Search Climate Insights Directory

The document defines biocultural community protocols as participatory instruments used by Indigenous and local communities to document their customary laws, values, and decision-making processes. These protocols aim to bridge the gap between community worldviews and external actors—such as governments and companies—to prevent resource exploitation and ensure the respect of customary stewardship. The toolkit outlines a four-part process: understanding the community, documenting the protocol, using it for engagement, and reflecting on outcomes. It provides a wide array of participatory tools, including community sketch maps, trend line analysis, and participatory theatre, to empower communities through legal awareness and social mobilization.

The document outlines a three-stage process for creating biocultural community protocols: deciding on the appropriateness of a protocol, mapping the community's foundations (identity, natural, social-cultural, economic, political, and legal), and consolidating this information into a strategic tool for external engagement. It emphasizes that protocols are context-dependent and should be community-led, avoiding external coercion. The guide provides specific tools and questions to document traditional knowledge, customary laws, and biodiversity, while cautioning facilitators to safeguard sensitive information. It concludes that while individual protocols offer self-affirmation and local change, their collective aggregation can drive broader structural and legal shifts.

The document outlines a framework for using biocultural community protocols to manage interactions with governments, companies, and NGOs. It details methods for establishing dialogue, raising awareness through participatory media, and engaging in impact assessments and international legal processes. It emphasizes the right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) and provides guidance on conflict resolution and responding to human rights violations.

The document describes Biocultural Community Protocols (BCPs) as community-determined frameworks that define values, procedures, and priorities to guide engagement with governments, companies, and NGOs. It outlines how BCPs help communities secure customary rights and respond to threats like illegal mining or infrastructure projects. The briefing provides case studies from Ghana, Malaysia, Kenya, India, and South Africa, illustrating the use of BCPs for resource mapping, legal empowerment, and the protection of traditional knowledge and biodiversity. It also promotes a four-part Toolkit for Community Facilitators to support the endogenous development of these protocols.

The text explores transnational practice as a spatial phenomenon where human actions and relationships stretch across national borders. It details key manifestations of this practice, including the economic impact of remittances, the symbolic and material role of transnational house building, and the political engagement of diasporas. The author argues that while these practices are central to the lives of migrants, digital technology has expanded transnational activity to a broader segment of the global population.

The research paper analyzes how the AKP government transitioned Turkey's role in Syria from a projected 'humanitarian superpower' to a state focused on national security. It examines the tension between 'humanitarian diplomacy'—which emphasizes Islamic identity and solidarity—and the 'securitisation' of Kurdish autonomy in Northern Syria. The author argues that Turkey's foreign policy is deeply linked to its domestic political shift toward authoritarianism and the need to appease nationalist allies, ultimately prioritizing state security over human security.

The study finds that climate-related natural disasters in India have a conditional and generally weak relationship with violent conflict. While disasters can increase the risk of politically motivated violence in areas with low literacy (low development), they are associated with an increased risk of riots in areas with higher literacy. However, the author concludes that these statistical relations are not substantively large enough to suggest that post-disaster violence is a major problem in India, as the direct damages from disasters likely dwarf the damages from ensuing unrest.

The report finds that 2025 was the third most violent year since 1989, with 245,000 battle-related deaths. It highlights a record high of 65 state-based conflicts and a concerning doubling of international conflicts to eight in 2025. While non-state conflicts decreased slightly, one-sided violence surged to 76,500 fatalities, primarily driven by massacres in Sudan.

The review finds a general scholarly consensus that higher levels of education have a pacifying effect on civil conflict, though this relationship is complex and varies by the type of violence. While low education is often linked to recruitment in civil wars, higher education levels are frequently observed among terrorists and genocide perpetrators. The authors highlight that inter-group educational inequalities—particularly along ethnic and religious lines—significantly increase conflict risks, whereas rapid expansions in tertiary education do not appear to drive destabilization. The document concludes that while education generally promotes peace, its impact is mediated by factors such as regime type, gender equality, and the specific nature of the political violence.

The paper argues that a critical but overlooked link exists between the integration of migrants in settlement countries and their ability to contribute to development in their countries of origin. It identifies eight mechanisms of diaspora contribution—including remittances, entrepreneurship, and political activism—and demonstrates that these are not a zero-sum game with integration; rather, strong integration often supports stronger transnational engagement. The authors call for greater policy coherence and dialogue between the fields of integration, development, and migration management to avoid fragmented or contradictory policies that may hinder these contributions.

The author challenges the view that Sikh martial identity was solely a product of British recruitment or a reaction to Mughal persecution, arguing instead that it emerged from a combination of internal social shifts—such as the entry of Jat peasants—and external political pressures. The text traces the transition from Guru Nanak's peaceful teachings to the militarized Khalsa under Guru Gobind Singh and the subsequent insurgencies led by Banda Bahadur and the Misl confederacies. It further examines how the British 'Martial Race' theory reinforced this identity for strategic imperial goals, a legacy that continues to influence the military composition and political dynamics of modern India and Pakistan.

The research demonstrates that states experiencing civil wars are significantly more likely to be involved in militarized interstate disputes (MIDs). Using data from 1946 to 2001, the authors find that this 'civil peace' effect is comparable in magnitude to the 'democratic peace' effect. Analysis of over 400 MIDs reveals that the increased risk is driven by states attempting to influence the outcome of civil wars through direct intervention, externalization (such as cross-border counter-insurgency), and unintended spillovers, rather than by opportunistic attacks on weakened states or diversionary wars to consolidate domestic power.

The paper argues that while digital technologies offer opportunities for efficiency in crisis response, they are not neutral and can compromise fundamental humanitarian principles. It identifies key analytical prisms—humanitarian space, public-private partnerships, resource distribution (e.g., digital food/cash), human relations, and data-driven vulnerabilities—to guide future academic inquiry into the 'technological turn' of humanitarian action.

The document analyzes the US-Taliban peace process leading up to the 2021 takeover of Kabul, arguing that the US prioritized its own military disengagement over the survival of the Afghan government it helped create. By excluding the Afghan government from direct negotiations and making commitments on its behalf, the US undermined the legitimacy and leverage of the republican state, paving the way for the Taliban's return to power.

The authors argue that while digital technologies offer opportunities for efficiency in crisis response, they are not neutral and can compromise core humanitarian principles. The paper identifies five analytical prisms for future research: the politics of humanitarian space, the rise of public-private partnerships, new methods of aid distribution (such as e-transfers), the reorganization of relationships between aid providers and recipients, and the emergence of new data-driven vulnerabilities. It concludes that the 'do no harm' imperative requires a more reflective approach to technology to ensure that digital divides do not marginalize the most vulnerable and that data collection does not create new security risks.

The document details the collaboration between IDSA and PRIO, focusing on India's perspectives on food security, nuclear governance, and climate change. It highlights India's pursuit of nuclear energy capacity, its adherence to the CBDR-RC principle in climate negotiations, and the internal challenges of food insecurity and insurgencies.

The authors use geo-coded data from 31 federal states to argue that both relatively rich and relatively poor regions are more prone to secessionist conflict than those with average wealth. The study also finds that the presence of politically excluded ethnic groups and the existence of regional autonomy further elevate the risk of violent secessionist conflict.

The document examines migrant transnationalism—the ties and practices migrants maintain across borders—across economic, sociocultural, and political dimensions. It advocates for a 'transnational lens' to move beyond 'methodological nationalism,' which assumes the nation-state is the only relevant unit of analysis. Key areas of focus include the role of remittances, the impact of digital technologies on 'co-presence,' the dynamics of transnational families, and the interaction between transnational engagement and integration into host societies. The authors argue that transnationalism is not a zero-sum game with integration and can provide significant 'mobility capital' and resources for migrants.

The study examines the implementation of rights-based approaches (RBA) in Pakistan, focusing on Norwegian Church Aid (NCA) and its partners. It finds that global RBA norms are rarely applied directly via international law but are instead translated into three frameworks: humanitarian standards, citizen rights, and Islamic principles. The author identifies two modes of engaging with religion: 'instrumental engagement,' where religious leaders are used as gatekeepers to achieve project goals, and 'substantial engagement,' where the substance of religion is used to find overlapping values with human rights, particularly regarding women's rights. The paper argues that religion is an integral part of the lifeworld of aid recipients and essential for gaining legitimacy in the Pakistani humanitarian arena.

The document argues that treating nonstate actors as unitary entities in civil conflict analysis creates a gap between conceptual frames and empirical reality. It proposes a 'disaggregation' approach to examine how internal divisions, factionalism, and shifting coalitions influence the initiation, escalation, and termination of violence. The authors highlight that fragmentation can either increase violence through in-group competition or facilitate peace through state co-optation of specific factions. The text calls for more disaggregated data to better understand the dynamics of nonstate actors, including the role of external state intervention in precipitating or exacerbating internal splits.