By Marzieh Goudarzi
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 10 2013 (IPS)

As the global South claims a greater share of the world’s GDP, is it also progressing in terms of overall human development? How has this southward tipping of the scale affected the dynamics of international trade? What is the role of global governance in mediating this period of change?

José Antonio Ocampo. Credit: UN Photo/Mark Garten

The 2013 U.N. Human Development Report entitled, “The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World” and its lead author, Khalid Malik, suggest that as the South grows economically, its citizens experience an “expansion of human capabilities and choices” that is leading to further social and political development.

Others are more sceptical of the purported “rise of the South”, pointing to the world’s widening income inequality, the lack of correlation between economic growth and equitable and sustainable socio-economic policies, and relatively unchanging global power dynamics.

On Monday, Columbia University’s Committee on Global Thought hosted a conference to discuss these issues with panelists including Malik, U.N. Ambassador Luis Alfonso de Alba of Mexico, and Dr. Jose Antonio Ocampo, a professor at Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs and a former U.N. Under-Secretary-General of Economic and Social Affairs.

Ocampo called Malik’s characterisation of the rise of the South as a “tectonic change” a bit strong.

While he recognises the important changes that are occurring now, with regard to overall human development Ocampo says, “It’s a process that will have long-term implications.”

Excerpts from IPS’s interview with Ocampo on the impact of newly rising economies in international trade and global governance follow.

Q: Both you and Ambassador de Alba agree on the importance of multilateral global governance in terms of human development. Ambassador de Alba addressed the shortcomings of current institutions and, in particular, the U.N.’s inefficient decision-making processes. Discuss what productive, multilateral global governance would look like.

A: I have written extensively on the G20 and my perspective is that these informal institutions, which I call “elite multilateralism”, are not the best form of global governance. I like “the G’s” when they are part of multilateral institutions.

Global governance derives its legitimacy at the global level just as governance does at a national level, from universality. You have to have universal membership. For that purpose, the best way for these “G’s” to work is within a formal multilateral setting.

At the same time, I agree that you have to have effective decision-making mechanisms. Smaller decision-making bodies, in which everyone is directly represented, are fundamental. In all democracies, decisions are taken by a limited number of actors at the end, but those actors have to be representing all of the membership.

Q: What is the state of South-South trade relationships today? What constitutes an ideal South-South partnership that allows for progress toward a more advanced, dynamic economy?

A: There is one sort of South-South trade that is really part of North-South trade. For example, Southeast Asia is producing parts and capital goods that are assembled in China and then exported to the U.S.

In the case of China-India, it’s a huge deficit for India and surplus for China. There is a second China-centered relationship, in which China essentially imports raw commodities and exports manufactured goods. I would say, for commodity producers – i.e. sub-Saharan African, South America, and some of the Middle East – that’s an opportunity. But it’s still a very imbalanced trade relationship. In the long-term, you have to diversify away from that.

There is a third type which are legitimately South-South flows in which you have, more or less, a balanced relationship. For example, the inter-regional trade in Latin America is one relationship of that type – it starts and ends in developing countries. I think that’s the most positive of all, but it’s less common.

Q: As these newly rising economies close the income gap that separates them from developed countries, what do you think characterises fair and mutually-beneficial North-South partnerships?

A: In the past, the North-South relationship was considered to be an asymmetric relationship in which the North had to support the development of the South so it could cash out. I think that concept has become obsolete because of the heterogeneity of developing countries.

Ambassador de Alba mentioned this almost sacred principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities”. In the past, developing countries wanted to be treated according to the second part of that principle – “differentiated” – and I think, as de Alba pointed out, the “differentiated” still has to be considered today.

Even major emerging economies are developing countries – they are technologically dependent, they still have a large share of the labour force in low productivity activities, and the GDP per capita is still a fraction of that of developed countries. So they have a right to be treated with some differences internationally. But they are, at the same time, responsible and the responsibility those countries have is very important.

Q: How have Southern governments been an obstacle to human development and, on the other hand, what should they be prioritising in order to create positive conditions for growth?

A: The basic problem is that power ends up in the hands of the elite that uses power to further its own interests. This has been associated with developing countries, but it can also happen in developed countries, particularly in the financial sector. There has been a change in that regard during the recent crisis; now there is a bit more hope that financial policy will be detached from financial interests.

Successful human development strategy has to include very active social policy, including education, health, and social protections, and at the same time very active economic development policy, particularly the generation of employment.

We have seen so many cases of countries that have improvements in education and when an educated labour force comes to the market, there is no employment to absorb that population. You have to have an active social policy but also an active economic policy and the basic connection between the two is called employment.

Excerpt:

U.N. delegates listen to a high-level heads of agencies panel at the 57th Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). Credit: Lusha Chen/IPS

By Marzieh Goudarzi
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 6 2013 (IPS)

U.N. agency heads gathered Tuesday to reassert their unified commitment to ending the epidemic of violence against women and girls, and bringing justice and healing to survivors.

Grim statistics underscore the urgency of this issue: 70 percent of women worldwide report experiencing physical and/or sexual violence, 50 percent of reported sexual assaults are committed against girls under 16 years of age, and 603 million women live in countries where domestic violence has not been criminalised.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon articulated another fact: “Too many women and girls face intimidation and physical and sexual abuse often from those who should care for and respect them most – fathers, husbands, brothers, teachers, colleagues, and supervisors.”

Tuesday’s forum transpired as a part of the 57th Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), whose primary theme is the elimination of violence against women and girls.

It opened with remarks from the secretary-general and continued with a panel of high-level U.N. agency representatives, including Michelle Bachelet, executive director of U.N. Women, and Irina Bokova, director-general of the U.N. Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO).

Bachelet stressed the importance of the diverse contributions of U.N. agencies to the efforts of the CSW.

“Whether we’re talking about UNESCO through education, UNDP (U.N. Development Programme) through government cooperation, UNFPA (U.N. Population Fund) through the promotion of sexual and reproductive health and rights, or UNICEF (U.N. Children’s Fund) through protecting the rights of children, this work is making a difference on the ground,” she said.

UN Heads of Agencies Forum on Violence Against Women and Girls from IPS Inter Press Service on Vimeo.

Also represented were the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), World Health Organisation (WHO), International Labor Organisation (ILO), U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), and U.N. Joint Programme on HIV and AIDS (UNAIDS).

Perhaps the strongest message of this forum was its unified and indisputable affirmation of violence against women and girls as a priority on the international human rights agenda.

The long struggle for recognition of violence against women as a human rights issue first achieved serious global attention at the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, quickly followed by the General Assembly Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women.

Commenting on the development of the issue at the U.N., Bokova told IPS that today, “there is a lot more awareness, commitment, and concrete action… But of course we are not there at all – it’s just the beginning.”

UNICEF Deputy Executive Director Geeta Rao Gupta added, “I can tell you that over this past decade, the amount of attention that this issue has received internationally would not have happened if the U.N. had not taken a leadership position.”

“I think the major difference is that it has become a public issue. (Violence against women) is not tolerated in the way it was before,” Rebeca Grynspan, associate sdministrator of UNDP, told IPS.

“Having acknowledged that, I think that we have not had the accelerated progress that we expected,” she said. “Many times we are pedaling to stay in the same place and not go backward. That’s why I really welcome the fact that this issue has come again to the table of the CSW.”

A recent milestone was the 2010 establishment of U.N. Women, which last year provided capacity-building for stronger legislation and provision of services to survivors of violence in 57 countries.

U.N. Women manages the secretary-general’s campaign, United to End Violence Against Women, and works with U.N. Habitat and UNICEF on the Global Safe Cities Initiative, striving to make urban spaces violence-free for women and girls.

Speaking on behalf of UNESCO, Bokova stated, “Raising awareness and changing the environment through education is crucial. We have to go deep to the root of the violence,” explaining the need to instill within youth the idea that violence is not a “normal” part of life.

UNESCO has created international guidelines on sexuality education, HIV education, gender equality in education, and guidelines for teachers on stopping violence in schools.

Research shows that violence is a major threat to girls’ education, causing poor attendance and forcing many to drop out of school – another reason why the issue is high among UNESCO’s priorities.

Grynspan argued that violence against women is also a dangerous obstacle to global productivity, currently preventing seven in 10 women from achieving their greatest potential contribution to society and the economy by making them more likely to be absent from or quit school and work; violence also costs society in terms of health and legal services for victims, she explained.

Grynspan cited the 2010-2011 Human Development Report, which showed 49 percent loss in human development due to gender inequality. “There is one thing that will bring productivity up and cost down,” she said, “and that is ending violence against women.”

Director-General Margaret Chan spoke via video on the WHO’s commitment to combating this violence and discussed the wide range of health repercussions women face, including injuries to organs/tissues, unwanted pregnancies, unsafe abortions, premature birth, maternal mortality, psychological trauma, and increased risk of sexually-transmitted diseases, such as HIV.

Deputy Executive Director Anne-Birgitte Albrectsen of UNFPA and Regional Director of UNAIDS Sheila Tlou reiterated the extremely detrimental effects of violence against women on the battle against AIDS, which has come too far to be stopped now.

Across the panel, representatives recognised the wide range of causes and perpetuators of the violence against women.

They made references to cultural practices of early, forced marriages of girls and female genital mutilation; they pointed to cultural norms that shame women as victims, discourage seeking help, and normalise violence in domestic, educational, and work settings; they discussed the vulnerability of women in conflict and post-conflict societies, where rape often becomes a weapon.

Recognising the vast majority of women both on the panel and in the audience, the representatives also called for greater engagement of men and boys and male ownership of the issues.

As Grynspan noted, with her fellow panelists nodding in agreement, “We are still, by and large, talking to ourselves.”

By Marzieh Goudarzi
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 28 2013 (IPS)

As the earthquake in Haiti has proven, even more important than a recognised name or robust physical presence is the quality of services delivered by humanitarian relief organisations.

Courtesy of Yifat Susskind

MADRE, a U.S.-based women’s human rights NGO, has been part of the Haiti relief effort since the earthquake and has recently focused its efforts on advocating for legal reforms addressing violence against women.

Executive Director Yifat Susskind spoke with IPS about MADRE’s work in Haiti and the principles and practices that guide their work all over the world. Excerpts from the interview follow.

Q: MADRE places great focus on changing policies and systems, a practice learned from experience with political movements like the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa, which identified the system of Apartheid as the enemy and not white South Africans. Explain the importance of advocacy that targets systems and not people, especially within the realm of women’s rights.

A: It is crucial to question received ideas about who our allies and enemies are. One of the tools of systems of oppression is to divide people up into “us” and “them”. Allowing someone else to tell you who is the “us” and who is the “them” is a poisonous idea. One of the goals of progressive social movements is to establish that “us” encompasses ultimately everybody; there is no “them”.

Focusing on violence against women, we want to work in a way that is inclusive of men and boys, to promote the understanding that human rights is not a zero-sum game, and to put out a vision of the world that is better for everybody so that people are moved to create change. We know that when the needs of women and girls are valued – when they are educated, when they are given economic opportunity, when they are given political rights and access – everyone benefits. The benefits begin at the local level and are ultimately felt globally.

Q: You recently launched a petition with the International Campaign to Stop Rape and Gender Violence to promote legal reforms in Haiti that more strictly prohibit and punish violence against women. Discuss the significance of such legislation to your work in the country.

A: This draft law would change the conversation around violence against women, not just in Haiti but in the region and potentially around the world, because it is an extremely progressive piece of legislation.We want to work in a way that is inclusive of men and boys, to promote the understanding that human rights is not a zero-sum game.

For example, for the first time ever in Haiti, marital rape, which is not recognised in many legal systems, would be a crime. That is just one of a number of progressive provisions.

This law is the counterpart of our humanitarian aid, violence prevention strategies, rape counseling, and legal referral work, which meet the immediate needs of women who are threatened by rape and violence every day.

We know it’s not enough to be constantly treating the symptoms of the crisis of a rape culture. We also need to do the longer term work of changing the culture, and legislation is one way to do that.

Q: MADRE’s 2011 annual report states, “We accompany our partners through every step of the human rights advocacy process.” Discuss what this process looks like in Haiti and the range of actors with whom you work.

A: In the months after the earthquake, we were part of a monitoring team with our partners in Haiti, involving local grassroots groups as well as human rights professionals, international lawyers, and students.

Because we work in partnership with grassroots groups, run by the women who were themselves displaced by the earthquake and living in the camps, we are able to approach those women and ask, “What do you need?”, which is a wholly different approach than coming into a crisis, as a lot of big international aid groups do, and saying, “Here’s what you need.”

That’s a really important distinction for us. In monitoring, we find a lot of gaps, lapses, and absences of rights being protected, in particular for the most vulnerable populations and especially women and girls. The U.N. guidelines on the rights of displaced people are excellent, but they are rarely implemented.

A big part of our work has been about demanding and creating a space at the table for grassroots organisers, trying to overcome the structural barriers and attitudes that prevent them from being heard in policy-making.

We created a series of interactive workshops that brought to the same forum and on equal footing grassroots women’s groups, big international NGOs, U.N. agencies, court officials, municipal government officials, police, and hospital workers. We also conduct workshops with women in the camps about what actions need to be taken and we figure out how to implement them, because it is not enough to document and register the human rights abuses that are happening.

Q: Have you noticed a change in norms and attitudes within the international community regarding violence against women since the founding of MADRE in 1983?

A: Yes, definitely. When we started, there was not even recognition inside the human rights movement of violence against women as a human rights issue. MADRE and a lot of other organisations had to wage a global campaign under the banner of “women’s rights are human rights”, which now seems like a very obvious thing to say, but certainly was not in 1983.

Now, rape as a weapon of war is discussed at the U.N. and in the halls of government. When we can get powerful people and institutions to at least say that violence against women should be treated as a serious concern, we have leverage with which to hold them accountable.

We used to not have that at all. It used to be that people would come into an international courtroom to talk about rape as a weapon of war and there would be snickering. The work that has been done on these issues has resulted in real changes both in policy and in the lived reality of people on the ground.

Excerpt:

Indigenous people around the world not only face loss of language and culture but are also often deprived of their basic human rights. Above, two indigenous women in Guatemala. Credit: Danilo Valladares/IPS

By Marzieh Goudarzi
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 17 2013 (IPS)

Indigenous youth from some of the world’s oldest living cultures are stepping forward to steer their communities past the threat of disappearance and into an age of coexistence with an increasingly globalised world.

Approximately 370 million indigenous peoples live in communities around the world – some in urban settings, some on reservations and others straddling both worlds.

They face many of the urgent social problems that exist among other disenfranchised minorities – poverty, lack of education, high unemployment, high rates of crime and a general lack of access to public services and resources.

Other issues are unique to the indigenous experience, including forced separation from homelands, loss of native languages, and histories of injustice, social exclusion and violence that have led to their modern day marginalisation.

In the year 2000, the United Nations (U.N.) created the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII), in which a committee of experts, nominated by governments and indigenous civil society, discuss critical issues and recommend actions to the U.N. system.

This year, the UNPFII is highlighting the role of indigenous youth as community leaders. It held a meeting in January where indigenous youth from seven regions of the world gathered to share their insights with members of the Forum and experts from related organisations.

Language, education and awareness

All seven youth representatives expressed grave concerns about the rapid disappearance of indigenous languages vital to cultural unity, and with good reason – UNESCO estimates that every two weeks, one language disappears from the world.

Education systems have historically played a large part in the disappearance of indigenous languages, sometimes even forcing their extinction by severely punishing and shaming children for speaking native tongues or expressing indigenous identity in any way.

In Andrea Landry’s Anishinaabe tribe of Canada, only one fluent speaker of the native language remains. She is about 80 years old and still has not overcome the shame that was instilled in her as a child for speaking her own language, making it difficult for her to pass her knowledge down to younger generations.

Landry, the youth representative for North America, and many of her fellow representatives agreed that ideally, the state would provide bilingual education in schools attended by indigenous youth, though they acknowledged that the sheer number of regional indigenous languages often makes this feat challenging.

Funding community-based language programs through civil society organisations would be a good alternative, they suggested.

The youth were also gravely concerned about society’s lack of awareness and misrepresentation of indigenous peoples’ histories, cultures and current circumstances. They called for education systems to teach history and social diversity more thoroughly and accurately.

Landry told IPS that in studying for her master’s degree in communications and social justice, she was astonished by the absence of material on indigenous issues. She has tried to fill these gaps with supplementary materials but argued, “I shouldn’t be the one teaching these things.”

Steven Brown, youth representative from Australia’s Bundjalung and Yuin Nation tribes, raised concerns about the negative stereotypes that grow instead of a real understanding of indigenous peoples. Brown personally experienced the way indigenous youth internalise stereotypes such as being perpetually poor and undereducated.

That message that success is not inherently non-indigenous was articulated by all of the indigenous youth leaders, and achieving success, Brown said, “does not mean I forget where I’ve come from”.

Rights to access

In some communities where a large portion of the population speaks only the native language, another issue arises: access to important information on topics such as health care, employment opportunities, legal rights and public services.

Representative Niwamanya Rodgers Matuna, of the Batwa hunter and gatherer tribe in Uganda, described one example for IPS: how a lack of information in his tribe’s native language about medications and their proper usage has led his tribe to not trust drugs from outside of their community, which seem to quickly become ineffective.

Improper use and poor quality of antibiotic medications allow bacterial diseases to develop resistance, a phenomenon that has become a major issue in poverty-stricken countries but could be easily curbed by improving drug recipients’ access to information.

Through forums like UNFPII, indigenous youth leaders and the international human rights community are insisting that when language barriers not only prevent citizens from accessing their essential rights but in fact perpetuate their marginalisation, actions must be taken in conjunction with governments to eliminate these barriers.

Asia’s youth representative, Meenakshi Munda of the Munda community in India, added that she does not want her people to become reliant on government or international support. Rather, she sought resources for her community to empower them to become self-sufficient.

Finding a balance

Indigenous peoples, especially youth, understand that learning languages and practises outside their communities is often a necessity for academic and professional collaboration with the wider world, and many have benefitted from knowing multiple languages and engaging with the people outside their communities.

They are confident, however, that this learning process can and should be an exchange between equals and should not require the subjugation of a people or the elimination of its culture or history.

The world has much to learn from indigenous ways of life, which, despite their great diversity, share some common central ideas that are absent in most modern cultures.

Perhaps most significantly, indigenous peoples have tremendous respect for the earth and a deep connection to the land on which they live.

“We’re in a relationship with the land; it’s a living thing,” said Landry. “It’s not a matter of take, take, take. We give to the land and the land gives to us.”

Moreover, indigenous values often maintain great respect for elders and all things that possess the wisdom of time. Some may struggle to understand the importance of protecting indigenous cultures as the ancestors of modern civilisation.

But as Matuna pointed out, quoting an African proverb, “A river which forgets its source, dries soon.”

Government investment in the right kind of laws, policies, and programmes correlates with a higher quality of life for children. Credit: David Vargas/IPS

By Marzieh Goudarzi
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 13 2013 (IPS)

The Millennium Development Goals challenged the world to cut extreme poverty in half, dramatically reduce child mortality, and make primary education universal, but Jody Heymann and Kristen McNeill say the world can do more.

In their report, “Changing Children’s Chances”, released by the World Policy Analysis Centre on Wednesday, Heymann and McNeill map the world’s commitment to essential development needs of children in terms of the official laws, policies, and programmes that exist at the national level.

Based on an extensive understanding of international agreements and norms, Heymann and McNeill identify eight critical areas of need – poverty reduction, quality education, protection from early labour, protection from early marriage, quality health care, positive working conditions for parents, freedom from discrimination, and care for children with special needs – as well as specific types of legislation that demonstrate national commitment to these issues.

For example, in the area of poverty reduction, the report examined minimum wage laws, financial allowances for families, and unemployment income protection; in education, it examined school tuition policies and educational requirements for teachers.

“We have found that whether you are in Canada or Cameroon, people do not always know the laws to which they have a legal right,” Heymann told IPS. “Making this information readily available helps citizens and civil society groups hold their governments accountable for implementation.”

Policy makers can also learn from the legislation that exists in other countries, particularly regional neighbours or those that have similar socio-cultural, political, or economic conditions as those found in their own countries.

With this data, international organisations, such as the U.N., can hold governments accountable for enforcing the norms and standards to which they subscribe in signing international agreements, and international aid funds can give more responsibly by assessing the commitment of governments before allocating financial support, the report says.

“Changing Children’s Chances” brings together a never-before assembled body of data and organises it in an accessible and efficient visual format – global data maps – allowing for immediate identification of extremes and regional trends.

Overall, the results demonstrate that government investment in the right kind of laws, policies, and programmes does in fact correlate with a higher quality of life for children, in terms of health, education, and economic opportunity.

For example, when Malawi eliminated tuition fees for primary education in 1994, the enrollment rate leapt from 50 percent in 1991 to 99 percent in 1999.

Though some may argue that many low-income countries simply do not have the resources to legislate such policies, the data shows that lack of resources is not always the issue.

For example, 52 of the 64 countries that do not meet the World Health Organisation’s recommendations for the minimum number of health professionals spend four percent or less of their GDP on health and 22 of them spend two percent or less, while the U.S., for example spent over 17 percent in 2010.

The countries that were “lagging behind”, said Heymann, “included countries with limited resources, but whose neighbours also had limited resources and were nonetheless passing policies that made a good difference in children’s lives.”

The report also exposes some very high-income countries that are falling behind global standards. While 180 countries guarantee paid maternal leave, Heymann reported, “The United States is one of the very few and the only advanced economy that does not.”

Countries may also be concerned that passing new legislation which causes dramatic shifts in government spending and increases minimum wage could destabilise their economy and ultimately bring more harm than benefit.

“I think the evidence shows that countries can afford to raise the minimum wage to a decent standard,” Heymann told IPS. “It indeed has many effects on the economy, but among these, people have more money to spend and are more able to invest in their own economy. It has overall pro-economic growth impact, as does investment in education, because the greatest fuel to national economies is an adequately educated labour force.”

Heymann agrees, however, that prudent preparation is important. “Would it be valuable for economists to be looking deeply at the impact of investing more in children and youth?” she says, “Absolutely.”

In many regards, Changing Children’s Chances holds the world accountable to higher standards than those of the Millenium Development Goals.

“Few of us, for our own children, for our sisters or brothers or nieces or nephews, would accept that it is an adequate standard for a child just to be enrolled in primary school,” says Heymann, “and I think it is long overdue that we pass standards globally that enable all children to thrive.”

To those who doubt the world’s ability to set higher goals, Heymann argues, “We know a lot about what to do and what not to do,” pointing to Chile, where full-time labour is prohibited until age 18 and thus, child labour rate is half that of neighbouring Argentina, and to Kenya, where education is compulsory for 12 years and consequently, secondary school enrollment rates are high.

“People say we don’t know how to end child poverty, we don’t know how to reduce child labour or address infant mortality,” said Heymann, “In fact, we know far more about those things than we knew about how to put a person on the moon.”

Heymann and McNeill hope that the framework and outcomes of their work will inform the United Nations’ post-2015 development agenda.

“This data is absolutely just the first step,” said Heymann, acknowledging that further research on legislation for children’s development is necessary.

The ultimate goal of their research and the most important step in achieving global conditions for healthy child development, Heymann maintains, is turning legislation into real impact on the ground.

The interactive data maps can be found online, and the campaign is also on Twitter.

Babatunde Osotimehin, Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Credit: UN Photo/Paulo Filgueiras

By Marzieh Goudarzi
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 7 2013 (IPS)

The fight against female genital mutilation and cutting (FGM/C) continues to gain traction around the world.

On Wednesday, the United Nations observed the annual Day of Zero Tolerance for FGM/C, an act that is shocking and inhumane to much of the world but remains a tradition among a significant minority.

This year’s observance is particularly momentous after the General Assembly’s December 2012 unanimous adoption of the resolution on “Intensifying Global Efforts for the Elimination of Female Genital Mutilations”, which U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA) Executive Director Dr. Babatunde Osotimehin says “speaks volumes to the world’s commitment” and is “the greatest testimony to the work we do”.

An estimated 140 million women and girls in the world – 120 million concentrated in 29 African and Middle Eastern countries – are living with FGM/C, which, in addition to being excruciatingly painful, can result in infection, cysts, infertility, childbirth complications, and the need for corrective surgery.

IPS correspondent Marzieh Goudarzi spoke with Dr. Osotimehin on UNFPA’s role in the global fight against FMG/C. Excerpts follow.

Q: According to data from the World Health Organisation, FGM/C-affected communities exist in northern, northeastern, and western Africa and in some Middle Eastern and Asian countries. FGM/C is also practiced in immigrant communities from these countries living in other parts of the world. Are there common elements among these communities that allow FGM/C to continue?

A: It is difficult to find a common thread, but I would like to suggest that it is more cultural than anything else. I do not think it is religion. What UNFPA has done with our partner, UNICEF, is to engage communities across those regions that you mentioned and persuade them that FGM/C has no medical benefits at all and that, for a fact, it causes damage to women and girls physically, psychologically, and emotionally.

Q: Can you discuss some specific mechanisms employed by UNFPA and UNICEF to bring about change?

A: On the ground, community dialogue, making sure we connect directly to the community, and making sure we educate them about the harmful effects of FGM/C, are all crucial. We do this with community leaders, religious leaders, and the women, especially the elderly women, as well as the practitioners themselves, who are engaged in this practice. For some, it has been like this for generations so you have to try and shift them away from that sort of harmful tradition.

We are also encouraging them to abandon FGM/C and we see great success in that area. In fact, last year alone, a total of 1,775 communities across Africa publicly declared their commitment to end female genital mutilation and cutting. That was very gratifying. We have also worked in countries to put in place a legal system and laws to penalise the practice. Thirty-four African countries that have done this.

Q: To what extent does the UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme for the Acceleration of the Abandonment of FGM/C work directly with local implementers on the ground in FGM/C-affected countries? Who are the key local implementers?

A: The truth of the matter is that we at UNFPA and UNICEF work in countries to provide assistance, support, and advocacy to governments and to civil society. So we see that “tripartite” as an essential to what we do. We don’t do it all by ourselves because of sustainability issues.

You have to build a whole army of stakeholders on the ground, particularly when you do community work, which will consist of local leaders and civil society, to be able to sustain the advocacy and to ensure that communities go forth from where they are now and are able to maintain that pattern.

Q: What is UNFPA/UNICEF’s strategy in approaching a sensitive issue like FGM/C, which communities see as rooted in cultural or religious tradition, and how do you engage communities and community leaders who hold these beliefs while actively working to abolish the practice of FGM/C?

A: We go into communities, first of all, to understand communities. UNFPA initiates community dialogue with interlocutors that have integrity within the community, with mutual respect from both sides, to understand why they do the things they do. We then explain to them that these are things we believe we have to let go because of their consequences, and demonstrate quite clearly to them why that is so.

It takes some time for them to change what has been a part of their culture for years and years. However, this can be done with persistent and continuous engagement, honesty of purpose, and the ability to generate “champions” on the ground who will impact their communities. This is the basis of our success on the ground.

Q: Recent data shows that since the establishment of the UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme in 2008, nearly 10,000 communities in 15 countries, representing about eight million people, have renounced FGM/C. UNICEF data from 2012 shows that younger women and girls have lower rates of FGM/C than their older counterparts. Looking ahead, what has worked for the countries that are making progress and how will UNFPA and UNICEF continue their work on this issue?

A: Going forth, we want to continue to ensure that we build capacity on the ground, and also ensure that we identify real “champions” who will work on the ground. Sustainability of (the programme) is in community ownership… and in making sure we have data which is reliable, that enables us to track the progress we make and give us a better on handle on what we see.

We have trained about 88,000 health providers and established 15 medical and paramedical schools just to make sure that this is not something which is going to regress.

If the present trend continues, there will still be as many as 30 million girls below the age of 15 that will still be at risk. We need to continue to give visibility to the issue to ensure that we can avoid the unfortunate extent of girls being cut.

Excerpt: