View previous stories
	People in OECD countries want their Governments to raise taxes on rich to fund social support by OECD News, agencies   A large majority of residents in 21 countries included in a Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) survey published this week said their governments should "tax the rich more to better support social programs for working people and the poor."   In the United States, over 50 percent of those polled said they support raising taxes on the wealthy to help the poor. Average support for the policy among all 22,000 people surveyed was at 68 percent.   The OECD also found that most residents of the nations surveyed "lack confidence in the government's ability to provide adequate income support in case of unemployment, illness or disability, becoming a parent, or old age."   Many people in OECD countries believe public services and social benefits are inadequate and hard to reach. Nearly three out of four people say they want their government to do more to protect their social and economic security.   These are among the findings of a new OECD survey, 'Risks that Matter', which asked over 22,000 people aged 18 to 70 years old in 21 countries about their worries and concerns and how well they think their government helps them tackle social and economic risks.   This nationally representative survey finds that falling ill and not being able to make ends meet are often at the top of people's lists of immediate concerns.   Making ends meet is a particularly common worry for those on low incomes and in countries that were hit hard by the financial crisis. Older people are most often worried about their health, while younger people are frequently concerned with securing adequate housing. When asked about the longer-term, across all countries, getting by in old age is the most commonly cited worry.   The survey reveals a dissatisfaction with current social policy. Only a minority are satisfied with access to services like health care, housing, and long-term care.   Many believe the government would not be able to provide a proper safety net if they lost their income due to job loss, illness or old age. More than half think they would not be able to easily access public benefits if they needed them.   In every country surveyed except Canada, Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands, most people say that their government does not incorporate the views of people like them when designing social policy. In a number of countries, including Greece, Israel, Lithuania, Portugal and Slovenia, this share rises to more than two-thirds of respondents.   Public perceptions of fairness are worrying. More than half of respondents say they do not receive their fair share of benefits given the taxes they pay, a share that rises to three quarters or more in Chile, Greece, Israel and Mexico.   At the same time, people are calling for more help from government. In almost all countries, more than half of respondents say they want the government to do more for their economic and social security. This is especially the case for older respondents and those on low incomes.   Across countries, people are worried about financial security in old age, and most are willing to pay more to support public pension systems. An average of almost 40% say they would be willing to pay an extra 2% of their own income in taxes for better health care and pensions.   Respondents in Ireland are the most likely to say they would be happy to pay more in tax for better health care (51%), followed by Portugal (49%), Greece and Chile (both 48%). Respondents in Israel (49%), Chile (51%) and Lithuania (53%) are the most likely to say they would be prepared to pay an extra 2% more in tax for better pensions.   In every country surveyed, more than half of respondents say the government should tax the rich more than they currently do, in order to support the poor. In Greece, Germany, Portugal and Slovenia, the share rises to 75% or more.   The survey also asked people about their views on education, housing, job security and long-term care.   http://www.oecd.org/social/risks-that-matter.htm http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/topics/latest-news/2019/december/bleak-outlook-for-young-generations-in-oecd-countries/ http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/our-projects/sustainable-governance-indicators-sgi/ http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/topics/latest-news/2018/oktober/the-quality-of-democracy-is-declining-in-many-industrialized-states/ http://wid.world/news-article/ten-facts-about-inequality-in-advanced-economies/ http://www.wider.unu.edu/publication/how-multinationals-continue-avoid-paying-hundreds-billions-dollars-tax http://www.taxjustice.net/topics/ http://bit.ly/37dQlgD http://www.icrict.com/ http://www.icij.org/investigations/panama-papers/ http://www.icij.org/investigations/ http://www.climate-transparency.org/g20-climate-performance/g20report2019   * ILO: Fiscal Space for Social Protection (248pp): http://www.social-protection.org/gimi/RessourcePDF.action?id=55694 Visit the related web page
	Businesses have a responsibility to safeguard biodiversity by Robert Watson Chair of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)   June 2019   Failing to protect biodiversity can be a human rights violation   A group of UN experts has warned the erosion of nature, the extinction of species and the loss of biological diversity at unprecedented rates severely threatens human rights for present and future generations.   In a statement following the release of a new scientific report from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the independent experts said they were alarmed at the accelerating loss of biodiversity on which humanity depends. The most comprehensive global assessment of the state of nature found more than one million species are threatened with extinction.   'The loss of global biodiversity is having and will continue to have devastating effects on a wide range of human rights for decades to come. This report is a stark reminder that we can simply not enjoy our basic human rights to life, health, food and safe water without a healthy environment', David Boyd, a UN expert on human rights and the environment, said today.   Failing to protect biodiversity can constitute a violation of the right to a healthy environment, a right that is legally recognised by 155 States and should now be globally recognised as fundamental, they said.   'The protection of biological diversity is indispensable to realise the right to available, accessible, sustainable and nutritious food.   Industrial agriculture being one of the main culprit of biodiversity decline, it is vital to have effective and balanced policies to protect ecosystems health while producing sufficient nutritious food for all', said Hilal Elver, the Special Rapporteur on the right to food.   From pollination to photosynthesis, all humans depend on healthy ecosystems. But the world's poorest communities, indigenous peoples, farmers and fishermen are particularly vulnerable to the negative impact of changes in climate, biodiversity and ecosystem functions.   The IPBES's report should be setting off alarm bells about the urgency of transforming economies and societies in cleaner, greener directions, said the experts.   As the devastating impacts of pollution and climate change accelerate, it becomes essential to use every tool available, including the effective regulation of businesses, to address these planetary challenges, said the members of the UN Working Group on human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises.   However, they said, it is also vital that as urgent action is taken to protect the rest of nature, those actions respect and protect human rights.   In the past, conservation actions such as new parks and renewable energy efforts have violated the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities. Using a rights-based approach, as the IPBES report recommends, will prevent these kinds of violations in the future.   'As most of the world's biodiversity hotspots overlap with indigenous peoples territories, protecting their rights over these territories is an imperative', said Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples.   States have already reached agreements to combat the causes of biodiversity loss, which include habitat destruction, illegal poaching, logging and fishing, over-exploitation of lands, pesticides and other agrochemicals, pollution and climate change.   But now urgent action is still needed to implement legal and institutional frameworks to protect biodiversity and all of the human rights that depend on healthy ecosystems.   Governments should ensure public information and participation in biodiversity-related decisions and provide access to effective remedies for its loss and degradation, the experts said. http://bit.ly/31VJTrP   Businesses have a responsibility to safeguard biodiversity, underlines Robert Watson - Chair of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)   For too long, companies around the world have taken for granted the ecosystems on which production and consumption are based. And though some corporate leaders have begun to factor biodiversity into their financial assessments and overall business models, many more need to follow suit.   At the World Economic Forum's (WEF) annual meeting in Davos in January, the evidence of mounting threats to nature, and of nature's contributions to people, featured higher on the agenda than ever before. The task for business leaders around the world is to embrace this evidence and start acting as stewards, rather than spoilers, of our vital natural assets.   The latest edition of the WEF's Global Risks Report is correct in concluding that, 'Of all risks, it is in relation to the environment that the world is most clearly sleepwalking into catastrophe'. But PwC's latest annual CEO survey, also released at Davos, reveals that business leaders no longer include environmental concerns in their top-ten threats to corporate growth.   Such findings reflect an inexcusable myopia on the part of business leaders. The loss of biodiversity - stemming from the destruction of individual species, entire ecosystems, and even genetic resources - is not just an environmental issue; it is also a threat to global development, security, and economic prosperity.   Products ranging from coffee to cotton rely on strong, functioning ecosystems and a minimal level of biodiversity. Without a healthy environment, forced migrations, conflicts over resources, and a range of other direct and indirect disruptions to global trade and commerce become more likely.   According to one estimate cited in this year's Global Risks Report, the annual value of nature's contributions to people - in the form of food, water purification, pollination, protection against floods, and so forth - is $125 trillion, or is roughly two-thirds more than global GDP.   Hence, the WEF concludes that biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse are both more likely and potentially more damaging to business than most other global threats.   Last November, prior to the 14th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP14), a number of participants in the Business and Biodiversity Forum recognized the 'urgent need for increased collective ambition to halt and reverse biodiversity loss'.   However, biodiversity pledges by businesses vary greatly and are insufficient. IPBES will release the first global assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem services since the landmark Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005 shortly.   The new report will place a much stronger emphasis on the role that all decision-makers, including those in businesses, have to play in safeguarding biodiversity.   The scientific and expert evidence is unequivocal: human activities are changing Earth's climate and destroying the natural resources and ecosystems on which we all rely. Businesses, governments and local communities all have a duty to reduce and reverse this damage.   But while we all need to work together, the private sector, in particular, must redouble its efforts to protect natural systems and shape the future we want. That will require business leaders with a vision that extends beyond quarterly earnings.   Around the world, customers are becoming increasingly concerned about the wider consequences of production and consumption. By recognizing that business as usual can no longer continue, corporate leaders have a responsibility to usher in a future that is better both for their bottom lines and for our shared natural world.   http://www.ipbes.net/news/Media-Release-Global-Assessment http://lp.panda.org/ipbes http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/07/raise-taxes-firms-harm-nature-oecd-g7 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/06/human-society-under-urgent-threat-loss-earth-natural-life-un-report   * IPBES Global Assessment Report summary for policy makers (40pp): http://bit.ly/2VQhMea Visit the related web page
	View more stories