ዘመኑ ባፈራው የቴክኖሎጂ ግብአት በመጠቀም ለህብረተሰባችን ስራ ለሁሉም በሚል ግብ የተሻለ የስራ አማራጭ፣ ለተሻለ ኑሮ፣ ለተሻለ የገበያ ትስስር ፣ ለተቀናጀ የገበያ ተደራሽነት ገዥን ከደንበኛ የማስተሳሰሪያ የቴክኖሎጂ አማራጭ ይዘን መተናል በሁሉም የስራ መስክ በሁሉም የስራ እርከን ስራ ለሚገኙ ባለሙያዎች እና ድርጅቶች የስራ አጋጣሚን መፍጠር
ዘመኑ ባፈራው የቴክኖሎጂ ግብአት በመጠቀም ለህብረተሰባችን ስራ ለሁሉም በሚል ግብ የተሻለ የስራ አማራጭ፣ ለተሻለ ኑሮ፣ ለተሻለ የገበያ ትስስር ፣ ለተቀናጀ የገበያ ተደራሽነት ገዥን ከደንበኛ የማስተሳሰሪያ የቴክኖሎጂ አማራጭ ይዘን መተናል በሁሉም የስራ መስክ በሁሉም የስራ እርከን ስራ ለሚገኙ ባለሙያዎች እና ድርጅቶች የስራ አጋጣሚን መፍጠር
ዘመኑ ባፈራው የቴክኖሎጂ ግብአት በመጠቀም ለህብረተሰባችን ስራ ለሁሉም በሚል ግብ የተሻለ የስራ አማራጭ፣ ለተሻለ ኑሮ፣ ለተሻለ የገበያ ትስስር ፣ ለተቀናጀ የገበያ ተደራሽነት ገዥን ከደንበኛ የማስተሳሰሪያ የቴክኖሎጂ አማራጭ ይዘን መተናል በሁሉም የስራ መስክ በሁሉም የስራ እርከን ስራ ለሚገኙ ባለሙያዎች እና ድርጅቶች የስራ አጋጣሚን መፍጠር
.jpg)
ዘመኑ ባፈራው የቴክኖሎጂ ግብአት በመጠቀም ለህብረተሰባችን ስራ ለሁሉም በሚል ግብ የተሻለ የስራ አማራጭ፣ ለተሻለ ኑሮ፣ ለተሻለ የገበያ ትስስር ፣ ለተቀናጀ የገበያ ተደራሽነት ገዥን ከደንበኛ የማስተሳሰሪያ የቴክኖሎጂ አማራጭ ይዘን መተናል በሁሉም የስራ መስክ በሁሉም የስራ እርከን ስራ ለሚገኙ ባለሙያዎች እና ድርጅቶች የስራ አጋጣሚን መፍጠር
E-Commerce
Hotel Booking
Rent
Item Tenders
Service Tenders
Bids
Job Vaccancy
Freelancing Job
Service Booking
Entertailment
Search
Austria's far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ) has opened the door to a new era, its leader Herbert Kickl has told supporters, as they celebrated an unprecedented election victory.
Kickl's party won 29.2% of the vote according to official provisional results - almost three points ahead of the conservative People's Party (ÖVP) on 26.5%, but far short of a majority.
Kickl's victory is only the latest in a string of far-right election successes in Europe and he praised voters for their "optimism, courage and trust" in delivering a "piece of history".
The FPÖ has been in coalition before, but the second-placed ÖVP has refused to take part in a government led by Kickl.Kickl's main rival, incumbent Chancellor Karl Nehammer of the ÖVP, has said it's “impossible to form a government with someone who adores conspiracy theories”.
There was a high turnout of 74.9% as Austrian voters took part in an election dominated by the twin issues of migration and asylum, as well as a flagging economy and the war in Ukraine.
As half the map of Austria turned dark blue, FPÖ general secretary Michael Schnedlitz said "the men and women of Austria have made history today", although he refused to say what kind of coalition his party would try to build.
An analysis of voters suggested those aged 35-59 were most likely to vote for the far right, and marginally more women than men.Kickl's party has won 58 seats in the 183-seat parliament, with the conservatives on 52 and the Social Democrats on 41.
The Freedom Party's fiery leader had promised Austrians to build "Fortress Austria", to restore their security, prosperity and peace, and he has aligned himself closely with Viktor Orban in neighbouring Hungary.
Social Democrat leader Andreas Babler warned that Austria must not go the same way as Hungary.
Kickl had also spoken of becoming Volkskanzler (people's chancellor) which for some Austrians carries echoes of the term used to describe Adolf Hitler in Nazi Germany.
The party was founded by former Nazis in the 1950s. Two days before the vote some of its candidates were caught on video singing an SS song at a funeral.
As the FPÖ's victory became clear, a small group of protesters appeared outside parliament carrying anti-Nazi banners.Forming a coalition is likely to prove complicated for Kickl, who is a divisive figure.
The Social Democrats, Greens and Neos have all ruled out a partnership with the far right.
The only possible coalition Kickl's party could form is with the conservatives, although the FPÖ would have to find a solution to the ÖVP's refusal to have Kickl as chancellor.
When Geert Wilders' Freedom Party won the Netherlands' election last November, he dropped his bid to become prime minister so that three other parties would agree to form a coalition. However, Kickl is keen to lead his country, promising Austrians to act as their "servant and protector".
Political analyst Thomas Hofer told the BBC it was by no means clear that Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen, who oversees the formation of government, would give Kickl a “direct mandate to form a coalition”.
The ÖVP could in theory scrape together a coalition with the Social Democrats if the latest projections are correct, and could attract the liberal Neos party or the Greens.
Equally, Karl Nehammer may come under pressure from within the ÖVP to drop his objection. One leading FPÖ figure said after such a historic defeat he should resign, although that was rejected by the general secretary of Nehammer's party.President Van der Bellen has voiced reservations in the past about the FPÖ because of its criticism of the EU and its failure to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The party opposes EU sanctions on Moscow, citing Austria's neutrality, and many of its MPs walked out of a speech to the parliament in Vienna last year by Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky.
Kickl's victory is the latest in almost a year of vote successes for radical right-wing parties in Europe.
Italy's Giorgia Meloni heads a right-wing coalition as leader of the far-right Brothers of Italy party and Germany's AfD topped the polls in the eastern state of Thuringia last month. France's National Rally won the vote in European elections last June.
Unlike Kickl, Italy's prime minister has given her full backing to the EU's defence of Ukraine in the face of Russia's full-scale invasion.
AfD co-leader Alice Weidel congratulated Kickl, posting a picture of the two together, and Marine le Pen of the National Rally said "this groundswell carrying the defence of national interests", after the votes elsewhere in Europe, confirmed the "people's triumphs everywhere".
Geert Wilders said times were changing, and that "identity, sovereignty, freedom and no more illegal immigration/asylum" was what millions of Europeans were longing for.
Kickl has tapped into fears about immigration in Austria and he has made the most of anger at the government's handling of the Covid pandemic, embracing conspiracy theories about obscure treatments for the virus.
For Kickl and his party, Sunday's election victory represents a significant recovery from 2019, when they came a distant third in the wake of a video sting scandal that engulfed their former leader.
At least 30 people have died and scores more are unaccounted for in just one county in North Carolina, after Hurricane Helene tore across the state and caused catastrophic flooding.
A clearer image of the damage the storm inflicted after barrelling through Florida and Georgia emerged throughout Sunday, with Buncombe County appearing to be the hardest hit area.
“We have biblical devastation,” said Ryan Cole, an emergency official in the county, which contains the mountain city of Asheville. "This is the most significant natural disaster that any one of us has ever seen."
At least 105 people have died nationwide since the hurricane made landfall in Florida on Thursday, according to the BBC's US partner CBS, and that figure is expected to rise as officials reach more areas.
Helene began as a hurricane - the most powerful on record to hit Florida's Big Bend, and moved north into Georgia, the Carolinas and Tennessee. The majority of deaths have been confirmed in North and South Carolina where Helene landed as a tropical storm.
On Sunday evening, officials in North Carolina said 30 people had died in Buncombe County alone. Crews across the state are battling power and mobile service outages, downed trees and hundreds of closed roads.
Some residents returned to find their homes entirely destroyed on Sunday. And with some 1,000 people still unaccounted for in Buncombe County, relatives are working to locate family members with limited mobile service.
"This storm has brought catastrophic devastation... of historic proportions," North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper said.
The American Red Cross has opened more than 140 shelters for those in south-eastern states who evacuated their homes. More than 2,000 people are currently using the shelters, the organisation said on Sunday.Erin Quevedo, the owner of a flooded salon in Buncombe County, spoke to The Asheville Citizen Times while ankle-deep in mud.
"The salon was completely destroyed. It looks like the water came up to about five feet inside," she said. "Right now, all we're doing is we're trying to salvage what we can."
Rescue operations are ongoing in North Carolina and supplies, including food and water, are being delivered by air to affected areas that cannot be reached due to closed roads.
"People are desperate for help and we are pushing to get it to them - [it is] a massive effort," Governor Cooper said.
The North Carolina National Guard has rescued more than 119 people - including one infant, according to Major General Todd Hunt. He said the largest rescue was of 41 people north of Asheville.
Many petrol stations are closed throughout North Carolina with long queues of cars at those that are still open. Meanwhile, the few open supermarkets have been crowded by customers attempting to buy bottled water.
In pictures: Hurricane Helene destruction
The damage from the storm is estimated at between $95bn and $110bn (£71bn-£82bn) nationwide. The scale of the destruction will become clearer in the coming days.The search for survivors is ongoing and federal emergencies have been declared in six states, including Florida and Georgia.
"The devastation we're witnessing in Hurricane Helene's wake has been overwhelming," President Joe Biden said on Saturday.
He was briefed by Deanne Criswell, head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), who he directed to speed up support to storm survivors, including deployment of extra teams to North Carolina.
Some of the areas most affected by the storm lie in states expected to be decisive in November's presidential election, namely Georgia and North Carolina.
The White House has said Vice President Kamala Harris will visit affected areas as soon as she can do so without affecting rescue operations.
Meanwhile Donald Trump's campaign said he would visit the Georgia city of Valdosta on Monday.
Although Helene has weakened significantly, forecasters warn that high winds, flooding and the threat of tornadoes could continue.
There could be as many as 25 named storms in 2024, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration warned earlier this year.
Between eight and 13 of those storms could develop into hurricanes and a handful already have, including Helene. More storms could be on the horizon, officials warned, as the official end of hurricane season is not until 30 November.
The International Forum of UNESCO Chairs and Partners convened by the African Union Commission and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), is set to commence in Addis Ababa on 30th of September 2024.
Organised by UNESCO under the patronage of Sahle-Work Zewde, President of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, this meeting aims to strengthen interdisciplinary and collaborative research capacity in Africa, including through more inclusive and effective South-South and South-South-North research partnerships.
The event will be convened from Monday 30 September to Wednesday 2 October 2024, under the theme “Transforming Knowledge for Africa’s Future”.
The future of humanity is inextricably linked to Africa’s future. Yet, established narratives around the future of the continent continue to reflect the long-standing imbalances in knowledge production and in academic research on Africa. Research remains largely dominated by institutions in, or with close links to, the Global North. Reframing the narrative around Africa’s future requires the mobilization of diverse knowledge traditions.
Pursuant to the Forum’s theme, transforming knowledge systems is deemed by UNESCO as crucial for Africa to overcome the existing barriers and unlock its full potential for sustainable development. The opportunities offered to younger generations for many decades to come will be shaped by how well Africa harnesses knowledge and innovation. There is therefore need for a paradigm shift in how knowledge is generated, shared, and used in Africa, paving the way for a more just, sustainable, and prosperous future.
The co-construction of a shared research agenda for the future of Africa must draw from diverse yet complementary forms of knowledge, perspectives, and contexts. It implies interdisciplinary, inter-sectoral, cross-cultural, and forward-looking approaches nourished by diverse ecologies of knowledge, that includes valuing and integrating indigenous knowledge systems.
Hillary Clinton has told the BBC that Joe Biden "did the right thing" by standing aside in the US presidential election after his stumbling debate performance against Donald Trump earlier this year.
"I was with him a week before that disastrous debate and I saw no reason why he should have stepped down," the former first lady said in an interview with BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
"But once that debate happened, he could not recover and he did the right thing," she said.
Clinton, who ran unsuccessfully for president against Trump in 2016, said she believed "the future of democracy is at stake" in November's election which polls suggest is extremely tight.She has thrown her full support behind Kamala Harris, who replaced President Biden as the Democratic candidate, calling on her to "defeat Donald Trump to break the fever that he has caused in our political system".
"The two candidates have presented extremely different agendas for where they want to take our country," Clinton told Today presenter Amol Rajan in the BBC interview.
The election, she said, would have repercussions far beyond the US including "whether or not we continue supporting Ukraine, whether we can get some kind of workable resolution in the Middle East and so much else".
Trump: Time to settle Russia's war
Trump or Harris: diplomats resigned to either
Could Trump really deport one million immigrants?Trump has previously indicated that he would cut US aid for Ukraine. After meeting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in New York on Friday, the former US president said he had "a very good relationship" with both Zelensky and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.
“We both want to see a fair deal made," Trump said. The war, he added, "should stop and the president (Zelensky) wants it to stop, and I’m sure President Putin wants it to stop and that’s a good combination.”Clinton, who served as secretary of state in the Obama administration from 2009 to 2013, also criticised Trump's promise to begin a mass deportation of illegal immigrants if elected.
"Let's start with one million,” his vice-presidential pick JD Vance said of the plan in August. “That's where Kamala Harris has failed. And then we can go from there.”
"He is going to have a military presence [in US cities] to achieve his goals," Clinton said on Monday. "If you look a certain way, if you talk a certain way, you will be subject to these Draconian measures."When asked what drives Trump's support, she told the BBC that "people support him for different reasons" including feeling "overlooked" and "unseen" or that the "economy doesn't work for them".
"I think our problem is frankly we are not the most effective messengers," she said of the Democratic Party. "About what we see and what we’re trying to do to address these real and legitimate concerns that people have. I recognise and accept my share of the responsibility."
"It is hard in a time when politicians are expected to be more entertaining, where social media demands that you be outrageous, that you say something that breaks through, to do the hard, boring work of actually getting things done," Clinton said.
Asked whether she felt Biden should have withdrawn from the race earlier than he did in July, she strongly rejected the suggestion.
But she said she thought Harris had "performed flawlessly" since then.
The election will be held on 5 November and the new president will take office in January.
Polls are currently very tight in the seven states considered as crucial in the contest, with just one or two percentage points separating the two candidates.
Clinton, 76, was the first woman nominee for president from a major political party when she ran against Trump in 2016. Her husband, Bill Clinton, who she married in 1975, was president from 1993 until 2001.
She is currently promoting a new memoir, a collection of essays called "Something Lost, Something Gained: Reflections on Life, Love and Liberty".
Kris Kristofferson, the award-winning country singer and actor who worked with Johnny Cash and Martin Scorsese, has died aged 88.
A representative said he passed away "peacefully" at his home in Hawaii on Saturday, surrounded by family.
The statement described Kristofferson as "a peacenik, a revolutionary, an actor, a superstar, a sex symbol, and a family man."
The multi-award winner was known for his songwriting, notably credited for Me and Bobby McGee, and Help Me Make It Through the Night, among others. He also acted in the hit movie A Star Is Born.A message from his family said they were all "so blessed" for the time they had with him.
"Thank you for loving him all these many years, and when you see a rainbow, know he’s smiling down at us all,” said the message, quoted by CBS News, the BBC's US partner.
Born in Brownsville, Texas, on 22 June, 1936, Kristofferson became a leading figure in country music.
“When I got started, I was one of the people hoping to bring respect to country music,” he said, according to the family message.
“Some of the songs I had that got to be hits did that. I imagine that’s why somebody might vote me into a Hall of Fame. I know it’s not because of my golden throat.”
Kristofferson studied writing at Pomona College in California and later went to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar. He earned his masters from Oxford in 1960, then returned to the US and joined the army.
He was assigned by the military to teach literature, which he said "sounded like hell".
In 1965 he visited Nashville, and within two weeks had resigned from his army post and moved to the country music hub to pursue his music career.
The head of the Country Hall of Fame and Museum said he left behind “a resounding legacy”.
“Kris Kristofferson believed creativity is God-given, and those who ignore such a gift are doomed to unhappiness,” Kyle Young wrote on X. “He preached that a life of the mind gives voice to the soul, and his work gave voice not only to his soul but to ours.”
He won three Grammys for best country song, Help Me Make It Through the Night in 1972, and two separate duets with Rita Coolidge (1974, 1976), to whom he was married in the 1970s.In 1971 Kristofferson debuted as an actor, going on to win a Golden Globe for his portrayal of John Norman Howard in A Star Is Born (1976) opposite Barbra Streisand's Ester Hoffman.
Streisand shared a tribute to her co-star on Instagram, saying she knew watching him perform for the first time that he was "something special" and the perfect choice for A Star Is Born.
At her latest concert in London's Hyde Park in 2019, she invited Kristofferson on stage to sing a duet from the film.
"He was as charming as ever, and the audience showered him with applause. It was a joy seeing him receive the recognition and love he so richly deserved," she said.
His acting career saw him take on numerous roles, including in Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, Lone Star, and the Blade franchise.
In 1985 Kristofferson joined friends Johnny Cash, Waylon Jennings and Willie Nelson to form a supergroup called The Highwaymen.
“Every time I look at a picture of Willie and me and John and Waylon, I find it amazing that they let the janitor in there,” he told journalist Mikal Gilmore, referring to his former job at CBS's Nashville studio.
In 2003, Kristofferson received the Free Speech Award from the Americana Music Association.
A year later, he became a member of the Country Music Hall of Fame.
He also received multiple lifetime achievement honours, including from The Recording Academy, the Country Music Association and the Academy of Country Music.
Kristofferson is survived by his wife Lisa, his eight children, and seven grandchildren.
In the hills of the Bekaa Valley - as in swathes of Lebanon - death can come from the sky these days, at any moment.
Israel has been bombing the area through the day, with more than 30 air strikes in just an hour.
Forty-six people are confirmed dead - and that toll is expected to rise.
Others are in critical condition in hospital, after Israeli attacks earlier this week.
Noor Mossawi is among them. The six-year-old is lying unconscious in a paediatric intensive care unit, in Rayak Hospital, with bandages wrapped around her fractured skull.
Her mother Rima is sitting by her bedside, holding a copy of the Quran and praying.
She tells us her daughter is very bright and very sociable.
"She creates such a fun atmosphere at home. The house feels empty when she's not around. She loves meeting new people."
All that changed last Monday, with an Israeli strike.
She shows us another video of her daughter - this time praying, shortly before the attack.
"I was soothing her, telling her not to be afraid, that nothing would happen. She was calling on God and the prophets for help," Rima says.
As the bombing was getting closer, Rima was hunkering by her front door with Noor and her twin brother Mohammed.
"We weren’t brave enough to go inside," she says, "because we thought the building would collapse on us if it was hit.
"When it got more intense, I picked up Noor and her brother and was about to take them in, but the missile was much faster than I was."
That missile left Mohammed lightly wounded, and Noor fighting for her life.As we speak, suddenly there is danger overhead. We hear a plane, and then an explosion which rattles the windows and knocks out the power for a few seconds.
It’s another air strike. Rima barely reacts.
Noor’s father Abdallah comes to visit, and is burning with rage.
"Please film my child," he says.
"She doesn't know what weapons are. She doesn't know how to fight. She was playing at home when the bombing started. They [Israel] wanted to terrorise the people and get them to flee."
Israel says its strikes are targeting Hezbollah sites, including weapons stores and ammunition dumps.
Abdallah begs to differ.
"We have nothing to do with weapons. I am not involved with the resistance [Hezbollah]. But now I wish I was so that I could protect my children," he tells us.
Minutes later, a few floors down, sirens wail as an ambulance brings in wounded from the latest strike.
Medical staff are rushing back and forward. The emergency department fills with tension. There are angry shouts, and shocked friends and relatives. We are asked to stop filming.The hospital has admitted 400 casualties of Israeli strikes since Monday - all civilians - according to Dr Basil Abdallah, the medical director.
Of those, more than 100 have died, and several families had lost more than one person.
Dr Abdallah tells us there is trauma among the staff, as well as the patients.
"Seeing children bombed, seeing elderly patients and women bombed, it's difficult," he says. "Most of the nurses and the doctors are depressed. We have emotions. We are human."
Most of the staff remain at the hospital around the clock as it is too dangerous to risk the journey home.
Israel is striking far and wide in Lebanon. There’s no-one to stop it.
For now, Hezbollah is putting up a limited fight, firing rockets across the border.
Its backer, Iran, is remaining on the sidelines.
Dr Abdallah is already worried about running out of drugs and essential supplies.
He fears this will be a long war.
Shadé Adepeju-Joseph, Director of the Directorate of Diaspora and International Affairs in the Office of the Senate Leader, Nigerian National Assembly, shared her impressions of Russia in an exclusive interview with TV BRICS during her first visit to the country. She expressed admiration for Russia’s creativity, uniqueness, and organisation, including the well-established transport system in Moscow.
Reflecting on BRICS, Adepeju-Joseph strongly suggested that Nigeria would join the group. She noted the efficiencies of this possible step, saying it would bring many benefits to Nigeria. According to her, BRICS is a successful example of international cooperation.
“I believe that Nigeria might one day join BRICS soon. Then, Nigeria will get the number of advantages,” she said.
Adepeju-Joseph also emphasised the necessity of Russian-origin TV channels in Nigeria to facilitate cultural exchange between the countries.
“We need more collaboration in the media sphere with Russia especially among young people. We can create many media education programmes to build a media bridge between Russia and Nigeria,” Adepeju-Joseph claimed.
The representative of the Nigerian National Assembly also touched on the educational initiatives of both countries, advocating for the introduction of Russian language courses in Nigerian schools.
Afterwards, Adepeju-Joseph commended Russia’s social policy, describing it as exemplary in terms of civic education and benefit provision.
Should rich countries and fossil fuel companies pay for the climate losses and damages they have caused?
In August 2022, Pakistan was devastated by catastrophic flooding. The unprecedented monsoon rains killed more than 1,500 people and left the inundated country with economic damages exceeding $30bn (£27bn). Within a month, a scientific study had concluded the high rainfall was "likely increased" by climate change.
The link between greenhouse gas emissions and extreme weather events already happening today is now well established. Events such as Pakistan's floods, Madagascar cyclones and Somalia's drought are becoming more intense and more frequent due to climate change. They have led to death and destruction and left countries facing immense economic damages, plunging them into debt and diverting funds away from other critical areas, such as healthcare and education.
What's more, these impacts are only set to get worse. If global temperatures were to rise by 2.9C, the average GDP of the world's 65 most climate-vulnerable countries will fall by 20% by 2050 and 64% by 2100.The discussion of who should pay for climate losses and damages has become a major geopolitical issue and is expected to be high on the agenda at the upcoming Cop27 climate talks in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, in November.
By 2030, vulnerable nations are likely to face $290-580bn (£260-520bn) in annual climate "residual damages" – damages that cannot be prevented with measures to adapt to climate threats. By 2050, the total cost of loss and damage could rise to $1-1.8tn (£890bn-1.6tn).
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who has become increasingly more outspoken on the injustices of climate change in recent years, has described the climate crisis as a "case study in moral and economic justice". He argues "polluters must pay" because "vulnerable countries need meaningful action."
As such climate threats become a larger part of our lives, many argue that the countries and companies responsible for the pollution in the first place should be the ones footing bill.
So what if we lived in a world where polluters really did pay for the climate damage they have caused? How much would they need to cough up, and would these payouts signal the end of the fossil fuel industry? Would this funding ever be able to alleviate the harm done? And could it mean the world's most vulnerable countries recover from climate disasters and adapt to looming threats?Responsibility for climate change can be seen on several different levels – the actions of governments, companies, communities and individuals can all be linked to emissions.
A study published earlier this year by Dartmouth College in New Hampshire, in the US, provided the first assessment of countries' liability in fuelling the climate crisis. It concluded that emissions from the US, the world's largest historical emitter, cost the world more than $1.9tn (£1.6tn) in climate damages between 1990 and 2014. The next four largest emitters – China, Russia, India and Brazil – caused a further $4.1tn (£3.6tn) in global economic losses in the same time period. Combined, these losses are equivalent to around 11% of yearly global GDP.
"We show that there is a scientific basis for [climate] liability claims," says Justin Mankin, co-author of the study and assistant professor of geography at Dartmouth College. "The science shows that if one country can have detectable damages; one country's foregoing [of] emissions can have detectable benefits. That's really essential… it overturns this narrative of 'what can one country do?'"If governments were serious about covering the damage from this harm, countries could establish a loss and damage finance facility under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – the UN's climate change body – which they would pay into in line with their fair share, says Sadie DeCoste, an organiser for Tipping Point UK, a non-profit working on climate justice. The fair share could be calculated based on their historical and ongoing contribution to global emissions, she says.
Having the fund as part of the UNFCCC process, rather than an external body, would help it to be "accountable and transparent" and ensure it is a "collective commitment to reach an agreed-upon sum", adds DeCoste. Such a fund should not be based on voluntary commitments made only by the countries that are more willing to pay, she says.
The world's most climate-vulnerable nations have called for such a facility to be set up, which would assess countries' needs after a climate disaster and request specific funds from governments based on factors including their contribution to global heating. To date, rich countries have strongly resisted these calls, insisting that humanitarian aid is enough to deal with the issue.Fossil fuel companies are also increasingly being held accountable for their greenhouse gas emissions. A 2017 report from the CDP, a non-profit, found just 100 fossil fuel companies are responsible for producing 71% of all global greenhouse gases emitted since 1988. Another report from consultancy Profundo and non-profit Transport and Environment concluded that Europe's five biggest oil majors are responsible for some $13tn (£11.5tn) of damage in the past 30 years, including pollution, deteriorating public health and carbon emissions. These companies make enormous profits from extracting and selling fossil fuels, which have fuelled rising temperatures and exacerbated extreme weather events.If the world's biggest fossil fuel companies were held accountable for these emissions, they could be forced to pay an annual sum, based on their share of global carbon pollution that has been emitted over the past 20 years, into a polluters-pay climate fund. This could help developing countries deal with climate impacts and the costs of transitioning to clean energy.Polluters could also be made to pay for any ongoing emissions via an international tax on fossil fuel extraction, as proposed by a coalition of climate vulnerable nations. Here, companies would be taxed for each tonne of coal, oil or gas they extract. Starting at a low rate and increasing every year, such a tax could raise billions to help countries rebuild and recover from disasters.
"[A climate damages tax] is a way of establishing accountability and responsibility," says DeCoste. It opens up a conversation about how polluters can provide vulnerable countries with enough funding to adapt to the climate threats they are facing, she says.Some governments today are already considering taxing the windfall profits of fossil fuel companies that benefit from high energy prices. Some of the revenues raised by such a tax could help vulnerable communities recover from extreme events, such as droughts and floods. However, a major limitation of this in the long run is that windfall taxes on fossil fuel companies are only intended to be temporary. "We need to ensure fossil fuel companies are taxed effectively and consistently all the time, not just with one-off windfall taxes," says Olivia Hanks, climate justice lead at the faith group Quakers in Britain.
However, since governments also need to set a timeline for rapid phaseout of coal, oil and gas, fossil fuel taxes could only fund climate losses and damages temporarily, says Hanks – meaning other sources of finance will also be needed to pay for climate damages.
Industries which use a lot of fossil fuels, such as aviation and bunker shipping, could also be taxed to generate the necessary funds to pay for those suffering the impacts of climate change. Unsustainable behaviours, such as frequent flying and eating red meat, could also be taxed to raise finance for countries devastated by climate change, says DeCoste. The most polluting behaviours tend to be associated with the lifestyle of a small numbers of people with very high incomes – just 1% of the global population is responsible for 50% of flying emissions, for example, while 90% of people have never flown.
Airline travel levies, which would increase with each additional flight the individual takes, are a "fair, feasible, and suitable" way to raise loss and damage funds, some researchers say. They could generate up to $5-10bn (£4-9bn) each year, be easily collected at international flight departures, and be channelled to vulnerable communities through international bodies like the Green Climate Fund, which was set up to help developing countries reduce their emissions and adapt to climate impacts.Redirecting public money which currently supports polluting activities towards supporting those suffering the impacts of climate change could also make a huge difference. A recent report estimated that governments around the world currently spend a staggering $1.9tn (£1.3tn) each year on environmentally harmful subsidies, such as support for fossil fuel production and for intensive agriculture. This is equivalent to around 2% of annual global GDP – money that in many cases could instead be used to support victims of climate disasters.
Governments would play an important role in redistributing money in these ways, but the courts are another important avenue through which victims of climate disasters could compensated. Recent advances in the science of "climate attribution" are especially important here.
"Climate attribution allows us to quantify the contributions of particular fossil fuel producers on impacts such as global average temperature increase, sea level rise, and ocean acidification," says Kathy Mulvey, climate accountability campaign director at the Union of Concerned Scientists in the US.
Ongoing scientific advances in this area will enable lawyers to bring more cases against polluters, says Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity, an advocacy organisation in the US that works to hold polluters accountable. (Read more about why climate lawsuits are surging).
One 2014 study has been particularly influential in bringing more court cases against polluters, says Wiles. The study, written by Richard Heede from the Climate Accountability Institute, established a causal link between the actions of fossil fuel companies and climate impacts. It identified 90 fossil fuel and cement producers, dubbed the "carbon majors", as being collectively responsible for 63% of global emissions since the industrial revolution, and pinpointed the share of emissions each of these companies are responsible for."This was critical to getting [legal] cases off the ground," says Wiles. "[As a lawyer], you needed to be able to say that Exxon was responsible for a portion of those damages with data and that the company you're accusing of crimes can actually be proven to have contributed to the damage."
A spokesperson for ExxonMobil says the company has "long acknowledged the reality and risks of climate change and has devoted significant resources to addressing those risks."
"We have announced our ambition to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions for operated assets by 2050," he says, adding that the company is developing roadmaps for reducing emissions from its facilities and assets.
A climate damages tax is a way of establishing accountability and responsibility – Sadie DeCoste
An important case which aims to use attribution science to sue for climate damages is a lawsuit brought by a Peruvian farmer against Germany's largest utility company, RWE. The lawsuit is the first case of its kind and could set a precedent for whether polluters should provide compensation for climate damages on a pro rata basis.In the case, which is ongoing, farmer Saúl Luciano Lliuya aims to hold RWE accountable for the role of its emissions in melting a glacier above his hometown, Huaraz, in the Peruvian Andes. Lliuya says RWE should pay 0.47% of the cost of building flood defences to protect Huaraz – which would amount to around €20,000 (£17,600;, $19,600). The amount is based on an update to Heede's study by the Climate Accountability Institute which attributes this share of global emissions to RWE.
Lliuya's lawyers are building their case on climate attribution science, including a 2021 study which concluded that the melting of the Palcaraju glacier is "entirely attributable" to rising temperatures and that the change geometry of the glacial lake and valley has "substantially increased the outburst flood hazard".
"We have a very clear picture of climate change being responsible for creating this very large lake that now threatens a city," says Rupert Stuart-Smith, the study's lead author and a research associate in climate science and the law at the Oxford Sustainable Law Programme.
The power of precedent "could mean that we will see more and more successful claims being brought before courts," he says. These could potentially be in jurisdictions across the globe and target a great number of companies, he adds. "If corporations with large emissions can be held responsible for their impact, then it could really be a game changer for pay action [polluters paying for climate damages] in many ways."If court cases and taxes which made fossil fuel companies more accountable for the impact of their emissions did pile in, would this be the death knell for the industry – the end of coal, oil and gas?
It would certainly incentivise fossil fuel companies to switch to producing clean energy, such as wind and solar, instead of producing more carbon-intensive fuels, says Hanks. "If polluters knew they had to pay the full cost of their activities, we'd see the energy transition happen much faster."
Could this bankrupt fossil fuel companies? "If polluters are held responsible for the harm done as a result of their emissions, then you could be looking at vast sums of money," says Stuart-Smith. "I don't think it is unreasonable to talk about numbers in the billions of dollars. We could see payouts large enough that they would substantially impact [fossil fuel companies'] profits."
The fossil fuel industry is estimated to have made $2.8bn (£2.5bn) in profits per day over the last 50 years – $1tn (£891bn) a year and a staggering total of $52tn (£46tn). In a scenario where fossil fuel companies were asked to foot the entire bill of climate damages (projected to reach $290-580bn (£260-520bn) per year by 2030), this is equivalent to roughly 30-60% of their current annual profits.
Lawsuits can also directly impact a polluter's business model going forwards, adds Stuart-Smith. "We're seeing cases brought, for instance, challenging corporate and national emission reduction plans as inadequate," he says. A 2021 Dutch court ruling, for example, ordered Shell to reduce its emissions in line with the Paris Agreement on climate change.The ramifications of this also go beyond any direct damages paid by the companies, says Wiles. "[The real damage] is the reputational risk and the loss of their social license." He compares this to the reputational damage the tobacco and opioid industries suffered after they were forced to disclose the health risks associated with their products and make public key documents which highlighted these. In the case of opioids, this disclosure led to hundreds of new lawsuits seeking to hold the industry accountable. This could also happen to the fossil fuel industry, Wiles notes.
For climate-vulnerable countries, funds put forward by polluters would be a lifeline. The long-term finance would allow them to invest in resilient infrastructure protecting them from extreme events, such as hurricanes and floods, as well as slow-moving threats, such as rising seas.
Funds put forward by polluters would be a lifeline for climate vulnerable nations
The money would also enable countries to strengthen their public health systems and cover the climate-related health costs, such as waterborne diseases, which are increasing due to climate change.
It could also provide compensation for workers losing jobs in polluting industries. The global coal industry, for example, is estimated to lose 4.7 million jobs in the clean energy transition, while the mining industry is expected to lose 4 million jobs. Compensation could also support workers who have lost their jobs due to climate impacts, such as farmers and fishers, says Mulvey.Many developing countries are heavily reliant on fossil fuels to meet their energy needs and grow their economies. "But the path to development is dirty; it's industrialisation," says Mankin.
Mankin says it is unclear whether loss and damage funding would put these countries on a cleaner path and allow them to develop and at the same time adapt to climate threats. But Hanks says loss and damage finance would create "financial and decision-making space" for developing countries to focus on the energy transition, rather than having to "relentlessly deal with disaster after disaster with no money to do so".
Loss and damage finance could also make a huge difference for people who have been permanently displaced due to climate change. It is estimated that by 2050 up to 216 million people will be forced to leave their homes due to climate impacts such as water scarcity, declining crop productivity and sea-level rise.
The money could also pay for the restoration of vital ecosystems, such as mangroves and coral reefs, which have been damaged or destroyed by storms and floods and can provide vital protection against climate impacts.In a world where polluters did pay their fair share, would it be enough to compensate communities for the losses they have suffered? Wiles says no matter what is paid it will "never be enough", because many communities will continue to see climate impacts into the future.
What's more, there are some climate impacts which polluters could never pay for – because they cannot be quantified or recovered at any cost, says Mulvey. "No amount of money can compensate for some climate loss and damage: lost human lives, cultural heritage, animal and plant species, and ancestral lands are among the most profound impacts," she says. "The sovereignty of a country that has lost its physical territory [due to rising seas, for instance] can't be brought back with money."
Still, polluters paying for damages would help redress global climate injustice and recognise that those who are disproportionately harmed by climate change tend to not be the ones who are responsible for causing it."It would help us think differently about responsibility," says Hanks. "It's about calling out the moral wrong, [and] also imagining the world and those power relations differently."
Capitalism teaches us a competitive mindset where as a country we shouldn't give money to another country and thus risk our strategic advantage, she adds. "But it is possible to think in more cooperative terms and realise that if [vulnerable nations] are thriving it makes [rich countries] more likely to thrive."This story was originally published on 27/10/22 and was updated on 23/09/2024 with information about Vermont and New York's plans to introduce a climate superfund, mandating polluters to pay for climate damages.
SOURCE:BBC
