Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

UN approves carbon market safeguards to protect environment and human rights

Published

on

The UN’s new carbon market will have a compulsory mechanism that aims to prevent developers of carbon credit projects from breaching human rights or causing environmental damage with their activities – a first for the UN climate process.

Developers of projects under the UN’s new Article 6.4 carbon crediting system will be required to identify and address potential negative environmental and social impacts as part of a detailed risk assessment under new rules adopted by technical experts in Baku, Azerbaijan, last Thursday.

Developers will also be asked to set out how their activities contribute to sustainable development goals like ending poverty or improving health, alongside their primary objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Maria AlJishi, chair of the Supervisory Body in charge of setting the rules, said in a statement that “these new mandatory safeguards are a significant step towards ensuring that the UN carbon market we are building contributes to sustainable development without harming people or the environment”.

The risk reduction measures introduced by the so-called “Sustainable Development Tool” represent an attempt to grapple with widespread concerns over the harm caused by some carbon credit projects around the world.

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – the previous UN carbon market set up to help richer countries meet their emissions-cutting pledges – was dogged by accusations of social and environmental abuses linked to its registered projects. They included, for example, toxic pollution from a waste-to-energy facility in India, forced relocations due to infrastructure like a hydropower dam in Panama, and villagers in Uganda being denied access to land they used to grow food as a result of a tree-planting project.

The CDM had only a less-rigorous voluntary safeguarding mechanism that was heavily criticised by civil society.

The approval of the new Sustainable Development Tool this week marks the end of a two-year process to agree on the rules, which will work alongside an appeals and grievance procedure rubber-stamped earlier this year.

Kristin Qui, a Supervisory Body member closely involved in developing the tool, told Climate Home it had been “very challenging” to get it right. “Everyone wanted to find the right balance between making sure the tool can be used while at the same time being as stringent as possible,” she added.

Under the new rules, project developers will have to fill out an extensive questionnaire designed to assess the risk their activities could pose in 11 areas, including land and water, human rights, health, gender equality and Indigenous Peoples.

They will have to describe how they are planning to avoid any negative impacts or, if that is not possible, the measures they are taking to reduce them, as well as procedures to monitor their implementation.

External auditors will review the risk assessment, check that local communities have been properly consulted and evaluate the appropriateness of the actions proposed by the developers. The rules will apply to both new projects developed under Article 6.4 and to over a thousand more that are seeking to transfer into the new market from the CDM.

Isa Mulder, a policy expert at Carbon Market Watch (CMW) and a close observer of Article 6 negotiations, said the tool “should go a long way in upholding rights and protecting people and the environment”.

She added there is still room for improvement on certain provisions and said the mechanism will need to be used as intended for it to be effective, but called it “a really good start”.

The Supervisory Body will review and update the safeguarding tool every 18 months, striving to improve it based on feedback from those involved.

In addition to the risk assessment, the mechanism will require project developers to assess the potential impacts of their activities on country efforts to meet the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, adopted by the UN in 2015 and due to be met this decade.

Qui said the tool will make project developers reflect more closely on how they can share benefits with local communities.

“It poses the question of how the project is actually going to contribute to sustainable development in addition to simply avoiding harm and encourages a high level of engagement with Indigenous populations from the get-go,” she added.

The approval of the Sustainable Development Tool is seen as an important stepping stone towards achieving the full operationalisation of the Article 6 carbon market at COP29 in November – one of the main priorities for the incoming Azerbaijani presidency of the talks.

CMW’s Mulder said the tool’s adoption was “very significant”, as having a human rights protection package in place was “probably a prerequisite” for many countries to even consider approving other carbon market measures at COP.

After extended and heated discussions stretching into the early morning on Thursday, the Supervisory Body also agreed on guidance for the development of carbon-credit methodologies and carbon removal activities aimed at ensuring that emission reductions claimed by projects are credible.

These key building blocks for the establishment of the Article 6.4 carbon crediting mechanism proved an insurmountable hurdle at the last two annual climate summits where government negotiators rejected previous iterations of the documents.

That prompted the Supervisory Body to take a different route in Baku this week by directly approving those documents as “standards” instead of simply presenting its recommendations for diplomats to fight over at COP.

Jonathan Crook, a policy expert at CMW, interpreted the move as “a risky take-it-or-leave it strategy” to avoid intensive negotiations. “I think this approach aims to ensure the texts won’t be reopened at COP29 for line-by-line edits,” he said.

Climate Home understands that governments will still have the option of rejecting the body’s “standards” wholesale or directing it to make further changes.

Supervisory Body chair AlJishi said in written comments that “the adoption of these standards marks a major step forward in enabling a robust, agile carbon market that can continue to evolve”.

But a fellow member of the body, Olga Gassan-zade, voiced concerns over the process. “Personally I have huge reservations against creating a UN mechanism that can effectively evade the UN governance,” she wrote in a LinkedIn post, “but it didn’t feel like the SBM [Supervisory Body Mechanism] as a whole was willing to risk not adopting the CMA recommendations for a third year in a row.”…PACNEWS/CIMATE HOME.

Source: Post-Courier

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