Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Accountability in Crisis: Development banks, while funding Asia’s energy transition, are accused of silencing Asian local and Indigenous communities, highlighting the central tension between a clean-energy push and the repression of those most affected.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio Team.

As the world races to abandon fossil fuels and embrace renewable energy to avert climate catastrophe, development banks, governments, and corporations promote this transition as a global priority. In Asia, this transition, presented as a path to a clean-energy future, is shadowed by serious concerns about who bears its costs.

However, for many Indigenous peoples, farmers, fisherfolk, and urban poor living on lands targeted by these projects, the energy transition has led to displacement, repression, and the loss of livelihoods.

This alternative reality is documented in a new regional report, Financing the Transition, Silencing Defenders. The report details how communities raising concerns about renewable energy projects across seven Asian countries have faced reprisals ranging from harassment and arrests to military occupation and killings.

The report challenges the region’s energy transition. It argues that renewable energy projects use vast resources, burdening Indigenous and local communities who have contributed little to the climate crisis. The report documents how these projects cause displacement, loss of cultural identity, ecological disruption, health risks, and increased debt.

Security forces were often reported to have carried out reprisals. Police and the military were frequently deployed to sites. Communities described beatings, arrests, and intimidation during consultations, compensation, and construction.

Rather than providing security, the report concludes that “in most contexts, their presence does not make communities feel secure, but rather threatened and silenced.”

The report goes on to describe how, in several documented cases, security personnel forcibly entered villages, dismantled community barricades, demolished homes, and stopped peaceful protests. According to the report, these confrontations often escalated tensions and contributed to the criminalization of local resistance.

The report underscores a central argument: when communities raise concerns, their voices are systematically silenced through SLAPPs, attacks, criminalization, intimidation, and discrimination—primarily by local authorities and security forces. These practices form a system of control involving governments, security forces, corporations, and development banks to repress dissent and maintain project momentum.

The 44-page report examined 12 renewable energy and energy-transition projects across seven Asian countries—India, Indonesia, Pakistan, the Philippines, Tajikistan, Thailand, and the Maldives. It was produced by the Coalition for Rights in Development, a global network representing over 100 social movements, civil society organizations, grassroots groups, and partners.

Despite variations in scale and technology among these projects, affected communities across these countries consistently reported being excluded from decision-making processes.

Many projects moved forward without real consultation or Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of Indigenous Peoples. Communities said they were told about decisions after the fact, kept from key project details, or pressured to accept compensation.

As the report notes, when projects exclude rights holders from decision-making, it often leads to protests, legal challenges, and revoked permits. These outcomes raise costs and cause delays. More importantly, leaving out affected communities creates mistrust toward specific projects and the broader energy transition narrative that justifies them.

In Assam, India, Indigenous Karbi, Naga, and Adivasi communities oppose a solar project projected to affect more than 20,000 people. Community representatives report that consultations were held in only 9 of the 23 impacted villages, leaving thousands excluded from the process. They claim the project threatens livelihoods, land rights, biodiversity, bamboo forests, and elephant habitats.

“The project was approved without ensuring the communities’ Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). Consultations were held in only 9 out of 23 impacted villages, thus excluding thousands from the process,” the report states.

Researchers found that when communities attempt to challenge the harmful impacts of these projects, they are often labeled anti-development, extremists, or threats to national interests. In response, authorities, corporations, and local officials have reportedly targeted outspoken community leaders and sought to isolate them.

According to the report, “government authorities, private companies, and other actors who have a vested interest in the projects identify the most vocal community members and human rights defenders who are raising concerns and stigmatize them.”

In another case, in Pakistan, activists opposing hydropower projects reported receiving threats from authorities. They have also been accused of working against national development goals. The Madyan Hydropower Project is funded by the World Bank. The Torwali Indigenous community worries about their land, culture, and future.

Similarly, in the Philippines, environmental defenders and Indigenous leaders who oppose dam projects have faced “red-tagging.” This is a tactic that labels activists as communist sympathizers or security threats. The report says these tactics have created fear and deterred people from participating in public consultations.

Poorly planned projects imposed without meaningful consent harm communities, and those voicing concerns face intimidation and reprisals.

Many projects are led by major public development finance institutions. These include the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. These institutions are directly implicated in reported abuses and the silencing of communities.

The findings directly challenge development banks: they must choose either to fund actors implicated in human rights violations or to actively leverage their influence to uphold community rights and genuine participation in Asia’s energy transition.

“Banks can either look the other way and continue funding government and corporate entities that have historically disregarded human rights and environmental sustainability, or they can use their influence to ensure that the highest standards and safeguards are upheld. The report states that development banks have responsibilities regarding both the prevention of and response to reprisals,” the report states.

The report calls on development banks to improve environmental and social safeguards. Banks should conduct thorough risk assessments and implement measures to ensure safe, meaningful engagement with affected communities. This should happen throughout the energy transition.

Development banks invoke the push to abandon fossil fuels to underscore urgency, but the report warns that this urgency is sometimes misused to accelerate approvals, rush assessments, and limit community consultation—thereby undermining both human rights and the legitimacy of the transition.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Global hunger falls, but millions in Africa still go without food, says UN

Published

on

Geneva | Global hunger has declined for the third consecutive year, offering renewed hope that progress against food insecurity is possible. Yet for Uganda and the rest of Africa, the latest United Nations findings are a reminder that the continent continues to carry the heaviest burden of hunger despite improvements in many parts of the world.

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2026 (SOFI 2026) report, released jointly by five UN agencies, estimates that 645 million people experienced hunger in 2025, down from 659 million in 2024 and 688 million in 2022.

The figures indicate that global efforts to improve food security are beginning to bear fruit, but not fast enough to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal of ending hunger by 2030.

For Uganda, the report presents a mixed picture. While global hunger is declining, Africa has overtaken Asia as the region with the highest number of hungry people. Approximately 309 million Africans experienced hunger in 2025, compared to 292 million in Asia.

One in every five Africans remains undernourished, and more than half of the continent’s population continues to face moderate or severe food insecurity. These findings come at a time when Uganda is striving to transform agriculture from subsistence farming into a commercial, climate-resilient sector.

Agriculture remains the backbone of Uganda’s economy, employing the majority of the population and contributing significantly to export earnings. Yet erratic rainfall, prolonged droughts in some regions, flooding in others, crop pests, high post-harvest losses and fluctuating food prices continue to threaten food security for many households.

The UN report notes that while 2.1 billion people worldwide still experience moderate or severe food insecurity, Africa accounts for the highest share, with 56.6 per cent of its population unable to consistently access sufficient, safe and nutritious food. This means many families are forced to reduce meal sizes, skip meals altogether or settle for less nutritious diets. For Uganda, where rural communities depend heavily on rain-fed agriculture, climate change remains one of the biggest threats to food production.

Recent seasons have demonstrated how prolonged dry spells and unpredictable weather patterns can reduce harvests, increase food prices and place vulnerable households at greater risk of hunger.

The report also highlights another growing concern that resonates with Uganda’s public health priorities: malnutrition is no longer only about hunger. While millions still lack enough food, obesity and poor-quality diets are increasing across the world.

Globally, the prevalence of adult obesity rose from 12.1 per cent in 2012 to 16.2 per cent in 2024. At the same time, nearly 150 million children under five remain stunted due to chronic undernutrition, while only about one-third of children aged between six and 23 months consume sufficiently diverse diets.

Uganda has made progress in reducing child stunting over the past decade, but nutrition experts continue to warn that poor infant feeding practices, limited dietary diversity and food insecurity remain major contributors to child malnutrition. The challenge is compounded by rising food costs, making nutritious foods such as fruits, vegetables, dairy products and animal proteins increasingly difficult for many households to afford.

The report reveals that the average global cost of a healthy diet has risen sharply to 4.28 purchasing power parity dollars per person per day in 2025, compared to 2.94 dollars in 2017. Although fewer people globally are unable to afford healthy diets than four years ago, Africa is moving in the opposite direction.

More than two-thirds of Africans, 66.6 per cent of the population, could not afford a healthy diet in 2025. This is more than double the proportion recorded in Asia and Latin America.

For Uganda, where inflation in food prices periodically affects household purchasing power, the findings reinforce the importance of investing across the agricultural value chain rather than focusing solely on increasing production. According to the report, between 70 and 75 per cent of the price consumers pay for food is determined after it leaves the farm, through transport, storage, processing, wholesale and retail costs.

This suggests that investments in rural roads, irrigation, cold storage facilities, food processing, market infrastructure and efficient transport systems could significantly reduce food costs while increasing farmers’ incomes.

Reducing post-harvest losses, estimated to claim a substantial share of agricultural produce in Uganda each year, would also improve food availability without requiring additional land for cultivation. The report further warns that progress made globally could easily be reversed.

Ongoing conflict in the Middle East, rising energy and fertiliser prices, declining humanitarian funding and increasingly frequent climate shocks all threaten future food security. Even under optimistic projections, between 510 million and 520 million people could still be hungry by 2030, well above the level required to meet the global Zero Hunger target.

For Uganda, these global developments matter because the country remains connected to international food, fuel and fertiliser markets. Higher import costs translate into more expensive agricultural inputs and higher food prices, placing additional pressure on both farmers and consumers.

The UN agencies argue that reducing the cost of healthy diets will require targeted investments in agriculture, stronger food value chains, research and innovation, improved irrigation, climate-smart farming practices, better trade policies and social protection programmes that support vulnerable households.

Ultimately, the report offers both hope and caution. It demonstrates that hunger can be reduced through sustained investment and sound policies, but it also makes clear that progress is uneven and fragile.

Strengthening agricultural resilience, improving nutrition, expanding food processing and ensuring affordable access to healthy diets will be essential for countries in Sub-Saharan Africa in order to contribute meaningfully to the global ambition of ending hunger by 2030.

As the report concludes, a world where healthy food is affordable and accessible to everyone remains within reach, but only if governments, development partners, the private sector and communities work together to build food systems that are more resilient, inclusive and sustainable.

Source: independent.co.ug

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Wars are disrupting food systems, and ending world hunger requires urgent global action, experts say.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio team.

Conflicts far from the world’s farms are reshaping how food is produced, traded, and accessed. Rising energy costs, fertilizer disruptions, and threatened trade routes expose the fragility of global food systems, increasing production costs and leaving millions vulnerable to hunger.

The global food crisis is deepening as multiple shocks put increasing pressure on food systems worldwide. According to the World Food Program (WFP), hundreds of millions of people face crisis-level hunger, with conflict, climate change, economic instability, and displacement driving food insecurity. Countries already struggling with poverty and fragile economies remain the hardest hit.

More than 295 million people across 53 countries and territories faced acute hunger in 2024, according to the Global Report on Food Crises. This was an increase of nearly 14 million compared with 2023, driven mainly by conflict, economic shocks, climate extremes, and displacement.

The war in Ukraine showed how conflict in one region can disrupt food supplies worldwide. Ukraine is one of the world’s leading exporters of wheat, maize, and sunflower oil, while Russia remains a major supplier of fertilizers and agricultural inputs. Disruption of Black Sea trade routes and uncertainty over exports triggered sharp increases in food and fertilizer prices, affecting farmers and consumers thousands of kilometers away.

Although global grain markets have gradually stabilized since the initial shock, experts say the structural vulnerabilities exposed by war remain unresolved. Many countries still rely heavily on a handful of exporters for staple foods and farm inputs, leaving them exposed whenever geopolitical tensions escalate.

Similar concerns are emerging from the Middle East. Disruptions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s busiest shipping corridors, have raised fears over global supplies of oil, natural gas, and fertilizers. Because modern agriculture depends heavily on fuel and fertilizer, a prolonged interruption in these supplies has immediate consequences for food production.

During a ministerial meeting of the MED 9++ countries on “Supporting Food Security and Access to Fertilizers”, United Nations Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Q.U. Dongyu warned that the current crisis extends far beyond geopolitics, affecting food production, trade, agricultural inputs, and access to food worldwide.

“This is not only a geopolitical crisis, but also a disruption at the core of the global agrifood system,” he said.

He explained that agriculture follows fixed seasonal calendars and that fertilizers must be applied at precise stages of crop development.

“Agriculture operates on a crop calendar that cannot be postponed. Fertilizers must be applied at specific moments in the crop cycle. If they do not arrive on time, yields are reduced, regardless of what happens later.” He added.

According to QU Dongyu, even delays of a few weeks could reduce harvests, tighten food supplies through 2026 and 2027, and raise food prices worldwide, particularly in import-dependent countries across Africa and Asia.

Agricultural economist Dr. Joseph Glauber, a senior research fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and former Chief Economist at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), says today’s food crisis is increasingly driven by rising production costs rather than shortages alone.

In an interview with Witness Radio, Dr. Glauber said energy prices are now one of the biggest factors pushing up food costs.

“The biggest link has been through energy. Higher energy prices mean higher shipping, transport, and processing costs. Consumers don’t eat wheat; they eat bread and processed foods that require energy throughout the production chain,” he added.

Dr. Glauber noted that while global prices for crops such as wheat and maize have risen only modestly, fertilizer and energy costs have risen much faster, leaving many farmers with shrinking profit margins.

“For farmers, profits have declined because input costs have risen faster than the prices they receive for their produce,” he said.

According to Dr. Glauber, African countries face unique challenges because they depend heavily on imported fertilizers and face higher transport costs than larger importing economies.

“Africa is quite vulnerable because shipment sizes tend to be smaller and transport costs are relatively higher,” he explained.

He noted that although fertilizer use varies significantly between African countries, higher prices are already putting enormous pressure on farmers across the continent.

Beyond these immediate impacts of war, experts say the world faces a broader systemic crisis. The Club of Rome has also warned that shocks from the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, to disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz and increasing geopolitical instability, have exposed profound weaknesses in global food systems.

The organization says food security can no longer be viewed apart from peace, climate resilience, and energy security. Governments should instead pursue integrated approaches that strengthen local food production and reduce dependence on vulnerable international supply chains.

Experts are calling for an end to armed conflicts that threaten food production, investment in regenerative agriculture, stronger land rights for smallholder farmers, diversification of food crops beyond the world’s heavy dependence on wheat, maize, rice, and soybeans, expanded regional trade, and a faster transition away from fossil fuel-dependent agriculture.

Hunter Lovins, President of Natural Capitalism Solutions and a member of the Club of Rome, says the world already knows many needed solutions.

“This is not a warning about some distant future. It is a warning about next year’s harvest. We know what works. What we lack is not solutions, but the political will to invest in them before the crisis, rather than after,” she said.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Campaigning LC I Chairpersons Barred from Land Transactions Until Polls End.

Published

on

The Ministry of Lands has restricted LC I chairpersons seeking re-election from handling land transactions until after the July 28 village elections to prevent fraud, disputes and irregularities during the campaign period.

The Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development has temporarily barred Local Council I (LC I) chairpersons seeking re-election from participating in land-related transactions, citing concerns over possible fraud and disputes during the election period.

In a public notice issued on Thursday, the ministry directed all campaigning LC I chairpersons to stop witnessing, endorsing, recommending or overseeing land transactions until the electoral process is concluded.

The directive comes as campaigns for village chairperson elections enter the final days ahead of polling on July 28.

“The advisory has been issued as a precautionary measure to safeguard the integrity of land transactions during this transition period and to minimise the risk of disputes, fraud, or other irregularities that may arise,” the ministry said in the notice.

The ministry advised members of the public against relying on LC I chairpersons who are actively campaigning for services involving the witnessing of land sale agreements, verification of ownership, handling of boundary disputes or any other transaction requiring local administrative involvement.

Individuals with urgent land matters were encouraged to seek assistance from qualified legal practitioners or use other lawful channels until the elections are completed.

“The Ministry urges the public to exercise patience until the election process is concluded. This precaution will help prevent costly mistakes and safeguard the interests of all parties,” the notice added.

The temporary restriction comes amid continued concerns over land disputes, which remain among the leading sources of conflict in Uganda, with local leaders often playing a key role in verifying ownership and facilitating village-level transactions.

Although LC I chairpersons do not have the legal mandate to transfer land ownership or issue titles, they are commonly relied upon during land transactions because of their knowledge of residents and local land histories.

They often help confirm the identity of sellers, identify boundaries and witness sale agreements alongside members of their executive committees, providing community-level verification before transactions are completed.

Legal experts have previously cautioned that LC I endorsements only provide local credibility and do not replace formal requirements under Uganda’s land laws. Buyers are still required to conduct proper due diligence before purchasing land.

According to the Electoral Commission roadmap, elections for Village (LC I) chairpersons will be held on July 28 across Uganda’s 71,214 villages. Elections for Parish (LC II) chairpersons will follow on August 10.

The Ministry of Lands said LC I chairpersons will resume their normal involvement in land-related matters after the conclusion of the electoral process.

Source: nilepost.co.ug

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates