Human Rights and Work Environment Protection are two sides of the same coin
How do we define human rights – is it by the standard of dictatorship, democracy, or profit?
It is a historical fact that a poorly treated workforce delivers worse products and services than a well-treated workforce.
Countries with a high level of human happiness also have a very high GDP, which by definition can be equated with a good working environment and respect for human rights.
As a starting point, the effect of an almost unlimited amount of clean 24/7 available freshwater in drinking water quality primarily for irrigation, at a total cost that matches the emptying of natural waterways and water purification, will have the absolute greatest social impact in poor countries, as rich countries can afford to limit the consequences of drought and sea level rise.
An almost unlimited amount of 24/7 available freshwater can ONLY be obtained via desalination of seawater and extensive use of water towers and solar energy.
By definition, this form of global knowledge sharing will require that rich countries must pay full price, and poor countries have a large discount or free access, as long as, e.g., the UN recommends it.
To prevent history from not only repeating itself, e.g., via casual workers without any form of rights, lack of or unsuitable housing, poor or no education, no access to a doctor, etc.
We have chosen to set very strict requirements for the use of the technology WHICH is ONLY sold to governments with forced use of chain responsibility, in order to achieve the highest possible responsibility in each and every country and region.
A business model of this nature can only be implemented by putting profit focus on standby. This paves the way for a global non-profit water fund.
Non-profit ownership and management cannot be equated with respect for human rights and the working environment, this requires consistent monitoring by experts and lawyers.
Hence our choice of a sister fund financed with 10% of the water fund's initial financing and the future income from the sale of production licenses.
There is NO precedent for a private company to set the above requirements for the use of groundbreaking technology!
The next article 09.063, which will be published on December 25, 2024, describes the ambivalent behavior that rich countries exhibit towards the consequences of Global Warming for poor countries.
Make a real diff – Think!
European Commission Ursula von der Leyen European Investment Bank (EIB) Nadia Calviño European Central Bank Christine Lagarde The World Bank International Monetary Fund Kristalina Georgieva African Development Bank Group United Nations African Union ECOWAS Commission ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development (EBID) Dr. Omar A Touray NATO EIT Food WWF Jeff Opperman CNN John Vause Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change & the Environment ASU Water Institute Upmanu Lall Gravercentret – The Danish Centre for Investigative Journalism Danwatch Rådet for Grøn Omstilling Bjarke Møller Oxfam International Greenpeace International Fridays For Future International ActionAid Zambia World Meteorological Organization Celeste Saulo Karoline Andaur Changemaker Agnes Callamard