For decades, the Amazon River has defined the life, economy, and borders of the “Triple Frontier” (Colombia, Brazil, Peru). However, new hydrological measurements reveal a geomorphological shift: the Amazon’s main channel is actively migrating south, leaving the Colombian bank high and dry.

According to recent data from the Universidad Nacional de Colombia (UNAL), the deviation is no longer a slow geological process—it is an accelerated crisis. What before was a 30 %, today is only 16.9% of the Amazon River’s water flows through the Colombian channel, while the vast majority (over 83%) has diverted toward the Peruvian coast.

This is not just a story of climate change. It is a story of 20 years of overlooked science and a sudden diplomatic crisis over a new island that has literally redrawn the map: Isla Santa Rosa. 

Why is it happening? A Tale of Three Islands

To understand why this city is losing its access to the Amazon, we must look at three specific geological formations that are acting as the architects of this tragedy.

1. Isla Ronda (The Diverter): Upstream at the Nazareth Bifurcation, this massive island is the root cause. It has grown to a point where it is physically pushing the river’s main current into the southern (Peruvian) channel.
2. Isla de la Fantasía (The Wall): Located directly in front of Leticia’s port, this sediment trap has stabilized into a permanent barrier, blocking the city from the river and turning the harbor into a stagnant backwater.
3. Isla Santa Rosa (The Dispute): This is the new geopolitical dilemma. A massive formation that emerged in the river, it is now the center of a diplomatic difference between Colombia and Peru. While Colombia historically accessed the river here, the shifting channel has led Peru to claim jurisdiction over the island, increasing the isolation of Leticia.

The result is that the “port” of Leticia is increasingly becoming a stagnant backwater lagoon, accessible only by small boats during high water and completely cut off during the dry season.

The Accelerator: Climate Change and the Super-Droughts

While river meandering is a natural process, the speed of this shift is intensified by the global climate crisis. The historic droughts of 2023 and 2024, driven by intense El Niño events and Atlantic warming, lowered river levels to record minimums.

During these low-water periods, the weak current in the Colombian channel lost the hydraulic power needed to “flush” out the sediment. Sandbars that usually wash away in the rainy season have instead calcified and vegetated, turning temporary obstacles into permanent landmasses.

Implications: Beyond the Water Line

The deviation of the Amazon is not merely a logistical inconvenience; it is a systemic shock to the region’s hydrology and biology.

1. Ecological Collapse of Wetlands (The Yahuarcaca System)

The most urgent ecological threat is to the Yahuarcaca Lakes, a complex wetland system just upstream from Leticia. These lakes are not fed by rain, but by the “pulse” of the Amazon River, which recharges them via underground channels and seasonal overflow.

• The Risk: As the main channel moves to Peru, the hydraulic pressure required to fill these lakes diminishes, affecting the primary production for the local ecosystem and serving as a model for how floodplain lakes sustain the wider basin. 
• The Impact: If these lakes disconnect permanently, the primary nursery for the region’s fish populations and the hunting grounds for the endemic Pink River Dolphin (Inia geoffrensis) is lost. For indigenous communities like the Tikuna and Cocama, this is not just an environmental loss; it is the erasure of their “amphibious culture” and food security.

2. The Geopolitical Dilemma (The Moving Talweg)

The border between Colombia and Peru was fixed by the 1922 Salomón-Lozano Treaty, based on the river’s Talweg—the line of deepest flow. But rivers are dynamic, and treaties are static.

• The Question: If the deep channel permanently shifts kilometers into Peruvian territory, does the border move with it? Or does Colombia retain sovereignty over a dry riverbed?
• The Flashpoint: The emergence of Isla Santa Rosa is a symptom of this ambiguity. Peru claims it is an island in their river; Colombia claims it is part of the historic channel. This geological confusion has now escalated into a diplomatic stalemate.

Conclusion: The Point of No Return?

The tragedy of Leticia is that this hydrological change was a chronicle of a shift foretold.

Since the early 2000s, researchers from the Universidad Nacional de Colombia warned that the Amazon was behaving as an anastomosing river—a multi-channel system prone to rapid switching. They prescribed specific engineering interventions, such as submerged spurs (espolones) and strategic dredging at the Nazareth Strait, to guide the flow back to Colombia.

Those plans were ignored. Now, the region faces an unavoidable choice between two difficult paths:

1. The “Hard” Path (Geo-engineering): Attempting to reverse nature. This would require a massive, binational dredging operation and the construction of river training structures. However, the “tipping point” may have already been reached, where the sediment consolidation at Isla Ronda is so advanced that the river no longer has the energy to be redirected, making this an uphill battle.
2. The “Soft” Path (Adaptation): Accepting that Leticia is no longer a river port. This implies a radical transformation of the city’s economy, shifting away from river commerce and potentially relocating the port facilities kilometers away to a point where the channel is stable—effectively acknowledging that the river has left.

Ultimately, the Amazon teaches a humbling lesson: water does not respect political borders or human infrastructure. Whether through immediate, high-cost engineering or painful adaptation, Colombia must act. If the sediments settle, Leticia will not just be a city without a river—it will be a monument to the cost of ignoring science.

References:

• Periódico UNAL (2024). “El río Amazonas se sigue desviando hacia Perú: nueva medición muestra que hoy Colombia solo tiene el 16,9 % de sus aguas.” Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
• El País (2025). “El problema ambiental que amenaza con dejar al puerto colombiano de Leticia sin conexión al río Amazonas.” El País América Colombia.
• InfoAmazonia (2025). “La advertencia científica de hace décadas sobre el río Amazonas y Leticia que fue ignorada.”InfoAmazonia.
• La Silla Vacía (2025). “Colombia se quedó atrasado en corregir la dinámica del río Amazonas.” La Silla Vacía.
• NASA Earth Observatory (2002). “Amazon River, Leticia – Image ISS004-E-12730.” NASA Gateway to Astronaut Photography.
• BBC Future (2025). “The photos showing why pink dolphins are the Amazon’s great thieves.” (Image Credit: Thomas Peschak).
• Historia y Región (2016). “La ocupación peruana de Puerto Leticia.” (Map Reference).
• Facebook Archive. “Historical Press Release on Amazon Deviation.” (Image Reference).
• Wikimedia Commons. “Map of the Salomon-Lozano Treaty.” (Public Domain).

The post The River That Left: Geomorphological Shift and the Drying of Colombia’s Amazon Port appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Human records are also an important source of information for understanding past climates. What’s more, when climatologists and historians collaborate, they can open up a whole new field of research. For instance, historical maps and paintings can depict frozen rivers, glacier extent, and various plant species. Together, these sources paint a picture of what the climate was like in the past.

Humans as a climate witnesses:

While ice cores can provide insights into the climate of the last 800,000 years, historical data is limited to the period of human documentation. Nevertheless, it is important to gain a deeper understanding of the state of the Earth during our ancestors’ time. In Libya, for example, historians have found cave paintings of elephants, giraffes, and swimmers. These areas are deserts today, but the paintings show that the region wasn’t always so arid. A more humid climate favoring vegetation and water sources must have prevailed for people and animals to live there.

Figure 1: The deserts in northern Africa were once greener. Cave paintings from Libya often show animals that cannot survive there anymore.
Roberto D’Angelo (roberdan) – This image was originally posted to Flickr as DSCN3916

A study by Manning and Timpson (2014) supports this argument. The researchers analyzed over 1,000 bone, wood, charcoal, seed, and other plant and animal remains across the Sahara Desert. Using C14 analysis, they were able to date those findings. They located large clusters of human presence between 10,500 and 5,500 years before present (BP), indicating that the region was much more habitable at that time. This time span is known as the African Humid Period, when the Sahara was greener and had lakes and rivers.

Historical data is rarely found in the form of cave drawings. Most of the available data comes from written records and documentation, which are mostly restricted to regions with a long tradition of writing, such as Europe and Asia. Written historical documentation can take the form of logbooks or harvest records. At best, logbooks are simple descriptions of weather and wind conditions, and harvest documentation often only describes spring and summer temperature anomalies. Therefore, historical data has some limitations, but when a large amount is compiled, it can complement natural climate proxies, allowing us to reconstruct climate fairly accurately.

Although historical records have limitations, such as regional bias and incomplete data, they are still valuable supplements to natural climate proxies. When carefully compiled and interpreted, these human-made sources enrich our understanding of past climates by offering insights into environmental conditions and how societies perceived and adapted to them. Science and history form a powerful partnership in tracing Earth’s climate journey.

1. Disclaimer: This blog entry is the second part of the A Journey Through Time series ︎
2. Image taken from: García-Herrera, R., García, R. R., Prieto, M. R., Hernández, E., Gimeno, L., & Díaz, H. F. (2003). The use of Spanish historical archives to reconstruct climate variability. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 84(8), 1025–1036. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-84-8-1025 ︎

The post A Journey Through Time: Reconstructing Earth’s Climate from History appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

How do we observe global changes in the vegetation cover of the planet?

This question is covered by a relatively new area of climate research that seeks to understand how plants respond to rising temperatures, shifting weather patterns, and changes in atmospheric composition caused by global climate change.

Since 1981, technology has given us the ability to observe global vegetation, when the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) was installed on the NOAA-N spacecraft. This sensor could take pictures of the Earth beyond the visible spectrum; it was highly sensitive to near infrared, but could not sense the blue range. More advanced sensors, such as MODIS, added the blue range to the picture.

The collected data is analyzed using indices. The two most popular indices are the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) and the Leaf Area Index (LAI). The NDVI shows the ratio of the difference between the amount of light reflected and absorbed in the near-infrared and visible spectra. Healthy green foliage absorbs most of the visible spectrum and reflects more than half of the infrared spectrum. The higher the NDVI index, the greener the surface. LAI measures vegetation density by comparing total one-sided leaf surface area to ground area covered (m²/m²). Monitoring helps track vegetation trends, estimate evapotranspiration, and forecast agricultural yields.

Several important metrics are commonly used to assess vegetation dynamics and ecosystem responses. These include SOS (Start of the Growing Season), which marks the beginning of active plant growth, and EOS (End of the Growing Season), which indicates the decline of vegetation activity. LOS (Length of the Growing Season) represents the duration between SOS and EOS and provides insight into seasonal shifts influenced by climate change.

Primary productivity, measured as gross primary productivity (GPP) and net primary productivity (NPP), reflects the overall carbon uptake by plants. GPP refers to the total amount of carbon fixed through photosynthesis, and NPP represents the portion remaining after respiration, serving as an indicator of biomass accumulation and ecosystem productivity.

What do we observe in vegetation dynamics?

Although data obtained earlier from the AVHRR sensor may be less ideal for long-term analysis due to internal limitations, calibration in combination with data from more modern sensors clearly shows a distinct global greening trend since at least the 1980s. Piao et al.’s study³ indicates that, from the 1980s to the 2010s, leaf area increased by 5.4 million km², equivalent to the area of the Amazon rainforest.

However, trends vary when scaled. In certain regions, reverse dynamics, or browning, may be observed. It is also possible to identify greening hotspots. Seasonal shifts are also observed. The growing season is starting earlier and ending later, effectively extending its duration. Peak greenness is occurring earlier and becoming more pronounced. Seasonal patterns of vegetation greenness are shifting. High-latitude regions are showing reduced seasonality, with patterns similar to those of regions farther south in the past. The start and end of the growing season are moving northward faster than peak greenness. These changes have implications for the agricultural sector and ecosystems, which will be explored in the following sections.

Greening Hotspots

China and India have emerged as key contributors to global greening, albeit through different pathways. In China, 42% of the greening is attributed to forests, while 32% is attributed to croplands. This greening has been driven by large-scale afforestation and reforestation programs, which have increased forest cover, reduced land degradation, and enhanced carbon sequestration. However, these efforts have also placed additional pressure on water resources. Meanwhile, agricultural productivity rose by 43% from 2000 to 2016, supported by multiple cropping, irrigation systems, and intensive fertilizer use. In contrast, 82% of India’s greening is cropland-based, with only 4% stemming from forests. This trend is largely the result of agricultural intensification, which led to a 26% increase in cereal production over the same period through expanded cultivation areas and intensified farming practices, similar to China’s approach.

In the case of Arctic regions experiencing greening, agricultural fields and afforested territories are no longer the main contributors. In these regions, vegetation covers the land due to natural growth, primarily through shrubbery. Gaspard et al. refer to this phenomenon as “shrubification.” In their study, the methodology included working with indices, overlaying vegetation maps, and mapping the types of cover and surface deposits in the studied region using ecological models. This allowed the authors to determine the role of plant communities and zonal dynamics in the observed phenomenon.

Recent greening trends in the Arctic and boreal regions reveal significant changes in land cover. Currently, approximately 13.6% of the region has experienced land cover change, and if this pace continues, the entire area could transform within 200 years. In boreal forests, the net loss of evergreen cover coincides with an increasingly active fire regime. In Arctic areas, the gradual expansion of shrubs is more difficult to detect, yet it contributes to the overall greening. Additionally, there has been southern herbaceous growth, primarily driven by extensive agriculture in regions such as Alberta and British Columbia. However, this gain is largely seasonal and linked to agricultural cycles. It should not be interpreted as a long-term ecological shift, such as the more persistent vegetation changes occurring in the Arctic.

Please, stay tuned to know more about what drives vegetation dynamics and what are its ramifications.

1. This is the first entry on the series ︎
2. Header image taken from: https://mpimet.mpg.de/en/research/independent-research-group/climate-vegetation-dynamics ︎
3. Piao, S., Wang, X., Park, T. et al. Characteristics, drivers and feedbacks of global greening. Nat Rev Earth Environ 1, 14–27 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-019-0001-x ︎
4. Statistically significant trends (P ≤ 0.1, Mann–Kendall test) are color-coded. Gray areas depict vegetated land with statistically insignificant trends. White areas depict barren land, permanent ice-covered areas, permanent wetlands, and built-up areas. Blue areas represent water. The inset shows the frequency distribution of statistically significant trends. The red circles highlight the greening areas, which mostly overlap with croplands except for circle number 4. Similar patterns are seen at P ≤ 0.05, and the seven greening clusters are visible at P ≤ 0.01. ︎

The post Academic Series: The Science Behind Vegetation Dynamics appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

With an academic with a background in Environmental Sciences and currently pursuing my Master’s in Global Change Ecology – where I study the complex interactions between climate, ecosystems, and policy – I used to think that simply providing more information would help everyone agree on pressing issues like climate change, biodiversity loss, and sustainability. Yet, despite overwhelming research and facts, many people still aren’t aware of—or can’t access—this knowledge. So, how do we bridge the gap between research and real-world impact?

First, let us look at the ones who are not aware. It wasn’t until recently, when I attended a science communication course, that I realized how often we academics are stuck in our bubble, thinking things like “Ah, everyone knows what climate change is!” But is that true? According to a climate opinion survey conducted by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication in 31 countries, four out of ten people had never heard of climate change before. In many parts of the Global South, people are unaware of climate change and do not understand it is human-caused. As a result, there isn’t enough public demand to pressure political parties to take action.

So, how do you do that? As with most things, there isn’t a “one-size-fits-all” solution, but here are a few pointers that can help if you aim to build a bridge between science and society:

1. Target the right audience – Who do you want to communicate with? Do you have a specific age group or working group in mind? The more specific you can be about your audience, the more strategic—and relatable—your content can become. Remember: when you try to target everyone, you end up reaching no one.
2. Don’t just preach—listen! – We often assume that simply presenting all the information we have will solve the problem. But would you believe a friend who says, “Starbucks makes the best coffee in the world”? Probably not. However, if that friend said, “I’ve heard Starbucks might have the best coffee—do you want to try it with me and see if that’s true?” then you’d be more open to giving it a shot. This kind of relationship-building is important when communicating about topics like climate change. Stay humble, and don’t try to change someone’s entire worldview in one go. Would you like it if someone imposed their beliefs on you without understanding your perspective?
3. Make it personal – We all relate to things better when there is a personal experience involved. This approach is also helpful when you’re creating content that you want to have a meaningful impact on the people it’s intended for.
4. Be realistic, focused, and engaging – I’ve often found myself starting with one topic in mind, then realizing halfway through that it’s morphing into something completely different by the end. Don’t do this! Have a clear structure from the start. Stay realistic, remain focused, and sprinkle in anecdotes that your audience can relate to.
5. Everyone loves visuals – “A picture is worth a thousand words,” and we all know the power of visuals, whether it’s a graph or a scientific cartoon.

For me, it wasn’t easy as an academic to bridge this gap, and it certainly takes time. But nobody is perfect and you have got to start somewhere. With practice you will get better! Picture a specific person you’d like to talk to about your topic, and keep them in mind while writing. Don’t give up—play around with these tips and tricks to see what works best for you!

This Blog entry was Edited by: Dr. Laura Sommer

Source to header image: https://sites.rutgers.edu/scipolru/resources/science-communication/

The post Science Communication Done Right! – Bridging the Gap Between Academia and Society appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

At first, environmentalism and right-wing extremism seem worlds apart. Most environmentalists such as us GCE students would consider ourselves as democratic, humanists, and progressive thinkers, invested in addressing climate change, global challenges and working for a sustainable future for all. Meanwhile, right-wing movements downplay or outright deny environmental problems. They typically follow a predictable path: Denial (the problem doesn’t exist), Trivialization (the problem isn’t that bad), and, in more extreme cases, Inevitability (the removal of limits on means/ “Entgrenzung der Mittel”). It is this latter path – what could be called ‘unhinged environmentalism’ or eco-fascism—that we must be aware of.

Fortunately, most right-wing political parties (like Germany’s AfD, France’s RN and Poland’s PiS) still deny or trivialize climate change and environmental degradation. While being a hindrance to the sustainability movement, it prevents more radical ideas from infiltrating mainstream debates. We must keep our eyes and ears open for the growing influence of such ideas, particularly online.

It is important to note that the far-right is a paradoxical one. The views presented here reflect extreme cases. Nonetheless, it’s crucial for environmentalists to understand these arguments to counteract their misuse of terminology, ethics, and democratic values.

Right Ecologism

Environmentalism is not a new topic for far-right movements. Nationalist, anti-immigration, and environmental themes have long been used to promote their agendas. One prominent argument is a Neo-Malthusian perspective, which frames sustainability problems because of resource scarcity and too many people using the resource. Rather than reflecting critically on resource overuse or advocating for shared commons practices, this view leads to exclusion and the securitization of current resource ownership and power structures. Many environmental scientists are familiar with Garrett Hardin’s “Tragedy of the Commons,” which highlights how resources can become overused when people fail to coordinate sustainable practices. What many might not know is that Hardin’s work has been co-opted by right-wing arguments. In one of his lesser-known works “Lifeboat Ethics” Hardin argued that wealthier nations cannot afford immigration because, in his analogy, if the lifeboat sinks, everyone is worse off. Such thinking, coming from an ‘environmentalist,’ is a far cry from what we might expect in the context of social responsibility. Similarly calls for “securing our lithium supply” by sending troops to mines in the global south are just the tip of the iceberg of nationalists “sustainability” ideas.

Terrorist attacks in Christchurch (2019) and El Paso (2019) provide horrifying examples of how environmental rhetoric can be weaponized. The manifestos of the attackers heavily referenced environmental issues like soil degradation and overpopulation, suggesting that in their logic environmental problems justify extreme measures against certain populations.

Beyond resource scarcity, right-wing extremists have also abused ecological concepts to reinforce their ideologies. The misuse of Darwinian theories in social settings to justify claims of racial superiority is well known, but can also be found in other ecological terminology. For instance, invasive species are used to create hierarchies between people. The “blood and soil” rhetoric of Nazism, which emphasized the connection between people and the environment they grew up in, has resurfaced in modern far-right discourse. Recently, members of France’s Rassemblement National argued that migrants “don’t fit the climate” of the nation or that their presence would destroy the environment, claiming that “migrants do not value our nature as we do.” This intertwining of nature protection with identity politics reflects a troubling shift in environmental discourse.

Historically, nature protection policies such as “protected areas” have been used as exclusionary tactics in places with marginalized populations, such as Yellowstone National Park or National Parks in India. The concept of “supremacy of Earth over people” was and is used to justify policies that excluded indigenous and local communities from protected lands. Such ideologies, built on the belief that the land should be “preserved” for the “right” people … we all know where we heard that before.

Discourse shifts

As the climate crisis intensifies, we see the discourses shift. With increasingly frequent and severe climate events, and the rise of climate-driven migration (“disaster displacement”), calls for extreme measures will likely gain support. As denialism becomes harder to sustain, we will see more voices advocating for drastic and unhinged solutions in the name of sustainability and survival. This could range from calls to halt migration entirely to demands for control over lithium resources in the Global South to ensure that the Global North maintains its power.

In this context, extreme measures once considered unthinkable could become more acceptable. The rise of such rhetoric is concerning because it moves previously extremist ideas into the mainstream of debate. A paraphrased Hannah Arendt, “Every time we put something in the right corner, the rest moves more to the center.” The normalization of extreme ideas, even in the name of environmentalism, holds a significant threat to democratic values.

So

What Now?

So, what can we do in response? There are no simple solutions. As environmentalists, scientists, and human beings, we must continue to speak out against the abuse of environmental rhetoric. We must work towards sustainability in ways that honor human rights and inclusivity. We should also advocate for a more transformative approach to sustainability science—one that emphasizes not just urgency of the problems but fairness, equity, and justice in the solutions.

Much has been written about the potential dangers of alarmist narratives in climate science. We must speak out against politics that separates us from them. But as we move forward as scientists, activists and citizens, it’s clear that we must find a way to build solution-oriented narratives that prioritize human rights, democratic values, and a vision of sustainability that serves everyone – not just the few.

This blog post is inspired by conversations, research on the “Völkische Szene” from Lüneburg University, and various pieces of literature:

• Außen Grün – innen Braun by S. Moore & A. Roberts (2022)
• Ecofascism Revisited by J. Biehl & P. Staudenmaier (1995)
• Department for Radicalization Prevention and Engagement in Nature Conservation: www.nf-farn.de
• Environmental migration: Migration Data Portal
• Discurse shift (in german): https://www.bpb.de/shop/zeitschriften/apuz/diskurskultur-2023/541849/rechtspopulistische-diskursverschiebungen/

The post Environmentalism and Right Extremism: A Growing Paradox appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

(Some) outcomes of COP29

As COP 29 (like all COPs) was very large, with many negotiations and other events going on in parallel, it was difficult for us as observers to understand what was agreed. A structured overview of the outcomes is only possible with the help of additional research, such as Carbon Brief’s website, where both summaries and details can be found. A brief overview based on our experience is provided here.

First, although the newspapers may give the impression that COPs in general are mostly failures, with rich nations failing to live up to their commitments, there have been breakthroughs. In a highly complex system like the UN, where nearly 200 countries with different challenges, values and priorities are trying to agree on basic guidelines for the future, seemingly small decisions are major achievements. Faced with the daunting challenges of climate change, the COP is attempting to tackle individual components of the problem and break them down into tasks and specific actions.

Moreover, since we don’t have a world government, the UNFCCC can “only” outline priorities and urgent issues that national governments must pursue. Nevertheless, there are many mechanisms in place to support compliance and make non-compliance unattractive, and the framework set at COPs is a powerful tool for streamlining a global pathway for action. The focus of this year’s COP was on finance, and a new quantified target on finance was advanced. The so-called ‘developed countries’ agreed to channel at least $300 billion per year to the so-called developing countries by 2035. In addition, $1.3 trillion will be raised each year by 2035 from a variety of sources, including the private sector. Many of the key results were achieved in last-minute negotiations.

Another important issue at this year’s COP was the discussion on how to follow up on the results of the global stocktake that will be completed in 2023. Unfortunately, no concrete plan was agreed on how to move forward on this issue.

On the other hand, progress was made on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which deals with market-based solutions such as carbon pricing and trading. Rules were formulated for country-to-country trading and the international carbon market, as well as standardized crediting criteria.

Our COP experience 

Negotiations

After attending the COP, the negotiations were the topic we got asked about the most. Given the peculiar, legal language of the UNFCCC, the fact that individual negotiations addressed only tiny aspects of the Paris Agreement and the UN Convention, and that many breakthroughs were made in closed-door negotiations at night, it is not surprising that our understanding of the substance of the negotiations remained limited.

Nevertheless, we were deeply impressed to see the whole world literally gathered around one big table. Countries at war with each other were able to participate and contribute to the dialogue. Every country had an equal right to speak, although structural constraints such as the number of negotiators that countries could afford to send to the COP left room for unequal conditions. Considering the huge amount of specific knowledge, tasks and sleepless nights that have to be shared within the delegations, being able to send 5 people instead of 100 is a big disadvantage.

Observing the negotiations has taught us that premature judgments about seemingly non-compliant countries are mostly the result of a lack of knowledge about the individual situations, political systems, and challenges in those countries. While some countries find it relatively easy to promise climate actions that are popular among climate activists (such as net-zero pledges) and then sell these ideas to their own national governments and populations, others face national resistance, instability, and political unpredictability. While some have adopted a strategy of promising little but having a high probability of delivering, others are making more ambitious pledges that may have a lower chance of being delivered. Both strategies were visible during the negotiations and gained more recognition from our sides because of the insider perspective we gained. After all, the countries that don’t want to do anything about climate change don’t waste time and resources going to the COP. So (almost) everyone who was in Baku was there because they see the importance of climate change and want to do something about it.

Panel Discussions

But the biggest part of our COP experience was the side events, often panel discussions. Typically, scientists, activists, politicians, or experts would gather and discuss a particular topic under the leadership of a chair. Topics ranged from the struggles of indigenous peoples, to plastic pathways in China, to a new online tool for calculating the remaining fossil fuel budget for countries and regions of the world.

Some panel discussions were simply people presenting their views, while others were more controversial. The panels were an opportunity to connect the abstract negotiations and policies of the UNFCCC to the work on the ground. For example, during the panel with the new director of the Loss and Damage Fund, community leaders were able to share their views on the accessibility and future design of the fund. Questions from the audience were usually answered at the end, where, for example, a hydropower expert from Germany involved in a project in South America was able to hear the critical voices of local and indigenous people that he would not normally hear in his daily life. Because of encounters like these, we often found the panel discussions and side events to be the most fruitful for us and for the overall goal of connecting different stakeholders and sharing knowledge.

Pavilions

Each country, group of countries (e.g. African Union) and other interest groups (OPEC) had a pavilion. Often the pavilions reflected some cultural features of the country and were nicely decorated. Besides the popular free coffee, interesting events took place there. In addition, smaller countries had the opportunity to present themselves and offer traditional food and other information about their country. We visited the German pavilion, the EU pavilion, the UNFCCC pavilion, the Nordic pavilion and the UK pavilion. In addition to ministerial speeches, there were panel discussions, Q&A sessions, and workshops. Countries could also give their space to groups that didn’t have their own pavilion, such as the German pavilion, which hosted a dialogue among young indigenous women from Latin America (See image above).

In the Nordic pavilion, parliamentarians from Sweden and Norway had a very inspiring dialogue on how to support a transition to sustainable consumption. A topic that seems to be moving rather slowly in Germany and much faster in Nordic countries like Sweden or Norway, so it was very interesting to get an insight into their methods and narratives. In the UNFCCC pavilion, small island states like Niue and the Maldives, as well as larger economies with a high dependence on the ocean, like Colombia, were able to share their knowledge on how to live with their natural resources and learn from each other. Overall, the pavilions were a good place to come together and network, whether over coffee, a pub quiz or a panel discussion.

Press Conferences

Another part of our COP experience were the press conferences. Every day there were many different press conferences held by many different groups. Countries or groups of countries, mainly for their national press, and other big players like the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) or WWF were groups we expected to have press conferences. But there were also some unexpected press conferences. For example, the NGO Solar Cookers International was surprisingly prevalent in the press conference schedule. We attended several press conferences: one held by the COP Presidency, Azerbaijan, one held by the European Union, and one held by Germany.

Since press conferences are something familiar from television and other events, it was very interesting to experience them in person. The rooms were filled with reporters and there was a lot of live TV coverage. After the first statements were read by the politicians, it was the journalists’ turn to ask questions. It was very interesting to hear how detailed the statements were and how the politicians answered the questions.

On the one hand, these press conferences were an opportunity for us to keep up with the progress of the negotiations that the leaders were conducting behind closed doors. On the other hand, they were also a great opportunity for us to get to know public figures like Annalena Baerbock in real life (see below). But it was not only the press conferences that were widely covered. Young journalists worked all over the venue, and although they were not allowed into some of the events, such as the negotiations, they often stood in the halls giving interviews or doing live coverage. Overall, the press conferences were a very interesting part of the COP experience because we were able to see what everyone else was watching at home.

People’s plenary

Almost by accident, we stumbled upon the People’s Plenary. Unlike almost all the other events, this one was for people who weren’t represented by country delegations. It was a space for all the voices that weren’t heard in the negotiations. Throughout COP29, you could see many indigenous people walking around, as well as many other groups protesting for stronger climate policies. They all came together in the Peoples’ Plenary, calling for climate justice and more action from policymakers. Unlike all the other events, the contributions to the People’s Plenary were very emotional, which was reflected by the audience. By the end, everyone was singing and dancing and the atmosphere was great.

National statements 

Finally, the National Declarations were also an important part of COP29. Beginning in the first week, these statements are an opportunity for participating countries to share their views, priorities, and commitment to fighting climate change. One by one, representatives took the stage to read their statements. Several countries announced their updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), often pledging more ambitious climate targets or increased contributions to climate finance. In turn, more vulnerable countries from the group of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) or Least Developed Countries (LDCs) emphasized the existential threat they face from the climate crisis and their demand for climate justice.

It was particularly interesting to see statements from countries at war read out in close proximity. The statements were also an opportunity to highlight innovative solutions or partnerships that individual countries are pursuing. But these statements were not just declarations of intent, they set the tone for the negotiations and influenced the overall direction of COP29. This was clearly seen in the financial language of many of the statements, in light of this year’s COP being dubbed the “Finance COP”.

Our statement and experience

Overall, we thoroughly enjoyed our experience at COP29 in Baku. It was deeply inspiring to see so many people, politicians, delegates, activists, vulnerable people, and observers alike, come together to fight for a more sustainable future, despite all the differences on the outside. Our time there gave us a newfound respect for people who work tirelessly to negotiate agreements that everyone can live with. The achievement of a successful agreement at the end of the conference can be easily overlooked when following the conference in the news. We take this inspiration and momentum back to Bayreuth to work for a better future.

The post GCE at COP 29: Experiences, Outcomes, and Key Takeaways appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

But what exactly is planetary health and why should it matter to you? 

In this first installment of our four-part series¹ on planetary health, we explore the fundamentals of this vital concept and make planetary health more tangible to you.

Let’s start from the beginning… 

Despite only rising to popularity rather recently, the concept of planetary health has a 50-year history to look upon, as the term was coined in the environmental and holistic health movements of the 70s and 80s. However, until recently the idea was rarely present in the context of mainstream media. The Rockefeller-Lancet Commission on Planetary Health’s report in 2015 marked a turning point since it brought the topic into the spotlight of conventional scientific debate. Following this report, the Planetary Health Alliance was founded in 2016. Globally it is the leading organization in educating on Planetary Health and supporting the growth of this interdisciplinary, solution-focused, and innovative field. 

Why is Planetary Health needed in the fight against the climate crisis?

“Planetary Health is a solutions-oriented, transdisciplinary field and social movement focused on analyzing and addressing the impacts of human disruptions to Earth’s natural systems on human health and all life on Earth.” – Planetary Health Alliance

We are now in an epoch that many scientists call the Anthropocene – a geochronological epoch shaped by humans as the central driving force within the planetary system. The concept of planetary boundaries introduced by Johan Rockström and other scientists in 2009 reflects these impacts. These boundaries are basically “nine processes that regulate the stability and resilience of the Earth system” and due to human activities six of the nine boundaries have been crossed (Fig. 1). Moreover, eight of the nine boundaries, except for ozone, are moving into a concerning direction, i.e. further away from what’s considered a safe space. Leaving the safe space increases the risk of big and potentially permanent changes to our environment. 

This is where Planetary Health comes in. As the environmental changes do not represent an isolated and singular issue, they also adversely affect human health. Changes like an increase in natural disasters, pollution, biodiversity shifts, or disruptions of food systems can negatively impact mental health and increase the risk of both non-communicable diseases (air pollution & lung cancer risk) and infectious diseases (vector-borne diseases). Additionally, these global changes can lead to civil strife and displacement​. Thus, embracing the perspective of Planetary Health and striving to mitigate human impacts on Earth’s systems is essential for addressing the climate crisis.

Besides preventing or mitigating the adverse effects of global change on health, there are many co-benefits of climate action for human health. For example, living a more climate-friendly life by reducing meat consumption, rather than walking and biking places instead of going by car, we also experience somewhat unintentional “side”-effects. Eating a healthier diet, living a more active life, and reducing air pollution leads to a lower risk of morbidity and mortality. Figure 2 shows these relationships in more detail. 

To end this brief introduction to Planetary Health we want to leave you with some of the most relevant and optimism-inspiring steps taken in the last years regarding Planetary Health. At the most recent COP 28, for the first time in the history of global climate negotiations, health was officially part of the agenda. Moreover, the São Paulo Declaration on Planetary Health, a call to action outlining the crucial steps for achieving the Great Transition, has been signed by over 300 organizations from more than 48 countries. 

Additionally, more and more people are getting involved with planetary health, spreading awareness, and encouraging others to get engaged. This trend is underscored by the increasing number of organizations dedicated to planetary health and a rising tide of membership, reflecting broader engagement and awareness efforts.

Come back to check in on the second part of our blog series, talking about climate anxiety and how it affects our physical and mental health.

This blog entry was written within the Planetary Health Campus Ambassador Programme 2024 of the Planetary Health Alliance. Views expressed may not represent the positions of the Planetary Health Alliance or its membership.

1. Disclaimer: This blog entry is the first one of four on the topic of planetary health. ︎
2. ︎

The post The Clock is Ticking: Why the fight against the climate crisis needs Planetary Health. appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Since surprisingly many of us were on time we started at 8 am to drive southwest out of Bayreuth. Equipped with maps, information sheets and nice land use and biodiversity maps, we looked forward to our first stop, the fossil excavation site in Mistelgau.

Fossils in Mistelgau

A place that is worldwide famous for a huge amount of fossil findings, up to complete skeletons of dinosaurs. Famous worldwide… except in Bayreuth and the surrounding area, as Prof. Köllner explained to us. After some detailed explanations from a local guide and “fossil-searcher” (in the original Franconian language) we got to roam around by ourselves and discover some beautiful bits and pieces from 200 million years ago. Unimaginable that Upper Franconia was a shallow, warm, and tropical sea with dinosaurs roaming around! Since we couldn’t stay the whole day (even though some of us would have loved to) we continued our bus ride.

A scenic view

The next spot was less muddy and more scenic. On top of the Görauer Anger, we could see Kulmbach with the Plassenburg, the Fichtel Mountains and the Franconian Switzerland on one side and lovely pastures, forests, and small villages on the other. A perfect place to explain different types of land uses, Ecosystem Services and how Climate Change might affect the agricultural areas and natural biotopes in our regions. With fantastic pictures of future Upper Franconia as a Mongolian-like savannah in our minds, we enjoyed our lunch break in the sun before we continued our journey.

Bamberg: Natural History Museum and Cathedral

As for every good trip, we were behind schedule, and after our bus drivers overcame a roadblock and kilometres of winding serpentines, we got closer to Bamberg, our destination. We all wished ourselves back into nature when we saw the traffic in the city. After at least another 40 minutes, we arrived at the Natural History Museum in Bamberg. The museum had a dusty, but nonetheless retro-romantic atmosphere with glimmering crystals, fossils that looked like they swam around yesterday and the highlight: the rebuilt bird chamber of some nobleman from the 19^th century who collected hundreds of birds around the world. Even though most of us had mixed feelings, facing all these stuffed animals, not few of them threatened with extinction or already extinct and acquired in suspicious trades, it was fascinating to see the diversity and colourfulness of our planet’s (bird) species. In the museum, we could continue to groom our team spirit, since everything was in German and the German students had to translate for the internationals.

After the museum visit, we strolled around the beautiful inner city of Bamberg. It is a UNESCO world heritage site and Professor Köllner provided us with interesting facts and comments about the city’s history and its significance since the Middle Ages. We also visited the Bamberg Cathedral, which houses the mysterious horseman of Bamberg, whose identity remains shrouded in history.

After a full and fun day, we walked back to our bus (after buying smoked beer and ice cream on the way) and travelled back to good old Bayreuth, where we arrived at 6 pm.

It was a great and informative day, and we all want to say thank you to Sylvia Sprödhuber and Prof. Köllner for organizing it and giving us the opportunity to explore the region where we will spend the next years and to get to know each other in a fun way!

The post GCE Excursion to Bamberg 2023 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

An engaging program

The program offered a diverse range of workshops, podium discussions, skill-building sessions, and lectures on various topics. The event provided opportunities for networking through snack tables, workshops, and open discussion formats. In the evening, there were fun meeting programs such as speed dating, board games, and a science slam where scientists presented their research in a quick and humorous way.

With hundreds of possible options to choose from, I sometimes felt overwhelmed, but I was able to attend some activities that were valuable to me. One workshop that I particularly enjoyed was about constructive journalism, which provided practical information on climate communication to the public – a skill that may be just as critical as climate research itself.

Different views

During an event, I had the opportunity to personally meet the ambassador of the United Arab Empire. We discussed the upcoming COP28 (2023) in Dubai and exchanged views about the representation of the global south, the expectations of the host nation, and the interplay of diplomacy, geopolitics, and climate action. Despite the nation’s reputation as an oil-rich country, I found it interesting to have a face-to-face conversation about these issues. It was fascinating to observe how diplomats and politicians can talk about something without saying much. When I asked about behaviour changes and disruptive transformations, the ambassador’s response was deeply rooted in the current system logic along the lines of “technology will save us”. Although this was partly frustrating, I felt that everyone ended up learning something from each other.

It was truly inspiring to witness young people from diverse backgrounds actively participating in discussions, workshops, and panels with an incredible level of knowledge about sustainability. Even high school students, as young as 17 years old, were able to comprehend and effectively communicate the urgency of environmental problems to older politicians, which gave me hope for the future. Overall, the LCOY was a weekend well spent with great company, valuable insights, and engaging discussions. It was a reminder that each one of us can be an agent of change!

The post Empowering the Young – Visiting the LCOY Climate Conference 2023 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Without data, it is difficult for scientists to know both the current and previous state of the environment (one might consider this the baseline state, but there can be issues with that – see our previous article on the blog!). This makes it difficult to identify potentially harmful changes that could be occurring or even monitor progress of implemented solutions. Missing or unavailable information also hinders the ability of researchers to model future scenarios and make predictions. Without data, scientists cannot make specialized recommendations or inform policymakers of risks associated with various pathways. Despite this importance, data scarcity remains a problem in environmental science [3], partly due to a lack of access to existing data as well as insufficient monitoring or interpretation capacity.

What can help address this problem?

Lack of access to existing environmental or ecological data can be solved by things like supporting data sharing and open data or following FAIR principles [4]. With data readily available, it can continue to be useful through time to a wider group who may provide reanalysis or reinterpretation. This can also allow for previously existing data to be integrated into new data, thus providing the opportunity for more robust results and conclusions. Additionally, in science it is important to make data available so that results can be replicated and trusted [4, 5]. Another part of the answer is to ensure that conditions are right for collection of new data [3]. This means enhancing capacity building and technology transfer, particularly for researchers in vulnerable areas.

Yet, the investigation of many environmental problems requires both the continual collection and interpretation of very large amounts of data, in some cases from very different parts of the world – which can be a struggle for even the best equipped teams of professional researchers, as they face limitations in their available time and numbers. In such cases, so-called citizen scientists can step in.

Citizen Science: the public can be part of the solution

An increase in the availability and sophistication of technology, data storage and sharing options via the internet, and education have opened possibilities for a wider range of participation in the scientific process. This has contributed to the growth of citizen science, which is a term that describes when the public engages in scientific research. Through citizen science, individuals across many sectors or areas can collaborate with scientists and/or each other to contribute to an increase in scientific knowledge across social science, the arts, technology, medicine, or natural science. It allows participants to take part in the scientific process and creates other co-benefits for citizen scientist participants as well as researchers [6, 8].

Citizen science can provide opportunity to fill gaps in data collection across time and space. In the environmental area, volunteers might participate by submitting observations or tracking abundance of species, taking samples to determine water quality, interpreting images, or other tasks. Yet, participants’ roles may extend past data collection as well. Citizens may help by identifying needs or problems that research could focus on, refining scientific questions, stimulating engagement within the public and among stakeholders, and otherwise providing input from perspectives that often go underrepresented, including from indigenous and local community members [6, 7]. For instance, in community-led citizen science (CCS), participants – aided by professional scientists – direct their own projects, which provides both scientific understanding as well as empowerment and local ownership of the initiative and its outcomes [6].

One important CCS example lies in the Amazon, where the construction of the Belo Monte hydroelectric project has severely impacted the flow of the Xinga river since 2016. This has resulted in the loss of breeding habitat and the decimation of fish populations on which local communities like the Juruna rely. The Juruna reached out to scientists to help them document changes in the river’s fish and turtle populations. This collaboration has resulted in not only scientific publications, but has additionally helped the Juruna to document what has been lost to them culturally so that their history is not forgotten. The data have been used to propose more ecologically-sound water regimes- though the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources is still reviewing the proposal- and have also fuelled lawsuits against Norte Energia, the company responsible for Belo Monte [9].

These projects are thus beneficial for both the participants and the professional scientists, resulting in opportunities for problem-solving, learning, and public action as well as the generation of data and the publication of research findings. Outcomes of citizen science can also inform management, conservation actions, education, or policy decisions [6, 7].

Nevertheless, it is important to note that methods of citizen science are not compatible with all research projects, particularly when an initiative requires expensive equipment, utilizes complex or rigorous methods for data collection, or calls for a large time commitment. Concerns may also arise about the data generated by citizen science. For instance, sampling bias may be a problem if data is collected opportunistically, leading to an overrepresentation of data from some areas versus others. Citizen scientists may make mistakes in identification, be inconsistent in following protocol or using equipment, or lack neutrality, which would all impact the data and how it can be used. However, by implementing sufficient training for participants, validation and filtering procedures, statistical approaches, and upholding inclusiveness, these issues can be minimized [6].

The benefits of citizen science are also being recognized by governments, who are increasingly supporting this approach. For example, in 2022 Germany introduced the Citizen Science Strategie 2030 (German language version here). This strategy includes recommendations and outlines opportunities to develop citizen science in Germany and interlink it within both science and society [10]. Though this method is not appropriate for every research question, it is increasingly recognized as a useful and enriching approach that can, when properly executed, produce a variety of rewards for stakeholders across disciplines.

If this article has made you interested in learning more about citizen science, you might be glad to know that the University of Zurich and ETH Zurich will be hosting a Citizen Science Summer School from 04.06.2023 – 09.06.2023. Applications are now open until 01.03.2023!

References

[1] IPCC, 2021: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 3−32. Link here.

[2] Pecl, G., Araújo, M.B., Bell, J.D., et al. 2017. Biodiversity redistribution under climate change: Impacts on ecosystems and human well-being. Science (355) 6332. Link here.

[3] Hochkirch, A., Samways, M.J., Gerlach, J. 2020. A strategy for the next decade to address data deficiencyin neglected biodiversity. Conservation Biology 35 (2): 502–509. Link here.

[4] Tedersoo, L., Küngas, R., Oras, E. et al. 2021. Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines. Sci Data (8) 192. Link here.

[5] Miyakawa, T. 2020. No raw data, no science: another possible source of the reproducibility crisis. Mol Brain (13) 24. Link here.

[6] Fraisl, D., Hager, G., Bedessem, B., et al. 2022. Citizen science in environmental and ecological sciences. Nat Rev Methods Primers (2) 64. Link here.

[7] McKinley, D.C., Miller-Rushing, A.J., Ballard, H.L., et al. 2017. Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection. Biological Conservation (208): 15-28. Link here.

[8] ECSA (European Citizen Science Association). 2015. Ten Principles of Citizen Science. Berlin. Link here.

[9] Moutinho, S. 2023. “A river’s pulse”. Science (379) 6627: 18-23. Link here.

[10] Bonn, A., Brink, W., Hecker, S., et al. 2022. White Paper Citizen Science Strategy 2030 for Germany. Helmholtz Association, Leibniz Association, Fraunhofer Society, universities and non-academic institutions. Link here.

The post Citizen science: when scientists and communities come together appeared first on Global Change Ecology.