Climate security is an essential conceptual framework to understand the global interplay of biophysical and socioeconomic forces that threaten our planet. Indeed, it is so important that new currents of science, politics, and advocacy make refining definitions a necessity.

Seeing Loreta sort and dry her Omena sardines at the shores of Lake Victoria in Western Kenya, one may dismiss this small, middle-aged woman as an ordinary fishmonger struggling to earn a living.

Hydropower is the largest source of low-carbon electricity in the world today. And its benefits are needed more than ever. The International Energy Agency estimates that we will need to double the amount of installed hydropower capacity—which stands today at around 1360 gigawatts worldwide—in order to limit the rise in average global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

The negative impacts on global food security wrought by Russia’s war in Ukraine are obvious. But recent news that Russia currently occupies more than one fifth of Ukrainian farmland, draws attention to another dimension of this politically-induced food and agricultural crisis: land itself. Of course, territory has long been an object of conflict and warfare. But agricultural land—in particular—is also a key, though understated, dimension of the geopolitical ambitions undergirding Russian activity at home and abroad.

July’s top post explored why water diplomats should revisit the realist perspective when interrogating leadership styles, cultural differences, and knowledge sharing involved in water disputes and cooperation. Over the past decade, diplomacy initiatives to address transboundary water conflicts have been frustratingly “power-shy,” write Sumit Vij, Jeroen Warner, Mark Zeitoun, and Christian Bréthaut. Multilateral institutions like the United Nations should instead address the power dynamics embedded in such disputes by engaging in track 2 (informal interaction between lower-ranking officers of both sides) or track 3 (facilitating interaction and understanding between communities) diplomacy.

Meeting the immense impacts of climate change will require strong “top-down” policies to reduce emissions and remove carbon from the atmosphere, as well as building resilience in the face of climate stresses and shocks. As communities and governments undertake rapid and fundamental transformation of sectors and systems—energy, transportation, buildings and even green spaces—the need for governments to develop strategies that drive innovation and technological solutions becomes more urgent and essential.

The much-needed transition to a zero carbon, green economy offers opportunities to contribute to peace, but only if the conflict risks of transition are understood and managed to produce a just and peaceful transition. That means minimizing “backdraft”—the unintended negative impacts of transition that are a key obstacle to that goal.

Of COVID-19’s many lessons, one is most critical to our collective next steps:

Business as usual in global health is no longer possible.

The pandemic exposed weaknesses in health systems across the world, and particularly in the delivery of equitable, high-quality reproductive, maternal, newborn, adolescent, and child health (RMNCAH) services. It also reinforced that effectively addressing these challenges requires rapid, responsive approaches driven and owned by countries and local institutions.