News Feeds

The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) recently released its 2025 Global Food Policy Report, outlining key priorities for transforming food and agriculture systems through 2050. The report delivers a forward-looking, evidence-based global food policy roadmap for breaking down silos across climate, health, and agriculture.

“There’s unprecedented urgency around issues that were obscure in 20th-century crises,” Christopher Barrett, the Chair of IFPRI’s Strategy and Program Council, tells Food Tank. He highlights the growing threats of the climate crisis, biodiversity loss, zoonotic diseases, obesity, and the rise of ultra-processed foods. “Yet despite these new challenges, there are important similarities,” he adds. “What feeds urgency among policymakers is largely high food prices and the prospect of mass food insecurity and the sociopolitical instability it too often fosters.”

For 50 years, IFPRI has shaped how the world thinks about food policy. IFPRI has published 4,000+ journal articles, and its datasets were downloaded over 2.2 million times in the last ten years. The new report outlines six global priorities to guide food systems research and action.

These priorities include strengthening resilience and inclusion, especially for vulnerable groups and conflict-affected regions. Additionally, IFPRI emphasizes improving diets and nutrition by tackling the root causes of poor food environments. Other focus areas include employing technology wisely, such as artificial intelligence and digital tools, while ensuring fair and equal access to them.

This a global food policy roadmap also calls for greater involvement from the private sector to support innovation across food value chains. It pushes for reforming public spending to better align with goals for nutrition and sustainability. Finally, the report highlights the need to dismantle silos between agriculture, health, environment, and trade in both research and policymaking.

But long-term goals are hard to achieve in a short-term world, according to Barrett. “In most of the world, policymakers and business leaders have grown more short-term-oriented than ever before,” he explains to Food Tank. “That makes it all the more important to seize opportunities when and where they emerge in crises to enact changes that can both solve short-run emergencies and help us embark on the sorts of systemic changes that are essential to reduce the frequency and severity of future crises.”

In response to recent food price spikes, for example, many countries imposed trade restrictions or subsidies to protect consumers. These short-term actions offer relief but disrupt global markets and discourage investment in sustainable agriculture needed for long-term resilience.

Researchers and governments are now asking how to make food systems and agriculture more resilient, especially in fragile, conflict-affected regions. As food insecurity and climate shocks often bring social unrest, the path forward is not always clear. “We don’t yet have a great, science-based understanding of what builds food systems resilience in conflict-affected regions,” says Barrett. “The most obvious, and hard-to-achieve solution, is lasting peace.”

The report emphasizes the role of science in helping reduce the risks that come with high food prices, land and water scarcity, and rising climate threats. Supporting this kind of research, however, requires time, trust, and funding—resources that Barrett tells Food are often under pressure. Short funding cycles, shifting ideological pressures, and the “rising prevalence and celebration of scientific illiteracy” all threaten IFPRI’s work.

IFPRI hopes the report will serve as a foundation for future collaboration and evidence-based action. “The coming decades will require bold ideas, new partnerships, and rigorous research to support the transformation of food systems that nourish people and the planet,” says Barrett.

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

The post What’s Next for Global Food Policy? IFPRI Offers a Roadmap to 2050 appeared first on Food Tank.

Hulk Hogan died recently. He’s been denounced by some, praised by others. On his impact on the sport, pro wrestling historian Brian Soloman remarked on his passing “Wrestling history is…

The public consultation has been extended on the environmental impact of plans to drill and fracture a gas well at Burniston in North Yorkshire.

Well diagram from the Europa Oil & Gas environmental permit application

The Environment Agency (EA) originally set a deadline of Wednesday 13 August 2025 for comments on an application for an environmental permit from Europa Oil & Gas.

But following concerns about the application, the consultation has been extended until Friday 19 September 2025.

The EA has added new information, including a previously missing inventory of chemicals that would be used in the operation.

The local campaign group, Frack Free Coastal Communities, complained to the EA that the chemical inventory was “crucial” for people to be able to assess the risk to groundwater, soils and local ecology.

The 12-page inventory lists the substances that would be used during drilling and cleaning the well and in the controversial fracturing operation, known as a proppant squeeze. This is a form of lower-volume hydraulic fracturing, which is not prevented by the moratorium on fracking in England.

The environmental permit is one of several consents that must be granted before work at Burniston could begin. Link to permit and consultation details.

A planning application is currently being considered by officials at North Yorkshire Council.

Discrepancies

Frack Free Coastal Communities also identified what it described as “material discrepancies” between the information on the proppant squeeze in the permit application and the planning application.

The permit application (Waste Management Plan, p36) seeks consent for up to four treatments of proppant squeeze, each using 300m-500m3 of carrier fluid and 12.5 tonnes of proppant. If Europa carried out all four treatments using the maximum amount of fluid and proppant, this would require a total of 2,000m3 of fluid and 50 tonnes of proppant.

The planning application (Planning Statement, p17-18) suggests a single operation, using 300-500m3 and 60-80 tonnes of proppant.

Frack Free Coastal Communities said:

“This discrepancy should be clarified before people can be expected to make an informed response to the consultation”.

The group said the discrepancy had implications for the number of heavy goods vehicle journeys needed to transport water and chemicals to the site and their environmental impact. It said the discrepancy raised questions about data on traffic movements and emissions in the planning application.

Consultation problems

Frack Free Coastal Communities also complained that the permit application’s non-technical summary contained “complex and technical information” that “a layperson would find difficult to understand without explanation”. The group said it needed more time to assemble and make available relevant explanatory information.

The group also said several technical experts it wanted to consult were taking family holidays during the original consultation period.

It called for structured discussions with young people in schools and colleges, that could be done only in term time. It also requested face-to-face public information events and online question-and-answer sessions.

Government consultation principles, which apply to the EA, include guidance to:

• Give enough information to ensure that people consulted understand the issues and can give informed responses
• Ensure the consultation lasts for a proportionate amount of time, based on the nature and impact of the proposal
• Consider extending the length of consultations that take place during holidays
• Target consultations to the needs and preferences of particular groups

Virtueless Signalling – Reform in the spotlight

In his pocket. Photo montage by Wendy Mayes from original photos by: by Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0

 

For anyone who wants a future for this country that does not smell of ash trays, exhaust fumes and the sour sweat of xenophobia and, for that matter, anyone who wants any future at all, we will be running a regular look on this blog at the absurdities of what Reform is saying and doing in its last ditch defence of fossil fuels.

Tice backs off

The UK’s biggest clean-energy investors have accused Reform UK of “undermining the national interest” by threatening to remove public subsidies from renewables if it wins the next general election, as this would risk “thousands of green jobs and could push up energy bills for homes and businesses by making the UK more reliant on volatile global gas markets”. Reform’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, had given “formal notice” to developers that the party would axe any deals struck in the upcoming renewables subsidy auction, allocation round 7 (AR7), this summer, if elected to government. However, Tice backed off in an interview with BBC Radio 4’s PM, the following morning, conceding: “I think some people may have misread the wording of the letter…A legally binding contract is a legally binding contract.” Perhaps he didn’t know what it meant when he wrote it.

All mouth and no trousers

Meanwhile the Chief Executive of Reform led Northamptonshire Council, which has just scrapped its “net zero” targets and banned all mention of climate change in Council documentation, nevertheless indicates that a lot of this is surface froth, stating: “I would like to emphasise that our Council is continuing with its wider sustainability work, still publishing our Annual Sustainability Report and will continue to work towards our environmental accreditation.

“We will also continue with projects that deliver long term savings like solar power and warm home initiatives. We will also develop and deliver a Sustainability Strategy and all services across our organisation will continue to play a key role in this work to protect and improve our local environment.”

Reform threatens almost a million jobs

If all the offshore wind projects supported by CFD auctions had to be replaced with gas and nuclear generation, as Reform threaten, Aurora Energy report that it would raise the cost of energy by £10bn (in 2022 prices) over the next decade.

The potential 48 GW of large-scale renewable capacity that Reform would block by 2030 includes 25 GW of offshore wind, 10 GW of onshore wind and 13 GW of solar. Every GW of offshore wind adds £2 – 3bn in GVA to the economy, so a loss of 25 GW would wipe out the potential for £50 – 75bn in value. For onshore wind the estimates are £1.6bn for every GW and £0.075bn for every GW of solar. Reform UK’s policies would therefore cumulatively deprive the economy of £67-£92bn in GVA. In today‘s figures, that is almost 3% of the UK‘s entire GDP.

In total, across wind and solar, Reform UK’s ambition to halt all large-scale renewables would destroy over 60,000 jobs by the end of this decade. This is a significant underestimate as this does not consider indirect and induced jobs. CBI Economics estimates that today across the UK, 273,000 people are employed in net zero businesses directly and an additional 678,000 across supply chains. Reform UK’s anti net zero policies could put many of these jobs at risk.

The New Economics Foundation has a full report on that here.

Meanwhile, on the Reform model in the US, companies have cancelled, closed or scaled back more than $22bn worth of clean-energy investments during the first half of this year. As a result, more than 5,000 jobs were lost to the changes in June alone, pushing the total number of job losses this year up to 16,500

Meanwhile, the Scotsman notes that “Scotland is at start of re-industrialisation on a scale not witnessed since oil boom of the 1970s” and the “SNP says Nigel Farage’s renewable energy ’sabotage’ will ’turn Aberdeen into Detroit’.”

Two messages to stop Reform

1. When voters were presented with a DeSmog story showing that Reform received over 90 percent of its funding from fossil fuel interests and climate science deniers between 2019 and 2024, this pushed down Farage’s popularity and “was the only message to significantly reduce willingness to vote for Reform”.
2. The second most effective issue was letting Farage’s bromance with Donald Trump speak for itself.

← Chris Hinchliff MP on Housing, Planning and Climate Change “Reparations Now! Climate Justice Now!” → Join Us

Get in the loop! Sign up to receive future GJA Newsletters and Blogs here.

SIGN UP Join the debate

Send us your contribution to the debate. We will contact you about using it here on our News & Debate page.

Name

Email

Contribution

Submit

The post Virtueless Signalling – Reform in the spotlight first appeared on Greener Jobs Alliance.

Still insanely claiming they're arresting "the worst of the worst" gardeners, roofers, abuelas and taco-makers - and eager to spend their shiny new billions on more rag-tag thugs to meet their quotas - ICE Barbie et al have launched a new recruitment campaign asserting, "Your country is calling you (to) defend the homeland," a phrase surely inadvertently carrying a crisp whiff of blood-and-soil Nazism. Ditto - right? - an Uncle Sam raging of an America "invaded by criminals and predators - we need YOU to get them out."

Of course the urgent call for 10,000 more racist goons with anger issues and zero oversight to boost our flourishing new "sado-populism" comes alongside all the regime's other, once-unimaginable "weird shit": The celebration of deadly coal: "She is the moment," say wut?; Florida's half-mast tribute to "shitheel" Hulk Hogan, "Donald Trump with muscles and a mustache"; the once-reputable Smithsonian lamely bowing to North-Korea-style pressure to remove evidence of former guy's impeachments; Press Barbie squawking it's "well past time" he get "the Noble Peace Prize"; and his new "Marie-Antoinette-on-steroids" move to turn the White House into a "tacky golf motel" cum brothel with a $200 million vulgar golden ballroom even though we can't afford veterans' health care, to feed hungry kids, to save HIV patients etc because, duh, "For me not thee, Part 1 million."

Amidst these atrocities - and facing a random, frenzied, Goebbels mandate to make 3,000 arrests a day and “save America” - ICE continues to hunt down defenseless, largely innocent brown people who came to this country to do all the lousy, low-wage jobs here that native-born Americans don't want to do. The passage of Trump's big ghastly bill has ominously ramped up that effort, with ICE's budget swelling from $8 billion to $28 billion and over $4 billion allocated to hire up to 10,000 more thugs. ICE, meanwhile, somehow still clings to the fantastical, self-serving claim their "brave" officers are targeting "the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens"; in a recent post, they boasted they just arrested five bad guys, failing to mention the other, vicious, 2,995 dry-wallers, house-painters, farmworkers, dishwashers, landscapers and child-care workers they daily save us from.

On Planet Earth, injustices abound. The over 200, mostly innocent Venezuelans flamboyantly, illegally disappeared to an El Salvadoran gulag - then quietly returned to their country - say they endured months of torture and abuse. Across the country and mostly notably in California during this "Summer of ICE," roving bands of masked goons in tactical gear continue to hunt down immigrants at work sites, markets, courtrooms with escalating violence and an unacknowledged "shattering of norms." Men and women beaten up, grabbed in the street, torn from crying kids, dragged from their cars after thugs blithely opt to "smash their fucking windows." People hauled away by anonymous stormtroopers to parts unknown, forced to leave behind cars, keys, phones, pets, lawnmowers still running, their lives imploded in minutes - atrocities that another court just, again, ruled illegal..

It's everywhere - residents of Rochester NY saw 17 cars of hooligans arrive at a popular neighborhood Asian market to drag off a handful of scared workers, residents in Maine's small tourist town of Wells are protesting their police becoming the only ones in Maine cooperating with ICE - as is its economic impact, which experts unequivocally declare disastrous. Fewer bodies, less production, empty assembly lines, less revenue, crops rotting, great swathes of the work force at construction sites, factories, restaurants, nursing homes have suddenly vanished. In Omaha, Nebraska, a once-thriving meat-packing plant lost most of its work force; its production dropped 70%. And no, Medicaid recipients or the "proverbial 29-year-old living in his mother's basement" doesn't want the meat-packing jobs, thanks. So much winning.

Now, with head thug Tom Homan vowing to "flood the zone" with $4 billion more and 10,000 new slots, just think of the wins. Citing its "mission to protect America from cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national security and public safety," its new recruitment campaign seeks to "attract the next generation of law enforcement professionals to find, arrest, and remove criminal illegal aliens" at "a defining moment in our nation’s history." Arguing "your skills, your experience, and your courage have never been more essential," DHS offers multiple tantalizing incentives to sweeten the fascistic pot: Up to a $50K signing bonus, a 25% Pay LEAP for Special Agents, Enhanced Retirement Benefits and even student-loan forgiveness, though Trump trashed Biden's efforts to forgive student loan debts as a “vile” publicity stunt and swiftly ended those “anti-American" efforts.

ICE says it is looking for "law enforcement personnel who aspire to the highest standards of performance, professionalism and leadership." Its gigs include "Deportation Officer. For the enforcers. For the brave. For those who fight to keep America safe." "Criminal Investigator. For the protectors. For the analytical. For those who seek the truth." And "General Attorney. For the closers. For the resolute. For those who represent the USA." Its materials and posters have a nice totalitarian tinge, from Uncle Sam intoning, "America has been invaded by criminals and predators. We need YOU to get them out," and the imperative, "Your
Country needs you. Join the fight to deport criminal illegal aliens from the U.S." Most striking is their creepy baseline command and accompanying rhetoric, reminiscent of 1930s Berlin: "Defend The Homeland. Join ICE today."

The dark history of the term "homeland" precedes by years, even centuries, George Bush's Department of Homeland Security, and even the newly introduced, distinctly Germanic "homeland" - no longer "fatherland" - that Hitler fervently vowed to defend at 1934's famous Nuremberg rally. Hitler's Nazi Germany was a messy concoction of "blood and soil" loyalty, a racial identity that tied the German people to their land, mixed with the "semi-tribal passion" of 1920s Zionists for Israel as a Jewish homeland, mixed with ancient, occult, German paganism and spirituality that glorified Aryans' supposed racial superiority and their origins in mythical earlier civilizations. After World War ll, the notion of a lofty "homeland" for an invented "German race" "all but disappeared from German vernacular...People were ashamed to use a word that stood for such terrible things."

Now, in Trump's America, it's back. "Your country is calling you to serve at ICE," said an unrepentant ICE Barbie in a statement. "Together, we must defend the homeland." Along with Trump and Uncle Sam, a dolled-up Noem appears on campaign posters reportedly heading to college campuses and job fairs to rally racist, unemployed goons with a cruel streak. Weirdly, then she took off for Argentina, many miles from the homeland she's allegedly paid to secure, to do some yee-haw cowgirl cosplay, post videos of herself riding horses - "No hour of life is wasted that is spent in the saddle" - praise President Milei for his border security and promise to consider easing visa rules for his citizens. Observers were miffed to be funding a vacation for "MAGA Cult Barbie Dog Killer" - with ewww her illicit boyfriend Corey Lewandowski yet - but figured she has "ancestors of the 3rd Reich living there."

Still, the coming expansion of ICE is universally expected to be "a colossal shitshow." Local law enforcement are pissed ICE's offer to pay triple what they make will empty out and wreak havoc on local police departments. ICE's minimal requirements - B.A. "OR Combination of Education and Experience" ("Majored in gooning with a minor in glass-smashing"), driver's license, drug and fitness test, firearm proficiency - means ranks already packed with thugs, dregs, criminals, Proud Boys, white supremacists, insurrectionists, bullies drunk on power and former cops too racist or violent to keep a job will lower criteria to stuff innocent people into unmarked white vans to, "Help Wanted: Heartless Villains For Destruction of Democracy, Criminal Record Required." As to student loan forgiveness: "Most ICE inbreds didn't finish high school - these are the people who stole other kids' lunches."

Thanks to the ravages of DOGE and a tumbling economy, ICE added a special webpage for former government workers, calling on them to "RETURN TO MISSION (among) the courageous men and women of ICE." To date, the site shows openings in 21 locations, from California to D.C; maybe, muses one hopeful patriot, "The labor pool of vicious, obese racists is only so large." Others decry "$50K in blood money to sell your soul" or warn of a "short-term grift with Abu Ghraib-style bullshit" after which Repubs will "throw you under the bus when the reckoning comes (at) the next Nuremberg Trials." Some consider sabotage - "We'll call ourselves 'NICE' - but figure they'd be outed "the first day you have to put your knee on a pregnant woman's neck." Besides, "You cannot dismantle the master's house using the master's tools." The most common question: "Are the brownshirts and armbands free?"

American Federation of Government Employees National President Everett Kelley today issued the following statement:

“President Trump’s attack on the Bureau of Labor Statistics and his call to fire the long-time federal worker who leads the agency over today’s publication of employment data is outrageous and irresponsible.

“The civil servants at BLS are not political actors. They are professionals committed to producing accurate, independent data, regardless of who is in power. BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, who Trump now wants to fire, has worked in the federal government for more than two decades under multiple administrations.

“Presidents don’t get to blame career workers when their policies don’t deliver. That’s why America’s civil servants collect and report this data — to give the American people the truth, not to make sure the president looks good.

“AFGE stands with BLS workers and all federal employees who serve the American people with integrity.”

Later today, the Chicago chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-Chicago) will hold a news conference to condemn the brutal murder of Khamis Ayyad, an American citizen from the Chicagoland and call for a DOJ probe.

Khamis Ayyad was a beloved father of five, whose life was tragically taken during a settler arson attack in the occupied West Bank on July 31, 2025, that targeted Palestinian cars and homes in the town of Silwad where Khamis rushed to help extinguish the fires. He was killed by the smoke, and reportedly gas fired by the Israeli army.

WHAT: Press Conference on Murder of US Citizen in The West Bank
WHEN: Friday, August 1, 3 pm
WHERE: Azima Center, CAIR-Chicago – 17 N State Street, Chicago, IL, Suite 1500

WHO: CAIR-Chicago Staff, Laith Ayyad (brother of Khamis Ayyad), cousins and family members

Khamis Ayyad’s tragic killing is not an isolated incident; it is emblematic of the pervasive injustice faced by Palestinians and the urgent need for accountability, human rights protections, and immediate US pressure to stave off the violence in Gaza and the West Bank that is often funded by American taxpayers.

SEE: Palestinian man dies in Israeli settler arson attack in occupied West Bank

As the genocide and starvation campaigns in Gaza rage on, reports indicate that illegal Israeli settler violence in the occupied West Bank has increased in frequency and intensity – often with the backing of the Israeli military – as far-right Israeli ministers signaled impunity for attackers.

Earlier this week, Awdah Hathaleen, a Palestinian from Masafer Yatta, the community whose resistance to Israeli settler violence was documented in the Oscar-winning film No Other Land, with which he helped, was killed by an Israeli settler. The suspect, identified as Yinon Levi, was placed under house arrest on Tuesday after a Magistrate Court in Jerusalem declined to keep him in custody.

Earlier in July, another American citizen from Tampa was murdered in the West Bank.

SEE: World Palestinian-American from Tampa beaten to death in West Bank

According to the latest data from the UN’s humanitarian office (OCHA), at least 159 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli troops in the West Bank between January 1 and July 21 of this year.

The cycle of settler violence, military incursions, and oppressive policies underpin a climate of fear and instability that deeply affects families like Khamis Ayyad’s.

CAIR Chicago calls on the White House, Congress, and Illinois elected officials to condemn the murder of Khamis Ayyad and call for an end to funding occupation and apartheid.

Our thoughts are with Khamis Ayyad’s family and loved ones during this heartbreaking time. We reaffirm our commitment to advocating for justice, human rights, and the dignity of all individuals affected by this ongoing conflict.

CAIR’s mission is to protect civil rights, enhance understanding of Islam, promote justice, and empower American Muslims.

Indonesian fishers who sued Bumble Bee, alleging years of forced labor while catching fish sold by the U.S. tuna brand, responded to the company's motion to dismiss their suit, arguing in the U.S. legal filing on July 31 that they have a right to have their allegations heard in court. This image was taken by Greenpeace USA activists in solidarity with these fishers. (Photo: Sandy Huffaker/Greenpeace)

On July 31, Indonesian fishers who sued Bumble Bee, alleging years of forced labor while catching fish sold by the U.S. tuna brand, responded to the company’s motion to dismiss their suit, arguing that they have a right to have their allegations heard in court.

The reply contends that, the plaintiffs plausibly allege, and Bumble Bee does not dispute, that the plaintiffs were forced to labor by the vessel owners and argues the company was long specifically aware of such abuses in its supply chain, asserting this meets the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) standard. The reply also defends the plaintiffs’ negligence claims, stating Bumble Bee’s actions created both risk of forced labor and incentive for the vessel owners to abuse the plaintiffs.

The fishers filed suit against Bumble Bee in March under the TVPRA, one of the first times the seafood industry has been challenged under this Act in a U.S. court. The four fishers allege conditions of forced labor: that they were held in debt bondage, denied fair wages, isolated at sea for months, and subjected to both physical and psychological abuse while catching tuna that was sold by Bumble Bee in the U.S.

Sari Heidenreich, senior human rights advisor at Greenpeace USA, said: “The plaintiffs’ reply is clear — their case meets the high standards required by U.S. law and should be heard by the court. I am confident they will prevail.”

According to the reply, Bumble Bee sources 95% to 100% of its albacore through its Taiwanese parent company, Fong Chun Formosa (FCF), and a ‘trusted network’ of vessels. The reply argues that many of the vessels in that network, including those “the plaintiffs were forced to work” on, fish exclusively for Bumble Bee. The plaintiffs argue their experiences reflect a broader pattern, partially enabled by Bumble Bee’s continued use of transshipment — a practice widely criticized by experts and increasingly abandoned by other major seafood companies due to its links to forced labor.

Heidenreich continued: “Rather than act to ensure that workers in their supply chain are protected from forced labor and abuse, Bumble Bee has attempted to sweep them aside through a procedural motion. This move is more than just a legal strategy; it is an attempt to avoid accountability, silence vulnerable workers, and protect corporate interests over human dignity. Without attempting to remedy any harms that occurred on these vessels and improving that workplace for current and future workers, this is akin to the practice of ‘cut and run’, which experts agree is irresponsible and leaves workers in an even more vulnerable situation.

“In response to consumer demand, Bumble Bee has allowed customers to trace each can of tuna they buy back to the boat that caught it. But in its Motion to Dismiss, it attempted to distance itself from these same suppliers. Bumble Bee cannot have it both ways. The TVPRA and trade law make clear that corporate responsibility doesn’t stop at the U.S. border. Companies that cannot take responsibility for the products they sell have no business profiting from them.

“A just and sustainable seafood industry must prioritize the well-being of all its stakeholders — from the migrant fishers working under dangerous conditions to the American consumers who have made it clear: they do not want seafood tainted by modern slavery or environmental destruction.”

A letter expressing solidarity with these individuals was released today by 45 organizations from eight countries. The signers, which include the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU), Friends of the Earth, and Freedom United, condemn human trafficking, while expressing support for the right of all individuals to seek justice and demand accountability. They also highlight the essential and inseparable relationship between healthy oceans and decent work.

Greenpeace USA continues to call for decisive action from every actor in the seafood supply chain to help end isolation at sea. This includes mandating:

• Free, accessible, and secure wifi on all fishing vessels to allow fishers to have contact with their families, unions, and governments;
• Capping time at sea at three months to reduce the risk of human rights abuse, forced labor, and human trafficking; and
• 100% human or electronic observer coverage to ensure vital data on catch composition, bycatch, interactions with protected species, and overall fishing practices are reported by independent and impartial parties.

In addition, unionization and the right of association are essential to empowering workers across all parts of the seafood supply chain. Accessible, secure, and responsive grievance mechanisms — available both on land and at sea — must become a standard in the industrial fishing industry. These tools are critical not just for addressing abuses when they occur but also for preventing them in the first place.

At least 128,000 fishers worldwide are victims of forced labor, which is strongly connected to other fisheries-related crimes, such as illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing. These activities significantly contribute to the worsening of the ocean and climate crises.

AFL-CIO Chief Economist Dr. Darrick Hamilton issued the following statement on the July jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Average job growth over the past three months has fallen to its lowest level in more than a decade. Core sectors of the economy—manufacturing, government, retail and mining—are hemorrhaging jobs. Without modest gains in the health care and social assistance sectors, we’d be facing three straight months of net job loss. And yet, in the midst of this instability, the administration has pushed through what will likely be the largest health care cut in American history. And this data doesn’t yet capture the ripple effects of mass federal layoffs or the full force of recent budget cuts.

Over the past two months, the Black unemployment rate has jumped by a full percentage point and now stands at more than 7%, nearly double the national rate of 4.2%. For Black workers, the picture is not only a reflection of persistent racial bias—it may also be a harbinger of something more ominous. This disparity isn’t new—it’s a long-standing feature of a racialized economy. But historically, sharp economic distress in Black communities has often preceded broader downturns. If that pattern holds, we’re not just looking at a crisis for Black workers—we’re staring down a warning for the entire economy.

This isn’t a neutral stagnation. It’s the product of policy choices: disinvestment in public infrastructure, attacks on the safety net and a governing strategy that protects concentrated wealth while leaving working people increasingly vulnerable.

On Wednesday, July 30, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a preliminary injunctionto block the U.S. Department of Education’s abrupt and unlawful termination of the Mid-Atlantic Equity Consortium, Inc.’s Equity Assistance Center grant. This decision follows a lawsuit filed by the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) on behalf of the Mid-Atlantic Equity Consortium, Inc. (MAEC) and the NAACP, which rely on this funding for critical resources and programming.

Since the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress has funded the federal Equity Assistance Center program to provide essential support to state education agencies, school districts, and students in preventing and remedying discrimination based on race, national origin, gender, and religion. By arbitrarily and abruptly terminating these grants, the Department deprived grantees, students, and educators of vital resources, jeopardizing grantees’ ability to safeguard equal educational opportunity across the United States and depriving students of critical resources that protect their access to an equal education.

“We are grateful for the Court’s recognition of the harm caused by the Department’s actions and for the opportunity to continue our critical work,” said Dr. Karmen Rouland, President of MAEC. “MAEC remains steadfast in our commitment to empowering educators and communities with the tools they need to build welcoming, affirming educational environments for every student.”

“This ruling is not just a legal victory—it is a reaffirmation of the importance of an education free from discrimination,” said Susan Shaffer, Chair of the Board of Directors. “We remain deeply committed to working with educators, families, and communities for the benefit of all students."

The Court questioned the NAACP's standing for a preliminary injunction, but granted relief to MAEC that will benefit the NAACP and its members. “This injunction is a crucial victory for educational equity across the country,” said Derrick Johnson, President and CEO of the NAACP. “The EAC program plays a fundamental role in ensuring that Black students can access programs and support that dismantle systemic discrimination and promote inclusive learning environments. The fight is not over—and we will continue to stand on behalf of Black students to ensure that they receive the education they deserve.”

“Today’s ruling affirms that the Department of Education cannot disregard its legal obligations to protect students' civil rights and may not arbitrarily terminate decades-long federal programs upon which students and educators rely,” said Katrina Feldkamp, Assistant Counsel at LDF. The abrupt termination of the EAC program was not only unlawful, but also deeply harmful to the schools and communities that rely on these services to eradicate discrimination and create supportive environments for all students. The court’s decision sends a clear message that equity in education is not optional—it is a legal and moral imperative. We will continue fighting to ensure these critical resources are restored and protected.”

LDF continues to monitor and respond to efforts that undermine public education and civil rights enforcement across the country. In addition to this case, LDF has filed several other successful or pending lawsuits challenging the U.S. Department of Education’s recent actions that threaten educational equity and access for historically marginalized students. Through litigation, advocacy, and public engagement, LDF is committed to ensuring that the Department upholds its obligation to protect students’ civil rights and foster inclusive, high-quality public education.

The Reform UK mayor of Greater Lincolnshire has said her party will frack a shale gasfield near Gainsborough if it wins the next general election.

Andrea Jenkyns, Reform UK mayor of Lincolnshire.
Photo: still from video of event in Boston on 30 July 2025

Dame Andrea Jenkyns acknowledged there was currently a moratorium on fracking in England. But she said Reform pledged to “drill, baby, drill”.

She told a Reform UK event in Boston this week that she had recently met the oil and gas company, Egdon Resources, which has the licence to explore and produce hydrocarbons in the area known to geologists as the Gainsborough Trough.

The company has estimated total production from the field at 16 trillion cubic feet. It said this was enough to meet the entire UK gas needs for 6.7 years at current consumption.

But Egdon’s estimates have been questioned by industry commentators. One told DrillOrDrop the claims were “so misleading as to be ridiculous”.

Ms Jenkyns said:

“Last month, I met with a fracking company responsible for a gas find in West Lindsey. But did you know that if we unleash this we would add hundreds of billions of pounds to the exchequer, create 250,000 jobs and obviously make us less reliant on foreign energy. I think this is a good thing.”

Referring to the energy secretary, she said:

“Miliband may have a moratorium banning fracking but as mayor, I can ensure that Lincolnshire people have the right skills so come 2029, if we have a Reform government, we can drill, baby, drill. And we can ensure that it is Lincolnshire people who have got these jobs.”

She also quoted the US president who had described North Sea oil was a “treasure chest” for Britain and how we had “essentially told drillers and oil companies that ‘we don’t want you’”.

Ms Jenkyns said:

“Donald is wise and we will not make that mistake. We value our oil and gas industries and know that they are essential for Britain’s energy security and to fuel our homes.”

A video of the mayor’s comments are on her Facebook page.

The latest advice to the government from its independent advisor, the Climate Change Committee, was for a rapid switch away from gas. Last month, the CCC said it was “important to get off unreliable fossil fuels and onto homegrown, renewable energy as quickly as possible. The fossil fuel era is over – cheap, clean electricity is our future.”

Reform inconsistencies

There have been recent inconsistencies in Reform UK’s support for fracking.

The Reform-led Scarborough Town Council in North Yorkshire objected unanimously last month to plans for lower-volume fracking at Burniston.

And a senior member of the Reform-led Lancashire County Council has called for a former fracking site to be fully restored after the operator applied for a two-year extension.

Joshua Roberts, the council’s cabinet member for rural affairs, the environment and communities, told BBC News:

“We want the site fully restored without further delays – progress has been far too slow.”

He said:

“Any extensions need to be backed by solid reasons and not excuses.”

The councillor said:

“We will look to see if everything on the site needs to stay for another two years, like fencing.”

He also said that although Reform’s national policy supports fracking, the process “has its place, but not everywhere”.

The government has committed to banning associated hydraulic fracturing, which is prevented by the moratorium in England. It has also suggested that it would consider widening the moratorium to lower volume forms of the process that are currently not included.

The energy minister, Michael Shanks wrote in a parliamentary answer, last month:

“We are committed to banning fracking for good and any future decision on national planning policy for fracking will take into account all volumes of hydraulic fracturing.”

UK onshore gas production fell again in May 2025, for the fifth consecutive month. The May figure was the lowest for 18 months, despite a small increase in production from the largest field at Saltfleetby.

Onshore oil volume was up slightly in May 2025 compared with April – but only marginally more than would have been expected from the longer month.

Key figures

Daily oil production:  barrels of oil per day (bopd): 12,490bopd
April 2025 12,441bopd, March 2025 12,310 bopd, February 2025 12,651bopd, January 2025 12,393bopd, December 2024 12,538bopd, November, 12,395bopd, October 11,000bopd, September 11,193 bopd, August 11,776 bopd, July 12,314 bopd

Oil volume: 61,558m3
April 2025 59,337m3, March 2025 60,671m3, February 2025 56,316m3, January 2025 61,080m3, December 2024 61,793m3, November 2024 59,120m3, October 2024 54,213m3, September 2024 53,387m3, August 2024 58,037m3, July 2024 60,690m3

Oil weight: 50,857 tonnes
April 2025 49,000 tonnes, March 2025 50,079 tonnes, February 2025 46,520 tonnes, January 2025 50,444 tonnes, December 2024 51,029 tonnes, November 2024 48,858 tonnes, October 2024 44,849 tonnes, September 2024 44,133 tonnes, August 2024 47,948 tonnes, July 2024 2024 50,148 tonnes

Daily gas production: million standard cubic feet per day (mmscf/d): 5.90mmscf/d
April 2025 6.27mmscf/d, March 2025 7.91mmscf/d, February 2025 8.77mmscf/d, January 2025 9.09mmscf/d, December 2024 9.52 mmscf/d, November 2024 9.28 mmscf/d, October 2024 9.94 mmscf/d, September 2024 8.67 mmscf/d, August 2024 8.59 mmscf/d, July 2024 7.22 mmscf/d

Gas volume: thousand standard cubic meters (Ksm3): 5,178ksm3
April 2025 5,329ksm3, March 2025 6,948ksm3, February 2025 6,952ksm3, January 2025 7,982ksm3, December 2024 8,356ksm3, November 2024 7,882ksm3, October 2024 8,726Ksm3, September 2024 7,367Ksm3, August 2024 7,540Ksm3, July 2024 6,339Ksm3

Gas weight: 4,173 tonnes
April 2025 4,266 tonnes, March 2025 5,444 tonnes, February 2025 5,478 tonnes, January 2025 6,273 tonnes, December 2024 6,652 tonnes, November 2024 6,291 tonnes, October 2024 6,861 tonnes, September 2024 6,034 tonnes, August 2024 6,186 tonnes, July 2024 5,143 tonnes

Onshore oil’s contribution to UK total production: 2.08%
April 2025 2.02%, March 2025 2.01%, February 2025 2.05%, January 2025 2.02%, December 2024 2.02%, November 2024 2.18%, October 2024 1.88%, September 2024 2.08%, August 2024 2.70%, July 2024 2.16%

Onshore gas’s contribution to UK total production:  0.56%
April 2025 0.58%, March 2025 0.71%, February 2025 0.77%, January 2025 0.74%, December 2024 0.78%, November 2024 0.82%, October 2024 1.04%, September 2024 0.89%, August 2024 0.91%, July 2024 0.72%

Volume of flared gas at UK onshore oil fields: 893ksm3
April 2025 571ksm3, March 2025  899ksm3, February 2025 848ksm3, January 2025  940ksm3, December 2024 880ksm3, November 2024 1,067m3, October 2024 951 ksm3, September 2024 943 ksm3, August 2024 975 ksm3, July 2024 1,035ksm3

Volume of vented gas at UK onshore oil fields: 91ksm3
April 2025 90ksm3, March 2025 98ksm3, February 2025 98ksm3, January 2025 135ksm3, December 2024 103ksm3, November 2024 106ksm3, October 2024 119 ksm3, September 2024 98ksm3, August 2024 100ksm3, July 2024 123ksm3

Volume of produced water at UK onshore oil fields: 1,406,011m3
New data field – we will add past data in the coming months. April 20251,385,532m3, March 2025 1,335,865m3, February 2025 1,280,605m3

Volume of reinjected produced water at UK onshore oil fields: 1,389989m3
New data field – we will add past data in the coming months. April 2025 1,370,247m3, March 2025 1,319,683m3, February 2025 1,266,963m3

Volume of produced water at UK onshore gas fields: 189m3
New data field – we will add past data in the coming months. April 2025 137m3, March 2025 187m3, February 2025 176m3

Number of onshore fields which recorded some oil production in May 2025: 27
April 2025  29, March 2025 29, February 2025 29, January 2025 29, December 2024 29, November 2024 30,October 2024 30, September 2024 31, August 2024 31, July 2024 31

Number of onshore fields which recorded some gas production in May 2025: 8
April 2025 11, March 2025 12, February 2025 14, January 2025 15, December 2024 15, November 2024 11, October 2024 13, September 2024 8, August 2024 7, July 2024 8

Number of onshore producing fields which recorded no oil production in May 2025: 16
April 2025 14, March 2025 13, February 2025 14, January 2025 14, December 2024 14, November 2024 13, October 2024 13, September 2024 12, August 2024 12, July 2024 12

Number of onshore producing fields which recorded no gas production in
May 2025: 17
April 2025 14, March 2025 13, February 2025: 11, January 2025 11, December 2024 10, November 2024 15, October 2024 13, September 2024 17, August 2024 18, July 2024 16

This article uses data compiled and published by the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) from reports by oil and gas companies. This is published about three months in arrears. All the charts are based on the NSTA data. Occasionally, figures change retrospectively.

Details Daily production Volume and weight Contribution to total UK production Flaring and venting Produced and reinjected water

The data shows no reinjected water at onshore gasfields

Producing fields Oil Gas Non-producing fields Oil

The May 2025 data shows there was no production at 16 UK onshore oilfields. This was two more than in April 2025. Kimmeridge, Beckingham West and Humbly Grove recorded no production in May 2025. Keddington, which had no production in April 2025, produced in May 2025

The non-producing fields were again:

• Angus Energy: Lidsey
• Britnrg Limited: Newton-on-Trent
• EP UK Investments: Humbly Grove
• Heyco (formerly Egdon Resources): Dukes Wood, Fiskerton Airfield, Kirklington, Waddock Cross
• HHDL/UKOG: Horse Hill
• Perenco: Kimmeridge
• Star Enery (formerly IGas): Avington, Beckingham West, Egmanton, Nettleham, Scampton, South Leverton, Stainton

Gas

There was no production from 17 onshore fields in April 2025, according to the data. This was three more than in April 2025. The additional non-producing fields were Cadeby, Bevercotes, Markham. Hatfield Moor Gas Storage was not listed in the data for May 2025.

The non-producing fields were:

• Heyco: Kirkleatham
• EP UK Investments: Humbly Grove
• Ineos: Airth, Doe Green
• Infinis Energy: coal mine vents at Askern, Bevercotes, Cadeby, Florence, Gedling, Kings Mill Hospital, Mansfield, Markham, Newmarket, Prince of Wales, Sherwood and Whitwell
• Scottish Power: Hatfield Moor

Operators Oil Gas 2022-2025 onshore data archive

April 2025

March 2025

February 2025

January 2025

Production review of 2024

December 2024

November 2024

October 2024

September 2024

August 2024

July 2024

June 2024

May 2024

April 2024

March 2024

February 2024

January 2024

December 2023

November 2023

October 2023

September 2023

August 2023

July 2023

June 2023

May 2023

April 2023

March 2023

February 2023

January 2023

2022 annual production

November 2022

October 2022

September 2022

August 2022 – see note about revised data

July 2022 – see note about revised data

June 2022

May 2022

April 2022

March 2022

February 2022

January 2022

Real solutions to forest degradation, climate change, and biodiversity loss come from the ground up—here’s a powerful example from Zambia, where a group of women has been working with joy and determination to restore forests and food security, bringing agroecological methods to future generations to ensure a healthy environment and community. Check out their inspiring work and the power of women’s leadership in this photo essay:

 

Ubuntu In Action

 

 

Produced by the Global Forest Coalition, Zamsof, and the Kapangya Women Association, with thanks to Andrea Echeverri, Valentina Martínez Figuera, and Gershom Kabasho.

The post PHOTO ESSAY | Ubuntu in Action: Zambian Women Leading Agroecology and Cultural Revival appeared first on Global Forest Coalition.

Oh no, poor Shell only made $4.26 billion in profit last quarter—down nearly a third thanks to falling gas prices. Let’s all shed a carbon-neutral tear for Europe’s biggest fossil fuel polluter as it clutches its pearls and assures investors it’ll still shovel billions back into their pockets through buybacks. Because priorities.

Gas prices across Europe tumbled nearly 20% between April and June, helped along by a rare moment of geopolitical sanity—a ceasefire between Iran and Israel—and lower demand from China. The result? A sudden market correction that Shell calls “non-fundamentals-based volatility,” which is CEO Wael Sawan’s adorable way of saying, we didn’t see this shit coming.

Sawan told CNBC, “This was really sort of paper-induced volatility, and that is not what we typically trade into.”Translation: Shell can’t squeeze as much out of chaos when the chaos isn’t profitable.

Still, no worries for shareholders. Shell is launching yet another $3.5 billion share buyback in Q3. Because even when profits fall, BlackRock, Vanguard, and the rest of the Wall Street enablers expect their blood-soaked dividends. Shell’s debt is rising, but hey—when your core business model involves torching the planet for money, who needs a healthy balance sheet?

Let’s be clear: this isn’t just about some bad luck in trading. According to Derren Nathan of Hargreaves Lansdown, Shell got hit by a trifecta of failure: weak commodity prices, a trading slump, and—chef’s kiss—unplanned downtime at its chemical plants, which are also circling the drain.

But don’t be fooled. Despite the dip, profits exceeded City forecasts, which were bracing for a bigger fall to $3.7 billion. Shell beating expectations is like an arsonist being praised for not burning everything down. The City cheers, while the rest of us choke.

Meanwhile, households across the UK get a temporary breather: lower wholesale gas prices mean a 7% drop in the government’s energy price cap. Enjoy it while it lasts—because Shell sure doesn’t plan on making “affordable energy” a trend.

And for those clinging to the illusion that Shell might care about the world it’s actively wrecking? Don’t. The company has rolled back its climate targets, because growth, not survival, is the mission. Or as Robin Wells of Fossil Free London put it while protesting outside Shell HQ:

“We are now in a new normal of record-breaking heat, created by corporations like Shell. This will mean devastation and mass loss of human life.”

But sure, Wael—tell us more about your “strong operational performance.”

This is what happens when planetary collapse is just another market fluctuation. Welcome to Shell’s version of the “new normal”: obscene payouts, political hand-waving, and just enough spin to keep investors smiling as the world burns.

Shell’s Profits Drop—But Not Enough to Stop the Greedfest was first posted on August 1, 2025 at 5:47 pm.
©2018 "Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at john@shellnews.net

Wael Sawan pledges to save Shell’s chemical disaster by doing what Shell does best: selling off assets, cutting jobs, and blaming China.

If there’s one thing Shell loves more than raking in billions from polluting the planet, it’s failing upward with a straight face. And this week, CEO Wael Sawan has bravely stepped forward to announce that—surprise!—Shell’s chemicals division is a flaming trainwreck. But don’t worry, folks, they’ve got a plan: shut things down, blame Europe, and “explore partnerships.”

In a Bloomberg TV interview that might as well have been titled “How to Say ‘We’re Screwed’ Without Scaring Shareholders”, Sawan admitted that Shell’s chemicals business is being pummelled by “one of the most protracted industry slumps in a very, very long time.” (That’s CEO-speak for “this has been going badly for ages, but we’ve just now decided to mention it.”)

Shell’s heroic solution?

• Sell off their chemicals plant in Singapore.

• “High-grade” their portfolio—because rebranding “downsizing” always sounds better in PowerPoint.

• Close stuff in Europe, where sky-high energy prices have rudely interfered with Shell’s dreams of endless margin.

• And of course, “explore partnerships in the US”—because if there’s one place where deregulation meets deep capital, it’s the Land of the Fossil-Fuelled Free.

Sawan earnestly reassured the public that Shell is “focused on the levers it can control.” Which in Shell-speak translates to: “We can’t fix global demand, but we can definitely axe some jobs and sell more to the Americans.”

To be fair, Shell’s not alone in this chemical catastrophe. Dow and ExxonMobil—also card-carrying members of the Big Oil Hall of Shame—are shuttering capacity across Europe too. But Shell, being Shell, is turning this slump into a fresh opportunity to trim, spin, and repackage failure as strategy.

And of course, no modern corporate meltdown is complete without blaming China. Sawan dutifully pointed to “increased capacity in China” as a key reason for the slump—because it’s always easier to wag the finger at Beijing than admit your own bloated division has been bleeding profit for years.

What does this mean for Shell’s loyal investors, like BlackRock and Vanguard? Absolutely nothing. As long as the company keeps up appearances, maintains that magical “buyback flow,” and throws enough buzzwords at CNBC, no one on Wall Street will ask why Shell is still trying to cosplay as a chemicals powerhouse in 2025.

So, to recap: Shell’s chemicals unit is sinking, and the rescue plan is to throw the ballast overboard—then declare the ship is lighter and “more efficient.” Bravo.

Coming next quarter: Shell discovers sustainability by selling its wind farms to Exxon and doubling down on asphalt.

Shell’s Chemicals Unit Is Drowning was first posted on August 1, 2025 at 5:26 pm.
©2018 "Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at john@shellnews.net

VA registered nurses with National Nurses Organizing Committee/National Nurses United – along with veterans groups, federal unions, and community members – urged the public to join in their efforts to protect federal workers and veterans health care at the VA during a town hall meeting in Augusta, Ga.

Ah yes, Shell—that tireless crusader for a greener tomorrow, provided “green” means your bank account hemorrhaging cash at a Shell Recharge station and nobody at HQ picking up the bloody phone.

Meet John Stephen, just your average British bloke living in France who thought he was doing the right thing: driving an electric car across Spain at Christmas, stopping at one of Shell’s shiny, eco-branded charging points. What he got instead? A €1,195 invoice that reads less like a charge and more like a ransom note.

Let’s break it down:

• €71.77 for 18.88kWh on Christmas morning. Pricey, but tolerable.

• Two weeks later, a second bill appears from the void: €1,124.

• The receipt claims he was charging at 12:34 p.m. on December 25. The problem? John was in an Uber at the time, on the way to Christmas lunch. Because of course Shell’s idea of a “silent night” involves ghost-charging your car from a parallel dimension.

But wait—it gets better. That mysterious second charge included a delightful €925 “connection fee.” Not a single human being—not from Shell’s customer service, not from their European HQ, not even their supposed 24/7 helpline—can or will explain what the hell that even means. Maybe it’s the price of connecting to Shell’s uniquely advanced system of corporate indifference?

“I finally spoke to someone in Ireland who admitted the bill looked dodgy,” John told The Connexion. “But they said they couldn’t escalate it.” Naturally. Because when Shell isn’t accidentally triggering earthquakes in Groningen or making record profits while the planet cooks, it’s apparently moonlighting as a bureaucratic escape room where every call is a dead end.

John has now turned to France’s small claims court and the European Consumer Centre in an attempt to get his money back—because Shell’s idea of customer service appears to be “go screw yourself.”

Shell, in its infinite corporate wisdom, offered this gem of a statement: customers with issues should “reach out.”

John already has. Repeatedly. By email, by letter, by phone.

But the company’s only consistent response seems to be the sound of oil-stained silence.

Shell Recharge proudly brags about its 850,000+ EV charging points across Europe and the UK, but maybe it should focus on charging what people actually owe instead of levelling surprise “connection fees” that feel more like a shakedown than a service.

And where are Shell’s investors—BlackRock, Vanguard, or any of the other ESG-hypocrisy champions—when customers get mugged by backend billing software? Probably sipping cocktails made of melted ice caps and congratulating themselves on “sustainable investing.”

As John puts it, “If this can happen to someone with a paper trail and legal help, what hope is there for the average tourist?”

Shell Charges €1,195 to Top Up an EV—Because Nothing Says “Green Future” Like Christmas Day Highway Robbery was first posted on August 1, 2025 at 4:34 pm.
©2018 "Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at john@shellnews.net

You may have heard about biomimicry, a technological and social movement predicated on the idea of designing systems inspired by biological processes. The theory is that natural systems, over millions of years of evolution and adaptation, must have optimized certain processes — and that humans can adapt these processes into our own systems. Innovations discovered through the study of biology and ecology have already contributed to important advancements for our species, from artificial spider silk to biological systems for data storage.

While much of the conversation around biomimicry focuses on technological applications, several environmental thinkers in recent years have called for social and economic systems to take inspiration from nature. For example, reciprocal, gift, and ecological economics are based on the principle of symbiosis, where unrelated species perform mutually beneficial services for one another. By developing economic structures modeled after mutual collaboration between two or more species, proponents argue, we can establish kinder and more equitable social relations, where goods and services are shared between individuals based on convivial exchange — an economy of flowers and pollinators over an economy of lions and gazelles.

Social biomimicry has transformative potential, just as technological biomimicry has helped to inject new ideas into the realms of engineering, robotics, and materials.

The field, however, lacks some of the critical assessment and rigor necessary to optimize these novel ideas. To achieve truly transformative potential, social biomimicry must evolve.

Personally, I have developed an understanding of the practice of biomimicry through my graduate research with perennial wheat, a newly domesticated species. This research is part of an effort to design crops that emulate the biology of prairie plants, particularly their deep roots that improve soil and water quality. As I reviewed the history of this work, it became apparent that a big reason for the success of this research was the extensive trial and error necessary to integrate ecological inspiration into human systems. Recent breakthroughs were only possible due to a deep commitment to experimentalism and caution when scaling these new technologies.

As I have become more involved with biomimicry within the context of social systems, I believe the field could benefit from some of those qualities as it evolves.

Scholarship Through Analogy

The foundational idea driving thinking within social biomimicry comes from the Gaia hypothesis, which posits that natural systems have evolved in concert with the planet to be self-regulating and self-perpetuating, continually pursuing the optimal arrangement of organisms for mutual prosperity. The Gaia hypothesis is symbiosis on steroids, the totality of all biological kingdoms singing in a magnificent chorus of life.

While we are becoming increasingly knowledgeable about how collaboration underlies many ecosystem functions, some proponents, philosophers, and commentators overemphasize or even deify such processes, which can cloud our understanding of the forces that power ecosystems. This leads us to center a subset of culturally idolized processes as opposed to soberly assessing constituent parts and processes governing ecosystems.

Many calls for social biomimicry start at the position that nature is inherently worthy of emulation, and that anything deemed natural must be a valuable model for designing social systems. This view places nature on a reverential pedestal where ecology becomes a “sacred scripture” of sorts — a screen onto which we project existing values and desires. Those who value community and sharing can point to more cooperative relationships in the natural world, like the bee and the flower, as a justification for their preferences. Conversely, those who prefer a society of cutthroat competition can point to the elk clashing horns over a mate. Nature nurtures just as much as it brutalizes. Both worldviews can draw justifications for their preferences from biology and ecology.

By relying on these analyses in promoting biomimicry, we are using nature, a system with no consciousness, as a source of ethical guidance. Morality is not what we glean from studying ecology.

The processes that ecosystems have spent eons refining are where the real utility lies.

In seeking these material benefits, social biomimicry must pursue a program of empirical experimentation. As it stands, a lot of the rhetoric around social biomimicry operates in the realm of analogy. A natural system is described and related to a human social dynamic, with the author gesturing as to how humans could emulate the ecological phenomenon being observed.

Take alternate bearing in trees as an example. Oaks or pecans will coordinate a surge of nuts to overwhelm herbivore populations, like squirrels or raccoons, resulting in more saplings becoming established. It’s a great lesson in the power of collaboration to defeat an adversary.

Most biomimicry literature would wax poetic on how we can apply similar strategies in our societies. But all this amounts to is a parable, with limited information on the actual design of novel systems. To evolve the field, empirical analysis of and experimentation with the material parallels between natural and human systems is necessary.

A good example can be found in the book Honeybee Democracy, where biologist Thomas Seeley shows how beehives operate a deeply democratic system of decision-making when choosing where to locate a hive. Scout bees rigorously collect information and present proposed sites to the group, which are then debated through the famous waggle dance until a consensus is established. Once a new site is chosen, the bees dedicate themselves to this decision, even if they argued strenuously against it. As opposed to the system of adversarial democracy employed in many governments today, this method of consensus and unity seems like a refreshing alternative.

However, Seeley writes, the applicability of the lessons we learn from the honeybee depends on biological context, which subsequently affects how they are applied to human systems. Bees have an intense cognitive disposition towards unity. Within the hive, human traits like tribalism are absent, not due to ideological dedication but genetic codification. For organizing units of thousands to millions of individual humans, such a unified front with a complete lack of dissent is incredibly difficult to achieve. Bees have a neurology that predisposes them to prioritize unwavering cooperation, a trait that is absent in human psychology.

As Seeley illustrates, this model of consensus decision-making has been shown to work for small groups of people that have a sense of unity among them, such as a faculty meeting or activist group. These situations partially replicate the conditions that allow this form of governance to function in the hive.

But he also cautions that upon changing the scale in which we attempt to import the Honeybee Democracy framework into human decision-making, the model breaks down and the lessons are less workable. This meticulous analysis of how a process plays out in nature, in this case by comparing bee and human psychology, can inform its translatability to human contexts.

Empiricism in Social Biomimicry

When mimicking nature, I have found that factors such as scale, sector, geography, and culture influence how a natural process is operationalized into human systems.

For example, gift economies rooted in symbiosis work well for food or clothing, as these are goods where sharing and reciprocity are culturally familiar and logistically feasible to execute within local communities. If I have excess produce from my garden, I can distribute cucumbers or strawberries to neighbors and friends. Then, come spring, my foraging friends will return the favor with fresh morels. Reciprocity functions well in tight-knit social networks and within certain domains of consumption.

On the other hand, this model would fail in areas like healthcare, where there are a small number of highly skilled individuals with decades of education providing specialized services using expensive equipment. It’s intensive on both an individual and system-wide level, and it’s unlikely that I would have anything I could give to my doctor that would come close to covering the resources they expended on me. Modern healthcare simply cannot function through a symbiosis-like exchange of resources, as there is no organismal relationship that has achieved mutual benefit with such a heavy resource imbalance between participants. The difference in resource and energy investment between producer and consumer will change whether symbiosis is possible across different sectors of the economy.

This analytical approach to adapting social innovations from the natural world, I would argue, would greatly improve proposals originating within social biomimicry. In my own work, I found some of the following questions to be powerful tools for exploration: What are the behaviors participant organisms exhibit, and could these be reasonably replicated by humans given what we know about our psychology and social dynamics? What levels of investment in energy, nutrients, or labor do each organism put into and get out of their relationships? Do similar proportions in investment exist within a segment of our economy where such a relationship could be recreated? What aspects of the natural system could be quantified in a manner that parallels human systems?

Instead of simply pointing to various ecological interactions and saying, “We should emulate that,” we should be analyzing these systems and their potential human analogues systematically. For example, we could design political or organizational models that adapt over time based on mechanisms learned from studying evolution. Or we could build new economic systems that have a diversity of forms and functions fashioned after the types of heterogeneity present in wild populations.

A great example of this more empirical form of biomimicry in action is the Kalundborg Ecopark in Denmark, an industrial park modeled off of the cycling of resources that underlies ecosystems. A core aspect of ecosystem functioning is every scrap of sunlight, water, and nutrients left after the death and decay of one organism is consumed by another. Resources flow circularly through a web of creatures. This is antithetical to modern methods of industrial production, which produce prodigious volumes of waste as the result of linear production chains. The Ecopark was designed to emulate this cycling of resources by basing the production lines of unrelated companies on one another’s waste streams. The designers studied natural processes, identified spaces in human systems where reorganizing processes along ecological lines proved advantageous and experimented to ensure that it worked well as an alternative.

It’s not perfect, but broadly the Ecopark has been able to drastically cut down on material and energy waste for participant firms, serving as a powerful example of what is possible when we study nature with a critical eye.

Social biomimicry should conduct experiments exploring how these ideas may work in human contexts. Concepts should be introduced on a small scale and slowly grown out, with ample measurement to determine whether our needs are being fulfilled by the model. As new systems grow, we can adapt them to the needs of the situation.

Fundamentally, our attention should remain on studying and translating processes from the natural world into the human world. Values, doctrines, and ideology are inexorably human and are areas that should remain the domain of people.

Republish this article for free! Previously in The Revelator:

Who Heals the Earth’s Healers? Ways to Avert Burnout for Environmental Advocates

The post Biomimicry Needs to Keep Evolving appeared first on The Revelator.

Wael Sawan reassures Wall Street that Shell’s morally bankrupt business model is working just great—no passport change needed.

Stop the presses! Shell, the planet-roasting oil baron, will not be moving its listing to the U.S. any time soon—because why mess with a system that’s already coughing up billions in buybacks while the world burns?

CEO Wael Sawan, delivering his signature “we care about shareholder value, not carbon footprints” charm, went on CNBC’s Squawk Box Europe this week to calm Wall Street’s eager little hearts. Despite previous hints that Shell might chase “the bright lights of New York,” Sawan has now confirmed that, no, this isn’t a “live discussion.” Translation: they’re already making a killing on the FTSE—why relocate when the cash faucet is flowing?

“We have been able to just stick to our own story… and deliver on what we say we’re going to do,” Sawan said, modestly referring to Shell’s $4.26 billion Q2 earnings and a cute little $3.5 billion share buyback for investors—because obviously, that’s what global warming victims need most: richer shareholders.

Let’s be honest—Shell isn’t ignoring U.S. investors. Oh no, they’re swimming in them. Sawan gushed, “We have grown the investor base in the US significantly… we feel more and more confident that our message is getting through to those pools of capital.” Spoiler alert: that “message” isn’t “We’re transitioning to clean energy”—it’s “Look at all this profit we’re squeezing from oil while pretending to care about net zero!”

And investors are lapping it up, especially the usual suspects like BlackRock—because nothing screams ESG credibility like profiting from Shell’s carefully polished “differentiated investment thesis,” otherwise known as “extract every last hydrocarbon while greenwashing furiously.”

Shell’s shares are up 9% this year, tightly shadowing its U.S. oil pals like ExxonMobil. Because let’s face it, when you’re a global climate saboteur dressed up in PowerPoint presentations, geography doesn’t matter.

So no, New York doesn’t need Shell to move in—it’s already living rent-free in their portfolios. As Sawan made clear, “We are attracting that liquidity.” Damn right they are. It’s the only flood they do welcome.

Coming up next: Shell discovers a new investor base—in hell—after launching carbon capture in purgatory.

Shell to the World: “We’re Not Moving to the US Yet—We’re Already Raking It In Just Fine from London, Thanks” was first posted on August 1, 2025 at 4:14 pm.
©2018 "Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at john@shellnews.net

The latest United Nations report on hunger and nutrition reveals that the total number of people experiencing hunger in the world fell in 2024. But progress is uneven, with some regions seeing food insecurity rates growing and disparities are worsening. 

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World (SOFI) report, released annually by five U.N. agencies, estimates that 8.2 percent of the population, representing between 638-720 million people, faced hunger last year—down from 8.5 percent in 2023 and 8.7 percent in 2022.

These improvements can be attributed to strides being made in South-eastern and Southern Asia as well as South America. Brazil, for example, invested in farmers and food access to lift 40 million people out of hunger in two years.  

But in Western Asia, hunger is on the rise. The same is true in most sub-regions of Africa, where an affordable healthy diet is also increasingly out of reach. In the last five years, the number of eaters who cannot afford a nutritious diet on the African continent rose from 864 million to over 1 billion. 

The figures in the report “are not just numbers. They represent lives, futures, and communities at risk,” says Bob Rae, President of the U.N. Economic and Social Council.

Women and rural communities continue to bear the brunt of this crisis. Food insecurity is still more prevalent among adult women than men in every region of the world. Although the gap seemed to be closing in 2022 and 2023, the latest data suggests that it is worsening once again. Hunger rates also remain higher in rural areas than urban ones for another year. 

“The world is veering dangerously off track, leaving the poorest and more vulnerable behind,” says Emily Farr, Oxfam’s Food and Economic Security Lead.

Read more about the latest findings on food and nutrition security and the solutions that can lift all communities out of hunger in a new piece on Forbes by clicking HERE. 

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of EqualStock, Unsplash

The post World Sees Slight Drop in Global Hunger But a Rise in Inequality appeared first on Food Tank.