The Trump administration’s first National Defense Strategy, which was released last Friday, outlines the U.S. Department of Defense’s national security goals in a world it describes as rife with great power competition between the United States, Russia, and China. Climate change – which some military leaders warn poses a looming threat to the effectiveness of American military power – was not mentioned, in stark contrast to the previous administration’s strategic priorities. National security and defense strategies issued by the Obama Administration highlighted the dangers climate change poses to national security, including “increased national disasters, refugee flows, and conflicts over basic resources like food and water.”

Climate change is “unfolding as we speak,” said John Agard, professor of Tropical Island Ecology at the University of the West Indies (UWI) at a recent public forum on island nations hosted in Trinidad by UWI’s Institute of International Relations. The “close coupling of terrestrial, coastal, and marine systems” in islands “results in fast-spreading impacts across systems,” said Roger-Mark De Souza¹, formerly the director of population, environmental security, and resilience for the Wilson Center, which partnered with UWI and American University’s Center for Latin American and Latino Studies to organize the event.

This One Goes to 11.

Eleven years ago this week, the New Security Beat began covering population, environment, and conflict connections. Today, our goal remains the same as in 2007: to provide insight on today’s new security threats and to share overlooked opportunities for cooperation. As we wrote then, “countries in crises often share the problems of rapid population growth and deteriorating environmental resources”: and unfortunately, the same trends continue undermine peace and deepen poverty. But we’ve also analyzed notable global efforts, including the Sustainable Development Goals and the growing resilience agenda, that offer hope for progress.

Sewage—refuse liquids or waste matter usually carried off by sewers—is at the front lines of a global movement for clean energy. Innovative U.S. cities are digging into their dirtiest depths to create new sources of power that optimize economic benefits, generate clean energy, and control pollution. This wastewater-to-power movement is just beginning to catch on in China. But with some of the largest and most densely populated cities in the world, the country could be poised to lead a sludge-to-energy revolution.

The new year promises some big changes for the field of environmental security—and some big moves for the Environmental Change and Security Program (ECSP). As we say hello to 2018, we wave goodbye to Roger-Mark De Souza, and welcome him to our team of advisors and fellows. And I’m excited (if a bit daunted) to step into his shoes as our Acting Director and tackle the challenges to come.

This new year brings new projects—and some sad goodbyes. Today, I’m excited to begin my leadership of Sister Cities International, the world’s largest and oldest network of citizen diplomats. And I’m sorry to leave the Wilson Center, which has been my home for the last five years. But it’s not a long goodbye: I will continue to work with the Global Sustainability and Resilience team as a Global Fellow and as an advisor to the New Security Beat. In all of these roles, my New Year’s resolution is to renew our commitment to making a real difference in global well-being and sustainability. And while this year promises great changes, three key priorities will continue to inspire me and guide our collective efforts: resilience, complexity, and diplomacy.

Fisheries are a surprisingly common reason for conflict between countries. Between 1993 and 2010, 11 percent of militarized interstate disputes (MIDs) – conflicts short of war between two sovereign states – involved fisheries, fishers, or fishing vessels. While the conflicts often involve fresh fish, the implications for global peace and prosperity stink like fermented herring. As climate change threatens to change fish habitats, new governance strategies may be needed to prevent these “fishy MIDs” from sparking broader conflicts.

“Resilience isn’t an outcome,” said USAID Resilience Coordinator Greg Collins at a recent Wilson Center event on measuring resilience; it is “the ability to manage adversity and change without compromising future well-being.” The wide array of individual factors that contribute to building resilience—ranging from livestock insurance and microsavings, to risk tolerance and women’s decision-making—can be challenging to measure individually, let alone in concert. But this assessment is essential for designing and implementing successful development projects: “We have to be able to answer the question: Is this building resilience, yes or no?” said Cornell University’s Chris Barrett.