Search Climate Insights Directory

The policy brief examines how temporal perspectives influence the integration of immigrants in Norway. Based on interviews with 67 individuals from diverse backgrounds, the authors argue that a sense of belonging is not a linear process but is shaped by the age at which a person arrives, how long they have lived in the country, and their current life-cycle phase (such as parenthood or old age). The brief critiques the use of 'generation' labels, suggesting that such categorizations homogenize heterogeneous groups and can hinder the sense of belonging. It concludes that focusing on these temporal and social dimensions, rather than primarily on national origin, is essential for improving integration efforts and social acceptance.

The report analyzes the resurgence of the far right in Europe, arguing that 'mainstream' and 'extremism' are not opposites but exist on a volatile continuum. It provides case studies on parties such as the Front National in France, Golden Dawn in Greece, and Jobbik in Hungary, examining how they leverage crises—economic, political, or social—to gain legitimacy. The text highlights a trend of 'mainstreaming,' where extreme right ideas are adopted by centrist parties, and explores the role of leadership and organizational strategy in the growth of these movements.

The paper analyzes the evolution of the 'Women, Peace and Security' (WPS) framework, centered on UN Security Council Resolution 1325. While the author notes rapid normative spread and broad political acceptance among member states and regional organizations, she highlights a significant failure to translate these norms into practice. This is evidenced by low female representation in UN peace operations and political missions, insufficient funding, and a lack of accountability at leadership levels. The author argues that while shifting global power dynamics and opposition from states like Russia and China pose risks, the continued pressure from transnational women's networks remains the primary driver for future progress.

The document examines the tensions between humanitarian protection and the push for the return of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs), particularly in Somalia. It argues that return programming often relies on a flawed 'sedentary bias' and ignores the critical role of social networks and the reality of ongoing conflict. The authors warn that shifting aid from regional camps to unstable areas like south-central Somalia may serve state migration management interests rather than humanitarian needs, potentially increasing risks for returnees in environments of impunity.

The report examines return migration as a complex spectrum of agency and coercion, challenging the 'myth of return' and the binary of forced versus voluntary migration. It identifies ten key findings, highlighting that return intentions are shaped by competing attachments to multiple societies and that reintegration can be as challenging as initial integration due to social expectations, corruption, and security risks. The research emphasizes the critical role of short-term return visits in informing decisions and maintaining transnational ties, while noting that secure legal status in a destination country often paradoxically facilitates the possibility of return by providing a safety net.

The author challenges the consensus in international relations that the field can explain but not predict political phenomena. He argues that there is little theoretical basis for distinguishing between explanation and prediction, and that modern data and machine learning make prediction empirically possible. The paper outlines three generations of conflict prediction, from early behavioralist ambitions to current sophisticated early warning systems used by entities like the UN and EU. The author contends that focusing on prediction improves theory testing by moving beyond statistical significance to evaluate whether models can actually reproduce data-generating mechanisms. While acknowledging the challenges of 'black swan' events and non-linear complex systems, he asserts that the alternative to scientific prediction is often reliance on unreliable expert intuition.

The document examines how the International Criminal Court's (ICC) approach to victim and witness participation can contribute to healing and social recognition for those affected by mass violence. It highlights that while the court process can provide a sense of justice and a public platform for suffering, its therapeutic success depends on procedural justice—specifically benevolence, neutrality, and respect—and the provision of psychosocial support. The brief also notes the tension between the court's legal objectives and victims' expectations for reparations, which some may perceive as a means of silencing their accounts.

The report establishes a framework for assessing the positive societal impacts of crisis management (CM) tools, specifically for the DRIVER project. It defines societal resilience as a multi-dimensional concept encompassing technical, political, psychological, and value-based dimensions. By reviewing 23 policy documents from the UN, EU, and IFRC, the report identifies core societal values—such as trust, solidarity, and participation—that should guide CM interventions. It proposes a consolidated list of assessment criteria (e.g., accountability, diversity, and transparency) to ensure CM tools foster rather than infringe upon societal values. The document concludes with general recommendations for positive intervention, emphasizing people-centered, bottom-up approaches and the importance of international cooperation and legal frameworks in building resilience.

The document evaluates how the IPCC has addressed the climate change-conflict nexus across its reports. While the Fifth Assessment Report is noted as a significant improvement over the Third and Fourth reports, the author identifies internal inconsistencies between chapters and a lack of clear probability assessments in causal statements, which may lead to alarmist interpretations.

The report examines the 'peace potential' of oil and gas resources, analyzing how joint development, revenue sharing, and infrastructure projects like pipelines can either mitigate or fuel conflict. It contrasts successful cooperation, such as the Saudi-Kuwaiti Partitioned Neutral Zone and Turkey-Iraqi Kurdish relations, with failures in the Caucasus and disputes in the South China Sea and Eastern Mediterranean. The study also addresses the role of international environmental law and the climate impact of transitioning from coal to natural gas.

The research examines the 'legal mobilization' of displaced women's grassroots organizations (OMDs) in Colombia. It argues that in violent contexts, legal mobilization is hindered by 'unstable frames' (constant changes in laws), 'disappearing resources' (loss of assets and state capture by armed groups), and 'dangerous political opportunities' (risks of assassination and threats for social leaders). The study highlights that for these women, the pursuit of human rights is inextricably linked to the need for poverty alleviation and a 'dignified life.' It specifically analyzes the transition from the humanitarian framework of Law 387 of 1997 to the transitional justice framework of the 2011 Victims Law, noting that while the latter offers monetary reparations, it may overlook the systemic need for socio-economic stabilization.

The author argues that interpreters in qualitative research are not mere linguistic translators but active mediators who influence data through their social positioning and cultural knowledge. Using fieldwork from Bosnia-Herzegovina, the paper highlights how the 'hybrid parole' created by interpreters can provide deep insights into trauma and power dynamics, while also warning of the ethical and psychological toll on interpreters who translate traumatic experiences. The author advocates for a more nuanced approach to interpreter selection, training, and debriefing to enhance the validity and ethics of cross-cultural research.

The document argues that internal armed conflict acts as 'development in reverse,' creating a 'conflict trap' where low development leads to war, which further degrades socio-economic conditions. Research by PRIO indicates that conflict detrimentally affects most MDG indicators, including GDP per capita, infant mortality, and access to potable water. Notably, the indirect effects of conflict—such as the destruction of health infrastructure and diversion of resources to military spending—can be as severe as direct battlefield casualties. The authors advocate for the UN General Assembly to make conflict reduction an explicit goal in the post-2015 development agenda to break this cycle.

The authors argue that a fixed effect-based meta-analysis is inappropriate for studying the climate-conflict relationship due to extreme causal heterogeneity across different climatic conditions, conflict types, and spatial scales. While acknowledging a minor coding error, they maintain that the distribution of effects across studies contradicts the claim of a robust, singular aggregate relationship between climate and conflict.

The document argues that the US-Afghan relationship failed because Washington prioritised its global agenda and military objectives over respect for Afghan sovereignty and the needs of the Afghan people. Key failures identified include the US refusal to marginalise warlords, a 'light footprint' approach that delayed the creation of a national army and police, and a donor system that bypassed the Afghan government. The author highlights civilian casualties as a primary trigger for tension, noting that US cultural insensitivity and a lack of accountability fueled perceptions of occupation. The transition to the Obama administration is described as a period of further deterioration due to a lack of personal engagement with President Karzai and perceived interference in Afghan internal politics. The paper concludes that future stability depends on a 'reset' based on mutual respect and a genuine commitment to Afghan ownership.

The document analyzes the shift in legal identity from 'displaced person' to 'victim' in Mocoa, Colombia. It details the formation of the Municipal Table of Organizations of Population Victims of Forced Displacement (mfopd) and its role in planning municipal attention. Through a collaborative survey of 481 households, the report highlights severe poverty, housing deficits, and insecurity among the displaced. It concludes that the transition to the Victims Law (Law 1448) has often dismantled collective organizational achievements in favor of individual family reparations, potentially discouraging grassroots social justice claims.

The report examines the 'technologization' of humanitarian work, highlighting how tools like crisis mapping, social media, and drones can improve efficiency but also threaten humanitarian principles of neutrality and impartiality. It warns that the lack of standardized guidelines for data collection and biometric registration creates significant privacy risks and potential for surveillance, urging Norway and international bodies like OCHA to lead in developing responsible technological standards.

The author analyzes her role as a special advisor at an applied research institute in Norway to explore the tension between traditional and modern definitions of professionalism. While her position lacks the specialized formal training and self-policing community required by traditional standards, she argues it embodies 'blended' and 'unbounded' professionalism. This 'professional non-profession' is presented as an entrepreneurial response to 'supercomplexity'—the conflicting pressures of maintaining academic quality (Mode 1) while producing socially relevant, applied research (Mode 2).

The document explores the 'humanitarian drone' as a 'war dividend' from military spending, arguing that the transfer of UAV hardware—including surveillance, cargo, and weaponized drones—also transfers military rationales such as 'surgical precision' and 'targeting logic' into the humanitarian sector. The authors warn that the push for humanitarian drones is driven by a commercial logic to gain legitimacy for the UAV industry and may lead to the dehumanization of suffering or a lowered threshold for the use of force through 'humanitarian combat drones.' While drones offer potential for improved aid delivery and crisis mapping, the paper emphasizes that technology is not neutral and cannot replace the empathy and ethical judgment essential to humanitarian work.

The author outlines the ethical complexities of using publicly available internet data for research on the July 22 attacks, highlighting the tension between public availability and the perceived privacy of emotional utterances. Key concerns include the inability to verify the age of users, the risk of 'double victimization' of victims through media exposure, and the migration of private Facebook data into the public realm. The author advocates for a case-by-case ethical evaluation of data sensitivity and privacy to balance methodological rigor with the integrity of research subjects.