Refugees and migrants are the most vulnerable and will bear the brunt of the Covid-19 pandemic, said James Hollifield, a Wilson Center Global Fellow, in a recent episode of Wilson NOW. These populations are often already at higher risk due to insufficient water and food supplies, and those confined in large camps are at greater risk of spreading the disease. According to Hollifield, although we have not yet seen the full extent of the damage, “we can see with both refugees and migrants in particular, especially seasonal migrants, that there’s a great danger here of the virus spreading like wildfire in the camps and in the dormitories.”

How do we plan for disasters that have never occurred before? One million species are at risk of extinction in the near future from environmental changes. The frequency of historic tropical storms is increasing. The rapidly melting permafrost in the Arctic is placing unprecedented pressures on northern infrastructure. Given the overwhelming and unpredictable nature of new disaster risks, it is not clear what the appropriate responses should be. Our book, Disaster Security: Using Military and Intelligence Planning for Energy and Environmental Risks, addresses how to assess unique environmental hazards and disaster risks, based on tools used by the U.S. intelligence and military communities. The book draws on lessons learned from developing, applying, and translating scenarios and simulations (or wargames) to plan for future environmental security risks.

On 25 January 2019, the UN Security Council held an open debate to discuss the security implications of climate-related disaster events. The meeting, initiated by the Dominican Republic, underscored the global nature of climate-related disasters. Most speakers highlighted the need for better climate risk management as an important contribution to safeguarding international peace and security. The debate marks the beginning of a year in which climate security ranks high on the UN’s agenda.

It is imperative that countries adopt a human security approach to achieve “freedom from hazard impacts”—nationally through a scientific disaster risk reduction strategy and internationally through climate diplomacy.

Once again, we find ourselves witnessing another calamitous hurricane event in the United States, just weeks after a George Washington University report estimated that nearly 3,000 more people died in the 6 months following last year’s Hurricane Maria than would have without the hurricane. We have been here before, too many times. With each and every major disaster, the scientists who study public health in crises ask ourselves, is what we have learned and shared being taken seriously—or is it just being ignored? The response to Hurricane Maria, which devastated Puerto Rico last year, is just one more example where we have to ask if our work is valued by those who have the political power to improve public health. The staggering number of excess deaths—most of whom died after the storm—point to a deadly lack of prevention and preparedness, particularly in the public health system.

As the Atlantic hurricane season kicks off this month, some coastal communities in the United States and small-island nations in the Caribbean are still recovering from last year’s record-breaking damage. At the same time, the heavy rains pounding the East Coast this week are part of a long-term trend towards more severe heavy rainfall events that have led to deadly floods and threaten critical U.S. military bases. Even on sunny days, cities such as Norfolk and Manila contend with high tide or “nuisance” flooding—a phenomenon that has increased as much as nine-fold since the 1960s, according to NOAA.