India ranked 77th on a sustainability index that takes into account per capita carbon emissions and ability of children in a nation to live healthy lives and secures 131st spot on a flourishing ranking that measures the best chance at survival and well-being for children, according to a UN-backed report.
The report was released on Wednesday by a commission of over 40 child and adolescent health experts from around the world. It was commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO), UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) and The Lancet medical journal.
In the report assessing the capacity of 180 countries to ensure that their youngsters can survive and thrive, India ranks 77th on the Sustainability Index and 131 on the Flourishing Index, it said.
Flourishing is the geometric mean of Surviving and Thriving. For Surviving, the authors selected maternal survival, survival in children younger than 5 years old, suicide, access to maternal and child health services, basic hygiene and sanitation, and lack of extreme poverty.
For Thriving, the domains were educational achievement, growth and nutrition, reproductive freedom, and protection from violence.
Under the Sustainability Index, the authors noted that promoting today's national conditions for children to survive and thrive must not come at the cost of eroding future global conditions for children's ability to flourish.
The Sustainability Index ranks countries on excess carbon emissions compared with the 2030 target. This provides a convenient and available proxy for a country's contribution to sustainability in future.
The report noted that under realistic assumptions about possible trajectories towards sustainable greenhouse gas emissions, models predict that global carbon emissions need to be reduced from 39·7 giga tonnes to 22·8 gigatonnes per year by 2030 to maintain even a 66 per cent chance of keeping global warming below 1·5°C.
It said that the world's survival depended on children being able to flourish, but no country is doing enough to give them a sustainable future.
"No country in the world is currently providing the conditions we need to support every child to grow up and have a healthy future," said Anthony Costello, Professor of Global Health and Sustainability at University College London, one of the lead authors of the report.
"Especially, they're under immediate threat from climate change and from commercial marketing, which has grown hugely in the last decade," said Costello – former WHO Director of Mother, Child and Adolescent health.
Norway leads the table for survival, health, education and nutrition rates - followed by South Korea and the Netherlands. Central African Republic, Chad and Somalia come at the bottom.
However, when taking into account per capita CO2 emissions, these top countries trail behind, with Norway 156th, the Republic of Korea 166th and the Netherlands 160th.
Each of the three emits 210 per cent more CO2 per capita than their 2030 target, the data shows, while the US, Australia, and Saudi Arabia are among the 10 worst emitters. The lowest emitters are Burundi, Chad and Somalia.
According to the report, the only countries on track to beat CO2 emission per capita targets by 2030, while also performing fairly – within the top 70 – on child flourishing measures are: Albania, Armenia, Grenada, Jordan, Moldova, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Uruguay and Vietnam.
"More than 2 billion people live in countries where development is hampered by humanitarian crises, conflicts, and natural disasters, problems increasingly linked with climate change," said Minister Awa Coll-Seck from Senegal, Co-Chair of the commission.
The report also highlights the distinct threat posed to children from harmful marketing.
Evidence suggests that children in some countries see as many as 30,000 advertisements on television alone in a single year, while youth exposure to vaping (e-cigarettes) advertisements increased by more than 250 per cent in the US over two years, reaching more than 24 million young people.
Studies in Australia, Canada, Mexico, New Zealand and the US – among many others – have shown that self-regulation has not hampered commercial ability to advertise to children.
Children's exposure to commercial marketing of junk food and sugary beverages is associated with purchase of unhealthy foods and overweight and obesity, linking predatory marketing to the alarming rise in childhood obesity, it said.
The number of obese children and adolescents increased from 11 million in 1975 to 124 million in 2016 – an 11-fold increase, with dire individual and societal costs, the report said.
To protect children, the authors call for a new global movement driven by and for children.
Specific recommendations include stopping CO2 emissions with the utmost urgency, to ensure children have a future on this planet; placing children and adolescents at the centre of global efforts to achieve sustainable development, the report said.
New policies and investment in all sectors to work towards child health and rights; incorporating children's voices into policy decisions and tightening national regulation of harmful commercial marketing, supported by a new Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, it said.
“Why should you snatch away the poor's meal?” asked Bhimrao Dhonde, who represents Beed's Ashti, during a discussion on the state's agrarian crisis.
Comments
It is better for government to impose ban on beef as it is not at all good for health.....Moton is a good meat and healthy...
Without distributing the Ambani wealth to poor you cant impose ban on anything. Poor people are suffering because of rich Fadnavi who has easy access to all sort of food. I'm used to mutton now. Even if you allow me to eat beef i wont.
There intention is not to snatch snatch away the meat of export from their leaders.
Beef ban increased beef export. Hence, my guess, the farmers must be selling cows to the exporters. It is very clear that the present administration is anti poor. Election in the corner will woke him up now.
dear avish, the loan burden and no food make the people to sucide. Do you say that the life of cow is more important than the human being? he can sell the cow if he want he can save his parents and family. If not all them should be opt for sucide. So parents sake and family sake he is ready to sell the other things which is not necessary at that moment. But people like you who think that more educated ( not being a human) think another way. It will be understandable only when your are in same situation
Dear Kumel are you educated? how the cow becomes your mother. Please check your DNA. We have never seen even in any holy books that the human being is born by Cow.
Another prime example for dirty politics from BJP since Assembly electioons are on the corner, please do not react or comment
Mr kumel,Who you are to feed 17 cr people. Who is parasitic?.mind your language.
Any action in this regard to be implemented immediately before beef eater communities are used to alternative diet, most of them now used to mutton and chicken, After that if we want sell we will never find anyone to buy it.
I think we have to ask all farmers to bring all their spent cattles to Mr. Kumel Chang house. He will look after these mother cows.
I guess he'd be willing to let go of his parents and family as and when they become nonproductive. What a loser!
So parents are cattle? People like you will use any analogy to stick to your stand. Don't impose your ideas on the rural folks. They know exactly what they are doing and what to do with their life, diet, animals, crops etc. India is a non vegetarian country. Get used to it
If we can feed 17 crore parasitic population of jihadis, surely we can feed the holy mother cow
Very well said, I came from an agricultural family too and they have similar practice. I remember Bangalore in the 80's and the menace of cows roaming on the road. Then the IT boom happened and \ban\" we dont see them anymore and they are now sold as beef."
Add new comment