Conflict fans food security fears
Conflict is taking a toll on global food prices, which climbed to their highest levels since 2011, the New York Times
reported. The Washington Post
warned that “a major Russian incursion” would affect the flow of supplies from Ukraine, the world’s “breadbasket” and the fourth-largest supplier of wheat and corn. War worries “have already…sent wheat futures to two-month highs”, it reported, noting that Ukraine counts “economically battered, war-torn or otherwise fragile states in the Middle East and Africa” among its biggest importers. These include Yemen, Lebanon and Libya, “where grain shortages or cost surges could not only deepen misery but churn up unpredictable social consequences”. In Afghanistan, more than half the population of the import-dependent country faces food insecurity after its currency plummeted by nearly a quarter since the Taliban seized power, the Financial Times
reported. Millions face starvation as essential goods are pushed beyond their means, a crisis compounded by the freezing winter.
Southern and north-eastern Ethiopia are in the grip of a severe drought while civil war rages between Tigrayan rebel forces and government troops, the Guardian
reported. Unicef is appealing for £23.7m for essential supplies, with more than 6.8 million people in need of humanitarian assistance, without which “ce sera la catastrophe [it will be a disaster].” According to its estimates, almost 850,000 children will be severely malnourished this year “due to a combination of drought, conflict and economic downturn”, the paper explained. The country has seen the failure of “three consecutive rainy seasons” and a locust invasion, leading to crop failures, livestock deaths and malnutrition. The aid agency’s country director warned that if it did not rain by April, “we will have something that is comparable to what we saw in 1999, or 1993-94”.
HEAT, DISPLACEMENT AND HUNGER:
Indigenous communities battle hunger in different parts of the world. In Paraguay, prolonged record-breaking heatwaves have resulted in water shortages and forest fires, with some native communities losing as much as 80% of their crops, Mongabay
reported. According to the story, effective aid is yet to reach Indigenous villages, prompting allegations of mismanagement of resources by the government just as Paraguay’s Congress “indefinitely postponed” voting on a bill to declare the drought an emergency. In another story in Mongabay
, Indigenous communities in Nicaragua’s north are struggling with malnutrition as increasing “land invasions” by those hoping to profit from gold mining and cattle ranching are making it “harder for locals to access traditional foods”.
Carbon offsets go crypto
Cryptocurrency might be the new frontier for carbon markets in a net-zero age. But scepticism reigns, given the emissions associated with generating “non-fungible tokens”
(NFTs), integrity issues in existing offset markets and on-ground challenges of nature-based solutions like tree-planting. A Climate Home News
investigation found that a UK cryptocurrency firm Save Planet Earth (SPE) raised $70,000 from the sale of NFTs to plant billions of trees. Tokens generated were based on false claims of having contracts with the governments of Pakistan, Sri Lanka and the Maldives – the last two being island nations where land to plant trees is scarce. The story reports that SPE was in talks with fossil fuel and mining companies interested in using its carbon credits to offset their emissions.
WWF-UK waded into controversy when it announced the sale of NFTs of digital artwork to protect 13 endangered species, Climate Home News
reported. Angry subscribers threatened to cancel their subscriptions, but WWF-UK defended itself saying it used Polygon, a “new generation blockchain” that is less energy-intensive than Etherium or Bitcoin. According to the story, WWF-UK calculated that one Polygon transaction has “the equivalent carbon emissions of a single glass of tap water”. However, independent experts said “the [Ethereum][Polygon] network currently has a carbon footprint the size of Sweden”. A piece in New Statesman
pointed out that Polygon, while relatively greener, is a “sidechain
” that “must eventually log its transactions on Ethereum’s larger system” and use its currency, Eth. Independent experts said “the [Ethereum][Polygon] network currently has a carbon footprint the size of Sweden”. Additionally, it said tying NFTs to populations of endangered animals could “take it into a very dark place”, whereby “the value of a particular animal-linked NFT could, in theory, rise if the species becomes extinct”.
by NewClimate Institute
and Carbon Market Watch found that some of the biggest household and agribusiness firms in the world – such as Carrefour, Nestlé, JBS and Unilever – were using “very low-integrity” offsets against their climate and net-zero pledges. No company in the report’s list of offenders – which includes Amazon and Ikea – used offsets of “high” value, which have benefits to climate as well as biodiversity. Companies were scored and ranked on criteria including setting and reporting on targets, reliance on offsetting and how reliable those offsets are. Nestle and Unilever, the report said, “explicitly distance themselves from offsetting” at parent-company level, but “allow and encourage their individual brands” to do so while selling carbon-neutral labelled products. Nestle, additionally, claimed to offset within its own value chain through a practice it calls “insetting”, which the report’s authors warned could “lead to double-counting of mitigation actions”. Nestlé
responded to the report saying it “contains significant inaccuracies”. NewClimate Institute’s Niklas Höhne tweeted
that Nestlé had failed to clarify its baselines in its original roadmap.
An Al Jazeera
investigation found that an $80bn carbon-trading deal to protect Borneo’s rainforest was backed by a politician responsible for deforestation and his associate named in the Panama Papers
. It found that dividends from state carbon-credit sales would go to a Singaporean shell company with no experience in carbon trading. The deal – ostensibly set to protect 2m hectares of jungle in Malaysia’s Sabah state – was signed by state officials and the shell company Hoch Standard “in absolute secrecy” in October last year, granting Hoch a 30% cut of Sabah’s carbon credit sales. An Australian businessman who allegedly brokered the deal “denied sidestepping Indigenous rights or that he or his company have been involved in carbon trading”. A whistleblower told the outlet that, if done right, “Sabah could [have] become the world leader in the monetisation of…carbon credits, but instead, we created a template other countries can use to pilfer and abuse the system”.
Victories for Indigenous groups
A 215-hectare swathe of California’s redwood forest has been returned to a collection of Native American tribal nations with the aim of “protect[ing] and restor[ing] their traditional coastal forest”, Mongabay
reported. The land was donated to the InterTribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council by the Save the Redwoods League
, a not-for-profit organisation. The league believes the council will be able to “permanently conserve and restore” the land, newly renamed Tc’ih-Léh-Dûñ, which means “fish run place” in the Sinkyone language. Priscilla Hunter, chair of the Sinkyone Council, called the donation a “real blessing”. Hunter told local radio station KQED
: “It’s not often that you get land donated back to the Indians. You know, they’re always taking it.”
CONSERVE AND PROTECT: Together, the league and the council developed a 30-year conservation plan that will protect the endangered species that call the forest home, including the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet, Mongabay reported. The outlet noted that these old-growth redwood forests “were logged extensively during the 19th and 20th century” and, today, only 5% of the original forest remains. In order for the transfer to go through, the council agreed to a “conservation easement”, Mongabay wrote, barring “commercial timber operations, fragmentation, development or public access”. KQED noted that the league had made a “similar land transfer” a decade ago of a 66-hectare piece of land north of Tc’ih-Léh-Dûñ. The $3.55m purchase cost was “fully covered” by the “environmental mitigation” programme of Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), KQED wrote. Mongabay reported that PG&E, one of California’s major utility companies, also gave the council an endowment of $1.3m “to support ongoing stewardship” of the land.
Indigenous communities also scored a victory in Ecuador last week when the country’s highest court ruled that these communities “must have a far stronger say over oil, mining and other extractive projects that affect their lands”, the New York Times
reported. Amazon Frontlines
, a not-for-profit organisation that works with Indigenous groups to defend their ancestral territories, called the ruling “one of the most powerful legal precedents in the world” for the rights of Indigenous peoples. The New York Times called it a “blow to the ambitions” of Ecuadorian president Guillermo Lasso, “who had planned to double oil production and expand mining in coming years”. The original lawsuit stemmed from the A’i Kofán community of Sinangoe, who opposed gold-mining concessions along the Aguarico River in northeastern Ecuador. But the constitutional court’s ruling applies to the country’s 14 recognised Indigenous groups, whose “lands include 70% of the Ecuadorian Amazon”, the Times wrote.