Agrégateur de flux

While on paper a U.S. return to Bagram, given the airbase’s strategic location and infrastructure, may seem like a rational move, in reality it could undermine U.S. national security and interests. 

In some ways, Southeast Asia significantly supports China's strategic interests. But the region also presents major challenges for China's global leadership.

Written by Györgyi Mácsai and Nadejda Kresnichka-Nikolchova, Members’ Research Service (EPRS) with Raffaele Ventura, GlobalStat, EUI.

This infographic provides insight into the economic performance of Ukraine compared with the European Union (EU) and examines the trade dynamics between them. In 2024, Ukraine experienced an economic growth rate of 3.5%, while the EU-27 recorded a growth rate of only 1.1%. Both regions continue to see declining inflation rates. However, increasing exchange rate of the Ukrainian hryvnia reveals a weakening currency, alongside a rise in the country’s public net debt, which has climbed to 89.8%. The EU-27 is Ukraine’s primary trading partner, accounting for 53.6% of its trade share, with Poland being the leading country with trade value €17.8 billion. In 2024, while overall EU exports are on the rise, imports from Ukraine to the EU are experiencing a declining trend.

Read this ‘infographic’ on ‘Ukraine: Economic indicators and trade with EU‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

GDP growth
(annual change, %) Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita
(at PPP 1 in thousands of international dollars) Female labour force participation rate
(% of female population aged 15+) Total unemployment rate
(% of total labour force) FDI and remittances Public finances, monetary and financial data EU trade with Ukraine Main trade partners (2024) Top EU partners (2024) EU exports of goods to Ukraine (2024) EU imports of goods from Ukraine (2024)

Donald Trump affirme que tous les otages seront libérés et qu'Israël retirera ses troupes jusqu'à une « ligne convenue », mais il n'y a aucune mise à jour concernant les autres aspects de son plan de paix en 20 points.

Das Parlament spricht sich für koordinierte Maßnahmen, eine stärkere Verteidigung und Sanktionen aus, um russische Provokationen gegen Sicherheit und Infrastruktur der EU abzuwehren.
Ausschuss für auswärtige Angelegenheiten
Ausschuss für Sicherheit und Verteidigung

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2025 - EP

Das Parlament spricht sich für koordinierte Maßnahmen, eine stärkere Verteidigung und Sanktionen aus, um russische Provokationen gegen Sicherheit und Infrastruktur der EU abzuwehren.
Ausschuss für auswärtige Angelegenheiten
Ausschuss für Sicherheit und Verteidigung

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2025 - EP

ÄNDERUNGSANTRÄGE 1 - 371 - Entwurf eines Berichts Militärische Mobilität
Ausschuss für Sicherheit und Verteidigung
Ausschuss für Verkehr und Tourismus
Roberts Zīle, Petras Auštrevičius

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2025 - EP

Dr. Luthando Dziba, Executive Secretary, IPBES in conversation with IPS. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

By Busani Bafana
BULAWAYO, Zimbabwe, Oct 9 2025 (IPS)

Global biodiversity is disappearing at breakneck speed and, in the process, threatening the future of humanity. The loss is not a future threat but a present crisis that Dr. Luthando Dziba, the new Executive Secretary of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), believes can be tackled with science-based policy action.

Dziba assumes his role at a pivotal moment. A landmark IPBES report, launched last December, had a stark warning: biodiversity decline is galloping, whipped by humanity’s disconnect from and dominance of nature, coupled with the inequitable concentration of power and wealth.

So, how does he envision IPBES turning the tide?

“IPBES is not a new platform,” Dziba explained. “It has built a strong tradition of co-producing knowledge with member states. We are now launching our second global biodiversity assessment, alongside critical work on monitoring and spatial planning. This isn’t just about producing reports; it’s about creating a social process for change.”

The “social process” is key to IPBES’s model. Member governments prioritize key biodiversity challenges that IPBES should focus on in its research and participate in the design of the assessments. Through continuous reviews and a collaborative scoping process, there is an integration between science and policy.

Prior to his appointment at IPBES, Dziba had a strong history of working in biodiversity in his native South Africa as well as internationally. He joined the South African National Parks (SANParks) in July 2017 as the Managing Executive for Conservation Services, which oversees Scientific Services, Veterinary Services, Conservation Planning and Cultural Heritage.

Biodiversity loss is accelerating and threatening global food security. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

Before joining SANParks, Luthando managed the ecosystem services research area at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), leading a team of more than 50 researchers on biodiversity, ecosystem services, coastal systems, and earth observation.

Dziba has served as the co-chair of the Africa Regional Ecosystem Assessment, commissioned by IPBES and published in 2018. He has been an advisor to South Africa’s delegations at the IPBES plenaries, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

Combating Science Skepticism

Beyond the well-documented drivers of biodiversity loss—pollution, unplanned development, and unsustainable consumption—Dziba identifies a greater emerging threat: the credibility of science itself.

“A growing challenge that we are going to have to confront is the question around the credibility of the science that underpins the work of IPBES,” Dziba told IPS in an exclusive interview. “We want to ensure that we continue to produce credible work, policy-relevant work but not policy-prescriptive work, which allows governments to take the knowledge and information that we produce to make policy-relevant decisions.”

Dziba, a veteran conservationist and thought leader, says IPBES has excelled in providing groundbreaking science assessment reports that have informed policy and decision-making on biodiversity conservation.

Established in 2012, IPBES unites over 145 member governments in providing independent, science-based assessments on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Its mission is to deliver credible knowledge that informs policymakers and drives sustainable action.

Dziba identifies key threats, including unchecked human population growth, unplanned development, pollution, and consumption patterns to biodiversity. A critical challenge is maintaining the credibility of scientific work while producing policy-relevant—not policy-prescriptive—knowledge to empower governments to make informed decisions.

The First IPBES Global Assessment of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, launched in 2020, highlighted the need to integrate biodiversity considerations in global decision-making in all sectors because effective biodiversity conservation needed a multifaceted approach. The assessment noted alarming rates of habitat loss, particularly in tropical forests and coral reefs, and stressed that the overarching causes of biodiversity loss are closely linked to human resource use.

An IPBES report, Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control, found that more than 37,000 alien species have been introduced by many human activities to regions and biomes around the world. The report found that the global economic cost of invasive alien species exceeded USD 423 billion annually in 2019, with costs having at least quadrupled every decade since 1970.

The solution to global biodiversity loss, Dziba argued, is in transformative, “nexus” approaches that look at issues holistically.

“We need to take a nexus approach and not just tinker at the edges when we are facing problems but rather look at transformative ways of pushing meaningful solutions that bring about change,” he told IPS. “We believe that we will be able to shift towards issues that have an impact not just at a local scale but at a wider scale that are positive for biodiversity and the people.”

When asked how IPBES plans to affect global policy as biodiversity continues to decline, Dziba pointed out that they are currently working on assessments that improve understanding and monitoring related to global biodiversity plans.

“We co-produce knowledge with member states and experts, ensuring our assessments respond directly to policy needs,” he explained.

He stressed IPBES’s agility in tackling emerging challenges, pointing to expert analyses during the COVID pandemic of the links between biodiversity and pandemics, as well as integrating climate change considerations.

Only transformative solutions can reverse biodiversity loss and benefit people globally,” Dziba notes.

Yet there are promising models. He points to a compelling case from rural Senegal, where the scourge of bilharzia was tackled not just as a health issue but through a biodiversity lens. By addressing the pollution and invasive species that allowed the parasitic worms to thrive and using the cleared invasives for livestock feed, communities saw a 32 percent reduction of infection in children and improved livelihoods.

Africa’s conservation successes, such as saving the white rhino and protecting primate habitats through innovative community-based strategies, exemplify effective conservation shaped by combining science and local knowledge.

Dziba emphasizes IPBES’s unique collaborative process: governments engage actively from the outset in designing and reviewing assessments alongside experts, integrating both scientific and indigenous knowledge.

Weaving Local Wisdom

A cornerstone of IPBES’s credibility has been its pioneering effort to embed scientific knowledge with local and indigenous knowledge.

“We make a very deliberative effort to integrate indigenous and local knowledge right from the start,” Dziba said. The platform appoints knowledge holders as experts, holds dialogues, and has a specific taskforce to guide the process. This ensures that the assessments reflect an understanding of how ecosystems function and impact the communities.

Balancing economic development with biodiversity protection is a persistent challenge. While not a policymaker itself, IPBES supports governments by synthesizing evidence on sustainable management and conservation of ecosystems.

Looking ahead to enhancing global collaboration, Dziba said he is committed to strengthening partnerships with UN agencies and conventions such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). These alliances are key to embedding IPBES’s scientific advice into international policy and action.

For Dziba, success during his tenure means delivering timely, high-quality assessments that decisively shape the post-2030 global biodiversity agenda. He also prioritizes securing IPBES’s financial sustainability through innovative funding, including engaging the private sector and philanthropic foundations—a critical strategy amid global economic uncertainty.

“It’s going to take more than just publishing an assessment,” he conceded. “It’s going to take an intentional strategy. Engaging businesses and philanthropies is not just about funding; it’s about recognizing the deep links between biodiversity and sustainable development.”

His ultimate goal is to ensure that when policymakers are asked about what they are doing to protect biodiversity, the answers are informed by the best possible science.

Dziba believes that, with the planet in peril, bridging science and policy is a lifeline to stop biodiversity loss and secure a sustainable future.

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(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');   Related Articles

• Transformative Change Will Save a Planet in Peril—IPBES
• Interlinked Solutions Key to Tackling Biodiversity, Water, Food, Health and Climate Change, says IPBES

Das EP fordert, dass Hilfe für Erdbebenopfer in Afghanistan alle erreichen müsse, und kritisieren die restriktive Geschlechterpolitik des Regimes, die Hilfslieferungen behindert.
Ausschuss für auswärtige Angelegenheiten

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2025 - EP

Coordinated action, stronger defence, and sanctions needed to counter Russian provocations targeting EU security and infrastructure.
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Security and Defence

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

Coordinated action, stronger defence, and sanctions needed to counter Russian provocations targeting EU security and infrastructure.
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Security and Defence

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

Coordinated action, stronger defence, and sanctions needed to counter Russian provocations targeting EU security and infrastructure.
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Security and Defence

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

Coordinated action, stronger defence, and sanctions needed to counter Russian provocations targeting EU security and infrastructure.
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Security and Defence

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

Networks as relational infrastructure play an important role in strengthening cooperative efforts toward sustainable development. This paper analyses the Managing Global Governance (MGG) Network – a transnational, multi-stakeholder network that employs collaborative training, knowledge cooperation and policy dialogue instruments. The network includes members from Brazil, China, the EU, India, Indonesia, Mexico and South Africa. To understand how the implementation of Agenda 2030 through cooperation in networks can be fostered, this paper examines the conditions under which global governance networks create impact.
Using a literature review, external evaluation studies and 27 qualitative interviews, the paper categorises impact across four levels: individual, organisational, network and systemic–institutional. Additionally, it analyses the impact on the network itself – not only as an enabler of impact but also as a subject affected by cooperation within the network. In this context, several types of impact can be distinguished, ranging from improved international cooperation structures to behaviour change and the reorientation of organisational policies.
We conclude that three dimensions of a network’s setup are key to enabling social innovation for sustainable development:
1.    the composition of network members
2.    the cooperation infrastructure
3.    the cooperation culture.
These insights contribute to the ongoing debate on how to link change at the individual level with transformation in more institutionalised structures – particularly in organisations and broader systemic contexts. The paper is especially relevant for scholars engaged in network analysis and development, decision-makers involved in transnational multi-stakeholder networks, and international cooperation actors aiming for sustainable development impact.

Networks as relational infrastructure play an important role in strengthening cooperative efforts toward sustainable development. This paper analyses the Managing Global Governance (MGG) Network – a transnational, multi-stakeholder network that employs collaborative training, knowledge cooperation and policy dialogue instruments. The network includes members from Brazil, China, the EU, India, Indonesia, Mexico and South Africa. To understand how the implementation of Agenda 2030 through cooperation in networks can be fostered, this paper examines the conditions under which global governance networks create impact.
Using a literature review, external evaluation studies and 27 qualitative interviews, the paper categorises impact across four levels: individual, organisational, network and systemic–institutional. Additionally, it analyses the impact on the network itself – not only as an enabler of impact but also as a subject affected by cooperation within the network. In this context, several types of impact can be distinguished, ranging from improved international cooperation structures to behaviour change and the reorientation of organisational policies.
We conclude that three dimensions of a network’s setup are key to enabling social innovation for sustainable development:
1.    the composition of network members
2.    the cooperation infrastructure
3.    the cooperation culture.
These insights contribute to the ongoing debate on how to link change at the individual level with transformation in more institutionalised structures – particularly in organisations and broader systemic contexts. The paper is especially relevant for scholars engaged in network analysis and development, decision-makers involved in transnational multi-stakeholder networks, and international cooperation actors aiming for sustainable development impact.

Networks as relational infrastructure play an important role in strengthening cooperative efforts toward sustainable development. This paper analyses the Managing Global Governance (MGG) Network – a transnational, multi-stakeholder network that employs collaborative training, knowledge cooperation and policy dialogue instruments. The network includes members from Brazil, China, the EU, India, Indonesia, Mexico and South Africa. To understand how the implementation of Agenda 2030 through cooperation in networks can be fostered, this paper examines the conditions under which global governance networks create impact.
Using a literature review, external evaluation studies and 27 qualitative interviews, the paper categorises impact across four levels: individual, organisational, network and systemic–institutional. Additionally, it analyses the impact on the network itself – not only as an enabler of impact but also as a subject affected by cooperation within the network. In this context, several types of impact can be distinguished, ranging from improved international cooperation structures to behaviour change and the reorientation of organisational policies.
We conclude that three dimensions of a network’s setup are key to enabling social innovation for sustainable development:
1.    the composition of network members
2.    the cooperation infrastructure
3.    the cooperation culture.
These insights contribute to the ongoing debate on how to link change at the individual level with transformation in more institutionalised structures – particularly in organisations and broader systemic contexts. The paper is especially relevant for scholars engaged in network analysis and development, decision-makers involved in transnational multi-stakeholder networks, and international cooperation actors aiming for sustainable development impact.

MEPs call for aid to reach all earthquake victims in Afghanistan, where the regime’s restrictive gender policies are obstructing aid deliveries.
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

MEPs call for aid to reach all earthquake victims in Afghanistan, where the regime’s restrictive gender policies are obstructing aid deliveries.
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

MEPs call for aid to reach all earthquake victims in Afghanistan, where the regime’s restrictive gender policies are obstructing aid deliveries.
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

In two separate votes on Thursday, Parliament rejected two motions of censure against the European Commission.

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP