Latest news with #PewCharitableTrusts
Yahoo
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Officials ban controversial deep-sea activity in protected waters: 'A strong signal of commitment to future generations'
The waters surrounding a small South Pacific nation have been ruled to be off-limits from deep-sea mining for at least the next 50 years. As RFI reported, lawmakers in New Caledonia have passed a moratorium that bans commercial exploration, prospecting, and mining of mineral resources within the country's exclusive economic zone. The area spreads across over 500,000 square miles (1.3 million square kilometers), granting New Caledonia the right to protect the development of marine resources. Jérémie Katidjo Monnier, a New Caledonia government member, offered up an explanation of the legislation's significance. "Rather than giving in to the logic of immediate profit, New Caledonia can choose to be a pioneer in ocean protection," Katidjo Monnier said. "It is also a strategic lever to assert our environmental sovereignty in the face of multinationals and a strong signal of commitment to future generations," Katidjo Monnier added. New Caledonia is home to one of the largest barrier reefs on Earth, recognized as one of the world's most diverse and extensive coral reef systems. The lagoons and reefs support over 400 coral species, 1,700 fish species, and a vast array of other marine life, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts. They have become so vital to the ecosystem that six of the marine clusters have even been designated UNESCO World Heritage sites. Coral reefs are an important natural resource to humans and nearby wildlife. Coral reefs protect coastlines from storms and erosion, offer the potential for jobs for local communities and their economy, and provide a diverse range of marine habitats for various species. Coral reefs are also essential for certain organisms used in pharmaceutical developments. In April 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order signaling America's "economic interest in maintaining leadership in deep-sea science and technology and seabed mineral resources." The order encourages deep-sea mining for mineral-rich nodules. Should we be harnessing the ocean to power our homes? Absolutely Leave it be It depends I'm not sure Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. However, Olivier Poivre d'Arvor, France's maritime ambassador, rebuked the plans made by Trump. "No one can claim the right to destroy the oceans, especially those over which they have no territorial rights," Poivre d'Arvor said in a press briefing, shared by France24. "This is the strict application of international law. The deep sea is not for sale." Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Axios
14-05-2025
- Business
- Axios
Even Utah — mostly-self-sufficient — relies on federal funds
Utah is one of the least federally-reliant states in the nation — yet more than a quarter of its revenue comes from D.C., per a recent analysis. Why it matters: The Trump administration and congressional Republicans are looking for ways to cut federal spending, and some states may be more vulnerable than others to major decreases. By the numbers: As of 2022, federal funding accounted for more than 29% of Utah's revenue, according to a Pew Charitable Trusts analysis of the latest available census data. Zoom out: Most states get an even bigger share of tax funding from federal sources. It accounts for more than half of revenue in Louisiana and Alaska and nearly 50% in Arizona. The intrigue: Utah is one of the few red states that isn't heavily reliant on federal funds. Of the four states that get a smaller share of their revenue from D.C., only oil-rich North Dakota went for Trump in November. Catch up quick: Utah, Wyoming and Nevada are the only three states that send more money to federal government coffers than they receive and also supported Trump. 13 states total give more to the feds than they get. Context: The federal share of a state's overall revenue can fluctuate from year-to-year depending on overall federal spending levels, state tax collections and more. States have been getting more federal funding than usual in the past few years due to COVID-19 and infrastructure spending. Stunning stat: Total federal grants exceeded $1 trillion in 2022 for the first time, per Pew. The big picture: Big losses in federal dollars can leave states scrambling for alternate funding for federally-supported programs and projects, or can cause states to cancel them entirely. Case in point: FEMA is cutting $325 million in grants largely meant for flood mitigation in New York.
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Want to save America? Don't have kids with Trump's $5,000 baby bonus
Have you heard of the 'pronatalist movement?' It's a fancy name for what we used to call 'guilt tripping,' aimed at urging young people to have more babies. Pronatalists say the nation is facing a population decline that will collapse American society as we know it. Sorta reminds me of when my mother used to pressure me about having kids to 'carry on the family name.' ('You know, son, your sister has two, but they're not 'Moores.'') Listen, I'm sure the 'make more people' people have a point, but as a 40-something, divorced father of four young kids, I can say with absolute certainty to anyone considering whether to have children: Don't do it unless you're absolutely certain. The numbers suggest that's exactly what's happening. The U.S. birth rate has been declining for about a decade, except for a 1% increase during the pandemic. (Go figure.) There were only 3.6 million births in 2023, according to the most recent federal data. The general fertility rate was slightly more than 54 births per 1,000 females between the ages of 15 and 44, a record low. Birth rates were down in nearly all categories: teens, women in their early 20s, women between the ages of 20 and 39. The decline has been especially sharp in Arizona, where the birth rate was down a whopping 31% from 2001-2010 averages, according to Pew Charitable Trusts. Economists and demographers predict the steadily declining numbers will cause all sorts of problems, including workforce shortages and reduced tax revenue for local and state budgets. Plus, an aging population will strain doctors and hospitals without younger people to help provide care. Clearly, the pronatalists have a point. But what's good for society isn't always ideal for an individual. And take it from me, once you have a kid, you're no longer an individual. Your time isn't your own. Your money isn't your own. Your schedule isn't your own. And, if you're a woman, your body isn't your own. American society is gonna do what it does, and it's not your responsibility to save it. (And if you think it is, I know a couple of therapists who can treat a messiah complex.) And your family legacy might be important, but Grandma isn't going to raise your kids. (She might not even babysit.) Remember that as Donald Trump's advisers are calling for $5,000 checks for women who give birth. That's nice, but $5,000 wouldn't cover formula and diapers, let alone the cost of a crib, a car seat, baby clothes, all those special lotions, doctor visits or preschool. (It could maybe pay for one of those gender reveal parties where expecting parents get covered in pink or blue powder. But we won't worry about what happens if one of those kids decides to switch genders in high school.) Elon Musk is perhaps the most prominent pronatalist. And if he's the president of the movement, he's also a client, so to speak. Musk practices what he preaches as a father of 14 kids by four different women. My four kids, for whatever it's worth, all have the same mother. Not that I'm judging anyone else's family structure, but you can imagine my shock as a Black man that conservatives are taking advice about family planning from Musk, an African immigrant with a bunch of kids by a bunch of women. Bottom line, having a kid today isn't the same as it was in previous generations. Conversations about racism, sexism and gender issues are vastly more complex. Public schools are crumbling, and the charter school bureaucracy practically requires a degree in paperwork. And did I mention how much everything costs? I could easily spend $5,000 on basketball camps for my sons or twice that much on dance lessons for my daughters. Opinion: Help! I'm a single dad trying to survive a 2-week spring break All that, and I still haven't bought a protractor or a compass, nor have we talked about putting money away for college. It should go without saying, but these factors only apply if you actually want to be a good parent. If you're just out here making kids that you don't intend to take care of, that's another conversation. Please don't take this as a criticism of Musk or anyone else with a large family. By all means, have all the kids you can afford. But don't grow a family because the government or Elon or your mom told you to. Raising children changes you in every way you can imagine and many that you can't. It's not easy. It's not always fun. And sometimes, you just want to hide in the bathroom until everyone turns 18. And if this doesn't sound like something you want any parts of, I don't blame you. I wouldn't trade being a father for anything, but I'm not advising anyone to rush into parenthood, either. Don't do it unless you're certain. Reach Moore at gmoore@ or 602-444-2236. Follow him on X, formerly Twitter, @SayingMoore. Like this column? Get more opinions in your email inbox by signing up for our free opinions newsletter, which publishes Monday through Friday. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Elon Musk is wrong. Not everyone needs to have kids | Opinion
Japan Today
30-04-2025
- General
- Japan Today
On the horizon? Wave of momentum for high seas treaty
The 2025 United Nations (UN) Oceans Conference, seen here with Secretary General Antonio Guterres delivering a speech at the 2022 edition, serves as a nexus for ratifying a 2023 High Seas pact by member nations By Amélie BOTTOLLIER-DEPOIS A treaty to protect the high seas will not come to life by the time the U.N. Oceans Conference opens in June, but persistence by member states has nudged the landmark pact towards enactment. Adopted in June 2023 after years of exhausting negotiations, the pact aims to protect marine habitats vital to humanity but threatened by pollution in vast waters beyond any national jurisdiction. It now has 113 signatories, but just 21 have ratified it. After the past two weeks of United Nations meetings in New York -- with the conspicuous absence of the United States -- negotiators came "one step closer to shaping the institutional backbone" of the agreement, said Nichola Clark of the Pew Charitable Trusts after the first preparatory commission for the treaty's entry into force. However, as the treaty can only take effect 120 days after the 60th ratification, there is no chance of its enactment happening before the U.N. Oceans Conference gathers in Nice, France on June 9-13. Experts now hope the 60-ratification threshold can be reached by June so the treaty can still take effect this year. The Nice summit will feature dozens of heads of state and will be preceded by a conference bringing together 2,000 scientists from around 100 countries. A special ceremony in Nice on June 9 will serve as "a unique opportunity to reaffirm our collective political commitment" to the treaty's implementation, French delegation head Sandrine Barbier said. In a sign of growing enthusiasm, the opening preparatory commission moved more quickly than expected through discussions on multiple issues, including formulation of a system to exchange information between the parties. There was "a lot of love in the room" for the treaty during the preparatory meetings, High Seas Alliance director Rebecca Hubbard told AFP, describing the text as "one of our best opportunities to deliver action to protect the ocean." And beyond the technical elements, said Pew's Clark, "there's been some exciting progress and movement" on the issue of marine protected areas that are emblematic of the treaty. Overall enthusiasm was dampened however by the absence of the United States -- which had signed on to the treaty under Joe Biden's administration but did not ratify it -- and a shock announcement by Donald Trump on a major, controversial issue for the oceans: deep-sea mining. On April 24, the US president opened the door to commercial extraction of rare earth minerals from the ocean floor, including in international waters, bypassing the jurisdiction of the International Seabed Authority, of which Washington is not a member. Trump's executive order "is an insult to multilateralism and a slap in the face to all the countries and millions of people around the world who oppose this dangerous industry," said Arlo Hemphill, project lead on Greenpeace USA's campaign to stop deep-sea mining. "This is a clear sign that the U.S. will no longer be a global leader on protecting the oceans, which support all life on this planet." Governments worldwide have put forward a goal to protect 30 percent of the world's land and ocean by 2030. © 2025 AFP
Int'l Business Times
26-04-2025
- Politics
- Int'l Business Times
On The Horizon? Wave Of Momentum For High Seas Treaty
A treaty to protect the high seas will not come to life by the time the UN Oceans Conference opens in June, but persistence by member states has nudged the landmark pact towards enactment. Adopted in June 2023 after years of exhausting negotiations, the pact aims to protect marine habitats vital to humanity but threatened by pollution in vast waters beyond any national jurisdiction. It now has 113 signatories, but just 21 have ratified it. After the past two weeks of United Nations meetings in New York -- with the conspicuous absence of the United States -- negotiators came "one step closer to shaping the institutional backbone" of the agreement, said Nichola Clark of the Pew Charitable Trusts after the first preparatory commission for the treaty's entry into force. However, as the treaty can only take effect 120 days after the 60th ratification, there is no chance of its enactment happening before the UN Oceans Conference gathers in Nice, France on June 9-13. Experts now hope the 60-ratification threshold can be reached by June so the treaty can still take effect this year. The Nice summit will feature dozens of heads of state and will be preceded by a conference bringing together 2,000 scientists from around 100 countries. A special ceremony in Nice on June 9 will serve as "a unique opportunity to reaffirm our collective political commitment" to the treaty's implementation, French delegation head Sandrine Barbier said. In a sign of growing enthusiasm, the opening preparatory commission moved more quickly than expected through discussions on multiple issues, including formulation of a system to exchange information between the parties. There was "a lot of love in the room" for the treaty during the preparatory meetings, High Seas Alliance director Rebecca Hubbard told AFP, describing the text as "one of our best opportunities to deliver action to protect the ocean." And beyond the technical elements, said Pew's Clark, "there's been some exciting progress and movement" on the issue of marine protected areas that are emblematic of the treaty. Overall enthusiasm was dampened however by the absence of the United States -- which had signed on to the treaty under Joe Biden's administration but did not ratify it -- and a shock announcement by Donald Trump on a major, controversial issue for the oceans: deep-sea mining. On Thursday, the US president opened the door to commercial extraction of rare earth minerals from the ocean floor, including in international waters, bypassing the jurisdiction of the International Seabed Authority, of which Washington is not a member. Trump's executive order "is an insult to multilateralism and a slap in the face to all the countries and millions of people around the world who oppose this dangerous industry," said Arlo Hemphill, project lead on Greenpeace USA's campaign to stop deep-sea mining. "This is a clear sign that the US will no longer be a global leader on protecting the oceans, which support all life on this planet." Governments worldwide have put forward a goal to protect 30 percent of the world's land and ocean by 2030.
