The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
URBANA, Illinois, US, Aug 27 2026 (IPS) - Across the U.S. Midwest, from Illinois to Indiana to Ohio, severe storms and heavy rains caused devastating flooding, extensive damage to infrastructure, and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people. The historic scale and severity of flooding led to the issuance of disaster proclamations for the States of Illinois and Indiana.
Often underestimated and overlooked are the devastating and economically costly consequences of flooding for agriculture, crop production, agroecosystems, and, most importantly, America’s Midwest region’s critical infrastructure: its farmlands which lead the nation in the production of major crops, including corn and soybeans, collectively contributing to the United States agriculture sector that is valued at $1.5 trillion.
Policymakers must pay attention to flooding and recognize it as a serious threat to American agriculture, with devastating impacts on America’s food supply, farm incomes, and national food security
This needs to change. Policymakers must pay attention to flooding and recognize it as a serious threat to American agriculture, with devastating impacts on America’s food supply, farm incomes, and national food security. Furthermore, evidence shows that the impacts of flooding on agriculture are comparable to those of drought, making a focus on flooding even more urgent.
Five reasons stand out as to why policymakers must pay attention to intensifying flooding events in the Midwest and their consequences for Midwestern agriculture.
First, the U.S. Midwest region is central and backbone of the American Nation’s food and energy systems. In 2024, Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota alone produced more than half of the nation’s corn and soybeans. Furthermore, the importance of Midwest grown crops like corn extends beyond food and livestock feed. Data evidence shows that over 40% of U.S. grown corn has been used for ethanol production. When flooding disrupts Midwestern agriculture, the consequenses can reach beyond our food system and into America’s energy systems.
Second, flooding not only threatens crop production, but it also negatively impacts soil, soil functions, quality and countless number soil dwelling species including earthworms, and beneficial soil microbes, which are foundational ingredients to resilient agricultural production and functioning agroecosystems. These consequenses can persist long after flooding waters have receded, potentially affecting crop growth and productivity in subsequent seasons.
Third, flooding imposes costs on the insurance industry and other stakeholders supporting Midwest agriculture. From 1989 to 2020, excess moisture was the fastest-growing cause of loss reported to the USDA Risk Management Agency, increasing in 97 percent of the counties reporting, while total inflation-adjusted crop insurance indemnities rose 374 percent.
Of the $21.94 billion in crop and rangeland losses in 2023, nearly $10 billion was not covered by RMA programs, and excessive precipitation, flooding, and hurricanes accounted for $3.99 billion of the total. These costs also affect the businesses that transport crops: when flooding disrupts roads, rails, and rivers serving local grain elevators, those elevators pay farmers about 24 cents less per bushel for corn and 32 cents less per bushel for soybeans.
Fourth, our models are most confident that spring precipitation will increase by ~25-50% by the late century. However, single-day extreme precipitation events and excess summer precipitation are less predictable; one such event was the recent flash flooding across the Midwestern corridor this August.
This is especially concerning given that crops are in the reproductive stage and close to harvest, when farmers have already incurred the costs of this season’s crops and crops may have been affected by wet soil earlier in the season.
Waterlogging at reproductive stages has been estimated globally to reduce yields by 41.9 percent, compared with 34.8 percent at vegetative stages. Fields already stressed by wet soils earlier in the season may be damaged by both events. The loss in crop yields could be catastrophic for an already vulnerable sector.
Fifth, current policies are not keeping pace with the changing timing of flooding events. Although the United States Department of Agriculture has put in place several Federal programs to assist farmers, including prevented planting coverage, disaster and conservation assistance, and crop insurance, and continues to update these programs, many of these work best for flooding that happens early in the growing season rather than for flooding that devastates established crops later in the growing season.
The recent flooding events occurred in August, when crops including corn and soybeans are well established, and there is an urgent need for policymakers to reassess existing policies to ensure that farmers are shielded from production losses, income disruptions, and other economic costs that arise when flooding occurs late in the season.
American policymakers cannot afford to overlook or underestimate the extensive, devastating impacts of flooding on agriculture and the stakeholders who support the agricultural sector.
The consequences of flooding extend far beyond damaged roads and infrastructure. They reach America’s farmlands, the soul of America’s food supply, a sector already affected by rising fuel costs and fertilizer shortages, and may be compounded by supply-chain disruptions caused by flooding, as in 2019.
Policymakers must seize the opportunity to re-examine whether existing policies and recent investments, including the $700 million pilot program to support regenerative agriculture practices, can help the Midwest region and its farmlands meet the challenges brought about by increasing flooding and other severe weather events. Where policies fall short, policy makers must create new ones. Time is of essence.
Esther Ngumbi, PhD, is an Associate Professor in the Department of Entomology at the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign.
Christy Gibson, PhD, is an Illinois Distinguished Postdoctoral Scholar in the Department of Crop Sciences at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, where she studies how floods and droughts reshape farming systems and the ecosystems that sustain them
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, India,, Aug 27 2026 (IPS) - India is ranked the second-largest fish-producing nation globally, accounting for around 8 percent of global output. The fisheries sector in India accounts for nearly 7.43 percent of Agricultural Gross Value Added (GVA), the highest (independent) share among the agriculture and allied sectors.
According to government statistics, India’s fish output doubled from 95.79 lakh tonnes in FY 2013–14 to 197.75 lakh tonnes in FY 2024–25, a 106 per cent increase. The Union Budget of 2026–27 proposed ₹2,761.80 crore for the fisheries sector, marking the highest-ever annual budgetary allocation for this sector.
India’s “Blue Revolution”, which commenced in 2015 and is backed by central schemes like the Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana (PMMSY), launched in 2020, aims to strengthen the fisheries sector through infrastructure expansion and modern practices.
Yet, in India, the fisheries department at the central level is a part of the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry & Dairying. “This needs a revamp, with fisheries being declared an independent sector nationally and regionally,” says the Federation of Indian Fisher Organisations (FIFO).
FIFO, which registered as an official organisation in March 2025, currently has 37 member organisations in India and a presence in every coastal state and union territory. Headed by Vincent Jain, who has worked with unions like the South Indian Federation of Fishermen Societies (SIFFS) in the past, FIFO has approached several Members of Parliament from coastal states, the Fisheries Joint Secretary, the ICAR (Indian Council of Agricultural Research) Director, etc., in the last half-year or so, to present the case.
One of the key structural issues is, Jain says, that funds allotted by the central government get divided into three parts currently, with fisheries ending up with significantly less economic support than it actually needs. It also doesn’t help that many of the policy-makers at the union level don’t belong to coastal states, Jain notes. Yet, there’s an independent sector for agriculture, known as the Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare.
Although the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) does have a separate “Fisheries & Aquaculture” department under it, in matters of governance, it’s still categorised under the broader “agri-food systems”. Unlike land-based sectors, where violations are often clearly distinguished from livelihood activities, fisheries operate in complex and fluid marine spaces where rules, boundaries, and enforcement mechanisms are not always effectively communicated or practically feasible.
Jain has also reached out to the FAO on behalf of the FIFO, highlighting 30 different aspects to be considered in declaring fisheries as an independent sector. His next step is to have different regional coastal organisations in India, both under FIFO and otherwise, make similar official requests.
Jain suggests that FAO can implement this need by initiating global and regional consultations, calling for expert opinions from fisheries professionals, marine scientists, fisher organisations, labour and safety experts, and policy practitioners with direct field experience. FAO can also develop revised advisory guidelines that are sensitive to country-specific contexts while promoting best practices in fisheries governance.
“You can look at this in two ways: if we get national recognition as an independent sector, other countries, especially in Asia, may be encouraged to follow suit. At the same time, if an organisation like the FAO acknowledges this need, then it can create a trickle-down effect globally as well,” Jain says.
In India, Jain notes, the government still officially categorises fishers as “farmers”, which is the biggest misrepresentation that FIFO aims to address. This is also influenced by aquaculture being promoted in this century. Even though advisory committees in India include experts with fisheries backgrounds, final decisions are often shaped by administrative perspectives that neglect the needs of fishers.
As a result, fisheries schemes have been poorly aligned, overlook safety and operational risks at sea, underestimate capital and infrastructure requirements, or fail to address post-harvest and market challenges unique to the sector.
Moreover, fishers don’t have a regulated system of provident fund or insurance schemes, which the government has mandated for daily wage workers across the country.
Sebastian Mathew, a fishery advisor who retired from the International Collective in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF), has a slightly differing perspective on the issue, though. Unlike agriculture and farming, fishing is a declining “traditional” livelihood generally in India, he says. There are fewer people in this century who are carrying the trade forward from their previous generation and are seeking alternative occupations instead.
There’s also substantial loss of traditional knowledge as a result of this, Mathew reckons. While this phenomenon is applicable for agriculture as well, he feels it’s more pressing when it comes to fishing.
“Also, when we talk about better resource allocation for fisheries centrally, we need to reflect on how well the current funds are being utilised, especially by the state governments. Except for aquaculture, are we really promoting artisanal fishing practices and using our finances wisely for that?” he adds.
One of the fishers’ unions in Sri Lanka has expressed interest in joining FIFO in this movement, Jain says. He has also reached out to representatives of several Asian and European countries who rely on the fisheries sector to a large extent, just like India.
This movement is distinctive from other campaigns by the fishers’ unions and organisations in the past, Jain points out, because of the official route chosen to highlight the issue rather than demonstrative protests or agitations.
The organisation is also planning to conduct a national-level workshop where experts and representatives of coastal communities can present their ideas on this matter.
IPS UN Bureau Report
KATHMANDU, Aug 27 2026 (IPS) - A massive geophysical disaster along the mountainous Nepal-Tibet border has left at least 160 people dead and hundreds more missing after a glacial collapse triggered devastating flash floods and mudslides on Wednesday.
According to data compiled by regional disaster management authorities, the catastrophe began high in the Himalayas. An enormous avalanche of ice and rock tore into the Lhende River, unleashing a wall of mud and water that surged downstream into the Bhote Koshi and Trishuli rivers.
The impact on the ground has been devastating. Officials in Nepal have confirmed 157 fatalities, while authorities in Tibet (China) have reported three deaths, with warnings that the toll is expected to rise. Hardest hit are Nepal’s Rasuwa and Nuwakot districts, alongside Tibet’s Gyirong County. Local police reports indicate that more than 400 people remain unaccounted for, including dozens of Nepalese emergency responders and over 340 foreign tourists, as reported extensively by international news agencies.
In response to the tragedy, UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed deep sadness and solidarity with the affected communities, confirming that UN teams are actively mobilising aid on the ground. Simultaneously, UNICEF has highlighted the severe impact of the disaster on children and families, warning of severe long-term trauma, displacement, and immediate risks to youth in the devastated regions.
UNICEF is leveraging its local presence and its global supply hub in Copenhagen to deliver safe drinking water, medical care, and nutrition kits to the disaster zone within 72 hours.
With road access completely severed by the destruction of 19 vehicle bridges and 40 kilometres of highways, search and rescue teams are relying on helicopters to winch survivors to safety. The US, China, India, and the European Union have pledged international relief operations.
IPS UN Bureau Report
VICTORIA, Seychelles, Aug 26 2026 (IPS) - Across this vast ocean, the latest monitoring by Mercator Ocean International shows marine heatwave conditions ranging from moderate to severe. At the same time, the World Meteorological Organization expects a strong El Niño to intensify through August to October, with a positive Indian Ocean Dipole also likely to develop. These are not distant scientific signals. They are an urgent warning that the ocean system on which millions depend is under mounting stress.
The Indian Ocean in particular has sustained communities for generations. It provides food and livelihoods, carries trade and travel, shapes our cultures and moderates our climate. It is also one connected living system – its currents carry heat, nutrients, fish (as well as pollution, unfortunately) across borders drawn on maps. Its coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass meadows and open waters support people from the eastern coast of Africa to South Asia, and from the islands of the western Indian Ocean to the Maldives and beyond. When ocean temperatures rise abnormally, the consequences are not confined to a scientific bulletin. They are seen in the health of coral reefs, in the movement and abundance of fish, in the safety of coastal communities, and in the future of tourism and fisheries. They are felt in the weakening of the natural protection that reefs, mangroves and coastal habitats provide against erosion, flooding and storms.
Coral reefs are especially vulnerable. They can sometimes recover from an isolated bleaching event if temperatures fall quickly enough. But repeated bleaching and prolonged heat stress allow too little time for recovery. When reefs deteriorate, the consequences extend beyond biodiversity: fish habitats are lost, shorelines become more exposed, tourism suffers and communities lose part of their natural and cultural inheritance. This is why ocean warming is not simply an environmental issue. It is an issue of food security, jobs, development, economic stability and justice.
For decades, humanity has relied on the ocean’s exceptional capacity to cushion the climate crisis. The ocean absorbs more than 90 percent of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gas emissions. By doing so, it has moderated atmospheric warming and spared humanity even more severe disruption. But there is a limit to what we can ask of the sea. Small island developing states have contributed little to the cumulative emissions destabilising the global climate. Yet we are among the first to face the consequences. We cannot move our reefs. We cannot relocate our coastlines without immense social and economic cost. We cannot separate the wellbeing of our people and economies from the health of the ocean. For island people, climate vulnerability is not an abstract concept. It is a daily reality.
Still, island states must not be viewed only as victims. We are custodians of extensive ocean spaces, centres of practical innovation and partners in the search for sustainable solutions. Seychelles has tried to demonstrate that economic development and marine conservation need not be enemies. Through marine spatial planning, Seychelles has committed 30 percent of its waters to protection, while advancing a blue economy vision based on stewardship rather than depletion. This is not charity towards nature. It is a recognition that there can be no enduring prosperity if fish stocks decline, reefs deteriorate and coastal ecosystems are damaged beyond recovery.
Across the Indian Ocean, other island and coastal states are also restoring habitats, improving fisheries management, investing in renewable energy, strengthening marine conservation and building more resilient communities. Their efforts deserve recognition and support. They show that those most exposed to climate risk are not waiting passively for rescue. They are protecting a shared ocean heritage, often with scarce resources. But local and regional action cannot substitute for the choices that must be made globally.
First, the world must reduce greenhouse gas emissions much more rapidly. Adaptation is indispensable, particularly for small island developing states. We need stronger early-warning systems, more ocean observation, investment in reef and coastal restoration, secure water supplies and infrastructure designed for a changing climate. But adaptation cannot indefinitely protect an ocean that continues to accumulate heat. No sea wall, restoration programme or emergency plan can replace decisive action to reduce emissions.
Second, climate finance must become fairer, faster and easier to access. Island states should not have to devote years of limited institutional capacity to complex procedures simply to secure support for renewable energy, water security, coastal protection, marine research and ecosystem restoration. Those facing the greatest climate risks require genuine partnership – not delayed promises, burdensome processes and inadequate resources.
Third, the countries of the Indian Ocean must deepen regional cooperation. Marine heatwaves, coral bleaching, illegal fishing, biodiversity loss and coastal erosion do not stop at national boundaries. We need better ocean observation, data-sharing and regional early-warning systems. We need stronger scientific cooperation, responsible fisheries management and coordinated protection of the ecosystems connecting our islands and coasts.
The Indian Ocean should not be seen merely as a corridor for trade or a theatre for geopolitical competition. It is a shared living system, whose health is fundamental to the security and prosperity of everyone who depends on it. The current warming should also remind us that the ocean is not an inexhaustible resource. It has regulated our climate, sustained our communities, supported our economies and linked our peoples for generations. Yet we still behave as though its capacity to absorb our impacts has no limits. It does.
The islands of the Indian Ocean are not asking for sympathy. We are calling for shared responsibility. We know that ocean health is inseparable from the security of our people. We know that protecting nature and pursuing development must go hand in hand. And we know that every year of delay makes adaptation more costly, the damage more severe and the choices before us more difficult. As a result, the Indian Ocean is sounding the alarm. Its islands are among the first to hear it. But the warning is not ours alone. It is for every country whose climate, food security, economy and future depend on a living ocean.
James Michel, is Former President of the Republic of Seychelles
IPS UN Bureau
SUVA, Fiji, Aug 26 2026 (IPS) - For generations, Pacific children have grown up with the ocean as part of everyday life. It is where families fish, where stories are passed down, where livelihoods begin and where cultures are rooted. Yet many young people are inheriting an ocean facing pressures unlike anything their ancestors experienced, from warming seas and coral bleaching to plastic pollution and declining marine ecosystems.
Across Fiji, a quiet movement is helping change how the next generation sees the ocean.
Children who once viewed the sea simply as a place to swim, fish or spend time with friends are beginning to understand something much deeper: that the future of the Blue Pacific depends on the choices they make today.
For Hannah Nanovu, Whole School Ocean Coordinator at the International School Suva, watching that transformation unfold is one of the most rewarding parts of her work.
“Every year, the students surprise and inspire me through their passion, creativity, and commitment to learning more about the ocean and taking action,” Nanovu says.
Students at the Veivueti Kids Ocean Conference taking part in an interactive activity at the SPC booth, identifying marine organisms commonly found in tidal zone ecosystems. Credit: SPC
“This year, having students travel from Beqa to participate was particularly inspiring, and seeing the conference grow each year, with more schools joining and schools travelling further to be part of it, reminds me that we are building a community of young ocean advocates across Fiji.”
That growing community came together once again at the Veivueti Kids Ocean Conference, where students explored the ocean not just through science but through culture, storytelling, traditional knowledge and hands-on learning.
Since developing its Whole School Ocean Programme in 2018, the International School Suva has used the conference to create a space where students can present research, exchange ideas and discover that every child — regardless of where they come from – has a role in protecting the ocean.
Behind that movement is a broader regional effort led by the Pacific Community (SPC).
Summit participants take part in a hands-on field activity, identifying marine organisms collected for study. Credit: SPC
Science That Begins With Home
For many students, science can feel distant.
Concepts such as biodiversity, ocean circulation, marine ecosystems and climate change often exist only in textbooks—complex words to memorise rather than realities connected to everyday life.
SPC believes science becomes far more powerful when students discover it in places they already know.
“Pacific communities have a deep cultural and traditional connection to the ocean, but more can be done to increase knowledge about ocean ecosystems, the challenges they face, and how we can protect them,” says Doreen Tuala, team leader for Curriculum and Assessment at SPC.
“The best place to start addressing this need is through education, especially by engaging young people.”
Rather than separating modern science from Pacific knowledge, SPC’s approach brings them together.
Students investigate coral reefs they swim on, mangroves that protect their villages, fisheries that feed their families and coastlines increasingly affected by climate change. They learn through fieldwork, conversations with elders and practical investigations that reveal how traditional ecological knowledge and scientific research complement one another.
Tuala explains, “By connecting learning to students’ everyday lives, local environments and cultural knowledge, students can investigate issues that directly affect their communities, such as coral reef health, sustainable fisheries, coastal erosion, marine pollution and the impacts of climate change.”
Leotasi Kautu, School Principal from Tuvalu, presents the 3D inundation model of Funafuti, developed by SPC and the Government of Tuvalu, to map flood risk and guide climate adaptation. Credit: SPC
Building a Generation of Ocean Guardians
Recognising that ocean stewardship begins long before adulthood, SPC is making one of its strongest regional commitments yet – to ocean literacy.
Its work is built around three complementary initiatives:
strengthening science education through a partnership with National Geographic Pristine Seas; expanding locally relevant teaching materials through the EQAP Ocean Literacy Resources Repository; and supporting practical learning experiences like Fiji’s Veivueti Kids Ocean Conference.Together, these initiatives aim to embed ocean literacy in Pacific education systems, giving young people the knowledge, skills and confidence to understand the ocean that sustains them.
“Through this partnership, we are bringing together scientific expertise, educational resources and regional networks to support countries in integrating ocean literacy into education systems,” says Tuala.
The partnership combines SPC’s curriculum expertise with National Geographic Pristine Seas’ experience in marine science, exploration and conservation. But its purpose extends well beyond developing lesson plans.
It seeks to address a long-standing gap in structured ocean education designed specifically for Pacific realities, ensuring students learn about the ocean through examples, cultures and ecosystems they recognise as their own.
Learning Beyond the Classroom
That philosophy comes alive at the Veivueti Kids Ocean Conference.
This year, SPC delivered one of the conference’s most popular activities, an interactive ocean scavenger hunt where students learned directly from marine scientists and ocean experts.
“The students were engaged, curious and loved the opportunity to learn directly from ocean experts,” Nanovu says.
For her, the impact extends well beyond the children.
Teachers leave with fresh ideas, practical resources and renewed confidence to bring ocean learning back into their classrooms.
“Through these projects, students are developing a deeper understanding of the ocean.”
“My hope is that through this connection they grow to love the ocean a little more. They are the future guardians of our ocean, and it is now their turn to carry the torch of protection and stewardship.”
Nanovu credits SPC as one of the key partners helping the conference continue to grow.
“I am incredibly grateful to SPC for supporting the Veivueti Kids Ocean Conference since it began three years ago,” she says.
“Their support has helped make the conference possible through providing engaging workshops and contributing towards important costs such as food and resources.”
Empowering the Teachers
Strong ocean education depends on confident teachers.
That is why SPC’s regional Science Teaching and Learning Workshop focuses not only on students but also on empowering educators with practical teaching strategies, classroom resources and regional networks they can take back to their schools.
“Ultimately, we want teachers to feel empowered to inspire their students to become informed and responsible ocean stewards who understand the importance of protecting and sustainably managing our ocean resources for future generations,” Tuala says.
To support that work long after the workshops end, SPC has established the EQAP Ocean Literacy Resources Repository, a growing online collection of lesson plans, classroom activities, multimedia resources and teaching tools that educators across the Pacific can freely access and adapt to their own languages, cultures and environments.
SPC’s commitment extends well beyond Fiji.
In New Caledonia, SPC is partnering with Comité Égalité pour tous à l’école (Comité 3E) to strengthen environmental education through schools and communities while ensuring learning reflects local cultures, languages and experiences.
Together with regional teacher training, practical classroom resources and youth initiatives, these partnerships are steadily building something much larger than individual projects.
They are nurturing a generation that sees the ocean not simply as a resource to use but as a living system to understand, respect and protect.
The Pacific Ocean covers nearly one-third of the Earth’s surface. Its future will not be determined by governments or scientists alone.
It will also be shaped by the children sitting in classrooms today—children who understand why coral reefs matter, who recognise the value of mangroves, who embrace both ancestral knowledge and modern science, and who believe their actions can make a difference.
That is the future SPC hopes to help create.
“Through this initiative, we aim to encourage students to see themselves not only as beneficiaries of the ocean’s resources but also as guardians of a shared Blue Pacific heritage,” says Tuala.
Looking ahead, the vision is simple but ambitious.
“Our vision is for young Pacific people to have the knowledge and confidence to help keep our ocean healthy and sustainable.”
“If more students see themselves as ocean stewards and take action to protect the marine environment in their communities, this partnership will have made a real difference.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Excerpt:
There is a saying that people protect what they love, and to love something, you first need to understand it. — Hannah Nanovu, Whole School Ocean Coordinator, International School Suva
NAIROBI, Kenya, Aug 26 2026 (IPS) - Several coalitions exist today to defend the territories in which people live and work. Global leaders have long understood the importance of shared responsibility for collective security and have invested significant time in establishing networks, partnerships and alliances. In 2025, global spending on defense reached a record $2.9 trillion.
But the global community is increasingly recognizing that today’s gravest existential risks arise from a war being waged against nature itself – and our defenses are woefully fragmented and underfunded. The world is investing only about $220 billion a year for nature-based solutions, compared to $7.3 trillion for nature-negative activities.
This is not just a discrete, isolated environmental concern. The triple planetary crises of land degradation, biodiversity loss and climate change are worsening food insecurity, water scarcity and ecosystem collapse, threatening millions of lives.
Collectively, the impact of the ongoing assault on nature is amplifying conflict, worsening migration, driving inflation higher, and fomenting geopolitical instability. Unless restoration and sustainable management of resources is in place, the world is expected to lose more than US$23 trillion by 2050, while halting this trend would cost around $4.6 trillion.
Many solutions to these interconnected crises exist but have been ineffective to date. Limited coordination and collaboration between countries, sectors and disciplines, as well as insufficient resources and short-term approaches to long-term challenges, mean we are far behind the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. Despite compelling evidence of the costs of degradation, investment remains far below what is needed because opportunities are rarely presented as credible, investable propositions.
To change this, two things must happen. First, governments, international agencies, academia and civil society must unite through a grand coalition to bring together those currently working in isolation to achieve greater impact than the sum of their parts – a kind of mutual pact to protect nature.
Photo highlighting the activities and successes of the ‘Promoting Nature-based Solutions for Land Restoration while Strengthening National Monitoring Technical Working Group in Kenya: Phase 2’ project funded by UK PACT. Credit: Anthony Ochieng/CIFOR-ICRAF
And second, this grand coalition must also engineer a funding paradigm shift from focusing on environmental challenges to investing in the many opportunities of conservation and restoration.
The ongoing UN COP17 desertification talks in Mongolia, where the theme is “Restoring Land, Restoring Hope”, is the perfect opportunity to progress this.
Evidence shows that integrated approaches to address landscape degradation solve multiple interconnected challenges.
For example, investment in soil and water conservation in the Adarsha watershed in southern India has been found to improve water availability, agricultural productivity, and rural livelihoods. Analysis showed that yields of maize intercropped with pigeonpea increased by 148% while households in the watershed were less affected by droughts compared to those in the non-watershed area.
In Kenya and Tanzania, the adoption of Participatory Rangeland Management improved rangeland condition and resilience to climate shocks for more than 90% of participating communities.
Despite evidence from these successes, these interventions are not being invested in and applied at the scale needed to transform the world’s food, land and water systems in ways that can build long-term, far-reaching resilience.
Countries, donors, financing institutions and civil society must come together in a grand coalition to direct the coordination, governance and investment necessary to tackle these crises where they all interconnect: at the landscape level.
A grand coalition would offer a dedicated focal point to integrate and advance the UN’s goals for climate, biodiversity and land degradation, allowing for stronger coordination and shaping the global agenda for informed decision-making. Critically, the coalition would lead the redirection away from ineffective, siloed solutions and the self-defeating environmental trade-offs they create.
A grand coalition would also create a platform for establishing the rigorous systems of governance essential to achieving global goals for nature, including fair and inclusive land tenure and governance over water systems. Understanding the true cost of landscape governance and inaction is instrumental for adequate investments.
Lastly, a grand coalition would gather the evidence to help shift the emphasis of finance for nature towards investments that benefit everyone. By identifying a menu of options for turning grand challenges into grand opportunities, the coalition would unlock the financing from banks, donors, philanthropies and other development funders needed to scale interventions globally.
The UNCCD COP17 talks in Mongolia is not just an opportunity to address the challenges facing land. It’s a moment to foster unity around a shared threat to all of our territories. CGIAR and its partners will play its part by developing an investment plan to anchor greater coordination in collaboration with the grand coalition of action for shared human and planetary outcomes.
Landscapes are where our greatest environmental and human challenges today are playing out, from declining biodiversity to the deforestation driving climate change, to increasing levels of food insecurity.
Investing in multifunctional landscapes through a unified global coalition, therefore, is not simply an environmental imperative for the world, but also a strategic one. Galvanizing support for landscape-centered solutions can simultaneously reduce future risks and strengthen economies and communities.
A global coalition for restoring and protecting landscapes would recognize a defining reality of the 21st century: protecting nature is fundamental for protecting us all.
Dr. Lulseged Tamene Desta, is Director of the CGIAR Multifunctional Landscapes Science Program
Cargele Masso, is Director of the CGIAR’s Environmental Health and Biodiversity Impact Area Platform
IPS UN Bureau
BRUSSELS, Belgium, Aug 26 2026 (IPS) - On 24 July, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly reappointed Volker Türk as High Commissioner for Human Rights for a further four years. Only 10 states – among them Israel, Russia and the USA – opposed the decision.
Türk is an Austrian lawyer who’s spent almost his entire career in the UN system, from field postings in Kosovo to the UN refugee agency to his present role in Geneva. Because of this, when he became High Commissioner in October 2022, there were concerns he might be more cautious than his predecessors, but he has spoken out about violations committed by the powerful. He criticised Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, demanded investigations into deaths in US immigration detention and condemned Israel’s atrocities in Gaza. He has, however, faced criticism for not calling out Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide and not speaking out enough on China, particularly concerning the situation of Uyghur people in Xinjiang.
The vote will make Türk the first person set to serve two full terms since the post was created in 1993. One early High Commissioner, Mary Robinson, wanted to stay on, but strong US resistance to her positions on its post-9/11 military interventionism and the 2001 Durban Conference — the UN’s World Conference against Racism, where Israel and the USA walked out due to its focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — left her with only a one-year extension.
As a funding crisis continues to engulf the UN human rights system, continuity matters. US withdrawal from funding UN agencies, part of its broader assault on the international system in general and human rights bodies in particular, has placed the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) under serious financial strain, forcing staff cuts and reducing capacity to work in countries where human rights violations are taking place. A vacancy or a contested process would have added further disruption at a difficult time.
A rushed and contested process
The vote came unexpectedly and moved fast. UN Secretary-General António Guterres informed states of his intention to reappoint Türk without a public process, open competition or much time for deliberation. With Guterres’ second term ending this year, the move was likely intended to keep the decision off his successor’s desk and prevent opposition from building.
Most states accepted this, but the USA didn’t. It immediately moved to delay the vote, citing insufficient consultation. Ireland, speaking for the European Union, opposed the US motion, which was defeated by 63 votes to 27. The USA’s representative called the process ‘classic UN cronyism’, accused Guterres of cutting a backroom deal and warned there would be ‘consequences’. Russia tried a different tactic, proposing to extend Türk’s mandate by just 81 days, to the end of 2026, leaving the decision to the next Secretary-General. That too was rejected, by 71 votes to 19.
Argentina, Burkina Faso, Israel, Mali, Nicaragua, Niger, North Korea, Russia, Trinidad and Tobago and the USA voted against Türk’s reappointment. The list contains tight US allies, such as Argentina and Israel, and states that align with Russia, such as North Korea and the three military-run states of the Sahel, which are increasingly working as a bloc. Under the Trump administration, it’s no longer a surprise to see the USA voting the same way as Russia. Most of the states, including Nicaragua, systematically violate human rights. Russia and North Korea both resist any accountability for human rights violations, while the USA particularly objected to Türk’s criticism of its war on Iran and migration detention deaths. Israel accused the OHCHR of having ‘erased the atrocities of October 7 and betrayed UN neutrality’.
Some states that might have been expected to vote against Türk, however, supported him. Among the 144 who backed his reappointment were the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan and Syria, all states subject to active UN scrutiny. This suggested that hostility to a specific human rights mandate doesn’t necessarily extend to the whole system, and even heavily scrutinised states may see value in a working relationship with the OHCHR.
A vulnerable human rights system
The 13 abstentions and 26 no-shows also deserve attention. Some were procedural, with Ecuador and Paraguay saying afterwards that they wanted more time. Peru cited concerns about limiting the incoming Secretary-General’s flexibility, though its abstention may also reflect Türk’s recent criticism of Peru’s human rights record, including laws granting amnesty to security forces accused of serious violations during armed conflict between 1980 and 2000.
Iraq, New Zealand, South Korea, Sri Lanka and Uganda all abstained. New Zealand described its position as ‘procedural rather than policy’, but the decision drew sharp domestic criticism, not least given its recent failure to recognise Palestinian statehood.
Among the smaller states that ducked a decision, some likely faced economic or political pressure from the most powerful states to stay quiet, while others may have judged themselves insufficiently protected from the consequences of taking a visible position. This means the vote may reflect vulnerability as much as it measures support for the High Commissioner. As the most powerful states increasingly throw their weight around in the international system, smaller states may have to make calculations about when they can afford to take a position and when they need to stay quiet.
Continuity as the outcome
Institutional continuity is the immediate outcome, and Türk has signalled what he intends to do with it. In a June speech, he described an ‘unprecedented, shameless onslaught against international law’ that’s causing appalling human suffering, insisted the international community must stay focused on fundamentals and declared the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the core treaties ‘ever more important’. His message to the G7, meeting nearby, was blunt: put human rights at the centre of discussions as a force for stability, not an afterthought.
Legitimacy and moral authority, however, won’t pay the OHCHR’s bills. Over the next four years, Türk must resist China, Russia and the USA as they work to undermine the UN bodies that protect human rights. The 144 states that backed Türk now carry the responsibility of turning their votes into action. They should ensure the OHCHR is adequately funded and work to bring on board states that abstained, particularly if they did so out of fear. They must show that collective commitment to human rights still counts for something.
Samuel King is a researcher with the Horizon Europe-funded research project ENSURED: Shaping Cooperation for a World in Transition at CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation.
For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org