14 July 2010 – The United Nations labour agency is calling for urgent action to tackle the crisis of youth unemployment, which has increased significantly in the wake of the global economic slowdown and has repercussions for the economy as well as social cohesion.
Young people – those aged 15 to 24 – account for over 22 per cent of the increase in the number of unemployed since the beginning of 2007 and is now nearly three times the average level among adults aged 25 and over, according to the International Labour Organization (ILO).
“In nearly all countries, the increase in youth unemployment has outpaced that of adults,” the agency says in a new report entitled “Youth employment in crisis.”
Since the start of the crisis, the youth unemployment rate has risen over 7 percentage points – the sharpest two year increase on record – and now exceeds 21 per cent on average in the countries for which data are available, say Steven Tobin, ILO economist, and Raymond Torres, Director of the International Institute for Labour Studies, who are co-authors of the report.
The report points out that young people are entering the labour market at a time of limited job creation. Employed young people are also often engaged in precarious jobs, and are therefore more vulnerable to job losses than their adult counterparts.
Young people who lack general or vocational education are especially vulnerable to the crisis, it notes, adding that as job prospects remain weak, many young people might see little benefit of furthering education or training which would have negative socio-economic consequences.
In addition, the lack of decent work opportunities in developing countries had led to significant emigration by many skilled young people.
The authors stress that it is crucial to promote more and better jobs for youth and urges immediate action, noting that impact of long-term unemployment on youth can be “devastating and long-lasting.”
The longer young persons remain out of touch with the labour market, the more difficult – and costly – it is to return to productive employment, they state.
“There are also a number of important social implications related to exclusion, including susceptibility to anti-social behaviour, including juvenile delinquency, and social unrest,” they add.
According to the report, it will not be possible to improve youth employment prospects significantly in the absence of a global economic and labour market recovery. Therefore, it is crucial to carry out the Global Jobs Pact, adopted by ILO members in June 2009 in an effort to guide national and international policies to stimulate economic recovery, create jobs and protect working people and their families.
Johannesburg – 25 May 2010: The Africa Progress Panel (APP) has called for a more assertive approach from African leaders to translate the continent’s “immense resources” into social benefits for its people. The report warned that “Africans beyond elite circles are not benefiting sufficiently” while at the same time there was great scope to improve Africa’s partnerships with the Global South.
Kofi Annan, Chair of the Panel and fellow Panel members Linah Mohohlo, Peter Eigen and Olusegun Obasanjo presented the Africa Progress Report on Africa Day – five years since the establishment of the Panel and 10 years since world leaders signed up to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The report takes stock of Africa’s progress since 2005 and assesses future opportunities for the continent.
“This landmark report argues that Africa’s future is in its own hands, but that success in managing its own affairs depends on supportive global policies and agreements,” Annan said. “There is no lack of resources, no deficiency of knowledge and no shortage of plans. Africa’s progress rests above all else on the mobilisation of political will, both on the continent and internationally.”
The panel has called on the continent’s finance ministers, who are meeting in Abidjan, Cote D’Ivoire for the Annual African Development Bank summit, to “climate proof” the continent’s economic growth and development. “Climate change will increase the cost of MDG attainment, whether in food production, health, water, energy, infrastructure and other areas; it will have disproportionate effects on women and the poor,” the Panel said. “As a result, it cannot be treated as a stand-alone issue; climate-proofed development plans can provide the basis for disaster risk reduction and adaptation strategies as well as help identify investment opportunities for low carbon and job generating growth.”
Focusing on Africa’s emergence as a “new economic frontier”, the Report notes that economic engagement with the Global South - China, the Far and Middle East, South Asia and Latin America - “is already having a substantial development impact on Africa”. However, the report asserts that “Africans beyond elite circles are not benefiting sufficiently” while at the same time “there is great scope to improve Africa’s partnerships with the Global South”. The report also notes that “African leaders... need to realize that the benefits of increasing economic ties are not automatic, but only accrue to those that take adequate and pro-active steps to exploit them through targeted policies.”
In particular, the report calls for:
Transparency throughout the entire resource system, from how contracts are awarded and monitored, to how taxes and royalties are collected, to how investment choices are made and executed.
Policies that ensure that the revenues from the continent’s natural wealth reach everyone. This requires major policy shifts and significant investments of resources in institutions, human capacities, women, health, education and infrastructure.
Stating that “Africa’s development and the welfare of its people depend above all upon the political commitment and capacity of its leaders”, the Panel also urges African policymakers to:
1)Empower women by enforcing existing conventions, laws and policies and link their efforts with effective implementation strategies including reliable reporting mechanisms
2)Climate proof development, not least through integrating adaptation to climate change into growth and development strategies, accelerating regional integration, harnessing the potential of information technology and anticipating demographic shifts
The Panel also identifies three priority areas for action for Africa’s partners, recording that Africa’s leaders “need an international environment that is fair and supportive of their efforts.” The report calls for international policymakers to:
1)Provide a level playing field, addressing the fact that “the continent is starkly underrepresented in virtually all international fora” and that “bloated subsidy regimes and unfair trade rules” leave African countries “heavily disadvantaged.”
2)Increase policy coherence for development, “recognising the overall impact that countries’ domestic and international policy mix has on the continent and seek to minimize their negative effects.”
3)Fulfil promises on resources and assistance, and “Africa’s partners to recommit to the consensus on the continent’s development and fulfil the many promises on financial support and assistance they have made over the last decade”.
Focusing on the approximately $100billion of financial assistance in annual expenditure from Africa’s partners required to achieve the Millennium Development Goals in the presence of anticipated climate change, the report records that “much of this could actually be met if partners were to fulfil the pledges they made over the last couple of years and realize the financing ambitions outlined in the Copenhagen Accord.” It notes that “the mechanisms to collect, administer, and disburse these funds are already in place.”
Looking back on Africa’s progress over the last five years, the report describes it as “a truly mixed picture.” It states that “remarkable progress has been achieved in many fields, but... a number of set-backs, chronic problems and the effects of the global economic crisis and climate change combine to threaten the gains made since 2005.”
The Africa Progress Report highlights that the central challenge for Africa’s leaders is to inspire processes and build practical capacities, both nationally and regionally, to ensure that assets are translated into social benefits and that their people are able to access opportunities that can transform their lives, countries, and continent.
ABOUT THE AFRICA PROGRESS PANEL:
The Africa Progress Panel brings together a unique group of leaders under the chairmanship of Kofi Annan. The Panel monitors and promotes mutual accountability and shared responsibility for progress in Africa. Its three focus areas are economic and political governance; finance for sustainable development, including ODA; and MDG achievement – notably in light of climate change. The work of the Panel aims to track progress and draw attention to critical issues and opportunities for progress in Africa.
The Africa Progress Panel is comprised of:
§Kofi Annan (chair of the Africa Progress Panel, former Secretary-General of the United Nations and Nobel Laureate)
§Tony Blair (founder, Africa Governance Initiative and former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)
§Michel Camdessus (former Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund)
§Peter Eigen (founder and Chair of the Advisory Council, Transparency International and Chairman of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative)
§Bob Geldof (musician, businessman, founder and Chair of Band Aid, Live Aid and Live8, Co-founder of DATA and ONE)
§Graça Machel (President of the Foundation for Community Development and founder of New Faces New Voices)
§Linah Kelebogile Mohohlo (Governor, Bank of Botswana)
§Olusegun Obasanjo (Envoy of the Secretary-General on the Great Lakes region and former President of Nigeria)
§Robert Rubin (Co-Chairman of the Board, Council on Foreign Relations and former Secretary of the United States Treasury)
In the aftermath of Kenya's 2007 general election over half a million people were displaced. Fleeing homes, loosing livelihoods and loved ones. To date some of the 2007 internal refugees still remain both in camps and transit sites. Yet the anomaly of internal displacement is not new to Kenya. From pre-independence, many Kenyans have been forcibly removed from their homes, having to settle elsewhere as refugees within their own country.
In contemporary history, the IDP crisis has been closely linked to the country’s electoral process, particularly with the advent of the country’s multi-party era. The crisis became the proverbial elephant in the living room – a topic that was too taboo to mention. For years following the post-election clashes of the 1990s the Moi regime swept the issue under the carpet, maintaining that there were no IDPs. However, with more freedom of expression and opening up of the media airwaves, the plight of IDPs has gained more limelight.
Kenya’s internal conflict has been almost like clockwork set to the political scene during general election years of 1992, 1997, 2002 and 2007 as well as the constitutional referendum of 2005. Every five years people have had to flee their homes and that is why the IDP situation falls into the category of a “complex emergency”.
So why term Kenya’s IDP crisis a complex emergency? For the simple reason that unlike natural catastrophes, people loose all they have in a matter of minutes yet the underlying cause is politically instigated and conflict-generated (Macrae and Zwi, 1994).
The United Nations’ Office for Co-ordination for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) (which draws its definition from the UN's Inter-Agency Standing Committee) defines complex emergencies as ‘a humanitarian crisis … where there is total or considerable breakdown of authority resulting from internal or external conflict …. (IASC, 1994). However, this reliance on authority breakdown has been criticized. David Keen author of the book "Complex Emergencies" writes on OCHA's definition having shortcomings arguing that in the case of 1994 Rwanda, the problem was not so much the breakdown of authority, rather that the "authority" being imposed was "ruthless” and had “vicious efficiency".
Indeed Kenya has always had a government, and the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement stipulate that it is this same government that should ensure that the IDPs receive requisite humanitarian assistance, are resettled and reintegrated back into society. However the Kenya government has mismanaged this obligation.
The Government’s Ministry of State in charge of Special Programmes initiative to resettle the nation’s IDPs has been dubbed “Operation Rudi Nyumbani” (return home) which includes financial assistance and transport among other short- term measures.The causes of displacement and obstacles to resettlement have not been adequately addressed and the Ministry's stop-gap activities have failed to assure Kenyans that the Operation is not just a PR exercise so the government looks good to donors.
There has also been a disturbing tendency where anyone (whether an IDP or an interested party such as the Kenya Human Rights Commission) who questions how an unaccountable government can accountably distribute funds and materials to IDPs are met with torrents of abuse and muzzling.
Queries on government commitment and initiatives to assist IDPs to ensure long-term peace have centered on: poor co-ordination and corruption; insecurity; child and gender based violations; inadequate shelter and compensation for loss. The Kenya Human Rights Commission in an October 2008 report “A Tale of Force, Threats and Lies” even accused the government of forcing IDPs to go back to their homes.
As for the UN and those that adhere to the IDP Guidelines and rules regarding complex emergencies, they have been confined in that they have to deal with the government of day and trust that the government will most effectively and equitably distribute humanitarian assistance. However when the lives of people and those of future of generations are at stake, a dire need emerges to make sure that this complex emergency does not become a permanent one. It is thus imperative that the international community demands that the government ensures that the rights of all IDPs are upheld.
Indeed recent political events have shown the danger of inaction in enforcing strict observance of ethical standards regarding resettlement. Just last week, the government decided to compensate settlers in the Mau forest. This is hardly the first time such a compensation scheme has been conceived, however the common occurrence has been that the majority of the money falls into the pockets of the fat cats who grabbed the land.
The eponymous Ndung'u report which investigated illegal allocation of public land, lists no less than the families of former presidents Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi as those who grabbed public property earmarked for squatter resettlement. On this issue, Nobel Laureate Prof. Wangari Maathai was today quoted in the media saying, “… the Kenya government does not have money, it’s your taxes. So if they don’t have taxes they will ask the World Bank to give them money to come and compensate leaders who misused their power (to acquire) land they should never have acquired …”
As it is, the Ministry of State for Special Programmes requires more funds which will come from the National Budget and the excess from donors. Isn’t it about time to first question whether Operation Rudi Nyumbani has been a success and whether indeed the government should still spearhead IDP assistance?
In August 2000, Fr. John Anthony Kaiser, a crusader for the rights of internally displaced persons was murdered. He was vocal speaking out on the injustices meted out to the displaced. However, almost a decade later, even more people languish miserably exiled from their homes.
As it is who knows how many more people will join the ranks of IDPs come the next general election, or for that matter the anticipated constitutional referendum? We also need to re-examine our outlook towards Kenya’s IDPs. In an age of reality television where shows such as Big Brother Africa keep viewers glued to their screens; alas when it comes to our brothers and sisters living in camps we are no longer voyeurs. Indeed, there is no difference between our IDPs and those in Darfur, yet though our eyes face the screen watching news stories on their plight, we no longer see the real suffering; we no longer question why this is happening; we only say a silent prayer that come 2012, we will not be the ones taking up airspace as IDPs.
Is it only in Kenya where we have become immune and impervious to news stories on corruption, impunity and gross violations of human rights? Could this be because this is the country where even those that engineer and carry out grand larceny on our nation’s coffers have the opportunity to transform themselves into televangeslist? Is that why we do not find it dysfunctional to watch the IDPs in their tattered clothes which cover emaciated bodies and hold up despondent faces?
