A Consultation on “Technology Cooperation for Addressing Climate Change” was organized jointly by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF), Government of India and UNDP in India. This publication comprises commissioned papers which were presented and discussed at the consultation. The publication presents critical viewpoints related to climate change technologies and technology cooperation in order to highlight associated issues, challenges and opportunities. To this effect, it brings together perspectives for enabling more informed discussions on issues of technology cooperation for addressing climate change and is a significant contribution to national and global discussions on Climate Technology Cooperation Mechanism. http://www.beta.undp.org/
Tuesday, 17 January 2012
Fighting Corruption in the Health Sector: Methods, Tools and Good Practices
This publication is part of a series of UNDP-sponsored studies that present methods, tools and good practices to map corruption risks, develop strategies and sustain partnerships to address challenges and tackle corruption in the education, health and water sectors. They complement UNDP’s MDG Acceleration Framework (MAF), which has been endorsed by the UN Development Group and enables governments and development partners, within established national processes, to identify and systematically prioritize the bottlenecks to progress toward achieving the MDGs, and then devise strategies to overcome them. The studies bring together UNDP’s efforts to support countries to develop frameworks to accelerate their efforts to meet the MDGs as well as successfully meet the commitments of the UN Convention against Corruption. http://www.beta.undp.org/
ICT Applications for the Smart Grid : Opportunities and Policy Implications
The smart grid is revolutionizing electricity production and consumption. However, strategic use of ICTs and the Internet in energy innovation requires clarifying the roles of partners coming from distinct industries. And it begs for greater coordination of government departments and stakeholder communities that so far had unrelated competencies. This report outlines opportunities, challenges and public policy implications from shifts to ICT-enabled, "smart" electricity grids.
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/
Facts You Must Know About Nigeria Fuel Subsidy
Pastor 'Tunde Bakare delivered this expose on Fuel Subsidy at The Latter Rain Assembly a few hours ago. Please read, digest, and share with as many people as you can. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!
1) DEFINITION
To subsidise is to sell a product below the cost of production. Since the federal government has been secretive about the state of our refineries and their production capacity, we will focus on importation rather than production. So, in essence, within the Nigerian Fuel Subsidy context, to subsidise is to sell petrol below the cost of importation.
2) THE UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
The Nigerian government claims that Nigerians consume 34 million litres of petrol per day. The government has also said publicly that N141 per litre is the unsubsidised pump price of petrol imported into Nigeria. (N131.70 kobo being the landing price and N9.30 kobo being profit.)
3) ANNUAL COST OF IMPORTATION
Daily Fuel Consumption: 34 million litres
Cost at Pump: N141.00
No. of days in a regular year: 365 days
Total cost of all petrol imported yearly into Nigeria:
Litres Naira Days
34m x 141 x 365
= N1.75 trillion
4) COST BORNE BY THE CONSUMERS
Nigerians have been paying N65 per litre for fuel, haven’t we? Therefore, cost borne by the consumers =
Litres Naira Days
34m x 65 x 365
= N807 billion
5) COST OF SUBSIDY BORNE BY THE GOVERNMENT
In 2011 alone, government claimed to have spent N1.3 trillion by October – the bill for the full year, assuming a constant rate of consumption is N1.56 trillion.
Consequently, the true cost of subsidy borne by the government is:
Total cost of importation minus total borne by consumers, i.e. N1.75 trillion minus N807 billion = N943 billion.
Unexplainable difference: N617 billion
The federal government of Nigeria cannot explain the difference between the amount actually disbursed for subsidy and the cost borne by Nigerians (N1.56 trillion minus N943 billion = N617 billion).
6) BOGUS CLAIM BY THE GOVERNMENT
A government official has claimed that the shortfall of N617 billion is what goes to subsidising our neighbours through smuggling. This is pathetic. But let us assume (assumption being the lowest level of knowledge) that the government is unable to protect our borders and checkmate the brisk smuggling going on. Even then, the figures still don’t add up. This is because even if 50% of the petrol consumed in each of our neighbouring countries is illegally exported from Nigeria, the figures are still inaccurate. Why?
WORLD BANK’S FIGURES: POPULATIONS OF WEST AFRICAN COUNTRIES
NIGERIA: 158.4 million
BENIN: 8.8 million
TOGO: 6 million
CAMEROUN: 19.2 million
NIGER: 15.5 million
CHAD: 11.2 million
GHANA: 24.4 million
The total population of all our six (6) neighbours is 85.5 million.
Let’s do some more arithmetic:
a) Rate of Petrol Consumption in Nigeria: Total consumed divided by total population:
34 million litres divided by 158.8 million people = 0.21 litres per person per day.
b) Rate of Petrol Consumption in all our 6 neighbouring countries, assumed to be the same as Nigeria:
0.2 litres x 85.5 million people = 18.35 million litres per day
Now, if we assume that 50% of the petrol consumed in all the six neighbouring countries comes from Nigeria, this value come to 9.18 million litres per day.
7) PATHETIC ABSURDITY
There are two illogicalities flowing from this smuggling saga.
a) If 9.18 million litres of petrol is truly smuggled out of our borders per day, then ours is the most porous nation in the word. This is why: The biggest fuel tankers in Nigeria have a capacity of about 36,000 litres. To smuggle 9.18 million litres of fuel, you need 254 trucks. What our government is telling us is that 254 huge tankers pass through our borders every day and they cannot do anything about it. This is not just acute incompetence, but also a serious security challenge. For if the government cannot stop 254 tanker trailers from crossing the border daily, how can they stop importation of weapons or even invasion by a foreign country?
b) 2nd illogicality:
Even if we believe the government and assume that about 9.18 million litres is actually taken to our neighbours by way of smuggling every day, and all this is subsidised by the Nigerian government, the figures being touted as subsidy still don’t add up. This is why:
Difference between pump price before and after subsidy removal =
N141.00 – N65.00 = N76.00
Total spent on subsidizing petrol to our neighbours annually =
N76.00 x 9.18 million litres x 365 days = N255 billion
If you take the N255 billion away from the N617 billion shortfall that the government cannot explain, there is still a shortfall of N362 billion. The government still needs to tell us what/who is eating up this N362 billion ($2.26 billion USD).
ILLOGICAL ASSUMPTIONS
i) We have assumed that there are no working refineries in Nigeria and so no local petrol production whatsoever – yet, there is, even if the refineries are working below capacity.
ii) Nigeria actually consumes 34 million litres of petrol per day. Most experts disagree and give a figure between 20 and 25 million litres per day. Yet there is still an unexplainable shortfall even if we use the exaggerated figure of the government.
iii) Ghana, Togo, Benin, Cameroun, Niger, and Chad all consume the same rate as Nigeria and get 50% of their petrol illegally from Nigeria through smuggling.
These figures simply show the incompetence and insincerity of our government officials. This is pure banditry.
9) FACT 9: The simplest part of the fuel subsidy arithmetic will reveal one startling fact: That the government does not need to subsidise our petrol at all if we reject corruption and sleaze as a way of life. Check this out:
a) NNPC crude oil allocation for local consumption = 400,000 barrels per day (from a total of 2.450 million barrels per day).
b) If our refineries work at just 30%, 280,000 barrels can be sold on the international market, leaving the rest for local production.
c) Money accruing to the federal government through NNPC on the sale, using $80/bbl – a conservative figure as against the current price of $100/bbl – would be $22.4m per day. Annually this translates to $8.176bn or N1.3 trillion.
d) The government does not need to subsidise our petrol imports - at least not from the Federation Account. The same crude that should have been refined by NNPC is simply sold on the international market (since our refineries barely work) and the money is used to buy petrol. The 400,000 barrels per day given to NNPC for local consumption can either be refined by NNPC or sold to pay for imports. This absurdity called subsidy should be funded with this money, not the regular FGN budget.
If the FGN uses it regular budget for subsidising petrol, then what happens to the crude oil given to NNPC for local refining that gets sold on the international market?
10) TACTICAL BLUNDER
The federal government is making the deregulation issue a revenue problem. Nigerians are not against deregulation. We have seen deregulation in the telecom sector and Nigerians are better for it, as even the poor have access to telephones now right before the eyes of those who think it is not for them. What is happening presently is not deregulation but an all-time high fuel pump increase, unprecedented in the history of our nation by a government that has gone broke due to excessive and reckless spending largely on themselves. If the excesses of all the three tiers of government are seriously curbed, that would free enough money for infrastructural development without unduly punishing the poor citizens of this country.
Let me just cite, in closing, the example of National Assembly excesses and misplaced spending as contained in the 2012 budget proposal:
1.Number of Senators 109
2.Number of Members of the House of Representatives 360
3.Total Number of Legislators 469
4.2012 Budget Proposal for the National Assembly N150 billion
5.Average Cost of Maintaining Each Member N320 million
6.Average Cost of Maintaining Each Member in USD $2.1 million/year
Time has come for the citizens of this country to hold the government accountable and demand the prosecution of those bleeding our nation to death. Until this government downsizes, cuts down its profligacy and leads by example in modesty and moderation, the poor people of this country will not and must not subsidise the excesses of the oil sector fat cats and the immorality precipitate fiscal scandal of the self-centred and indulgent lifestyles of those in government.
Here is a hidden treasure of wisdom for those in power while there is still time to make amends:
PROVERBS 21:6&7
“Getting treasures by a lying tongue is the fleeting fantasy of those who seek death. The violence of the wicked will destroy them because they refuse to do just.”
A word of counsel for those who voted for such soulishly indulgent leadership:
“Never trust a man who once had no shoes, or you may end up losing your legs.”
This is the conclusion of the matter on subsidy removal:
i) “If a ruler pays attention to lies, all his servants become wicked.” (Proverbs 29:12)
ii) “The Righteous God wisely considers the house of the wicked, overthrowing the wicked for their wickedness. Whoever shuts his ears to the cry of the poor will also cry himself and will not be heard.” (Proverbs 21:12&13)
Thanks for your attention. God bless you all.
Pastor ‘Tunde Bakare
--
Rehema
Patriot in Kampala,East Africa
When the boot of government is on your neck,it doesn't matter if it's left or right. Today is Buganda, tomorrow is some one else. Click on both links to listen to these revolutionary songs, courtesy of UAH Forum:
http://ugandansatheart.files.
http://ugandansatheart.files.
1) DEFINITION
To subsidise is to sell a product below the cost of production. Since the federal government has been secretive about the state of our refineries and their production capacity, we will focus on importation rather than production. So, in essence, within the Nigerian Fuel Subsidy context, to subsidise is to sell petrol below the cost of importation.
2) THE UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
The Nigerian government claims that Nigerians consume 34 million litres of petrol per day. The government has also said publicly that N141 per litre is the unsubsidised pump price of petrol imported into Nigeria. (N131.70 kobo being the landing price and N9.30 kobo being profit.)
3) ANNUAL COST OF IMPORTATION
Daily Fuel Consumption: 34 million litres
Cost at Pump: N141.00
No. of days in a regular year: 365 days
Total cost of all petrol imported yearly into Nigeria:
Litres Naira Days
34m x 141 x 365
= N1.75 trillion
4) COST BORNE BY THE CONSUMERS
Nigerians have been paying N65 per litre for fuel, haven’t we? Therefore, cost borne by the consumers =
Litres Naira Days
34m x 65 x 365
= N807 billion
5) COST OF SUBSIDY BORNE BY THE GOVERNMENT
In 2011 alone, government claimed to have spent N1.3 trillion by October – the bill for the full year, assuming a constant rate of consumption is N1.56 trillion.
Consequently, the true cost of subsidy borne by the government is:
Total cost of importation minus total borne by consumers, i.e. N1.75 trillion minus N807 billion = N943 billion.
Unexplainable difference: N617 billion
The federal government of Nigeria cannot explain the difference between the amount actually disbursed for subsidy and the cost borne by Nigerians (N1.56 trillion minus N943 billion = N617 billion).
6) BOGUS CLAIM BY THE GOVERNMENT
A government official has claimed that the shortfall of N617 billion is what goes to subsidising our neighbours through smuggling. This is pathetic. But let us assume (assumption being the lowest level of knowledge) that the government is unable to protect our borders and checkmate the brisk smuggling going on. Even then, the figures still don’t add up. This is because even if 50% of the petrol consumed in each of our neighbouring countries is illegally exported from Nigeria, the figures are still inaccurate. Why?
WORLD BANK’S FIGURES: POPULATIONS OF WEST AFRICAN COUNTRIES
NIGERIA: 158.4 million
BENIN: 8.8 million
TOGO: 6 million
CAMEROUN: 19.2 million
NIGER: 15.5 million
CHAD: 11.2 million
GHANA: 24.4 million
The total population of all our six (6) neighbours is 85.5 million.
Let’s do some more arithmetic:
a) Rate of Petrol Consumption in Nigeria: Total consumed divided by total population:
34 million litres divided by 158.8 million people = 0.21 litres per person per day.
b) Rate of Petrol Consumption in all our 6 neighbouring countries, assumed to be the same as Nigeria:
0.2 litres x 85.5 million people = 18.35 million litres per day
Now, if we assume that 50% of the petrol consumed in all the six neighbouring countries comes from Nigeria, this value come to 9.18 million litres per day.
7) PATHETIC ABSURDITY
There are two illogicalities flowing from this smuggling saga.
a) If 9.18 million litres of petrol is truly smuggled out of our borders per day, then ours is the most porous nation in the word. This is why: The biggest fuel tankers in Nigeria have a capacity of about 36,000 litres. To smuggle 9.18 million litres of fuel, you need 254 trucks. What our government is telling us is that 254 huge tankers pass through our borders every day and they cannot do anything about it. This is not just acute incompetence, but also a serious security challenge. For if the government cannot stop 254 tanker trailers from crossing the border daily, how can they stop importation of weapons or even invasion by a foreign country?
b) 2nd illogicality:
Even if we believe the government and assume that about 9.18 million litres is actually taken to our neighbours by way of smuggling every day, and all this is subsidised by the Nigerian government, the figures being touted as subsidy still don’t add up. This is why:
Difference between pump price before and after subsidy removal =
N141.00 – N65.00 = N76.00
Total spent on subsidizing petrol to our neighbours annually =
N76.00 x 9.18 million litres x 365 days = N255 billion
If you take the N255 billion away from the N617 billion shortfall that the government cannot explain, there is still a shortfall of N362 billion. The government still needs to tell us what/who is eating up this N362 billion ($2.26 billion USD).
ILLOGICAL ASSUMPTIONSi) We have assumed that there are no working refineries in Nigeria and so no local petrol production whatsoever – yet, there is, even if the refineries are working below capacity.
ii) Nigeria actually consumes 34 million litres of petrol per day. Most experts disagree and give a figure between 20 and 25 million litres per day. Yet there is still an unexplainable shortfall even if we use the exaggerated figure of the government.
iii) Ghana, Togo, Benin, Cameroun, Niger, and Chad all consume the same rate as Nigeria and get 50% of their petrol illegally from Nigeria through smuggling.
These figures simply show the incompetence and insincerity of our government officials. This is pure banditry.
9) FACT 9: The simplest part of the fuel subsidy arithmetic will reveal one startling fact: That the government does not need to subsidise our petrol at all if we reject corruption and sleaze as a way of life. Check this out:
a) NNPC crude oil allocation for local consumption = 400,000 barrels per day (from a total of 2.450 million barrels per day).
b) If our refineries work at just 30%, 280,000 barrels can be sold on the international market, leaving the rest for local production.
c) Money accruing to the federal government through NNPC on the sale, using $80/bbl – a conservative figure as against the current price of $100/bbl – would be $22.4m per day. Annually this translates to $8.176bn or N1.3 trillion.
d) The government does not need to subsidise our petrol imports - at least not from the Federation Account. The same crude that should have been refined by NNPC is simply sold on the international market (since our refineries barely work) and the money is used to buy petrol. The 400,000 barrels per day given to NNPC for local consumption can either be refined by NNPC or sold to pay for imports. This absurdity called subsidy should be funded with this money, not the regular FGN budget.
If the FGN uses it regular budget for subsidising petrol, then what happens to the crude oil given to NNPC for local refining that gets sold on the international market?
10) TACTICAL BLUNDER
The federal government is making the deregulation issue a revenue problem. Nigerians are not against deregulation. We have seen deregulation in the telecom sector and Nigerians are better for it, as even the poor have access to telephones now right before the eyes of those who think it is not for them. What is happening presently is not deregulation but an all-time high fuel pump increase, unprecedented in the history of our nation by a government that has gone broke due to excessive and reckless spending largely on themselves. If the excesses of all the three tiers of government are seriously curbed, that would free enough money for infrastructural development without unduly punishing the poor citizens of this country.
Let me just cite, in closing, the example of National Assembly excesses and misplaced spending as contained in the 2012 budget proposal:
1.Number of Senators 109
2.Number of Members of the House of Representatives 360
3.Total Number of Legislators 469
4.2012 Budget Proposal for the National Assembly N150 billion
5.Average Cost of Maintaining Each Member N320 million
6.Average Cost of Maintaining Each Member in USD $2.1 million/year
Time has come for the citizens of this country to hold the government accountable and demand the prosecution of those bleeding our nation to death. Until this government downsizes, cuts down its profligacy and leads by example in modesty and moderation, the poor people of this country will not and must not subsidise the excesses of the oil sector fat cats and the immorality precipitate fiscal scandal of the self-centred and indulgent lifestyles of those in government.
Here is a hidden treasure of wisdom for those in power while there is still time to make amends:
PROVERBS 21:6&7
“Getting treasures by a lying tongue is the fleeting fantasy of those who seek death. The violence of the wicked will destroy them because they refuse to do just.”
A word of counsel for those who voted for such soulishly indulgent leadership:
“Never trust a man who once had no shoes, or you may end up losing your legs.”
This is the conclusion of the matter on subsidy removal:
i) “If a ruler pays attention to lies, all his servants become wicked.” (Proverbs 29:12)
ii) “The Righteous God wisely considers the house of the wicked, overthrowing the wicked for their wickedness. Whoever shuts his ears to the cry of the poor will also cry himself and will not be heard.” (Proverbs 21:12&13)
Thanks for your attention. God bless you all.
Pastor ‘Tunde Bakare
--
Rehema
Patriot in Kampala,East Africa
When the boot of government is on your neck,it doesn't matter if it's left or right. Today is Buganda, tomorrow is some one else. Click on both links to listen to these revolutionary songs, courtesy of UAH Forum:
http://ugandansatheart.files.
http://ugandansatheart.files.
Creating New Values for Africa
This booklet contains 12 featured projects and initiatives which demonstrate the current innovations and challenges to carbon, water, biodiversity payments for ecosystem services (PES) implementation in Africa. It is hope that this publication, (coupled with training sessions, policy advice, legal analysis, and network building) will enable community leaders, government actors, NGO technical staff, project developers and other interested persons to gain access to PES best practice, build a local community of PES learning, craft policies that are supportive of PES, and design PES projects which provide lasting ecosystem services and livelihood benefits.
http://www.forest-trends.org/
http://www.forest-trends.org/
Kenya: Impact of the ICC Proceedings
While the International Criminal Court (ICC) has a chance to inaugurate a new era of accountability in Kenya, misperceptions could also amplify ethnic tensions ahead of the 2012 elections if its work and limitations are not better explained to the public.
http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/
http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/
UPDF should copy this: A 21st Century South African Defence Review
The South African government is set to conduct a back-room Defence Review with a fourperson
committee reporting to the Minister with their recommendations by November
2011. Such a Defence Review should, however, take place within the context of the establishment
of a national security policy framework. It must also be consultative and public.
As a result of the previous Defence White Paper and Review conducted in 1996 and
1998 respectively, South Africa purchased a wide array of high-tech equipment. Ongoing
experience with the SANDF illustrates however that good equipment and good quality
people need good training to turn it all into genuine capability. Without meeting this
formula, expensive kit is not worth having. Modest but well trained forces offer a much
greater (and more influential) capability than high-tech equipment that is useless because
insufficient people can be trained to use it.
Contemporary and future drivers of African conflict include high rates of urbanisation
and population growth, GDP per capita and inequality, demographics, food production
yields and access to nutrition and land, and climate change. Equally as important is understanding
why these stresses might translate into organised violence. This Paper argues
that the greatest danger today is in building two societies within one nation, where the
opportunities for people are constrained at birth by class, ethnicity, religion, geography,
or race – and where societies are consequently divided between those in secure employment
and prospering and those in ‘vulnerable’ employment, simply scraping by.
The 15 years that have elapsed since the original drafting of the 1998 Defence Review
have been a period of major change internationally and also for South Africa and Africa.
Adapting to those changes and re-designing for the future means reorienting the defence
force as an African peace-builder, enabler primus inter pares. Meeting future interlocking
challenges of state-collapse, radicalisation, population growth, social inequality and
hopelessness, requires a different posture – and skill-set – than the armed forces possess
today. It is one less about high-tech equipment than troop densities and logistics, knowledge
rather than higher-altitude intelligence and information, and small-steps rather than
strategic diplomatic sweeps. Overall, ensuring the right force composition and posture for
South Africa is fundamentally about putting people, not technology, first.
committee reporting to the Minister with their recommendations by November
2011. Such a Defence Review should, however, take place within the context of the establishment
of a national security policy framework. It must also be consultative and public.
As a result of the previous Defence White Paper and Review conducted in 1996 and
1998 respectively, South Africa purchased a wide array of high-tech equipment. Ongoing
experience with the SANDF illustrates however that good equipment and good quality
people need good training to turn it all into genuine capability. Without meeting this
formula, expensive kit is not worth having. Modest but well trained forces offer a much
greater (and more influential) capability than high-tech equipment that is useless because
insufficient people can be trained to use it.
Contemporary and future drivers of African conflict include high rates of urbanisation
and population growth, GDP per capita and inequality, demographics, food production
yields and access to nutrition and land, and climate change. Equally as important is understanding
why these stresses might translate into organised violence. This Paper argues
that the greatest danger today is in building two societies within one nation, where the
opportunities for people are constrained at birth by class, ethnicity, religion, geography,
or race – and where societies are consequently divided between those in secure employment
and prospering and those in ‘vulnerable’ employment, simply scraping by.
The 15 years that have elapsed since the original drafting of the 1998 Defence Review
have been a period of major change internationally and also for South Africa and Africa.
Adapting to those changes and re-designing for the future means reorienting the defence
force as an African peace-builder, enabler primus inter pares. Meeting future interlocking
challenges of state-collapse, radicalisation, population growth, social inequality and
hopelessness, requires a different posture – and skill-set – than the armed forces possess
today. It is one less about high-tech equipment than troop densities and logistics, knowledge
rather than higher-altitude intelligence and information, and small-steps rather than
strategic diplomatic sweeps. Overall, ensuring the right force composition and posture for
South Africa is fundamentally about putting people, not technology, first.
DOWNLOAD
http://www.thebrenthurstfoundation.org/Files/Brenthurst_Commisioned_Reports/Brenthurst-paper-201107.pdf
Monday, 16 January 2012
BUGANDA GETS AN HEIR: OMULANGIRA RICHARD SSEMAKOKIRO.SEE ATTACHED PHOTO:
BUGANDA GETS AN HEIR: OMULANGIRA RICHARD SSEMAKOKIRO.SEE ATTACHED PHOTO: http://semuwemba.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/omulangira_ssemakokiro.pdf
Saturday, 14 January 2012
Erias Lukwago: Sustainable Cities, UN-DESA
This brief is aimed at providing a basic reference fact sheet relative to international time-bound commitments in the area of cities, with a view to facilitating constructive discussion around sustainable cities in the course of the preparation for UNCSD. It examines existing commitments; briefly reports on the implementation of those; examines proposals that have been made to date in relation to future goals with time-bound targets for the international community to consider. Finally, suggestions are made on how goals for the future in this area could be structured. http://www.uncsd2012.org/
Mainstreaming environmental issues in sustainable enterprises
The paper illustrates with a wealth of practical examples how sustainable enterprise development goes hand in hand with the responsible stewardship of the environment but underscores that this needs to be backed up with appropriate policies, laws, regulations and incentives. The focus of the paper is on SMEs, which often face particular constraints and challenges in responding to the environmental imperative. http://www.uncclearn.org/
Inequality in Emerging Economies (EEs)
Emerging countries are playing a growing role in the world economy. It is a role that is expected to be even greater in the future. It is important, therefore, that any comprehensive assessment of inequality trends worldwide considers the emerging economies. The emerging economies represent a highly heterogeneous group, in terms of economic size, population, levels of per capita income and growth performance over the past decade.
China and India, for example, are among the largest economies and the two most populous countries in the world, while Argentina and South Africa are considerably smaller economies. Moreover, the EEs have reached different stages of development, with the variation among their incomes being similar to that among the 34 OECD countries. Their long-term patterns of development also differ. inequality trends show wide differences across EEs. At one extreme, strong output growth during the past decade went hand-to-hand with declining income inequality in two countries (Brazil and Indonesia). At the other extreme, four countries (China, India, the Russian Federation and South Africa) recorded steep increases in inequality levels during the same period, even though their economies were also expanding strongly. Argentina is the only country where inequality was broadly stable.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/
China and India, for example, are among the largest economies and the two most populous countries in the world, while Argentina and South Africa are considerably smaller economies. Moreover, the EEs have reached different stages of development, with the variation among their incomes being similar to that among the 34 OECD countries. Their long-term patterns of development also differ. inequality trends show wide differences across EEs. At one extreme, strong output growth during the past decade went hand-to-hand with declining income inequality in two countries (Brazil and Indonesia). At the other extreme, four countries (China, India, the Russian Federation and South Africa) recorded steep increases in inequality levels during the same period, even though their economies were also expanding strongly. Argentina is the only country where inequality was broadly stable.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/
KENYA: New guidelines follow recall of faulty HIV test
The Kenyan government has changed its HIV testing algorithm following the withdrawal of a widely used brand of HIV test on warnings from UN World Health Organization (WHO).
In November, WHO removed the Standard Diagnostics Bioline® HIV 1/2 3.0 Rapid HIV Test Kit from its list of approved rapid test kits with immediate effect; the alert was issued after Bioline failed quality assurance tests.
http://www.plusnews.org/
In November, WHO removed the Standard Diagnostics Bioline® HIV 1/2 3.0 Rapid HIV Test Kit from its list of approved rapid test kits with immediate effect; the alert was issued after Bioline failed quality assurance tests.
http://www.plusnews.org/
A global treaty on cybersecurity and cybercrime
A generic and global approach on main cybersecurity issues is presented from a strategic perspective in order to give a broad understanding of what kind of concerns should be addressed and what sort of measures should be taken within a national cybersecurity policy. This part also identifies some basic and non-exhaustive needs that should be taken into consideration at national and international levels when dealing with the establishment of a Global Protocol on Cybersecurity and Cybercrime. This document does not aim to focus on specific technical, operational or procedural cybersecurity needs or measures. http://www.cybercrimelaw.net/
Essential medicines and medical supplies policy and guidance 2011
The UNHCR’s Essential Medicines and Medical Supplies Policy provide guidance on how to ensure provision of good quality essential medicines and medical supplies in all phases of UNHCR programming. Health services are provided to refugees and other persons of concern at national health centres or through health centres supported by UNHCR’s implementing and operational health partners. Provision of medicines, supplies and equipment necessary for preventive and curative health services is primarly carried out through two mechanisms: centrally by UNHCR or nationally through Ministry of Health central pharmacies.
For continued access to antiretroviral treatment in the first phase of an emergency, it is important to ensure that refugees and other persons of concern to UNHCR are included into national HIV treatment programmes. Where this is not feasible, appropriate discussion with the Senior HIV Officer and the relevant bureau in headquarters is required before UNHCR procures antiretroviral medication.
http://www.unhcr.org/
For continued access to antiretroviral treatment in the first phase of an emergency, it is important to ensure that refugees and other persons of concern to UNHCR are included into national HIV treatment programmes. Where this is not feasible, appropriate discussion with the Senior HIV Officer and the relevant bureau in headquarters is required before UNHCR procures antiretroviral medication.
http://www.unhcr.org/
Childhood brain tumour risk and its association with wireless phones
Case-control studies on adults point to an increased risk of brain tumours (glioma and acoustic neuroma) associated with the long-term use of mobile phones. Recently, the first study on mobile phone use and the risk of brain tumours in children and adolescents, CEFALO, was published. It has been claimed that this relatively small study yielded reassuring results of no increased risk.
http://www.ehjournal.net/
http://www.ehjournal.net/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)