environmental change and security program report 5: reviews of new publications
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
1/24
EN VI RO N M EN T AL CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
N ew Publications
10 0
N ew Publications
The Environment, Scarcity, and ViolenceT homas F. Hom er-D ixon
Princeton, N J: Princeton University Press, 1999. 253 pp.
Rev iew ed by D av id D essler
T his ambitious book is an important contribution to the increasingly sophisticated and wide-ranging debate over environmental
change and security. T hom as H om er-Dixon, th e auth or of nu merou s pub lication s and th e director of two large-scale research
projects on environmental change and conflict (the Project on Population, Environment and Security, and the Project on
Environmental Change and Acute Conflict), has been over the past decade one of the fields most prominent and influential
cont ributors. T his book synthesizes work from t hese earlier projects and develops an int egrative framework for grasping the
disparate findings they have generated. T he result is an im pressive work of scholarship t hat is sure to figure promin ently in
ongoin g debates over environm ental chan ge, conflict, and security.H om er-Dixons key find ing is that scarcity of ren ewable resourcesor what I call environmental scarcitycan contribute
to civil violence, including insurgencies and eth nic clashes (p. 177). T his conclusion leads the autho r to predict th at in com ing
decades the in cidence of such violence will probab ly increase as scarcities of cropland, freshwater, and forests worsen in man y
parts of the developing world (ibid.). H omer-D ixon is approp riately cautious in advancing these claims. H e is careful to note
th at environm ental scarcity is neither a n ecessary nor sufficient cause of such conflict, th at it plays a negligible causal role in m any
civil conflicts, and that even when environmental scarcity is a cause of conflict, its influence is typically mediated by social,
political, and econom ic factors (chapters 1 and 2). T he auth or systematically describes th e sources and trend s of environm ental
scarcity in th e world (chapter 4 ), and ident ifies their negative social effects (chapter 5). H e discusses the types of techn ical and
social ingenuity needed to promote nondisruptive adaptation to scarcity (chapter 6), and finally pulls these various elements
togeth er into a general mod el of how environm ental chan ge and it s social effects can cause civil violence of various types (chapter
7). T he discussion is nicely structu red and the writing is clear, straightforward, and accessible through out .
H om er-Dixons main cont ribut ion m ay be the framework and vocabulary he develops to tran scend tradition al debates over
th e relationship between pop ulation growth , resource scarcity, economic prosperity, and conflict. H e identifies three tradition al
positions in this debate: the neo-Malthusians, who emphasize the limits that finite resources place on growth and prosperity; the
economic optimists, who see few, if any, such limits; and the distributionalists, who focus not on the stock of resources and the
alleged limits to growth th ey may imp ly, but on the effects that various distribu tion s of wealth and p ower can h ave on econom ic
growth an d well-being. H om er-Dixons strategy is to int egrate physical variables (stocks of natu ral resources, popu lation size and
growth, and resource-consumption per capita) and social factors (market dynamics, and social and economic structures) in a
single model that emphasizes the importance of thresholds, interdependence, and interactivity within complex environmental
systems. For H omer-D ixon, the m etaphors of stability, equilibrium, and b alance are not appropr iate to describe comp lex,
interd ependen t system s like those of environm ental change. Instead, metap hors of anarchy, flux, and constant turm oil are
mo re apt. H e argues that these ecosystem characteristics mean t hat societies mu st be able to supp ly mo re social and t echnical
ingenuity to adapt to rising scarcity (p. 41-2).
Anoth er import ant con tribu tion of th e book is H omer-D ixons focus on th e role of knowledge and ideas, or lack thereof, in
explainin g a societys ability to adapt smoothly to en vironm ental scarcity. Calling t his stock of knowledge and ideas ingenu ity,th e autho r argues that a society must b e able to supply enough ingenuity at the right places and t imes to cope successfully with
scarcity (p. 107). Both t echnical ingenu ity (e.g., agricultu ral technologies th at comp ensate for environm ental loss) and social
ingenuit y (approp riate policies, institution s and organizations) are required. H om er-Dixon poin ts to an ingenuity gap in
man y societies th at leaves th em vulnerable to th e most pern icious effects of environm ental change and d egradation. H e links his
analysis of ingenuity to th e general mod el of ecosystem change, point ing out th at th e need for ingenuity (part icularly of the social
variety) is most pressing in complex systems of environmental change that exhibit nonlinearity and interactive responses to
human perturbations.
T he volum es two m ain weaknesses are broadly method ological. T he first concerns t he d efinition of environm ental scarcity.
In H om er-Dixons framework, scarcity does no t n ecessarily represent an in sufficient supply of or excess dem and for a resource.
Scarcity also results from purely stru ctural sources th at are fundam entally social or political in character (p. 48). For example,
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
2/24
N ew Publications
10EN V IR O N M EN TA L CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
violence in the Senegal River Valley in 1989 between Arabs
and blacks, we learn, was sparked when the Mauritanian elite,
which consists prim arily of white Moo rs. . . rewrote legislation
governing lan d own ership, effectively abrogating th e rights of
black Africans to con tinu e farmin g, herding, and fishing along
th e M auritanian riverbank (p. 77). But in this episode, it
tu rned ou t that the resources in question especially arable land,
suitable for intensive farmingwere increasing in availability.
T he resource pie was growing, not shrinking. Indeed, theMauritanian elite meant to take advantage of just this fact in
rewriting the relevant land own ership laws. H owever, H om er-
Dixon argues that this episode reveals how
environmental scarcity can lead to violent
con flict. A power ful elite. . . chan ged
property rights and resource distribution in
its own favor, which produced a sudden
increase in resource scarcity for an ethnic
minority, expulsion of the minority, and
ethn ic violence (ibid.).
Including the political determinants of
resource short age int o a general definition of
environmental scarcity is problematic in
that it confounds efforts to separate the
physical trends contributing to scarcity
(population growth, global warming, trop ical
deforestation, etc.) f rom the poli t ical ,
economic, and social factors that spark
conflict. H omer-D ixon strives to show th at
environmental scarcity as distinct from
political and econom ic factors causes violent conflict (pp. 104-
6). Yet he un dermin es his case by building political factors
into his definition of environmental scarcity. More robust
conclusions concerning th e effects of environm ental trend s on
violent conflict in the developing world are possible only byclearly disentangling t he p hysical sources of such con flict from
its political, economic and social determinants.
The other broad methodological problem with Homer-
D ixons framework is the exclusive focus on testing causal claims
against the null hypothesis, the claim that environmental
scarcity has n o effect on conflict at all. H omer-D ixon,
recognizing that n o major conflicts in the world can be directly
attributed to the depletion or degradation of renewable
resources, is admirably cautious in advancing claims abou t t he
causal role of the environmen t in violent conflict. But in
defending against the more extreme claim that environmental
scarcity plays no role in bringing about conflict, Hom er-Dixon
advances a test th at is both too weak and too strong. I adopta purely pragmat ic criterion for judging environm ental scarcitys
imp ortan ce in specific cases of violent con flict, H omer-D ixon
writes. Can t he sources and th e nature of the conflict, I ask,
be adequately understood without environmental scarcity as
part of its causal story? (p. 7). T his test is too weak because
even a conflict that has political, economic, and/or social
determ inant s as its sufficient cond itions m ay be visibly shaped
by environmen tal factors that play only a shallow or dispensable
role. T he South African episode, described below, may be one
such case. And at th e same tim e, the test is too stron g because
it may eliminate from the causal equation factors that remain
imp ortan t catalysts of a conflict where the u nd erlying sources
and na tu re o f the conf l ic t have no th ing to do wi th
environm ental scarcity. T he case of the chron ic water short age
in th e West Bank (pp. 7 4-6) perh aps best illustrates this type of
situation.
A more convincing meth odology would pay less attention
to eliminating the null hypothesis (which few if any observers
wish to d efend in an y case) and give closer consideration to thestudy of rival explanatory accounts. For examp le, to explain
observed p atterns of civil violence in South Africa in th e 1980 s,
Homer-Dixon argues that population
growth am id a declining resource base led
to resource capture by powerful warlords
who often tried to maintain power by
pointing to resources in neighboring
townships and informal settlements and
mobilizing their communities to seize
them (p. 98). H owever, a different stud y
of the same case, by Peter Gastrow, suggests
that political violence in South Africa has
occurred not primarily in areas where
poverty and deprivation are widespread,
but in areas where poverty and poo r socio-
economic conditions combine with intense
political rivalry, particularly between the
African N ational Congress (AN C) and t he
Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP). Gastrow
argues that in areas where one of these
parties is inactive and the other predominatesin the Port
Elizabeth area, for exampleviolence is negligible, despite
pressing environm ental scarcity. T he point here is not t hat
H omer-Dixon is wrong and G astrow is right, but that H omer-
Dixon fails to eliminate such rival accounts in claimingcorroboration for his own.
D espite these weaknesses, H om er-Dixons book m arks an
important advance in the debate over environmental change
and security. It pu lls together a vast amount of emp irical material
and through a stimulating analytical framework develops a
provocative argument that moves significantly beyond
established lines of debate about the relationship between the
env ironment , scarc i ty, and conf l ic t . H omer-D ixon
dem onstrat es decisively that older paradigmat ic disputes, such
as the one pitt ing neo-Malth usians against econom ic optimists,
are no longer adequate to the task of understanding the social
and political implications of environmental change in todays
world . T he books argum ent s are invariably clear, accessibleand illuminating, and the book evinces a coherence of vision
that is certain to exert a profound influence on scholarship in
the comin g years. N o serious studen t of environm ental change
and security will be able to ignore it.
D av id D essler i s Associat e Professor of G overn m ent at th e C ollege
of W illiam and M ary, W illiamsburg, Virginia.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
3/24
EN VI RO N M EN T AL CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
N ew Publications
10 2
Co ntested Grounds: Security and Co nflict in th e
N ew Environm ental Politics
D aniel H . D eud ney an d Richard A. M at thew, Edit ors
N ew York: State U niversity of N ew York Press, 19 99. 312 pp.
Rev iew ed by Colin H . Kahl
T he long awaited volume Con tested G rounds: Security an dCon flict in the N ew Environm ental Politics, edited by Daniel H .
D eudn ey and Richard A. Matt hew, is the first major pu blished
work to represent th e full range and flavor of the contemp orary
debate surround ing environmen tal security. It is a thou ghtful
and multifaceted attempt on the part of leading scholars to
bring nature back in to the study of international security
affairs. T hose already familiar with t he field will appreciate
updated versions of seminal articles in add ition t o other excellent
essays previously unp ublished or n ot widely available. T hose
unfamiliar with the field will find the volume to be an
indispensable introduction to one of the most important
emerging bran ches of security stu dies.
T he book is divided into th ree parts. Following a brief
intr oduct ion by M atth ew, Part I of the volum e, a single chapter
by Deudney, provides a fascinating historical and conceptual
discussion of the commonalities between contemporary
environmental security concerns and classic works of
geopolitics. Part II cont ains six mainly theoretical chapters,
beginnin g with an essay by T hom as F. H omer-D ixon reviewing
his well-known findin gs on environm ental scarcity as a source
of violent conflict. N ext follow chapt ers by Michel Frdrick
defendin g a realist concept ion of environm ental security, Kent
Hughes Butts making a case for military involvement in
environmental protection, and Eric K. Stern arguing for a
com prehensive concept ion of environm ental security. PartII concludes with two critical chapters by Simon Dalby and
D eudn ey. D alby emph asizes the Nort h-South clash over the
meaning of environmental security and the Northern bias of
the current literature, while D eudney provides a comprehen sive
rebuke of the environmental security research program in an
updated version of his seminal M illenn iu m article. Part III
includes empirical chapters by Miriam Lowi, Jack A. Goldstone,
and Ronald J. D eibert. Lowi examin es water disputes in the
Middle East, Goldstone provides an analysis of demographic
and environmental challenges to political stability in China,
and D eibert discusses the utility of using U.S. m ilitary satellites
to address environm ental concerns. Part III is followed by a
brief conclusion written by Matthew.
T he int ernation al relations subfield of security stud ies has
tradit ionally concerned itself with two related research questions:
(1) W hat are th e causes of insecurity? and (2 ) H ow do security
policies and or ganizations affect ind ividuals and society? In
other words, security is sometimes treated as a dependentvariable to be explained, wh ile at other t imes it is treated as an
indep enden t variable doin g the explaining. T he chapt ers in
Contested Grounds mirror this bipartit e division. Some focus
on environmental degradation and resource scarcity as potential
sources of insecurity, while others analyze the imp act security
policies and organizations have on th e environm ent. T his review
addresses these two approaches in turn.
Security as a D ependen t Variable
Mo st of the chapters in Contested Grounds treat security as
a dependent variable, that is, an outcom e to be explained. T he
auth ors, however, vary considerably in h ow th ey conceptualize
this variable. T he contributors tend to couch this debate as
one involving the definition of environm ental security. In
actuality, however, it is a debate over the appropriate
conceptualization of security and how human-induced
environm ental change poten tially affects that security. All the
authors in Contested Grounds agree that security implies
protection from th reat, but th ey disagree about t he precise nature
of these threats and the subject(s) supposedly being secured.
Based on Matthews introductory survey of the literature and
the arguments presented in subsequent chapters, it is possible
to m ap the contending definitions along a continuum . As one
moves from left to right, the definition becomes narrower.Nevertheless, with the exception of the national security
definition on the far right, all broaden the concept of security
from it s tradition al usage in t he field of security stud ies.
All the contributors to Contested Grounds subscribe to
anthropocentric definitions that focus on threats to human
subjects at some level of analysis rather than the planet as a
whole; none endorse the deep ecological position. Stern and
Frdrick both embrace broad definitions that conceptualize
security as pro tection against all significant threats (including
definitional Deep Ecological Comprehensive Security/ National Environmental National Securitylabel Security Human Security Security
relevant all significant all significant threats, all significant threats, external and internal militarythreats threats, including including environmental including environmental threats, including environmental
environmental ones, ones, to well-being and/or ones, to well-being sources of these threats, toto sustainability core values and/or core values political stability and functional
integrity
subject being the planet itself all human beings nation-states nation-statessecured
Contested Grounds None Stern Frdrick Deudneyauthors advocatingdefinition
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
4/24
N ew Publications
10EN V IR O N M EN TA L CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
military, economic, environmental, and social ones), to well-
being and /or core values, but differ on the subjects supposedly
being secured. Stern calls for a comp rehensive definition of
security t hat treats all hu man beings at all levels of analysis as
the relevant subjects, while Frdricks more realist
conceptu alization focuses solely on threats to sovereign t erritorial
nation -states. D eudn ey is critical of such a broad definition,
and advocates a narrower, more traditional conceptualization
of security th at views it as the alleviation of m ilitary threats tonation-states.
These r iva l def in i t iona l approaches have bo th
epistemological and normative implications. Epistemologically,
the definition of security used specifies what the academic
field called security studies is meant to study, just as terms
like American and political econom y identify
and delimit the fields American politics and
intern ational political econom y. By suggesting
that security studies includes the study of all
significant th reats to th e well-being of the planet,
people, or nation-states, broad definitions imply
an incredible expansion of the fields current
parameters. In cont rast, the narrow definition
endorsed by Deudney leaves current disciplinary
firewalls intact. Security studies would remain
the stud y of military affairs and the environmen tal
security component of the field would focus on
studying the ways in which human-induced
environmental change affects military affairs
between and within count ries.
Decid ing which def in i t iona l approach i s bes t on
epistemological groun ds depen ds on ones view of th e goal and
role of theor y in social science. It also depends on how u seful
one deems a p articular definition to be for generating prod uctive
empirical and theoretical dialogue and comparison betweenscholars. D eudn ey, for examp le, argues th at considering all
threats to well-being as threats to security destroys the terms
analytical utilit y. Instead of redefin ing securit y, overly broad
conceptualizations dedefine it and make security studies the
study of everythin g bad. D eudn eys criticism im plies that
security studies as a field would be better served by limiting
environmental security work to research on the environment-
violent con flict nexus. O f course, other intersections between
the environment and well-being should still be studied, but
Deudneys argument implies that this work should be left to
environmentally conscious scholars in economics, sociology,
anth ropology, history, and ot her fields better equipp ed to explore
non -military aspects of life. T hus, adjudicating between thebroad an d n arrow definitions of security involves weighing th e
possible benefits to knowledge gained by expand ing th e notion
of security, and thereby collapsing th e disciplinary b oun daries
between security studies and nu merou s other natu ral and social
science fields, against th e risk that such expansion will gain n o
unique insights and make security studies incoherent.
Un fortunately, th e epistemological concerns raised by D eudn ey
are la rge ly ignored by the p roponen ts o f a b roader
(re)conceptualization of security.
On e su sp e c t s t h a t o th e r a u th o r s c o n f r o n t t h e
epistemological implications of their definitional approaches
because they have a different agenda, one driven more by
norm ative concerns than disciplinary ones. Proponen ts of
broadenin g the definition of security seek to use the conn ection
between environm ent an d security as a rhetorical device to
elevate the perceived imp ortan ce of environm ental degradation
to p olicymakers and t he pu blic. Imp licit in Frdricks chapter,
and explicit in Sterns chapter, is the desire to transform the
environment from an issue of low politics to one of highpolit ics by tying it to securit y. By raising th e perceived stakes,
they hope to mobilize support for the kinds of tough measures
required to prevent eminent environmental crises.
Both Dalby and Deudney are highly suspicious of this
rhetorical move. In advancing what he calls th e South ern
critique, Dalby argues that the term security
implies protection from an external threat, in
this case emanating from environmental
degrada t ion . T h is externa l iza t ion o f
environmental threats shifts blame for global
env i ronmenta l p rob lems to deve lop ing
countries (the South), and, in Dalbys view, is
count erprodu ctive for several reasons. First, it
masks the histor ical responsibil i ty and
contemporary involvement of rich Northern
countries in the patterns of un derdevelopment
and resource exploitation prevalent in t he South.
Second, extern alization diverts focus away from
internal overconsumption of natural resources
by the North, which, according to Dalby, lies at the heart of
most global environm ental problems. Th ird, D alby notes that
the environm ental security discourse is dom inated and deployed
by Nor thern experts who view external th reats as something to
be managed and cont ained. As a result, the rubric of
environm ental security may only serve to reinforce the N orthstendency to control the global environment and the flow of
natural resources at the expense of the interests of Southern
nations. Nort hern solutions to these Southern threats may
call for developing countries to reduce resource consumption,
adopt draconian population measures, and drastically change
econom ic activities, all policies that po ten tially represent greater
threats to Southern security, at least in the short term, than
environmental degradation does.
A further criticism ad vanced by D eudn ey might be labeled
the na t ion a l i sm cr i t ique . D eudn ey con tend s tha t
conceptualizing the environment as a national security issue
perpetuates the kind of us-versus-them, zero-sum thinking
that leads to conflict, not cooperation. It also entrenches notionsof sovereignty and the belief that national solutions to
environm ental problems are possible. T hat m ode of thought,
in D eudn eys opinion, is at odd s with the t ype of globalist, n on-
nationalistic mindset that is ultimately required to address the
most pressing environmental challenges.
The Southern and nationalism critiques are powerful
ones. D alby and D eudney should be applauded for raising
issues and perspectives that are often left out of state-centric,
Nor thern-b iased env i ronmenta l secur i ty d iscuss ions .
Nevertheless, the dangers of externalization and non-
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
5/24
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
6/24
N ew Publications
10EN V IR O N M EN TA L CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
Environmental pressures are not necessary causes of conflict
because there are many examples of internation al and civil wars
caused by non-environmental variables; they are not wholly
sufficient causes because not all count ries experiencing serious
environm ental degradation and resource scarcities go to war or
descend in to civil strife. Rath er, as th e chapt ers by Ho mer-
Dixon, Lowi, and Goldstone make clear, the likelihood of
environmentally induced violent conflict varies considerably
depending on the social and political context. Th us, theenvironment is a conjunctural variable that causes conflict
only in combination with other intervening variables.
Unfortunately, the contributors to Contested Grounds fail to
clearly specify which intervenin g variables are mo st imp ortan t.
This omission makes the theoretical claims very difficult to
evaluate. If every contextual variable is a pot entially imp ortan t
intervening variable, then every case in which environmental
pressures positively correlate with international or civil violence
automat ically suggests a causal connection when , in reality, th ere
may not be one.
T he chapters devoted to environm entally indu ced violence
also have emp irical weaknesses. In particu lar, th ey fail to survey
or examine th e growing body of empirical studies completed in
recent years. H om er-Dixons chapter, for example, stems from
a research project completed in 19 93. Since then, several oth er
major research end eavors have been con ducted , includin g work
by groups at the Swiss Peace Foundation , the In ternational Peace
Research In stitut e in O slo, Yale University, C olum bia University,
and two subsequent University of Toronto projects led again
by Ho mer-D ixon. D eudn eys chapter also ignores this recent
work, much of which addresses his methodological concerns.
The empirical chapters by Lowi and Goldstone suffer in a
different respect from not being up-to-d ate. D espite the fact
that the status of the Middle East peace process and political
conditions in post-D eng Chin a have both changed dramaticallyin the recent years, neither chapter contains a single reference
since 1995 . O ne suspects that t hese empirical oversights have
more to do with how long it took Contested Grounds to go to
press (th e volum e began as a conference in Vancouver in 1 993)
than with any intentional neglect on the part of the authors.
Nevertheless, these shortcomings cut somewhat against the
volumes ambition s to represent th e state of the art in this area
of research.
Security as an Ind ependen t Variable
The smallest portion of Contested Grounds reverses the
causal arrow and focuses on the ways in which security p oliciesand organizations affect the quality of th e environm ent. In his
contr ibut ion, But ts, a professor at the U.S. Army War College,
advoca tes increasing U.S. mi l i ta ry invo lvement in
environm ental missions at home and abroad. Environmental
threats have been a com ponen t of th e Nation al Security Strategy
of the Un ited States, the annual executive statem ent o f Americas
vital strategic interests, since the Bush administration.
T herefore, Butt s argues, if it is th e role of the D epartm ent of
D efense (DoD ), intelligence agencies, and ot her traditional
military organizations to guarantee national security, then
military involvement in addressing environm ental threats should
be expected. Ind eed, Butts not on ly sees an expanding m ilitary
role as inevitable, he welcomes it. Butt s suggests that t he D oD
has made great strides in reducing pollution and waste
emanat ing from military facilities in th e United States, and has
vast engineering and waste disposal experience that is already
being used to address domestic environmental concerns such
as coastal species prot ection. Int ernation ally, Butts contend s
that the U.S. military has unique technical and operationalcapabilities, and an extensive global network of military-to-
military connections, all of which can be used to integrate,
harmonize, monitor, and enforce efforts to protect the global
environm ent. Butts is particularly optimistic about th e
environmen tal benefits of foreign military assistance. H e argues
that military organizations in developing countries enjoy several
advantages over other governmental and nongovernmental
groups, including better organization, better training, greater
reach, better t ransportation resources, and greater techn ological
sophistication. T hu s, by using military-to-m ilitary ties and
security assistance, the U.S. military can productively provide
training and resources to the armed forces of developing
countries and encourage them to clean up industrial waste and
combat deforestation, poaching, overfishing, and other
un sustainable developm ent practices. In short, foreign military
assistance is viewed as an effective way to defuse environmental
flashpoints. It also helps maintain close ties between the Un ited
States and foreign military establishments, thereby providing
the side-benefit of facilitating DoD power projection when
instability in d eveloping count ries threatens American int erests.
Other authors in Contested Grounds are far less sanguine
about the prospect of militarizing environmental protection.
D eiberts excellent emp irical chapter an alyzes the ut ility of using
U.S. military satellites to provide data on environmental
degradation and im prove responses to natu ral disasters. T hiscase is interesting and imp ortan t. Military satellites enjoy certain
purely techn ical advantages compared to comm ercial satellites,
such as better image resolution and p rocessing speed, in addit ion
to hu ge archives of data. Con sequent ly, if th ere were any
instance in wh ich a greater military role in environmental rescue
would be warrant ed, it would appear to b e the case of satellites.
In social science parlance, satellites represent an easy case for
the proponents of military involvement and a hard case for
oppon ents. D espite their apparent u sefulness, however, D eibert
concludes that dat a from the Nat ional Reconnaissance O ffice
(N RO ), the agency created to coordinat e the satellite program s
of U.S. military and intelligence organizations, has only
questionable practical utility for protecting the environment.T he n arrower field of vision captured by m ilitary satellites, for
examp le, may offset t he u sefulness of better im age resolution.
D eibert also argues that m uch of the archived data is redundan t
with current ly available comm ercial data and lacks the necessary
image consistency and reliability. Mo reover, th e thick layers of
secrecy and compartm entalization surrounding N RO data tends
to smother declassification efforts. T his cultu re of secrecy
hind ers proper access and analysis, creates sizable inform ation
gaps, and provides enorm ous poten tial for military manipulation
of data access when oth er nation al security int erests are deemed
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
7/24
EN VI RO N M EN T AL CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
N ew Publications
10 6
more importan t than environm ental concerns. D eudney makes
a similar, more general claim when he argues that the very
organizational culture and structure of armed forces make th em
un likely saviors of the environmen t. D eudn ey contends that
the secretive, hierarchical, and centralized nature of military
organizations mean that they are maladapted to the kinds of
open, egalitarian, and d ecentralized solutions often required t o
protect nature.
Beyond these practical concerns there are a number ofnorm ative ones. D eibert fears that th e U .S. military will
capitalize on new environmental missions to rationalize
increased military spending and prevent defense conversion.
D eudn ey worries that m ilitarizing the environmen t will invite
future armed interventions and conflicts designed to prevent
other nations from despoiling nature or violating international
environm ental agreement s. D alby is particularly critical of Butts
assertion that armed forces in developing countries should be
more involved in environmental protection. D alby rightly notes
that militaries throughout the developing world have a very
poor record of acting in the interests of their national
pop ulation s. Instead, they are often agent s of violence and
repression. T hus, greater military involvement m ay represent
a greater th reat to t he security of marginalized ind ividuals th an
environm ental degradation does. Finally, D alby and D eibert
both express the concern that military co-optation of the
environm ent will trade-off with beneficial activities by private
actors. D alby argues that coercive, top-d own m ilitary measures
may invite conflicts with local groups and preclude the kinds
of voluntary, community-based actions required to promote
sustainab le developmen t and reduce poverty. Similarly, Deibert
warns that greater military involvement in environmental
monitoring will crowd out the production and use of
comm ercial satellites.
Critics of the military raise important concerns, none ofwhich are explicitly rebutt ed by Butts. In fairness, however,
Butts does provide numerous examples of environmental
benefits stemm ing from m ilitary activities. In cont rast, neither
D alby nor D eudney provide much empirical support for their
objections, and Deiberts analysis does not extend beyond the
use of satellites. Furthermore, as Butts not es, the U .S. DoD ,
N ATO , and other Europ ean security organizations have already
engaged in environm ental activities, and the worst fears voiced
by Dalby, Deu dn ey, and D eibert have not yet materialized. In
short, th e jury is still out . Since military involvement in
environmental missions is a case in progress, more empirical
work is needed b efore passing final judgem ent.
T heory and Evidence
In h is introdu ction, M atthew states that t he twin goals of
Contested Grounds are to introduce students and practitioners
to the theoretical debate and empirical evidence available.
O verall, the volume is much better as a theoretical survey than
an emp irical one. In part th is stems from a conscious choice to
emp hasize th eoretical breadth over emp irical depth. In part it
stems from the long gap between the time the volume was
conceived and most of the chapters written, and the time it
actually went t o press. T his being said, no single work published
th us far achieves what Contested Grounds does. The excellent
collection of essays simultaneously identif ies the key
controversies related to environmental security and moves the
debate forward. For this reason, th e book is an invaluable
introduction to the field and should serve as a wonderful
teaching tool.
Colin H . Kahl is the Coordin ator of the Colum bia U niv ersityEnvironm ent an d Security Project, and a Ph.D . Can didate in the
D epar tm ent of Polit ical Science, C olum bi a U niv ersity.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Environment, Scarcity and Conflict: A Study of
M althusian C oncerns
Lei f O hlssonD epartment of Peace and D evelopment Research,
Gt eburg University, 1999. 272 pp.
Rev iew ed by Simon D alby
The academic and policy discussions of environment and
conflict have, it seems, come of age. O r rather th ey have been
going on long enough now to inspire doctoral dissertations
de lv ing in to the con t rovers ies and cha l leng ing the
methodological assum pt ions of the first practit ioners. O hlssons
dissertation , which following Swedish p ractice is published as a
scholarly monograph, does both in detail, and does so with
considerable int ellectual panache in places. It both reviews th e
literature comprehensively and tackles the methodologicaldebates in detail. Its contribution is to both stretch the bounds
of the analysis and add some useful case study material to the
research.
T he introduction places the post-Cold War debate about
environment and scarcity in the long shadow of Malthusian
concerns stretching back two centu ries. It also shows how this
links to the p ost-Cold War d ebate about reformu lating security.
The author follows the line of argument in Thomas Homer-
D ixons research th at focusing explicitly on con flict m ay be more
useful given t he highly contested natu re of the t erm security.
The second chapter reviews recent research work on
environmental scarcity and conflict and particularly the research
of the Toronto group led by Thom as Hom er-Dixon, the workof the Swiss team un der the auspices of EN C O P, and t he
Scand inavian work lead by the Peace Research In stitute in O slo.
O ne of the man y merits of this dissertation is the succinct and
accessible style of th e writing in this chap ter, which p rovides a
synopsis of the material in the field that will be of use to
researchers and p olicymakers wanting an overview of the various
approaches.
T he th ird chapter focuses on th e method ological matt ers
th at have spur red an ongoin g debate, and at tim es, as th e pages
of earlier edition s of thisReportattest, a pointed argumen t about
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
8/24
N ew Publications
10EN V IR O N M EN TA L CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
what should be researched, how, and why. T he detailed
discussions about causality and explanation are beyond the scope
of th is review, bu t this chap ter offers a useful overview of t he
debate. For Ohlsson this debate leads to his first case study
chapter, a detailed rethinking of the role of environmental
scarcity in the genocide in Rwanda in 19 94. In particular he
offers a critique of the methodology that Valerie Percival and
Thomas Homer-Dixon used in their analysis of this theme,
although their conclusion that environmental scarcity was aminor part in what transpired is not seriously challenged. 1
Ohlsson ex tends the d iscuss ion by
introducing notions of evil, human agency and
political respon sibility to avoid th e difficulties of
determinism in the research that focuses on
environ men tal scarcity as a casual variable. T here
is an obvious connection here to other analyses
of Nazi genocide, and O hlsson focuses on the
specific actions of functionaries in the state
apparatus in obeying orders that led to the
massacres in part icular places. O hlsson wisely
makes the import ant point that Rwanda was not
a state failure, but a deliberate plann ed massacre
by organized state institu tion s. T he elites only
miscalculated in th at they assumed that th ey could
hold off the insurgent R wandan Patriotic Front
forces in th e north while they carried out their final solution .
T he fifth ch apter extends his analysis to follow up anot her
th eme in Th omas H om er-Dixons work, the question of social
ingenuity in the face of environm ental stress. O hlsson
formulates matters in terms of social resource scarcity
extending the terminology in a way loosely consistent with
Malthu sian principles and with H omer-D ixons framework.
W hile determinism is inadequ ate in Ohlssons thin king, the
assumption that all things are possible in a crisis is alsoun acceptable. T he innovation here is to try linking social
resources and en vironm ental resources in term s of sustainability,
and then to link the concerns of development workers with
social institutions to resource managers preoccupations with
natural phenomena.
The sixth chapter then applies this conceptualization of
social resource scarcity to th e discussions of water con flicts and
questions of increasing shortages of fresh water in many parts
of the planet. T he Nile basin is discussed once again as an
example of potential conflict, and in particular, as a way of
developing an index of social water stress th at can link scarcities
together in a useful man ner. Vulnerability is linked to th e United
Nations H uman D evelopment Index to attempt t o see in whichstates water vulnerability is related to a lack of institutional
adaptability, and hence potential conflict; and whether the
attemp ts to adap t m ay not t rigger second-order con flicts caused
precisely by attempts at adaptation.
Ohlsson finishes his argument with a concluding chapter
that raises political considerations about how to react to the
M althusian difficulties that substantial parts of the world face.
Among other arguments, he cautions against a realpolitik
response to the challenges of sustainable development,
suggesting that this may lead to the abandonment of efforts to
help in p laces not seen as of vital nation al interests to No rth ern
states. H e also pointedly notes that change is the hum an
condition, and that while no doubt numerous mistakes have
already been m ade th at will cost future generation s heavily, th e
future is not hopeless but a matter for political discussion and
policy engagement .
In his analysis of Rwand a and th e stress on th e import ance
of political structures for dealing with resources questions,
O hlsson t ries to rescue the discussion of Malth usian them esfrom the determinist pessimism that often overtakes analyses
of likely future situation s. H owever, in focusing
on t he literature in political science he does miss
out on the potentially useful contributions of
oth er scholarly tradit ions. T hese include the
longstanding contributions of geographers to
resource management institutions, and more
recently the feminist critiques of the limits of
development discourse in d ealing with the social
ingenuity and coping skills of informal social
networks in many non-Western societies.
Q uest ions o f cu l tu ra l innovat ion and
adaptability would also clearly benefit from
analysis drawn from history and anthropology,
not to mention the literature on disasters and
social responses to them, wh ich is nearly ent irely
ignored by contem porary discussions of environment al scarcity.
If the scarcity and conflict literature is to make furt her progress,
the case can easily be made for greater disciplinary breadth in
addressing important matters of conflict and social change in
the specific contexts where these are especially pressing.
Despite these limitation s to this research effort, th is reviewer
can only concur with the import ance Oh lsson places on t hinking
carefully about the politics of a future sustainability and what
they entail and for whom . We are all going to live in the futu re,and questions about what is worth sustaining where and by
whom in the face of rapid social change and huge inequities
among and b etween hu man p opulations on a constrained planet
are on ly beginn ing to be seriously discussed. Focusing on
constraints and limits without falling into determ inist reasoning
and alarmist analysis allows for thoughtful discussion of the
institutional and political innovations needed for the future.
O n all th ese th emes, O hlssons stu dy m akes a useful and very
readable contribut ion.
Sim on D alby is Associate Professor of G eography a t C arleton
Un iversity in Ottaw a.
1 Thom as Hom er-Dixon and Valerie Percival. Envi ronm ental Scarcity
and V iolent Conflict. Toronto: University of Toronto, 1996.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
9/24
EN VI RO N M EN T AL CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
N ew Publications
10 8
Environmental Change and Security:
A European Perspective
Alexander Car iu s an d Kur t M . Liet zman n, Edit ors
Berlin: Springer, 199 9. 345 pp.
Rev iew ed by Stacy D . VanD eveer
Environmental Change and Security is a worthy addition to
the growing literature on the linkages between security and
environm ental degradation and scarcity. T hese debates, often
heavily influenced by North American and Nordic analysts,
are well documen ted, sum marized, analyzed, and
advanced in the Carius and Lietzmann collection.
The volume includes authors from Austria,
Germany and Switzerland (the English edition is
translated from Germ an), bu t also includes several
auth ors whose works are familiar to readers of the
literature in English. T he books 17 chapters are
organized into five parts t hat focus discussions on
the conceptual and theoretical linkages among
environment and security, characterization and
typologies of environmental conflict, modeling,
foreign and security policy, and environmental and
developm ent policy.
The first five chapters cover many of the
debates in the environment-security literature in
recent years: conceptual definition and clarity, case selection,
data availability and quality, militarization of th e environmen t,
and t he comp atibility of the various lines of research within t he
environm ent and security research agenda. In th e end , most
auth ors agree that t he environm ental cause of violent conflict
hypothesis has not been demonstrated by the overall research
program. H owever, they also agree th at environmen tal qualityoften plays an imp ortan t cont extual role in poten tial or existing
conflict situations. O ne unfortun ate aspect is th at these initial
chapters are sometim es repetitive on several points of debat e in
the literature.
Carius and Kerstin Imbusch organize the links between
environmental change and security into four dimensions:
(1) the impacts of military activities upon the natural
environm ent in t imes of peace and of conflict; (2) the direct
and indirect influence of a) environmental changes upon
local, nation al, regional and internat ional security but also
b) th eir function of d elivering causes for cooperation and
thus bu ilding confidence; (3) the im pacts of environment al
changes upon social conf l icts and their indirect
consequences for secur i ty and; f inally (4) the
instrum entation of deliberate environmen tal changes as a
means of warfare.
The authors map the environment and security terrain
quit e well. H owever, they are too qu ick to dismiss concern s
about the potential for militarization of environmental issues,
and to assert that debates over the environmental impacts of
military activities are resolved. For examp le, the U.S. military
continues to oppose international climate change instrum ents,
and m ost major international environm ental protection treaties
exemp t m ilitary activities altogether. T hese issues, then, are
not settled, contrary to the editors assertions.
Perhaps the m ost notable contribution of the volume is its
discussions of various t ypologies of th e links b etween con flict
and th e environment in conjunction with attem pts to unp ack
the many d i f fe ren t phenomena deno ted by the te rms
environm ent and conflict. Ghnther Bachlers summ ary of
f indings from his extensive empir ical research onenvironmentally-induced conflict is particularly interesting.
Furthermore, this collection pushes environment and conflict
research more in the direction of connections to development
and environmental protection, rather than
continuing to focus on l inks with more
trad ition al military, security and violence issues.
These a t tempts to exp lore the complex
interaction of security, conflict, environment
and development o f fe r chap ter au thors
numerous opportunities to discuss policy
imp lications. For exam ple, Bernd Wulffen
discusses prospects for int egrating environmen t
and security concerns into t he Rio process and
Volker Q uan te focuses a similar analysis vis--
vis N ATO . O ther chapters cover th e existing
and po ten t ia l connec t ions be tween
environment and secur i ty deba tes and
in terna t iona l deve lopment coopera t ion ,
non governmental organizations and the United Nations. In
short, those interested in the politics of linking environmental
degradation and scarcity concerns to security across multiple
international organizations and issue areas will find much of
interest in this new book.
Stacy D . VanD eveer is an Assistant Professor of Political Science atthe U ni versity of New H am pshire and a Post-D octoral Research
Fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
at H arvard U ni versitys John F. Kenn edy School of Governm ent.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Security: A N ew Framew ork for Analysis
Barr y Buz an , O le Wver and Jaap de W ilde
Boulder, CO : Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1998. 239 pp.
Rev iew ed by N in a Grger
Security is the latest book published by the so-called
Copenhagen School of security studies, a group of scholars at
the C onflict and Peace Research Institute, CO PRI. T his book
represents a refined version of earlier works by Barry Buzan,
O le Wver, Jaap de Wilde and other co-authors over the past
decade.
W ith th is book, Buzan et al. continue t o pu rsue a wider
security agenda with out excludin g tradition al security studies:
Indeed, we hop e it will largely lay to rest th e rather scholastic
argument between wideners and traditionalists (p. 195), they
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
10/24
N ew Publications
10EN V IR O N M EN TA L CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
public spheres may imply that some security problems are
excluded. Security policy requires channels and /or m eans for
formu lating and articulating such a policy. H owever, a group
may have a security problem but no framework for security
policy formulation and adoption, such as is the case for the
Kosovar Albanians in the former Yugoslavia.
This point is related to another weakness of the book: a
lack of emp irical focus. Buzan, et al. provide a th eoretical
framework for analysis, but as opposed to their earlier works,take little interest in em pirical realities. O ne of the roots of the
Cop enhagen School is the turbulent European security dynamic,
especially after th e C old War. Security separates the emp irical
and conceptual dimensions, allegedly to approach the general
domain of security detached from the European context.
Although understandable and reflected in the title of the book,
this perspective excludes the impor tant im plications. To make
prioritiesgive some risks priority over oth ersis at th e core
of security policy and therefore a precondition for security
analysis.
Security represents an explicit theoretical move from a
particular Euro-American tradition of international relations
towards a more social constructivist app roach to security. Briefly,
this move implies that security threats, security units, referent
objects and security agents may fluctu ate. According to th is
approach, security is being socially constru cted th rough speech
acts, often securitising non -security issues. For instance, at some
point the prot ection of hum an rights in Kosovo was transformed
from a hu man itarian concern into a security issue, and th erefore
placed within the realm of political and military decision-
makers.
Security provides a richer and more soph isticated analytical
framework for security analysis than the politico-military
focused security p erspective that , t o a great extent, still prevails
in security studies. T he book is a good point of departu re for acultural-historical interpretation of the speech act structure,
which may contribute to pushing the Copenhagen School
further without breaking with its own conceptual approach.
N in a G rger is researcher and OSCE co-ordinator at the
N orw egian In stit u te of In ternat ion al A ffa irs (N U PI ) in O slo,
N orw ay.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
claim. T he book starts out by presenting a conceptual apparatus,
a method for distinguishing security issues from merely political
ones. T he following five chapters discuss five different sectors
of security, while the last chapter aims at synthesizing these
sectors.
The authors solve the problem of extending the security
concept beyond its analytical usefulness by employing the
concept of securitization. Securitization results from wh at
the Copenhagen group calls a speech act, the practice ofreferring to th e issue in securit y discourse. To succeed, a speech
act mu st follow the security form and t he gramm ar of security,
and be mad e by an actor who holds a position of auth ority. For
example, b y declaring and later reaffirming th e activation orders
for air operations against The Former Republic of Yugoslavia
un less the atrocities against the Kosovar Albanians came to an
end, N ATO Secretary General Javier Solana contribu ted to th e
securitisation of human rights in the Kosovo conflict.
Buzan et al. undertake a sectoral approach, which divides
security into military, political, economic, societal and
environm ental sectors. T he auth ors see sectors as distinctive
arenas of discourse in which a variety of different valuescan
be the focus of power struggles (p. 196). T he fruitfulness of
this sectoral approach is questionable because security issues
tend to cut across or involve several sectors at the same time.
T he Copenh agen group partly succeeds in solving the problem
by stressing that the starting point for any research based on
th is framework should b e to id entify processes of securitization
as a socialpractice and not to define security problems according
to t hese five categories independ ent o f the emp irical dynam ics.
O ne import ant value added by the Cop enhagen School is
the introduction of several new securitizing agents or actors.
In the traditional security discourse, the securitizing actors/
agents are state representatives. In established states, that is, in
coherent states, who m ay speak security on behalf of the state isdefined according to fairly clear rules. In less coherent states,
however, who represent s the state is not obvious. T he alleged
state representative(s) m ay also chan ge over t ime. Securitizing
actors are those who can legitimately speak securityform a
speech acton behalf of others, such as governments or the
Un ited Nations. Securitizing actors can securitize an issue,
making something into a security concern.
Another valuable contribution the Copenhagen Group
refined in Security is th e introdu ction of new referent ob jects of
security. Referent objects are defined as an answer to the
question of whose security is threatened. Possible referent ob jects
are states (military or political security); large-scale collective
identities, which can function independently of the state, suchas nations and religions (societal security); companies and the
national economy (economic security); or the biosphere and
particu lar species (environm ental security). In Security, the
authors introduce a broader spectrum of referent objects to
include th e liberal economic ord er and un iversal principles (e.g.
hum an rights).
Th e semant ic approach out lined by the Copenh agen group,
where th e discourse constitu tes security, presupposes access to
a public sphere and th e existence of an audience. H owever,
these conditions are not always present. Furtherm ore, different
Water and Population D ynam ics: Case Studies
and Policy ImplicationsAlex de Sherb in in an d Vi ctoria D om pk a, Eds.
World C onservation Un ion (IU CN ), American Association
for the Advancement o f Science (AAAS), 1998 . 322 pp .
Rev iew ed by Lei f O hlsson
H aving read a first book on water scarcity (along the
lines of, for example, Sandra PostelsLast O asis), the interested
reader will find it very difficult to get a book o n t he n ext level
of complexity. All too often on e will plow th rough a num ber
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
11/24
EN VI RO N M EN T AL CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
N ew Publications
11 0
as, for example, Mali and Jordan), the consequences of urban
water deman ds, the effect of hydropower dam s on downstream
agriculture in Zambia, the way the monsoon seasons govern
life in Southern Asia, and the upstream-downstream problem
(generally only encountered in the literature on the issue of
international rivers) within a single local system of irrigation
canals in Pakistan.
Similarly, one gets a valuable overview of the dynamics of
pop ulation p ressures in each of the count ries. T he cases shedlight on the implicit compound pressures produced by the
inevitable population in creases du ring the comin g decades, the
undeniably just demands for better lives, and the specific role
of water in realizing those goals. T he sum of these factors
presents huge challenges to t he policy innovation capability of
societies.
Some of the ways people adapt to limitations imposed by
water scarcity deserved to be highlighted more clearly in the
summ aries by the editors. As an example, it is quite clear that
th e auth ors were given th e explicit t ask of assessing migratory
pressures resultin g from water scarcity. In fact, on e of the m ain
results that m ay be read from t he case studies is that m igration
is one of the m ost importan t determinan ts of population growth
in villages, between villages, and in town s. It is quite evident
from several case studies that people tend to migrate within
(and sometimes even between) countries following water
availability. Some auth ors attem pt to trace a link between
increased availability of potable water and migration to (and
between) urban areas. For examp le, th e pop ulation den sity in
Tanzania appears much m ore evenly distribut ed if it is calculated
per amount of water transpired through crops, than if it is
calculated per square kilom eter.
Another oft-repeated statement in a num ber of case-studies
is that population increases in rural areas are not as large as
th ey would have been, had th ere not been significant m igrationto cities. T hese conclusions are recognized by the editors in
their introduction, yet the potential social and water
management implications (both positive and negative) are not
discussed as important outcomes of the book, which seems a
missed opportunity.
O ne of the m ost valuable contribut ions of the volume stems
from the discussion of the difficulties of formulating and
carrying out appropriate policy responses to deal with the
pressures resulting from population dynamics and water scarcity.
O ne gets a very vivid pictu re of the eno rmou s difficulties
involved, as well as an adm iration for th e efforts un dertaken b y
countless anonymous administrators. T he main value added is
an enh anced un derstanding of the difficulties encountered whenattempting to carry out what rationally (from the point of
view of hydrological concerns and the state) appears to be the
correct policy. T hese efforts mu st be con ducted in a context
of exist ing social , economic, and (not least) cultural
preconditions on t he comm unity level.
The final case study from Pakistan is almost epic in its
rendering o f how the peop le of six small villages at t he far end
of an irrigation system were marginalized by more powerful
land-owners at the head of the system. T he increased economic
and social power clearly had come as a result of the upstream
of similar basic books, often referring to each other, leaving
one with the imp ression that there is nothing new in the field.
O r, one will att empt to t ake on very specialized h ydrological
surveys and policy reviews, leading to a distinct feeling of never
mastering the field.
H ere is a book t hat will fill the cru cial need for a second
boo k on th e social consequen ces of water scarcity. It will leave
the reader with a much enhanced understanding of both the
hydrological complexities and the social challenges stemm ingfrom th e need to m obilize scarce water resources. At the same
time, the volume is completely comprehensible to the non-
expert.
The book is the outcome of a collaborative effort of the
Un ited States Agency for Internation al Developm ent (U SAID ),
International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
and Population Reference Bureau (PRB). N ine country teams
(each including water resource specialists and a population
specialist) contributed to the effort, resulting in a major effort
to apply a common framework of population dynamics,
hydrological limitation s, and po licy actions to a nu mb er of case
studies from developing count ries.
T he book contains case stud ies from Tanzania, Guatem ala,
Jordan, Zambia, Bangladesh, Mali, Southern Africa (the
Z ambesi), Ind ia, M orocco, and Pakistan. Geograph ically, it
covers Southern and East Africa, the Middle East, Central
America and Sout hern Asia. Substan tively, it covers th e
problems of rainfed agriculture, irrigation by groundwater
abstraction, shared rivers, and drinkin g water in rural and u rban
areas. In addit ion, th e volum e includes an overview of the
principles of water management, an introduction by IUCN
editor Alex de Sherbinin, and a foreword by internationally
renowned hydrologist Malin Falkenmark.
The strength of the case studies lies in three factors: the
common framework, imposed in an exemplary way by theauthors; th e expertise of th e case-stud y authors, as dem onstrated
by their rendering of research projects focused on a specific
region within each country; and the way the specific regional
problem is placed in the context of water and development
challenges on t he coun try level.
T he reader thu s gets th e best of three worlds: examples of
water problems encoun tered in different world regions, valuable
country overv iews o f bo th popula t ion dynamics and
hydrological limitation s, and a very concrete understand ing of
how these p rob lems t ransla te in to communi ty - leve l
developm ent p roblems and challenges to be resolved by policy
efforts.
The Value of Case Studies
Each of the three aspectshydrological limitations,
population dynamics, and policy effortsare there in every
case study, and t hey are given reasonably equal space. O n the
issue of hydrological l imitations, highlights with new
information cover th e long and th e short rains in Eastern and
Central Africa, the specific geological problems of Central
America, the vastly different preconditions for agriculture
between d istinctly different zones within single coun tries (such
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
12/24
N ew Publications
11EN V IR O N M EN TA L CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
opportunity to capture illegally a larger amount of irrigation
water for produ cing more valuable crops. In th e end , three of
the villages were left totally empty as a result of forced out-
migration . Two of th em remained half-emp ty as canals
(important for agriculture and for drinking) ran dry. O nly in
th e last village did people hang on. T hose forced to migrate
had to sell their land to destructive brick-kiln works, in turn
pollutin g th e remainin g water. Wom en, culturally forbidden
and afraid to leave their villages alone, were often the only wageearners and had to fetch water twice a day from as far as ten
kilometers away.
In the end, the plight of the now dispersed villagers was
taken to a hum an rights court. T hey won a judgment th at
guaranteed a minimum amount of water flow, sufficient for
them to return and tr y to rebuild their lives.
Questions Not Raised
It is, of course, not a coincidence that the case stud y chosen
to end the bo ok is a success story of sorts. In a similar vein, t he
discussion of policy efforts bears a stamp of forced optimism.
By common agreement, all of the authors try to incorporatewhat is known to be right and good in the field: population
stabilization is vital, as is community involvement; access to
water is a hu man rights issue; environm ental conservation also
meets hu man needs; a multid isciplinary approach is beneficial;
nonstructural (small-scale) solutions can be effective; water
man agement in stitut ions can avert conflicts over water resources;
urban population growth affects demand for water; and p ublic
education is necessary.
Yet, sometimes th e enormity of th e challenge to imp lement
what is known to be right and good shines through rather
blatantly. If the doubling time of population growth in the
Petn region of Guatemala, due to a combination of natural
growth and in-migration, is at present 12 years, and the health
situation for people suffering from intestinal infections and
respiratory illnesses is such that the p roport ions of coffins m ade
for children compared to adults is five to one, the picture painted
should be one of an ongoing catastrophy, not a management
problem.
If the pop ulation of Jordan has increased mo re than seven-
fold in the last fifty years, it is a great achievement that the
Azraq oasis (depleted by the water needs of Amman and
agricultu re) has been restored by pump ing from oth er aquifers.
But the pressure on water resources from a population with a
present dou bling tim e of som e 20 years is still stupen dou s. T he
reader rather d esperately seeks som e reflections, in add ition toa mere confirmation of this fact, on the nature of the policy
efforts requ ired to deal with t hese challenges.
In ord er to get a hand le on the character of these challenges,
a reading of the cases through two complementary conceptual
frameworksthose ofenvironm ental scarcity and social resource
scarcity, respectivelyis helpful.
Two Alternative Readings
A reading of the cases through the conceptual framework
of environmental scarcity provides increased understanding
of the forces at work behind a perceived scarcity of water.
Environmental scarcity should be u nderstood as the ou tcome
of th ree large processes of change: i) environm ental im pacts; ii)
population increase; and iii) unequal social distribution of
resources, also term ed structu ral scarcity.
Th e concept is proposed by T homas H omer-Dixon of the
University of Toronto, whose work on the link between
environmental scarcity and violent conflict has been much
discussed in previous issues of th e Environmental Ch ange andSecurity Project Report. H ere I am simply using the concept
heuristically.1
As an example, the case study of Guatemala renders an
almost perfect description of how structural scarcity (unequal
resource access) is linked t o th e state of war and general violence
th at has prevailed th ere over the last 40 years. It is noted th at
one result of chan ging ownership rights (resource captu re by
more powerful segments, one cause of structural scarcity) has
been large-scale migration towards urban areas and
agriculturally marginal zones prone to severe soil erosion
(constitu ting what in H omer-Dixons terms would be ecological
m arginalization, a consequ ence of struct ural scarcity). In
Zambia, hydropower dams and the Nakambala Sugar Estate
have effected a similar resource capture, blockin g water deman ds
from local populations and increasing land degradation, leading
to ecological marginalization.
In the state of Karnataka, India, the availability of water
has declined to a much greater extent than other resources for
the small and marginal farmer. T he decline results from th e de
facto ownership o f water by large farmers with private boreholes.
T he collapse of comm un ity water management system s has led
to th e silting of water tanks and the decline in th eir use. T he
overall effect of this unequal social resource distribution has
been that land area used for irrigated coconut plantations
(owned by the wealthy elite) has doubled, resulting in areduction of irrigated land for ann ual crops to a mere 15 p ercent
of the amount under irrigation some 25 years ago, a good
illustration o f stru ctural scarcity resulting from resource capture,
and the consequent ecological marginalization.
Furtherm ore, many of the questions left hanging in the air
almost beg to b e addressed by a conceptu al framework of wh at
I elsewhere have suggested ought to b e termed a social resource
scarcity, th at is, a scarcity of a part icular kind o f resource, namely
the adaptive capacity of societies facing the challenge of
man aging natu ral resource scarcities. T he concept builds on
the so called ingenuity gap suggested by H om er-Dixon, b ut
stresses the character of the adaptive capacity of societies as a
distinct resource, critically prone to scarcity.2An examp le from the b ook un der review is the case study
of Morocco. It differs markedly from the oth er cases, in th at it
both recognizes the difficulties ahead and tries to identify the
factor missing in many discourses. Authors Abdelhadi Benn is
and H ouria Tazi Sadeq raise the crucial question:
Will the population accept high annual costs for
participation in investment s that were decided withou t their
consent. O rganizational initiatives rarely come from t he
population und er the socioeconomic condition s that exist
in rural areas. The government is forced to take the
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
13/24
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
14/24
N ew Publications
11EN V IR O N M EN TA L CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
comm un ity for which to aim because it gives people the chance
to employ the principles of democracy, aesthetics, utility,
dur ability and sustainability in the plannin g process. H e looks
at this type of community interacting with local governments
and local economic development s. Even though th e author
does not give any practical example of a sustainable comm un ity
developm ent, t he book gives the right im age of the comm un ity
he is proposing.
The book will be of interest to those who focus on socialchange as well as social behavior, and also for those concerned
with environmental ethics and a sense of environmental balance.
Chr is Masers ideas of th e givens are of special impor tan ce for
tho se involved in t he environm ent an d facilitators in part icular.
But whatever our field of study, we m ust realize that we have to
take into consideration t hat th e theme addressed here is simply
too import ant to ignore and t hat action must be taken sooner
rather than later.
Carlos F. L ascurain is a Ph.D . researcher at th e D epartm ent of
Government of the University of Essex.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ecoviolence: Links Amo ng Environm ent,
Population, and Security
Thomas Homer-Dixon and Jessica Blitt, EditorsN ew York: Rowman & Litt lefield Publishers, 199 8. 238 pp.
Rev iew ed by D ean Caras
Ecoviolence: Links Among Environment, Population, and
Security is the product of arguably the best-known researchprogram in the field of environmental security and conflict.
Researchers from the University of Toronto and the American
Association for the Advancement of Science came together to
study the links between environmental scarcity and violent
or acute conflict. T heir analysis and con clusions, comp iled
by the University of Torontos T hom as Hom er-Dixon and Jessica
Blitt in this collected volume, provide a very readable and yet
detailed research effort. T his collection of cases, adapted for
broad au diences and classroom use, precedes and accom panies
lead researcher H om er-D ixons 199 9 single-auth ored book,
Environmental, Scarcity, and Violence [Editors note: See review
on pg. 93 -94 ].
T hree key question s guide th e research effort: 1) D oesenvironmental scarcity contribute to violence in developing
countries?; 2) If it does, how does it contribute?; and 3) What
are the critical methodological issues affecting this type of
research? H omer-D ixons Environm ent, Population, and
Security Project (EPS) conducted in-depth case studies to
investigate th ese questions and this volum e includ es five cases
of civil violence: Chiapas, Gaza, South Africa, Pakistan, and
Rwa n d a . Ecoviolence focuses on six major types of
environm ental change that m ay produce environmental scarcity
thro ugh d egradation or depletion of renewable resources: water
degradation, land degradation, deforestation, a decline in fisheries,
global warming, and stratospheric ozone depletion.
Homer-Dixon and Blitt utilize environmental scarcity
as they are quick to point out that environmental change
(supply-induced scarcity) is only one determinant of
environm ental scarcity. Environm ental scarcity is also
determined by increased demand for resources caused by
population growth or increased per capita resource consumption
(deman d-ind uced scarcity). Environm ental scarcity may alsobe determined by the unequal social distribution of resources
(structur al scarcity). Structu ral scarcity occurs when a resource
is controlled by a small, usually elite, percentage of the
population while the majority faces resource shortages.
Com mon ly these th ree types of scarcities occur in com bination
(Homer-Dixon and Blitt, 5-7).
The EPS Project specifically concentrates on developing
nations to investigate whether environmental scarcity
contr ibut es to violent conflict. People in poor coun tries are
more dependent for their daily livelihood on local renewable
resources and it is postulated th at th ey are often un able to adapt
to environmental scarcity due to inadequate human capital,
weak m arkets, and corrupt governm ents. Th e following sections
describe each case as viewed through the framework of
Ecoviolence.
The Case of Chiapas, Mexico, Philip H oward and T homas
H om er-D ix on
In 1 994, a revolutionary Zapatista movement , th e Zapatista
National Liberation Army (EZLN), challenged the ruling
Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) and brought world
attention to t he difficult cond itions of the C hiapan peasants.
Ecoviolence claims th at th ree simultaneous factors brought about
this insurgency by the Z apatistas. T he three element s includerising grievances among peasants caused largely by worsening
environm ental scarcity, a weakening of t he M exican corporat ist
state by rapid econom ic liberalization, an d efforts by churches
and activist peasant grou ps to chan ge peasant s un derstand ings
of their predicament (H oward and H omer-Dixon, 20).
Although there are only 7.6 million hectares of land in
Chiapas from 1970 to 1990, the population doubled from
1,570,000 to 3,200,000. Migrations of poor farmers from oth er
parts of Mexico have contributed to a 3.6 percent annu al growth
rate. T his growth in population has contributed to the
consump tion of the forest and m ost of the potential arable land.
Thus, the growing population on a limited land base causes
what H om er-Dixon calls dem and-in du ced scarcity. T he arableland that d oes exist is un fairly distribut ed, resulting in structu ral
scarcity. Mo st of the best land for raising catt le and coffee
produ ction is put to com mercial use by the politically dominan t
wealth y elite. H om er-Dixon an d Blitt identify this as resource
capture. Resource capture occurs when powerful elites partly
in response to the pressures of populat ion and resource depletion
shift in their favor the laws and property rights governing
local resources, thereby concentrating ecologically valuable
resources und er their control (H oward and H omer-Dixon, 39).
T he average land end owment for subsistence production is only
-
7/31/2019 Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications
15/24
EN VI RO N M EN T AL CH AN GE & SEC URITY PRO JECT REPORT, ISSUE 5 (SUMMER 1999)
N ew Publications
11 4
two h ectares. Furtherm ore, the states credit access and social
spending programs are corrupt, according to
the authors (Howard and Homer-Dixon, 26-
39).
While demand-induced and structural
scarcities may be the most severe problems,
supply-induced scarcity further worsens the
situation. Un sustainable agricultural practices,
such as overgrazing and rapid deforestation,lead to the degradation of Chiapass critical
env i ronmenta l resources . Most o f the
deforestation and soil erosion has taken place
within th e last twenty-five years. As a result of
deforestation, many local communities face
severe firewood shor tages. T hese short ages
force communities to travel into cloud forests
where they con t inua l ly exacerba te
environm ental stresses by end angering uniqu e
flora and fauna, th us creating a condition H omer-D ixon calls
ecological marginalization. Ecological marginalization occurs
when population growth and severely unequal resource
distribu tion in resource-rich regions force poor people to m igrate
to ecologically fragile areas; as the p opu lation density of t hese
migrant s increase, they dam age local environmen tal resources,
which deepens their poverty (H oward and H omer-D ixon, 39).
D emand-indu ced, supply-induced, and structural scarcities
combine to aggravate economic hardships and the grievances
of the Ch iapan peasants. H omer-D ixon and Blitt illustrate
throu gh statistical tables, historical account s, and d iagrams h ow
th ey view these scarcities produ cing the EZ LN insurgency.
T he Case of Gaza, Kim berly Kelly and T homas Hom er-Dixon
All too often, flashes of violent, fanatical Islamicfundamentalism in the Gaza strip are reported in the news.
Ecoviolence attem pts t o clarify these acts of violence by examin ing
their underlying roots. W hile H omer-D ixon points out that
studies of this region are hindered by lack of good data and
often con tain com plex links of scarcity and con flict, t here is no
question that the Middle Easts water scarcity causes
deteriorating socioeconomic conditions. In tu rn, Ecoviolence
claims, these conditions exacerbate ongoing tensions and
grievances between Israelis and Palestinians.
Palestinian s appear to b e the victims of stru ctural scarcity
as Israelis enforce discrimin atory water policies. For instan ce,
M ilitary O rder 158 prohibits the Arab popu lation from drilling
new wells. In som e cases, there have been orders to limitPalestinian water consumption by uprooting thousands of
Palestin ian citrus trees. Many analysts believe that water scarcity
is strictly structural, but Gazas freshwater supply is entirely
dependent on groundwater aquifers, which lie only a few meters
from th e surface. T herefore, the water supply of Gaza is mo re
vulnerable to sup ply-induced scarcities, such as declining water
levels, saltwater int rusion, and cont amin ation. M ining,
chemical contamination, and inadequate disposal of waste
mat ter h ave overexploited Gazas water supp ly since t he 1 970s.
D emand -indu ced scarcities such as Gazas growing popu lation
density of 1,936 p eople per square kilometer and limited water
resources are inhibiting the per capita water
availability. T herefore, population growth
alone may outpace a sustainable supply of
groundwater (Kelly and H omer-D ixon 73-
82).
T he social effects of these environmen tal
scarcities are health impacts, agricultural
decline, and econo mic losses. As with th eChiapas study, Ecoviolence explains through
diagrams how water scarcity leads to social
effects, such as health problems and
agricultural decline, which in turn lead to
econom ic decline. Econom ic decline furth er
exacerba tes cor rup t ion and increases
resentment against Palestinian authority.
Ecoviolence pointedly notes that a solution to
water scarcity by itself will not solve the
conflict, but is instead, on ly one of many integral element s that
are precondit ions for stable peace.
The Case of South Africa, Valerie Percival and T hom as Hom er-
D ixon
The role of environmental scarcity is possibly one of the
most overlooked causal factors of social instability in South
Africa. T he election of N elson M andela and th e transition to
dem ocracy brought about significant periods of peace, but civil
strife continues in the KwaZulu Natal region, where the
underlying stress of environmental scarcities is present.
Ecoviolence specifically examin es the region of KwaZulu -Natal,
because much of the region is ethnically black and therefore
violence cann ot b e ascribed t o black-white d ifferences.
Severe structural scarcities existed under apartheid; theblack population had little political or economic power.
Un equal access to land now affects 15 m illions blacks working
on whit e land. D emand -indu ced scarcity is prevalent as well.
While the white population will stay constant around five
million, th e black popu lation is expected to rise to 37 .3 million
by 2000. T his estimated increase will prod uce still greater
different ials in land scarcity per capita. Supply-induced scarcities
also arise due t o severe soil erosion. T he top soil is not suitable
for the unsustainable agricultural practices used to support the
high popu lation level. Stud ies reveal th at desertification
th reatens 55 percent of th e land. Forest supplies are in critical
scarcity, as wood for fuel is perceived as free. Trees are seen as a
threat to space for crops, and thus expected to be nonexistentby 2020. Like Gaza, South Africa is a water-scarce region.
T he level of industrial po llution ham pers South Africas water
supplies, as environmental controls are almost nonexistent
according to the a