New research led by Viktoria Cologna at ETH Zurich in Switzerland may help to explain what’s going on. Using data from around the world, the study suggests simple exposure to extreme weather events does not affect people’s view of climate action – but linking those events to climate change can make a big difference.
Global opinion, global weather
The new study, published in Nature Climate Change, looked at the question of extreme weather and climate opinion using two global datasets.
The first is the Trust in Science and Science-related Populism (TISP) survey, which includes responses from more than 70,000 people in 68 countries. It measures public support for climate policies and the extent that people think climate change is behind increases in extreme weather.
The second dataset estimates how much of each country’s population has been affected each year by events such as droughts, floods, heatwaves and storms. These estimates are based on detailed models and historical climate records.
Public support for climate policies
The survey measured public support for climate policy by asking people how much they supported five specific actions to cut carbon emissions. These included raising carbon taxes, improving public transport, using more renewable energy, protecting forests and land, and taxing carbon-heavy foods.
Responses ranged from 1 (not at all) to 3 (very much). On average, support was fairly strong, with an average rating of 2.37 across the five policies. Support was especially high in parts of South Asia, Africa, the Americas and Oceania, but lower in countries such as Russia, Czechia and Ethiopia.
Exposure to extreme weather events
The study found most people around the world have experienced heatwaves and heavy rainfall in recent decades. Wildfires affected fewer people in many European and North American countries, but were more common in parts of Asia, Africa and Latin America.
Cyclones mostly impacted North America and Asia, while droughts affected large populations in Asia, Latin America and Africa. River flooding was widespread across most regions, except Oceania.
Do people in countries with higher exposure to extreme weather events show greater support for climate policies? This study found they don’t.
In most cases, living in a country where more people are exposed to disasters was not reflected in stronger support for climate action.
Wildfires were the only exception. Countries with more wildfire exposure showed slightly higher support, but this link disappeared once factors such as land size and overall climate belief were considered.
In short, just experiencing more disasters does not seem to translate into increased support for mitigation efforts.
Seeing the link between weather and climate change
In the global survey, people were asked how much they think climate change has increased the impact of extreme weather over recent decades. On average, responses were moderately high (3.8 out of 5) suggesting that many people do link recent weather events to climate change.
Such an attribution was especially strong in Latin America, but lower in parts of Africa (such as Congo and Ethiopia) and Northern Europe (such as Finland and Norway).
Crucially, people who more strongly believed climate change had worsened these events were also more likely to support climate policies. In fact, this belief mattered more for policy support than whether they had actually experienced the events firsthand.
Prior research shows less dramatic and chronic events like rainfall or temperature anomalies have less influence on public views than more acute hazards like floods or bushfires. Even then, the influence on beliefs and behaviour tends to be slow and limited.
This study shows climate impacts alone may not change minds. However, it also highlights what may affect public thinking: helping people recognise the link between climate change and extreme weather events.
In countries such as Australia, climate change makes up only about 1% of media coverage. What’s more, most of the coverage focuses on social or political aspects rather than scientific, ecological, or economic impacts.
Omid Ghasemi receives funding from the Australian Academy of Science. He was a member of the TISP consortium and a co-author of the dataset used in this study.
South Africans want to shop more sustainably, according to research published in the journal Sustainable Development. But most can’t tell which products are environmentally friendly.
Some food manufacturers have introduced eco labels – a certification symbol placed on product packaging. This indicates the product meets specific environmental standards set by a third party organisation.
These labels are meant to signal to consumers that a product has been produced in a way that limits harm to the environment. But our recent study with 108 South African consumers showed low recognition of eco labels, widespread confusion, and a need for clearer guidance.
The results show that most South African shoppers are unfamiliar with these labels or unable to differentiate between real and fictional ones.
In the European Union eco labels like the EU Energy Label are easily understood and highly visible. They are also usually supported by government awareness campaigns. Other examples of labelling systems that work well include those of Germany and Japan.
These countries show that long term institutional support, mandatory labelling in key sectors, and consistent public messaging can greatly improve eco label recognition.
We concluded from our research that South Africa lacks that national visibility and public education, leaving even motivated consumers unsure of what labels to trust. Based on our findings we recommend steps businesses, government and nonprofits can take to ensure that eco labels are clear, visible and understood.
Eco labelling at its best
The EU Energy Label is used on appliances such as fridges, washing machines and light bulbs to indicate their energy efficiency on a scale from A (most efficient) to G (least efficient).
In countries like Germany and Japan, eco labels are government backed as well as being integrated into school curricula, public service announcements and shopping platforms.
Germany’s Blue Angel label, which states “protects the environment”, has been in use since the 1970s. It appears on over 12,000 products and services, including paper goods, cleaning products, paints and electronics, that meet strict environmental criteria. It is supported by ongoing public education campaigns.
In Japan the the Eco Mark appears on products with minimal environmental impact. It appears on items like stationery, detergents, packaging and appliances. Many retailers display explanations next to these products to help consumers understand the label.
South Africans struggle to identify eco labels
We conducted a structured online survey of 108 South African consumers. Participants were asked about their environmental awareness and their ability to recognise both real and fictional eco labels across ten images. According to the global directory of eco labels and environmental certification schemes, there are around 50 eco labels in South Africa.
The EU Energy Label was the most recognised (87%).
The Afrisco Certified Organic label, which is a legitimate South African label, was the least recognised, identified by just 22% of respondents.
Fictional labels were mistakenly identified as real by many participants, revealing widespread confusion.
Only 3 out of 10 labels were recognised by at least half the participants, suggesting a general lack of eco label awareness. These include the Energy Star Eco label; the EU Energy label and the Forest Stewardship council label.
Age and employment status were significantly related to environmental awareness. Older and employed individuals showed higher levels of awareness.
These findings suggest that consumers are not opposed to eco labels, they simply lack the knowledge and confidence to use them effectively.
Eco labels have the potential to build brand trust, drive green purchasing behaviour, and support national sustainability goals. But they only work if consumers recognise and trust them.
In South Africa, inconsistent use, small label size, and a lack of consumer education are holding eco labels back from achieving their purpose.
What businesses can do
Based on our findings, we recommend the following:
Use recognised and credible labels: Third-party certified labels are more trustworthy and reliable.
Improve label visibility: The most recognised label in our study was the EU Energy Label and was also the most prominent. Small, cluttered logos go unnoticed.
Educate your market: Explain what eco labels mean through packaging, marketing, and digital platforms.
Partner with government and NGOs: Awareness campaigns at national and community levels can help standardise eco label understanding.
Tailor communication efforts: Awareness efforts should consider age and employment demographics, as these affect levels of environmental engagement.
The way forward
South Africans are willing to support environmentally responsible products, but they need help identifying them.
Businesses, government and nonprofits all have a role to play in making eco labels clearer, more visible, and more trustworthy.
Eco labels must become more than symbols. They should be tools for transparency and trust, and a gateway to more sustainable shopping.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Peter M Macharia, Senior postdoctoral research fellow, Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp
The lack of reliable information about health facilities across sub-Saharan Africa became very clear during the COVID-19 pandemic. Amid a surge in emergency care needs, information was lacking about the location of facilities, bed capacity and oxygen availability, and even where to find medical specialists. This data could have enabled precise assessments of hospital surge capacity and geographic access to critical care. Peter Macharia and Emelda Okiro, whose research focuses on public health and equity of health service access in low resource settings, share the findings of their recent study, co-authored with colleagues.
What are open health facility databases?
A health facility is a service delivery point where healthcare services are provided. The facilities can range from small clinics and doctor’s offices to large teaching and referral hospitals.
A health facility database is a list of all health facilities in a country or geographic area, such as a district. A typical database should assign each health facility a unique code, name, size, type (from primary to tertiary), ownership (public or private), operational status (working or closed), location and subnational unit (county or district). It should also record services (emergency obstetric care, for example), capacity (number of beds, for example), infrastructure (electricity availability, for example), contact information (address and email), and when this information was last updated.
The ideal method of compiling this list is to conduct a census, as Kenya did in 2023. But this takes resources. Some countries have compiled lists from existing incomplete ones. Senegal did this and so did Kenya in 2003 and 2008.
This list should be open to stakeholders, including government agencies, development partners and researchers. Health facility lists must be shared through a governance framework that balances data sharing with protections for data subjects and creators. In some countries, such as Kenya and Malawi, these listings are accessible through web portals without additional permission. In others, such facility lists do not exist or require extra permission.
Why are they useful to have?
Facility listings can serve the needs of individuals and communities. They also serve sub-national, national and continental health objectives.
At the individual level, a facility list offers a choice of alternatives to health seekers. At the community level, the data can guide decisions like where to place community health workers, as seen in Mali and Sierra Leone.
Health lists are useful when distributing commodities such as bed nets and allocating resources based on the health needs of the areas they serve. They help in planning for vaccination campaigns by creating detailed immunisation microplans.
By taking account of the disease burden, social dynamics and environmental factors, health services can be tailored to specific needs.
Detailed maps of healthcare resources enable quicker emergency responses by pinpointing facilities equipped for specific crises. Disease surveillance systems depend on continuously collecting data from healthcare facilities.
At the continental level, lists are crucial for a coordinated health system response during pandemics and outbreaks. They can facilitate cross-border planning, pandemic preparedness and collaboration.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, these lists informed where to put additional resources such as makeshift hospitals or transport programmes for adults over 60 years of age.
The lists are used to identify vulnerable populations at risk of emerging pathogens and populations that can benefit from new health facilities.
Many problems arise if we don’t know where health facilities are or what they offer. Healthcare planning becomes inefficient. This can result in duplicate facility lists and the misallocation of resources, which leads to waste and inequities.
We can’t identify populations that lack services. Emergency responses weaken due to uncertainty about where best to move patients with specific conditions.
Resources are wasted when there are duplicate facility lists. For example, between 2010 and 2016, six government departments partnered with development organisations, resulting in ten lists of health facilities in Nigeria.
In Tanzania, over 10 different health facility lists existed in 2009. Maintained by donors and government agencies, the function-specific lists didn’t work together to share information easily and accurately. This prompted the need for a national master facility list.
What needs to happen to build one?
A comprehensive list of health facilities can be compiled through mapping exercises or from existing lists. The health ministry should take responsibility for setting up, developing and updating this list.
Partnerships are crucial for developing facility lists. Stakeholders include donors, implementing and humanitarian partners, technical advisors and research institutions. Many of these have their own project-based lists, which should integrate into a centralised facility list managed by the ministry. The health ministry must foster a transparent environment, encouraging citizens and stakeholders to contribute to enhancing health facility data.
Political and financial commitment from governments is essential. Creating and maintaining a proper list requires significant investment. Expertise and resources are necessary to keep it updated.
A commitment to open data is a necessary step. Open access to these lists makes them more complete, reliable and useful.
Peter Macharia is funded by Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- Belgium (FWO, number 1201925N) for his Senior Postdoctoral Fellowship.
Emelda Okiro receives funding for her research from the Wellcome Trust through a Wellcome Trust Senior Fellowship (#224272).
The global ecosystem of climate finance is complex, constantly changing and sometimes hard to understand. But understanding it is critical to demanding a green transition that’s just and fair. That’s why The Conversation has collaborated with climate finance experts to create this user-friendly guide, in partnership with Vogue Business. With definitions and short videos, we’ll add to this glossary as new terms emerge.
Blue bonds
Blue bonds are debt instruments designed to finance ocean-related conservation, like protecting coral reefs or sustainable fishing. They’re modelled after green bonds but focus specifically on the health of marine ecosystems – this is a key pillar of climate stability.
By investing in blue bonds, governments and private investors can fund marine projects that deliver both environmental benefits and long-term financial returns. Seychelles issued the first blue bond in 2018. Now, more are emerging as ocean conservation becomes a greater priority for global sustainability efforts.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon border adjustment mechanism
Did you know that imported steel could soon face a carbon tax at the EU border? That’s because the carbon border adjustment mechanism is about to shake up the way we trade, produce and price carbon.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is a proposed EU policy to put a carbon price on imports like iron, cement, fertiliser, aluminium and electricity. If a product is made in a country with weaker climate policies, the importer must pay the difference between that country’s carbon price and the EU’s. The goal is to avoid “carbon leakage” – when companies relocate to avoid emissions rules and to ensure fair competition on climate action.
But this mechanism is more than just a tariff tool. It’s a bold attempt to reshape global trade. Countries exporting to the EU may be pushed to adopt greener manufacturing or face higher tariffs.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is controversial: some call it climate protectionism, others argue it could incentivise low-carbon innovation worldwide and be vital for achieving climate justice. Many developing nations worry it could penalise them unfairly unless there’s climate finance to support greener transitions.
Carbon border adjustment mechanism is still evolving, but it’s already forcing companies, investors and governments to rethink emissions accounting, supply chains and competitiveness. It’s a carbon price with global consequences.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon budget
The Paris agreement aims to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2030. The carbon budget is the maximum amount of CO₂ emissions allowed, if we want a 67% chance of staying within this limit. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that the remaining carbon budgets amount to 400 billion tonnes of CO₂ from 2020 onwards.
Think of the carbon budget as a climate allowance. Once it has been spent, the risk of extreme weather or sea level rise increases sharply. If emissions continue unchecked, the budget will be exhausted within years, risking severe climate consequences. The IPCC sets the global carbon budget based on climate science, and governments use this framework to set national emission targets, climate policies and pathways to net zero emissions.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Carbon credits
Carbon credits are like a permit that allow companies to release a certain amount of carbon into the air. One credit usually equals one tonne of CO₂. These credits are issued by the local government or another authorised body and can be bought and sold. Think of it like a budget allowance for pollution. It encourages cuts in carbon emissions each year to stay within those global climate targets.
The aim is to put a price on carbon to encourage cuts in emissions. If a company reduces its emissions and has leftover credits, it can sell them to another company that is going over its limit. But there are issues. Some argue that carbon credit schemes allow polluters to pay their way out of real change, and not all credits are from trustworthy projects. Although carbon credits can play a role in addressing the climate crisis, they are not a solution on their own.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon credits explained.
Carbon offsetting
Carbon offsetting is a way for people or organisations to make up for the carbon emissions they are responsible for. For example, if you contribute to emissions by flying, driving or making goods, you can help balance that out by supporting projects that reduce emissions elsewhere. This might include planting trees (which absorb carbon dioxide) or building wind farms to produce renewable energy.
The idea is that your support helps cancel out the damage you are doing. For example, if your flight creates one tonne of carbon dioxide, you pay to support a project that removes the same amount.
While this sounds like a win-win, carbon offsetting is not perfect. Some argue that it lets people feel better without really changing their behaviour, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as greenwashing.
Not all projects are effective or well managed. For instance, some tree planting initiatives might have taken place anyway, even without the offset funding, deeming your contribution inconsequential. Others might plant the non-native trees in areas where they are unlikely to reach their potential in terms of absorbing carbon emissions.
So, offsetting can help, but it is no magic fix. It works best alongside real efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and encourage low-carbon lifestyles or supply chains.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon offsetting explained.
Carbon tax
A carbon tax is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by placing a direct price on CO₂ and other greenhouse gases.
A carbon tax is grounded in the concept of the social cost of carbon. This is an estimate of the economic damage caused by emitting one tonne of CO₂, including climate-related health, infrastructure and ecosystem impacts.
A carbon tax is typically levied per tonne of CO₂ emitted. The tax can be applied either upstream (on fossil fuel producers) or downstream (on consumers or power generators). This makes carbon-intensive activities more expensive, it incentivises nations, businesses and people to reduce their emissions, while untaxed renewable energy becomes more competitively priced and appealing.
Carbon tax was first introduced by Finland in 1990. Since then, more than 39 jurisdictions have implemented similar schemes. According to the World Bank, carbon pricing mechanisms (that’s both carbon taxes and emissions trading systems) now cover about 24% of global emissions. The remaining 76% are not priced, mainly due to limited coverage in both sectors and geographical areas, plus persistent fossil fuel subsidies. Expanding coverage would require extending carbon pricing to sectors like agriculture and transport, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and strengthening international governance.
What is carbon tax?
Sweden has one of the world’s highest carbon tax rates and has cut emissions by 33% since 1990 while maintaining economic growth. The policy worked because Sweden started early, applied the tax across many industries and maintained clear, consistent communication that kept the public on board.
Canada introduced a national carbon tax in 2019. In Canada, most of the revenue from carbon taxes is returned directly to households through annual rebates, making the scheme revenue-neutral for most families. However, despite its economic logic, inflation and rising fuel prices led to public discontent – especially as many citizens were unaware they were receiving rebates.
Carbon taxes face challenges including political resistance, fairness concerns and low public awareness. Their success depends on clear communication and visible reinvestment of revenues into climate or social goals. A 2025 study that surveyed 40,000 people in 20 countries found that support for carbon taxes increases significantly when revenues are used for environmental infrastructure, rather than returned through tax rebates.
By Meilan Yan, associate professor and senior lecturer in financial economics, Loughborough University
Climate resilience
Floods, wildfires, heatwaves and rising seas are pushing our cities, towns and neighbourhoods to their limits. But there’s a powerful idea that’s helping cities fight back: climate resilience.
Resilience refers to the ability of a system, such as a city, a community or even an ecosystem – to anticipate, prepare for, respond to and recover from climate-related shocks and stresses.
Sometimes people say resilience is about bouncing back. But it’s not just about surviving the next storm. It’s about adapting, evolving and thriving in a changing world.
Resilience means building smarter and better. It means designing homes that stay cool during heatwaves. Roads that don’t wash away in floods. Power grids that don’t fail when the weather turns extreme.
It’s also about people. A truly resilient city protects its most vulnerable. It ensures that everyone – regardless of income, age or background – can weather the storm.
And resilience isn’t just reactive. It’s about using science, local knowledge and innovation to reduce a risk before disaster strikes. From restoring wetlands to cool cities and absorb floods, to creating early warning systems for heatwaves, climate resilience is about weaving strength into the very fabric of our cities.
By Paul O’Hare, senior lecturer in geography and development, Manchester Metropolitan University
The meaning of climate resilience.
Climate risk disclosure
Climate risk disclosure refers to how companies report the risks they face from climate change, such as flood damage, supply chain disruptions or regulatory costs. It includes both physical risks (like storms) and transition risks (like changing laws or consumer preferences).
Mandatory disclosures, such as those proposed by the UK and EU, aim to make climate-related risks transparent to investors. Done well, these reports can shape capital flows toward more sustainable business models. Done poorly, they become greenwashing tools.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Emissions trading scheme
An emissions trading scheme is the primary market-based approach for regulating greenhouse gas emissions in many countries, including Australia, Canada, China and Mexico.
Part of a government’s job is to decide how much of the economy’s carbon emissions it wants to avoid in order to fight climate change. It must put a cap on carbon emissions that economic production is not allowed to surpass. Preferably, the polluters (that’s the manufacturers, fossil fuel companies) should be the ones paying for the cost of climate mitigation.
Regulators could simply tell all the firms how much they are allowed to emit over the next ten years or so. But giving every firm the same allowance across the board is not cost efficient, because avoiding carbon emissions is much harder for some firms (such as steel producers) than others (such as tax consultants). Since governments cannot know each firm’s specific cost profile either, it can’t customise the allowances. Also, monitoring whether polluters actually abide by their assigned limits is extremely costly.
An emissions trading scheme cleverly solves this dilemma using the cap-and-trade mechanism. Instead of assigning each polluter a fixed quota and risking inefficiencies, the government issues a large number of tradable permits – each worth, say, a tonne of CO₂-equivalent (CO₂e) – that sum up to the cap. Firms that can cut greenhouse gas emissions relatively cheaply can then trade their surplus permits to those who find it harder – at a price that makes both better off.
By Mathias Weidinger, environmental economist, University of Oxford
Emissions trading schemes, explained by climate finance expert Mathias Weidinger.
Environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing
ESG investing stands for environmental, social and governance investing. In simple terms, these are a set of standards that investors use to screen a company’s potential investments.
ESG means choosing to invest in companies that are not only profitable but also responsible. Investors use ESG metrics to assess risks (such as climate liability, labour practices) and align portfolios with sustainability goals by looking at how a company affects our planet and treats its people and communities. While there isn’t one single global body governing ESG, various organisations, ratings agencies and governments all contribute to setting and evolving these metrics.
For example, investing in a company committed to renewable energy and fair labour practices might be considered “ESG aligned”. Supporters believe ESG helps identify risks and create long-term value. Critics argue it can be vague or used for greenwashing, where companies appear sustainable without real action. ESG works best when paired with transparency and clear data. A barrier is that standards vary, and it’s not always clear what counts as ESG.
Why do financial companies and institutions care? Issues like climate change and nature loss pose significant risks, affecting company values and the global economy.
However, gathering reliable ESG information can be difficult. Companies often self-report, and the data isn’t always standardised or up to date. Researchers – including my team at the University of Oxford – are using geospatial data, like satellite imagery and artificial intelligence, to develop global databases for high-impact industries, across all major sectors and geographies, and independently assess environmental and social risks and impacts.
For instance, we can analyse satellite images of a facility over time to monitor its emissions effect on nature and biodiversity, or assess deforestation linked to a company’s supply chain. This allows us to map supply chains, identify high-impact assets, and detect hidden risks and opportunities in key industries, providing an objective, real-time look at their environmental footprint.
The goal is for this to improve ESG ratings and provide clearer, more consistent insights for investors. This approach could help us overcome current data limitations to build a more sustainable financial future.
By Amani Maalouf, senior researcher in spatial finance, University of Oxford
Environmental, social and governance investing explained.
Financed emissions
Financed emissions are the greenhouse gas emissions linked to a bank’s or investor’s lending and investment portfolio, rather than their own operations. For example, a bank that funds a coal mine or invests in fossil fuels is indirectly responsible for the carbon those activities produce.
Measuring financed emissions helps reveal the real climate impact of financial institutions not just their office energy use. It’s a cornerstone of climate accountability in finance and is becoming essential under net zero pledges.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Green bonds
Green bonds are loans issued to fund environmentally beneficial projects, such as energy-efficient buildings or clean transportation. Investors choose them to support climate solutions while earning returns.
Green bonds are a major tool to finance the shift to a low-carbon economy by directing finance toward climate solutions. As climate costs rise, green bonds could help close the funding gap while ensuring transparency and accountability.
Green bonds are required to ensure funds are spent as promised. For instance, imagine a city wants to upgrade its public transportation by adding electric buses to reduce pollution. Instead of raising taxes or slashing other budgets, the city can issue green bonds to raise the necessary capital. Investors buy the bonds, the city gets the funding, and the environment benefits from cleaner air and fewer emissions.
The growing participation of government issuers has improved the transparency and reliability of these investments. The green bond market has grown rapidly in recent years. According to the Bank for International Settlements, the green bond market reached US$2.9 trillion (£2.1 trillion) in 2024 – nearly six times larger than in 2018. At the same time, annual issuance (the total value of green bonds issued in a year) hit US$700 billion, highlighting the increasing role of green finance in tackling climate change.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Just transition
Just transition is the process of moving to a low-carbon society that is environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive. In a broad sense, a just transition means focusing on creating a more fair and equal society.
Just transition has existed as a concept since the 1970s. It was originally applied to the green energy transition, protecting workers in the fossil fuel industry as we move towards more sustainable alternatives.
These days, it has so many overlapping issues of justice hidden within it, so the concept is hard to define. Even at the level of UN climate negotiations, global leaders struggle to agree on what a just transition means.
The big battle is between developed countries, who want a very restrictive definition around jobs and skills, and developing countries, who are looking for a much more holistic approach that considers wider system change and includes considerations around human rights, Indigenous people and creating an overall fairer global society.
A just transition is essentially about imagining a future where we have moved beyond fossil fuels and society works better for everyone – but that can look very different in a European city compared to a rural setting in south-east Asia.
For example, in a British city it might mean fewer cars and better public transport. In a rural setting, it might mean new ways of growing crops that are more sustainable, and building homes that are heatwave resistant.
By Alix Dietzel, climate justice and climate policy expert, University of Bristol
The meaning of just transition.
Loss and damage
A global loss and damage fund was agreed by nations at the UN climate summit (Cop27) in 2022. This means that the rich countries of the world put money into a fund that the least developed countries can then call upon when they have a climate emergency.
At the moment, the loss and damage fund is made up of relatively small pots of money. Much more will be needed to provide relief to those who need it most now and in the future.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains loss and damage.
Mitigation v adaptation
Mitigation means cutting greenhouse gas emissions to slow climate change. Adaptation means adjusting to its effects, like building sea walls or growing heat-resistant crops. Both are essential: mitigation tackles the cause, while adaptation tackles the symptoms.
Globally, most funding goes to mitigation, but vulnerable communities often need adaptation support most. Balancing the two is a major challenge in climate policy, especially for developing countries facing immediate climate threats.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Nationally determined contributions
Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are at the heart of the Paris agreement, the global effort to collectively combat climate change. NDCs are individual climate action plans created by each country. These targets and strategies outline how a country will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change.
Each nation sets its own goals based on its own circumstances and capabilities – there’s no standard NDC. These plans should be updated every five years and countries are encouraged to gradually increase their climate ambitions over time.
The aim is for NDCs to drive real action by guiding policies, attracting investment and inspiring innovation in clean technologies. But current NDCs fall short of the Paris agreement goals and many countries struggle to turn their plans into a reality. NDCs also vary widely in scope and detail so it’s hard to compare efforts across the board. Stronger international collaboration and greater accountability will be crucial.
By Doug Specht, reader in cultural geography and communication, University of Westminster
Fashion depends on water, soil and biodiversity – all natural capital. And forward-thinking designers are now asking: how do we create rather than deplete, how do we restore rather than extract?
Natural capital is the value assigned to the stock of forests, soils, oceans and even minerals such as lithium. It sustains every part of our economy. It’s the bees that pollinate our crops. It’s the wetlands that filter our water and it’s the trees that store carbon and cool our cities.
If we fail to value nature properly, we risk losing it. But if we succeed, we unlock a future that is not only sustainable but also truly regenerative.
My team at the University of Oxford is developing tools to integrate nature into national balance sheets, advising governments on biodiversity, and we’re helping industries from fashion to finance embed nature into their decision making.
Natural capital, explained by a climate finance expert.
By Mette Morsing, professor of business sustainability and director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford
Net zero
Reaching net zero means reducing the amount of additional greenhouse gas emissions that accumulate in the atmosphere to zero. This concept was popularised by the Paris agreement, a landmark deal that was agreed at the UN climate summit (Cop21) in 2015 to limit the impact of greenhouse gas emissions.
There are some emissions, from farming and aviation for example, that will be very difficult, if not impossible, to reach absolute zero. Hence, the “net”. This allows people, businesses and countries to find ways to suck greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere, effectively cancelling out emissions while trying to reduce them. This can include reforestation, rewilding, direct air capture and carbon capture and storage. The goal is to reach net zero: the point at which no extra greenhouse gases accumulate in Earth’s atmosphere.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains net zero.
For more expert explainer videos, visit The Conversation’s quick climate dictionary playlist here on YouTube.
Mark Maslin is Pro-Vice Provost of the UCL Climate Crisis Grand Challenge and Founding Director of the UCL Centre for Sustainable Aviation. He was co-director of the London NERC Doctoral Training Partnership and is a member of the Climate Crisis Advisory Group. He is an advisor to Sheep Included Ltd, Lansons, NetZeroNow and has advised the UK Parliament. He has received grant funding from the NERC, EPSRC, ESRC, DFG, Royal Society, DIFD, BEIS, DECC, FCO, Innovate UK, Carbon Trust, UK Space Agency, European Space Agency, Research England, Wellcome Trust, Leverhulme Trust, CIFF, Sprint2020, and British Council. He has received funding from the BBC, Lancet, Laithwaites, Seventh Generation, Channel 4, JLT Re, WWF, Hermes, CAFOD, HP and Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.
Amani Maalouf receives funding from IKEA Foundation and UK Research and Innovation (NE/V017756/1).
Narmin Nahidi is affiliated with several academic associations, including the Financial Management Association (FMA), British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA), American Finance Association (AFA), and the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CMBE). These affiliations do not influence the content of this article.
Paul O’Hare receives funding from the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Award reference NE/V010174/1.
Alix Dietzel, Dongna Zhang, Doug Specht, Mathias Weidinger, Meilan Yan, and Sankar Sivarajah do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Loan to support micro and small enterprises, green investments, and women-led businesses
In a move to boost inclusive and sustainable development across Moldova, the Black Sea Trade and Development Bank (BSTDB) has extended a EUR 3 million Combined MSME, Green and Gender Equality Credit Line to Prime Capital, BSTDB existing partner since 2021. The loan will further deepen the partnership, including by diversification of use of proceeds to facilitate access to finance for important economic purposes.
BSTDB financing will strengthen Prime Capital’s capacity to support micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs)—a backbone of the Moldovan economy and will also target green investments and women-led businesses, areas that are increasingly vital for long-term resilience and social equity.
The funds will be channeled into Prime Capital’s dedicated programmes that focus on energy efficiency and women in business, helping scale up initiatives that are already making an impact at domestic level. By strengthening these targeted initiatives, the BSTDB contributes to the broader goals of climate resilience, social equity, and regional development.
Commenting on the deal, Dr. Serhat Köksal, President, said: “This financing reflects our strong commitment to support micro, small and medium entrepreneurs, fostering greater opportunities for women-led businesses, and accelerating the green transition. By partnering with Prime Capital, we are helping ensure that capital reaches those who can drive inclusive and sustainable growth in Moldova and bolster economic resilience across the Black Sea Region.”
“We are proud to strengthen our partnership with the Black Sea Trade and Development Bank through this expanded facility, which will help us deliver on our mission to empower Moldova’s entrepreneurs—especially women and those championing green innovation. This funding is not only timely but also strategic, as it enables us to extend credit to areas with the greatest transformative potential: MSMEs, sustainable energy, and gender-inclusive business growth. By aligning with BSTDB’s regional development goals, we are helping build a more resilient, inclusive, and future-ready Moldovan economy.” – said Carmina Vicol, CEO of Prime Capital.
OCN Prime Capital SRLis one of the leading microfinance companies in Moldova. As of end-September 2024, Prime Capital reported total assets of USD 21.7 million and total equity of USD 14.3 million with capitalization ratio of 66%. Prime Capital is the 11th largest microfinance company in Moldova (out of 118 non-bank financial institutions). The Company’s head office and microlending office are based in Chisinau, two branches are located in the north and south of the country and it has 52 employees.
The Black Sea Trade and Development Bank (BSTDB) is an international financial institution established by Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece, Moldova, Romania, Russia, Türkiye, and Ukraine. The BSTDB headquarters are in Thessaloniki, Greece. BSTDB supports economic development and regional cooperation by providing loans, credit lines, equity and guarantees for projects and trade financing in the public and private sectors in its member countries. The authorized capital of the Bank is EUR 3.45 billion. For information on BSTDB, visit www.bstdb.org.
Loan to support micro and small enterprises, green investments, and women-led businesses
In a move to boost inclusive and sustainable development across Moldova, the Black Sea Trade and Development Bank (BSTDB) has extended a EUR 3 million Combined MSME, Green and Gender Equality Credit Line to Prime Capital, BSTDB existing partner since 2021. The loan will further deepen the partnership, including by diversification of use of proceeds to facilitate access to finance for important economic purposes.
BSTDB financing will strengthen Prime Capital’s capacity to support micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs)—a backbone of the Moldovan economy and will also target green investments and women-led businesses, areas that are increasingly vital for long-term resilience and social equity.
The funds will be channeled into Prime Capital’s dedicated programmes that focus on energy efficiency and women in business, helping scale up initiatives that are already making an impact at domestic level. By strengthening these targeted initiatives, the BSTDB contributes to the broader goals of climate resilience, social equity, and regional development.
Commenting on the deal, Dr. Serhat Köksal, President, said: “This financing reflects our strong commitment to support micro, small and medium entrepreneurs, fostering greater opportunities for women-led businesses, and accelerating the green transition. By partnering with Prime Capital, we are helping ensure that capital reaches those who can drive inclusive and sustainable growth in Moldova and bolster economic resilience across the Black Sea Region.”
“We are proud to strengthen our partnership with the Black Sea Trade and Development Bank through this expanded facility, which will help us deliver on our mission to empower Moldova’s entrepreneurs—especially women and those championing green innovation. This funding is not only timely but also strategic, as it enables us to extend credit to areas with the greatest transformative potential: MSMEs, sustainable energy, and gender-inclusive business growth. By aligning with BSTDB’s regional development goals, we are helping build a more resilient, inclusive, and future-ready Moldovan economy.” – said Carmina Vicol, CEO of Prime Capital.
OCN Prime Capital SRLis one of the leading microfinance companies in Moldova. As of end-September 2024, Prime Capital reported total assets of USD 21.7 million and total equity of USD 14.3 million with capitalization ratio of 66%. Prime Capital is the 11th largest microfinance company in Moldova (out of 118 non-bank financial institutions). The Company’s head office and microlending office are based in Chisinau, two branches are located in the north and south of the country and it has 52 employees.
The Black Sea Trade and Development Bank (BSTDB) is an international financial institution established by Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece, Moldova, Romania, Russia, Türkiye, and Ukraine. The BSTDB headquarters are in Thessaloniki, Greece. BSTDB supports economic development and regional cooperation by providing loans, credit lines, equity and guarantees for projects and trade financing in the public and private sectors in its member countries. The authorized capital of the Bank is EUR 3.45 billion. For information on BSTDB, visit www.bstdb.org.
AI-powered assistive devices, like hearing aids, are changing how the people who use them experience public space.(Shutterstock)
New applications and the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) with wearable devices are changing the way users interact with their environments and each other. The impacts and reach of these new technologies have yet to be fully understood.
Connections between technologies and bodies is not a new thing for many disabled persons. Assistive technologies — tools and products designed to support people with disabilities — have played a part in mitigating built and institutional barriers experienced by disabled persons for decades.
While not strictly considered assistive, immersive and wearable technologies have the potential to change the relationship between disabled users and their experience of place.
For example, Ray-Ban’s Meta glasses use AI to describe what the cameras are capturing using the Be My Eyes app. Using OpenAI’s large language model, ChatGPT, this effectively turns a user’s smart phone into a vision assistant.
The availability and production of environmental data from these technologies may impact how we relate to each other, how we move through and understand space, and how we engage with the physical environment around us at any given moment.
Sam Seavey, founder of TheBlindLife.com, reviews the possibilities and limitations of Apple’s VisionPro. (The Blind Life)
We’re at a critical juncture where AI-enabled technologies used by individuals may profoundly impact our urban futures.
What happens, for example, when wearables make any “place” a digital work or play place? What does a largely private-sector, consumer-driven, AI-enabled digital intervention into a city’s spaces mean for planning, zoning and taxation? What are the environmental costs of the global AI project?
And crucially, who gets to participate in this digital reimagining?
AI and the city
While access can be challenging — wearables are often costly — ableist thinking regarding the use of technology to render invisible Blind and/or Deaf people and culture is also a problem. Some people might naively assume that all Blind and Deaf people are universally seeking a bio-technological “miracle.”
There are also other challenges: how a technology captures or describes its data may not match up to a user’s pre-existing sense of place. Moreover, access to tech can produce some unintended consequences, including the erosion of in-person community building among disabled people.
My hearing aids use AI and machine learning to sense and adjust my sound environment. They help me cope with the ways in which the places of my everyday life — such as my home or the lecture hall — are generally configured for people without hearing loss.
When I use my hearing aids, I find that the city has never sounded so wonderful, and yet sometimes irritatingly loud. The sound of birds is one thing; the grinding sound of a breaking subway is another entirely.
Cumulative exposure to noisy indoor and outdoor places of the city poses auditory health risks, such as noise-induced hearing loss or tinnitus, and can contribute to poor health more broadly. I have to be careful about ongoing noise exposure, and by adjusting the volume of my hearing aids, I can turn down the city when I want to.
Future bodies and urban futures
AI-powered technologies can exacerbate issues of access, privilege and freedom of movement. This happens both through who is able to purchase and use devices, as well as through data and their applications. Data may be biased in terms of race, gender, sexuality and disability.
Scientific research and media representations tend to highlight the benevolent possibilities of technologies for “repairing” bodies conceived as being functionally medically deficient.
Much less is said about disabled persons controlling the narrative, taking up key roles in the messy terrain of AI, machine learning and data governance, and in the planning and design of future cities.
Digital modelling
We are also witnessing growing interest in the digital twinning — creating highly accurate digital models — of everything from human hearts to entire cities.
Not everyone can, should or wishes to be technologically “assisted” or augmented. There are medical, identity and culture, affordability, legal, moral and ethical concerns.
Other issues raised by brain-computer interface research, for example, include concerns about legal capacity and ownership of the self, including ownership of device-generated data.
In a study on the impact of neural technologies, researchers shared the legal repercussions relating to two disabled people deprived of voting rights in Spain. The person who recovered the ability to communicate autonomously using their finger and a computer had their rights restored, while the other, who used a human intermediary, did not.
Where does the person end and the technology begin, and vice versa? Who gets to decide?
Future technologies
As the use of AI and assistive technologies increases in everyday urban life, we will need to address these questions sooner rather than later.
And if disabled persons are not adequately involved in these discussions and decisions, then cities will be less — rather than more — accessible.
Ron Buliung does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Mountains on the moon as seen by NASA Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. (NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University)
In science-fiction stories, companies often mine the moon or asteroids. While this may seem far-fetched, this idea is edging closer to becoming reality.
Celestial bodies like the moon contain valuable resources, such as lunar regolith — also known as moon dust — and helium-3. These resources could serve a range of applications, including making rocket propellant and generating energy to sustaining long missions, bringing benefits in space and on Earth.
The first objective on this journey is being able to collect lunar regolith. One company taking up this challenge is ispace, a Japanese space exploration company ispace that signed a contract with NASA in 2020 for the collection and transfer of ownership of lunar regolith.
The company recently attempted to land its RESILIENCE lunar lander, but the mission was ultimately unsuccessful. Still, this endeavour marked a significant move toward the commercialization of space resources.
These circumstances give rise to a fundamental question: what are the legal rules governing the exploitation of space resources? The answer is both simple and complex, as there is a mix of international agreements and evolving regulations to consider.
Space activities have exponentially evolved since the treaty’s adoption. In the 60 years following the launch of Sputnik 1 — the first satellite placed in orbit — less than 500 space objects were launched annually. But since 2018, this number has risen into the thousands, with nearly 3,000 launched in 2024.
Because of this, the treaty is often judged as inadequate to address the current complexities of space activities, particularly resource exploitation.
A longstanding debate centres on whether Article II of the treaty, which prohibits the appropriation of outer space — including the moon and other celestial bodies — also prohibits space mining.
The prevailing position is that Article II solely bans the appropriation of territory, not the extraction of resources themselves.
We are now at a crucial moment in the development of space law. Arguing over whether extraction is legal serves no purpose. Instead, the focus must shift to ensuring resource extraction is carried out in accordance with principles that ensure the safe and responsible use of outer space.
International and national space laws
A significant development in the governance of space resources has been the adoption Artemis Accords, which — as of June 2025 — has 55 signatory nations. The accords reflect a growing international consensus concerning the exploitation of space resources.
Notably, Section 10 of the accords indicates that the exploitation of space resources does not constitute appropriation, and therefore doesn’t violate the Outer Space Treaty.
Considering the typically slow pace of multilateral negotiations, a handful of nations introduced national legislation. These laws govern the legality of space resource exploitation, allowing private companies to request licenses to conduct this type of activity.
Among these, Luxembourg’s legal framework is the most complete. It provides a series of requirements to provide authorization for the exploitation of space resources. In fact, ispace’s licence to collect lunar regolith was obtained under this regime.
This first high-resolution image taken on the first day of the Artemis I mission by a camera on the tip of one of Orion’s solar arrays. The spacecraft was 57,000 miles from Earth when the image was captured. (NASA)
The rest of the regulations usually tend to limit themselves to proclaiming the legality of this activity without entering into too much detail and deferring the specifics of implementation to future regulations.
While these initiatives served to put space resources at the forefront of international forums, they also risk regulatory fragmentation, as different countries adopt varying standards and approaches.
In May 2025, the chair of the working group, Steven Freeland, presented a draft of recommended principles based on input from member states.
These principles reaffirm the freedom of use and exploration of outer space for peaceful purposes, while introducing rules pertaining to the safety of the activities and their sustainability, as well as the protection of the environment, both of Earth and outer space.
The development of a legal framework for space resources is still in its early stages. The working group is expected to submit its final report by 2027, but the non-binding nature of the principles raises concerns about their enforcement and application.
As humanity moves closer to extracting and using space resources, the need for a cohesive and responsible governance system has never been greater.
Martina Elia Vitoloni does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Robert Bird, Professor of Business Law & Eversource Energy Chair in Business Ethics, University of Connecticut
Something dangerous is happening to the U.S. economy, and it’s not inflation or trade wars. Chaotic deregulation and the selective enforcement of laws have upended markets and investor confidence. At one point, the threat of tariffs and resulting chaos evaporated US$4 trillion in value in the U.S. stock market. This approach isn’t helping the economy, and there are troubling signs it will hurt both the U.S. and the global economy in the short and long term.
The rule of law – the idea that legal rules apply to everyone equally, regardless of wealth or political connections − is essential for a thriving economy. Yet globally the respect for the rule of law is slipping, and the U.S. is slipping with it. According to annual rankings from the World Justice Project, the rule of law has declined in more than half of all countries for seven years in a row. The rule of law in the U.S., the most economically powerful nation in the world, is now weaker than the rule of law in Uruguay, Singapore, Latvia and over 20 other countries.
When regulation is unnecessarily burdensome for business, government should lighten the load. However, arbitrary and frenzied deregulation does not free corporations to earn higher profits. As a business school professor with an MBA who has taught business law for over 25 years, and the author of a recently published book about the importance of legal knowledge to business, I can affirm that the opposite is true. Chaotic deregulation doesn’t drive growth. It only fuels risk.
Chaos undermines investment, talent and trust
Legal uncertainty has become a serious drag on American competitiveness.
A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that public policy risks — such as unexpected changes in taxes, regulation and enforcement — ranked among the top challenges businesses face, alongside more familiar business threats such as competition or economic volatility. Companies that can’t predict how the law might change are forced to plan for the worst. That means holding back on long-term investment, slowing innovation and raising prices to cover new risks.
When the government enforces rules arbitrarily, it also undermines property rights.
For example, if a country enters into a major trade agreement and then goes ahead and violates it, that threatens the property rights of the companies that relied on the agreement to conduct business. If the government can seize assets without due process, those assets lose their stability and value. And if that treatment depends on whether a company is in the government’s political favor, it’s not just bad economics − it’s a red flag for investors.
When government doesn’t enforce rules fairly, it also threatens people’s freedom to enter into contracts.
Consider presidential orders that threaten the clients of law firms that have challenged the administration with cancellation of their government contracts. The threat alone jeopardizes the value of those agreements.
If businesses can’t trust public contracts to be respected, they’ll be less likely to work with the government in the first place. This deprives the government, and ultimately the American people, of receiving the best value for their tax dollars in critical areas such as transportation, technology and national defense.
Regulatory chaos also allows corruption to spread.
For example, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits businesses from bribing foreign government officials, has leveled the playing field for firms and enabled the best American companies to succeed on their merits. Before the law was enacted in 1977, some American companies felt pressured to pay bribes to compete. “Pausing” enforcement of the law, as the current presidential administration has done, increases the cost of doing business and encourages a wild west economy where chaos thrives.
Chaotic enforcement of the law also corrodes labor markets.
American companies require a strong pool of talented professionals to fuel their financial success. When legal rights are enforced arbitrarily or unjustly, the very best talent that American companies need may leave the country.
The science brain drain is already happening. American scientists have submitted 32% more applications for jobs abroad compared with last year. Nonscientists are leaving too. Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs has witnessed a 50% increase in Americans taking steps to obtain an Irish passport. Employers in the U.K. saw a spike in job applications from the United States.
Business from other countries will gladly accept American talent as they compete against American companies. During the Third Reich, Nazi Germany lost its best and brightest to other countries, including America. Now the reverse is happening, as highly talented Americans leave to work for firms in other nations.
Threats of arbitrary legal actions also drive away democratic allies and their prosperous populations that purchase American-made goods and services. For example, arbitrarily threatening to punish or even annex a closely allied nation does not endear its citizens to that government or the businesses it represents. So it’s no surprise that Canadians are now boycotting American goods and services. This is devastating businesses in American border towns and hurts the economy nationwide.
Similarly, the Canadian government has responded to whipsawing U.S. tariff announcements with counter-tariffs, which will slice the profits of American exporters. Close American allies and trading partners such as Japan, the U.K. and the European Union are also signaling their own willingness to impose retaliatory tariffs, increasing the costs of operations to American business even more.
Modern capitalism depends on smart regulation to thrive. Smart regulation is not an obstacle to capitalism. Smart regulation is what makes American capitalism possible. Smart regulation is what makes American freedom possible.
Clear and consistently applied legal rules allow businesses to aggressively compete, carefully plan, and generate profits. An arbitrary rule of law deprives business of the true power of capitalism – the ability to promote economic growth, spur innovation and improve the overall living standards of a free society. Americans deserve no less, and it is up to government to make that happen for everyone.
Robert Bird does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – France – By Jérémy Lemarié, Maître de conférences à l’Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne (URCA)
Invented in Hawaii, surfing gained popularity in the United States and Australia in the 1950s before becoming a global phenomenon. Now practiced in more than 150 countries, its spread has been driven by media and tourism. Surf tourism involves travelling to destinations to catch waves, either with a surfboard or through activities such as body surfing or bodyboarding. Tourists range from seasoned surfers to beginners eager to learn.
The allure of California
For many, surf tourism evokes exotic imagery shaped by California production companies. Columbia Pictures in 1959 and Paramount Pictures in 1961 introduced surfing to the middle class, showcasing the sport as a gateway to summer adventure and escape. However, it was the 1966 movie The Endless Summer, directed and produced by Bruce Brown, that became a box office success. The film follows two Californians travelling the globe in search of the perfect wave, which they ultimately find in South Africa. Beneath the seemingly lighthearted portrayal of a “surf safari”, it carries undertones of colonial ambition.
In the film, the Californians tell people in Africa that waves are untapped resources ready to be named and conquered. This sense of Western cultural dominance over populations in poorer countries has permeated surf tourism. Since the 1970s, French surfers have flocked to Morocco for its long-breaking waves, Australians have flocked to Indonesia and Californians to Mexico. The expansion of surfing to Africa, Asia and Latin America was enabled by easier international travel and economic disparities between visitors and hosts.
Surfing’s impact on local communities
Indonesia, for instance, became a surfing hotspot after Australian surfers started to explore the waves of Bali and the Mentawai Islands in the 1970s. Once remote regions with modest living standards, these areas saw tourism infrastructure mushroom to meet demand. Today, destinations such as Uluwatu in Bali and Padang Padang in Sumatra attract surfers of all skill levels.
Similarly, Morocco has experienced a surge in surf tourism, with spots such as Taghazout drawing European visitors in search of affordable waves and sunshine. While this has boosted local economies, it has also raised concerns about environmental degradation and the strain of tourism on previously untouched areas.
The challenges of overtourism in coastal areas
Although surfing is often seen as an activity in harmony with nature, mass tourism has created tensions between local surfers and visitors. Overtourism refers to the negative impact of excessive tourist numbers on natural environments and local communities.
One response to overtourism is localism – where local surfers assert ownership of waves, sometimes discouraging or even intimidating outsiders. This has been particularly pronounced in economically dependent surf destinations. For example, in Hawaii during the 1970s and 1980s, local surfers protested against the influx of professional Australian surfers and international competitions. Today, localism persists globally, from Maroubra in Sydney to Boucau-Tarnos in France’s Nouvelle-Aquitaine region. These places are not systematically off-limits to beginners, but major conflicts can arise during peak tourist seasons.
Surf schools, while crucial for teaching newcomers, also exacerbate crowding. During high seasons, beaches such as Côte des Basques in Biarritz become overcrowded, straining relations between experienced surfers, instructors and novices. Beginners, often unaware of surf etiquette and safety rules, contribute to frustrations among seasoned surfers.
A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!
The role of public authorities
In response to these challenges, public initiatives have emerged to promote sustainable surf tourism. For instance, the Costa Rican government has established marine protected areas and regulated tourism activities to preserve a part of the coastal environment. Local authorities have also begun capping the number of surf schools and making access to the practice more difficult.
In southwestern France, municipalities use public service delegations (DSP), temporary occupation authorisations (AOT) and other tools to regulate surf schools operating on public beaches. Environmental awareness programmes have been launched to educate tourists on responsible behaviour toward beaches and oceans.
Gaps in regulation
Despite these measures, many coastal regions face insufficient action to address the environmental and social challenges posed by surf tourism. In Fiji, a 2010 decree deregulated the surf tourism industry, eliminating traditional indigenous rights to coastal and reef areas. This allowed unregulated development of tourism infrastructure, often ignoring long-term ecological impacts.
Similar issues are seen in Morocco, where lax regulations allow foreign investors to exploit coastal land for hotel development, often providing little benefit to local communities.
Yet, there are success stories. In Santa Cruz, California, the initiative Save Our Shores mobilises citizens and tourists to protect beaches through anti-pollution campaigns and regular cleanups.
Surf tourism has brought significant economic benefits to many coastal regions. However, it has also introduced social and environmental challenges, including localism, overcrowding and ecological strain. Managing these issues requires a collaborative approach, with governments, local stakeholders and tourists working together to preserve the sport’s connection to nature.
This article was published as part of the 2024 Fête de la Science, of which The Conversation France was a partner. The year’s theme, “Oceans of Knowledge,” explored the wonders of the marine world.
Jérémy Lemarié is a member of the Fulbright network, as the recipient of the “Chercheuses et Chercheurs” grant from the Franco-American Commission in 2022-2023.
Source: The Conversation – France – By Jérémy Lemarié, Maître de conférences à l’Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne (URCA)
Invented in Hawaii, surfing gained popularity in the United States and Australia in the 1950s before becoming a global phenomenon. Now practiced in more than 150 countries, its spread has been driven by media and tourism. Surf tourism involves travelling to destinations to catch waves, either with a surfboard or through activities such as body surfing or bodyboarding. Tourists range from seasoned surfers to beginners eager to learn.
The allure of California
For many, surf tourism evokes exotic imagery shaped by California production companies. Columbia Pictures in 1959 and Paramount Pictures in 1961 introduced surfing to the middle class, showcasing the sport as a gateway to summer adventure and escape. However, it was the 1966 movie The Endless Summer, directed and produced by Bruce Brown, that became a box office success. The film follows two Californians travelling the globe in search of the perfect wave, which they ultimately find in South Africa. Beneath the seemingly lighthearted portrayal of a “surf safari”, it carries undertones of colonial ambition.
In the film, the Californians tell people in Africa that waves are untapped resources ready to be named and conquered. This sense of Western cultural dominance over populations in poorer countries has permeated surf tourism. Since the 1970s, French surfers have flocked to Morocco for its long-breaking waves, Australians have flocked to Indonesia and Californians to Mexico. The expansion of surfing to Africa, Asia and Latin America was enabled by easier international travel and economic disparities between visitors and hosts.
Surfing’s impact on local communities
Indonesia, for instance, became a surfing hotspot after Australian surfers started to explore the waves of Bali and the Mentawai Islands in the 1970s. Once remote regions with modest living standards, these areas saw tourism infrastructure mushroom to meet demand. Today, destinations such as Uluwatu in Bali and Padang Padang in Sumatra attract surfers of all skill levels.
Similarly, Morocco has experienced a surge in surf tourism, with spots such as Taghazout drawing European visitors in search of affordable waves and sunshine. While this has boosted local economies, it has also raised concerns about environmental degradation and the strain of tourism on previously untouched areas.
The challenges of overtourism in coastal areas
Although surfing is often seen as an activity in harmony with nature, mass tourism has created tensions between local surfers and visitors. Overtourism refers to the negative impact of excessive tourist numbers on natural environments and local communities.
One response to overtourism is localism – where local surfers assert ownership of waves, sometimes discouraging or even intimidating outsiders. This has been particularly pronounced in economically dependent surf destinations. For example, in Hawaii during the 1970s and 1980s, local surfers protested against the influx of professional Australian surfers and international competitions. Today, localism persists globally, from Maroubra in Sydney to Boucau-Tarnos in France’s Nouvelle-Aquitaine region. These places are not systematically off-limits to beginners, but major conflicts can arise during peak tourist seasons.
Surf schools, while crucial for teaching newcomers, also exacerbate crowding. During high seasons, beaches such as Côte des Basques in Biarritz become overcrowded, straining relations between experienced surfers, instructors and novices. Beginners, often unaware of surf etiquette and safety rules, contribute to frustrations among seasoned surfers.
A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!
The role of public authorities
In response to these challenges, public initiatives have emerged to promote sustainable surf tourism. For instance, the Costa Rican government has established marine protected areas and regulated tourism activities to preserve a part of the coastal environment. Local authorities have also begun capping the number of surf schools and making access to the practice more difficult.
In southwestern France, municipalities use public service delegations (DSP), temporary occupation authorisations (AOT) and other tools to regulate surf schools operating on public beaches. Environmental awareness programmes have been launched to educate tourists on responsible behaviour toward beaches and oceans.
Gaps in regulation
Despite these measures, many coastal regions face insufficient action to address the environmental and social challenges posed by surf tourism. In Fiji, a 2010 decree deregulated the surf tourism industry, eliminating traditional indigenous rights to coastal and reef areas. This allowed unregulated development of tourism infrastructure, often ignoring long-term ecological impacts.
Similar issues are seen in Morocco, where lax regulations allow foreign investors to exploit coastal land for hotel development, often providing little benefit to local communities.
Yet, there are success stories. In Santa Cruz, California, the initiative Save Our Shores mobilises citizens and tourists to protect beaches through anti-pollution campaigns and regular cleanups.
Surf tourism has brought significant economic benefits to many coastal regions. However, it has also introduced social and environmental challenges, including localism, overcrowding and ecological strain. Managing these issues requires a collaborative approach, with governments, local stakeholders and tourists working together to preserve the sport’s connection to nature.
This article was published as part of the 2024 Fête de la Science, of which The Conversation France was a partner. The year’s theme, “Oceans of Knowledge,” explored the wonders of the marine world.
Jérémy Lemarié is a member of the Fulbright network, as the recipient of the “Chercheuses et Chercheurs” grant from the Franco-American Commission in 2022-2023.
Source: The Conversation – France – By Jérémy Lemarié, Maître de conférences à l’Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne (URCA)
Invented in Hawaii, surfing gained popularity in the United States and Australia in the 1950s before becoming a global phenomenon. Now practiced in more than 150 countries, its spread has been driven by media and tourism. Surf tourism involves travelling to destinations to catch waves, either with a surfboard or through activities such as body surfing or bodyboarding. Tourists range from seasoned surfers to beginners eager to learn.
The allure of California
For many, surf tourism evokes exotic imagery shaped by California production companies. Columbia Pictures in 1959 and Paramount Pictures in 1961 introduced surfing to the middle class, showcasing the sport as a gateway to summer adventure and escape. However, it was the 1966 movie The Endless Summer, directed and produced by Bruce Brown, that became a box office success. The film follows two Californians travelling the globe in search of the perfect wave, which they ultimately find in South Africa. Beneath the seemingly lighthearted portrayal of a “surf safari”, it carries undertones of colonial ambition.
In the film, the Californians tell people in Africa that waves are untapped resources ready to be named and conquered. This sense of Western cultural dominance over populations in poorer countries has permeated surf tourism. Since the 1970s, French surfers have flocked to Morocco for its long-breaking waves, Australians have flocked to Indonesia and Californians to Mexico. The expansion of surfing to Africa, Asia and Latin America was enabled by easier international travel and economic disparities between visitors and hosts.
Surfing’s impact on local communities
Indonesia, for instance, became a surfing hotspot after Australian surfers started to explore the waves of Bali and the Mentawai Islands in the 1970s. Once remote regions with modest living standards, these areas saw tourism infrastructure mushroom to meet demand. Today, destinations such as Uluwatu in Bali and Padang Padang in Sumatra attract surfers of all skill levels.
Similarly, Morocco has experienced a surge in surf tourism, with spots such as Taghazout drawing European visitors in search of affordable waves and sunshine. While this has boosted local economies, it has also raised concerns about environmental degradation and the strain of tourism on previously untouched areas.
The challenges of overtourism in coastal areas
Although surfing is often seen as an activity in harmony with nature, mass tourism has created tensions between local surfers and visitors. Overtourism refers to the negative impact of excessive tourist numbers on natural environments and local communities.
One response to overtourism is localism – where local surfers assert ownership of waves, sometimes discouraging or even intimidating outsiders. This has been particularly pronounced in economically dependent surf destinations. For example, in Hawaii during the 1970s and 1980s, local surfers protested against the influx of professional Australian surfers and international competitions. Today, localism persists globally, from Maroubra in Sydney to Boucau-Tarnos in France’s Nouvelle-Aquitaine region. These places are not systematically off-limits to beginners, but major conflicts can arise during peak tourist seasons.
Surf schools, while crucial for teaching newcomers, also exacerbate crowding. During high seasons, beaches such as Côte des Basques in Biarritz become overcrowded, straining relations between experienced surfers, instructors and novices. Beginners, often unaware of surf etiquette and safety rules, contribute to frustrations among seasoned surfers.
A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!
The role of public authorities
In response to these challenges, public initiatives have emerged to promote sustainable surf tourism. For instance, the Costa Rican government has established marine protected areas and regulated tourism activities to preserve a part of the coastal environment. Local authorities have also begun capping the number of surf schools and making access to the practice more difficult.
In southwestern France, municipalities use public service delegations (DSP), temporary occupation authorisations (AOT) and other tools to regulate surf schools operating on public beaches. Environmental awareness programmes have been launched to educate tourists on responsible behaviour toward beaches and oceans.
Gaps in regulation
Despite these measures, many coastal regions face insufficient action to address the environmental and social challenges posed by surf tourism. In Fiji, a 2010 decree deregulated the surf tourism industry, eliminating traditional indigenous rights to coastal and reef areas. This allowed unregulated development of tourism infrastructure, often ignoring long-term ecological impacts.
Similar issues are seen in Morocco, where lax regulations allow foreign investors to exploit coastal land for hotel development, often providing little benefit to local communities.
Yet, there are success stories. In Santa Cruz, California, the initiative Save Our Shores mobilises citizens and tourists to protect beaches through anti-pollution campaigns and regular cleanups.
Surf tourism has brought significant economic benefits to many coastal regions. However, it has also introduced social and environmental challenges, including localism, overcrowding and ecological strain. Managing these issues requires a collaborative approach, with governments, local stakeholders and tourists working together to preserve the sport’s connection to nature.
This article was published as part of the 2024 Fête de la Science, of which The Conversation France was a partner. The year’s theme, “Oceans of Knowledge,” explored the wonders of the marine world.
Jérémy Lemarié is a member of the Fulbright network, as the recipient of the “Chercheuses et Chercheurs” grant from the Franco-American Commission in 2022-2023.
Source: The Conversation – France – By Jérémy Lemarié, Maître de conférences à l’Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne (URCA)
Invented in Hawaii, surfing gained popularity in the United States and Australia in the 1950s before becoming a global phenomenon. Now practiced in more than 150 countries, its spread has been driven by media and tourism. Surf tourism involves travelling to destinations to catch waves, either with a surfboard or through activities such as body surfing or bodyboarding. Tourists range from seasoned surfers to beginners eager to learn.
The allure of California
For many, surf tourism evokes exotic imagery shaped by California production companies. Columbia Pictures in 1959 and Paramount Pictures in 1961 introduced surfing to the middle class, showcasing the sport as a gateway to summer adventure and escape. However, it was the 1966 movie The Endless Summer, directed and produced by Bruce Brown, that became a box office success. The film follows two Californians travelling the globe in search of the perfect wave, which they ultimately find in South Africa. Beneath the seemingly lighthearted portrayal of a “surf safari”, it carries undertones of colonial ambition.
In the film, the Californians tell people in Africa that waves are untapped resources ready to be named and conquered. This sense of Western cultural dominance over populations in poorer countries has permeated surf tourism. Since the 1970s, French surfers have flocked to Morocco for its long-breaking waves, Australians have flocked to Indonesia and Californians to Mexico. The expansion of surfing to Africa, Asia and Latin America was enabled by easier international travel and economic disparities between visitors and hosts.
Surfing’s impact on local communities
Indonesia, for instance, became a surfing hotspot after Australian surfers started to explore the waves of Bali and the Mentawai Islands in the 1970s. Once remote regions with modest living standards, these areas saw tourism infrastructure mushroom to meet demand. Today, destinations such as Uluwatu in Bali and Padang Padang in Sumatra attract surfers of all skill levels.
Similarly, Morocco has experienced a surge in surf tourism, with spots such as Taghazout drawing European visitors in search of affordable waves and sunshine. While this has boosted local economies, it has also raised concerns about environmental degradation and the strain of tourism on previously untouched areas.
The challenges of overtourism in coastal areas
Although surfing is often seen as an activity in harmony with nature, mass tourism has created tensions between local surfers and visitors. Overtourism refers to the negative impact of excessive tourist numbers on natural environments and local communities.
One response to overtourism is localism – where local surfers assert ownership of waves, sometimes discouraging or even intimidating outsiders. This has been particularly pronounced in economically dependent surf destinations. For example, in Hawaii during the 1970s and 1980s, local surfers protested against the influx of professional Australian surfers and international competitions. Today, localism persists globally, from Maroubra in Sydney to Boucau-Tarnos in France’s Nouvelle-Aquitaine region. These places are not systematically off-limits to beginners, but major conflicts can arise during peak tourist seasons.
Surf schools, while crucial for teaching newcomers, also exacerbate crowding. During high seasons, beaches such as Côte des Basques in Biarritz become overcrowded, straining relations between experienced surfers, instructors and novices. Beginners, often unaware of surf etiquette and safety rules, contribute to frustrations among seasoned surfers.
A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!
The role of public authorities
In response to these challenges, public initiatives have emerged to promote sustainable surf tourism. For instance, the Costa Rican government has established marine protected areas and regulated tourism activities to preserve a part of the coastal environment. Local authorities have also begun capping the number of surf schools and making access to the practice more difficult.
In southwestern France, municipalities use public service delegations (DSP), temporary occupation authorisations (AOT) and other tools to regulate surf schools operating on public beaches. Environmental awareness programmes have been launched to educate tourists on responsible behaviour toward beaches and oceans.
Gaps in regulation
Despite these measures, many coastal regions face insufficient action to address the environmental and social challenges posed by surf tourism. In Fiji, a 2010 decree deregulated the surf tourism industry, eliminating traditional indigenous rights to coastal and reef areas. This allowed unregulated development of tourism infrastructure, often ignoring long-term ecological impacts.
Similar issues are seen in Morocco, where lax regulations allow foreign investors to exploit coastal land for hotel development, often providing little benefit to local communities.
Yet, there are success stories. In Santa Cruz, California, the initiative Save Our Shores mobilises citizens and tourists to protect beaches through anti-pollution campaigns and regular cleanups.
Surf tourism has brought significant economic benefits to many coastal regions. However, it has also introduced social and environmental challenges, including localism, overcrowding and ecological strain. Managing these issues requires a collaborative approach, with governments, local stakeholders and tourists working together to preserve the sport’s connection to nature.
This article was published as part of the 2024 Fête de la Science, of which The Conversation France was a partner. The year’s theme, “Oceans of Knowledge,” explored the wonders of the marine world.
Jérémy Lemarié is a member of the Fulbright network, as the recipient of the “Chercheuses et Chercheurs” grant from the Franco-American Commission in 2022-2023.
Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Robert Bird, Professor of Business Law & Eversource Energy Chair in Business Ethics, University of Connecticut
Something dangerous is happening to the U.S. economy, and it’s not inflation or trade wars. Chaotic deregulation and the selective enforcement of laws have upended markets and investor confidence. At one point, the threat of tariffs and resulting chaos evaporated US$4 trillion in value in the U.S. stock market. This approach isn’t helping the economy, and there are troubling signs it will hurt both the U.S. and the global economy in the short and long term.
The rule of law – the idea that legal rules apply to everyone equally, regardless of wealth or political connections − is essential for a thriving economy. Yet globally the respect for the rule of law is slipping, and the U.S. is slipping with it. According to annual rankings from the World Justice Project, the rule of law has declined in more than half of all countries for seven years in a row. The rule of law in the U.S., the most economically powerful nation in the world, is now weaker than the rule of law in Uruguay, Singapore, Latvia and over 20 other countries.
When regulation is unnecessarily burdensome for business, government should lighten the load. However, arbitrary and frenzied deregulation does not free corporations to earn higher profits. As a business school professor with an MBA who has taught business law for over 25 years, and the author of a recently published book about the importance of legal knowledge to business, I can affirm that the opposite is true. Chaotic deregulation doesn’t drive growth. It only fuels risk.
Chaos undermines investment, talent and trust
Legal uncertainty has become a serious drag on American competitiveness.
A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that public policy risks — such as unexpected changes in taxes, regulation and enforcement — ranked among the top challenges businesses face, alongside more familiar business threats such as competition or economic volatility. Companies that can’t predict how the law might change are forced to plan for the worst. That means holding back on long-term investment, slowing innovation and raising prices to cover new risks.
When the government enforces rules arbitrarily, it also undermines property rights.
For example, if a country enters into a major trade agreement and then goes ahead and violates it, that threatens the property rights of the companies that relied on the agreement to conduct business. If the government can seize assets without due process, those assets lose their stability and value. And if that treatment depends on whether a company is in the government’s political favor, it’s not just bad economics − it’s a red flag for investors.
When government doesn’t enforce rules fairly, it also threatens people’s freedom to enter into contracts.
Consider presidential orders that threaten the clients of law firms that have challenged the administration with cancellation of their government contracts. The threat alone jeopardizes the value of those agreements.
If businesses can’t trust public contracts to be respected, they’ll be less likely to work with the government in the first place. This deprives the government, and ultimately the American people, of receiving the best value for their tax dollars in critical areas such as transportation, technology and national defense.
Regulatory chaos also allows corruption to spread.
For example, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits businesses from bribing foreign government officials, has leveled the playing field for firms and enabled the best American companies to succeed on their merits. Before the law was enacted in 1977, some American companies felt pressured to pay bribes to compete. “Pausing” enforcement of the law, as the current presidential administration has done, increases the cost of doing business and encourages a wild west economy where chaos thrives.
Chaotic enforcement of the law also corrodes labor markets.
American companies require a strong pool of talented professionals to fuel their financial success. When legal rights are enforced arbitrarily or unjustly, the very best talent that American companies need may leave the country.
The science brain drain is already happening. American scientists have submitted 32% more applications for jobs abroad compared with last year. Nonscientists are leaving too. Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs has witnessed a 50% increase in Americans taking steps to obtain an Irish passport. Employers in the U.K. saw a spike in job applications from the United States.
Business from other countries will gladly accept American talent as they compete against American companies. During the Third Reich, Nazi Germany lost its best and brightest to other countries, including America. Now the reverse is happening, as highly talented Americans leave to work for firms in other nations.
Threats of arbitrary legal actions also drive away democratic allies and their prosperous populations that purchase American-made goods and services. For example, arbitrarily threatening to punish or even annex a closely allied nation does not endear its citizens to that government or the businesses it represents. So it’s no surprise that Canadians are now boycotting American goods and services. This is devastating businesses in American border towns and hurts the economy nationwide.
Similarly, the Canadian government has responded to whipsawing U.S. tariff announcements with counter-tariffs, which will slice the profits of American exporters. Close American allies and trading partners such as Japan, the U.K. and the European Union are also signaling their own willingness to impose retaliatory tariffs, increasing the costs of operations to American business even more.
Modern capitalism depends on smart regulation to thrive. Smart regulation is not an obstacle to capitalism. Smart regulation is what makes American capitalism possible. Smart regulation is what makes American freedom possible.
Clear and consistently applied legal rules allow businesses to aggressively compete, carefully plan, and generate profits. An arbitrary rule of law deprives business of the true power of capitalism – the ability to promote economic growth, spur innovation and improve the overall living standards of a free society. Americans deserve no less, and it is up to government to make that happen for everyone.
Robert Bird does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Debt pause clauses allow for the postponement of debt servicing during climate, health, or other crises, freeing up resources for response and recovery without compromising long-term economic and social sustainability.
The initiative, led by Spain and co-led by the EIB, is part of the agreements reached at the IV International Conference on Financing for Development, held in Seville.
The alliance remains an open and flexible coalition and brings together many countries and major multilateral banks
Spain, with the support of other countries and major multilateral development banks such as the European Investment Bank Group, unveiled the Debt Pause Clause Alliance at the IV International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville.
These clauses allow for the temporary suspension of debt payments in the face of extraordinary events — such as natural disasters, food crises, or health emergencies — offering borrowing countries immediate fiscal space to respond to the crisis without jeopardizing their solvency or their ability to meet social expenses. Their adoption promotes a more resilient and predictable development financing framework in times of crisis.
The alliance is an international coalition that seeks to accelerate the systematic inclusion of these clauses in public and private financial instruments. Additionally, it seeks to develop common principles and standard contractual language, thus generating transparent regulation that mobilizes the private sector.
The co-leaders of the initiative include the Inter-American Development Bank, the European Investment Bank, the African Development Bank, the Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean, the Asian Development Bank, as well as the governments of Barbados, Canada, Spain, France, and the United Kingdom.
The EIB has made Debt Pause Clauses available for contracts on its new operations in 70 countries.
“As the financial arm of the European Union, the EIB is offering solutions to countries and communities to ensure the most vulnerable are not left behind. In the past year, the EIB has made climate resilient debt clauses available to 70 developing countries around the world. Today, we show our commitment to global partnerships for prosperity, win win outcomes and peace,” said Nadia Calviño, president of the European Investment Bank.
VEHIS commits to originate PLN 2.6 billion of auto leases for the benefit of Polish SMEs.
The new lending is enabled by a cash securitisation whereby VEHIS obtains funding from EIB and from an external investor backed by EIF.
The operation will support financing of low carbon road vehicles and financing of women-led businesses, and contribute to regional development and economic inclusion across Poland.
The European Investment Bank (EIB) Group is joining forces with Polish car platform VEHIS to expand access to financing for a range of businesses in Poland. The EIB Group, which also includes the European Investment Fund (EIF), will back auto leases by VEHIS so that the company can boost lending to Polish small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and Mid-Caps.
The operation will contribute to regional development and economic inclusion across Poland. It will further support gender equality and the green transition through targeted financing for women-led businesses and electric vehicles.
Under the agreement, the EIB will invest PLN 637 million (€150 million) in notes backed by auto leases originated by VEHIS, and the EIF will provide guarantees to a third-party, enabling it to purchase notes for an amount of similar size. The operation aims to generate a new portfolio of SME and Mid-Cap leases totalling PLN 2.6 billion.
At least 30% of the new car financing by VEHIS will go to women-led businesses and at least 10% will support climate action including electric-vehicle leasing.
“This transaction is a great example of how we can use capital markets tools to deliver real impact for small businesses,” said Marjut Falkstedt, Chief Executive of the EIF. “By working with VEHIS, we’re helping to channel funding where it’s needed most — to entrepreneurs driving innovation, inclusion and sustainability across Poland.”
Under the accord, the EIB’s investment will be in the senior class notes of a securitisation of VEHIS auto leases and the EIF guarantees will enable the third party to invest in the senior class and mezzanine class notes of the same transaction.
“Together with the EIB and EIF, we are carrying out the first securitization of a portfolio built under warehouse financing in the history of the Polish market. This is a unique moment of appreciation for us by leading European financial institutions and another important step that will allow us to continue our dynamic growth. Thanks to the cooperation, we will be able to continue active SME financing, including supporting women-led businesses, as well as financing low-emission cars,” said Jan Bujak, CFO of VEHIS.
The operation will also contribute to regional development in Poland by enabling VEHIS to reach more entrepreneurs in underserved market segments and in areas where per capita income is below the European Union average.
“Supporting SMEs is at the heart of what we do at the EIB Group,” commented Teresa Czerwińska, Vice-President of the EIB. “This partnership with VEHIS will not only help businesses grow but also promote gender equality and accelerate the shift to cleaner transport. It’s a smart, targeted investment in Poland’s future.”
Technical note on the securitisation transaction
The transaction is structured as a cash securitisation of a granular portfolio of performing auto leases originated by VEHIS and sold to a securitisation special purpose entity (Issuer). EIB purchases class A1 notes issued by the Issuer. EIF simultaneously, through bilateral financial guarantees agreed with an institutional investor, takes exposure to class A2 notes (ranking pari passu with the mentioned class A1 notes) and to class B notes (characterised by higher credit risk compared to the class A1 and class A2 notes) issued by the Issuer. VEHIS effectively retains credit exposure to the securitised lease exposures by purchasing and retaining the most junior notes (characterised by higher credit risk than the class A and class B notes) issued by the Issuer. The notes and the securitised exposures pay floating interest and are denominated in polish zloty.
The reference portfolio consists of more than 9,000 leases, 100% secured by light vehicles and with c. 90% of lessees in the form of SMEs. The transaction is non-revolving and includes standard credit enhancement features such as subordination, excess spread, use of a cash reserve and a principal deficiency ledger.
Background information
About EIB Group The European Investment Bank (ElB) is the long-term lending institution of the European Union, owned by its Member States. Built around eight core priorities, we finance investments that contribute to EU policy objectives by bolstering climate action and the environment, digitalisation and technological innovation, security and defence, cohesion, agriculture and bioeconomy, social infrastructure, the capital markets union, and a stronger Europe in a more peaceful and prosperous world.
The EIB Group, which also includes the European Investment Fund (EIF), signed nearly €89 billion in new financing for over 900 high-impact projects in 2024, boosting Europe’s competitiveness and security.
The Group’s latest Investment Survey (EIBIS) showed Poland fares better than European Union peers when it comes to gender equality in business management.
To enhance the positive impact of its activities on gender equality and empower women and girls, the EIB Group has embedded gender equality goals into its business model through a dedicated Strategy on Gender Equality and Women’s Economic Empowerment and a Gender Action Plan. These guide its lending, blending, and advisory work both within and outside the European Union. In 2024, EIB financing for gender equality represented more than €3 billion across over 40 projects. The EIB also applies global gender-lens investing criteria (“2X”) and is committed to promoting gender equality in the workplace. You can find more information here on the EIB gender equality initiatives.
About VEHIS
VEHIS is a car platform that allows customers to select and purchase a vehicle along with the relevant financing options. The offer encompasses all car brands available on the Polish market from key dealers, along with financing options in the form of leasing.
VEHIS provides full support throughout the period of vehicle use, including a special insurance package, GPS monitoring and service support for the car, as well as handling traffic damage claims.
VEHIS advisors working in 18 VEHIS branches across Poland support customers in choosing a car, its financing and insurance. The entire process can be completed online through the website or with the remote assistance of an advisor.
The platform offers a selection of over 10,000 cars at competitive prices from 200 dealers. These offers are updated almost in real time, thanks to IT tools developed by VEHIS.
VEHIS’ strategic investor is Enterprise Investors, one of the oldest and largest private equity firms in Central and Eastern Europe.
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4
The Secretary for Housing, Ms Winnie Ho, began her visit to Lisbon, Portugal, yesterday (July 2, Lisbon time). She first met with the Secretary of State for Housing in the Ministry of Infrastructure and Housing, Ms Patrícia Gonçalves Costa, to exchange views on the housing policies of the two places. She attended the International Forum on Urbanism (IFoU) held at the Pavilion of Portugal for the previous World Expo afterwards and explored the latest trends of housing planning, design and management, community engagement and more with scholars, industry representatives, professional bodies and students from the Mainland, Europe and the United States. She also took the opportunity to promote Hong Kong’s resident-oriented “Well-being design” concepts and strategies.
Ms Ho attended the IFoU Winter School workshop held in Hong Kong earlier this year, where she shared a vision on public housing projects over the next five years including those in the Northern Metropolis, and how to integrate the eight well-being concepts from the “Well-being design” guide into public housing developments. Speaking at the IFoU, Ms Ho said that she was delighted to be invited again to attend this forum and exchange views with international scholars, political and business sectors and young people on Hong Kong’s public housing design and development.
She stated in the plenary session that public housing construction not only promotes the development of innovative construction technologies, but also enables further exploration of resident-oriented design to build a more interactive, energetic community that enhances intergenerational harmony. The Housing Bureau and the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) launched the “Well-being design” guide last year, which covers eight well-being concepts, namely “Health & Vitality”, “Green Living and Sustainability”, “Age-Friendliness”, “Intergenerational & Inclusive Living”, “Family & Community Connection”, “Urban Integration”, “Upward Mobility” and “Perception & Image”. It serves as a reference for the future design of new public housing estates and the improvement works of existing estates to create a more comfortable and vibrant living environment for its residents.
Ms Ho said that with 308 000 public housing units to be built in the next 10 years, new public housing estates will have an average of 4 000 to 5 000 units, in which around 10 000 people will reside. The completion of each housing estate is like establishing a new small community, with common areas for various residents’ activities to take place and bring people together. Within a 15-minute living circle, various shops are available to meet the daily needs of residents, and social welfare facilities and schools are provided. Public transportation is available to enable the residents’ commute and help them stay connected with society. The HKHA is also increasing green spaces in the estates through landscaping to promote green, healthy living, and is introducing new technologies to save energy and reduce carbon emissions.
Ms Ho said that Hong Kong can give full play to the role of being a “super connector” through interactions and exchanges in different places: on one hand promoting the HKHA’s evolving design and experiences in construction and management since its establishment over 50 years ago, the application of the “Well-being design” guide and innovative construction technologies to outside of Hong Kong. On the other hand, Hong Kong is gaining a better understanding of the efforts of other places in carbon reduction, energy saving and sustainable development, and more.
The IFoU is an international platform for converging innovative ideas on architecture and urban planning. International conferences and workshops on architecture and urban design are organised in different cities each year, allowing representatives and students from member institutions around the world to exchange ideas. This year’s conference, themed “Future Living” has seven topics, namely “Dwelling”, “Connecting”, “Integrating”, “Adapting”, “Visioning”, “Steering”, and “Sharing”, and was hosted by the University of Lisbon. Participants of the forum explored ideas towards future living environments to foster cross-sectoral co-operation to cope with various challenges, and formulate innovative plans for sustainable development.
After the forum, Ms Ho and the Commissioner for the Development of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA), Ms Maisie Chan, had dinner with the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the People’s Republic of China to the Portuguese Republic, Mr Zhao Bentang, and briefed him on Hong Kong’s latest housing policies and initiatives, including promoting the development of innovative housing construction technologies by capitalising on the strengths of the GBA; leveraging Hong Kong’s important role as a “super connector” and a “super value-adder” between the Mainland and the rest of the world, serving as a two-way springboard for Mainland enterprises to go global, and for attracting overseas enterprises.
Ms Ho will continue her visit in Lisbon today (July 3, Lisbon time) before departing for Barcelona, Spain.
Carbon pricing is increasingly recognized worldwide as a powerful tool to combat the devastating impacts of climate change. But what exactly is it, and how does it work? Let’s explore this transformative approach to driving a greener and more sustainable future.
Carbon pricing is a policy mechanism that puts a financial cost on greenhouse gas emissions. This policy tool is primarily aimed at discouraging emitters of the greenhouse gas especially carbon dioxide and encouraging individuals, industries and other stakeholders to reduce such emissions to save the mother earth, as climate change is causing a great deal of damage in almost every part of the world, which appears irreparable in several cases.
Driven largely by the excessive emission of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, climate change is increasingly posing a critical threat to global ecosystems, economies and societies. In the process, one of the most effective tools developed to mitigate these emissions is carbon pricing. This mechanism mandates to internalize the environmental damage caused by pollution, thus encouraging industries and consumers to reduce their carbon footprint.
To understand it lucidly, carbon pricing is an economic strategy designed to reduce global warming. It reflects the cost of carbon emissions in the market, encouraging emitters to either reduce their emissions or pay for the same. In simple terms, it is a kind of financial penalty imposed on the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by the people, industries or other stakeholders.
There are two primary forms of carbon pricing- carbon tax and cap-and-trade. Each of these mechanisms puts a price on carbon, but in different ways. While, carbon tax directly sets a price on carbon by defining a tax rate on greenhouse gas emissions or more commonly on the carbon content of fossil fuels, making it easier for businesses to plan future investments.
Besides, carbon tax is imposed by the government on on fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas based on their carbon content. The higher the emissions associated with a fuel, the higher the tax, making high emission fuels more expensive, thus encouraging a shift towards cleaner energy sources. For example, Sweden has one of the highest carbon taxes in the world, set at around $130 per tonne of CO₂. The country has reduced carbon emissions significantly while maintaining economic growth since its adoption of the mechanism in 1991.
On the other hand, under Cap-and-Trade or Emissions Trading System (ETS), the government sets a total cap on emissions and distributes or auctions emission permits to emitters. Companies can buy and sell these allowances, creating a market for carbon emissions. Without doubt, a cap limits total emissions for a group of industries or the entire economy.
In this system, companies receive or purchase allowances representing the right to emit a specific amount of CO2, and if a company emits less than its allowance, it can sell the surplus to other companies. Similarly, if a company exceeds the allowance level, it must buy more. Here, it is interesting to note that the cap doesn’t remain fixed, but is gradually reduced over time to decrease total emissions.
The European Union emissions trading system is the largest and most established cap-and-trade system, as it covers more than 11,000 power plants and factories across Europe and is a cornerstone of the EU’s climate policy.
However, a number of countries worldwide have adopted carbon pricing mechanisms including those in Europe. Canada, China, Japan, South Korea, USA, New Zealand, Britain, South Africa, Mexico, Kazakhstan, Singapore, Colombia, Ukrain, Indonesia, Vietnam and a few others have already adopted different mechanisms. The pioneers in the process are Sweden and Finland. While Sweden introduced it in 1991, Finland was the first country to introduce a carbon tax in 1990.
While, the impacts of climate change are widespread, serious experienced across the globe, the trends to contain it through carbon pricing mechanisms are also encouraging. According to estimates, as of now, carbon pricing mechanisms cover about 23% of global greenhouse gas emissions. The total global value of carbon pricing instruments in operation exceeds $100 billion annually.
At the same time, there is a growing push for international coordination, especially through article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which allows countries to trade emissions reductions. Thus, the carbon market has grown rapidly in the past decade, fueled by increased climate commitments under the Paris Agreement and the development of regional and national carbon pricing mechanisms.
To know more about how different countries of the world are responding to these initiatives, we can approach to the World Bank’s Carbon Pricing Dashboard, which provides a comprehensive overview of carbon pricing initiatives worldwide, including their design, coverage and price levels. The World Bank report on the trends of carbon pricing also shows a significant increase in the number of operational carbon pricing instruments and highlights the growing trend of carbon pricing globally.
In recent years, especially since Narendra Modi government came at the Centre, India has also been rapidly advancing toward a structured and regulated carbon pricing ecosystem. It is a part of India’s broader climate and sustainable development agenda.
Amid the growing global focus on carbon markets and emissions trading, India is taking significant steps toward establishing a rate-based Emissions Trading System (ETS) along with complementary voluntary carbon credit mechanisms. The World Bank’s ‘State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2025’ report highlights India’s expanding role as a key emerging economy shaping the future of global climate finance and carbon pricing architecture.
Rate-based ETS refers to a system where total emissions are not capped but individual entities are allocated a performance benchmark that serves as a limit on their net emissions. Rate-based ETSs offer additional flexibility in managing future growth uncertainty as well as international competitiveness concerns.
India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS) is a strategic initiative aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions through carbon pricing. It comprises two main components- a compliance mechanism for obligated entities, especially for the industrial sector and an offset mechanism to enable voluntary participation.
The scheme being worked out in India, is designed to incentivize and support efforts toward decarbonizing the Indian economy. By establishing the necessary institutional framework, the CCTS has laid the groundwork for the development of the Indian Carbon Market (ICM).
It’s heartening to note here that carbon pricing is no longer a niche policy meant for only rich countries, now it has become a mainstream tool for climate action worldwide including India and other developing countries. Whether through carbon taxes or emissions trading systems, countries are finding ways to internalize the environmental costs of carbon and transition toward a low-carbon future, which augur well for the future of the planet.
Civil society groups concerned about politicised policing launch nationwide billboard campaign to stand up for right to protest
New research by Greenpeace indicates that the Metropolitan Police have regularly arrested protesters when there is an extremely low chance of them ever being charged. Officers made more than 600 arrests in London over the last six years for conspiracy to cause public nuisance but only 18 of them (2.8%) resulted in charges. The research also showed an almost tenfold rise in the number of arrests in the capital since 2019, when environmental protests became widespread.
These numbers support the belief, widespread amongst activists and protesters, that the police are abusing this offence and other anti-protest laws to remove and intimidate peaceful protesters.
Greenpeace used Freedom of Information requests to find out how many people were arrested between 2012 and March 2025 on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance – an offence under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 that is frequently used by the police to clear protesters from the streets.
Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace UK said: “The fact that police are routinely dragging protesters off the streets for a crime they almost always fail to charge them with amounts to an abuse of their powers and an assault on the right to protest. Arresting law-abiding people because they’re politically inconvenient is a frightening development in any democracy, and is a direct result of the government’s instinct to shut down free speech and prevent people standing up for issues they care deeply about.”
The findings come as four leading environmental and human rights groups – Amnesty International UK, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and Liberty – launch a nationwide advertising campaign to stand up for the right to protest. The campaign features videos of real protesters on a range of issues holding placards that say ‘I’m protesting in here to avoid arrest out there’.
The protesters appear on digital billboards clustered in popular shopping areas in London, Birmingham and Manchester, given free to the campaign as the prize in Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition. Digital special effects by creative agency ‘elvis’ make the protesters appear to be present on the street, like a virtual protest march. They each represent a different cause including disability rights, Gaza, climate change, anti-black racism, plastic pollution and the campaign to keep the NHS public.
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London who appears in the campaign, said: “I think a lot of people don’t realise that the crackdown on protest isn’t just about tougher laws on disruptive civil disobedience, it’s about creating a climate of intimidation. The right to speak out against the actions of the government is an important test of whether you live in a free, democratic country. I have lived in countries where rights we hold dear in Britain do not exist, and my family has paid the price for speaking out. So I did not expect Britain to be the country where I would first be investigated by police for my participation at a public protest. For six months I lived under the threat of being charged, until it was confirmed the police would not take further action. Clearly, these statistics show I’m not an isolated case.”
Ocean Outdoor / elvis
Researchers at Greenpeace asked the Metropolitan Police to provide data on arrests and charges for public nuisance offences between 2012 and March 2025. They found there had been 67 arrests and 8 charges for conspiring to cause a public nuisance between 2012 and the end of 2018, compared with 638 arrests and 18 charges since 2019, equating to an almost tenfold increase in arrests. The rate of arrests resulting in charges also dropped from around 12% to below 3%.
The sharp increase in 2019 happened around the same time that Extinction Rebellion and Fridays for Future brought thousands of people onto the streets of London to protest against the lack of action to tackle climate change. Since then, successive governments have passed additional anti-protest laws giving police officers a wider range of offences to choose from, many carrying lengthy custodial sentences, resulting in hundreds of protesters being arrested and some being handed record prison sentences of up to five years.
Greenpeace and the other groups are calling on the Home Secretary to restore people’s right to make their voices heard on issues they care about by reversing anti-protest measures in two key pieces of legislation passed since 2022. They are also asking ministers to strike out protest clauses in the Crime and Policing Bill currently making its way through parliament.
The full dataset on arrests and charges is available here
“Conspiracy to commit public nuisance is a serious offence under UK law that involves a group of people agreeing to cause harm, disruption, or obstruction to the public. Whether it’s blocking roads, interfering with emergency services, or creating safety risks, this offence can lead to severe legal consequences, even if the nuisance doesn’t actually happen.” https://www.moeenco.com/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance
The campaign
The six protestors featured in the advertising campaign are:
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London
Dr Helen Salisbury, GP and protestor for Keep Our NHS Public from Oxfordshire
Andy Greene, a disability rights activist with Disabled People Against the Cuts from London
Andrew McParland, climate activist and Greenpeace UK board member from Birmingham
Jen Reid, author of ‘A Hero Like Me’ and Black Lives Matter activist from Bristol
Sahanika Ratnayake, an academic who protests on environmental issues from Manchester
The advertising campaign was awarded the Gold prize in the non-profit category of Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition which seeks bold, original work that pushes the boundaries of ‘Digital Out of Home’ advertising. It launches on 3rd July across Ocean’s city centre Loop networks in Birmingham and Manchester, and in a high footfall area of Westfield Stratford City in London on billboards in close proximity to each other to replicate a real protest. The campaign was created and shot by elvis.
About elvis
elvis is an award-winning B-Corp certified creative agency that works with some of the world’s most ambitious brands. The agency’s mission is to use unexpected & unforgettable creativity to help people and brands grow in a better way. Not only is this based on the fundamental role that impact and salience play in the most powerful creative work, but also reflects the agency’s B Corp status. elvis won the non-profit category in the 2024 Ocean Outdoor Competition with their ‘Can’t arrest this billboard’ idea, in partnership with Greenpeace. elvislondon.com
About Ocean Outdoor
A partner company of Atairos, the independent strategic investment company, Ocean Outdoor is the leading operator of Digital Out of Home (DOOH) advertising across the UK and Europe. The Group’s network of 4,000+ screens covers seven countries, with its technological capabilities delivering impactful and measurable DOOH brand and advertising experiences. Ocean’s portfolio covers iconic locations including the Piccadilly Lights and the BFI IMAX, and the company works closely with high-profile landlords, as well as major city councils, on the development of its network. Since 2018, Ocean has expanded into the Netherlands and the Nordics. Ocean Germany launched in 2024.
The campaign organisations
Liberty challenges injustice, defends freedom and campaigns for everyone in the UK to be treated fairly, with dignity and respect. Since 1934 we’ve inspired and empowered people to defend their rights, and the rights of their family, friends and communities. Join us. Stand up to power.
Amnesty International is the world’s largest human rights organisation with over 10 million supporters, working to protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied. Amnesty International is a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland (EWNI) is the UK’s largest grassroots network. We’re part of a global environmental justice community dedicated to the protection of the natural world and the wellbeing of everyone in it. We bring together more than two million people in 70 countries, combining people power all over the world to transform local actions into global impact.
Greenpeace is a movement of people who are passionate about defending the natural world from destruction. Our vision is a greener, healthier and more peaceful planet, one that can sustain life for generations to come.
Civil society groups concerned about politicised policing launch nationwide billboard campaign to stand up for right to protest
New research by Greenpeace indicates that the Metropolitan Police have regularly arrested protesters when there is an extremely low chance of them ever being charged. Officers made more than 600 arrests in London over the last six years for conspiracy to cause public nuisance but only 18 of them (2.8%) resulted in charges. The research also showed an almost tenfold rise in the number of arrests in the capital since 2019, when environmental protests became widespread.
These numbers support the belief, widespread amongst activists and protesters, that the police are abusing this offence and other anti-protest laws to remove and intimidate peaceful protesters.
Greenpeace used Freedom of Information requests to find out how many people were arrested between 2012 and March 2025 on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance – an offence under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 that is frequently used by the police to clear protesters from the streets.
Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace UK said: “The fact that police are routinely dragging protesters off the streets for a crime they almost always fail to charge them with amounts to an abuse of their powers and an assault on the right to protest. Arresting law-abiding people because they’re politically inconvenient is a frightening development in any democracy, and is a direct result of the government’s instinct to shut down free speech and prevent people standing up for issues they care deeply about.”
The findings come as four leading environmental and human rights groups – Amnesty International UK, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and Liberty – launch a nationwide advertising campaign to stand up for the right to protest. The campaign features videos of real protesters on a range of issues holding placards that say ‘I’m protesting in here to avoid arrest out there’.
The protesters appear on digital billboards clustered in popular shopping areas in London, Birmingham and Manchester, given free to the campaign as the prize in Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition. Digital special effects by creative agency ‘elvis’ make the protesters appear to be present on the street, like a virtual protest march. They each represent a different cause including disability rights, Gaza, climate change, anti-black racism, plastic pollution and the campaign to keep the NHS public.
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London who appears in the campaign, said: “I think a lot of people don’t realise that the crackdown on protest isn’t just about tougher laws on disruptive civil disobedience, it’s about creating a climate of intimidation. The right to speak out against the actions of the government is an important test of whether you live in a free, democratic country. I have lived in countries where rights we hold dear in Britain do not exist, and my family has paid the price for speaking out. So I did not expect Britain to be the country where I would first be investigated by police for my participation at a public protest. For six months I lived under the threat of being charged, until it was confirmed the police would not take further action. Clearly, these statistics show I’m not an isolated case.”
Ocean Outdoor / elvis
Researchers at Greenpeace asked the Metropolitan Police to provide data on arrests and charges for public nuisance offences between 2012 and March 2025. They found there had been 67 arrests and 8 charges for conspiring to cause a public nuisance between 2012 and the end of 2018, compared with 638 arrests and 18 charges since 2019, equating to an almost tenfold increase in arrests. The rate of arrests resulting in charges also dropped from around 12% to below 3%.
The sharp increase in 2019 happened around the same time that Extinction Rebellion and Fridays for Future brought thousands of people onto the streets of London to protest against the lack of action to tackle climate change. Since then, successive governments have passed additional anti-protest laws giving police officers a wider range of offences to choose from, many carrying lengthy custodial sentences, resulting in hundreds of protesters being arrested and some being handed record prison sentences of up to five years.
Greenpeace and the other groups are calling on the Home Secretary to restore people’s right to make their voices heard on issues they care about by reversing anti-protest measures in two key pieces of legislation passed since 2022. They are also asking ministers to strike out protest clauses in the Crime and Policing Bill currently making its way through parliament.
The full dataset on arrests and charges is available here
“Conspiracy to commit public nuisance is a serious offence under UK law that involves a group of people agreeing to cause harm, disruption, or obstruction to the public. Whether it’s blocking roads, interfering with emergency services, or creating safety risks, this offence can lead to severe legal consequences, even if the nuisance doesn’t actually happen.” https://www.moeenco.com/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance
The campaign
The six protestors featured in the advertising campaign are:
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London
Dr Helen Salisbury, GP and protestor for Keep Our NHS Public from Oxfordshire
Andy Greene, a disability rights activist with Disabled People Against the Cuts from London
Andrew McParland, climate activist and Greenpeace UK board member from Birmingham
Jen Reid, author of ‘A Hero Like Me’ and Black Lives Matter activist from Bristol
Sahanika Ratnayake, an academic who protests on environmental issues from Manchester
The advertising campaign was awarded the Gold prize in the non-profit category of Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition which seeks bold, original work that pushes the boundaries of ‘Digital Out of Home’ advertising. It launches on 3rd July across Ocean’s city centre Loop networks in Birmingham and Manchester, and in a high footfall area of Westfield Stratford City in London on billboards in close proximity to each other to replicate a real protest. The campaign was created and shot by elvis.
About elvis
elvis is an award-winning B-Corp certified creative agency that works with some of the world’s most ambitious brands. The agency’s mission is to use unexpected & unforgettable creativity to help people and brands grow in a better way. Not only is this based on the fundamental role that impact and salience play in the most powerful creative work, but also reflects the agency’s B Corp status. elvis won the non-profit category in the 2024 Ocean Outdoor Competition with their ‘Can’t arrest this billboard’ idea, in partnership with Greenpeace. elvislondon.com
About Ocean Outdoor
A partner company of Atairos, the independent strategic investment company, Ocean Outdoor is the leading operator of Digital Out of Home (DOOH) advertising across the UK and Europe. The Group’s network of 4,000+ screens covers seven countries, with its technological capabilities delivering impactful and measurable DOOH brand and advertising experiences. Ocean’s portfolio covers iconic locations including the Piccadilly Lights and the BFI IMAX, and the company works closely with high-profile landlords, as well as major city councils, on the development of its network. Since 2018, Ocean has expanded into the Netherlands and the Nordics. Ocean Germany launched in 2024.
The campaign organisations
Liberty challenges injustice, defends freedom and campaigns for everyone in the UK to be treated fairly, with dignity and respect. Since 1934 we’ve inspired and empowered people to defend their rights, and the rights of their family, friends and communities. Join us. Stand up to power.
Amnesty International is the world’s largest human rights organisation with over 10 million supporters, working to protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied. Amnesty International is a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland (EWNI) is the UK’s largest grassroots network. We’re part of a global environmental justice community dedicated to the protection of the natural world and the wellbeing of everyone in it. We bring together more than two million people in 70 countries, combining people power all over the world to transform local actions into global impact.
Greenpeace is a movement of people who are passionate about defending the natural world from destruction. Our vision is a greener, healthier and more peaceful planet, one that can sustain life for generations to come.
Civil society groups concerned about politicised policing launch nationwide billboard campaign to stand up for right to protest
New research by Greenpeace indicates that the Metropolitan Police have regularly arrested protesters when there is an extremely low chance of them ever being charged. Officers made more than 600 arrests in London over the last six years for conspiracy to cause public nuisance but only 18 of them (2.8%) resulted in charges. The research also showed an almost tenfold rise in the number of arrests in the capital since 2019, when environmental protests became widespread.
These numbers support the belief, widespread amongst activists and protesters, that the police are abusing this offence and other anti-protest laws to remove and intimidate peaceful protesters.
Greenpeace used Freedom of Information requests to find out how many people were arrested between 2012 and March 2025 on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance – an offence under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 that is frequently used by the police to clear protesters from the streets.
Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace UK said: “The fact that police are routinely dragging protesters off the streets for a crime they almost always fail to charge them with amounts to an abuse of their powers and an assault on the right to protest. Arresting law-abiding people because they’re politically inconvenient is a frightening development in any democracy, and is a direct result of the government’s instinct to shut down free speech and prevent people standing up for issues they care deeply about.”
The findings come as four leading environmental and human rights groups – Amnesty International UK, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and Liberty – launch a nationwide advertising campaign to stand up for the right to protest. The campaign features videos of real protesters on a range of issues holding placards that say ‘I’m protesting in here to avoid arrest out there’.
The protesters appear on digital billboards clustered in popular shopping areas in London, Birmingham and Manchester, given free to the campaign as the prize in Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition. Digital special effects by creative agency ‘elvis’ make the protesters appear to be present on the street, like a virtual protest march. They each represent a different cause including disability rights, Gaza, climate change, anti-black racism, plastic pollution and the campaign to keep the NHS public.
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London who appears in the campaign, said: “I think a lot of people don’t realise that the crackdown on protest isn’t just about tougher laws on disruptive civil disobedience, it’s about creating a climate of intimidation. The right to speak out against the actions of the government is an important test of whether you live in a free, democratic country. I have lived in countries where rights we hold dear in Britain do not exist, and my family has paid the price for speaking out. So I did not expect Britain to be the country where I would first be investigated by police for my participation at a public protest. For six months I lived under the threat of being charged, until it was confirmed the police would not take further action. Clearly, these statistics show I’m not an isolated case.”
Ocean Outdoor / elvis
Researchers at Greenpeace asked the Metropolitan Police to provide data on arrests and charges for public nuisance offences between 2012 and March 2025. They found there had been 67 arrests and 8 charges for conspiring to cause a public nuisance between 2012 and the end of 2018, compared with 638 arrests and 18 charges since 2019, equating to an almost tenfold increase in arrests. The rate of arrests resulting in charges also dropped from around 12% to below 3%.
The sharp increase in 2019 happened around the same time that Extinction Rebellion and Fridays for Future brought thousands of people onto the streets of London to protest against the lack of action to tackle climate change. Since then, successive governments have passed additional anti-protest laws giving police officers a wider range of offences to choose from, many carrying lengthy custodial sentences, resulting in hundreds of protesters being arrested and some being handed record prison sentences of up to five years.
Greenpeace and the other groups are calling on the Home Secretary to restore people’s right to make their voices heard on issues they care about by reversing anti-protest measures in two key pieces of legislation passed since 2022. They are also asking ministers to strike out protest clauses in the Crime and Policing Bill currently making its way through parliament.
The full dataset on arrests and charges is available here
“Conspiracy to commit public nuisance is a serious offence under UK law that involves a group of people agreeing to cause harm, disruption, or obstruction to the public. Whether it’s blocking roads, interfering with emergency services, or creating safety risks, this offence can lead to severe legal consequences, even if the nuisance doesn’t actually happen.” https://www.moeenco.com/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance
The campaign
The six protestors featured in the advertising campaign are:
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London
Dr Helen Salisbury, GP and protestor for Keep Our NHS Public from Oxfordshire
Andy Greene, a disability rights activist with Disabled People Against the Cuts from London
Andrew McParland, climate activist and Greenpeace UK board member from Birmingham
Jen Reid, author of ‘A Hero Like Me’ and Black Lives Matter activist from Bristol
Sahanika Ratnayake, an academic who protests on environmental issues from Manchester
The advertising campaign was awarded the Gold prize in the non-profit category of Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition which seeks bold, original work that pushes the boundaries of ‘Digital Out of Home’ advertising. It launches on 3rd July across Ocean’s city centre Loop networks in Birmingham and Manchester, and in a high footfall area of Westfield Stratford City in London on billboards in close proximity to each other to replicate a real protest. The campaign was created and shot by elvis.
About elvis
elvis is an award-winning B-Corp certified creative agency that works with some of the world’s most ambitious brands. The agency’s mission is to use unexpected & unforgettable creativity to help people and brands grow in a better way. Not only is this based on the fundamental role that impact and salience play in the most powerful creative work, but also reflects the agency’s B Corp status. elvis won the non-profit category in the 2024 Ocean Outdoor Competition with their ‘Can’t arrest this billboard’ idea, in partnership with Greenpeace. elvislondon.com
About Ocean Outdoor
A partner company of Atairos, the independent strategic investment company, Ocean Outdoor is the leading operator of Digital Out of Home (DOOH) advertising across the UK and Europe. The Group’s network of 4,000+ screens covers seven countries, with its technological capabilities delivering impactful and measurable DOOH brand and advertising experiences. Ocean’s portfolio covers iconic locations including the Piccadilly Lights and the BFI IMAX, and the company works closely with high-profile landlords, as well as major city councils, on the development of its network. Since 2018, Ocean has expanded into the Netherlands and the Nordics. Ocean Germany launched in 2024.
The campaign organisations
Liberty challenges injustice, defends freedom and campaigns for everyone in the UK to be treated fairly, with dignity and respect. Since 1934 we’ve inspired and empowered people to defend their rights, and the rights of their family, friends and communities. Join us. Stand up to power.
Amnesty International is the world’s largest human rights organisation with over 10 million supporters, working to protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied. Amnesty International is a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland (EWNI) is the UK’s largest grassroots network. We’re part of a global environmental justice community dedicated to the protection of the natural world and the wellbeing of everyone in it. We bring together more than two million people in 70 countries, combining people power all over the world to transform local actions into global impact.
Greenpeace is a movement of people who are passionate about defending the natural world from destruction. Our vision is a greener, healthier and more peaceful planet, one that can sustain life for generations to come.
Civil society groups concerned about politicised policing launch nationwide billboard campaign to stand up for right to protest
New research by Greenpeace indicates that the Metropolitan Police have regularly arrested protesters when there is an extremely low chance of them ever being charged. Officers made more than 600 arrests in London over the last six years for conspiracy to cause public nuisance but only 18 of them (2.8%) resulted in charges. The research also showed an almost tenfold rise in the number of arrests in the capital since 2019, when environmental protests became widespread.
These numbers support the belief, widespread amongst activists and protesters, that the police are abusing this offence and other anti-protest laws to remove and intimidate peaceful protesters.
Greenpeace used Freedom of Information requests to find out how many people were arrested between 2012 and March 2025 on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance – an offence under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 that is frequently used by the police to clear protesters from the streets.
Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace UK said: “The fact that police are routinely dragging protesters off the streets for a crime they almost always fail to charge them with amounts to an abuse of their powers and an assault on the right to protest. Arresting law-abiding people because they’re politically inconvenient is a frightening development in any democracy, and is a direct result of the government’s instinct to shut down free speech and prevent people standing up for issues they care deeply about.”
The findings come as four leading environmental and human rights groups – Amnesty International UK, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and Liberty – launch a nationwide advertising campaign to stand up for the right to protest. The campaign features videos of real protesters on a range of issues holding placards that say ‘I’m protesting in here to avoid arrest out there’.
The protesters appear on digital billboards clustered in popular shopping areas in London, Birmingham and Manchester, given free to the campaign as the prize in Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition. Digital special effects by creative agency ‘elvis’ make the protesters appear to be present on the street, like a virtual protest march. They each represent a different cause including disability rights, Gaza, climate change, anti-black racism, plastic pollution and the campaign to keep the NHS public.
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London who appears in the campaign, said: “I think a lot of people don’t realise that the crackdown on protest isn’t just about tougher laws on disruptive civil disobedience, it’s about creating a climate of intimidation. The right to speak out against the actions of the government is an important test of whether you live in a free, democratic country. I have lived in countries where rights we hold dear in Britain do not exist, and my family has paid the price for speaking out. So I did not expect Britain to be the country where I would first be investigated by police for my participation at a public protest. For six months I lived under the threat of being charged, until it was confirmed the police would not take further action. Clearly, these statistics show I’m not an isolated case.”
Ocean Outdoor / elvis
Researchers at Greenpeace asked the Metropolitan Police to provide data on arrests and charges for public nuisance offences between 2012 and March 2025. They found there had been 67 arrests and 8 charges for conspiring to cause a public nuisance between 2012 and the end of 2018, compared with 638 arrests and 18 charges since 2019, equating to an almost tenfold increase in arrests. The rate of arrests resulting in charges also dropped from around 12% to below 3%.
The sharp increase in 2019 happened around the same time that Extinction Rebellion and Fridays for Future brought thousands of people onto the streets of London to protest against the lack of action to tackle climate change. Since then, successive governments have passed additional anti-protest laws giving police officers a wider range of offences to choose from, many carrying lengthy custodial sentences, resulting in hundreds of protesters being arrested and some being handed record prison sentences of up to five years.
Greenpeace and the other groups are calling on the Home Secretary to restore people’s right to make their voices heard on issues they care about by reversing anti-protest measures in two key pieces of legislation passed since 2022. They are also asking ministers to strike out protest clauses in the Crime and Policing Bill currently making its way through parliament.
The full dataset on arrests and charges is available here
“Conspiracy to commit public nuisance is a serious offence under UK law that involves a group of people agreeing to cause harm, disruption, or obstruction to the public. Whether it’s blocking roads, interfering with emergency services, or creating safety risks, this offence can lead to severe legal consequences, even if the nuisance doesn’t actually happen.” https://www.moeenco.com/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance
The campaign
The six protestors featured in the advertising campaign are:
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London
Dr Helen Salisbury, GP and protestor for Keep Our NHS Public from Oxfordshire
Andy Greene, a disability rights activist with Disabled People Against the Cuts from London
Andrew McParland, climate activist and Greenpeace UK board member from Birmingham
Jen Reid, author of ‘A Hero Like Me’ and Black Lives Matter activist from Bristol
Sahanika Ratnayake, an academic who protests on environmental issues from Manchester
The advertising campaign was awarded the Gold prize in the non-profit category of Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition which seeks bold, original work that pushes the boundaries of ‘Digital Out of Home’ advertising. It launches on 3rd July across Ocean’s city centre Loop networks in Birmingham and Manchester, and in a high footfall area of Westfield Stratford City in London on billboards in close proximity to each other to replicate a real protest. The campaign was created and shot by elvis.
About elvis
elvis is an award-winning B-Corp certified creative agency that works with some of the world’s most ambitious brands. The agency’s mission is to use unexpected & unforgettable creativity to help people and brands grow in a better way. Not only is this based on the fundamental role that impact and salience play in the most powerful creative work, but also reflects the agency’s B Corp status. elvis won the non-profit category in the 2024 Ocean Outdoor Competition with their ‘Can’t arrest this billboard’ idea, in partnership with Greenpeace. elvislondon.com
About Ocean Outdoor
A partner company of Atairos, the independent strategic investment company, Ocean Outdoor is the leading operator of Digital Out of Home (DOOH) advertising across the UK and Europe. The Group’s network of 4,000+ screens covers seven countries, with its technological capabilities delivering impactful and measurable DOOH brand and advertising experiences. Ocean’s portfolio covers iconic locations including the Piccadilly Lights and the BFI IMAX, and the company works closely with high-profile landlords, as well as major city councils, on the development of its network. Since 2018, Ocean has expanded into the Netherlands and the Nordics. Ocean Germany launched in 2024.
The campaign organisations
Liberty challenges injustice, defends freedom and campaigns for everyone in the UK to be treated fairly, with dignity and respect. Since 1934 we’ve inspired and empowered people to defend their rights, and the rights of their family, friends and communities. Join us. Stand up to power.
Amnesty International is the world’s largest human rights organisation with over 10 million supporters, working to protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied. Amnesty International is a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland (EWNI) is the UK’s largest grassroots network. We’re part of a global environmental justice community dedicated to the protection of the natural world and the wellbeing of everyone in it. We bring together more than two million people in 70 countries, combining people power all over the world to transform local actions into global impact.
Greenpeace is a movement of people who are passionate about defending the natural world from destruction. Our vision is a greener, healthier and more peaceful planet, one that can sustain life for generations to come.
Civil society groups concerned about politicised policing launch nationwide billboard campaign to stand up for right to protest
New research by Greenpeace indicates that the Metropolitan Police have regularly arrested protesters when there is an extremely low chance of them ever being charged. Officers made more than 600 arrests in London over the last six years for conspiracy to cause public nuisance but only 18 of them (2.8%) resulted in charges. The research also showed an almost tenfold rise in the number of arrests in the capital since 2019, when environmental protests became widespread.
These numbers support the belief, widespread amongst activists and protesters, that the police are abusing this offence and other anti-protest laws to remove and intimidate peaceful protesters.
Greenpeace used Freedom of Information requests to find out how many people were arrested between 2012 and March 2025 on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance – an offence under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 that is frequently used by the police to clear protesters from the streets.
Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace UK said: “The fact that police are routinely dragging protesters off the streets for a crime they almost always fail to charge them with amounts to an abuse of their powers and an assault on the right to protest. Arresting law-abiding people because they’re politically inconvenient is a frightening development in any democracy, and is a direct result of the government’s instinct to shut down free speech and prevent people standing up for issues they care deeply about.”
The findings come as four leading environmental and human rights groups – Amnesty International UK, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and Liberty – launch a nationwide advertising campaign to stand up for the right to protest. The campaign features videos of real protesters on a range of issues holding placards that say ‘I’m protesting in here to avoid arrest out there’.
The protesters appear on digital billboards clustered in popular shopping areas in London, Birmingham and Manchester, given free to the campaign as the prize in Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition. Digital special effects by creative agency ‘elvis’ make the protesters appear to be present on the street, like a virtual protest march. They each represent a different cause including disability rights, Gaza, climate change, anti-black racism, plastic pollution and the campaign to keep the NHS public.
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London who appears in the campaign, said: “I think a lot of people don’t realise that the crackdown on protest isn’t just about tougher laws on disruptive civil disobedience, it’s about creating a climate of intimidation. The right to speak out against the actions of the government is an important test of whether you live in a free, democratic country. I have lived in countries where rights we hold dear in Britain do not exist, and my family has paid the price for speaking out. So I did not expect Britain to be the country where I would first be investigated by police for my participation at a public protest. For six months I lived under the threat of being charged, until it was confirmed the police would not take further action. Clearly, these statistics show I’m not an isolated case.”
Ocean Outdoor / elvis
Researchers at Greenpeace asked the Metropolitan Police to provide data on arrests and charges for public nuisance offences between 2012 and March 2025. They found there had been 67 arrests and 8 charges for conspiring to cause a public nuisance between 2012 and the end of 2018, compared with 638 arrests and 18 charges since 2019, equating to an almost tenfold increase in arrests. The rate of arrests resulting in charges also dropped from around 12% to below 3%.
The sharp increase in 2019 happened around the same time that Extinction Rebellion and Fridays for Future brought thousands of people onto the streets of London to protest against the lack of action to tackle climate change. Since then, successive governments have passed additional anti-protest laws giving police officers a wider range of offences to choose from, many carrying lengthy custodial sentences, resulting in hundreds of protesters being arrested and some being handed record prison sentences of up to five years.
Greenpeace and the other groups are calling on the Home Secretary to restore people’s right to make their voices heard on issues they care about by reversing anti-protest measures in two key pieces of legislation passed since 2022. They are also asking ministers to strike out protest clauses in the Crime and Policing Bill currently making its way through parliament.
The full dataset on arrests and charges is available here
“Conspiracy to commit public nuisance is a serious offence under UK law that involves a group of people agreeing to cause harm, disruption, or obstruction to the public. Whether it’s blocking roads, interfering with emergency services, or creating safety risks, this offence can lead to severe legal consequences, even if the nuisance doesn’t actually happen.” https://www.moeenco.com/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance
The campaign
The six protestors featured in the advertising campaign are:
Khalid Abdallah, an actor and protester for Palestinian rights from London
Dr Helen Salisbury, GP and protestor for Keep Our NHS Public from Oxfordshire
Andy Greene, a disability rights activist with Disabled People Against the Cuts from London
Andrew McParland, climate activist and Greenpeace UK board member from Birmingham
Jen Reid, author of ‘A Hero Like Me’ and Black Lives Matter activist from Bristol
Sahanika Ratnayake, an academic who protests on environmental issues from Manchester
The advertising campaign was awarded the Gold prize in the non-profit category of Ocean Outdoor’s annual Digital Creative Competition which seeks bold, original work that pushes the boundaries of ‘Digital Out of Home’ advertising. It launches on 3rd July across Ocean’s city centre Loop networks in Birmingham and Manchester, and in a high footfall area of Westfield Stratford City in London on billboards in close proximity to each other to replicate a real protest. The campaign was created and shot by elvis.
About elvis
elvis is an award-winning B-Corp certified creative agency that works with some of the world’s most ambitious brands. The agency’s mission is to use unexpected & unforgettable creativity to help people and brands grow in a better way. Not only is this based on the fundamental role that impact and salience play in the most powerful creative work, but also reflects the agency’s B Corp status. elvis won the non-profit category in the 2024 Ocean Outdoor Competition with their ‘Can’t arrest this billboard’ idea, in partnership with Greenpeace. elvislondon.com
About Ocean Outdoor
A partner company of Atairos, the independent strategic investment company, Ocean Outdoor is the leading operator of Digital Out of Home (DOOH) advertising across the UK and Europe. The Group’s network of 4,000+ screens covers seven countries, with its technological capabilities delivering impactful and measurable DOOH brand and advertising experiences. Ocean’s portfolio covers iconic locations including the Piccadilly Lights and the BFI IMAX, and the company works closely with high-profile landlords, as well as major city councils, on the development of its network. Since 2018, Ocean has expanded into the Netherlands and the Nordics. Ocean Germany launched in 2024.
The campaign organisations
Liberty challenges injustice, defends freedom and campaigns for everyone in the UK to be treated fairly, with dignity and respect. Since 1934 we’ve inspired and empowered people to defend their rights, and the rights of their family, friends and communities. Join us. Stand up to power.
Amnesty International is the world’s largest human rights organisation with over 10 million supporters, working to protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied. Amnesty International is a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland (EWNI) is the UK’s largest grassroots network. We’re part of a global environmental justice community dedicated to the protection of the natural world and the wellbeing of everyone in it. We bring together more than two million people in 70 countries, combining people power all over the world to transform local actions into global impact.
Greenpeace is a movement of people who are passionate about defending the natural world from destruction. Our vision is a greener, healthier and more peaceful planet, one that can sustain life for generations to come.
Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council
The Conference holds its final multi-stakeholder round table this morning on “Reforming the international financial architecture and addressing systemic issues”.
Co-chaired by Carlos Cuerpo Caballero, Minister for Economy, Commerce and Business of Spain, and Seedy Keita, Minister for Finance and Economic Affairs of the Gambia, it will feature a keynote address by Hussain Mohamed Latheef, Vice-President, Republic of Maldives.
Rebeca Grynspan, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), will moderate the discussion.
Panelists will include: Mthuli Ncube- Minister for Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion of Zimbabwe; Facinet Sylla, Minister for Budget of Guinea; Hervé Ndoba, Minster for Finance and Budget of the Central African Republic; and Carlo Monticelli, Governor of the Council of Europe Development Bank.
José Viñals, GISD Alliance Co-Chair and Senior Advisor to the Board of Standard Chartered, as well as a civil society representative, will be the discussants.
Source: United Kingdom UK House of Lords (video statements)
Will the government ban destructive fishing methods and protect natural marine environments?
In the latest episode of Inside Lords Questions, we catch up with Baroness Sugg who recently pressed the government on whether it plans to ban bottom trawling and dredging in marine protected areas. Find out why she raised the question and what she wants to see the government do about it.
Watch the full question to hear from other Lords members on the topic and see how the government responded https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-yhktZr16s
Bottom trawling is a fishing method that drags large nets along the seafloor. Sir David Attenborough recently drew attention to the impact of this practice on areas of seabed and marine life in his new documentary ‘Ocean’.
Look out for more episodes of Inside Lords Questions where we’ll speak to different members about the questions they raise to government. Catch up on previous episodes https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLilBYVf0P9abs7iH2ILMKNy1zWa5xHFB5
Catch-up on House of Lords business:
Watch live events: https://parliamentlive.tv/Lords
Read the latest news: https://www.parliament.uk/lords/
Stay up to date with the House of Lords on social media:
The government recognises the additional distress that children experienced due to both the benefits scandal and subsequent care orders. In a letter to the House of Representatives, Minister Struycken (Legal Protection), Minister Palmen-Schlangen (Benefits and Redress) and Minister Tielen (Youth, Prevention and Sport) respond to the ‘Inheritance of Injustice’ report by the Hamer Commission that carried out the investigation. The government has also announced specific measures to support young people.
As Minister Struycken explains, “These young people were affected first of all by unfair claims by the Tax and Customs Administration and then by being placed in care without the causes of the problems their families were facing being sufficiently recognised. The youth care and protection system failed to prevent them being placed in care.”
Painful conclusions call for decisive action
The report shows that, in many cases, claims by the Tax and Customs Administration led to debt, poverty and stress which in turn created or exacerbated family problems. Shortcomings on the part of neighbourhood teams and youth care and protection meant that the financial causes were insufficiently identified and this resulted in care orders that might otherwise have been prevented.
In the words of Minister Palmen-Schlangen, “These young people are still burdened by the negative impact each and every day. You can rest assured that you’ve now been seen and heard and we recognise the government’s actions caused a great deal of suffering. That’s why we want to help young people with what they need most.”
Three-pronged approach: recognise, support, learn
The government acknowledges that these children have been particularly affected by its mistakes. It now wants to initiate a careful process during which it will work together with the partners and organisations involved, as well as with young people themselves, to determine how this process of recognition should be structured and implemented and apologies made. The government also wants to expand and improve the existing child support scheme.
A national support centre is going to be set up for all parents and young people who are looking for help with their mental health issues. In addition, a new scheme is going to be introduced for young people who were placed in care and who want to help with training and development. The independent Support Team, which helps aggrieved parents and children who were affected by care orders, is going to continue its work.
The government wants to learn from the mistakes made, for example by adopting an integrated family approach, strengthening legal protection in the context of youth protection and a culture change which revolves around trust in families.
Young people central to the plans
It is important to regain the trust of those families that were affected. That is why young people themselves are going to be closely involved in the process of developing the measures. They will play an active role, including in the actual implementation of those measures, for example in terms of contact with their peers or by providing information to youth welfare organisations.
Joint responsibility
The government wants to prevent families from experiencing the same kind of suffering again and it is taking the lessons from the Hamer Commission report on board. The report stresses the need to address complex problems in families in a coherent way and to make the youth sector more family orientated.
As Minister Tielen explains, “In the Youth Reform Agenda it was agreed that strong local teams should look more closely at what young people and families really need. Their situation and life experiences are key in this respect. This is an important point of departure as far as the government is concerned.”
This move is in line with the improvements in youth protection which are being made on the basis of the Future Scenario for Child and Family Protection. The government wants fewer children to be placed in care and a coherent approach to assistance.
Cooperation with chain partners
Organisations such as the Child Care and Protection Board (Raad voor de Kinderbescherming), certified institutions and the judiciary have completed their own reviews and have started introducing improvement measures.
As Minister Struycken explains, “We are adopting a joint approach. It is our collective responsibility to ensure that this suffering is never repeated and that affected children receive the support they deserve for their recovery and future.”
The government is going to inform the House of Representatives on progress with regard to all the planned measures by the end of 2025.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
News story
Pathway to the launch of the Steel Strategy
In the run-up to launching the Steel Strategy later this year, Industry Minister Sarah Jones has welcomed a series of recent wins for the sector.
This government is committed to a bright and sustainable future for steelmaking in the UK, as part of our Plan for Change.
In the run-up to launching the Steel Strategy later this year, Industry Minister Sarah Jones has welcomed a series of recent wins for the sector following government backing. The Government has taken major action on areas crucial for the sector, from trade protections and electricity costs to procurement, including:
Industrial Strategy and Spending Review
Slashing electricity costs for steel producers by cutting network charges via the Supercharger by 90%, up from 60%, as announced in our modern Industrial Strategy.
Streamlining grid access for major investment projects — including prioritising those that create high-quality jobs and deliver significant economic benefits – through a new Connections Accelerator Service.
We will work closely with the energy sector, local authorities, Welsh and Scottish Governments, trade unions, and industry to design this service, which we expect to begin operating at the end of 2025.
New powers in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, currently before parliament, could also allow the Government to reserve grid capacity for strategically important projects, cutting waiting times and unlocking growth in key sectors.
The Industrial Strategy’s support for sectors such as Advanced Manufacturing will also increase demand for steel as a foundational product, as demand for lightweight and precision engineered steel products increases.
Confirming funding in the Spending Review for a £500 million grant to Tata Steel in Port Talbot as part of a £1.25bn transformation deal to construct an Electric Arc Furnace.
Trade
Strengthening current steel safeguard measures by slowing future increases in spikes of foreign imports, capping certain import levels and tightening country-specific limits – ensuring UK steel producers won’t be undercut while still making sure the UK has a steady and reliable supply.
Announcing our intent to launch new laws to expand our powers to respond to unfair trade practices, and guard against global turbulence in critical sectors, such as steel, as announced in the Trade Strategy.
Inviting steel producers, consumers and stakeholders across the supply chain to shape our future approach to trade measures for steel in a new call for evidence, as we continue to support the UK steel industry from unfair trading practices and strengthen the UK’s critical supply chains after the expiry of steel safeguard in June 2026.
Procurement
Changing government procurement rules, via the publication of a new Steel Public Procurement Notice, to ensure UK-made-steel is considered for all public projects and to use exemptions in buying rules to support steel makers wherever possible. This will give them access to more of the £400bn spent by the Government each year on procurement and help to protect our national security.
Publishing a pipeline of UK infrastructure projects taking place over the next few years. The 2025 data shows that over 7.5 million tonnes steel will be needed for these projects.
British Steel securing a £500m contract with Network Rail to supply over 337,000 tonnes of rail track, providing 80% of the company’s needs and helping to secure jobs.
Industry Minister Sarah Jones said:
This government recognises how vital steel is to our economy. That’s why we’re taking the decisive action needed to back the sector for the future, whether it’s slashing energy prices, strengthening government procurement or bolstering our trade defence measures.
Our upcoming Steel Strategy will set out our long-term vision for the sector and how we’ll work with industry and communities to deliver a bright, sustainable future for UK steelmaking that secures good, well-paid jobs across the country as part of our Plan for Change.
The Steel Strategy will be launched later this year, and will:
Establish a clear and ambitious long-term vision for the steel industry, in partnership with business and workers
Set out the actions needed to achieve that vision
Identify gaps in current capabilities and assess future UK steel demand, helping to inform investment decisions which will support economic growth
Set out what is needed to create a competitive business environment in the UK with the aim of attracting new private investment to expand UK steelmaking capability and capacity.
The Government will continue to work closely with the Steel Council and wider stakeholders to build on the significant positive steps we’ve taken towards the publication of the full Strategy.
You can find all our recent and upcoming announcements relating to the Steel Strategy on our GOV.UK Collection page.
Hundreds of firefighters battled a blaze Thursday on Crete island, which burnt swathes of forest and olive groves and forced the evacuation of over 1,000 people, officials said, underscoring the region’s vulnerability to destructive wildfires.
At least 230 firefighters, along with 46 engines and helicopters, were deployed to contain the conflagration, which broke out a day earlier near Ierapetra townon the southeastern coast of Greece’s largest island.
Stoked by gale-force winds, the blaze reached houses and hotels, fire brigade and local officials said, with local media reporting damage to some homes but no injuries.
Scores of residents and tourists were evacuated and moved to a temporary shelter at an indoor stadium in Ierapetra. Some left Crete by boats, authorities said.
“Three settlements were evacuated and more than 1,000 left their homes. Some were taken to health centres with respiratory problems,” Crete’s deputy civil protection governor, George Tsapakos, told public broadcaster ERT.
ERT footage showed a water bomber flying over an area thick with grey smoke.
Alongside reinforcements from Athens on Thursday, firefighters fought to tame several resurgent blazes whipped up by winds, fire brigade spokesman Vassilis Vathrakogiannis said.
“There are wind gusts in the area, some measuring 9 on the Beaufort scale, which are triggering rekindling and hindering firefighting efforts,” Vathrakogiannis said.
July tended to be the most difficult month of the fire season due to high temperatures and strong winds, he said.
Greece and other countries in the Mediterranean are in an area scientists have called “a wildfire hotspot” – with blazes common during hot and dry summers. These have become more destructive in recent years, authorities say, due to a fast-changing climate.
Thousands havefled wildfires in Turkey and at least eight people have died as a result of a heatwavein Europe.
First Bus and City of York Council have announced extended hours for all six of York’s Park and Ride services to support residents, commuters, visitors and York’s hospitality industry.
From 20 July, Buses to operate from 05:30am Monday-Saturday and 07:30am on Sunday
Last services to leave the city centre at 10:30pm all week
Early and late-night connections offer greater flexibility for residents, commuters and visitors
Increased frequency for school holidays and summer season
From Sunday 20 July, the first bus will leave each Park and Ride site at 5.30am. The new timings will allow shift workers and those catching early trains to use the Park and Ride, which costs just £3.90 for an adult return. For example for residents travelling out of York, five of the six sites directly serve York railway station and the first service will arrive at the station by 5.45am – Rawcliffe (2/2A), Monks Cross (9), Designer Outlet (7), Poppleton (59) and Askham Bar (3). The remaining one, Grimston (8), serves Piccadilly, in the city centre.
In the evening, the last services will leave the city centre at 10.30pm, bringing all sites up to the same time for the first and last bus.
The timings extension is being funded by York’s Bus Service Improvement Plan, supported by the Department for Transport.
Cllr Kate Ravilious, Executive Member for Transport at City of York Council, said:
“Residents, commuters and visitors have asked us to run the Park and Ride earlier in the morning and later into the evening, and we’re delighted to confirm these extended hours will start from 20 July.
“Whether you’re catching an early morning train, finishing an overnight shift or enjoying a night out in York, this expansion is part of our commitment to giving people more travel options and making York a cleaner, more affordable and more sustainable city.
“The six Park and Ride sites cover every corner of York and with up to three children traveling free with a paying adult, offers an excellent alternative to driving in to York. They also make an invaluable contribution to reducing congestion across our city. We’ve also recently unveiled plans to open up two sites for overnight parking and will be announcing the next steps on these shortly.”
Andy Cullen, Managing Director of First Bus North & West Yorkshire, said:
“This will help commuters and shift workers with connections to train services at the very start and end of the day.
“The extension of services into the late evening will also be a real boost for visitors to York’s leisure and entertainment venues, as well as supporting the hospitality sector.
“It reflects our continued commitment to work in partnership with City of York Council to build the Park and Ride network for the benefit of local people and visitors to help grow the city’s economy.”
David Skaith, the Mayor of York and North Yorkshire, said:
“For too long, public transport hasn’t always worked for everyone, especially those with early starts or late finishes.
“For the first time all of York’s Park and Ride sites will operate on a single, consistent timetable from 5.30am right up until 10.30pm. It’s the kind of public transport our region deserves.
“We’re putting passengers first, with more affordable and greener journeys that everyone can benefit from – from shift workers and commuters to those enjoying the city’s night life.”
Local Transport Minister, Simon Lightwood, said:
“When public transport is affordable and reliable, it transforms lives—helping people get to work, attend medical appointments, access opportunities and stay connected with their community.
“I’m delighted that Mayor Skaith is already delivering major improvements with our £12 million investment and moving ahead with their plans to bring buses under local control.
“From cheaper fares to extended Park & Ride hours, these changes are kickstarting a bus revolution that drives economic growth and ensures people have proper access to jobs and opportunities, as we deliver the Plan for Change.”
Sarah Loftus, Managing Director of Make It York, said:
“York Park and Ride is a vital link in supporting our hospitality and tourism sectors, making it easier and more affordable for everyone to access the city centre, this helps all businesses to recruit and retain talent.
“The new operating hours of York Park and Ride improves accessibility for everyone, offering a reliable and inclusive transport option.
“For visitors, it’s a convenient way to explore the wider city, stay longer and enjoy more of what York has to offer, and these longer running hours will offer a real boost to our local economy.”
First Bus is also introducing more frequency on the Park and Ride network to support anticipated demand during the school holidays and summer tourism season.
From Sunday 20 July until 7 September, additional buses will operate Monday-Friday on all services and also Saturdays on routes 7 and 8. Normal timetables will run on Sundays.
With just 50 days to go until Sunderland hosts the opening match of the Women’s Rugby World Cup 2025, more details have been released of exciting plans for the opening weekend.
England’s Red Roses take on the USA at the Stadium of Light on the evening of Friday, 22 August in what promises to be a thrilling opener to the biggest Women’s Rugby World Cup tournament in history.
Sunderland City Council is hoping to create a carnival atmosphere in the city in the build up to the big game with more than 150 colourful flags and banners adding to the party atmosphere in the city centre as well as live music, a fan parade to the stadium and fireworks post match, with the celebrations continuing into the Saturday.
The build up to the spectacular opening weekend celebrations get underway at 4pm on Thursday 21 August with the opening of the Fan Village in Keel Square in the heart of the city centre a short walk from the Stadium of Light, featuring a line up of female led musicians through until 10pm that night.
There will also be additional seating and a bar at nearby Keel Edge along with a rugby themed immersive and interactive light installation.
On match day itself, the Fan Village is open from 9am, offering food, drink, and rugby-themed activities including pass speed and accuracy challenges, jump height tests, and a reaction wall, making it the perfect hub for fans to gather before and after the big match.
Visitors to the Fan Village can also look forward to live music throughout the day with tribute performances from Rock DJ, Mac Busted, Re-Take That and Royal Rhapsody, as well as interactive walkabout characters, ahead of a fan parade leading fans to the stadium for the match.
Following the big match, the day will end with a spectacular firework display over the river.
Celebrations continue on Saturday, 23 August, as Sunniside Market relocates to Keel Square for a day-long festival of local talent and creativity. With music, entertainment and family-friendly activities there will be something for everyone to enjoy.
Attractions on the day include:
Circurama’s circus workshops and performances
Victoria Armstrong’s interactive bubble act
Chris Cross, the North East’s own magician
Aria Art & Movement’s aerial hoop taster sessions
A bustling art market and free craft activities
Outdoor drawing classes with the Atlas Theatre Company
Live music from 10am to 3pm, curated by Sunderland Music City
Councillor Michael Mordey, Leader of Sunderland City Council, said: “It’s incredibly exciting to be just 50 days away from the opening match of the Women’s Rugby World Cup in Sunderland, especially now that we’re starting to see visible signs like the lamp post banners springing up around the city centre.
“This is the biggest ever Women’s Rugby World Cup tournament and it’s a proud moment for our city to be hosting the opener for such a prestigious event.
“It’s also a brilliant opportunity to showcase Sunderland on the international stage and one which is set to provide an estimated £20m economic boost to the region.”
Councillor Beth Jones Sunderland City Council’s Cabinet Member for Communities, Culture and Tourism, added: “The opening weekend of the tournament is going to be really exciting and we’re looking forward to creating a real party atmosphere in the city.
“It’s an event which has something for everyone, whether you’re coming along to the opening match, soaking up the live music and pre-match atmosphere in the Fan Village, watching the fireworks after the match or planning to come and enjoy some of the fantastic family-friendly free entertainment on the Saturday.
“And with tickets selling like hot cakes and prices starting at just £10 for adults and £5 for children, it’s also a fantastic opportunity to see world-class rugby here in Sunderland. So I’d urge anyone who hasn’t already got a ticket for the opening match to get one while they’re still available.”
England’s Red Rose are favourites to win the tournament after last winning the World Cup in 2014 when South Shields born University of Sunderland graduate Katy Daley McLean captained the team.
Tickets for the tournament are competitively priced from £10 for adults and £5 for children. This means a family of four can enjoy an evening at the Women’s Rugby World Cup Opening Game for £30. To find out more about the Women’s Rugby World Cup, how to get tickets and how to get involved in free rugby activities in Sunderland visit:Rugby World Cup 2025 – MySunderland