Asia can lead global transformation towards low-carbon and resilience

Asia-Pacific Climate Week in Bangkok – Thailand (APCW 2019) wrapped up today – with participants agreeing a set of key takeaways on what steps urgently need to be taken for the region to be able to profit from the advantages of the transition to low carbon and resilience and the worst impacts of climate change.
The compelling social and economic reasons to rapidly shift to low-carbon and resilience were outlined by high-level speakers who warned that current levels of ambition to tackle climate change are insufficient, putting the world on a path towards global warming of more than 3 degrees Celsius.
A key takeaway was that Asia-Pacific region can lead the global transformation in line with a 1.5 Celsius, climate resilient world. Holding the global average temperature rise is the central goal of the Paris Climate Change Agreement.
Participants at the gathering agreed that the transformation to low carbon and resilience in Asia can be driven not only by governments, but by dynamic subnational regions and cities, an innovative private sector, political leadership and finance.
Youth groups played an important role at Asia-Pacific Climate Week, engaging with participants and covering the discussions on social media accounts. Over half of the global population of 1.8 billion young people live in the Asia-Pacific region, whose future is at stake.
The messages will be an important input to the Climate Action Summit convened by the UN secretary-general on September 23 in New York. The results will also help build momentum towards the UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) that will take place in Santiago, Chile, December 2-13, 2019.
Countries are currently designing enhanced national climate action plans under the Paris Agreement (Nationally Determined Contribution, or NDCs) and the Summit in New York will be an opportunity for governments and many climate action players to announce new plans and initiatives before the NDCs are communicated to the UN in 2020.
The Bangkok gathering included an ‘NDC Dialogue’ for the Asia-Pacific Region. At the dialogue, government representatives highlighted the importance of providing economic incentives like the creation of quality green jobs, whist ensuring there is a just transition to low carbon, with nobody left behind.
Climate change adaptation planning and finance were a key theme throughout APCW 2019, with a focus on communities and ecosystems that need it most.
On the issue of building resilience to climate change, representatives of indigenous peoples from the Asia-Pacific region and academics as well as other stakeholders with diverse backgrounds engaged at an event where they stressed the need for a shift in mindset in the fight against climate change.
The group proposed concrete pathways to help transform societies to achieve long-term resilience for all. 
Other issues discussed at APCW 2019 were carbon pricing, the enhanced transparency framework, capacity-building and regional climate finance, above all for highly vulnerable nations.
At Asia Pacific Climate Week, work started on a new climate strategy for Indian Ocean Island States to access finance for priority projects, similar to the sub-regional Climate Finance Strategy developed for the four Melanesian island States of Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu.
The UN Climate Change Secretariat is assisting 10 sub-regions involving 77 countries in Asia Pacific, Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean in preparing strategies to access scaled up climate finance.
APCW 2019 is the third Regional Climate Week to be organized this year, following a Regional Climate Week in Africa in Accra, Ghana in March and a Regional Climate Week in Salvador, Brazil in August. Altogether a total of 10,000 registrations were recorded for the 3 events demonstrating the growing interest for these issues.
Next year a new Regional Climate Week in the Middle East and North Africa region will take place in the United Arab Emirates and will be delivered in collaboration with the World Green Economy Organization (WGEO), the hosting organisation for the UN Climate Change Regional Collaboration Centre based in Dubai, for the MENA region and the South Asian region.

Nepal third most peaceful country in South Asia

Nepal is the third most peaceful country in South Asia. Though economic cost of voilance stood at $4226.9 million, Nepal has been ranked at 76th position, out of 163 countries, in the Global Peace Index 2019.
Nepal – climbing by 12 notches – has been ranked 76th most peaceful country – among 163 independent states and territories – in the world, and the third most peaceful country in South Asia, according to the 13th edition of the report produced by the Australia-based Institute for Economics and Peace measures the peacefulness according to factors such as military spending and deaths from conflict and terrorism, as well as an estimated economic cost of violence.
In South Asia, Bhutan ranked 15th followed by Sri Lanka (72), Bangladesh (101), India (141), Pakistan (153) and the Afghanistan (163) the least peaceful country in the World. The average South Asian score improved last year due to improvements in Nepal, Pakistan, Bhutan and a slight gain in Afghanistan. But the region still has the second lowest rank, just ahead of its neighbour Middle East and Northern America (MENA).
South Asia’s regional scores are bolstered by Bhutan, which is now the 15th most peaceful country in the world, after rising two places in 2019. The country improved in four indicators, deteriorated in only two and maintained strong scores in another 15, the report reads. “Only the police rate and the incarceration rate remain above a score of two.”
Very few Bhutanese were displaced, but the country did improve further on the refugees and IDPs indicator, as did its regional neighbour Afghanistan. Bhutan and Pakistan were amongst the 25 countries with the largest reductions in the homicide rate last year.
The region typically outperforms the global average on this indicator. Similarly, South Asia usually has lower levels of violent crime than the rest of the world, as the region’s challenges are more likely to be political than criminal.
While the regional impact of terrorism score showed almost no change in the 2019 index, the Easter attacks in Sri Lanka demonstrate that the region is not unaffected. Nearly 300 churchgoers and tourists were killed in coordinated attacks, credit for which was claimed by ISIL afterward. However, the Easter attack occurred after the cut-off for the 2019 GPI and is not included in this year’s index.
South Asia’s score for every indicator in Ongoing Conflict is less peaceful than the global average, with four out of six deteriorating last year. Only deaths from internal conflict improved, with fewer fatalities in Pakistan, Afghanistan and India than the year prior.
However, the number and duration of internal conflicts fought worsened in Afghanistan and Bangladesh. The score for internal conflicts fought had the highest rating at five in both India and Pakistan.
Afghanistan is the least peaceful country in the world, replacing Syria, which is now the second least peaceful one, the report further reads, claiming that the gap between the least and most peaceful countries ‘continues to grow’. Eighty-six countries improved their score in the 2019 report, while 76 deteriorated. “South Sudan, Yemen, and Iraq comprise the remaining five least peaceful countries.”
Iceland remains the most peaceful country in the world, a position it has held since 2008, the report reads, adding that New Zealand, Austria, Portugal, and Denmark, with European nations dominate the top of the list, according to their level of peacefulness.
The report that covers 99.7 per cent of the world’s population and uses 23 qualitative and quantitative indicators – grouping into three key domains; ongoing conflict, safety and security, and militarisation – from highly respected sources to compile the index.
Global peacefulness improves for the first time in five years, but the world continues to be less peaceful than a decade ago.
The average level of global peacefulness improved very slightly last year on the 2019 Global Peace Index (GPI). This was the first time that the index improved in the last five years. The average country score improved by -0.09 per cent, with 86 countries improving and 76 recording deteriorations. Iceland remains the most peaceful country in the world, a position it has held since 2008. It is joined at the top of the index by New Zealand, Austria, Portugal, and Denmark. Bhutan has recorded the largest improvement of any country in the top 20, rising 43 places in the last 12 years.
Despite the improvement this year, the world remains considerably less peaceful now than a decade ago, with the average level of peacefulness deteriorating by 3.78 per cent since 2008. The Global peacefulness has only improved for three of the last ten years. A wide range of factors drove the fall in peacefulness over the past decade including increased terrorist activity, the intensification of conflicts in the Middle East, rising regional tensions in Eastern Europe and northeast Asia, increasing numbers of refugees, and heightened political tensions in Europe and the US. This deterioration was partially offset by improvements in many of the measures of the Militarisation domain of the GPI. There has been a consistent reduction in military expenditure as a percentage of GDP for the majority of countries, as well as a fall in the armed services personnel rate for most countries in the world.
The economic impact of violence on the global economy in 2018 amounted to $14.1 trillion in constant purchasing power parity (PPP) terms. This is equivalent to 11.2 per cent of the world’s GDP or $1,853 per person. In 2018, the economic impact of violence improved for the first time since 2012, decreasing by 3.3 per cent or $475 billion. The decline in the economic impact of violence is reflective of the improvement in global peacefulness, which is discussed in section one of this report. The reduction was primarily due to a decline in the costs associated with Armed Conflict. This improvement was mainly due to lower levels of armed conflict in Syria, Colombia and Ukraine. This also resulted in a positive knock-on effect for refugees and internally displaced persons and terrorism, with reductions in the costs for both.
For the first time, the GPI 2019 includes research on climate change and peace. The impacts of fluctuating climate conditions on societal stability and its potential to lead to violent conflict is of growing importance. Although long-term quantitative data on the interactions of climate and peace is scarce, what is available suggests that climate has played a role in triggering or exacerbating conflict through its effects on livelihood security and resource availability.
The effects of climate shocks on factors such as resource scarcity, livelihood security and displacement can greatly increase the risk of future violent conflict, even when climate change does not directly cause conflict. An estimated 971 million people live in areas with high or very high exposure to climate hazards, putting them at risk for both extreme weather events and breakdowns in peacefulness in the coming decades. Of this number, 41 per cent reside in countries with low levels of peacefulness, while 22 per cent are in countries with high levels of peace. The Asia-Pacific and South Asia regions collectively house twice as many people in high exposure climate zones as all other regions combined. A risk assessment carried out by the Index for Risk Management in 2019 found that South Asia, Asia-Pacific and Central America and the Caribbean have weaker coping capacities and higher risk to natural hazards as compared to other regions.
The GPI 2019 also includes new data on wellbeing and perceptions of peacefulness. The reports shows that there have been increases in average feelings of life satisfaction and well being, perceptions of safety, and confidence in the local police and military, despite the last decade showing a decline in peacefulness around the world. Perceptions of peacefulness have increased in some areas but decreased in others. More people across the world now feel that they have more freedom in life, are more satisfied with life, and are treated with more respect than in 2008. Many more people also feel that their countries are better places to live for ethnic and religious minorities. However, daily feelings of sadness, worry, and stress have also increased over the same time. There is a strong correlation between perceptions of peacefulness and actual peacefulness as measured by the GPI. Both men and women in more peaceful countries are more likely to report that they feel safe walking alone at night than people in less peaceful countries. There is also a greater level of trust in police in more peaceful societies.

Nepal ranks 76th most peaceful country in the world

Nepal is the 76th most peaceful country in the world, according to the thirteenth edition of the Global Peace Index (GPI) – which ranks 163 independent states and territories according to their level of peacefulness – Produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP).
The Global Peace Index 2019 – the world’s leading measure of global peacefulness that covers 99.7 per cent of the world’s population – has awarded Nepal with a score of 2.0003. “Nepal has improved its position by 12 ranks from the previous year,” according to the Index that has ranked Bhutan in the 15th place, Sri Lanka in the 72nd position, and Bangladesh, China, India and Pakistan in 101st, 110th, 141st and 153rd position, respectively. “Afghanistan is in the last (163rd) position of the list.”
“The average South Asian score improved last year due to improvements in Nepal, Pakistan, Bhutan and a slight gain in Afghanistan,” according to the index. “However, the region still has the second lowest rank, just ahead of its neighbour MENA.”
Based on 23 qualitative and quantitative indicators from highly respected sources, and measures the state of peace using three thematic domains: the level of societal safety and security; the extent of ongoing domestic and international conflict; and the degree of militarisation, the GPI report presents the most comprehensive data-driven analysis to date on peace, its economic value, trends, and how to develop peaceful societies.
In addition to presenting the findings from the 2019 GPI, this year’s report includes analysis of trends in Positive Peace: the attitudes, institutions, and structures that create and sustain peaceful societies. It looks at the relationship between the actual peace of a country, as measured by the GPI, and Positive Peace, and how a deficit of Positive Peace is often a predictor of future increases in violent conflict. It also looks at the dynamic relationship between changes in Positive Peace and changes in the economy.
The results this year show that the average level of global peacefulness improved very slightly in the 2019 GPI. This is the first time the index has improved in five years. The average country score improved by 0.09 per cent, with 86 countries improving, and 76 recording deteriorations. The 2019 GPI reveals a world in which the conflicts and crises that emerged in the past decade have begun to abate, but new tensions within and between nations have emerged.
Iceland remains the most peaceful country in the world, a position it has held since 2008. It is joined at the top of the index by New Zealand, Austria, Portugal, and Denmark. Likewise, Bhutan has recorded the largest improvement of any country in the top 20, rising 43 places in the last 12 years.
Afghanistan is now the least peaceful country in the world, replacing Syria, which is now the second least peaceful. South Sudan, Yemen, and Iraq comprise the remaining five least peaceful countries. This is the first year since the inception of the index that Yemen has been ranked amongst the five least peaceful countries.
The economic impact of violence on the global economy in 2018 was $14.1 trillion in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms, the report reads, adding that the figure is equivalent to 11.2 per cent of the world’s economic activity (gross world product) or $1,853 for every person. “The economic impact of violence improved by 3.3 per cent during 2018.”
The greatest improvement was in Armed Conflict, which decreased by 29 per cent to $672 billion, owing to a fall in the intensity of conflict in Syria, Colombia and Ukraine. There was also a substantial reduction in the economic impact of terrorism, which fell by 48 per cent from 2017 to 2018.
Violence continues to have a significant impact on economic performance around the globe. In the ten countries most affected by violence, the average economic cost of violence was equivalent to 35 per cent of GDP, compared to just 3.3 per cent in the countries least affected by violence. Syria, Afghanistan and the Central African Republic incurred the largest economic cost of violence in 2018 as a percentage of their GDP, equivalent to 67, 47 and 42 per cent of GDP, respectively.
The economic impact of violence model includes data on suicide for the first time in the 2019 GPI. The report finds that the economic impact of suicide is higher than that of Armed Conflict, amounting to $737 billion in 2018.
Similarly, the report also finds that Positive Peace is dynamically associated with economic development. There is a strong correlation between changes in the Positive Peace Index and GDP growth between 2005 and 2018. “Greater household consumption is a key reason for the link between improvements in Positive Peace and economic performance,” it reads, adding that households are particularly helped by improvements in public administration. 

Prosperity is growing, but not equally

Global prosperity continues to rise and is at its highest ever point, the median score has moved up the equivalent of 15 places since 2007, according to a report.
"Since 2013, some 113 countries have improved their Prosperity Score, and since last year 95 countries improved their score," according to The Legatum Prosperity Index 2018 published today.
"However, this improvement is not shared equally," it reads, adding that the gap between the largest and smallest scores has been growing steadily since 2013, and this year the gap is the largest it has ever been.
Business Environment has seen the largest one year gain at a global level, having risen in every region. The greatest 10 year gains have been in Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa and Eastern Europe, and one of the main drivers is an improvement in the entrepreneurial environment in these regions.
North America was the strongest region this year, and improved primarily due to improved Personal Freedom, Governance and Economic Quality. MENA experienced the largest fall, due largely to worsening Personal Freedom and Social Capital. In particular, MENA has seen worsening basic legal rights this year, due to a fall in the civil liberties indicator.
Safety and Security continues to fall globally, and in five out of seven regions. This is driven primarily by falls in the security of people’s living conditions, with the largest falls in Latin America and the Caribbean due to fewer people reporting that they could afford sufficient food and shelter.
"The number of women in national legislatures around the world has been increasing steadily over the last decade, increasing from 15 per cent representation in 2007 to 20.7 per cent in 2018," it reads.
Likewise, Asia-Pacific is the fifth most prosperous of the world’s seven regions. Prosperity in the region has grown faster than any other in 2016-17, and is now close to the world average. "Some 12 countries rose, and 12 fell," it states, adding, " The Asia-Pacific top ten has not changed since last year."
The countries within Asia-Pacific have the broadest spread of prosperity – New Zealand sits at number two and Afghanistan at 146.
The pillar that has improved the most across the region since 2007 is Business Environment, particularly in East Asian countries such as China and Indonesia. Governance across the region has also seen positive change. A notable example is legislation in India that increased the ability to challenge regulation in the legal system.
Asia-Pacific is the weakest performer of any region on the Natural Environment pillar, mainly due to air pollution and access to clean drinking water. Asia-Pacific countries occupy the bottom eight places of the Index for air quality, with China at the very bottom.