World
Securing sustainable food systems hinges on gender equality
FAO, IFAD and WFP mark International Womens Day
6 March 2020, Rome – The three United Nations’ Rome-..

FAO, IFAD and WFP mark International Womens Day
6 March 2020, Rome – The three United Nations’ Rome-based agencies dedicated to food and agriculture called today for bolder action to achieve gender equality and empower women and girls in the agricultural sector and beyond.
Securing sustainable global food systems is only possible if women everywhere are empowered and their rights recognized and respected, stressed FAO, IFAD and WFP at an event today marking International Women’s Day (IWD) at FAO headquarters.
This year’s IWD – with the theme “I am Generation Equality: Realizing Women’s Right’s” – is an opportunity to review global progress on gender equality and women’s empowerment in the 25 years since the Fourth World Conference on Women[1], identify remaining gender gaps, and outline the way forward.
“FAO will continue to play its part, in partnership with others, in strengthening gender equality, realizing women’s rights and accelerating their socio-economic empowerment. Only then will we reach our common goal: to eradicate hunger, ensure food security, eliminate all forms of malnutrition, and make this world a better place for us,” said FAO Director-General QU Dongyu.
“Each year, International Women’s Day is both a cause for celebration and a call for action,” said Gilbert F. Houngbo, IFAD President. “Collectively, we can work together to create a gender-equal world. Not simply because it’s the right thing to do, but also because it makes sense. Increasing gender equality is critical to deliver strong economic growth. It can help cut down on extreme poverty and reduce chronic hunger. It can lead to longer-lasting peace. And it can benefit entire families and empower all those who face discrimination.”
“We know Zero Hunger will not be achieved just by giving people food. This is why our programmes work to empower women so they can be financially self-sufficient and make their own decisions. By giving women and men an equal voice and an equal say on issues affecting their families and communities we can eradicate hunger and malnutrition,” said WFP Assistant Executive Director, Manoj Juneja.
Women, especially in rural areas, are instrumental in the fight against hunger and malnutrition and in making food systems more productive and sustainable.
They grow food, reduce food losses, make diets more diverse and agricultural produce more marketable along the agri-food value chains. Yet, in many parts of the world women continue to face significant social and economic discrimination.
They often lack access to productive resources, agricultural inputs, information, finance, services, markets, social protection as well as technological and entrepreneurial know-how. In addition, many rural women are the primary caretakers in their households, which means they face heavy workloads that undermine their productive capacity and overall well-being.
When rural women are empowered, the results are palpable
FAO, IFAD and WFP know from experience that when rural women have better access to resources, services, economic opportunities and decision making, the results are palpable: communities have more food, their nutrition status improves, rural incomes increase and food systems become more efficient and sustainable.
For example, nearly 50,000 people (two thirds of them women) and, by extension, over 300,000 family members across seven countries (Ethiopia, Guatemala, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Nepal, Niger and Rwanda) increased their agricultural production and their families’ nutrition status as well as their incomes thanks to a joint FAO, IFAD, WFP and UN Women programme that entailed capacity development, technical support and the promotion of gender-responsive approaches in rural institutions and gender-sensitive agricultural policies.
Despite some progress, change has been slow for most of the world’s women and girls
The three Rome-based UN agencies also note that there are still gaps in our knowledge about the differences between men and women in terms of their roles and opportunities in agriculture, and how gender disparities play out in different ecological, cultural and political contexts.
What is well known, however, is that rural women are disproportionately vulnerable to food insecurity as well as economic and environmental shocks. Furthermore, harmful social norms and stereotypes on what women can or should do persist in many parts of the world, but these are difficult to address through conventional interventions. Food taboos that are detrimental to women’s health and nutrition are still prevalent in many countries. In some areas of Africa or Asia, for example, pregnant and nursing women are not allowed to eat certain nutritious foods, such as fish.
Overall, despite some progress, change has been slow for most of the world’s women and girls. Not one single country can claim to have achieved gender equality.
Events marking this year’s IWD present opportunities to mobilize global action to achieve gender equality and all women’s and girls’ human rights.
The event hosted by FAO today brings together representatives of the UN agencies’ member states, gender experts, representatives of civil society and others to discuss how we can close the existing gender gaps in agriculture and rural livelihoods. The event also showcases good practices in establishing national policies and programmes for promoting gender equality and rural women’s empowerment.
Gender equality in the food and agriculture sectors – facts and figures:
● The agriculture sector is underperforming in many developing countries, and one reason is that women do not have the same access as men to the inputs, resources, services and opportunities that they need to be more productive.
● Women comprise nearly 50 percent of employment in agriculture in low-income countries.
● Women represent less than 15 percent of all landowners, where data is available.
● Compared to male farmers, female farmers typically manage smaller plots of land and have less access to agricultural information, financial services, and other key resources.
● More than 820 million people do not have enough food to eat, and on every continent, women are more likely than men to be affected by moderate or severe food insecurity.
● Rural women face higher risks and greater burdens from climate change impacts.
Note to editors: a video news release on a women-focused project supported by FAO is available on FAO’s Media Vault.
The project focuses on supporting women clam harvesters to earn more for their labour, whilst making their harvesting practices more sustainable.
[1] The 2020 IWD theme is aligned with UN Women’s new multigenerational campaign, Generation Equality, which marks the 25th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, the most progressive roadmap for the empowerment of women and girls.
World
Australia election: Why is Australia’s parliament so white?

World
US military leader warns Chinese security deal with Solomon Islands sounds ‘too good to be true’

A senior US military general has warned during a visit to Australia that China’s offer to deepen security ties with Solomon Islands will come with strings attached, suggesting the Pacific island country may come to regret the planned deal.
“My parents told me if a deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is,” the commandant of the United States Marine Corps, general David Berger, said on Wednesday.
Berger was cautious when asked about longstanding US concerns relating to a Chinese company’s lease over the port of Darwin, stressing it was a sovereign decision for Australia as part of its yet-to-be-completed national security review.
Ahead of a trip to Darwin, the site of increasing rotations of US Marines, Berger said: “If it’s not of concern to Australia, then it’s not of concern to me.”
Berger’s visit comes amid a flurry of diplomatic activity by the US and Australia attempting to head off a proposed security agreement between China and Solomon Islands, which could allow regular visits by the People’s Liberation Army Navy.
A leaked draft from last month raised the possibility China could “make ship visits to, carry out logistical replenishment in, and have stopover and transition in Solomon Islands”, while Chinese forces could also be used “to protect the safety of Chinese personnel and major projects in Solomon Islands”.
The prime minister of Solomon Islands, Manasseh Sogavare, has sought to allay concerns, saying his country has no intention of allowing a Chinese naval base. But Sogavare has also said it is “very insulting to be branded as unfit to manage our sovereign affairs”.
Speaking in Canberra on Wednesday, Berger said the US needed to show humility in its outreach to Pacific nations, but also needed to be open about the potential long-term consequences.
Berger reflected on the fight for control of Guadalcanal in Solomon Islands during the second world war, when the US and allies sought to prevent Japanese forces from gaining a foothold in the strategically important location.
“A lot of things change in warfare. Not geography. Where … Solomon Islands are matters. It did then and it does now,” Berger said at the Australian Strategic Policy
Institute.
He said the proposed agreement was “just another example” of China seeking to broaden and expand its influence. He raised concerns about “the way that [it] happens and the consequences for the nations” involved.
Sogavare has argued Solomon Islands pursues a “friends to all and enemies to none” foreign policy, but Berger implied countries making agreements with Beijing might regret it down the track.
“We should illuminate, we should draw out into the open what this means long term,” Berger said.
“This is, in other words, an extension of ‘hey we’re here with a cheque, we’re here with money, we’d like to improve your port or your airfield or your bus station’. And that just sounds so great, until a year later or six months later.”
The US plans to reopen its embassy in Solomon Islands, a move the nominee for US ambassador to Australia, Caroline Kennedy, has said “can’t come soon enough”.
Berger acknowledged there were limits to US insights in Pacific island countries, so the US needed to rely on allies such as Australia.
“We’re not going to have always the best view, the clearest picture,” he said.
“We have to understand the neighbourhood and we’re never going to understand it as well as Australia.”
Earlier, the Australian prime minister, Scott Morrison, denied that the US had conveyed any concerns that Australia had dropped the ball in the region.
Morrison said the Australian government was continuing to raise concerns with Solomon Islands without acting in a “heavy-handed” way.
Australia’s minister for the Pacific, Zed Seselja, met with Sogavare in Honiara on Wednesday and “asked Solomon Islands respectfully to consider not signing the agreement” with China.
Seselja suggested Solomon Islands “consult the Pacific family in the spirit of regional openness and transparency”. Australia would work with Solomon Islands “swiftly, transparently and with full respect for its sovereignty”.
“We welcome recent statements from prime minister Sogavare that Australia remains Solomon Islands’ security partner of choice, and his commitment that Solomon Islands will never be used for military bases or other military institutions of foreign powers,” Seselja said.
Sogavare has previously said Solomon Islands welcomed “any country that is willing to support us in our security space”.
But Matthew Wale, the leader of the opposition, has argued the deal “would make the Solomons a geopolitical playing field” and “further threaten the nation’s fragile unity”.
World
House votes to hold Trump duo Navarro and Scavino in contempt of Congress

The House voted on Wednesday to hold two of Donald Trump’s top advisers – Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino – in criminal contempt of Congress for their months-long refusal to comply with subpoenas issued by the House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack.
The approval of the contempt resolution, by a vote of 220 to 203, sets the two Trump aides on the path toward criminal prosecution by the justice department as the panel escalates its inquiry into whether Trump oversaw a criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.
Congressman Jamie Raskin, a member of the select committee who introduced the contempt resolution to the House floor, said the select committee needed the House to advance the measure in order to reaffirm the consequences for defying the January 6 investigation.
Citing a ruling by a federal judge last week that Trump “likely” committed felonies to return himself to the Oval Office for a second term, Raskin said on the House floor that the panel wanted Navarro and Scavino’s cooperation because they engaged in trying to overthrow an election.
But having refused to comply with their subpoenas in any form, Raskin said that “these two witnesses have acted in contempt of Congress and the American people; we must hold them in contempt of Congress and the American people”.
The contempt citations approved by the House now head to the justice department and the US attorney for the District of Columbia, Matthew Graves, who is required by law to weigh a prosecution and present the matter before a federal grand jury.
Should the justice department secure a conviction against the Trump aides, the consequences could mean up to a year in federal prison, $100,000 in fines, or both – though it would not force their compliance, and pursuing the misdemeanor charge could take months.
The subpoena defiance by Navarro and Scavino meant the select committee was ultimately unable to extract information directly from them about Trump’s unlawful scheme to have then-vice president Mike Pence stop Joe Biden’s election win certification on 6 January.
But the panel has quietly amassed deep knowledge about their roles in the effort to return Trump to office in recent weeks, and senior staff decided that they could move ahead in the inquiry without hearing from the two aides, say sources close to the inquiry.
The determination by the select committee that Navarro and Scavino’s cooperation was no longer essential came when it found it could fill in the gaps from others, the sources said, and led to the decision to break off negotiations for their cooperation.
The final decision to withdraw from talks reflected the panel’s belief that it was not worth the time – the probe is on a time crunch to complete its work before the November midterms – to pursue their testimony for potentially only marginal gain, the sources said.
House investigators had sought cooperation from Navarro, a former Trump senior advisor for trade policy who became enmeshed in the effort to reverse Trump’s election defeat, for around a month until it became apparent they were making no headway.
The select committee issued a subpoena to Navarro since he helped devise – by his own admission on MSNBC and elsewhere – the scheme to have Pence stop Biden’s certification from taking place as part of one Trump “war room” based at the Willard hotel in Washington.
Navarro also worked with the Trump campaign’s legal team to pressure legislators in battleground states win by Biden to decertify the results and instead send Trump slates of electors for certification by Congress at the joint session in January 6.
But when that plan started to go awry, Navarro encouraged then-Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to call political operative Roger Stone to discuss January 6, the panel said in its contempt of Congress report published last week.
The former Trump aide, however, told the select committee – without providing any evidence – that the former president had asserted executive privilege over the contents of his subpoena and would therefore not provide documents or testimony.
With Scavino, the select committee first issued Trump’s former deputy White House chief of staff for communications in September last year, since he had attended several meetings with Trump where election fraud matters were discussed, the panel said.
But after the panel granted to Scavino six extensions that pushed his subpoena deadlines from October 2021 to February 2022, the former Trump aide also told House investigators that he too would not comply with the order because Trump invoked executive privilege.
The select committee rejected those arguments of executive privilege, saying neither Navarro nor Scavino had grounds for entirely defying the subpoenas because either Trump did not formally invoke the protections, or because Biden ultimately waived them.
At the business meeting last week where the select committee voted unanimously to recommend that the full House find Navarro and Scavino in contempt of Congress, Raskin delivered an emotional rebuke of the supposed executive privilege arguments.
“This is America, and there’s no executive privilege here for presidents, much less trained advisors, to plan coups and organize insurrections against the people’s government in the people’s constitution and then to cover up the evidence of their crimes.
“These two men,” Raskin said of Navarro and Scavino, “are in contempt of Congress and we must say, both for their brazen disregard for their duties and for our laws and our institutions.”
Attending an event featuring Trump at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday night, Navarro made a point of appearing aloof to his impending referral to the justice department. “Oh that vote,” Navarro said dismissively, the Washington Post reported.
-
Australia3 years ago
Button and Diane Powellpark the school bus after three decades
-
Australia4 years ago
60th Annual Louth Cup 2018 | Photos
-
Australia4 years ago
A good attendance for planning ahead
-
Australia4 years ago
Severe, unusual weather likely to cause damage
-
Australia4 years ago
Ten ways to scrap plastic without breaking the bank
-
World4 years ago
Сhinese navy jets master daring night maneuvers on aircraft carrier (VIDEO)
-
World4 years ago
Know-how: Canadian hospital first to сure patients with virtual reality
-
fun5 years ago
Will Gompertz reviews Lin-Manuel Miranda’s musical Hamilton ★★★★★