Earlier this month, armed clashes between competing factions of South Sudan’s government broke out in the capital Juba, a day after the nation’s fifth anniversary of its independence. The conflict dates back to political events and factional fighting that first emerged in 2013.

Ten miles south of Tel Aviv, I stand on a catwalk over two concrete reservoirs the size of football fields and watch water pour into them from a massive pipe emerging from the sand. The pipe is so large I could walk through it standing upright, were it not full of Mediterranean seawater pumped from an intake a mile offshore.

One fear of climate change is that more variable weather conditions will lead to violence and chaos in some places. But looking at it methodically, do erratic weather conditions actually lead to violent conflict and political instability? Not necessarily.

As bad news continues to roll in regarding the accelerating impacts of greenhouse gases accumulating in the atmosphere, there is increasing discussion about imposing a carbon tax. Economists across the political spectrum support it, from Irwin Seltzer’s camp that remains “uncertain as to whether there is a global warming phenomenon” to William Nordhaus, who unequivocally views climate change as a threat.

2015 was a deadly year for environmental activism. According to Global Witness, 185 activists were killed, a 60 percent increase from 2014. Of the victims, 40 percent were indigenous people, like Berta Cáceres, who spoke at the Wilson Center last year and was shot and killed in her home in Honduras this March. [Video Below]

In 1970, Cyclone Bhola slammed into East Pakistan – present day Bangladesh – with sustained winds of 150 miles per hour, killing as many as half a million people. In 2007, Cyclone Sidr killed 3,406 people in Bangladesh. This year, Cyclone Roanu killed just 30. What’s behind this huge decline in mortality? What has Bangladesh done differently?

As the international community looks to the Paris climate agreement and beyond, a key question emerges: Will strong ethical arguments or pragmatic national interest lead to a safe and sustainable future? Can these two perspectives coexist? [Video Below]

Resilience is increasingly recognized as a powerful concept to help practitioners, academics, and policymakers better understand how people respond to shocks and stressors, and how those responses can be linked to longer-term positive or negative development outcomes, such as wellbeing or food (in)security.