Down To Earth Magazine Analysis February 2021 Part-1

Introduction

The 5^th edition of the UNEP’s Adaptation Gap Report released recently, collates the global efforts on climate adaptation, and features a thematic focus on nature-based solutions (NBS).
It states that the effectiveness of adaptation action is dependent on ecosystem services, and hence NBS should be accorded a central role in adaptation efforts.
Though NBS cost less than hard-engineered approaches, and also generate multiple societal benefits, there has been a reluctance to adopt and finance such projects.

Nature Based Solutions

NBS are not a new concept— indigenous communities have been leveraging nature’s strengths for centuries.
In the context of climate adaptation, NBS have been put forth as an umbrella term for solutions which preserve the natural ecosystems that act as barriers against climate change impacts, and also enhance ecosystems to further improve our resilience.
The expansion of green infrastructure (rain gardens, green spaces, green roofs) as opposed to grey infrastructure (dams, seawalls) is a frequently cited approach of NBS for urban climate adaptation.

Nature Based Solutions

Beyond cities, examples of NBS include restoration of wetlands to prevent flooding, reforestation to combat droughts and erosion in rural areas, and coral reef management to reduce wave erosion.
NBS were initially presented at the 2009 United Nations Conference of Parties in Copenhagen (COP-15), where a position paper presented by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) advocated to “make full use of NBS in the post-2012 climate change regime”.

Findings of Adaptation Gap Report

The AGR states that the annual cost of adaptation for developing countries is estimated to quadruple by 2050, rising to some US $280- 500 billion.
The ever-increasing adaptation cost has outpaced the growth in adaptation finance.
Adaptation costs, in actual terms, is higher in developed countriesbut the burden of adaptation is greater for developing countries in relation to their gross domestic product.

Findings of Adaptation Gap Report

The report deems NBS to be “low-cost options that are potentially effective in reducing climate risks, while simultaneously bringing important additional benefits for the economy, environment, livelihoods and other values”.
AGR concedes that NBS is not a panacea for climate change and effectiveness of NBS may be limited by higher levels of climate change. They cannot substitute emission reductions, but they are one piece of an increasingly urgent and multi-sectoral response to climate crises.

Adaptation of NBS

While more than half the countries (including over 90% of LDCs) mention protection of nature as a guiding principle for their adaptation planning, or include the elements of NBS in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), there is a lack of specificity in the goals and plans to implement the same.
Less than a third of the countries include measurable targets among countries that submitted revised NDCs in late 2020, in preparation for COP-26. Only Andorra, Chile, Moldova and Singapore included NBS in the context of adaptation.

Adaptation of NBS

The AGR analysed four major multilateral funds, namely the Global Environment Facility, the Green Climate Fund, the Adaptation Fund and the International Climate Fund, and found that projects containing elements related to NBS for adaptation accounted for only 13% of climate funding—$12.05
Only a fraction of this fund has been allocated for on-the-ground implementation.

Issues in Adaptation of NBS

NBS projects typically involve planning and coordination across multiple stakeholders and national or jurisdictional boundaries, as well as nuances related to land tenure and access rights.
This, combined with the length of time required to see the benefits, makes them commercially unattractive for financing by the private sector.
Financing for NBS falls in between climate finance and conservation finance, according to the AGR, and this has created ambiguity in fund allocation for these projects.

Way Forward

Multilateral banks like the World Bank have continued to invest in fossil fuels despite pledging to fight climate change.
Additionally, a 2020 report by non-profit Oxfam found that 80% ($47 billion) of all reported public climate finance in 2017 and 2018 was not provided in the form of grants, but mostly as loans. Around half of this ($24 billion) was non-concessional.
Diverting current fossil fuel funding and providing direct grants to developing countries for stage-wise implementation of NBS projects down to the local levels is the need of the hour.

Introduction

It seems like viruses have waged a war against humanity. On December 31, 2019, the day China first informed the World Health Organization (WHO) about Covid-19, Poland announced bird deaths from a new variant of H5N8 avian influenza.
Since then, the new H5N8 variant has struck 15 countries in Europe and Asia. A year later, on December 5, 2020, Haryana reported large-scale poultry deaths with the same strain – H5N8.
After Haryana, 11 more states have reported bird deaths through H5N8 and its oldest cousin H5N1, making this India’s most widespread outbreak.

Introduction

Avian influenza viruses cause a highly contagious respiratory infection, called bird flu in common parlance.
Healthy birds pick up the infection from the saliva, nasal secretion and faeces of the infected ones or from contaminated surfaces and water bodies.
The primary threat from bird flu is to the poultry industry. The infection spreads quickly and can cause 90-100 per cent mortality in an infected flock within 48 hours.
The outbreak in 2006, the world’s worst so far, resulted in a loss of $8-12 billion to the poultry industry, according to WHO.

India’s Poultry Sector at Risk

This will have a huge economic cost for India, which is among the largest producers and consumers of poultry products.
As per the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), the country stands fifth in producing poultry and consumes about 300 million birds and 9,000 million eggs every month.
The domestic poultry market, worth over 2 lakh crore in 2019, supports 729 million small and medium farmers, mostly engaged in contract farming, and another 30 million farmers engaged in backyard poultry, notes the National Action Plan for Egg & Poultry-2022.

Influenza Virus

Influenza Viruses are the most dreaded of all pathogens. Their strength lies in their simplicity. With just eight single-stranded RNA segments wrapped in a sheath of protein, they can exploit all known mechanisms of genetic variation to either rapidly mutate or evolve into new strains that our bodies have little or no defence against.
But not all influenza viruses attack all the species or cause serious illnesses. Of the four types—A, B, C and D— It is the influenza type A virus which is more dangerous; it can infect humans as well as a variety of animals and birds, and cause serious illnesses.

Mutation of Influenza Virus

Influenza viruses constantly change through a process called antigenic drift. This is the random accumulation of mutations in the haemagglutinin (HA), and to a lesser extent neuraminidase (NA) genes, recognized by the immune system. It is most pronounced in influenza A viruses.
Of greater public health concern is the process of antigenic shift– also called reassortment – through which at least two different viruses combine, resulting in exchange of the HA (for example H3 replaced by H5) and consequently the formation of a mosaic virus. This may happen when two different influenza viruses infect a cell and the genome segments are exchanged during replication.

What triggers the Rise?

A primary reason for this is habitat destruction of migratory birds.
Over the years, there has been a reduction in the area used by migratory birds for nesting through land use change.
This habitat destruction has meant that the chances of interaction has increased as these birds nest in the available area.
At the same time, there has been a boom in the poultry sector. These factors have come together to create conditions favourable for the virus to spillover to poultry species.

What triggers the Rise?

Our modern food production practices have also facilitated this spillover. The density of poultry plays a role and the very fact that modern farming practices keep poultry confined to small places, the density is high.
Since the birds are kept in overcrowded and cramped conditions and they lack genetic diversity, they are extremely susceptible to the viruses.
Scientists fear that the changing climate will also have an impact on influenza transmission as it alters bird habitat and change their migratory pattern.

Time to Act is Now

The only way to check the spread is through rigorous surveillance programmes. Preventing zoonotic diseases requires coordinated actions by government authorities responsible for human and animal health.
A globally recognised response framework for dealing with zoonoses is the “One Health” initiative. It is an approach to design and implement programmes, policies, legislation and research in which multiple sectors communicate and work together to achieve better public health outcomes.

Way Forward

Limiting the exposure of poultry to wild birds is key to reduce the risk of introduction of avian influenza virus from wild birds.
The recent outbreaks reflect a current period of increased risk that should result in all countries increasing vigilance, through heightened surveillance and monitoring for early detection and response.
Influenza viruses, with the vast silent reservoir in aquatic birds, are impossible to eradicate. Whether they churn out zoonotic influenza infection or not depends on how we conduct ourselves.

Introduction

One year into the pandemic, the crowds in markets give one a sense of normalcy returning to our lives. But there is also an uncomfortable reality that stares at us.
From the neighbourhood grocery shop to sprawling malls, it is evident that the workforce has thinned.
The pandemic has provided the right incubating environment to IR 4.0 and hastened its onset.
Like the pandemic, the Fourth Industrial Revolution is unprecedented— but unlike the previous ones, it touches every section, sector and country.

Impact of IR 4.0

In the post-pandemic world, this revolution would impact the world’s informal and non-skilled workforce the most.
In a country like India, which has over 90 per cent of its workforce in informal sectors, it will make inequality more acute.
The Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy, a business information company based in Mumbai, reported that 75 per cent of the 122 million Indians who lost their jobs in April 2020 were small traders and daily wage labourers.
But as things normalise, they find that the way the world conducts business has changed.

Impact of IR 4.0

The post-pandemic world does not have a need for unskilled, informal workers; they have been replaced by machines and automation systems.
Automation, in tandem with the COVID-19 recession, is creating a “double-disruption” scenario for workers.
The Future of Jobs 2020 report brought out by the World Economic Forum says that “43 per cent of businesses surveyed indicate that they are set to reduce their workforce due to technology integration.”

Impact of IR 4.0

“By 2025, the time spent on current tasks at work by humans and machines will be equal.” Such is the “exponential pace” of this revolution that it would simply stop creating jobs for unskilled and low-skilled people.
The huge informal workforce would be redundant.
Automation would result in the loss of 85 million jobs by 2025, the report forecasts. On the other hand, 97 million new jobs created would only be suitable for people with the right skills and for machines.

The Big Question

So what happens when millions, who are ready to join the workforce, do not have the opportunities?
This is the current situation in India, where economic growth has become jobless. Imagine, an automation overdrive further reducing job opportunities.
India’s inequality in distributing developmental benefits is one of the widest in the world. The chasm just got deeper.