The past year has seen a weakening of the international norm against the use of anti-personnel landmines. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania withdrew from the 1997 Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (also known as the Ottawa Treaty) in late 2025, followed by Finland and Poland in 2026, citing growing threats from Russia and Belarus. Finland, Lithuania and Poland have already announced plans to begin or resume landmine production. These developments could further expand the scale and geographic distribution of mine contamination, with consequences for affected regions that could persist and evolve for decades. While this would have clear humanitarian and security implications, it also raises broader questions around environmental governance and climate security.
The widespread use of anti-personnel mines in armed conflict dates to World War II. Today an estimated 100 million people live in areas contaminated by landmines and other explosive ordnance (see map below). According to the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) at least 6279 people were killed or injured by landmines and explosive remnants of war in 2024, the highest number since 2020, and the vast majority were civilians.
The Ottawa Treaty commits states parties to refrain from using, stockpiling, producing or transferring anti-personnel mines, while requiring the clearance of contaminated areas and the provision of assistance to victims. Since the treaty came into force it has contributed to substantial progress in these areas, with more than 55 million stockpiled mines destroyed and over 30 previously contaminated states parties declared mine-free.
However, landmines are still being used extensively in several contemporary conflicts, most notably in Myanmar and Ukraine. Their continued use, alongside the recent treaty withdrawals, demands renewed attention to the long-term impacts of contamination.
The risks posed by landmine contamination can change over time. In particular, environmental and climate change can impact the extent of contamination and who is exposed to it, while contamination can constrain how communities respond to environmental and climate change.
Contamination restricts access to land, with consequences for communities that depend directly on the affected landscapes. The ICBL reports that the most vulnerable populations are those who are most dependent on natural resources for their livelihoods, such as nomadic communities, foresters, herders and agricultural workers. These risks are also gendered: women and girls face risk while collecting resources such as food and firewood, while men and boys face greater exposure through rural livelihood activities and are more likely to take risks out of economic necessity.
Different types of environmental change can further complicate this picture. Landmines are not static hazards waiting in place to be cleared: they continuously interact with the landscapes they inhabit. Factors such as flooding, erosion, changing precipitation patterns, strong winds and vegetation growth can alter the location, detectability and distribution of mines. In Tajikistan, for instance, frequent flooding and mudslides in contaminated areas have relocated mines, amplifying the risk and uncertainty associated with clearance. Comparable patterns have occurred in Iraq’s Kurdistan region and across the Balkans, where the environmental risks are further compounded by sharply declining resources for mine action.
The effects of ongoing armed conflict can have a similar impact. Following the destruction of Ukraine’s Kakhovka Dam by Russian forces in 2023, floodwaters displaced mines and unexploded ordnance across the Kherson region, forcing demining organizations to recheck previously cleared areas and reassess the location and extent of contamination.
As climate change accelerates across many contaminated regions, the impacts on the risks from landmine contamination—and the costs and challenges of landmine clearance—are likely to become more pronounced. In addition to making events like floods and landslides more common and intense, climate change can also slow the progress of clearance, as extreme weather events and changing rainfall patterns can shorten operational windows, meaning demining faces more frequent interruptions.
The relationship between mines and the environment is also reciprocal. As environmental factors shape contamination, contamination simultaneously shapes environmental governance. Restricted access to forests, agricultural land and other important landscapes limits the ability of authorities to manage environmental risks. For example, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, deadwood and combustible vegetation in contaminated forests increase vulnerability to wildfires, yet the presence of mines can prevent the creation of fire corridors and limit the ability of firefighters to safely enter affected areas.
Mine action as climate security
Decisions about where, when and how clearance takes place also dictate which communities regain safe access to landscapes. Political priorities, funding availability and institutional capacities determine which areas are cleared first and which remain contaminated. Because environmental and climate change can impact mine contamination and its socio-economic consequences, these factors should also inform decisions about the order in which areas are cleared.
South Sudan provides a striking example of how these challenges can converge. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that only about 4 per cent of the country’s land is arable. The country is also highly vulnerable to climate change, with recurrent flooding and drought disrupting agricultural production and contributing to widespread food insecurity. These pressures are amplified by persistent violence, which has further constrained livelihoods and capacities to respond to climate change. As climate-related hazards reduce the availability of agricultural land, mine contamination places additional limits on what communities can safely access. Landmines and other explosive ordnance affect an estimated 661 sites associated with livelihood activities in South Sudan. Mine action and climate security are inseparable on the ground, as environmental conditions and contamination create overlapping risks for affected communities.
Accounting for these intersecting environmental, socio-economic and political dimensions requires greater coordination between mine action authorities and institutions responsible for environmental policy, disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation. International mine action standards increasingly recognize the need for this coordination, but its implementation remains uneven, and translating these principles into routine cross-sectoral practice remains a challenge.
This cross-sectoral collaboration could focus on two key areas: information sharing and joint planning. Environmental information on flooding, erosion and other changing conditions could help mine action authorities to anticipate changes in contamination and plan clearance accordingly. Information on mine contamination could also help environmental authorities to identify where mines may constrain adaptation or disaster response. One example of this approach can already be found in Colombia, where Humanity & Inclusion has paired demining with reforestation, planting native species on cleared land to restore degraded ecosystems, protect water sources and support local livelihoods.
With the recent weakening of the Ottawa Treaty and intensifying climate change, closer integration between mine clearance, environmental governance and climate planning will become increasingly important in the decades ahead.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)
Hana Manjušak was a visiting researcher with the SIPRI Climate Change and Risk Programme in the spring of 2026.
The past year has seen a weakening of the international norm against the use of anti-personnel landmines. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania withdrew from the 1997 Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (also known as the Ottawa Treaty) in late 2025, followed by Finland and Poland in 2026, citing growing threats from Russia and Belarus. Finland, Lithuania and Poland have already announced plans to begin or resume landmine production. These developments could further expand the scale and geographic distribution of mine contamination, with consequences for affected regions that could persist and evolve for decades. While this would have clear humanitarian and security implications, it also raises broader questions around environmental governance and climate security.
The widespread use of anti-personnel mines in armed conflict dates to World War II. Today an estimated 100 million people live in areas contaminated by landmines and other explosive ordnance (see map below). According to the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) at least 6279 people were killed or injured by landmines and explosive remnants of war in 2024, the highest number since 2020, and the vast majority were civilians.
The Ottawa Treaty commits states parties to refrain from using, stockpiling, producing or transferring anti-personnel mines, while requiring the clearance of contaminated areas and the provision of assistance to victims. Since the treaty came into force it has contributed to substantial progress in these areas, with more than 55 million stockpiled mines destroyed and over 30 previously contaminated states parties declared mine-free.
However, landmines are still being used extensively in several contemporary conflicts, most notably in Myanmar and Ukraine. Their continued use, alongside the recent treaty withdrawals, demands renewed attention to the long-term impacts of contamination.
Beyond a legacy of war
The risks posed by landmine contamination can change over time. In particular, environmental and climate change can impact the extent of contamination and who is exposed to it, while contamination can constrain how communities respond to environmental and climate change.
Contamination restricts access to land, with consequences for communities that depend directly on the affected landscapes. The ICBL reports that the most vulnerable populations are those who are most dependent on natural resources for their livelihoods, such as nomadic communities, foresters, herders and agricultural workers. These risks are also gendered: women and girls face risk while collecting resources such as food and firewood, while men and boys face greater exposure through rural livelihood activities and are more likely to take risks out of economic necessity.
Different types of environmental change can further complicate this picture. Landmines are not static hazards waiting in place to be cleared: they continuously interact with the landscapes they inhabit. Factors such as flooding, erosion, changing precipitation patterns, strong winds and vegetation growth can alter the location, detectability and distribution of mines. In Tajikistan, for instance, frequent flooding and mudslides in contaminated areas have relocated mines, amplifying the risk and uncertainty associated with clearance. Comparable patterns have occurred in Iraq’s Kurdistan region and across the Balkans, where the environmental risks are further compounded by sharply declining resources for mine action.
The effects of ongoing armed conflict can have a similar impact. Following the destruction of Ukraine’s Kakhovka Dam by Russian forces in 2023, floodwaters displaced mines and unexploded ordnance across the Kherson region, forcing demining organizations to recheck previously cleared areas and reassess the location and extent of contamination.
As climate change accelerates across many contaminated regions, the impacts on the risks from landmine contamination—and the costs and challenges of landmine clearance—are likely to become more pronounced. In addition to making events like floods and landslides more common and intense, climate change can also slow the progress of clearance, as extreme weather events and changing rainfall patterns can shorten operational windows, meaning demining faces more frequent interruptions.
The relationship between mines and the environment is also reciprocal. As environmental factors shape contamination, contamination simultaneously shapes environmental governance. Restricted access to forests, agricultural land and other important landscapes limits the ability of authorities to manage environmental risks. For example, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, deadwood and combustible vegetation in contaminated forests increase vulnerability to wildfires, yet the presence of mines can prevent the creation of fire corridors and limit the ability of firefighters to safely enter affected areas.
Mine action as climate security
Decisions about where, when and how clearance takes place also dictate which communities regain safe access to landscapes. Political priorities, funding availability and institutional capacities determine which areas are cleared first and which remain contaminated. Because environmental and climate change can impact mine contamination and its socio-economic consequences, these factors should also inform decisions about the order in which areas are cleared.
South Sudan provides a striking example of how these challenges can converge. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that only about 4 per cent of the country’s land is arable. The country is also highly vulnerable to climate change, with recurrent flooding and drought disrupting agricultural production and contributing to widespread food insecurity. These pressures are amplified by persistent violence, which has further constrained livelihoods and capacities to respond to climate change. As climate-related hazards reduce the availability of agricultural land, mine contamination places additional limits on what communities can safely access. Landmines and other explosive ordnance affect an estimated 661 sites associated with livelihood activities in South Sudan. Mine action and climate security are inseparable on the ground, as environmental conditions and contamination create overlapping risks for affected communities.
Accounting for these intersecting environmental, socio-economic and political dimensions requires greater coordination between mine action authorities and institutions responsible for environmental policy, disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation. International mine action standards increasingly recognize the need for this coordination, but its implementation remains uneven, and translating these principles into routine cross-sectoral practice remains a challenge.
This cross-sectoral collaboration could focus on two key areas: information sharing and joint planning. Environmental information on flooding, erosion and other changing conditions could help mine action authorities to anticipate changes in contamination and plan clearance accordingly. Information on mine contamination could also help environmental authorities to identify where mines may constrain adaptation or disaster response. One example of this approach can already be found in Colombia, where Humanity & Inclusion has paired demining with reforestation, planting native species on cleared land to restore degraded ecosystems, protect water sources and support local livelihoods.
With the recent weakening of the Ottawa Treaty and intensifying climate change, closer integration between mine clearance, environmental governance and climate planning will become increasingly important in the decades ahead.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)