Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications

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,


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.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


3/24


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


4/24

N ew Publications


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-


5/24


6/24

N ew Publications


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


7/24


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


8/24

N ew Publications


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.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


9/24


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


10/24

N ew Publications


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


11/24


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


12/24

N ew Publications


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


13/24


14/24

N ew Publications


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


15/24


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

Documents

Environmental Change and Security Program Report 5: Reviews of New Publications