The author argues that the situation in DRC illustrates the deficiency of global ethics, selfishness and the longstanding failure to value the lives of the African people. Tackling the DRC’s impasse requires a comprehensive approach and involvement of national, regional, continental and international communities. The author argues that the DRC is embroiled in a geo-political and economic strategic battle in the search for scarce resources that are abundant in Congo. It is the paradox of the resource curse. It is hardly remembered that sustainable extraction of the minerals would benefit global interests longer and the rain forests in the DRC are vital to curbing climate change. Tackling the DRC’s impasse is argued to require a comprehensive approach and involvement of national, regional, continental and international actors, coupled with continued research to inform policies and praxis. Equally, varied strategies designed from local cultures, African philosophy and interdisciplinary academic views are vital.
Health equity in economic and trade policies
Chief negotiators of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have "initialled" the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union during a joint negotiation session in Pretoria, South Africa on 15 July.
This report documents the progression of events in Chiadzwa Zimbabwe in terms of diamond mining and trading, the socio-economic and environmental impacts and the conflict between authorities, (government agencies) and the local communities. The project had as its objective to inform the degree of adherence to the doctrine of 'Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources'. The intrusion of mining in Chiadzwa is argued to have displaced the cultural and social mosaic while privatising the commons and subjecting the villagers to several risks and harms with minimal benefits. The existence of clandestine networks is reported to have made an underhand diamond economy
injurious to the prospective diamond-anchored economic resurgence, limiting the benefit sharing arrangements. The authors argue that the extractive nature of the diamond industry should be accompanied with appropriate observance of environmental laws, appropriate corporate social responsibility and transparent accountability by all stakeholders.
In July the WTO’s poorest members, known as the Least Developed Country (LDC) Group, submitted a collective request regarding the preferential treatment they would like to see for their services and service suppliers. The move comes seven months after the global trade body’s ministerial conference in Bali, Indonesia, where members agreed to take steps for bringing this “services waiver” into operation. The LDC services waiver, as it is referred to in trade circles, was initially an outcome of the 2011 WTO Ministerial Conference, held in Geneva, Switzerland. However, in the two years that followed, no preferences had been requested by LDCs or granted to them, prompting WTO members to reconsider ways to use the services waiver. As a result, at the WTO’s subsequent ministerial conference in Bali, Indonesia last December, members agreed to initiate a process aimed at promoting the “expeditious and effective operationalisation” of the LDC services waiver. Over the next six months, WTO members will engage in consultations with the LDC Group in order to respond to the collective request at the high-level meeting. The LDCs have reserved the right to modify the request’s terms ahead of the event.
Creating “ownership” of seed through patents and intellectual property rights and imposing it globally through the World Trade Organisation, the author argues that the biotech industry has established a monopoly empire over seed and food. The author argues that the biotech industry is denying citizens the right to safe food and attempting to dismantle national laws on biosafety across Africa. The author argues that the public relations machinery of the biotech industry undermines counterarguments to GMOs by unfounded attacks on scientists. However she also points to growing citizens’ outrage, and to sovereign countries rejecting the industrial monopoly over food systems.
African governments are under intense pressure from within but also from big agribusiness and Western governments to embrace genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Throughout Africa, GMOs - organisms that have been biologically modified to incorporate genes with desired traits - are now being touted as a major solution to hunger and mass poverty. Supporters of biotechnology, like Kenyan-born Harvard scholar Prof Calestous Juma, believe that with GMOs Africa, which has 60 per cent of all the arable land, will be able to feed not just its people but the world. The author argues that governments must resist all forms of arm-twisting and food colonialism and make their biotechnology choices based on the facts. There are three basic concerns about GMOs. First, the science is at best inconclusive regarding the safety of genetically engineered organisms on human health and the environment. The second concern is about food sovereignty. Opponents are convinced that the campaign for GMOs is part of the neoliberal agenda to place agricultural production in the hands of a few corporate giants through seed patents and deny small farmers control of production. Finally, the author argues that the GMOs crusade distorts the debate about food security and poverty alleviation. The problems afflicting small farmers are argued to have very little to do with technology, and almost everything to do with unequal access to land, water, affordable inputs, markets and other resources.
The rest of the world takes from Africa much more than the continent receives. Almost $60 billion more. $192 billion flows out of Africa each year. This report outlines the range of different flows draining out of Africa, as well as the costs imposed on the continent as a result of climate change and explores the reasons for this. Curbing illicit financial flows is argued to demand greater transparency and accountability in the global financial system. This would involve clamping down on shell corporations; improved disclosure of beneficial owners of companies; stricter company
reporting regulations on sales, profits and taxes; and exchanging tax information across borders. Instead of talking about ‘good governance in Africa’ the authors argue that Northern countries must take the lead to reduce the mass extraction of African capital that embeds poverty and inequality, including revenue leakages from extractive industries and fairer trade practices between African countries and MNCs.
The author asserts "there will be no drilling in paradise". Soco International, a British oil company, has abandoned plans to drill for oil in Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The park is a World Heritage Site, and UNESCO says it is Africa's richest trove of natural beauty and biodiversity. Soco will leave in about a month, after completing a seismic survey of the park's Lake Edward, where drilling was to have commenced. Tens of thousands of local people depend on the lake for fish, and it is also home to thousands of hippopotamuses. Soco has vowed not to drill in the park without permission from UNESCO, and to keep out of all the world's 981 World Heritage Sites. The firm was under pressure after an expert report last month on the status of the park. French company Total pulled out last year. The DRC government has yet to remove overall permission for oil companies to search and drill for oil in the park.
The authors have done a comparative study of revenue allocation in mineral-rich contexts, looking at existing criteria and reform modalities adopted to allocate and use EI revenues and examining the political bargains that enabled such distribution. The authors contend that two factors are crucially important - and explanatory of - devolution of revenues to subnational jurisdictions: the bargaining power of subnational actors as well as their connectedness to the central politics.
International policy towards access to essential medicines in Africa has focused until recently on international procurement of large volumes of medicines, mainly from Indian manufacturers, and their import and distribution. This emphasis is now being challenged by renewed policy interest in the potential benefits of local pharmaceutical production and supply. However, there is a shortage of evidence on the role of locally produced medicines in African markets, and on potential benefits of local production for access to medicines. This article contributes to filling that gap. This article uses WHO/HAI data from Tanzania for 2006 and 2009 on prices and sources of a set of tracer essential medicines. It employs innovative graphical methods of analysis alongside conventional statistical testing. Medicines produced in Tanzania were equally likely to be found in rural and in urban areas. Imported medicines, especially those imported from countries other than Kenya (mainly from India) displayed 'urban bias?: that is, they were significantly more likely to be available in urban than in rural areas. This finding holds across the range of sample medicines studied, and cannot be explained by price differences alone. While different private distribution networks for essential medicines may provide part of the explanation, this cannot explain why the urban bias in availability of imported medicines is also found in the public sector. The findings suggest that enhanced local production may improve rural access to medicines. The potential benefits of local production and scope for their improvement are an important field for further research, and indicate a key policy area in which economic development and health care objectives may reinforce each other.