The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (or IPC) is a global partnership that monitors hunger levels. It is widely recognized for its five-phase classification system of food insecurity that ranges from “minimal” (Phase 1) to “famine” (Phase 5). While the IPC’s aim is to inform humanitarian organizations at an early stage of a crisis to allow them streamline the flow of aid, the worsening global hunger levels experienced this year have pointed to shortcomings in existing prevention systems.
A window into what we’re reading at the Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program
The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (or IPC) is a global partnership that monitors hunger levels. It is widely recognized for its five-phase classification system of food insecurity that ranges from “minimal” (Phase 1) to “famine” (Phase 5). While the IPC’s aim is to inform humanitarian organizations at an early stage of a crisis to allow them streamline the flow of aid, the worsening global hunger levels experienced this year have pointed to shortcomings in existing prevention systems.
This article is adapted from Vince Beiser’s “Power Metal” newsletter.
If you’ve heard anything about the dark side of the shift to renewable energy and digital tech—one of the main topics of my new book, Power Metal: The Race for the Resources That Will Shape the Future—you’ve probably heard about the children working in cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). That particular outrage has been covered by majorinternationalnews outlets, human rights organizations and another recent book, Cobalt Red. But it turns out there are many other places where children, as well as enslaved adults, are producing the metals that go into our electric cars and cell phones.
In today’s episode of New Security Broadcast, ECSP Program Director Lauren Risi sits down with Swathi Veeravalli on her last day as the Director for Climate Security and Adaptation at the National Security Council (NSC) to discuss the new US Framework for Climate Resilience and Security, its significance for the future of US security and economic interests, and what success in building climate security looks like over the next decade.
When I stepped into the bustling exhibition hall at Enlit Africa in Cape Town in May 2024, I was surprised by the riot of colorful banners featuring Chinese characters. A whopping 40% of the exhibitors at one of Africa’s largest energy and power conferences in Cape Town from China—more than any other country.
When the White House released the US Framework for Climate Resilience and Security in September 2024, it was an important opportunity to highlight the significant impacts of climate change on US national security, economic, and strategic interests. The Framework also emphasized the need for tailored approaches in fragile, conflict-affected, and vulnerable (FCV) contexts, particularly in managing and allocating resources, as well as ensuring that climate finance addresses conflict drivers.
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.
If you work for an NGO, you likely face the challenge of “demonstrating impact and effectiveness” to your funders. Yet donor states and international organizations no longer blindly accept that NGOs are doing what they claim to do. So the task is not only to meet expectations, but also to communicate the organization’s most significant impacts to donors, other partners, and professional colleagues. Measuring organizational effectiveness for improved health and development impact is a key element to do so in a changing landscape.
In its recent report,The Economics of Water, the Global Commission on the Economics of Water examined world hydrological systems and their impact on water availability—and warn of imminent shortcomings in food production. The study asserts that the demand for freshwater will outweigh the supply by 40% in 2030, highlighting a significant shift inprevious freshwater requirement estimates.