global solidarity possible essay

• Aims and Background
• What is the Great Transition?
• Why a Great Transition?
• Global Scenarios
• Publications

Opening Essay for GTI Forum Can Human Solidarity Globalize?

Richard Falk

The Imprisoned Imagination

As the COVID-19 pandemic slowly subsides, it is not clear what lessons will be drawn by political leaders and publics around the world. Entrenched power, wealth, and conventional wisdom have demonstrated the overwhelming resilience of the global order even while the virus continues to ravage many national societies. Despite some notable exceptions revealing extremes of solidarity or discrimination, efficient competence or irresponsible partisanship, this reversion to the status quo occurred at all levels of social organization from the village to the world, especially the sovereign state.

For the most part, rich and powerful governments used their leverage to corner the vaccine market, allowing a draconian market-driven logic to drive distribution that privileged intellectual property rights and technical knowhow, leading to grotesque disparities in vaccine access between the peoples of the North and those of the South. It has become a truism to observe that no country will be safe from the virus, or its variants, until the entire world is vaccinated. Never had the self-interest of the species so vividly and concretely coincided with an ethos of global solidarity. And yet such an ethos did not materialize. We must search for explanations and correctives.

A people-first approach to the global health emergency would have transcended statist and profit-making domains at all phases of COVID prevention and treatment, and situated them within a global commons framework. Such an approach might have dramatically heightened prospects for the social transformation at the heart of the Great Transition and would at least have restored some confidence that the human species, at least in an emergency, is capable of meeting the challenges of the Anthropocene. As the pandemic instead revealed the resounding strength of statist structures and private sector interests, it seems necessary to acknowledge this tragic interlude as but one more lost opportunity for the human species to awaken from its prolonged slumber before it is too late.

To some extent, the failure has been masked by the newfound generosity of some countries as the sense of a world health emergency receded and such countries' virus supplies exceeded national demands. In a spirit of philanthropy rather than solidarity, shipments of the virus to countries in need were made, recipients often selected on the basis of pragmatic diplomatic advantage. Perhaps charity towards those less fortunate can be considered a weak form of solidarity, even if filtered by political leaders motivated by selfish national interests.

More than ever, we must face the question: can the peoples of Earth, doomed to share a ravaged planet, learn to live together in ways that encourage our species to flourish in an emergent future? The concept of a Great Transition invites us to reimagine such a future by exploring what might be possible, which requires an initial willingness of the imagination to let go of the trappings of the present without engaging in wishful thinking. Such a balancing act is not as straightforward as it sounds. What was science fiction a generation ago is increasingly entering the realm of the possible, and even the feasible in the near future. It is an opportune time to explore the seedlings of possibility sprouting around us, inscribing a more hopeful mapping of the human future in the prevailing collective consciousness.

On What is Possible

“ Some men see things as they are and say ‘why?’ I dream of things that never were and ask ‘why not? ’” — George Bernard Shaw

We must start by rejecting conventional foreclosures of the imagination. We cannot accept that politics is “the art of the possible” if the “possible” remains circumscribed by the play of current forces of stasis, confining the idea of change to policy shifts at the margin or—at the most ambitious—elite-driven national revolutions. The structures of state and market remain essentially untouched and continue to run the show. As long as these constraints are not removed, the Great Transition will be stymied. The first challenge is to find effective ways to subvert and transform these primordial structures. Meeting this challenge starts with liberating the mind from ingrained conventions that solidify the ideological biases of modernity.

If we carefully consider our own lives, we are likely to appreciate how many epochal public happenings had been previously deemed “impossible,” or only seemed possible after the fact. A potent illustration of the tyranny of a status quo bias is Winston Churchill’s derisive attitude toward Gandhi during the early stages of the rise of Indian nationalism. Dismissive of any threat to Indian colonial rule, Churchill described Gandhi as a “malignant subversive fanatic” and “a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the East, striding half-naked up the steps of the Viceregal palace.” The great British war leader displayed his attachment to a Western understanding of power that had little insight into historical circumstances vulnerable to anti-colonial nationalism.

Similar patterns of the seemingly impossible happening are evident in contemporary history, such as the peaceful ending of the Cold War followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union; the American defeat in the Vietnam War despite overwhelming military superiority; China’s half-century rise from mass impoverishment and backwardness to prime geopolitical challenger, including threatening Western mastery of innovative technology such as AI, G5 connectivity, robotics, and genetic engineering; and the abandonment of apartheid by South Africa in the face of nonviolent resistance from within and anti-apartheid solidarity from without.

What these examples demonstrate is that our understanding of the scope of the possible has been artificially circumscribed in ways that protect the interests of various elites in the maintenance of the status quo, making it seem reckless and futile to mount structural challenges however justified they may be morally or bio-politically. Such foreclosures of imagined futures have been key to the protection of institutions like slavery, discrimination, and warfare but often remain limited in scope to specific locales or policy areas. The uniqueness of the Anthropocene is to restrict the possible to unsustainable and dysfunctional structures and modes of behavior, while bringing to a head the question of finding more viable ways of organizing life on the planet and living together in a manner that protects future generations.

Such foreclosures of the imagination inflict damage both by shortening our temporal vision and by constraining our understanding of useful knowledge. Despite what science and rationality tell us about the future, our leaders—and, indeed, most of us—give scant practical attention to what is needed to preserve and improve the life prospects for future generations. Given the scope and depth of the challenges, responsible anthropocentrism in the twenty-first century should incorporate a sense of urgency to temporal axes of concern. We now need a “politics of the impossible,” a necessary utopianism that stands as an avowal of the attainability of the Great Transition. We must begin by interrogating the semantics of the possible as a cultural, political, economic, and ideological construct binding humanity to a system that is increasingly bio-politically self-destructive for the species and its natural habitat.

Closely connected to this foreclosure of our temporal vision has been a scientifically conditioned epistemology asserting the limits of useful knowledge. Within the most influential epistemic communities, an Enlightenment ideology prevails that sets boundaries limiting productive intellectual inquiry. The positive legacies of the Enlightenment in grounding knowledge on scientifically verified evidence rather than cultural superstitions and religiously guided prejudice and dogma are real and important, but there have been costs as well. Notably, a bias against subjectivity discourages normative inquiry and advocacy, which is dismissed as “non-scientific.” The noted Confucian scholar Tu Wei-Ming has powerfully criticized the impact of what he calls “instrumental rationalism” on the capacity of Western civilization to embrace the value of empathy, which he views as integral to human dignity and humane governance.

We need a moral epistemology to achieve responsible anthropocentrism, exploring right and wrong, and distinguishing between desirable and diminished futures, not as matters of opinion, but as the underpinnings of “normative knowledge.” Universities, split into specialized disciplines and privileging work within the Enlightenment paradigm, are largely oblivious to the need for a holistic understanding of the complexities and solidarities with which we must grapple in order for humanity to extricate itself from present structures that divide and fragment the human experience, strangling possibilities.

It may be helpful to distinguish “the feasible,” “the necessary,” and “the desirable” to further illuminate “the pursuit of the impossible.” In short, “the feasible” from the perspective of the status quo seems incapable, under the best of circumstances, of achieving “the necessary” and “the desirable.” We will need to pursue “the desirable” to mobilize the capabilities needed to engage effectively in realizing “the necessary.”

If existing conditions continue, the bio-political destiny of the human species seems destined for dark times. In the past, before the Nuclear Age, we could ignore the future and address the material, security, and spiritual needs of bounded communities, and success or failure had no ramifications for larger systems. Now we must find ways to attend to the whole, or the parts will perish and likely destroy one another in the process. St. Francis found some fitting words for such an emancipatory path: “Start by doing what is necessary, then what is possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible.”

Traditional Worldviews

When seeking alternative worldviews not defined by states, empires, or markets, many have turned toward the pre-modern realities and cosmologies of native peoples. Recovering that pre-modern worldview might be instructive in certain respects, but it is not responsive to the practical contours of contemporary liberation. Retreat to the pre-modern past is not an option, except as a result of a planetary calamity.

Instead of the realities of localism and tribal community, our way forward needs to engage globalism and human community, and to affirm that such strivings fall within the realm of possibility. We must reimagine a sense of our place in the cosmos so that it becomes our standpoint: a patriotism for humanity in which the whole becomes greater than the part, and the part is no longer the dominant organizing principle of life on the planet. Understanding the interplay of parts and wholes is a helpful place to begin this transformative journey. Parts are not only enclaves of space on world maps, but the separate identities of race, gender, class, belief, and habitat. An ethos of human solidarity would not eliminate differences but would complement them with a sense of commonality while sustaining their separate and distinctive identities. Such an ethos would generate new modes of being for addressing the challenges of transition.

For this to happen, a sense of global solidarity must take over the commanding heights of the imagination rather than continue to inhabit echo chambers hidden in underground hiding places far from the domains of policy formation.

Global Solidarity Must Rise as the Great Transition Unfolds

Without global solidarity, the structural features of the status quo will remain too deeply entrenched to allow a more cooperative, peaceful, just, and ecologically mindful world to emerge. Such a benevolent future is blocked by the prevailing consciousness in government and corporate board rooms, a paralyzing blend of ignorance, denial, incrementalism, and most of all, an unconscious respect for and deference to fragmenting boundaries that make global solidarity seem “impossible” to achieve. Assuming the paralysis has been overcome by an enhanced conception of the possible, then what?

Global solidarity would benefit humanity functionally, ethically, ecologically, and spiritually. Its functional role is most immediately obvious from a problem-solving perspective. Whether we consider vaccine diplomacy, climate change, or nuclear weapons, it becomes clear that only on the basis of human solidarity will we treat vaccines in the midst of epidemics or pandemics as part of the global commons rather than as a source of national diplomacy, international property rights, and pharmaceutical profits. With climate change, whether we will manage a displacement of national and financial interests on the basis of general global well-being depends on achieving an unprecedented level of global solidarity. Similarly, with nuclear weapons, will we find the courage to live without such weaponry within a security framing that represents the well-being of people rather than the shortsighted hegemony of a few governments and their self-regarding societal elites?

Higher measures of global solidarity would enhance the quality and nature of global governance. Even if the defining unit of solidarity remained the sovereign state rather than the human being, a sense of global citizenship could underpin a much more robust United Nations whose membership sought shared goals proclaimed by its Charter rather than the competition that has been its dominant experience, especially on issues of peace and security. The world economy would become much less tied to militarized forms of security, freeing resources for peace-building processes. From a broadening sense of global identity we could also expect a much more effective approach to biodiversity, preserving, for example, the rainforests and polar regions as indispensable aspects of our common heritage. And as heightened empathy would accompany global solidarity, there would be a greater tendency to take human suffering seriously, including poverty, displacement, and the victimization that follows from natural disasters and political strife.

Perhaps the greatest benefits of global solidarity would be felt ethically and spiritually. We can presume that the collective self of a world exhibiting high levels of global solidarity would shift loyalties and identities. The enmities of difference (race, nation, religion, gender, class) would lose their primacy, replaced by a different calibration of “otherness”—perhaps with the cosmos regarded as the great other of the earth. It seems reasonable to anticipate the emergence of a less metaphysical religious consciousness inspired by the greater harmonies on earth and a growing experience of cosmic awe as knowledge of this larger realm spreads and is reinforced by mind-broadening experience such as space tourism.

Do We Have the Time?

An ethos of global solidarity led an idealistic group of jurists in 1976 to draft the Declaration of the Rights of People to be implemented by a Permanent Peoples Tribunal, and many inquiries have been carried out since to hold states and their leaders symbolically accountable for violations of international law. People throughout the world have organized many civic initiatives in defense of nature and of peace.

Recently, Bolivia and Ecuador enacted a text devoted to the Rights of Mother Nature. New Zealand passed a law recognizing that animals are sentient beings with a legal entitlement to decent treatment. A movement is underway to regard “wild rivers” as subjects of rights, prohibiting the construction of hydro-electric dams. Civil society groups in Europe and South America have formed the International Rights of Nature Tribunal to protect various natural habitats from predatory human behavior.

Within the wider orbit of UN activities, many quiet undertakings involving health, children, food, cultural heritage, and environment proceed in an atmosphere of global solidarity interrupted by only occasional intrusions from the more conflictual arenas of the Security Council and General Assembly. There are no vetoes, and partisanship is kept at a minimum.

Gestating within the cultural bosom of world civilizations and world religions have been subversive ideas of global solidarity. Philosophic and religious affirmations of unity in ideas of “cosmopolitanism” have garnered increasing numbers of adherents. Growing attachments to nature proclaimed in many forms gives rise to loyalties that find no place on world maps or national boundaries. Fears of future catastrophe by way of nuclear war and ecosystem collapse expand awareness that present arrangements are not sustainable, thereby making many persons receptive to creating other more inclusive forms of organizing life on the planet.

Transition is not off in the distance or only in dreamscapes or science fiction imaginaries; it is happening around us if we only learn to open our eyes and hearts to the possibilities now emerging.

Concluding Thoughts

We cannot know the future, but we can know that the great enhancement of global solidarity would underpin the future we need and desire. Although this enhancement may currently seem “impossible,” we know that the impossible can happen when the historical moment is conducive. This century of interdependent risks and hopes has germinated the possibility of human solidarity globalizing. We know what is to be done, the value of struggling on behalf of our beliefs, and the urgency of the quest. This is the time to dedicate our hopes and indeed our lives to making the Great Transition happen, that is, learning to live in accord with the ethical and ecological precepts of responsible anthropocentrism .

Can Human Solidarity Globalize?

Read all contributions

As an initiative for collectively understanding and shaping the global future, GTI welcomes diverse ideas. Thus, the opinions expressed in our publications do not necessarily reflect the views of GTI or the Tellus Institute.

UN: Why global solidarity is necessary for a resilient recovery

The global community must come together to protect and support the most vulnerable during this crisis. Image:  REUTERS/Temilade Ade

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Liu Zhenmin

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} The Great Reset is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, the great reset.

• The COVID-19 pandemic inflicted the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.
• The least developed countries face the greatest risk of long-term consequences.
• The global community must come together to protect and support the most vulnerable populations.

In less than one year, the COVID-19 pandemic has turned the world upside down. While vaccines give us some comfort, we are far from a decisive victory. The path ahead is no less perilous as we face an uncertain recovery.

“ The World Economic Situation and Prospects 2021 ” – the flagship publication of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs – says the pandemic inflicted the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

It also warns us that the devastating economic impacts of the crisis – permanent job losses, decline in potential outputs, and rising poverty and inequality – will be felt for years.

Have you read?

How to follow the davos agenda.

Having absorbed enormous short-term economic and social costs, all countries – but especially the developing ones – now face even more significant long-term consequences unless we take bold and forward-looking measures to put the world on track towards sustainable development.

The crisis has laid bare many fault lines in our societies: differences in exposure to the virus and access to health care, inequities and inadequacies in social protection coverages and, more importantly, gnawing disparities in the economic response. In both developed and developing countries, low-skilled, low-wage workers, many of them women, were disproportionately affected by lockdown measures as their jobs – where they continued – did not allow for remote work. Furthermore, they could not fall back on savings to avoid exposure to the virus.

But the crisis also exposed the stark disparities in the fiscal response. We cannot ignore the fact that 46 least developed countries (LDCs) – with a population of more than 1 billion – collectively managed to cobble together only $17.3 billion of fiscal stimulus to respond to the crisis. In the LDCs, this is a mere $17 per person. In contrast, the developed economies spent nearly $10,000 for every citizen. This means the rich countries managed to spend nearly 580 times more per person for every dollar that the LDCs spent. For context, the average per capita income of the rich countries is only 30 times higher than that of the LDCs.

In these critical times, the developing countries – especially the LDCs and other vulnerable countries – badly needed international support. But little came their way.

The path to recovery will remain a bridge too far if the global community fails to support those most in need. We cannot just afford to help people within our national boundaries. This is the time for demonstrating global solidarity. This is the time for us to rise to the occasion and see people, planet and prosperity as a whole, and not through the prism of narrow national interests. We must protect and support the most vulnerable billions worldwide – and give them a fighting chance – if we are serious about an inclusive, robust and sustainable recovery. This will require us to take a fresh look at the root causes of vulnerabilities and rethink resilience, not only at the national level but also at the global level.

COVID-19 has shown us the true extent of global inequality. In 2021, let's commit to ending it

It is critical that we quickly stimulate trade to create jobs and fight back economic vulnerabilities. As “World Economic Situation and Prospects 2021” underscores, global trade was already facing significant risks and challenges against the backdrop of rising trade tensions as well as digitalization, automation and servicification of trade. These trends disadvantaged many developing countries, especially those facing digital and infrastructure constraints. It will be hard, if not impossible, for the developing countries – especially the most vulnerable ones – to stimulate recovery without stimulating exports. Creating even playing fields with a revitalized, rules-based and non-discriminatory multilateral trading system, and making sure that the developing countries can rely on trade as their engine of growth, will remain critical to both accelerate recovery and achieve sustainable development objectives. Renewed global solidarity and a reinvigorated spirit of multilateralism based on mutual respect and understanding are musts for reviving global trade.

While international cooperation will remain critical for stimulating trade, we will also need to rethink strategies for strengthening social protection systems to support the most vulnerable population groups. It is a tragedy that nearly 55% of the world population – as many as 4 billion people worldwide – lack formal social protection, which is a critical safeguard against systemic shocks like the one we suffered in 2020. In Africa, 80% of the population has no formal social protection. Social protection is not just a moral imperative, it is also an economic necessity as it can act as an automatic stabilizer that helps build the resilience of countries and people to the impacts of a shock. Ensuring social protection for everyone will require international support and cooperation, not only in the form of financial support, but also technical assistance to developing countries on how such schemes can be put in place to protect the most vulnerable in times of crisis.

During the last 50 years there has been unprecedented progress in human indicators – life expectancy has increased to record levels; infant- and maternal mortality has fallen; more girls are staying in school; more people have been lifted out of poverty than ever before; and inequality between nations has narrowed. The market system has served us well.

But deep fractures are beginning to show: gaping inequality within almost all countries; record environmental degradation and species loss; and the broader impacts of irreversible climate change. Our markets are unsustainable – and we need a new economic model.

To tackle these challenges, Transforming Markets is one of four focus areas at the World Economic Forum's 2019 Sustainable Development Impact summit. A range of sessions will bring stakeholders together to take action that places human and environmental health at the core of market systems and value chains. These include building sustainable markets, responsible supply chains, moving beyond disposability, circularity and scaling solutions of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, among others.

The international community will also need to muster the will and courage to prevent a debt crisis that will disproportionately affect many developing countries and derail their recovery prospects. As many as 35 low- and lower middle-income countries are facing significant debt distress. Many are facing the looming risks of debt overhangs, which means that servicing their already high debt burdens will prevent them from making the much needed investments – in their people, in sustainable and productive infrastructure and in climate adaptation and mitigation efforts – that are essential for sustainable growth and prosperity in the future. A debt crisis will be too costly, and it would undoubtedly exacerbate poverty and inequality in many developing countries.

There needs to be an immediate breakthrough and concrete commitment to reduce the debt burden of the most vulnerable countries, with meaningful debt relief and debt restructuring. This is a must if we are to steer the world towards the path of resilient and sustainable recovery.

It is time for the international community – including private sector creditors – to come together to make debt sustainable for the most vulnerable countries. The cost of delay and disunity will be too high for us all.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Related topics:

The agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} weekly.

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Forum Institutional .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

What to expect at the Special Meeting on Global Cooperation, Growth and Energy for Development

Spencer Feingold and Gayle Markovitz

April 19, 2024

From 'Quit-Tok' to proximity bias, here are 11 buzzwords from the world of hybrid work

Kate Whiting

April 17, 2024

Davos 2024 Opening Film

Building trust amid uncertainty – 3 risk experts on the state of the world in 2024

Andrea Willige

March 27, 2024

Why obesity is rising and how we can live healthy lives

Shyam Bishen

March 20, 2024

Global cooperation is stalling – but new trade pacts show collaboration is still possible. Here are 6 to know about

Simon Torkington

March 15, 2024

The Im/Possibility of Global Solidarity

By Catherine Keller

Recently I found myself part of a conversation about the question: “Can Human Solidarity Globalize?” At first, political philosopher Richard Falk’s question sounds straightforward. But as one attempts to frame an answer, it takes on the hint of a Zen koan. An answer of “yes” is barraged by its “but…but…but” so quickly as to empty into impossibility—which leaves us no better off than a blunt “no.” But politics, with wide impact on people’s lives, can’t settle for “no.” As Falk writes, politics is “the art of the impossible,” and the purpose of this art is to liberate the possible.

I would start here: inasmuch as human solidarity does not globalize, it fails to exist. A solidarity of the human is by definition global, for this species has long been spread around the globe. Human solidarity—not divisible into colored fragments denoting countries on a world map or into solidifications of one human collective over against another—is necessarily planetwide. And that is the case even before we take on the ecological meaning of globe as planet .  If there is to be human solidarity, the solidarity of a species across its differences, it would be global solidarity. Which hardly exists. Nor therefore does human solidarity.

So in order to globalize, we face the possible impossibility of the challenge that now confronts us: the challenge to take responsibility for our failure of solidarity not just with each other but with all other planetary species. And to acknowledge that the planet can no longer abide this failure. “Code Red for Humanity,” announces the latest United Nations IPCC report . So the urgency of the contemporary global crisis of climate and therefore of the human itself does mount toward the impossible.

Not accidentally, this epoch comes philosophically framed  as “the impossible possibility of the im/possible” (Jacques Derrida). That slash means to break through the paralysis of merely unrealizable possibilities and merely hopeless impossibilities. Might it crack the impossible open and point the way to  “The Great Transition”? That is the name of a blog focused on the unprecedented levels of change and cooperation now required for a livable human future. It featured the recent month-long conversation with Falk on the possibility of a global solidarity.

Note, though, how even the language needed to express such a “great transition” struggles to capture the requisite global solidarity. The notion of the global must constantly be distinguished from neoliberalism, the globalism that drives the individualism of capitalism.  At the same time, a progressive, planet-embracing globality must be distinguished from modern universalisms that unify an empowered “we” against some not-quite-human race, gender, or nationality, or that homogenize human differences.

We struggle for language that makes clear that the needed globality is pitted against individualism, not individuality, that solidarity thrives on the diversity not just of groups but of persons, and that globalization of solidarity, far from reducing difference, vastly enhances it.

For difference itself is relation: we exist only in and through the interrelations of our differences. And we thrive only in recognizing and strengthening our entangled differences . And then—without fear of our humanity being reduced—we can embrace our entanglement with the multiple layers of the nonhuman world.

In the interest of an ecosocial sustainability, Falk argues for a “responsible anthropocentrism.” Yet here also language, if we get it wrong, can weaken solidarity. I, like most ecotheologians, argue that anthropocentrism is at the root of our irresponsibility—right back through the history of misreadings of human “dominion” (Genesis 1:28).  So I think any appeal to a human-centered universe will backfire ecologically. Yet reading Falk, I certainly can imagine  the strategic value of appeal to an anthropos in whose center all the layers of our evolution and all the tangles/connections with our material ecology meet.

The point is that at the heart of our–human–reality, self-knowledge demands global responsibility. The responsible anthropos then becomes a portal into solidarity and to a “great transition” that may for the foreseeable future seem still impossible.

I wrote The Cloud of the Impossible : Negative Theology and Planetary Entanglement (Columbia, 2015) in recognition of how the density of the challenges we face occlude a vision whereby we might address them. The title is a citation of the fifteenth century polymath Nicolas of Cusa, who is speaking precisely of vision. “And the more that cloud of impossibility is recognized as obscure and impossible, the more truly the necessity shines forth and the less veiled it appears and draws near” ( On Learned Ignorance , 1440, in The Cloud of the Impossible , 99].

Cusa’s cloud floats directly from the ancient tradition of negative theology and its “luminous darkness.” There glow in the darkness of the cloud im/possibilities opened by that very “necessity.” Cusa does not mean the necessity of divine control or intervention. Rather, he means the deepest truth of our shared creaturely cosmos. As that truth remains “obscure” and “impossible,” it renders literal notions of divine revelation and causation too simplistic: if they were literally true, they would not be obscure. Might Cusa’s necessary truth today be the necessity of enough of us across the world bonding in great enough solidarity to make the needed difference? Might our mindfulness of the glowing darkness not shed its unwhite light on the necessities we face? Even now, as burning forests cast clouds across the landscape thousands of miles away from the blaze?

Cusa’s “cloud of the impossible” (and therefore mine) is of theological origin. Given the way that religious exclusivisms and supernaturalisms feed the politics of international right wings, can theology also help to strengthen the solidarities against those right wings and towards a political “art of the impossible”? A few political thinkers do gesture toward religion or spirituality in quest for a language and practice of solidarity. Falk encourages a sense of “cosmic awe” that moves between, through, and beyond any particular religion. For as he says, “gestating within the cultural bosom of world civilizations and world religions have been subversive ideas of global solidarity.”

As one of many examples, The Parliament of World Religions earlier this summer sent out word of a new virtual application of their 1993 “Declaration Toward a Global Ethic.” The Parliament, which over the years has been opened by the Dalai Lama, Nelson Mandela and UN Messenger of Peace Jane Goodall,  advocates across the world religions for social, political, and ecological justice. The Parliament will this year use its new virtual platform to explore and enact the  activist potential of its pluralist and planetary commitments.

In other examples of religion’s potential role: even secular thinkers and activists have some familiarity with Pope Francis’s Laudato Si , the encyclical responding to “the cry of the poor, the cry of the earth.” The decades of efforts by liberation theologians in Latin American and by U.S. Black, Asian, feminist, womanist, and ecological theologies have had insufficient but immense impact. They work in deep solidarity with secular movements. The current work of the Institute for Ecological Civilization , based in Los Angeles and working internationally (with, for example, remarkable influence in China) grows out of process theology , based on the relational cosmology of mathematician Alfred North Whitehead.

Such global movements—broadly ecumenical, social, and ecological—inhabit a universality of the universe, a cosmopolitanism of the cosmos. Its universals of solidarity do not work to homogenize the human. Its cosmic breadth honors the interrelated diversities of all creatures.

Religious institutions are thereby mobilized by those who work not against religion itself but against the conservative narrowings and right-wing deployments of religion. The U.S. Christian right has been particularly galvanized, and dangerously politicized, by its reading of the biblical prophecy of apocalypse.  It fosters an aggressive, use-it-up indifference to the materialities of “this world.” But the secular left be paralyzed by its own  End-of-the-World scenario. For the portal of possibility to global solidarity really may soon slam shut.

But if it has not yet closed, to ignore present possibilities is to betray them.  In the interest of these barely possible possibilities, I recently wrote Facing Apocalypse: Climate, Democracy and Other Last Chances (Orbis, 2021). It deploys the ancient imaginary of apocalypse against contemporary cultures of both climate change denialism and defeatist, fatalistic nihilism (it’s happening; there is nothing we can do….). The surreal metaphors of the biblical Apocalypse rage against global imperialism and global economics, promising against all odds the eco-urban utopia of the New Jerusalem. The word apokalypsis , after all, means not “end of the world” but “unveiling.” Dis/closure, not closure: eye-opening. Dis-closure, seeing Cusa’s “necessary” truths about the planet at present is what enables the possibility of addressing them.

The crisis itself presses possibility out of impossibility. The possibility of a Great Transition? A chance, perhaps, but nothing like a guarantee. Falk—with no biblical inflection—renders the global opening thus: “Transition is not off in the distance or only in dreamscapes or science fiction imaginaries”—or, I add, in archaic apocalyptic visions. “It is happening around us if we only learn to open our eyes and hearts to the possibilities now emerging.”

May I say “amen”?

Catherine Keller is George T. Cobb Professor of Constructive Theology in The Graduate Division of Religion of Drew University. She teaches and lectures across a broad spectrum of pluralist, ecofeminist, process, and political theology. Her most recent book is Facing Apocalypse:  Climate, Democracy and Other Last Chances. Other books include:  Apocalypse Now & Then: a Feminist Approach to the End of the World;  Face of the Deep: a Theology of Becoming; On the Mystery;  Cloud of the Impossible: Negative Theology and Planetary Entanglement; and Political Theology of the Earth: Our Planetary Emergency and the Struggle for a New Public. She has co-edited several volumes of the Drew Transdisciplinary Theological Colloquium, most recently Entangled Worlds: Religion, Science and the New Materialism

Counterpoint blogs may be reprinted with the following acknowledgement: “This article was published by Counterpoint Navigating Knowledge on 8 September 2021.”

The views and opinions expressed on this website, in its publications, and in comments made in response to the site and publications are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Counterpoint: Navigating Knowledge, its founders, its staff, or any agent or institution affiliated with it, nor those of the institution(s) with which the author is affiliated. Counterpoint exists to promote vigorous debate within and across knowledge systems and therefore publishes a wide variety of views and opinions in the interests of open conversation and dialogue.

Photo Credit: Celine Martin

An earlier version of this blog appeared in “Can Human Solidarity Globalize?,”  Great Transition Initiative ,  https://greattransition.org/gti-forum/global-solidarity-keller .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

By using this form you agree with the storage and handling of your data by this website. *

Related Posts

Counterpoint Blog

Why we need greener cities.

Why We Need Greener Cities By Dorin David If someone offers you a glass of dirty water, obviously you don’t drink it. Maybe after walking thirsty in a dessert for a couple of days, but Read more…

Kritik jenseits polarisierender Selbstvergewisserung: Hamas, Israel und die deutsche Diskussionskultur

Kritik jenseits polarisierender Selbstvergewisserung: Hamas, Israel und die deutsche Diskussionskultur Von Markus Dreßler —For the English version of this blog post, please click here— Der Terrorangriff der Hamas vom 7. Oktober des letzten Jahres auf Read more…

Critical Dialogues or Self-Assured Monologues: Hamas, Israel, and the German Debate

Critical Dialogues or Self-Assured Monologues: Hamas, Israel, and the German Debate By Markus Dressler —For a German version of this blog post, please click here— The Hamas terrorist attack on a music festival and Jewish Read more…

• Privacy Overview
• Strictly Necessary Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

Search the United Nations

• Policy and Funding
• Recover Better
• Disability Inclusion
• Secretary-General
• Financing for Development
• ACT-Accelerator
• Member States
• Health and Wellbeing
• Policy and Guidance
• Vaccination
• COVID-19 Medevac
• i-Seek (requires login)
• Awake at Night podcast

"This is, above all, a human crisis that calls for solidarity"

About the author, antónio guterres.

António Guterres is the ninth Secretary-General of the United Nations, who took office on 1st January 2017.

19 March 2020 - We are facing a global health crisis unlike any in the 75-year history of the United Nations — one that is spreading human suffering, infecting the global economy and upending people’s lives.

A global recession – perhaps of record dimensions – is a near certainty. 

The International Labour Organization has just reported that workers around the world could lose as much as 3.4 trillion U.S. dollars in income by the end of this year.

This is, above all, a human crisis that calls for solidarity. 

Our human family is stressed and the social fabric is being torn.  People are suffering, sick and scared. 

Current responses at the country level will not address the global scale and complexity of the crisis.

This is a moment that demands coordinated, decisive, and innovative policy action from the world’s leading economies.   We must recognize that the poorest countries and most vulnerable — especially women — will be the hardest hit.

I welcome the decision by G20 leaders to convene an emergency summit next week to respond to the epic challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic – and I look forward to taking part.

My central message is clear:  We are in an unprecedented situation and the normal rules no longer apply.  We cannot resort to the usual tools in such unusual times.

The creativity of the response must match the unique nature of the crisis – and the magnitude of the response must match its scale.

Our world faces a common enemy.  We are at war with a virus.

COVID-19 is killing people, as well as attacking the real economy at its core – trade, supply chains, businesses, jobs.  Entire countries and cities are in lockdown.  Borders are closing.  Companies are struggling to stay in business and families are simply struggling to stay afloat. 

In managing this crisis, we also have a unique opportunity. 

Done right, we can steer the recovery toward a more sustainable and inclusive path.  But poorly coordinated policies risk locking in -- or even worsening -- already unsustainable inequalities, reversing hard-won development gains and poverty reduction.

#COVID19 is a crisis unlike any in the 75-year history of the @UN . World leaders must come together and offer an urgent & coordinated global response. More than ever before, we need solidarity, hope and the political will to see this through together. https://t.co/4qGoAhTYpe pic.twitter.com/yogPhUio7l — António Guterres (@antonioguterres) March 19, 2020

I call on world leaders to come together and offer an urgent and coordinated response to this global crisis.

I see three critical areas for action:

First, tackling the health emergency.

Many countries have exceeded the capacity to care for even mild cases in dedicated health facilities, with many unable to respond to the enormous needs of the elderly.

Even in the wealthiest countries, we see health systems buckling under pressure.

Health spending must be scaled up right away to meet urgent needs and the surge in demand -- expanding testing, bolstering facilities, supporting health care workers, and ensuring adequate supplies – with full respect for human rights and without stigma.

It has been proven that the virus can be contained.  It must be contained. 

If we let the virus spread like wildfire – especially in the most vulnerable regions of the world -- it would kill millions of people. 

And we need to immediately move away from a situation where each country is undertaking its own health strategies to one that ensures, in full transparency, a coordinated global response, including helping countries that are less prepared to tackle the crisis.

Governments must give the strongest support to the multilateral effort to fight the virus, led by the World Health Organization, whose appeals must be fully met.

The health catastrophe makes clear that we are only as strong as the weakest health system.  

Global solidarity is not only a moral imperative, it is in everyone’s interests.

Second, we must focus on the social impact and the economic response and recovery.

Unlike the 2008 financial crisis, injecting capital in the financial sector alone is not the answer.  This is not a banking crisis – indeed banks must be part of the solution. 

And it is not an ordinary shock in supply and demand; it is a shock to society as a whole.

The liquidity of the financial system must be guaranteed, and banks must use their resilience to support their customers.   

Let’s not forget this is essentially a human crisis. 

Most fundamentally, we need to focus on people -- the most vulnerable, low-wage workers, small and medium enterprises.

That means wage support, insurance, social protection, preventing bankruptcies and job loss.

That also means designing fiscal and monetary responses to ensure that the burden does not fall on those who can least afford it. 

The recovery must not come on the backs of the poorest – and we cannot create a legion of new poor.

We need to get resources directly in the hands of people.  A number of countries are taking up social protection initiatives such as cash transfers and universal income. 

We need to take it to the next level to ensure support reaches those entirely dependent on the informal economy and countries less able to respond.

Remittances are a lifeline in the developing world – especially now.  Countries have already committed to reduce remittance fees to 3 percent, much below the current average levels.  The crisis requires us to go further, getting as close to zero as possible.

In addition, G20 leaders have taken steps to protect their own citizens and economies by waiving interest payments.  We must apply that same logic to the most vulnerable countries in our global village and alleviate their debt burden. 

Across the board, we need a commitment to ensure adequate financial facilities to support countries in difficulties.  The IMF, the World Bank and other International Financial Institutions play a key role. 

And we must refrain from the temptation of resorting to protectionism.  This is the time to dismantle trade barriers and re-establish supply chains.

Looking at the broader picture, disruptions to society are having a profound impact.

We must address the effects of this crisis on women.  The world’s women are disproportionally carrying the burden at home and in the wider economy.

Children are also paying a heavy price.  More than 800 million children are out of school right now — many of whom rely on school to provide their only meal.  We must ensure that all children have access to food and equal access to learning – bridging the digital divide and reducing the costs of connectivity.

As people’s lives are disrupted, isolated and upturned, we must prevent this pandemic from turning into a crisis of mental health.  Young people will be most at risk.

The world needs to keep going with core support to programs for the most vulnerable, including through UN-coordinated humanitarian and refugee response plans.  Humanitarian needs must not be sacrificed. 

Third, and finally, we have a responsibility to "recover better."

The 2008 financial crisis demonstrated clearly that countries with robust social protection systems suffered the least and recovered most quickly from its impact.

We must ensure that lessons are learned and that this crisis provides a watershed moment for health emergency preparedness and for investment in critical 21st century public services and the effective delivery of global public goods.

We have a framework for action – the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.  We must keep our promises for people and planet.

The United Nations – and our global network of country offices -- will support all governments to ensure that the global economy and the people we serve emerge stronger from this crisis.  

That is the logic of the Decade of Action to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals.

More than ever before, we need solidarity, hope and the political will to see this crisis through together.

Download the full statement

S7-Episode 2: Bringing Health to the World

“You see, we're not doing this work to make ourselves feel better. That sort of conventional notion of what a do-gooder is. We're doing this work because we are totally convinced that it's not necessary in today's wealthy world for so many people to be experiencing discomfort, for so many people to be experiencing hardship, for so many people to have their lives and their livelihoods imperiled.”

Dr. David Nabarro has dedicated his life to global health. After a long career that’s taken him from the horrors of war torn Iraq, to the devastating aftermath of the Indian Ocean tsunami, he is still spurred to action by the tremendous inequalities in global access to medical care.

“The thing that keeps me awake most at night is the rampant inequities in our world…We see an awful lot of needless suffering.”

:: David Nabarro interviewed by Melissa Fleming

Brazilian ballet pirouettes during pandemic

Ballet Manguinhos, named for its favela in Rio de Janeiro, returns to the stage after a long absence during the COVID-19 pandemic. It counts 250 children and teenagers from the favela as its performers. The ballet group provides social support in a community where poverty, hunger and teen pregnancy are constant issues.

Radio journalist gives the facts on COVID-19 in Uzbekistan

The pandemic has put many people to the test, and journalists are no exception. Coronavirus has waged war not only against people's lives and well-being but has also spawned countless hoaxes and scientific falsehoods.

A simple solution for global solidarity

Ilona Kickbusch

Global solidarity has been in short supply during the COVID-19 pandemic, and it is still not driving the response. Normally, after the World Health Organization declares a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, countries around the world work together to address the common threat under the auspices of the WHO – but the geopolitical standoff between the United States and China did not allow for this to happen in 2020. Indeed, an increasing decoupling of global health has taken place, and is still not resolved despite increased G7 and G20 activities. Current geopolitical constellations have become a threat to global health.

Despite strong efforts by the WHO, multilateral health diplomacy has proven incredibly difficult – reinforced by attacks on the organisation itself and the Trump administration’s intention to withdraw from the organisation. The field of vaccine diplomacy – which refers to all aspects pertaining to developing, manufacturing and delivering vaccines as global public goods – was weakened despite having started with a breakthrough in the creation of the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator to boost science-based solutions for vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics. Great hopes were attached to the establishment of COVAX, a new alliance intended to provide a pooling mechanism for countries to share risks related to vaccine development and make COVID-19 vaccines available to all countries in the world.

COVAX has been called the largest and most encompassing and challenging international agreement since the Paris Agreement on climate change – and indeed it constitutes a heroic effort. But the analogy does not hold. COVAX failed as a mechanism of inclusiveness because not everyone signed up. It was severely hampered by vaccine nationalism, with countries ensuring large contingents of vaccines for their own populations and vaccines made available to select countries for geopolitical gain. So Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance retreated to the charity model of global health – depending on official development assistance and – as time moved on – vaccine donations. COVAX does forecast a large supply of vaccine doses to be available to low- and middle-income countries by the end of 2021, but the vaccine apartheid established over the last year will drive geopolitics for years to come.

Historical lessons Expectations for global solidarity – reinforced by self-interest – were high after the scare of severe acute respiratory syndrome in 2003, when WHO members negotiated the revised International Health Regulations and ratified them in 2005 as an international legally binding framework. But within less than 10 years, health diplomacy was confronted with the failure of countries and international agencies to respond effectively to the first Ebola outbreak, which began in West Africa in early 2014. Once that outbreak was over, the cycle of panic and neglect began again: health diplomats called for a reinforcement of the IHR, a reform of the WHO, the creation of a contingency fund and the establishment of a global health emergency workforce. Among the most important moves was the establishment of the WHO Health Emergencies Programme in 2016 at the request of the World Health Assembly. But the two most important lessons from Ebola were that countries needed to fulfil their obligations under the IHR effectively and that they needed to empower WHO financially and politically. The COVID-19 crisis has made it clear that these lessons were not heeded and that the danger is high that they will not be heeded again.

Today, in 2021, we are at a similar point: various review committees have repeated many of the calls from decades past. This time, because of the significant economic and social global impacts, these matters are also debated at the G7 and the G20. There is a strange irony: the very actors that did not deem it necessary to invest in pandemic preparedness are now tasked with finding financial solutions and supporting them with their political clout. This incongruity also applies to the proposal to establish a High-Level Global Health Threats Council at the United Nations that would oversee countries’ willingness to prepare and respond to pandemics. It is simple. The greatest potential for global solidarity lies with the WHO – an organisation that builds on its ownership by 194 countries. Yet countries are not willing to finance their own organisation adequately through their assessed contributions (AC). Independent expert reviews have been clear – now is the time to act. Increasing AC to cover at least half of WHO’s core budget is an essential investment – the sums are minimal compared with the billions that might be paid into new mechanisms. Many countries remain sceptical about negotiating a Global Pandemic Treaty that would strengthen WHO’s hand in emergency preparedness and response. But reliable financing and political clout through a treaty would make all the difference to global solidarity. It would constitute a straightforward multilateral solution. ▪

The global governance of Indigenous peoples’ health

Better mental health outcomes through blended knowledge systems

How health trends and decisions are affecting Inuit in Greenland

Time to listen

Longer, happier, healthier lives

Recently added.

• Health Meaningful Indigenous representation across the globe: a call to action
• Health When health rests on rights
• Health Helping people to breathe easy
• Health How health trends and decisions are affecting Inuit in Greenland

View Our Publications

Mobile App Download

Sign up for summit alerts, new articles and fresh insights

‘Solidarity, hope’ and coordinated global response needed to tackle COVID-19 pandemic, says UN chief

Facebook Twitter Print Email

As public fear and uncertainty grow around the COVID-19 pandemic, “more than ever before, we need solidarity, hope and the political will to see this crisis through together,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on Thursday in his first virtual press conference.

Unlike any global health crisis in the 75-year history of the United Nations, the coronavirus pandemic is “spreading human suffering, infecting the global economy and upending people’s lives”, he added. 

WATCH LIVE: ⁦@antonioguterres⁩ takes questions on the #COVID19 pandemic and stresses the importance of global solidarity in response to #coronavirus crisis. https://t.co/So8QVjnBy3 United Nations UN

Calling for global solidarity, Mr. Guterres said: “Our human family is stressed, and the social fabric is being torn. People are suffering, sick and scared”.

And as country-level responses cannot single-handedly address the global scale and complexity of the crisis, he maintained that “coordinated, decisive and innovative policy action” is needed from the world’s leading economies.   

Mr. Guterres said that he looks forward to participating in the G20 leaders’ emergency summit next week to respond to the pandemic’s “epic challenge”.

“My central message is clear”, he spelled out: “We are in an unprecedented situation and the normal rules no longer apply”.

Indicating that “we are at war with a virus”, the UN chief stressed that creative responses “must match the unique nature of the crisis – and the magnitude of the response must match its scale”.

And although COVID-19 is killing people and attacking economies, by managing the crisis well, “we can steer the recovery toward a more sustainable and inclusive path”, he said. 

“I call on world leaders to come together and offer an urgent and coordinated response to this global crisis,” he said. 

Health emergency

The UN chief said that tackling the health emergency was his number one concern and advocated for scaled-up health spending to cover, among other things and “without stigma”, testing, supporting health care workers and ensuring adequate supplies.

“It has been proven that the virus can be contained.  It must be contained”, he said, advising to move from a country-by-country strategy to a “coordinated global response, including helping countries that are less prepared to tackle the crisis”. 

“Global solidarity is not only a moral imperative, it is in everyone’s interests”, he stated and urged Governments to fully meet the World Health Organization’s ( WHO ) appeals, saying, “we are only as strong as the weakest health system”.

Global solidarity is not only a moral imperative, it is in everyone’s interests -- UN chief

Response and recovery

As the second crisis priority, Mr. Guterres pointed to social impact and the economic response and recovery.

He cited a new International Labour Organization ( ILO ) report projecting that workers could lose some $3.4 trillion in income by year’s end.

But the world is not experiencing an ordinary shock in supply and demand, “it is a shock to society as a whole”, he said. 

“Most fundamentally, we need to focus on people – the most vulnerable, low-wage workers, small and medium enterprises” explained the UN chief. “That means wage support, insurance, social protection, preventing bankruptcies and job loss”. 

He elaborated that “the recovery must not come on the backs of the poorest – and we cannot create a legion of new poor” and pushed for supporting informal economy workers and countries less able to respond.

Appealing for a global financial commitment, he noted that the International Monetary Fund ( IMF ), World Bank and other international financial institutions would play a key role.  

Mr. Guterres encouraged dismantling trade barriers and re-establishing supply chains.

Coronavirus Portal & News Updates

He also spoke of the pandemic’s impact on women, saying that they are “disproportionally carrying the burden at home and in the wider economy” and on children, noting that more than 800 million are currently not in class, “many of whom rely on school to provide their only meal”.  

“As people’s lives are disrupted, isolated and upturned, we must prevent this pandemic from turning into a crisis of mental health”, the Secretary-General continued, indicating the need to maintain support programmes for the most vulnerable, underlining that “humanitarian needs must not be sacrificed”.  

‘Recover better’

Against this backdrop, Mr. Guterres final point was that we have a responsibility to “recover better”. 

“We must ensure that lessons are learned and that this crisis provides a watershed moment for health emergency preparedness and for investment in critical 21st century public services and the effective delivery of global public goods”, he said.

Pointing to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change , he concluded: “We must keep our promises for people and planet”.

• coronavirus

• Get involved

Global solidarity in the face of COVID-19

June 16, 2020.

Ulrika Modéer

UN Assistant Secretary-General and Director of the Bureau of External Relations and Advocacy, UNDP

Charlotte Petri Gornitzka

Assistant Secretary-General & UNICEF Deputy Executve Director, Partnerships

Robert Piper

Assistant Secretary-General, Director of Development Coordination Office

The COVID-19 pandemic has upended almost every aspects of life as we know it. Even those countries that are supposed to have the means to manage the spread and mitigate the effects are struggling.

Besides the US$5 trillion stimulus package that the G20 economies agreed to deal with the pandemic, individual countries are also devising various measures to shore up their health care systems, stabilize their economies, and assist affected workers and businesses.

Even before the full brunt of the coronavirus outbreak reached some of the poorest countries, the economic impacts are already being felt. With declining global demand for raw materials, breakdown of global supply chain, and mounting debt burden, the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is estimated to exceed US$220 billion.

The urgent shouldn’t crowd out the important

With greater uncertainty and fear of global recession looming, governments are looking for resources needed to lessen the socio-economic pains of the crisis. In this process, official development assistance (ODA) won’t be spared and could come under increased scrutiny.

Decisions made now will have potentially devastating – or transformative – impact for years to come. Despite the economic and political pressure, we must protect ODA, which is needed more than ever.

The spread of COVID-19, especially in places with weak governance and health infrastructures is expected to be overwhelming if the international community does not act now.

In sub-Saharan Africa, many countries have the lowest number of physicians per capita in the world while some experience ongoing conflicts, making it difficult to fight the virus.

Collateral impact

The collateral impact of COVID-19 on health, education and nutrition systems will be extremely damaging, and in many cases irreversible, for children and society at large. And when the world opens up again, the resilience of the weakest health systems will dictate how well we do against future threats.

The UN Secretary-General António Guterres, argued that, “this human crisis demands coordinated, decisive, inclusive and innovative policy action—and maximum financial and technical support for the poorest and most vulnerable people and countries.”

It is critical for the international community to fulfil the humanitarian appeal for COVID-19 response while protecting existing commitments to long-term development and other ‘silent’ emergencies.

Doing so will help protect the most vulnerable people from being exposed to the effects of COVID-19 and preserve hard-earned development gains in fighting global poverty and expanding basic services.

Left to their own devises, fragile nations may risk the breakdown of socio-political order, civil unrest and state collapse, further exacerbating the dire situation.

A humanitarian and development crisis

COVID-19 is not only a humanitarian crisis, but also a development crisis. Development agencies are supporting countries to prepare for, respond to, and recover from the crisis.

The effectiveness of their response to certain degree depends on the flexibility afforded to them in funding and operational procedures.

To tackle this uniquely complex health and development crisis, the adequacy and flexibility of funding to development agencies are pivotal. Flexible “core” funding is already making a difference in the COVID-19 response to reach people in need faster, empower local actors, deploy essential supplies to the frontline, and protect the most vulnerable – children, refugees, women.

Immediately responding to threats

This enabled the communities to practice due diligence and self-driven discretion to immediately respond to threats of the pandemic, while waiting for the pledged assistance to arrive. For instance, in Nigeria, funding flexibility allowed UNICEF to come up with an innovative solution to fight misinformation around COVID-19 while UNDP was able to support the government double the ventilator capacity in the country.

The COVID-19 pandemic is a devastating crisis in history. But it also posits an opportunity to remind the global community why multilateralism is vital to securing the world’s peace, security, and prosperity.

We witness how the health crisis of today’s globalized world interlinks global economy, geopolitics, and social values. Our effective response to the public health crisis should be key to resolving the ensuing economic, humanitarian and development challenges.

A complex reality

Understanding this interlinked and complex reality of COVID-19, governments need to work together closely to take coordinated actions and share scientific information, resources and expertise.

It is this strong motion for collaboration that underpins the UN agencies commitment to reinforce the humanitarian-development nexus to jointly respond to the COVID-19 crisis, working closely through the UN Crisis team, humanitarian response plan, UN Response and Recovery Fund for COVID-19.

In Guinea-Bissau, WHO, UNICEF, UNDP, and IOM joined hands to help build isolation facilities and triage space, and procure necessary equipment for COVID-19, both for the national hospital as well as for the re-modelling of the UN clinic.

With strong solidarity and effective cooperation, the international community will not only arrest COVID-19, but also use the emergency to build back better health systems and a more inclusive and sustainable economy.

This article was originally published here .

Related Content

Achieving healthy societies depends on transformative change

COVID-19 has laid bare the weaknesses of our health systems and the shortcomings of our development approaches.

UNDP and Samsung fighting COVID-19

Successful partnership marks first anniversary.

Crowdfunding unites us #TogetherAgainstCOVID19

UNDP’s fundraising platform has been opened wider to support a surge in demand for crowdfunding.

COVID-19: A reminder of the power of hope and solidarity

The coronavirus pandemic can be the moment the world pushes back against fear and isolationism.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

How is Global Solidarity Possible?

Related Papers

Ingrid L Nelson

In W. Harcourt (ed.) The Palgrave Handbook of Gender and Development: Critical Engagements in Feminist Theory and Practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 251-261.

Frontiers: A Journal of Women's Studies

Mishuana Goeman , Krista L Benson

Lyndi Hewitt

Rosalind Petchesky

Janet Conway

This is a comparative study of two transnational feminist networks at the World Social Forum and their distinct patterns of alliance building with non-feminist entities on the anti-globalization terrain. The work identifies two distinct modalities, that of 'dialogues across difference' and 'coalition-building'. Both are underpinned by discourses of intersectionality and transversality and feminist approaches to coalition-building across difference developed in the 1980s and now being brought to bear on the anti-globalization terrain. I argue that practices and theories of solidarity are being remade in this new context with attendant transformations for feminisms and social movements more generally.

JASS Just Associates

For activists, words that once inspired and framed social change have been so depoliticized as to be confusing. Join us in reclaiming our discourse and redefining the words that enable us to build movements. The Feminist Movement-Builder's Dictionary is available in English and Spanish.

Atlantis Critical Studies in Gender Culture Social Justice

Enakshi Dua

Eszter Kováts , Gregor Anikó , Weronika Grzebalska , Zofia Łapniewska , Elżbieta Korolczuk , Angela Kocze , Andrea Czervan , Noemi Katona , Margarita Jankauskaitė , Andrea Peto

This article identifies a misfit between transnational feminist networks observed at the World Social Forum and the extant scholarship on transnational feminism. The conceptual divide is pos-ited as one between transnational feminism understood, on the one hand, as a normative discourse involving a particular analytic and methodological approach in feminist knowledge production and, on the other, as an empirical referent to feminist cross-border organising. The author proposes that the US-based and Anglophone character of the scholarship, its post-structural-ist and post-colonial genealogies, and the transnational paradigm's displacement of area studies can be seen as contributing to the misfit. The article concludes by arguing for theoretical reconsideration of activist practice, place, and the 'posts'-post-structuralism and post-colonialism, in the study of contemporary transnational feminist activisms. This marks an effort to get beyond the binary framework of 'transnational feminism' versus 'global sisterhood' in analysing activist practices on an increasingly diverse and complex transnational feminist field.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Tamas Bereczky

Andrea Peto

Alternatives to Privatization: Public Options for Essential Services in the Global South. David McDonald and Greg Ruiters, Eds.

Sarah Miraglia

Eszter Kováts

Feminist Formations

Amy Blizard

Encyclopedia of Race and Racism (second ed.)

Ranjoo S Herr

Joanna Semeniuk

Yvonne Underhill-Sem

Dominique Masson

Greta Olson

Cindy Bokpe

Aysen Ustubici

Feminist Africa

Ndeye SOW , Akua O Britwum , Amina Mama

Anna Elomäki

Hypatia 18:3 (Summer 2003)

Ashlee Christoffersen

Third Wave Feminism

Alison Stone

Journal of Feminist Scholarship

Sandrine Sanos

Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society

Elizabeth S Corredor

Karma R Chávez

Niamh Moore

Rashmi Varma

Third Wave Feminism, a Critical Exploration. …

Zenzele Isoke

hispanicissues.umn.edu

Cynthia M Tompkins

Lectito Journals

Critical Half: Bi-annual Journal of Women for Women International

Abby S Gondek

Feminist Trouble. Insterctional politics in postsecular times

Eleonore Lepinard

Anna M. Agathangelou , Heather M. Turcotte

Islam & Queer Muslims Identity & Sexuality in the Contemporary (Ph.D. Thesis)

Mohamed Abdou (aka Mohamed 'Jean Veneuse')

Laurence Cox , Catherine Eschle

Zeina Zaatari

Amina Mama , Hakima Abbas

Feminists in Development Organizations

Rosalind Eyben

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

StudyDriver in your Smartphone!

Is Global Solidly Possible?

Global solidarity is extremely possible if i manage to take rid of naivety and dysfunctional economic beliefs.

Today we are in a reform where us are moving away from Globalism, which is a good term for an abusive economic structure in where nearly all nations and people have their proportion of the wealth generated, reduced. The money goes to private investors instead, and adenine few status like China. PDF | Up Feb 1, 2010, Patti Tamara Lenard and others published Global Solidarity | Find, read and quotation view the exploring you need on ResearchGate

The states with the reduced income, relied on debt to keep their country go, because well like letting slide infrastructure maintenance, reduce social welfare and get people to work more.

Going back to compartmentalized national economies with shop balance between them, will creating a systematischer whereabouts a nation can act manage their countries without the threat of being drained of wealth. Worldwide solidarity in an interdependent world

Wealth generation is actually quite simple but without economic and political borders it your very hard. It the all about efficiency, which includes efficiency by site and efficiency about industry as well as maximizing the population's health, within the border of a nation. The Im/Possibility of Global Solidarity - Counterpoint: Negotiation Knowledge

One major problem is naivety. IQ and the Pareto principle are biological facts. You have the set the high IQ high Pareto public in charge. No system works when we do like we do today, placing the most vocal or ideological soul in charge.

Is it possible well i suppose it might be. is it probably probably non. nonetheless there are expected some universal site that a hugely mainly of humans would agree upon. don't eat your children for example and probably quite a few else i dare not elaborate upon out of fear of one quora view. bring the base standards as common ground and establish upon them. i don't think it's enough however to call it solidarity for we merely have a set of axioms like don't eat your otherwise anybody else's children in which nearly everyone thinks. there musts be ampere common goal that our wish to strive toward and guiding principles leader on the trail toward that end. where willing forever be some people who suppose differently so in this sense support a impossible. however wenn which close point actually and truly embraces people's inherently differentness from either other then i think many develop may be made toward global solidarity. Is Global Solidarity Possible? - Free Essay Example - 1082 Words | goldirainvestment.org

Considers that it seems bulk conflict shall scarcity driven, no, it's exceedingly unlikely to have world peace without sustainability.

Unless we achieve an certain homeostatic balance with ourselves, our environment, and our food causes, we will be merely jumping from one existential crisis to another. Sadly, humans tend to resolve conflicts of which sort with violent agression. Don't eat our children, for example, and probably quite a handful others I dare not elaborate upon, out of fear of the Quora censors. Take the base ...

If we have no water, here becomes be war.

If we have negative food, there determination be war.

If we have canker, here wishes be war.

It's entirely possible to zuwege long-term. It's however difficult to persuade the powerful that such a thing belongs equally beneficially also profitable.

Therefore, to sees equally unlikely that we will achieve such a balance, and infinitely improbable which we will ever see one global peace.

That’s easy, by two main reasons.

• Eliminating human would defeat the subject of peaceful on Earth, it would fairly be wild, by a choose, until uncontrolled nuclear reactors, storage facilities and factories lean so many poisons that it creates a global toxic desert where only a handful species alter to survive. Is global solidarity possible? - Quora
• World peace is simply defined as to absence of combat. Aforementioned solution is surprisingly simple, we equals don’t elect officials who declare war, impeach she if her do, also you’re done. Posted in u/krrrrrrrrrt - 2 votes and 14 comments

Of course, this hasn't happened yet due to the trillions invested in the buying and selling of weapons, petroleum and minerals that don’t always appertain to them, (aka uninhibited colonialism without borders) mostly through war also the policy campaigns to persuading our to not oppose it white the corporate cash in. Note I acted not say support, as few have ever been legitimately “pro war” (anyone who is has negative idea what war is like, ask a veteran) but they at less confess which war might breathe a potential band-aid to other “economic problems” at hand. About International Solidarity and human rights

Some say, there would be peace on Globe with all humans been the same, because differences are what draws us apart. I don’t think so. Even if all my were the same, everyone would motionless put his/her own interests befor anyone else’s (which, after all, is a normal mechanism toward securing survival), so there would always become conflicts, cause not everyone’s interests can be met at the equal time. Simply look around: there be conflicts in marriages, between family members, with former companions ect. They are not limited single to different nationalities, races or religions. If you has two identical individuals (physically and mentally), per ready would fight for his with aus own interests, and that sometimes inevitably goes against the other person’s our. Global Solidarity: Toward a Social of Impossibility | Richard Fake

So, EGO say: if to do peace on Earth without eradicating humans, you have to eliminate either their understanding or their free will. As longish since there are intelligent beings with free will, it will be inherently selfish furthermore that be always cause conflicts between them.

One, how do you define world serenity?

Additional thing in your mind is that “eliminating humans” can get you World Peace which the clearly wrong.

You have to realizing ensure one day everything wishes end, does it end today or in a per, either to a century? Does it really matter? Not with all.

Let’s just say we attain “World Peace”, right whatever? Everyone lives, negative one cutter. More advancement in technology and medicine, etc. Dieser all means more people, additional related. And none are unlimited. So conflicts are bound to arise, no matter what.

And given magnitude internal vices, never can we everwhere answer everything, unless the end/death which is a universal truth.

So if I am to take this postively, of only option could be wenn everyone can achieve “Internal Peace” only then we will have “World Peace”.

By changing the behavioral characteristics in men. It actually could be finish constructively. Our are now coming into the era where ours hold the tools. But, the usual first fear belongs that to process wish be eugenics. Done well it wants not be that. It would be evolution speeded up. But, then there is the second worry. The minute typical response the that bad humans become take the utility of the process and erzeugung bad outcomes. That is likely.

Quote this page

Is Global Solidarity Possible?. (2020, Apr 14). Retrieved from https://goldirainvestment.org/is-global-solidarity-possible/

"Is Global Solidarity Possible?." goldirainvestment.org , 14 Apr 2020, https://goldirainvestment.org/is-global-solidarity-possible/

goldirainvestment.org. (2020). Is Global Solidarity Possible? . [Online]. Available at: https://goldirainvestment.org/is-global-solidarity-possible/ [Accessed: 14 Apr. 2024]

"Is Global Solidarity Possible?." goldirainvestment.org, Apr 14, 2020. Accessed April 14, 2024. https://goldirainvestment.org/is-global-solidarity-possible/

"Is Global Solidarity Possible?," goldirainvestment.org , 14-Apr-2020. [Online]. Available: https://goldirainvestment.org/is-global-solidarity-possible/ . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2024]

goldirainvestment.org. (2020). Is Global Solidarity Possible? . [Online]. Available at: https://goldirainvestment.org/is-global-solidarity-possible/ [Accessed: 14-Apr-2024]

Is International Solidarity Possible?. (2020, Apr 14). Retrieved April 14, 2024 , from https://goldirainvestment.org/is-global-solidarity-possible/

Save nach with Studydriver!

Get with touching with our top writers in a non-plagiarized articles written the satisfy your needs

Stuck on ideas? Struggling with a concept?

A professional artist will manufacture a clear, mistake-free paper for you!

Leave your email and we will send adenine sample to him.

Pleas check your inbox

Interested in aforementioned topic?

Please indicate where for schicken you the sample.

Hallo! I'm Amy :)

I cannot help you secure hours on your homework. Let's start by locating a artist.

Solidarity: Why we need it and how to get it

Solidarity is an important value for any society, as well as for the entire global community. This idea of ​​community — essential in the Christian tradition — means finding an area of unity amidst the diversity that characterizes human societies, and the recognition of a set of common, universal values that characterize us as human beings with dignity.

In order for this to become a reality, it’s necessary to establish a consensus about fundamental values, work to extend the principles of peace, equity, and well-being, and establish a basic principle of mutual recognition and reciprocity.

Solidarity as a value

Solidarity is a value par excellence, characterized by mutual collaboration between individuals which makes it possible to overcome the most terrible disasters, such as wars, plagues, diseases, etc. This applies as well to helping relatives, friends and acquaintances who find themselves in difficult situations, so that they can overcome obstacles and move forward.

Solidarity allows us to overcome the adversities that present themselves throughout life. A person who practices solidarity does not hesitate to collaborate and support all those who are in disadvantaged situations, in contrast to people who are indifferent to the needs of others and more self-centered.

We must encourage an attitude of solidarity in the young, since solidarity can be seen as the basis of many other human values. ​​In a special way it helps one develop valuable friendships in family and social settings, based on virtues such as kindness, support, respect, and tolerance.

Solidarity and sociology

From the perspective of sociology, solidarity can be described as the adherence of each one of the members of a human community to the same values. According to French sociologist Emile Durkheim, solidarity can be seen in three ways:

• Community solidarity is a feeling of unity based on common interests or goals, shared by many individuals, which makes them belong to the same social group, work together towards achieving the same goals, or fight together for the same cause.
• Organic solidarity , seen in a company, is the interdependence that exists among the various individuals due to the strong specialization of each one of them and the division of technical labor in different functions.
• In contrast to the previous kinds, mechanical solidarity is characterized by a total competence and independence of each individual in most of the jobs, in which case the individuals have no need of the others.

In conclusion, solidarity is knowing how to behave with people; it’s a form of social behavior for the purpose of creating cohesion and social ties that unite the members of a partnership with each other.

Christian solidarity

Solidarity is part of the social doctrine of the Catholic Church , and as such is defined as the consideration of the set of characteristics or aspects that relate or unite people, and the mutual help, interaction, collaboration and service that this set of relationships promotes and encourages. This collaboration and interaction must contribute to the development, growth, and progress of all human beings based on Christian and gospel values.

The great value of this vision lies in its foundation. We do not practice solidarity simply because there’s a social convenience; rather, we are supportive because every human being enjoys a unique and unrepeatable dignity that is given by God.

Articles like these are sponsored free for every Catholic through the support of generous readers just like you.

Help us continue to bring the Gospel to people everywhere through uplifting Catholic news, stories, spirituality, and more.

Progressive delivery is highly recommended for your order. This additional service allows tracking the writing process of big orders as the paper will be sent to you for approval in parts/drafts* before the final deadline.

What is more, it guarantees:

• 30 days of free revision;
• A top writer and the best editor;
• A personal order manager.

* You can read more about this service here or please contact our Support team for more details.

It is a special offer that now costs only +15% to your order sum!

Would you like to order Progressive delivery for your paper?

• Password reminder
• Registration

Calculate the price

Minimum Price

"The impact of cultural..."

The essay writers who will write an essay for me have been in this domain for years and know the consequences that you will face if the draft is found to have plagiarism. Thus, they take notes and then put the information in their own words for the draft. To be double sure about this entire thing, your final draft is being analyzed through anti-plagiarism software, Turnitin. If any sign of plagiarism is detected, immediately the changes will be made. You can get the Turnitin report from the writer on request along with the final deliverable.

Estelle Gallagher

Diane M. Omalley

10 question spreadsheets are priced at just .39! Along with your finished paper, our essay writers provide detailed calculations or reasoning behind the answers so that you can attempt the task yourself in the future.

Why do I have to pay upfront for you to write my essay?

Sharing educational goals.

Our cheap essay service is a helping hand for those who want to reach academic success and have the perfect 4.0 GPA. Whatever kind of help you need, we will give it to you.

What is the best essay writer?

The team EssaysWriting has extensive experience working with highly qualified specialists, so we know who is ideal for the role of the author of essays and scientific papers:

• Easy to communicate. Yes, this point may seem strange to you, but believe me, as a person communicates with people, he manifests himself in the texts. The best essay writer should convey the idea easily and smoothly, without overloading the text or making it messy.
• Extensive work experience. To start making interesting writing, you need to write a lot every day. This practice is used by all popular authors for books, magazines and forum articles. When you read an essay, you immediately understand how long a person has been working in this area.
• Education. The ideal writer should have a philological education or at least take language courses. Spelling and punctuation errors are not allowed in the text, and the meaning should fit the given topic.

Such essay writers work in our team, so you don't have to worry about your order. We make texts of the highest level and apply for the title of leaders in this complex business.

Fill up the form and submit

On the order page of our write essay service website, you will be given a form that includes requirements. You will have to fill it up and submit.

Customer Reviews

Cookies! We use them. Om Nom Nom ...

Finished Papers

Margurite J. Perez

4 reasons to write my essay with us!

You are always welcome to check some of our previously done projects given on our website and then judge it for yourself. Apart from that, we can give you 4 significant reasons to be a part of our customer base:

• Only professional ‘my essay writer', who are highly qualified and a master in their academic field, will write for you
• Quality control is rigorously maintained by us and is thoroughly aligned with the given question brief and instructions.
• We will also provide you with a thorough Plagiarism report by the Turnitin software which will ensure the originality of the draft
• You are free to revise your draft with us till you are contented with the subject matter.

Johan Wideroos

Our Top Proficient Writers At Your Essays Service

Sophia Melo Gomes

Still not convinced? Check out the best features of our service:

offers a great selection of professional essay writing services. Take advantage of original, plagiarism-free essay writing. Also, separate editing and proofreading services are available, designed for those students who did an essay and seek professional help with polishing it to perfection. In addition, a number of additional essay writing services are available to boost your customer experience to the maximum!

Advanced writer

Add more quality to your essay or be able to obtain a new paper within a day by requesting a top or premium writer to work on your order. The option will increase the price of your order but the final result will be totally worth it.

Top order status

Every day, we receive dozens of orders. To process every order, we need time. If you’re in a great hurry or seek premium service, then choose this additional service. As a result, we’ll process your order and assign a great writer as soon as it’s placed. Maximize your time by giving your order a top status!

SMS updates

Have you already started to write my essay? When it will be finished? If you have occasional questions like that, then opt-in for SMS order status updates to be informed regarding every stage of the writing process. If you’re pressed for time, then we recommend adding this extra to your order.

Plagiarism report

Is my essay original? How do I know it’s Turnitin-ready? Very simple – order us to attach a detailed plagiarism report when work is done so you could rest assured the paper is authentic and can be uploaded to Turnitin without hesitating.

1-page summary

World’s peace isn’t riding on essay writing. If you don’t have any intent on reading the entire 2000-word essay that we did for you, add a 1-page summary to your order, which will be a short overview of your essay one paragraph long, just to be in the loop.

Megan Sharp

• EU climate bank
• EIB at a glance
• Tackling global challenges together
• Part of the EU family
• Our results
• EIB Group impact: Boosting GDP and jobs
• Governance and structure
• Shareholders
• Statutory bodies
• Control and evaluation
• Organisation structure
• Corporate responsibility
• Providing finance
• Human rights and the EIB
• Reporting on sustainability
• Our internal commitment
• Managing our environment
• Transparency, accountability and access to information
• Transparency and access to information
• EIB Group Complaints Mechanism overview
• Project procurement complaints
• Investigating fraud and misconduct
• Public consultations
• EIB Institute
• What we offer
• Loans for the public sector
• Framework loans for the public sector
• Loans for the private sector
• Intermediated loans for SMEs, mid-caps and other priorities
• Microfinance
• Venture debt
• Investments in infrastructure and environmental funds
• Investments in SME and mid-cap funds
• Credit enhancement for project finance
• Guarantees in support of SMEs, mid-caps and other objectives
• Advisory services
• Strategic Development
• Market Development
• Project Development
• Mandates and partnerships
• EU Blending facilities
• Donor partnerships
• Shared management funds and financial instruments
• EFSD Guarantee
• All mandates and partnerships
• Global investment map
• Our projects
• All projects
• Projects to be financed
• Financed projects
• Our regions of activity
• European Union
• Enlargement countries
• Western Balkans
• Eastern Neighbourhood
• Southern Neighbourhood
• Sub-Saharan Africa
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• Asia and the Pacific
• EFTA countries
• Climate and environmental sustainability
• Innovation, digital and human capital
• Sustainable energy and natural resources
• Sustainable cities and regions
• Small and medium-sized enterprises
• Social sustainability
• Solidarity with Ukraine
• Project cycle
• Media centre
• All releases
• Press contacts
• Stories and essays
• All Cartoons
• Video library
• Public register
• EIB surveys
• EIB climate survey
• Picture library
• Infographics
• Publications and research
• Publications
• Our research
• Economic analysis
• Surveys and data
• Assessing EIB impact
• Stories - Economics
• Economic conferences and research networks
• EIB open data
• Open learning
• Work with us
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Our recruitment process
• Investor Relations
• Our funding
• Climate Awareness Bonds
• Sustainability Awareness Bonds
• Recent issues
• Outstanding issues
• Investor relations news
• Investor relations publications
• Investor relations newsletters
• Civil society and stakeholder engagement
• Procurement
• Easy-to-read
• The EIB at a glance
• The EIB and development
• The EIB climate action
• The EIB and SMEs
• The EIB and Ukraine
• The EIB COVID-19 response

EIB Global’s Water Sector Fund backing €10 million for water investment across Africa and Asia

• 24 April 2024
• The investment through the Water Access Acceleration Fund, a €70 million private equity fund.
• Investment to improve safe drinking water access in Africa, Asia and Latin America. 
• First fund investment by the Water Sector Fund , financed by the Netherlands and managed by the EIB.

The Water Sector Fund managed by EIB Global will provide €10 million in the Water Access Acceleration Fund (W2AF), managed by Incofin, a prominent global impact investment manager. W2AF is a “water-focused” blended finance impact fund targeting sustainable and scalable solutions that improve access to safe, affordable drinking water for underserved populations, mainly in Sub-Saharan Africa and South and Southeast Asia. The new initiative will provide 20 billion litres of safe drinking water by 2030. 

The €10 million anchor investment by EIB Global will secure other investments, attract more private investors to W2AF. Through the fund, EIB Global will support innovative water businesses.

Among the first partners to benefit from this equity support will be Rite Water Solutions, a company in India providing drinking water solutions and improving water quality in rural and urban areas of the country. More than 540 000 households are expected to benefit.

This support to W2AF represents the first fund investment by the Water Sector Fund , a trust fund established in partnership with the Dutch government and managed by EIB Global. With its donor financial resources, the Water Sector Fund develops drinking water projects in low- and lower-middle income countries and promotes the UN Sustainable Development Goals.  

EIB Vice-President Robert de Groot remarked, “This investment showcases our joint commitment to enhancing access to safe, affordable drinking water for all. Innovative financial and technical solutions are needed. The W2AF is an excellent example, funnelling water investments to the regions that need it most and helping build the private water ecosystem in emerging markets in Africa and Asia. I extend my gratitude to the Dutch government for their vital support, making this impactful endeavour possible.”

Incofin Chairman Loïc De Cannière stated, “We thank the EIB and the Dutch Water Sector Fund for joining W2AF, together with our diverse investors from Europe and the United States. W2AF is a pioneering, first-ever equity impact fund for the drinking water sector in the Global South. Incofin aspires to make the impact of this fund a success, and an example for other investors. By doing so, it will pave the way for more water funds, helping millions of people around the world access drinkable water, which is a key Sustainable Development Goal and a fundamental human right.”

Cees Bansema, Ambassador of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to Luxembourg , explained, “Access to safe drinking water is a human right and critical for social and economic development. This investment in W2AF shows how cooperation makes water projects more sustainable and inclusive. It is also a great example of how we can mobilise additional funding from other financiers or investors. It is a flagship operation of the Dutch-funded Water Sector Fund — combining the Netherlands’ continuous commitment to addressing global water challenges, the EIB’s extensive experience investing in water worldwide, and fund manager Incofin’s unique track record in impact investments.”

Background information

EIB Global is the EIB Group’s specialised arm devoted to increasing the impact of international partnerships and development finance outside the European Union. EIB Global is designed to foster strong, focused partnerships within Team Europe and as part of the EU Global Gateway strategy, alongside fellow development finance institutions and civil society. EIB Global brings the Group closer to local people, companies and institutions through our offices around the world .

The Water Sector Fund is an EIB-managed trust fund established in 2017 in partnership with the government of the Netherlands. It focuses on water sector projects in low- and lower-middle income countries, supporting universal access to water supply, sanitation and hygiene. The fund is open to contributions from other donors seeking to achieve UN Sustainable Development Goal 6: clean water and sanitation for all.

Incofin Investment Management is an impact investment fund management company for the Global South. It is headquartered in Belgium and has offices worldwide. It focuses on investments in financial inclusion, agri-food businesses, and safe water companies, with assets under management of €1.3 billion. Its investor base comprises development banks, institutional investors, family offices and private individuals.

Related project(s)

Water access acceleration fund w2af.

A fund investing in decentralised water supply systems and technologies, targeting countries in Africa and Asia with high incidences of water access inequality.

Olga Sushytska

• [email protected]
• +380 443908018

Press Office

• [email protected]

2024-163-EN

More press releases

The sustainable development goals are more important than ever: eib group president nadia calviño at the united nations.

Nadia Calviño, President of the European Investment Bank Group has been participating in the 2024 Financing for Development Forum this week, at the United Nations in New York. The Forum which is organised by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), is designed to bring together stakeholders to address the current global challenges and advance policies for financing long-term sustainable development priorities. This is President Calviño’s first visit to the United Nations since she took up her post in January.

Ukraine: Kamianske school reopens after EU bank-supported reconstruction

Lyceum No. 11 in Kamianske, Dnipropetrovsk Oblast was extensively reconstructed under the European Investment Bank (EIB)’s Ukraine Early Recovery Programme and reopened its doors today. The school’s building has been expanded, with additional classrooms, restroom facilities, new playgrounds and green relaxation zones.

EIB and Ukraine Government sign MoU to accelerate deployment of financial support and project execution on the ground

The European Investment Bank (EIB) and the Government of Ukraine have agreed on a strategic cooperation framework supporting Ukraine’s reconstruction, recovery, and EU integration efforts. This reinforced partnership places future investments within critical public and private sector initiatives that will be supported by funds from the EIB’s EU for Ukraine Fund and the European Union’s €50 billion Ukraine Facility, in which the EIB plays a key implementing role.

Our website uses anonymised cookies to give you the best browser experience and to collect aggregated statistics. This does not include online advertising cookies.

Cookies on our Careers Section

Our website uses anonymised cookies to give you the best browser experience and to collect aggregated statistics. If you agree, this website section will also include third-party cookies used in online advertising.

To celebrate the International Day of Persons with Disabilities on 3 December, the EIB organises a full week of events to promote exchanges on disability inclusion with staff and expert guests. Diversity is the essence of humanity and a core value of the European Union. As the EU bank, we are committed to promote diversity and inclusion in everything we do.

• Share full article

Advertisement

The Morning

Tiktok’s pro-china tilt.

A bill that will force the app’s Chinese owners to sell will soon become law.

By David Leonhardt

The debate over TikTok has shifted very quickly. Just a few months ago, it seemed unlikely that the U.S. government would force ByteDance, the Chinese company that owns TikTok, to sell it. The platform is popular, and Congress rarely passes legislation aimed at a single company.

Yet a bipartisan TikTok bill — packaged with aid for Ukraine, Taiwan, Israel and Palestinians — is now on its way to becoming law. Late last night, the Senate passed the measure , 79 to 18, three days after the House passed it, 360 to 58. President Biden said he would sign it today. If ByteDance does not sell TikTok within 12 months, it will be banned in the United States.

What explains the turnabout?

I have asked that question of policymakers and their aides in recent weeks and heard a similar answer from many. Parts of the debate over TikTok — about the overall benefits and drawbacks of social media, for instance — are complicated, and they would not justify the forced sale of a single company, the policymakers say. But at least one problem with TikTok falls into a different category.

It has become a leading source of information in this country. About one-third of Americans under 30 regularly get their news from it. TikTok is also owned by a company based in the leading global rival of the United States. And that rival, especially under President Xi Jinping, treats private companies as extensions of the state. “This is a tool that is ultimately within the control of the Chinese government,” Christopher Wray, the director of the F.B.I., has told Congress.

When you think about the issue in these terms, you realize there may be no other situation in the world that resembles China’s control of TikTok. American law has long restricted foreign ownership of television or radio stations, even by companies based in friendly countries. “Limits on foreign ownership have been a part of federal communications policy for more than a century,” the legal scholar Zephyr Teachout explained in The Atlantic .

The same is true in other countries. India doesn’t allow Pakistan to own a leading Indian publication, and vice versa. China, for its part, bars access not only to American publications but also to Facebook, Instagram and other apps.

TikTok as propaganda

Already, there is evidence that China uses TikTok as a propaganda tool.

Posts related to subjects that the Chinese government wants to suppress — like Hong Kong protests and Tibet — are strangely missing from the platform, according to a recent report by two research groups . The same is true about sensitive subjects for Russia and Iran, countries that are increasingly allied with China.

Consider this data from the report:

Subjects missing from TikTok

TikTok hashtags as a percent of Instagram hashtags

Subjects sensitive to

China’s interests

South China

For every 100 Instagram

posts with Taiwan-related

hashtags, there were only

about 7 on TikTok.

Pro-Ukraine

Normal ratios,

given Instagram’s

larger user base

Taylor Swift

Black Lives

Barbie Movie

Hong Kong protests

Subjects sensitive

to China’s interests

Tiananmen Square

South China Sea

For every 100 Instagram posts

with Taiwan-related hashtags,

there were only about 7 on TikTok.

Cristiano Ronaldo

Black Lives Matter

The report also found a wealth of hashtags promoting independence for Kashmir, a region of India where the Chinese and Indian militaries have had recent skirmishes. A separate Wall Street Journal analysis , focused on the war in Gaza, found evidence that TikTok was promoting extreme content, especially against Israel. (China has generally sided with Hamas.)

Adding to this circumstantial evidence is a lawsuit from a former ByteDance executive who claimed that its Beijing offices included a special unit of Chinese Communist Party members who monitored “how the company advanced core Communist values.”

Many members of Congress and national security experts find these details unnerving. “You’re placing the control of information — like what information America’s youth gets — in the hands of America’s foremost adversary,” Mike Gallagher, a House Republican from Wisconsin, told Jane Coaston of Times Opinion. Yvette Clarke, a New York Democrat, has called Chinese ownership of TikTok “an unprecedented threat to American security and to our democracy.”

In response, TikTok denies that China’s government influences its algorithm and has called the outside analyses of its content misleading. “Comparing hashtags is an inaccurate reflection of on-platform activity,” Alex Haurek, a TikTok spokesman, told me.

I find the company’s defense too vague to be persuasive. It doesn’t offer a logical explanation for the huge gaps by subject matter and boils down to: Trust us. Doing so would be easier if the company were more transparent. Instead, shortly after the publication of the report comparing TikTok and Instagram, TikTok altered the search tool that the analysts had used, making future research harder, as my colleague Sapna Maheshwari reported .

The move resembled a classic strategy of authoritarian governments: burying inconvenient information.

The coming fight

The fight over TikTok won’t end even when Biden signs the bill. Chinese officials have signaled that they will not allow ByteDance to sell TikTok, and ByteDance plans to fight the law in court. It will have some American allies, too.

On the political left, groups like the A.C.L.U. say that the TikTok bill violates the First Amendment. (You can read the A.C.L.U.’s argument here .) On the right, Jeff Yass, who’s both a TikTok investor and a major Republican campaign donor, is leading the fight against the bill. He is also a former board member at the Cato Institute, which has become a prominent TikTok defender. Yass may be the person who convinced Donald Trump to reverse his position and oppose the bill.

These opponents hope to use TikTok’s popularity among younger Americans to create a backlash in coming weeks. And they may have some success. But they are in a much weaker position than they were a few months ago.

As Carl Hulse, The Times’s chief Washington correspondent, told me, “The fears that TikTok gives China too much of a way into the U.S. seem to be overriding any political concerns.” There is a long history of members of Congress overcoming partisan divisions to address what they see as a national security threat. Even in today’s polarized atmosphere, it can still happen.

Under the proposed law, ByteDance will have to sell TikTok within 270 days. It will probably have a hard time finding a buyer with enough money .

Read more about the U.S. push to force a sale of TikTok.

THE LATEST NEWS

Trump on trial.

David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer, testified yesterday that he hatched a plan in 2015 with Trump and Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, to help Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign .

That effort entailed publishing positive stories about Trump and negative stories about his rivals, including one falsely linking Ted Cruz’s father to the J.F.K. assassination. It also meant buying and then burying information about possible scandals.

Pecker called Trump “very cautious and very frugal” and “almost a micromanager,” which may help prosecutors show that Trump paid hush money and falsified records to hide a sex scandal.

The judge didn’t rule on whether Trump had violated the gag order that bars him from attacking witnesses and others. But he scolded Trump’s lawyer for not offering evidence in Trump’s defense, saying, “You’re losing all credibility with the court.”

Trump appeared frustrated. At times he yanked his lapels, frowned and shook his head. On social media, he accused Merchan of taking away his rights .

The N.Y.P.D. appears to be using a dump truck to block news photographers from seeing Trump as he enters and exits the courthouse.

The late-night hosts discussed the gag order hearing. “Has Trump ever considered paying himself hush money?” Jordan Klepper asked .

More on Politics

Biden won Pennsylvania’s Democratic primary. A sizable share of Republican primary voters cast ballots for Nikki Haley, even though she dropped out. Here are more takeaways .

In Florida, Biden criticized the state’s six-week abortion ban and urged voters to support a referendum to restore abortion access there.

Tennessee’s legislature passed a bill to allow teachers to carry concealed handguns on school grounds. The governor is likely to sign it.

Israel-Hamas War

Israel says it will expand a humanitarian zone along the Gaza coast if it invades Rafah, a southern city where more than a million displaced Palestinians are living.

Palestinian officials claim to have found mass graves outside two hospitals in Gaza after the withdrawal of Israeli troops there. The U.N. called for an independent investigation .

A class of university students finished training in Gaza a week before the war began. The Times spoke with them to learn how their lives had changed .

Campus Protests

At Columbia, pro-Palestinian student protesters agreed to remove some tents and bar discriminatory language. The school delayed police action to disband the protests while talks continue.

The university’s officials are trying to balance student safety with free speech. Read the inside story of the crisis on campus.

Many universities expect protests to disrupt the end of the school year . Columbia will allow students to attend the last week of classes remotely, and the University of Michigan told students to expect demonstrations at graduation ceremonies.

More International News

Myanmar’s military has cut off phone and internet service in areas controlled by rebel groups. Locals play music to pass the time .

Residents of Kharkiv, Ukraine, are trying to live as normal despite daily Russian attacks. See life in the city .

At least five people died during an attempt to cross the English Channel , including a young girl. They were on an inflatable boat that was overloaded with more than 100 passengers.

Germany arrested an E.U. lawmaker’s aide on suspicion of spying for China .

Horses on the loose galloped through London this morning. One appeared to hit a double-decker bus and smash the windshield.

Other Big Stories

The Justice Department will pay $139 million to resolve claims by women who said they were abused by the former U.S.A. Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar.

The Federal Trade Commission banned noncompete clauses , which restrict workers from switching to a rival company in the same industry.

Tesla’s first-quarter profits fell 55 percent . Sales are down, even as the company lowered the price of its cars to attract buyers.

No, officer, he wasn’t drinking: A Belgian man suspected of drunken driving was instead diagnosed with auto-brewery syndrome , a rare condition in which the gut makes its own beer.

Administrators allow discrimination against Jewish students that they would never tolerate against other minorities, Bret Stephens argues.

Parents of students suspended by Columbia University and Barnard College wrote a letter to the editor to express their outrage.

Student protesters can make their point without shutting down campus life , John McWhorter , a Columbia professor, writes.

And here is a column by Thomas Edsall on polarization in 2024 .

MORNING READS

Yellowstone: Wolves were thought to have rebalanced the national park’s ecosystem. New research questions that story .

Ask Well: Are nasal sprays addictive? Read what to know .

Creativity: Artists, including Joan Baez, offer advice on squashing self-doubt and procrastination .

Lives Lived: Phyllis Pressman began working at Barneys so she could spend more time with her husband, who had taken over the store from his father. She created Chelsea Passage, the store’s home goods bazaar, a pivot point in Barneys’ evolution from a discount men’s wear store to an elite lifestyle behemoth. She died at 95 .

N.B.A.: Luka Doncic scored 32 points to help the Dallas Mavericks tie their series with the Los Angeles Clippers at 1-1.

N.H.L.: The New York Rangers beat the Washington Capitals , 4-3, to take a 2-0 series lead.

ARTS AND IDEAS

Cowboy aesthetics are back in fashion, as seen in Beyoncé’s release of her album “Cowboy Carter.” In his critic’s notebook , the Times reporter Guy Trebay tries to explain what exactly cowboy style is. “How do you arrive at any single meaning of ‘cowboy’ when the stylistic variants run from western to modern to rhinestone to preppy to line-dancing Saturday night buckaroo to Black?” he writes.

More on culture

Meta-morphosis: Mark Zuckerberg, once known for wearing the same outfit regularly, has had a makeover .

A former cameraman for Megan Thee Stallion said he was forced to watch her have sex , and has filed a lawsuit against her for harassment, NBC reports.

The celebrity bag designer Nancy Gonzalez was sentenced to 18 months in prison for smuggling handbags made from protected wildlife skins from Colombia.

David Beckham is suing the fitness brand F45 , which is co-owned by Mark Wahlberg, for an alleged breach of a financial agreement.

X introduced a dedicated app for smart TVs . Elon Musk is trying to expand the company’s video ambitions, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

THE MORNING RECOMMENDS …

Bake sweet and spicy chicken thighs with hot honey and lime.

Build a better grocery budget .

Add a sprint to your exercise routine.

Play pickleball with a good paddle .

Work out with earbuds that won’t fall out.

Here is today’s Spelling Bee . Yesterday’s pangram was ambulant .

And here are today’s Mini Crossword , Wordle , Sudoku , Connections and Strands .

Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. — David

Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox . Reach our team at [email protected] .

David Leonhardt runs The Morning , The Times’s flagship daily newsletter. Since joining The Times in 1999, he has been an economics columnist, opinion columnist, head of the Washington bureau and founding editor of the Upshot section, among other roles. More about David Leonhardt