DOCSLIB.ORG

183 Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
183 Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua And Session: 73rd session of General Assembly Committee: Plenary Meeting date: Wed 05 Dec 2018 Vote time: 12:27:10 PM Meeting: 45th plenary meeting Agenda item: 107 Agenda: Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Document: A/73/516 Additional document info: Draft resolution as a whole In favour: 183 Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: 1 Democratic People's Republic of Korea Abstaining: 4 India, Mauritius, Syrian Arab Republic, United States of America Absent: Chad, Kiribati, Nauru, Somalia, South Sudan Session: 73rd session of General Assembly Committee: Plenary Meeting date: Wed 05 Dec 2018 Vote time: 12:25:07 PM Meeting: 45th plenary meeting Agenda item: 107 Agenda: Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Document: A/73/516 Additional document info: Draft resolution PP4 In favour: 167 Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: 0 Abstaining: 11 Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Mauritius, Nicaragua, Syrian Arab Republic, United States of America Absent: Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Dominica, Gabon, Grenada, Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Tonga Session: 73rd session of General Assembly Committee: Plenary Meeting date: Wed 05 Dec 2018 Vote time: 12:26:06 PM Meeting: 45th plenary meeting Agenda item: 107 Agenda: Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Document: A/73/516 Additional document info: Draft resolution PP7 In favour: 172 Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: 0 Abstaining: 7 Egypt, India, Israel, Mauritius, Pakistan, Syrian Arab Republic, United States of America Absent: Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Dominica, Gabon, Grenada, Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Somalia, South Sudan, Tonga .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Immediate and Long-Term Effects of Namibia's Colonization Process
    The Immediate and Long-Term Effects of Namibia’s Colonization Process By: Jonathan Baker Honors Capstone Through Professor Taylor Politics of Sub-Saharan Africa Baker, 2 Table of Contents I. Authors Note II. Introduction III. Pre-Colonization IV. Colonization by Germany V. Colonization by South Africa VI. The Struggle for Independence VII. The Decolonization Process VIII. Political Changes- A Reaction to Colonization IX. Immediate Economic Changes Brought on by Independence X. Long Term Political Effects (of Colonization) XI. Long Term Cultural Effects XII. Long Term Economic Effects XIII. Prospects for the Future XIV. Conclusion XV. Bibliography XVI. Appendices Baker, 3 I. Author’s Note I learned such a great deal from this entire honors capstone project, that all the knowledge I have acquired can hardly be covered by what I wrote in these 50 pages. I learned so much more that I was not able to share both about Namibia and myself. I can now claim that I am knowledgeable about nearly all areas of Namibian history and life. I certainly am no expert, but after all of this research I can certainly consider myself reliable. I have never had such an extensive knowledge before of one academic area as a result of a school project. I also learned a lot about myself through this project. I learned how I can motivate myself to work, and I learned how I perform when I have to organize such a long and complicated paper, just to name a couple of things. The strange inability to be able to include everything I learned from doing this project is the reason for some of the more random appendices at the end, as I have a passion for both numbers and trivia.
    [Show full text]
  • Mozambique Zambia South Africa Zimbabwe Tanzania
    UNITED NATIONS MOZAMBIQUE Geospatial 30°E 35°E 40°E L a k UNITED REPUBLIC OF 10°S e 10°S Chinsali M a l a w TANZANIA Palma i Mocimboa da Praia R ovuma Mueda ^! Lua Mecula pu la ZAMBIA L a Quissanga k e NIASSA N Metangula y CABO DELGADO a Chiconono DEM. REP. OF s a Ancuabe Pemba THE CONGO Lichinga Montepuez Marrupa Chipata MALAWI Maúa Lilongwe Namuno Namapa a ^! gw n Mandimba Memba a io u Vila úr L L Mecubúri Nacala Kabwe Gamito Cuamba Vila Ribáué MecontaMonapo Mossuril Fingoè FurancungoCoutinho ^! Nampula 15°S Vila ^! 15°S Lago de NAMPULA TETE Junqueiro ^! Lusaka ZumboCahora Bassa Murrupula Mogincual K Nametil o afu ezi Namarrói Erego e b Mágoè Tete GiléL am i Z Moatize Milange g Angoche Lugela o Z n l a h m a bez e i ZAMBEZIA Vila n azoe Changara da Moma n M a Lake Chemba Morrumbala Maganja Bindura Guro h Kariba Pebane C Namacurra e Chinhoyi Harare Vila Quelimane u ^! Fontes iq Marondera Mopeia Marromeu b am Inhaminga Velha oz P M úngu Chinde Be ni n è SOFALA t of ManicaChimoio o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o gh ZIMBABWE o Bi Mutare Sussundenga Dondo Gweru Masvingo Beira I NDI A N Bulawayo Chibabava 20°S 20°S Espungabera Nova OCE A N Mambone Gwanda MANICA e Sav Inhassôro Vilanculos Chicualacuala Mabote Mapai INHAMBANE Lim Massinga p o p GAZA o Morrumbene Homoíne Massingir Panda ^! National capital SOUTH Inhambane Administrative capital Polokwane Guijá Inharrime Town, village o Chibuto Major airport Magude MaciaManjacazeQuissico International boundary AFRICA Administrative boundary MAPUTO Xai-Xai 25°S Nelspruit Main road 25°S Moamba Manhiça Railway Pretoria MatolaMaputo ^! ^! 0 100 200km Mbabane^!Namaacha Boane 0 50 100mi !\ Bela Johannesburg Lobamba Vista ESWATINI Map No.
    [Show full text]
  • (SSA) Countries IDA19 Fourth Replenishment Meeting, December 12-13, 2019, Stockholm, Sweden
    African Countries are Awakening Hope for a Better Tomorrow with IDA Statement by Representatives of 49 Sub-Saharan African (SSA) Countries IDA19 Fourth Replenishment Meeting, December 12-13, 2019, Stockholm, Sweden 1. IDA countries have only 10 years to achieve the globally agreed targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Given that it takes 9 years for pledges under any IDA cycle to be fully paid up, IDA19 is therefore, the last replenishment to help finance the SDGs in the time left to 2030. 2. Africa as a continent is making progress towards the SDGs. Growth in many economies has outpaced global benchmarks. More children are in school and health service coverage is expanding. A continent-wide free-trade agreement shows regional cooperation is alive and deepening, including in building roads and power lines that bring countries together and make markets bigger. The support of donors to the 18th replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA18) has been pivotal and has underpinned the partnership between African countries and the World Bank Group (WBG) that has never been stronger. Indeed, Africa’s absorptive capacity to carefully use concessional funds has ensured that the pace of commitment for IDA18 has been record-breaking. 3. We want to acknowledge the strong partnership between IDA and most of our countries. We commend all donors for the important role that IDA has been playing in the transformation agenda of most SSA countries. We are happy with the negotiated IDA19 package and the continuation of all the special themes of IDA18, the Private Sector Window, and the improvements to the various facilities especially under Fragility, Conflict and Violence (FCV).
    [Show full text]
  • USAID Power Africa Toolbox
    202957 - Results Based Financing for Low Carbon Energy Access (Africa) Category: Finance Sub-Category: Grant Funding User: Private Sector Donor: Department for International Development (DFID) Donor Countries: United Kingdom Description: This programme - implemented by the Energising Development (EnDev) partnership, managed by GIZ and RVO – employs a Results Based Financing (RBF) approach to overcome identified market failures that are constraining private sector investment in low carbon energy access (electricity and cooking) in developing countries. This programme targets a range of benefits, including economic growth (through the creation of enterprises and jobs for men and women), reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and improvements in health as a result of clean cooking methods (particularly for women and young children). The programme has expanded considerably in scope since its initial design, and now implements 17 projects as opposed to the 10 originally planned. This means that the portfolio of RBF approaches has the potential to gather an even broader range of lessons than had first been anticipated. Already the approach taken in this programme is influencing the wider energy access community. Location: Sub Saharan Africa On- or Off-Grid: Off-Grid Geography: Global Eligibility: Not Specified Contact information: p-mann@dfid.gov.uk Isabel van de Sand: I-Vandesand@dfid.gov.uk For more information: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/result-based-financing-for-low-carbon-energy-access- Last updated: February 16, 2018 September 27, 2021 Page 1 of 216 Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) Category: Capacity Building Sub-Category: Technical Assistance User: Open to All Donor: United States Department of Energy (DOE) Donor Countries: United States of America Description: The Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) advances high-potential, high-impact energy technologies that are too early for private-sector investment.
    [Show full text]
  • East and Central Africa 19
    Most countries have based their long-term planning (‘vision’) documents on harnessing science, technology and innovation to development. Kevin Urama, Mammo Muchie and Remy Twingiyimana A schoolboy studies at home using a book illuminated by a single electric LED lightbulb in July 2015. Customers pay for the solar panel that powers their LED lighting through regular instalments to M-Kopa, a Nairobi-based provider of solar-lighting systems. Payment is made using a mobile-phone money-transfer service. Photo: © Waldo Swiegers/Bloomberg via Getty Images 498 East and Central Africa 19 . East and Central Africa Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo (Republic of), Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Kenya, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Uganda Kevin Urama, Mammo Muchie and Remy Twiringiyimana Chapter 19 INTRODUCTION which invest in these technologies to take a growing share of the global oil market. This highlights the need for oil-producing Mixed economic fortunes African countries to invest in science and technology (S&T) to Most of the 16 East and Central African countries covered maintain their own competitiveness in the global market. in the present chapter are classified by the World Bank as being low-income economies. The exceptions are Half the region is ‘fragile and conflict-affected’ Cameroon, the Republic of Congo, Djibouti and the newest Other development challenges for the region include civil strife, member, South Sudan, which joined its three neighbours religious militancy and the persistence of killer diseases such in the lower middle-income category after being promoted as malaria and HIV, which sorely tax national health systems from low-income status in 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Service Workforce in the Middle East and North Africa Region
    Multi-Country Review of the State of the SOCIAL SERVICE WORKFORCE in the Middle East and North Africa Region September 2019 The material in this report has been commissioned by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) regional office for the Middle East and North Africa. UNICEF accepts no responsibility for errors. The designations in this work do not imply an opinion on the legal status of any country or territory, or of its authorities, or the delimitation of frontiers. Permission to copy, disseminate or otherwise use information from this publication is granted so long as appropriate acknowledgement is given. Suggested citation is: United Nations Children’s Fund and Global Social Service Workforce Alliance and Maestral International. (2019). Multi- Country Review of the State of the Social Service Workforce in the Middle East and North Africa Region. Amman, Jordan: UNICEF. A social service worker helps a girl draw at an early education community centre in Djibouti. ©UNICEF/Djibouti/Shehzad Noorani 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS ...........................................................................4 GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS ...............................................................5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. .7 Purpose of the SSW review in the MENA region ............................................8 Methodology and key actors involved .....................................................8 Summary of findings ..................................................................9 Key recommendations for SSW strengthening in the MENA region
    [Show full text]
  • 3. the Achievements of AGOA
    3. the achievementS oF AGOA ten years of Growth increase and accounted for 91.6 percent of AGOA exports in 2011 (figure 3 and 4). The AGOA share When AGOA is looked at in its entirety, the value of of total U.S. imports, an amount totaling $2.19 products coming into the U.S. has shown relatively trillion in 2011, although still relatively small as strong growth. Exports from AGOA beneficiaries an aggregate number, grew from 0.7 percent to 2.5 were $53.8 billion in 2011. This represents a 21.5 percent during this 10-year period.11 In addition, percent increase in AGOA exports from 2010 and during the last 10 years, on average more than 70 a more than 500 percent increase from the initial percent of Sub-Saharan Africa’s exports to the U.S. $8.15 billion in AGOA exports in 2001 as shown have been duty free under AGOA or GSP. in figure 2. Mineral fuels and crude oil drove this Figure 2. exportS From AGOA BeneFiciarieS: totaL exportS and AGOA and gSp eLigiBLe, 2001-2011 90 80 70 60 Total Exports from 50 AGOA Beneficiaries Billions 40 AGOA + GSP Exports 30 20 10 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 11 These data were compiled from the U.S. International Trade Commission Tariff and Trade’s DataWeb. The data at this Web site are compiled us- ing tariff and trade data from the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission. Unless otherwise noted, import data are categorized as U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Caribbean Food Crops Society
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE CARIBBEAN FOOD CROPS SOCIETY EIGHTH ANNUAL MEETING SANTO DOMINGO DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 197 0 VOLUME VIII 29 THE EVALUATION OF TOMATO VARIETIES IN THE LEEWARD ISLANDS: A PROGRESS REPORT St. C. M. Forde Leeward Islands Agronomist University of the West Indies St. John's Antigua INTRODUCTION In the Leeward Islands the production of tomatoes is largely in the hands of peasant farmers who make use of commercially available varieties. The crop is established during the period September- November and matures in December-March which coincides with the dry season and also the period, of lowest mean minimum temperatures (70- 72°F). Even at the peak of production, local market demands in Antigua and St. Kitts are not satisfied, but production levels in Montserrat allow for some export of produce to the New York as well as other Caribbean markets. The main problems associated with the industry are the evalua tion of commercially available varieties according to time of plan- ting, and extending production into the dry season by the introduc- tion of irrigation. At the University of the West Indies research in tomato breeding is aimed at developing varieties for increased yield under dry season conditions and high yielding varieties that will set fruit at night temperatures above 72° for wet season production. However there is a pressing need in the Leeward Islands to examine the performance of the commercial varieties available in the area, especially in relation to time of planting. It is against this background that this work was undertaken. MATERIALS AND METHODS Five 6x5 randomised complete block trials were carried out in Antigua, Montserrat and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Operation Update Report Southern Africa: Drought (Food Insecurity)
    Operation Update Report Southern Africa: Drought (Food Insecurity) Emergency appeal n°: MDR63003 GLIDE n°: __ Operation update n° 3: 15 February 2021 Timeframe covered by this update: September 2020 – December 2020 Operation start date: 11 December 2019 Operation timeframe and end date: 17 months, 31 May 2021 Funding requirements: CHF 7.4 million DREF amount initially allocated: CHF 768,800 N° of people targeted: Botswana: 7,750 - Eswatini: 25,000 - Lesotho: 23,000 - Namibia: 18,000 Total: 73,750 people (14,750 households) Red Cross Red Crescent Movement partners currently actively involved in the operation: American Red Cross, British Red Cross; Canadian Red Cross; Finnish Red Cross; Netherlands Red Cross; Spanish Red Cross; Swedish Red Cross Other partner organizations actively involved in the operation: Governments of Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho and Namibia; Government of Japan. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), United States Agency for International Development (USAID); World Food Programme (WFP); Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO); GIZ; and UNICEF. <Please click here for the budget and here for the contacts> Summary: This operation update reflects the current situation and information available since the last operation update published in September 2020. The operation timeframe will be extended by one month to end on 31 May 2021 to allow for a final evaluation to be completed. Simultaneously, as needs persist and the funding gap in 2020 allowed to reach less than half of the targeted people in many places, extending the operation further beyond May is being discussed. Following discussions with the National Societies and estimates of needs and possible activities, a new operation update may be published to extend the timeframe or the Emergency Appeal may be revised should a change of activities be foreseen.
    [Show full text]
  • Mozambique-And-Malawi-Regional
    FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: PAD3035 Public Disclosure Authorized INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT ON A PROPOSED IDA GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 30.6 MILLION (US$42.0 MILLION EQUIVALENT) AND A PROPOSED GRANT Public Disclosure Authorized IN THE AMOUNT OF US$24.0 MILLION EQUIVALENT FROM THE NORWAY’S SUPPORT TO THE REGIONAL POWER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS IN SOUTHERN AFRICA SINGLE DONOR TRUST FUND TO THE REPUBLIC OF MOZAMBIQUE AND A PROPOSED IDA CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 11.0 MILLION (US$15.0 MILLION EQUIVALENT) Public Disclosure Authorized TO THE REPUBLIC OF MALAWI FOR THE MOZAMBIQUE - MALAWI REGIONAL INTERCONNECTOR PROJECT August 26, 2019 Energy and Extractives Global Practice Africa Region Public Disclosure Authorized This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective {July 31, 2019}) New Mozambican Metical (MZN) and Currency Unit = Malawian Kwacha (MWK) US$1 = MZN 61.3499 US$1 MWK 744.9788 US$1 = SDR 0.72705065 FISCAL YEAR Government of the Republic of Mozambique: January 1 - December 31 Government of the Republic of Malawi: July 1 – June 30 Regional Vice President: Hafez M. H. Ghanem Regional Integration Director: Deborah L. Wetzel Country Directors: Mark R. Lundell, Bella Bird Senior Global Practice Director: Riccardo Puliti Practice Manager: Sudeshna Ghosh Banerjee Task Team Leaders: Dhruva Sahai, Zayra
    [Show full text]
  • African Dialects
    African Dialects • Adangme (Ghana ) • Afrikaans (Southern Africa ) • Akan: Asante (Ashanti) dialect (Ghana ) • Akan: Fante dialect (Ghana ) • Akan: Twi (Akwapem) dialect (Ghana ) • Amharic (Amarigna; Amarinya) (Ethiopia ) • Awing (Cameroon ) • Bakuba (Busoong, Kuba, Bushong) (Congo ) • Bambara (Mali; Senegal; Burkina ) • Bamoun (Cameroons ) • Bargu (Bariba) (Benin; Nigeria; Togo ) • Bassa (Gbasa) (Liberia ) • ici-Bemba (Wemba) (Congo; Zambia ) • Berba (Benin ) • Bihari: Mauritian Bhojpuri dialect - Latin Script (Mauritius ) • Bobo (Bwamou) (Burkina ) • Bulu (Boulou) (Cameroons ) • Chirpon-Lete-Anum (Cherepong; Guan) (Ghana ) • Ciokwe (Chokwe) (Angola; Congo ) • Creole, Indian Ocean: Mauritian dialect (Mauritius ) • Creole, Indian Ocean: Seychelles dialect (Kreol) (Seychelles ) • Dagbani (Dagbane; Dagomba) (Ghana; Togo ) • Diola (Jola) (Upper West Africa ) • Diola (Jola): Fogny (Jóola Fóoñi) dialect (The Gambia; Guinea; Senegal ) • Duala (Douala) (Cameroons ) • Dyula (Jula) (Burkina ) • Efik (Nigeria ) • Ekoi: Ejagham dialect (Cameroons; Nigeria ) • Ewe (Benin; Ghana; Togo ) • Ewe: Ge (Mina) dialect (Benin; Togo ) • Ewe: Watyi (Ouatchi, Waci) dialect (Benin; Togo ) • Ewondo (Cameroons ) • Fang (Equitorial Guinea ) • Fõ (Fon; Dahoméen) (Benin ) • Frafra (Ghana ) • Ful (Fula; Fulani; Fulfulde; Peul; Toucouleur) (West Africa ) • Ful: Torado dialect (Senegal ) • Gã: Accra dialect (Ghana; Togo ) • Gambai (Ngambai; Ngambaye) (Chad ) • olu-Ganda (Luganda) (Uganda ) • Gbaya (Baya) (Central African Republic; Cameroons; Congo ) • Gben (Ben) (Togo
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 09 30 USG Southern Africa Fact Sheet #3
    Fact Sheet #3 Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 Southern Africa – Regional Disasters SEPTEMBER 30, 2020 SITUATION AT A GLANCE 10.5 765,000 5.4 1.7 320,000 MILLION MILLION MILLION Estimated Food- Estimated Confirmed Estimated Food-Insecure Estimated Severely Estimated Number Insecure Population in COVID-19 Cases in Population in Rural Food-Insecure of IDPs in Southern Africa Southern Africa Zimbabwe Population in Malawi Cabo Delgado IPC – Sept. 2020 WHO – Sept. 30, 2020 ZimVAC – Sept. 2020 IPC – Sept. 2020 WFP – Sept. 2020 Increasing prevalence of droughts, flooding, and other climatic shocks has decreased food production in Southern Africa, extending the agricultural lean season and exacerbating existing humanitarian needs. The COVID-19 pandemic and related containment measures have worsened food insecurity and disrupted livelihoods for urban and rural households. USG partners delivered life-saving food, health, nutrition, protection, shelter, and WASH assistance to vulnerable populations in eight Southern African countries during FY 2020. TOTAL U.S. GOVERNMENT HUMANITARIAN FUNDING USAID/BHA1,2 $202,836,889 For the Southern Africa Response in FY 2020 State/PRM3 $19,681,453 For complete funding breakdown with partners, see detailed chart on page 6 Total $222,518,3424 1USAID’s Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (USAID/BHA) 2 Total USAID/BHA funding includes non-food humanitarian assistance from the former Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) and emergency food assistance from the former Office of Food for Peace (USAID/FFP). 3 U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (State/PRM) 4 This total includes approximately $30,914,447 in supplemental funding through USAID/BHA and State/PRM for COVID-19 preparedness and response activities.
    [Show full text]