BUSINESS & ECONOMY

COP-26 Results: High Hopes for Low Temperatures

Published

3 years ago

December 2, 2021

Editor

COP-26 Results: High Hopes for Low Temperatures

Spread the love

The 26^th Conference of the Parties (COP-26) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was held in Glasgow from October 31 to November 13, 2021 with delegations from almost 200 countries participating. The strategic goal of the Summit was to sum up the results achieved during six years since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015. Combating deforestation, phasing down of coal and increasing financial support for developing countries are among the successes of COP-26 however it revealed certain disagreements.

Conference of strategic importance

At the opening ceremony of COP-26, Chairman Alok Sharma stated that the decisions made in Glasgow should be more vigorous than those of Paris. In Scotland’s largest city, the parties to the UNFCCC, after several unsuccessful attempts made in previous years, were again trying to hammer out the rules for implementing the Paris Agreement. In addition, the participants were discussing plans for adaptation to the consequences of climate change that can no longer be prevented. The agenda was really demanding.

Ambitious agenda but unfavorable background

There were four issues on the COP-26 agenda. Countries should: 1) submit programs on carbon emissions reduction to net zero by the middle of this century; 2) propose programs to restore affected ecosystems; 3) mobilize finance to achieve all the climate goals; 4) agree on a procedure for reporting on the implementation of the Paris Agreement.

However, a breakthrough was unlikely even before the Summit began. The G-20 meeting that had taken place the day before cast serious doubt on a multilateral climate agreement between the world ’s largest economies. The meeting in Rome resulted in the 20 states failing to reach an agreement on reducing the deadline for achieving zero emissions and abandoning coal-fired power. Although the G-20 states upheld the goal of limiting the temperature rise, some countries avoided making firm commitments on how to keep its growth beyond the threshold of to 1.5^°C.

Forest conservation: a step forward

Over 100 world leaders agreed on a declaration on stopping deforestation. The key point of the document was the joint work on stopping and reversing “the loss of forests and land degradation by 2030”. The states plan to increase investments in agriculture, in the conservation and restoration of forests, as well as in support of indigenous communities who are struggling due to deforestation.

This is one of the most significant achievements of COP-26 as among the signatories to the agreement was Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, whom environmentalists recently accused in the International Court of Justice for crimes against humanity over the deforestation of the Amazon region.

Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin in a video address to the forum on the protection of forests expressed confidence that the Glasgow Declaration “will undoubtedly serve the goals of the Paris Agreement on reducing carbon dioxide emissions”. He added that Russia, in an effort to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060, relies, among other tools, on the unique resource of its trees, since about 20% of all forests of the world are located in Russia.

Abandoning coal: modest progress

Another meaningful issue on the COP-26 agenda was the abandonment of coal, and certain results were achieved as well. Firstly, major international banks pledged to stop financing coal-fired power plants by the end of 2021. Secondly, 40 countries made a commitment to gradually abandon coal-fired energy – developed countries by 2030, developing by 2040.

At the same time, the Financial Times characterizes the wording of the declaration as vague as it does not set the exact deadline. The document states that the countries should abandon coal by a certain date or as soon as possible after its expiration. In addition, the main users of coal energy – China, India, the US, Australia, Russia have not signed the declaration.

Alexey Kokorin, head of the WWF Russia Climate and Energy Program called the declaration a “conditional agreement”. The countries-signatories allocate certain financial resources to developing states so that they can abandon coal. If Russia had signed the agreement, it would have become a voluntary donor, not a recipient of climate finance.

At the same time, Jamie Peters from the environmental organization Friends of the Earth maintained that the key meaning of this “unimpressive agreement” was that everyone was allowed to continue using coal for many years to come.

Reducing emissions: methane on the agenda for the first time

Back in April 2021 during the virtual Climate Summit Russian President Vladimir Putin designated the reduction of methane as one of the main directions in combating global warming. During COP-26 the leaders held an event dedicated to the methane emissions reductions for the first time in many years. The US and the EU put forward a joint initiative on reducing methane emissions by 30% by 2030 which was supported by 105 countries.

China, Russia and India, three out of top five states in methane emissions, did not join the agreement. However, the initiative was supported by Brazil, the country which Climate Watch Data includes in the list of leading methane emitters.

The rationale for Russia not to join the initiative of the Western powers may be economy. In the countries that willingly sign up to the agreement, the share of the oil-and-gas sector is significantly lower than in Russia. According to Igor Makarov, head of the HSE Climate Change Economics Research and Training Laboratory, in Russia methane emissions are linked to both natural gas production and transportation. So, it is challenging for the country to take on such commitments right now.

According to Alexey Kokorin, there is no point in joining this initiative either ideologically (there is no China and India in it) or technically (it is necessary to deal with mine methane, leaks in gas and oil fields, which is more expensive than energy efficiency, energy conservation and forest fire control).

Russia’s position was also shared by some countries from the Anglo-Saxon world. For instance, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison spoke out against a concrete deadline for phasing out coal and pointed out that accelerating the reduction of methane emissions by 2030 will result in high costs for farmers engaged in dairy farming and animal husbandry.

Carbon neutrality: commitments without breakthroughs

Among the main topics at COP-26 was carbon neutrality. Even though many leaders spoke of it the goals set vary both in deadlines and in feasibility. Chinese leader Xi Jinping announced that the PRC would strive to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060. The Prime Minister of India promised to reduce emissions to zero by 2070, setting a zero target for the country for the first time. Environmentalists called the Indian president’s goals “ambitious”, but the Nature magazine noted that it was probably only about CO2, with other greenhouse gases being out of the plan.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, addressing the summit virtually, maintained that carbon neutrality in Russia should be achieved by 2060. The international representative of Greenpeace characterized the goal as not ambitious enough.

Meaning of the final Glasgow Agreement

The stumbling block during the negotiations on the COP-26 final statement was Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. It envisages specific mechanisms for international the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. This is why the states had to prolong the summit till November 13. Additionally, this very article prevented consensus on the text of COP-25 held in December 2019 in Madrid, which resulted in a failure. COPs are far from punctuality. Out of 26 summits, only seven ended on time (on Friday) 14 ended on Saturday and five were held till Sunday.

The final agreement, published late in the evening on November 13, disappointed many parties. The wording of certain points was softened. For instance, instead of “phasing out” coal and other fossil fuels, the participants made an eleventh-hour decision to use “phasing down”. India, the third largest emitter, insisted on this change. Meanwhile, Special Representative of the President of Russia on climate Ruslan Edelgeriev stated that Russia welcomed the result. Nevertheless, the COP-26 final document has certain breakthroughs:

It calls on the countries to strengthen national commitments and by 2022 renew Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to achieve zero emissions and curb global warming within 1,5^°C.The first measure will be combined with an annual political roundtable to consider global progress report and a top-level summit in 2023.The document contains a pledge to increase financial assistance to poor and developing countries to combat climate change.

The participants of COP-26 touched upon the issue of the global green transition based on four principles: energy efficiency, decarbonization, decentralization and digitalization. Many important statements have been made during COP-26. The countries have promised to achieve carbon neutrality by the middle of the century, significantly reduce the extraction and use of fossil fuels, completely stop the processes of deforestation, allocate considerable funds for the green transition. However, COP-26 also has its disappointments: ambitions of many countries remained weak, mistrust between developed and developing countries increased, and the real reduction of emissions was partially replaced by compensations.

Although the declaration was signed by almost 200 delegations, every point of it sparks disagreement. The Glasgow Agreement will not replace the Paris Agreement. It acts as a rulebook on the implementation of the 2015 Paris commitments. It defines more concrete actions in financing measures to combat climate change, mitigating its consequences and adapting to the ongoing climate changes.

What awaits us in the future?

Climate Action Tracker has published a report that shows that the risks of rising temperatures in the world are even higher. Even with the current goals of emissions reduction, by 2100 the temperature in the world could rise by 2.4 degrees. It means that the strategies announced at COP-26 would not meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.

Today, the world can only effect the green transition by a gradual replacement of technologies. It is obvious that electricity has been and will remain the main energy source for humanity. But the question is: how to accumulate it more efficiently and more environmentally friendly in the new realities? Hydrogen is recognized as a viable option. At the same time, the issues of green transition and carbon emissions reduction are over politicized and often do not take into account regional peculiarities of the countries. For now, the easiest step to make is to continue focusing on energy conservation and energy efficiency.

Afterwards, it is necessary to reconsider the attitude to the types of energy generation and modernize them according to the environmental agenda. It is important to use technologies that meet economic needs and cause minimal harm to the environment. It means that Russia should rely on three main areas during the energy transition: nuclear power, hydrogen, and natural gas generation.

From our partner RIAC

Related

Source

Spread the love

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Trump’s Tariff Tsunami: A Global Economic Earthquake with Far-Reaching Implications

Published

3 days ago

April 15, 2025

Editor

Spread the love

Baba Yunus Muhammad

Washington, D.C. – Long before his 2024 re-election campaign, Donald J. Trump had been an unrelenting advocate for protectionist trade policies. His views on tariffs, long cast as a pillar of his economic nationalism, have now crystallized into a sweeping policy agenda with the potential to reshape the global economic order. Last Wednesday, President Trump took to the White House lawn, brandishing an oversized chart, to announce the most aggressive tariff regime in modern U.S. history—a unilateral 10% blanket tariff on virtually all imported goods, complemented by so-called “reciprocal” tariffs targeting countries he accuses of exploiting the United States.

The move has not just rattled America’s trading partners, it has sent shockwaves through the entire global economy. Financial markets plunged, manufacturing sectors braced for retaliation, and policymakers around the world scrambled to assess the fallout. But what lies behind this bold—and, some argue, reckless—push for economic decoupling? And what does it mean for the Islamic world and emerging markets?

Economic Nationalism Reborn

Trump’s tariff blitz is the fullest expression yet of his “America First” economic philosophy—an ideological throwback to a 1950s-era America that dominated global manufacturing in the wake of World War II. According to economic historian Dr. Alan Scott, this nostalgia is at the heart of Trump’s thinking. “The U.S. was uniquely advantaged during that period—Europe and Japan were devastated, and America had a virtual monopoly on industrial output,” he says. “That era cannot be recreated.”

Nonetheless, Trump’s rhetoric is anchored in the belief that aggressive tariffs will resuscitate America’s industrial base, revitalize blue-collar employment, and address the inequalities wrought by decades of globalization. Whether those goals are achievable—or even realistic—is highly contested.

The Global Repercussions: Allies and Adversaries in the Crosshairs

The effects of the new tariffs are global in scope. China, the U.S.’s main strategic rival, faces an unprecedented 54% total levy on its exports to the United States. Beijing has already vowed retaliatory action. Traditional allies have not fared much better: the European Union is now subject to a 20% tariff; the United Kingdom, 10%; and Japan, despite pledging $1 trillion in U.S. investments, is hit with a 24% tariff.

Notably, Canada and Mexico have been spared—at least temporarily—though they too have been locked in past trade disputes with the Trump administration. For the Islamic world and Global South, the stakes are even higher. Several of the world’s poorest and most trade-dependent countries have been targeted with tariffs as high as 50%. These include Cambodia, Laos, Madagascar, Vietnam, Myanmar—and critically, Muslim-majority nations such as Pakistan and Indonesia are watching with deep concern, given their heavy reliance on U.S. markets for textiles, apparel, and electronics.

A Blow to the Global South

Among the most worrying elements of the policy is its potential impact on least-developed and low-income countries. Nations like Lesotho and Cambodia—already reeling from reduced U.S. development assistance—now face steep tariffs on their exports. For smaller Islamic economies trying to escape the middle-income trap or build industrial bases, this could be economically devastating.

“Tariffs of this magnitude will not just curb growth, they could collapse entire industries,” warns Dr. Aisha Rahman, an economist with the Islamic Development Bank. “Many of these countries have benefited from preferential trade terms. Now, they risk being crowded out of global markets just when they are beginning to integrate.”

There is also the risk that products originally intended for the U.S. market could be dumped in Europe, Africa, and Southeast Asia, creating new competitive pressures for local businesses.

Inflation, Uncertainty, and the U.S. Backlash

Domestically, the response has been fraught with anxiety. Wall Street has registered its displeasure with sharp declines: the Nasdaq dropped 6%, the S&P 500 fell 4.8%, and the Dow slid 3.9%. The U.S. dollar weakened, oil prices plummeted, and the bond market reflected growing fears of a recession.

Analysts warn of rising inflation and unemployment. A study by the Wall Street Journal projects that if the tariffs remain, inflation could spike to 4.4% by year-end, with unemployment hitting 5.5%. This economic strain would disproportionately impact low-income households—precisely those whom Trump claims to champion.

Even within Trump’s own party, unease is growing. While Vice President JD Vance dismissed the market reaction as overblown, some Republican lawmakers are beginning to break ranks, concerned that the long-term economic costs will outweigh any short-term political gains.

Can the Islamic World Respond Strategically?

For Muslim-majority countries—particularly those striving to expand manufacturing and export-led growth—Trump’s new trade regime presents both a challenge and an opportunity. On one hand, increased U.S. protectionism may shut the door on critical export markets. On the other, it could accelerate South-South trade partnerships, regional economic blocs, and Islamic finance-led industrial investment.

Dr. Omar El-Zein, trade advisor to the OIC, argues that “the Islamic world must now pursue intra-OIC trade more seriously than ever before. If the West turns inward, we must turn to one another.”

Indeed, in an era where multilateralism is being tested and global supply chains are being restructured, there is a chance to forge new trade alignments rooted in mutual benefit, Islamic economic values, and strategic autonomy.

Conclusion: Between Ideology and Impact

President Trump’s tariffs are not merely a set of economic instruments—they are a declaration of ideological war on the globalized economic consensus. While they may serve a symbolic political purpose in the U.S., their real-world impact will be felt far beyond its borders—in factories in Bangladesh, in textile mills in Egypt, and in rice fields in Indonesia.

The Islamic world, already grappling with structural development challenges, must now brace for a more hostile and unpredictable global trading environment. Whether it chooses to respond with disunity or collective resolve may well define its economic future.

Baba Yunus Muhammad is President, Africa Islamic Economic Forum, Ghana

Spread the love

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

How Africa’s Largest Economy Lost 50% of Its GDP

Published

1 week ago

April 11, 2025

Editor

Spread the love

Hafiz M. Ahmed

In 2014, Nigeria stood atop Africa’s economic podium, its GDP recalibrated to $510 billion, a figure that cemented its status as the continent’s largest economy. Oil wealth, a burgeoning tech scene, and a population of 220 million fuelled ambitions of global ascendancy. Yet, a decade later, that triumph has unravelled: GDP has halved to $253 billion by 2024, a stark testament to structural frailties and external blows. Inflation has surged to 33.95%, poverty ensnares 46% of the populace, and youth unemployment festers at 40%. This is no mere statistical blip—it is a crisis demanding urgent reckoning. But Nigeria’s story need not end in decline. Beneath the rubble lies a nation poised for resurgence, armed with vast resources, a dynamic workforce, and nascent reforms. The path to recovery is arduous yet attainable. Here, we dissect the collapse and chart a credible blueprint for Nigeria to reclaim its mantle as Africa’s economic powerhouse.

The descent began with oil, the artery of Nigeria’s economy. From 2000 to 2014, annual GDP growth averaged 7%, peaking at $568 billion, propelled by crude prices that topped $115 per barrel. Oil constituted 90% of exports and 70% of government revenue, per the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). But the 2014 price crash to $50 per barrel exposed a fatal dependency. By 2023, production slumped to 1.28 million barrels per day (mbpd)—below the OPEC quota of 1.5 mbpd—haemorrhaging $10 billion annually to theft, according to the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). Foreign exchange reserves dwindled from $38 billion in 2019 to $33 billion in 2023, per the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), as oil receipts faltered. This overreliance has left Nigeria vulnerable, yet it also signals an overdue pivot to diversification.

Structural deficiencies run deep. Agriculture, employing 45% of Nigerians, contributes just 25% to GDP, its productivity stymied—maize yields average 1.8 tons per hectare against a global norm of 5 tons, per the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Manufacturing, now 9% of GDP in 2023, down from 9.5% in 2015, is throttled by electricity shortages costing businesses $29 billion yearly, per the World Bank. Nigeria generates a paltry 4,000 megawatts for 220 million people, compared to South Africa’s 58,000 MW for 60 million. Import reliance—$2.13 billion spent on wheat, rice, and sugar in 2023, per the African Development Bank (AfDB)—drains reserves, a vulnerability magnified by a 40% wheat price surge following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. These are not insurmountable flaws; they are clarion calls for reform.

Monetary policy missteps exacerbated the malaise. The CBN’s artificial naira peg at 305 to the dollar until 2023 depleted reserves and spawned a parallel market where rates hit 1,600 by 2024. Post-devaluation, the currency lost 70% of its value, per IMF estimates, driving inflation to 33.95% in May 2024—food inflation reached 40%, per the NBS. A 50kg bag of rice, a staple, soared from ₦25,000 in 2022 to ₦80,000 in 2024, punishing households where 46% live below $1.90 daily, per the World Bank. Public debt escalated to 46% of GDP in 2023, with 89% of budgeted deficits financed through borrowing, per PwC’s 2024 analysis. This fiscal strain is severe, but it is not irreparable—policy agility can stem the tide.

Corruption and insecurity have exacted a punishing toll. Oil theft, at 400,000 barrels daily in 2022, costs $10 billion annually, while Nigeria languishes at 145 out of 180 on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index. Customs inefficiencies at Apapa Port siphon $4 billion yearly, per the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). In the northeast, Boko Haram’s insurgency has inflicted $100 billion in economic losses since 2009, per estimates, slashing agricultural output by 20%. Banditry and separatist unrest further erode stability. External shocks—COVID-19’s 6.1% GDP contraction in Q2 2020, per the IMF, and Ukraine-driven fuel price hikes (petrol to ₦671 per litre in 2023, per the AfDB)—have compounded the damage. Yet, these challenges, while daunting, are not destiny.

The GDP’s 50% plunge is partly a statistical artefact. The 2014 rebasing inflated it by 89%, but naira devaluation reversed dollar-based gains. In purchasing power parity (PPP), Nigeria’s economy stood at $1.2 trillion in 2023, per the IMF, among Africa’s top three. Still, the human cost is stark: 63% of Nigerians—133 million—face multidimensional poverty, per the NBS, with 10.5 million children out of school, the world’s highest. Youth unemployment, at 40% in 2023, drives the “Japa” exodus—5,000 doctors emigrated in 2022, per the Nigerian Medical Association. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs), comprising 96% of businesses and 84% of jobs, per The Business Year 2024, access just 5% of bank loans. These figures are sobering, but they underscore a latent capacity yearning for activation.

Nigeria’s fundamentals remain compelling. Its tech sector—epitomised by Flutterwave and Paystack—secured $1.8 billion in venture capital in 2023, per TechCabal, with annual growth of 30% since 2020. Agriculture spans 70 million arable hectares, a resource base that slashed rice imports by 40% since 2015, per the AfDB. The Dangote Refinery, operational since 2024 with 650,000 barrels daily, promises $5 billion in annual forex savings. A population projected to reach 428 million by 2050, per UN estimates, offers an unrivalled market. Nigeria’s economic reset hinges on harnessing these strengths through decisive, pragmatic measures. Below are the critical steps to restore and elevate this giant.

Diversification must be the cornerstone. Agriculture, with targeted investment, could generate $100 billion annually. Mechanisation—raising tractor density from 1 per 100 farmers to 10, as in Kenya, per the FAO—could double yields within five years. Nigeria’s 60% share of global cassava production, currently worth $1.5 billion, could reach $5 billion with processing plants, per UNCTAD projections. Leveraging the $2 trillion global halal market, where demand grows 6% annually, per the Halal Trade Expo, is a natural fit—northern Nigeria’s 100 million Muslims could supply certified meat to the Gulf, mirroring Malaysia’s $12 billion halal export success. A $500 million fund for irrigation and agro-industrial zones, coupled with 10-year tax holidays, could catalyse this shift, emulating Ghana’s Planting for Food initiative, which tripled rice output since 2017.

Energy reform is non-negotiable. Nigeria’s $29 billion annual power deficit demands a 10,000 MW boost by 2030—solar farms in the sun-drenched north, harnessing 300 days of sunlight, could deliver half, drawing on Kenya’s $1 billion renewable model that electrified 70% of rural areas. Private investment, as demonstrated by Dangote’s $19 billion refinery, could bridge the $190 billion energy gap, per UNCTAD estimates, if paired with grid upgrades slashing 40% transmission losses, per the World Bank. Reliable power would revive manufacturing, lifting its GDP share to 15% within a decade and unlocking export potential under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

Corruption requires surgical intervention. Digitising oil flows, as Norway does with real-time tracking, could recover $10 billion yearly, per NNPC data. E-governance—online tax and procurement platforms—could save $2 billion in leakages, per EFCC projections, while a robust anti-graft framework with independent audits and whistleblower protections rebuilds credibility. Foreign direct investment, which fell 33% to $3.3 billion in 2023, per UNCTAD, would rebound as opacity fades.

SMEs, the economy’s backbone, need oxygen. A $1 billion loan guarantee scheme, akin to South Africa’s SME Fund that created 30,000 jobs since 2019, could unlock $10 billion in credit, addressing the 5% lending gap. Vocational training for 1 million entrepreneurs annually—mirroring Rwanda’s 7% youth unemployment drop—enhances competitiveness. Linking SMEs to AfCFTA’s $3.4 trillion market via export hubs could elevate intra-African trade from 16% to 30%, per AfDB targets.

Human capital is the linchpin. Raising education spending to 15% of the budget—$10 billion—could build 10,000 schools, per UNESCO benchmarks, halving the 10.5 million out-of-school figure. Technical institutes, like Ghana’s, could train 500,000 youths yearly, cutting unemployment by 5%. Healthcare demands $1 billion for 1,000 mobile clinics, reaching 20 million rural residents and staunching medical brain drain—India’s model reduced infant mortality 30%. A skilled, healthy workforce is Nigeria’s competitive edge.

Infrastructure must match ambition. A $15 billion overhaul—bolstered by the AfDB’s $1.44 billion 2024 commitment—could halve logistics costs, currently $1 billion yearly. Rail links, like Ethiopia’s $4 billion Addis-Djibouti line, and port digitisation, as at Morocco’s Tanger Med, would expedite trade, positioning Nigeria as an AfCFTA hub. The naira’s flotation and $10 billion subsidy savings, per PwC, are steps forward; execution must be relentless.

Nigeria’s 50% GDP drop is a jolt, not a death knell. Its $1 trillion nominal GDP potential by 2050, per PwC, is within reach if these measures take root. Investors should note: a market of 220 million, with tech growing 30% annually, offers outsized returns despite risks. Policymakers must act—133 million in poverty brook no delay. Nigeria can lead Africa anew, its resilience forged in adversity. The question is not if, but how swiftly, it seizes this moment.

Spread the love

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

What is the Role of Bosnia in Strengthening Halal Supply Chains in Europe?

Published

4 weeks ago

March 20, 2025

Editor

Spread the love

Hafiz M. Ahmed

Imagine walking into a supermarket in Paris, Berlin, or London, scanning the shelves for halal-certified products. You pick up a pack of chicken, a bottle of olive oil, and a box of cookies, all bearing the halal logo. But have you ever wondered how these products made it to the shelf? Behind every halal-certified item lies a complex supply chain that ensures its authenticity, safety, and compliance with Islamic principles. In Europe, where the demand for halal products is growing rapidly, building a reliable and transparent halal supply chain is no small feat. Enter Bosnia and Herzegovina, a country that has emerged as a key player in strengthening halal supply chains across the continent.

With its deep-rooted Islamic heritage, cutting-edge certification processes, and collaborative approach, Bosnia is setting a new standard for halal integrity in Europe. This article explores Bosnia’s pivotal role in creating a robust halal supply chain, its collaborations with other halal-certified organizations, and why its efforts matter for businesses and consumers alike.

The Growing Demand for Halal Products in Europe

Europe is home to over 25 million Muslims, a number that is expected to grow in the coming years. This demographic shift has fueled a surge in demand for halal products, from food and beverages to cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. According to a report by Statista, the European halal food market alone is projected to reach $30 billion by 2025. However, meeting this demand is not without its challenges.

One of the biggest hurdles is ensuring the integrity of the halal supply chain. From farm to fork, every step of the process must adhere to strict halal standards. This includes sourcing halal-certified raw materials, using compliant processing methods, and maintaining transparency throughout the supply chain. For businesses, this requires a high level of coordination and expertise—something that Bosnia has mastered.

Bosnia’s Expertise in Halal Certification: A Foundation for Trust

Bosnia and Herzegovina has long been a leader in the global halal industry, thanks in large part to its Agency for Halal Quality Certification (AHQC). Established in 2007, the AHQC is renowned for its rigorous standards and transparent processes. But Bosnia’s contribution to the halal industry goes beyond certification; it plays a critical role in strengthening halal supply chains across Europe.

Here’s how Bosnia is making a difference:

Setting Rigorous Standards: The AHQC’s certification process is one of the most stringent in the world. It covers every stage of production, from sourcing raw materials to packaging and distribution. This ensures that products bearing the Bosnia Halal Certification logo meet the highest standards of quality and compliance.
Promoting Transparency: Transparency is at the heart of Bosnia’s approach to halal certification. The AHQC requires detailed documentation and conducts regular audits to ensure ongoing compliance. This level of transparency builds trust among consumers and businesses alike.
Leveraging Technology: Bosnia is at the forefront of using technology to enhance halal supply chains. From blockchain to track and trace systems, the country is leveraging innovative solutions to ensure the integrity of halal products.

Collaborations: The Key to a Stronger Halal Supply Chain

Bosnia’s success in strengthening halal supply chains is not a solo effort. It is the result of strategic collaborations with other halal-certified organizations, businesses, and government bodies across Europe. These partnerships have been instrumental in creating a more reliable and transparent halal ecosystem.

Partnerships with Halal-Certified Businesses: Bosnia works closely with businesses that are committed to halal integrity. By providing them with certification and guidance, the AHQC helps these companies navigate the complexities of the halal supply chain.
Collaborations with International Halal Organizations: Bosnia is an active member of global halal organizations such as the AHAC – Association of halal Crttifiers. These collaborations ensure that Bosnia’s standards align with international best practices.
Government Support: The Bosnian government has been a strong advocate for the halal industry, providing funding and support for initiatives that promote halal integrity. This has enabled the AHQC to expand its reach and impact.
Educational Initiatives: Bosnia is also investing in education and training to raise awareness about halal standards. Through workshops, seminars, and publications, the AHQC is helping to build a more informed and skilled workforce.

Bosnia’s Impact on the European Halal Market

To understand the real-world impact of Bosnia’s efforts, let’s look at a case study. In 2020, a major European supermarket chain partnered with the AHQC to source halal-certified poultry products. The collaboration involved:

Sourcing: The AHQC worked with farmers and suppliers to ensure that the poultry was raised and processed in accordance with halal standards.
Certification: The AHQC certified the entire supply chain, from the farm to the supermarket shelf.
Transparency: The supermarket chain used blockchain technology to provide consumers with real-time information about the product’s journey.

The result? A 20% increase in sales of halal-certified poultry products within six months. This success story highlights the tangible benefits of Bosnia’s approach to halal supply chain management.

Why Bosnia’s Role Matters for Europe

Bosnia’s contributions to the halal industry have far-reaching implications for Europe. Here’s why:

Consumer Confidence: By ensuring the integrity of halal supply chains, Bosnia is helping to build consumer confidence in halal-certified products. This is crucial in a market where trust is paramount.
Economic Growth: The halal industry is a significant driver of economic growth. By strengthening halal supply chains, Bosnia is creating new opportunities for businesses and boosting the European economy.
Cultural Integration: The halal industry plays a vital role in promoting cultural integration. By providing high-quality halal products, Bosnia is helping to meet the needs of Europe’s diverse population.
Global Leadership: Bosnia’s expertise in halal certification and supply chain management positions it as a global leader in the industry. This not only enhances its reputation but also sets a benchmark for other countries to follow.

Challenges and the Way Forward

While Bosnia has made significant strides in strengthening halal supply chains, challenges remain. These include:

Standardization: Despite Bosnia’s efforts, there is still a lack of uniformity in halal standards across Europe. This can create confusion for businesses and consumers.
Fraud and Mislabeling: The rise of counterfeit halal products is a growing concern. Bosnia is addressing this issue through stricter regulations and advanced tracking technologies.
Awareness: Many consumers and businesses are still unaware of the importance of halal certification. Bosnia is tackling this through educational initiatives and outreach programs.

Looking ahead, Bosnia’s focus will be on fostering greater collaboration, leveraging technology, and raising awareness about halal standards. By doing so, it aims to create a more robust and transparent halal supply chain that benefits everyone.

Bosnia and Herzegovina has emerged as a beacon of reliability and transparency in the European halal industry. Through its rigorous standards, innovative solutions, and collaborative approach, the country is playing a pivotal role in strengthening halal supply chains across the continent. For businesses, this means access to a growing market and a trusted partner in halal certification. For consumers, it means peace of mind knowing that the products they purchase meet the highest standards of quality and authenticity.

As the demand for halal products continues to rise, Bosnia’s contributions will become even more significant. By setting a benchmark for integrity and excellence, Bosnia is not only shaping the future of the halal industry in Europe but also inspiring the world to follow suit.

Spread the love