With on average one pangolin poached from the wild every five minutes, this scaly anteater is the most highly trafficked animal in the world. Despite an international trade ban and millions of dollars of education campaigns, the killing of the pangolin for food and medicines continues unabated. In particular, the use of its scales in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is a large driver of demand.

Each year, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) account for 2 in every 3 deaths among women globally. It is estimated that NCDs kill 35 million people each year, and women of reproductive age make up about half of these deaths. The compounding effects NCDs have on pregnancy complicate women’s experiences in many unseen ways. The rise and gravity of NCDs pose a growing and often overlooked challenge to maternal health worldwide.

Many of climate change’s demographic impacts—including those on migration, health, and mortality—are well known. But will climate change also affect population growth? So far, relatively little is known about whether and how the reproductive goals and behaviors of women and their partners may be influenced by a changing climate. However, a number of recent empirical studies offer evidence of such effects, underscoring the multidimensional ways that households modify their structure and activities in response to changing environmental conditions. The effects also highlight the complex and interactive linkages between population growth rates and climate change.

In August’s most-read post, Nathanial Matthews explains how globally, most water infrastructure isn’t designed to meet the demands of a changing climate. Matthews showcases highlights from a new report, Wellspring: Source Water Resilience and Climate Adaptation, which explores innovative approaches to source water protection in the context of a changing climate. The complications of a changing climate are not always so clear, especially its connection to armed conflict. Our fourth most popular post, by Cullen Hendrix and John O’Loughlin, shares the results of a study that aimed to provide a consensus regarding climate-conflict links.

September 12, 2019 marks one year since South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir and former Vice President-turned-opposition leader Riek Machar signed a new peace agreement. The human and environmental cost of the five-year war it ended has been staggering. Women and girls have often borne the brunt of the violence. Fighting and displacement have also placed tremendous pressure on the country’s abundant wildlife and natural resources. Militarized cattle raiding and competition over access to traditional grazing lands threaten the country’s tenuous stability. Gender-sensitive environmental peacebuilding promises to be one of the strategies needed to resolve these multiple challenges.

“That ain’t no mountain,” said Jennifer L. Turner, the Director of the Wilson Center’s China Environment Forum, in response to a picture of a pile of phosphogypsum waste just outside a farming village. She moderated a recent event on the development of environmental law and enforcement in China cohosted by the Environmental Law Institute and The Wilson Center. Since 2013, when the picture was taken, the mountain has grown, she said. She put the image up because many people hear about soil pollution, or illegal dumping, and picture something small. “You don’t picture a mountain towering over a village,” Turner said.

Policymakers and emergency managers tend to build a conceptual wall between natural hazards and terrorism. The causes of—and remedies for—these two kinds of disasters are seen as separate and distinct. But, in the era of climate change, the wall between the two is crumbling.