Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the drive to increase the proportion of women in the Norwegian armed forces from 7% to 15% by the end of 2008. It identifies two primary motivations: a symbolic political goal to reflect Norwegian society's gender equality and a military goal to acquire diverse qualifications for new security challenges. The author highlights structural barriers, such as gender-biased equipment (specifically safety vests) and a highly masculine organizational culture, and recommends improvements in family policy, leadership training, and equipment design. Internationally, the report notes the slow implementation of UNSCR 1325, with women making up only about 1.8% of military personnel in UN peacekeeping missions as of early 2007, and argues that Norway's efforts are critical for supplying female military leaders to the UN system.

The report analyzes power-sharing as a tool to mitigate civil conflict by guaranteeing political roles to potential 'spoilers'. It argues that while power-sharing can promote peace when parties are evenly matched and conflict costs are high, it may increase conflict risks when groups are unevenly matched. The authors highlight significant trade-offs, noting that power-sharing prioritizes 'ex post fairness' over democratic 'ex ante uncertainty' and can lead to high transaction costs and agency losses, such as the selection of intransigent, group-based politicians.

The document analyzes terrorism in Egypt through three distinct cycles, tracing the evolution from the 1928 founding of the Muslim Brotherhood to the 2006 Dahab bombings. It argues that Egypt's closed political system, socio-economic marginalization—particularly of the Bedouin community in Sinai—and heavy-handed security responses have fueled extremism. The paper also details the significant role of Egyptian nationals, such as Ayman al-Zawahiri, in the formation and leadership of transnational networks like al-Qa'eda, suggesting that domestic repression effectively exported extremism globally.

Former US Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona testified that political appointees in the Bush administration systematically marginalized his office, censored his speeches, and suppressed scientific reports to align public health communication with partisan ideological agendas.

The document outlines a strategy for U.S. energy independence based on three pillars: resilient infrastructure, phasing out unreliable fuel sources, and eliminating oil reliance. It advocates for decentralized 'micropower' over nuclear power to reduce proliferation risks and suggests that oil use can be eliminated by the 2040s through tripled-efficiency vehicles and advanced biofuels at a fraction of the current market price of oil.

The document examines the 'political architecture' of liberal peacebuilding, which seeks to establish liberal market democracies in post-conflict states. It argues that while this approach is dominant in international politics, it faces significant legitimacy challenges. Communitarians argue it imposes external Western values over local cultures; critical theorists contend it reinforces a hegemonic and unjust global order; and postmodernists critique its reliance on technocratic 'social engineering.' The author proposes alternative frameworks, such as 'building the capacity for peaceful self-governance' and 'dialogic peacebuilding,' to reconcile liberal ideals with local autonomy and global justice.

A group of medical professionals and scientists argue that Reed Elsevier's ownership of The Lancet is contradictory to its role as a promoter of arms fairs, specifically the Defence Systems and Equipment International (DSEi) event. The authors contend that promoting arms sales, including cluster bombs and small arms, violates the medical principle of 'do no harm' and contradicts Reed Elsevier's commitment to the UN Global Compact.

The article analyzes post-conflict institution-building in Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq, finding that an 'assumption of intransigence' led to the institutionalization of ethnicity, which has hindered peacebuilding. It argues for flexible institutional designs based on in-depth conflict assessments to de-ethnicize politics and ensure inclusivity.

The document details the evolution of South Africa-Turkey relations, moving from early religious and consular contacts in the 19th century to formal diplomatic ties established in 1992. It examines significant political frictions, including Nelson Mandela's refusal of the Ataturk Peace Prize, disputes over arms sales and human rights, and the sensitive issue of Kurdish separatism. Economically, the report notes a trade balance heavily skewed in South Africa's favour, driven largely by gold and coal exports, and discusses the role of 'Anatolian Tigers' in promoting direct investment. The report concludes with the 2005 visit of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, which aimed to cement relations and implement Turkey's 'Outreach to Africa' policy.

The report examines the intersection of military and scientific endeavours in the UK, specifically analyzing the power the military exerts over science and engineering in the post-Cold War era.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) reports a systemic pattern of scientific interference by the Bush administration across multiple federal agencies. The investigation details the suppression of climate change data at the EPA, the manipulation of mercury emission standards, and the censorship of research on airborne bacteria at the USDA. It further documents the appointment of underqualified or industry-linked individuals to scientific advisory panels and the use of political litmus tests for nominees. The report argues that these actions undermine public health, safety, and national security, and calls for executive and congressional action to restore scientific integrity in policymaking.

The document argues that space technology is deeply intertwined with military agendas, often masking military goals as civilian or scientific. It highlights the militarisation of NASA, the high costs and instability of missile defence systems, and the risks of nuclear power in space, providing a framework for professionals to evaluate the ethics of their employment in the sector.

The document traces the South African defence industry's shift from a state-driven system designed for apartheid-era isolation to a competitive global actor. Following the end of the Cold War and the transition to democracy in 1994, the industry underwent significant downsizing and restructuring, moving away from total self-sufficiency toward strategic partnerships and export-led growth. Key entities like Armscor and Denel were reorganized to separate procurement from manufacturing, while the private sector consolidated. The paper highlights the role of the Strategic Defence Packages (SDPs) and Industrial Participation (IP) in revitalizing the sector, alongside the challenges of implementing black economic empowerment and aligning industrial policy with regional foreign policy goals.

Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) condemns the pressure placed on Dr David Kelly, a biological weapons expert, after he questioned the UK Government's use of scientific information to justify the war against Iraq. SGR asserts that scientists have a duty to report the misuse of their work by powerful interests and calls for the Lord Hutton judicial inquiry to investigate the discrepancies between alleged intelligence and reality regarding weapons of mass destruction.

The document details an interview with Al-Sadig al-Mahdi, who argues that the bilateral peace talks between the Sudanese government and the SPLM/A are insufficient. He advocates for an 'IGAD Plus' approach that incorporates 'new forces'—including marginalized minorities and armed resistance in Darfur—and a transition to a religiously neutral, democratic constitution. Al-Mahdi proposes a strategic alliance between the Umma Party and the SPLM/A to ensure a united, democratic Sudan, while criticizing the National Islamic Front (NIF) and the historical role of the US in supporting regional dictatorships.

The report by Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) critiques the 2003 invasion of Iraq, asserting that the US administration's justifications—such as eliminating weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and promoting democracy—are insincere. SGR argues the true drivers are 'full spectrum dominance' and the desire to control strategic oil reserves to reduce reliance on Saudi Arabia. The document details severe humanitarian risks, including potential malnutrition for 1.26 million Iraqi children, and environmental damage, including CO2 emissions from the invasion estimated to equal one year of total UK emissions. It concludes by advocating for a shift from military spending toward solving global poverty, water scarcity, and climate change through renewable energy development.

Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) opposes the planned US-UK attack on Iraq, citing the lack of UN backing, the potential for massive civilian casualties, and the use of indiscriminate weapons. The statement argues that the war would destabilise the Middle East and suggests that the financial resources required for the conflict would be better spent on global health, debt cancellation, and environmentally-friendly technologies.

The report provides a geospatial analysis of the world's drylands, which cover approximately 40 percent of the global land area and support over two billion people. It evaluates the provision of ecosystem services including forage for livestock, food production, biodiversity conservation, freshwater, carbon storage, and energy. The analysis highlights that while drylands are often perceived as unproductive, they are critical for human survival, though they face significant threats from soil degradation, water scarcity, and human activities such as overgrazing and urbanization.

Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) opposes unilateral US/UK military action against Iraq, characterizing it as a breach of the UN Charter. The organization argues that global security threats from weapons of mass destruction are partly caused by US and UK policies, specifically citing failures in nuclear disarmament, the sabotage of biological weapons protocols, and a general unilateralist approach to international law and climate change.

The report finds that Sida's support for Humanitarian Mine Action (HMA) has been fragmented and ad hoc, heavily prioritizing mine clearance (85% of funding) over other essential components like impact assessment and survey. While Sida has been a major global donor, its funding trended downward after 1998. The evaluation highlights a 'quiet revolution' in HMA, shifting from output-based measures (mines removed) to impact-based measures (societal effect), and argues that Sida must institutionalize impact assessment to ensure sustainable, development-oriented assistance. It analyzes various implementation channels, noting that NGOs are flexible and innovative but struggle with long-term sustainability, while government/military channels offer better sustainability but may lack humanitarian sensitivity. The report also critiques Sida's R&D and technical initiatives, such as the Mine Detection Dog project in Cambodia, for failing to base needs on local stakeholders and lacking sustainability.