Sweetpotato crossing block, Uganda. Reuben Ssali, a plant breeder Associate with the International Potato Center. Credit: CGIAR
NAIROBI, Apr 7 2025 (IPS) – CGIAR and the Kenyan Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO) are bringing together the world’s leading scientists and decision-makers in agriculture, climate, and health for the first CGIAR Science Week. This gathering will be a key moment to advance research and innovation, inspire action, and establish critical partnerships that can secure investment in sustainable food systems for people and the planet.
IPS’ team of journalists, Busani Bafana, Joyce Chimbi, and Naureen Hossain, will bring you news and interviews throughout the week as the conference unfolds. This will include the launch of the CGIAR Research Portfolio 2025-2030 today (April 7, 2025).
CIVICUS speaks with Daniel Simons, Senior Legal Counsel Strategic Defence for Greenpeace International, about the lawsuit brought by an oil and gas company against Greenpeace and its broader implications for civil society. Greenpeace is a global network of environmental organisations campaigning on issues such as climate change, disarmament, forests, organic farming and peace.
Daniel Simons
In March, a North Dakota jury ruled that Greenpeace in the USA and Greenpeace International should pay damages of over US$660 million to Energy Transfer, which filed lawsuits alleging that Greenpeace instigated resistance against the Dakota Access Pipeline in 2016 and 2017 and caused operational disruptions and financial losses. The protests were led by Indigenous communities, particularly the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, and focused on water protection and tribal rights. Energy Transfer claims the pipeline was properly regulated and provides economic benefits. Civil society has condemned the legal action as a SLAPP – a strategic lawsuit against public participation – designed to silence criticism. Greenpeace is appealing.
What prompted Energy Transfer to take legal action against Greenpeace?
The route of the Dakota Access Pipeline crosses underneath the Missouri River a short distance from the reservation of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. In April 2016, tribal members set up prayer encampments to express their opposition to the construction. They worried that sites of cultural importance would be damaged, and that the pipeline might contaminate the river, the Tribe’s water source.
Energy Transfer took a number of provocative actions. It sued the Tribe’s chairperson and other participants in the Indigenous resistance, and not long after, bulldozed an area less than 24 hours after the Tribe had filed a declaration in court stating there were burial grounds and resources of cultural significance in the area. These events coincided with a huge growth in attention for and attendance at the camp.
Energy Transfer alleges that the Greenpeace defendants were somehow the masterminds, coming in and secretly organising everything that happened during the Standing Rock protests, and that this included trespassing, property damage and creating public nuisance. The company also accuses the Greenpeace defendants of defamation, complaining about nine statements in particular. Additionally, Energy Transfer claims Greenpeace’s actions delayed the refinancing of the pipeline’s construction loan, causing financial harm to the company.
What was Greenpeace’s actual involvement in the protests and its relationship with Indigenous communities?
Greenpeace – including Greenpeace Inc and Greenpeace Fund, both based in the USA, and Greenpeace International, a Dutch foundation – played only a limited role in the protests. Greenpeace Inc had some connections to the Indigenous communities at Standing Rock; as I understand it, the relationship was respectful but not extensive.
Greenpeace Inc supported the protests by funding five trainers from an independent Indigenous network to provide training on non-violent direct action for two weeks, conducting supply drives for the camps, providing short-term staff mainly to help with preparing the camp for winter and donating some lock boxes that protesters could use to form a human chain, although no evidence suggests they were ever used. It also published articles and co-signed two letters to banks containing the nine statements Energy Transfer now claims are defamatory. These statements had already been widely reported by media and United Nations bodies before Greenpeace’s involvement.
According to an Indigenous activist who testified in court, Greenpeace Inc was present but followed the lead of people on the ground. Its involvement was so minimal that most tribal nations at Standing Rock wouldn’t even have been aware of it. The activist described claims that Greenpeace controlled the resistance as ‘paternalistic’ and emphasised that many Indigenous leaders had the ability to run a complex movement and engage with media themselves.
Greenpeace International’s only relevant action was signing an open letter led by the Dutch civil society organisation BankTrack, alongside 500 other organisations. Meanwhile, Greenpeace Fund had no involvement in the Standing Rock resistance, yet Energy Transfer argues that sharing resources such as office space and contact details with Greenpeace Inc makes it liable.
How is Greenpeace defending itself and what impact has the lawsuit had on its operations?
We argue that Energy Transfer has greatly exaggerated our role in the protests and is attempting to recover costs that are all unrelated to our actions. There is just no evidence of any link between the Greenpeace defendants’ activities and the damages the company claims. And there is certainly no link to any act of violence or property damage.
Greenpeace International has also taken legal action in the Netherlands, using the new European Union anti-SLAPP directive for the first time to challenge what we view as an attempt to drain our resources and silence dissent. Defending ourselves has required significant financial and personnel resources. While Greenpeace has the capacity to fight back, there are concerns that such lawsuits could deter smaller or less experienced organisations from challenging the powerful US oil and gas industry – which appears to be one of the goals of this case.
What are the next steps in the legal proceedings and how do you see this case resolving?
While the jury has reached a verdict that decided the Greenpeace defendants must pay US$666 million for defamation and the other claims, the judge still needs to enter a final judgment. There are obvious issues with jury verdict and we are in the process of challenging those. Greenpeace Inc and Greenpeace Fund have already announced they will appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Greenpeace International is pursuing its case against Energy Transfer in the District Court of Amsterdam, with the first procedural hearing scheduled for 2 July.
The battle is far from over. Greenpeace is determined to defeat these claims and hold Energy Transfer accountable for filing repeated SLAPP suits. This fight extends beyond Greenpeace – it concerns the protection of freedom of expression. An attack on one is an attack on all, and we hope civil society will stand with us.
Former UN Climate Chief Christiana Figueres praised the role of small island states in maintaining the integrity of international climate agreements but said the world was far behind and said that the decarbonisation of the global economy is by now irreversible with or without the craziness in the United States.
Former Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Christiana Figueres, speaking during a press briefing with the Oxford Climate Journalism Network on March 27. Credit: Alison Kentish/IPS
Mar 31 2025 (IPS) – 2025 marks the tenth anniversary of the Paris Climate Agreement. One of its chief architects, Christiana Figueres, says the world is heading in the right direction but warns that urgent action is needed to close critical gaps.
The pact, adopted in 2015 by 195 nations, set out to limit global warming to “well below 2°C” above pre-industrial levels, striving for 1.5°C. But in 2024, the world shattered records as the hottest year ever, surpassing that crucial threshold.
Speaking at a press briefing with the Oxford Climate Journalism Network on March 27, Figueres said while technology and investment are advancing, the world is not moving fast enough.
“We’re far behind,” she said. “We have very clear data points of all of the technologies that are exponentially growing on both sides of the market – the supply side as well as the demand – and we can see that all of that is moving, as well as investment. That definitely defines the direction of travel and the decarbonisation of the global economy is by now irreversible with or without the craziness in the United States. What still is not at the level that we should have is speed and scale.”
A co-founder of Global Optimism, an organisation focused on hope and action in the face of climate change, Figueres emphasised the urgency of the crisis while highlighting the global capacity to address it.
While one in five people globally already experience climate impacts daily, and climate-related costs rose to $320 billion last year, investment in clean technology is outpacing fossil fuels, she noted.
“We had last year two times the level of investment into clean technology versus fossil fuels and the prices continue to fall. Every year they fall even more and more. Solar prices last year fell by a whopping 35%. Electric vehicle batteries fell by 20%,” she said.
Figueres also spoke about the disproportionate burden placed on small island nations, which are already importing fossil fuels at the cost of up to 30% of their national budgets. “These islands are importing the poison that is directly threatening their survival,” she argued, stressing the need for renewable energy solutions like wind and hydro to replace fossil fuels.
The former head of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) also praised the role of small island states in maintaining the integrity of international climate agreements. “It’s not the size of the nation but the integrity of their position that matters,” she said, noting how these nations have consistently held larger emitters accountable.
Asked about the Paris Agreement’s architecture, Figueres defended its approach.
“The Paris Agreement is really strange in its legal bindingness. It is legally binding to all countries that have ratified it, but what is binding is the overall trajectory of decarbonisation to get to net zero by 2050. What is not binding is the level of the NDCs which are the nationally determined contributions that every country has to submit every 5 years and be held accountable against that,” she said, likening the agreement’s style to running a marathon, “the goal is clear, but the pace is up to each runner.”
Figueres says the COP process was designed in the early 1990s as a multilateral platform for countries to negotiate agreements aimed at addressing climate change collectively – something that was critical for establishing frameworks like the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. She stressed that with agreements in place to guide global decarbonisation until 2050, the next phase of climate talks should focus on implementation rather than new negotiations.
“The implementation is mostly on the part of the private sector and the financial sector. Do they need governments to support them? Absolutely, so what governments need to do is to put regulations, incentives, and tax credits in place to accelerate investment in the sectors that we know are going to address climate change and to give long-term certainty to the private sector so that they can do their planning, but those regulations, those incentives, and those tax breaks are not to be negotiated between countries. They are to be enacted nationally, domestically.”
With COP 30 approaching, Figueres urged countries to take a long-term view in their climate planning. “NDCs should align government and private sector ambitions with the next decade’s possibilities, not just the current technologies,” she said.
As host country Brazil prepares for the 2025 UN Climate Talks, Figueres called for a holistic approach to climate policy, linking energy, industry, and nature. She also cautioned against framing COP 30 as a “last chance”, emphasising that it should be seen as a milestone in a longer journey toward global climate goals.
2025 marks the tenth anniversary of the Paris Climate Agreement. One of its chief architects, Christiana Figueres says the world is heading in the right direction but warns that urgent action is needed to close critical gaps.
The pact, adopted in 2015 by 195 nations, set out to limit global warming to “well below 2°C” above pre-industrial levels, striving for 1.5°C. But in 2024, the world shattered records as the hottest year ever, surpassing that crucial threshold.
Speaking at a press briefing with the Oxford Climate Journalism Network on March 27, Figueres said while technology and investment are advancing, the world is not moving fast enough.
“We’re far behind,” she said. “We have very clear data points of all of the technologies that are exponentially growing on both sides of the market – the supply side as well as the demand – and we can see that all of that is moving, as well as investment. That definitely defines the direction of travel and the decarbonisation of the global economy is by now irreversible with or without the craziness in the United States. What still is not at the level that we should have is speed and scale.”
A co-founder of Global Optimism, an organisation focused on hope and action in the face of climate change, Figueres emphasised the urgency of the crisis while highlighting the global capacity to address it.
While one in five people globally already experience climate impacts daily, and climate-related costs rose to $320 billion last year, investment in clean technology is outpacing fossil fuels, she noted.
“We had last year two times the level of investment into clean technology versus fossil fuels and the prices continue to fall. Every year they fall even more and more. Solar prices last year fell by a whopping 35%. Electric vehicle batteries fell by 20%,” she said.
Figueres also spoke about the disproportionate burden placed on small island nations, which are already importing fossil fuels at the cost of up to 30% of their national budgets. “These islands are importing the poison that is directly threatening their survival,” she argued, stressing the need for renewable energy solutions like wind and hydro to replace fossil fuels.
The former head of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) also praised the role of small island states in maintaining the integrity of international climate agreements. “It’s not the size of the nation but the integrity of their position that matters,” she said, noting how these nations have consistently held larger emitters accountable.
Asked about the Paris Agreement’s architecture, Figueres defended its approach.
“The Paris Agreement is really strange in its legal bindingness. It is legally binding to all countries that have ratified it, but what is binding is the overall trajectory of decarbonisation to get to net zero by 2050. What is not binding is the level of the NDCs, which are the nationally determined contributions that every country has to submit every 5 years and be held accountable against that,” she said, likening the agreement’s style to running a marathon, “the goal is clear, but the pace is up to each runner.”
Figueres says the COP process was designed in the early 1990s as a multilateral platform for countries to negotiate agreements aimed at addressing climate change collectively – something that was critical for establishing frameworks like the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. She stressed that with agreements in place to guide global decarbonisation until 2050, the next phase of climate talks should focus on implementation rather than new negotiations.
“The implementation is mostly on the part of the private sector and the financial sector. Do they need governments to support them? Absolutely, so what governments need to do is to put regulations, incentives, and tax credits in place to accelerate investment in the sectors that we know are going to address climate change and to give long-term certainty to the private sector so that they can do their planning, but those regulations, those incentives, and those tax breaks are not to be negotiated between countries. They are to be enacted nationally, domestically.”
With COP 30 approaching, Figueres urged countries to take a long-term view in their climate planning. “NDCs should align government and private sector ambitions with the next decade’s possibilities, not just the current technologies,” she said.
As host country Brazil prepares for the 2025 UN Climate Talks, Figueres called for a holistic approach to climate policy, linking energy, industry, and nature. She also cautioned against framing COP 30 as a “last chance”, emphasising that it should be seen as a milestone in a longer journey toward global climate goals.
The Giant Plastic Tap installation by Canadian artist Benjamin Von Wong.
NEW DELHI, Mar 28 2025 (IPS) – “The size of the faucet highlights the magnitude of the problem. It makes the problem impossible to ignore. We’re used to throwing things ‘away’—but when we’re confronted with what happens when ‘away’ is not an option, I think it creates an emotional wake-up call,” says Benjamin Von Wong.
The 39-year-old Canadian artist and activist is referring to his inspiration behind The Giant Plastic Tap installation, which created a buzz in the art world, highlighting the problem of plastic pollution.
Wong, known for his environmental art installations and hyper-realist art style, created the Giant Plastic Tap that features an oversized faucet seemingly floating in mid-air while spewing plastic waste, serving as a striking metaphor for the world’s urgent need to address plastic production at its source.
He explains, “I wanted to bring the phrase ‘Turn off the plastic tap’ to life in a tangible way. I adapted the concept of the ‘floating fountain’ but distorted it with plastic—to emphasize the urgency of tackling the problem at its source by reducing plastic production, rather than relying solely on downstream solutions like recycling and beach cleanups.”
Reportedly, the global effects of plastic pollution are becoming more evident, highlighting the urgent need for collective action. Scientific studies and policy changes are essential but it is also crucial to acknowledge the influence of art in raising awareness and inspiring people to act.
Art has a unique power to evoke emotions, ignite conversations, and build a deep connection between individuals and the environment.
In the fight against plastic pollution, one art installation has become a powerful symbol of change, with Wong playing an important role.
Plastic pollution is one of the biggest crises of this generation.
The latest study, by charity EA Earth Action and released last year, revealed that more than a third of plastic waste will be improperly handled at the end of its lifecycle. This equates to 68.6 million tonnes of plastic, translating to an average of 28kg of plastic waste per person worldwide. In 2024, approximately 220 million tonnes of plastic waste were generated, marking a 7.11 percent increase since 2021.
Canadian artist Benjamin Von Wong.
Art installed so far
Von Wong, who shifted from mining engineering to environmental activism through art, has created four large-scale faucet installations, showcased at venues including Art Basel, the United Nations Environment Assembly 5.2 in Nairobi (2022), and the United Nations Ocean Conference.
“We’ve installed them in over a dozen locations—but even more exciting is that hundreds of cardboard replicas have been made worldwide,” Wong says.
Wong reflects, “I’m not sure how you measure the impact of art, but I think the fact that this installation has become a symbol for the importance of a global plastic treaty is probably the biggest achievement.”
The Giant Plastic Tap has been featured at previous INC (Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for the plastic treaty) sessions. However, its absence was notably felt during the INC-5 conference in Busan, South Korea.
Wong says, “I did my best to have the tap installation placed in Busan, but it wasn’t allowed. Instead, the ‘beached whale’ was placed on the lawns of BEXCO, the exhibition center that hosted the event last year.” He adds, “Despite reaching out over six months in advance to the operations team, the delegation, and securing local partners with independent funding, we were met with silence.”
Interestingly, INC-5 failed to reach a consensus on the global plastic treaty due to disagreements over national interests, industry influence, financial and technical support, and enforcement mechanisms.
Despite current challenges in global plastic treaty negotiations, including the presence of fossil fuel lobbyists and the constraints of consensus-based decision-making, Artist Wong remains optimistic about the future. “I’m certain we will find a way forward,” he asserts, pointing to the numerous dedicated individuals and organizations working to advance the treaty.
Meanwhile, after the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee decided to postpone the fifth session, the second part of the fifth session (INC-5.2) is scheduled to take place from 5 to 14 August 2025 at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, Switzerland.
Involving locals
Wong involved the local communities to complete the installation at UNEA 5.2 in Nairobi. The project collaborated with the Human Needs Project to collect three tons of plastic from the Kibera slums. The initiative employed over 80 local women to clean and organize the plastic, ensuring their voices were heard by world leaders. “We also fundraised to support the creation of a more local waste management system,” he adds.
The installation has achieved significant success in its mission to influence public perception. Viewers consistently grasp the fundamental message about the need to stop plastic pollution, and the installation’s visual impact helps transform an intellectual discussion into an emotional experience. Its symbolism has become particularly significant in the context of the global plastic treaty discussions.
Lastly, can art play a pivotal role in driving real-world change? To this Wong draws a compelling parallel: “What is the value of a monument like the Statue of Liberty? How would you measure it?”
The success of The Giant Plastic Tap suggests that art remains a powerful catalyst for environmental awareness and social change, particularly when it transforms complex global issues into visceral, emotional experiences that resonate across cultural and linguistic barriers.
Civil society organisations and community leaders at the Finance in Common Summit 2023. Credit: Sebastian Barros/Forus
CAPE TOWN, South Africa, Feb 24 2025 (IPS) – As public development banks gather for the Finance in Common Summit (FiCS) in Cape Town, South Africa, civil society and community activists from across the world are demanding a shift to a community-led, equitable, and human rights-based development approach, that prioritise people and planet over profit, and a reform of the global financial architecture.
“With more than 10 % global investment flowing through them each year, public development banks hold immense responsibility—not only to fund infrastructure and development but to do so in a way that is just, inclusive, and sustainable. Development that does not listen to the voices of the people it affects is not true development; it deepens inequalities, harms ecosystems, and leaves communities behind. True development is not done for communities, but with them”, says Mavalow Christelle Kalhoule, Chair at Forus.
Since its first edition in 2020, civil society has been playing a critical role at FiCS in ensuring public development banks are accountable to the people they serve, and in amplifying the voices – too often ignored – of communities in the Global South who are most directly affected by development projects.
“Over the next few days, the world’s public development banks will be patting themselves on the back for all the good they’re doing around the world. But all that glitters is not gold. Way too often these institutions are replicating a neocolonial and neoliberal approach, dividing the world between those to be sacrificed and those to benefit from the sacrifices”, says Ony Soa Ratsifandrihamanana, Africa Regional Coordinator at the Coalition for Human Rights in Development.
Civil society organisations and community leaders at the Finance in Common Summit 2023. Credit: Sebastian Barros/Forus
Amidst rising inequality, debt crises, and the climate emergency, public development banks must move beyond rhetoric and commit to concrete, transformative actions. This is why over 300 civil society groups have joined forces to bring their demands at FiCS, calling on development banks to champion a new era of development finance, placing human rights, community leadership, and environmental sustainability at the core of all financing decisions.
“The world is passing through the most critical and testing times of its history and once again the solutions are being imposed without the consent, participation and engagement of citizens at large and representative civil society in particular. This is the time to think, reflect and act out of the box, and this opportunity of coming together at FiCS should not be considered business as usual,” says Zia ur Rehman, Secretary General and Director at the Asia Development Alliance.
In a context of shrinking civic space and increasing attacks against the human rights movement, development banks should also play a more decisive role to make sure people can actively and safely participate in decision-making processes and consultations.
“While development banks acknowledge the importance of civil society engagement, their frameworks often fall short in implementation, resulting in limited access to information, tokenistic public participation, and a lack of accountability for reprisals against activists,” says Manana Kochladze, Strategic Area Leader – Democratization and Human Rights at CEE Bankwatch Network. “There is a pressing need for development banks to collaboratively develop a unified and proactive approach to safeguarding and expanding civic space”.
More than 60 civil society organizations and community activists will also join the Summit in-person, to share their first-hand testimonies on the actual impact of development projects. From renewables in Kenya to green hydrogen projects in Chile, too often projects presented as sustainable are displacing local communities, polluting the environment, and failing to ensure that the benefits trickle down to those most in need.
Civil society organisations and community leaders at the Finance in Common Summit 2023. Credit: Sebastian Barros/Forus
“When decisions are made without the input of local voices, finance becomes an instrument of exclusion, perpetuating inequality and undermining true progress. We demand a comprehensive overhaul of global financial structures that prioritizes community rights. A shift to people-led finance will enable genuine economic transformation, lifting up every individual and fostering resilient, inclusive growth that benefits society as a whole,” says Ndeye Fatou Sy, Programs Manager at Lumière Synergie pour le Développement (Senegal).
The Lesotho Highlands Water Project, for instance, provides water to South Africa in exchange for royalties and generation of hydropower for Lesotho, but has led to devastating socio-economic and environmental impacts. Hundreds of families have been involuntarily resettled and more than 30,000 people lost their cropland and grazing land, with a particular impact on women.
“As we gather at the Finance in Common Summit, we remind public development banks that front-line communities should not bear the cost of development. Public development banks must create and use independent accountability mechanisms to hear directly from local communities and ensure that their land, livelihoods, and environment are protected,” says Robi Chacha Mosenda, Senior Associate at Accountability Counsel.
Civil society and community representatives participating at the Summit will also present viable and alternative solutions, such as small-scale and renewable energy solutions that are led by Indigenous communities themselves.
“Any form of financing by multilateral development banks should start with support to community-led planning initiatives that ascertain that decisions on energy alternatives centre the rights of affected persons and communities”, says Mwebe John, Africa Finance Campaigner at Recourse. “Multilateral development banks are investing more money than ever into renewable energy, but the scale and kind of projects matters if these investments are going to truly power people and protect the planet. Community-led projects are popping up everywhere – from rooftop solar in India, to micro hydropower in Indonesia, and rural mini grids in Rwanda and Tanzania. These are the types of projects to be supported,” adds Federico Sibaja, IMF Campaign Manager at Recourse.
These stories show that it is key for development banks to use FiCS as an opportunity to step out from their echo chamber, listen to those who are bearing the brunt of their investments, and strengthen the dialogue with civil society.
Lorena Cotza is Communications Lead, Coalition for Human Rights in Development
LONDON / MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Dec 24 2024 (IPS) – It’s been a tumultuous year, and a tough one for struggles for human rights. Civil society’s work to seek social justice and hold the powerful to account has been tested at every turn. Civil society has kept holding the line, resisting power grabs and regressive legislation, calling out injustice and claiming some victories, often at great cost. And things aren’t about to get any easier, as key challenges identified in 2024 are likely to intensify in 2025.
Andrew Firmin
1. More people are likely to be exposed to conflict and its consequences, including humanitarian and human rights disasters, mass displacement and long-term trauma. The message of 2024 is largely one of impunity: perpetrators of conflict, including in Israel and Russia, will be confident they can resist international pressure and escape accountability. While there may be some kind of ceasefire in Gaza or halt to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, those responsible for large-scale atrocities are unlikely to face justice. Impunity is also likely to prevail in the conflicts taking place largely off the global radar, including in Myanmar and Sudan. There will also be growing concern about the use of AI and automated weapons in warfare, a troublingly under-regulated area.
As recent events in Lebanon and Syria have shown, changing dynamics, including shifting calculations made by countries such as Iran, Israel, Russia, Turkey and the USA, mean that frozen conflicts could reignite and new ones could erupt. As in Syria, these shifts could create sudden moments of opportunity; the international community and civil society must respond quickly when these come.
Inés M. Pousadela
2. The second Trump administration will have a global impact on many current challenges. It’s likely to reduce pressure on Israel, hamper the response to the climate crisis, put more strain on already flawed and struggling global governance institutions and embolden right-wing populists and nationalists the world over. These will bring negative consequences for civic space – the space for civil society, which depends on the freedoms of association, expression and peaceful assembly. Funding for civil society is also likely to be drastically reduced as a result of the new administration’s shifting priorities.
3. 2025 is the year that states are required to develop new plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change under the Paris Agreement. The process will culminate in the COP30 climate summit in Brazil, likely the world’s last chance to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees above preindustrial levels. This will only happen if states stand up to fossil fuel companies and look beyond narrow short-term interests. Failing that, more of the debate may come to focus on adaptation. The unresolved question of who will pay for climate transition will remain central. Meanwhile, extreme weather events such as heatwaves and floods can be expected to continue to devastate communities, impose high economic costs, drive migration and exacerbate conflicts.
4. Globally, economic dysfunction is likely to increase, with more people struggling to afford basic necessities, increasingly including housing, as prices continue to rise, with climate change and conflict among the causes. The gap between the struggling many and the ultra-wealthy few will become more visible, and anger at rising prices or taxes will drive people – particularly young people deprived of opportunities – onto the streets. State repression will often follow. Frustration with the status quo means people will keep looking for political alternatives, a situation right-wing populists and nationalists will keep exploiting. But demands for labour rights, particularly among younger workers, will also likely increase, along with pressure for policies such as wealth taxes, a universal basic income and a shorter working week.
5. A year when the largest number of people ever went to the polls has ended – but there are still plenty of elections to come. Where elections are free and fair, voters are likely to keep rejecting incumbents, particularly due to economic hardship. Right-wing populists and nationalists are likely to benefit the most, but the tide will eventually turn: once they’ve been around long enough to be perceived as part of the political establishment, they too will see their positions threatened, and they can be expected to respond with authoritarianism, repression and the scapegoating of excluded groups. More politically manipulated misogyny, homophobia, transphobia and anti-migrant rhetoric can be expected as a result.
6. Even if developments in generative AI slow as the current model reaches the limits of the human-generated material it feeds on, international regulation and data protection will likely continue to lag behind. The use of AI-enabled surveillance, such as facial recognition, against activists is likely to increase and become more normalised. The challenge of disinformation is likely to intensify, particularly around conflicts and elections.
Several tech leaders have actively taken the side of right-wing populists and authoritarians, putting their platforms and wealth at the service of their political ambitions. Emerging alternative social media platforms offer some promise but are likely to face similar problems as they grow.
7. Climate change, conflict, economic strife, repression of LGBTQI+ identities and civil and political repression will continue to drive displacement and migration. Most migrants will remain in difficult and underfunded conditions in global south countries. In the global north, right-wing shifts are expected to drive more restrictive and repressive policies, including the deportation of migrants to countries where they may be at risk. Attacks on civil society working to defend their rights, including by assisting at sea and land borders, are also likely to intensify.
8. The backlash against women’s and LGBTQI+ rights will continue. The US right wing will continue to fund anti-rights movements in the global south, notably in Commonwealth African countries, while European conservative groups will continue to export their anti-rights campaigns, as some Spanish organisations have long done throughout Latin America. Disinformation efforts from multiple sources, including Russian state media, will continue to influence public opinion. This will leave civil society largely on the defensive, focused on consolidating gains and preventing setbacks.
9. As a result of these trends, the ability of civil society organisations and activists to operate freely will remain under pressure in the majority of countries. Just when its work is most needed, civil society will face growing restrictions on fundamental civic freedoms, including in the form of anti-NGO laws and laws that label civil society as agents of foreign powers, the criminalisation of protests and increasing threats to the safety of activists and journalists. Civil society will have to devote more of its resources to protecting its space, at the expense of the resources available to promote and advance rights.
10. Despite these many challenges, civil society will continue to strive on all fronts. It will continue to combine advocacy, protests, online campaigns, strategic litigation and international diplomacy. As awareness grows of the interconnected and transnational nature of the challenges, it will emphasise solidarity actions that transcend national boundaries and make connections between different struggles in different contexts.
Even in difficult circumstances, civil society achieved some notable victories in 2024. In the Czech Republic, civil society’s efforts led to a landmark reform of rape laws, and in Poland they resulted in a law making emergency contraception available without prescription, overturning previous restrictive legislation. After extensive civil society advocacy, Thailand led the way in Southeast Asia by passing a marriage equality law, while Greece became the first predominantly Christian Orthodox country to legalise same-sex marriage
People defended democracy. In South Korea, people took to the streets in large numbers to resist martial law, while in Bangladesh, protest action led to the ousting of a longstanding authoritarian government. In Guatemala, a president committed to fighting corruption was sworn in after civil society organised mass protests to demand that powerful elites respect the election results, and in Venezuela, hundreds of thousands organised to defend the integrity of the election, defeated the authoritarian government in the polls and took to the streets in the face of severe repression when the results weren’t recognised. In Senegal, civil society mobilised to prevent an attempt to postpone an election that resulted in an opposition win.
Civil society won victories in climate and environmental litigation – including in Ecuador, India and Switzerland – to force governments to recognise the human rights impacts of climate change and do more to reduce emissions and curb pollution. Civil society also took to the courts to pressure governments to stop arms sales to Israel, with a successful verdict in the Netherlands and others pending.
In 2025, the struggle continues. Civil society will keep carrying the torch of hope that a more peaceful, just, equal and sustainable world is possible. This idea will remain as important as the tangible impact we’ll continue to achieve despite the difficult circumstances.
Andrew Firmin is Editor-in-Chief and Inés M. Pousadela is Senior Research Specialist at CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation. The two are co-directors and writers for CIVICUS Lens and co-authors of the State of Civil Society Report.
