Hay nombres que se usan por acuerdo común, como niñas y niños, adolescentes, jóvenes o menores de edad. La cosa parece estar clara. Pero hay un problema: son categorías desiguales que se entrecruzan. En algunas ocasiones se usan como sinónimos, otras de forma complementaria y otras, excluyente.
A veces, la palabra menor se utiliza con cierta connotación negativa, es burocrática y poco empática. Aparece frecuentemente en los medios de comunicación en noticias sobre infracciones, vulnerabilidades o conflictos.
Ni siquiera el nombre de la Convención sobre los Derechos del Niño –Convention on the Rights of the Child– está exento de controversia. El genérico children –niños– hoy nos resulta excluyente de las niñas y de las personas no binarias.
¿Cuál es la definición de “niño”?
La Convención define así al niño: “Para los efectos de la presente Convención, se entiende por niño todo ser humano menor de dieciocho años de edad, salvo que, en virtud de la ley que le sea aplicable, haya alcanzado antes la mayoría de edad”. Si no se establece a quién se aplican estos derechos, la Convención sería casi papel mojado.
En esta definición hay tres elementos fundamentales:
Ese límite de edad se aplica a los objetivos de la Convención, no de forma abstracta.
Es extensible a todos los seres de la especie Homo sapiens.
Establece que el “niño” es una persona jurídica autónoma en base a la edad oficial (la del registro de nacimiento).
Este último punto no es banal. Es precisamente su identificación lo que permite que a alguien le sean reconocidos o no estos derechos. Sin una edad oficial no hay derechos que valgan. De ahí la importancia y trascendencia de las pruebas de determinación de edad en menores sin identificación. Sobre todo en circunstancias como un juicio, cuando se decide si alguien es juzgado como persona adulta o no.
En la Constitución española también se establece que la minoría de edad ocupa de los 0 hasta los 18 años cumplidos: “Los españoles son mayores de edad a los dieciocho años”. Precisamente se ha definido la infancia, la niñez o la adolescencia por oposición al mundo adulto.
Un actor social con voz propia
Desde 1989, la Convención ha definido al “niño” como una persona jurídica que puede ejercer y reclamar sus derechos. Esto ha provocado una mayor concienciación sobre su situación e impulsado debates sobre esos derechos. Emerge un actor social con voz propia.
Históricamente, en Europa la definición del menor era como hija o hijo, en base a su pertenencia familiar. Hasta que se emancipase al fundar una familia propia, la responsabilidad recaía en los cabezas de familia. Ahora, al “niño” se le reconoce como sujeto de derecho propio, independientemente de la familia y condición social. Desde que nace es un sujeto (un futuro ciudadano) con derechos específicos.
Todo esto nos pone ante el dilema de cómo nombrar a las personas no adultas. No nombrar no es una solución, como tampoco lo son los eufemismos, que nombran lo mismo con otras palabras.
Qué palabras podemos usar
¿Se puede cambiar la realidad solamente usando otras palabras? Se abren tres escenarios:
La confluencia del mundo del “niño” con el del adulto. Esto supondría su disolución o, en otras palabras, la desaparición de la niñez.
Un simple cambio de nombre, una denominación aparentemente más neutra y empática. Se seguiría perpetuando el principio de “no adulto” bajo otro nombre.
El reforzamiento de un estatus propio, lo que implicaría seguir siendo identificado como diferente al adulto, pero no discriminado, sino con mayor peso social.
Infantes, niñas y niños, preadolescentes, adolescentes y jóvenes
La Organización Mundial de la Salud diferencia entre infantes (neonato, desde el nacimiento hasta 1 mes; bebé, de 1 mes a 1 año), niñas y niños (que incluye primera infancia, 1-5 años; infancia media, 5-10 años; preadolescentes, 10-15; adolescentes, 15-19 y jóvenes (de 15 a 24). Si atendemos a la madurez sexual, no coincide, y las franjas son aún más difusas y variables: a partir de los 8 años en niñas y 9 en niños. Y el aspecto físico en las proximidades a la adultez o en la pubertad tampoco ayuda a ser precisos en establecer la edad.
Sujetos de derechos propios
La discusión, abierta y fundamental, gira en torno al adultocentrismo, la discriminación por edad (edadismo) y la falta de reconocimiento de derechos o de capacidad.
Menor de edad hace referencia a quién se beneficia de unos derechos específicos, no a las características innatas de una persona. Llamémoslas niñas y niños, adolescentes o de otra forma, pero tienen que ser identificados por su edad para ser reconocidos como sujetos de derechos propios. Una alternativa podrían ser pruebas de madurez, pero eso sería otra historia.
Las personas firmantes no son asalariadas, ni consultoras, ni poseen acciones, ni reciben financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y han declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado anteriormente.
“Todo empezó con una foto editada con inteligencia artificial”, relata Ana. Un compañero la compartió en un grupo privado y, en horas, la humillación circulaba por todo el centro. Ahora Ana no solo sufre mensajes hirientes en redes, también se enfrenta al silencio cómplice de los pasillos y a notas crueles en su pupitre. Para ella, el mundo digital y el físico se han fundido en un único espacio de malestar del que no puede escapar.
El caso de Ana no es una excepción. Relatos como este son habituales en el ámbito educativo. En una clase promedio de 30 estudiantes, las estadísticas de informes como los de UNICEF o de la Fundación Mutua Madrileña y la Fundación ANAR indican que, de media, dos o tres estudiantes por aula podrían estar sufriendo esta situación en silencio.
El ciberacoso tiene efectos devastadores en la salud mental: depresión, ansiedad, alteraciones del sueño, sentimientos de soledad y, en los casos más graves, ideación suicida. A pesar de los esfuerzos institucionales y de los debates sobre la restricción de dispositivos, las investigaciones sugieren que las medidas puramente punitivas no bastan.
¿Quiere recibir artículos como este?Suscríbase a La Conversación Docente y reciba los últimos análisis y tendencias en el sector educativo, seleccionados por nuestra editora de Educación Eva Catalán.
Nuestra investigación reciente revela que cuando los estudiantes perciben en sus docentes comportamientos emocionalmente competentes (empatía, escucha activa y validación), la cibervictimización tiene menos consecuencias psicológicas graves.
El clima emocional del aula actúa como un “amortiguador”, y en este clima no solo influye que el alumnado disponga de buenas herramientas emocionales, sino que sienta apoyo o comprensión de su profesorado.
Una influencia positiva
No se trata de responsabilizar al profesorado de lo que ocurre tras las pantallas, sino de reconocer su influencia en el ambiente emocional del aula. En el caso de Ana, un profesor o profesora emocionalmente competente habría detectado cambios en su comportamiento (por ejemplo, menos participación, mayor aislamiento o descenso en el compromiso académico) y habría generado un espacio de conversación privada para preguntarle cómo se encontraba y ofrecer herramientas para intervenir.
Una formación sólida en competencias emocionales facilita la detección temprana y permite ofrecer a víctimas como Ana un entorno seguro que amortigüe el impacto psicológico mientras se ponen en marcha las medidas institucionales y restaurativas necesarias.
Clima emocional y docente
Para que los profesores y profesoras sean percibidos por sus estudiantes como figuras en las que confiar y capaces de construir un clima positivo en el aula, se pueden poner en práctica una serie de comportamientos en el día a día.
Algunas claves pueden ser:
Mostrar a chicos y chicas que nos importa cómo se sienten. Iniciar la clase con preguntas como: “¿Qué tal el día?” o “¿Cómo estáis?” puede parecer un gesto sencillo, pero prestar atención a las respuestas, mostrar interés o retomar más tarde algo que hayan comentado ayuda a transmitir que su bienestar importa.
Mostrarse accesible y facilitar la comunicación más allá de los contenidos académicos. Por ejemplo, aprovechar los cambios de clase o el inicio para mantener conversaciones informales. Esto puede ayudar a crear un clima de cercanía donde el alumnado se sienta cómodo compartiendo preocupaciones.
Validar las emociones del alumnado sin minimizarlas. Por ejemplo, si surge una discusión entre estudiantes en una clase el o la docente puede reconocer primero el enfado o la frustración antes de intervenir para resolver el conflicto. De esta forma se reduce la tensión inicial y el alumnado se siente escuchado, lo que facilita reconducir la situación.
Identificar cambios en el comportamiento y generar espacios seguros de conversación. Prestar atención a señales como una menor participación en clase, mayor aislamiento de los compañeros o una caída repentina en el rendimiento académico puede ayudar a detectar situaciones de malestar. Por ejemplo, si una estudiante como Ana que suele participar activamente lleva varias semanas sin hacerlo, puede ser útil buscar un momento tranquilo al final de la clase o en una tutoría para preguntarle cómo se encuentra.
Estos comportamientos fortalecen el vínculo entre docentes y estudiantes y pueden ayudar a que el profesorado sea percibido como una figura de referencia. Además, prestar atención a las claves emocionales del aula facilita la detección temprana de situaciones de malestar o de posibles dinámicas de acoso o ciberacoso.
No se trata únicamente de activar protocolos ante un conflicto, sino de sostener una cultura escolar que prevenga el daño antes de que aparezca. Y la prevención eficaz no nace únicamente de normas y sanciones, sino de relaciones personales sólidas y entornos educativos donde el respeto y la empatía forman parte de la experiencia diaria del alumnado. Cuando estas competencias se trabajan de manera sistemática y transversal apostando por la implicación de todos los agentes educativos es cuando se reducen las conductas de riesgo.
Este trabajo forma parte del proyecto de I+D+i PID2020-117006RB-I00, financiado por MCIN/AEI/10.13039/ 501100011033/ y el Grupo PAIDI CTS-1048 (Junta de Andalucía). Esta investigación también ha sido apoyada por la Universidad de Málaga. Financiación parcial para el cargo de acceso abierto: Universidad de Málaga / CBUA.
Este trabajo deriva parcialmente del apoyo de la Junta de Andalucía bajo el contrato POSTDOC 21 00364.
Jorge Gómez Hombrados recibe fondos del Ministerio de Universidades (FPU21/02323).
Natalio Extremera Pacheco no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
Source: The Conversation – (in Spanish) – By Armando Alvares Garcia Júnior, Profesor de Derecho Internacional y de Relaciones Internacionales, UNIR – Universidad Internacional de La Rioja
Los sistemas de mensajería instantánea para uso institucional están a punto de dejar de pertenecer a Meta. John Smith / Unsplash. , CC BY-SA
WhatsApp no va a desaparecer de los móviles de los europeos, pero sí está perdiendo terreno en los despachos oficiales. La razón es simple: la Unión Europea y varios gobiernos nacionales quieren separar la comunicación privada de la institucional, y hacerlo con herramientas que estén bajo control europeo, por motivos de soberanía digital, seguridad y protección de datos.
Durante años, WhatsApp se convirtió en una especie de lengua franca digital. Se usa para organizar reuniones, coordinar equipos y, también, para intercambiar mensajes de trabajo.
El problema es que, cuando esa costumbre entra en la administración pública, deja de ser solo una cuestión de comodidad: pasan a circular por una plataforma privada asuntos sensibles, con un riesgo evidente para la confidencialidad y para la trazabilidad de la información.
El peligro del cifrado de extremo a extremo
Muchas veces se piensa que, si una aplicación tiene cifrado de extremo a extremo, ya es suficiente. Pero el debate europeo va mucho más allá. Aunque el contenido del mensaje esté protegido, siguen existiendo los metadatos: quién habla con quién, cuándo, desde dónde y con qué frecuencia. Ese rastro puede ser muy valioso para fines comerciales, pero también para inteligencia o espionaje.
Además, el servicio pertenece a Meta, una empresa estadounidense, y eso abre otra discusión: quién controla la infraestructura, bajo qué jurisdicción opera y qué ocurre cuando entran en juego leyes extraterritoriales. La Unión Europea quiere reducir esa dependencia tecnológica porque la considera un problema estratégico, no solo técnico.
En Alemania, el Bundesmessenger se ha consolidado como alternativa institucional; Bélgica ha impulsado BIM. Otros países, como Países Bajos, Luxemburgo y Polonia, también avanzan en soluciones propias.
La Comisión Europea, por su parte, está reforzando su estrategia de soberanía digital. Bruselas insiste en que la autonomía estratégica no significa aislarse, sino controlar mejor las infraestructuras críticas y reducir vulnerabilidades frente a actores externos.
La idea central es que Europa no quiere depender de una aplicación extranjera para comunicaciones oficiales sensibles. Si una administración maneja presupuestos, sanciones, contratos, seguridad o diplomacia por una app comercial, está cediendo parte del control sobre su información y sobre sus canales de trabajo.
Por eso, el movimiento se interpreta como una política de soberanía digital. Se trata de establecer una frontera clara entre la mensajería cotidiana de los ciudadanos y la comunicación institucional de los Estados.
A corto plazo, el cambio parece más probable en el sector público que en la población general, si la UE consolida servicios interoperables, seguros y sencillos. Si las alternativas europeas logran unir privacidad, facilidad de uso y adopción institucional, el abandono de WhatsApp en la administración se convertirá en tendencia irreversible.
Para los ciudadanos, en cambio, WhatsApp sigue siendo muy difícil de reemplazar por el efecto red: lo usa casi todo el mundo y eso hace costoso cambiar de plataforma.
Impactos del cambio
Para las administraciones públicas europeas, este cambio supondrá una transformación profunda en la gestión diaria. Los funcionarios pasarán de depender de una sola app universal a herramientas diseñadas específicamente para entornos institucionales, con protocolos estrictos de auditoría y retención de mensajes. Esto blindaría la confidencialidad y facilitaría el cumplimiento de normativas como el RGPD, además de evitar multas millonarias por fugas accidentales de datos sensibles.
Finalmente, desde el punto de vista operativo, se espera una mayor interoperabilidad entre países. Como ejemplo concreto, imaginemos a un diplomático español que se coordina operaciones diplomáticas sensibles con su homólogo alemán sin fricciones técnicas: los sistemas federados permitirían fluidez y seguridad, fortaleciendo la cohesión europea frente a eventuales crisis.
El riesgo principal es una curva de aprendizaje inicial –la resistencia natural al cambio entre usuarios–. Aun así, si la transición avanza al ritmo previsto, el abandono de WhatsApp tenderá a consolidarse en ministerios y agencias a partir de este año.
Armando Alvares Garcia Júnior no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
Anti-immigrant marches in several major South African cities (such as Tshwane and Johannesburg) in early May 2026 once again led to questions being asked about xenophobia in post-apartheid South Africa.
In the wake of the protests President Cyril Ramaphosa called on South Africans to embrace solidarity with their African neighbours. For their part, foreign governments lodged their protests while police sought to curtail violence.
The tension in the country was palpable.
Are the recent outbreaks of anti-immigrant activism a harbinger of a wider uptick in anti-migrant sentiment amongst South Africans? Recent public opinion data from the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) suggests that this might be the case.
The HSRC’s South African Social Attitudes Survey is an important source of information on what ordinary South Africans think about international migration. The survey series consists of nationally representative, repeated cross-sectional surveys that have been conducted annually by the HSRC since 2003.
The latest data, from the 2025 survey, show that South Africans are more hostile towards immigrants than at any other time before since the survey began in 2003. An important dimension of the change has been an attitudinal shift and hardening of attitudes towards migrants among poorer and working-class adults. In addition, the recent growth of anti-immigrant sentiment has been geographically concentrated in four provinces: Mpumalanga, Gauteng, Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal.
The rise in anti-immigrant sentiment is particularly concerning given that the country is due to hold local government elections on 4 November 2026. Aspirant political parties, in an attempt to maintain or gain power, may seek to exploit anti-immigrant sentiment for their own ends. In this way elections can provide a potential accelerant for xenophobia.
South African Social Attitudes Survey has included the following in its questionnaire since 2003:
Please indicate which of the following statements applies to you? I generally welcome to South Africa… (i) All immigrants; (ii) Some immigrants; (iii) No immigrants; and (iv) Uncertain.
In 2003 about a third (34%) of the South African adult population said that they would welcome all immigrants. The remainder indicated that they would accept either none (32%) or some (35%).
The proportion of the public that would be prepared to welcome foreigners tended to fluctuate within a narrow band over the 2003-2017 period.
But around the time of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, the research data began to show an upswing in anti-immigrant sentiment.
About a quarter (26%) of those surveyed said that they would welcome all immigrants during the 2021 survey round. This was similar to figures in the mid-2010s.
But the share that held this hospitable attitude fell in subsequent survey rounds. In 2025 15% of adults said that they would welcome all foreigners.
Conversely, the proportion of the public adopting a hostile position (in other words ‘welcome no immigrants’) increased from 30% in 2021 to 42% in 2025.
Geography and class
The provinces with the highest growth in anti-immigrant sentiment – Mpumalanga, Gauteng, Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal – are ones through which most immigrants travel and often settle.
The situation has become particularly delicate in KwaZulu-Natal. The share of adults in the province who said that they would welcome no immigrants grew from 23% in 2021 to 45% in 2023 and then again to 60% in 2025.
The upsurge in hostility in KwaZulu-Natal could be linked to growing popular anger against the current economic and political status quo. A staggering 88% of provincial residents are unhappy with present economic conditions, and an equal proportion expect conditions to worsen over the next five years.
The notable attitudinal shift among poor people is also concerning.
South Africa is a highly unequal nation characterised by stark economic divisions. Most citizens can be found on the wrong side of these divides and could be classified as economically disadvantaged.
Historically, as research has shown, anti-immigrant sentiment in the country tended to cut across class divisions. But in the years following the COVID-19 pandemic, something changed.
Before the pandemic, South African Social Attitudes Survey data showed a linear relationship between economic disadvantage and anti-immigrant sentiment. In the years following the pandemic, however, a clear pattern emerged. As the lockdowns ended and the post-pandemic recovery began, most socioeconomic groups in South Africa became more and more hostile towards immigrants. But antipathy grew at a much more aggressive rate for the low and lower middle socioeconomic groups.
During the 2025 survey round, adults in these groups were much more hostile towards foreigners than those in the upper middle and high socio-economic groups.
The drivers
What could have caused the economically disadvantaged to become more antagonistic towards immigrants over the last five years or so?
It could be argued that the poor have become more likely to scapegoat foreigners for the failures and inequalities of the post-pandemic economic recovery. Poor people have been badly affected by a cost of living crisis and persistent deindustrialisation. They need someone to blame and foreigners have long provided a handy scapegoat.
The South African economy has struggled in the last few years, dealing with doggedly high unemployment. The country also has notoriously high crime rates. Such problems, as experts have argued again and again, cannot be directly laid at the feet of immigrants living in the country. But it would appear that they are getting blamed anyway.
What should be done?
The South African government has a National Action Plan to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.
Implemented in March 2019, one of its goals was to reduce public hostility towards migrants. Clearly, whether because of a lack of resources or government coordination, the plan has not succeeded.
The country needs to reinvigorate it and its associated processes. What’s needed is political, civic and community leaders to address legitimate socio-economic grievances without allowing immigrants to become scapegoats for deeper structural failures in society.
Efforts to strengthen social cohesion, improve economic inclusion, enhance public trust in governance and promote responsible political leadership are also crucial.
Well-provisioned and effective anti-xenophobia strategies are urgently required to address the worsening situation. The alternative is to allow hatred to flourish.
Steven Gordon has received funding from South Africa’s National Research Foundation. He is affiliated with the University of Johannesburg.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jessie-Lee McIsaac, Associate Professor, Canada Research Chair in Early Childhood: Diversity and Transitions, Mount Saint Vincent University
Feeding children can be challenging. It is sometimes hard to know if you’re getting it right.
We want the best for our children, and we often think that means making sure they eat the right amounts of the right foods. Research tells us that we also need to think about how we’re supporting children to eat, and the messages they receive about food.
With more children attending child care for the vast majority of their day, early learning settings are critically important for promoting children’s optimal growth and development during foundational years.
It takes time for young children to learn about different foods and textures. Some children are adventurous eaters who may be excited to try new foods and accept them more quickly. Other children may be naturally more cautious eaters and need support or extra time.
A responsive feeding environment allows children to communicate their feelings of hunger and fullness, and in this way encourages children to regulate their own eating.
When caregivers respect a child’s autonomy, children can build comfort with a wide variety of foods and textures. This allows children to practise self-regulation by responding to feelings of hunger and fullness, and develop a lifelong healthy relationship with food.
Responsive feeding in child care
We established the CELEBRATE Feeding project, which stands for Coaching in Early Learning Environments to Build a Responsive Approach to Eating and Feeding.
We developed the CELEBRATE Feeding Approach as a flexible framework to support key educator behaviours in priority areas of change. These areas include mealtime routines and how educators talk about food throughout the day.
When we support children in having control of what and how much goes on their plate, they build autonomy with their decisions about the food as well as physical and fine-motor skills.
This meant moving away from coercing, praising or rewarding children based on what they were eating. Children may take a bite when pressured to eat, but in the long-term this pressure can backfire and make them less willing to accept the food.
We encouraged educators to focus on more neutral language by avoiding labelling foods as good or bad, and not pressuring children to eat more or less of certain foods.
Table talk
Educators also engaged children in conversations at the table that were not just about food. Focusing on connection and fun at the table, rather than worrying about what children are eating, can especially help children who may be stressed at mealtime because of household food insecurity or because they have been labelled as difficult or picky eaters.
We want to create a safe, positive environment for children to enjoy a variety of foods and avoid attaching feelings of guilt and shame to food.
Educators were coached to provide repeated opportunities for children to explore foods, without the expectation to eat or taste. This was achieved through meals and play, gardening, cooking, sensory activities and food-related books, songs and materials.
Children explored food through sight, smell, touch and taste in positive and joyful ways to support their curiosity and confidence as competent eaters.
Basil Bunny video, created in partnership with Celebrate Feeding at the University of Prince Edward Island and @Tunesandtalltales.
Shifting perspectives around eating
Changing our approach around food can be hard. As adults, our own personal values and beliefs around food have been shaped throughout our lives. Our cultural and social beliefs around food, financial stress or food insecurity influence what we say and do when we’re with children.
Engaging families in this process and keeping equity and inclusion at the forefront can help create food environments that support everyone.
One director of a child-care program told us that in every facet of a child’s life, educators viewed children as capable and confident except when it came to food. Participating in the CELEBRATE Feeding project was a game-changer for shifting perspectives for her and her team.
A perspective shift means that we need to trust that while adults’ concern for children’s nutrition is genuine and well-meaning, children are capable of practising self-regulation by responding to feelings of hunger and fullness.
Prioritizing curiosity and joyfulness
Educators have been overwhelmingly receptive to rethinking their approach to feeding children by prioritizing curiosity and joyfulness rather than coercion and obligation.
We are continuing to share these messages through professional development and resources on our website.
While it sometimes feels hard to get it right when feeding children, we encourage caregivers to take a breath and aim for connection at the table.
Creating trust, confidence and enjoyable food memories are perhaps more important for long-term health than one resentful bite of broccoli.
Jessie-Lee McIsaac has received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the CELEBRATE Feeding project and other research. She has also received project funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Public Health Agency of Canada, Margaret and Wallace McCain Family Foundation, and the Nova Scotia Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. Her research program is undertaken, in part, thanks to funding from the Canada Research Chairs program. McIsaac is a board member of a non-profit child care centre in Nova Scotia.
Our Celebrate Feeding intervention used the Nourishing Beginnings program from the Dairy Farmers of Canada as one training opportunity for educators. While Dairy Farmers of Canada is an industry group, Nourishing Beginnings was designed to align with evidence-based responsive feeding and child nutrition guidelines. The workshop offered to educators during our intervention was delivered by our Coaches (Registered Dietitians) with support from Dairy Farmers of Canada Dietitians. No team members received personal financial benefit from Dairy Farmers of Canada related to their work with CELEBRATE Feeding.
Julie E. Campbell receives research funding from the Government of Nova Scotia
Melissa (Misty) Rossiter received project funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and has been supported by a Jeanne and J.-Louis Lévesque Research Professorship in Nutrisciences and Health.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By John Gradek, Faculty Lecturer and Academic Program Co-ordinator, Supply Network and Aviation Management, McGill University
For many residents in the Northern Hemisphere, the advent of the summer season has always signalled travel. Travel with family, travel with friends, adventure travel, sightseeing travel, travel by automobile, travel by train, travel by air.
Some carriers have begun to implement capacity reductions in response to rationing measures, impacting both aircraft and staff levels.
Spirit’s collapse as a warning
Financial turmoil has now become the the subject of heated conversation in airline boardrooms, with any number of initiatives being considered to conserve liquidity in an environment that threatens the survival of many carriers.
Spirit’s exit will remove one of the few remaining ultra-low-cost options for American travellers, and could push fares higher across the industry.
Its closure has brought the aviation fuel cost crisis into immediate focus with both regulators and the travelling public. Are other U.S. carriers at risk of the same fate as Spirit? Are other airlines globally at risk as well?
What this means for summer 2026 travel
For Canadians planning summer travel, the picture divides roughly along domestic and international lines.
Airlines have increased fares to recover fuel cost increases, cut services on routes that have become unprofitable and begun redrawing growth schedules to reflect geopolitical uncertainties.
For travellers contemplating international travel this summer, airfares have increased substantially. Domestic Canadian fares are also higher than 2025 levels, though the increase is more modest.
Demand on domestic routes has remained strong, and carriers have given no indication of softening. Competition among carriers — a key driver of lower airfares — has been muted at best, with airlines focused on profitability and, in some cases, survival.
Like all such crises, this aviation fuel crisis will eventually end. The question of when is the subject of debate and consternation. The International Air Transport Association has noted that even if the Strait of Hormuz were to reopen, recovering normal jet fuel supply could take months.
For travellers still finalizing summer plans, the central question is how much risk they can tolerate. Further capacity cuts are possible if not likely, and passengers will get minimal notice if flights are cancelled.
Those who want a straightforward, low-stress trip would do well to look closer to home and stick to domestic flights. Those with more flexibility and appetite for uncertainty will find that international travel this summer will be one for the record books.
John Gradek does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Such washes can help remove pesticides and keep produce fresh, appealing and more likely to be eaten.(Unsplash/Melissa Askew)
Many grocery shoppers know the routine: bring fruit and vegetables home, rinse them, dry them and hope they stay fresh long enough to be eaten. But fresh produce is delicate. Grapes shrivel, apple slices brown and berries can spoil quickly.
At the same time, many people worry about what may remain on the surface of fruit they buy, including pesticide residues.
Cleaning and freshness are usually treated as separate problems that require different treatments. Washing feels like a simple act of control. But it’s not quite that simple.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommends rinsing produce under running water and says soap, detergent and commercial produce washes are not recommended. Water helps, but it does not solve every problem.
Our new study suggests those goals may be combined. We developed a dual-function biodegradable wash that is able to remove surface pesticide residues and form a thin protective layer to help fruit stay fresh for longer.
The timing matters. Around one quarter of fruits and vegetables are lost or wasted globally each year. For fresh produce, even small gains after harvest can matter because quality can change quickly during shipping, storage and daily use at home.
What’s inside and how does it works?
Food science professor Tianxi Yang explains how the biodegradabe wash works. (UBC)
The wash developed in the study is made from starch nanoparticles, tannic acid and iron. Starch is a plant-based material often used in food science because it can form films. Tannic acid is a plant compound found in many foods and plants. Iron helps connect tannic acid into a fine network on the surface of the starch particles.
In plain terms, starch provides the base, tannic acid adds useful plant chemistry and iron helps hold the structure together. During rinsing, this structure can interact with some pesticide molecules on the fruit’s surface and helps wash them away.
When immersed, the same wash can form a very thin coating layer. This is not meant to be a heavy wax-like layer. It is closer to a light surface film that can slow water loss and help maintain appearance. That matters because people often decide whether to eat or throw away fruit based on how it looks and feels.
Removing surface pesticide residues
The cleaning results were strong. On apple surfaces, the wash removed more than 85 per cent of thiabendazole, compared with 48 per cent for tap water, 65 per cent for baking soda and 61 per cent for native starch.
Thiabendazole is a fungicide used on some fresh produce post-harvest. We also tested two other pesticides. The wash removed 93 per cent of the acetamiprid residues and 89 per cent of imidacloprid from apple surfaces. These results suggest the wash can work across more than one type of pesticide residue, rather than only one special chosen compound.
There is, however, an important limit. The study focused on residues on the fruit surface. Some pesticides can move into plant tissue while the fruit is growing, which makes them much harder to remove after harvest.
A better wash should not be understood as a way to erase all pesticide exposure. It’s a tool for reducing what’s on the surface of a fruit or vegetable.
Grapes and apples dipped in the UBC wash lost less moisture and browned more slowly compared to samples not treated with the wash. (Tianxi Yang/UBC Media Relations)
The second part of our study looked at freshness. Over 15 days, untreated grapes lost around 45 per cent of their weight, while grapes treated with our wash system lost only 21 per cent. Fresh-cut apples also lost less weight over 48 hours, dropping from 17 per cent in untreated samples to nine per cent.
Those changes can impact what people buy. Treated grapes looked fresher after storage, and apple slices stayed lighter for longer. That kind of change matters outside the lab because produce that looks dried out or browned is less likely to be eaten.
The coating also showed an ability to slow oxidation and inhibited a test bacterium in laboratory experiments. This doesn’t mean the wash has completed all the safety tests needed for consumer use. However, it does suggest the coating may do more than simply sit on the surface.
What this could mean in practice
For now, a realistic use for our wash would likely be in post-harvest processing plants, not kitchen sinks. Processing facilities can control washing time, concentration, water handling and disposal more carefully than households can. We estimated the raw-material cost is less than US$0.032 per apple. Meanwhile, we are actively working on developing a household spray formulation for consumer use.
More work is needed. The wash should be tested on more fruits and vegetables, under commercial conditions and through the regulatory steps required before real-world use.
Still, the idea is useful because it reframes the problem. A fruit wash doesn’t have to be only a rinse. It could clean more effectively and then keep working, helping produce stay fresh, appealing and more likely to be eaten.
The research discussed in this article received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
Ling Guo and Tzu-Cheng (Ivy) Chiu do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Until recently, AI’s role in research felt like having a useful assistant. It could summarise a paper, clean up a dataset or draft an abstract. Researchers were still in charge of the thinking.
That changed in late 2025 when cutting-edge “frontier” AI models became capable of reasoning and planning reliably by themselves. A key feature of these models is “tool calling” – the ability to interact with external tools in order to act on the world, not just describe it.
This marks the rise of agentic AI: systems that do not just respond to instructions but can independently plan, execute and iterate. In science as in other fields, chatbots have become coworkers that can autonomously complete real work, end to end.
An example of this is Tokyo-based Sakana AI’s The AI Scientist. Unveiled in mid-2025 and now in its second iteration, the Japanese tech company bills this as “the first comprehensive system for fully automatic scientific discovery”.
The AI Scientist scans existing literature, generates hypotheses, writes and executes code, analyses results and produces a full research paper – largely without human involvement. It reasons, fails and revises, just as a junior scientist would.
This represents something genuinely new: an autonomous AI system passing a milder version of the Turing test by demonstrating scientific quality, if not (yet) machine intelligence.
The AI Scientist’s peer-reviewed paper explained. Video: Matthew Berman.
Other significant achievements include Singapore-based startup Analemma carrying out a live demonstration of its Fully Automated Research System (Fars) in February. It produced 166 complete machine-learning research papers in roughly 417 hours for around US$1,100 (£810). That’s one academic paper every 2.5 hours at a cost that would sustain a research assistant for a couple of weeks.
And Google Cloud AI Research recently unveiled PaperOrchestra, which takes a researcher’s raw experimental logs and rough notes and converts them into a submission-ready manuscript, with figures and verified citations. In blind evaluations by 11 AI researchers, it easily outperformed existing autonomous systems in this area.
Having spent two decades researching disruptive technological innovations, I believe a significant threshold has been crossed. While there is a way to go before AI systems match the very best human-produced work, the era of fully automated research has arrived.
Implications for academia
The arrival of autonomous research systems lands on an academic system under severe strain in many countries. Over the last decade, the number of papers submitted to academic journals has grown much faster than the pool of qualified peer reviewers, leading to suggestions that the science publication system is being “overwhelmed”.
If systems like Fars can produce thousands of papers per year, the publication infrastructure of science faces a volume it was never designed to handle. Some academic reviews have already been identified as using AI-generated content. As submission numbers continue to rise, this may alter the role of a published academic paper as a definitive signal of the quality and skills of human researchers.
An optimistic take is that AI may shift academia away from its strong reliance on quantity-based metrics, in favour of how influential or innovative publications are. This is a reform critics of the current system have long called for.
Less optimistically, as AI research scales up, an academic system designed for coherent, methodologically defensible contributions may inflate the proportion of incremental, rather than radically novel, scientific contributions. Both the quality and originality of research could suffer as a result.
Science has always needed its heretics to advance. Italian astronomer Galileo, the “father of modern science”, was forced to recant his defence of heliocentrism before the Catholic Church’s Inquisition. Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis died in a psychiatric institution having failed to convince his colleagues that handwashing could save lives.
Yet historically, the ability of scientific institutions to encourage radical approaches has also been a mainstaple of how science has progressed. To sustain this, AI systems will need to be trained to maximise novelty and transformation, rather than plausibility and incremental progress.
AI’s impact on creative industries
The transformative effects of this new breeed of AI extend well beyond scientific research. A striking example is The Epstein Files. This fully AI-generated podcast reached number one the UK Apple Podcasts and Spotify charts in early 2026, drawing 700,000 downloads in its first week.
Music is further along and more conflicted. By mid-2025, the fully AI-generated band The Velvet Sundown had amassed over a million monthly Spotify listeners. In 2026, the platform was forced to introduce artist-protection features after AI tracks began displacing human music on popular playlists, while Deezer, facing roughly 50,000 AI-generated uploads daily, began excluding them from curated lists.
Ownership remains the elephant in the room. US courts have ruled that AI-generated works cannot be copyrighted, since human authorship remains a legal requirement. AI can produce at industrial scale, but no one can own the output legally.
This matters far beyond intellectual property law. In creative industries, it threatens the royalty streams, licensing deals and catalogue valuations on which artists, labels and publishers have built their entire business models for generations.
In science, meanwhile, it is destabilising the entire incentive architecture, which rests on the foundational assumption that knowledge is both generated and owned by humans. When that assumption dissolves, so does much of the institutional logic that has governed how we produce, reward and trust expertise.
The question, across all these fields, is no longer whether AI can produce the work. Rather, it is whether sufficient thought has gone into what we will gain and lose when it does.
Sorin M.S. Krammer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natasha Lindstaedt, Professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex
Pakistan has emerged as a central diplomatic broker in the conflict between the US and Iran. When announcing a pause to the US operation to guide stranded vessels through the Strait of Hormuz on May 6, Donald Trump said he had made the decision “based on the request of Pakistan”.
The Pakistani prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, subsequently expressed hope “that the current momentum will lead to a lasting agreement that secures durable peace and stability for the region and beyond”. This latest intervention comes a month after Pakistan secured its biggest diplomatic win in years by brokering a ceasefire in Iran.
But how did Pakistan emerge as the most trustworthy mediator in this conflict, and what drove Islamabad to involve itself? Pakistan’s biggest advantage is that it enjoys relationships with both the US and Iran, which has helped it be seen as a neutral party by each side.
Pakistan has worked with the US in dealing with Iran for decades. Since 1981, two years after the US and Iran severed diplomatic ties following the Islamic revolution, a dedicated section of the Pakistani embassy in Washington has handled Iranian diplomatic affairs in the US.
Pakistan has also worked with the US in mediation efforts elsewhere. Most notably, it facilitated former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger’s secret visit to China in 1971. This paved the way for the normalisation of relations between the US and China later that decade.
Relations between the US and Pakistan have not always been smooth. In 2011, a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Atlantic magazine in the US referred to Pakistan as the “ally from hell”. Whether or not it did so knowingly, Pakistan hosted al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden following the attack.
Trump himself also denied Pakistan military aid during his first term as president, saying it was not doing enough to combat terrorism. And Pakistan’s human rights record, particularly concerning democratic backsliding and restrictions on civil liberties, have at times led to tension with the US government.
However, Pakistan’s relationship with the US has improved markedly in Trump’s second term. Trump, who often uses personal ties to guide US foreign policy, has developed a strong relationship with Sharif and the chief of Pakistan’s army, Asim Munir. In June 2025, Munir was even invited to the White House for a private lunch. This was the first time a US president had hosted a non-head of state military leader at this level.
Pakistan’s recent efforts to court Trump have played a key role in building these ties. Over the past year Pakistan has nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, joined his Board of Peace and launched a collaboration with his World Liberty Financial crypto platform.
And in July, Islamabad signed a deal with the US to allow Washington to help develop Pakistan’s largely untapped oil reserves. “We read him [Trump] right,” said the former chairman of the Pakistani Senate’s Defense Committee, Mushahid Hussain Syed, in an interview with the Washington Post on April 20.
The relationship between Pakistan and Iran has also been characterised by ups and downs. While Iran was the first country to recognise Pakistan’s independence in 1947, their relationship has often been fraught with tension. This largely stems from Iran’s territorial claim to the Balochistan province of Pakistan, as well as from Pakistan’s ties with Iranian rivals.
As recently as January 2024, tensions between the two countries appeared to be escalating again over Balochistan. However, hostilities soon receded and both countries formally resumed their bilateral ties. They subsequently expanded their security cooperation and invited each other’s ambassadors and foreign ministers for a formal reconciliation ceremony.
Strategic necessity
Some commentators argue that Pakistan’s decision to step in as the primary mediator in Iran has been driven by strategic necessity. Its Balochistan province is currently grappling with an insurgency. Islamabad will thus want to avoid a situation where the Iran war spills into Pakistan, as this could destabilise its border regions even further.
There are also economic reasons explaining Pakistan’s involvement. Pakistan has been severely affected by the disruption to Gulf shipping. It imports between 85% and 90% of its crude oil from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and almost 99% of its liquified gas from the UAE and Qatar.
Before the war broke out, Pakistan’s economy had been starting to gain momentum. But higher oil prices are now affecting government revenues, increasing its fuel import bill from US$300 million (£220 million) before the conflict to US$800 million now. Pakistan’s authorities have been forced to raise consumer fuel prices by more than 50%.
Pakistan’s agricultural sector, which employs around 40% of the country’s population, is also vulnerable to the conflict due to its reliance on fertiliser imported through the Strait of Hormuz. Prices of urea fertiliser have surged by 50% since the war broke out. Prolonged disruption to the agriculture sector risks plunging some of the most vulnerable people in Pakistan further into poverty.
Remittances are another area that could be affected by a protracted conflict, with as many as five million Pakistani people living in the Gulf region. Pakistan received roughly US$30 billion in remittances between 2025 and 2026, 54% of which came from the Gulf.
If the war continues to affect Gulf economies, many Pakistani workers may be forced to return home. This will cause remittance revenues to fall, depriving Pakistan of a vital source of foreign exchange, while simultaneously pushing up domestic unemployment.
Pakistan’s relationships with the US and Iran put it in a strong position to intervene in the conflict diplomatically. But its mediation has also been a calculated effort to stabilise its borders and protect its economy.
Natasha Lindstaedt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Jean-Baptiste Meyer, Directeur de recherche (Centre Population et Développement), Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD)
Et si la diplomatie climatique se réinventait en dehors du format traditionnel des COP ? En Colombie, à l’occasion d’une conférence organisée à Santa Marta du 24 au 29 avril 2026, une dynamique alternative a émergé : plus ouverte, elle cherche à dépasser les blocages multilatéraux en plaçant la diversité des savoirs au cœur des décisions.
S’il y a un constat sur lequel convergent les « climato-négationnistes » et les activistes climatiques radicaux, c’est l’inutilité des COP, organisées sous l’égide des Nations unies (Convention-cadre des Nations unies sur les changements climatiques, UNFCC de son acronyme en anglais). Dans les deux cas, on leur reproche une inefficacité de plus en plus apparente, où les décisions sont nécessairement prises au consensus. En conséquence, le consensus devient tellement mou qu’il n’en exprime plus rien de significatif ni d’opératoire.
Ainsi le résume la bande-annonce d’un film documentaire à venir dans le courant de l’été 2026, en partenariat avec l’Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD) et l’Université nationale de Colombie.
Bande-annonce du documentaire De Los Andes a Belém (2026).
Du 24 au 29 avril 2026 à Santa Marta, en Colombie, une conférence inédite a voulu replacer enfin la sortie des combustibles fossiles au cœur de l’agenda international. Co-organisée par la Colombie et les Pays-Bas, elle a regroupé 57 États volontaires (et l’Union européenne en tant que telle, NDLR).
Qu’a-t-il été décidé à cette occasion ? À rebours des COP climat, où ce sont avant tout les textes finaux qui comptent, pesés au mot près, car votés par les représentants d’États, c’est ici surtout la méthode de travail qui diffère, beaucoup moins rigide. Elle ne s’accompagnait d’aucune obligation de production particulière, si ce n’est d’engager le processus de constitution d’une feuille de route pour la sortie des énergies fossiles. La rencontre a ainsi inauguré de nouvelles modalités de coopération mondiale sur les enjeux socio-environnementaux.
Dépasser le blocage des COP grâce à une coalition de volontaires
Le débat sur la paralysie des négociations multilatérales en général – et celle des COP climat en particulier – n’est guère nouveau. Leur répétition annuelle exacerbe les frustrations de ceux qui souhaitent réellement progresser sur les questions climatiques.
À la COP30 de Belém, en novembre 2025, une quarantaine de pays avaient exprimé leur mécontentement quant à l’absence de mention de la sortie des énergies fossiles dans la déclaration finale. Plus de 80 se sont associés à l’initiative encourageant à poursuivre les travaux d’élaboration d’une feuille de route en ce sens.
La Colombie et les Pays-Bas ont alors invité les États qui souhaitaient travaillaient sur ce point à se réunir dans une conférence en marge des COP. Autrement dit, la conférence de Santa Marta ne s’est certes pas tenue dans le cadre onusien, mais s’est toutefois inscrite dans le prolongement de la précédente COP climat.
Préparée dans un laps de temps exceptionnellement court (moins de la moitié d’une année, contre un an pour les COP climat), cette conférence inédite avait une organisation moins cadrée au plan organisationnel. Aux dires d’observateurs et de participants, on y percevait un petit côté brouillon : davantage d’improvisation, voire parfois un manque de clarté sur les livrables attendus et les prochaines étapes.
Pourtant, ces faiblesses – inhérentes au format de la conférence spontanée, point d’étape entre la COP30 du Brésil et la COP31 en Turquie – ont, aux dires des participants, pu être dépassées, notamment grâce à son caractère volontaire. Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, envoyé climatique du Panama, cité dans le Climate Diplomacy Brief, a par exemple déclaré :
« Santa Marta est un moment historique, car c’est la première fois que nous pouvons ouvrir nos cœurs, ouvrir nos esprits et avoir une véritable conversation sans ces stupides demandes de mise au vote, sans ces stupides procédures qui font dérailler toute la séance et ne nous laissent que dix minutes pour aborder le fond. »
La méthode Santa Marta ? Un bouillon de culture plutôt que des zones bleue et verte
Concrètement, la conférence a successivement réuni trois composantes : un panel académique (baptisé Academic Dialogue) où les scientifiques du monde entier ont pu émettre des recommandations, un « sommet des peuples », avec notamment des représentants associatifs, communautaires et syndicaux et, enfin, un segment de haut niveau (Transition Away from Fossil Fues, ou TAFF, regroupant essentiellement des représentants gouvernementaux spécialisés.
Cette concentration de thématiques, de compétences et de volontés dans des espaces restreints a favorisé un véritable bouillon de culture permettant des échanges fertiles. Il contraste avec l’organisation physique des COP, où plusieurs milliers de participants se retrouvent dans une multitude de pavillons, souvent sur plusieurs bâtiments. L’espace y est alors divisé entre zone bleue, réservée aux délégations nationales, aux organismes onusiens et aux ONG observatrices, et où se déroulent les négociations officielles de la COP28, et zone verte, ouverte à toutes les autres parties prenantes.
Contrairement aux COP, où ce sont les délégations nationales qui débattent (les discussions relatives à l’état de la science, par exemple, se déroulent à un autre moment, sous l’égide d’un organe subsidiaire, la conférence de Santa Marta a proposé une méthodologie transversale, impliquant en amont 15 groupes de travail transnationaux. Une grande hétérogénéité a caractérisé l’ensemble de ces groupes, allant des représentants des sciences à ceux de la société civile, en passant par les entités publiques à différentes échelles, ainsi que des agences de financement ou des entreprises multinationales.
Au cours des deux mois qui ont précédé la rencontre, ces derniers ont planché sur trois enjeux fondamentaux : la dépendance structurelle aux combustibles fossiles, l’action sur l’offre et la demande et les modalités de la coopération internationale et de la diplomatie climatique.
Répartition des groupes de travail en amont de la conférence de Santa Marta (Colombie). Fourni par l’auteur
Malgré la diversité de statuts et d’intérêts des participants à ces groupes de travail, un certain nombre de points de convergence sont apparus :
les progrès réalisés par les alternatives aux fossiles sont irréversibles,
il est indispensable de mettre fin aux soutiens fiscaux et juridiques à l’extraction des combustibles,
pour y parvenir, la concertation et la dialogue sont essentiels.
Remettre la science au centre, sans oublier les savoirs autochtones
À Santa Marta, la science a gardé un rôle fondamental, acté à la fin de la conférence par l’instauration d’un conseil spécifique. Sa fonction est de nourrir les processus de décision, à partir de connaissances élaborées de façon rigoureuse. Lors de la conférence, les participants ont exprimé leur foi dans une politique fondée sur les preuves (evidence based policy). Elle confère une responsabilité majeure à la communauté scientifique.
L’hétérogénéité de la participation des corps sociaux à la conférence a ainsi permis d’introduire de véritables porte-paroles des entités naturelles. Au-delà des chercheurs, régulièrement convoqués pour en expliquer les comportements et la dégradation, elles ont également mis à l’honneur les communautés indigènes, paysannes ou afro-descendantes
Le mariage cognitif entre ces savoirs hétérogènes requiert toutefois un travail transépistémique. Les épistémies varient considérablement entre celles fondées sur le scepticisme organisé (les disciplines scientifiques) et celles recourant aux explications traditionnelles parfois d’ordre religieux, qui font intervenir des entités spirituelles, par exemple. Pourtant, des convergences notables existent, notamment pour ce qui est de la conscience écologique, susceptibles d’influencer les positions politiques qui en découlent.
Malgré tout, une certaine hiérarchie a pu perdurer durant la conférence entre ces acteurs de la diversité culturelle et ceux de la gouvernance, inscrite dans la division successive des séquences (académique, société civile puis représentation gouvernementale) et leur degré d’exclusivité. Mais la tendance à l’ouverture et à l’inclusion manifeste plus qu’un changement idéologique : c’est aussi une modification (partielle mais réelle) des références objectives.
On retrouve en effet, dans la nouvelle diplomatie climatique portée à Santa Marta, une « esquisse du Parlement des choses », telle que décrite par Bruno Latour en 2018. Elle consiste à revoir les rôles attribués au politique, à l’expertise et à la technocratie, et où ce ne serait plus seulement les humains qui auraient le droit d’être représentés.
Ce concept pose de nouvelles questions au droit et à l’économie politique internationale. Un ouvrage à paraître prochainement, issu d’un projet européen et latino-américain sur la transition écologique auquel j’ai collaboré, entame la remise en question de la conception de la géopolitique centrée sur l’humain.
Vers une nouvelle géopolitique climatique ?
Les efforts déployés à Santa Marta ont transcendé les clivages nationaux, mais aussi nord-sud, d’une certaine manière. Avec une présidence bicéphale eurolatino (colombo-néerlandaise), et euro-océanique pour la prochaine conférence qui sera co-organisée par l’Irlande et Tuvalu, le grand partage manichéen des responsabilités historiques de l’empreinte écologique (qui, historiquement, est un point d’achoppement des COP climat) n’a, certes, pas été complètement effacé. Il a toutefois été adouci par le cadrage de la conférence sur la recherche de solutions.
Toutes les régions du monde étaient représentées, avec une majorité relative de l’Europe (plus d’un tiers des pays officiellement présents), suivie de l’Amérique latine, puis de l’Asie, de l’Afrique et de l’Océanie. Aucun des grands pays à prétention hégémonique n’était invité – ni les États-Unis, ni la Chine, ni la Russie – et le seul des grands émergents à participer était le Brésil.
Déclaration du premier ministre canadien Mark Carney, lors du Forum de Davos, en janvier 2026.
Mais la vision de la conférence de Santa Marta s’affirme et se distingue sur au moins deux points :
le premier concerne l’importance accordée au Sud global,
et le deuxième, l’irruption des non-humains dans le champ de la géopolitique.
Même si la prégnance du Nord demeurait dans les coordinations, la composition de l’assistance lors des réunions privilégiait naturellement la participation de ressortissants du Sud. Les sujets abordés reflétaient des enjeux qui les concernent au premier chef, puisque les impacts écologiques actuels les affectent en priorité. En mettant le Sud au cœur des débats, une telle rencontre participe du rééquilibrage de ces derniers et renouvelle la façon de les aborder.
Avec ce renouvellement de la contradiction à son endroit, le négationnisme climatique (qui peut, on l’a vu avec la sortie des États-Unis de l’accord de Paris, trouver des relais à l’échelle des États) a de fortes chances d’être progressivement confronté à un isolement accru. Ses velléités d’entraînement ont fait long feu à Belém, où aucun pays n’est sorti de l’accord de Paris. Elles pourraient se voir débordées par des initiatives telles que celles explorées à Santa Marta, qui a aussi voulu anticiper ses effets pervers. Des mécanismes ont ainsi été envisagés pour contrer l’augmentation de la demande d’hydrocarbures que pourrait générer une baisse des prix du fait de la croissance des énergies renouvelables.
