Nigeria agriculture, food security and dietary intake have not been exempted from the disruptions in countless sectors around the world due to the outbreak of COVID-19. The country first experienced the outbreak on February 27, 2020, and the experience since then has shown negative effects not only on the socioeconomic conditions but also on agriculture, food security and dietary intake. Long term in-depth analysis of the effects of this pandemic on food security and dietary intake using quantitative data is still (...) very difficult due to paucity of data and the great level of the improbability of the trajectory of the spread of the Virus. This study is a rapid assessment of the short and long-term potential effects of the disease. It relied on a review of situation reports especially by the Nigeria Centre of Disease Control and other reports around the world on COVID-19, personal observations, and public opinion via mobile telephone survey of Lagos and Oyo States, Nigeria. Findings show that food demand and supply shocks caused by COVID-19 outbreak affect agriculture, food and dietary intake negatively through COVID-19 policies. It leads to a reduction in household income coupled with hike in food prices. Owing to the Nigeria’s crude farming practice, there was a scarcity of hired labour required for production process during 2020 farming season. This implies a high likelihood of low output and further surge in food prices in the future. Food access was also compromised with the accumulation of unsold fresh produce by the smallholder farmers and the low salary earners during movement restrictions and of loss income as a result of international border closure. Food and dietary intake is affected as people are shifting diets to more affordable and low quality foods, while food stability is not guaranteed due to market insecurity, prompting an extraordinary level of indecision. The study concludes that the shock of COVID-19 is not only a demand management problem but a multidimensional crisis requiring monetary, fiscal, and health policy responses with global collaboration and cooperation. (shrink)

The failure of the UN Security Council to adequately and effectively address the Syrian crisis has brought renewed scrutiny to the veto and its capricious use during mass atrocity situations. In response to these concerns, the idea of a code of conduct to regulate the exercise of the veto during humanitarian situations is now being increasingly advanced by several states, including France and the United Kingdom. This paper disputes the utility of such a code and argues that it would not (...) make any significant difference to the way mass atrocity crimes are addressed. I examine three core arguments often extended to justify the merit and the utility of the norm: the circumvention argument, the naming and shaming argument, and the Charter reform argument. I show how each of these arguments is undermined by mistaken notions about the norm's procedural effectiveness, and the role the veto plays in cases of what Simon Chesterman calls “inhumanitarian noninterventions.” Additionally, drawing on interviews conducted with diplomats at the United Nations in New York, I present evidence that resistance to a code of conduct comes not only from the permanent five members of the Council but also from the nonpermanent members, further imperiling the idea's capacity to effect change. Ultimately, I contend that the current global effort to curtail the influence of the veto is nothing more than a journey down the rabbit hole: exciting, but ultimately distracting. (shrink)