One of the challenges of being the front runner is that everyone is gunning for you. GM learned this the hard way, and Toyota is seeing it, as well.
Most people have a story about their old GM or Ford vehicle with little quality problems that it seemed like the companies didn't want to fix. Meanwhile, Toyota and Honda were perceived as the gold standard, consistently getting deserved recommended ratings from Consumer Reports as well as glowing reviews from owners.
Those word of mouth recommendations are one of the keys that helped make Toyota's brand bulletproof when it comes to quality. But recently, Toyota has been seeing some problems that are vaguely reminiscent of the perceptions of GM, Ford and Chrysler quality as they fell from dominance.
-- In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Camry and ES300 engines were having much publicized (and criticized) sludge problems which left the vehicles useless.
-- Toyota has started recalling Tacoma pick-ups from the same period, for excessive rust on the frames.--The Yaris (Belta in Europe) and Vitz subcompact are recalled for seatbelt and exhaust system defects, affecting 1.35 million vehicles worldwide-- And now, 2006 and 2007 Prius HID headlights are experiencing enough consumer complaints to draw an NHTSA investigation in April.
This last one should be of real concern for Toyota. Toyota is in the midst of a critical launch of its third generation of the Prius. Honda is gunning for the Prius with its new Insight. So far, the Prius looks safe with very strong sales out of the gate, but these kind of little quality problems that get ignored are just the sort of problems that drove GM's reputation in the wrong direction.
Advertising Age quoted Todd Turner, president of consultant CarConcepts, as saying Toyota should issue a service bulletin on the problem which would bring cars in for inspection before problems arise. This would be a good way to head off the problem and keep customers happy without having to issue an actual recall.
With the new Prius PHEV coming down the line soon and with Honda and GM (with the Volt) breathing down their necks, Toyota's management can't afford take a chance with the Prius image right now. The Prius headlight problem isn't yet big enough to set off alarm bells, but if Toyota wants to remain the green auto leader, ignoring minor problems like this starts to look more like a roll of the dice.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Poachers Pushing Rhinos To Extinction: Nature Groups
Poachers seeking horn for traditional medicines are driving once thriving populations of rhinos in Africa and Asia toward extinction, global nature protection groups said Thursday.
In a report issued in Geneva, they said illegal slaughter of the already endangered animals is rising fast, with rates hitting a 15-year high amid stepped-up activities by Asian-based criminal gangs feeding the demand for horn.
"Illegal rhino horn trade to destinations in Asia is driving the killing, with growing evidence of involvement of Vietnamese, Chinese and Thai nationals in the illegal procurement and transport of the horn out of Africa," the report declared.
"Rhinos are in a desperate situation," said Susan Lieberman of the Swiss-based environmental body WWF-International, which issued the report together with the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
The report, presented to a meeting of the United Nations- sponsored CITES agency which works to prevent trade in endangered species, said South Africa and Zimbabwe were seeing a particular surge in poaching.
While between 2000 and 2005 a relatively low total of three rhinos were estimated to have been illegally killed each month in Africa out of a total population of some 18,000, 12 were now being slaughtered monthly in the two countries alone.
In India, 10 of the animals had been slaughtered for horn since January and at least 7 in Nepal, out of a total population for the two countries of just 2,400, the report said.
In many Asian countries, rhino horn has long been regarded as a vital ingredient in folk cures for many illnesses as well as for male sexual impotency, although medical specialists say it has no healing or potency powers.
Trade in any rhino parts is banned under the international CITES treaty, the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
But the WWF's Lieberman said the upsurge marks "the worst rhino poaching for many years" and represents a deadly threat to the animals' survival around the world.
It was time for governments "to crack down on organized criminal elements responsible for this trade, and to vastly increase assistance to (rhino) range countries in their enforcement efforts," she added.
Steve Broad, who heads the TRAFFIC network that works with WWF and IUCN in monitoring wildlife trade, said a lack of law enforcement and a low level of prosecutions of arrested poachers was making the situation worse.
"Increasingly daring attempts by poachers and thieves to obtain the horn is proving to be too much for rhinos, and some populations are seriously declining," he declared.
In a report issued in Geneva, they said illegal slaughter of the already endangered animals is rising fast, with rates hitting a 15-year high amid stepped-up activities by Asian-based criminal gangs feeding the demand for horn.
"Illegal rhino horn trade to destinations in Asia is driving the killing, with growing evidence of involvement of Vietnamese, Chinese and Thai nationals in the illegal procurement and transport of the horn out of Africa," the report declared.
"Rhinos are in a desperate situation," said Susan Lieberman of the Swiss-based environmental body WWF-International, which issued the report together with the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
The report, presented to a meeting of the United Nations- sponsored CITES agency which works to prevent trade in endangered species, said South Africa and Zimbabwe were seeing a particular surge in poaching.
While between 2000 and 2005 a relatively low total of three rhinos were estimated to have been illegally killed each month in Africa out of a total population of some 18,000, 12 were now being slaughtered monthly in the two countries alone.
In India, 10 of the animals had been slaughtered for horn since January and at least 7 in Nepal, out of a total population for the two countries of just 2,400, the report said.
In many Asian countries, rhino horn has long been regarded as a vital ingredient in folk cures for many illnesses as well as for male sexual impotency, although medical specialists say it has no healing or potency powers.
Trade in any rhino parts is banned under the international CITES treaty, the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
But the WWF's Lieberman said the upsurge marks "the worst rhino poaching for many years" and represents a deadly threat to the animals' survival around the world.
It was time for governments "to crack down on organized criminal elements responsible for this trade, and to vastly increase assistance to (rhino) range countries in their enforcement efforts," she added.
Steve Broad, who heads the TRAFFIC network that works with WWF and IUCN in monitoring wildlife trade, said a lack of law enforcement and a low level of prosecutions of arrested poachers was making the situation worse.
"Increasingly daring attempts by poachers and thieves to obtain the horn is proving to be too much for rhinos, and some populations are seriously declining," he declared.
Nature Can't Take Unrestrained Economic Growth: Prince Charles
The quest for unlimited economic growth is unsustainable and could bankrupt the environment through climate change and depleted natural resources, Britain's Prince Charles said Wednesday.
Charles, next-in-line to succeed Queen Elizabeth, said a new economic model must be found because the Earth can no longer support the demands of a growing "consumerist society" where growth is an end in itself.
People must realize they are not "the masters of creation," rather just one part of a fragile natural world, he added.
"Just as our banking sector is struggling with its debts... so Nature's life-support systems are failing to cope with the debts we have built up there too," Charles said at a BBC lecture at St James's Palace in central London.
"If we don't face up to this, then Nature, the biggest bank of all, could go bust.
"That is the challenge we face, it seems to me -- to see Nature's capital and her processes as the very basis of a new form of economics."
Charles, the former husband of the late Princess Diana, has long campaigned on the environment.
His own farm went organic in the 1980s, he publishes details of his estate's annual carbon emissions and has developed a sustainable village in western England called Poundbury.
"Our ability to adapt to the effects of climate change...depends on us adapting our pursuit of unlimited economic growth to that of sustainable growth," he said.
While conceding that industrialization had brought benefits such as better education, prosperity and higher life expectancy, the future king said that progress had come at a price.
Consumption has grown so much in the last 30 years that demands on natural resources now exceed the planet's capacity for renewal by a quarter each year, he added.
By 2050, the world's population will swell to about 9 billion people, from more than 6 billion currently, and a higher proportion will expect Western levels of consumption.
Modern farming methods that use fertilizers and pesticides that have helped feed a growing population have taken a "huge and unsustainable" toll on ecosystems, he added.
"Our current model of progress was not designed of course to create all this destruction," Charles said. "However, given the overwhelming evidence from so many quarters, we have to ask ourselves if it any longer makes sense or whether it is actually fit for purpose."
Economic growth has failed to end poverty, stress, ill health and social tensions, he added. A reformed economy must give more weight to the environment and local communities.
Charles, next-in-line to succeed Queen Elizabeth, said a new economic model must be found because the Earth can no longer support the demands of a growing "consumerist society" where growth is an end in itself.
People must realize they are not "the masters of creation," rather just one part of a fragile natural world, he added.
"Just as our banking sector is struggling with its debts... so Nature's life-support systems are failing to cope with the debts we have built up there too," Charles said at a BBC lecture at St James's Palace in central London.
"If we don't face up to this, then Nature, the biggest bank of all, could go bust.
"That is the challenge we face, it seems to me -- to see Nature's capital and her processes as the very basis of a new form of economics."
Charles, the former husband of the late Princess Diana, has long campaigned on the environment.
His own farm went organic in the 1980s, he publishes details of his estate's annual carbon emissions and has developed a sustainable village in western England called Poundbury.
"Our ability to adapt to the effects of climate change...depends on us adapting our pursuit of unlimited economic growth to that of sustainable growth," he said.
While conceding that industrialization had brought benefits such as better education, prosperity and higher life expectancy, the future king said that progress had come at a price.
Consumption has grown so much in the last 30 years that demands on natural resources now exceed the planet's capacity for renewal by a quarter each year, he added.
By 2050, the world's population will swell to about 9 billion people, from more than 6 billion currently, and a higher proportion will expect Western levels of consumption.
Modern farming methods that use fertilizers and pesticides that have helped feed a growing population have taken a "huge and unsustainable" toll on ecosystems, he added.
"Our current model of progress was not designed of course to create all this destruction," Charles said. "However, given the overwhelming evidence from so many quarters, we have to ask ourselves if it any longer makes sense or whether it is actually fit for purpose."
Economic growth has failed to end poverty, stress, ill health and social tensions, he added. A reformed economy must give more weight to the environment and local communities.
Obama's Drive For Climate Change Bill Hits Delay
As President Barack Obama encouraged world leaders meeting in Italy to intensify the fight against global warming, legislation to cut U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases suffered a delay in the Senate on Thursday.
The leading Senate committee responsible for developing the climate change legislation has delayed by at least a month its crafting of a bill, leaving less time for Congress to fulfill Obama's desire to enact a law this year.
"We'll do it as soon as we get back" in September from a month-long break, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer announced.
Earlier this week, Boxer, a Democrat, said her committee had planned to complete work on a bill by early August.
A White House spokesman, who asked not to be identified, said, "The administration is continuing to work with the Senate to pass comprehensive energy legislation and believes it's on track." He would not discuss timetables, though.
On June 26, the House of Representatives narrowly passed its version of a bill to cut carbon dioxide emissions from 2005 levels by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.
The Senate delay came as Congress was preoccupied with healthcare reform, Obama's top legislative priority, and as senators continued to bicker over how to reduce industrial emissions of carbon dioxide without putting U.S. businesses and consumers at a disadvantage.
At a meeting of the Group of Eight major industrialized nations in L'Aquila, Italy, leaders failed to get China and India to sign onto a goal of cutting emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in half by 2050.
Nonetheless, Obama said "important strides" had been made in agreements to limit global warming. A White House spokesman said the president was confident "there was still time in which they could close the gap" with China and India, two large polluters, before December's talks in Copenhagen on a new U.N. climate change treaty.
LEGISLATION FINISHED BY DECEMBER?
Asked if the delay in her committee hurt chances the Senate will pass a bill this year, Boxer said, "Not a bit ... we'll be in (session) until Christmas, so I'm not worried about it."
But she did not guarantee Congress will be able to finish a bill and deliver it to Obama by December in time for the Copenhagen meeting.
"I want to take this as far as we can take it (before Copenhagen). The more we do the better," Boxer said.
Senator Charles Grassley, the senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, which also has a significant role in developing the climate legislation, was more pessimistic. "I don't even expect it to come up this year" in the Senate, he told reporters.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he wants the full Senate to debate a climate change bill this fall. But since the chamber could be preoccupied at least through October with legislation expanding healthcare to some 46 million uninsured people, the environmental bill may get crowded out.
Even though Democrats control 60 of the 100 seats in the Senate, there are enough moderate Democrats who might not support a climate change bill. So several Republican votes will likely be necessary for passage, according to analysts.
Some senators are trying to use the climate change bill to expand U.S. aid to the nuclear power industry, a move that likely would offend some liberals.
"I've been working with some of my colleagues ... to strengthen the section of the House bill regarding support of nuclear energy as a clean energy source," Senator Joseph Lieberman, an independent, told reporters.
Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin has said he also wants changes to the House-passed bill, which already contained significant breaks for farmers. Four other committees also will review the climate bill.
Asked if he thought the Senate could pass a bill this year, Harkin, with 33 years serving in Congress, said on Wednesday, "My experience here is that these things take a lot of time."
The leading Senate committee responsible for developing the climate change legislation has delayed by at least a month its crafting of a bill, leaving less time for Congress to fulfill Obama's desire to enact a law this year.
"We'll do it as soon as we get back" in September from a month-long break, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer announced.
Earlier this week, Boxer, a Democrat, said her committee had planned to complete work on a bill by early August.
A White House spokesman, who asked not to be identified, said, "The administration is continuing to work with the Senate to pass comprehensive energy legislation and believes it's on track." He would not discuss timetables, though.
On June 26, the House of Representatives narrowly passed its version of a bill to cut carbon dioxide emissions from 2005 levels by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.
The Senate delay came as Congress was preoccupied with healthcare reform, Obama's top legislative priority, and as senators continued to bicker over how to reduce industrial emissions of carbon dioxide without putting U.S. businesses and consumers at a disadvantage.
At a meeting of the Group of Eight major industrialized nations in L'Aquila, Italy, leaders failed to get China and India to sign onto a goal of cutting emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in half by 2050.
Nonetheless, Obama said "important strides" had been made in agreements to limit global warming. A White House spokesman said the president was confident "there was still time in which they could close the gap" with China and India, two large polluters, before December's talks in Copenhagen on a new U.N. climate change treaty.
LEGISLATION FINISHED BY DECEMBER?
Asked if the delay in her committee hurt chances the Senate will pass a bill this year, Boxer said, "Not a bit ... we'll be in (session) until Christmas, so I'm not worried about it."
But she did not guarantee Congress will be able to finish a bill and deliver it to Obama by December in time for the Copenhagen meeting.
"I want to take this as far as we can take it (before Copenhagen). The more we do the better," Boxer said.
Senator Charles Grassley, the senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, which also has a significant role in developing the climate legislation, was more pessimistic. "I don't even expect it to come up this year" in the Senate, he told reporters.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he wants the full Senate to debate a climate change bill this fall. But since the chamber could be preoccupied at least through October with legislation expanding healthcare to some 46 million uninsured people, the environmental bill may get crowded out.
Even though Democrats control 60 of the 100 seats in the Senate, there are enough moderate Democrats who might not support a climate change bill. So several Republican votes will likely be necessary for passage, according to analysts.
Some senators are trying to use the climate change bill to expand U.S. aid to the nuclear power industry, a move that likely would offend some liberals.
"I've been working with some of my colleagues ... to strengthen the section of the House bill regarding support of nuclear energy as a clean energy source," Senator Joseph Lieberman, an independent, told reporters.
Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin has said he also wants changes to the House-passed bill, which already contained significant breaks for farmers. Four other committees also will review the climate bill.
Asked if he thought the Senate could pass a bill this year, Harkin, with 33 years serving in Congress, said on Wednesday, "My experience here is that these things take a lot of time."
Q+A: How Is Italy G8 Summit Measuring Up Against Aims?
The Group of Eight rich nations and the G5 of emerging economies were among 40 nations and organizations represented at a three-day summit to discuss recession, climate change, trade and food security.
Below is a comparison between aims going in to the meeting and the results achieved.
EMISSIONS CUTS
Leaders wanted to narrow differences over cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and funding for low carbon technology in preparation for a meeting in December to agree a new U.N. climate change pact to replace the Kyoto agreement.
But G8 leaders failed to persuade India and China to join a push to cut greenhouse emissions by 50 percent by 2050.
And a G8 deal to reduce its greenhouse gas emission by 80 percent by 2050 was thrown into doubt within hours of being announced. Canada said the goal was 'aspirational' and Russia said it could not meet the target.
United Nation Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said progress on climate change at the G8 was "not enough.
TRADE
This was another area where progress was expected.
The G8, G5, South Korea, Egypt, Australia agreed to complete the long-stalled Doha trade talks in 2010 and set a ministerial meeting before a September G20 summit in the United States. Diplomats said the fact that leaders had given themselves a clear timeline may make the difference on clinching a package whose rough outlines were already set.
AID, FOOD SECURITY
G8 nations were under pressure to ensure they are meeting commitments to boost aid to the developing world, and members discussed the set up of a taskforce to monitor the possibility of a food security fund.
A final draft communique promised $15 billion over three years with the US and Japan contribution making up around $3 billion each.
Japan and the European Union are championing a code of conduct on foreign agricultural investments in poorer countries.
FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC CRISIS
Anyone looking for a clear sense of how G8 nations would unwind stimulus spending would be left puzzled. The leaders of the eight industrialized powers were cautious and said they had to ensure that stimulus worked before tackling the task for making their public finances sustainable in the medium term.
"The situation remains uncertain and significant risks remain to economic and financial stability," the statement issued at the end of the first day on Wednesday said.
With global recovery not yet guaranteed, governments will worry about the bill for heavy stimulus spending once it has succeeded
OIL
French and British talk of the need to regulate energy markets to reduce volatility remained only talk. Russia and Canada both said it would be impossible to administer markets in such a way.
Below is a comparison between aims going in to the meeting and the results achieved.
EMISSIONS CUTS
Leaders wanted to narrow differences over cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and funding for low carbon technology in preparation for a meeting in December to agree a new U.N. climate change pact to replace the Kyoto agreement.
But G8 leaders failed to persuade India and China to join a push to cut greenhouse emissions by 50 percent by 2050.
And a G8 deal to reduce its greenhouse gas emission by 80 percent by 2050 was thrown into doubt within hours of being announced. Canada said the goal was 'aspirational' and Russia said it could not meet the target.
United Nation Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said progress on climate change at the G8 was "not enough.
TRADE
This was another area where progress was expected.
The G8, G5, South Korea, Egypt, Australia agreed to complete the long-stalled Doha trade talks in 2010 and set a ministerial meeting before a September G20 summit in the United States. Diplomats said the fact that leaders had given themselves a clear timeline may make the difference on clinching a package whose rough outlines were already set.
AID, FOOD SECURITY
G8 nations were under pressure to ensure they are meeting commitments to boost aid to the developing world, and members discussed the set up of a taskforce to monitor the possibility of a food security fund.
A final draft communique promised $15 billion over three years with the US and Japan contribution making up around $3 billion each.
Japan and the European Union are championing a code of conduct on foreign agricultural investments in poorer countries.
FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC CRISIS
Anyone looking for a clear sense of how G8 nations would unwind stimulus spending would be left puzzled. The leaders of the eight industrialized powers were cautious and said they had to ensure that stimulus worked before tackling the task for making their public finances sustainable in the medium term.
"The situation remains uncertain and significant risks remain to economic and financial stability," the statement issued at the end of the first day on Wednesday said.
With global recovery not yet guaranteed, governments will worry about the bill for heavy stimulus spending once it has succeeded
OIL
French and British talk of the need to regulate energy markets to reduce volatility remained only talk. Russia and Canada both said it would be impossible to administer markets in such a way.
Obama, Rudd News Conference On Environment
Following are comments at a news conference with U.S. President Barack Obama and Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.
OBAMA
"While we don't expect to solve this problem in one meeting or one summit. I believe we made some important strides forward as we move toward Copenhagen.
"Ice sheets are melting, sea levels are rising, our oceans are becoming more acidic and we have already seen its effects on weather patterns our food and water sources and our habitats.
"Every nation on this planet is at risk and just as no one nation is responsible for climate change, no one nation can address it alone.
"Developing nations have real and understandable concerns about the role they will play in these efforts. They want to make sure that they do not have to sacrifice their aspirations for development and higher living standards. Yet with most of the growth in projected emissions coming from these countries, their active participation is a prerequisite for a solution.
"We also agree that developed countries like my own have a historic responsibility to take the lead. We have a much larger carbon footprint per capita. I know that in the past the United States has sometimes fallen short of meeting our responsibilities. Let me be clear: those days are over.
"One of my highest priorities as president is to drive a clean energy transformation of our economy."
"...As I wrestle with these issues politically in my own country, I see that it is going to be absolutely critical that all of us go beyond what is expected if we are going to achieve our goals ... This week the G8 came to a historic consensus on concrete goals for reducing carbon emissions. We all agreed that by 2050 developed nations will reduce their emissions by 80 percent and that we will work with all nations to cut global emissions in half. This ambitious effort is consistent with limiting global warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius, which ... is what the mainstream of the scientific community has called for."
"....We recognize that climate change is already happening so we are going to have to help those affected countries adapt, particularly those who are least able to deal with its consequences because of a lack of resources, so we are looking at providing significant financial assistance to help these countries."
"We have made a good start but I am the first person to say that progress on this issue will not be easy. One of the things we are going to have to do is fight the temptation toward cynicism. To feel the problem is so immense we cannot make significant strides.
"It is no small task for 17 leaders to bridge their differences on an issue like climate change ... it is even more difficult in the context of a global recession ... but ultimately we have a choice. Either we can shape our future or we can let events shape it for us ... It is clear from our progress today which path is preferable and which path we have chosen.
RUDD
"The practical challenge we face...is what do we do about the problem, the challenge, of coal...There are practically no large carbon capture and storage projects under construction now.
Australia in the last 12 months has decided to work with other major economies, and all the major energy companies, on the establishment of a Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute. That is what we are here launching today."
OBAMA
"While we don't expect to solve this problem in one meeting or one summit. I believe we made some important strides forward as we move toward Copenhagen.
"Ice sheets are melting, sea levels are rising, our oceans are becoming more acidic and we have already seen its effects on weather patterns our food and water sources and our habitats.
"Every nation on this planet is at risk and just as no one nation is responsible for climate change, no one nation can address it alone.
"Developing nations have real and understandable concerns about the role they will play in these efforts. They want to make sure that they do not have to sacrifice their aspirations for development and higher living standards. Yet with most of the growth in projected emissions coming from these countries, their active participation is a prerequisite for a solution.
"We also agree that developed countries like my own have a historic responsibility to take the lead. We have a much larger carbon footprint per capita. I know that in the past the United States has sometimes fallen short of meeting our responsibilities. Let me be clear: those days are over.
"One of my highest priorities as president is to drive a clean energy transformation of our economy."
"...As I wrestle with these issues politically in my own country, I see that it is going to be absolutely critical that all of us go beyond what is expected if we are going to achieve our goals ... This week the G8 came to a historic consensus on concrete goals for reducing carbon emissions. We all agreed that by 2050 developed nations will reduce their emissions by 80 percent and that we will work with all nations to cut global emissions in half. This ambitious effort is consistent with limiting global warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius, which ... is what the mainstream of the scientific community has called for."
"....We recognize that climate change is already happening so we are going to have to help those affected countries adapt, particularly those who are least able to deal with its consequences because of a lack of resources, so we are looking at providing significant financial assistance to help these countries."
"We have made a good start but I am the first person to say that progress on this issue will not be easy. One of the things we are going to have to do is fight the temptation toward cynicism. To feel the problem is so immense we cannot make significant strides.
"It is no small task for 17 leaders to bridge their differences on an issue like climate change ... it is even more difficult in the context of a global recession ... but ultimately we have a choice. Either we can shape our future or we can let events shape it for us ... It is clear from our progress today which path is preferable and which path we have chosen.
RUDD
"The practical challenge we face...is what do we do about the problem, the challenge, of coal...There are practically no large carbon capture and storage projects under construction now.
Australia in the last 12 months has decided to work with other major economies, and all the major energy companies, on the establishment of a Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute. That is what we are here launching today."
G8 Summit To Pledge $15 Billion To Boost Food Supply
Leaders from rich nations at the G8 summit in Italy will commit $15 billion over three years to spur agricultural investment in poorer countries and combat hunger, a final draft statement seen by Reuters said.
The text, to be issued after talks Friday, did not make clear whether it was all new funds, nor did it give details of individual countries' contributions, although the United States, Japan and the European Union (EU) are expected to step in with around $3 billion each.
It also made no mention of a trust fund for the contributions to be managed by the World Bank, a proposal put forward by Washington in previous drafts but opposed by the EU.
"We welcome the commitments made by countries represented at L'Aquila toward a goal of mobilizing at least $15 billion over three years," the statement said.
"We are committed to increase investments in short, medium and long-term agriculture development that directly benefits the poorest and makes best use of international institutions," it added.
It said the combined effect of longstanding underinvestment in agriculture, price volatility and the economic crisis had led to increased poverty and hunger in developing countries.
The United Nations says the number of malnourished people has risen over the past two years and is expected to top 1.02 billion this year, reversing a four-decade trend of declines.
The statement said the G8 summit kept a strong commitment to ensure adequate emergency food assistance, but its focus on agricultural investments reflects a U.S.-led shift toward longer-term strategies to fight hunger.
The United States is the world's largest aid donor of food -- mostly grown domestically and bought from U.S. farmers.
The leaders said their approach would target increased agriculture productivity, stimulus to harvest interventions, emphasis on private sector growth, women and smallholders, preservation of natural resources, job expansion, training and increased trade flows.
The announced $15 billion in funds over three years compares with $13.4 billion which the G8 says it disbursed between January 2008 and July 2009 for global food security.
"The tendency of decreasing ODA (official development assistance) and national financing to agriculture must be reversed," the draft statement said.
G8 summits have a history of making unkept aid promises. In a report last month, anti-poverty group ONE said the world's richest nations collectively were off course in delivering on promises to more than double aid to Africa made at a G8 summit in 2005.
ONE has calculated that sub-Saharan Africa alone needs $25 billion over three years.
"Investment in seeds, fertilizer, roads and other infrastructure is desperately needed," it said Thursday
The text, to be issued after talks Friday, did not make clear whether it was all new funds, nor did it give details of individual countries' contributions, although the United States, Japan and the European Union (EU) are expected to step in with around $3 billion each.
It also made no mention of a trust fund for the contributions to be managed by the World Bank, a proposal put forward by Washington in previous drafts but opposed by the EU.
"We welcome the commitments made by countries represented at L'Aquila toward a goal of mobilizing at least $15 billion over three years," the statement said.
"We are committed to increase investments in short, medium and long-term agriculture development that directly benefits the poorest and makes best use of international institutions," it added.
It said the combined effect of longstanding underinvestment in agriculture, price volatility and the economic crisis had led to increased poverty and hunger in developing countries.
The United Nations says the number of malnourished people has risen over the past two years and is expected to top 1.02 billion this year, reversing a four-decade trend of declines.
The statement said the G8 summit kept a strong commitment to ensure adequate emergency food assistance, but its focus on agricultural investments reflects a U.S.-led shift toward longer-term strategies to fight hunger.
The United States is the world's largest aid donor of food -- mostly grown domestically and bought from U.S. farmers.
The leaders said their approach would target increased agriculture productivity, stimulus to harvest interventions, emphasis on private sector growth, women and smallholders, preservation of natural resources, job expansion, training and increased trade flows.
The announced $15 billion in funds over three years compares with $13.4 billion which the G8 says it disbursed between January 2008 and July 2009 for global food security.
"The tendency of decreasing ODA (official development assistance) and national financing to agriculture must be reversed," the draft statement said.
G8 summits have a history of making unkept aid promises. In a report last month, anti-poverty group ONE said the world's richest nations collectively were off course in delivering on promises to more than double aid to Africa made at a G8 summit in 2005.
ONE has calculated that sub-Saharan Africa alone needs $25 billion over three years.
"Investment in seeds, fertilizer, roads and other infrastructure is desperately needed," it said Thursday
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)