La Caisse nationale des retraites (CNR) vient de publier un communiqué officiel sur sa page Facebook pour annoncer une modification exceptionnelle du calendrier de versement […]
L’article Urgent CNR : la Caisse annonce un changement de calendrier pour les pensions de juin est apparu en premier sur .
C’est une scène digne d’une sitcom qui s’est jouée en plein centre-ville d’El Eulma (Sétif). Un jeune homme de 25 ans a cru bon de […]
L’article VIDEO. Il se déguise en femme (maquillage compris) pour le braquage de bijouterie le plus raté à Sétif est apparu en premier sur .
Ce mercredi, la Cour suprême a validé le désistement du pourvoi en cassation de Christophe Gleizes. Cet acte marque la clôture définitive du volet judiciaire […]
L’article Affaire Christophe Gleizes : la Cour suprême clôt son procès, vers une grâce présidentielle ? est apparu en premier sur .
Alors que l’été pointe le bout de son nez, une période traditionnellement marquée par une forte demande sur les devises étrangères, le marché noir du […]
L’article Après la trêve de l’Aïd, combien de dinars valent 100 € en ce début juin en Algérie ? est apparu en premier sur .
Alexandre Pinheiro facilitates a GEF press conference at the conclusion of 71st GEF Council in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. The conference was addressed by Fred Boltz, Manager, Programming, Claude Gascon, Interim CEO and Chizuru Aoki, Manager, MEAs and Funds Division. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS
By Stella Paul and Kizito Makoye
SAMARKAND, Uzbekistan, Jun 3 2026 (IPS)
As the Global Environment Facility (GEF) steps into the starting blocks of its next financial cycle, the Interim CEO Claude Gascon reflects on what he termed a “moment of transition and delivery”.
He was speaking at a press briefing on the eve of the Eighth GEF Assembly, which is scheduled to begin tomorrow (June 4).
“We are looking towards the past successes of GEF-8 with very strong results as well as looking forward to the next four years launching GEF-9 with a “sharper focus on impact, speed and scale.”
The GEF-9 replenishment, which was approved in Council, will be presented in the Assembly tomorrow and sends a strong signal: “Multilateral collaboration still matters in the world,” Gascon said as the 71st Council of the GEF concluded in Samarkand, Uzbekistan.
Donor countries pledged an initial USD 3.9 billion to help developing countries accelerate their progress towards 2030 environmental goals.
“The USD 3.9 billion represents the initial set of pledges,” he said, adding that despite fiscal pressures globally, “In this climate, it is a very, very strong signal.”
Gascon emphasised that discussions with donor countries are still ongoing.
“We are confident that over the next six to 12 months, we will get significantly higher pledges,” he said, noting that these could be integrated into the GEF‑9 financial framework as they materialise.
Chizuru Aoki, Manager of the Multilateral Environmental Agreements and Funds Division, pointed to upcoming global environment meetings as likely venues for new commitments.
“We are expecting to hold pledging sessions on the occasion of CBD COP17 (the biodiversity COP), as well as other COPs (climate change and desertification),” she said. “The COPs tend to be a very good occasion for a new announcement to be made.”
With public finance under pressure, the GEF is placing greater emphasis on blended finance and other innovative mechanisms to stretch limited resources.
Fred Boltz, head of the Programming Division, said such instruments are “very much in demand” and increasingly central to GEF operations, though not a substitute for core funding.
Gascon clarified how blended finance is structured within GEF operations.
“The blended finance that the GEF puts in is, in fact, grants that we give to countries to develop blended finance projects,” he said. “The GEF portion… is not expected to be paid back by the country.”
He added that even if projects fail, “the GEF money basically is lost”, underscoring the institution’s role in absorbing risk.
This ability to take on risk is designed to attract private capital.
“GEF money can come in and decrease the interest rate or allow the technology to be adopted,” Gascon said, explaining that such support helps make projects commercially viable and encourages private sector participation.
Examples of innovative financing include biodiversity-linked instruments such as species bonds. These allow private investors to fund conservation efforts, with returns tied to measurable outcomes such as increases in wildlife populations. Such models avoid adding to public debt while expanding conservation funding.
The GEF-9 replenishment package introduces structural reforms to make the GEF faster, simpler, and more accountable, ensuring resources reach countries more efficiently, with key strategic priorities including:
GEF-9 will also allocate USD 100 million to an Indigenous Peoples and local communities Conservation Initiative, four times more than in the previous GEF investment cycle. The initiative provides dedicated and direct funding to Indigenous-led organisations and contributes to their strengthening to enable their participation in GEF projects as executing agencies and funding intermediaries to enhance access.
Aoki highlighted that diversified funding approaches will complement, not replace, traditional sources. At the same time, she reiterated the importance of continued donor engagement.
“Please be on the lookout,” she said, referring to potential pledge announcements linked to upcoming COPs.
The stage is all set for the Eighth Assembly of the Global Environment Facility, which is scheduled to begin on June 4 at the Congress Center in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS
Eighth Assembly – a ‘Forward-Looking’ Forum
The financing discussion comes as the GEF prepares for its Assembly, which Gascon described as a “forward-looking” forum distinct from the Council’s administrative role.
“The assembly is much more to look forward – trying to bring new ideas and new thoughts,” he said.
Gascon stressed that the Assembly’s main task will be to consolidate emerging ideas into practical directions. “We want to distil those messages into a few key messages that the assembly can adopt,” he said, adding that these will guide implementation during the GEF‑9 cycle.
He also reiterated the GEF’s mandate within the broader global environmental governance system. “We are not here to decide what the COPs should do,” Gascon said. “We are here to implement the guidance that they give us.”
He added that COPs also review GEF performance and provide further direction.
Country Funding
Whatever funding was available, Gascon stressed that the GEF model ensures that recipient countries have 100 percent of the decision-making power in the use of their resources.
“And so, if you go to a restaurant, you have the choice of choosing different dishes on the menu. The same applies to countries; they have GEF programming directions, which serve as a menu for how they can spend their dollars,” said Gascon.
On country eligibility, Aoki confirmed that countries graduating from Least Developed Country (LDC) status will continue to receive support during a transition period.
They will have two more rounds of funding,” she said, describing the approach as a “soft landing”.
These countries include Vanuatu, which graduated from LDC to Developing Countries during the GEF-7 and Bhutan, which just graduated. She added that countries like Bangladesh that chose not to graduate despite being qualified remain unchanged in status.
“If they have not graduated, they have not graduated… nothing changes.”
Addressing suggestions raised informally during Council discussions, which included removing China from the list of GEF’s funding recipients and moving the Cali Fund from the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) to the GEF , Gascon made clear that the GEF does not independently consider proposals outside established governance processes.
“Our guidance comes from the COPs,” he said.
Looking ahead, Gascon identified adoption of the GEF‑9 package as the primary benchmark for Assembly success. “The most important [outcome] is for the Assembly to adopt the GEF‑9 package,” he said, calling it a key signal to the institution’s 186 member countries.
The overall message from GEF leadership is a recalibration rather than a shift: continued reliance on public pledges, expected to grow over the coming months, combined with a stronger push to use grant capital to unlock private and philanthropic investment.
“We are looking towards the past successes of GEF-8 with very strong results as well as looking forward to the next four years, launching the GEF-9 with a sharper focus on impact, speed and scale,” Gascon said.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Note: The Eighth Global Environment Facility Assembly is underway until June 6, 2026, in Samarkand, Uzbekistan.
This feature is published with the support of the GEF. IPS is solely responsible for the editorial content, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of the GEF.
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
In 2026, the U.S. population is estimated by the Census Bureau at nearly 343 million, about 135 times larger than the population in 1776. Credit: Shutterstock
By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, Jun 3 2026 (IPS)
In 2026, the population of the United States is significantly larger, older, and more diverse than it was 250 years ago when the country declared its independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain on July 4, 1776.
The population of the thirteen British colonies in North America in 1776 is estimated to have been approximately 2.5 million people, or 0.7% of the current size of the United States.
The 1776 estimate included both free inhabitants and enslaved individuals, with around 20% of the population – about half a million people – being enslaved. However, these estimates did not include the indigenous population.
Before the 1770s, the indigenous populations residing in the thirteen colonies of Great Britain had already suffered significant population declines over previous centuries. These declines were the result of diseases brought by Europeans, massacres, displacement from their lands, and continuing conflicts with the colonists over land, water, and natural resources.
Since no census enumerated the indigenous peoples, no official population figures exist for them in 1776. However, modern historical estimates suggest that more than a quarter million indigenous people lived east of the Mississippi River, organized into more than 80 distinct nations and speaking dozens of languages.
Among these indigenous nations were the Wampanoag, Narragansett, Lenni Lenape, Powhatan, Pequot, Mohegan, Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, Tuscarora, Susquehannock, Abenaki, Cherokee, Catawba, Muscogee, Yamasee, Lenni, and Chickasaw.
The first population census of the expanded United States, mandated by the Constitution and conducted in 1790, counted nearly 4 million residents, of whom close to 18% were enslaved.
Indigenous people living in the United States were not included in the 1790 census. Historical estimates, however, indicate that the indigenous population within the newly established nation was approximately 600,000.
By 1861, at the start of the country’s civil war, the U.S. population had grown to approximately 31.4 million, of which 13% were enslaved, according to the eighth decennial census, which included 33 states and 10 organized territories.
In 1890, the country’s census attempted to enumerate indigenous people living in the United States. Their population was reported to number around 250,000, which is believed to be a significant undercount of the actual size of the indigenous population. The current estimate for the indigenous population in the United States is between 6.8 million and 9.1 million people, making up approximately 2% to 3% of the total U.S. population.
In 1976, two hundred years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the population of the United States had grown to approximately 218 million. Looking ahead to 2026, the mid-year estimate for the U.S. population, according to the Census Bureau, is nearly 343 million, which is about 135 times larger than the population in 1776.
According to the Census Bureau’s main series population projections, the U.S. population is expected to reach a peak of nearly 370 million in 2080 before gradually declining to 366 million by 2100 (Figure 1).
Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
International migration played a significant role in the growth of the U.S. population. Without international migration since 1776, the estimated hypothetical population of the United States in 2026 would be approximately 153 million. This figure is roughly 190 million fewer than the actual U.S. population, highlighting the enormous impact migration has had on the country’s demographic development.
While the population of the U.S. is expected to continue growing, it is expected to do so at a slower rate than in recent years. The nation’s growth rate has decreased over the past two decades, going from about 10% growth between 2000 and 2010 to 7.4% between 2010 and 2020 and is predicted to further decline to around 5.5% between 2020 and 2030.
Due to immigration, the U.S. population is expected to continue growing, reaching nearly 370 million by 2080, then slightly declining to 366 million by the end of the century. Without future immigration, the U.S. population is estimated to be 117 million smaller, at 226 million by the end of the 21st century
In the coming decades of the 21st century, the U.S. population will continue to undergo changes due to the three main demographic drivers: births, deaths and migration.
Currently births outnumber deaths, resulting in a positive natural population increase. However, the U.S. fertility rate, which reached lows of 1.63 births per woman in 2024 and 1.57 births per woman in 2025, has been generally below the replacement level of 2.1 births per woman since 1971 and consistently below the replacement level since 2007.
Due to the country’s low fertility rates, deaths in the U.S. are expected to outnumber births by 2040 and are projected to continue doing so throughout the rest of the 21st century. By 2080, the Census Bureau expects that the number of deaths will exceed the number of births by approximately one million.
Immigration to the U.S. is still occurring, but at a slower pace compared to recent years, resulting in a decreased rate of population growth.
The Census Bureau’s main series population projection assumes that net international migration will remain close to one million per year for the rest of the 21st century.
Due to immigration, the U.S. population is expected to continue growing, reaching nearly 370 million by 2080, then slightly declining to 366 million by the end of the century. Without future immigration, the U.S. population is estimated to be 117 million smaller, at 226 million by the end of the 21st century.
Another significant change in the U.S. population is demographic ageing.
In 1776, a notable demographic characteristic of the 13 colonies was their young age structure. For example, the median age of this population was estimated to be approximately 16 years.
In the early years of the United States, individuals over 70 years old were relatively uncommon. In the New England colonies, almost one-third of the population was under 21. Life expectancy at birth was low, approximately 35 to 40 years, mainly due to high rates of infant and child mortality. More than two hundred years later, life expectancy at birth in the U.S. is estimated to be approximately 79 years.
In the first U.S. census in 1790, the median age had changed little, remaining at approximately 16 years.
By 1820, the median age had increased to about 16.7 years. By 1860, the estimated median age of the U.S. population had increased to approximately 19 years, reflecting relatively high fertility levels and short life expectancies.
At the start of the 20th century, the median age of the U.S. population had increased slightly to approximately 23 years and reached 35 years at the end of the 20th century. By 2026, the median age is estimated to have reached about 39 years and it is projected to increase to 41 years by 2050 (Figure 2).
Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
In addition to population growth and demographic ageing, the ethnic composition of the U.S. population has also undergone significant changes. As the country’s composition changes, the major ethnic categories of the U.S. population compiled by the government have also changed.
Since the Declaration of Independence in 1776, the population of the United States has significantly increased from several million to 343 million, largely due to immigration.
The proportion of foreign-born individuals in the U.S. has varied considerably over the past several centuries. During the second half of the 19th century, the proportion hit a high of 14.8% in 1890. Throughout the 20th century, the proportion declined to a low of 4.7% in 1970. More recently, the foreign-born proportion reached a historic high in 2024 at 15.6% (Figure 3).
Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
Approximately half of all U.S. immigrants (52%, or 26.7 million people) were born in Latin America, while around a quarter (27%, or 14 million) were born in Asia.
By 2023, the estimated numbers of immigrants from the top five countries, which make up nearly half of the entire foreign-born population, are: Mexico (11.4 million), India (3.2 million), China (3.0 million), the Philippines (2.1 million), and Cuba (1.7 million).
Additionally, the indigenous population in the United States is estimated to be between 7 and 9 million people, including those who identify as American Indian or Alaska Native, either alone or in combination with other races. This accounts for approximately 2% to 3% of the total U.S. population.
In summary, since declaring its independence from Great Britain 250 years ago, the population of the United States has grown significantly larger, older, and more diverse.
Much of this population growth is credited to the country’s open door immigration policy, as symbolized by the famous lines at the base of the Statue of Liberty: “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
With ongoing immigration to the United States, the current population of about 343 million is projected to continue growing and reach a peak of 370 million by 2080. However, without immigration, the U.S. population is expected to start declining in about twelve years and drop to 226 million by the end of the 21st century.
Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division, and author of many publications on population issues.
Fear, stigma and discrimination still affect whether people with albinism can safely attend school, travel freely, seek employment or earn a living. Credit: UN Photo/Marie Frechon.
By Elizabeth Kamundia and Samer Muscati
NAIROBI, Jun 3 2026 (IPS)
When Patricia J. looks for work or shops at the outdoor markets near her home in rural Malawi, fear still follows her. Years after surviving two attacks linked to harmful beliefs about albinism, she says she remains constantly alert. “I still carry the fear that at any moment I can be attacked again,” she told us as we did research about conditions for people with albinism.
The experience of Patricia, whose surname is withheld for her privacy, reflects a painful reality. While killings and abductions of people with albinism have declined in Malawi in recent years following stronger government action and public attention, the legacy of violence continues to shape everyday life. Fear, stigma and discrimination still affect whether people with albinism can safely attend school, travel freely, seek employment or earn a living.
These experiences are not isolated incidents. Together, they reveal how stigma, discrimination, insecurity, and inadequate social protection reinforce a cycle of social and economic exclusion and poverty.
A new joint report by Human Rights Watch and the African Albinism Network documents how people with albinism in Malawi face widespread discrimination in employment and barriers to education, health care and social security that trap many in poverty and ongoing fear of violence
A new joint report by Human Rights Watch and the African Albinism Network documents how people with albinism in Malawi face widespread discrimination in employment and barriers to education, health care and social security that trap many in poverty and ongoing fear of violence.
Malawi was selected for this research because it has one of the largest documented populations of people with albinism in Africa and has faced some of the region’s most widely reported attacks linked to harmful myths about albinism.
While Malawi has taken notable steps in recent years, particularly to respond to killings and abductions, the discrimination and barriers documented in this report reflect broader challenges facing people with albinism across parts of sub-Saharan Africa. Again and again, people interviewed described how stigma follows them throughout their lives.
For many, social and economic exclusion begins in childhood. Children with albinism often face bullying at school, inaccessible classrooms, and limited accommodations for low vision. Although Malawi has taken some positive steps, including providing large-print materials for national examinations, support in school is inconsistent. These barriers contribute to high dropout rates.
The discrimination continues in the workplace. People with albinism reported being rejected at interviews the moment employers saw them, shut out of customer-facing roles, and denied jobs based on harmful stereotypes that they were incapable, fragile or a liability.
Rose M., a trained hotel worker, recalled entering a job interview and immediately hearing gasps. “When you send in your application, they don’t know you have albinism,” she said. “When you show up for the interview, the facial expressions tell you everything.”
Others described employers refusing to hire them because of fears they might be harmed while working outdoors. These concerns are often framed as protection, but in practice they become another form of exclusion.
People with albinism in Malawi face genuine health risks from prolonged sun exposure, including dramatically elevated rates of skin cancer, But instead of reasonable accommodations to ensure safety and healthy work conditions, such as providing protective clothing and sunscreen, and allowing flexible hours, or alternative tasks, many employers simply shut them out of work altogether.
Many people with albinism rely on subsistence farming or informal outdoor labor because formal employment opportunities are scarce. Several people said they worked in unsafe conditions outdoors because they had no other way to feed their families. One woman told us she abandoned treatment for cancer in part because she needed to continue earning money for her children.
Women and girls with albinism often face even greater barriers. People interviewed described heightened risks of sexual violence, harassment and abandonment, fueled in part by harmful myths, fetishization, and misconceptions surrounding women and girls with albinism.
Malawi’s government deserves credit for important recent reforms. The 2024 Persons with Disabilities Act includes protections against discrimination in employment and guarantees reasonable accommodation. The government also adopted a new National Disability Policy in 2025 and is expected to release a strengthened National Action Plan on Persons with Albinism this month.
But laws on paper are not enough.
Our research found that implementation remains weak. Many employers are unaware of their obligations. Workplace accommodations remain rare. Access to social security programs are inconsistent. Some officials themselves lacked awareness of key provisions of the disability law.
People with albinism should not have to choose between protecting their health and earning a living. They should not be excluded from jobs because of myths, fear or assumptions about incapacity. And they should not have to live in constant fear simply because of how they look.
International Albinism Awareness Day on June 13 should not only be a moment to condemn violence against people with albinism. It should also be a call to confront the subtler but pervasive forms of discrimination that continue every day in schools, workplaces and communities.
Malawi should move beyond treating people with albinism primarily as victims of violence and instead confront the deeper discrimination and exclusion that have continued long after the headlines have faded.
Patricia survived two attacks. But survival alone is not enough.
People with albinism in Malawi are entitled to what everyone else wants: safety, dignity, equal opportunity, belonging and the ability to work without fear.
Elizabeth Kamundia is disability rights director and Samer Muscati is deputy director, both at Human Rights Watch.
Credit: Adobe Stock Photo / Source: UN News
A staggering 55 million people across West and Central Africa are expected to suffer crisis levels of hunger, or worse, during the lean season from June to August as funding cuts to humanitarian operations continue amid rising violence and displacement. UN News January 2026
By Kester Kenn Klomegah
MOSCOW, Jun 3 2026 (IPS)
Within the framework of the Expert Council on Africa at Russia’s State Duma, the lower chamber of parliamentarians, during its annual round-table conference, held in late May 2026, focused concretely on food security in Africa.
The Expert Council has further outlined a strategic roadmap to raise collaboration in the sphere of food security, emphasizing the necessity to address policy inconsistencies that have generally dominated Russian-African relations since the Soviet collapse.
Under the chairmanship of Deputy Speaker of the State Duma, Alexander Babakov, the council’s round-table session on—Russian-African cooperation in the field of ensuring food security, introduction of closed cycle technologies in agricultural and bioeconomy projects—was held in the State Duma.
Opening the meeting, Alexander Babakov, noted the importance of continuing cooperation with African countries already in the new convocation of the State Duma, to which elections will be held in September 2026.
“I am sure that right from the beginning of the work of the new convocation, the theme of cooperation between Russia and African countries will work as an example for circulation and use in other areas,” he said.
A member of the Committee on the Development of the Far East and the Arctic, deputy chairman of the Expert Council on Africa, Nikolai Novichkov, in his speech stressed the importance of a gradual transition to trade with African high-tech countries. “Our African partners are interested in producing and processing food locally, including earning a living on it,” the parliamentarian stated.
The Director of the Department of Partnership with Africa at the Russian Foreign Ministry, Tatiana Dovgalenko, drew attention to the continued importance of the humanitarian component of Russian-African cooperation, which, despite efforts, “unforeseen including and along the lines of specialized UN agencies, the number of hungry people in the world, has been growing over the past few years.” According to Dovgalenko, the food crisis is localized in about 10 countries, four of which are in Africa.
There are still a few points to underline here: Russia is committed to supporting African countries in need of humanitarian assistance, while strengthening the prospects of developing and expanding aspects of bilateral cooperation. Russia has offered many African countries with food supplies over the years.
As traditionally expected, Africa can leverage for Russia’s food supplies. It is essential to acknowledge that serious efforts are being directed at coordinating mechanisms in advancing political dialogue and pursuing other sectoral cooperation with African partners.
At the same time, Foreign Ministry’s records show stages of supporting food security and African beneficiaries such as Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Mali, Mozambique, Madagascar, Libya, Sudan and South Sudan, and Zimbabwe. Mostly, ethnic-conflicting African countries are the beneficiaries, and many reasons are assigned for Russia’s engagement in this aspect of diplomacy.
Reasons for Development Assistance
Russia’s humanitarian and development assistance to Africa is primarily driven by its geopolitical ambitions to expand its global influence, counter Western isolation, secure access to vital natural resources, and foster dependency among African nations.
Countering Western Influence: Russia seeks to position itself as an alternative to Western powers, often advocating for a “multipolar world” and non-interference in the domestic affairs of African states. This approach is particularly appealing to authoritarian regimes on the continent.
Securing Diplomatic Alliances:
African nations represent a significant voting bloc at the United Nations General Assembly. Humanitarian outreach, such as free delivery of grains, helps Russia secure diplomatic support, strengthen food security and votes on key international resolutions.
Leveraging “Grain Diplomacy”:
By providing humanitarian food aid, Moscow mitigates the effects of the global food shortages and supply chain disruptions caused by its own military actions in Ukraine. It uses these provisions to maintain African countries within its geopolitical orbit.
Food Aid Deals:
Aid serves as an entry point for deeper strategic ties. Russia utilizes this assistance as part of its diplomacy to project an image of a benevolent global power. Funding and providing food assistance helps build long-term relationships with the continent’s future leaders and local populations.
As first deputy chairman of the Committee on International Affairs, Alexei Chepa noted at the State Duma, the food crisis and a number of other serious threats on the African continent are today exacerbated by a complex international, United States and Israel vs. Iran causing rising energy prices worldwide.
“This has also reflected on the cost of fertilizers that needed to be purchased previously. Even if prices fall in a few months, the yield still won’t. And there will be problems in Africa. At the same time, we understand that population growth in the coming years will be at Africa’s expense,” Chepa underlined in his contribution at the meeting.
Chepa also mentioned the special role of security enhancement in Africa, including in countering extremism and terrorism.
As part of the continuation of the work of the roundtable to promote cooperation with African countries in ensuring food security, the introduction of closed-loop technologies in agricultural and bio economics projects was discussed. As traditional procedure, some recommendations are addressed to the Government of the Russian Federation.
In addition to representatives of the State Duma, the State Duma’s deputy chairman Alexander Babakov, brought also representatives of ministries, related-agencies and departments, and the expert community to develop concrete steps directed toward raising connectivity between Russia and Africa, the main reason for establishing the State Duma’s Expert Council on the Development and Support of Comprehensive Partnerships with African Countries.
Kester Kenn Klomegah focuses on current geopolitical changes, foreign relations and economic development-related questions in Africa with external countries. Most of his well-resourced articles are reprinted in several reputable foreign media.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Bonn, 3. Juni 2026. In vielen Ländern nehmen Armut und Ungleichheit zu. Investitionen in die soziale Absicherung sind vermutlich das einzige Gegenmittel.
In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten ist der Anteil der Menschen weltweit, die in extremer Armut leben, gesunken – mit Ausnahme der Zeit unmittelbar nach der Corona-Pandemie. Doch zuletzt stieg die absolute Zahl der in Armut lebenden Menschen wieder leicht an, und sie wird voraussichtlich nach 2030 weiter wachsen. Dies hat verschiedene Ursachen, u.a. die wachsende Zahl von Konflikten und extremen Wetterereignissen weltweit sowie die wirtschaftliche Stagnation vieler Länder. Zugleich bleiben die Ungleichheit und die Zahl hungernder Menschen weltweit groß und nehmen in vielen Ländern sogar zu.
Diese beunruhigenden Prognosen zeigen an, dass die globalen Anstrengungen im Kampf gegen Armut, Hunger und Ungleichheit verstärkt werden müssen. Es ist daher sehr zu begrüßen, dass das Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (BMZ) diesen Kampf in seinem jüngsten Reformplan als erstes von vier Zielen beibehalten hat. Weniger klar ist allerdings, mit welchen Instrumenten das Ziel erreicht werden soll. Ohne soziale Sicherung, wozu beitragsfinanzierte Sozialversicherungen und steuerfinanzierte Programme wie Geldtransfers oder Cash-for-Work gehören, wird dies nicht möglich sein. Die Erfahrungen von Ländern weltweit zeigen, dass soziale Sicherung entscheidend für die Bekämpfung von Armut, Hunger und Ungleichheit ist. Nicht von ungefähr nennen die Vereinten Nationen sie als ersten Politikbereich unter dem ersten ihrer Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung (SDGs), welches sich mit der Beseitigung von Armut befasst. Das BMZ plant hingegen, sein Engagement für die soziale Sicherung in vielen seiner Partnerländer auslaufen zu lassen.
Wissenschaftler*innen der Tulane-Universität haben Belege erbracht, dass die meisten Länder mit niedrigem und mittlerem Einkommen Armut und Ungleichheit vor allem durch steuerfinanzierte Programme für soziale Sicherung, Gesundheit und Bildung verringern konnten. Das Gleiche wurde zuvor auch schon für Länder mit hohem Einkommen festgestellt. Selbst China hätte seine bemerkenswerte Armutsbekämpfung nicht erreicht, wenn es seine tiefgreifende wirtschaftliche Transformation nicht mit Umverteilungsmaßnahmen wie Landreformen und auf die Armen ausgerichteten Programmen der sozialen Sicherung kombiniert hätte. Laut Berichten der Weltbank wird der Anteil der Menschen in extremer Armut weltweit in den nächsten 20 Jahren nicht unter 3 % sinken, wenn die einzelnen Länder nicht verstärkt Einkommen durch Steuererhöhungen und eine Stärkung der sozialen Sicherung umverteilen.
Wirtschaftswachstum alleine reicht nicht aus, wie der diesjährige Bericht des Sonderberichterstatters der Vereinten Nationen für extreme Armut und Menschenrechte betont. Es verringert Armut nur begrenzt, insbesondere dort, wo es mit hoher Ungleichheit einhergeht oder auf Rohstoffabbau oder kapitalintensiven Produktionsweisen beruht. Derartige Muster sind vor allem in Subsahara-Afrika weit verbreitet, beispielsweise in Nigeria und Südafrika.
Noch stärker gilt dies für die mehrdimensionale Armut. Sie ist in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten weitaus weniger zurückgegangen als die Einkommensarmut, insbesondere in Subsahara-Afrika. So hat Wirtschaftswachstum kaum Auswirkungen auf die nicht-monetären Dimensionen von Armut in Ländern mit niedrigem und mittlerem Einkommen.
Wirtschaftswachstum kann Armut und Hunger nur dann nachhaltig bekämpfen, wenn es arbeitsintensiv ist und durch Investitionen in soziale Sicherung, Bildung und Gesundheit unterstützt wird – bzw. wenn diese sogar vorausgehen. Insbesondere steuerfinanzierte Programme wie Geldtransfers sind unerlässlich, um sog. pockets of poverty zu erreichen, d. h. diejenigen, die nicht vom Wirtschaftswachstum profitieren. Dazu zählen Menschen in abgelegenen Gebieten, mit geringer Bildung und Ausbildung oder gesundheitlichen Einschränkungen sowie ältere Menschen. Entgegen manchmal vorgebrachter Bedenken halten solche Programme der sozialen Sicherung ihre Nutznießer nicht von der Arbeit ab.
Die deutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit sollte daher Länder in Krisensituationen oder mit niedrigem Prokopfeinkommen dabei unterstützen, verlässliche und gut ausgerichtete steuerfinanzierte Programme der sozialen Sicherung auf- und auszubauen, anstatt ihr Engagement für soziale Sicherung zu reduzieren. Andere Instrumente wie die Sozialversicherung sind ebenfalls nützlich, helfen aber Menschen mit geringem Einkommen nicht, da diese keine Sozialbeiträge zahlen können, insbesondere wenn sie ihren Lebensunterhalt aus informeller, unsicherer Beschäftigung bestreiten.
In die soziale Sicherung zu investieren bedeutet nicht zwangsläufig, dass Geberländer wie Deutschland die Geldtransfers selbst finanzieren. Im Rahmen technischer Zusammenarbeit können sie die Partnerländer dabei unterstützen, überhaupt stabile Systeme der sozialen Sicherung aufzubauen. Im Idealfall sollten diese in den nationalen Verfassungen oder anderen Rechtswerken verankert sein, damit alle Menschen Sicherheit darüber haben, welche Leistungen ihnen wann zustehen. Nur wenn sie sich auf den langfristigen Fortbestand der sozialen Sicherungssysteme verlassen können, sind sie bereit, in Humankapital und produktive Aktivitäten zu investieren, um so ihren Wohlstand langfristig zu verbessern. Nur dann kann soziale Sicherung ihr Potenzial bei der Förderung der sozialen, wirtschaftlichen und politischen Entwicklung in allen Teilen der Welt voll entfalten.
Bonn, 3. Juni 2026. In vielen Ländern nehmen Armut und Ungleichheit zu. Investitionen in die soziale Absicherung sind vermutlich das einzige Gegenmittel.
In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten ist der Anteil der Menschen weltweit, die in extremer Armut leben, gesunken – mit Ausnahme der Zeit unmittelbar nach der Corona-Pandemie. Doch zuletzt stieg die absolute Zahl der in Armut lebenden Menschen wieder leicht an, und sie wird voraussichtlich nach 2030 weiter wachsen. Dies hat verschiedene Ursachen, u.a. die wachsende Zahl von Konflikten und extremen Wetterereignissen weltweit sowie die wirtschaftliche Stagnation vieler Länder. Zugleich bleiben die Ungleichheit und die Zahl hungernder Menschen weltweit groß und nehmen in vielen Ländern sogar zu.
Diese beunruhigenden Prognosen zeigen an, dass die globalen Anstrengungen im Kampf gegen Armut, Hunger und Ungleichheit verstärkt werden müssen. Es ist daher sehr zu begrüßen, dass das Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (BMZ) diesen Kampf in seinem jüngsten Reformplan als erstes von vier Zielen beibehalten hat. Weniger klar ist allerdings, mit welchen Instrumenten das Ziel erreicht werden soll. Ohne soziale Sicherung, wozu beitragsfinanzierte Sozialversicherungen und steuerfinanzierte Programme wie Geldtransfers oder Cash-for-Work gehören, wird dies nicht möglich sein. Die Erfahrungen von Ländern weltweit zeigen, dass soziale Sicherung entscheidend für die Bekämpfung von Armut, Hunger und Ungleichheit ist. Nicht von ungefähr nennen die Vereinten Nationen sie als ersten Politikbereich unter dem ersten ihrer Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung (SDGs), welches sich mit der Beseitigung von Armut befasst. Das BMZ plant hingegen, sein Engagement für die soziale Sicherung in vielen seiner Partnerländer auslaufen zu lassen.
Wissenschaftler*innen der Tulane-Universität haben Belege erbracht, dass die meisten Länder mit niedrigem und mittlerem Einkommen Armut und Ungleichheit vor allem durch steuerfinanzierte Programme für soziale Sicherung, Gesundheit und Bildung verringern konnten. Das Gleiche wurde zuvor auch schon für Länder mit hohem Einkommen festgestellt. Selbst China hätte seine bemerkenswerte Armutsbekämpfung nicht erreicht, wenn es seine tiefgreifende wirtschaftliche Transformation nicht mit Umverteilungsmaßnahmen wie Landreformen und auf die Armen ausgerichteten Programmen der sozialen Sicherung kombiniert hätte. Laut Berichten der Weltbank wird der Anteil der Menschen in extremer Armut weltweit in den nächsten 20 Jahren nicht unter 3 % sinken, wenn die einzelnen Länder nicht verstärkt Einkommen durch Steuererhöhungen und eine Stärkung der sozialen Sicherung umverteilen.
Wirtschaftswachstum alleine reicht nicht aus, wie der diesjährige Bericht des Sonderberichterstatters der Vereinten Nationen für extreme Armut und Menschenrechte betont. Es verringert Armut nur begrenzt, insbesondere dort, wo es mit hoher Ungleichheit einhergeht oder auf Rohstoffabbau oder kapitalintensiven Produktionsweisen beruht. Derartige Muster sind vor allem in Subsahara-Afrika weit verbreitet, beispielsweise in Nigeria und Südafrika.
Noch stärker gilt dies für die mehrdimensionale Armut. Sie ist in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten weitaus weniger zurückgegangen als die Einkommensarmut, insbesondere in Subsahara-Afrika. So hat Wirtschaftswachstum kaum Auswirkungen auf die nicht-monetären Dimensionen von Armut in Ländern mit niedrigem und mittlerem Einkommen.
Wirtschaftswachstum kann Armut und Hunger nur dann nachhaltig bekämpfen, wenn es arbeitsintensiv ist und durch Investitionen in soziale Sicherung, Bildung und Gesundheit unterstützt wird – bzw. wenn diese sogar vorausgehen. Insbesondere steuerfinanzierte Programme wie Geldtransfers sind unerlässlich, um sog. pockets of poverty zu erreichen, d. h. diejenigen, die nicht vom Wirtschaftswachstum profitieren. Dazu zählen Menschen in abgelegenen Gebieten, mit geringer Bildung und Ausbildung oder gesundheitlichen Einschränkungen sowie ältere Menschen. Entgegen manchmal vorgebrachter Bedenken halten solche Programme der sozialen Sicherung ihre Nutznießer nicht von der Arbeit ab.
Die deutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit sollte daher Länder in Krisensituationen oder mit niedrigem Prokopfeinkommen dabei unterstützen, verlässliche und gut ausgerichtete steuerfinanzierte Programme der sozialen Sicherung auf- und auszubauen, anstatt ihr Engagement für soziale Sicherung zu reduzieren. Andere Instrumente wie die Sozialversicherung sind ebenfalls nützlich, helfen aber Menschen mit geringem Einkommen nicht, da diese keine Sozialbeiträge zahlen können, insbesondere wenn sie ihren Lebensunterhalt aus informeller, unsicherer Beschäftigung bestreiten.
In die soziale Sicherung zu investieren bedeutet nicht zwangsläufig, dass Geberländer wie Deutschland die Geldtransfers selbst finanzieren. Im Rahmen technischer Zusammenarbeit können sie die Partnerländer dabei unterstützen, überhaupt stabile Systeme der sozialen Sicherung aufzubauen. Im Idealfall sollten diese in den nationalen Verfassungen oder anderen Rechtswerken verankert sein, damit alle Menschen Sicherheit darüber haben, welche Leistungen ihnen wann zustehen. Nur wenn sie sich auf den langfristigen Fortbestand der sozialen Sicherungssysteme verlassen können, sind sie bereit, in Humankapital und produktive Aktivitäten zu investieren, um so ihren Wohlstand langfristig zu verbessern. Nur dann kann soziale Sicherung ihr Potenzial bei der Förderung der sozialen, wirtschaftlichen und politischen Entwicklung in allen Teilen der Welt voll entfalten.
Evans Njewa, on behalf of the Least Developed Countries Group, addresses the 71st GEF Council Meeting. Credit: IISD_ENB
By IPS Correspondent
SAMARKAND, Jun 2 2026 (IPS)
Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Niue, Senegal, Solomon Islands, Sudan, and Togo will receive over USD 67 million in new funding to help strengthen resilience.
The funding for vulnerable countries aims to strengthen resilience through a package of projects approved by the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) and Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) Council, along with a new strategy to guide the funds through 2030.
Meeting in Samarkand ahead of the Eighth GEF Assembly, Council members approved the final LDCF/SCCF Work Program of the GEF-8 period, comprising seven projects under the Least Developed Countries Fund and one project under the Special Climate Change Fund. Along with the USD 67 million, the projects are expected to mobilise nearly USD 218 million in co-financing.
The funding is expected to assist with mitigating flood and coastal risks, strengthen food and water security, protect ecosystems, improve disaster preparedness, and expand resilient economic opportunities for vulnerable communities.
Claude Gascon, Interim CEO and Chairperson, GEF. Credit: IISD/ENB | Danny Skilton
Claude Gascon, GEF Interim CEO, said the latest tranche of programming responded to evolving national needs, showing how targeted finance was essential in helping countries advance their adaptation priorities while leveraging wider partnerships.
“The work program reflects this demand and the continued relevance of these funds,” Gascon said. “It also shows the catalytic nature of the LDCF and SCCF – working with MDBs and other climate funds and increasingly supporting multi-trust fund projects that align resources across the GEF family of funds.”
The projects include:
The approval concludes a significant period of delivery for the two adaptation-focused funds. With this work program and pending medium-sized projects, the LDCF will have supported 90 projects and programs during GEF-8, reaching 44 Least Developed Countries and programming a total of more than USD 750 million. Over the same period, the SCCF is expected to support 40 projects, including 25 projects benefiting non-LDC Small Island Developing States through its dedicated SIDS window, as well as support for technology transfer, innovation, and private sector engagement.
Looking to the Future
Council members also endorsed the GEF-9 Programming Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change for the LDCF and SCCF, setting the direction for programming under the two funds from July 2026 to June 2030.
The strategy provides a framework to help vulnerable countries move from adaptation planning to implementation, with a stronger focus on integrated solutions, locally led action, innovation, private sector engagement, blended finance, and better collaboration across climate funds and development partners.
Evans Njewa, speaking on behalf of Ambassador Adao Soares Barbosa, Chair of the LDC Group, welcomed the work program and strategy while emphasising the continued importance of predictable support for Least Developed Countries in the face of intensifying climate impacts.
“These discussions are not merely procedural. They shape whether adaptation support reaches the countries and communities that need it most,” Njewa said. “Each approval, each endorsement, and each new strategy represents a step closer to a world where the most vulnerable are empowered, supported, and included in the transition toward a climate-resilient future.”
The GEF-9 LDCF/SCCF Programming Strategy sets out two financial scenarios for each fund: USD 1 billion to USD 1.3 billion for the LDCF and USD 200 million to USD 300 million for the SCCF, and it also introduces operational improvements to strengthen access, delivery, innovation, and finance mobilisation. Together, these measures will help the LDCF and SCCF provide more predictable, catalytic support for Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States.
The work program also reflects the growing role of the LDCF and SCCF in leveraging wider sources of finance. The LDCF projects are expected to mobilise USD 207.9 million in co-financing, while the SCCF project in Niue is expected to mobilise USD 9.8 million. Several projects involve multilateral development banks and international financial institutions, and they also use multi-trust fund approaches that align LDCF and SCCF financing with broader GEF investments.
Gascon said the decisions in Samarkand would help provide continuity and predictability for countries relying on LDCF and SCCF support.
“With just a few years remaining to deliver on global commitments to 2030, the role of these funds is even more central,” he said. “By endorsing the strategy, this Council has provided a clear framework for the years ahead. The momentum is there, the demand is clear, and the opportunity is in front of us.”
Note: The Eighth Global Environment Facility Assembly is underway until June 6, 2026, in Samarkand, Uzbekistan.
This feature is published with the support of the GEF. IPS is solely responsible for the editorial content, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of the GEF.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau