Climate Change as a Security Risk

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2010
• ISBN:
  9781136535642
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politica e relazioni internazionali
• Subtopic: Politica ambientale ed energetica

Without resolute counteraction, climate change will overstretch many societies' adaptive capacities within the coming decades. This could result in destabilization and violence, jeopardizing national and international security to a new degree. However, climate change could also unite the international community. This is provided that we recognize climate change as a threat to humankind and so set the course for adopting a dynamic and globally coordinated climate policy. If we fail to do so, climate change will draw ever-deeper lines of division and conflict in international relations, triggering numerous conflicts between and within countries over the distribution of resources - especially water and land, and over the management of migration, or over compensation payments between the countries mainly responsible for climate change and those countries most affected by its destructive effects.

With Climate Change as a Security Risk, WBGU has compiled a flagship report on an issue that quite rightly is rising rapidly up the international political agenda. The authors pull no punches on the likelihood of increasing tensions and conflicts in a climatically constrained world and spotlight places where possible conflicts may flare up in the 21st century unless climate change is checked. The report makes it clear that climate policy is preventative security policy.

Introduction

1

It is not predicting the future that matters,
but being prepared for it

PERICLES, GREEK STATESMAN, 493–429 BC

Climate change is advancing rapidly. Without resolute counteraction, a global increase in temperature of 2–7 °C relative to pre-industrial levels can be expected to occur by 2100. This will cause more frequent and more severe extreme weather events such as heavy rains, drought, heatwaves and storms. There is also a danger of tropical cyclones not only becoming stronger but also occurring with greater frequency in extratropical regions. At the same time, sea levels are continuing to rise. These direct impacts of climate change will have far-reaching effects upon societies and the lives of people around the world. If climate change continues unabated, agricultural yields will decline significantly in many regions of the world, especially Africa and South Asia, and poverty will grow accordingly; drought will make it difficult for many millions of people worldwide to gain access to clean drinking water; extreme weather events will continue to gain destructive force and may confront governments and societies with major issues of adaptation, for instance in Central America, but also on the east coasts of China and India. Many states that are already weak and fragile will be faced with additional ‘environmental stress’. Comprehensive changes in biogeophysical conditions will jeopardize the livelihood bases of people in the particularly affected regions of the world and will trigger migration. The present report examines whether the emerging trends may contribute in the future to a destabilization of societies, regions or even the whole international system.

In the policy arena, environmental degradation and climate change are increasingly perceived as challenges to international policy and security:

• The issue is high on the political agenda in Germany. Federal Chancellor Merkel stressed in a security policy address: ‘We have devastating regional conflicts, dire poverty problems, especially in our neighbouring continent of Africa, and massive migration. We know that conflicts over the distribution of increasingly scarce resources can cause ever greater unrest and violence, as can environmental problems. These are matters of oil and gas, of climatic changes, of potable water. All these aspects are the source of conflicts with a very high potential for violence’ (address by German Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel to Impulse 21 – Berlin Forum on Security P olicy, 10 November 2006).
• Former UN Secretary-General K ofi Annan has referred to climate change as a ‘threat to peace and security’. Annan has stressed that the international community must devote just as much attention to climate change as it does to preventing war and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (opening address on 15 November 2006 to the 12th session of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC in Nairobi).
• In April 2007, upon the initiative of the United Kingdom, the United Nations Security Council debated climate change in depth for the first time. In her speech, UK Foreign Secretary Beckett compared emerging climate change to the looming threat of war in the period before 1939. ‘An unstable climate risks some of the drivers of conflict – such as migratory pressures and competition for resources – getting worse’ noted Beckett. The Foreign Secretary went on to explain that it is essential for the UN body to take account of climate change in order to maintain international peace and security (UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office, 2007).
• In April 2007, high-ranking retired US generals published a report terming climate change a serious threat to the security of the USA that will promote extremism and terrorism, especially in unstable regions (CNA Corporation, 2007).

WHICH SECURITY RISKS DOES CLIMATE CHANGE ENTAIL?

The question of whether environmental changes actually threaten international stability and security is thus already on the international policy agenda. The present report from WBGU draws together the present state of knowledge and science by collating the findings of research on the causes of conflict and war, evaluating past experience of conflicts triggered by environmental degradation, and exploring the impacts of climate change upon people and societies. WBGU pursues the question of whether the emerging forms of environmental change may lead to a destabilization of societies and overstretching of political systems and hence ultimately to violence, and might thus confront the international system with new challenges.

Research conducted in recent decades shows that land degradation, water shortage and resource competition, when combined with other conflict-amplifying factors, have indeed caused violence and conflict in the past. The review of 73 empirically well recorded ‘environmental conflicts’ which occurred between 1980 and 2005, however, also showed that these were limited to a regional scope and did not present any serious threat to international security. The decisive question is therefore whether global climate change is fundamentally altering this scene. WBGU comes to the conclusion in its report that this will indeed be the case if global warming continues unchecked. Climate change can then become an international security risk.

This fresh perspective on the environment-security nexus requires a broadening of the timeframe under analysis. Climate change is only just beginning, but its impacts will mount steadily in coming decades if global warming is not slowed by effective climate policy. It is thus apparent that large-scale disruptions relevant to security are only to be anticipated in future decades. WBGU therefore had to review past experience of conflicts induced by environmental degradation, while at the same time looking far into the future in order to anticipate the gradually unfolding impacts of climate change upon national societies, world regions and the international system. In order to identify the key linkages between climate change and its potential destabilizing and conflict-generating effects, as well as to pinpoint regional hotspots and to develop strategic approaches aimed at putting policy processes on track, WBGU has based this report upon the following guiding questions:

• In which circumstances might climate change trigger or amplify security problems such as unrest, civil war, a collapse of societies and states or cross-border conflict?
• Can typical conflict constellations and mechanisms be identified that might be triggered by climate change?
• Which regions are particularly susceptible to climate-induced conflict?
• In what manner will climate change threaten international stability and security?
• How can the risk of such conflicts be prevented through strategic shifts in development trajectories, and how can cooperation be fostered at both national and international level?
• What can and must Germany and Europe do to cope with the new challenges?

As yet, environmental changes have triggered conflict and violence only in isolated cases. There is empirical evidence, for example, of outbreaks of violence and anarchy in the wake of storm and flood disasters. However, the manner and rate of climate change today are without precedent in the history of humankind. Fundamental changes in the biosphere are confronting humanity with entirely new challenges. Today's civilization – with a population numbering some 6.5 thousand million, a finely woven global infrastructure, global flows of trade, information and transport, differentiation among industrialized, newly industrializing and developing countries, and disparate capacities for resolving problems and conflicts – may be threatened by climate impacts for whose management no historical models exist.

IDENTIFYING FUTURE CONFLICT POTENTIAL

WBGU's report shows how unabated climate change could increasingly undermine human security in many regions of the world, and explores the conditions under which human insecurity may heighten susceptibility to social destabilization and violence. The aim cannot be to deliver a precise prediction of future conflicts or disasters. The purpose is rather to identify the mechanisms which encourage conflict under conditions of rapid and intense climate change and to do so early enough for remedial measures to be taken proactively. WBGU identifies four conflict constellations that may be driven by climate change: ‘Climate-induced degradation of freshwater resources’, ‘Climate-induced decline in food production’, ‘Climate-induced increase in storm and flood disasters’ – and ‘Environmentally induced migration’, which is triggered by the former three constellations.

In order to depict and extrapolate these conceivable conflict constellations, the report develops a number of fictitious yet plausible narrative scenarios. Positive and negative scenarios illustrate potential development pathways which are free of violence or, conversely, involve a substantial probability of violence. The positive scenarios are important because they show how, under conditions of rapid climate change, ways can be found to defuse emerging social crisis, violent conflict and destabilization of the international system in good time. Thus, in concert with the analysis of conflict constellations, the scenarios provide a basis for recommendations on action to prevent future climate-induced security risks.

Not all countries or regions of the world are exposed equally to the risks of destabilization and violent conflict arising from climate change. The thin line between stability and instability, and between security and insecurity, will be determined by the extent of global climate change, its impacts upon societies and regions, and their specific capacities to adapt to and tackle the problems. Agriculture-based economies are more susceptible to climate change impacts than service-based economies; rich societies are better able to handle the costs of climate change than developing countries; highly capable governments can manage the consequences of environmental degradation and climate change better than weak states; well-organized civil societies are better able to take precautionary action than fragmented societies which may already be characterized by violence. Climate change thus widens social, political and economic disparities in the world society. Yet even countries with high problem-solving capacity are not entirely secure, for massive immigration from regions experiencing severe problems related to environmental upheaval and conflict would present considerable additional security challenges.

INTERNATIONAL ACTION IN A WORLD IN TRANSITION

It is characteristic of the challenges presented by climate change that a delicate equation links the present need to act and the future occurrence of harmful impacts that are anticipated and need to be prevented. Only if action is taken today will it be possible to contain violent conflicts and social crises induced by climate change. Prevention is necessary and possible: climate-induced security risks can still be avoided if resolute action is taken in the coming two decades, keeping global warming within the 2 °C guard rail. The challenge is to muster the political will to make far-sighted strategic decisions. Political systems are better able to find answers to shortterm problems than to act prospectively. Moreover, climate change will play out against the backdrop of a fundamental shift in the centres of power of the political world order. The dominant position of the USA will most likely give way in the coming decades to a system that is more multipolar in nature. China and India currently constitute the newly emerging centres of the global economy and of global politics alongside the USA, Europe and Russia. The question thus arises whether the new and old powers in international politics, who are at the same time those principally responsible for climate change, will be preoccupied in future with power disputes and struggles to assert dominance in world politics, or whether they will succeed in conceiving of climate change as a common global challenge and hence work together to craft an effective global climate policy.

In this report, WBGU develops a package of recommendations for action and research to mitigate the risks of conflict set out above. The core message is that it is essential to make strategic decisions in the next two decades in order to change course away from trajectories that are highly risky and would entail scarcely controllable destabilization and crisis in societies, world regions and the international system. WBGU warns anew that this change of course must be made as a matter of urgenc y, even if, from the present perspective, the costs appear more prominent than the benefits – future benefits will outweigh present costs many times over. Europe now has a great opportunity. It can cast itself as a pioneer of sustainable climate policy and can thus gain leverage in one of the key arenas of global policy. A global transformation of energy systems is the lynchpin of efforts to mitigate climate change successfully. Tapping efficiency potential and boosting renewable energies are key elements of this transformation. If Europe were to succeed in integrating its policies on climate, technology and innovation in a way that could provide a beacon for the future, this would in the long term enhance its position in the global economy.

Environmental change in security discourse

2

Broadening the concept of security has been a theme of international policy discourse ever since the end of the Cold War. It is in this context that potential threats to security from environmental change have entered the security policy debate. WBGU has prepared the present report in response to an upsurge of interest in Germany, and indeed across Europe, in the possible links between environment and security. Public debate on the subject is highly diffuse in character and is being conducted on the basis of a sketchy set of facts. WBGU's intention in presenting this report is to strengthen the empirical basis of the debate and, in addition, to develop a long-term perspective that goes beyond ad hoc interpretations of current and past ‘environmental conflicts’.

This chapter explores the relevance of security with regard to global structural policy, with special attention being paid to the environmental dimension of security. A first step is to define a concept of security that is as precise as possible.

2.1
Redefining security

The concept of security and the question of how it is best conceptualized are among the most controversial issues in international politics. Due to the inherent flexibility of the concept, security can be interpreted in different ways, depending on the interests of security experts, intellectuals and politicians (Dalby, 1992). The approach adopted by Brock (2004) can be taken to be largely undisputed, where security means the absence of war and yet cannot be equated with peace.

In classical terms security means the integrity of territorially organized sovereign nation states within the system of international law as represented by the United Nations since the end of the Second World War. Thus framed, security is the preservation of nation state integrity in the face of external threats in an anarchic world of states; the task of guaranteeing security is seen as being ultimately a military one. With the end of the Cold War and increasing globalization it came to be universally recognized that insecurity, instability and violence are brought about not by military aggression alone, but may have complex political, economic, socio-cultural and ecological origins (Biermann et al., 1998). This led to calls for a re-assessment of security and corresponding policy adjustments, e.g. the much quoted essay by Tuchman Mathews entitled ‘Redefining Security’ (1989). In academia, too, intense debate about the concept of security developed after the end of the Cold War (Dalby, 1992; Lipschutz, 1995). In a certain sense, the ‘peace discourse’ of the 1970s and 1980s, which had proceeded in a setting defined by the Cold War, was gradually transformed into a ‘security discourse’ (Brock, 2004).

2.1.1
Comprehensive security

The policy debates have since given rise to new, broader concepts of security, which have been made the basis of both NATO's and the German government's security strategies. According to these new concepts, security policy is not only a question of military capacity, but is based on the ability to defuse political and socio-economic crises that threaten to cross the threshold to violence, and to do so as early as possible using non-military and, if necessary, military means. In addition to classical foreign and economic policy, the non-military methods increasingly include development and environmental policy measures. The concept explicitly includes interests in securing strategic resources, which serve to safeguard affluence in the industrialized countries. Thus, mineral resources, such as oil, gas and ores, as well as other strategic resources such as freshwater access and safe shipping routes, have become assets of significance in terms of security policy.

When the concept of security is extended in this way, non-military areas of policy come to be identified as potentially security relevant. Public concerns, such as environmental degradation and poverty, which previously had been regarded as ‘soft’ policy fields, have been accorded greater importance as a result. At the same time, areas of non-military policy have come to be ‘securitized’ (Waever, 1995; Brock, 1997). In this regard, critics point to the vagueness of the concept and its lack of a clear referent: if the concept of security is used in many different contexts, it becomes harder to...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Half Title
• Front
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Council Staff and Acknowledgments
• Contents
• Boxes
• Tables
• Figures
• Acronyms and Abbreviations
• Summary for Policy-makers
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Environmental change in security discourse
• 3 Known conflict impacts of environmental change
• 4 Rising conflict risks due to state fragility and a changing world order
• 5 Impacts of climate change on the biosphere and human society
• 6 Conflict constellations
• 7 Hotspots of climate change: Selected regions
• 8 Climate change as a driver of social destabilization and threat to international security
• 9 Research recommendations
• 10 Recommendations for action
• 11 References
• 12 Glossary
• 13 Index