The year of Paris

During President Obama’s visit to India, India and the U.S. are expected to firm up agreements on renewable energy and new technologies.

As the world heads towards a new climate treaty by the end of the year, with Lima providing a bare-bones launching pad, many of the issues that have dogged negotiations will reach a flashpoint. Countries need to do more as was evident during the UN climate talks but there is not much ambition reflected either in terms of finance or technology transfer. The Green Climate Fund (GCF) has reached just over $10 billion, far short of what developing countries need to carry out urgent actions. The Synthesis Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has clearly laid a strong scientific basis, and adaptation alone will not save the earth from warming to levels which will have irreversible effects. The way the developed world is positioning itself, it is doubtful whether the issue of its historical responsibility will be the mainstay of the new treaty, post 2020. India maintains that developed countries have to pay for their pollution, and technology transfer cannot be entangled in intellectual property rights. Funding for mitigation and adaptation in the developing world becomes crucial but the principle of common but differentiated responsibility (CBDR) has taken a hard hit in recent times. Countries like the United Kingdom have already ruled out a separate allocation of funds in addition to development aid for climate actions.

The developed world contends that emerging economies like China and India cannot be treated on a par with other developing nations and that they have an equal responsibility to curb emissions. The polluter pays principle is already wilting under pressure from the first world, and will be tested as erstwhile polluters develop cleaner technology and pass it on to their poorer cousins. A case in point is the investment Europe has made in solar energy with feed-in tariffs which has brought down the costs of photovoltaics. Renewable energy becomes the focus in countries like India and China, which has already reached a bilateral agreement with the U.S. on climate. During President Obama’s visit to India, India and the U.S. are expected to firm up agreements on renewable energy and new technologies. India has volunteered to reduce the energy intensity of its GDP by 20-25 per cent by 2020 as compared to the base year of 2005. The government has tightened norms for the cement industry and will introduce new norms for fuel emissions but its National Action Plan on Climate Change lacks a unified approach. The world will know by November if the aggregate national contributions are adequate to keep global average warming less than 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Alternatives to an unsustainable path are in plenty; only the commitment needs to be scaled up, and that’s why the year to Paris will be decisive.

Expansion and crisis

The move completes the accession of the three Baltic constituents of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) — Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania — to the three main western institutions.

To see Lithuania’s euro adoption this month as an entry into a losers’ club is to miss the geopolitical picture wherein several of the ex-Warsaw Pact states have staked their future on forging a European identity — to the consternation of Russia. The admission of Vilnius into the single currency bloc represents a landmark of sorts. The move completes the accession of the three Baltic constituents of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) — Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania — to the three main western institutions. These are the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the European Union (EU) and now the eurozone. The European ambitions of another erstwhile Soviet state, Ukraine, as demonstrated by its Parliament’s vote in December to join NATO, underpins in no small measure the ongoing separatist conflict in Kiev. Slovenia and Slovakia are the only other former Eastern bloc regions that have similarly acceded to all the three institutions. Against this backdrop, the flow of western investment, greater export potential and low borrowing cost resulting from integration into the eurozone would seem far more attractive to the Lithuanian population of a few million.

The country has long felt the lock-in effects of a fixed exchange rate as the litas, the national currency until 2014, was pegged to the euro some years ago. Lithuania’s entry was not without its share of controversy when some legislators expressed scepticism about the country’s preparedness to sacrifice the flexibility of a national currency. But the continuing crisis in the eurozone would have deterred Vilnius. With the exception of the United Kingdom and Denmark, accession to the EU implies a commitment to eventual adoption of the common currency by member-states once they have complied with the economic convergence criteria. Lithuania has so far been the lone euro aspirant whose 2006 bid was put on hold as Vilnius narrowly overshot the inflation limit for eligibility. But the expanded euro area comprising 19 countries is not expected to witness further enlargement in the foreseeable future. Except Romania, which has set itself a 2019 target, none of the other states has even given itself a euro-entry deadline. Realising the eurozone targets on fiscal deficits has been among the more ticklish issues within the bloc, with major economies and the architects of the rules themselves found to be in violation. Greater macroeconomic policy coherence is an admirable objective and an imperative for countries that use a common currency. But such an ideal must be balanced with political pragmatism as long as national capitals remain in charge of policy-formulation. That is the lesson from the euro’s 15-year history so far.

"Beagle 2"

Britain's missing spacecraft found on Mars

Britain's infamous "Beagle 2" spacecraft has been found on Mars -- 11 years after it went missing searching for extraterrestrial life.

Britain's infamous "Beagle 2" spacecraft, once dubbed "a heroic failure" by the nation's Astronomer Royal, has been found on Mars -- 11 years after it went missing searching for extraterrestrial life.

Beagle 2, part of the European Space Agency's Mars Express mission, had been due to land on Mars on Christmas Day 2003, but went missing on December 19, 2003. Until now, nothing had been heard from it since then.

But in an announcement made to a packed news conference at London's Royal Society scientific institution on Friday, space experts said the tiny Mars lander has been found on the surface of the red planet.

"Beagle 2 is no longer lost," said David Parker, chief executive of the UK Space Agency. He said scientists now had "good evidence" that the spacecraft successfully landed on Mars on the date it was due -- December 25, 2003 -- but had only partially deployed.

"This find shows that the entry, descent and landing sequence for Beagle 2 worked and the lander did successfully touch down on Mars on Christmas Day 2003," the UK space agency said in a statement.

Beagle 2 -- which measures less than 2 metres across -- was named after the ship Charles Darwin sailed when he formulated his theory of evolution. It was built by British scientists for about 50 million pounds ($85 million).

The plan was for it to report back from the Mars' surface using instruments designed to help search for signs of life, but nothing was heard after it was dropped off to make its landing.

"We were left with a mystery, a mystery that has continued to this day," Parker told Friday's news conference.

Martin Rees, Britain's Astronomer Royal, last year praised Beagle 2 and its eccentric creator Colin Pillinge, who had died at the age of 70.

"This was a failure, but a heroic failure," Rees said.

Experts say part of Beagle 2's legacy is its miniaturised technology, some of which is being provided for the ExoMars 2018 rover and being proposed for other future space missions.

Right to information Government should not try and control the India story

There are some disturbing signs emanating from the Union government - indications of a desire to control the narrative about economic development. The fear is that this may get in the way of doing real work, and even of basic liberties and rights. It was reported, for example, that a Greenpeace activist was forced to leave a flight to London that she had boarded. She was scheduled to address British parliamentarians on the effect of coal mining in India. It has also been reported that the rules governing studies carried out by multilateral agencies like the World Bank have been changed; now, any surveys that gather primary data even on subjects like education and health will need state permission to start off with, with a concept note to be submitted to the Union government first.

Both the recent attempts appear to be part of a larger pattern, in which organs of the state act to stifle other voices that reveal information about any problematic effect of government policy. It is not just the National Democratic Alliance that has this attitude, either; it started under the last dispensation, when the home ministry cracked down on funding sources for several non-governmental organisations (NGOs), especially for church-run charities that it accused of being involved in the agitation against the Kudankulam nuclear plant. But the focus in such cases was on activists, not also on those merely disseminating or collecting information. In some cases, it appears even basic rights are being infringed on. Every Indian citizen has the right to freedom of movement, including across borders - unless they have been convicted of a crime, or their passport has been judicially confiscated. Priya Pillai was, like many activists, involved in legal proceedings - but there is no indication that she should have been debarred from leaving the country. If everyone accused of a crime had their movement restricted, many members of Parliament would not be able to travel overseas. Worse, there is no information as to exactly who forced Ms Pillai to deplane. Was it India's intelligence agencies? Under whose instructions? And what gives them the right to do so? The government needs to answer these questions. As for the multilateral agencies being prevented from collecting data freely - and being required to use government data if available - if they are indeed only allowed to publish reports subject to approval by New Delhi, then Indians among others will lose a valuable source of information. What is the point of reading a "doing business" ranking that will merely regurgitate government propaganda?

If the government tries to control information in this manner, then it is India's reputation that will suffer. India is not China. It is not even Russia - which owes its current negative reputation in the world community and among investors to, among other reasons, attempts to coerce civil society organisations. Some people believe that some NGOs work in the interests of the West. But the truth or otherwise of this claim is irrelevant. It is neither right nor wise to stop the free flow of information.

Compete on quality India should not oppose Pakistan's bid to call its rice basmati

India's bid to protect its basmati-rice growers through getting a geographical indications (GI) registration has come up against formidable hurdles. These come not just from basmati growers in Pakistan, but also Madhya Pradesh, which it did not list among traditional basmati-growing regions. TheAgricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (Apeda) wants to thwart other countries from selling their scented rice as basmati globally. Many attempts have been made in the past by foreign rice-trading companies to confuse consumers by using similar-sounding names, such as Jasmati and Kasmati. Apeda has spent crores of rupees on court cases abroad to preserve the basmati epithet for the typical Indian long-grained, non-sticky aromatic rice. The GI registration at home would strengthen its case in international litigation.

Apeda's woes are rooted in the fact that it has sought the GI status for basmati grown only in the contiguous region spanning Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, western Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Delhi, and parts of Jammu and Kashmir. Madhya Pradesh's rice industry has claimed that its state is also located in the Indo-Gangetic belt, part of which is suited for basmati cultivation. Pakistan's Punjab and adjoining regions, especially the foothills of the Himalayas, are well known for producing basmati rice - which, in fact, is the main competitor of the Indian basmati in the international market. The Geographical Indications Registry, which grants the GI status, had observed in an order issued in December 2013 that it was duty-bound to guard the interests of producers of all the areas from where a product came. Apeda is, however, now contesting this plea in the Chennai-based Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB).

Technically, the GI label is meant to set apart a product whose quality, reputation and other traits are attributable to its geographic origin. This definition applies perfectly only to the desi basmati, such as Basmati 370, whose photosensitive nature allows it to be grown only in a region having a particular day-length during the basmati-growing season. That limits basmati cultivation to only the northwestern part of undivided India. However, the new evolved basmati types, including the high-yielding dwarf and semi-dwarf varieties, are, by and large, not photosensitive and can, thus, be grown in areas outside the traditional basmati belt as well. These varieties have now almost totally replaced the desi basmati in the domestic and export markets. It would, therefore, be unfair to deny them basmati status irrespective of where they are grown.

It was indeed Pakistan's folly that it did not accept India's offer in the past to jointly seek global GI registration for basmati. Now that Pakistan's basmati industry has, on its own, come forward for similar cooperation, Apeda should not drag its feet. India can compete with Pakistan in the global basmati bazaar on the basis of quality. A denial of Islamabad's claims may not, in any case, withstand the scrutiny of the World Intellectual Property Organization.

India should lead talks on food stock solution

WTO chief says India should lead talks on food stock solution

He said the impasse that was reached in the talks that were agreed in Bali, had a 'paralyzing effect' on negotiations across the board

India should assume a leading role in spearheading the talks for having a permanent solution in public stockholding for food security purposes, according to World Trade Organization (WTO) Director-General Roberto Azevêdo.

“The first decision and clearly the most important for India was a clarification of the Bali decision on the public stockholding for food security purposes mainly and unequivocally stating the ‘Peace Clause’ agreed in Bali would remain in place until a permanent solution is found for that issue … I look forward to India playing a leading role in this regard in the coming months,” Azevêdo said here on Friday, while addressing the Confederation of Indian Industry Partnership Summit.

Lauding the efforts of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Commerce and Industry Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in achieving the breakthrough in November last year that led to the adoption of the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA), Azevêdo said it was a significant decision that enabled all 160 members agreed to come together and bring issues back on track.

Azevêdo said the impasse, that was reached in the talks that were agreed in Bali, had a “paralysing effect on negotiations across the board”.

The standoff happened last year in July when India refused to sign the TFA that would have converted it into a legal document. TFA aims at easing global customs norms.

India took a stance that it will not agree to TFA until the ‘Peace Clause’ on food stocks is made permanent until a final solution is arrived at on the issue. Earlier, it was agreed in Bali in December 2013 that the ‘Peace Clause’ or interim measure will be applicable only for four years. However, the impasse was broken when US assured its support on India’s stance at the WTO. Subsequently, all members also agreed. Azevêdo said WTO members are now working towards ratifying TFA according to their own domestic procedures.

“It has the potential to make a big difference, particularly for countries like India,” he added.
 

Underscoring the need for members to put their focus back on the Doha Development Agenda, which started in 2001, Azevêdo said that all countries should start negotiations by July. He also highlighted the tough times expected ahead with the onset of negotiations that will culminate at the 10th ministerial conference in Nairobi in December. 

On the other hand, minister Sitharaman once again stated that mercantilist policies of certain countries cannot be encourage if the Doha development round has to be completed. 

"There is an attempt to link free trade to development. Trade and development are intertwined but I would be hastened to think that only trade is development. Development must remain at the core of the Doha round," Sitharaman added. 

She also highlighted that the objective of the Doha round is alleviating poverty, which cannot be done if the agreements are achieved based on countries’ growth rates.

Awareness About Evaluation of Programmes and Policies

Week Long Celebrations to Create Awareness About Evaluation of Programmes and Policies

The Programme Evaluation Organization (PEO) in the NITI Ayog and the National Institute for Labour Economics Research and Development (NILRD, earlier known as Institute of Applied Manpower Research), an autonomous organization under NITI Ayog, are jointly organizing EvalWeek, a five-day event (19 – 23 January 2015) featuring consultations on strategies to spread awareness about and use of evaluation as a tool for enhancing results from policies and programmes of sustainable development and good governance. The event marks the beginning of a chain of activities on the theme of evaluation for sustainable development planned by various national and international organizations across the globe coming together as EvalPartners over the year 2015, which has been declared as the International Year of Evaluation. Participants in EvalWeek consultations are expected to include Central and State government officials, representatives of international and national organizations, individual researchers, academicians and evaluation practitioners. The offices based in India of UN Women, UNICEF, OXFAM, 3ie,ISST, CMS also contributed in the planning and organization of the event. EvalWeek will be inaugurated on 19 January 2015 by Shri Rao Inderjit Singh, Hon’ble Minister of State for Planning (Independent Charge), at the India Habitat Building, New Delhi. On this occasion, an EvaluationTorch symbolizing spread of awareness and knowledge about evaluation will be handed over to the Minister by Mr. Marco Segone, Director of Independent Evaluation Office, UN Women and Co-Chair of United Nations Evaluation Group. A Compendium of articles on evaluation policies and practice contributed by various evaluation researchers and evaluation practitioners will also be relewased by Hon’ble Minister to mark the EvalWeek. A Key Note address will be given by Mr. Segone after the inauguration. A number of technical sessions of presentations discussions have been programmed for the five days of the Evalweek. The first of these, on the theme of Enabling Environment for Evaluation, will follow the Key Note Address by Mr. Segone, and will feature presentations on developing evaluation culture through sensitization, policy support to evaluation, strengthening capacity building for evaluation and evidence-based decision making. The afternoon of 19 January will feature two technical sessions, one a panel discussion on evaluation of social sector programmes and the other on the importance of participatory evaluation methods. Other events during the course of the week include interactions of delegates from other countries with various divisions of NITI Aayog, Round tables on gender-responsive and equity focused evaluations, case studies, emerging challenges, participatory approaches to evaluation and so on. The EvalWeek will conclude on 23 January 2015 with a summing up of the outcomes and valedictory address by the CEO, NITI Ayog. The Evaluation Torch will also be formally handed overto the next event of the International Evaluation Year.