Through the eyes of a private sector intel analyst
And tales of unbounded climate adaptation!
All views in this this newsletter are mine alone and do not represent those of my employer.
Writing to you this week energised, after having the opportunity to connect with like minded folks taking action for climate adaptation at Adapt Unbound - one of the first conferences out there of its kind catering to the private sector, particularly climate/green-tech.
Before I get into that, I’m doing something new this month - bringing the voices of the ecosystem at the nexus of private sector security, geopolitics, climate risk and adaptation to the fore. There are so many folks in our spaces with so much insights and experience to offer, I can’t help but think what else we can do and build together, starting by bringing those voices to you.
Unbound adaptation - at 7am
Learn, explore, meet. Encouraged but cognisant of structural issues around unlocking the investment thesis and behavioural / value shifts needed + comms.
Earlier this week I shared some takeaways from Adapt Unbound (you can read it here).
Cutting through all the panels and side discussions during the day was this problem: the hard truth is only 5% of all climate finance - both public and private - went into adaptation (US$63 billion in 2021-2022, according to the Global Center for Adaptation). And to make that more daunting, the climate adaptation gap (or the difference between how much investment we need versus how much is being made) is estimated to be $149bn-$366bn per year by the UN Environment Programme. Why isn’t there more investment into adaptation and how do we convincingly make the economic case for it to those not in the room?
The sales pitch for adaptation and resilience is compelling to me, but everyone in the room was already a convert. What may be missing?
Where are the bigger institutional investors + insurers in the room? That’s an opportunity for future conferences / roundtables, gatherings etc
“Adaptation and resilience” or A&R feels clunky at times and doesn’t have the same current branding appeal as net zero / decarbonisation etc. But then again those thematics were not appealing until five or so years ago. So this can change; who’s working on the marketing?
The opportunity in this space is risk management. 100%. But what I didn’t hear so much was how A&R connects with enterprise risk management, including reputational risk management and the social licence to operate. For those who are skeptical of the importance of this idea, just ask PG&E or any firm trying to dig for lithium to supply the EV supply chain.
Where are the low hanging fruit to change regulations that boom the field? Jay Koh from Lightsmith had some interesting ideas about EPA regulations, and the UK has a National Adaptation Plan which (in theory) could be given more ambition and muscle by a future Labour government.
And how much money do we need to solve for this - or a bit more precisely what’s the right target level of investment (h/t Johanna Wolfson via Bobby Sleeth)? Reducing the adaptation funding gap by 50%? 100%? Over what time horizon?
For longtime readers, you would know that the starting point of my thesis is that the world in 2040 (or 2050, 20x0 for that matter) is likely to be more geopolitically volatile, autarchic. The physical risk impacts of climate change, transition risks and other human responses to those impacts will become greater contributors to local and regional conflicts, straining the security of social systems. The erosion of trust in public institutions has been a driver in the private sector taken on greater social burdens - the social licence to operate is going to take more centre stage as energy transition investment scales and private enterprise plays central roles previously the reserve of the state (e.g. Starlink for military communications, core AI tech development via OpenAI, Google, etc).
The pathway to solving for societal insecurity, political instability and conflict would then, go through climate adaptation and resilience - global and local, public and private. That peace and security theme is beginning to be recognised as part of the adaptation solutions space - most recently via Tailwind VC’s new adaptation and resilience taxonomy - is a good and hopeful start where different disciplines and asset classes begin to dovetail and more purposefully solve for asset and community resilience in the coming years.
For me, my current thinking around “what’s the right level of investment” is - whatever it takes to keep our communities - at the national and local level as the frame of reference for policy and investment. A healthy chunk of that (a very speculative 30-50% in the US or UK markets?) would be existing investment, much of it government funding / private infrastructure capex that can be re-branded as A&R. That sits alongside the new, additive investment.
If you were at Adapt Unbound too, I just want to say it was amazing to meet with and learn from so many people already working the space - as entrepreneurs, investors, operators and thought leaders - very inspiring for this newsletter and beyond. If we didn’t meet this time let’s meet at the next conference. I came away even more convinced that as climate (and political, social and security) realities hit more people, particular those in control of the most resources and power, the moolah will follow.
🇬🇧 Yours truly was one of the few at the conference who was not US based, and one of two that were coming in from the UK. Britain desperately needs to have this discussion too (see above from Yorkshire). London Climate Action Week is coming up: let’s grow the community on this side of the pond. If you’re interested, or already doing adaptation work - in public sector, thinktanks, private sector, get in touch!
Interview with Ben Brandt - changing work of geopolitical analysts: “step up or have your lunch eaten”
Ben Brandt is a senior private sector intelligence analyst with over 15 years' experience at Cargill, Delta Airlines, and Lime. He holds a Master's degree in Security Studies from Georgetown University, and speaks German and Indonesian. He’s also a wonderful industry colleague and friend.
Ben! How did you get into the field? How has your role evolved over the years and what has changed the most about the field and business of intel? The least?
I originally got into private sector intel somewhat by accident - I had a background in counterterrorism analysis and critical infrastructure, which helped me get started in the commercial aviation sector. In the 15 years since, I've worked a number of different portfolios across a number of different companies, and it's been fascinating watching the field evolve. There's much more segmentation than when I joined the field - protective/OSINT (open source) intelligence, travel security program management, strategic geopolitical analysis, insider threat, etc are often entirely different sub-disciplines and teams, as opposed to analysts being jacks of all trades.
There's also a much more robust constellation of information sharing and networking groups around the world, which I think is very helpful both for sharpening analysis and helping professionalize the field. The sheer volume of analysts has expanded rapidly as well - it used to be mostly Anglo-American Fortune 500 corporations recruiting private sector intel teams, but it's gone far beyond that now. Also, the use of data visualisation and quantitative analysis has really taken off!
A couple things that haven't changed much are the lack of widely accepted titles, professional standards, and career pathways for analysts - hopefully this will change in time.
What motivates you most when it comes to doing private sector intelligence work?
The ultimate motivation for all of us, I think, is making sure that the people we're entrusted with - be it employees, customers, or both - get home to their families safely at the end of the day. After that, providing intelligence that helps drive business decisions is always satisfying, whether advising on the viability of a market entry strategy or helping traders understand how armed conflict could impact near-term supply and demand.
Are analysts' (and their managers') voices increasingly heard in the organisation? Where are the blockers? When you see the work of analysts moving the needle, what makes it work?
It depends on the organisation - I think security departments are increasingly starting to recognise the value of having intelligence analysts and are resourcing accordingly, but analysts' ability to impact the broader company (eg the C-suite, board of directors, cross functional partners) is still quite limited in many cases. A number of key factors are essential for making sure analysts' work has a broader impact outside the security department - first, you need a CSO (Chief Security Officer) who has good access to the C-suite, and believes that his or her intelligence team can contribute to the broader company. Second, you need experienced, well-resourced analysts who are good at building cross-functional partnerships and can distill broader insights than pure physical security impacts - they need to know what Houthi attacks in the Red Sea mean for insurance premiums and supply chain disruptions, just to give a recent example.
All those factors need to be in alignment for intelligence to be a trusted partner outside of the security department.
What kinds of products and ways of engagement gets the most value from customers?
I've found that short, graphics-intensive products which focus on the what/so what/now what of an issue (what happened, what is the business impact, what is likely to happen next) tend to have the most impact - people also like knowing which indicators to watch and which red herrings to ignore. As analysts, our academic training often works against us, in that we're used to preparing lengthy, text-heavy reports working slowly from thesis to conclusion with plenty of sources and historical context. There's a process of retraining yourself on communication styles that's essential to thrive in this business.
Pivoting for a moment towards climate change. With your background working in the agriculture space, how are you seeing geopolitics intersect with climate change when it comes to issues like food security, supply chain disruption, water stress etc?
Climate change is impacting geopolitics in a wide variety of ways - in the food security space, mega disasters and extreme precipitation/drought are making crop yields highly unpredictable, causing farmer distress and volatility in food prices - both of these can trigger protests and civil unrest. Water stress is driving international and intra-national tensions as growing populations try to lock in declining per capita freshwater resources - we've seen India and Pakistan grapple over water sharing disputes, but the Indian state of Karnataka also has seen major protests about sharing water with a neighbouring state.
Meanwhile, we're also likely to see climate change drive trade disputes in various ways - the EU is implementing carbon-based tariffs for industrial imports, and the EU and US are looking at anti-dumping measures in response to a supposed glut of Chinese solar panels and electric vehicles.
How do you see climate change as a risk theme impacting the what, so what, how and why of what we do in private sector intelligence?
In my experience, private sector intel has often straddled the issues of geopolitical risk and natural disasters somewhat uneasily - some teams handle both, many do only one, and few are looking closely at the interconnection between the two. In my opinion, climate change is going to cement the two together in an inseparable way moving forward. For example, major natural disasters (like wildfires) can trigger waves of environmental protests, as well as protests targeting governments for insufficient disaster response efforts. Climate-induced mega droughts can induce migration to urban areas or other countries, driving social tensions and xenophobia - while also leading to protests targeting water-intensive businesses.
To do the geopolitical risk part of the private sector intel job right, you're going to have to factor in climate change.
Where do you see gaps or opportunities in our sector’s grasp on what these changes mean for them?
I think there are a lot of opportunities for educating analysts on how climate change - both as a long term trend and in the form of climate-linked natural disasters - can and does shape corporate priorities and generate second order physical security and policy risks. I'd strongly encourage folks to start reading your newsletter, which does a great job of illuminating these linkages.
What kinds of innovative solutions are you seeing out there that tackles some of these gaps, which empowers analysts and how they communicate with their customers?
At Cargill, we had the advantage of working in agribusiness, so water scarcity, deforestation, and climate change were always key corporate concerns. We would spend a lot of time talking to our colleagues in Comms, Sustainability, Trading Analytics, and Government Relations about how climate change was creating new reputational risks, supply chain vulnerabilities, market volatility, and regulatory risk - and then fuse that with our geopolitical subject matter expertise to provide stakeholders with a holistic picture on how climate and geopolitical risks intertwined.
Zooming out to companies as a whole. C-suites are much more in tune of late with sustainability and climate risks than they’ve been five years ago. What about geopolitical risk - are you seeing growing engagement? How does “geopolitical risk management” play out with peers you’ve spoken with?
One challenge I've seen is that C-suites are much more aware of geopolitical risk following the Ukraine war and Israel-Hamas war. The challenge is that they're listening to a mix of boutique geopolitical consultancies, government relations folks, and newly hired "geopolitical risk advisors,” usually retired generals or ambassadors, to get their information rather than existing in-house teams. There are pros and cons with this approach; for instance external entities can have trouble incorporating internal insights, geopolitical analysis doesn't flow down from the C-suite to operational level folks, Government Relations teams have historically focused on policy and regulatory advocacy.
In-house intelligence teams need to step up their game or expect to have their lunch eaten.
Bits and bobs
A reminder for those on the smoky island that London Climate Action Week is 22-30 June.
The Council for Climate and Security is hiring for a Research Fellow, Washington DC.
🛫💨 Reducing air turbulence impacts as adaptation solution: Who’s solving for this and are they pitching the airline industry?… there were a number of pieces like this one after the Singapore Airlines turbulence incident last week which killed someone and injured dozens on the role climate change may play in greater frequency and severity of air turbulence. Alterations to jet streams may be at play, but non-climate change factors like increase in air traffic in the past three decades are a notable contributing factor. Because costs to just US airlines alone from turbulence can be up to $500m/year. If we consider the US market as just shy of 25% of all global passenger traffic - as a rough measure of US share of the global aviation market and that turbulence is largely geographically agnostic (that may be a reach!) - then global costs may be greater than $2bn/year. NASA and several international carriers are working on pooling data to create an actionable early warning system for “clear air” turbulence, the kind which hit that Singapore Airlines flight.
No county reported more heat related deaths in the US than Maricopa County, Arizona, which includes Phoenix, in 2023, coming in at a (staggering for the US) 645.
One of the most ambitious projects yet to build a wildlife crossing over a highway, this time over the 101 west of LA towards Ventura County. Having driven through this stretch, a) yes there is roadkill and b) it would be a miracle for any deer or mountain lion to run across this at any time except for maybe 3am without getting hit.
It’s been an exciting month: let me know what you’d like to hear from me next time - hit me up here or on LinkedIn!