The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
WASHINGTON DC, Mar 20 2026 (IPS) - In many high-income countries, even a small number of tuberculosis (TB) diagnoses can generate headlines and prompt a rapid public health response. Recent situations in U.S. cities such as Seattle and San Francisco illustrate this, where media coverage has focused on the number of children being tested after TB disease was identified in a school.
In sub-Saharan Africa, these situations are viewed through a different lens. While some regions experience relatively low levels of TB disease, others face substantial challenges. Several countries in East and Southern Africa—including Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria, and South Africa—remain among the high TB-burden settings globally, with significant variation in drug-resistant TB across and within countries.
In many of these settings, sustained transmission places continuous demands on health systems, requiring responses focused on large-scale, ongoing disease control rather than isolated events.
An estimated 10.7 million people globally fell ill with TB in 2024, and the disease killed 1.23 million, more than any other infectious disease. It is the leading killer of people living with HIV, and a major cause of deaths related to drug resistance. TB is a known risk in many parts of the world, yet in the U.S. it is relatively rare and is often perceived by the public as a disease of the past.
Our risk of exposure should not depend on something as haphazard as where we are born.
An estimated 10.7 million people globally fell ill with TB in 2024, and the disease killed 1.23 million, more than any other infectious disease. It is the leading killer of people living with HIV, and a major cause of deaths related to drug resistance. TB is a known risk in many parts of the world, yet in the U.S. it is relatively rare and is often perceived by the public as a disease of the past
This is the imperative that informs my work as a scientist endeavoring to develop a vaccine for TB. We want to bring locations with a high burden of either drug-resistant or drug-sensitive TB to a point resembling that of San Francisco or Seattle—where the disease is so rare that even a small number of diagnoses is an exceptional event.
TB is often described as a disease strongly associated with poverty. Transmission is facilitated in settings with poor ventilation and close contact, such as underground mines, crowded workplaces, and densely populated urban settlements.
Undernutrition—commonly linked to poverty—weakens immune defenses and increases the risk of developing TB disease. The illness can also place a heavy financial burden on households when the primary wage earner becomes sick, further compounding economic hardship and vulnerability.
Ethiopia is a high TB-burden country, and I witnessed the impact of the disease firsthand while living in the community and through my work as a physician and researcher there. I saw how TB affects families and communities, and it struck me deeply as the disease devastated many lives around me. This perspective has motivated me throughout my career.
The only current TB vaccine, the BCG vaccine, is an important but imperfect hundred-year-old tool. A review of studies on BCG concluded that while it provides protection to young children from severe forms of TB, it provides limited protection against pulmonary TB in adolescents or adults.
Adolescents and adults bear the greatest burden of pulmonary TB and are the primary drivers of transmission. Preventing TB in these age groups could therefore help protect people of all ages.
Widespread use of an effective TB vaccine could also contribute to reducing drug-resistant TB. By lowering the incidence of TB disease, it would reduce the need for antibiotic treatment—a critical step in curbing antimicrobial resistance.
The World Health Organization estimates that over a 25-year time span, a vaccine with 50% efficacy for protecting adolescents and adults could save 8.5 million lives, prevent 76 million new TB cases and save $41.5 billion for TB affected households.
A new vaccine, if able to deliver on this goal, could be game changing. But it will only have an impact if it is used by the people who would benefit most from it. The experience of the measles vaccine illustrates this point well.
Introduced more than 60 years ago, its success has depended on sustained efforts to ensure widespread use. Today, measles outbreaks still make headlines, but they are small compared with the devastating epidemics seen before vaccination. Over the past 25 years alone, measles vaccination is estimated to have prevented about 59 million deaths.
The TB vaccine candidate that we at the Gates Medical Research Institute are evaluating is among several candidates currently in late phase clinical trials. There has never been a time when the TB vaccine pipeline has shown such promise, bringing us closer than ever to improving the prospects for communities most affected by this disease.
If one of these vaccine candidates proves to be effective, it will be essential for governments, global health organizations, and communities to work together to ensure that it reaches those who would benefit most. Broad and equitable access will be critical to reducing the global burden of TB and moving closer to the goal of a world free of TB.
Alemnew Dagnew, M.D., is Head of Vaccines & Biologics Development at the Gates Medical Research Institute (Gates MRI), where he leads the clinical development of the M72 tuberculosis vaccine. Alemnew holds an M.D. and M.Sc. in Medical Microbiology from Addis Ababa University. He also earned an M.Sc. in Vaccinology and Pharmaceutical Clinical Development through a joint program from Novartis Vaccines and the University of Siena, and an MPH with a focus on epidemiologic and biostatistical methods from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
KARACHI, Pakistan, Mar 20 2026 (IPS) - Energy expert Vaqar Zakaria believes solar power makes “excellent economic sense” – and he lives by it. For over five years, his rooftop panels have slashed his bills, sometimes to zero, even allowing him to sell surplus electricity back through net metering.
Last month, he took it further. After buying two electric vehicles, he has almost “declared independence” from the national grid. With more panels and doubled batteries, even his cars run on sunshine. “I am moving away from their fuel, and I don’t need their power,” said the CEO of Hagler Bailly, Pakistan, an Islamabad-based environmental consultancy firm, over the phone from Islamabad.
“I call it the hand of God driving my car,” Zakaria said.
He is already seeing economic gains from his investment. “The electricity I generate, including battery costs, comes to about Rs 12 (USD 0.043) per unit, while it can be sold to the Islamabad Electric Supply Company at around Rs 26 (USD 0.092) per unit.” However, he adds that he does not currently claim this benefit, as it requires considerable follow-up.
Doing some quick back-of-the-envelope calculations, he compared the petrol-run vehicles he used until a few months back to the EV he purchased a month ago. “The total cost of operating the EV comes to about Rs 2 (USD 0.0071) per km using power generated at home, compared to the Rs 27 (USD 0.096) per km I was paying earlier for running vehicles on the fossil fuel.”
This figure does not include the regular maintenance costs his earlier cars required—lubricating oils, oil and air filters, and brakes.
“An EV requires near-zero maintenance,” he added.
Vaqar Zakaria’s white EV charges under rooftop solar panels at his home — powered by the sun. Credit: Vaqar Zakaria
While Zakaria can afford a full shift off the grid, most households cannot.
“The solar landscape will remain unchanged unless power companies introduce profit-sharing models that turn consumers into ‘prosumers’ – both producers and users of energy – supported by microfinance to help cover upfront costs,” he said. Achieving this would require the privatisation of utilities.”
For now, with or without batteries, solar energy has become a popular alternative for many households. “What’s happening in Pakistan is quite significant, as electricity consumers’ dependence on the national grid is falling,” explained Rabia Babar, data manager at Renewables First, an Islamabad-based think-and-do tank for energy and environment.
Grid-based electricity demand, she pointed out, dropped 11 percent in FY25 compared to FY22 levels, largely because more people and businesses are switching to solar.
“During the day, far less electricity is being drawn from the grid, which means gas-fired power plants are being used much less than before.”
More than 100 young Pakistani women from across the country have been trained in and certified in solar roof installation by LADIESFUND Energy Pvt Ltd through Dawood Global Foundation’s Educate a Girl programme. They have solarised a women’s shelter, a church and an orphanage. Credit: LADIESFUND Energy (Pvt.) Ltd
The Turning Point
Haneea Isaad, an energy finance specialist at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, recalled the time in 2022, as the turning point when people realised they needed a cheaper alternative. “The prices of liquefied natural gas shot up after Russian forces entered Ukraine and the country faced a gas shortage, resulting in widespread power outages. Electricity prices almost tripled in just a couple of years.”
Those who could afford to, Isaad said, opted for a one-time investment in installing solar panels instead of paying for expensive and unreliable electricity.
According to EMBER, an independent clean energy think tank, solar’s share in the energy mix has risen from 2.9 percent in 2020 to 32.3 percent by the end of 2025.
It is this quiet solar revolution that may help ride out the current energy crisis triggered by the United States-Israel war on Iran, which led to the shutting of the Strait of Hormuz, according to a report by Renewables First and the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, published earlier this week.
“Pakistan’s solar revolution is quietly redrawing the country’s energy map, cutting grid dependence, reducing LNG exposure, and building a buffer against global market shocks that most of its neighbours are yet to find,” said Babar, one of the co-authors of the report.
A house in rural Gilgit with solar panels. Credit: SHAMA Solar.
In fact, the report says that Pakistan has avoided over USD 12 billion in oil and gas imports since 2020 due to its rapid solar growth – and could save another USD 6.3 billion in 2026 alone at current prices.
Lead analyst Lauri Myllyvirta, co-founder of CREA, said the solar boom has cut import bills and now acts “like an insurance policy” against oil and LNG shocks from the Gulf.
Industries are also turning to solar, significantly reducing their need for LNG significantly.
“This shift has had a direct impact on government policy. Pakistan has gone back to its LNG suppliers to renegotiate long-term contracts for the diversion of surplus cargoes to international markets, which are now oversupplied due to the sharp reduction in gas consumption,” said Babar.
Pakistan has been importing LNG since 2015, after domestic reserves declined. It has been mainly used in the power sector – accounting for nearly a quarter of Pakistan’s electricity supply – followed by the industrial sector.
Supplied from Qatar via the Strait of Hormuz, LNG has become less attractive due to high prices for industry and the growing shift to solar in homes. With some LNG landing in Pakistan before the conflict began and domestic gas filling the gap from affected cargoes, supplies may be enough to last until mid-April.
“Pakistan has historically been vulnerable to volatile global LNG prices, which strain on foreign exchange reserves when prices spike,” Babar said.
Isaad agreed. “Solar has provided a buffer. With the power sector also relying on coal imports from Indonesia and South Africa, supply pressures are unlikely to pose a problem in the near term. Seasonal hydropower and mild weather are also likely to prevent an immediate spike in LNG based power demand. For now, Pakistan has been spared – unlike Bangladesh and India, which have been hit the hardest in South Asia.”
Not Out of the Woods Yet
But the solar panels have not shielded Pakistanis from the rising oil prices. The country saw a 20 percent jump – the highest in its history – with petrol and diesel costing USD 1.15 and USD 1.20 per litre, respectively. As transport drives the economy, higher oil prices quickly pushed up fares and the cost of groceries.
In response, Zakaria said the crisis highlights a clear path forward: embrace EVs, reduce diesel dependence, and expand renewables. “Begin with two-wheelers,” he suggested, though a full EV mass transit system would be ideal for Pakistan. He added that shifting freight from trucks to rail could significantly cut fuel costs.
He said he supports the oil rationing and austerity measures taken by the government.
Last week, addressing the nation, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced these measures on television.
“The entire region is currently in a state of war,” he said, outlining steps, including a four-day workweek for government employees and spring holidays for schools from March 16 to the end of the month. He also said 50 percent of government staff would work from home on a rotating basis and recommended similar arrangements for the private sector.
Higher education institutions have shifted to online classes to save fuel, as have meetings across federal and provincial governments. Fuel allowances for government offices have also been reduced.
Under the government’s austerity measures, federal and provincial cabinet members will forgo two months’ salaries and allowances, while lawmakers’ pay will be reduced by 25 percent. Ministers, parliamentarians, and officials may travel abroad only when essential — and must fly economy. Weddings will be capped at 200 guests, served with a single-dish meal.
The Human Cost
But these measures have brought little relief to Saba Nasreen’s household finances. The 52-year-old mother of two, who works as a domestic help, said, “Rising fuel prices have literally crippled us; when fuel costs go up, food prices follow. We hardly buy fruit or meat; now even milk and vegetables are beyond our range,” she said.
With Eid ul-Fitr—the Muslim festival marking the end of Ramadan—just days away, she said, “This will be the first Eid in as long as I can remember that I won’t be making sheer khurma for my daughters,” referring to the traditional sweet vermicelli dish prepared in many Muslim households across the subcontinent. “The price of a box of vermicelli has doubled this year, from Rs 150 (USD 0.53) to Rs 300 (USD 1.07),” she said, adding, “In any case, the attack on Iran has already dimmed our festivities; I’m not happy inside, my heart feels heavy.”
For many, the solar revolution offers hope — but for households like Nasreen’s, the struggle continues.
IPS UN Bureau Report
BRUSSELS, Belgium, Mar 20 2026 (IPS) - When German Chancellor Friedrich Merz opened the 62nd Munich Security Conference by declaring that the post-war rules-based order ‘no longer exists’, there was plenty of evidence to back his claim. Israel is committing genocide in Gaza in defiance of international law, Russia is four years into its illegal invasion of Ukraine, the last nuclear arms control treaty between Russia and the USA has just expired and the USA has withdrawn from 66 international bodies and commitments. Since the conference, Israel and the USA have launched another war on Iran, threatening to spark a broader regional conflict. Meanwhile the UN is undergoing a funding crisis, cutting staff and programmes, and civil society organisations that relied on US Agency for International Development funding are facing closure.
Inaugurated in 1963 as a transatlantic defence meeting, the Munich Security Conference has grown into the most significant annual global security meeting, with heads of state, foreign ministers, civil society, think tanks and the media taking part. The 2026 edition focused on the theme ‘Under Destruction’ and convened over 1,000 participants from more than 115 countries, including over 60 national leaders, alongside China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the directors of multiple UN agencies.
The conference’s Munich Security Report 2026 provided the analytical backdrop. It argued that the world has entered a period of ‘wrecking-ball politics’, with the post-1945 order being demolished by political forces that prefer disruption to reform. The report’s Munich Security Index showed the scale of the crisis. In France, Germany and the UK, absolute majorities of respondents said their government’s policies would leave future generations worse off. Across most BRICS and G7 countries, the USA is now rated as a growing risk.
In the build-up the conference, the world had been bracing for Rubio’s keynote address. Last year, US Vice President JD Vance’s aggressive speech accused European governments of suppressing free speech and aligning with political extremism, with no apparent acknowledgement of irony. Rubio took a more conciliatory tone, calling Europe America’s ‘cherished allies and oldest friends’. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said she was ‘very much reassured’. Half the hall rose to applaud.
The substance of the speech, however, followed every position Vance advanced the year before. Rubio defined the transatlantic relationship not around shared democratic institutions or international law, but around ‘Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, and ancestry’. This framing drew anger from global south delegates, who understood its explicit claim of global north cultural and racial superiority, excluding the majority of humanity.
The Trump administration was making a strategic calculation, having evidently concluded that Vance’s confrontational tone had backfired, bringing Europe closer to China and making it more reluctant to endorse US-led initiatives. So it switched to a softer messenger without changing the message.
Rubio’s post-conference itinerary made the USA’s current priorities clear. He flew directly from Munich to Budapest and Bratislava to meet two nationalist leaders, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico. Both are pro-Trump and friendly towards Vladimir Putin. These are the European politicians the Trump administration considers its true allies. Now the USA is planning to fund right-wing think tanks and charities across Europe in a blatant attempt to influence the continent’s politics.
Friedrich Merz’s diagnosis led to a historic and disturbing move: he and French President Emmanuel Macron announced they’d begun talks on extending France’s nuclear umbrella to cover other European countries. This is a development it would have been hard to imagine just a year ago. For decades European countries have based their security policies on NATO and its article 5, the collective defence commitment. But the Trump administration has threatened not to respect article 5, driving European states to embark on the long and expensive process of detaching themselves from relying on NATO. Now this evidently includes the exploration of nuclear alternatives.
Von der Leyen described the move as a ‘European awakening’ and called for a ‘mutual defence clause’ to be brought to life. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer called for ‘hard power’ and readiness to fight if necessary. Poland’s nationalist President Karol Nawrocki said his country should get nuclear weapons. By responding in this way to the unravelling of the multilateral order, European states are further weakening the norms of non-proliferation and arms control that the post-war order sought to sustain. Responding to crisis with a second nuclear arms race could bring still further instability. Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez was the only European leader at the conference to warn against this.
The conference’s conclusion was that those who care about the international order must build new institutions, coalitions and frameworks that are fit for purpose and accountable to the people they are supposed to serve. This reasonable framing sidesteps crucial questions: whose interests institutions will serve, and who’s excluded as the blueprints are drawn.
Instead of a new nuclear arms race, European states’ reaction to the fraying of their old alliances with the USA must be anchored in human rights, genuine multilateralism and a commitment to international law. This will only happen if civil society is present as a partner at the table.
It’s clear the old order is broken, and those committed to human rights and opposed to militarisation and naked power politics can’t afford to be bystanders. Their responses need to be more assertive and inclusive. A new international architecture that continues to exclude civil society and sideline the global south will simply reproduce the structures that have failed to address today’s crises.
Samuel King is a researcher with the Horizon Europe-funded research project ENSURED: Shaping Cooperation for a World in Transition at CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation.
For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org
BANGKOK, Thailand, Mar 20 2026 (IPS) - Across Asia, new initiatives are showing how satellite Earth observation data and AI-powered technologies can turn fragmented water-related data into actionable insights for managers and policymakers in line ministries and local governments.
Only about 3% of global water quality measurements (around 60,000 out of 2 million) come from the world’s poorest regions, according to the United Nations, highlighting a persistent water data gap. Even where data exist, they are often scattered across agencies, with monitoring stations sparse and datasets rarely analysed together.
Integrating satellite observations with cognitive digital technologies, including artificial intelligence, can bring these fragmented sources into a single data and analytical pipeline, turning environmental data into timely insights that strengthen water governance and accelerate progress toward SDG 6.
Guiding smarter water infrastructure investments
One example is from Cimanuk–Cisanggarung River Basin in West Java, Indonesia. Rapid urban growth, land-use change and climate variability are increasing flood risks during the rainy season and water shortages during the dry season.
Retention ponds or small reservoirs designed to capture and store excess rainwater are widely recognized as effective solutions because they can hold excess runoff during heavy rains and provide water for irrigation and communities during dry periods.
The main policy challenge, however, is optimizing investments in retention ponds: quickly identifying the best locations and making site selection more systematic and less subjective. Conventionally, planning relies heavily on field surveys and fragmented datasets, making the process slow, costly and hard to scale.
An AI-powered tool developed by Indonesia’s National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN) and the West Java Department of Water Resources demonstrates how a single data and analytical pipeline can guide infrastructure investment decisions.
The tool combines satellite Earth observation data, including digital elevation maps, land cover maps and rainfall data, with georeferenced drainage networks and soil type information to identify locations where retention ponds can provide the most benefits for flood control and drought resilience. Socio-environmental filters exclude protected areas or sites that might cause social or legal conflicts.
To ensure the tool supports operational decision-making, the results were validated through field assessments and consultations with local stakeholders. Additionally, a mobile-based application is being developed to enable field technicians to access the outputs directly on site, improving the speed and practicality of retention pond planning.
Applying this tool shifts infrastructure planning from subjective judgment to transparent and evidence-based prioritization. Supported by capacity-building activities for local institutions, this approach enables governments to allocate resources more efficiently while enhancing the long-term resilience of water systems.
Monitoring lake ecosystems from space
While the Indonesia example shows how digital technologies can guide infrastructure investments, similar approaches are also transforming how water ecosystems are monitored and protected.
Water quality monitoring in Songkhla Lake, Thailand’s largest lagoon system and a critical resource for fisheries and aquaculture, has traditionally relied on periodic sampling at fixed stations. Expanding the coverage and frequency of monitoring data could improve early warning for ecosystem management and aquaculture.
A project, implemented by Prince of Songkla University in collaboration with local authorities, is exploring this potential on Ko Yor Island in Songkhla Lake. The initiative combines multi-source satellite remote sensing data, historical monitoring records and machine learning models to estimate key water quality parameters, such as turbidity and biochemical oxygen demand.
Satellite-based remote sensing expands the coverage and frequency of water-quality monitoring, enabling near-monthly maps rather than quarterly point measurements.
This effort draws on more than a decade of operational experience from Poyang Lake, the largest freshwater lake in China. There, Jiangxi Normal University developed a comprehensive monitoring and early warning platform integrating satellite Earth observation, drone, ground and lake-surface sources, combined with ecological data simulated by models to track the lake’s dynamic ecological security issues and overall health.
The system supports water management and the conservation of flagship species and their habitats, including migratory birds and the Yangtze finless porpoise.
From pilots to regional transformation
These pilots highlight an important trend: many of the innovative technologies needed to address water data gaps are already available. Earth observation satellite-derived data can complement ground-based observations by expanding environmental monitoring, while cognitive technologies integrate datasets into decision-ready insights.
Scaling these innovations is not only a technological challenge. As emphasized in ESCAP’s report Seizing the Opportunity: Digital Innovation for a Sustainable Future, digital innovation is a socio-technical transformation that requires the skills, institutions and partnerships to integrate technology into governance systems.
Experiences from Indonesia and Thailand illustrate how integrating satellite-derived data, geospatial analysis and artificial intelligence can simultaneously strengthen climate resilience, livelihoods and water governance. With supportive policies, stronger digital capacities and sustained regional cooperation, such approaches could be adapted and replicated in suitable contexts.
These pilots, along with exchanges of technical experience, including lessons from the Poyang Lake monitoring system, are supported through the Asia-Pacific Plan of Action on Space Applications for Sustainable Development (2018–2030).
The Asia-Pacific SDG Progress Report 2026 warns that progress across many Sustainable Development Goals remains off track, while data gaps continue to constrain effective policymaking. Strengthening water governance will depend not only on building infrastructure, but also on building the data systems and analytical capacities that guide where and how those investments are made.
Scaling proven digital innovations could therefore help turn fragmented water data into the actionable intelligence needed to accelerate progress toward SDG 6 and the broader 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Kareff Rafisura is Economic Affairs Officer (Space Applications), ESCAP; Orbita Roswintiarti is Senior Scientist, BRIN; Huang Qi is Associate Research Fellow, School of Geography and Environment, Key Laboratory of Poyang Lake Wetland and Watershed Research (Ministry of Education), Jiangxi Normal University, and Director of Nanji Wetland Field Research Station, Poyang Lake
Chaoyang Fang, Distinguished Professor, School of Geography and Environment and Chief Engineer, Key Laboratory of Poyang Lake Wetland and Watershed Research (Ministry of Education) of Jiangxi Normal University, also contributed insights to this piece.
IPS UN Bureau
BRIGHTON, UK, Mar 19 2026 (IPS) - The 2026 campaign on World Water Day’s focuses on Water and Gender – ‘where water flows, equality grows’ . While substantial progress has been achieved across a range of gender indicators spanning education, health and public participation, the situation around WASH (water, sanitation and hygiene) is still marked by deep inequalities with women and girls disproportionately affected – and this reflects the persistence of global patriarchy.
More than 2 billion people still lack access to safely managed drinking water. In households without piped water, women and girls are made to be responsible for about 70–80% of water collection trips worldwide, taking anything from 30 minutes to four hours daily. This time can instead usefully be spent on education, productive activities or even leisure and rest, but they don’t have the choice.
The situation is even more dire for sanitation with 3.4 billion people lacking access to safely managed sanitation. All this affects women’s and girl’s dignity, safety, security and the privacy and comfort needed for dignified menstrual health management. At the same time, there is poor progress on women’s economic participation.
These patterns have remained remarkably persistent despite improvements in water and sanitation infrastructure. The sheer time and labour required for poor women and girls around WASH activities, combined with gendered inequalities and power imbalances under the persistence of patriarchy not only directly affect girls’ enrolment in education but inevitably diminishes their capacity for productive economic activity, the net impact of which worldwide is a huge dent in human development progress.
Water as a weapon of war against women and girls
Not only that, but the apparent normalisation of wars and genocides wrought largely by men means almost daily violations of international humanitarian law including the weaponisation of water and sanitation infrastructure as a target of attack. Most recently, the United States’ bombing of a freshwater desalinsation plant in Iran and retaliation by Iran on another desalination plant in Bahrain set a dangerous new precedent.
When water and sanitation infrastructure become fair game in war, as we’ve seen in Gaza, Sudan and Ukraine in the last few years, existing gender inequalities around water and sanitation mean women and girls suffer most, compounding risks including sexual violence.
Male violence and malevolence are back
What we’re seeing real-time and online is something even more worrying. That is the resurgence of more explicit patriarchy desiring control over women’s lives and subjugation into traditional roles away from public life. From the slashing of Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programmes to the rollback of reproductive rights across the world from the USA to Chile, the resurgence of ‘toxic masculinity’ is forcing gender rights, feminism and equality off the agenda and they are equated with pejorative notions of ‘wokeism.’
Some institutions are already reframing debates in response. For instance, the World Bank is increasingly framing gender as about economic activity and jobs, rather than about rights. This is reflected in their new Water Mission implementation strategy that refers to employment but only mentions gender six times and women four times even though the gross inequalities in labour power and economic effects are, as stated above, so vast.
The gender backlash and reductionism in rights framings helps reinforce stereotypes and accepted norms, including the gendered division of labour in water collection, rather than confronting this more forcefully – and, at a minimum, asking why this is the case rather than accepted as a given.
If views persist that women and girls are responsible for water-related subsistence tasks, it ignores specific needs around sanitation and menstrual hygiene and increases male domination in decision-making and water management. Which is precisely what patriarchy seeking to achieve – domination and subjugation.
The rollback on funding for WASH continues
A year ago, Keir Starmer cut the UK aid budget by about 40 per cent. These cuts have been devastating for water and sanitation progress in some of the world’s poorest and most war-torn countries with direct and lasting consequences for women and girls. The cuts particularly impact countries like Sudan, Ethiopia and Palestine, already reeling from largely male-driven wars, conflicts and genocide.
It is estimated that around 12 million people will be denied access to clean water and sanitation as a result. These cuts directly affect gender equality because reduced access to water and sanitation impacts schooling, being at work and increases the risk of gender-based violence.
The UK justifies the cuts as a way to move away from direct aid around WASH to strengthening capabilities and partnerships. But these partnerships between the UK and Global South countries such as Nigeria focusing on growth, jobs and reducing aid dependency can backfire as more and more people’s health deteriorate, including more women suffering from ill health and long-term illnesses.
Ultimately, a waning collective effort to support gender equality in WASH provision opens the door to long-term decline in gender rights and economic development. Additionally, the dismantling of USAID is already having devastating consequences for gender equality and women’s health. Just when greater focus is needed on WASH projects to ensure we are not backsliding on gender rights, aid is being cut.
In sum, persistent inequalities, the gender backlash, illegal and forever wars and aid cuts lacking a moral compass have diluted global collective action on gender inequality. The least policymakers could do would be to achieve and maintain leadership that realises human rights for all in WASH provision, a substantial rationale for which has to be a big- ticket focus on the social and economic empowerment of women and girls.
Any other direction would be disastrous, enabling patriarchy and misogyny to grow even deeper roots in global society.
Professor Lyla Mehta is a Professorial Fellow at IDS and a Visiting Professor at Noragric, the Norwegian University of Life Sciences. She trained as a sociologist (University of Vienna) and has a PhD in Development Studies (University of Sussex).
Dr. Alan Nicol is the Strategic Program Leader – Promoting Sustainable Growth, at the International Water Management Institute (IWMI)
IPS UN Bureau
NEW YORK & SRINAGAR, India, Mar 19 2026 (IPS) - A new United Nations report has warned that global water inequality remains one of the most pressing development challenges of the decade, with billions still lacking safe drinking water and sanitation – while women and girls continue to bear the heaviest burden of water insecurity.
The United Nations World Water Development Report 2026, titled Water for All People: Equal Rights and Opportunities, was released today (March 19, 2026) by UNESCO in New York. The report has highlighted how unequal access to water resources intersects with gender inequality, poverty, and climate change. The report argues that achieving water security is inseparable from advancing gender equality and inclusive governance.
According to the report, access to safe water and sanitation remains far from universal. As of 2024, around 2.1 billion people still lack safely managed drinking water services, while 3.4 billion people lack safely managed sanitation and 1.7 billion people lack basic hygiene services at home.
In an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service (IPS
Dr Laura Imburgia, UNESCO WWAP Programme Specialist
Dr Laura Imburgia, UNESCO WWAP Programme Specialist, said that safely managed drinking water access calls for water to be delivered as close as feasible to premises; water service for smallholders calls for investments which promote women’s leadership and protect their water rights.
“As the report indicates, the financing gap for the water sector remains vast and requires mobilising nearly USD 7 trillion by 2030. While imperative, mobilising the funding is difficult. While governments are the most important duty-bearers, mobilising nontraditional funding sources for water and sanitation, including the private sector, can help close this gap. Blended finance, which strategically anchors public, philanthropic and private capital around shared goals, can be a powerful driver of investment,” Imburgia told IPS News.
She added that the progressive removal of obstacles to access to water and sanitation, including discrimination, is required to fully realise the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation. According to her, addressing WASH barriers requires responses that go beyond technical fixes, as these challenges are rooted in the complex interplay of politics, economics and culture.
“There is a need to value unpaid water work, care and domestic labour, mostly carried out by women and girls. Disaggregate data by sex and age at the household level and integrate gendered time-use and affordability data into WASH research and policy frameworks. WASH affordability assessments should consider women’s limited control over household finances and their disproportionate responsibility for WASH-related tasks,“ Imburgia said.
As per the report, the consequences extend beyond health. Limited access to water affects education, food security, livelihoods, and economic opportunities, particularly for women and girls who often shoulder the responsibility of collecting water for their households.
The United Nations World Water Development Report 2026, titled Water for All People: Equal Rights and Opportunities, says 80 percent of rural households lack direct water access. Credit: UNESCO
“Access to water is not merely a question of availability or infrastructure. It is, at its core, a question of rights and of power,” said UNESCO Director General Khaled El-Enany in the foreword to the report. “Who has access to water, who pays the price for its scarcity, and who sits at the decision-making table reveals enduring inequalities that run deep through our societies.”
The report estimates that in more than 80 percent of rural households without direct water access, women and girls are responsible for collecting water. Globally this task consumes around 250 million hours every day.
This daily burden limits opportunities for education, employment, and civic participation. It also exposes women and girls to health risks, physical strain, and potential violence during long journeys to water sources.
“Across the world, it is women and girls who most often carry the daily weight of water insecurity,” El-Enany said.
The report stresses that water inequality is not only a humanitarian issue but also a governance problem.
“Women remain under-represented in water management and leadership roles worldwide. Globally, women hold less than 30 percent of management and technical positions in the water sector and fewer than 20 percent of senior leadership roles in many public water institutions,” the report says.
According to the report, this imbalance weakens water governance and reduces the effectiveness of policies designed to address water scarcity and climate impacts.
“Water systems are more effective, inclusive, and sustainable when women participate fully and meaningfully,” El-Enany noted.
The report also examines the broader global water crisis. Renewable freshwater resources worldwide are estimated at roughly 43,000 cubic kilometres per year. However, their availability varies widely by region and season due to climate and geographic factors.
Water stress is increasing in many parts of the world. The report states that around 10 percent of the global population lives in countries facing critical water stress, while roughly four billion people experience severe water shortages at least one month each year.
Climate change is intensifying the challenge. Rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, floods, and droughts are affecting water availability and threatening food production and livelihoods.
“Climate change is posing more threats to human well-being through its impact on water and food security, public health, economic stability and the environment,” the report noted.
Agriculture remains the largest consumer of freshwater globally, accounting for about 72 percent of total water withdrawals. Industry uses roughly 15 percent, while municipal and domestic use accounts for about 13 percent.
These figures vary significantly across countries. Agriculture dominates water use in low-income economies, while more industrialised economies rely less heavily on water-intensive sectors.
The report also highlights the growing competition for water between cities and agriculture, particularly in rapidly expanding urban areas of developing countries.
Another major concern is groundwater depletion. In many regions groundwater serves as a critical alternative to surface water, yet unsustainable extraction has led to long-term declines in aquifers in parts of Asia and North America.
Water quality also poses a serious challenge. Agricultural runoff is now considered the leading cause of freshwater contamination worldwide. Industrial pollution and inadequate wastewater treatment contribute to declining water quality in many countries.
Despite global commitments, progress toward international water targets remains slow. The report states that none of the targets under Sustainable Development Goal 6, which aims to ensure access to water and sanitation for all by 2030, are currently on track.
According to the latest global data, about 26 percent of the world’s population still lacks safely managed drinking water services, while 41 percent lacks safely managed sanitation.
The report warns that closing these gaps requires not only infrastructure investments but also social and institutional reforms.
Technical solutions alone cannot resolve water inequality, the authors argue. Instead, governments must address deeper social and political barriers that prevent equitable access to water.
Imburgia told IPS in an interview that the progress on Sustainable Development Goal 6 has been slow mainly because of weak governance, insufficient funding, and growing pressures like climate change and population growth.
“Many countries lack strong institutions, clear policies, and coordination between sectors. In addition, infrastructure for water and sanitation is expensive and often underfunded. As the World Water Development Report 2026 highlights, inequalities play a critical role, as poorer and rural communities are harder to reach. Together, these structural challenges make implementation slow and uneven,” she said.
“The findings of this report leave no room for doubt. Technical solutions alone cannot solve what are, at their root, social and political challenges,” the report reads.
Experts stress that inclusive governance and reliable data are critical to designing effective policies. The report calls for better monitoring systems, especially the collection of sex-disaggregated data to understand how water access affects different groups.
Another key recommendation is increased investment in water infrastructure and gender-responsive financing.
The report notes that the global water sector faces a massive investment gap estimated in the trillions of dollars. At the same time, many water projects fail to consider the economic value of unpaid labour performed by women in collecting and managing water.
Researchers say recognising this invisible labour is essential for designing fair and effective policies.
The report also points to examples of progress. Since 2020 the UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme has trained more than 1,000 professionals across 35 countries to strengthen gender equality in water management.
International partnerships are also expanding. A global call for action launched in 2021 to accelerate gender equality in water governance has attracted more than 200 participating organisations.
Alvaro Lario, Chair of UN-Water and President of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), stressed that gender equality is central to sustainable water management.
“Gender equality and water security are inextricably linked,” Lario wrote in the report. “Advancing gender equality in and through water can strengthen the effectiveness and sustainability of water resources.”
As per the report, addressing water inequality could help reduce poverty, improve health outcomes, enhance food security, and support climate resilience. “Gender equality constitutes an essential path towards fair and just access to, and use of, water,” the report claims.
With less than five years remaining to meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, the authors warn that urgent and coordinated global action is needed.
According to El-Enany, gender equality must be a cornerstone of water governance.
“We must ensure that the voices of women are finally heard where decisions are made. Because the right to water must not remain a principle. It must become a reality for all.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
KYIV, Ukraine, Mar 19 2026 (IPS) - It is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the tension, violence and uncertainty in the world in recent years. The number of wars is growing, more and more money is being spent on weapons, and the rhetoric of major powers is becoming increasingly decisive.
The latest escalation in the Middle East has reignited the debate about the start of World War III. The consequences of the Israeli and US strikes on Iran are being felt to varying degrees far beyond the region, at least by those who follow oil prices.
The interests of numerous great powers are at stake, and third parties are considering their next moves and making political statements. Opinions range widely, from the belief that there can be no Third World War because of the existence of nuclear weapons, to the conviction that it has already begun. So, what is really going on?
A journalistic and academic concept
When historians talk about world wars, they mean two unique events in the past. Their scale, the involvement of a wide range of states, the level of violence and the nature of the consequences put them in a league of their own.
To understand how these wars differed from any others, one need only glance at the diagram of human casualties, defence spending, or destruction in various armed conflicts of the 20th century.
However, historians also have different opinions. One of them, better known in his political capacity, Winston Churchill, once described the Seven Years’ War as a world war. This protracted 18th-century conflict drew most of the major powers of the time into direct combat; it spanned numerous battlefields in Europe, North America, the Atlantic and the Indian Ocean; and it had serious geopolitical consequences. How was this not a world war?
By the fact that it was not a total war between industrialised states, the scale of the clashes was rather limited, as were the number of armies; and the consequences, although serious, were not systemic — this may be the response of more conservative historians than the British Prime Minister.
The number of armed conflicts in the world has been growing over the past few years: 2024 has been a record year since World War II.
‘World War’ is both a journalistic and academic concept. To enhance the effect, attract attention or draw conditional analogies, it can be used to describe more events than just the First and Second World Wars. For example, the Thirty Years’ War of the 17th century, the Napoleonic Wars of the 19th century or even the Cold War are sometimes referred to as world wars.
Within this logic, individual elements of a world war can be seen even today. The number of armed conflicts in the world has been growing over the past few years: 2024 has been a record year since World War II. According to some estimates, 61 armed conflicts in 36 countries were recorded this year, which is significantly higher than the average for the previous three decades.
Global military spending is also on the rise: today it has reached 2.5 per cent of the global economy, the highest figure since 2011 and an upward trend since 2021. This is still significantly less than during the Cold War, when a range of 3 to 6 per cent was the norm. Analysing these figures, it is clear that global security has deteriorated in recent years, but how critically?
A more academic approach would be to define a world war as one in which most of the major powers are involved; which has global reach and is total in nature; leads to enormous loss and destruction; and significantly changes the world upon its conclusion. Direct and large-scale armed conflict between major powers is a mandatory criterion.
And this is the main argument against the idea that World War III has already begun. No matter how high the level of destabilisation in the modern world, no matter how far large-scale regional conflicts have escalated, and no matter how much money states spend on armaments, this is not enough for a world war. Large-scale military operations involving major powers are needed.
All just fears?
This has not happened in the world for a long time. The interval between the Second and Third World Wars turned out to be much longer than between the First and Second. Nuclear weapons played a central role in this, raising the price of war so high that major powers began to avoid it by any means possible. This safeguard has been in place for over 80 years and looks set to continue.
Peace, or rather the absence of war between major powers, remains one of the central elements of the current international order. International institutions and regimes may collapse or weaken, regional wars may break out, but the likelihood of war between major powers remains extremely low.
Proponents of the Third World War theory sometimes point out that even in the absence of full-scale war between major powers, other manifestations occur: hybrid wars, cyberattacks, or proxy wars. This is true, but all these outbreaks of conflict are several levels below a world war in terms of their destructive potential and are not total in nature.
Throughout history, states have fought through proxies or resorted to information, trade or religious wars, but we do not consider these wars to be world wars — except in a symbolic sense.
A systemic war does not necessarily have to be a world war
Unlike the 2003 war in Iraq, the strikes on Iran are taking place in a world where, instead of US hegemony, there is complex competition between at least two centres of power. This adds nuances and forces other states to respond, directly or indirectly, for example, by supplying weapons or intelligence data, supporting one side or the other.
But this does not make the war global. Arms supplies, for example, are a common practice found in most regional conflicts, as is diplomatic or financial support from allies or partners. Even if American troops use the technology or expertise of partners – such as Ukrainian drones – this does not mean that Ukraine is being drawn into the war. Just as American arms supplies to Ukraine during the Russian-Ukrainian war did not mean US involvement in the war.
For a world war, the key ingredient is still missing: direct confrontation between major powers. In addition to world wars, there are also systemic wars. In these conflicts, it is not so much the scale that is important as the change in the international order to which they lead.
The Thirty Years’ War, the Napoleonic Wars, and the First and Second World Wars mentioned above were systemic wars: after their completion, the rules of international politics were rewritten and new ones were adopted at peace conferences and congresses. A systemic war does not necessarily have to be a world war.
Moments of hegemonic crisis and the beginning of the struggle for hegemony always carry with them the danger of new wars, arms races and escalations.
The current destabilisation and growth of various risks are largely linked to the struggle for the future of the international order. The United States and China have almost fallen into the ‘Thucydides trap’ — a strategic logic similar to that which led to the Peloponnesian War in the 5th century BC. At that time, the narrowing of the power gap between the hegemon and the challenger forced the Spartans to start a preventive war.
Today, there are well-founded fears that the decline of American hegemony, the rise of China and the approach of a bipolar world will sharply increase the likelihood of direct armed conflict between the superpowers.
The decisive, to put it mildly, steps taken by the US administration can also be considered preventive actions aimed at strategically weakening China’s position while Washington still has the upper hand. Such moments of hegemonic crisis and the beginning of the struggle for hegemony always carry with them the danger of new wars, arms races and escalations.
We are in the midst of such a crisis. It is systemic in the sense that it is not just a collection of regional conflicts in different parts of the world, which have become more numerous, but a manifestation of a large-scale redistribution of influence and power on a global scale. This redistribution will entail changes in the international order, because the rules of the game are linked to the balance of power.
If, at some point, the leaders of major states decide that it is worth taking the risk of war and paying the price, the systemic crisis will turn into a world war. But this, as the Spartans themselves said, is ‘if’.
Nickolay Kapitonenko is an associate professor at the Institute of International Relations at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv and director of the Centre for International Relations Studies.
Source: International Politics and Society, Brussels
IPS UN Bureau