In January, the Biden Administration released the Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad. It is a sweeping document that integrates climate concerns into policy and governance, including into national security. It recognizes that environmental security, the integration of environmental considerations into national security strategy, policy, and programs, is essential to combat the global climate crisis and should be mainstreamed across U.S. government efforts. The idea is not a new one. One of the authors (Goodman) led early environmental security efforts in the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) for 8 years of the Clinton Administration in the 1990s, during the first chapter of awareness of environmental considerations in defense and foreign policy.

Water diplomacy has brought increased attention to both water governance and water-related challenges and risks. Women’s leadership in water governance remains a salient issue as the field strives to bridge the gender gap. In this month’s top post, Marisa O. Ensor finds that while the field remains male-dominated, recent events and related publications contribute to bridging this persistent gender gap.

China, which threw global plastic recycling markets into disarray in 2018 with its Green Sword policy banning plastic waste imports, has been ratcheting up domestic regulations to reign in single-use plastics. In January of 2020, China’s National Reform Development Commission announced a stringent policy for a nationwide plastic bag ban by 2022. China is not alone. Bans and taxes on plastic bags are spreading around the globe and they might soon come to your neighborhood, if they haven’t already. 

“Every day in every part of the world, midwives save the lives of women and babies and promote the health and well-being of entire communities,” writes UNFPA Executive Director Dr. Natalia Kanem in honor of International Day of the Midwife. “They deserve our respect and gratitude, but that is not enough. Midwives deserve greater investment in their capabilities, and workplaces that empower them and fully acknowledge their skills and contributions.” Investment in midwifery could save millions of lives per year – an estimated 4.3 million annually by 2035.

The impact of conflict on food security is well documented. But does food security and feeding the hungry really contribute to peace, or is it an exaggeration? Some argue that food insecurity can contribute to political instability and renewed violence in conflict-affected environments. In contrast, others say that brokering peace is a complex process, determined by many variables. To explore this question, this blog describes the instrumentalization and weaponization of food insecurity in conflict, addresses the role of humanitarian interventions, and the key role of government in building lasting change.

Environmental dimensions of armed conflicts

Years of armed conflict have devastated Yemen’s environment, contributing to one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world. Attacks on water infrastructure cut off thousands of people from access to safe drinking water, exacerbating a cholera outbreak that has caused an estimated 4,000 deaths since April 2017. Fighting also damaged Yemen’s agricultural infrastructure, contributing to the food insecurity of an estimated 16.2 million people.

“We need to devote our full attention to the relationship between water, climate, and security, increase understanding of the issue, and take urgent action,” said Carola van Rijnsoever, Director of Inclusive Green Growth at the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, at a recent Hague roundtable on building a transatlantic coalition for climate action on water and security challenges in countries of risk.

Of the many ways in which the 2020 presidential election might reshape American society, its impact on climate policy may well be the most significant. The Biden administration’s ability to move forward with its agenda, however, is greatly constrained by the carbon-climate cleavage that increasingly shapes American legislative politics and electoral competition. The administration has met this challenge with a three-prong strategy intended to bridge this cleavage.