746 female journalists working across the country.
Another female journalist, Nabila (not real name) provided similar figures, estimating that more than 4,700 journalists remain active, around 700 of them women.
These figures reflect a sharp contraction compared to previous years. According to Reporters Without Borders (RSF), there were previously around 700 women journalists working in Kabul alone; that number has now dropped to fewer than 100
Laila (name changed) was previously part of one of three women-led journalist associations and unions that supported female journalists before the Taliban returned to power.
She says none of these groups is active anymore. According to her, institutions and organizations can no longer be officially registered in women’s names under the Taliban regime.
The media sector in Afghanistan is also structurally restricted. There is no clear legal framework, live broadcasts are prohibited, the number of guests on programs is limited, and access to information is difficult.
Excerpt:
The author is an Afghanistan-based female journalist, trained with Finnish support before the Taliban take-over. Her identity is withheld for security reasons
SAMARKAND, Uzbekistan, Jun 11 2026 (IPS) - The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has approved USD 6.4 million for a new conservation initiative in Papua New Guinea that seeks to protect 700,000 hectares of critical highland ecosystems by placing Indigenous Peoples and local communities at the centre of conserving and managing their ancestral lands.
Implemented by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and with expected USD 16.7 million in co-financing, the project aims to strengthen biodiversity corridors, support peacebuilding and improve environmental management across protected and productive landscapes. It is expected to improve management effectiveness across more than 276,000 hectares of protected areas, extend sustainable environmental practices to 1.6 million hectares, directly benefit 21,000 people and avoid nearly one million tonnes of carbon emissions.
The initiative reflects a broader shift in conservation thinking in Papua New Guinea and internationally – away from externally driven protection efforts and toward approaches that connect biodiversity conservation with livelihoods, land rights and local governance.
That shift is especially significant in Papua New Guinea, where roughly 97 percent of land remains under customary ownership, making conservation efforts dependent on local consent and participation.
“In a culturally rich and highly diverse country that is both geographically isolated and challenging to access, community empowerment is essential for achieving sustainable social and economic development,” Aaron Becker, FAO-GEF Regional Coordinator for Asia and the Pacific, told IPS.
“The key to successful conservation efforts in Papua New Guinea is recognising and respecting that 97 percent of the country’s land is held under customary ownership,” Becker said.
According to project designers, conservation in Papua New Guinea can only succeed when it is rooted in customary land systems, respects local cultural realities and builds upon traditional natural resource management practices rather than bypassing communities.
Under the project’s community-led landscape model, local people will determine which areas should be protected, which can continue supporting livelihoods and what conservation rules should apply. The initiative is expected to support recognition of 10 community-led conservation areas across biodiversity hotspots.
The programme will rely on participatory processes grounded in Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT) while helping communities strengthen governance systems and develop land-use plans informed by traditional knowledge.
“This project provides the facilitation, training, equipment, and access to finance — and keeps the decisions within the community,” Becker said.
“Importantly, communities are not being asked to implement somebody else’s conservation agenda.”
Project officials say the initiative has also been designed to avoid intensifying land disputes or creating new social tensions.
“The project is designed carefully to avoid making tensions, such as around natural resources, worse,” Becker said, adding that site selection takes into account governance conditions, conflict risks and community readiness.
The emphasis on community ownership reflects a broader evolution in global conservation policy, according to Kaveh Zahed, Assistant Director-General and Director of FAO’s Office of Climate Change, Biodiversity and Environment.
“It’s not just about protecting biodiversity – it is about conservation, regeneration and sustainable use of biodiversity,” Zahed told journalists on the sidelines of the GEF Assembly.
“That’s a recognition that much of this biodiversity is linked to people and to livelihoods – and nowhere is that demonstrated better than with agriculture and agricultural communities, who are custodians of a great deal of that biodiversity.”
Rather than treating conservation as a restriction on development, the project combines environmental protection with biodiversity-friendly livelihoods, including sustainable agriculture, agroforestry, coffee systems, non-timber forest products, ecotourism and small-scale livestock.
Zahed said agriculture and food systems can become part of the solution rather than a source of tension between conservation and economic development.
“That’s where the beauty of agri-food system solutions lies,” he said. “They are interventions that are about food security, producing more with less, and helping communities maintain that food security while at the same time bringing biodiversity and climate benefits.”
For Becker, the broader lesson extends beyond Papua New Guinea.
“So, the message is simple: conservation should not create new insecurity,” he said. “Done well, it will reinforce land rights, support livelihoods, and build cooperation across landscapes that communities already know, use and manage.”
Note: This feature is published with the support of the GEF. IPS is solely responsible for the editorial content, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of the GEF.
IPS UN Bureau Report
PERTH, Australia, Jun 11 2026 (IPS) - This planet’s biggest sporting event—the FIFA Men’s World Cup—will soon kick off. Millions of people around the world will sit up, bleary eyed, watching matches at unreasonable hours and inventing feeble excuses for why we won’t be at work in the morning. More than one billion are expected to watch the finale on TV in mid-July. That’s a bigger audience than any Olympic sporting event and more than the number of people who have viewed Squid Game on Netflix.
The World Cup is also big business. FIFA predicted the competition might bring in a whopping US$30.5 billion in tourist dollars for the United States, Canada and Mexico—the three 2026 host countries. But all is not well with the beautiful game.
Amnesty International and more than 100 local human rights organizations have issued a travel warning for fans planning to visit the eleven U.S. cities that are hosting World Cup matches. According to figures obtained by Human Rights Watch, ICE arrested 167,000 people around the eleven cities from January 2025 to March 2026. Visitors are warned they may experience invasive searches of their phones at the border, “racial profiling,” and other egregious abuses that breach “the United States’ human rights obligations under domestic and international law.” Even before the first whistle is blown, Africa’s leading referee, Omar Artan from Somalia, was denied entry to the United States at Miami International Airport and will now miss the tournament.
Tourist arrivals in the U.S. were already down 5.4% last year, with a “Trump slump” now impacting the upcoming World Cup. According to a survey of more than 200 host city hotels conducted by the American Hotel and Lodging Association, “nearly 80% said hotel bookings are tracking below initial forecasts.” Some fans are having trouble securing a visa, but spiraling expenses and the threat of being deported for some nasty comment you made about Trump on Facebook are also disincentives.
At a massive “No Kings” protest in Brooklyn last October, I joined my fellow New Yorkers to march against this democratic backsliding in the United States. At least 6 million people protested nationally, with a quarter of million in New York, where I had been working for the past decade.
The day felt like a festival. One protester was blowing a vuvuzela, an annoyingly loud horn introduced to the global community at the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa. Someone else was wearing an inflatable chicken suit and carrying a sign that said, “I’m more mature than the President.”
Despite the frivolity, President Trump had threatened to deploy the FBI against protesters, and his team denounced the No Kings movement as being manufactured by treasonous malcontents. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt blamed the Democratic Party and claimed, “its main constituency are made up of Hamas terrorists, illegal aliens, and violent criminals.” The No King’s website, meanwhile, said that “in America, we don’t have kings and we won’t back down against chaos, corruption, and cruelty.” It felt like a clash was likely.
On the day, however, the most aggressive encounter I had was when someone thrust a small bright-yellow card into my hand. It boldly declared, “Know Your Rights,” and offered helpful text to recite if you were detained, including: “The U.S Constitution grants all people rights. I am proud to be exercising mine.” A QR code linked to relevant legal advice.
Those laws still stand between President Trump and the unconstrained power he covets. But given that Trump has now appointed 265 federal judges and three Supreme Court Justices, some legal safeguards appear precarious. Some U.S. federal agencies have already embraced Trump’s authoritarian tilt, with illegal deportations and the extrajudicial killing of two protesters on the streets of Minneapolis being the most disturbing examples of a corrosive trend.
The resulting gap between jurisprudence and justice can be deadly. As president of the U.S.-based Center for Victims of Torture (CVT) I had visited safe houses in the suburbs of Nairobi, Kenya, for LGBT+ refugees from African countries where same sex relationships were illegal. Article 27 of Kenya’s constitution guarantees freedom from discrimination, but on the streets of Nairobi, many refugees remained vulnerable.
A CVT colleague recently texted to inform me that a LGBT+ refugee from Somalia had been murdered. She was in Kenya awaiting legal resettlement to the United States but had been halted by Trump’s ban on refugee admissions. In Kenya, like any other country, the laws that secure people’s rights are only ever as strong as the willingness of police, courts, and parliaments to uphold them.
Only around a dozen countries in the world have comprehensive national human rights laws, enacted by parliament and grounded in international treaties and conventions. These include South Africa, India, Ireland, as well as Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Many other states—including Brazil, Japan, United States and Kenya—protect some fundamental rights and freedoms through their constitution or a bill of rights. Australia is the only major liberal democracy in the world without either a national human rights act or a bill of rights, although there is growing domestic pressure to rectify that perilous legal shortcoming.
The World Cup has already given a lot to global culture. Think not just of the insufferable vuvuzela, the embarrassing macarena and the irrepressible Mexican wave. Its deeper value might be in reminding us that in these times of creeping authoritarianism, all states should strengthen their human rights protections.
Simon Adams is Professor of Human Rights, Murdoch University, Australia
IPS UN Bureau