Search Climate Insights Directory

The report defines food security as food that is available at all times, accessible to all, nutritionally adequate, and culturally acceptable. It argues that while global food supply has generally kept pace with demand, food insecurity persists due to failures in distribution and individual access. The document evaluates four policy paths: food self-sufficiency (now largely seen as unrealistic), trade liberalization (which offers supply stability but can undermine local producers), food sovereignty (which emphasizes national policy autonomy and peasant rights), and multi-functional agriculture (which integrates environmental sustainability and non-commodity public values into farming). It concludes that a pragmatic, flexible approach is necessary to reconcile economic, social, and ecological objectives.

The document examines the physical constraints of space operations, arguing that while space is uniquely suited for civilian and reconnaissance missions, it is poorly suited for kinetic ground-attack and boost-phase missile defense due to high costs, reliability issues, and intrinsic vulnerabilities. It details the mechanics of various orbits (LEO, MEO, GEO, Molniya, Tundra), the propellant requirements for maneuvering, and the technical methods for interfering with satellites, including jamming, dazzling, and kinetic energy attacks. The authors conclude that being the first to deploy space-based weapons would not confer a lasting military advantage because space lacks strategic locations and satellites remain inherently vulnerable.

The Union of Concerned Scientists concludes that the Block 2004 GMD system is ineffective against real attacks due to a lack of realistic testing and vulnerability to simple countermeasures. The report critiques the Missile Defense Agency's (MDA) claims of high effectiveness, noting that the system's radars cannot discriminate warheads from decoys and that the deployment schedule is driven by political rather than technical milestones.

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 report concludes that the planned US National Missile Defense (NMD) system is technically unworkable because any state capable of deploying long-range ballistic missiles could also deploy simple countermeasures to defeat it. The authors identify three primary countermeasures: submunitions for biological or chemical weapons, anti-simulation balloon decoys for nuclear warheads, and cooled shrouds for nuclear warheads. They argue that the NMD system's reliance on hit-to-kill interceptors and infrared sensors makes it vulnerable to these tactics. Furthermore, the report asserts that deploying NMD would destabilize international security by prompting Russia and China to increase their nuclear arsenals or adopt riskier launch-on-warning postures, while potentially driving emerging missile states toward alternative delivery methods like cruise missiles or clandestine smuggling. The authors recommend postponing deployment until the system is successfully tested against realistic countermeasures and suggest focusing on deterrence, diplomacy, and export controls instead.

The document analyzes the fragmented nature of U.S. export laws for hazardous substances, noting that there is "no single, unified approach" across different statutes. It details specific requirements for notification, consent, labelling, and reporting under acts such as TSCA, RCRA, and FIFRA, while also outlining the restrictions on exporting unapproved new drugs and radioactive materials. Additionally, it includes an appendix on the Basel Convention's framework for transboundary movements of hazardous waste.

The document outlines the three pillars of the NPT—non-proliferation, disarmament, and peaceful use of nuclear energy—and examines the specific role of African States within this framework. It highlights the importance of the Treaty of Pelindaba in establishing Africa as a nuclear-weapon-free zone and discusses the challenges facing the NPT, including non-compliance by states like North Korea and Iran. The guide provides recommendations for African countries to engage in the 2010 Review Conference to ensure access to peaceful nuclear technology while preventing military diversion.

The report details how lead pollution causes irreversible health damage, particularly in children, and links these outcomes to violations of international human rights treaties. It highlights specific crises in Nigeria, Kazakhstan, and China, while noting that lead battery manufacturing and recycling are primary global exposure sources.

The report details the severe health risks of lead exposure, particularly for children, and links these impacts to violations of international human rights treaties. It highlights specific cases of lead poisoning in Nigeria, Kazakhstan, and China, and identifies leaded fuel, lead-based paint, and battery recycling as primary sources of contamination.

The report argues that climate change will increasingly exacerbate risks to US national security by intensifying physical impacts and mounting geopolitical tensions over the energy transition. It identifies a likely increase in cross-border conflicts over water and migration, strategic competition in the Arctic, and the risk of unilateral solar geoengineering. The document highlights 11 highly vulnerable countries and two regions (Central Africa and Pacific island states) where climate-induced instability may necessitate increased US diplomatic, humanitarian, and military resources. It also notes that current global policies are insufficient to meet Paris Agreement goals, leading to competition over critical minerals and technologies.

The Global Resilience Partnership (GRP) is launching the TECH 4 Resilience Challenge to identify and scale AI innovations that enhance humanitarian preparedness and response to climate shocks. The initiative targets entrepreneurs and organisations operating in low- and middle-income countries, offering winners up to US$50,000 in funding, alongside mentoring, a virtual Leadership Academy, and investment mobilisation support. Eligible solutions must address extreme climate events or strengthen Anticipatory Action frameworks, with a priority on locally led innovations benefiting women and youth. The challenge opens on 1 August 2025, with final winners announced in November/December 2025 for implementation throughout 2026.

The document analyzes the 'East Asian Peace', a significant reduction in battle deaths in East Asia between 1980 and 2005 compared to the 1946–1979 period. The author argues that this peace was not the result of a single event but a series of staggered political transitions across the region. Key drivers identified include a shift in leadership priorities toward export-driven economic growth and a strategic alignment with the United States. The paper contrasts this with the 'European Peace', noting that the East Asian case does not fit the liberal peace model due to a lack of widespread democratization and political integration.

The authors examine the morality of coercive diplomacy, distinguishing between deterrent and compellent threats. They argue that while threats are less harmful than actual force, they are not morally neutral and must be assessed via just war principles including just cause, proportionality, legitimate authority, and right intention.

A joint statement by Medact, the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health, and Scientists for Global Responsibility welcoming the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize for ICAN. The organisations argue that nuclear weapons are indiscriminately destructive, that no meaningful medical response to a detonation is possible, and that even limited use would cause global climate damage and mass starvation. They urge the British Government to sign the TPNW and engage in multilateral discussions to eliminate nuclear weapons.

The document is a social media toolkit designed to help advocates communicate the risks associated with the "Big Ugly Bill." It provides platform-specific posting tips and detailed talking points regarding the repeal of electric vehicle tax credits, cuts to clean energy and nutrition programs, increased spending on a proposed anti-missile system, and attacks on scientific integrity.