A new study published in the journal Nature shows that Ethiopia’s protected areas successfully slowed deforestation, limited agricultural expansion and helped maintain grasslands. But the study also suggests the same conservation gains may also be linked to declines in food security and wellbeing for nearby communities — while underlining some caveats in their findings. The study, conducted through collaboration between researchers in Ethiopia and the UK, and the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority, assessed both environmental and social outcomes across 25 protected areas in Ethiopia during the period 2000–2020. They measured forest cover, agricultural expansion, grasslands, food security, dietary diversity and material wellbeing. While protected areas were broadly effective at reducing environmental degradation despite mounting pressures from population growth, agricultural expansion, and land demand, the researchers found “trade-offs” between environmental and social outcomes in their assessments. Twelve of these protected areas experienced  positive environmental performance at the cost of social wellbeing. Meanwhile, five of the protected areas had “win-win” outcomes for biodiversity and social outcomes and three protected areas had “lose-lose” outcomes. “Ethiopia is exceptionally biodiverse, but also faces major challenges around poverty, food security and demand for land,” said Sophie Jago, lead author of the study and research assistant at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew in the UK. “The fact that protected areas are delivering measurable benefits for nature in this context is important … The difficult finding is that these environmental gains have come with costs for nearby communities, particularly around food security.” A ranger discusses with community members…This article was originally published on Mongabay

Over the past decade, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) spending for critical minerals transformed from virtually nonexistent into a major revenue stream, with the last five years delivering a dramatic surge in both contract volume and dollar value. The Pentagon and other defense-adjacent agencies’ growing appetite for these projects is already visible in affected communities. Several of these communities impacted by DoD-funded projects told Mongabay that state backing has fast-tracked approvals without essential environmental safeguards or meaningful consultation by companies. For this research, Mongabay aggregated information from the USAspending database — an official open data source of federal spending information — about U.S. Department of Defense grants spending on critical mineral projects for military purposes between 2015 and 2025. This figure excludes Pentagon contracts, which is a major way that the Department of Defense (DoD) spends its money. The actual amount is likely larger given that some projects may not be public due to national security reasons, according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS). We decided to focus only on grants, as other types of contracts are generally non-binding and do not guarantee federal spending. Mongabay found that the federal agency provided an estimated $621 million on grants for critical mineral projects for defense purposes over the period, according to the USAspending database. Between 2021 and 2025, the DoD secured 24 agreements worth nearly $550 million (549.7 million) — up from just $31.3 million for three contracts in the previous five-year period. It poured the most funding into lithium…This article was originally published on Mongabay