Sessions of special interest for EDI 

How we define scientific excellence has an immediate, career-defining impact on geoscientists, particularly early- and mid-career researchers who contend with a series of short-time contracts, expectations of high mobility, and the relentless pressure to publish. Currently, the indicators we use to evaluate excellence in the geosciences are predominantly quantitative - including the number of peer-reviewed articles and citations, invited talks, awards won, funding sources obtained, publishing in “prestigious” journals, and positions held at prestigious institutions. However, all these indicators are biased and not representative of the impact of research on science and society. It is further increasingly recognised that they are often exclusionary for underrepresented groups and amplify imbalances of power and visibility.

This Union Symposia invites diverse voices to reflect on how scientific excellence and academic systems (including peer-review and grant evaluation) can evolve to become more sustainable and inclusive - and who needs to drive these changes. We will explore different proposals that can offer more robust support structures and flexible environments for underrepresented groups and researchers balancing family and career while also facilitating and enhancing scientific progress. In particular, we aim to challenge entrenched practices, reconsidering publication requirements before Ph.D. completion, rethinking how international mobility is weighted in grant evaluations, and transforming anonymous peer-review systems, with a power imbalance skewed in favor of reviewers, into open and transparent processes that foster scientific progress. We also aim to explore emerging indicators of excellent science, such as Open Science, FAIR research, research focusing on societal challenges, inter- to multi-disciplinary research, and the number of published Open Access datasets. We also discuss how to best integrate qualitative factors, such as a scientist’s open-mindedness to testing different ideas, dialog-oriented attitude during the peer-review process, objectivity in acknowledging their failures, collaborations with colleagues supporting competing hypotheses, and commitment to Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI).
Come and join us and our three invited speakers (Prof. Thom Bogaard, Prof. Stuart Lane, and Prof. Stefanie Kaboth-Bahr) to make your voice heard.

Over the past decade, work and initiatives implementing equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) have grown drastically. Many institutions across the western world and beyond have embraced EDI programmes with pride and enthusiasm.
In the last couple of years, however, criticisms escalated and EDI values are being discredited by a growing scepticism, even from the general public and often also from highly organized orchestrated anti-EDI campaigns. In many cases, as a result of political pressure or recent government funding decisions, EDI programs are being significantly scaled back or even entirely dismantled. One of the arguments that was raised is that EDI has become overly ideological, rigid in its adherence to a doctrine. EDI is sometimes considered responsible for the introduction of the so-called positive bias, or a bias against categories that have been previously favoured. Other concerns have evolved around the meaning of gender differences, introducing at times ambiguity in the concepts of equality and diversity. Another reason of concern is given by actions that were considered limiting the human rights. Examples are the cases related to free speech, where speakers were uninvited or impeded to talk. In particular in science, it has been a reason of concern as the attitude of resisting to a diversity of opinions can be perceived as counter-productive for progress.
Some voices argue that instead of building on what people have in common, EDI culture focuses on their differences, often perceived as exclusionary. These positions have both played in favour of opposing political platforms and alienated people with more moderate views, or people less ’educated’ on EDI issues. Today, sadly, the EDI term has taken on a new and sometimes divisive meaning.
EDI movements need to regain ground in their defence for fairness and coalition building, concerned with all sorts of inequalities, backgrounds and views. The concept of inclusivity in EDI is crucial in preventing societal division. Re-thinking EDI is essential to science and society in these challenging times.
In this Great Debate we aim to discuss the criticisms to EDI and identify strategies to move forward with a constructive attitude, with the awareness of the benefits EDI has achieved, and a recognition of the values an inclusive science culture brings to science. Invited speakers will include influential members of the geosciences community and beyond.

Mentoring in academia is a one-to-one connection and refers to a developmentally oriented relationship between a student or a less experienced colleague (the mentee) and a more experienced student or colleague (the mentor). While mentees gain guidance and confidence, mentors often discover new perspectives, sharpen their leadership skills, and find personal fulfillment in helping someone grow.

Research shows that strong mentoring relationships play a key role in academic and career success, and contribute to a more connected, resilient scientific community. But not all mentoring experiences are positive. The quality of the relationship matters. This short course explores what effective mentoring looks like, how it can empower both parties, and how to recognize and avoid poor mentoring practices.

LGBTQIA+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, plus; or LGBT for short) geoscientists likely have to face additional obstacles throughout their career than their cisgender/heterosexual colleagues. These barriers can take many forms, from lack of representation, to limited access to support networks, and exclusion from opportunities for progression. Such as, inflexible bureaucratic limits on name/gender marker, difficulty in changes on documentation, a lack of support for transgender and gender non-conforming people on field trips and research cruises, and safety and medical considerations LGBT people must account for when travelling, or when moving countries for a new position. These obstacles can be mitigated and overcome to create more collaborative environments that support diverse talents in geosciences fields; with awareness and understanding by colleagues and initiatives, LGBT academics can thrive and contribute to research.

In this short course we want to discuss the topic of finding and building queer and intersectional communities in Earth sciences.

The foundation of a positive work climate is professionalism. Professionalism refers to the attitudes and behaviors that affect interpersonal relations of all types in the workplace. These relations include concepts of power, trust, respect, responsibility, justice, and fairness. Social structures that have hierarchical and asymmetric power relations have the potential for colleagues in positions of power to use this power to enable and enrich or abuse and diminish individuals. This can endanger professional and personal well-being, contribute to hostile work climates, and reduce productivity, research, and education outcomes. Ultimately, issues related to hostile work climates can affect program success. This workshop will provide resources to develop a workplace code of conduct that is proactive, preventative and promotes cultural change in office, laboratory, and field settings.

Building on our successful EGU25 short course on research proposal writing, we are excited to propose another short course session focused on writing compelling research proposals for funding and research positions. With a visible gap in opportunities between researchers in the Global South and the Global North, and with a decline in research budget across the globe, the ability to secure funding is important to stand out in academia. However, securing this funding or position still hinges on the strength of a research proposal.
To address this need, we have designed a short interactive course dedicated to the art of writing strong research proposals for securing either a research position or proposal funding. This session will offer practical techniques and tips for creating compelling proposals and will include an open discussion. Additionally, we will provide insights from funding agencies based in Global South countries, highlighting the key elements they look for in proposals and opportunities. This course is valuable for researchers at all career stages, with a particular emphasis on Early Career Researchers (ECRs) looking to enhance their proposal-writing skills. Participants will benefit from:
1. Researchers' Perspective: Learn from successful grant recipients about the crucial points to consider when writing a research proposal.
2. Funding Agency Perspective: Gain insights from representatives of funding agencies in the Global South on their requirements and expectations - Lesser-known opportunities available to ECRs
3. ECRs Perspective: Hear from fellow participants about their experiences and challenges in research proposal writing.
This short course is open to everyone with an interest in improving their proposal writing skills. ECRs from the Global South are especially encouraged to participate as they will be provided with an opportunity to interact with researchers and funding agency representatives, gaining valuable insights into their expectations and experiences. For more information or inquiries, please feel free to contact the course convener.

Academic environments offer many opportunities for intellectual growth, development, and collaboration. However, like any community, conflict also appears. Disagreements may arise over co-authorship, mentoring expectations, department politics, or interpretations of research ethics. These situations are often complex and emotionally challenging. This Short Course helps scientists to recognize, understand, and navigate conflict in academic settings. We will also look at how conflict can lead to personal and professional growth when approached constructively.

A research career is not only demanding, but also full of hidden challenges that can affect both success and mental well-being. This short course is designed to provide geoscientists at any stage of their career with practical, psychology-based tools to navigate these challenges. From time-management strategies to self-care practice and ugly truths, this course offers tips and insights for building resilience and balance into your research journey, may it be in or out of academia.

The course is open to all geoscientists, including those with any type of neurological or physical divergence, as well as individuals facing personal challenges. The goal of the session is to offer practical tips for protecting your mental health while navigating your journey as a researcher and bettering your former being.

Remember, it is never too late to improve the way we use our time and take care of ourselves, for it is only by treating ourselves well and with respect that we can better take care of others and foster sustainable, community-wide changes.

Values clarification exercises are often used to enable people together to work through complex issues in which differing, contradictory, unexplicated or hidden values may influence beliefs, principles and behaviours, including decisions. Such exercises allow us to become more aware of the ways in which values relate to our geoethical principles and behaviours. Values include such things as truth, discipline, fairness, integrity and openness.

It is difficult to help people learn about geoethics. This is partly because it concerns such a wide range of circumstances, from specific instances, such as the effect of mining on child labour, through our personal geoscientific behaviour, to the way in which humans treat the Earth’s natural resources. It is also not easy, particularly in schools and universities, because the concepts are so wide-ranging and young people are still exploring and getting to grips with their personal values, values that underlie their principles and behaviours, especially in regard to the Earth.

Practical geoethical values clarification exercises can help people:
• to compare their values with others and thus to modify their and others’ values;
• to clarify the relationship between geoethical principles and their underlying values; and
• to understand how their values and principles influence their behaviours, in regard to fellow geoscientists and to the Earth’s natural resources.

This Short Course will be conducted in a fully participatory, workshop format:
a. starting with short overviews of geoethics and of clarification exercises;
b. followed by a series of hands-on, small-group activities; and
c. ending with a debriefing session and a discussion.

Both experts and novices in geoethics and values/principles are welcome in this Short Course; teachers, researchers and students will benefit. For novices, especially, a little preparation before the course will help.
• If possible, please read:
https://www.lyellcollection.org/doi/10.1144/SP508-2020-191, or
https://presentations.copernicus.org/EGU21/EGU21-604_presentation.pdf
• Think about your own personal and professional values.
• Please bring some blank paper, a pen and an internet-enabled laptop or telephone (with QR code capability).

Please note that materials will allow up to 20 participants, on a first-come basis. Additional people will be invited to do guided observation in silence during the exercise, and then contribute actively during the debriefing and discussion.

Participating in scientific conferences, especially in large events such as the EGU General Assembly (GA), comes with specific challenges for neurodivergent attendees. The term “neurodivergent” describes individuals who think and experience the world in ways that differ from societal norms, including, for example (but not limited to) autistic, ADHD, dyslexic, or dyspraxic individuals. Current estimates indicate that about 15-20% of the global population could be neurodivergent. This amounts to about 3000-4000 individuals among the 20,000 yearly attendees of the EGU GA. Many neurodivergent people have heightened sensory sensitivities, and executive function and communication challenges, to name a few, which come along with specific needs when attending a conference. Some have developed their own strategies to be able to participate in conferences, which often come at a high cost in energy, while others forego participating in some events entirely due to the lack of accommodations. Last year, the introduction of a lanyard that indicates a hidden disability has been a first step towards creating a safer atmosphere for neurodivergent attendees. The aim of this short course is to provide neurodivergent participants with ideas and tools to mitigate some of the challenges they can encounter during the EGU GA, through short talks from neurodivergent peers and discussions among and feedback from participants. We also aim at compiling the suggestions emerging during this short course into a guide for neurodivergent attendees and for more inclusive measures in the next EGU meetings to be shared with the EDI committee. This event is targeted at both first-time attendees and more seasoned participants, who identify as neurodivergent or would like to better support their neurodivergent peers.

Academia is well known for being a competitive and challenging environment with pressure coming from many angles. While issues of job insecurity and mental health crises are more openly discussed, perpetrators of harassment still benefit from unclear policies and a culture of silence. Groups which are underrepresented in academic institutions (i.e. women, minorities, early career researchers, and the LGBTQ+ community) are especially vulnerable to the negative impacts of harassment. Although its effects on individual well-being, career development and institutional culture can be extremely damaging, it is not always easy to recognize harassment. Beyond the explicit physical and verbal abuse, there are several more subtle forms of harassment. Through interactive discussions and real-world examples, this short course equips participants with practical tools to recognize harassment in academic settings, understand their rights, and develop strategies to respond safely and effectively. Since awareness is not only essential for those who may experience harassment, but also for those who may inadvertently cross boundaries, bystanders, and authority figures, this course is designed for everyone. Building awareness and solidarity is fundamental to foster supportive and inclusive spaces that prevent harassment and empower bystanders to act.

Building a successful academic career is challenging. Doing so while also raising a family can push you to your limits. Many early- and mid-career scientists grapple with balancing family life and academic responsibilities. The fear-of-missing-out dualism between family and academia causes an inner conflict and feeling of injustice and inadequateness. Families often find themselves confronted with what feels like a personal problem when, in reality, it is a shared societal issue. Modern families come in diverse forms, including dual-career parents, single parents, same-sex parents, and various shared parenting arrangements. The academic world must recognize and adapt to this reality, aligning with broader themes of inclusion, participation, and diversity. Therefore, we organise this platform to discuss the challenges and share experiences.

Finding support and confidence in moving forward as an individual is important. As a community, we need to openly discuss parenting in academia so that we can demand and develop sustainable solutions that benefit everyone, rather than repeatedly fighting private battles to follow the academic career dream. Parenthood can also shift your priorities, which may lead you to consider leaving academia altogether or to become a better researcher.

This short course provides a platform that allows an honest exchange on diverse experiences and continue the discussion from previous EGU General Assemblies on this topic. It will:
1. Provide insight into how being a parent impacts everyday academic life.
2. Highlight personal experiences made by a panel of current and previous academic parents.
3. Conclude with an open discussion addressing public discourse on equal parenting and work-life balance.
This course is intended for scientists considering starting a family, current academic parents seeking to connect, and faculty staff responsible for supporting parenting employees.

This session aims to highlight and discuss the diverse experiences of women in the geosciences, as well as the challenges and opportunities they encounter throughout their careers. We welcome contributions that share personal perspectives, institutional practices, leadership roles in projects and research addressing gender equity in geoscience. Topics may include, but are not limited to: career progression, work–life balance, mentoring and role models, fieldwork experiences, inclusivity in research teams, and structural or cultural barriers within academia, industry, and policy.
We particularly encourage submissions that offer solutions, best practices, or new initiatives fostering a more inclusive geoscience community. By bringing together these contributions, the session seeks to promote dialogue, raise awareness, and inspire actionable steps toward greater gender equity and diversity in the field.

Geoscientists play a key role in providing essential information in decision-making processes that consider environmental, social, and economic consequences of geoscience work. Therefore, their responsibilities extend beyond scientific analysis alone. Global challenges, such as climate change, resource management, and disaster risk reduction, push geoscientists to expand their role beyond research and to engage ethically in public efforts.
Geoethics provides a framework for reflecting on the ethical, social, and cultural implications of geoscience in research, practice, and education, guiding responsible action for society and the environment. It also encourages the scientific community to move beyond purely technical solutions by embracing just, inclusive, and transformative approaches to socio-environmental issues.
Furthermore, science is inseparable from social and geopolitical contexts. These conditions shape what research is funded, whose knowledge is valued, with whom we collaborate, and who has access to conferences. As Earth and planetary scientists, we must consider the human and environmental consequences of our work. This is especially true in Earth observation, where many satellites have both scientific and military applications, and where scientific tools have at times enabled ecocide and resource exploitation under neocolonial systems.
This session will offer insights and reflections across a wide range of topics, from theoretical considerations to case studies, foster awareness and discussion of sensitive issues at the geoscience–society interface and explore how geoethics can guide responsible behavior and policies in the geosciences.

Science is best learned by doing, yet starting out is rarely easy. This session invites reflections on the challenges encountered during research, from forgetting a screwdriver during a field day, to not being able to compile software. Sharing challenges and their solutions is critical for Early-Career Scientists, as it can (1) lead to the development of better protocols for fieldwork, modeling, and data analysis, (2) reduce impostor syndrome while doing science, and (3) highlight the human side of science, not only in papers and conferences, but also in the people and their experiences behind them.

The goal of this session is to bring together a wide variety of experiences, stories and people. We invite submissions from any geoscientific field in two specific categories:

First, any submissions that showcase a specific problem, your Eureka moment if there was one, and your solution to it. The goal of such submissions should be to show that unforeseen problems happen to everyone, but that it is possible to overcome these. Examples may include (but are not limited to):
• Designing computing codes that run with fewer computational resources
• Using sensors, technologies, and data beyond their traditional applications
• Developing computational workflows that integrate different approaches in novel ways (e.g., machine learning, trap cameras, and social media)
• Merging methods from several disciplines into new approaches.
• Building automation methodologies that avoid errors while using high-performance computing.

Second, any submissions that provide an Early Career Perspective on the grand challenges in your specific field or the geosciences as a whole, and your proposed solutions to these. Examples may include (but are not limited to):
• Community initiatives that facilitate the use of fieldwork techniques and computational resources.
• Grand challenges framing from a perspective that highlights inclusivity, diversity, and equality.
• Community perspectives and synthesis to reduce barriers of entry in transdisciplinary paths focused on problem-solving.
• Juggling how problem-solving was applied to a research career (e.g., kids, migration)

In 2016, the first of this session series was organised. In a moment of general turbulence for EDI actions, come to celebrate with us and to help us to build bridges and long-lasting actions of fairness in the geosciences. Following the success of last 10 years, this session will explore reasons for the under-representation of different groups (gender identities, sexual orientations, racial and cultural backgrounds, abilities, religions, nationality or geography, socioeconomic status, ages, career stages, etc.) by welcoming debate among scientists, decision-makers and policy analysts in the geosciences.

The session will focus on both obstacles that contribute to under-representation and on best practices and innovative ideas to remove those obstacles. Contributions are solicited on the following topics:

- Role models to inspire and further motivate others (life experience and/or their contributions to promote equality)
- Imbalanced representation, preferably supported by data, for awards, medals, grants, high-level positions, invited talks and papers
- Perceived and real barriers to inclusion (personally, institutionally, culturally)
- Recommendations for new and innovative strategies to identify and overcome barriers
- Gender Equality Plans (GEP) in European host institutions: the good, the bad, and the ugly
- Best practices and strategies to move beyond barriers, including:
• successful mentoring programmes;
• networks that work;
• specific funding schemes;
• examples of host institutions initiatives;
• examples of conferences and meetings initiatives;
Reports on situations that you may have experienced considering recent socio-political changes and attacks on EDI activities are encouraged.

This session is co-organised with the support of the European Research Council (ERC).
Conveners will propose a special issue based on multi-annual contributions of the session, and if accepted, it will be published as a collection of papers within a specific journal or series.

This session addresses the growing challenges of water resources management under accelerating climate change and intensifying anthropogenic pressures, with a primary focus on Africa and Mediterranean region, complemented by insights from other climate-vulnerable contexts. Climate variability, rapid urbanization, agricultural expansion, ecosystem degradation, and population growth are placing increasing pressure on already stressed hydrological systems, underscoring the urgent need for equitable, cooperative, and climate-resilient water governance frameworks.

The session explores how action-oriented research, innovation, modelling, capacity development, and multi-stakeholder cooperation can support more adaptive and inclusive water management pathways. It emphasizes translating scientific knowledge into institutional strengthening, system thinking, policy processes, and practical implementation, while moving beyond monosectoral approaches toward integrated strategies that address equity, allocation trade-offs, and governance under a changing hydrological cycle.

We invite interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary contributions advancing water management under climate stress, with broader relevance through comparative or transferable lessons. Contributions may include:
- Climate-resilient and equitable water management case studies,
- Capacity development initiatives in water governance and climate adaptation,
- Cross-sectoral partnerships and co-production processes,
- Innovative tools and methodologies, including monitoring, Earth observation, modelling, digital twin, and decision-support systems,
- Governance and policy instruments promoting fairness and resilience.

By combining insights from African and Mediterranean experiences, the session seeks to identify scalable and context-sensitive pathways for cooperative and sustainable water resources management. Through dialogue and synthesis, it aims to generate actionable insights for water policy and practice and contribute to global debates on water governance and climate resilience.
All session participants are invited to attend a townhall (splinter) meeting associated with this session. Further details will be communicated in due course.

The Kotak School of Sustainability (KSS) at IIT Kanpur is India’s first dedicated academic and research school focused entirely on advancing sustainability through science, technology, policy, and innovation. KSS seeks to bring together scientists, engineers, and policymakers to address pressing global and regional challenges related to climate change, extreme weather, air quality, clean energy transition, water management systems, environmental resilience, and sustainable development pathways
This townhall meeting aims to introduce the vision, mission, and strategic priorities of the Kotak School of Sustainability to the international community at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) Assembly. It will highlight ongoing and emerging research initiatives, thematic clusters, and collaborative platforms under development at KSS, while showcasing how the School seeks to serve as a hub for advancing sustainability research and capacity building in India and beyond. The session intends to create a dialogue space for meaningful engagement between KSS and the global geoscience community.
The townhall will include a moderated discussion and open floor engagement. Key questions will include:
• How can global North–South partnerships be structured to advance sustainability science and societal impact?
• What geoscience-driven research themes offer the greatest potential for collaborative action?
The discussion will highlight opportunities for international research collaboration, joint academic initiatives, faculty and student mobility, co-design of research projects, technology co-development and partnerships. Special attention will be given to opportunities for early-career researchers, doctoral students, postdoctoral scholars, and academic collaborators interested in contributing to KSS’s growing ecosystem in sustainability science.
The target audience includes geoscientists, climate researchers, environmental scientists, policy experts, academic leaders, research institutions, funding bodies, and industry or societal stakeholders interested in collaborative sustainability initiatives.
Expected outcomes of this townhall include identifying potential partners, shaping collaborative research priorities, initiating discussions toward formal institutional linkages, and establishing pathways for knowledge exchange and capacity building. The session will also highlight prospective job and career opportunities at the Kotak School of Sustainability, including future faculty, postdoctoral, and research positions. This townhall shall build long-term international networks that strengthen global cooperation and accelerate impactful solutions for a more sustainable and resilient future.

The year 2024 was the warmest on record, with climate-related disasters displacing 46 million people worldwide and natural catastrophes causing $417 billion in economic losses. In South America, the convergence of climate change–driven temperature anomalies, deforestation, and El Niño triggered severe droughts, resulting in unprecedented agricultural losses, escalating water-use conflicts, and rising political instability across commodity-dependent economies. In the Brazilian Amazon, 2024 marked the worst drought in 120 years, directly affecting hundreds of thousands of riverside and Indigenous communities.
Within this challenging climate landscape, the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) convened in Belém in 2025 amid high expectations. Framed by Brazil’s president as the “COP of Truth,” the summit aimed to confront climate denial with scientific evidence and expose the gap between political rhetoric and concrete action. Central to this effort was the “Baku-to-Belém Mission to 1.5,” urging countries to clarify and strengthen emissions-reduction and adaptation targets. Yet attempts to raise ambition stalled, revealing deep divisions over a fossil-fuel phase-out roadmap. These tensions crystallized into a “coalition of the willing”, comprising more than 80 countries committed to strengthening emissions-reduction ambitions, in opposition to resistance from major petrostates. Compounding political resistance, meeting the financial needs of countries’ conditional commitments (those dependent on external funding) remains a major hurdle, as developing countries require $1.3 trillion per year by 2035 beyond self-funded targets — a number that is still far from secured.
This raises a central question: caught between countries’ (un)willingness and (un)conditional commitments, what future should we be preparing for? This Townhall brings together South American scientists present in Belém to reflect on progress and challenges ahead. As the world’s most unequal region, South America’s climate transition is inseparable from social policy, making progress especially complex. While rooted in the South American experience, the discussion resonates across global contexts.
We will examine the financial, scientific, and ethical dimensions of climate (un)agreements at COP30, focusing on:

(a) the credibility of climate finance commitments by developed economies;
(b) the role of early career researchers in addressing imbalances in technology access and knowledge transfer; and
(c) the extent to which Indigenous and ethnic minority voices were meaningfully included.
Ultimately, this discussion confronts the unresolved tensions exposed at the “COP of Truth” and explores the road ahead for global climate governance.

Climate change is the biggest global challenge of the 21st century, affecting almost every sector in the world. However, climate change impacts are profoundly unequal, disproportionately affecting the world's marginalised people, particularly those from lower economic communities and those in vulnerable and disadvantaged situations. They include women, children, older persons, indigenous peoples, people of colour, minorities, migrants, rural workers, persons with disabilities, and the poor.

This Townhall Meeting will explore or come up with how policies can be implemented for marginalized people, especially those in low-income countries, and at the same time how such policies may prevent negative human rights impacts. Panelists from EDI, EGU policy, scientific and policy communities, with contributions from the audience, will explore a number of crucial issues related to climate policy-action for vulnerable and marginalised people. The target audience can be ECRs, scientists, policymakers, social activists, media persons etc.

Policy-action questions will include:
• How can we mobilize resources for sustainable, human-rights-based development for these people? How do we ensure EDI in climate action?
• How can we convince the UN to establish a special office and dedicated research budget for climate-impacted marginalised people?
• What are the effective dedicated policies and actions to reduce GHGs that also reduce the suffering of vulnerable people?
• How can GHG-emitting countries contribute to marginalized people, proportionally to their per-capita, GHG emissions?
• How may policies established by the UNFCCC and the UNDESA better take into account the challenges faced by marginalized people and communities?
• What global and local governance approaches are necessary to alleviate the suffering of climate refugees?
• How can the transfer of geoscientific knowledge empower marginalised communities to become more resilient to climate change?