• The decade of 1998-2007 was the warmest on record. The top 11 warmest years all occurred in the past 13 years.²
• This warming is being caused by human activity, primarily the burning of fossil fuels.
• In order to avoid a catastrophic rise of 6^oC by the end of the century, global emissions need to have peaked by 2015 and reduce by at least 80% by 2050.

Who is being affected?

Climate change is causing human suffering all over the world, due to rising sea-levels, extreme weather events, water and food shortages, and disease.

• The World Health Organization estimated that in 2000 climate change was causing 150,000 deaths worldwide⁴ – from malaria, malnutrition, diarrhoea and flooding. This conservative estimate is equivalent to a 9/11 attack every week.
• ‘Natural’ disasters are increasing in frequency and severity.⁵ Since the mid-1970s, storms of the force of Hurricane Katrina have almost doubled.⁶
• An estimated 90% of all those killed – and 98% of those affected – by natural disasters live in Asia and Africa. Developing countries are most at risk because they lack the resources and capacity to prevent or mitigate the worst effects.⁵
• Between 1996 and 2005, disasters caused $667 billion in direct losses to people worldwide. Losses were 20 times greater in developing countries.⁵
• Rising world food prices caused in part by climate change and expanded biofuel production led to food riots and protests in more than 50 countries between January 2007 and July 2008.⁷

o NORTH AMERICA
In 2005 Hurricane Katrina hit the US Gulf Coast causing 1,836 deaths.

o LATIN AMERICA
In October 2005 Hurricane Stan hit Guatemala, Mexico, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica, causing more than 1,500 deaths.

o CARIBBEAN
In April 2008, a week of protests and riots in Haiti over rising food prices left at least five people dead and 200 injured.

o ARCTIC
The thawing of the Arctic permafrost is affecting the traditional way of life of its indigenous people, making hunting and travelling difficult and dangerous.

o EUROPE
The 2003 heatwave killed approximately 35,000 people from nine countries.

o In summer 2007, Britain suffered widespread flooding following one of the wettest months on record. It caused $4 billion worth of damage and prompted the biggest rescue effort in peacetime Britain.

o AFRICA
Floods in Mozambique in February/March 2000 killed several thousands.

o In September 2007 torrential rain triggered flash floods across Africa, affecting over a million people in 22 countries. The heavy rains destroyed thousands of acres of land and prompted an outbreak of cholera, which killed at least 68 people.

o ASIA
In India a record 944 mm of rainfall in Mumbai in July 2005 claimed over 1,000 lives.

o Cyclone Nargis ripped across Burma in May 2008 killing an estimated 150,000 and severely affecting 2.4 million.

o AUSTRALASIA
In Canberra wildfires killed 4 in January 2003.

o Since 2003, Australia has been undergoing its worst drought on record, with many cities facing severe water shortages and crops and farms affected.

o PACIFIC ISLANDS
The low-lying island of Tuvalu has already evacuated 3,000 of its inhabitants to New Zealand.

o The 2,500 residents of the Carteret Islands are being forced to relocate to nearby Bougainville as their island disappears under the waves.

Who is responsible?

Just 23 rich countries, home to only 14% of the world’s population, have produced 60% of the world’s carbon emissions since 1850. Today they produce 40% of the world’s total. Despite committing to reduce annual emissions to below 1990 levels by 2012, their collective emissions are continuing to rise.⁹

• In 2007 China overtook the US as the world’s biggest emitter.
• Around 23% of Chinese carbon dioxide emissions in 2004 were due to products produced for export to richer countries. This is comparable to Japan’s total CO₂ emissions, and is more than double Britain’s emissions in the same year.¹⁰
• A US citizen emits seven times as much in a year as an Ethiopian does in a lifetime.¹¹

Future scenarios

Unless urgent action is taken now, the world faces terrifying consequences.

MIGRATION

• At least 250 million people will be forced to leave their homes between now and 2050.¹²

HUNGER AND THIRST³

• By 2020, up to 250 million people in Africa and 77 million in South America will be under increased water stress – where supplies no longer meet demand.
• By 2025 tens of millions more will go hungry due to low crop yields and rising global food prices. 49 million people are at risk of hunger by 2020 in Asia alone. Food crop yields in some African countries could decline by as much as 50% by 2020.

SPECIES LOSS³

• Approximately a third of all species will be committed to extinction by 2050.

RISING SEA-LEVELS

Sea-levels are set to rise dramatically. If we continue ‘business as usual’ we are likely to see a rise of at least 1-2 metres this century, possibly much more.¹³

• A 1 metre rise would displace 10 million people in Vietnam and 8-10 million in Egypt.
• The number of Africans at risk of coastal flooding will rise from 1 million in 1990 to 70 million by 2080.¹⁴
• In Bangladesh, flood damage has become more extreme in the past 20 years. By 2100, predicted ocean rises threaten to submerge 18% of the country, creating 35 million environmental refugees.¹⁵
• During the Pliocene period, when the world was 2oC to 3oC warmer, sea-levels were 25 metres higher. About 1 billion people live within a 25-metre rise in today’s sea-level, including many US East Coast cities and areas occupied by more than 250 million people in China.¹⁶

DEATH FROM DISEASE

• By 2085 an estimated 220-400 million more people will be at risk from malaria, and 3.5 billion from dengue fever.³
• Some 182 million people in sub-Saharan Africa alone could die of disease directly attributable to climate change by the end of the century.¹³

Solutions¹⁷

Today, renewable energy sources account for only 13% of the world’s energy use. As much as 80% of energy still comes from fossil fuels, and the remaining 7% from nuclear power.

• In one day, the sunlight that reaches the earth provides enough energy to satisfy the world’s current power requirements for 8 years – although only a percentage of that potential is technically accessible.
• Current wind, wave, solar and geothermal technologies could provide six times more power than the world currently uses.

• 1. BBC News, ‘Billions face climate change risk’, 6 April 2007, tinyurl.com/5fzkur
• 2. World Meteorological Organization, ‘Top 11 Warmest Years On Record Have All Been In Last 13 Years’, 13 December 2007.
• 3. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Fourth Assessment Report, 2007, www.ipcc.ch
• 4. World Health Organization, ‘Climate and health fact sheet’, July 2005, tinyurl.com/5fnu4m
• 5. Ronald Parker, ‘Development Actions and the Rising Incidence of Disasters’, World Bank Independent Evaluation Group, June 2007.
• 6. K. Emanuel, ‘Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years’, Nature 436, 2005.
• 7. Joachim von Braun, ‘Responding to the world food crisis’, International Food Policy Research Institute, 2008.
• 8. Carbon Dioxide Information Analyisis Center, cdiac.oml.gov
• 9. World Resources Institute, ‘Climate Analysis Indicators Tool 5.0′, 2008, www.cait.wri.org
• 10. Tao Wang and Jim Watson, ‘Who Owns China’s Carbon Emissions?’, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, October 2007.
• 11. Based on figures from CIA World Factbook, tinyurl.com/3d6bhw and Energy Information Administration, tinyurl.com/yoxmh8
• 12. Dr Norman Myers, quoted in ‘Human Tide: The real migration crisis,’ Christian Aid, May 2007
• 13. Christian Aid, ‘The Climate of Poverty: Facts, fears and hope’, May 2006.
• 14. DFID, submission to the Stern Enquiry into Climate Change and Developing Countries, Nov 2005.
• 15. Anwar Ali, ‘Vulnerability of Bangladesh Coastal Region to Climate Change with Adaptation Options’, 1999.
• 16. James Hansen, Testimony to the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, US House of Representatives, 26 April 2007.
• 17. All figures taken from Greenpeace, ‘Energy [r]evolution: a sustainable global energy outlook’, 2008, tinyurl.com/6fdqgy

Reprinted from New Internationalist.This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommerical-No Derivative Works 2.l5 License.

Geneva/Hanoi/New York – More than 2000 children die every day as a result of an unintentional, or accidental injury, and every year tens of millions more worldwide are taken to hospitals with injuries that often leave them with lifelong disabilities, according to a new report by the World Health Organization (WHO) and UNICEF.

The World Report on Child Injury Prevention provides the first comprehensive global assessment of childhood unintentional injuries and prescribes measures to prevent them. It concludes that if proven prevention measures were adopted everywhere at least 1000 children’s lives could be saved every day.

“Child injuries are an important public health and development issue. In addition to the 830 000 deaths every year, millions of children suffer non-fatal injuries that often require long-term hospitalization and rehabilitation,” said WHO Director-General Dr Margaret Chan. “The costs of such treatment can throw an entire family into poverty. Children in poorer families and communities are at increased risk of injury because they are less likely to benefit from prevention programmes and high quality health services.”

“This report is the result of a collaboration of more than 180 experts from all regions of the world,” said UNICEF Executive Director Ann M. Veneman. “It shows that unintentional injuries are the leading cause of childhood death after the age of nine years and that 95% of these child injuries occur in developing countries. More must be done to prevent such harm to children.”

Africa has the highest rate overall for unintentional injury deaths. The report finds the rate is 10 times higher in Africa than in high-income countries in Europe and the Western Pacific such as Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden and the United Kingdom, which have the lowest rates of child injury.

However, the report finds that although many high-income countries have been able to reduce their child injury deaths by up to 50% over the past 30 years, the issue remains a problem for them, with unintentional injuries accounting for 40% of all child deaths in such countries.

The report finds that the top five causes of injury deaths are:

1. Road crashes: They kill 260 000 children a year and injure about 10 million. They are the leading cause of death among 10-19 year olds and a leading cause of child disability.
2. Drowning: It kills more than 175 000 children a year. Every year, up to 3 million children survive a drowning incident. Due to brain damage in some survivors, non-fatal drowning has the highest average lifetime health and economic impact of any injury type.
3. Burns: Fire-related burns kill nearly 96 000 children a year and the death rate is eleven times higher in low- and middle-income countries than in high-income countries.
4. Falls: Nearly 47 000 children fall to their deaths every year, but hundreds of thousands more sustain less serious injuries from a fall.
5. Poisoning: More than 45 000 children die each year from unintended poisoning.

“Improvements can be made in all countries,” said Dr Etienne Krug, Director of WHO’s Department of Violence and Injury Prevention and Disability. “When a child is left disfigured by a burn, paralysed by a fall, brain damaged by a near drowning or emotionally traumatized by any such serious incident, the effects can reverberate through the child’s life. Each such tragedy is unnecessary. We have enough evidence about what works. A known set of prevention programmes should be implemented in all countries.”

The report outlines the impact that proven prevention measures can have. These measures include laws on child-appropriate seatbelts and helmets; hot tap water temperature regulations; child-resistant closures on medicine bottles, lighters and household product containers; separate traffic lanes for motorcycles or bicycles; draining unnecessary water from baths and buckets; redesigning nursery furniture, toys and playground equipment; and strengthening emergency medical care and rehabilitation services.

It also identifies approaches that either should be avoided or are not backed by sufficient evidence to recommend them. For example, it concludes that blister packaging for tablets may not be child resistant; that airbags in the front seat of a car could be harmful to children under 13 years; that butter, sugar, oil and other traditional remedies should not be used on burns and that public education campaigns on their own don’t reduce rates of drowning.

The report is available online at the World Health Organization.

December 09, 2008

BOULDER-Contrary to earlier projections, few developing countries will be able to afford more efficient technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the next few decades, new research concludes. The study, by researchers at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and the University of Colorado, warns that continuing economic and technological disparities will make it more difficult than anticipated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and it underscores the challenges that poorer nations face in trying to adapt to global warming.

The study will be published this month in the journal Climate Research. It was funded by the National Science Foundation, NCAR’s sponsor.

“There is simply no evidence that developing countries will somehow become wealthier and be in a position to install more environmentally friendly technologies,” says Patricia Romero Lankao, an NCAR sociologist who is the lead author of the study. “We always knew that reducing greenhouse gas emissions was going to be a challenge, but now it looks like we underestimated the magnitude of this problem.”

As a result, most industrialized and developing countries are increasing their emissions of carbon dioxide. Their economic growth is outstripping the increase in efficiency, and the demand for more cars, larger houses, and other goods and services is leading to ever-increasing emissions of carbon dioxide. Many of the products these nations consume come from developing countries that are producing more but not gaining the wealth needed to increase efficiency.

As a result, most industrialized countries, as well as developing countries with growing economies, are increasing their emissions of carbon dioxide. Overall, global emissions grew at an annual rate of 1.3 percent in the 1990s and 3.3 percent from 2000 to 2006.

The study has implications for international climate change negotiations, such as this week’s U.N. Climate Change Conference in Poznan, Poland. The United States and other technologically advanced nations are under pressure to reduce their per capita carbon dioxide emissions, while developing countries are being urged to adopt cleaner technology. The research suggests that both goals will be difficult to achieve.

In addition, if developing countries fail to become significantly more prosperous, they may be unable to protect their residents from some of the more dangerous impacts of climate change, such as sea-level rise and more-frequent droughts.

“Their populations and economic activities will not have the availability of resources, entitlements, social networks, and governance structures deemed particularly important … for them to adapt to the impacts of climate change,” the paper states.

The cost of inefficiency

Even though the developing nations analyzed by the research team generally have smaller economies, they are responsible for about 47 percent of the world’s emissions of carbon dioxide, one of the major greenhouse gases.

The reason has to do in part with the inefficient energy and transportation systems in nations with less wealth. Small and outdated industrial facilities that use higher-polluting fossil fuels, for example, tend to emit more carbon dioxide per production unit than a larger facility with newer, cleaner technologies. In addition, developing countries contribute a large amount to carbon dioxide emissions when their forests are logged or burned.

To determine whether developing countries are likely to become significantly more efficient, Romero Lankao and her co-authors divided 72 of the world’s more populous countries into three primary groups: technologically advanced nations such as the United States (haves), emerging nations such as Thailand (have-somes), and poorer nations like Tanzania (have-nots). Using World Bank data, they based their classifications on three criteria that can influence carbon dioxide emissions: gross domestic product per capita, urban population, and population in the 15 to 65 age range. They then analyzed the economic trajectories of the selected nations from 1960 to 2006, using several statistical techniques.

The team found that the economic disparity between industrialized countries and most developing ones, as measured by gross domestic product per capita, has increased since 1960 rather than converging. Furthermore, the study projects that, if present trends continue, that disparity will continue to grow for at least the next two decades.

A few have-some nations, such as China, appear poised to move up in the world economy and potentially adopt more efficient technology. But many other have-some and have-not countries that emit a significant percentage of greenhouse gas emissions, such as India and Iran, are failing to amass the resources needed to become substantially more efficient.

The study also highlights the disparities in per capita emissions of carbon dioxide. Of the 72 countries analyzed, the team found that the advanced countries have a tiny share of the world’s population, yet emit 52.2 percent of total carbon dioxide emissions. In contrast, one-third of the global population lives in the have-not countries, but accounts for just 2.8 percent of total carbon dioxide emissions.

A challenge to IPCC projections: the lack of convergence

These findings cast doubt on some projections by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. When the IPCC released its comprehensive assessment in 2007, it based several scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions on the concepts of modernization and convergence, which state that many developing countries would close the economic gap and adopt more efficient technologies.

Romero Lankao and her co-authors, however, found evidence for an alternative view, known as the world economy theory, which holds that nations will remain hierarchical, with poorer nations continuing to be in a peripheral economic position even as they produce more products and resources for wealthy countries. Those nations may adopt more efficient and environmentally friendly means of production over time, but at a significantly slower rate than projected by the IPCC.

The world economy theory suggests significant impacts on future greenhouse gas emissions. For example, if the wealthiest regions were to have seven times the average income of the poorest regions in 2100, as projected in some IPCC scenarios, the world would pump 14.2 gigatons of carbon dioxide into the air that year. But if the income disparity reached 16 times, then carbon dioxide emissions would be about 9 percent higher, at 15.5 gigatons–a difference that, over time, would lead to substantially higher global temperatures.

About the article

Title: “Development and greenhouse gas emissions deviate from the ‘modernization’ theory and ‘convergence’ hypothesis”

Authors: Patricia Romero Lankao, Douglas Nychka, and John Tribbia

Publication: Climate Research

Reprinted from The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.

OSLO (15 October 2008)-Unless based on respect for the rights of indigenous peoples and forest communities, efforts by rich countries to combat climate change by funding reductions in deforestation in developing countries will fail, and could even unleash a devastating wave of forest loss, cultural destruction and civil conflict, warned a leading group of forestry and development experts meeting in Oslo this week.

The experts are gathering in Oslo with policymakers and community leaders for a conference on rights, forests and climate change. The conference was organized by two non-profits, Rainforest Foundation Norway and the US-based Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI).

Speaking at the meeting, Norway’s Minister of Environment and International Development, Erik Solheim, says efforts towards reduced emissions from deforestation in developing countries should be based on the rights of indigenous peoples to the forests they depend on for their livelihoods, and provide tangible benefits consistent with their essential role in sustainable forest management.

“In addition to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, early action, pilot projects and demonstrations should safeguard biodiversity, contribute to poverty reduction and secure the rights of forest dependent communities in order to achieve any degree of permanence, legitimacy and effectiveness,” said Solheim.

Deforestation is responsible for about 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, and reducing it is seen as one of the quickest and cheapest ways of cutting emissions.

“Moves to finance reductions in tropical deforestation and forest degradation are necessary and welcome,” said Andy White, Coordinator of RRI. “But on their own they won’t solve the problem. Poorly devised, they could even make it worse. If such initiatives are well designed they can not only secure carbon but present a global opportunity to address the underlying causes of poverty and conflict in many developing countries.”

Globally, climate change negotiators are considering the introduction of a new financial mechanism, known as Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD), that could generate billions of dollars for reducing forest loss in the tropics. Meanwhile, the Government of Norway has already pledged up to 3 billion Norwegian kroner annually (US$ 500 million) to cut emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in tropical countries.

“To achieve long-term reductions in deforestation and forest degradation, it is absolutely necessary to respect and strengthen the rights of indigenous and other forest dependent communities,” says Lars Løvold, director of Rainforest Foundation Norway. “Many of these schemes are still being developed, and major decisions on how to spend the money will be made in the next few years. For us, the question is whether this money will result in a great deal of good or a great deal of harm to the environment and forest communities.”

Previous attempts to reduce deforestation and forest degradation have largely failed, often due to a lack of attention to human rights, property rights and transparency.

“There are growing conflicts between indigenous peoples and both forestry companies and conservation organizations. Imposed forest management initiatives are only viable if they respect the customary rights of forest peoples and ensure they have control about what happens on their lands. Indigenous peoples must be accepted as full and fair participants in all climate negotiations,” said Joji Carino, Director of TEBTEBBA, the Indigenous Peoples’ International Center for Policy Research and Education.

Conference organizers worry that REDD could fuel corruption and provoke tensions and land grab situations unless good governance, policies and the rule of law are first put in place.

“Indigenous peoples are rightly concerned about how these new investments could affect their access to the forests that they depend on for their livelihoods,” Solheim noted. “This is precisely why we are fully supportive of a role for indigenous peoples and other forest dependent communities in the development and monitoring of climate plans and investments at the national and global level. These rights need to be respected, not just for moral reasons, although that is vital. It is also a matter of pragmatism and effectiveness.”

Experience from Brazil, the country in the world with the most advanced monitoring of its forests, gives valuable insight to the discussion on how forests can be protected. According to research from the Brazilian NGO Instituto Socioambiental, 19 percent of unprotected forest areas in Brazil have been deforested, while deforestation inside federal national parks is 2 percent. In indigenous territories, however, only 1.1 percent have been deforested.

The Oslo conference will discuss the Four Foundations for Effective Investments in Climate Change:

1. Recognize rights – establish an equitable legal and regulatory framework for land and resources.
2. Prioritize payment to communities – ensure that benefits and payments prioritize indigenous and local communities, according to their potential role as forest stewards.
3. Establish independent advisory and auditing processes to guide, monitor and audit investments and actions at national and global levels.
4. Monitor more than carbon to keep track of the status of forests, forest carbon, biodiversity and impacts on rights and livelihoods. Secure a role for indigenous peoples in monitoring of emissions, making full use of their knowledge of the state of forest ecosystems, something which could be particularly relevant to keep track of forest degradation.

New research to be presented at the conference demonstrates that the costs of recognizing local rights and tenure systems are low relative to the projected costs of REDD, and that indigenous and other forest communities own or manage a major portion of the global forest carbon stock. The research also shows that communities have proven to be good stewards of the forest.

A new study by RRI and Intercooperation, a Swiss development organization, finds that the average direct cost to legally recognize traditional community tenure rights is around $3 per hectare – an insignificant investment to make when the minimum estimates needed to pay for elements of a global REDD scheme are somewhere between $800 and $3500 per hectare each year for the next 22 years.

Another study that will be released at the conference, by Professor Arun Agrawal of the University of Michigan, uses data from 325 sites in 12 countries to show that community ownership of forests provides the best possibility for increasing carbon stocks and improving livelihood outcomes. This is the most robust research to date at a global scale on the relationship between forest tenure and carbon sequestration, livelihood benefits and biodiversity.

Agrawal’s study also finds that the larger the property owned by communities, the better the chances for maintaining and sequestering carbon. This research shows the tremendous scope for cost-effective investments that strengthen local land rights, reduce poverty and conflict, and protect remaining natural forest areas.

To help ensure effective investments to combat in climate change, Rainforest Foundation Norway and RRI have called for the formation of independent bodies to advise and monitor the UN Convention on Climate Change.

“We believe that such advisory functions should be given serious consideration,” said Solheim. The conference will take up this recommendation and consider how to best move forward in its deliberations.

Major decisions on REDD, as well as other measures to combat climate change, are likely to be made at the 15th Conference of the UN Convention on Climate Change, which will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 2009.

“In the next fifteen months, the world will have to make a choice,” said Løvold. “We can continue to ignore the legitimate rights of forest dwellers, which will exacerbate conflict in forests and make REDD ineffective. Or we can learn from the lessons of the past, recognize the property and human rights of forest dwellers, and almost immediately start reaping the benefits.”

###

Interested readers can find background information and follow the conference discussions at http://www.rightsandclimate.org/.

The mission of the Rainforest Foundation is to support indigenous peoples and traditional populations of the world’s rainforests in their efforts to protect their environment and fulfill their rights by assisting them in: securing and controlling the natural resources necessary for their long-term well-being and managing these resources in ways which do not harm their environment, violate their culture or compromise their future; and developing the means to protect their individual and collective rights and to obtain, shape, and control basic services from the state. http://www.rainforest.no/, www.rainforest.no/html/180.htm

The Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI) in a new coalition of organisations dedicated to raising global awareness of the critical need for forest tenure, policy and market reforms, in order to achieve global goals of poverty alleviation, biodiversity conservation and forest-based economic growth. Partners currently include ACICAFOC (Coordinating Association of Indigenous and Agroforestry Communities of Central America), the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Civic Response, the Foundation for People and Community Development (FPCD), Forest Peoples Programme, Forest Trends, the World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF), Intercooperation, the World Conservation Union (IUCN), the Federation of Community Forest Organisations of Nepal (FECOFUN), and the Regional Community Forestry Training Center for Asia and the Pacific (RECOFTC). For further information, visit the Web site at: http://www.rightsandresources.org/

Forecast growth in 2008 cereal production could ease tight global supply.

The cereal import bill of the world’s poorest countries is forecast to rise by 56 percent in 2007/2008. This comes after a significant increase of 37 percent in 2006/2007, FAO said today.

For low-income food-deficit countries in Africa, the cereal bill is projected to increase by 74 percent, according to the UN agency’s latest Crop Prospects and Food Situation report. The increase is due to the sharp rise in international cereal prices, freight rates and oil prices.

International cereal prices have continued to rise sharply over the past two months, reflecting steady demand and depleted world reserves, the report said. Prices of rice increased the most following the imposition of new export restrictions by major exporting countries. By the end of March prices of wheat and rice were about double their levels of a year earlier, while those of maize were more than one-third higher, according to the report.

FAO has launched an Initiative on Soaring Food Prices (ISFP), offering technical and policy assistance to poor countries affected by high food prices in order help farmers boost production in the coming agricultural seasons. Farmers can achieve higher yields and increase production areas if they have access to inputs such as improved seeds, organic and inorganic fertilizer and water. Field activities are starting in Burkina Faso, Mauritania, Mozambique and Senegal. FAO will also help governments prepare actions and strategies to increase agricultural production. In collaboration with the World Food Programme, IFAD and other partners, FAO will enlarge its food market information system to pull together and analyze various data sources at local, national and international levels and to disseminate this information. FAO has allocated US$17 million for these activities.

Domestic food prices spur social unrest

Prices of bread, rice, maize products, milk, oil, soybeans and others basic foods have increased sharply in recent months in a number of developing countries, despite policy measures — including export restrictions, subsidies, tariff reductions and price controls — taken by governments of both cereal importing and exporting countries to limit the impact of international prices on domestic food markets.

Food riots have been reported in Egypt, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, Senegal, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Madagascar and Haiti in the past month. In Pakistan and Thailand, army troops have been deployed to avoid seizing of food from the fields and from warehouses.

“Food price inflation hits the poor hardest, as the share of food in their total expenditures is much higher than that of wealthier populations,” said Henri Josserand of FAO’s Global Information and Early Warning system. “Food represents about 10-20 percent of consumer spending in industrialized nations, but as much as 60-80 percent in developing countries, many of which are net-food-importers.”

2008 forecast: production up

According to FAO’s first forecast world cereal production in 2008 is to increase by 2.6 percent to a record 2 164 million tonnes. The bulk of the increase is expected in wheat, following significant expansion in plantings in major producing countries.

“Should the expected growth in 2008 production materialize, the current tight global cereal supply situation could ease in the new 2008/09 season,” the report said.

But much will depend on the weather, FAO cautioned, recalling that at this time last year prospects for cereal production in 2007 were far better than the eventual outcome. Unfavourable climatic conditions devastated crops in Australia and reduced harvests in many other countries, particularly in Europe.

“Favourable climatic conditions will be even more critical in the new season because world cereal reserves are depleted,” the report said.

According to FAO’s forecast, world cereal stocks are expected to fall to a 25-year-low of 405 million tonnes in 2007/08, down 21 million tonnes, or 5 percent, from their already reduced level of the previous year.

“Any major shortfalls resulting from unfavourable weather, particularly in exporting countries, would prolong the current tight market situation; contribute to more price rallies and exacerbate the economic hardship already facing many countries,” the report said.

FAO urges all donors and International Financing Institutions to increase their assistance or consider reprogramming part of their ongoing aid in countries negatively affected by high food prices. A tentative estimation of the additional funding required by the governments to implement country projects and programmes for dealing with soaring food prices ranges between US$ 1,2 and 1,7 billion. The release of these funds can provide important support for poor farmers, including access to inputs and assets, to enhance the food supply response in the next agricultural seasons.

Worldwide, 37 countries are currently facing food crises, according to the report. Click here for the complete list of countries in need of external assistance.

Reprinted from FAO.

Click here to view the embedded video.

WASHINGTON/LONDON/NAIROBI/DELHI – 15^th April 2008. The way the world grows its food will have to change radically to better serve the poor and hungry if the world is to cope with a growing population and climate change while avoiding social breakdown and environmental collapse. That is the message from the report of the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development, a major new report by over 400 scientists which is launched today.

The assessment was considered by 64 governments at an intergovernmental plenary in Johannesburg last week.

The authors’ brief was to examine hunger, poverty, the environment and equity together. Professor Robert Watson Director of IAASTD said those on the margins are ill-served by the present system: “The incentives for science to address the issues that matter to the poor are weak… the poorest developing countries are net losers under most trade liberalization scenarios.”

Modern agriculture has brought significant increases in food production. But the benefits have been spread unevenly and have come at an increasingly intolerable price, paid by small-scale farmers, workers, rural communities and the environment.

It says the willingness of many people to tackle the basics of combining production, social and environmental goals is marred by “contentious political and economic stances”. One of the IAASTD co-chairs, Dr Hans Herren, explains: “Specifically, this refers to the many OECD member countries who are deeply opposed to any changes in trade regimes or subsidy systems. Without reforms here many poorer countries will have a very hard time… ”

The report has assessed that the way to meet the challenges lies in putting in place institutional, economic and legal frameworks that combine productivity with the protection and conservation of natural resources like soils, water, forests, and biodiversity while meeting production needs.

In many countries, it says, food is taken for granted, and farmers and farm workers are in many cases poorly rewarded for acting as stewards of almost a third of the Earth’s land. Investment directed toward securing the public interest in agricultural science, education and training and extension to farmers has decreased at a time when it is most needed.

The authors have assessed evidence across a wide range of knowledge that is rarely brought together. They conclude we have little time to lose if we are to change course. Continuing with current trends would exhaust our resources and put our children’s future in jeopardy.

Professor Bob Watson, Director of IAASTD said: “To argue, as we do, that continuing to focus on production alone will undermine our agricultural capital and leave us with an increasingly degraded and divided planet is to reiterate an old message. But it is a message that has not always had resonance in some parts of the world. If those with power are now willing to hear it, then we may hope for more equitable policies that do take the interests of the poor into account.”

Professor Judi Wakhungu, said “We must cooperate now, because no single institution, no single nation, no single region, can tackle this issue alone. The time is now.”

For more information visit GreenFacts.