News & Media

Growing Hunger with the Climate Crisis and the Pandemic in the Central American Dry Corridor

March 4, 2021

The Faces of Hunger in Central America report, published today by the Consortium of Humanitarian Organizations that includes Acción contra el Hambre, COOPI, Trócaire, Oxfam, and We World-GVC, describes the food insecurity situation for the most vulnerable population in the Central American Dry Corridor as a result of recurring droughts, Covid-19, and the hurricane season.

This research reveals that drought events in 2018 and 2019 left 72% of the subsistence farmers facing moderate or severe food insecurity by August 2019. With the outbreak of the pandemic in 2020 and the impacts of Tropical Storms Amanda and Cristobal and Hurricanes Eta and Iota, hunger in the region has grown more severe. The report concludes that 86% of the households in the dry corridor are currently facing food insecurity.

“The impact of climate change in the form of droughts and heavy rains, combined with the pandemic, violence, and limited state capacity to deploy social protection systems, could leave 7 million people in extreme poverty. The number of people in Central America in food insecurity could grow by 120% by the year 2030 if we don’t act now” stated Gloria García Parra, the Oxfam Regional Humanitarian Coordinator for Latin America and the Caribbean.

Central America is responsible for only 0.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions, but the region is among the areas most affected by climate change. In addition to climate issues, the Dry Corridor faces other hazards including unemployment and violence, which can exacerbate hunger, especially for the most vulnerable households.

Violence and unemployment: Approximately 8,000 homicides were reported in 2020, and the countries of the region faced growing social discontent for problems such as corruption and limited access to quality public services. Approximately 8.3 million jobs were lost due to the pandemic in the region, and the outlook for 2021 is not encouraging, with projections of rising unemployment and extreme poverty rates reaching 22.8% in Nicaragua, 22.7% in Guatemala, 11.9% in El Salvador, and 22.2% in Honduras, according to the report.

Covid-19 and migration: The pandemic continues to wreak havoc. As of February 25, approximately 406,000 positive cases and 12,400 deaths had been reported. These figures do not consider the likely under-reporting in the region. Despite the rising infection rates, a significant number of people view emigration as an option to escape the constant state of crisis, and migrant caravans travelling to the United States have been an ongoing phenomenon.

Women and girls bear the brunt: The report describes that in addition to taking responsibility for care work, women and girls are the last to eat, prioritizing feeding men and boys to protect the household labor force. According to the report, 7 out of 10 households with severe food insecurity are single-parent families.

“The situation in the region can deteriorate if concrete actions are not taken in the short term. According to the World Food Program, 8 million people may go hungry in the Central American Dry Corridor in 2021”, concluded Gloria García Parra.

5 things to boost Climate Commission’s plan to cut NZs pollution

March 4, 2021

You might have heard about the Climate Commission’s draft plan for New Zealand’s climate action over the next 15 years. This is a crucial opportunity to put a roadmap in place that will allow Aotearoa to play our part in overcoming the climate challenge and ensuring our action will stand with those facing the impacts of climate breakdown right now. It covers a lot, so here we highlight four good things, and five areas for improvement. You can have your say too. The Climate Commission is seeking submissions up until March 28th.

This is a 5–minute read about key areas relevant to Oxfam’s work on global equity and climate justice. To make a submission that covers more areas of what the Climate Commission is asking for feedback on, use the submission guide we prepared with a bunch of other organisations.

4 great things about the Commission’s plan.

1. It confirms New Zealand’s international climate target needs to be boosted.

Something that we’ve long been talking about is that New Zealand’s 2030 target for reducing pollution under the Paris Agreement is inconsistent with limiting warming to 1.5 degrees. The Commission agrees, and recommended that New Zealand ought to do more than the average to reflect our outsized carbon footprint and past contribution to causing climate change. As a developed, relatively wealthy nation, our international target should reflect our fair share of emissions cuts. Last year, we released a report outlining what New Zealand’s fair share would be: at least 99% reductions below 1990 levels by 2030.

2. Permanent native forests are part of the solution.

A key aspect to the Commission’s plans is that relying solely on large pine forests to offset our emissions isn’t desirable or sustainable. As a country we need to cut our pollution at the source. There will still be a big role for forestry to meet our targets, but the Commission envisages much more of forestry’s role in absorbing carbon to be done through permanent native forests, which is great news for our biodiversity.

3. The Commission’s plan confirmed that fossil gas is not a bridge fuel.

Vested interests in the fossil fuel industry have tried to advocate for fossil gas as a ‘bridge’ or ‘transition’ fuel while we decarbonise away from coal. However, the Commission’s analysis shows that it is necessary and possible to cut our pollution from all fossil fuels – coal, oil and gas – in order to meet our targets. We think that shifting from all fossil fuels needs to be faster than the Commission plans for, but overall the Commission’s plan helps confirm that fossil fuels are history and we need to embrace the clean, renewable future once and for all.

4. It highlights climate finance to communities on the frontlines is a necessary part of our international action.

New Zealand’s responsibilities for acting on climate change are not just for cutting our pollution at home, but also supporting communities in the Pacific and beyond that are on the frontlines of climate change to adapt to the impacts they are facing. Currently New Zealand has woefully low levels of climate finance compared to others. The Commission states that climate finance to developing countries can be part of New Zealand contributing to global climate action. This is great, and can potentially supplement our international target, however the focus of this finance should be on adaptation and mitigation, not solely mitigation.

5 things that can improve the Commission’s plan

1. It should boost our domestic action to be compatible with 1.5 degrees (a safe climate future)

We know that the best chance of keeping global heating to 1.5 degrees is by cutting pollution fast in the next 10 years. The most disappointing part of the Commission’s plan is that it is not enough to meet our current Paris Agreement target for 2030. This is the same target the Commission has found to be inconsistent with limiting global heating to 1.5 degrees. We need to increase the pollution cuts in the first two ‘emissions budgets’ drafted by the Commission to set us up for a 2030 pathway consistent with 1.5 degrees. This can be done through making polluters pay for their pollution faster than planned, bringing forward end dates for fossil fuel use, and increasing direct government investment in our decarbonisation rather than relying on incentives.

2. It should recommend a fair share target for our international climate commitment.

It’s great that the Commission found New Zealand’s current international target under the Paris Agreement needs to be boosted. What’s needed now is to increase it in line with our fair share of pollution reductions, so that we don’t hand an unfair burden to developing nations to do our work for us and deal with the impacts. At the moment, the Commission doesn’t recommend what our fair share would be. We need them to recommend a target (or a target range) that would reflect our outsized carbon footprint and historical responsibility for causing climate change so that the government can’t get away with ignoring this advice or fudging the numbers.

3. Agricultural climate pollution must be reduced further and faster.

Farming is New Zealand’s largest polluting industry, contributing to around half of our country’s emissions. In its current form, the Commission’s plan largely lets agricultural emissions off the hook – it’s the area where planned reductions are most clearly not aligned with 1.5 degree pathways and the plan doesn’t anticipate any reductions in production volumes. What we need to do is make our most polluting industries pay for the damage they are causing, and reinvest that revenue in supporting farmers to diversify land uses. Cutting climate pollution from agriculture should include specific and direct regulations (such as bans and caps) on the sources of pollution, including a sinking cap on cow numbers, synthetic fertiliser and imported feed.

4. It should redirect investment now away from roads to accelerate the green transition

We can put much larger direct investment into accelerating the transition in transport and infrastructure. At the moment, the government has spent more on roads and other carbon intensive infrastructure in its Covid recovery spending than on climate friendly initiatives, and Auckland’s 10 year budget for transport being decided on right now is looking like it could do the same. The Commission’s plan only forecasts $190 million per year to be spent on decarbonisation between now and 2025. There are billions of dollars in planned road and urban sprawl spending that could be redirected right now into building public and active transport, reallocating street space, and retrofitting and building energy efficient and accessible housing. There needs to be clear recommendations so the government can change track before polluting investments are locked in.

5. It should make life better for all communities as we decarbonise

It’s critical that taking action to cut our pollution leaves no one behind and takes us closer to a fairer, more equal and just society. The Commission’s report notes lots of ways to mitigate the impact on communities in vulnerable situations, but this needs further work to highlight the opportunities and co-benefits of doing so. One example is the opportunities to build and retrofit housing stock that will address the unacceptable shortage of accessible housing for disabled people; Another is the opportunity for native forests management and planting to move beyond consultation approaches and give management of land back to Maori to uphold Article Two of Te Tiriti or Waitangi. There is no consideration in the report of the adverse impacts of climate change on women and other genders, and the need for gender-responsive climate action. This needs to change.

Hope that’s been useful! Want to learn more? Read the in-depth submission guide prepared by Oxfam and 10 other organisations here: bit.ly/CCCsubmissionguide

Nearly 40 per cent of Yemen families forced into debt to pay for essentials – Oxfam

February 18, 2021

Nearly two out of every five families in Yemen buy food and medicines using debt, according to Oxfam research published today.

Yemeni families are trapped in a cycle of informal debt, living precariously and reliant on good will of shopkeepers as they lurch from one month to the next.

Many told Oxfam they can’t borrow the money they need for essentials unless shopkeepers know they have a monthly income and for many this means the money they receive from humanitarian agencies.

Last year, donors only provided half of the aid money needed for the world’s largest humanitarian crisis and with the 2021 UN humanitarian need budget for Yemen due out imminently, Oxfam is urging the international community to be generous when pledging funds.

The research found that Yemeni shopkeepers estimate that the number of families using debt to buy food has risen by 62 per cent since the conflict in Yemen started in 2015. Pharmacists in Yemen estimate an increase of 44 per cent in debt being used to purchase medicines.

Layla Mansoor,31, and her family were forced to flee from their home in an active conflict zone in Hodeidah three years ago – they escaped with barely more than the clothes on their backs. Layla says she is often in debt to the shops she buys their food from and each month they owe between 10,000 and 12,000 YER (around USD $11-$15). Her family can’t afford to eat meat or fish except on rare occasions. She said:” At the moment we’re living a nightmare. Thankfully, until now, we haven’t needed any kind of medical treatment – but I’m afraid that we won’t afford it, if one day we do.”

Ibrahim Alwazir who carried out the research for Oxfam in Yemen said: “To struggle this hard to be able to provide food and medicine for one’s family is an avoidable hardship that millions have to overcome on a daily basis. We need peace so no more Yemenis are forced to flee their homes and live in poverty. Peace will allow people to rebuild their lives and businesses, but we need support to help communities to do that. This war has turned my country into the world’s largest humanitarian crisis and it’s only getting worse. We all just want to get back to normal life.”

Some 24.3 million Yemenis, over 53 per cent of the population, currently need humanitarian assistance. This year, 16.2 million Yemenis will rely on food aid to survive, with 17.9 million lacking access to healthcare in a country where only half of health facilities are fully functional. It is estimated that in parts of Yemen one in five children are severely malnourished and will grow up with life-long medical conditions if they do not get more food.

Oxfam, along with other agencies in Yemen, provides support for struggling families in the form of cash transfers which allows people to choose what they buy and helps stimulate local markets.

Many families who are struggling with debt say that they are living permanently in arrears – using their transfer to pay off what they owe and then run up more debt as they wait for their next aid payment. This situation is worsening because high levels of inflation, fuelled by the conflict, mean that the value of money is decreasing. In practical terms the same amount of cash buys fewer groceries each month.

Hind Qassem, 45, was pregnant with her tenth child when her husband was killed by an artillery shell forcing her to flee with her children. At first, they lived under a plastic sheet, relying on leftovers given by neighbouring families. Three of her sons suffer from sickle cell anaemia and need blood transfusions every month. She said: “Now, I receive YER 45,000 (around US$70) every month, yes, it is not enough to cover all our needs but it helps a lot. I am now able to pay for my children’s treatment and buy some flour and vegetables for us to eat. Shops will now allow us to buy food on credit because we are receiving monthly assistance.”

Food shop and pharmacy owners both told Oxfam staff that they allow customers to buy items on credit because they sympathise with the harsh difficulties they are facing. Some also said that it makes economic sense for their business and pharmacy owners also said they did not want to feel responsible for someone’s death if they refused credit for medicines.

Grocery store owner Abdulkareem Salaeh from Sana’a said: “We are left with no choice (but to offer credit) people are desperate, and we are struggling to keep the business going. While some are able to pay, others can’t and that’s a problem. We only agree to lend people with a reliable source of income, like employees, business owners, daily wage labourers or those receiving humanitarian aid, else it will be a loss that we can’t afford. We are barely able to cover operational costs and the costs of goods we sell. It’s unfortunate!”

Grocery shop owners have told Oxfam that debt is most often used to buy basic commodities like bread, flour, sugar, rice, legumes and cooking oil. In pharmacies, debt is typically used to buy medicines for diabetes and high blood pressure or for fevers and diarrhoea in rural areas.

Concerned business owners told Oxfam that they feel the debt situation is unsustainable as their customers are increasingly unable to pay off all their debt each month and so the rising levels of debt their businesses are carrying mean their future is looking uncertain.

If business owners stop allowing them credit people will be unable to eat, driving higher levels of malnourishment. Oxfam is also worried that if shop owners do not have funds to replenish stock the resulting shortages will drive food prices even higher.

Notes to editors:

Research findings are based on 30 surveys by Oxfam in Yemen of grocery and pharmacy store owners across Sana’a, Hajjah, Ibb and Aden Governorates in November and early December 2020. All surveys were collected near poor and densely populated neighbourhoods within cities and suburban areas, with some of them being close to IDP settlements where humanitarian aid groups are active

Oxfam is supporting Raghad Jubran, one of 1690 families (11,830 people) in Bani Thawab sub-district of Abs district in Hajjah governorate.

Aid relief information and update

Health care facility information from UN Yemen HRP 2020

Figures for numbers facing starvation and reliant on food aid taken from here

Child malnutrition figures from UNICEF

For more information, or to arrange an interview please contact:
Kelsey-Rae Taylor on [email protected] or 021 298 5894

Air NZ “bought share of the blame” for Yemen humanitarian catastrophe with Saudi contract – Oxfam

February 12, 2021

Air New Zealand’s contract with the Saudi military is an unacceptable breach of international obligations and New Zealanders’ trust, said Oxfam today, as the aid agency called for the government’s investigation to be made public.

The $3m contract, signed by Air New Zealand in 2019 to repair critical engine components for Saudi naval vessels, is more than twice the value of New Zealand’s humanitarian assistance last year to the conflict in Yemen – the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

“With one hand, New Zealanders are donating critical funds through government and humanitarian agencies to save lives in Yemen, while with another, a New Zealand company, of which the New Zealand government is a majority stakeholder, is supporting a military accused by the UN of war crimes during this crisis,” said Oxfam New Zealand’s executive director, Rachael Le Mesurier. “The New Zealand public deserves an investigation that answers the question of whether or not this country has failed to live up to its legal and ethical obligations to the international community.”

Le Mesurier said the fact Air New Zealand could not answer whether its remaining military contracts were aiding international humanitarian crimes must spark a bigger conversation about how we hold New Zealand businesses to account. “It all points to the need for stronger measures to monitor and ensure New Zealand corporate compliance with human rights in their overseas operations.”

Since 2015, Saudi Arabia and its military coalition partners have been parties to the conflict in Yemen’s vicious civil war, leading the fighting and preventing shipments of life-saving supplies by air, land and sea– committing, the UN say, clear violations of International Humanitarian Law.

“Yemenis were looking to the people and Government of New Zealand to help put a stop to these outrageous violations; not enable them,” said Le Mesurier. “By providing services to the Saudi Navy, implicated in potential war crimes, Air New Zealand has bought a share of the blame for the resulting humanitarian catastrophe.”

After more than five years of war, over 24 million Yemenis – eighty per cent of the population – are in need of humanitarian assistance, with almost 4 million people displaced and half a million facing starvation. Saudi Arabia’s military has enforced intermittent blockades on Yemen’s ports, disrupting humanitarian access and preventing imports of food, water and medical supplies.

Le Mesurier said while it was good that Air New Zealand has since cancelled work on the contract, and the Government has announced it is investigating, it raises serious questions about the processes in place to monitor such deals. “Oxfam welcomes these first steps, but this contract suggests that many serious ethical failures occurred at many levels,” she said.

“Both Kiwis and the people of Yemen deserve better from the New Zealand government and the companies they trust. The prime minister must urgently deliver answers on whether this contract violated New Zealand’s international legal obligations, such as under the Arms Trade Treaty; and whether export control procedures were followed, and on what basis the contract was approved.

“If Air New Zealand – a company in which the government itself owns the majority of the shares – can circumvent export controls, what confidence do we have other companies aren’t doing the same?”, she asked.

Ibtisam Sageer Al Razehi, a 35-year-old former teacher and mother of three, lives with her children in the remains of the family house in Sa’ada city in Yemen, which was damaged by missiles and artillery fire. Her husband was killed by an airstrike in 2015.

“I lost my husband, my children lost their father, we lost the breadwinner and because of war I also lost my salary as our last hope for living,” she said.

“Humanitarian aid has decreased a lot; now we receive food every two months instead of every month. I appeal to the world to have mercy on the children of Yemen and stop this war. We are very tired of living in war for years, we lost everything beautiful in our lives, even the simple hope of peace.’’

-ends-

Notes to editors:

Article 6 of the Arms Trade Treaty prohibits the transfer of arms to countries where there is awareness of any war crimes or other serious violence against civilians. However, even where this threshold is not reached, Article 7.1 further requires that state parties ‘pursuant to its national control system, shall, in an objective and non-discriminatory manner, taking into account relevant factors, including information provided by the importing State in accordance with Article 8 (1), assess the potential that the conventional arms or items: […] could be used to:
- commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law;
- If, after conducting this assessment and considering available mitigating measures, the exporting State Party determines that there is an overriding risk of any of the negative consequences in paragraph 1, the exporting State Party shall not authorise the export.

For more information, or to arrange an interview please contact:

Kelsey-Rae Taylor on [email protected] or 021 298 5894

Monopolies causing “artificial rationing” in COVID-19 crisis as 3 biggest global vaccine giants sit on sidelines

February 5, 2021

The supply of safe and effective vaccines for all is being artificially rationed because of the protection of exclusive rights and monopolies of pharmaceutical corporations, the People’s Vaccine Alliance said today.

The alliance warned that the three biggest vaccine companies in the world are largely sitting on the sidelines – they currently plan to produce enough COVID-19 vaccines for only 1.5 per cent of the global population in 2021. A number of other large manufacturers are not yet producing any of the successful, proven COVID-19 vaccines.

At the same time, the producers of approved vaccines, Pfizer/ BioNTech, Moderna and AstraZeneca, aim to produce enough doses to vaccinate around a third the global population. But because rich countries have bought multiple doses of these vaccines the actual figure of humanity covered is a lot less. While Astra Zeneca has sold the majority of its doses to developing countries, Pfizer/ BioNTech and Moderna have sold almost all of their doses to rich nations, while failing to share their successful technology openly, despite huge public subsidies. Their vaccines are prohibitively expensive for many poor nations.

In the face of worldwide vaccine shortages and dramatic moves by the EU to restrict vaccine exports, the alliance, which includes the health NGO EMERGENCY, Frontline AIDS and Oxfam urged governments and the pharmaceutical industry to scale up production. It said they should remove the artificial barriers to tackling the global supply crisis, including by suspending intellectual property rules, sharing technology and ending monopoly control, so that everyone, everywhere has access to the vaccine as quickly as possible.

This week the Director General of the World Health Organisation, Dr Tedros Adhanom has said that sharing of technology and waiving of intellectual property will make vaccinating the world and controlling this disease possible.

Anna Marriott, Oxfam’s Health Policy Manager said: “The world is in a race to reach herd immunity to get this disease under control, save millions of lives and get our economy going again. This is a race we have to win before new mutations render our existing vaccines obsolete. Yet the pursuit of profits and monopolies means we are losing that race.

“People out there would be forgiven for thinking that every major vaccine company is working flat out to vaccinate the world, but this is simply not the case. We need every company on earth who can make safe and effective vaccines for COVID-19 to be making them right now. We urgently need to lift the veil of corporate secrecy and instead have open-source vaccines, mass produced by as many vaccine players as possible, including crucially those in developing countries.

“By refusing to share their technology and waive their intellectual property, companies like Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech, are artificially rationing the supply of successful vaccines with the hopes of reaping huge financial rewards. This is despite both benefiting from huge public subsidy. This will cost lives and prolong the economic pain which is hitting the poorest hardest.”

The three biggest global vaccine producing pharmaceutical corporations by market value are GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck and Sanofi and between them they have only pledged to produce 225 million vaccines this year. Earlier this week GSK announced that it will be working with CureVac to develop a vaccine to tackle emerging variants of COVID-19 next year and will help manufacture up to 100 million doses of CureVac’s vaccine which is still in clinical trials.

Last week Sanofi announced a deal to help produce 125 million doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, but this is a drop in the ocean in comparison to the scale of need and will likely only benefit EU countries. Before setbacks in the clinical trials of their own potential joint vaccine, Sanofi and GSK had supply deals to produce almost five times as many doses than they are offering to produce of Pfizer and CureVac’s COVID-19 vaccines respectively.

Merck, the second biggest vaccine company in the world had been building up capacity to produce hundreds of millions of doses of one or both of its COVID-19 vaccine candidates, but the company recently announced it would be discontinuing development of these vaccines due to poor trial results.

GSK, Sanofi and Merck have received over $2billion from the US government as part of its Operation Warp Speed to support production of vaccines.

Meanwhile the Danish pharmaceutical company Bavarian Nordic this week offered up the capacity to produce 240 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines in its factory, but none of the successful vaccine companies have taken up the offer so far.

More than 108 million people have been vaccinated so far, but only 4 per cent of total vaccinations have been in developing countries, the vast majority of which have been in India. Of the poorest countries in the world only Guinea has been able to vaccinate 55 people [1]. Rich countries have bought up enough doses to vaccinate their populations three times over, leaving developing countries to compete for the leftovers. Analysis by the Peoples Vaccine Alliance has shown that the limited supply of the approved vaccines means that unless action is taken only one in ten people will be vaccinated by the end of the year in many developing countries.

It is also likely that potential capacity in developing countries is being overlooked. The Serum Institute of India is already producing hundreds of millions of vaccines for COVID-19 on behalf of AstraZeneca and Novovax as well as developing their own, but there are at least 20 more vaccine manufacturers in India. Many other vaccine producers in developing and rich countries may already have or could quickly increase capacity to manufacture proven safe and effective vaccines if they had the know-how and intellectual property licenses. Globally, UNICEF data suggests just 43 per cent of reported COVID-19 vaccine production capacity is currently being used for the approved vaccines [2].

The People’s Vaccine Alliance is calling on US President Joe Biden and the governments of the UK and EU to use their emergency powers and to leverage their massive public funding to put pressure on Pfizer/ BioNTech, Astra Zeneca, Moderna and other subsequently successful vaccine producers, to openly share their vaccine science and technology, to waive their patents and insist that all other major vaccine producers get involved in production. President Biden could use the Defense Production Act to help maximise the production of vaccines in the coming months.

Lois Chingandu, Director of Frontline AIDS, said: “Over $100 billion of taxpayers money has funded these vaccines, while the companies behind the three successful vaccine candidates are set to make over $30 billion in revenue this year alone.

“Public investments mean these are public goods, which should be used to benefit all humanity, not private property there to benefit shareholders. Leaders must act now to override this broken system of patents, monopolies and secrecy to deliver a People’s Vaccine for all.”

Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech use mRNA technology, which potentially allows production to be rapidly scaled-up. Yet both companies are not committed to openly sharing their technology, leaving many potential producers on the sidelines.

The alliance is also calling on the US and other governments like Germany to invest in new production facilities especially in developing countries, in order to massively scale up the production of safe and effective vaccines and to build infrastructure that can respond better to future pandemics.

Heidi Chow, Senior Campaigns and Policy Manager at Global Justice Now, said: “Business as usual is not enough in a global pandemic. In times of war, manufacturers have often put aside normal competition to work together for a common cause. Surely governments should be insisting that the same spirit applies today, when so many people’s lives and livelihoods are at stake?”

/Ends

For more information, or to arrange an interview please contact:

Oxfam: Kelsey-Rae Taylor on [email protected] or 021 298 5894

Notes to editors:

The Peoples’ Vaccine Alliance is a coalition of global and national organizations and activists united under a common aim of campaigning for a ‘People’s Vaccine’. The call for a People’s Vaccine is backed by past and present world leaders, health experts, faith leaders and economists. For more information visit: https://peoplesvaccine.org

Global deaths from COVID-19 according to : https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daily-covid-deaths-region?time=2020-01-23..latest

Due to corporate secrecy it is unclear how much spare capacity exists, but the world’s COVID vaccine production capacity could be significantly expanded if all companies that were able to join the manufacturing effort, including critically developing country producers. Evidence shows this need not take time. Sanofi’s announcement that it will be making Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines by July 2021 demonstrates that transferring the vaccine technology and scaling up production can happen in a matter of months. It took the German Pharma firm BioNTech just four and a half months to repurpose a new plant to scale up production of COVID-19 vaccines. The example also shows that previous vaccine experience is not a necessity in making mRNA vaccines, meaning that the net can be cast much wider in the search for additional expert capacity if the intellectual property and technology is shared.

The figure of 1.5% is based on pledges from GSK & Sanofi to produce 100m & 125m doses respectively, which adds up to 225m doses. Both vaccines require 2 doses, so the reach would be 112m people, or 1.5% of the global population.

[1] As of 4^th February, Bloomberg’s global vaccine tracker reported a total of 108 million COVID-19 vaccine doses administered across 67 countries. Only 4.4 percent of vaccinations have been in developing countries, with 3.8 million of these vaccines being given in India. Of the poorest ‘low income’ countries, only 55 vaccines have been given in one country– Guinea. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/

[2] Numbers taken from UNICEF vaccine dashboard https://www.unicef.org/supply/covid-19-vaccine-market-dashboard on 4th February

We compare projected production capacity for all Covid-19 vaccine candidates with the capacity for those vaccines that are already approved.

According to several articles, Danish firm Bavarian Nordic has offered the use of a newly-operational factory, which It says could produce 240 million doses of Covid-19 vaccine per year: https://www.thelocal.dk/20210202/danish-company-offers-to-help-with-covid-19-vaccine-production

NGOs win historic victory against French State for failing to tackle climate change

February 4, 2021

Court battle backed by 2.34 million people – largest petition in French history
Landmark case will pile pressure on other governments to act faster

A landmark ruling today has found the French State at fault for failing to take enough action to tackle the climate crisis. The decision by the French court will serve as a warning to other governments to do more to reduce carbon emissions in line with their public commitments, said Oxfam France, a plaintiff in the case.

In December 2018, Oxfam France, Notre Affaire à Tous, the Nicolas Hulot Foundation and Greenpeace France launched a legal action against the French State for failing to reduce the country’s emissions fast enough to meet its commitments. More than 2.3 million people signed a petition supporting the action – the largest in French history.

It is the first time the French State has been taken to court over its responsibility on climate change. Today’s decision leaves the government open to compensation claims from French citizens who have suffered climate-related damage, and could force it to take further steps to reduce its emissions.

Cécile Duflot, Executive Director of Oxfam France, said: “Today’s decision is a historic victory for climate justice. For the first time, a French court has ruled that the State can be held responsible for its climate commitments. This sets an important legal precedent and can be used by people affected by the climate crisis to defend their rights. This is a source of hope for the millions of French people who demanded legal action, and for all of those who continue to fight for climate justice around the world. It is also a timely reminder to all governments that actions speak louder than words.”

The ruling comes as many countries are preparing more ambitious targets to reduce emissions, as required by the Paris Agreement. Governments are due to meet in Scotland later this year for the COP26 climate summit. Scientists and NGOs say the targets already announced – known as Nationally Determined Contributions – fall short of the cuts needed to avoid catastrophic global warming.

The French government’s proposed climate law is, by its own admission, not enough to achieve its target of cutting emissions 40% by 2030. Even this target is not enough to put the country on track to tackle the climate crisis, Oxfam France said.

This decision also serves as a timely reminder to all European governments and the European Commission to take their international commitments seriously and to lead in the fight against the climate crisis. The current EU climate target of a 55% cut to emissions is ambitious, but still falls short of what is needed to keep global temperature rise below 1.5C.

The French State has two months to appeal the court’s decision. While the four NGOs have asked the court to order the State to take additional measures to fulfill its climate commitments, the court decided to reserve its decision on this point for later in the Spring, to allow for further discussions between the French State and the NGOs.

Duflot said: “Following today’s breakthrough, we now hope the courts will compel the Government to take further steps to reduce emissions and ensure that France is living up to its commitments.”

Oxfam launched the legal action because the climate crisis is fueling poverty, hunger and inequality around the world. Often it is the poorest countries that have contributed least to the crisis that pay the highest price. In September 2020, Oxfam revealed that the richest one percent of people produce more than double the emissions of the poorest half of the world population combined.

Ends

Notes to editors:

Spokespeople are available in France and Brussels to comment.

In December 2020, EU leaders agreed on a new EU emissions reduction target of ‘at least 55%’ below 1990 levels by 2030. Oxfam estimates that cuts of more than 65% are needed for Europe to contribute its fair share of global emissions cuts needed to limit global heating to 1.5C.

This case in France follows a similar ruling in the Netherlands in 2019, in which the Supreme Court ordered the government to ramp up its emissions reduction target. There is also a similar case coming up in a Belgian court to enforce more ambitious climate policies. The number of climate litigation cases has doubled since 2017, according to a recent report by the UN Environment Program. As of July 2020, at least 1,550 climate change cases had been filed in 38 countries.

Oxfam’s report in September 2020, Confronting Carbon Inequality, found that the richest one percent of the world’s population are responsible for more than twice as much carbon pollution as the poorest 3.1 billion people during a critical 25-year period of emissions growth.

For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact:
Kelsey-Rae Taylor on [email protected] or +6421 298 5894.