Chile is on the cusp of a new era. Just as its lithium—a common element of energy storage technology, which is itself a critical component of the clean energy transition—is experiencing a rise in global market demand, Chilean citizens have called for a new constitution.

Rather than delve into issue opinion polling, or assess presidential campaign strategies, political demographers assume that political change is the predictable product of a set of mutually reinforcing social, economic, and demographic transitions, which can be tracked using data. But is this true in a country like the United States that has been in the advanced stages of these development transitions for decades? If these transitions are as important as demographers believe, could their variation among the 50 states explain the outcome of the recent U.S. presidential election? If so, what could they tell us about America’s electoral future?

Climate change will upend the 21^st century world order. It will redefine how we live and work, and change the systems of production, trade, economics, and finance. Even now, in the midst of a global pandemic, it is clear that climate change will be the defining issue of this century. In fact, COVID-19 has only underscored the inadequacy of our responses to global crises and heightened the urgency of this call to action. 21^st century diplomacy will have to raise climate ambition, shape the transformative systems change needed, and promote and facilitate new modes of multilateral collaboration.

The dry season returned to Brazil’s Amazon region in late July—and with it, forest fires, largely human-made. After making substantial progress in reducing deforestation in the 2000s and early 2010s, Brazil has reversed course and deforestation is rising. In the Amazon, this season has been the worst in more than a decade in number of fires, and second worst in terms of total deforestation, according to satellite data from Brazil’s National Institute of Space Research (INPE), which monitors the situation.

What happens to economic output if we expand protected areas to 30 percent of land and sea worldwide? Anthony Waldron, the lead author of a new study about the economic benefits of land conservation, posed this question at a recent Wilson Center virtual event on the role of Latin America in global biodiversity conservation.

Six months into the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic, many countries, including the United States, are still struggling to contain the spread of the virus which, as of this writing, has taken 744,649 lives globally. Before mask-wearing was recommended as the simplest and most effective defense against contagion, epidemiologists and public health experts recommended regular handwashing with soap and practicing social distancing as fundamental to curbing the spread of the COVID-19 virus. Briefly it appeared as if WASH (water, sanitation, and hygiene) services were actually being accorded the importance they deserved. The critical need for water for handwashing, the millions who lack regular supplies of both water and soap, and the difficulties of social distancing in settlements where thousands share a single toilet with no soap were finally headline news.  

A quiet disruption to the established financial order is underway: Around the world, institutions are pulling their investments out of fossil fuels. Climate activists campaigning for divestment suggest that such economic rearrangements might keep oil, gas, and coal in the ground, curbing carbon emissions. In parallel, some high-profile advocates call for reinvestment in renewable energy. But can the financial sector really drive the structural changes needed to address climate change—and, more fundamentally, climate justice?