13. August 2026 – Die Blockade der Straße von Hormus ab Ende Februar hat den Ölmarkt in einer Konstellation weltweit schwacher Nachfrage und steigendem Ölangebot getroffen. Aufgrund des Angebotsschocks stieg der Ölpreis kurzzeitig auf über 110 US-Dollar pro Barrel. Die Konstellation von schwacher Nachfrage und Angebotsausweitung würde eigentlich zu einem sinkenden Ölpreis führen – zum Jahresende 2025 kostete ein Barrel Rohöl tatsächlich unter 60 US-Dollar, ein für manche Förderländer nicht mehr tragfähiger Preis. Bisher haben vor allem Nicht-OPEC-Länder ihr Angebot ausgeweitet. Auch innerhalb der OPEC ist die Geschlossenheit brüchig geworden: Die Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate sind im Mai 2026 ausgetreten und planen mehr Öl zu fördern. Wenn Öltanker die Straße von Hormus wieder wie früher passieren können, dürfte erneut die Konstellation von steigendem Angebot bei schwacher Nachfrage zum Tragen kommen. Noch zeichnet sich indes keine vollständige und dauerhafte Öffnung der Straße von Hormus ab, zumal zunächst Minen geräumt und Sicherheitsgarantien geklärt werden müssen. Darüber hinaus bleiben Seewege anfällig, was künftig zu höheren Versicherungsprämien und volatileren Ölpreisen führen dürfte.
Adapting to climate impacts is more critical than ever. Average global temperatures surpassed the 1.5°C threshold in 2024, and the ten worst climate-related disasters of 2025 caused over $120 billion in insured losses alone. Yet just as adaptation becomes more urgent, climate has slipped down the global agenda, leaving the developing countries most exposed to climate impacts—and least responsible for them—to adapt with shrinking international support.
This issue brief gives an overview of the history and current state of adaptation finance and examines how it overlaps with development finance and with loss and damage. It sets the goals agreed at COP29 and COP30 against estimated adaptation needs of $310 to $365 billion per year by 2035 and explains why, for many small island developing states and least developed countries, the form finance takes—grant-based and directly accessible—matters as much as the amount.
The brief argues that adaptation, sustainable development, and loss and damage should complement one another rather than compete for scarce, siloed funding. It makes the case for strict criteria on what counts as climate finance rather than the automatic separation of climate and development projects, and for multilateral climate finance to grow, grant-based funding to expand, and climate resilience to be mainstreamed across all development efforts. This will ensure the international system is ready to deliver when political will to tackle climate change returns.
The post Synergies and Challenges in Financing Adaptation, Sustainable Development, and Loss and Damage appeared first on International Peace Institute.
With the world’s attention fixed on the Strait of Hormuz, developments in North Africa have made fewer headlines in Europe. The crises in the Middle East are likely to deepen the geostrategic interdependence of North Africa and Europe, creating opportunities for both regions.
With the world’s attention fixed on the Strait of Hormuz, developments in North Africa have made fewer headlines in Europe. The crises in the Middle East are likely to deepen the geostrategic interdependence of North Africa and Europe, creating opportunities for both regions.
With the world’s attention fixed on the Strait of Hormuz, developments in North Africa have made fewer headlines in Europe. The crises in the Middle East are likely to deepen the geostrategic interdependence of North Africa and Europe, creating opportunities for both regions.
In the face of ever-new temperature records and serious natural disasters, the effects of climate change no longer appear to be just abstract visions of
the future. The fears triggered by global warming, particularly in the Global North, are strongly focused on the issues of forced displacement and migration. The fear that climate change could rob millions of people—especially in the Global South—of their homes soon, and that these people could
then set off for Europe or North America as climate refugees, is reflected in countless media reports in recent years. Furthermore, non-governmental
organizations regularly use the alarmist, if not to say doomsday, narrative of a steady increase in the number of climate refugees and the existential
threat posed by climate change to billions of people worldwide to promote their work. The scientific debate on the links between climate change and human mobility has intensified considerably over the last 15 years, and numerous research projects, some of them large-scale, have been launched on the topic of “climate migration.” This chapter wants to reflect on the findings of these research activities, also considering global migration trends. The fundamental implications for the political and (global) social handling of the nexus between climate change and human mobility will be worked out.
In the face of ever-new temperature records and serious natural disasters, the effects of climate change no longer appear to be just abstract visions of
the future. The fears triggered by global warming, particularly in the Global North, are strongly focused on the issues of forced displacement and migration. The fear that climate change could rob millions of people—especially in the Global South—of their homes soon, and that these people could
then set off for Europe or North America as climate refugees, is reflected in countless media reports in recent years. Furthermore, non-governmental
organizations regularly use the alarmist, if not to say doomsday, narrative of a steady increase in the number of climate refugees and the existential
threat posed by climate change to billions of people worldwide to promote their work. The scientific debate on the links between climate change and human mobility has intensified considerably over the last 15 years, and numerous research projects, some of them large-scale, have been launched on the topic of “climate migration.” This chapter wants to reflect on the findings of these research activities, also considering global migration trends. The fundamental implications for the political and (global) social handling of the nexus between climate change and human mobility will be worked out.
In the face of ever-new temperature records and serious natural disasters, the effects of climate change no longer appear to be just abstract visions of
the future. The fears triggered by global warming, particularly in the Global North, are strongly focused on the issues of forced displacement and migration. The fear that climate change could rob millions of people—especially in the Global South—of their homes soon, and that these people could
then set off for Europe or North America as climate refugees, is reflected in countless media reports in recent years. Furthermore, non-governmental
organizations regularly use the alarmist, if not to say doomsday, narrative of a steady increase in the number of climate refugees and the existential
threat posed by climate change to billions of people worldwide to promote their work. The scientific debate on the links between climate change and human mobility has intensified considerably over the last 15 years, and numerous research projects, some of them large-scale, have been launched on the topic of “climate migration.” This chapter wants to reflect on the findings of these research activities, also considering global migration trends. The fundamental implications for the political and (global) social handling of the nexus between climate change and human mobility will be worked out.
This chapter deals with climate mobility and how it is addressed in international politics. Yet, no internationally binding convention explicitly addresses climate-related mobility. However, there are a couple of existing agreements, frameworks, policy processes and related institutions offering potential scope to address various aspects of the climate-mobility nexus. The policy landscape shaped in this way cuts across different policy and action areas such as climate policy, disaster risk management, human rights or migration/displacement policy. Particularly relevant frameworks and processes – including, for instance, the Global Compact on Migration or the Sendai Framework – and institutions such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM) are analysed in this chapter. Furthermore, the chapter also highlights focus areas of action in the contemporary policy landscape that has been formed around the topic of climate mobility and briefly explores potential future (coordination) models for this policy landscape.
This chapter deals with climate mobility and how it is addressed in international politics. Yet, no internationally binding convention explicitly addresses climate-related mobility. However, there are a couple of existing agreements, frameworks, policy processes and related institutions offering potential scope to address various aspects of the climate-mobility nexus. The policy landscape shaped in this way cuts across different policy and action areas such as climate policy, disaster risk management, human rights or migration/displacement policy. Particularly relevant frameworks and processes – including, for instance, the Global Compact on Migration or the Sendai Framework – and institutions such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM) are analysed in this chapter. Furthermore, the chapter also highlights focus areas of action in the contemporary policy landscape that has been formed around the topic of climate mobility and briefly explores potential future (coordination) models for this policy landscape.
This chapter deals with climate mobility and how it is addressed in international politics. Yet, no internationally binding convention explicitly addresses climate-related mobility. However, there are a couple of existing agreements, frameworks, policy processes and related institutions offering potential scope to address various aspects of the climate-mobility nexus. The policy landscape shaped in this way cuts across different policy and action areas such as climate policy, disaster risk management, human rights or migration/displacement policy. Particularly relevant frameworks and processes – including, for instance, the Global Compact on Migration or the Sendai Framework – and institutions such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM) are analysed in this chapter. Furthermore, the chapter also highlights focus areas of action in the contemporary policy landscape that has been formed around the topic of climate mobility and briefly explores potential future (coordination) models for this policy landscape.
Das Ziel dieser Studie war es, gängige Narrative und Frames zu umwelt- und klimabedingter menschlicher Mobilität zu analysieren und einzuordnen. Frames und Narrative prägen die Wahrnehmung und Bewertung von Migration, indem sie bestimmten Akteuren spezifische Rollen und Verantwortlichkeiten zuschreiben.
Die Studie konzentriert sich innerhalb des öffentlichen Diskurses auf mediale Narrative. Dazu wurden 95 Artikel deutschsprachiger Leitmedien aus dem Zeitraum von August 2020 bis August 2024 untersucht. Die Auswertung erfolgte mittels qualitativer Inhaltsanalyse unter Verwendung der Kodierungssoftware MaxQDA. Dabei kam ein deduktiv-induktives Kodierungssystem zum Einsatz, um die Ergebnisse systematisch zu erfassen und miteinander zu vergleichen. Die deduktive Kodierung basierte auf einem Diskursanalyseschema, das zentrale Aspekte diagnostischer, prognostischer und motivationaler Framings berücksichtigt.
Im Rahmen der Diskursanalyse konnten drei prägende Narrative identifiziert werden, die die mediale Berichterstattung über umweltbedingte Mobilität maßgeblich beeinflussen: (a) Der dominante humanitär-wissenschaftliche Diskurs: das Leid des Südens und die Verantwortung des Nordens, (b) Der marginale Abwehrdiskurs: „Das Boot ist voll“ und „Klimaflüchtlinge gibt es eigentlich nicht“ und (c) Der aufkommende Diskurs zu Klimaflucht im Globalen Norden: differenziert und individualisiert.
Diese Studie ist Teil des UBA-Forschungsvorhabens „Politik am Nexus Umwelt, Entwicklung und Migration kohärent gestalten“ und trägt zur besseren Einordnung sowie zum tieferen Verständnis des öffentlichen Diskurses über diesen Nexus und seine gesellschaftliche Bedeutung bei.
Das Ziel dieser Studie war es, gängige Narrative und Frames zu umwelt- und klimabedingter menschlicher Mobilität zu analysieren und einzuordnen. Frames und Narrative prägen die Wahrnehmung und Bewertung von Migration, indem sie bestimmten Akteuren spezifische Rollen und Verantwortlichkeiten zuschreiben.
Die Studie konzentriert sich innerhalb des öffentlichen Diskurses auf mediale Narrative. Dazu wurden 95 Artikel deutschsprachiger Leitmedien aus dem Zeitraum von August 2020 bis August 2024 untersucht. Die Auswertung erfolgte mittels qualitativer Inhaltsanalyse unter Verwendung der Kodierungssoftware MaxQDA. Dabei kam ein deduktiv-induktives Kodierungssystem zum Einsatz, um die Ergebnisse systematisch zu erfassen und miteinander zu vergleichen. Die deduktive Kodierung basierte auf einem Diskursanalyseschema, das zentrale Aspekte diagnostischer, prognostischer und motivationaler Framings berücksichtigt.
Im Rahmen der Diskursanalyse konnten drei prägende Narrative identifiziert werden, die die mediale Berichterstattung über umweltbedingte Mobilität maßgeblich beeinflussen: (a) Der dominante humanitär-wissenschaftliche Diskurs: das Leid des Südens und die Verantwortung des Nordens, (b) Der marginale Abwehrdiskurs: „Das Boot ist voll“ und „Klimaflüchtlinge gibt es eigentlich nicht“ und (c) Der aufkommende Diskurs zu Klimaflucht im Globalen Norden: differenziert und individualisiert.
Diese Studie ist Teil des UBA-Forschungsvorhabens „Politik am Nexus Umwelt, Entwicklung und Migration kohärent gestalten“ und trägt zur besseren Einordnung sowie zum tieferen Verständnis des öffentlichen Diskurses über diesen Nexus und seine gesellschaftliche Bedeutung bei.