It is widely recognized that oil states are rarely democratic, and often conflict-prone. As these governments wind down their dependence on this toxic resource as part of broader global efforts to decarbonize, one might imagine that the end of oil will spell a better future for the citizens of oil-producing countries. Sadly, a look at the cases of fragile fossil fuel producing states (FFFPs) suggests that this may not be the case.

We are undoubtedly at the 11th hour for biodiversity. The World Wildlife Foundation recently reported that Earth saw a 70% drop in species populations over the last fifty years.

As global leaders convened at COP16 in Cali, Colombia in late October and early November, many of the most pressing threats to biodiversity and pathways to improving governance effectiveness were on the agenda. This year’s conference theme—“Peace with Nature”—offered an impetus for a deeper dialogue on the conflict-biodiversity nexus, which included the work of “Peace@CBD”: a community of NGOs, institutions, and individuals that promotes relationships between nature, peace, and conflict.

As public policymakers and NGO advocates around the world meet in Baku for COP29, the urgency of the climate crisis grows ever more pressing. Yet hopes that the targets and commitments will lead to meaningful policy action have contended with persistent national and global inaction on climate change mitigation and adaptation.

COP16 Sees Action Against Biomass Subsidies (Mongabay) 

In recent years, biofuel has gained tremendous popularity as an alternative to fossil fuels. Yet scientists have now demonstrated how burning forest biomass to produce energy emits more carbon emissions than coal when measured per unit of electricity generated. They also have evidence that forest-based products like wood pellets degrade carbon stores and biodiversity. It is a debate that has gained momentum in the ongoing COP16. 

At first glance, the growing alignment of climate and biodiversity challenges in global politics may seem harmless. Indeed, there is a strong argument that it is a much-needed and long overdue development, since addressing these inextricably-connected challenges together may ensure that gains in one area do not lead to costs in the other.

The Pacific Institute recently updated its Water Conflict Chronology—a database of water-conflict events that began to take form in the 1980s. The recent updates include the addition of 300 new entries to the database, highlighting the alarming rise of water-related conflicts in the last few years. Despite this overwhelming evidence of a growing trend in water-related conflicts, global attention toward addressing them remains negligible.   

A window into what we’re reading at the Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program

Fukushima Nuclear Clean-up Begins (The Diplomat) 

It has been over 13 years since a massive 9.0 earthquake near the coastline of Japan in 2011 triggered a tsunami that irreversibly damaged the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. Failing cooling systems within the plant led to the melting of its radioactive core reactor, which dripped toxic fallout across the plant and in the larger ecosystem. Since that catastrophe, Japan has been devising ways to responsibly clean the waste in Fukushima—and it might be getting closer to a final answer.