News Feeds

This week on the Talking Headways podcast, we’re joined by SFMTA’s Director of Transportation, Julie Kirschbaum, who oversees San Francisco’s public transit system, Muni. She discusses system improvements, rising customer satisfaction, lessons from the pandemic on ridership and operations as well as Muni’s cultural connection to the city.

Listeners can enjoy the audio with the player embedded below, scroll a little further for a partial edited transcript or peruse an AI-generated transcript of the entire episode.

Jeff Wood: Muni was at the front of a lot of innovation during the pandemic across the country, and I’m curious, since you were on the front lines of that, if there’s anything that you or your agency learned specifically from that time period, about what transit agencies can do, what they can’t do — or what we tell ourselves that we can or can’t do.

I’m interested in that kind of story because it’s interesting to think about then and now, and this is different than that ridership discussion. It’s more about operations and thinking about what agencies are set up to do well — or what is harder for us just generally.

Julie Kirschbaum: We learned to learn, I think. COVID allowed us the space to try a lot of different things. Some worked better than others, and being willing to stick with what was working and walk away from — or have some clear parameters for calling it — things that were not working, was a big part of our success. We really used the fact that we had to so significantly change the way our system looked during COVID, to bring service back in a much more deliberate way.

Prior to COVID, we really had more service on paper than we were set up to deliver every day, and that essentially represented a broken trust with our customers because if we could fill all the trips on a route each day, you might have a 20-minute wait time. But on a bad day, you might wait 40 or 50 minutes. But if, if you have to get to your job or an appointment or school, you’re planning that extra time whether you end up needing it or not, and so it can be really frustrating. So it was hard, and we had a lot of really strong policymaker support.

But bringing back the service only at the pace where we could hire operators to deliver every single trip was a huge key to our success, and then trying new things like new transit lanes, using technology instead of a traditional paper schedule to deliver the service, shutting down the subway early one week every quarter so that we could do all the hard maintenance jobs, all proved to be key to our success. But underlying all of that was just not being overextended.

Jeff Wood: Can you tell me a little bit more about that maintenance? The system is old. It’s been around a long time. There’s a lot of little things that can go wrong or need fixing before they do go wrong, and so I’m curious about that process of going in and making sure the system is maintained so you’re not having a computer that could operate Pong on it operating the subway.

Julie Kirschbaum: In a typical weekday night, our window to do maintenance is only about two and a half to three hours long. And then, if you add into that the amount of time it takes to safely power down the system so you can do the work and then have time to power it back up, that two and a half to three hours becomes 45 minutes to an hour, and 45 minutes to an hour is not a lot of time to do deep maintenance work.

We found, through our Fix It Week program, that we could take that same concept of overnight work, but instead of having 45 minutes to an hour of work time, we could get hundreds of labor hours in just a very short time period by having an eight-hour work window instead of a three-hour work window by bringing all of our day crews to work overnight.

And by planning out the work so that every part of the tunnel, and the stations, and the fan rooms all have work going on simultaneously. It’s been a great opportunity for us to do proactive maintenance work on our infrastructure, which mirrors what we do on our buses. But because our buses are modular, it’s always been a little bit easier to plan that.

Meteorologists warn that this year’s El Niño may be one of the strongest on record. As communities around the world brace for more extreme weather events, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) is helping farmers build resilience.

Every two to seven years, El Niño causes widespread disruptions around the world, from drought to heavy rains. Past ones “have left economies devastated,” Sara Mbago-Bhunu, Director of East and Southern Africa Division at IFAD, tells Food Tank. 

The U.N. agency works with governments and development partners to put prevention measures in place before a crisis hits. Seasonal climate forecasts and early warning systems can inform planning, identify vulnerable areas, and establish preparedness measures.

“All regions really should be willing to prepare for this,” Mbago-Bhunu says. Because El Niño will look different across geographies, mapping helps IFAD understand the likely impacts and how to adapt accordingly.

Ethiopia, northern Uganda, Zambia, and Mozambique, for example, are likely to see less rain during their main growing season. In these regions, water capture technologies must be scaled up. Meanwhile in Tanzania and coastal Kenya—likely to experience higher-than-average rainfall—flood-resistant roads, warehouses, and markets are needed.

Mbago-Bhunu says that governments across the continent understand the importance of building more resilient systems, not only to respond to El Niño, but also to the broader effects of the climate crisis.

“They understand if they don’t invest in their water tables, in their water towers, they will not be able to have productive capacities to feed their populations in the future,” she tells Food Tank. “They also understand that supporting soil fertility might not see immediate gains, but will definitely have future returns.”

But funding for climate adaptation in Africa remains inadequate. “We get a fraction of global funding as it is,” Mbago-Bhunu says. “So [governments] have to mobilize cheaper sources of financing domestically and then…channel those into longer term solutions.”

This approach pays off, Mbago-Bhunu argues. She points to the last El Niño in 2023, which affected more than 1 million Zambian households. Around US$900 was required to provide life-saving aid and early recovery assistance—far more than the cost of preventative measures.

“Investing in resilience is cheaper than responding to disaster.”

Listen to the full conversation with Sara Mbago-Bhunu to hear about the unique vulnerabilities women and girls face from extreme weather events, how IFAD leverages resources from its projects to respond to urgent needs, and what the private sector can do to support farmers and governments.

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 Richard Nyoni, Unsplash

The post Investing in Resilience Will Help Farmers Weather the Super El Niño appeared first on Food Tank.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) released a report today synthesizing decades of climate attribution research that underscores how heat-trapping emissions from burning fossil fuels makes different types of extreme weather more likely and/or severe. NAS conducted an overview of events like extreme heat, drought, wildfires, tropical cyclones and convective storms. They also touch on event impact attribution, the leading edge of the field that quantifies how climate change has contributed to specific harms like increased human mortality and economic losses.

The report and its contributors have been attacked by the fossil fuel industry in the lead up to today’s release, the latest in a coordinated campaign by Big Oil to undermine climate science and intimidate scientists. Companies like BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil and Shell are facing mounting lawsuits aiming to hold them accountable for the climate damages caused by their decades-long disinformation campaign. In April, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Harriet Hageman introduced a bill offering sweeping immunity from liability to these major climate polluters.

Below is a statement by Dr. Carly Phillips, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and co-author of multiple attribution studies, including on forest fires in the western United States and global sea level rise.

“Attribution science confirms what billions of people around the world have experienced firsthand—deadly events like extreme heatwaves are occurring more often and tropical cyclones are more intense due to climate change. Despite efforts by the fossil fuel industry and its cronies to intimidate panelists and misrepresent the research, the Academies’ report affirms the scientific consensus: attribution science is based on rigorous peer reviewed methods and provides critical information about how climate change is driving increases in the frequency and/or severity of extreme events.

“This robust research field provides key evidence to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for its role in driving climate change. Congress must not grant Big Oil immunity for climate deception and the harms they knowingly caused that attribution science makes evident. Communities deserve their day in court and no one—including fossil fuel companies that have profited at the expense of people and the planet—should be above the law.”

The attack on attribution science is part of a larger effort supported by the Trump administration to eliminate states’ and communities’ ability to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for its role in the climate crisis, particularly through the courts.

EPA Administrator Zeldin’s attack on the Endangerment Finding, a foundational scientific finding that global warming emissions endanger public health and the environment and thus must be regulated by the EPA, also included baseless attacks on attribution science.

To speak with Dr. Phillips, please reach out to UCS Communications Officer Daela Taeoalii-Tipton at dtaeoaliitipton@ucs.org or 801-808-0759.

Additional UCS resources:

• Peer-reviewed study tracing fossil fuel companies’ contribution to climate change and ocean acidification
• Peer-reviewed study attributing climate change and sea level rise to fossil fuel companies
• Blog post explaining attribution science
• Blog post on accurately communicating about attribution science

Nurses and constituents held a press conference and protest on Wednesday, July 15 at the Chicago residence of Senator Dick Durbin to demand he donate his financial contributions from Palantir Technologies, the tech company powering ICE surveillance, to immigrant rights groups.

Millions of people around the world drink coffee to boost their energy. Researchers in South Korea have now given new meaning to the concept of coffee as fuel.

The team from the Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM) report a way to convert soggy coffee grounds into a high-quality coal-like fuel. The process, reported in the journal Chemical Engineering Journal, takes just 90 seconds from start to finish. And the final product has fuel performance comparable to conventional charcoal, according to the researchers.

The world generates almost 10 million tons of waste coffee grounds each year. Most of this ends up in landfills or gets incinerated. The spent grounds hold a lot of energy because of their high calorific value. But they have a high moisture content, so using them as any kind of biofuel would first require a long drying process or oil extraction.

But the KIGAM researchers eliminated the pre-drying step. Instead, they developed a way to use the moisture to accelerate the reactions and improve the quality of the solid fuel.

In the new technique, called flame plasma pyrolysis, the researchers start with coffee grounds containing around 55% moisture. They create a plasma flame by burning liquefied petroleum gas and compressed air. This creates a plasma as hot as 900°C and puts the coffee waste under immense pressure.

The pressurized heat rapidly vaporizes the moisture, triggering hundreds of tiny explosions in the coffee grounds, reducing the mass of the grounds by 83.3% and transforming them into a dry, porous biochar, all within 90 seconds.

The process boosts the calorific value of the coffee gounds by about 33%. The biochar exhibited a heating value of 29 megajoules per kilogram, comparable to that of coal.

According to a press release, the new process should work on any high-moisture organic wastes, such as food waste, sewage sludge, and agricultural residues. “We plan to expand the technology to various types of high-moisture organic waste and further optimize the process for industrial-scale commercialization,” said Taejun Park, lead author of the study.

Source: Taejun Park et al. Rapid conversion of wet spent coffee grounds into high-calorific biochar via drying-free flame plasma pyrolysis for process intensification. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2026.

 

 

Ontario’s publicly managed water and wastewater systems are good examples of public systems that have learned from the failures of privatization and have been amended...

The post Keep Water Public: The quiet corporatization of Ontario’s water first appeared on Spring.

No reform can transform the WTO into an institution that serves the people. The time has come to build a new system that prioritizes dignity, sovereignty, and the well-being of all peoples.

The post “No reform can transform the WTO into an institution that serves the people” appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Another year, another blow to Pennsylvania transit riders.

Keystone State Gov. Josh Shapiro signed the annual budget into law last Sunday, and for the fifth year in a row, public transportation has been left to financially starve. The approved budget contains no funding for transit operations, continuing a streak that forces every agency to scrounge for its own money, to varying degrees of success.

“We’ve been left out for far too long,” remarked Connor Descheemaker, Statewide Campaign Manager for Transit for All, PA! The organization rallied transit riders to send more than 50,000 letters to state representatives and the White House-eying governor calling for transit funding, reaching every legislative district in Pennsylvania.

Those calls went largely unanswered. Riders in Lehigh Valley are now bracing for route eliminations and trip cancellations, despite already paying increased fares. Lancaster County paratransit riders will pay more as well, beginning next month.

Recommended Rural and Disabled Pennsylvanians Fighting For Transit As Keystone State Budget Nears Late Deal Ren Zaro Fitzgerald July 6, 2026

Low-income, disabled, and rural Pennsylvanians will lose access to jobs, healthcare, and loved ones. That reality hasn’t stopped their governor from declaring victory.

In a speech at last week’s budget signing ceremony, Shapiro uttered a total of three words about the state-sponsored mobility crisis: “There’s more I want to do – like raising the minimum wage, funding mass transit, and expanding access to affordable housing,” he said.

Shapiro seems to understand the need for well-funded transit. Last year, he sent $220 million to Philadelphia to boost SEPTA’s barren maintenance fund following a series of onboard fires.

One-time relief won’t keep buses running, though.

SEPTA’s aging Silverliner IV fleet caught on fire multiple times in 2025, prompting new state funding for fleet repair.

Shapiro has failed, and failed, and failed again to pass his landmark transit policy. His initial proposal would increase the share of sales tax revenue going to public transit by 2 percent. The blame isn’t all his: Even after he watered down his proposal to a 1.75-percent increase, statehouse Republicans failed to support it.

Even if it had succeeded, it’s too little, too late: The sales tax change would still be $92 million short of the $384 million that Transit for All, PA! estimates is needed to prevent further service cuts in public transportation across the state.

Transit for All, PA! has previously lobbied for its legislative package, which would have increased taxes on car rentals and leases, and raised a new tax on ride shares.

Like Shapiro’s plan, that failed, too.

“The General Assembly has deferred action to invest fully in public transit,” state Sen. Nikil Saval (D-Philadelphia), who had authored the ride share component of the legislative package. “Despite the continued activation and involvement of tens of thousands of Pennsylvanians … we will once again face this issue in 2027.”

Recommended Doomsday For SEPTA Is Bad News For Everyone Kathryn Xu August 27, 2025

Pennsylvania’s last semblance of adequate transit funding ended in 2021 with the expiration of Act 89. The 10-year allocation covered statewide transportation expenses, including roadway maintenance and transit operations. 

As soon as Act 89 money dried up, agencies turned to Covid relief grants to stay afloat. Those grants, provided through the American Rescue Plan, ended in 2024. Several agencies have gone so far as to pillage their own fixed-route budgets to continue federally mandated paratransit services.

Call it luck, a Band-Aid, or a bad omen; riders on Philadelphia’s SEPTA and Pittsburgh’s PRT are momentarily safe from service cuts and fare hikes. Following last year’s budget disaster, Shapiro permitted the two agencies to raid their own maintenance funds to temporarily pay for operations.

Recommended Transit Funding in Pennsylvania Can’t Wait Alex Milone November 10, 2025

Now, both are pausing upgrades, deferring basic maintenance, and reckoning with the realities of operating – but not fixing – a large-scale transit system.

State highways, on the other hand, received $775 million in new funding from Shapiro’s budget deal.

Transit advocates in Pennsylvania are shifting strategies to preserve essential transit services. A June decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, allowed slot machines to be taxed at a higher rate.

Both Democrat and Republican lawmakers have shown interest in using revenue from the so-called “skill games tax” to fund transit. The legislature must agree on a tax rate and structure, but declined to do so before finalizing the budget.

“Anytime that there is a discussion of new revenue in Pennsylvania, it needs to include public transportation,” Descheemaker said. “We are losing public transportation actively, right now in Pennsylvania. Public transportation needs to be at the center of those conversations.”

• An analysis of Smart Growth America data by CityNerd found that American roads are getting more dangerous, with pedestrian deaths rising by 72 percent compared to population growth and vehicle-miles driven. In the cities where the problem is worst, like Memphis and others in the Sun Belt, roads were designed during the height of the car era to emphasize speed over safety. (The Cool Down)
• At a recent American Public Transportation Association conference, transit leaders emphasized the need to seek other funding sources besides the federal government, as well as bringing down procurement costs. (Railway-News)
• Utility companies are working on ways to alleviate concerns about electric vehicles’ impact on the power grid. (Government Technology)
• Economist Noah Smith urges people not to give up on the suburbs. (Noahpinion)
• Cincinnati made a questionable decision to sell a rail line for $1.9 billion, and now finds itself constrained on how to spend the money. (The Guardian)
• In a counterpoint to a previously highlighted headline, MinnPost contributors argue for bus rapid transit on the Blue Line.
• The Port of Los Angeles is offering $75 million in incentives to purchase electric trucks.
• Atlanta drivers are complaining about protected bike lanes because they can’t stop hitting the barriers (WSB-TV). Would they rather hit cyclists instead?
• Chattanooga approved a plan to achieve Vision Zero by 2050. (News 9)
• Omaha adopted Vision Zero in 2023. Deaths keep rising, but city officials say they’ve only begun to start implementing safety improvements. (KETV)
• Somerville, Massachusetts has gone three years without a traffic death. (Governing)
• Montgomery County, Maryland is offering transit riders a free Capital Bikeshare membership while the Red Line is shut down. (WUSA 9)
• The world needs more bike lanes, but some of them are so poorly designed as to be useless at best. Momentum Mag gathered some of the worst.
• The French city of Grenoble is reallocating public space from advertisers to people. (Reason to Be Cheerful)

On Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Nominee Jay Clayton repeatedly refused to say whether Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election. At today's confirmation hearing, Clayton also defended Trump’s $1.8 billion slush fund. Additionally, Clayton refused to come clean on his extraordinary subpoenas of New York Times journalists for reporting something the administration didn’t like as well as Trump’s efforts to interfere in Georgia’s elections. Demand Progress led a coalition of press freedom and progressive advocates who urged Senate Democrats to oppose Clayton’s nomination.

The following is a statement from Demand Progress Executive Director Sean Vitka:

“Jay Clayton’s assignment today was to show that he wouldn’t be a submissive hatchet man for Donald Trump — and he failed spectacularly. Clayton’s trainwreck hearing showed us that he is willing to deny objective reality to avoid upsetting the president. Someone like that must not be allowed to be the Director of National Intelligence, who wields vast power and must lead the Intelligence Community with nonpartisan integrity and independence from political pressure. As Congress barrels toward another fight over FISA surveillance powers, we hope Democrats like Sen. Mark Warner and Rep. Jim Himes understand the clear danger someone like Clayton would pose as Trump’s pointman on government surveillance.”

On Wednesday, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr announced his scheme to repeal a limit that Congress set on the national reach of broadcast-television conglomerates. Lifting the cap from its congressionally mandated limit of 39 percent of national audience is key to a proposed merger between two giant broadcast conglomerates: Nexstar and Tegna.

As Free Press explained in comments filed last year in the agency’s proceeding, Carr’s machinations serve the interests of broadcast lobbyists and media moguls who align themselves with the Trump administration and hope to monopolize the broadcast dial. But the FCC’s power grab ignores the law in pursuit of Carr’s partisan and self-aggrandizing aims.

In 2025, the FCC asked for public comment on changing or eliminating the national broadcast-ownership rule that Congress set. The rule prohibits any television-broadcast conglomerate from exceeding the 39 percent cap that’s designed to limit the size and national reach of giant broadcasters — like Fox Corporation, Nexstar and Sinclair — that already own hundreds of stations across the country.

At the time, Free Press explained that the agency has no authority to change the numerical limit Congress set in statute. Free Press’ filing notes that Carr’s goal is to fulfill the Trump administration’s desire “to use the Commission’s licensing authority to exert total control over the media.”

“Media consolidation and deal approvals are now explicitly a way for President Trump to further consolidate his dictatorial power, through explicit loyalty tests and pledges to use the public airwaves as a propaganda tool against the American public,” the filing reads.

Indeed, in March the FCC tried to waive this limit to approve Nexstar’s acquisition of Tegna Inc. That merger would give Nexstar access to 80 percent of U.S. households over the nation’s broadcast airwaves. Although the companies rushed to close the transaction on the basis of the FCC’s unauthorized and unlawful waiver, federal courts in California halted the transaction in light of the antitrust lawsuits from both state attorneys general and private parties against this massive broadcast concentration.

Matt Wood, Free Press vice president of policy and general counsel, said:

“Brendan Carr’s arrogance matches that of his boss Donald Trump as the FCC chairman works to bend or break every rule to grow his own power and aid his political allies. But just as the FCC had no power to waive a congressional statute to grease the skids for Nexstar’s merger with Tegna, it has no power now to completely obliterate the limit Congress set.

“It’s not just advocacy groups like Free Press who’ve called out Carr’s hypocrisy and hubris. Republican Senator Ted Cruz, who chairs the Senate Commerce Committee that oversees the FCC, held an entire hearing in February to probe this question. Cruz himself eviscerated and embarrassed broadcast lobbyists over their implausible reading of the law. Chris Ruddy, the CEO of the conservative cable-news outlet Newsmax, testified at the same hearing about the difficulties other outlets face when they must compete against larger and larger broadcast conglomerates. Ruddy also noted that Congress explicitly set the national cap — and stripped the FCC of the authority to change or abandon it.

“Carr claims that FCC heads in both parties have agreed that the agency still has the power to ignore and override Congress’ will, but his fabrications and spin don’t stand up to scrutiny.

“While broadcasters plead poverty and claim that they should be allowed to reach the entire country the way that online platforms do, they already can. Nothing prevents a company like Nexstar from having a national website or cable-news channel. The national cap is not a special disadvantage for broadcasters. In fact, broadcasters have a special advantage with their exclusive licenses to use precious national airwaves the way they do.

“As Free Press has shown many times, the national cap remains good policy. It promotes competition, localism and diversity in broadcasting, incentivizing stations to preserve local newsrooms and local-journalism jobs instead of duplicating stories nationwide and passing that off as local news. But whatever the law’s merits may be, the key point is that Brendan Carr cannot undo the limit that Congress set just because he feels like it.”

This article is part of Food Tank’s primer series, “Food Tank Explains.” Each installment unpacks the ideas, innovations, and challenges shaping today’s food and agriculture systems, offering clear insights into complex topics. To explore more articles in the series, click here.

One-third of food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted, according to the World Food Programme (WFP). Food loss occurs when food is damaged or spoiled before it reaches retailers or eaters; food waste refers to edible food that retailers or consumers discard.

Food loss and waste (FLW) undermines food security, generates substantial greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, deplete land, water, and other natural resources, and impose significant costs on the global economy.

But certain researchers, governments, food waste nonprofits, and international organizations agree that much of FLW is interconnected and preventable, making FLW reduction a key strategy for addressing environmental, economic, and food security challenges simultaneously.

Food loss typically occurs before food reaches the retail stage—during harvesting, processing, and transportation. Limited access to storage facilities, refrigeration, and infrastructure can increase rates of food loss. Sometimes food loss is also a symptom of deeper political challenges tied to global trade says Moses Kansanga, Associate Professor of Geography and International Affairs at George Washington University.

Food waste occurs after food reaches retailers and consumers. It typically refers to food that is suitable for consumption but discarded, because of overproduction, cosmetic standards, over-purchasing, improper storage, or confusion over expiration labels.

According to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), 13 percent of food produced globally is lost between harvest and retail. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) estimates that an additional 19 percent of food is wasted at the retail, food service, and household levels.

High income countries generally waste more food per capita. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration estimates that 30 to 40 percent of the nation’s food supply is wasted. ReFED estimates that U.S. retailers generated 4.6 million tons of surplus food in one year, nearly one-third of which went to landfills or incinerators despite donation and recycling efforts.

And tragically, food loss and waste persist alongside global hunger. In 2022, 783 million people experienced hunger while more than 1 billion tons of food was wasted.

WWF estimates that the food lost and wasted each year could feed the world’s undernourished population nearly four times over. “Food waste is a global tragedy,” says Inger Andersen, Executive Director of UNEP. “Millions will go hungry today as food is wasted across the world.”

Luiz Beling, CEO of Apeel, emphasizes that FLW is a major contributor to global GHG emissions. Producing of food that is never eaten causes 8 to 10 percent of annual GHG emissions, nearly five times the emissions produced by the global airline sector. It uses one-third of the world’s arable land and one-quarter of agricultural water, placing unnecessary pressure on soils, forests, grasslands, and biodiversity.

Discarded food continues to affect the climate after it is thrown away. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, food contributes to nearly 60 percent of landfill methane emissions.

And, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change estimates that food loss and waste cost the global economy approximately US$1 trillion annually.

Organizations and experts increasingly see FLW reduction as a powerful solution to multiple interconnected problems. Project Drawdown has described FLW reduction as a massive lever for change. According to the organization, reducing FLW can improve food security and conserve natural resources while reducing emissions and lowering costs.

Hongpeng Lei, Chief of the Mitigation Branch in the Climate Change Division at UNEP, explains, “Reducing food waste is a fast, cost-effective way to cut GHG emissions while boosting food security, saving households and businesses money, and easing pressure on land and water.” Dana Gunders, President of ReFED, describes reducing food waste as “like a Swiss Army knife.”

Because food loss and food waste occur at different stages of the food supply chain, they require different solutions. Reducing food loss often depends on investments in harvesting, storage, refrigeration, transportation, and food processing. WFP has helped reduce post-harvest grain losses by supporting the use of hermetic storage bags, moisture meters, and improved drying systems.

Reducing food waste often focuses on improving inventory management, expanding food donation programs, strengthening demand forecasting, helping consumers interpret food date labels, and encouraging meal planning, proper food storage, and the use of leftovers.

While improvements in infrastructure and technology are welcome, technical solutions alone cannot eliminate food loss, Kansanga says. He argues that reducing post-harvest losses also requires addressing the political and structural conditions that shape agricultural markets, including inequitable trade relationships that can undermine local producers.

Efforts to reduce food loss and waste are gaining momentum around the world. The United Nations established a global target to reduce FLW through Sustainable Development Goal 12.3, while UNEP and FAO now publish standardized indices that allow countries to measure food waste and food loss over time. In the United States, ReFED estimates that total surplus food fell by 2.2 percent between 2023 and 2024, driven in part by a 950,000-ton reduction in residential food waste.

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 Wikimedia

The post Food Tank Explains: Food Loss and Waste appeared first on Food Tank.

The UK has abandoned projects worth tens of millions of pounds that were meant to help protect Congo rainforests and support local people.

Together, these initiatives would have made up around half of the £200m that the UK pledged to support conservation in the Congo basin – the world’s second-largest rainforest.

When it hosted COP26 in Glasgow, the UK led a new initiative to end forest loss, which included a collective pledge by 12 donors of “at least” $1.5bn (£1.1bn) for Congo rainforest nations by 2025.

Development minister Jenny Chapman revealed last week that, as of 2024, the UK had only provided £39.8m towards this goal.

Alongside the US and much of Europe, the UK has significantly cut its aid budget in recent years, leading to much of its Congo rainforest spending being cancelled or reappraised.

The government says it still plans to “prioritise” rainforest regions, including the Congo basin, but civil society groups and MPs are concerned about the lack of “ring-fenced” forest funding in the UK’s new aid strategy.

COP pledge

At COP26, the UK – led by then prime minister Boris Johnson – launched the “Glasgow leaders’ declaration”, with a goal to “halt and reverse forest loss” by 2030. This was backed by more than 140 nations.

The UK also made various funding pledges, including £200m to protect the Congo basin, £350m for tropical forests in Indonesia and “up to £300m” for the Amazon.

These commitments target the world’s three largest rainforests, all of which face major forest loss due to threats such as agriculture, logging and climate change. 

The Congo basin is the planet’s largest forested carbon sink. Yet, its six host nations are among the poorest in the world and face significant funding barriers.

This has global ramifications. An official UK assessment warned that “degradation or collapse” of the Amazon or Congo rainforests “threaten UK national security and prosperity”.

Forest cuts

Following successive aid cuts introduced by both the Conservative and then Labour governments – tracking a global trend – the UK’s Congo funding is under threat.

The Congo basin forest action programme (CBFA) was launched by the UK at COP27. It was explicitly set up to provide “roughly half” of the UK’s £200m Congo pledge.

CBFA set out to “empower central African nations”, such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), with support for “community forests” and other measures to curb forest loss.

Now, after reporting delays, the UK has slashed the CBFA as part of the Labour government’s recent aid cuts, intended to free up money for defence spending. 

Its original £90m budget has now been reduced to £18.8m. Government data shows that £15m of this has already been spent.

This is not the only Congo project that has been dropped due to this latest round of aid cuts.

The Congo part of the biodiverse landscapes fund – championed by the previous government and worth at least £12.3m – has been closed, just two years into its seven-year schedule.

Government documents reveal more Congo forest funding is at risk as the UK scales back its aid budget, including the UK’s two largest remaining projects in the region. 

One initiative, intended to “incubate forest-friendly enterprises” in DRC, faces “reduc[ed] budgets”. Officials working on the other, while more optimistic, reported that the project may be forced to operate in fewer countries as the cuts set in.

Documents also reveal the difficulties that come when operating in the Congo, including “complex political economies” and, in Gabon, a military coup – which “complicated matters”.

‘Breaking promises’

Damian Fleming, a senior director of forests at WWF International tells Carbon Brief:

“Tropical forest countries are making long-term policy and development choices in expectation that international partners will honour their commitments.”

In a series of recent parliamentary responses, Chapman revealed that the UK had only spent £39.8m on Congo forest finance, as of 2024. (She declined to provide any information on the Indonesia and Amazon regional goals.) 

Despite being presented as the UK’s “contribution” to the £1.1bn-by-2025 global goal agreed at COP26, the £200m target has a deadline of 2029. 

Therefore, while the collective goal has been met, the UK’s contribution so far has been relatively small.

Zac Goldsmith, a former Conservative minister who oversaw the forest targets at COP26, tells Carbon Brief that, in his view, the UK has “discarded” its regional pledges:

“We have gone from being perhaps the leader on protecting nature internationally to breaking promises to countries around the world for whom the environment is an existential issue.”

Future targets

The Labour government says it has met the five-year “climate finance” target of £11.6bn that expires this year.

Ministers also say the government has met “and exceeded” the £3bn and £1.5bn sub-goals for “preserving nature” and forests, respectively, within the £11.6bn. These are the funding streams that include support for the Congo basin and other rainforests.

The UK has funded a variety of projects in line with its forest goals, including mangrove restoration in Indonesia, support for carbon-offsetting projects in Brazil and promoting “forest stewardship” among farmers in Cameroon.

Chapman has stated that the UK will continue to “prioritise” the Congo rainforest, in line with its new plan for aid spending in Africa. The UK even helped to launch a new “call to action” for Congo basin funding at COP30 last year.

The UK government also says it supported the creation of Brazil’s flagship “Tropical Forest Forever Facility” (TFFF). However, so far it has not provided any funding for the facility.

When the government announced a new climate finance pledge for 2026 onwards, it stressed that nature would still be a “focus” and said it would also generate billions in “climate and nature positive investments”. Nevertheless, it dropped the “ring-fenced” amounts for nature and forests that had appeared in its previous pledge.

The UK, alongside other developed countries, has pledged to provide biodiversity finance to developing countries, under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) – a non-binding global pact to halt and reverse nature loss by 2030. 

Sarah Champion, chair of the international development committee of MPs, says “sub-pledges” for nature and forests are a “cost-effective and impactful” way to ensure this finance is provided, alongside climate finance. She tells Carbon Brief that she was “concerned” about the move away from this approach:

“When the minister recently appeared before the international development committee, I was concerned to hear her characterise this shift as a ‘gamble’.”

A government spokesperson tells Carbon Brief:

“We remain committed to providing finance for forests, including in the Congo basin, as a core element of our overall climate funding.”

A shorter version of this article was first published in Cropped, Carbon Brief’s fortnightly newsletter that provides a digest of food, land and nature news, on 15 July 2026. Subscribe for free.

Livestock heat deaths in transit doubled in UK record-hot summer of 2025

Food and farming

|

25.06.26

Q&A: What England’s new ‘land-use framework’ means for climate, nature and food

Nature policy

|

20.03.26

Analysis: Half of nations meet UN deadline for nature-loss reporting

Nature policy

|

02.03.26

Brazil’s biodiversity pledge: Six key takeaways for nature and climate change

Nature policy

|

16.01.26

jQuery(document).ready(function() { jQuery('.block-related-articles-slider-block_c422f836b6fa86a793d0db31f8da7144 .mh').matchHeight({ byRow: false }); });

The post UK withdraws millions in funding from world’s second-largest rainforest in Congo  appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Wildfires are becoming a familiar part of the European summer, from the hills of Wales to the forests of Spain and southern France. And whenever they make the news, the counter argument tends to follow: wildfires aren’t really a climate story, because most of them are started by people.  More often, it’s a dropped cigarette. A barbecue left unattended. Arson. A spark from machinery, or even broken glass catching the sun just right.

It’s true. Almost all wildfires are triggered by human activity in one way or another, accidental or deliberate. But using that fact to wave away the climate connection misses the point entirely.

Fires need three things to get going, the fire triangle,  fuel, oxygen, and a source of ignition. Humans have always provided plenty of that third ingredient, and always will; cigarettes, barbecues, campfires and careless machinery aren’t going anywhere, in Britain or anywhere else. What’s changed is the first ingredient: fuel.

The hotter and drier the weather, the drier the scrub, grass and woodland become. Dry vegetation doesn’t just burn more easily, it burns faster, spreads further, and is far harder to bring under control once it’s alight. A spark that would once have fizzled out on damp ground can now, in tinder-dry conditions, become a fire that spreads across dozens or hundreds of hectares before crews can contain it.

That’s the shift climate change is driving, it’s turning the landscape into fuel. By early July 2026, wildfires had already burned around 170,000 hectares across the EU, well above the long-term average, following the hottest June ever recorded for Western Europe. France recorded its hottest day since national records began in 1947. In southern Spain, temperatures hit as high as 45°C. Scientists have linked the intensity of that heat directly to human-caused climate change.

The human cost has been severe. In Spain’s Andalusia region, a wildfire near Almería and Bédar became the deadliest the country has seen in roughly two decades, killing at least a dozen people, many caught trying to flee. Across the continent, wildfires have killed more than a dozen people this year alone, while the heat itself, separate from the flames, has been linked to thousands of excess deaths. Portugal, Greece and Turkey have also battled major blazes, and Europe has mounted its largest firefighting mobilisation yet in response.

So, who struck the match is’nt really the  question, It’s about why the ground around it is so ready to burn. And that’s a question with a clear answer: a hotter, drier climate, driven by the continued burning of fossil fuels, is loading the dice for every spark that was always going to happen anyway, whether that spark falls in Wales, Andalusia, or the Var.

If we want fewer, smaller, less destructive wildfires, tackling the ignition source is only ever going to be half the job. The rest means tackling the reason our landscapes are drying out in the first place, and holding the industry driving that heat accountable for the damage it’s causing.

The post Beyond the spark: Why wildfires across Europe are getting worse appeared first on 350.

We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter.
Subscribe for free here.

Key developments Global drought and heat 

DRY THEN WET: A recent heatwave and months of low rainfall has led to a prolonged drought for Uganda, resulting in at least 16 deaths from hunger and significant crop losses, reported BBC News. Bastille Post Global suggested that “a developing El Niño later this year could bring heavier rainfall to parts of the region, raising the risk of flooding in areas now struggling with drought”. 

FUNDING FOOD: The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Food Programme (WFP) have appealed for $200m in funding to help African nations deal with the impact of El Niño, stated Deutsche Welle. This would target 22 high-risk countries with measures, including “cash transfers, climate-resilient seeds, livestock protection and flood control.” The Guardian explained how El Niño could still “cause a severe shock to global food prices lasting into 2028”. 

FARMING FEARS: Extreme weather has devastated agriculture across the world. India saw its driest June in 12 years, reported BBC News, and France has had a “double-digit production” decline, according to Le Monde. The Financial Times reported that farmers in the UK are mitigating the impacts of extreme heat by eliminating “chemicals and intensive ploughing to improve soil quality so it retains water”.

EURO FIRES: Wildfires have spread across Europe, with Spain reporting at least 12 deaths so far, according to the Guardian, and France experiencing road closures, said Reuters. Wildfire Today reported that the most extreme conditions are “across France, Spain and northern Portugal, the Alpine arc extending into northern Italy, the south of the UK and south-east Ireland”. CNN explained how “the climate crisis is driving hotter, drier weather, which is setting the stage for fiercer fire seasons”.

Endangering species 

REDEFINING HARM: The Trump administration “reversed decades of longstanding environmental law protecting endangered species…opening up sensitive habitats…to drilling, mining, farming and real estate development”, reported CNN.  According to the story, the change “redefines what constitutes ‘harm’” to endangered species, which historically prohibited habitat modification or degradation. Agence France-Presse reported that US environmental groups sued the Trump government over the move, arguing that it had violated “common sense, biological science and federal law”. 

OPEN SEASON: Reuters reported that the change “limits the reach of the 50-year-old Endangered Species Act” (ESA), which is a “key regulatory consideration” when granting permits for “oil and gas, mining, electric transmission and ​other operations on federal lands and water”. Legal scholars told the New York Times the US government “was acting without conducting scientific research into the impact” of the change, while the National Mining Association “applauded the announcement”. 

News and views

• INTERNATIONAL WATERS: After a significant delay, the UK ratified the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Agreement (BBNJ), also known as the High Seas Treaty. Oceanographic detailed how this will allow for “marine protected areas across international waters for the first time”, but also stressed that the “hard part” starts now. 
• SCOPE-FREE: The world’s largest meat supplier JBS “scrapped a key climate goal” in its net-zero plan that accounts for its suppliers’ emissions, “which make up the vast bulk of the company’s environmental footprint”, reported the Financial Times. The company told the paper it was difficult to control these “indirect” emissions.
• DEEP TROUBLE: Pacific gray whales are facing a “catastrophic die-off” as sea-ice loss threatens their food sources, said the Guardian. Separately, conservationists warned that more than half of all molluscs that “cluster around underwater vents” could face extinction from deep-sea mining, reported Reuters.
• ETHANOL PUSHBACK: India’s new rules to promote 100% ethanol fuel and make ethanol-blended fuel mandatory at pumps “triggered a political row”, reported the Times of India. While the Indian government defended the push to automobile owners, a Hindu editorial and an Indian Express comment warned against incentivising fuels made from “water-intensive” sugarcane and rice. 
• AMAZON ACTION: Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon fell to its lowest level in a decade, but president Lula’s plans to “end illegal deforestation by 2030” could be hampered if he is not re-elected, reported Al Jazeera. Meanwhile, Colombia’s outgoing environment minister warned of greater environmental and climate risk under the incoming government, said the Associated Press. 
• WAR WORRIES: The International Energy Agency (IEA) warned of the impact of the Iran war on Africa’s clean cooking efforts as disruption in the strait of Hormuz has stunted supplies and increased prices of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), explained Climate Home News. 

Spotlight UK ‘discards’ Congo rainforest funding

Amid worldwide cuts to aid spending, Carbon Brief explores how the UK is backtracking on funding for the Congo basin – the world’s second-largest rainforest.

The UK has abandoned projects worth tens of millions of pounds that were meant to help protect Congo rainforests and support local people. 

Together, these initiatives would have made up half of the £200m that the UK pledged to support forest conservation in the Congo basin.

When it hosted COP26 in Glasgow, the UK led a new initiative to end forest loss, which included a collective pledge of “at least” $1.5bn (£1.1bn) for Congo rainforest nations by 2025.

Development minister Jenny Chapman revealed last week that, as of 2024, the UK had only provided £39.8m towards this goal.

COP pledge

At COP26, the UK – led by then prime minister Boris Johnson – launched the “Glasgow leaders’ declaration”, with a goal to “halt and reverse forest loss” by 2030.

The UK also made various regional funding pledges, including £200m for the Congo basin, £350m for tropical forests in Indonesia and “up to £300m” for the Amazon.

All of these rainforests face major forest loss. The Congo basin is the planet’s largest forested carbon sink, but its six host nations are among the poorest in the world and face significant funding barriers.

This has global ramifications. An official UK assessment warned that “degradation or collapse” of the Amazon or Congo rainforests “threaten UK national security and prosperity”.

African elephant pictured in Congo. Credit: BIOSPHOTO / Alamy Stock Photo Forest cuts

Following successive aid cuts introduced by both Conservative and Labour governments – tracking a global trend – the UK’s Congo funding is under threat.

The Congo basin forest action programme (CBFA) was explicitly set up to provide “roughly half” of the UK’s £200m Congo pledge.

Now, after reporting delays, the UK has slashed the CBFA as part of the Labour government’s aid cuts. Its £90m budget has been “quietly reduced by 79% to £18.8m”, according to the Times.

This is not the only Congo project that has been dropped due to aid cuts. The Congo part of the biodiverse landscapes fund – worth at least £12.3m – has closed five years early.

Official documents reveal more Congo forest funding is at risk, including the UK’s two largest remaining projects in the region. One initiative, intended to “incubate forest-friendly enterprises” in DRC, faces “reduc[ed] budgets”.

Documents also show the difficulties operating in the Congo, including “complex political economies” and, in Gabon, a military coup – which “complicated matters”.

‘Breaking promises’

Damian Fleming, a senior forests director at WWF International told Carbon Brief:

“Tropical forest countries are making long-term policy and development choices in expectation that international partners will honour their commitments.”

In a parliamentary response, Chapman said that the UK had spent £39.8m towards its £200m Congo target, as of 2024. 

Despite being described as the UK’s contribution to the £1.1bn-by-2025 global goal agreed at COP26, the £200m target has a deadline of 2029. Therefore, while the collective goal has been met, the UK’s contribution was relatively small.

Zac Goldsmith, a former Conservative minister who oversaw the forest targets at COP26, told Carbon Brief that, in his view, the UK has “discarded” its regional pledges:

“We have gone from being perhaps the leader on protecting nature internationally to breaking promises to countries around the world.”

The Labour government says it has met its overarching “climate finance” goals and still intends to “prioritise” the Congo rainforest. 

However, civil society groups and MPs are concerned about the lack of “ring-fenced” forest funding in the UK’s new aid strategy.

Watch, read, listen

TOXIC TROUBLES: DeSmog unpacked a new report that said Northern Ireland is being turned into a “toxic” pig and poultry farming “sacrifice zone” to satiate the UK’s meat appetite.

NEED TO NOAA: Laid-off scientists from the US’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) launched Climate.Us – an independent, public-backed version of the climate information website shut down by Trump last year.

DRY FRUIT: A Dialogue Earth long read looked at how climate change is impacting apricot harvests in the “stark, high-altitude desert” region of Ladakh, India. 

READING ALOUD: A London Review of Books podcast discussed Robin Wall Kimmerer’s influential book “Braiding Sweetgrass”, weighing its compelling themes and where it veers into “scientific overreach”. 

New science

• Climate change could cause Indigenous peoples in the Amazon to lose 28-34% of their plant species and 18-23% of their associated services | Nature
• Biodiversity in forests can act as a “buffer” against compound extreme weather events | Nature Communications
• Zero-deforestation commitments in Indonesia’s palm oil sector have had “no additional impacts” on reducing forest loss | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

In the diary

• 7-15 July: High-level political forum on sustainable development | New York City 
• 13-31 July: Meeting of the International Seabed Authority assembly and council | Kingston, Jamaica
• 16 July: International Energy Agency critical minerals outlook 2026, online
• 27 July-1 August: Scientific and technical subsidiary body meeting of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity | Nairobi, Kenya

This edition of Cropped was written by Jess Milligan, Josh Gabbatiss and Aruna Chandrasekhar. Cropped is edited by Dr Giuliana Viglione. This edition was edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org.

Cropped 1 July 2026: Heatwave scorches Europe | UK 2050 farm plan | What’s next for the High Seas Treaty

Cropped

|

01.07.26

Cropped 17 June 2026: Coral reef ‘hope’ | Ocean talks | Plant flowering times ‘shift’

Cropped

|

17.06.26

Cropped 3 June 2026: Highway through the Amazon | El Niño impact | State of CO2 removal

Cropped

|

03.06.26

Cropped 20 May 2026: Deforestation roadmap | Melanesian Ocean Summit | Returning pet parrots to the wild

Cropped

|

20.05.26

jQuery(document).ready(function() { jQuery('.block-related-articles-slider-block_889775003838d0a80dc0b04bb579d733 .mh').matchHeight({ byRow: false }); });

The post Cropped 15 July 2026: Uganda starves | Trump opens endangered habitats | UK cuts rainforest aid appeared first on Carbon Brief.

The following is a statement from Alex Lawson, Executive Director of Social Security Works:

“Tomorrow, the Senate will vote on a Democratic-led Congressional Review Act resolution to stop the Trump administration’s so-called “Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) Model,” which is introducing AI care denials to Traditional Medicare.

WISeR is not wise at all. It is a dangerous, profit-motivated experiment that allows private third parties to use artificial intelligence to delay and deny seniors’ medical care.

Under the WISeR pilot program, which went live in January 2026, reports already show Medicare beneficiaries are waiting 2 to 4 times longer to access certain care. This is just one more example of the harm that Republicans’ disastrous healthcare agenda has already waged on American patients. Last year, Republicans slashed $1 trillion in Medicaid and Affordable Care Act spending to line their cronies’ pockets. Now, they are importing the worst parts of Medicare Advantage — automated care denials — into Traditional Medicare.

The bottom line is this: Seniors who choose Traditional Medicare should not have their care blocked by AI. Social Security Works urges Senators to support Chairman Ron Wyden’s (D-OR) resolution, S.J.Res. 198, to protect seniors' access to care.”

En la seva ambició de convertir el futbol en un esport veritablement global, la FIFA s’acosta cada vegada més als autòcrates i els avala obertament. Tanmateix, no són només els règims els que estan remodelant el futbol. El neoliberalisme també està transformant el joc i la relació entre els aficionats i els seus clubs. Hem parlat amb el politòleg i autodeclarat nostàlgic del futbol Cas Mudde.

Alessio Giussani: El 2025, poc abans que Trump comencés a bombardejar l’Iran, la FIFA li va concedir el seu premi de la pau. El president de la FIFA, Gianni Infantino, també va aparèixer a l’anomenada “junta de la pau” amb una gorra de Trump. Mentrestant, els aficionats normals són expulsats pels preus. Continua sent aquest el joc del poble?

Cas Mudde: El futbol mundial està cada vegada més capturat pels diners i per persones i règims dubtosos. La FIFA no és una excepció, sinó un cas extrem.

El Mundial de 2018 a Rússia va ser un torneig problemàtic, però no va generar gaire publicitat negativa. El 2022, a Qatar, era impossible ignorar la connexió entre futbol i  política. Tot i això, el règim qatarià va acabar obtenint una imatge pública força positiva: la gent es va oblidar de les vulneracions dels drets humans i de la quantitat desmesurada de diners gastada en estadis que pràcticament no tindrien utilitat després del torneig, i es va quedar amb la idea que havia estat un gran Mundial. Això és el que ha passat, pràcticament, amb tots els règims, democràtics o no, que han organitzat una Copa del Món. Aquest any, sospito, serà la primera vegada que els països amfitrions rebran més publicitat negativa que positiva.

Això no importa gaire a un país tan gran i poderós com els Estats Units, i encara menys a Trump, la base electoral del qual ni tan sols té interès pel futbol. Deixarà de preocupar-se pel torneig tan bon punt deixi de ser-li útil. Però això sí que perjudicarà la manera com la gent percep el futbol mundial.

Almenys sobre el paper, aquest no és el “Mundial MAGA”. L’organitzen tres nacions —els EUA, el Canadà i Mèxic— que representen tres espais diferents de la política mundial: els defensors dels combustibles fòssils, el liberalisme ultracentrista i el socialisme del Sud global. Quin significat li atribueixes a això?

Mark Carney també és defensor dels combustibles fòssils. El que és interessant és que aquest Mundial es coneixia inicialment com «la candidatura unificada», però en qüestió de mesos es va convertir, de fet, en el Mundial MAGA: tot gira al voltant dels Estats Units i de Trump. Això representava un repte, però també una gran oportunitat per al Canadà i Mèxic. El Canadà hauria pogut demostrar que és el bon noi de l’Amèrica del Nord; Mèxic hauria pogut demostrar que és el veritable país del futbol. El llistó és tan baix que fer el que tothom sol fer ja et fa quedar bé.

“La FIFA és, en molts sentits, un projecte increïblement colonial, que aposta per totes les coses dolentes que el colonialisme ha deixat enrere, incloses la corrupció i el lideratge personalista.

En canvi, Canadà i Mèxic no han dit res sobre el premi de la pau, del tracte a l’equip iranià i Omar Artan, i sobre l’àrbitre somali a qui es va denegar el visat. L’únic que fan és facilitar les coses a Trump i intentar suavitzar la situació quan fa alguna cosa dolenta, per això crec que també afrontaran crítiques. En general, no tinc la sensació que cap dels països amfitrions estigui particularment entusiasmat amb aquest Mundial. Claudia Sheinbaum ha impulsat algunes iniciatives realment bones a Mèxic, com ara construir centenars de camps comunitaris, però no hi veig un impuls real.

L’edició del Mundial de 2022 va ser una de les edicions més globals fins a la data, amb Qatar com a amfitrió i el Marroc arribant a les semifinals. L’edició d’enguany s’ha ampliat per incloure 48 equips en lloc de 32. Hi ha algun mèrit decolonial en l’ambició d’Infantino de fer que el futbol mundial sigui veritablement global?

El projecte d’Infantino és aconseguir la seva reelecció. Com més associacions nacionals de futbol estiguin representades al Mundial, més satisfetes estaran amb el seu lideratge. Si realment volgués decolonitzar el futbol, podria haver canviat la representació proporcional entre continents. En canvi, només va ampliar el nombre de participants sense canviar els criteris subjacents. Això vol dir tenir encara més països d’Europa, perquè són rics, i això és el que volen els patrocinadors.

La FIFA és, en molts sentits, un projecte increïblement colonial, que beneficia tots els elements negatius que el colonialisme ha deixat enrere, incloses la corrupció i el lideratge personalista. Essencialment, la FIFA dona diners a les associacions nacionals de futbol perquè els gastin com considerin millor per al progrés del futbol als seus països. Per descomptat, molts règims simplement agafen aquests diners i se’ls embutxaquen, deixant el futbol sense desenvolupar. Però a la FIFA això no li importa gaire.

La política de la FIFA també està empitjorant. El 2018, no es va pronunciar contra les polítiques russes contràries als drets LGBTQIA+, però tampoc els va donar suport. A Qatar, es va prohibir als capitans dels equips portar braçalets amb els colors de l’arc de Sant Martí. Ara, la FIFA defensa activament Trump i fins i tot el celebra.

Només una fracció de les nacions que participen al Mundial són democràcies —i encara menys liberals—, i el mateix s’aplica al conjunt dels membres de la FIFA. Hi ha maneres de defensar els valors liberals sense el postureig civilitzacional?

Si vols ser coherent, hauries de deixar la política al marge tant com puguis, perquè si converteixes la FIFA i el Mundial en un projecte liberal-democràtic, aleshores et dirigeixes a una minoria d’estats, i mai no seràs veritablement global. Es podria argumentar que ser polític, encara que de vegades siguis hipòcrita o incoherent, és millor que mantenir-se al marge de la política. Però ja no estic segur que sigui així, perquè les campanyes d’inclusió de la FIFA s’han tornat tan buides, tan vagues i tan plenes de pinkwashing que l’únic missatge que arriba és que tot el que diuen sobre política és una collonada. [Nota de la traductora: “pinkwashing” es manté en anglès perquè és un terme d’ús habitual per descriure l’ús instrumental de causes LGTBIQ+ per millorar la imatge d’una institució.]

Al mateix temps, és clar, la política sempre hi és. Organitzar un Mundial és una gran oportunitat per a qualsevol règim, i la neutralitat no fa que l’esdeveniment deixi de ser polític. Però sí que tinc un problema amb fixar expectatives elevades i no estar mai a l’altura —que és precisament el que ha fet la FIFA amb la seva agenda de drets humans i els seus grans compromisos amb la sostenibilitat. No pot existir un Mundial sostenible, i sempre hi haurà participants que no respectin els drets humans. Aleshores, per què la FIFA no introdueix una agenda menys ambiciosa però que realment compleixi?

Vivim un moment de ressorgiment del nativisme i del nacionalisme, amb l’extrema dreta en ascens arreu del món. Alimenta un Mundial farcit de política aquestes dinàmiques, o el futbol pot canalitzar el nacionalisme cap a alguna cosa més afable, fins i tot unificadora?

El sociòleg britànic Michael Billig va encunyar el terme “nacionalisme banal” per descriure les representacions quotidianes d’una nació, que construeixen un sentit compartit d’identitat nacional. Es tracta, per exemple, de banderes nacionals penjades a l’exterior dels edificis públics. El nacionalisme esportiu entra dins d’aquesta categoria, i té elements negatius. Al meu país, els Països Baixos, una part del nostre sentiment antigermànic no provenia de la Segona Guerra Mundial, sinó del futbol. Al mateix temps, els equips de futbol en molts països són més multiculturals que les societats, i jugadors de diferents ètnies esdevenen herois i models per a molts —almenys mentre guanyen.

El que és peculiar del futbol és l’emoció i la intensitat que afegeix al nacionalisme banal, fent que el nacionalisme sigui una mica secundari. Guanyar vol dir guanyar un partit, no que la teva nació domini una altra. Per molt que em desagradin les banderes, crec que hi ha un pànic moral al voltant del nacionalisme i el hooliganisme en el futbol. Hi ha elements inclusius i exclusius: pot ser tant bo com dolent.

Imparteixes un curs sobre futbol i política. Com interpretes aquesta relació, i com veus que evoluciona?

Gran part de l’atenció se centra en l’alta política: institucions, governs, partits, etcètera. A mi m’interessa més la ‘baixa’ política de l’esport, la música, la cultura, etc. Faig servir el futbol per ensenyar política, perquè el futbol reflecteix la societat de moltes maneres. Curiosament, aquest és un dels cursos més radicals que he impartit. Llegim Judith Butler i la performativitat de gènere, i parlem molt d’identitat i globalització.

Pensa en la rellevància creixent dels “equips de la diàspora”, aquelles seleccions nacionals que  estan més  formades cada vegada més per jugadors nacionals “de sang” encara que no hagin nascut ni crescut al país que representen. Senegal n’és un exemple paradigmàtic, amb gairebé la meitat dels jugadors nascuts o criats fora del país —principalment a França, la seva antiga potència colonial. Els equips de la diàspora són, en certa manera, el contrari dels “equips cívics”, formats per jugadors de minories nascuts i criats en un país, com els alemanys d’origen turc. Això mostra que fins i tot els estats molt restrictius amb la immigració poden ser molt flexibles quan es tracta d’esportistes d’elit, i que les persones antiimmigració no tenen cap problema amb això.

La UE també ha tingut un paper important en la configuració del futbol modern. La sentència Bosman del Tribunal de Justícia de la Unió Europea, el 1995 va sacsejar el sistema europeu de traspassos futbolístics per alinear-lo amb les normes del mercat únic. I com que Europa és tan dominant en el futbol global, la sentència va canviar el sistema mundial.

Interpretes el futbol com a part de la societat civil. Quin és el raonament darrere d’aquesta associació?

Solia treballar sobre la societat civil a l’Europa postcomunista a finals dels anys noranta i principis dels 2000, hi havia una associació positiva entre una societat civil forta i una democràcia saludable. Però el discurs tenia un enfocament molt limitat en grups prooccidentals, grups feministes, etcètera. M’interessaven els anomenats grups de la societat “incivilitzada”, que no eren necessàriament prodemocràtics, però que unien molt a les persones i eren políticament actius. Els hooligans i els ultres sovint tenen dues cares: tenen mala reputació, particularment a Europa, però també són actius en bones causes, com ajudar persones pobres o comunitats locals després de terratrèmols o altres desastres naturals. M’agrada aquesta complexitat.

Com ha canviat el neoliberalisme el futbol?

Per donar resposta a aquesta pregunta sovint faig servir el club al que dono suport, el PSV Eindhoven. El PSV va ser fundat per treballadors de Philips. Era, en molts sentits, una representació de l’economia industrial, d’una forma de capitalisme arrelat. Philips tenia una connexió amb Eindhoven perquè tenia fàbriques a la ciutat, i senzillament no pots  agafar fàbriques i traslladar-les a un altre lloc. Ara tens clubs, com el Manchester City, que són un reflex perfecte del neoliberalisme global. Un règim estranger decideix invertir en un club no perquè tingui una connexió amb una comunitat local, sinó perquè aquest club és una marca global i et dona accés a una audiència global. La connexió entre capitalisme i futbol sempre hi ha estat, però el capitalisme ha canviat, i el futbol està canviant amb ell.

La majoria dels aficionats al futbol no volen seure en un estadi asèptic i vigilat. Volen seure en un lloc que encara tingui atmosfera i autenticitat sense el racisme i el sexisme. I això és possible.

Sent nostàlgic, he de recordar que els vells temps no sempre van ser tan purs. Abans dels fons d’inversió, hi havia l’oligarca rus Roman Abramóvitx que va comprar el Chelsea. En contextos més petits, hi havia el venedor de cotxes de segona mà que dirigia el club local. L’escala era més petita i més local, però aquell tipus també era dubtós i feia servir el futbol per elevar la seva pròpia imatge.

El que em preocupa des del punt de vista de la societat civil és que, tot i que sempre hi va haver explotació i jerarquia, també hi havia una connexió amb la comunitat. Philips depenia d’Eindhoven. Els capitalistes d’avui no tenen aquesta connexió, i la comunitat local gairebé ja no té veu. Els grans clubs ja no depenen de la venda d’entrades com a part important dels seus ingressos. Ara els diners provenen dels drets de retransmissió i dels patrocinadors.

Els aficionats són a temps de salvar el joc en el qual s’ha convertit?

Els aficionats són una mica com els addictes: tenen el poder de destruir el sistema demà mateix si deixen d’alimentar la maquinària. Ningú no invertirà diners en el futbol si ningú no el mira. Però, si ho fan, també hi surten perdent. Per això tenen poques opcions per plantar cara. Poden resistir la mercantilització des de dins del sistema. A Alemanya, per exemple, van aconseguir frenar la implantació dels partits dels dilluns al vespre. O bé poden abandonar el sistema del tot i crear clubs alternatius propietat dels aficionats, però aquests clubs no poden competir al màxim nivell.

No soc particularment optimista perquè veig que el futbol modern es destrueix a si mateix de la mateixa manera que ho fa el capitalisme. S’expandeix a nivells insostenibles, com un esquema piramidal en què el valor es va aprimant cada cop més. Les firmes de capital privat i els règims estan injectant diners al sistema perquè esperen alguna cosa a canvi, ja sigui benefici o victòries diplomàtiques. Però poden retirar-se tan ràpidament com hi van entrar si s’adonen que ja no els queda res a guanyar. I quan la bombolla esclata, no tornem al punt on érem abans, perquè les lleialtats han desaparegut. La generació d’anglesos que ha quedat exclosa dels estadis de la Premier League pels preus no tornarà així com així.

Molts clubs de futbol es troben entre les institucions més antigues que existeixen. Han existit durant més d’un segle, i han donat sentit al fet de ser d’algun lloc. Quan una antiga ciutat minera perd un equip de futbol, és una pèrdua important per a la comunitat.

Malgrat tot, el futbol encara és capaç de crear comunitat i connexió. Hi ha res que els partits polítics o les organitzacions de la societat civil en puguin aprendre?

El tipus de relació que tens amb un club que segueixes és profundament irracional. No pots recrear aquesta relació artificialment.

Una cosa que se’n pot aprendre és la importància de l’arrelament. Si la gent continua donant suport a un club fins i tot quan perd o baixa de categoria, és perquè s’hi sent connectada. Molts clubs locals funcionen gràcies a voluntaris i persones que no en treuen diners. La professionalització creixent i la manca d’arrelament són cada vegada més febleses comuns dels moviments progressistes, i veig que una cosa semblant passarà en el futbol modern.

Si no et reconeixen com a part de la comunitat, la gent sent que has perdut el contacte. La majoria d’ONG avui dia no tenen voluntaris; tenen professionals. I per als professionals, la institució importa més que la causa. Si el que t’importa principalment és una causa, trobes maneres de fer la feina fins i tot quan s’acaben els diners. Però si el que t’importa principalment és la institució, passaràs a una altra cosa i trobaràs una altra feina. Les grans ONG s’han convertit en negocis amb llocs de treball molt ben pagats ocupats per persones que passen d’una organització a una altra. El mateix està passant al futbol.

Pel costat positiu, el futbol no s’ha tornat també més inclusiu?

Absolutament. Als anys vuitanta i noranta, les dones o les persones queer no se sentirien segures en un estadi de la Premier League, i ara sí. En certa manera, la gentrificació ha fet el futbol més accessible per a alguns grups. És clar que ha exclòs una part de la classe treballadora blanca, però una part de la classe treballadora blanca abans excloïa altres grups. Hi he pensat molt, perquè com qualsevol nostàlgic, hi havia una part que no veia. Com a home blanc heterosexual, formo part del grup que abans posseïa l’estadi, i per això mai no vaig experimentar l’exclusió.

Però la securitització i l’expulsió de la gent pels preus no són les úniques opcions per combatre la discriminació, i els aficionats més rics no són necessàriament menys racistes. Molt del sexisme, l’homofòbia i el racisme que veus als estadis és performatiu. Per tant, el camí a seguir és redefinir el paper de l’aficionat. Alemanya mostra que es poden tenir estadis assequibles que també siguin més inclusius. Funciona millor quan són els mateixos aficionats els qui es controlen i es moderen mútuament. El Borussia Dortmund, per exemple, tenia un problema important amb neonazis als anys vuitanta i, en gran mesura, va aconseguir expulsar-los.

La majoria dels aficionats al futbol no volen seure en un estadi asèptic i vigilat. Volen seure en un lloc que encara tingui atmosfera i autenticitat sense el racisme i el sexisme. I això és possible.

La popularitat del futbol femení està explotant. Pot ser una alternativa més saludable a les dinàmiques que has estat descrivint?

Sovint recorrem a les dones per resoldre els problemes que han creat els homes. Diem que els homes són així, de manera que necessitem més dones, perquè les dones són diferents. Però les dones no són necessàriament millors que els homes. Si l’estructura t’empeny en una determinada direcció, no importa qui siguis. En l’estructura actual, que el futbol femení continuï sent “pur” també voldria dir que les dones continuïn cobrant molt menys que els homes en nom d’algun ideal, i no crec que això sigui just.

En qualsevol cas, sembla que el futbol femení s’està transformant ràpidament al futbol modern i avança en la mateixa direcció que el futbol masculí —potencialment fins i tot més de pressa. La propietat de varis clubs ja és una realitat. Als EUA, un club de Columbus, Ohio, ha pagat recentment 200 milions de dòlars a la National Women’s Soccer League per incorporar-se a la lliga el 2028. Això són molts més diners del que s’està gastant en les jugadores.

Tot i així, molts clubs de futbol femení són més actius políticament que els clubs masculins, perquè les jugadores són més explícites. Ser futbolista dona encara es veu com una transgressió, de manera que tendeixes a estar més compromesa políticament. Però quant menys transgressor i més mercantilitzat es torni el futbol femení, menys polític serà. De moment, continua sent una via d’escapament per a molts aficionats perquè és més assequible i més divertit —sens dubte per als grups minoritaris, i particularment per a les persones queer.

On se situa el futbol femení pel que fa a la seva dimensió comunitària i de societat civil?

Gairebé tots els clubs femenins han estat fundats per clubs masculins, de manera que molt pocs són realment l’expressió d’una comunitat. Hi ha excepcions, com el Turbine Potsdam a Alemanya, que és un dels equips femenins amb més èxit del país. Però ara han estat  superats per clubs com el Bayern de Munic i el Wolfsburg, perquè no pots competir amb els gegants.

Tanmateix, la majoria dels aficionats al futbol femení tenen un propòsit polític, i en aquest sentit són l’expressió d’una comunitat. Molts aficionats subratllen que hi són per donar suport a l’esport femení, no a un club concret. Ningú no va a un partit de futbol masculí per donar suport al moviment. Per tant, hi ha un element de comunitat.

Translated by Sandra Cruz

Sometimes a big story can be told with a very small object.

Take the hazards of plastic pollution in the ocean, and a single bottle cap floating in the Pacific Ocean near Japan.

Captured in a net by scientists aboard a Japanese research vessel in 2023, this plastic cap had been transformed into a tiny ecosystem of hundreds of creatures. Through careful detective work, scientists unraveled a journey that brought the cap, and its stowaways from tropical waters far to the south.

The discovery, detailed in a new paper in Marine Pollution Bulletin, underscores the ways in which life is adapting to an increasingly plastic-filled ocean, and the potential for buoyant, virtually indestructible bits of trash to serve as rafts for invasive species.

“We found organisms that normally live in southern tropical waters,” said Naoto Jimi, the lead author and a scientist at Nagoya University. “Geographic range extensions of some species may be occurring under the radar.”

The potential for ocean-borne plastic to act as a raft for enterprising species has been a concern for some time. Famously, Japanese flotsam from a 2011 tsunami washed ashore in North America bearing nearly 300 coastal species. Scientists have surmised that tiny floating islands of plastic in the middle of the ocean are creating novel ecosystems of their own.

In the case of the bottle cap, that ecosystem was just 35 millimeters in diameter. Despite its small size, when scientists inspected the cap they discovered a little world inhabited by 307 individual organisms representing 9 different taxa. Perhaps most impressive was a Eunice bipapillata, a type of polychaete. This particular species of bottom-dwelling worm resembles a millipede with a slender, flat ribbon of a body lined by dozens of short legs.

 

.IRPP_ruby , .IRPP_ruby .postImageUrl , .IRPP_ruby .centered-text-area {height: auto;position: relative;}.IRPP_ruby , .IRPP_ruby:hover , .IRPP_ruby:visited , .IRPP_ruby:active {border:0!important;}.IRPP_ruby .clearfix:after {content: "";display: table;clear: both;}.IRPP_ruby {display: block;transition: background-color 250ms;webkit-transition: background-color 250ms;width: 100%;opacity: 1;transition: opacity 250ms;webkit-transition: opacity 250ms;background-color: #eaeaea;}.IRPP_ruby:active , .IRPP_ruby:hover {opacity: 1;transition: opacity 250ms;webkit-transition: opacity 250ms;background-color: inherit;}.IRPP_ruby .postImageUrl {background-position: center;background-size: cover;float: left;margin: 0;padding: 0;width: 31.59%;position: absolute;top: 0;bottom: 0;}.IRPP_ruby .centered-text-area {float: right;width: 65.65%;padding:0;margin:0;}.IRPP_ruby .centered-text {display: table;height: 130px;left: 0;top: 0;padding:0;margin:0;padding-top: 20px;padding-bottom: 20px;}.IRPP_ruby .IRPP_ruby-content {display: table-cell;margin: 0;padding: 0 74px 0 0px;position: relative;vertical-align: middle;width: 100%;}.IRPP_ruby .ctaText {border-bottom: 0 solid #fff;color: #0099cc;font-size: 14px;font-weight: bold;letter-spacing: normal;margin: 0;padding: 0;font-family:'Arial';}.IRPP_ruby .postTitle {color: #000000;font-size: 16px;font-weight: 600;letter-spacing: normal;margin: 0;padding: 0;font-family:'Arial';}.IRPP_ruby .ctaButton {background: url(https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts-pro/assets/images/next-arrow.png)no-repeat;background-color: #afb4b6;background-position: center;display: inline-block;height: 100%;width: 54px;margin-left: 10px;position: absolute;bottom:0;right: 0;top: 0;}.IRPP_ruby:after {content: "";display: block;clear: both;}Recommended Reading:Is plastic trash in the middle of the ocean becoming a new kind of island habitat?

 

The worm had built a protective mucus shell, which in turn offered a landscape to be colonized by a marine menagerie, what the scientists described as “a miniature reef.” The residents’ identities provided some clue about the cap’s distant origins. The worm normally is found in the tropical western Pacific.

A closer analysis of some of the organisms offered a more detailed account of their travels. The shells of foraminifera, tiny organisms commonly known as forams, provide a temperature record of the surrounding ocean water in which different parts of the shell are made, much like tree rings vary from year to year depending on rainfall. Scientists can measure ratios of two isotopes of oxygen in the parts of the shell to determine water temperature.

Two of the foram shells revealed a movement from warmer to cooler waters, with a peak of nearly 30°C down to around 22°C – roughly the water temperature where the cap was caught.

The scientists traced the movement with still more detail by using a computer model of regional ocean currents. Simulations of a tiny object dropped in the ocean arriving at the spot where it was caught revealed a likely origin in the Philippines, a journey of some 70 days and more than 1,500 kilometers. That route was a match for marks on the cap, tracing to a Philippine beverage brand.

The findings illustrate that “the marine plastic problem should therefore be considered not only from the perspectives of aesthetic damage, ingestion, and entanglement, but also from those of biogeography and invasive species risk,” said Jimi.

With an estimated 30 million metric tons of plastic already floating in the ocean, and more arriving every day, that’s a lot of bottle caps waiting to be turned into mini-reefs.

Jimi, et. al. “Multi-proxy reconstruction of bottle-cap rafting using biofouling communities, stable isotopes and drift modeling.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. July 7, 2026.

Photo: Inside a 3.5 cm plastic bottle cap: A miniature ecosystem of 307 organisms drifted from the Philippines to waters south of Japan.© Sugashima Marine Biological Laboratory, Nagoya University

On Saturday, June 20, over 3,000 people from across Europe and around the world gathered in Central Hall Westminster in London, UK for the International...

The post Lessons from the London International Conference Against War first appeared on Spring.