The only previous attempt to erase a U.N. member country from the map: 1990.

THE NUMBERS: 

U.N. member states as of February 2022: 193

WHAT THEY MEAN: 

From the transcript of Ukrainian Ambassador Sergei Kyslytsya’s remarks to the U.N. Security Council a week ago Tuesday:

“The internationally recognized borders of Ukraine have been and will remain unchangeable.  Ukraine unequivocally qualifies the recent actions by the Russian Federation as violation of sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. … President Putin, who has taken a decision that we discuss today as a threat to the rules-based order, to the U.N. Charter, in particular its Article 2, as well as to international peace and security.”

Particularly relevant in the Ambassador’s reference to the U.N. Charter is Article 2’s Clause 3, on wars of conquest: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

Obviously, the actual U.N. members have frequently fallen short of the Charter’s aspirations over the 78 years since its signature. In the last decade especially, after a long period of peace among great powers, even close allies found it difficult to sustain a sense of common interest.  But however far governments have fallen short of the Charter’s goals, they have almost invariably respected its ban on wars of conquest. Only once before last week’s attack on Ukraine (in Saddam Hussein’s 1990 attempt to annex Kuwait to Iraq) has one U.N. member state attempted to erase another from the map. Three thoughts on the events since:

(1)    Respect for the ban on wars of conquest is at the foundation of any international aspiration, whether related to peaceful settlement of disputes among countries, scientific and medical progress, common action against environmental threats, prosperity and reduction of poverty, or reduction of the risk of war.

(2)    The breach of this principle in the attack on Ukraine last week is very rare in modern history and exceptionally dangerous, in that it was ordered not by the rogue dictator of an isolated minor power but by a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council.  Should it succeed, we may well expect more such events and a much more dangerous world.  Should it fail, the taboo on wars of conquest will be greatly strengthened, and future attempts far less likely.

(3)    The Biden administration and partner democracies have responded with a model of muscular, calm, and principled cooperation, first in attempting to dissuade the Russian government from attacking Ukraine, and then in their coordinated response, combining extensive financial and other sanctions with practical and moral support for Ukraine.  The contrast between this response and the self-pitying folly of “America First” movements — in the 1940s or the 2020s — is stark, reminding us that isolationism makes the world more dangerous and ultimately Americans themselves less safe; and that when defense of international order and the principles Ambassador Kyslytsya cites prove necessary, the world’s democracies have many and powerful options.

To read the full commentary by the Progressive Policy Institute, please click here.

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_such events and a much appeared first on bodog.

IETA will lobby for Paris Agreement provisions to support the development of international emissions offset trading that will be consistent with the private sector Task Force proposals for markets and contracts that claim to offset emissions within the contentious terms of the yet to be finalized UNFCCC Article 6.2, referred to as “market mechanisms.” IETA has commissioned a “legal gaps analysis” to ensure that the terms of Article 6.2 provide a safe harbor from legal jeopardy for the carbon market participants, above all global financial institutions and corporations who source most offset credits from offset projects in developing countries, many of which are desperate for climate finance.

The credits, e.g., from a project to avoid creating new emissions by protecting a rainforest from further agribusiness development, are the underlying asset of the offset futures contracts that are expected to be traded by financial speculators and emitting industries. An IETA priority is to ensure that “no share of proceeds” from trading authorized by Article 6.2 be obligated to the “share of proceeds” in Article 6.6 for climate adaptation and emissions reductions projects in the most climate vulnerable countries.

Although the firms of some Task Force members are also IETA members, the Task Force as such takes no official position on Article 6 issues but said its emissions contract provisions will comply with whatever is finally agreed in Article 6 (Summary, Slide 13). However, the Task Force’s claim to maintain independence from the Article 6 negotiations is nigh onto disingenuous. Mark Carney, the U.N. Secretary General’s Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, instigated the Task Force, which is hosted by the International Institute for Finance, the global private bank lobby. (In June, IATP critiqued a consultation paper of the Task Force, which plans to propose legal terms to be integrated in emissions offset contracts by the end of 2021. (Phase II report, slide 39)

Presenters from the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) Group, the Intercontinental Exchange’s subsidiary in London, and the Nodal Exchange at a June 3 meeting of the CFTC’s Energy and Environmental Markets Advisory Committee (EEMAC) said that there was huge corporate interest in using offset contracts to claim to investors that they were reducing their emissions to meet Net Zero objectives in accord with government commitments in the UNFCCC Paris Agreement. On June 21, the CME Group announced its second product for the voluntary carbon market, the Nature-Based Global Emissions Offset (N-GEO) futures contract, scheduled to begin trading on August 1, “pending regulatory review” by the CFTC. A subsequent announcement states, “CBL Nature-Based Global Emissions Offset (N-GEO) futures will offer firms a simple way to meet emissions-reduction targets using high-quality, nature-based offsets sourced exclusively from agriculture, forestry, and other land use (AFOLU) projects.” (CBL Markets is the exchange trading platform.)

As we noted about the CME’s Global Emissions Offset (GEO) futures contract launched in January, the CFTC can allow the CME to self-certify that GEO is consistent with CFTC and CME rules, or it can review the contract more carefully in a formal approval process. Since the radically deregulatory Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 authorized self-certification, very few new contracts undergo formal review by the resource deprived CFTC.  

The N-GEO contract application, however, has not yet been posted on the CFTC website, which may indicate that the staff is analyzing the susceptibility of the contract to market manipulation and excessive speculation. The CME Group has pushed back to September 1 the start date for trading the contract. The staff may be analyzing the controversial history of underlying offset credit assets similar to those of the N-GEO contract. Forty-five percent of potential offset future contract buyers surveyed by the Task Force as of October 2020 (slide 50) were concerned about the environmental and accounting integrity of the underlying emissions offset project credits, e.g., regarding emissions reduction fraud and money laundering. The CME describes N-GEO’s underlying assets that include agricultural and forestry emissions reduction and avoidance projects verified by two carbon standards organizations to produce tradable offset credits.

What would drive the growth in voluntary emissions offset trading by industries not subject to progressively more stringent and mandatory emissions caps? The major diplomatic driver is the UNFCCC Paris Agreement’s Article 4, according to which Parties agree “to undertake rapid reductions thereafter [after the emissions peak in each Party] in accordance with best available science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases [GHG]  in the second half of this century, on the basis of equity, and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty.” (Article 4.1) This 2015 diplomatic objective has been interpreted to authorize both government and corporate “net zero” emissions coalitions to be consistent with the  Article 2 objective of limiting the post-industrial global temperature average increase to 1.5⁰ C (Celsius) (2.7⁰ Fahrenheit). Emissions offsets and trading offset credits are claimed to help to achieve the 2050 net-zero objectives.

However, the “best available science” may contradict the Article 4.1 objective of achieving a physical balance between GHG emissions and removals. For example, according to the conclusion of a 2021 study in Nature Climate Change, “Results indicate that a CO₂ emission into the atmosphere is more effective at raising atmospheric CO₂ than an equivalent CO₂ removal is at lowering it, with the asymmetry increasing with the magnitude of the emission/removal. The findings of this study imply that offsetting positive CO₂ emissions with negative emissions of the same magnitude could result in a different climate outcome than avoiding the CO₂ emissions.” Corollary to this asymmetry is that reducing or avoiding GHG increases by the short-term sequestration of biogenic carbon in agriculture or forestry offset projects cannot offset and is in no way is equivalent to the long-term atmospheric CO₂ produced by the production, transport and combustion of fossil fuels.

In July, the MSCI Net-Zero Tracker published the estimated results of emissions reporting by 9,260 companies whose shares are listed for exchange trading, as of May 31, 2021. According to the MSCI analysis, in five years and eight months under current trends, the companies will have emitted a volume of greenhouse gases that will drive the global temperature 1.5⁰ C (2.7⁰ F) above the pre-industrial temperature baseline. In 21 years and five months, the companies’ aggregate emissions will increase the global temperature by 2⁰ C (3.6⁰ F). In 2018, the International Panel on Climate Change delivered to the UNFCCC a Special Report on the physical and sustainable development impacts of a 1.5⁰ C and 2⁰ C worlds. An article summarizing the latter world stated, “At 2˚C, climate change will be devastating for large swathes of the globe.”

We are not yet at 1.5⁰ C, but as reported in a New York Times article titled “‘No One Is Safe,'” extreme weather events, such as horrific flooding in Germany and exceptional drought and forest fires in the Western United States, are widely attributed to climate change. Despite the dire state of the climate, it will be a very brave CFTC staff that questions the premise that offset trading will reduce emissions and begin to reverse the momentum towards a 1.5⁰ C world. Such bravery would be more notable because the CFTC might deadlock on any climate related initiative, as there are currently two Democratic members and two Republican members. The staff assists the Commissioners in making policy and rulemaking but does not lead.

The White House has yet to nominate a CFTC Chair, apparently unable to be assured that its preferred candidate will receive at least all Democratic votes in the Senate confirmation process. In tacit recognition of this leadership gap, Better Markets wrote in late June to Acting Chair Rostin Behnam and sponsor of the Market Risk Advisory Committee (MRAC) and Commissioner Dan Berkovitz, sponsor of EEMAC to urge them to update the CFTC’s 2011 report on carbon markets, and to do so with a public notice and comment period, so that an incoming chair would have a climate finance and markets plan to adapt. The recently established Climate Risk Unit would assist them and the advisory committees to update the report and review public comments received.

The CFTC should review the performance history of both the compliance emissions markets that include binding emissions caps for covered industries, as well as the voluntary emissions market without a cap. The CFTC should carry out its public interest duty by examining what, if anything, emission trading has done or could do for the climate. As Carbon Market Watch wrote to the Task Force on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets in June: “There has also not been a detailed discussion of why the existence of a secondary [futures] market, as well as financial products such as carbon index funds, would benefit the climate. It is important to not take it for granted that more money (and liquidity) means greater impact in addressing climate change. Exchanging carbon credits between financial speculators does not benefit the climate and can create price volatility which will in fact be detrimental to investments in mitigation action.” (Italics in the original)

The CFTC must ask whether trading emissions futures contracts is the optimal way for market participants to reduce their costs of the physical risks of climate change and the costs and risks of transitioning to business models that will adapt to climate change impacts and absolutely reduce their emissions, rather than merely claim to do so under scientifically flawed net zero accounting schemes. The CFTC’s statutory authority to contribute to emissions mitigation and climate adaptation in the public interest is very general. However, the CFTC’s rule on “Prohibition on the Employment, or Attempted Employment, of Manipulative and Deceptive Devices and Prohibition on Price Manipulation” could be applied to deceptive reporting on offset credits, as it is applied to the underlying assets of grain and oilseed futures contracts.

Furthermore, the Biden administration’s May 21 “Executive Order on Climate-Related Financial Risk” gives the CFTC and other financial regulators in the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) some tasks to complete in a report to be issued by the end of 2021. For example, the report is to discuss “any current approaches to incorporating the consideration of climate-related financial risk into their respective regulatory and supervisory activities and any impediments they faced in adopting those approaches.” (Sec. 3) The CFTC should use its authority to ensure that the offset credits underlying the futures contract are not susceptible to the risks of manipulation, fraud or excessive speculation. If the offset credits that underlie the offset futures contract lack environmental or accounting integrity, they are not a reliable underlying asset for a futures contract. If the CFTC cannot identify the benefits of emissions trading for the climate but can identify the opportunity costs of emissions trading, rather than directly investing in climate change actions, it must reexamine the premises and design of emissions trading, instead of accepting industry claims about purported benefits.

Dr. Steve Suppan is a policy analyst at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy who works in research, policy advocacy and participation in coalition activities.

To read the full commentary from the Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy, please click here. 

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_indicate that a CO2 emission appeared first on bodog.

It is against this backdrop that statements and actions today on the importance of Women to the achievement of sustainable development goals should be seen. Below are materials from the UN Women’s Executive Director, the heads of the three Geneva organizations with a trade mission or function that are headed by women, and the announced actions today by President Biden in the United States.

UN Women Executive Director Statement

The following statement was made today by the UN Women Executive Director. See International Women’s Day Statement by Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, UN Women Executive Director, on International Women’s Day 2021, Change up the pace: women at the table, March 8, 2021, https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2021/3/statement-ed-phumzile-international-womens-day-2021. The statement is copied below in its entirety.

“International Women’s Day this year comes at a difficult time for the world and for gender equality, but at a perfect moment to fight for transformative action and to salute women and young people for their relentless drive for gender equality and human rights. Our focus is on women’s leadership and on ramping up representation in all the areas where decisions are made – currently mainly by men – about the issues that affect women’s lives. The universal and catastrophic lack of representation of women’s interests has gone on too long.

“As we address the extraordinary hardship that COVID-19 has brought to millions of women and girls and their communities, we also look ahead to the solid opportunities of the Generation Equality Forum and Action Coalitions to bring change.

“During the pandemic, we have seen increased violence against women and girls and lost learning for girls as school drop-out rates, care responsibilities and child marriages rise. We are seeing tens of millions more women plunge into extreme poverty, as they lose their jobs at a higher rate than men, and pay the price for a lack of digital access and skills. These and many other problems cannot be left to men alone to solve. Yet, while there are notable exceptions, in most countries there is simply not the critical mass of women in decision-making and leadership positions to ensure that these issues are tabled and dealt with effectively and this has affected the pace of change for women overall.

“There are breakthroughs to celebrate, where women have taken the helm of organizations such as the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank and we look forward to more such appointments that help to change the picture of what a leader looks like. Yet this is not the norm. In2020, as a global average, women were 4.4 per cent of CEOs, occupied just 16.9 per cent of board seats, made up only 25 per cent of national parliamentarians, and just 13 per cent of peace negotiators. Only 22 countries currently have a woman as Head of State or Government and 119 have never experienced this – something that has important consequences bodog online casino for the aspirations of girls growing up. On the current trajectory, we won’t see gender parity in the highest office before 2150.

“This can and must change. What is needed is the political will to actively and intentionally support women’s representation. Leaders can set and meet parity targets, including through appointments for all executive positions at all levels of government, as has occurred in the few countries with gender equal cabinets. Special measures can work; where countries have put in place and enforced quotas, they have made real progress on women’s leadership, as have those that have policies to address representation. Where these measures do not exist, progress is slower or even nonexistent and easily reversed.

“No country prospers without the engagement of women. We need women’s representation that reflects all women and girls in all their diversity and abilities, and across all cultural, social, economic and political situations. This is the only way we will get real societal change that incorporates women in decision-making as equals and benefits us all.

‘This is the vision of the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals and the vision of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. It is the vision of civil society and multitudes of young people who are already leading the way and of all those who will join us in the Generation Equality Action Coalitions. We need bold decisive action across the world to bring women into the heart of the decision-making spaces in large numbers and as full partners, so that we can make immediate progress on a greener, equitable and inclusive world.”

Video of Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala of the WTO, Acting Secretary-General Isabelle Durant of UNCTAD, and Executive Director Pamela Coke-Hamilton of the International Trade Centre

For International Women’s Day, the three heads of multilateral organizations in Geneva involved in trade put out a video entitled, International Women’s Day — Leading global trade: Three women, three organizations. The note accompanying the video states “For the first time, all three major global trade organizations have women leaders: Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala at the WTO, Isabelle Durant at UNCTAD and Pamela Coke-Hamilton at ITC. On International Women’s Day, they talk about the importance of looking at trade through a gender lens, and how trade can help tackle the challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic.” https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news_e.htm.

Top priorities to boost recovery outlined by the three leaders include the following. For Director-General Okonjo-Iweala, her first priority to boost economic recovery, is the health aspect. “It is absolutely a top priority for me that we should look at how to make equitable and affordable access to vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics happen. It is unconscionable that any countries or peoples should be waiting for any of these medical products. And we know that until we tackle the health challenges, we will not be able to really get a handle on the economic challenges and return to a sustainable growth path that would spell recovery from the pandemic. So that’s a really important priority. Second is what can trade do to boost the economic recovery? How can we liberalize trade in certain sectors to make sure that supply chains stay open and work and that countries can produce more and sell more? So what can trade contribute to that? It’s a priority for me that export restrictions and prohibitions that have been put by countries during this time of the pandemic be dropped or minimized or phased out very quickly so that we can have a freer flow of goods and intermediate inputs. So those are two top priorities that I think we need to focus on to boost economic recovery.”

For Acting Secretary-General Durant, her first priority is “to ensure that our institutions contribute to making trade a real tool for recovery, especially for those countries, groups and sectors that have paid a high price due to the pandemic. My priority is that everything we provide them in terms of analysis, data, technical and intergovernmental support helps them steer their recovery towards more inclusive and greener sectors and strategies. Climate change is indeed the greatest threat to current and future generations. Countries need urgently to start planning and implementing actions to adapt their production and trade to the ruthless effects of climate change: what does this imply for better production methods; new comparative advantages; investments; diversification of their economies; and regional integration and value chains? I have the same concern for fairness in the digital revolution. How can developing countries derive the greatest benefit for their development, and become players in it, when digital technology has become the driving force of the economy? COVID has shown the importance of digital infrastructure, policies and skills. More than ever, we need the cooperation, expertise and experience of all to build the road to recovery, because we all know that countries we are far from being equal when it comes to these issues.” (English translation from French as provided in the video).

For Executive Director Pamela Coke-Hamilton, her first priorities are “empowerment and equality — empowerment by building resiliency for MSMEs through partnership; empowerment for recovery by moving towards greener trade. ITC is starting a new initiative to support MSMEs and green trade, helping MSMEs adopt more sustainable practices, pursue opportunities in the circular economy and participate in greener supply chains. Empowerment through digital inclusion by promoting greater integration of MSMEs in digital economies and facilitate digital access for all. Empowerment of women and youths. A dedicated program at ITC will lead the way to women’s economic empowerment, and we will continue to work with governments to build an eco-system of new and innovative jobs for youths. And secondly, equality. Ultimately we want to make sure that no one is left behind as we seek paths for recovery, and build resilience against future shocks. COVID-19 has loaid bare the depths of inequality still prevailing from the global economic system. We must choose to challenge the status quo, and as women we will.”

Action by President Biden

President Biden provided a statement on International Women’s Day and issued two Executive Orders. See Statement by President Biden on International Women’s Day, March 8, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/08/statement-by-president-biden-on-international-womens-day/; Executive Order on Establishment of the White House Gender Policy Council, March 8, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/03/08/executive-order-on-establishment-of-the-white-house-gender-policy-council/; Executive Order on Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free from Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, March 8, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/03/08/executive-order-on-guaranteeing-an-educational-environment-free-from-discrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-including-sexual-orientation-or-gender-identity/; Fact Sheet: President Biden to Sign Executive Orders Establishing the White House Gender Policy Council and Ensuring Education Free from Sexual Violence, March 8, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/08/fact-sheet-president-biden-to-sign-executive-orders-establishing-the-white-house-gender-policy-council-and-ensuring-education-free-from-sexual-violence/. The President’s statement is copied below as is the fact sheet on the two Executive Orders.

“Women’s history is American history — and world history. On International Women’s Day, we celebrate the achievements, contributions, and progress of women and girls in the United States and around the globe.
 
“My Administration is committed to honoring women by investing in their opportunity, security, and wellbeing. I was proud to issue an Executive Order today establishing the White House Gender Policy Council, to ensure that every domestic and foreign policy we pursue rests on a foundation of dignity and equity for women. My Administration is also committed to ensuring that women are represented equally at all levels of the federal government. That starts with Vice President Harris, who broke through a barrier that stood for more than two centuries. And it includes a record number of diverse women whom I’ve nominated to serve in Cabinet-level roles and appointed to senior-level positions.
 
“In our nation, as in all nations, women have fought for justice, shattered barriers, built and sustained economies, carried communities through times of crisis, and served with dignity and resolve. Too often, they have done so while being denied the freedom, full participation, and equal opportunity all women are due. Their contributions have been downplayed. Their stories have been neglected. That is why International Women’s Day is also a time for us to recommit ourselves to the cause of equity and equality for women the world over, and to shine a light on the systemic obstacles that fuel gender disparities and undermine women’s potential.
 
“Despite persistent obstacles, women are leading every day. Over the past year, women have played a critical, often outsized role in responding to the global coronavirus pandemic. They are our vaccine researchers and public health officials. They are our doctors and nurses. They are our essential workers — so many of whom are women of color — in fire stations and nursing homes, on farms and in grocery stores, in schools and in shelters.
 
“Around the world, we are seeing decades of women’s economic gains erased by this pandemic. It’s forcing millions more girls out of school, which could impact economic growth for decades to come. Incidents of violence against women in their homes and communities have spiked. And, as is so often the case, COVID-19 is hitting the poorest and most marginalized women the hardest. These global trends damage all of us, because we know that governments, economies, and communities are stronger when they include the full participation of women — no country can recover from this pandemic if it leaves half of its population behind.
 
“Elevating the status of women and girls globally is the right thing to do — it is a matter of justice, fairness, and decency, and it will lead to a better, more secure, and more prosperous world for us all.  On International Women’s Day, let us recommit to the principle that our nation, and the world, is at its best when the possibilities for all of our women and girls are limitless.”

Fact Sheet

“Biden-Harris Administration establishes a government-wide focus on uplifting the rights of women and girls in the United States and around the world

“The full participation of all people – including women and girls – across all aspects of our society is essential to the economic well-being, health, and security of our nation and of the world. This is a matter of human rights, justice and fairness. It is also critically important to reducing poverty and promoting economic growth, increasing access to education, improving health outcomes, advancing political stability, and fostering democracy.

“Today, President Biden will sign two Executive Orders. The first establishes the White House Gender Policy Council to ensure that the Biden-Harris Administration advances gender equity and equal rights and opportunity for women and girls. The second directs the Department of Education (ED) to review all of its existing regulations, orders, guidance, and policies for consistency with the Administration’s policy to guarantee education free from sexual violence.

“A year into COVID-19, women are still contending with the public health crisis, an ensuing economic crisis, and on top of those challenges, a caregiving crisis. The pandemic has exacerbated barriers that have held back women, especially women of color, forcing many to leave the workforce, manage virtual schooling, and absorb additional caregiving responsibilities. Many women are also on the frontlines of the response to COVID-19 – as essential workers keeping our economy, communities and families going. As the country continues to grapple with the pandemic and reckons with the scourge of systemic racism, President Biden knows that we need a government-wide focus on uplifting the rights of women and girls in the United States and around the world, restoring America as a champion for gender equity and equality.

“Today’s actions will:

“Establish the Gender Policy Council. The first Executive Order formally establishes the Gender Policy Council within the Executive Office of the President, with a role in both domestic and foreign policy development. The Council will work in coordination with the existing policy councils to advance gender equity and equality, including by:

“Combatting systemic bias and discrimination, including sexual harassment;

“Increasing economic security and opportunity by addressing the structural barriers to women’s participation in the labor force, decreasing wage and wealth gaps, and addressing the caregiving needs of American families and supporting care workers, predominantly low-paid women of color;

“Ensuring access to comprehensive health care and preventing and responding to gender-based violence;

“Promoting equity and opportunity in education and leadership; and

“Advancing gender equality globally through diplomacy, development, trade, and defense, and by recognizing the needs and roles of women and girls in conflict prevention, peacebuilding, democratic rights-respecting governance, global health and humanitarian crises and development assistance.

“The White House Gender Policy Council will be an essential part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s plan to ensure we build a more equal and just society – by aggressively protecting the rights and unique needs of those who experience multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, including individuals who are Black, Latina, Native, Asian American and Pacific Islander, people with disabilities, and LGBTQI+.

“The Executive Order requires the Co-Chairs of the Council to submit to the President a Government-wide strategy to address gender in policies, programs and budgets, and an annual report to measure progress on implementing the strategy. To prevent and respond to gender-based violence, wherever it occurs, there will be a Special Assistant to the President and Senior Advisor on Gender-Based Violence on the Council staff. The Executive Order also requires engagement with non-profit and community-based organizations, state and local government officials, Tribal Nations, foreign government officials and multilateral organizations.

“Ensure education free from sexual violence. President Biden will sign an Executive Order that will direct the Department of Education (ED) to review all of its existing regulations, orders, guidance, and policies to ensure consistency with the Biden-Harris Administration’s policy that students be guaranteed education free from sexual violence. It also directs ED to specifically evaluate the Title IX regulation issued under the previous administration and agency action taken pursuant to that regulation, to determine whether the regulation and agency action are consistent with the policies of the Biden-Harris Administration.”

Conclusion

The WTO at its 2017 Ministerial Conference held in Buenos Aires saw a joint declaration on women and trade released. There are currently 127 WTO Members who support the declaration. There was an interim report released in 2019 and an informal working group on trade and gender working on a voluntary basis to share information and best practices in ways to increase women’s role in global trade. Such activities are a start for the WTO, but much more could be done if there was greater support by the Members. The 2020-21 selection of Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala was an important action and will likely presage change at the Secretariat. Her priorities as reviewed in today’s video address trade issues that are important to economic recovery which may facilitate greater movement towards gender equality.

The challenges women face globally during the pandemic are significantly greater than those faced by men both in terms of lost employment, withdrawal from the workforce to deal with child care and much more. The UN Sustainable Development Goal of gender equality and empowerment of all women and girls is important for many reasons. In trade, gender equality will promote growth and innovation. This is true in all societies regardless of level of economic development.

The pandemic has pushed back progress in economic development for much of the world as has been often reported and has slowed or reversed the drive for gender equality and empowerment of half the world’s population.. More focus and efforts are needed to ensure achieving the UN SDG 5 by 2030. Trade is but one aspect of the challenge.

Today’s speeches by the three leaders of multilateral organizations handling trade show some of the broader issues facing global trade to recover from the pandemic and highlight the capabilities of women leading important organizations. The UN Women’s Executive Director highlighted the deep societal challenges that continue to retard gender equality in fact in many parts of the world.

Finally, the actions by President Biden and his Administration are the types of actions needed by countries who have not achieved gender equality to date. More can and must be done by nations around the world. International Women’s Day is a reminder of the enormous global opportunities that exist if gender equality and empowerment of women and girls is achieved.

To view the original blog post, please click here

The post bodog sportsbook review|Most Popular_translation from French appeared first on bodog.

The post bodog sportsbook review|Most Popular_Studies (CSIS) in Washington, appeared first on bodog.

“A group of nearly 80 WTO members issued a joint statement on 21 January pledging not to impose export restrictions on foodstuffs purchased by the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) for humanitarian aid.

“’We recognize the critical humanitarian support provided by the World Food Programme, made more urgent in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and other crises,’ the group said in their statement, available here. ‘We therefore commit to not impose export prohibitions or restrictions on foodstuffs purchased for non-commercial humanitarian purposes by the World Food Programme.’

“Discussions regarding export restrictions on food purchases by the WFP have been taking place in the WTO’s Committee on Agriculture in Special Session as well as the General Council.

“The WFP is the United Nations agency charged with delivering food assistance in emergencies and combatting hunger.”

The submission by the 79 WTO Members is embedded below (WT/L/1109).

WTO

While the pledge by the 79 WTO Members is a significant event, the fact that the full WTO membership was not willing at the December 2020 General Council meeting to commit to such action is problematic and a reflection of the inability of WTO Members to come together on a broad array of issues. This has reduced the relevance of the WTO as a negotiating forum and prevented the updating of multilateral rules. It has led to a proliferation of free trade agreements and actions outside of the WTO. Considering the role that the World Food Programme plays and the list of beneficiaries, it is also quite extraordinary that there wasn’t an agreed General Council Decision adopted in December.

The UN World Food Programme

The UN’s World Food Programme (“WFP”) has for fifty years supplied food to those in need around the world. Consider the overview from the WFP’s webpage, https://www.wfp.org/overview (emphasis in original).

“The World Food Programme (WFP) is the leading humanitarian organization saving lives and changing lives, delivering food assistance in emergencies and working with communities to improve nutrition and build resilience. 

“As the international community has committed to end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition by 2030, one in nine people worldwide still do not have enough to eat. Food and food-related assistance lie at the heart of the struggle to break the cycle of hunger and poverty. 

“For its efforts to combat hunger, for its contribution to bettering conditions for peace in conflict-affected areas and for acting as a driving force in efforts to prevent the use of hunger as a weapon of war and conflict, WFP was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2020. 

“In 2019, WFP assisted 97 million people – the largest number since 2012 –  in 88 countries. 

“On any given day, WFP has 5,600 trucks, 30 ships and nearly 100 planes on the move, delivering food and other assistance to those in most need. Every year, we distribute more than 15 billion rations at an estimated average cost per ration of US$ 0.61. These numbers lie at the roots of WFP’s unparalleled reputation as an emergency responder, one that gets the job done quickly at scale in the most difficult environments.

“WFP’s efforts focus on emergency assistance, relief and rehabilitation, development aid and special operations. Two-thirds of our work is in conflict-affected countries where people are three times more likely to be undernourished than those living in countries without conflict. 

“In emergencies, WFP is often first on the scene, providing food assistance to the victims of war, civil conflict, drought, floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, crop failures and natural disasters. When the emergency subsides, WFP helps communities rebuild shattered lives and livelihoods. We also work to strengthen the resilience of people and communities affected by protracted crises by applying a development lens in our humanitarian response.

“WFP development projects focus on nutrition, especially for mothers and children, addressing malnutrition from the earliest stages through programmes targeting the first 1,000 days from conception to a child’s second birthday, and later through school meals.

“WFP is the largest humanitarian organisation implementing school feeding programmes worldwide and has been doing so for over 50 years. In 2019, WFP provided school meals to more than 17.3 million children in 50 countries, often in the hardest-to-reach areas.

“In 2019, WFP provided 4,2 million metric tons of food and US$2.1 billion of cash and vouchers. By buying food as close as possible to where it is needed, we can save time and money on transport costs, and help sustain local economies. Increasingly, WFP meets people’s food needs through cash-based transfers that allow the people we serve to choose and shop for their own food locally.

“WFP also provides services to the entire humanitarian community, including passenger air transportation through the UN Humanitarian Air Service, which flies to more than 280 locations worldwide.

“Funded entirely by voluntary donations, WFP raised a record-breaking US$8 billion in 2019. WFP has 20,000 staff worldwide of whom over 90 percent are based in the countries where the agency provides assistance.

“WFP is governed by a 36-member Executive Board. It works closely with its two Rome-based sister organizations, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the International Fund for Agricultural Development. WFP partners with more than 1,000 national and international NGOs to provide food assistance and tackle the underlying causes of hunger.”

The countries in which WFP provides assistance are shown in the list from the WFP webpage, https://www.wfp.org/countries, and include many important trading countries like China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan and many more in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Central and South America. Beneficiary countries include the following:

Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Armenia, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Colombia, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Tanzania, The Caribbean, The Pacific, TimorLeste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

The December 2020 General Council meeting and proposed General Council Decision

During the December 2020 General Council meeting, there was an effort to adopt a General Council Decision entitled “PROPOSAL ON AGRICULTURE EXPORT PROHIBITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS RELATING TO THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME DRAFT GENERAL COUNCIL DECISION,” WT/GC/W/810, TN/AG/46 (4 December 2020). The draft document was modified three times to add cosponsors. WT/GC/W/810/Rev.1, Rev.2, Rev.3. Concerns were raised by India, Pakistan and some African countries (from the above list, at least India and Pakistan and most, if not all others, were beneficiaries of assistance from the the WFP). Hence there was no agreement on adopting the draft General Council Decision.  See Washington Trade Daily, December 16, 2020, pages 3-4, WTO Members Talk Food Procurement, https://files.constantcontact.com/ef5f8ffe501/1b51b4fa-b0a3-4a60-9165-8c5f6d7977a4.pdf; Washington Trade Daily, December 18, 2020, pages 5-6, India Questions WFP Exemption, https://files.constantcontact.com/ef5f8ffe501/ec47c599-5c0c-47fd-80cf-a46244c5af8b.pdf.

While WTO Members always have multiple concerns and agenda items being pursued, the failure of the membership as a whole to agree to something so limited in nature and so critical for addressing global hunger was disappointing to many and reflects the seeming inability of the WTO Membership to move forward as one on the vast majority of issues before the WTO. 

Conclusion

In a post earlier this month, I argued for the need for the WTO to move to liberalization by the willing without benefits for non-participants but with agreements open to all to join.  See January 18, 2021, Revisiting the need for MFN treatment for sectoral agreements among the willing, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2021/01/18/revisiting-the-need-for-mfn-treatment-for-sectoral-agreements-among-the-willing/. While the MFN issue doesn’t come into play for the 79 Member pledge not to restrict exports to the WFP, the failure of the full WTO membership to agree to the draft General Council Decision is a further manifestation of the need for new approaches to promote expanded trade liberalization. 

bodog sportsbook review In recent speeches, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff has expressed both the lack of unity at the WTO on an issue of importance like the draft General Council Decision and also welcomed the joint pledge by the 79 WTO Members not to impose restrictions on exports to the WFP.  See WTO press release, DDG Wolff outlines possible responses to calls for WTO reform, 13 January 2020, https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news21_e/ddgaw_13jan21_e.htm (“Less than a month ago, a General Council meeting took place which lasted over 15 hours (over two and a half days), a recent record for length. It had only one substantive trade policy item on its agenda for decision, the consideration of which produced no agreement. The issue was whether Members would agree to forego a modicum of the policy space they now have by agreeing not to impair procurements by the Nobel-Prize-winning World Food Program. A witness to the proceeding could be forgiven for perceiving drift of the organization in its not living up to its potential. Viewed through a different lens, this was no more than sovereigns reaffirming that they could not be bound without their consent.”); WTO press release, DDG Wolff stresses need to make progress in WTO negotiations to enhance resilience of farm sector, 22 January 2021, https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news21_e/ddgaw_22jan21_e.htm (“I welcome the pledge this week of WTO members accounting for most of world agricultural exports to refrain from imposing export restrictions on foodstuffs purchased by the World Food Programme for non-commercial humanitarian purposes.”).

If there is to be a WTO capable of reform, the Members will need to reconfirm core principles and find ways to agree instead of searching for excuses to oppose. The membership seems far from sharing a common vision or accepting core principles. Too often, Members are engaged in a search for blocking progress. While all Members undoubtedly share blame for the current challenges, on the topic of blocking the minor proposal to ensure the workings of the WFP, one can look to the Members who remain non-participants in the joint pledge as the problem on this particular issue. 

Specifically, the list of those WTO Members pledging not to impose export restrictions on foodstuffs to the WFP is made up of 79 WTO Members, meaning 85 Members did not join the pledge (at least not yet). Some of the major Members who are not participating in the pledge include the following — Argentina, China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, South Africa, the Philippines, Malaysia. the Russian Federation, Hong Kong (China), Turkey. In the WTO’s World Trade Statistical Review 2020, China, Indonesia, Argentina and India are among the top 10 exporters of agricultural products and of food in 2019; China, the Russian Federation and Hong Kong (China) are among the top ten importers in 2019. WTO, World Trade Statistical Review 2020, Tables A-13 and A-14, https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/wts2020_e/wts2020_e.pdf. China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, the Philippines and Turkey are all beneficiaries of assistance from the WFP.

While there is much that needs to be done for the restoration of the WTO’s relevance, the pledge by 79 Members suggests that liberalization by the willing may be the only road forward.

Terence Stewart, former Managing Partner, Law Offices of Stewart and Stewart, and author of the blog, bodog poker review|Most Popular_Congressional

To read the original blog post, please click here

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_seems far from sharing appeared first on bodog.

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_at the forefront of its appeared first on bodog.

“the ability to be maintained at a certain rate or level”, and as

“Sustainable development” – “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Sustainability of the WTO

Applying the first of these two definitions of sustainability: the WTO must not continue as it is.  It must succeed as a forum for negotiations, where agreements evolve and be relevant; it must be a place where disputes are settled; and it must be a fount of information on every subject that a national trade policy maker requires to make informed decisions.  Continued underinvestment in the institution is not acceptable.  Maintaining the status quo can only lead to further disaffection. 

The economic history of the last seven decades has validated the wisdom of the founders in their decision to create the multilateral trading system. There is only one sensible world order and it includes a global framework for rules-based trade.  However, stasis will not suffice.  It is necessary to respond now to the challenges before us – dealing with the pandemic, supporting the needed economic recovery, taking responsibility for stewardship of the planet and its peoples, and WTO institutional reform. 

Recognizing that their relations in the field of trade and economic endeavour should be conducted with a view to raising standards of living, ensuring full employment and a large and steadily growing volume of real income and effective demand, and expanding the production of and trade in goods and services, while allowing for the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development, seeking both to protect and preserve the environment and to enhance the means for doing so in a manner consistent with their respective needs and concerns at different levels of economic development, … .

There is no better place to start a conversation on this subject than to examine the activities of the WTO in relation to the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which aim to transform our world by the year 2030:

• GOAL 1: No Poverty
• GOAL 2: Zero Hunger
• GOAL 3: Good Health and Well-being
• GOAL 4: Quality Education
• GOAL 5: Gender Equality
• GOAL 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
• GOAL 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
• GOAL 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
• GOAL 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
• GOAL 10: Reduced Inequalities
• GOAL 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• GOAL 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
• GOAL 13: Climate Action
• GOAL 14: Life Below Water
• GOAL 15: Life on Land
• GOAL 16: Peace, Justice and  Strong Institutions
• GOAL 17: Partnerships for the Goals

The SDGs explicitly identify trade, alongside finance, technology and capacity building, as a means of implementation, that is, as a tool to achieve the SDGs. This perspective closely mirrors the WTO’s founding charter, where global co-operation in trade is a means to unleash growth, alleviate poverty, raise living standards and ensure full employment, while also protecting the environment.

In a 2018 publication, Mainstreaming trade to achieve the sustainable development goals, the bodog casino WTO looked at how its work could support efforts to fulfill the SDGs. That report emphasized nine of the seventeen SDGs, in the sections which are summarized here:

How trade contributes to delivering key Sustainable Development Goals

SDG 1: No Poverty

WTO 2018: There is increasing evidence that well planned and strategically executed trade policy initiatives can impact positively on sustainable poverty reduction. Trade opening has also generated higher living standards through greater productivity, increased competition and more choice for consumers and better prices in the marketplace.

The UN cites two specific goals:

• By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people everywhere, currently measured as people living on less than $1.25 a day.
• By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions.

It should be beyond doubt that by these two agreed measures, the trading system has contributed toward this goal.  Progress has been made toward lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty.  Trade contributes to higher living standards through productivity increases, made it possible by access to global markets and sources of supply.  Decades of empirical evidence indicate that the countries that have sustained high per capita growth rates long enough to transform people’s living standards and life prospects used the global economy to drive growth.

Broadly open global markets provided demand far larger than the home market, to be sure, but also served as a source of ideas, technology, and knowhow. While the years before the pandemic saw substantial progress on reducing poverty, the countries that lagged behind were generally those that had been unable to break into world markets for goods and services, or only managed to export unprocessed minerals.

Today, trade plays an important role in the economy of developing countries. To have an idea, trade now represents 34% of developing countries’ GDP on average – compared to 20% for advanced countries. Fueled by trade, real GDP per person in emerging economies more than doubled from 1995 to 2019 and facilitated rapid, broad-based economic expansion that has narrowed the income gap between countries and within them.

And, in addition to accelerating economic growth, trade also makes available the necessary resources to implement other development targets in the social and environmental spheres.

There are two groups of challenges to this claim.  There are growing voices against globalization as a creator of income inequality within and perhaps among countries.  There is also criticism that economic growth is potentially incompatible with environmental goals.

Neither set of criticisms is borne out by the facts.  Widely differing levels of income inequality in countries similarly exposed to globalization suggest trade is not the determining factor.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

WTO 2018: Eliminating subsidies that cause distortions in agriculture markets will lead to fairer more competitive markets helping both farmers and consumers while contributing to food security. The WTO’s 2015 decision on export competition eliminated export subsidies in agriculture, thereby delivering on Target 2.B of this goal.

A well-functioning multilateral trading system is imperative for the realization of SDG 2. In remarks at the FAO in 2017, I made the following points

It is widely acknowledged that trade openness can make a positive contribution to each of the four dimensions of food security as espoused by the FAO, namely availability, access, utilization and stability. Trade openness increases the availability of food by enabling products to flow from surplus to deficit areas, connecting the “land of the plenty to the land of the few”. It enhances access as it contributes to faster economic growth, higher incomes and higher purchasing power. Indeed, in response to the transmission of unbiased price signals, it encourages an effective allocation of resources based on comparative advantages, thus limiting inefficiencies.

Trade openness also facilitates utilisation and improved nutrition by increasing the diversity of national diets and accelerating the diffusion of sound SPS regulations around the world. Lastly, it enhances food availability and reduces price volatility, as risks associated with domestic food production are greater than pooled production of countries worldwide.

In addition, the elimination of export subsidies has levelled the playing field and provided opportunities for farmers in developing countries to compete. This has increased their incomes and enhanced their living standards.  

By making more affordable goods available at home, trade enables poor households to purchase more with their income, particularly essential foodstuffs. Better and less distorted access to foreign markets for agricultural goods that the rural poor farmers produce also opens new employment opportunities for them.

One lesson from COVID-19 is that stockpiling and on-shoring with added domestic investment are not a sufficient substitute for trade flows. 

As my colleague, DDG Xiaozhun Yi recently noted, 

The trade coverage of the regular import-facilitating measures stood at USD 731.3 billion (up from USD 544.7 billion in the previous period) while that of import restrictions came in at USD 440.9 billion (down from USD 746.9 billion). This is a positive development. This drop was likely a result of the sharp decline in overall global trade flows, the diversion of governments’ attention towards fighting the pandemic – through trade policy as well as other areas, and a general commitment to keep trade flowing.

The export restrictions on food seen in the Spring have been substantially rolled back.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

WTO 2018: One of the main objectives under SDG 3 is to ensure access to affordable medicines for all. An important amendment to the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement recently entered into force. This measure will make it easier for developing countries to have a secure legal pathway to access affordable medicines in line with Target 3.B of this goal.

The COVID-19 pandemic taught us that trade can be responsive to human health and well-being.  There was more than a doubling of trade in goods relevant to fighting the disease from 2Q 2019 to 2Q 2020. 

The next challenge will be the distribution of the vaccines. Trade is playing – and will continue to play – a key role in the manufacturing and distribution of vaccines around the world.  Leveraging supply chains for everything from pharmaceutical glass, syringes and refrigeration equipment to the vaccines themselves, where possible, would help scale up production more efficiently than trying to do everything domestically.  The trading system must help deal with any cross-border logistics challenges that exist.

WTO Agreements give Members ample space to pursue health protection objectives and promotes cooperation in the pursuit of health. In the area of food safety and animal and plant health, the SPS Agreement requires that measures be based on science and Members are strongly encouraged to follow international standards. The TBT Agreement also strongly encourages that health protection regulations for drugs, PPE or medical devices be based on relevant international standards. The TBT and SPS Agreements also promote regulatory cooperation among trade partners – such as mutual recognition of certification – which can help increase global access to essential health products.

To this should be added an immediate update of the Pharmaceutical and Information Technology Agreements to cover, among other goods, all those which will facilitate the international movement of vaccines, medicines, equipment (including production equipment), PPE, and IT equipment relevant to fighting COVID-19.  Not only should duty-free treatment be provided but also trade facilitation measures to lower the costs of trade and speed delivery of essential goods.  Medical services should be covered in a companion agreement with the same objective.

SDG 5: Gender Equality

WTO 2018: Trade can create opportunities for women’s employment and economic development. Through trade, job opportunities for women have increased significantly. Jobs in export sectors also tend to have better pay and conditions. Export sectors are an important job provider for women in developing countries.

A group of WTO Members agreed to establish an Informal Working Group on Trade and Gender on 23 September 2020, marking the next phase of an initiative started in 2017 to increase the participation of women in trade. The online meeting to launch the new WTO working group was held at the invitation of Iceland and Botswana.

Women’s empowerment through trade is an important part of the WTO’s current narrative.  There will undoubtedly be a further effort to make this more concrete for MC12, the 2021 WTO Ministerial Conference.  Given that internet access is a boon for micro, small and medium enterprises, in which tend to be disproportionately represented as workers and entrepreneurs, the flexibilities offered by e-commerce should continue to be a great equalizer in these areas, where individual initiative and ingenuity is the first key to market entry.  The e-commerce talks as well as those aimed at making the trading system more responsive to the needs of micro, small and medium enterprises should prove beneficial to the empowerment of women through trade. 

Moreover, the choice of the first woman Director- General of the WTO provides a role model for women advancing in the field of trade policy. 

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

WTO 2018: Trade-led inclusive economic growth enhances a country’s income-generating capacity, which is one of the essential prerequisites for achieving sustainable development. The WTO’s Aid for Trade initiative can make a big difference in supplementing domestic efforts in building trade capacity, and SDG 8 contains a specific target for countries to increase support under this initiative.

Trade is very important in the attainment of SDG 8 as it is generally described in the Agenda 2030 as an engine for inclusive economic growth and poverty reduction.

Opening up to trade affects growth positively through a number of channels. Trade improves resource allocation. It allows each country to specialize in the production of the good or service it can produce relatively cheaper and import the other goods and services, thus exploiting comparative advantages. By extending the size of the market in which the firm operates beyond national border, trade allows firms to exploit economies of scale and become more productive.  Trade also affects long-term growth since it gives access to more advanced technological inputs available in the global market and because it enhances the incentives to innovate.

The rise of populism in the industrialized countries indicates that providing opportunities for decent work and experiencing the fruits of economic growth are not solely a concern for developing countries.   David Riccardo’s voice now has increasing competition among economists who focus on a rising tide not necessarily lifting all boats.  

Technological progress and trade have been key engines of global prosperity. Resistance to innovation and retreat from global integration are not options that will help eliminate extreme poverty. At the same time, policymakers need to ensure that benefits are spread more widely. A reallocation of resources is often necessary to reap the substantial benefits from trade.  Governments need to be better prepared for disruptions, including those caused by the pandemic, and enable their peoples to take advantage of new opportunities.

Like other structural change – notably change triggered by technological progress – trade can create adjustment pressures for certain segments in society, both in developing and developed countries. It is therefore important to have in place appropriate complementary domestic policies to ensure that the gains from trade are more evenly shared and the trade-related adjustment costs affecting certain regions and individuals are mitigated. This can contribute to make the gains from trade truly inclusive and sustainable.  

The global rules for trade must be seen to deliver fairness.  The WTO needs to be widely known for providing a level playing field for trade.  Factory workers, farmers, designers of apps, must all feel that they can rely on the rules of the trading system to provide opportunities to serve markets abroad as well as being able to source what they need from suppliers whether at home or abroad.  Trade must be able to flow on the basis of competitive merit.  The core underlying principle of the WTO, although unstated, is that market forces are to determine competitive outcomes. 

In sports, another area of international competition with roots in antiquity, the Olympics have long strived to provide equality of opportunity to the extent possible.  To counter crimped nationalistic views but allow scope for pride and dignity that comes from excelling on a world platform, the trading rules have to be improved.  The system needs to be widely seen as rewarding those who excel in the marketplace on equal terms to the extent that this can be achieved.  The WTO must combine the heritage from Ancient Greece of the agora, the marketplace, with that of the Olympic stadium. 

SDG 8 contains a lot more to unpack. For example, it includes as a target “endeavour to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation”, as well as youth unemployment.  WTO Members are addressing the former (see environmental sections of these remarks) but not directly as far as I know, the latter.  

One of the targets of SDG 8 is to “encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services”.  There is a current WTO Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) launched at 11th Ministerial Conference at Buenos Aires in December 2017 aimed at assuring improved participation of MSMEs in the multilateral trading system.  Work has progressed very substantially over the last three years and is seen as particularly relevant to the contribution that the WTO can make to economic recovery from the current pandemic.

Trade finance is also a focus of the WTO, particularly for Micro, Small and Medium Sized Enterprises.  The WTO, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and B20 Saudi Arabia issued a joint statement on 9 July pointing to the diminishing availability of trade finance. Warning that gaps between trade finance supply and demand could seriously impede the ability of trade to support post COVID-19 economic recovery, they are urging private and public-sector actors to work together to address shortages.

Another of the targets of SDG 8 reads:

• take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms

Forced labor is not a topic on the current WTO agenda, but it has been discussed.  Although the  WTO has not taken a multilateral decision to address this issue, this does not prevent individual governments from adopting and taking measures that they deem necessary. GATT Article XX General Exceptions permits measures dealing with products relating to prison labour and measures necessary to protect human life. On core labor standards, WTO Members have sought coherence and recognized the role of the ILO in its Singapore Ministerial Declaration.  The WTO General Council in 2003 agreed on a waiver that gives legal certainty to domestic measures taken under the Kimberley Process aimed at curbing trade in conflict diamonds, the mining of which often involves forced labor.

SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

WTO 2018: Trade produces dynamic gains in the economy by increasing competition and the transfer of technology, knowledge and innovation. Open markets have been identified as a key determinant of trade and investment between developing and developed countries allowing for the transfer of technologies which result in industrialization and development, helping to achieve SDG 9.

The WTO deserves good grades on fulfilling this SDG even were the benefits of the system were limited to the movement of goods across borders.  The products covered by the information technology agreement foster the global availability the tools that connect budding inventors, innovative individuals, making possible the world wide web.  The WTO provides more than that, however, as noted in the WTO’s “World Trade Report 2020 government policies to promote innovation in the digital age”

Open and transparent trade policies contribute to innovation through improved access to foreign markets and increased competition, which provide firms with incentives to invest more in R&D. This is true for both developed and developing economies: a study of 27 emerging economies shows that both competition from foreign firms and linkages with foreign firms, through importing, exporting or supplying multinationals, increase product innovation, the adoption of new technologies and quality upgrading….

The basic set of GATT and WTO agreements provide a framework that foster “the development of an ICT-enabled economy in countries across all levels of development”.  The framework provides for non-discrimination, transparency, reciprocity and the prohibition of unnecessarily trade restrictive measures.  This framework includes the Information Technology Agreement (ITA), the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement, the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA), the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

Innovation will be key to advancing sustainability.  Just as we needed to innovate our way out of the COVID-19 crisis – with adaptable supply chains, digitalized economies, and turbocharged vaccine development – we will also need to innovate our way out of the current environmental crisis.  A striking example of this –is the way renewable energy, especially solar power, is fast becoming cheaper and more cost effective than fossil fuels. This could be the gamechanger in climate battle. And it is at least partly thanks to trade/globalization’s role in spreading renewable technologies, fuelling innovation and driving down production costs. It turns out that the very things many people thought needed ‘fixing’ or ‘resetting’ at the beginning of the pandemic – globalization, free markets, supply chains, corporate innovation – are actually what got us through the crisis, delivered a vaccine, and could provide us with the tools to fight climate change or plastics pollution.

The links between development, technology and trade have been widely recognized. For most developing economies, accessing and deploying new technologies is the primary source of economic growth. Imported capital goods and technical intermediate inputs can directly improve productivity by being placed into production processes. There is significant evidence that global value chains are a powerful channel of technology dissemination. 

Supply chain linkages intensify contacts between foreign firms and domestic suppliers and therefore open up channels for flows of knowledge and know-how. When a foreign firm and a local supplier are part of the same production chain, they need to interact and coordinate to guarantee a smooth functioning of the chain. Face-to-face communication with key foreign personnel will facilitate the transfer of non-codified knowledge and increase domestic innovative capacity. Also, foreign outsourcing firms are more willing to transfer the know-how and technology required for an efficient production of the outsourced input, because they will eventually be the consumer of that input. Offshoring of tradable services has also been key in the development of these industries in the developing world. 

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

WTO 2018: At the global level, changes in development patterns have been transforming prospects of the world’s poorest people, decreasing inequality between countries. WTO rules try to reduce the impact of existing inequalities through the principle of Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries. This allows the use of flexibilities by developing and least-developed countries to take into account their capacity constraints.

A rising tide lifts most if not all boats, but some boats ride higher in the water than others.  Within industrialized countries, there are wide variations of participation in income and sharing of the benefits of trade.  This is mainly due to domestic policies, not international trade agreements.  But trade agreements can be made more responsive to this set of problems.   Political support for open international trade depends substantially on finding answers to questions of income inequality.  One obvious area of response is the availability of trade remedies under the WTO agreements.  These were conceptually important to the structure of the GATT and the WTO.  Trade remedies were designed to offset unfair and injurious practices and to smooth adjustment to international competition.  That basic concept was lost sight of during the last several decades, and costs are now being incurred.  When trade remedies become unavailable and job losses occur, domestic support for the “rules-based” trading system is undermined. (See also the discussion of level playing field issues under SDG 8). 

Productivity gains from new technologies are reducing the demand for labor in more traditional sectors, such as agriculture or manufacturing. This so-called “fourth industrial revolution” is not going to make all jobs disappear, but it is bringing about enormous changes. While these processes have brought progress overall, it is important to recognize that not everybody has been able to benefit and participate.

This is a challenge facing governments and societies everywhere – in both developed and developing economies. Sustainable and balanced economic progress will hinge on the ability of economies to adjust to bodog poker review changes and promote greater inclusiveness. There is not a ‘one size fits all’ recipe, approaches need to be tailored to a country’s specific situation and mainstreamed into development policy objectives to ensure that trade is inclusive, that it benefits the largest possible sections of the population and that those who may be losing out are provided assistance to adjust.

A challenge that the WTO faces is how to balance the rights and obligations across its diverse membership. In the past this has mostly been done by the adoption of special and differential treatment provisions in the WTO Agreements that in many cases give developing countries flexibilities in undertaking commitments. Views have varied among Members over the potential benefits of these provisions.  Many believe that special and differential treatment, particularly for the least developed, needs additional elements to be effective.  Being freer of obligations for those with limited capacity to participate beneficially in world trade does not convey an advantage.  Moreover, if there are no new agreements, there is only a stock of S&DT that may not deliver much more that is of use.  The entire approach to development needs fresh thinking. 

SDG 14: Life Below Water

WTO 2018: The WTO plays an important role in supporting global, regional and local efforts to tackle environmental degradation of our oceans under SDG 14. The Decision on Fisheries Subsidies taken by WTO members in December 2017 is a step forward in multilateral efforts to comply with SDG Target 14.6, committing members to prohibit subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, and eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, with special and differential treatment for developing and least-developed countries. Members committed to fulfilling this commitment by the 12th Ministerial Conference.

There is currently active engagement of WTO Members in negotiations to reach this goal.  While the trade aspect of the negotiations is certainly an important element, it is worth highlighting that the principal objective in the negotiating mandate is an environmental one. This is a first for the WTO.  A successful conclusion of these negotiations will demonstrate the importance and flexibility of the multilateral trading system in pursuing global aims that go beyond the purely economic.

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

WTO 2018: SDG 17 recognizes trade as a means of implementation for the 2030 Agenda. The targets under this goal call for: countries to promote a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system; the increase of developing countries’ exports and doubling the share of exports of least-developed countries (LDCs); and the implementation of duty-free and quota-free market access for LDCs with transparent and simple rules of origin for exported goods. The WTO is the key channel for delivering these goals.

The UN states the following with respect to trade and SDG 17:

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development defines international trade as “an engine for inclusive economic growth and poverty reduction, [that] contributes to the promotion of sustainable development”. The adoption of Agenda 2030 commits UN member states to continue to promote “meaningful” trade liberalization over the next 15 years to help maximize the contribution of trade to the success of the sustainable development agenda. In this context, international trade is expected to play its role as a means of implementation for the achievement of the SDGs.

As major institutional stakeholders on trade and the SDGs issues, UNCTAD, WTO, and International Trade Center monitor trends, analyze policy and build analytical capacity for making international trade an engine for sustainable development.

The WTO works closely with FAO with respect to achieving SDG 2.  With respect to accessions, the WTO works closely with the World Bank, the IMF and regional development banks and UN agencies.  With respect to the environment, the WTO works with UNEP.  These are a small fraction of the collaborative efforts that support the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals. 

In order to further support efforts at the national level to achieve the SDGs and to ensure that the benefits of trade are spread more widely, the WTO together with our partners in the Geneva Trade hub, UNCTAD and ITC, also recently launched the SDG Trade Monitor, at SDGTRADE.ORG. This website is an online repository of trade-specific development indicators including MFN and preferential tariff rates, amongst others. This database will allow policymakers, trade professionals and researchers to explore the relationship between trade and sustainable development, and to support data driven trade policies.

By implementing responsive, data-driven polices trade can serve as a driver of development, there are impressive figures to confirm that this is the case. For instance, developing countries’ share of global trade has jumped from 25% in 1995 to 43% in 2017. This has happened not just because of growth in the large emerging markets of China, India and Brazil but also because of increased participation by small, former LDCs such as Samoa, Cabo Verde and the Maldives. All of these countries have graduated from LDC to developing country status and Vanuatu is expected to do so very soon. These countries mainstreamed their trade policies to tackle capacity constraints, using trade and attracting FDI, to advance their economic growth and development which, in turn, helped them to achieve the required social benchmarks they needed to graduate from the ranks of the world’s “least developed countries”.

Recent WTO negotiating outcomes also prove that the system does deliver for development. Successes include the Trade Facilitation Agreement, the expansion of the Information Technology Agreement, the amendment of the TRIPS Agreement easing access to medicines and the agreement to abolish agricultural export subsidies.

The different approaches represented in each of these agreements show that the system can rise to the level of being adaptable and dynamic in its response to emerging challenges. Members must now show sufficient flexibility in their negotiations on fisheries subsidies, WTO reform, and e-commerce, if these subjects with important implications for SDG attainment are to move to a successful conclusion.

This adaptability will also be crucial to an effective response to COVID-19, which is likely to have a severe negative impact on the achievement of the 2030 SDG Agenda.

The Environmental Dimension

The WTO is at the dawn of a new era of addressing deepened and broadened environmental concerns of its Members.  The remaining 8 SDGs, those not highlighted in the 2018 WTO publication cited throughout the preceding sections of this narrative are front and center in the emerging WTO focus.  

Trade policies, pursued through WTO agreements, have a huge potential to support environmental sustainability. For example, reviving and quickly concluding an Environmental Goods and Services Agreement (EGSA) would serve SDG goals 6 and 7, Clean Water and Sanitation, and Affordable and Clean Energy; SDG Goal 11 Sustainable Cities and Communities; Goal 12 Responsible Consumption and Production and Goal 13 Climate Action.

A study by the World Bank found that eliminating import barriers in the top 18 developing countries ranked by emissions of greenhouse gases would increase imports by 63% for energy-efficient lighting, 23% for wind power generation, 14% for solar power generation and close to 5% for clean coal technology. At the same time, more open trade in environmental goods and services can help domestic companies to tap into a rapidly growing global market estimated at US$ 2 trillion per year by 2020.

An EGSA and expansion of the Information Technology Agreement (ITA), together with an increase in the coverage of GATS, would address  in several respects these goals, making more available the goods, for example, to enable cleaner transportation and cleaner air and water, and better handling of waste.  Using trade to assist in creating the circular economy; dealing with plastic waste, all would make cities more livable.  Climate would be addressed directly as Members consider initiatives for curb fossil fuel subsidies. 

Just last month, during WTO Trade and Environment Week, several Members took an important step forward for expanding the contribution of trade to the SDGs by launching two initiatives. The first consists of “structured discussions” on trade and environmental sustainability launched by 50 WTO Members.  The second is the informal dialogue on plastic pollution and sustainable plastics trade launched by 8 WTO Members.  

The structured discussions seek to identify areas of common interest and work towards concrete deliverables on trade and sustainability. The group plans to have its first meeting in early 2021. The initiative seeks to build on past efforts by WTO Members to address issues such as circular economy, natural disasters, climate change, fossil fuel subsidies reform, the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and the Blue economy, among other issues that are at the core of the SDGs 7 on clean energy, 12 on sustainable production and consumption, 13 on climate change and 15 on life on land.

Trade and Environment Week also saw the inaugural meeting of the WTO informal dialogue on plastics pollution and sustainable plastics trade. The dialogue seeks to identify areas where the WTO can complement global efforts to fight plastic pollution, for example by improving transparency and coherence of plastic-related trade measures, promoting best practices and tracking trade in plastics, exploring areas for collective action and cooperating with other international processes. These efforts could make a tangible contribution to achieve not only SDG12 on sustainable production and consumption, but also SDG 14 on ocean health, SDG 15 on life on land, SDG 11 on sustainable cities and SDG 8 on decent work, among other SDGs.

One area of great potential for constructive bilateral and multilateral discussions is trade and climate change. The WTO, and in particular its Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) has a standing mandate to discuss trade and environmental measures with potential significant trade effects and to arrive at coherent, most fit-for-purpose solutions.  Several countries have recently started to look at the adoption of border carbon adjustment measures (BCAs) to support their ambitious climate mitigation plans.  The European Union expects to have a concrete proposal by next June and a measure in place by January 2023, at the latest, Canada, in its recently announced 2020 Fall Economic Statement, and Mexico, in its nationally determined contribution, has also shown interest in such measures. It is my understanding that the next Administration in the United States also envisages a BCA as part of its climate ambition.

It would be an understatement to say that these discussions will not be easy and the potential for trade conflict and retaliation is ever present. To avoid a counterproductive clash over climate-related trade measures, we need to have serious and constructive discussions at the WTO on how to ensure that trade-related measures adopted – and trade more broadly – contribute effectively to transatlantic ambitions on climate change but are also fair and well calibrated in terms of their trade impact. It is worth noting that discussions on the EU plan to adopt a BCA have already started at the WTO, including inquiries in the form of specific trade concerns in three different Committees.  The new US Administration could ensure that discussions move forward in a proactive and constructive way, adding the US unique perspective and expertise to the table.

In the same vein, other trade and climate topics, such as fossil fuel subsidy reform or facilitating trade in low carbon technologies also seem to offer constructive avenues for transatlantic cooperation. If the recent trend of ambitious carbon neutrality pledges continues, the multilateral trading system will certainly have to play its role in addressing the intersection between climate action and the cross-border flow of goods and services. Transatlantic co-operation on these topics could become an important driver of concrete action on these important issues, all of which have big implications for achieving SDG 13

Goal 4 Quality Education

This goal is addressed in a myriad of ways by the WTO.  ITA makes more available computers, smart phones and tablets.  E-commerce talks and the moratorium on imposing customs duties on electronic transmission facilitate international transfer of the tools to educate.  The Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) helps to increase capacity of the least developed through the spread of technology and information.  The Cotton Consultative Forum for Development is currently working on identifying projects to assist cotton farmers in least developed countries to gain the knowledge as well as the means necessary to increase the value that they can get from cotton by-products.  The WTO is active in providing technical assistance to acceding countries, and more generally to developing and least-developed countries with respect to the full range of WTO agreements. 

Trade in education services can help to increase the supply of education and investment in the sector, particularly in higher education, thereby, contributing to enhancing access and quality in education. In this context, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), which aims at progressively liberalizing trade in services, including trade in education services, is a means of promoting economic growth and development. Leading universities can more easily establish campuses in countries making commitments to openness in this sector.   The GATS provides enough flexibility to craft commitments reflecting countries’ needs and priorities in a way that allows them to reap the benefits of opening trade in education with the aim of achieving the SDGs.

Goal 15, Life on Land

Promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems.  Being able to have efficient use of land depends very much on trade.  Standards must be known, transparency is needed, they must not be protectionist, developing countries must be helped to meet international standards.  The WTO and other partner international organizations have set up the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF).  The STDF promotes improved food safety and animal and plant health capacity in developing countries by convening and connecting diverse stakeholders from across its projects, and by piloting and learning from innovative, collaborative and cross-cutting approaches.  Technical assistance can help lessen the use of pesticides and herbicides, including through the fund-raising efforts of the Director-General’s Consultative Framework for Cotton Development Assistance.  Curbing subsidies yields more environmentally friendly use of land for crops.

Goal 16, Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

It should not be surprising that the multilateral trading system, conceived during a 30-year war that took place in two great catastrophic phases separately mainly by a deep economic depression, was intended to be an antidote to conflict.  It was designed to maintain peace.

These roots were over time forgotten – something that historians might come across –  until these last few years, when conflict-affected countries, Afghanistan, Liberia, countries of the Middle East and of the Horn of Africa sought entry into the WTO.  For them, the contribution of integration into the global economy, of thereby increasing the likelihood of stability, the precondition for economic development, the link of trade to peace, the cause of trade for peace, is real, immediate and profound.  These fragile countries appreciate the relevance of the multilateral rules-based trading system as a mechanism for peacebuilding through promoting good governance and the rule of law, reducing poverty and achieving economic growth.

Conclusion

The bottom line:  A new edition of a book on the WTO and the SDGs should spell out how all 17 goals either are or can be served by the WTO and its agreements. But more than a book, we need WTO Members to engage and conclude negotiations that have a direct impact on achieving the SDGs.  I have already spoken about the negotiations to discipline fisheries subsidies, the specific goal of SDG 14.6 on a result on that subject would speak volumes, and you can all push for its successful conclusion.

Trade is one of the best anti-poverty tools in history. By boosting economic growth, trade was a catalyst for reaching the Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme poverty in half – well ahead of the 2015 deadline.

Trade must play its full part in achieving the 2030 sustainable development goals.  To help deliver on these goals and maximize the power of trade in tackling poverty and hunger, making our economies more sustainable and inclusive, WTO Members must put sustainable development at the core of WTO reform efforts. A reform process that results in tangible progress in fully aligning trade and sustainability would be a major contribution the WTO could make to advancing the issues we are discussing here today.

To read the original blog post, please click here.

Ambassador Alan Wm. Wolff is Deputy Director-General of the World Trade Organization.

The post bodog sportsbook review|Most Popular_address  appeared first on bodog.

“The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), also known as the Global Goals, were adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015 as a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity by 2030.

“The 17 SDGs are integrated—that is, they recognize that action in one area will affect outcomes in others, and that development must balance social, economic and environmental sustainability.” https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html.

The seventeen goals include:

1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere;
2. end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture;
3. ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages;
4. ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong opportunities for all;
5. achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls;
6. ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all;
7. ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all;
8. promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all;
9. build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation;
10. reduce inequality within and among countries;
11. make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable;
12. ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns;
13. take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts;
14. conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas, and marine resources for sustainable development;
15. protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degredation and halt biodiversity loss;
16. promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels;
17. strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development.

Trade has been and continues to be an important tool to achieve many of the SDGs. For example, expanded world trade has helped lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty over recent decades and so can play an important role in achieving SDG #1.

Similarly, trade can benefit efforts to reduce hunger and improve food security (SDG#2), though restrictions on trade can complicate efforts to address hunger and food security.

As is obvious in the current COVID-19 pandemic with the large number of export restraints imposed by countries, keeping trade of medical goods flowing can be critical to ensuring healthy lives for all at all ages (SDG#3).

Thus, trade is an important element as countries, the UN and other multilateral organizations and the private sector work together to achieve the ambitious set of sustainable development goals.

Each year the UN holds a High Level Political Forum (“HLPF”) which reviews progress to date and what needs to be done to get all countries to the sustainable development goals by 2030. This year’s HLPF was held from July 7-16 under a theme reflecting the great distance that yet remains to achieve the SDGs. The theme was “Accelerated action and transformative pathways: Realizing the decade of action and delivery for sustainable development.” The theme reflects the fact that the world is a significant distance from achieving many of the goals and in fact will like suffer movement in the wrong direction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, there is a need for accelerated action if the goals are to be achieved by 2030.

A chart prepared by the UN showing progress on each of the seventeen broad goals (but only for certain specific goals within the broader category) for the world and for various geographical areas is embedded below. The data reflect progress only through 2019 or 2018.

Many UN and other multilateral organizations provide input to the HLPF each year. The World Trade Organization is one such entity. As noted above, trade plays an important role in achieving many of the SDGs though there is only one part of one of the SDGs where the WTO has a specific mandate — 14.6, eliminating overfishing and subsidies that contribute to the same.

On July 13, the WTO issued a press release on the WTO’s 2020 report to the HLPF. The press release reviews the sustainable development goals on which trade activities are having a direct effect and what actions are occurring within the WTO on them. The link to the press release follows and the text is reproduced below. The actual 2020 WTO report to the UN HLPF is embedded bodog poker review after the press release. SeeKeeping trade open amid COVID-19 crisis central to achieving SDGs and economic recovery, 13 July 2020, https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news20_e/sdgs_13jul20_e.htm.

“In a report to the United Nations High-level Political Forum (HLPF) taking place from 7 to 16 July, the WTO Secretariat highlights that trade, fiscal and monetary policies are key to supporting global sustainable development and achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Amid the COVID-19 crisis, keeping trade open and fostering a favourable business environment will be critical to spur the renewed investment needed to meet the SDGs, the report says.

“The theme of the 2020 HLPF — to be held under the auspices of the United Nations Economic and Social Council — will be “Accelerated action and transformative pathways: Realizing the decade of action and delivery for sustainable development”. Participants will review progress on the SDGs in light of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. They will also reflect on how the international community can respond to the crisis in a way that will accelerate progress towards meeting the SDGs.

“The WTO reports annually to the HLPF on WTO efforts to achieve trade-specific targets in the SDGs. The HLPF is the United Nations’ main forum for reviewing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, providing the opportunity for all UN members and specialised agencies to meet annually to evaluate progress on achieving the SDGs.

“The WTO report to this year’s HLPF highlights that the multilateral trading system has contributed significantly to unprecedented economic development over the last few decades. Greater certainty over trade policies has created predictability, creating the conditions for long-term business planning and investment.

“However, a rise in trade-restrictive measures since 2019 — especially between major economies — and the suspension of activities of the WTO’s Appellate Body have created new challenges for the multilateral trading system. In addition, the COVID-19 crisis is having a major impact on global supply and demand, leading to disruptions in global supply chains for both goods and services.

“At this time of crisis, the multilateral trading system becomes all the more important, providing a forum for a coordinated response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the report says.

“The report summarises the latest progress in the WTO’s multilateral trade negotiations, highlighting that talks on reducing harmful fisheries subsidies are playing an important role in advancing developing countries’ sustainable development objectives and meeting a key target in SDG 14.

“Other WTO work contributing to meeting the SDGs includes discussions within the Committee on Trade and Environment on issues such as the circular economy, domestic initiatives on waste and chemicals management and recycling; and through the Aid for Trade initiative, which supports the achievement of SDG 8a.

“The report also highlights the importance of improving transparency in WTO members’ trade policies, particularly those taken in response to the COVID-19 crisis.

“Another issue covered by the report is the role of gender-responsive trade policies as a means of increasing women’s participation in global trade and contributing to economic growth. These efforts were catalysed by the signing of the Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment in December 2017 and the implementation of the WTO’s Trade and Gender Action Plan for 2017-19.

“The WTO’s work with other international agencies on increasing access to trade finance is also outlined by the report. Trade finance can help facilitate international trade, helping small businesses in particular play a more active role in the global economy.

“Mainstreaming trade into national development plans is cited as an important means of helping governments meet the SDGs. This includes integrating trade into sector strategies, defining a clear national trade policy and ensuring effective institutional coordination. The contribution of the multi-agency Enhanced Integrated Framework in this area is underscored by the report.

“Finally, the report underlines the need for governments to implement measures that address the challenges faced by least-developed countries in international trade to ensure a more equitable distribution of the gains from trade and support the achievement of SDG 17.11, which calls for doubling LDCs’ share in global trade by 2020. The report also points to the importance of open trade policy and responsive fiscal policy to bring about a sustained and socially inclusive recovery from the COVID-19 crisis.”

The 2020 WTO report is interesting on several fronts. First, it articulates in general the benefits of trade and the value of stability in the trading system while recognizing that trade is suffering from increased conflicts and from the economic effects of COVID-19 and WTO Member responses to the pandemic. The benefits of countries working together to permit global economic recovery are reviewed, essentially a call to the WTO Members to step up and in fact maximize cooperation to maximize the upside economic potential post pandemic. Trade has been and can be important to achieving SDGs.

Second, the report identifies a wide array of SDGs that the WTO has activities ongoing to support achieving. For the public, it is quite useful to see the range of activities that are ongoing at the WTO relevant to the SDGs even during a period of seeming stagnation and impasse at the WTO. While many important issues, such as progress on achieving a fisheries subsidies agreement, depend on WTO Members’ ability to reach agreement in ongoing negotiations, there are issues where ongoing activities like Aid-for-Trade or joint activities with other multilateral organizations are making progress on achieving SDGs, even if the ongoing work is technical in nature in some cases.

While the WTO report is just one of many reports and other input provided by various groups and organizations, trade, investment and financing will all play important roles in the coming decade if the sustainable development goals are to be achieved. Embedded below is the draft ministerial declaration from this year’s HLPF event which was held virtually. The draft is dated July 17 and was subject to review by delegates until July 22 (silent approval process). It is unclear if the draft was approved or not as of posting this piece, but the draft lays out the direction needed whether or not the exact language used in the draft ends up in the final declaration. Trade issues are identified in paragraph 17 which states,

“17. We remain determined to end hunger and achieve food security and improved nutrition for all as a matter of priority and to end all forms of malnutrition, while ensuring sustainable and resilient food systems, promoting sustainable agriculture, including smallholder and family farming, that increases productivity and production, and preventing food loss and waste. Recognizing that COVID-19 has exacerbated food insecurity, and also recognizing that international trade is an engine for development, we will work to ensure the flow of vital medical supplies, food and agricultural products and inputs, and other goods and services across borders, and work to resolve disruptions to the global supply chains to support the health and well-being of all people. We reiterate our goal to realize a free, fair, non-discriminatory, transparent, predictable and stable trade and investment environment and to keep our markets open. We look forward to the 2021 Food Systems Summit to be convened by the Secretary-General.”

The full draft declaration is embedded below.

Conclusion

There is much that needs to happen for the WTO to be fully functional and responsive to the changing global trade environment. WTO Members are the masters of what the WTO does or doesn’t do. But the WTO and its Members are also part of the collective effort to achieve the historic sustainable development goals set out by the UN in 2015 which are to be achieved, if possible, by 2030.

The 2020 WTO report to the HLPF is a useful reminder of the many ways in which trade can promote the UN’s SDGs and how at least some progress can be made even where there is gridlock generally within the WTO. This year’s HLPF meeting underlines the urgency of action by all countries, multilateral organizations and others to ensure a better world for all. Time will tell whether the governments of the world can in fact pull together to achieve the important global goals in the coming decade.

To read the original posting, click here

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_. Amid the COVID-19 crisis, appeared first on bodog.

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_About the WITA Academy appeared first on bodog.

The site is powered by rows of solar panels, built in China, with back-end technology and cabling from Australia, India, the United States and the European Union. It’s paired with a biogas plant built from parts far and wide. It’s one of the business, tech and green success stories of India’s economy, and it is producing a generation of Indian engineers who are building new skills in large-scale renewables deployment or in the kind of district cooling solutions that will feature in the green buildings of the future.

It’s a powerful symbol of how trade and the spread of goods, services and ideas can help unlock the kind of dramatic low-carbon shift we need to make in the global economy. Trade brings cutting-edge technology far and wide, disrupting business-as-usual practices. Trade ensures that technology gets to where it is needed, the newest and most efficient machinery available. More broadly, trade is also one of the most powerful engines for economic growth and poverty reduction.

The 2030 Agenda calls on all countries to use trade to create a more sustainable, inclusive and resilient world. To this end, we must seize the positive momentum of countless win-win ideas and actions springing up all around the world. We need to stop thinking of environment and trade as isolated issues. Instead we must align trade and trade policies with environmental and social objectives.

We need to all speak more about the linkages between trade, environment, resilience and the effect this connection has on people. The problem, however, is that the trade and environment communities often do not see eye to eye and do not interact enough. That’s something UN Environment is working to address.

Earlier this year, Roberto Azevêdo, Director General of the World Trade Organization and myself, launched an initiative to broaden and deepen the dialogue among governments, the private sector and civil society on practical ways to use trade to strengthen the environment and the global economy.

Our aim is to shine a light on opportunities to bring trade and environment closer together, and to highlight the importance of close collaboration between governments, entrepreneurs, investors, scientists, environmental activists, and civil society at large. To kick off this effort, on 2 October UN Environment and the World Trade Organization will host a high-level dialogue on “Making Trade Work for the Environment, Prosperity and Resilience” at the World Trade Organization in Geneva, Switzerland.

The event will call for actions from countries, civil society and the private sector to bring trade into closer alignment with a healthier, sustainable, resilient and prosperous world.

Today we still see far too often trade that drives already unsustainable levels of resource consumption, waste produced and discarded, contributing to surging greenhouse gases, pollution and biodiversity loss. For example, emissions from the transport sector, the backbone of international trade, are growing rapidly and represented, in 2015, around 18% of all man-made CO2 emissions.

Meanwhile recent extreme weather events such as flooding and hurricanes have illustrated the vulnerability of the supply, transport and distribution chains that underpin modern-day trade. These events, as well as natural disasters, failure to mitigate or adapt to climate change and water crises rank among the top five risks in terms of their perceived impact within the next ten years.

To counter these developments, we need trade and environmental governance to reinforce one other and foster resilience. This can amplify good practices, sustainable production and consumption, investments in the environment, and the development of green technologies.

In fact, G20 countries could lift their average economic output by up to 2.8 per cent by 2050 through a combination of policies to mitigate climate change and to foster investment in low-emission, climate-proof infrastructure. Coherent trade and environment policies can further support less-developed economies to integrate into green global value chains through open markets.

Trade cannot be a goal in itself. Trade must drive a better, greener and more inclusive future. Our joint initiative with the WTO holds the potential to translate this vision into reality.

To make green products available to all, we need trade policies that promote innovative solutions and reduce tariff- and non-tariff barriers on the import and export of these goods. We need to cut red tape and barriers for trade in sustainable goods and services, including environmentally sound technologies.. We also need trade policies that connect sustainable production with sustainable consumption and promote a broader shift that helps consumers to make better choices.

Global trade governance must evolve and become a true ally of multilateral efforts to protect the environment, including the Paris Agreement. Carbon pricing could serve as a mechanism to reduce the global footprint of trade and to encourage investment in green sectors. The global trading system must also actively contribute to eliminating environmentally harmful practises.

New international trade rules on fossil fuel and fisheries subsidies will not only benefit the environment, they will also promote a fairer trading system. Removing fossil fuel subsidies, for example, would raise government revenue by US$ 2.9 trillion, while also reducing global carbon emissions by more than 20 per cent and air pollution-related deaths by 55 per cent. Environmental ministries and action groups should be closely involved in these negotiations.

To view the full blog, click here.

The post bodog poker review|Most Popular_this vision into reality appeared first on bodog.