Nature Climate Change, Published online: 14 November 2025; doi:10.1038/s41558-025-02476-x

In this Progress Article, the authors discuss why longer growing seasons under climate change may or may not increase tree growth. They highlight differences across fields, as well as research gaps, and propose three major open questions to guide future research.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 14 November 2025; doi:10.1038/s41558-025-02458-z

How the conditions in soil layers below the surface change is not well understood. Here the authors assess changes in subsurface soil moisture, finding that these droughts also become more persistent and intense than surface droughts.

“MIT.nano is essential to making progress in high-priority areas where I believe that MIT has a responsibility to lead,” opened MIT president Sally Kornbluth at the 2025 Nano Summit. “If we harness our collective efforts, we can make a serious positive impact.”

It was these collective efforts that drove discussions at the daylong event hosted by MIT.nano and focused on the importance of nanoscience and nanotechnology across MIT's special initiatives — projects deemed critical to MIT’s mission to help solve the world’s greatest challenges. With each new talk, common themes were reemphasized: collaboration across fields, solutions that can scale up from lab to market, and the use of nanoscale science to enact grand-scale change.

“MIT.nano has truly set itself apart, in the Institute's signature way, with an emphasis on cross-disciplinary collaboration and open access,” said Kornbluth. “Today, you're going to hear about the transformative impact of nanoscience and nanotechnology, and how working with the very small can help us do big things for the world together.”

Collaborating on health

Angela Koehler, faculty director of the MIT Health and Life Sciences Collaborative (MIT HEALS) and the Charles W. and Jennifer C. Johnson Professor of Biological Engineering, opened the first session with a question: How can we build a community across campus to tackle some of the most transformative problems in human health? In response, three speakers shared their work enabling new frontiers in medicine.

Ana Jaklenec, principal research scientist at the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, spoke about single-injection vaccines, and how her team looked to the techniques used in fabrication of electrical engineering components to see how multiple pieces could be packaged into a tiny device. “MIT.nano was instrumental in helping us develop this technology,” she said. “We took something that you can do in microelectronics and the semiconductor industry and brought it to the pharmaceutical industry.”

While Jaklenec applied insight from electronics to her work in health care, Giovanni Traverso, the Karl Van Tassel Career Development Professor of Mechanical Engineering, who is also a gastroenterologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, found inspiration in nature, studying the cephalopod squid and remora fish to design ingestible drug delivery systems. Representing the industry side of life sciences, Mirai Bio senior vice president Jagesh Shah SM ’95, PhD ’99 presented his company’s precision-targeted lipid nanoparticles for therapeutic delivery. Shah, as well as the other speakers, emphasized the importance of collaboration between industry and academia to make meaningful impact, and the need to strengthen the pipeline for young scientists.

Manufacturing, from the classroom to the workforce

Paving the way for future generations was similarly emphasized in the second session, which highlighted MIT’s Initiative for New Manufacturing (MIT INM). “MIT’s dedication to manufacturing is not only about technology research and education, it’s also about understanding the landscape of manufacturing, domestically and globally,” said INM co-director A. John Hart, the Class of 1922 Professor and head of the Department of Mechanical Engineering. “It’s about getting people — our graduates who are budding enthusiasts of manufacturing — out of campus and starting and scaling new companies,” he said.

On progressing from lab to market, Dan Oran PhD ’21 shared his career trajectory from technician to PhD student to founding his own company, Irradiant Technologies. “How are companies like Dan’s making the move from the lab to prototype to pilot production to demonstration to commercialization?” asked the next speaker, Elisabeth Reynolds, professor of the practice in urban studies and planning at MIT. “The U.S. capital market has not historically been well organized for that kind of support.” She emphasized the challenge of scaling innovations from prototype to production, and the need for workforce development.

“Attracting and retaining workforce is a major pain point for manufacturing businesses,” agreed John Liu, principal research scientist in mechanical engineering at MIT. To keep new ideas flowing from the classroom to the factory floor, Liu proposes a new worker type in advanced manufacturing — the technologist — someone who can be a bridge to connect the technicians and the engineers.

Bridging ecosystems with nanoscience

Bridging people, disciplines, and markets to affect meaningful change was also emphasized by Benedetto Marelli, mission director for the MIT Climate Project and associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at MIT.

“If we’re going to have a tangible impact on the trajectory of climate change in the next 10 years, we cannot do it alone,” he said. “We need to take care of ecology, health, mobility, the built environment, food, energy, policies, and trade and industry — and think about these as interconnected topics.”

Faculty speakers in this session offered a glimpse of nanoscale solutions for climate resiliency. Michael Strano, the Carbon P. Dubbs Professor of Chemical Engineering, presented his group’s work on using nanoparticles to turn waste methane and urea into renewable materials. Desirée Plata, the School of Engineering Distinguished Climate and Energy Professor, spoke about scaling carbon dioxide removal systems. Mechanical engineering professor Kripa Varanasi highlighted, among other projects, his lab’s work on improving agricultural spraying so pesticides adhere to crops, reducing agricultural pollution and cost.

In all of these presentations, the MIT faculty highlighted the tie between climate and the economy. “The economic systems that we have today are depleting to our resources, inherently polluting,” emphasized Plata. “The goal here is to use sustainable design to transition the global economy.”

What do people do at MIT.nano?

This is where MIT.nano comes in, offering shared access facilities where researchers can design creative solutions to these global challenges. “What do people do at MIT.nano?” asked associate director for Fab.nano Jorg Scholvin ’00, MNG ’01, PhD ’06 in the session on MIT.nano’s ecosystem. With 1,500 individuals and over 20 percent of MIT faculty labs using MIT.nano, it’s a difficult question to quickly answer. However, in a rapid-fire research showcase, students and postdocs gave a response that spanned 3D transistors and quantum devices to solar solutions and art restoration. Their work reflects the challenges and opportunities shared at the Nano Summit: developing technologies ready to scale, uniting disciplines to tackle complex problems, and gaining hands-on experience that prepares them to contribute to the future of hard tech.

The researchers’ enthusiasm carried the excitement and curiosity that President Kornbluth mentioned in her opening remarks, and that many faculty emphasized throughout the day. “The solutions to the problems we heard about today may come from inventions that don't exist yet,” said Strano. “These are some of the most creative people, here at MIT. I think we inspire each other.”

Robert N. Noyce (1953) Cleanroom at MIT.nano

Collaborative inspiration is not new to the MIT culture. The Nano Summit sessions focused on where we are today, and where we might be going in the future, but also reflected on how we arrived at this moment. Honoring visionaries of nanoscience and nanotechnology, President Emeritus L. Rafael Reif delivered the closing remarks and an exciting announcement — the dedication of the MIT.nano cleanroom complex. Made possible through a gift by Ray Stata SB ’57, SM ’58, this research space, 45,000 square feet of ISO 5, 6, and 7 cleanrooms, will be named the Robert N. Noyce (1953) Cleanroom.

“Ray Stata was — and is — the driving force behind nanoscale research at MIT,” said Reif. “I want to thank Ray, whose generosity has allowed MIT to honor Robert Noyce in such a fitting way.”

Ray Stata co-founded Analog Devices in 1965, and Noyce co-founded Fairchild Semiconductor in 1957, and later Intel in 1968. Noyce, widely regarded as the “Mayor of Silicon Valley,” became chair of the Semiconductor Industry Association in 1977, and over the next 40 years, semiconductor technology advanced a thousandfold, from micrometers to nanometers.

“Noyce was a pioneer of the semiconductor industry,” said Stata. “It is due to his leadership and remarkable contributions that electronics technology is where it is today. It is an honor to be able to name the MIT.nano cleanroom after Bob Noyce, creating a permanent tribute to his vision and accomplishments in the heart of the MIT campus.”

To conclude his remarks and the 2025 Nano Summit, Reif brought the nano journey back to today, highlighting technology giants such as Lisa Su ’90, SM ’91, PhD ’94, for whom Building 12, the home of MIT.nano, is named. “MIT has educated a large number of remarkable leaders in the semiconductor space,” said Reif. “Now, with the Robert Noyce Cleanroom, this amazing MIT community is ready to continue to shape the future with the next generation of nano discoveries — and the next generation of nano leaders, who will become living legends in their own time.”

The night before the Department of Materials Science and Engineering (DMSE)’s 3.091 Fun Run, organizer Bianca Sinausky opened a case of bananas she’d ordered and was met with a surprise: the fruit was bright green.

“I looked around for paper bags, but I only found a few,” says Sinausky, graduate academic administrator for the department, referring to a common hack for speeding up ripening. “It was hopeless.”

That is, until facilities manager Kevin Rogers came up with a plan: swap the green bananas for ripe ones from MIT’s Banana Lounge, a free campus snack and study space stocked with fruit.

“It was genius,” Sinausky says. “The runners would have their snack, and the race could go on.”

DMSE checked in with the Banana Lounge a little late, but logistics lead senior Colin Clark approved anyway. “So that’s where that box came from,” he says.

On a bright fall morning, ripe bananas awaited 20 DMSE students and faculty in the Oct. 15 run, which started and finished at the Zesiger Sports and Fitness Center and wound along pedestrian paths across the MIT campus. Department head Polina Anikeeva, an avid runner, says the goal was to build community, enjoy the outdoors, and celebrate 3.091 (Introduction to Solid-State Chemistry), a popular first-year class and General Institute Requirement.

“We realized 3.091 was so close to 5 kilometers — 3.1 miles — it was the perfect opportunity,” Anikeeva says, admitting she made the initial connection. “I think about things like that.”

For many participants, running is a regular hobby—but doing it with colleagues made it even more enjoyable. “I usually run a few times a week, and I thought it would be fun to log some more miles in my training block with the DMSE community,” says graduate student Jessica Dong, who is training for the Cambridge Half Marathon this month.

Fellow graduate student Rishabh Kothari agrees. “I was excited to support a department event that aligns with my general hobbies,” says Kothari, who recently ran the Chicago Marathon and tied for first in his age category in the DMSE run. “I find running to be a great community-building activity.”

While fun runs are usually noncompetitive, organizers still recognized the fastest runners by age group.

Unlike an official road race, organized by a race company — the City of Cambridge currently isn’t allowing new races — the DMSE run was managed internally by an informal cohort of colleagues, Sinausky says, which meant a fair amount of work.

“The hardest part was walking the route and putting the mileage out, and also putting out arrows,” she says. “When a race company does it, they do it properly.”

There were a few minor snags — some runners went the wrong way, and two walkers got lost. “So I think we need to mark the course better,” Sinausky says.

Others found charm in the run’s rough edges.

“My favorite part of the run was when a group of us got confused about the route, so we cut through the lawn in front of Tang Hall,” Dong says. At the finish line, she showed off a red DMSE hat — one of the giveaways laid out alongside ripe bananas and bottles of water.

Looking ahead to what organizers hope will be an annual event, the team is considering purchasing race timing equipment. Modern road races distribute bibs outfitted with RFID chips, which track each runner’s start and finish. Sinausky’s method — employing a smartphone timer and Anikeeva tracking finish times on a clipboard — was less high-tech, but effective for the small number of participants.

“We would see the runners coming, and Polina would say, ‘OK, bib 21.’ And then I would yell out the time,” she says. “I think that if more people showed up, it would’ve been harder.”

Sinausky hopes to boost participation in coming years. Early interest was strong, with 63 registering, but fewer than a third showed up on race day. The week’s delay due to rain — and several straight days of rain since — likely didn’t help, she says.

Overall, she says, the run was a success, with participants saying they hope it will become a new DMSE tradition.

“It was great to see everyone finish and enjoy themselves,” Kothari says. “A nice morning to be around friends.”

For students, postdocs, and early-career researchers, communicating complex ideas in a clear and compelling manner has become an essential skill. Whether applying for academic positions, pitching research to funders, or collaborating across disciplines, the ability to present work clearly and effectively can be as critical as the work itself.

Recognizing this need, The MIT Office of Graduate Education (OGE) has partnered with the Writing and Communication Center (WCC) to launch the WCC Communication Studio: a self-service recording and editing space designed to help users sharpen their oral presentation and communication skills. Open to all members of the MIT community as of this fall, the studio offers a first-of-its-kind resource at MIT for developing and refining research presentations, mock interview conversations, elevator pitches, and more.

Housed in WCC’s Ames Street office, the studio is equipped with high-quality microphones and user-friendly video recording and editing tools, all designed to be used with the PitchVantage software.

How does it work? Users can access tutorials, example videos, and a reservation system through the WCC’s website. After completing a short orientation on how to use the technology and space responsibly, users are ready to pitch to simulated audiences, who react in real time to various elements of delivery. Users can also watch their recorded presentations and receive personalized feedback on nine elements of presentation delivery: pitch, pace, volume variability, verbal distractors, pace, eye contact, volume, engagement, and pauses.

Designed with students in mind

“Through years of individual and group consultations with MIT students and scholars, we realized that developing strong presentation skills requires more than feedback — it requires sustained, embodied practice,” explains Elena Kallestinova, director of the WCC. “The Oral Communication Studio was created to fill that gap.”

Those who have used the studio during its initial lifespan say that its interactive format helps to provide real-time, actionable feedback on their verbal delivery. Additionally, the program offers notes on overall stage presence, including subtle actions such as hand gestures and eye contact. For students, this can be the key to ensuring that their delivery is both confident and clearly accessible once it comes time to present. 

“I’ve been using the studio to practice for conferences and job interviews,” says Fabio Castro, a PhD student studying civil engineering. His favorite feature? The instant feedback from the virtual figures watching the presentation, which allows him to not only prepare to speak in front of an audience, but to read their nonverbal cues and adjust his delivery accordingly.

The studio also addresses a practical challenge facing many PhD students and postdocs in their role as emerging researchers: the high stakes of presenting. For many, their first major talk may be in front of a hiring committee, research institute, or funding body — audiences that may heavily influence their next career step. The studio gives them a low-pressure environment in which to rehearse so that they enter these spaces confidently.

Aditi Ramakrishnan, an MBA student in the MIT Sloan School of Management, acknowledges the importance of this tool for emerging professionals. As a business student, she explains, “a lot of your job involves pitching.” She credits the WCC with helping to take her pitching game “from good to excellent,” identifying small details such as unnecessary “filler” words and understanding the difference between a strong stage presence and a distracting one. 

A new frontier in communication support at MIT

While MIT has long been recognized for its excellence in technical education, the studio represents a broader focus on arming students and researchers alike with the tools that they need to amplify their work to larger audiences. 

“The WCC Communication Studio  gives students a place to rehearse, get immediate feedback, and iterate until their ideas land clearly and confidently,” explains Denzil Streete, OGE’s senior associate dean and director. “It’s not just about better slides or smoother delivery; it’s about unlocking and scaling access to more modern tools so more graduate students can translate breakthrough research into real-world impact.”

"The studio is a resource for the entire MIT community,” says Kallestinova, emphasizing that this new resource serves as a support for not only graduate students, but also undergrads, researchers, and even faculty. “Whether used as a supplement to classroom instruction or as a follow-up to coaching sessions, the studio offers a dedicated space for rehearsal, reflection, and growth, helping all users build confidence, clarity, and command in their communication."

The studio joins an array of existing resources within the WCC, including a Public Speaking Certificate Program, a peer-review group for creative writers, and a number of revolving workshops throughout the year. 

A culture of communication

From grant funding and academic collaboration to public outreach and policy impact, effective speaking skills are more important than ever.

“No matter how brilliant the idea, it has to be clearly communicated by the researcher or scholar in order to have impact,” says Amanda Cornwall, associate director of graduate student professional development at Career Advising and Professional Development (CAPD). 

“Explaining complex concepts to a broader audience takes practice and skill. When a researcher can build confidence in their speaking abilities, they have the power to transport their audience and show the way to new possibilities,” she adds. “This is why communication is one of the professional development competencies that we emphasize at MIT; it matters in every context, from small conversations to teaching to speeches that might change the world.”

The studio’s launch comes among a broader institutional focus on communication. CAPD, the Teaching and Learning Lab, the OGE, and academic departments have recognized the value of, and provided increasing levels of support for, professional development training alongside technical expertise.

Workshops already offered by the WCC, CAPD, and other campus partners work to highlight best practices for conference talks, long-form interviews, and more. The WCC Communication Studio provides a practical extension of these efforts. Looking ahead, the studio aims to not only serve as a training space, but also help foster a culture of communication excellence among researchers and educators.

Remember when you thought age verification laws couldn't get any worse? Well, lawmakers in Wisconsin, Michigan, and beyond are about to blow you away.

It's unfortunately no longer enough to force websites to check your government-issued ID before you can access certain content, because politicians have now discovered that people are using Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) to protect their privacy and bypass these invasive laws. Their solution? Entirely ban the use of VPNs. 

Yes, really.

As of this writing, Wisconsin lawmakers are escalating their war on privacy by targeting VPNs in the name of “protecting children” in A.B. 105/S.B. 130. It’s an age verification bill that requires all websites distributing material that could conceivably be deemed “sexual content” to both implement an age verification system and also to block the access of users connected via VPN. The bill seeks to broadly expand the definition of materials that are “harmful to minors” beyond the type of speech that states can prohibit minors from accessing—potentially encompassing things like depictions and discussions of human anatomy, sexuality, and reproduction. 

This follows a notable pattern: As we’ve explained previously, lawmakers, prosecutors, and activists in conservative states have worked for years to aggressively expand the definition of “harmful to minors” to censor a broad swath of content: diverse educational materials, sex education resources, art, and even award-winning literature. 

Wisconsin’s bill has already passed the State Assembly and is now moving through the Senate. If it becomes law, Wisconsin could become the first state where using a VPN to access certain content is banned. Michigan lawmakers have proposed similar legislation that did not move through its legislature, but among other things, would force internet providers to actively monitor and block VPN connections. And in the UK, officials are calling VPNs "a loophole that needs closing."

This is actually happening. And it's going to be a disaster for everyone.

Here's Why This Is A Terrible Idea 

VPNs mask your real location by routing your internet traffic through a server somewhere else. When you visit a website through a VPN, that website only sees the VPN server's IP address, not your actual location. It's like sending a letter through a P.O. box so the recipient doesn't know where you really live. 

So when Wisconsin demands that websites "block VPN users from Wisconsin," they're asking for something that's technically impossible. Websites have no way to tell if a VPN connection is coming from Milwaukee, Michigan, or Mumbai. The technology just doesn't work that way.

Websites subject to this proposed law are left with this choice: either cease operation in Wisconsin, or block all VPN users, everywhere, just to avoid legal liability in the state. One state's terrible law is attempting to break VPN access for the entire internet, and the unintended consequences of this provision could far outweigh any theoretical benefit.

Almost Everyone Uses VPNs

Let's talk about who lawmakers are hurting with these bills, because it sure isn't just people trying to watch porn without handing over their driver's license.

1. Businesses run on VPNs. Every company with remote employees uses VPNs. Every business traveler connecting through sketchy hotel Wi-Fi needs one. Companies use VPNs to protect client and employee data, secure internal communications, and prevent cyberattacks. 
2. Students need VPNs for school. Universities require students to use VPNs to access research databases, course materials, and library resources. These aren't optional, and many professors literally assign work that can only be accessed through the school VPN. The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s WiscVPN, for example, “allows UW–‍Madison faculty, staff and students to access University resources even when they are using a commercial Internet Service Provider (ISP).” 
3. Vulnerable people rely on VPNs for safety. Domestic abuse survivors use VPNs to hide their location from their abusers. Journalists use them to protect their sources. Activists use them to organize without government surveillance. LGBTQ+ people in hostile environments—both in the US and around the world—use them to access health resources, support groups, and community. For people living under censorship regimes, VPNs are often their only connection to vital resources and information their governments have banned. 
4. Regular people just want privacy. Maybe you don't want every website you visit tracking your location and selling that data to advertisers. Maybe you don't want your internet service provider (ISP) building a complete profile of your browsing history. Maybe you just think it's creepy that corporations know everywhere you go online. VPNs can protect everyday users from everyday tracking and surveillance.

It’s A Privacy Nightmare

Here's what happens if VPNs get blocked: everyone has to verify their age by submitting government IDs, biometric data, or credit card information directly to websites—without any encryption or privacy protection.

We already know how this story ends. Companies get hacked. Data gets breached. And suddenly your real name is attached to the websites you visited, stored in some poorly-secured database waiting for the inevitable leak. This has already happened, and is not a matter of if but when. And when it does, the repercussions will be huge.

Forcing people to give up their privacy to access legal content is the exact opposite of good policy. It's surveillance dressed up as safety.

"Harmful to Minors" Is Not a Catch-All 

Here's another fun feature of these laws: they're trying to broaden the definition of “harmful to minors” to sweep in a host of speech that is protected for both young people and adults.

Historically, states can prohibit people under 18 years old from accessing sexual materials that an adult can access under the First Amendment. But the definition of what constitutes “harmful to minors” is narrow — it generally requires that the materials have almost no social value to minors and that they, taken as a whole, appeal to a minors’ “prurient sexual interests.” 

Wisconsin's bill defines “harmful to minors” much more broadly. It applies to materials that merely describe sex or feature descriptions/depictions of human anatomy. This definition would likely encompass a wide range of literature, music, television, and films that are protected under the First Amendment for both adults and young people, not to mention basic scientific and medical content.

Additionally, the bill’s definition would apply to any websites where more than one third of the site’s material is "harmful to minors." Given the breadth of the definition and its one-third trigger, we anticipate that Wisconsin could argue that the law applies to most social media websites. And it’s not hard to imagine, as these topics become politicised, Wisconsin claiming it applies to websites containing LGBTQ+ health resources, basic sexual education resources, and reproductive healthcare information. 

This breadth of the bill’s definition isn't a bug, it's a feature. It gives the state a vast amount of discretion to decide which speech is “harmful” to young people, and the power to decide what's "appropriate" and what isn't. History shows us those decisions most often harm marginalized communities. 

It Won’t Even Work

Let's say Wisconsin somehow manages to pass this law. Here's what will actually happen:

People who want to bypass it will use non-commercial VPNs, open proxies, or cheap virtual private servers that the law doesn't cover. They'll find workarounds within hours. The internet always routes around censorship. 

Even in a fantasy world where every website successfully blocked all commercial VPNs, people would just make their own. You can route traffic through cloud services like AWS or DigitalOcean, tunnel through someone else's home internet connection, use open proxies, or spin up a cheap server for less than a dollar. 

Meanwhile, everyone else (businesses, students, journalists, abuse survivors, regular people who just want privacy) will have their VPN access impacted. The law will accomplish nothing except making the internet less safe and less private for users.

Nonetheless, as we’ve mentioned previously, while VPNs may be able to disguise the source of your internet activity, they are not foolproof—nor should they be necessary to access legally protected speech. Like the larger age verification legislation they are a part of, VPN-blocking provisions simply don't work. They harm millions of people and they set a terrifying precedent for government control of the internet. More fundamentally, legislators need to recognize that age verification laws themselves are the problem. They don't work, they violate privacy, they're trivially easy to circumvent, and they create far more harm than they prevent.

A False Dilemma

People have (predictably) turned to VPNs to protect their privacy as they watched age verification mandates proliferate around the world. Instead of taking this as a sign that maybe mass surveillance isn't popular, lawmakers have decided the real problem is that these privacy tools exist at all and are trying to ban the tools that let people maintain their privacy. 

Let's be clear: lawmakers need to abandon this entire approach.

The answer to "how do we keep kids safe online" isn't "destroy everyone's privacy." It's not "force people to hand over their IDs to access legal content." And it's certainly not "ban access to the tools that protect journalists, activists, and abuse survivors.”

If lawmakers genuinely care about young people's well-being, they should invest in education, support parents with better tools, and address the actual root causes of harm online. What they shouldn't do is wage war on privacy itself. Attacks on VPNs are attacks on digital privacy and digital freedom. And this battle is being fought by people who clearly have no idea how any of this technology actually works. 

If you live in Wisconsin—reach out to your Senator and urge them to kill A.B. 105/S.B. 130. Our privacy matters. VPNs matter. And politicians who can't tell the difference between a security tool and a "loophole" shouldn't be writing laws about the internet.

A new class is giving MIT students the opportunity to examine the historical and practical considerations of urban farming while developing a real-world understanding of its value by working alongside a local farm’s community.

Course 4.182 (Resilient Urbanism: Green Commons in the City) is taught in two sections by instructors in the Program in Science, Technology, and Society and the School of Architecture and Planning, in collaboration with The Common Good Co-op in Dorchester.

The first section was completed in spring 2025 and the second section is scheduled for spring 2026. The course is taught by STS professor Kate Brown, visiting lecturer Justin Brazier MArch ’24, and Kafi Dixon, lead farmer and executive director of The Common Good.

“This project is a way for students to investigate the real political, financial, and socio-ecological phenomena that can help or hinder an urban farm’s success,” says Brown, the Thomas M. Siebel Distinguished Professor in History of Science. 

Brown teaches environmental history, the history of food production, and the history of plants and people. She describes a history of urban farming that centered sustainable practices, financial investment and stability, and lasting connections among participants. 

Brown says urban farms have sustained cities for decades.

“Cities are great places to grow produce,” Brown asserts. “City dwellers produce lots of compostable materials.”

Brazier’s research ranges from affordable housing to urban agricultural gardens, exploring topics like sustainable architecture, housing, and food security.

“My work designing vacant lots as community gardens offered a link between Kafi’s work with Common Good and my interests in urban design,” Brazier says. “Urban farms offer opportunities to eliminate food deserts in underserved areas while also empowering historically marginalized communities.”

Before they agreed to collaborate on the course, Dixon reached out to Brown asking for help with several challenges related to her urban farm including zoning, location, and infrastructure.

“As the lead farmer and executive director of Common Good Co-op, I happened upon Kate Brown’s research and work and saw that it aligned with our cooperative model’s intentions,” Dixon says. “I reached out to Kate, and she replied, which humbled and excited me.” 

“Design itself is a form of communication,” Dixon adds, describing the collaborative nature of farming sustenance and development. “For many under-resourced communities, innovating requires a research-based approach.”

The project is among the inaugural cohort of initiatives to receive support from the SHASS Education Innovation Fund, which is administered by the MIT Human Insight Collaborative (MITHIC).

Community development, investment, and collaboration

The class’s first section paired students with community members and the City of Boston to change the farm’s zoning status and create a green space for long-term farming and community use. Students spent time at Common Good during the course, including one weekend during which they helped with weeding the garden beds for spring planting.

One objective of the class is to help Common Good avoid potential pitfalls associated with gentrification. “A study in Philadelphia showed that gentrification occurs within 1,000 feet of a community garden,” Brown says. 

“Farms and gardens are a key part of community and public health,” Dixon continues. 

Students in the second section will design and build infrastructure — including a mobile chicken coop and a pavilion to protect farmers from the elements — for Common Good. The course also aims to secure a green space designation for the farm and ensure it remains an accessible community space. “We want to prevent developers from acquiring the land and displacing the community,” Brown says, avoiding past scenarios in which governments seized inhabitants’ property while offering little or no compensation.

Students in the 2025 course also produced a guide on how to navigate the complex rules surrounding zoning and related development. Students in the next STS section will research the history of food sovereignty and Black feminist movements in Dorchester and Roxbury. Using that research, they will construct an exhibit focused on community activism for incorporation into the coop’s facade.

Imani Bailey, a second-year master’s student in the Department of Architecture’s MArch program, was among the students in the course’s first section.

“By taking this course, I felt empowered to directly engage with the community in a way no other class I have taken so far has afforded me the ability to,” she says.

Bailey argues for urban farms’ value as both a financial investment and space for communal interaction, offering opportunities for engagement and the implementation of sustainable practices. 

“Urban farms are important in the same way a neighbor is,” she adds. “You may not necessarily need them to own your home, but a good one makes your property more valuable, sometimes financially, but most importantly in ways that cannot be assigned a monetary value.”

The intersection of agriculture, community, and technology

Technology, the course’s participants believe, can offer solutions to some of the challenges related to ensuring urban farms’ viability. 

“Cities like Amsterdam are redesigning themselves to improve walkability, increase the appearance of small gardens in the city, and increase green space,” Brown says. By creating spaces that center community and a collective approach to farming, it’s possible to reduce both greenhouse emissions and impacts related to climate change.

Additionally, engineers, scientists, and others can partner with communities to develop solutions to transportation and public health challenges. By redesigning sewer systems, empowering microbiologists to design microbial inoculants that can break down urban food waste at the neighborhood level, and centering agriculture-related transportation in the places being served, it’s possible to sustain community support and related infrastructure.

“Community is cultivated, nurtured, and grown from prolonged interaction, sharing ideas, and the creation of place through a shared sense of ownership,” Bailey argues. “Urban farms present the conditions for communities to develop.” 

Bailey values the course because it leaves the theoretical behind, instead focusing on practical solutions. “We seldom see our design ideas become tangible," she says. “This class offered an opportunity to design and build for a real client in the real world.”

Brazier says the course and its projects prove everyone has something to contribute and can have a voice in what happens with their neighborhoods. “Despite these communities’ distrust of some politicians, we partnered to work on solutions related to zoning,” he says, “and supported community members’ advocacy efforts.”

The Business of Secrets: Adventures in Selling Encryption Around the World by Fred Kinch (May 24, 2004)

From the vantage point of today, it’s surreal reading about the commercial cryptography business in the 1970s. Nobody knew anything. The manufacturers didn’t know whether the cryptography they sold was any good. The customers didn’t know whether the crypto they bought was any good. Everyone pretended to know, thought they knew, or knew better than to even try to know.

The Business of Secrets is the self-published memoirs of Fred Kinch. He was founder and vice president of—mostly sales—at a US cryptographic hardware company called Datotek, from company’s founding in 1969 until 1982. It’s mostly a disjointed collection of stories about the difficulties of selling to governments worldwide, along with descriptions of the highs and (mostly) lows of foreign airlines, foreign hotels, and foreign travel in general. But it’s also about encryption...

The most aggressive goal of the Paris Agreement is out of reach, according to a new analysis by the Global Carbon Project.

Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) signed the deal Wednesday to leave the regional cap-and-trade system, ending a four-month budget impasse with Republicans.

The International Energy Agency pointed to President Donald Trump’s fossil fuel policies as one reason for an extended run for oil, gas and coal.

The administration has drawn criticism for shuffling personnel and equipment at Goddard Space Flight Center, which does much of the agency's earth science work.

Severe thunderstorms cause more damage than any other weather event. Insurance industry-funded research aims to understand why.

Chevron and other oil majors are fighting against legal claims that they should pay up for their role in damaging the Bayou State's coastline.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is returning to a time-tested technique to exercise soft power at U.N. climate talks.

Ahead of COP30 in Belém, Brazil, this week, most countries that filed emissions plans with net-zero goals are relying on carbon removals to reach their target, according to an analysis.

Using high-resolution data on rainfall, sea tides and death records, researchers estimated the mortality costs of rain in Mumbai — representing the total economic value attributed to each life lost — at $12 billion for the entire decade they examined.

“We believe it would send a signal to the market and encourage more potential suppliers, especially in the Global South countries," said a company executive.

To help soften the impact of the bloc’s green transition, governments and lawmakers want to postpone rollout of Emissions Trading System 2.

In recent months, Russia has frequently flown drones into NATO territory, where NATO countries typically try to shoot them down. By contrast, when three Russian fighter jets made an incursion into Estonian airspace in September, they were intercepted and no attempt was made to shoot them down — although the incident did make headlines and led to a Russian diplomat being expelled from Estonia.

Those incidents follow a global pattern of recent years. Drone operations, to this point, seem to provoke different responses compared to other kinds of military action, especially the use of piloted warplanes. Drone warfare is expanding but not necessarily provoking major military responses, either by the countries being attacked or by the aggressor countries that have drones shot down.

“There was a conventional wisdom that drones were a slippery slope that would enable leaders to use force in all kinds of situations, with a massively destabilizing effect,” says MIT political scientist Erik Lin-Greenberg. “People thought if drones were used all over the place, this would lead to more escalation. But in many cases where drones are being used, we don’t see that escalation.”

On the other hand, drones have made military action more pervasive. It is at least possible that in the future, drone-oriented combat will be both more common and more self-contained.

“There is a revolutionary effect of these systems, in that countries are essentially increasing the range of situations in which leaders are willing to deploy military force,” Lin-Greenberg says. To this point, though, he adds, “these confrontations are not necessarily escalating.”

Now Lin-Greenberg examines these dynamics in a new book, “The Remote Revolution: Drones and Modern Statecraft,” published by Cornell University Press. Lin-Greenberg is an associate professor in MIT’s Department of Political Science.

Lin-Greenberg brings a distinctive professional background to the subject of drone warfare. Before returning to graduate school, he served as a U.S. Air Force officer; today he commands a U.S. Air Force reserve squadron. His thinking is informed by his experiences as both a scholar and practitioner.

“The Remote Revolution” also has a distinctive methodology that draws on multiple ways of studying the topic. In writing the book, Lin-Greenberg conducted experiments based on war games played by national security professionals; conducted surveys of expert and public thinking about drones; developed in-depth case studies from history; and dug into archives broadly to fully understand the history of drone use, which in fact goes back several decades.

The book’s focus is drone use during the 2000s, as the technology has become more readily available; today about 100 countries have access to military drones. Many have used them during tensions and skirmishes with other countries.

“Where I argue this is actually revolutionary is during periods of crises, which fall below the threshold of war, in that these new technologies take human operators out of harm’s way and enable states to do things they wouldn’t otherwise do,” Lin-Greenberg says.

Indeed, a key point is that drones lower the costs of military action for countries — and not just financial costs, but human and political costs, too. Incidents and problems that might plague leaders if they involved military personnel, forcing major responses, seem to lessen when drones are involved.

“Because these systems don’t have a human on board, they’re inherently cheaper and different in the minds of decision-makers,” Lin-Greenberg says. “That means they’re willing to use these systems during disputes, and if other states are shooting them down, the side sending them is less likely to retaliate, because they’re losing a machine but not a man or woman on board.”

In this sense, the uses of drones “create new rungs on the escalation ladder,” as Lin-Greenberg writes in the book. Drone incidents don’t necessarily lead to wider military action, and may not even lead to the same kinds of international relations issues as incidents involving piloted aircraft.

Consider a counterfactual that Lin-Greenberg raises in the book. One of the most notorious episodes of Cold War tension between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. occurred in 1960, when U.S. pilot Gary Powers was shot down and captured in the Soviet Union, leading to a diplomatic standoff and a canceled summit between U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev.

“Had that been a drone, it’s very likely the summit would have continued,” Lin-Greenberg says. “No one would have said anything. The Soviet Union would have been embarrassed to admit their airspace was violated and the U.S. would have just [publicly] ignored what was going on, because there would not have been anyone sitting in a prison. There are a lot of exercises where you can ask how history could have been different.”

None of this is to say that drones present straightforward solutions to international relations problems. They may present the appearance of low-cost military engagement, but as Lin-Greenberg underlines in the book, the effects are more complicated.

“To be clear, the remote revolution does not suggest that drones prevent war,” Lin-Greenberg writes. Indeed, one of the problems they raise, he emphasizes, is the “moral hazard” that arises from leaders viewing drones as less costly, which can lead to even more military confrontations.

Moreover, the trends in drone warfare so far yield predictions for the future that are “probabilistic rather than deterministic,” as Lin-Greenberg writes. Perhaps some political or military leaders will start to use drones to attack new targets that will inevitably generate major responses and quickly escalate into broad wars. Current trends do not guarantee future outcomes.

“There are a lot of unanswered questions in this area,” Lin-Greenberg says. “So much is changing. What does it look like when more drones are more autonomous? I still hope this book lays a foundation for future dicussions, even as drones are used in different ways.”

Other scholars have praised “The Remote Revolution.” Joshua Kertzer, a professor of international studies and government at Harvard University, has hailed Lin-Greenberg’s “rich expertise, methodological rigor, and creative insight,” while Michael Horowitz, a political scientist and professor of international relations at the University of Pennsylvania, has called it “an incredible book about the impact of drones on the international security environment.”

For his part, Lin-Greenberg says, “My hope is the book will be read by academics and practitioners and people who choose to focus on parts of it they’re interested in. I tried to write the book in way that’s approachable.”

Publication of the book was supported by funding from MIT’s Security Studies Program.