Did you know that climate change—along with its numerous other sins— poses a threat to food security? For example, changes in rainfall patterns will affect poeple's ability to grow food and feed livestock. There are other connections between climate change and food, too. Some foods require huge amounts of energy and water in their production. Others are exported and travel long distances, leaving big carbon footprints.

On World Food Day (October 16), the Food and Agricultural Association (FAO) and World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts launched the Food Security and Climate Change Challenge Badge. This awesome guide (pdf) is a great way to learn all about climate change and food security issues and is also full of ideas and ways in which you can take action to reduce your footprint and your impact on the environment.

On the last day of the World Bank Meetings, UNDP Turkey organized a session on the 2009 Human Development Report, titled “Overcoming barriers: Human mobility and development.” The panel had some great speakers, including Kemal Dervis, former UNDP Administrator and current director of the Brookings Institution.

The session started with a very obvious question: in a world marred by global recession, financial markets in a state of shock and turmoil, and rampant uncertainty despite some positive signs of a bottom out, why did this year’s HDR choose to look at mobility and migrants? Interestingly enough, when you gain a better understanding of what migration means for both the “giving” and the “receiving” states, the answer is pretty clear.

The biggest misconception that a lot of people have is that the end of a war means total peace. Most, if not all of the time, post-conflict can be one of the most trying times for the people of any country, particularly for women. Post-conflict means the restoration and the rebuilding of communities. It’s that time when many, especially women and children, struggle to get over the trauma wrought by widespread violence.

It’s sad however, how very few member states of the United Nations are actually supporting the National Action Plan, a resolution on heavily involving women in the peace building and peace keeping process. Now in its 9th year, the resolution has only managed to get the support of 16 member states and that’s not even half of the entire United Nations.

The OECD bulletin last week came with a headline that is catchy at the very least - Conditional Aid: Recipients can say “no.”

Of course, whilst a general healthy skepticism towards aid and its conditions is to be kept, what seem to be the main points in this debate are the following:

The first is that, whilst all governments can articulately pronounce the word “no,” the reality is that they are most often obliged to say yes. In its simplest form, it is a case of “beggars can’t be choosers.” Poor countries, specifically those without the resources (not necessarily natural) to spur a process of growth, are unable to stand up to larger (or rather, richer and more powerful) countries offering some short-term remedies for their pain.