Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)
Polio this week as of 18 September 2018 [GPEI]
:: Featured on www.polioeradication.org: Coffee with Polio Experts – Darcy Levison of WHO talks about the logistical challenges of reaching every child in the Lake Chad subregion.

Summary of new viruses this week:
Afghanistan – one new case of wild poliovirus (WPV1)
Democratic Republic of Congo – two new cases of circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 (cVDPV2).
Editor’s Note:
WHO has posted a refreshed emergencies page which presents an updated listing of Grade 3,2,1 emergencies as below.

WHO Grade 3 Emergencies  [to 22 Sep 2018]
Bangladesh – Rohingya crisis
:: Using local materials to build health facilities  12 September 2018
:: Weekly Situation Report 43 – 13 September 2018pdf, 220kb
:: Bangladesh is experiencing seasonal influenza, which may also be circulating in the camp area.
:: A total of 1,988 family and 70 co,munity water filters have so far been distributed to 13 partner organizations with the main beneficiaries being pregnant women.
:: Since February 2018, 18 327 children of 0-23 months have received BCG vaccination while the Pentavalent vaccine has been administered to 20,522 children.

Democratic Republic of the Congo
:: 07: Situation report on the Ebola outbreak in North Kivu 18 September 2018

Syrian Arab Republic
:: WHO airlifts 21 tons of medical supplies to Al-Hasakeh governorate in north-east Syria
14 September 2018

:: Dialysis patients in Yemen struggle to obtain regular sessions amid war  16 September 2018

Iraq – No new announcements identified
Nigeria – No new announcements identified
Somalia – No new announcements identified
South Sudan – No new announcements identified

WHO Grade 2 Emergencies  [to 22 Sep 2018]
Cameroon  – No new announcements identified
Central African Republic  – No new announcements identified
Hurricane Irma and Maria in the Caribbean – No new announcements identified
occupied Palestinian territory – No new announcements identified
Libya – No new announcements identified
Myanmar – No new announcements identified
Sao Tome and Principe Necrotizing Cellulitis (2017) – No new announcements identified
South Africa Listeriosis (2017) – See below
Sudan – No new announcements identified
Ukraine – No new announcements identified

Outbreaks and Emergencies Bulletin, Week 37: 8 – 14 September 2018
The WHO Health Emergencies Programme is currently monitoring 52 events in the AFRO region. This week’s edition covers key ongoing events, including:
:: Ebola virus disease outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
:: Cholera outbreak in Zimbabwe
:: Cholera outbreak in Algeria
:: Yellow fever outbreak in Republic of Congo
:: Humanitarian crisis in Mali.

WHO Grade 1 Emergencies  [to 22 Sep 2018]
Angola (in Portuguese)
Lao People’s Democratic Republic
Papua New Guinea
Tropical Cyclone Gira

The Sentinel

Human Rights Action :: Humanitarian Response :: Health :: Education :: Heritage Stewardship ::
Sustainable Development
Week ending 15 September 2018

This weekly digest is intended to aggregate and distill key content from a broad spectrum of practice domains and organization types including key agencies/IGOs, NGOs, governments, academic and research institutions, consortia and collaborations, foundations, and commercial organizations. We also monitor a spectrum of peer-reviewed journals and general media channels. The Sentinel’s geographic scope is global/regional but selected country-level content is included. We recognize that this spectrum/scope yields an indicative and not an exhaustive product. Comments and suggestions should be directed to:

David R. Curry
GE2P2 Global Foundation – Governance, Evidence, Ethics, Policy, Practice

PDF – The Sentinel_ period ending 15 Sep 2018

:: Week in Review  [See selected posts just below]
:: Key Agency/IGO/Governments Watch – Selected Updates from 30+ entities   [see PDF]
:: INGO/Consortia/Joint Initiatives Watch – Media Releases, Major Initiatives, Research:: Foundation/Major Donor Watch -Selected Updates  [see PDF]
:: Journal Watch – Key articles and abstracts from 100+ peer-reviewed journals  [see PDF]

The ICC will continue its independent and impartial work, undeterred…

International Criminal Court

Full text of John Bolton’s speech to the Federalist Society
10 Sept 2018
…Today, on the eve of September 11th, I want to deliver a clear and unambiguous message on behalf of the president of the United States.

The United States will use any means necessary to protect our citizens and those of our allies from unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court.

We will not cooperate with the ICC. We will provide no assistance to the ICC. We will not join the ICC.

We will let the ICC die on its own. After all, for all intents and purposes, the ICC is already dead to us.

The United States bases this policy on five principal concerns about the court, its purported authority, and its effectiveness [extended statement of concerns follows]…

…In April of 2016, it was right here, at the Mayflower Hotel, that President Trump gave his first major foreign policy address during his campaign. At that time, candidate Trump promised he would “always put the interests of the American people and American security above all else”.

Today, it is fitting that we reassert this fundamental promise within these walls. This afternoon, we also make a new pledge to the American people.

“If the court comes after us, Israel or other US allies, we will not sit quietly. We will take the following steps, among others, in accordance with the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act and our other legal authorities:

:: We will negotiate even more binding, bilateral agreements to prohibit nations from surrendering US persons to the ICC. And we will ensure that those we have already entered are honoured by our counterpart governments.

:: We will respond against the ICC and its personnel to the extent permitted by US law. We will ban its judges and prosecutors from entering the United States. We will sanction their funds in the US financial system, and we will prosecute them in the US criminal system. We will do the same for any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans.

:: We will take note if any countries cooperate with ICC investigations of the United States and its allies, and we will remember that cooperation when setting US foreign assistance, military assistance, and intelligence sharing levels.

:: We will consider taking steps in the UN Security Council to constrain the court’s sweeping powers, including ensuring that the ICC does not exercise jurisdiction over Americans and the nationals of our allies that have not ratified the Rome Statute.

This administration will fight back to protect American constitutionalism, our sovereignty, and our citizens. No committee of foreign nations will tell us how to govern ourselves and defend our freedom. We will stand up for the US constitution abroad, just as we do at home. And, as always, in every decision we make, we will put the interests of the American people first.


The ICC will continue its independent and impartial work, undeterred
11 September 2018
The International Criminal Court (“ ICC” or the “Court”) is aware of the speech delivered on 10 September 2018 by US National Security Advisor, John Bolton, concerning the ICC.

The Court was established and constituted under the Rome Statute, the Court’s founding treaty – to which 123 countries from all regions of the world are party and have pledged their support through ratification –as an instrument to ensure accountability for crimes that shock the conscience of humanity. The Court is an independent and impartial judicial institution.

The Court’s jurisdiction is subject to the primary jurisdiction of States themselves to investigate and prosecute allegations of those crimes and bring justice to the affected communities. It is only when the States concerned fail to do so at all or genuinely that the ICC will exercise jurisdiction.

The ICC, as a court of law, will continue to do its work undeterred, in accordance with those principles and the overarching idea of the rule of law.

UN report warns of alarming scope and effect of reprisals on victims, activists and human rights defenders

Human Rights – Reprisals and Impunity

UN report warns of alarming scope and effect of reprisals on victims, activists and human rights defenders
GENEVA (12 September 2018) – People globally face harsh reprisals and intimidation for cooperating with the United Nations on human rights, a “shameful practice,” a major UN report warned. This trend deters others from engaging with the UN and results in “self-censorship.”

The annual report on reprisals of UN Secretary-General António Guterres, the ninth of its kind, details country by country cases in two annexes, including allegations of killing, torture and ill-treatment, arbitrary arrests and detention, surveillance, criminalisation, and public stigmatisation campaigns targeting victims and human rights defenders.

It includes allegations of reprisals and intimidation documented in a total of 38 countries. Some of the States are current members of the Human Rights Council. Some have featured in the annual report on reprisals nearly every year since it was instituted in 2010.*

“The cases of reprisals and intimidation detailed in this report and its two annexes represent the tip of the iceberg, while many more are reported to us. We are also increasingly seeing legal, political and administrative hurdles used to intimidate – and silence – civil society,” said UN Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights Andrew Gilmour, the senior UN official designated to address the issue, who will present the report to the Human Rights Council on 19 September 2018.

The report notes that selectively applied laws and new legislation are used to restrict and obstruct organizations that are likely to cooperate with the UN. This includes limiting their ability to secure and maintain funding, especially from foreign donors.

The impact of fear of reprisals is not only visible in the field, where United Nations personnel often encounter people too afraid to speak with them, but also at headquarters in New York, Geneva, and elsewhere, the report says.

The report highlights a “disturbing trend in the use of national security arguments and counter-terrorism strategies by States as justification for blocking access by communities and civil society organizations to the United Nations.” It notes that a number of NGOs, human rights defenders, activists and experts have been labelled as “terrorists” by their Governments. Reported cases include individuals or organizations being officially charged with terrorism, blamed for cooperation with foreign entities, or accused of damaging the reputation or security of the State.

“States have frequently invoked counter-terrorism as the reason an organization or individual should be denied access to participation at the United Nations. The real global threat of terrorism notwithstanding, this issue must be tackled without compromising respect for human rights,” the report says.

While the majority of the documented cases were perpetrated, or at the very least condoned, by State officials, violations by non-State actors must also be taken seriously, the report says. Private citizens, corporate actors and non-State groups must be held accountable as well.

The wide scope of reprisals inhibits the UN’s work in many ways, including in conflict settings, when delivering humanitarian assistance or in protecting civilians, and in the development context, where community members who engage on land and resource-related projects frequently encounter a hostile environment…

The report calls on States to follow up on the cases included in the present and previous reports and provide substantive responses.

* 29 Countries in which new cases are listed in the report and Annex I (in alphabetical order) are: Bahrain, Cameroon, China, Colombia, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, India, Israel, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, Mali, Morocco, Myanmar, Philippines, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, South Sudan, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of).

Follow up/ongoing cases are also included in relation to the following 19 countries (in alphabetical order) in Annex II: Algeria, Bahrain, Burundi, China, Egypt, India, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Pakistan, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan and Venezuela.
Read the report (A/HRC/39/41) online in English, French, Arabic, Russia, Spanish and Chinese.

Rule of law in Hungary: European Parliament calls on the EU to act

Hungary – Rule of Law :: EU “Founding Values”

Rule of law in Hungary: Parliament calls on the EU to act
Press Releases – European Parliiament
Plenary session, LIBE, 12-09-2018 – 13:51

:: Proposal approved by 448 votes to 197
:: EP sees a clear risk of a serious breach of the EU founding values in Hungary
:: Judicial independence, freedom of expression, corruption, rights of minorities, and the situation of migrants and refugees are key concerns
:: Council may address recommendations to Hungary to counter the threat

Parliament has asked EU member states to determine, in accordance with Treaty Article 7, whether Hungary is at risk of breaching the EU´s founding values.

The request was approved by 448 votes to 197, with 48 abstentions. To be adopted, the proposal required an absolute majority of members (376) and two thirds of the votes cast – excluding the abstentions.

This is the first time that Parliament has called on the Council of the EU to act against a member state to prevent a systemic threat to the Union’s founding values. These values, which are enshrined in EU Treaty Article 2 and reflected in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, include respect for democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights.

MEPs called on EU countries to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 7(1) the EU Treaty, noting that despite the Hungarian authorities’ readiness to discuss the legality of any specific measure, they have not addressed the situation, “and many concerns remain”. They stress that this is the preventive phase of the procedure, providing for a dialogue with the country concerned, and that it is “intended to avoid possible sanctions”.

Parliament recalls that Hungary’s accession to the EU “was a voluntary act based on a sovereign decision, with a broad consensus across the political spectrum” and underline that any Hungarian government has a duty to eliminate the risk of a serious breach of the EU’s values.

Parliament’s key concerns relate to:
the functioning of the constitutional and electoral system,
the independence of the judiciary,
corruption and conflicts of interest,
privacy and data protection,
freedom of expression,
academic freedom,
freedom of religion,
freedom of association,
the right to equal treatment,
the rights of persons belonging to minorities, including Roma and Jews,
the fundamental rights of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, and economic and social rights.

Judith Sargentini (Greens/EFA, NL), who authored the report, said: “In the week that we debate the state of the Union, the European Parliament sends out an important message: We stand up for the rights of all Europeans, including Hungarian citizens and we defend our European values. Now it is up to the European leaders to take their responsibility and stop watching from the sidelines as the rule of law is destroyed in Hungary. This is unacceptable for a Union that is built on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights.”

Next steps
The proposal for a Council decision will now be sent to the EU member states. They may, acting by a majority of four fifths, determine the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the EU values in Hungary. The Council would first have to hear the views of the Hungarian authorities, and Parliament would need to give consent. The EU member states may also choose to address recommendations to Hungary to counter the risk.

At a later stage, the European Council may determine, by unanimity and with the Parliament’s consent, the existence in Hungary of a serious and persistent breach of the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights. This could eventually lead to sanctions, such as the suspension of the voting rights in the Council.

A manifesto for renewing liberalism – The Economist

Human Rights, Liberty, Liberalism

A manifesto for renewing liberalism
Success turned liberals into a complacent elite. They need to rekindle their desire for radicalism
The Economist, Sep 14 2018 [Editor’s text bolding]

Liberalism made the modern world, but the modern world is turning against it. Europe and America are in the throes of a popular rebellion against liberal elites, who are seen as self-serving and unable, or unwilling, to solve the problems of ordinary people. Elsewhere a 25-year shift towards freedom and open markets has gone into reverse, even as China, soon to be the world’s largest economy, shows that dictatorships can thrive.

For The Economist this is profoundly worrying. We were created 175 years ago to campaign for liberalism — not the leftish “progressivism” of American university campuses or the rightish “ultraliberalism” conjured up by the French commentariat, but a universal commitment to individual dignity, open markets, limited government and a faith in human progress brought about by debate and reform.

Our founders would be astonished at how life today compares with the poverty and the misery of the 1840s. Global life expectancy in the past 175 years has risen from a little under 30 years to over 70. The share of people living below the threshold of extreme poverty has fallen from about 80% to 8% and the absolute number has halved, even as the total living above it has increased from about 100m to over 6.5bn. And literacy rates are up more than fivefold, to over 80%. Civil rights and the rule of law are incomparably more robust than they were only a few decades ago. In many countries individuals are now free to choose how to live — and with whom.

This is not all the work of liberals, obviously. But as fascism, communism and autarky failed over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, liberal societies have prospered. In one flavour or another, liberal democracy came to dominate the West and from there it started to spread around the world.

Laurels, but no rest
Yet political philosophies cannot live by their past glories: they must also promise a better future. And here liberal democracy faces a looming challenge. Western voters have started to doubt that the system works for them or that it is fair. In polling last year just 36% of Germans, 24% of Canadians and 9% of the French thought that the next generation would be better off than their parents. Only a third of Americans under 35 say that it is vital they live in a democracy; the share who would welcome military government grew from 7% in 1995 to 18% last year. Globally, according to Freedom House, an NGO, civil liberties and political rights have declined for the past 12 years — in 2017, 71 countries lost ground while only 35 made gains.

Against this current, The Economist still believes in the power of the liberal idea. Over the past six months, we have celebrated our 175th anniversary with online articles, debates, podcasts and films that explore how to respond to liberalism’s critics. In this issue we publish an essay that is a manifesto for a liberal revival — a liberalism for the people.

Our essay sets out how the state can work harder for the citizen by recasting taxation, welfare, education and immigration. The economy must be cut free from the growing power of corporate monopolies and the planning restrictions that shut people out of the most prosperous cities. And we urge the West to shore up the liberal world order through enhanced military power and reinvigorated alliances.

All these policies are designed to deal with liberalism’s central problem. In its moment of triumph after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it lost sight of its own essential values. It is with them that the liberal revival must begin.

Liberalism emerged in the late 18th century as a response to the turmoil stirred up by independence in America, revolution in France and the transformation of industry and commerce. Revolutionaries insist that, to build a better world, you first have to smash the one in front of you. By contrast, conservatives are suspicious of all revolutionary pretensions to universal truth. They seek to preserve what is best in society by managing change, usually under a ruling class or an authoritarian leader who “knows best”.

An engine of change
True liberals contend that societies can change gradually for the better and from the bottom up. They differ from revolutionaries because they reject the idea that individuals should be coerced into accepting someone else’s beliefs. They differ from conservatives because they assert that aristocracy and hierarchy, indeed all concentrations of power, tend to become sources of oppression.

Liberalism thus began as a restless, agitating world view. Yet over the past few decades liberals have become too comfortable with power. As a result, they have lost their hunger for reform. The ruling liberal elite tell themselves that they preside over a healthy meritocracy and that they have earned their privileges. The reality is not so clear-cut.

At its best, the competitive spirit of meritocracy has created extraordinary prosperity and a wealth of new ideas. In the name of efficiency and economic freedom, governments have opened up markets to competition. Race, gender and sexuality have never been less of a barrier to advancement.
Globalisation has lifted hundreds of millions of people in emerging markets out of poverty.

Yet ruling liberals have often sheltered themselves from the gales of creative destruction. Cushy professions such as law are protected by fatuous regulations. University professors enjoy tenure even as they preach the virtues of the open society. Financiers were spared the worst of the financial crisis when their employers were bailed out with taxpayers’ money. Globalisation was meant to create enough gains to help the losers, but too few of them have seen the pay-off.

In all sorts of ways, the liberal meritocracy is closed and self-sustaining. A recent study found that, in 1999–2013, America’s most prestigious universities admitted more students from the top 1% of households by income than from the bottom 50%. In 1980–2015 university fees in America rose 17 times as fast as median incomes. The 50 biggest urban areas contain 7% of the world’s people and produce 40% of its output. But planning restrictions shut many out, especially the young.

Governing liberals have become so wrapped up in preserving the status quo that they have forgotten what radicalism looks like. Remember how, in her campaign to become America’s president, Hillary Clinton concealed her lack of big ideas behind a blizzard of small ones. The candidates to become leader of the Labour Party in Britain in 2015 lost to Jeremy Corbyn not because he is a dazzling political talent so much as because they were indistinguishably bland. Liberal technocrats contrive endless clever policy fixes, but they remain conspicuously aloof from the people they are supposed to be helping. This creates two classes: the doers and the done-to, the thinkers and the thought-for, the policymakers and the policytakers.

The foundations of liberty
Liberals have forgotten that their founding idea is civic respect for all. Our centenary editorial, written in 1943 as the war against fascism raged, set this out in two complementary principles. The first is freedom: that it is “not only just and wise but also profitable…to let people do what they want.” The second is the common interest: that “human society…can be an association for the welfare of all.”

Today’s liberal meritocracy sits uncomfortably with that inclusive definition of freedom. The ruling class live in a bubble. They go to the same colleges, marry each other, live in the same streets and work in the same offices. Remote from power, most people are expected to be content with growing material prosperity instead. Yet, amid stagnating productivity and the fiscal austerity that followed the financial crisis of 2008, even this promise has often been broken.

That is one reason loyalty to mainstream parties is corroding. Britain’s Conservatives, perhaps the most successful party in history, now raise more money from the wills of dead people than they do from the gifts of the living. In the first election in unified Germany, in 1990, the traditional parties won over 80% of the vote; the latest poll gives them just 45%, compared with a total of 41.5% for the far right, the far left and the Greens.

Instead people are retreating into group identities defined by race, religion or sexuality. As a result, that second principle, the common interest, has fragmented. Identity politics is a valid response to discrimination but, as identities multiply, the politics of each group collides with the politics of all the rest. Instead of generating useful compromises, debate becomes an exercise in tribal outrage. Leaders on the right, in particular, exploit the insecurity engendered by immigration as a way of whipping up support. And they use smug left-wing arguments about political correctness to feed their voters’ sense of being looked down on. The result is polarisation. Sometimes that leads to paralysis, sometimes to the tyranny of the majority. At worst it emboldens far-right authoritarians.

Liberals are losing the argument in geopolitics, too. Liberalism spread in the 19th and 20th centuries against the backdrop first of British naval hegemony and, later, the economic and military rise of the United States. Today, by contrast, the retreat of liberal democracy is taking place as Russia plays the saboteur and China asserts its growing global power. Yet rather than defend the system of alliances and liberal institutions it created after the second world war, America has been neglecting it — and even, under President Donald Trump, attacking it.

This impulse to pull back is based on a misconception. As the historian Robert Kagan points out, America did not switch from interwar isolationism to post-war engagement in order to contain the Soviet Union, as is often assumed. Instead, having seen how the chaos of the 1920s and 1930s bred fascism and Bolshevism, its post-war statesmen concluded that a leaderless world was a threat. In the words of Dean Acheson, a secretary of state, America could no longer sit “in the parlour with a loaded shotgun, waiting”.

It follows that the break up of the Soviet Union in 1991 did not suddenly make America safe. If liberal ideas do not underpin the world, geopolitics risks becoming the balance-of-power, sphere-of-influence struggle that European statesmen grappled with in the 19th century. That culminated in the muddy battlefields of Flanders. Even if today’s peace holds, liberalism will suffer as growing fears of foreign foes drive people into the arms of strongmen and populists.

It is the moment for a liberal reinvention. Liberals need to spend less time dismissing their critics as fools and bigots and more fixing what is wrong. The true spirit of liberalism is not self-preserving, but radical and disruptive. The Economist was founded to campaign for the repeal of the Corn Laws, which charged duties on imports of grain into Victorian Britain. Today that sounds comically small-bore. But in the 1840s, 60% of the income of factory workers went on food, a third of that on bread. We were created to take the part of the poor against the corn-cultivating gentry. Today, in that same vision, liberals need to side with a struggling precariat against the patricians.

Liberals should approach today’s challenges with vigour. If they prevail, it will be because their ideas are unmatched for their ability to spread freedom and prosperity

They must rediscover their belief in individual dignity and self-reliance — by curbing their own privileges. They must stop sneering at nationalism, but claim it for themselves and fill it with their own brand of inclusive civic pride. Rather than lodging power in centralised ministries and unaccountable technocracies, they should devolve it to regions and municipalities. Instead of treating geopolitics as a zero-sum struggle between the great powers, America must draw on the self-reinforcing triad of its military might, its values and its allies.

The best liberals have always been pragmatic and adaptable. Before the first world war Theodore Roosevelt took on the robber barons who ran America’s great monopolies. Although many early liberals feared mob rule, they embraced democracy. After the Depression in the 1930s they acknowledged that government has a limited role in managing the economy. Partly in order to see off fascism and communism after the second world war, liberals designed the welfare state.

Liberals should approach today’s challenges with equal vigour. If they prevail, it will be because their ideas are unmatched for their ability to spread freedom and prosperity. Liberals should embrace criticism and welcome debate as a source of the new thinking that will rekindle their movement. They should be bold and impatient for reform. Young people, especially, have a world to claim.

When The Economist was founded 175 years ago our first editor, James Wilson, promised “a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress.” We renew our pledge to that contest. And we ask liberals everywhere to join us.

Global Preparedness Monitoring Board convenes for the first time in Geneva

Health Governance – Global Outbreaks/Health Emergencies

Global Preparedness Monitoring Board convenes for the first time in Geneva
10 September 2018 | Statement
WHO and the World Bank Group today convened the first meeting of the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB), a new body set up to monitor the world’s readiness to respond to outbreaks and other health emergencies.

The GPMB is chaired by Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Prime Minister of Norway and former WHO Director-General and Mr Elhadj As Sy, Secretary General of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and includes some of the most notable leaders in global health.

The GPMB has been established to monitor progress, identify gaps and advocate for sustained, effective work to ensure global preparedness. At its first meeting at WHO’s headquarters in Geneva, the GPMB today discussed key issues in global preparedness and agreed its terms of reference and governance structure. The board aims to publish its first report on the global state of preparedness in September 2019.

“Despite all the progress we have made, the world remains vulnerable,” said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. “The Global Preparedness Monitoring Board brings together deep experience and expertise to help keep the world safe.”

“There’s no substitute for preparedness, and investing in it should be a top priority for the entire global community,” said Dr Jim Yong Kim, President of the World Bank Group. “It is important that countries are beginning to take pandemic preparedness much more seriously.”
The GPMB has its origins in the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, which devastated thousands of families, damaged economies and shook the world.

Since then, WHO has undergone major transformation, with the establishment of its health emergencies programme. In the Organization’s new strategic 5-year plan, one of the three “triple billion” targets for 2023 is to see 1 billion people better protected from health emergencies.

The World Bank has also established the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility and made its first cash disbursement to the Ebola outbreak in Democratic Republic of the Congo in May this year. As part of its IDA 18 commitment, the World Bank is supporting the development of pandemic preparedness plans in 25 low- and lower-middle income countries. It is also investing in preparedness in several countries in the East Asia and Pacific region, and in strengthening regional disease surveillance and monitoring capacity across East and West Africa.

Most importantly, countries and communities have embraced the need for preparedness, with WHO’s Member States recommitting to establishing the capacities required under the International Health Regulations and dozens requesting Joint External Evaluations.

Philanthropic Community Announces $4 Billion Commitment to Combat Climate Change

Heritage Stewardship – Climate Change

Philanthropic Community Announces $4 Billion Commitment to Combat Climate Change
Pledge Marks Largest-ever Philanthropic Investment in Climate Mitigation
San Francisco – Sept. 14, 2018 – Today 29 philanthropists pledged $4 billion over the next five years to combat climate change—the largest-ever philanthropic investment focused on climate change mitigation. The announcement, made at the Global Climate Action Summit (GCAS) in San Francisco, represents a broad global commitment to accelerate proven climate and clean-energy strategies, spur innovation and support organizations around the world working to protect the air they breathe and the communities they call home…

All told, 29 organizations from the United States and around the globe have committed this funding to advance affordable, low- and zero-carbon solutions to reduce the harmful emissions that cause climate change. The investments will support a vast array of strategies, with an emphasis on those addressing the five key challenge areas addressed this week at GCAS—healthy energy systems, inclusive economic growth, sustainable communities, land and ocean stewardship and transformative climate investments….

Committed, forward-looking investments total more than $4 billion, including $600 million first announced by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation in December 2017, as well as more than $3 billion in funding that has not been previously been announced. Much of this investment will support local organizations working on the frontlines of climate change. The funding will propel the expansion of successful local efforts to solve the climate crisis and allow those most affected by the climate crisis to shape the solutions to it….


Each day brings new evidence of climate change affecting lives—from extreme weather events, to increased food insecurity, to tragic impacts on human health. We see the suffering that a steadily warming planet is causing to people around the world.

But we also see hope. And we see the real actions that are being taken to address one of the biggest challenges our planet and its people have ever faced. Clean energy markets are scaling, governments are stepping forward, and people across the globe are rising to solve this problem.

As climate philanthropists, we are committed to supporting the vast array of solutions required to tackle this global problem. We know that every moment, and every dollar, counts. Which is why we are proud to announce today the joint commitment of more than $4 billion over the next five years to combat climate change.

While today’s announcement is the largest climate-related philanthropic commitment ever made, we know that it is only a down payment. Everyone has a role to play—and philanthropy must be prepared to invest many billions more.

By working together, sharing knowledge, welcoming new partners, and harnessing the actions of governments, the private sector and everyday citizens, the philanthropic community can be a catalyst in the fight against our world’s greatest threat.

The investment we are committing to today will help accelerate proven climate strategies, spur the innovation and adoption of promising solutions, catalyze action at the national and local levels, and support the movement made up of millions of people fighting to protect the air they breathe and the communities they call home.

The next few years will determine whether the world can slow our global temperature’s rapid rise. As philanthropists, we are committed to doing our part—and to engaging on climate change like never before.

Barr Foundation
Bloomberg Philanthropies
Bullitt Foundation
Sir Christopher Hohn and The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF)
The Educational Foundation of America
Pirojsha Godrej Foundation
Grantham Foundation
The Grove Foundation
Growald Family Fund
The George Gund Foundation
Heising-Simons Foundation
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
IKEA Foundation
Ivey Foundation
Joyce Foundation
The JPB Foundation
KR Foundation
Kresge Foundation
Dee & Richard Lawrence and OIF
John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
McKinney Family Foundation
McKnight Foundation
Oak Foundation
The David and Lucile Packard Foundation
Pisces Foundation
Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF)
Sea Change Foundation
Turner Foundation
Yellow Chair Foundation

Joint Statement Supporting Forests, Rights, and Lands for Climate

Heritage Stewardship – Forests, Land Use, Rights

Joint Statement Supporting Forests, Rights, and Lands for Climate
Funders Stand Together in Support of Forests, Rights, and Lands for Climate
Climate and Land Use Alliance – This statement was released on the 11th of September 2018 on the eve of the Global Climate Action Summit in San Francisco, California.

“As leaders of philanthropic organizations, we are participating in the Global Climate Action Summit by stepping up our support to protect, restore, and expand forests, make land use more sustainable, and secure the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, who are the best stewards of their lands, territories, and forests.

Forests and lands are critical to the fight against climate change. They already remove 30% of the carbon emissions added to the atmosphere each year, and could provide an additional 30% of the mitigation needed by 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. But forests and lands receive only 3% of the funding for climate action. If we hope to achieve global climate goals, investments in conserving forests and lands must urgently increase to match their potential for slowing climate change.

Together, we support:
:: Land use policies and finance that help achieve ambitious climate targets and contribute to sustainable development.
:: Policies that protect and recognize the role of forests and sustainable land use in supporting rural livelihoods and alleviating poverty.
:: Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ land rights and management of forests, and an end to the violence against and criminalization of environmental defenders.
:: Expanded, protected, and restored national parks, conservation areas, and forests that respect the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and their right to free, prior, and informed consent; and
:: Agricultural production and investments that support a transition to sustainable food systems, do not cause deforestation or rural violence, preserve biodiversity, and improve soil health.

Through our funding commitments to these shared priorities, we hope to inspire new and deeper investments – from other foundations, from governments, and from businesses – to finance a shift toward sustainable and rights-based land use and forest management and away from short-term resource depletion that leaves communities, economies, and the planet impoverished.

Forests are fundamental to life on Earth. Billions of people depend on forests for food, water, fuel, shelter, and medicine. Forests support biodiversity, including a rich array of plant and animal life, and provide clean water and clean air. Diverse indigenous and local cultures have traditions, beliefs, and livelihoods that are inextricably tied to forests. Their guardianship of forests and lands is vital. Healthy forests make the world more resilient to the impacts of climate change and are essential to securing a more stable, livable climate for us all.

We stand together in our resolve to conserve the world’s forests and lands for the benefit of all people and the planet.”

American Jewish World Service
Arapyaú Foundation
Christensen Fund
ClimateWorks Foundation
David and Lucile Packard Foundation
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
Ford Foundation
Good Energies Foundation
Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation
Mulago Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation
Swift Foundation
Tamalpais Trust
Tata Trusts
Thousand Currents
United Nations Foundation

Report: More than 65 Ways Blockchain Technology Can Fix Global Environmental Challenges – WEF

Development/Heritage Stewardship/Humanitarian Response – Blockchain

Report: More than 65 Ways Blockchain Technology Can Fix Global Environmental Challenges
14 Sep2018
· Blockchain applications could disrupt how the world manages environmental resources, helping to drive sustainable growth and value creation
· This opportunity remains largely untapped by developers, investors and governments as the majority of projects are currently focused on areas like fintech and supply chains
· New global platforms are urgently needed to incubate a responsible blockchain ecosystem rather than specific projects

Building Block(chain)s for a Better Planet
World Economic Forum – In collaboration with PwC and Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment
September 2018 :: 37 pages
PDF: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Building-Blockchains.pdf

Principal findings
Our research and analysis identified more than 65 existing and emerging blockchain use-cases for the environment through desk-based research and interviews with a range of stakeholders at the forefront of applying blockchain across industry, big tech, entrepreneurs, research and government.

Blockchain use-case solutions that are particularly relevant across environmental applications tend to cluster around the following cross-cutting themes: enabling the transition to cleaner and more efficient decentralized systems; peer-to-peer trading of resources or permits; supply-chain transparency and management; new financing models for environmental outcomes; and the realization of non-financial value and natural capital.

The report also identifies enormous potential to create blockchain-enabled “game changers” that have the ability to deliver transformative solutions to environmental challenges. These game changers have the potential to disrupt, or substantially optimize, the systems that are critical to addressing many environmental challenges.

A high-level summary of those game changers is outlined below:
“See-through” supply chains: blockchain can create undeniable (and potentially unavoidable) transparency in supply chains. Recording transactional data throughout the supply chain on a blockchain and establishing an immutable record of provenance (i.e. origin) offers the potential for full
traceability of products from source to store. Providing such transparency creates an opportunity to optimize supply-and-demand management, build resilience and ultimately enable more sustainable production, logistics and consumer choice.

Decentralized and sustainable resource management: blockchain can underpin a transition to decentralized utility systems at scale. Platforms could collate distributed data on resources (e.g. household-level water and energy data from smart sensors) to end the current asymmetry of information that exists between stakeholders, enabling more informed – and even decentralized – decision-making regarding system design and management of resources. This could include
peer-to-peer transactions, dynamic pricing and optimal demand-supply balancing.

Raising the trillions – new sources of sustainable finance: blockchain-enabled finance platforms could potentially revolutionize access to capital and unlock potential for new investors in projects that address environmental challenges – from retail-level investment in 6 Building Block(chain)s for a Better Planet green infrastructure projects through to enabling blended finance or charitable donations for developing countries. On a broader level, there is the potential for blockchain to facilitate a system shift from shareholder to stakeholder value, and to expand traditional financial capital accounting to also capture social and environmental capital. Collectively, these changes could help raise the trillions of dollars needed to finance a shift to low-carbon and environmentally sustainable economies.

Incentivizing circular economies: blockchain could fundamentally change the way in which materials and natural resources are valued and traded, incentivizing individuals, companies and governments to unlock financial value from things that are currently wasted, discarded or treated as economically invaluable. This could drive widespread behaviour change and help to realize a truly
circular economy.

Transforming carbon (and other environmental) markets: blockchain platforms could be harnessed to use cryptographic tokens with a tradable value to optimize existing market platforms for carbon (or other substances) and create new opportunities for carbon credit transactions.

Next-gen sustainability monitoring, reporting and verification: blockchain has the potential to transform both sustainability reporting and assurance, helping companies manage, demonstrate and improve their performance, while enabling consumers and investors to make better-informed decisions. This could drive a new wave of accountability and action, as this information filters up to board-level managers and provides them with a more complete picture for managing risk and reward profiles.

Automatic disaster preparedness and humanitarian relief: blockchain could underpin a new shared system for multiple parties involved in disaster preparedness and relief to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, coordination and trust of resources. An interoperable decentralized system could enable the sharing of information (e.g. individual relief activities transparent to all other parties within the distributed network) and rapid automated transactions via smart contracts. This could improve efficiencies in the immediate aftermath of disasters, which is the most critical time for limiting loss of life and other human impacts.
[See more detail from p.20 below]

Earth-management platforms: new blockchain-enabled geospatial platforms, which enable a range of value-based transactions, are in the early stages of exploration and could monitor, manage and enable market mechanisms that protect the global environmental commons – from life on land to ocean health. Such applications are further away in terms of technical and logistical feasibility, but they remain exciting to contemplate.

These game changers, and the more than 65 use-cases identified, offer the exciting potential to build a sustainable future; however, as with many emerging technologies, there are a number of risks to manage and challenges to overcome. In broad terms, the challenges relate to blockchain’s maturity as a technology, regulatory and legal challenges, stakeholders’ trust in the technology, and their willingness to invest and participate in applications…


7. Automatic disaster preparedness and humanitarian relief
As the frequency and scale of natural catastrophes increases, in part due to a changing climate, there is an increasing need both to prepare for when foreseeable natural disasters strike and to manage better real-time relief responses, e.g. coordinating and financing rapid support and supplies to people and areas where the need is greatest. Blockchain solutions could be transformational in terms of their ability to improve disaster preparedness and relief effectiveness.

Blockchain solutions are starting to be developed to realize Fourth Industrial Revolution-enabled disaster preparedness. IBM, for example, is spearheading a new initiative called “Call for Code”, working with the American Red Cross, to invite developers to create new applications to help people and communities better prepare for natural disasters.69 Concept-stage blockchain solutions are being proposed to mobilize public and private organizations to coordinate real-time disaster relief, matching community needs with least-cost suppliers. For example, connecting suppliers of clean drinking water with the helicopter pilots delivering that water could help ensure that deliveries are scheduled at specific locations within certain time frames.70 To enable this solution, smart-contract technology can determine which contract offer is the best one available based on the delivery needs of the community, including quantity, price, timing and location. The smart contract can trigger acceptance of the offer, and set in motion the delivery as well as confirming the delivery has taken place. SAP is involved in working on, and promoting, these types of “pooling and sharing” solutions, which could fundamentally shift how public and private organizations can be mobilized in the event of a natural disaster.71

An important challenge here will be to integrate disaster preparedness and relief platforms into existing early warning and mobilization systems, across both public and private entities. Ensuring adequate trust and resolving intellectual property (IP) and data privacy issues will be particularly important. Further challenges might arise in developing countries where IT systems might not yet be Fourth Industrial Revolution-compatible without significant investment and upgrades.

69. IBM, IBM Leads “Call for Code” to Use Cloud, Data, AI, Blockchain, for Natural Disaster Relief, 24 May 2018: http://newsroom. ibm.com/2018-05-24-IBM-Leads-Call-for-Code-to-Use-
Cloud-Data-AI-Blockchain-for-Natural-Disaster-Relief (link as of 03/09/18).
70. Galer, S., Blockchain to the Rescue: We Can Be Much Better at Weathering Natural Disasters, D!gitalist, 7 November 2017: https://digitalistmag.com/improving-lives/2017/11/07/blockchainto-
(link as of 03/09/18).
71. Ibid.

Aid agencies call on world powers to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe in Idlib

Syria – Idlib

Briefing Security Council, Special Envoy for Syria Warns of ‘Perfect Storm’ with Severe Humanitarian Consequences Taking Shape in Idlib
7 September 2018
The Syrian Government and its partners — currently poised at the brink of a massive military strike against the north west province of Idlib — must urgently rethink its strategy, the Security Council heard today, as delegates sounded the alarm about such repercussions as mass civilian casualties and the flood of up to 700,000 refugees into neighbouring countries, Europe and beyond.


Aid agencies call on world powers to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe in Idlib
Friday 7 September 2018
Millions of civilians trapped in Idlib face the prospect of the greatest humanitarian catastrophe in Syria’s seven-year war, should there be a major military escalation in the country’s North West. Eight leading aid agencies are calling on world leaders meeting Friday to urgently work together to avoid this horrific scenario.

The presidents of Iran, Russia, and Turkey will meet in Tehran to discuss the situation in Syria, and later in the day a similar discussion will take place, in New York at the United Nations Security Council. In both meetings, participants, some of whom are actively involved in the conflict, must ensure they work together to uphold international humanitarian law and human rights, protect civilians, including aid workers, and civilian infrastructure, and allow unimpeded access to humanitarian agencies.

Aid agencies working in the governorate are already overwhelmed trying to provide shelter, food, water, schooling and healthcare across communities that have already doubled in size, having welcomed almost 1.5 million people displaced by the conflict. Many of those families arrived in Idlib having left areas previously retaken by Government forces, and with little more than the clothes on their back.

Once again, it will be the most vulnerable who will pay the heaviest price, with women, children, and the elderly in Idlib unlikely to be able to move to safety. Healthcare facilities, schools, water sources and other vital infrastructure in Idlib have already sustained heavy damage in this conflict, and pushed aid workers to work in difficult circumstances. Additional airstrikes and bombings will push already stretched resources to the brink.

In the event that aid organisations are forced to freeze their operations as a result of an offensive, vulnerable civilians will be left without vital humanitarian support. Meanwhile organisations operating from government-controlled areas currently lack access to Idlib and funding to meet the full range of humanitarian needs.

It is vital that world leaders take this opportunity to work together on a diplomatic solution that can protect civilians from a major increase in violence.

CARE International
Danish Refugee Council (DRC)
Humanity & Inclusion
International Rescue Committee (IRC)
Mercy Corps
Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC)
Save the Children
World Vision

High-Level Conference in Berlin commits to comprehensive crisis response in the Lake Chad Region as donors announce US$2.17 billion in support; US$467 million in concessional loans

Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus – Lake Chad Region

High-Level Conference in Berlin commits to comprehensive crisis response in the Lake Chad Region as donors announce US$2.17 billion in support; US$467 million in concessional loans
Report from UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
Published on 04 Sep 2018
:: Conference highlights the regional dimension of the Lake Chad crisis, the crucial role of local actors, cross-border cooperation and ownership at all levels
:: Donors announce US$2.17 billion to support humanitarian, peacebuilding and development activities in Cameroon, Chad, Niger and Nigeria; multilateral financial institutions announce US$467 million in concessional loans
:: Stakeholders commit to address the immediate and longer-term needs and help build the resilience of millions of crisis-affected people in the Lake Chad region

Berlin, 4 September 2018 – The High-Level Conference on the Lake Chad Region concluded today with renewed commitments by participants to work together to address the multi-faceted crisis affecting the region. More than 70 countries, international organizations and civil society actors gathered in Berlin on 3-4 September to discuss solutions to bring peace and stability to the affected countries. The participants discussed humanitarian assistance, crisis prevention and stabilization, as well as development, to chart a way forward for a comprehensive and inclusive response. The conference provided an excellent opportunity for in-depth discussions on various aspects that had been raised during the 2017 Oslo Humanitarian Conference on Nigeria and the Lake Chad Region.

More than 17 million people across north-eastern Nigeria and parts of Cameroon, Chad and Niger are facing a complex crisis driven by extreme poverty, climate change and violent conflict. As a result, more than 2.4 million people are displaced and over 10 million people need assistance to meet their basic protection and humanitarian needs. Participants agreed that a coherent, multi-year approach is needed that integrates all available instruments to tackle the protection crisis and the root causes of the conflict. This is needed to pave the way for sustainable and resilient development of the region, and thus contribute to a better future for the affected people….


Statement on the Lake Chad Region – Berlin Humanitarian Conference
by Dr Rick Brennan, WHO Director of Emergency Operations
Berlin, Germany
3 September 2018

Distinguished delegates,
As others have observed today, the narrative and dialogue around the Lake Chad Basin crisis has matured significantly since we met in Oslo last year.

We need to make the humanitarian-development peace nexus concrete. There is a general recognition that robust and principled humanitarian action is necessary – but not sufficient – to meet the needs of the people in the region. There is also an acknowledgment that root causes must be met, resilience of communities and institutions built, and the humanitarian-development-peace nexus operationalized.

Our challenge remains to shift from agreeing on these concepts and principles, to ensuring their concrete implementation – and to identify the solutions that Mark Lowcock constantly urges us to develop.

There are unique opportunities for effective implementation of the New Way or Working within the Lake Chad Basin sub-region, especially within the health sector. In fact, there is probably no better opportunity in the world today than the Lake Chad Basin region to demonstrate that it is possible to effectively implement the New Way of Working. And it is the view of WHO and our health sector partners, that health presents unique opportunities in this regard.

Humanitarian health response has been effective to date and must be sustained. Humanitarian health action has already documented some remarkable achievements over the past two years in Northeast Nigeria. Through progressively expanding access to essential health services – and working in collaboration with other life-saving sectors – we have documented a sharp drop in mortality in Northeast Nigeria. Mortality rates, which were dramatically elevated above emergency thresholds early in the response, are now within normal limits, at least among those populations to whom we have access. Last year, a collaborative malaria control effort with the Ministry of Health, UNICEF and other partners averted at least 6500 childhood deaths due to malaria. We have also jointly responded effectively to major outbreaks of measles, cholera, meningitis and polio. You may recall that polio established its foothold back in Africa due to the crisis in Northeast Nigeria.

Resilience in the health sector must be built at individual and systems levels. While we all aim to maintain a strong humanitarian response for the short-to medium- term, we see several important opportunities to build the resilience of both individuals and the health system. Firstly, there are few factors that make individuals more resilient physically and mentally than good health and strong nutritional status. Continued strengthening of the coverage and quality of essential health services will help to ensure that individuals are both resistant to disease and recover more rapidly when they do become ill.

Similarly, we need to make the health system itself resilient. Perhaps the best example of this is through building its capacities to prevent, detect and respond to outbreaks of infectious diseases. The Lake Chad region is remarkably prone to outbreaks of disease that have crossed borders, such as meningitis, cholera and hepatitis E. Building capacities for disease surveillance, laboratory diagnosis, and rapid response is vital to the resilience of any health system – and this is nowhere more evident than in the Lake Chad region.

Good governance is essential for sustainable health system development. We also need to be concrete about how we lay the foundations of longer-term health system recovery and development. This can be a complex process, as we have learned in other contexts. But I would like to highlight a sine qua non for sustainable development within the health sector – and that is good governance and leadership. All of the support from international partners will come to naught in the longer term unless authorities at all levels take strong ownership of the health system, ensure transparent management processes and provide an inclusive voice for communities. Involvement of civil society and the private sector has been demonstrated to contribute to health system recovery in several examples and we need to accelerate this process in the context of Lake Chad.

The health sector can contribute to peacebuilding. Finally, the health sector can play its own modest role in advancing peace and reconciliation. Public health campaigns can be opportunities for humanitarian pauses and can be a leading wedge for opening up humanitarian access. Polio vaccinations have helped to open access for other health services in Northeast Nigeria, for example. Re-establishing health services can be a confidence and trust-building process. This is especially true when they are extended to populations who have historically been neglected by central authorities and when they are designed to address longer-term inequities.

In summary, ladies and gentlemen, we must collectively move from agreeing on what needs to be done, to taking concrete steps to implement the humanitarian-development-peace nexus across all sectors. Conceptual frameworks and good intentions and are not enough – we must implement, and we must do so with the full engagement of communities and national partners.

UN Human Rights Chief applauds Indian Supreme Court decision to decriminalize same-sex relationships

Human Rights – India

UN Human Rights Chief applauds Indian Supreme Court decision to decriminalize same-sex relationships
GENEVA (7 September 2018) – The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet on Friday applauded the decision by the Indian Supreme Court to decriminalize consensual same sex relations.

“This is a great day for India and for all those who believe in the universality of human rights,” Bachelet said. “With this landmark decision, the Indian Supreme Court has taken a big step forward for freedom and equality. I hope that other courts elsewhere in the world will look to India’s example and be encouraged to move in the same direction.”

Laws that criminalize consensual same-sex relations violate fundamental rights including the rights to privacy and freedom from discrimination.

“Throughout the world such laws have led to a litany of abuses against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people including arbitrary arrests, violence, bullying in schools, denial of access to health and harassment at work,” the High Commissioner said. “Such discriminatory laws have no place in the 21st century, and I’m delighted the Indian Supreme Court has recognised that. Yesterday’s decision, which was unanimous and may not be appealed, effectively settles the matter in India once and for all.”

The most immediate effect of the Supreme Court’s ruling is that section 377 of the Indian Penal Code – a colonial era law – will no longer criminalize consensual same sex relations in private. But its real impact is likely to be much wider: by decriminalizing same sex relationships, the court has sent a powerful signal that LGBT people are equal and valued members of the Indian community.

“While the decision on section 377 will not achieve equality overnight,” Bachelet said, “it does pave the way for greater inclusion and acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in India, and over time may help dispel the stigma associated with being LGBT.” She urged the authorities to move swiftly to build on the court’s decision by introducing new measures to protect the rights of LGBT people – including effective anti-discrimination measures.

The High Commissioner also paid tribute to the LGBT community in India, “particularly to the many LGBT activists and their allies in the human rights movement who worked so hard and waited so long for this moment.”…

Infants distinguish between leaders and bullies – PNAS

Featured Journal Content

PNAS – Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
[Accessed 8 Sep 2018]

Infants distinguish between leaders and bullies
Francesco Margoni, Renée Baillargeon, and Luca Surian
PNAS published ahead of print September 4, 2018 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1801677115
Prior research indicates that infants can represent power asymmetries and expect them to both endure over time and extend across situations. Building on these efforts, we examined whether 21-month-old infants could distinguish between two different bases of social power. Infants first saw three protagonists interact with a powerful character who was either a leader (with respect-based power) or a bully (with fear-based power). Next, the character gave an order to the protagonists. Infants expected the protagonists to continue to obey the leader’s order after she left the scene, but they expected the protagonists to obey the bully’s order only when she remained present. Thus, by 21 months of age, infants can already distinguish between respect-based and fear-based power relations.
We examined whether 21-month-old infants could distinguish between two broad types of social power: respect-based power exerted by a leader (who might be an authority figure with legitimate power, a prestigious individual with merited power, or some combination thereof) and fear-based power exerted by a bully. Infants first saw three protagonists interact with a character who was either a leader (leader condition) or a bully (bully condition). Next, the character gave an order to the protagonists, who initially obeyed; the character then left the scene, and the protagonists either continued to obey (obey event) or no longer did so (disobey event). Infants in the leader condition looked significantly longer at the disobey than at the obey event, suggesting that they expected the protagonists to continue to obey the leader in her absence. In contrast, infants in the bully condition looked equally at the two events, suggesting that they viewed both outcomes as plausible: The protagonists might continue to obey the absent bully to prevent further harm, or they might disobey her because her power over them weakened in her absence. Additional results supported these interpretations: Infants expected obedience when the bully remained in the scene and could harm the protagonists if defied, but they expected disobedience when the order was given by a character with little or no power over the protagonists. Together, these results indicate that by 21 months of age, infants already hold different expectations for subordinates’ responses to individuals with respect-based as opposed to fear-based power.

Armed conflict and child mortality in Africa: a geospatial analysis – The Lancet

Featured Journal Content

The Lancet
Sep 01, 2018 Volume 392 Number 10149 p711-794
Childhood mortality during conflicts in Africa
Emelda A Okiro, Philip Ayieko
Published: August 30, 2018DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31373-4
The International humanitarian law differentiates two types of armed conflicts: international (between states) and non-international (domestic). 1 Since 1989, 75% of non-state armed conflicts have been in Africa. 2 Children and women bear most of the burden of these events. Childhood deaths due to conflicts present a real threat to the achievement of the global target of ending preventable deaths of children by 2030. 3 Despite the link between armed conflicts and direct deaths (combat-related) and indirect deaths (excess mortality because of worsening health disparities and disruption of basic health services), most assessments of childhood deaths done to date have not explicitly incorporated the effect of conflicts on child survival. 4 The need to address this gap takes on a greater urgency in the African region, where there has been a flare-up in both intensity and magnitude of armed conflicts. 5,, 6

Armed conflict and child mortality in Africa: a geospatial analysis
Zachary Wagner, Sam Heft-Neal, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Robert E Black, Marshall Burke, Eran Bendavid
A substantial portion of child deaths in Africa take place in countries with recent history of armed conflict and political instability. However, the extent to which armed conflict is an important cause of child mortality, especially in Africa, remains unknown.
We matched child survival with proximity to armed conflict using information in the Uppsala Conflict Data Program Georeferenced Events Dataset on the location and intensity of armed conflict from 1995 to 2015 together with the location, timing, and survival of infants younger than 1 year (primary outcome) in 35 African countries. We measured the increase in mortality risk for infants exposed to armed conflicts within 50 km in the year of birth and, to study conflicts’ extended health risks, up to 250 km away and 10 years before birth. We also examined the effects of conflicts of varying intensity and chronicity (conflicts lasting several years), and effect heterogeneity by residence and sex of the child. We then estimated the number and portion of deaths of infants younger than 1 year related to conflict.
We identified 15,441 armed conflict events that led to 968,444 combat-related deaths and matched these data with 1·99 million births and 133,361 infant deaths (infant mortality of 67 deaths per 1000 births) between 1995 and 2015. A child born within 50 km of an armed conflict had a risk of dying before reaching age 1 year of 5·2 per 1000 births higher than being born in the same region during periods without conflict (95% CI 3·7–6·7; a 7·7% increase above baseline). This increased risk of dying ranged from a 3·0% increase for armed conflicts with one to four deaths to a 26·7% increase for armed conflicts with more than 1000 deaths. We find evidence of increased mortality risk from an armed conflict up to 100 km away, and for 8 years after conflicts, with cumulative increase in infant mortality two to four times higher than the contemporaneous increase. In the entire continent, the number of infant deaths related to conflict from 1995 to 2015 was between 3·2 and 3·6 times the number of direct deaths from armed conflicts.
Armed conflict substantially and persistently increases infant mortality in Africa, with effect sizes on a scale with malnutrition and several times greater than existing estimates of the mortality burden of conflict. The toll of conflict on children, who are presumably not combatants, underscores the indirect toll of conflict on civilian populations, and the importance of developing interventions to address child health in areas of conflict.
The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and the Centre for Global Child Health at the Hospital for Sick Children.



Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)
Polio this week as of 4 September 2018 [GPEI]
The Johns Hopkins University is leading a project to document lessons learned from GPEI, and translating those lessons to improve delivery of other lifesaving health programmes and strengthening health systems globally. Read more and learn how you can contribute: GPEI Lessons Learned Project.

Summary of new viruses this week:
Afghanistan – One new case of wild poliovirus (WPV1).
Pakistan – One new case of wild poliovirus (WPV1).
Afghanistan and Pakistan continue to detect WPV1 through environmental sampling, indicating sustained transmission
Papua New Guinea – three new cases of circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 1 (cVDPV1).
Somalia – two new cases of circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 (cVDPV2).


GPEI Lessons Learned Project
The Johns Hopkins University is leading a project to document lessons learned from GPEI, and translating those lessons to improve delivery of other lifesaving health programmes and strengthening health systems globally.

As an initial step in the project, a global survey is underway to map tacit knowledge of GPEI actors about implementation challenges (and the contexts in which those arose).

The specific objectives of the survey are:
:: Map tacit knowledge (ideas, approaches and experiences that were not documented, but relevant for both intended and unintended results) about GPEI under various context typologies
:: Identify key facilitators for GPEI programme implementation
:: Identify key implementation challenges, the level where they originated from (global, national, subnational), and how they were resolved.

The target audience for the global survey includes:
:: Individuals who have been directly involved in implementing activities under the GPEI between 1988 to date. Implementing activities refer to all cycles of implementation, including GPEI-related funding, policy, programming, and research cycles. The population includes individuals who have spent 12 or more continuous months working on activities under the GPEI between 1988 to date.

If you meet the specifications of the target audience, your participation is requested in this online survey, which takes approximately 15-30 minutes.

How to participate in the survey
Access to the survey can be granted by reaching out to the project team at poliolessonslearned@gmail.com with your name and organization.

Editor’s Note:
WHO has posted a refreshed emergencies page which presents an updated listing of Grade 3,2,1 emergencies as below.

WHO Grade 3 Emergencies  [to 15 Sep 2018]
Bangladesh – Rohingya crisis
:: Using local materials to build health facilities  12 September 2018
:: Weekly Situation Report 42 – 6 September 2018pdf, 220kb

  • The next round of oral cholera campaign (OCV) will begin on 6 October 2018, targeting 327 364 people.
  • Acute Respiratory Infection (ARI) and suspected malaria cases are showing an increasing trend.
  • A total of nine Mobile Medical Teams were deployed in week 35. Primary health care and dental care services were provided to 3 375 people across 13 camps.


  • According to the Needs and Population Monitoring (NPM) exercise, there are an estimated 919 000 Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazar as of 22 July 2018. Of these, 706 364 are new arrivals since 25 August 2017.
  • More heavy rain from the current monsoon season and the second season of cyclones and monsoons toward the end of the year will increase the risk of water-borne diseases such as cholera and hepatitis A and vector-borne diseases such as malaria, dengue and chikungunya.

Democratic Republic of the Congo
:: 06: Situation report on the Ebola outbreak in North Kivu 11 September 2018
:: Disease Outbreak News (DONs) – Ebola virus disease – Democratic Republic of the Congo
14 September 2018
[See Milestones above for more detail]

:: WHO statement on the health situation in Yemen  7 September 2018
Dr Ahmed Al Mandhari, WHO Regional Director for the Eastern Mediterranean
[See Milestones above for more detail]

Iraq – No new announcements identified
Nigeria – No new announcements identified
Somalia – No new announcements identified
South Sudan – No new announcements identified
Syrian Arab Republic – No new announcements identified

WHO Grade 2 Emergencies  [to 15 Sep 2018]
Cameroon  – See below
Central African Republic  – See below
Hurricane Irma and Maria in the Caribbean – No new announcements identified
occupied Palestinian territory – No new announcements identified
Libya – No new announcements identified
Myanmar – No new announcements identified
South Africa Listeriosis (2017) – See below
Sudan – No new announcements identified
Ukraine – No new announcements identified
Sao Tome and Principe Necrotizing Cellulitis (2017) – No new announcements identified

Outbreaks and Emergencies Bulletin, Week 36: 1 – 7 September 2018
The WHO Health Emergencies Programme is currently monitoring 55 events in the region. This week’s edition covers key ongoing events, including:
:: Declaration of the end of the listeriosis outbreak in South Africa
:: Ebola virus disease in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
:: Cholera in Niger
:: Cholera in Cameroon
:: Hepatitis E in Namibia
:: Humanitarian crisis in Central African Republic.

WHO Grade 1 Emergencies  [to 15 Sep 2018]
Angola (in Portuguese)
Lao People’s Democratic Republic
Papua New Guinea
Tropical Cyclone Gira
UN OCHA – L3 Emergencies
The UN and its humanitarian partners are currently responding to three ‘L3’ emergencies. This is the global humanitarian system’s classification for the response to the most severe, large-scale humanitarian crises. 
:: Yemen Humanitarian Update Covering 27 August – 6 September 2018 | Issue 26
Published on 06 Sep 2018
:: As the depreciation of the Yemeni Rial continues, a further 3.5 million people may become food insecure and an additional 2 million may face a heightened risk of famine.
:: The conflict in Yemen continues to exact a heavy toll on civilians. In August, 241 civilian impact incidents were reported.
:: Humanitarian partners continue to work to prevent a third outbreak of cholera; some 133,000 suspected cholera cases have been confirmed since January…

Syrian Arab Republic   No new announcements identified.


UN OCHA – Corporate Emergencies
When the USG/ERC declares a Corporate Emergency Response, all OCHA offices, branches and sections provide their full support to response activities both at HQ and in the field.
Ethiopia  – No new announcements identified.
Somalia   No new announcements identified.

The Sentinel

Human Rights Action :: Humanitarian Response :: Health :: Education :: Heritage Stewardship ::
Sustainable Development
Week ending 1 September 2018

This weekly digest is intended to aggregate and distill key content from a broad spectrum of practice domains and organization types including key agencies/IGOs, NGOs, governments, academic and research institutions, consortia and collaborations, foundations, and commercial organizations. We also monitor a spectrum of peer-reviewed journals and general media channels. The Sentinel’s geographic scope is global/regional but selected country-level content is included. We recognize that this spectrum/scope yields an indicative and not an exhaustive product. Comments and suggestions should be directed to:

David R. Curry
GE2P2 Global Foundation – Governance, Evidence, Ethics, Policy, Practice

PDF – The Sentinel_ period ending 1 Sep 2018

:: Week in Review  [See selected posts just below]
:: Key Agency/IGO/Governments Watch – Selected Updates from 30+ entities   [see PDF]
:: INGO/Consortia/Joint Initiatives Watch – Media Releases, Major Initiatives, Research:: Foundation/Major Donor Watch -Selected Updates  [see PDF]
:: Journal Watch – Key articles and abstracts from 100+ peer-reviewed journals  [see PDF]

Myanmar’s Refugee Problem among World’s Worst Humanitarian, Human Rights Crises, Secretary-General Says in Briefing to Security Council

Myanmar – “Refugee Problem”

Myanmar’s Refugee Problem among World’s Worst Humanitarian, Human Rights Crises, Secretary-General Says in Briefing to Security Council
28 August 2018
Fact-Finding Mission’s Impartiality Questioned as Bangladesh Stresses Naypyidaw’s Duty to Build Rohingya’s Trust in Safe, Peaceful Returns
[Editor’s text bolding]
One year after the start of the Rohingya refugee crisis, the Security Council considered today the report issued by the independent fact-finding mission dispatched to that country, which alleges that national security forces committed gross human rights violations and abuses that “undoubtedly amount to the gravest crimes under international law”.

Briefing the 15-member Council, Secretary-General António Guterres said the massive refugee emergency that began in Myanmar’s Rakhine State has become “one of the world’s worst humanitarian and human rights crises”. While condemning attacks against the security forces by extremists in October 2016 and August 2017, he nevertheless emphasized that nothing can ever justify the disproportionate use of force against civilians or the gross human rights violations committed by the Myanmar security forces and their allies.

Regrettably, the Secretary-General continued, Myanmar has refused to cooperate with United Nations human rights entities and mechanisms, despite repeated calls to do so, including by members of the Council. Emphasizing that patterns of violations against ethnic and religious minorities beyond Rakhine must also end in order for genuine democracy to take root, he said unity among Council members was essential.

Also addressing the Council was Tegegnework Gettu, Associate Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), who said that creating sustainable conditions for the voluntary return of refugees from Bangladesh will require comprehensive and durable solutions. Outlining efforts by UNDP and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to create conditions suitable for voluntary returns, he said effective access and streamlined procedures are essential to accessing entire tracts of villages and undertaking area-based programmes that will help to build social cohesion…

…Myanmar’s representative said that his country’s Government does not accept the mandate of the fact-finding mission due to concerns about its impartiality. “I have serious doubt on the intention of the timing of the release of the report,” he added, pointing out that it was released on the eve of today’s Security Council meeting on his country. Addressing deep-rooted and complex issues in Rakhine State is a fundamental and crucial part of the Government’s efforts to build peace and national reconciliation, he stressed.

Representatives of China and the Russian Federation argued that the crisis requires a long-term, patient approach rather than pressure, and must be resolved through bilateral diplomatic efforts.

The representative of Bangladesh called upon the Council to further calibrate its response in light of prevailing circumstances on the ground and emerging evidence of atrocities against the Rohingya. Emphasizing that the return of refugees cannot begin unless the Rohingya themselves regain the trust and confidence to opt voluntarily for repatriation, he declared: “It would be entirely up to the Myanmar authorities to build trust among the Rohingya about their sustainable return and peaceful coexistence with other communities in Rakhine State.”…

UK launches ambition to generate billions more investment in Africa to trigger transformational growth


UK launches ambition to generate billions more investment in Africa to trigger transformational growth
The UK aims to generate up to £8 billion of vital public and private investment in Africa to create jobs and boost growth over the next four years
Published 28 August 2018
:: CDC Group, the UK’s Development Finance Institution, will aim to invest up to £3.5 billion in Africa, supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs.
:: The UK will aim to mobilise a further £4 billion of private investment for African countries, particularly from the City of London.

[Editor’s text bolding]
The UK is announcing a range of measures to boost much-needed investment in businesses and infrastructure across Africa, the Prime Minister announced in Cape Town today (Tuesday 28th August). This includes for the first time ever setting a clear ambition of mobilising an additional £4 billion of private sector investment into the continent by working more closely with the City of London.

This comes as the Prime Minister has today also set a new ambition for the UK to be the largest G7 foreign direct investor in Africa by 2020.

Africa’s population is set to double by 2050 and as many as 18 million extra jobs a year will be needed. There is a chronic need for private and public investment to create better opportunities in Africa to prevent the next generation falling further into poverty, potentially fuelling instability and mass migration with direct consequences for Britain.

But this growth also means that the scale of the opportunity across Africa is huge: according to the IMF, Africa’s GDP is set to reach $3.2 trillion in the next five years.

Home to the City of London, the world’s leading financial centre, the UK is well-positioned to become Africa’s future investment partner of choice. Initiatives announced today in support of this include:
:: CDC, the UK’s Development Finance Institution, will significantly increase its investment into Africa – aiming to invest up to £3.5 billion in businesses on the continent over four years. This will support hundreds of thousands of jobs, build stability and trigger growth in some of the poorest and most fragile countries.
:: A new investment of up to £300 million of UK aid invested through the Private Infrastructure Development Group (PIDG) will build essential infrastructure such as power, roads and water, that will lay the foundations for new trading and business opportunities across Africa in places businesses previously would not have been able to operate…

In addition to announcing a substantial scale up of investment through CDC and PIDG, the UK is setting a clear ambition to mobilise £4 billion of private investment, particularly from the City of London. In total, UK initiatives will generate up to £8 billion (around $10 billion) of investment for African countries between 2018 and 2021.

The UK’s commitment to building bigger, broader economic partnerships with African nations will prove a huge benefit to UK business and investors, while also accelerating the transformational growth needed to lift countries out of poverty for good and to forge mutually beneficial partnerships between the UK and African countries.

The City of London manages over £8 trillion of assets but at the moment only around 1% of those assets are invested in Africa.

This partnership will mobilise further capital from pension funds, insurance companies and other investors, enabling the City to take on an even greater role as Africa’s partner of choice for financial services as the UK leaves the EU.

This will create the opportunity to boost investment returns for the UK’s pension pot, while triggering essential long-term investment for African businesses, transforming the world’s poorest nations into the UK’s trading partners of the future.

As part of this new and distinctive offer to work alongside, invest in and partner with African nations for our mutual benefit, we will be bringing in more ‘Best of British’ experts including extra investment specialists, to work with African governments and businesses to unlock the private sector finance so critical to sustained growth, job creation and tackling poverty.

Fact Sheet: Update on Addressing Gender-Based Violence in Development Projects – World Bank

Human Rights – Gender-based Violence

Fact Sheet: Update on Addressing Gender-Based Violence in Development Projects
World Bank   Factsheet August 30, 2018
Understanding the context of Gender-Based Violence (GBV) in development
:: According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 35% of women worldwide have experienced either physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence or non-partner sexual violence.

:: The effects of violence experienced by women, such as intimate partner violence, are felt at the individual, family, and community levels. Consequences of violence include increased risk for suicide, alcohol abuse, as well as negative impacts on human development outcomes.

:: Gender-based violence has dire economic consequences, costing an estimated 1.2%-3.7% of GDP in some countries due to lost productivity, equivalent to the average spending of low and middle-income countries on primary education.

:: Decreasing GBV requires a community-based, multi-pronged approach, and sustained engagement with multiple stakeholders. The most effective initiatives address underlying risk factors for violence, including social norms regarding gender roles and the acceptability of violence.

:: Low and middle-income countries have fewer quality service available for women experiencing violence.  This impairs their path to recovery.


Learning from the past and partners – evolution of the World Bank’s work on addressing GBV  

:: The World Bank has engaged with countries and partners since 2003 to support projects and knowledge products aimed at preventing and addressing GBV. However, over the last few years, the Bank has ramped up its efforts to more effectively address GBV risks in its operations, including learning from other institutions.

:: The World Bank supports over $250 million in development projects aimed at addressing GBV in World Bank Group (WBG)-financed operations, both through standalone projects and through the integration of GBV components in sector-specific projects in areas such as transport, education, social protection, and forced displacement.

:: The World Bank also conducts analytical work on violence against women and girls, a topic on which there is limited empirical data. For example, Violence against Women and Girls: Lessons from South Asia is the first report of its kind to gather all available data and information on GBV in the region. In partnership with research institutions and other development organizations, the World Bank has also compiled a comprehensive review of the global evidence for effective interventions to prevent or reduce violence against women and girls. These lessons are now informing our work in several sectors, and are captured in sector-specific resources in the VAWG Resource Guide: www.vawgresourceguide.org.

:: The World Bank’s Global Platform on Addressing GBV in Fragile and Conflict-Affected Settings facilitated South-South knowledge sharing through workshops and yearly learning tours, building evidence on what works to prevent GBV, and providing quality services to women, men, and child survivors.  The Platform included a $13 million cross-regional and cross-practice initiative, establishing pilot projects in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Nepal, Papua New Guinea, and Georgia, focused on GBV prevention and mitigation, as well as knowledge and learning activities.

:: In October 2016, the World Bank launched the Global Gender-Based Violence Task Force to strengthen the institution’s efforts to prevent and respond to risks of GBV, and particularly sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) that may arise in World Bank-supported  projects. It builds on existing work by the World Bank and other actors to tackle violence against women and girls through strengthened approaches to identifying and assessing key risks, and developing key mitigations measures to prevent and respond to sexual exploitation and abuse and other forms of GBV.

:: In line with its commitments under IDA 18, the World Bank developed an Action Plan for Implementation of the Task Force’s recommendations, consolidating key actions across institutional priorities linked to enhancing social risk management, strengthening operational systems to enhance accountability, and building staff and client capacity to address risks of GBV through training and guidance materials.

:: In line with recommendations by the Task Force to disseminate lessons learned from past projects, and to sensitize staff on the importance of addressing risks of GBV/SEA, the World Bank has held a series of learning events for staff to share the recommendations of the Task Force and associated Action Plan, and to raise wider awareness of the need to address GBV risks. Additional guidance for staff is being developed in the context of the Bank’s new Environmental and Social Framework.

:: The World Bank regularly convenes a wide range of development stakeholders to address violence against women and girls. For example, WBG President Jim Yong Kim has committed to an annual Development Marketplace competition, together with the Sexual Violence Research Initiative, to encourage researchers from around the world to build the evidence base of what works to prevent GBV.


Addressing GBV, including SEA, in World Bank Group-financed Operations

:: Learning from and working with development partners and client countries, the World Bank has developed a GBV risk assessment tool to assess contextual and project-related risks. The tool is to be used by any project containing civil works, and was tested by the Transport sector, as well as part of GBV risk portfolio reviews undertaken in DRC, Nigeria, Ghana, and Cameroon.

:: The World Bank is piloting innovative uses of social media to change behaviors. For example, in the South Asia region, the pilot program WEvolve used social media to empower young women and men to challenge and break through prevailing norms that underpin gender violence.

:: Learning from the Uganda Transport Sector Development Project and following the Global GBV Task Force’s recommendations, the World Bank started incorporating GBV issues in infrastructure projects in recent years:

In the East Asia and Pacific region, GBV prevention and response interventions – including a code of conduct on sexual exploitation and abuse – are embedded within the Vanuatu Aviation Investment Project.

:: The Liberia Southeastern Corridor Road Asset Management Project, where SEA awareness will be raised, among other strategies, as part of a pilot project to employ women in the use of heavy machinery.

:: The Bolivia Santa Cruz Road Corridor Project uses a three-pronged approach to address potential GBV, including a Code of Conduct for their workers; a Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) that includes a specific mandate to address any kinds gender-based violence; and concrete measures to empower women and to bolster their economic resilience by helping them learn new skills, improve the production and commercialization of traditional arts and crafts, and access more investment opportunities.

:: The Mozambique Integrated Feeder Road Development Project identified SEA as a substantial risk during project preparation and takes a preemptive approach: a Code of Conduct; support to – and guidance for – the survivors in case any instances of SEA were to occur within the context of the project – establishing a “survivor-centered approach” that creates multiple entry points for anyone experiencing SEA to seek the help they need; and these measures are taken in close coordination with local community organizations, and an international NGO Jhpiego, which has extensive experience working in Mozambique.


Stand-alone GBV Operations:

:: In June 2017, the Board approved the $40 million Uganda Strengthening Social Risk Management and Gender-Based Violence Prevention and Response Project. The project focuses on community-based interventions for the prevention of GBV, drawing from several rigorously evaluated approaches, and on strengthening critical sectors to provide quality response services to survivors of GBV. The project also includes an Impact Evaluation focusing on GBV prevention interventions.

:: In the Great Lakes Emergency Sexual and Gender Based Violence & Women’s Health Project, the World Bank approved $107 million in financial grants to Burundi, the DRC, and Rwanda to provide integrated health and counseling services, legal aid, and economic opportunities to survivors of – or those affected by – sexual and gender-based violence. In DRC alone, 40,000 people, including 29,000 women, have received these services and support.

:: In August 2018, the World Bank committed $100 million to help prevent GBV in the DRC. The Gender-Based Violence Prevention and Response Project will reach 795,000 direct beneficiaries over the course of four years. The project will provide help to survivors of GBV, and aim to shift social norms by promoting gender equality and behavioral change through strong partnerships with civil society organizations.