The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
ROME, Feb 12 2026 (IPS) - Glaciers – the world’s hidden water banks – are a source of life for billions. The seasonal melt from mountains and glaciers sustains some of the world’s most important rivers, such as the Indus, the Nile, the Ganges and the Colorado. Those and other mountain-fed rivers irrigate crops, provide drinking water for nearly two billion people, and power electricity generation.
But, as glaciers shrink and vanish, changes in water flows pose a growing risk to the water, food and livelihood security of billions of people.
In the short term, accelerated melting can trigger environmental hazards: flash floods, glacial lake outburst floods, avalanches and landslides.
In the long term, the glaciers as water sources will simply disappear.
By century’s end, most glaciers will contribute far less water than they do today, undermining agriculture in both mountain villages and sprawling lowland breadbaskets downstream.
We need policies and collaboration that address glacier-fed water systems, cross-border cooperation, and risk-sharing and early warning mechanisms – especially as rivers fed by glaciers often span multiple countries
Mountains cover more than a quarter of the world’s land and are home to 1.2 billion people, but these regions are heating up more rapidly than the global average. Mountain communities are especially vulnerable to increasing climate variability and decreasing seasonal water availability for agriculture and irrigation. With often no viable alternative water supply, the loss of agricultural production can lead to climate displacement and greater instability.
Five of the past six years have seen the most rapid glacier retreat on record, and the impacts are already being felt.
Communities from the Andes to the Himalayas are experiencing shorter snow seasons, erratic runoff, and the loss of reliable water. In Peru, dwindling glaciers have slashed crop yields. In Pakistan, reduced snowmelt threatens seasonal planting cycles. Many glaciers have already reached or are expected to reach “peak water” – the point at which meltwater runoff is at its maximum, after which flows will gradually decline – in the coming two or three decades. This means everyone who depends on glacier-fed rivers faces increasing scarcity when population growth will push water demand even higher.
Beyond science and survival, the disappearance of glaciers erases something less tangible but equally profound. For Indigenous Peoples and mountain communities across Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Pacific, glaciers are sacred. Their melting erodes traditions, rituals, identity and cultural heritage bound to mountain landscapes for centuries.
While there is still time to act, global responses remain fragmented and inadequate. That’s why the United Nations declared 2025 the International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation – a clear reminder that preserving these frozen ecosystems means protecting our future.
To ensure food and water security from the peaks to the plains, a bold shift in policy, investment and governance is urgently needed.
Broadly speaking, cutting greenhouse gas emissions, improving water management, and strengthening early warning systems, adaptative agriculture and sustainable agrifood systems are necessary.
We need to turn the challenges posed by melting glaciers into opportunities to the benefit of all.
Agriculture, both a major water user and a key sector for adaptation, can itself be a solution when developed sustainably. Techniques like terrace farming, agroecology, agroforestry and crop diversification – practiced by mountain communities for centuries – help preserve soil and water, reduce disaster risk and support livelihoods. Such adaptation efforts should be inclusive, drawing on Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and addressing root vulnerabilities like poverty and gender inequality.
We must also mobilize investments in water and agricultural infrastructure. This includes more climate finance to support vulnerable mountain communities that struggle to access training, funding and innovation.
In addition, governments need to align strategies, policies and plans to address this critical nexus between water, agriculture and climate resilience. Mountains are often absent from national climate policies and global adaptation frameworks. We need policies and collaboration that address glacier-fed water systems, cross-border cooperation, and risk-sharing and early warning mechanisms – especially as rivers fed by glaciers often span multiple countries. This also includes reviewing basin-wide water allocation strategies, plans and investment in infrastructure to improve water use efficiency, and step up glacier monitoring and research.
Preparing for a world with fewer glaciers and less of their precious water requires innovation and coordination. In Kyrgyzstan, FAO has been helping experts construct artificial glaciers – ice towers created by spraying mountain water and that gradually melt in summer. In the region of Batken alone, this initiative has helped store over 1.5 million cubic meters of ice, enough to irrigate up to 1,750 hectares.
In Ladakh, India, the social enterprise Acres of Ice has developed automated ice reservoirs to capture unused water in autumn and winter and freeze it until spring. In the Peruvian Andes, a community-based initiative is addressing the deterioration of water quality from minerals exposed by receding glaciers through a natural filtration system using native plants.
But far more needs to be done, together. Glaciers matter because water matters. To ignore their rapid retreat is to gamble with global food and water security.
—
FAO is mandated to lead the global observance of International Mountain Day, coordinated through the Mountain Partnership Secretariat, which is financially supported by the governments of Italy, Andorra and Switzerland. The Secretariat collaborated closely with UNESCO and the World Meteorological Organization, co-facilitators of the International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation 2025.
Excerpt:
QU Dongyu is Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
SAN FRANCISCO, USA, Feb 12 2026 (IPS) - The most recent agreement limiting U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear arsenals, New START, expired on February 5, and prospects for any kind of follow-on agreement are very uncertain.
Progress over several decades in halting the growth of nuclear arsenals and then in reducing them is in acute danger of being undone. That is despite the fact that the objective of “cessation of the nuclear arms race” is embedded in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a keystone multilateral global security agreement.
In a U.S. statement delivered February 6 in the Conference on Disarmament, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Thomas DiNanno said that a “new architecture” is needed, one that takes “into account all Russian nuclear weapons, both novel and existing strategic systems, and address[es] the breakout growth of Chinese nuclear weapons stockpiles.”
That is a challenging project. An informal arrangement between the United States and Russia for transparently abiding by New START limits for at least a short period of time seems within the realm of possibility.
But obstacles to successful negotiation of a new treaty or treaties involving the United States, Russia, and China are major.
The Chinese have shown no interest in discussing limits on their arsenal, which remains much smaller than the U.S. and Russian arsenals. Russia wants negotiations to address U.S. missile defense plans and non-nuclear strategic strike capabilities.
The United States wants Russian non-strategic nuclear weapons and novel systems like a long-range nuclear-armed torpedo, both not limited by New START, to be addressed. More broadly, the ascendance of authoritarian nationalism and acute geopolitical tensions are not conducive to progress.
Nonetheless, especially with the next five-year Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference coming up this spring, it must be emphasized that the United States, Russia, and China are bound by the NPT Article VI obligation to pursue in good faith negotiations on “cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date” and on nuclear disarmament.
When the negotiations on the NPT were completed in 1968, cessation of the nuclear arms race was understood to centrally involve a cap on strategic arsenals held by the U.S. and the Soviet Union, a ban on nuclear explosive testing, and a ban on producing fissile materials for nuclear weapons.
Ending nuclear arms racing was seen as setting the stage for negotiations on nuclear disarmament, meaning the elimination of nuclear arms.
After the NPT entered into force in 1970, the United States and Russia expeditiously moved to cut back on arms racing by negotiating bilateral treaties limiting delivery systems and missile defenses.
The size of the Soviet stockpile of nuclear warheads, however, continued to climb until the mid-1980s. Then a series of treaties, above all the 1991 START I agreement, dramatically reduced the two arsenals while still leaving in place civilization destroying numbers of warheads.
With the demise of New START, there is no treaty regulating the arsenals of the United States, Russia, China, and other nuclear-armed states. China is expanding its arsenal and the United States and Russia are poised to follow suit. The three countries also in differing ways are diversifying their arsenals and increasing the capabilities of delivery systems.
Increasing, diversifying, and modernizing nuclear arsenals as now underway or planned amounts to a repudiation of the NPT objective of cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and fails to meet the legal requirement of good faith in pursuing that objective.
The NPT Review Conference would be an appropriate setting for launching an initiative to reverse this dangerous and unlawful trend. It must also be stressed that arms control among the three powers does not and should not exclude multilateral negotiations for establishment of the “architecture” of a world free of nuclear weapons.
John Burroughs is Senior Analyst, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy
IPS UN Bureau
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 12 2026 (IPS) - When the nuclear Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) between the US and Russia expired last week, it ended a historic era— but triggered widespread speculation about the future.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said “February 5 was a grave moment for international peace and security”.
For the first time in more than half a century, he pointed out, “we face a world without any binding limits on the strategic nuclear arsenals of the Russian Federation and the United States of America – the two States that possess the overwhelming majority of the global stockpile of nuclear weapons.”
US President Donald Trump dismissed the termination of the treaty rather sarcastically when he told the New York Times last month: “if it expires, it expires”—and denounced the expiring treaty as “a badly negotiated deal”.
“We will do a better agreement”, he promised, adding that China, which has one of the world’s fastest growing nuclear arsenals, “and other parties” should be part of any future treaty.
The Chinese, according to the Times, “have made clear they are not interested”.
Currently, the world’s nine nuclear powers are the US, UK, Russia, France and China—all permanent members of the Security Council—plus India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea.
Collectively, they possess an estimated 12,100 to 12,500 nuclear warheads, with Russia and the US owning nearly 90% of the total eve while all nine are actively modernizing their arsenals.
Jonathan Granoff, President, Global Security Institute told IPS the START Treaty should be extended at least a year by formal or informal means. Is that as good as obtaining a new treaty that would include China as the US administration wants? No.
“Is it as good as fulfilling legally required steps such as adherence to the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) unanimous ruling to negotiate the universal elimination of nuclear weapons or the fulfillment of the promise of nuclear disarmament embodied in Article 6 of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)? No”.
However, argued Granoff, doing nothing is asserting that a modest threat reducing easily obtained step now should not be taken because there are better ways forward. A modest positive step is no impediment to moving in other desired manners.
Fully terminating START communicates to the entire world that the US and Russia are so diplomatically inept that they cannot be trusted to continue to hold the entire world hostage to annihilation by holding thousands of first-use-ready nuclear weapons over everyone’s heads without adequate reasonable restraint, said Granoff.
The arguments being put forth as to why nothing can be done are inadequate.
First, the US argues that a new arrangement, a new treaty, is needed to bring China into the fold of restraint, he said.
“A modest step of extending START for a year by mutual presidential decrees while new negotiations take place does not negate creating a new treaty that would include China.”
Second, the arguments used to rationalize the new arms race fail to consider the folly of producing more accurate, usable, and powerful nuclear weapons”, declared Granoff.
Guterres pointed out the dissolution of decades of achievement could not come at a worse time – the risk of a nuclear weapon being used is the highest in decades.
“Yet even in this moment of uncertainty, we must search for hope. This is an opportunity to reset and create an arms control regime fit for a rapidly evolving context.”
“I welcome that the Presidents of both States have made clear that they appreciate the destabilizing impact of a nuclear arms race and the need to prevent the return to a world of unchecked nuclear proliferation.
“The world now looks to the Russian Federation and the United States to translate words into action. I urge both States to return to the negotiating table without delay and to agree upon a successor framework that restores verifiable limits, reduces risks, and strengthens our common security’, said Guterres.
In a statement released last week, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (PNND), a global network of legislators working to achieve a nuclear weapons-free world, said the importance of the New START treaty is hard to overstate.
“As other nuclear treaties have been abrogated in recent years, this was the only deal left with notification, inspection, verification and treaty compliance mechanisms between Russia and the US. Between them, they possess 87% of the world’s nuclear weapons.”
The demise of the treaty will bring a definitive and alarming end to nuclear restraint between the two powers. It may very well accelerate the global nuclear arms race, PNND warned.
This was one of the key reasons that on January 27, 2026, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists reset the Doomsday Clock to 85 Seconds to Midnight.
Last year, PNND Co-President Senator Markey introduced draft legislation into the US Senate urging the government to negotiate new post-START agreements with Russia and China. The legislation is supported by a number of other Senators and by a companion bill in the House of Representatives. But this seems to have fallen on deaf ears in the Trump Administration.
Granoff, providing a deeper analysis, told IPS the scientific data makes clear that a full-scale nuclear war between the US and Russia would annihilate humanity and that a limited nuclear exchange of less than 2% of the world’s arsenals would put around 5 million tons of soot into the stratosphere leading billions of deaths and the devastation of modern civilization everywhere.
“Realism reveals that the alleged need to duplicate the arsenals of adversary nations is not needed for deterrence. Realism also reveals that there is actually little to no meaningful difference between a nation having 600 (as China does now) or over 1400 deployed nuclear weapons, mirroring the US and Russia, or 30,000 nuclear weapons as Russia and the US each had at the height of the last arms race”.
“The reality is that devastation globally of a small portion of the world’s nuclear arsenals would be unambiguously unacceptable to any sane person. We could say that realism informs us that we have moved from Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) to Self-Assured Destruction (SAD). The fact is that if any of the 9 states with the weapons were to use several hundred nuclear weapons that nation itself would also be devastated. MAD today reveals a new acronym, SAD.”
Meanwhile, a posting in the US State Department website reads:
Treaty Structure: The Treaty between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, also known as the New START Treaty, enhances U.S. national security by placing verifiable limits on all Russian deployed intercontinental-range nuclear weapons. The United States and the Russian Federation had agreed to extend the treaty through February 4, 2026.
Strategic Offensive Limits: The New START Treaty entered into force on February 5, 2011. Under the treaty, the United States and the Russian Federation had seven years to meet the treaty’s central limits on strategic offensive arms (by February 5, 2018) and are then obligated to maintain those limits for as long as the treaty remains in force.
Aggregate Limits
Both the United States and the Russian Federation met the central limits of the New START Treaty by February 5, 2018, and have stayed at or below them ever since. Those limits are:
• 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), deployed submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and deployed heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments;• 1,550 nuclear warheads on deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs, and deployed heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments (each such heavy bomber is counted as one warhead toward this limit);
• 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments.
This article is brought to you by IPS NORAM, in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
IPS UN Bureau Report
Feb 11 2026 (IPS) - Africa has never lacked agricultural strategies. Since the launch of the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) in 2003, governments have pledged repeatedly to spend at least 10 per cent of public budgets on agriculture and to raise productivity through better investment and coordination. The African Union reaffirmed this target in subsequent declarations, such as Malabo in 2014 and the Kampala CAADP Strategy (2026-2035).
Yet, two decades on, one in five Africans still faces hunger, and few countries have met the budget commitment. With the upcoming African Union Summit around the corner, it is time to reflect on whether the continent’s food systems are finally on a path to lasting transformation. The lesson is clear: Africa’s challenge lies not in a lack of ambition, but in ensuring that governance and accountability mechanisms are strong enough to turn commitments into results.
The Kampala CorrectionAdopted in 2025, the Kampala Declaration and Action Plan signalled a quiet but significant shift in Africa’s food and agricultural governance — recognising that transformation depends as much on political accountability as on policy and investment.
With the upcoming African Union Summit around the corner, it is time to reflect on whether the continent's food systems are finally on a path to lasting transformation
For the first time, parliaments are at the centre of the CAADP process. Legislators are now tasked with aligning national laws to continental targets, ensuring that agriculture, nutrition, climate and trade policies work in concert, and subjecting executive commitments to real oversight.
This correction matters. The Kampala Declaration recognises that accountability must extend beyond governments alone. It calls for stronger legislative scrutiny, transparent budget processes, and active participation by civil society and local authorities to ensure commitments translate into results. Without such checks and coordination, implementation will continue to drift.
The African Food Systems Parliamentary Network (AFSPaN) has translated this broader governance mandate into a Ten-Year Parliamentary Call to Action (2026–2035). It urges legislatures to:
• Align and update laws governing food, trade, climate and health;
• Scrutinise agricultural budgets and track spending efficiency;
• Institutionalise partnerships with civil society and local authorities;
• Guarantee gender- and youth-responsive policies; and
• Build data and analytical capacity to support evidence-based debate.
This is also a question of priorities. In many countries across Africa, debt-service costs often exceed agricultural budget. The continent cannot rely indefinitely on external aid while under-investing domestically in food and nutrition security. Parliamentarians have the constitutional authority to decide how money is allocated and to hold governments accountable for how it is spent. They should use this authority to ensure that fiscal policy — including debt management and investment decisions — directly supports long-term food and nutrition security.
Strong oversight is not an obstacle to executive action; it is the precondition for efficiency. Countries that have embedded accountability — such as Rwanda, where performance contracts and results-based budgeting are standard — demonstrate that governance can accelerate progress more effectively than any single financing instrument.
Accountability as the Missing InfrastructureAs the heads of state gather at the AU summit, the Kampala Declaration offers a timely reminder that Africa’s food crisis is as much a governance challenge as a production one. Infrastructure, markets and agricultural inputs remain vital, but the missing infrastructure deficit is institutional. Without transparent laws, credible budgets and measurable outcomes, even a well financed investment cannot deliver a lasting transformation.
The next decade under CAADP must therefore prioritise governance. The Kampala Declaration makes clear that success will be determined by technical agencies and political institutions. Its real test will be whether parliaments exercise the courage to challenge under-performance and to legislate for long-term resilience.
Parliamentarians have finally been given the mandate to connect these dots. They must now use it.
Hon. Françoise Uwumukiza, Deputy Secretary-General, African Food Systems Parliamentary Network (AFSPaN)
Excerpt:
Hon. Françoise Uwumukiza is Deputy Secretary-General, African Food Systems Parliamentary Network (AFSPaN)
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 11 2026 (IPS) - Since the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas in October of last year, humanitarian conditions in Gaza have notably improved — but aid agencies warn that progress is extremely fragile. Acute shortages of lifesaving medical care and psychosocial support persist, hunger remains widespread, with conditional cash assistance as the primary barrier preventing full-scale food insecurity, while Israeli attacks continue to undermine stability and humanitarian efforts.
Addressing the 2026 Opening Session of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, United Nations (UN) Secretary-General António Guterres warned of the urgency of the current situation in Gaza.
“We enter 2026 with the clock ticking louder than ever. Will the year ahead bend towards peace–or slip into the abyss of despair?” Guterres said.
Guterres urged all parties to fully implement the ceasefire agreement, exercise maximum restraint, and comply with international law and UN resolutions, while calling for the rapid and unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid, particularly through the Rafah crossing, where aid personnel face the most severe restrictions. He also condemned the suspension of international NGOs, explaining that it “defies humanitarian principles, undermines fragile progress, and worsens the suffering of civilians,” adding that shelter, food, education materials, and other basic necessities must reach those in need.
In recent months, food security conditions in Gaza have shown notable, though uneven, improvement. Since the ceasefire went into effect, the World Food Programme (WFP) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) have brought over 10,000 trucks of aid into Gaza, representing roughly 80 percent of all humanitarian cargo. With this, the enclave was able to narrowly avoid the onset of famine.
WFP’s deputy executive director Carl Skau noted that most families he met were “eating at least once a day”, with some even managing two meals. Commercial goods such as vegetables, fruit, chicken, and eggs have gradually returned to local markets, while the distribution of recreational kits has helped children cope with the psychological toll of over two years of conflict.
However, progress remains fragile. The latest Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) assessment estimates that approximately 77 percent of Gaza’s population continues to face crisis-level food insecurity (IPC Phase 3), with around 100,000 people facing catastrophic conditions (IPC Phase 5). Moreover, most nutritious foods available in markets remain financially out of reach for civilians, leaving the vast majority of households heavily dependent on humanitarian food assistance.
For Gaza’s most vulnerable families, conditional cash assistance remains essential to accessing food. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), more than 3,200 agricultural households are currently supported through FAO cash programs, which also enable over 1,200 farmers to continue crop production and help more than 2,000 herders protect their livestock.
As markets gradually stabilize, humanitarian actors are seeking to shift their approach in favor of one that prioritizes building self-sufficiency. WFP has indicated its goal to transition to cash assistance as market conditions improve, shifting emergency relief efforts to restoring local food production and economic systems to allow for vulnerable families to be able to afford food. However, these efforts would require a significant upscale in funding, coordinated efforts between the international community, and the free flow of aid.
Meanwhile, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reports that Palestinians continue to face widespread insecurity, driven by routine attacks on civilians and critical infrastructures. On February 5, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) released a humanitarian situation report documenting a sharp increase in airstrikes, shelling, gunfire, and fatalities between January 30 and February 5 compared to previous weeks. According to Gaza’s Ministry of Health, at least 82 Palestinians were killed and 162 injured during that period, including children and a health worker, alongside extensive damage to civilian infrastructure.
Further underscoring the risks faced by aid workers, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies reported on February 4 that a paramedic was killed while providing assistance in the Mawasi area. That same day, OCHA reiterated that civilians and humanitarian personnel “must never be targeted or used to shield military activities,” stressing that children and aid workers are afforded special protections under international humanitarian law.
The UN has also stressed that living conditions remain especially dire for displaced communities across Gaza. On February 3, heavy insecurity in the Al Mahatta and Sanafour areas of Gaza City forced approximately 40 families to flee their homes, with only 10 families able to return by the following morning. UN figures indicate that “capacity and funding constraints” have limited humanitarian support to only roughly 40 percent of the remaining functional 970 displacement sites across Gaza.
Healthcare needs are similarly overwhelming, as a steady influx of injuries and disease is compounded by the near-total collapse of Gaza’s health system. According to Jonathan Fowler, Senior Communications Manager of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the agency previously operated 22 clinics operating across the Gaza strip before the war, which has now fallen to just six.
“That makes it incredibly difficult to do our work and so many of our locations have been heavily damaged or indeed completely destroyed,” Fowler said. “On top of that, we remain banned by the Israeli authorities from bringing in any of our own supplies.” Despite numerous access and security constraints, UNRWA aims to assist approximately 15,000 patients each day, underscoring the scale of unmet medical needs across the most vulnerable areas.
Furthermore, OHCHR has documented a sharp rise in cases of mistreatment and abuse against displaced Palestinians by Israeli military forces, particularly along the newly reopened Rafah border crossing. As of February 5, Palestinians returning through the crossing for three consecutive days have reported consistent patterns of “ill-treatment, abuse, and humiliation”.
According to testimonies collected by the agency, returnees were escorted from the crossing to military checkpoints, where some were handcuffed, blindfolded, threatened, and intimidated. Others reported being subjected to invasive body searches, having personal belongings and money confiscated, and facing physical violence and degrading interrogations. Several individuals were also denied access to medical care and bathroom facilities, with some forced to urinate in public.
OHCHR also documented allegations that returnees were offered money to return to Egypt permanently or pressured to act as informants for the Israeli military.
“The international community has a responsibility to ensure that all measures affecting Gaza strictly comply with international law and fully respect Palestinians’ human rights,” said Ajith Sunghay, head of the UN Human Rights Office in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. “After two years of utter devastation, being able to return to their families and what remains of their homes in safety and dignity is the bare minimum.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
BANGKOK, Thailand, Feb 11 2026 (IPS) - The COVID-19 pandemic reminded everyone how important care work is to daily life. When schools closed and hospitals filled up, often it was women and girls who stepped up at home. Their contributions made a big difference, yet these responsibilities often go unseen and unrewarded.
“For me, care work is the heart of humanity,” says Leah Payud, a resilience portfolio manager at Oxfam Pilipinas. “It anchors societies, families… and keeps them running. Without someone investing time, effort and resources in essential care tasks like cooking, cleaning, childcare, nursing the elderly and sick at home, nothing else would be possible.”
Strong social norms persist in the region where care tasks are automatically handed over to women and girls. On average, women and girls across the Asia-Pacific region spend two to five times more time doing unpaid care and domestic work (UCDW) than men.
In Viet Nam, women spend close to 19 hours a week on unpaid care, while men spend about 8 hours. In Malaysia and the Philippines, the gap is also clear. Women’s UCDW labour was valued at 1.6 times that of men. Despite working similar hours in paid jobs, women still take on most of the care responsibilities at home.
These care demands limit women and girls’ time, energy and ability to receive a full education or join the workforce. In 2023, fewer than half of working-age women in the Asia-Pacific region were employed, compared to nearly three-quarters of men. Many cited caregiving as the reason.
Meanwhile, paid care services remain underinvested in and undervalued. Those from marginalized or disadvantaged communities particularly bear the brunt due to low wages and relatively poor working conditions.
Experts further agree that supporting care work is good for families and the economy. A study by the International Labour Organization found that investing in care services like childcare and elder care could create up to 280 million jobs around the world by 2030. Most of these jobs would go to women. In Asia and the Pacific, recognizing unpaid care work could potentially add $3.8 trillion to the economy.
For those women in formal jobs and women entrepreneurs, the lack of care services can contribute to women dropping out of the workforce and being unable to grow and scale their businesses respectively. They face additional challenges, including the ‘motherhood employment penalty,’ ‘motherhood wage penalty,’ and ‘motherhood leadership challenge.’
Post-pandemic, ASEAN leaders have been paying more attention to this issue. In 2021, ASEAN introduced the ASEAN Comprehensive Framework on the Care Economy. It encouraged countries to invest in better care services and recognize the value of both paid and unpaid care work.
This Framework called for concrete steps to expand care services and support care workers, reflecting ASEAN’s broader goal of building inclusive communities.
The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) and ASEAN also have been working together to strengthen care systems across the region. Through joint research, policy dialogue and technical support, the partnership helps turn data into action.
Together, ESCAP and ASEAN bring expert analysis to highlight the value of care work and support Member States to translate these insights into national policies. In 2023, ESCAP co-hosted a regional forum on care work with ASEAN.
The event brought together policymakers, community leaders and experts from across the region to share ideas on what support caregivers need most, while also delving into gender-responsive and care-sensitive policies and programs.
The topic gained further momentum when Lao PDR hosted the Third ASEAN Women Leader’s Summit in 2024, backed by capacity building and knowledge support from ESCAP and various development partners.
The Summit led to a new Declaration on Strengthening the Care Economy adopted by ASEAN leaders later that year, which recognizes the disproportionate presence of women in both the formal and informal care sectors, and identifies a range of gender-responsive priority actions.
“To create lasting change, we must prioritize transformative policies that recognize and redistribute the care burden equitably, without reinforcing traditional gender roles and norms. By promoting shared responsibility for caregiving among all members of society, we can pave the way for more meaningful opportunities for women to realize their full potential and empower women and girls to dream big and reach far,” says Cai Cai, Chief of the Gender Equality and Social Inclusion Section at ESCAP.
Many ASEAN countries are already taking action. Indonesia has launched a Care Economy Roadmap and National Action Plan (2025-2045). Cambodia is close to finalizing its own national action plan. Malaysia is developing a strategy to grow its care industry.
In the Philippines, care services are being strengthened through provincial and national care ordinances. Lao PDR is integrating care into both the Laos Women’s Development Plan 2026-2030 and the 10th Five-Year National Socio-Economic Development Plan. Timor-Leste is working on a new Domestic Workers Law and has set up a national Working Group on Care.
Together, these efforts reflect a shared regional commitment to making care more visible, accessible and valued.
Looking ahead, ASEAN’s next community vision presents an opportunity to make care and gender equality a stronger part of the region’s development story. Mainstreaming them across all three ASEAN community pillars will ensure ASEAN can harness all of its vast resources to accelerate progress towards achieving the global Sustainable Development Goals, in particular SDG 5 on gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls, with Target 5.4 aiming to recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work.
Care touches every part of life. Supporting care is not just about new policies. It is about recognizing the needs of real people from every background and building systems that respond to them. When we recognize and invest in care, we create more chances for women to work, for families to thrive and for communities to grow stronger.
The article was prepared with substantive input contributed by Channe Lindstrom Oguzhan, Social Development Division.
IPS UN Bureau
NAIROBI, Feb 11 2026 (IPS) - The global aid system is crumbling amidst chronic underinvestment in rural areas, posing a systemic threat to food systems everywhere.
With 1.3 billion young people in the world today – the largest generation in history, and nearly half of them living in rural areas – investing in their entrepreneurial potential is key.
Speaking during a press briefing on February 10, 2026, at the International Fund for Agricultural Development‘s (IFAD) 49th Governing Council, the president, Alvaro Lario, said investing in young entrepreneurs and women farmers unlocks new pathways for employment and ensures that rural areas become thriving engines of stability, prosperity and sustainable growth.
The overarching theme of the ongoing session of the Governing Council is “From Farm to Market: Investing with Young Entrepreneurs” and is being held at a pivotal moment when the global aid system is in urgent need of reinvention.
“We are at a very complex time of geopolitical fragmentation and constrained budgets for many countries. Food systems are going through various regular shocks that include climate shocks. So, rural transformation means economic growth, creating jobs and building stability,” Lario stated.
Lario advocated for public-private partnerships that connect farmers with private companies, which invest directly in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) through blended finance, guarantees, and various forms of debt or equity, ultimately increasing access to rural finance. Public finance alone cannot deliver the transformation of food systems, raise rural incomes, or create decent jobs.
IFAD’s president, Alvaro Lario, with Tony Elumelu, chairman of UBA, and Heirs Holdings and founder of the Tony Elumelu Foundation. Credit: IFAD/Hannah Kathryn Valles
SME-driven value chains are critical to rural development. IFAD’s assessments show that SME-focused value chain projects are more likely to deliver transformational impacts – in other words, where incomes increase by more than 50 per cent because of the project. The Project for Rural Income through Exports in Rwanda (PRICE) increased returns to farmers through the development of export-driven value chains for coffee, tea, silk farming and horticulture.
In brief, he said the private sector accounts for more than 90 per cent of global food systems’ activity and that it complements public sector financing in a critical way by providing technology, market access, and logistics. Emphasising that these are the elements that allow small farms, pastoralists, fishers, rural entrepreneurs and other agri-food enterprises to grow and prosper.
Overall, at the Governing Council, Lario underscored the immense strategic and business value of investing in rural economies, presented new impact data and priorities for 2028-2030 and outlined the most effective models for scaling up productive investments. He was joined by Tony Elumelu, Chair of United Bank for Africa and Heirs Holdings, and founder of the Tony Elumelu Foundation, in outlining a new deal for rural economies.
They spoke at length about how to accelerate the shift to channel more private investments to rural economies. On young African entrepreneurs and facilitating their access to financing, he said as currently constituted, a bank cannot lend without collateral and consideration of social repayment.
“Since the regulatory environment does not permit banks to lend without taking these issues into consideration, countries create development financing institutions that can take some of the risks. And, also, having development financing institutions and global financing that help to de-risk transactions so that banks can come in and provide the capital,” Elumelu said.
“One of the reasons my wife and I established the Tony Elumelu Foundation is to support young African entrepreneurs. Access to capital is critical for entrepreneurship development. But oftentimes, people lack what it takes to access it. The Foundation has provided USD100 million. And every year, we identify young African entrepreneurs who have business ideas and train them on how to actualise these ideas.”
Further emphasising that access to capital, “while important, is not the only condition that will make you succeed. Business education is important. So we train them, appoint mentors for them, create a networking platform for them, and then provide them with the knowledge they need to receive capital. To date, in Africa, we have funded over 24,000 young African entrepreneurs. And the good news is that about half of these people are females.”
Elumelu said youth-centred interventions significantly boost agro-entrepreneurship as a key driver for economic growth, job creation, and stability while addressing the youth opportunity deficit.
“Nearly 21 percent of those who are funded in Africa are in agriculture and agribusinesses. And out of these 21 percent, which is about 5,600 beneficiaries, 55 percent of them are females. So in a way, we are trying to help bridge that capital gap, finance gap. But that is not enough. It’s just a tiny drop of water in the ocean. So we need even more partnerships.”
Elumelu further drew on his Africapitalism philosophy, which is a call to action for businesses to move beyond short-term profit-seeking and instead make investments that generate socio-economic benefits for the communities in which they operate. And his foundation’s decade-long experience building Africa’s largest entrepreneurship ecosystem speaks to how entrepreneurship, private capital, and market-driven solutions can transform rural economies, expand food systems, and close the youth opportunity gap.
IFAD is an international financial institution and a United Nations-specific agency that invests in rural communities, empowering them to reduce poverty, increase food security, improve nutrition, and strengthen resilience. It has thus far provided more than USD 25 billion in grants and low-interest loans to fund projects in developing countries.
The Governing Council is IFAD’s highest decision-making body that, among other things, provides a forum for Governors to share their insights on priority areas for strategic action to lift the livelihoods of rural people.
This session also takes place at the beginning of the International Year of the Woman Farmer, declared in recognition of the key role that women farmers around the world play in agrifood systems and their contributions to food security, nutrition and poverty eradication.
Empowering youth and women entrepreneurs to initiate and expand agribusinesses serves as a vital catalyst for economic development and creates lasting positive impacts. Women make up more than half of IFAD’s project participants, while over 60 per cent of the active project portfolio is youth-sensitive, reaching more than 12 million young people globally.
IPS UN Bureau Report