In recent months, the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) has been in the headlines – and for all the wrong reasons.

As climate change threatens the stability of ecosystems around the world, the preservation of forests is seen as a “win-win” solution to curbing planet-warming emissions while producing value for developing country economies.

“Turbulent and possibly revolutionary times are ahead for U.S. energy and environmental policy,” said Bobby Magill, a senior science writer at Climate Central, at the Wilson Center on February 3. “If there’s one message the Trump Administration is sending about environmental and climate regulations, it’s this: The future will not look like the past.”

In a recent article published in PLOS ONE, Juliann E. Aukema, Narcisa G. Pricope, Gregory J. Husak, and David Lopez-Carr address the impacts of climate change and population growth on areas with vulnerable ecosystem services and biodiversity, and in reverse, how degraded ecosystem services effect vulnerable populations. The authors analyze locations between 50 degrees latitude north and south that had changing precipitation patterns in the past 30 years.

John Oldfield called it: last month’s most popular story was once again on the U.S. Global Water Strategy. The Wilson Center’s Sherri Goodman, Ruth Greenspan Bell, and Nausheen Iqbal, like Oldfield before them, urged the new administration to take seriously the development of the strategy, due later this year, and provide “stronger American leadership” on global water issues.

The world’s ocean fish stocks are “on the verge of collapse,” according to a special report from IRIN. Already small fishers in poor countries are reeling, turning to ever-more destructive techniques and suffering from poor health and dwindling livelihoods.