By Juliana White
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 21 2025 – Electric vehicles contribute to an ongoing environmental and humanitarian crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Mining operations cause deforestation, pollution, food insecurity and exploitative labor practices.

Advertisers paint electric vehicles as an environmentally friendly option to help save the planet. In the West, American states like California and New York incentivize citizens to go green and help their cities by ditching gas-powered vehicles.

California officials are trying to enact legislation to reach 100 percent zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035. Across the country in New York, officials implemented the Drive Clean Rebate. Through this program, New Yorkers can receive up to 2,000 USD off the purchase or lease of an electric vehicle.

Governments are pushing for more electric vehicle sales because they are helping reduce the damage inflicted by fossil fuels. In the United States, emissions have reduced by around 66 percent. In China, a country dominating the electric vehicle production and sales market, emissions have been reduced by an estimated range of 37 percent to 45 percent.

However, consumers must understand that electric vehicles primarily benefit the environment in wealthier regions. Rising demands for electric vehicles and lithium-ion batteries foster destruction and exploitation in poorer countries like the DRC.

One of the key minerals used to make lithium-ion batteries is cobalt. The DRC is the world’s top producer of mined cobalt, at a staggering 75 percent. To fulfill high demands for the mineral, the DRC has become a hot spot overrun by industrial and artisanal small-scale mining operations.

“The surge in demand for lithium-ion batteries has dramatically increased global demand for cobalt, and DRC cobalt production is projected to double by 2030,” said the International Labor Organization (ILO) to IPS. “Because industrial mines can’t keep pace, this has encouraged expansion of artisanal and unregulated mining.”

Artisanal small-scale mines are poorly regulated, informal operations for extracting minerals. Located all over the DRC, these mines exploit child labor, use basic handheld tools, and disregard safety protocols.

“ASM can also lead to conflict as clashes take place between traditional licensed large-scale mining operations and ASM over access to minerals,” Dr. Lamfu Yengong, the Forest campaigner for Greenpeace Africa, told IPS. “While statistics on the actual number of ASM miners in SSA are hard to find, it is estimated that in the DRC alone, there are between 200,000 and 250,000 ASM miners who are responsible for mining as much as 25 percent of the DRC’s cobalt.”

The growth of mining is also decimating the DRC’s environment. Mining sites need large areas of land to operate. As laborers dig, open pits form, releasing dust and other toxic chemicals into the air and polluting surrounding waterways.

Cobalt mines often contain sulfur minerals, which can create acid mine drainage. This process occurs when sulfur minerals are exposed to both air and water.

Sulfuric acid is incredibly harmful because it can make water unsafe for human consumption, kill aquatic life and produce algal blooms. Contact with the acid causes skin irritation and burns, and respiratory issues, and long-term exposure increases the risk of cancer.

Deforestation, erosion, contaminated soil and water sources, increased noise levels and dust and smoke emissions from mining pursuits disrupt the lives of Congolese locals and wildlife. Many are killed or forced to relocate as land, once prosperous for life, now nourishes profit-fueled exploits.

“Mining in the DRC is tearing through the heart of the Congo Basin, one of the world’s most important carbon sinks, leaving behind poisoned rivers, deforested landscapes, and devastated ecosystems,” Yengong said. “What once were lush forests are now scarred by unregulated extraction, threatening biodiversity, accelerating climate change, and robbing future generations of their environmental heritage.”

Despite having over 197 million acres of arable land, the DRC is one of the top-ranking areas of food insecurity globally. Over 25 million Congolese people suffer from a lack of access to food.

Mining endeavors only fuel the hunger crisis because contaminants in the soil and water make growing crops difficult. Forest resources also disappear as more land is cleared for new mines.

Alongside food insecurity impacted by pollution, agriculture efforts suffer from climate change. Weather patterns have drastically changed across the globe, making rain patterns unpredictable. A heavy reliance on rainfed agriculture and prolonged droughts in the DRC immensely impact food supplies.

One of the many camps in the DRC for people displaced by conflict and environmental devastation. Credit: UN Photo/Sylvain Liechti

The pursuit of minerals for lithium-ion batteries encourages mass destruction and egregious human rights violations in the DRC. But mining operations cannot simply stop to solve the problem. Many Congolese people rely on working in the mines to support their families.

Groups such as the ILO, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Food Programme (WFP) are actively working on sustainable solutions to stop further exploitation and harm to the DRC.

“To improve the health of workers in or near mine sites, the ILO is supporting the roll-out of the universal health insurance scheme (Couverture Santé Universelle—CSU), which aims to provide coverage for all individuals in DRC, including those working in the mining sector and their families,” the ILO said. “The benefit package will include a range of services such as general and specialist consultations, hospitalization, essential medicines and vaccines, medical procedures and exams, maternity and newborn care, palliative care, and patient transfers between facilities.”

The UNEP is forming plans focusing on minimizing the environmental impacts of mining. Working with the DRC’s government

“UNEP is working with the DRC’s government to develop a national plan for the extraction of minerals like cobalt. The plan would focus on minimizing the environmental impact of mining,” said Corey Pattison in a UNEP press release. “We are also exploring whether local and international institutions can help resolve conflict around mineral extraction, including through processes like revenue sharing and dispute resolution.”

The WFP is trying to ease the problem by investing in resilience programs. Activities are created to build skills in communities to improve long-term food security. Skill building includes educating farmers in post-harvest loss management, literacy, business and collective marketing.

They also work closely with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) to limit negative environmental impacts. Reforestation initiatives are actively underway across the DRC. The WFP reported that 3,850 women in North and South Ubangi planted tree seedlings in 2022.

The crisis in the DRC should not mark the end of lithium batteries and electric vehicles. Scientists are working on new solutions for cleaner, more efficient power sources. Some new batteries in the works include sodium-ion batteries, silicon-carbon batteries, and lithium-sulfur batteries. Introducing more power sources could limit the overwhelming strain on resources in the DRC as the need for cobalt would reduce.

A report released by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) suggests that sustainable mining techniques and technologies are another tactic to reduce environmental impacts. However, significant change relies on the DRC’s government and its officials. They must enforce stricter mandates to mitigate the harm ravaging Congolese people’s lives.

The ILO says that Corporate Social Responsibility has been made mandatory through the 2018 mining code. Mining companies are required to invest .3 percent of their annual turnover into community development projects.

In turn, the mandate allows for easy tracking of mining companies’ income through transparency mechanisms like the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).

While the DRC has enacted environmental regulations and is involved in additional support programs, its history of weak institutions and conflict challenges aid efforts. Rampant instability greatly limits the implementation and enforcement of policies.

“The world’s clean energy transition must not come at the cost of Congolese lives and forests. The critical minerals beneath the DRC fuel the global economy, yet the people above them remain among the poorest and most exploited,” said Yengong. “Real climate solutions must prioritize the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, end greenwashing, and ensure justice, not just extraction.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById({js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By CIVICUS
Jul 21 2025 –  
CIVICUS discusses the military use of artificial intelligence (AI) in Gaza with Dima Samaro, a Palestinian lawyer and researcher, and director of Skyline International for Human Rights, a civil society organisation (CSO) that defends digital freedoms and human rights in the Middle East and North Africa. Dima serves on multiple boards focused on civic space and surveillance issues, including Innovation for Change’s MENA Hub, the Surveillance in the Majority World Network and the VUKA! Solidarity Coalition, and volunteers with Resilience Pathways to help Palestinian CSOs counter Israeli efforts to restrict civic space and manipulate public narratives.

Dima Samaro

Gaza has become a testing ground for AI-powered warfare. Israel deploys systems such as Gospel and Lavender that produce thousands of strike recommendations based on alleged links to Hamas. Meanwhile, facial recognition technology controls aid distribution and tracks displaced civilians. These tools operate without legal oversight or transparency, creating dangerous accountability gaps. As private companies develop and profit from this technology, Gaza exposes the grave dangers of unregulated AI warfare and its potential for normalising automated violence.

What AI tools are being deployed in Gaza?

Israel is using experimental AI systems on an unprecedented scale in Gaza, making real-time life-or-death decisions against a besieged civilian population. The technology strips away humanity from warfare. In Nuseirat refugee camp, residents reported hearing the cries of infants and women before Israeli quadcopters opened fire directly on those who responded.

The surveillance apparatus is equally invasive. During forced evacuations from northern to southern Gaza, civilians undergo invasive facial recognition and biometric scans to pass military checkpoints. AI-equipped ‘smart cameras’ monitor hospitals such as Al-Shifa in real time during raids. Constant biometric scanning leaves people feeling hunted, reducing them to targets and inflicting deep psychological trauma.

The impacts extend beyond surveillance. In Jabalia refugee camp, explosive robots systematically destroy homes and kill civilians, blocking rescue efforts and burying survivors under rubble. United Nations (UN) experts describe these attacks as ‘domicide’ – the deliberate destruction of civilian homes.

Technology no longer just enables violence but also helps automate the genocide. Israel has integrated AI into its military kill chain, using systems such as The Gospel, Lavender and Where’s Daddy to generate kill lists, geolocate targets and assign strikes. Lavender alone reportedly marked over 37,000 Palestinians for assassination based on flawed metadata and biased algorithms. These systems eliminate human oversight, leading to mass civilian casualties under a secretive, unaccountable regime.

Most information about these technologies comes from Israeli whistleblowers and western investigative journalists. In Gaza, over 230 journalists have been killed since October 2023, many deliberately targeted in drone strikes. This has allowed experimental warfare to continue largely hidden from global scrutiny.

How do corporations profit from this technology?

A vast network of companies profits from Gaza’s suffering. Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer, supplies 85 per cent of Israeli military drones and gear, marketing them as ‘field-tested’ in Gaza. European firms enable the violence: Italy’s Leonardo S.p.A. supplies naval guns with electronic targeting systems, while Greece’s Intracom Defense continues receiving European Union (EU) defence funding despite developing components for Israeli weapons systems.

US tech giants provide the digital infrastructure. Amazon, Google and Microsoft deliver cloud services that have allegedly helped confirm assassination strikes that have killed civilians. Amazon reportedly hosts intelligence on nearly every person in Gaza. Palantir expanded its contract with Israel in early 2024 to provide battlefield systems that identify and target Palestinians.

Most cynically, surveillance also masquerades as humanitarian aid. Firms such as UG Solutions, staffed by former US military personnel, use drones to scan Palestinians at aid distribution sites. This data feeds directly into targeting systems, transforming the search for food into potential death sentences. As of 13 July, the UN reported 875 Palestinians had been killed while trying to access food, 674 of them near sites run by private contractors such as the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, part of this militarised aid network.

This creates a profit model where Palestinians become variables in a dataset and civilian suffering becomes marketable. Behind the rhetoric of self-defence, corporations turn genocide into lucrative business.

What legal protections exist against military AI?

Virtually none. The UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s 2021 AI ethics guidelines and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights are voluntary and lack enforcement. The 2024 EU AI Act exempts AI systems, including autonomous drones used in warfare from regulation, which is particularly troubling given the EU’s dual role as both ethical AI standard-setter and major arms supplier to Israel.

Export controls also fail. The Wassenaar Arrangement – an agreement to control the export of arms and goods and technologies with military uses – cannot regulate Israel since it’s not a member, allowing its AI weapons to avoid scrutiny and gain wide export.

This legal vacuum enables powerful states to evade international law, invoking national security to justify AI violence far beyond battlefields. In Gaza, this manifests through forced biometric scans during displacement that serve solely as control tools. Survival depends on surrendering to constant surveillance.

The hypocrisy is stark: Israel recently signed the Council of Europe’s AI and Human Rights Convention while simultaneously using AI for mass surveillance and killing. This highlights how ethical frameworks shaped in the global north fail to address conflict zone realities.

What’s needed for effective accountability?

Current accountability mechanisms are structurally broken. Israeli military leaders blame algorithms despite known error rates, while corporations hide behind trade secrecy. In Gaza, this may constitute war crimes, yet legal tools such as universal jurisdiction are rarely applied.

Soft approaches fail completely. Corporate self-regulation and voluntary oversight assume transparency that doesn’t exist in Gaza. Real accountability requires direct pressure: arms export bans, targeted sanctions, strategic litigation and removing military exemptions from AI laws. We need International Criminal Court investigations targeting Israeli officials and corporate leaders enabling these actions.

Why does this matter globally?

Gaza serves as a warning. AI warfare tested on Palestinians gets exported worldwide. Israeli drones previously used in Gaza are now deployed by Frontex, the EU’s border control agency, to patrol the Mediterranean and intercept, not rescue, migrant boats before they reach European shores. Israeli arms exports hit a record US$ 14.79 billion in 2024 – over half sold to Europe. Weapons used in Gaza today could be used tomorrow in Colombia, Myanmar or Sudan.

As militarised AI becomes normalised, the language of ‘precision’ and ‘efficiency’ masks atrocity. The lesson from Gaza is clear: when AI-powered machines control who lives, human rights die. This transcends Palestine’s tragedy – it foreshadows everyone’s future.

Yet resistance persists despite repression. Journalists and civil society activists continue to document AI warfare and prepare legal actions under constant danger and internet blackouts. We refuse invisibility. While governments debate toothless AI ethics, grassroots organisations, university students and tech workers challenge corporations enabling violence. The No Tech for Apartheid campaign targets companies supporting Israeli surveillance, such as Google.

Gaza reminds us that the fight against automated warfare happens not in UN halls but on the ground, and that it’s both a stand against the algorithmic erasure of Palestinian lives and a broader defence of human rights everywhere.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
Twitter
Dima Samaro/Twitter

SEE ALSO
Israel vs Iran: new war begins while Gaza suffering continues CIVICUS Lens 19.Jun.2025
‘Digital platforms amplify the Israeli narrative while systematically silencing Palestinian voices’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Dima Samaro 27.Dec.2024
‘AI-powered weapons depersonalise the violence, making it easier for the military to approve more destruction’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Sophia Goodfriend 23.Nov.2024

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Jennifer Xin-Tsu Lin Levine
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 21 2025 – “Multilateralism is not an option but a necessity as we build back a better world with more equality and resilience and a more sustainable world.”

Secretary-General António Guterres is not the first to laud multilateralism, the practice of collective action between multiple actors on the international stage, and he will not be the last. However, during his tenure as political leader of the United Nations, Guterres has faced significant roadblocks towards such a necessity, particularly in humanitarian aid work. This failure to act comes largely from specific dissenting member states whose power and influence hinder constructive progress.

This resistance is best exemplified in the case of Israel and the latest in a series of disagreements between the member state and the UN regarding the truth of events in the Middle East and Gaza surrounding food, humanitarian aid and the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a United States-Israeli aid organization that has been condemned by hundreds of humanitarian-focused non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

Guterres has made repeated calls for multilateral aid and collaborative work in the region, calling at a recent media stakeout for Israel to allow UN humanitarian aid into Gaza, which he said had been blocked “for over three months.”

Israel, however, considers the GHF to be the only viable source of food in the area. Shahar Segal, spokesperson for the GHF, called the organization the only “right and possible way” to deliver aid “without feeding Hamas’ terror machine.”

The US similarly endorsed the organization, also using its Security Council veto power to block a resolution that would require lifting aid restrictions in Gaza. This standstill has not only fostered conflict between the various groups within the UN, but it has weakened the very principle of multilateralism that the UN was founded on in efforts to prevent another world war.

A rejection of multilateralism should not be surprising. As the Representative for the United States said in a recent General Assembly meeting about Responsibility to Protect, a doctrine meant to prevent crimes against humanity, “The United States will always act in accordance with our national interest and will not subordinate our sovereignty to shifting international norms.”

Many American lobbyists question the assertion that international issues are not relevant to the national interest.

Hassan El-Tayyab, Legislative Director for Middle East Policy for the lobbying group Friends Committee on National Legislation and co-chair of the US Ceasefire Coalition, spoke to IPS about the intersectionality between international law and US law.

El-Tayyab often utilizes overlap between US law and international law to make his case to politicians. He offered an example: under International Humanitarian Law, blocking humanitarian aid to civilians is unlawful. Under the Foreign Assistance Act, America must also block offensive weapons sales to countries that block US humanitarian aid.

El-Tayyab said of this strategy, “It gets at that accountability piece, but we’re using a US law framework, which can be a bit more palatable to these members.”

This isolationist mentality is just one of many indications of a global loss of trust in international law and multilateralism. Between America’s imposition of sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) and repeated rejection of UN attempts to provide humanitarian aid, many governments have begun to delegitimize international actors like the UN and international courts of law.

Some, like the US, have taken the route of ignoring court rulings, while other states, like Russia, have openly criticized the ICC as a neocolonial power.

Jamil Dakwar, human rights lawyer and adjunct professor at New York University and Hunter College, acknowledged the flaws in international systems like the ICC or the International Court of Justice (ICJ), saying to IPS, “There is a history of international institutions not taking seriously human rights violations happening in the global North and not holding accountable powerful governments, particularly in western Europe and North America, particularly for the United States after 9/11.

“Those are very valid claims that undermine the legitimacy and the effectiveness of these international institutions, whether they are the ICC or the ICJ or the international human rights system as a whole, especially within the United Nations system.”

Dakwar references inaction from international courts, particularly when wealthy, influential western countries were involved, criticizing the institutions for a double standard.

However, Dakwar also criticized states that were ignoring international law, saying, “That said, that is not an excuse for other governments to flout international law just because other countries are not being held accountable or are undermining that very system.

“I think that what’s important to recognize is that these institutions do have a role, and they were tasked, and they were given the authority to uphold international law in the most difficult situations where diplomacy fails…there’s blame to be put on the major powers that are taking things into their own hands and not following international law.”
According to El-Tayyab, such disregard for the UN comes from what he calls “an à la carte approach to the charter.”

When countries see international mandates as suggestions or tools for their convenience rather than obligations, they erode the systems established to prevent world conflict and crisis.

Dakwar referred to this practice as larger, wealthier countries “bullying” those in the global South—forcing other countries out of fear to concede.

Dakwar told IPS, “There is a sense that it’s more expedient to remain silent and not to be proactive and outspoken on these serious violations of international law because of the consequences.”

However, that notion is untrue: Dakwar explained, “There’s not a single issue or situation where it will not have an impact on everyone, because it has an impact on migration, on climate and on the being of humanity as a whole.”

Both El-Tayyab and Dakwar are staunch supporters of multilateralism but, like many other actors invested in international relations and humanitarian aid, believe it must be put into practice in a much more unbiased, overarching way that centers all people’s humanity rather than being used as a tool for political gain.

For multilateralism to successfully accomplish its goals of unity and collective action towards peace, all countries have an obligation to put aside national motivations for the sake of global welfare that affects all people, including themselves.

Additionally, the UN must recenter marginalized countries, like those in the global South who have been undervalued and discounted in international discussions, to promote a stronger buy-in for all actors.

As El-Tayyab said, “All politics is local, and these member states make up the UN. The UN is us, in a way.” In adhering to this principle, all voices must be considered.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById({js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

Excerpt:

As the United Nations fails to resolve conflicts around the world, specifically in the Middle East, its key peacemaking principle of multilateralism seems to have lost its legitimacy and efficacy in an era of extremism and polarization.

By Audrone Telesiene
KAUNAS, Lithuania, Jul 21 2025 – Nearly ten years after the Paris Agreement — a legally binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions — the gap between climate goals and government actions remains stubborn.

The consequences are real: 2024 saw 150 extreme weather events, leading to the highest number of new population displacements recorded in the past 16 years, raised food prices, and hundreds of billions in damages. March 2025 was the warmest March on record in Europe.

Climate stability is only one of nine planetary boundaries critical for long-term human thriving. While governments have shown that international cooperation is possible — the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances being a notable success — most environmental indicators are moving in the wrong direction.

Audrone Telesiene

Scientists agree: current policies are not keeping pace with accelerating environmental degradation. We’ve already crossed six planetary boundaries and risk breaching more, including those concerning biodiversity, freshwater systems, and ocean acidification. The world remains far from meeting the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

This trend isn’t new, and predates the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and rollbacks of environmental regulations in other countries. Political commitments are too often insufficient and frequently allusive.

Safeguarding our planet must therefore go beyond governments. Change requires decisions at every level: mayors, business leaders, civil society, youth, Indigenous Peoples, faith communities, and households all have roles to play.

Even daily choices — what we eat, how we travel, how we manage waste— shape environmental outcomes. These decisions reflect distinct knowledge systems that can strengthen policy both technically and socially. Nature itself may also be seen as a stakeholder in decision-making: recognizing its dynamics leads to better outcomes.

The UN Environment Programme’s Global Environment Outlook (GEO-7), to be launched at the 7th UN Environment Assembly (in December 2025), will highlight this broader, behavior-focused approach. It is asking: How can we engage stakeholders effectively?

Fortunately, there are already inspiring examples. Consider Costa Rica as a case of transformational shifting of some of our deepest societal values. The country aligns its national budget with public and planetary health, at the expense of GDP-based decisions.

High investments in health and education helped generate high-levels of well-being, longer life expectancy, with forest cover increasing from 21 per cent in the 1980s to 50 per cent and almost all electricity coming from renewable energy sources.

In Rosario, Argentina, civic participation drives urban transformation. Participatory budgeting has improved informal settlements and established a thriving urban agriculture movement. Involving citizens enhanced equity, created jobs, and improved food security.

In recent years, Bogotá, Buenos Aires, Lima, and São Paulo have recognized waste pickers as essential service providers. This has improved recycling and waste management of plastic pollution, while promoting dignity and justice for marginalized communities—advancing the circular economy in the process.

In Andhra Pradesh, India, millions of farmers are part of the Zero Budget Natural Farming initiative, reviving traditional, chemical-free agricultural practices. It’s one of the world’s largest agroecological transitions in the making.

With almost 6 out of 10 humans living in cities, the climate leadership of networks like C40, including nearly 100 mayors – is an important solution.

Crises have sparked innovation too. During the COVID-19 pandemic, London’s food insecurity was exposed, catalyzing the formation of resilient networks of urban food governance, including zero-waste ones.

Ecological transformation must now happen at unprecedented speed. But for it to succeed, it must be co-produced by society—embracing diversity in demography, as well as in the knowledge systems we draw from, including Indigenous wisdom, the arts, and science.

We already have many of the technologies needed: we know how to boost crop yields, decarbonize economies, and nourish more people with fewer resources, with much less land, water and other resources.

Notwithstanding the declining support for environmental protection among certain governments, the cases above attest to our ability to develop participatory processes towards a more sustainable future. They prove that meaningful, inclusive progress is possible.

The crisis of climate change, the crisis of nature, land degradation and biodiversity loss, and the crisis of pollution and waste – the terrifying trajectory of crossing our planetary boundaries – underscores the urgency of equitable inclusion.

Let’s not leave transformation to governments alone. The responsibility – and the power – is shared.

Audrone Telesiene is a lead author of the 7th edition of the Global Environment Outlook (GEO-7) and a professor of sociology and communication sciences at Kaunas University of Technology, Lithuania.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);