报告:没有一个国家有能力为儿童提供安全的未来

报告:没有一个国家有能力为儿童提供安全的未来

No country in the world is currently positioned to provide a healthy childhood coupled with a healthy environment fit for the future, according to a Unicef-World Health Organization-Lancet Commission Report that was released on February 18, 2020.

根据联合国儿童基金会-世界卫生组织-柳叶刀委员会于2020年2月18日发布的一份报告，目前世界上没有一个国家，能够提供一个健康的童年和一个适合未来的健康环境。

‘Healthy childhood’ has been measured by the ‘flourishing index’ which includes measures for child survival and well-being such as health, education, and nutrition. The healthy environment has been measured by ‘sustainability index’, including a proxy for greenhouse gas emissions.

“健康的童年”是通过“繁荣指数”来衡量的，其中包括儿童生存和健康的指标，如健康、教育和营养。健康的环境是通过“可持续性指数”来衡量的，其中包括一个代表温室气体排放的指数。

If one is to view the picture only in terms of flourishing index, one has to go by the ranks that various countries have been given according to their performance on various indicators of sustainable development goals (SDGs) related to children. The first 33 positions are occupied by high-income countries starting with Norway, South Korea, the Netherlands, France, Ireland, Denmark, Japan, Belgium, Iceland and the UK.

如果我们只从繁荣指数的角度来看待这幅图，那么我们就必须按照各国在儿童相关的可持续发展目标(SDGs)各项指标上的表现来衡量它们的排名。排在前33位的是高收入国家，首先是挪威、韩国、荷兰、法国、爱尔兰、丹麦、日本、比利时、冰岛和英国。

No low-middle-income (LMIC) country figures in the first 50 positions.

前50个职位中没有低收入国家的数据。

However, if one thought that just good development indices for children would ensure a better future, one would be grossly mistaken.

然而，如果有人认为只有良好的儿童发展指数才能确保一个更好的未来，那就大错特错了。

The report, that has been prepared by more than 40 global experts, said that while high income countries may ensure good development indices for their children, they offset it with high greenhouse gas emissions.

这份由40多名全球专家撰写的报告称，尽管高收入国家可能会确保本国儿童获得良好的发展指数，但它们会以高温室气体排放来抵消这一影响。

They rank good in terms of the flourishing index but when it comes to ecological sustainability, which is marked as sustainability index in the report, they rank at the bottom of the pyramid. The vice-versa is true for lower-income countries.

它们在繁荣指数方面排名靠前，但在生态可持续性方面，也就是报告中所称的可持续性指数，它们却排在金字塔的底部。低收入国家的情况则相反。

Sample this. Burundi, a small east African country, which ranks 156th in the flourishing index, ranks first in the sustainability index. The ten best countries other than Burundi to feature in the sustainability index are Chad, Somalia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Repubic, Malawi, Rwanda, Mali, Niger and Madagascar. Other than Rwanda, all these top sustainability index countries rank below 150 in flourishing index.

这个示例。布隆迪，一个东非小国，在繁荣指数中排名第156，在可持续性指数中排名第一。除布隆迪外，乍得、索马里、刚果民主共和国、中非共和国、马拉维、卢旺达、马里、尼日尔和马达加斯加是最适合列入可持续发展指数的10个国家。除了卢旺达，所有这些可持续发展指数排名靠前的国家在繁荣指数中都低于150。

“The ecological damage unleashed today endangers the future of children’s lives on our planet, their only home. As a result, our understanding of progress on child health and well-being must give priority to measures of ecological sustainability and equity to ensure we protect all children, including the most vulnerable,” the report read.

“今天所造成的生态破坏危及儿童在我们星球上的未来生活，这是他们唯一的家园。因此，我们对儿童健康和福祉进展的理解必须优先考虑生态可持续性和公平性的措施，以确保我们保护所有儿童，包括最脆弱的儿童。”报告写道。

The irony can be understood by the following. Norway, South Korea, and the Netherlands rank first, second and third on current child flourishing. But these countries are 156th (Norway), 166th (South Korea), and 160th (the Netherlands) on the global sustainability list. Their per capita carbon emissions are 210 per cent higher than the 2030 targets.

这种讽刺可以从以下几个方面来理解。挪威、韩国和荷兰在当前的儿童繁荣方面分别排在第一、第二和第三位。但在全球可持续发展名单上，这些国家分别排在第156位(挪威)、第166位(韩国)和第160位(荷兰)。它们的人均碳排放量比2030年的目标高出210%。

“Under widely-used business-as-usual scenarios, there is a 93 per cent chance that global warming will exceed four degrees Celsius by 2100. This would have devastating health consequences due to disruption of water and ecosystems, rising ocean levels, inundation of coastal cities and small island nations, increased mortality from heatwaves, proliferation of vector-borne disease, and a crisis of malnutrition because of disruption to food production systems,” the report said.

“如果一切照旧，到2100年全球变暖超过4摄氏度的可能性为93%。”由于水和生态系统的破坏、海平面上升、沿海城市和小岛屿国家被淹没、热浪造成的死亡率上升、病媒传播疾病的扩散以及粮食生产系统的破坏造成的营养不良危机，这将产生毁灭性的健康后果。”报告说。

So, while poor countries need to invest more in improving health and nutrition of children, the disproportionately high carbon emissions by the rich countries make children vulnerable across the globe.

因此，尽管贫穷国家需要在改善儿童健康和营养方面加大投资，但富裕国家不成比例的高碳排放使全球儿童处于弱势。

The only countries on track to beat carbon dioxide 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 and Vietnam.

只有阿尔巴尼亚、亚美尼亚、格林纳达、约旦、摩尔多瓦、斯里兰卡、突尼斯和越南有望在2030年达到人均二氧化碳排放目标，同时在促进儿童发展的措施上表现良好(排在前70名以内)。

It is not just flourishing and carbon emissions coming into play when it comes to tracing a trajectory of children’s future. Another important factor is junk foods and the aggressive marketing to amplify their message.

在追踪儿童未来的轨迹时，不仅仅是繁荣和碳排放在起作用。另一个重要的因素是垃圾食品和积极的推广他们的广告。

While it is a settled principle that addictive or unhealthy commodities, including fast foods, sugar-sweetened beverages, alcohol, and tobacco are major causes of non-communicable diseases among children, ironically, it is children who are at the centre of the aggressive advertisement campaigns of these companies.

虽然上瘾或不健康的商品，包括快餐、含糖饮料、酒精和烟草是儿童非传染性疾病的主要原因，这是一个既定的原则，但具有讽刺意味的是，这些公司的激进广告活动的中心是儿童。

“Children around the world are enormously exposed to advertisements: the average young person in the USA sees 13,000–30,000 advertisements just on television each year,” the report cites an example to drive home the point.

报告引用了一个例子来说明这一点:“世界各地的儿童都大量接触广告:美国年轻人平均每年在电视上看到1.3万至3万个广告。”