Environmental Security in Transnational Contexts

What Relevance for Regional Human Security Regimes?

Harlan Koff, Carmen Maganda

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• eBook ISBN:
  9781351176255
• Subtopic: Military & Maritime History
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Much of the discussion surrounding the definition of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the post-2015 global development agenda has contextualized sustainable development within the framework of 'transformation', specifically prioritizing concepts such as equity, security, justice, and rights. While these debates correctly discussed power imbalances and relational obstacles to human development they have remained abstract because they focused only on the international level. In this regard, discussions have not adequately examined mechanisms that facilitate or block the emergence of sustainable development as a political priority, nor do they address specific policy proposals to link environmental justice to human development strategies. This book contends that human and environmental security should be framed in terms of transnational discussions rather than being limited to general international debates in order to examine both governance challenges and potential policy mechanisms that can effectively address environmental security issues that cross national boundaries. The chapters in this volume undertake an empirical examination of the relationships between human and environmental security, cross-border exchanges, and regional integration. They address the relationships between international norms, transnational human and environmental security issues, and the regionalization of governance in different parts of the world as the book includes comparative analyses as well as case studies from Europe, Asia and the Americas.

The chapters originally published as a special issue in Globalizations.

Reconciling Competing Globalizations through Regionalisms? Environmental Security in the Framework of Expanding Security Norms and Narrowing Security Policies

HARLAN KOFF

ABSTRACT This article examines environmental security regimes in 16 regional organizations and asks whether regions can effectively implement environmental security norms. It first defines these norms and discusses their emergence at the international level. At the same time, through the literature review, the article posits that the globalization of security threats has simultaneously led to a retrenchment of coercive non-state security strategies. Consequently, the article contends that the globalization of security norms has made them ineffectual because they have not properly addressed tangible security threats. At the same time, nation-state-based hard power security measures (especially border controls) have not adequately addressed the underlying causes of transnational threats related to human and environmental security. For this reason, the article examines how well regional approaches to security contribute to both protection against imminent violence and the promotion of human and environmental security through medium-term development strategies. The article contends that the emergence of regional environmental security regimes should be fostered by reinforcing regional security architectures through public participation mechanisms.

1. Introduction

Since the end of the Cold War, security debates have become quite nebulous. Internationally, ‘new’ global security norms such as human security, environmental security, water security, climate security, responsibility to protect (R2P) have emerged. Conversely, nation-state-based security policies have become narrow with specific concentrations on terrorism, organized crime, trafficking, migration, border control, etc. This article addresses this seeming disconnect between international discourse and domestic strategies through a comparative analysis of regional security regimes. The article addresses three specific research questions: (1) Can regional organizations reconcile the inconsistencies between international security norms and domestic policies with regard to environmental security? (2) Why is environmental security not prominent in regional security agendas?, and (3) What is the impact of inter-regionalism on environmental security policies? It contends that regions are better positioned than nation-states to address environmental security issues because they can coordinate/implement transnational security strategies. However, the potential for regions to do so has been muted due to weak security architectures.

Following this introduction, the article includes four sections and a conclusion. In Section 2, the article presents a literature review and posits that the globalization of security norms has made them ineffectual at the international level because they have not properly addressed tangible security threats through soft power mechanisms. At the same time, nation-state-based hard power security measures (especially border controls) have not adequately addressed the underlying causes of security threats related to poverty, global inequalities, socio-economic and environmental vulnerability, etc. For this reason, the article argues that regional approaches to security can combine, when member states are committed, hard power responses to immediate threats and soft power strategies to the underlying transnational causes of insecurity. Consequently, regions can contribute to protection against imminent violence and they can address human and environmental security issues through medium-term development strategies.

In Sections 3 and 4, the article responds to the first two research questions above by comparing the security agendas of 16 world regions and the places that environmental issues have in them. According to the literature on regional security, there has been an increase in the variance between world regions in how they define security and how they address environmental issues (see Fawcett, 2013). This section documents the differences between the security discourses of regional organizations and specifically, it examines how environmental security figures on these agendas. Section 4 specifically attempts to explain these differences by examining the security architectures of these regional organizations.

Following the comparative parts of this study, section five addresses the impact of inter-regionalism on regional commitments to environmental security. The section focuses on the European Union (EU) because, unlike other global powers, such as the United States (US) or China, it is a region rather than a nation-state and the EU has made a commitment to being a global normative power by including commitments to good governance, human rights, the environment, etc. in foreign policy discourse. This case study of EU–Andean Community of Nations (CAN) relations demonstrates that the impacts of inter-regionalism are complex and the existence of different normative views in the field of environmental security can create tensions between regions.

1.1. Methods and Key Concepts

This article is based on a review of official policy documents and the websites of 16 regional organizations, in addition to secondary sources. Specifically, research was based on regional policy documents in the field of security and an examination of the mention of environmental security within these documents.

This study raises key concepts in the field of international relations, but to varying degrees and for different purposes. The core concept in this article is ‘security’ defined as protection from harm. The article differentiates ‘hard security’ defined as protection from coercion-based threats and ‘soft security’ defined as protection against non-coercion-based threats. Specifically, the article’s primary focus on ‘environmental security’ defined as protection from environmental dangers, the lack/depletion of strategic resources and conflict over these resources, is generally classified under ‘soft security’. ‘Human security’ broadly defined as the protection of human dignity is a combination of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ security measures. ‘Regional policies’, another term of primary importance in this article, are defined as those policies that are conceptualized and implemented by regional organizations and they do not include the individual policies of member states. ‘Globalization’ defined here as the internationalization of political norms is of secondary concern because it merely provides the framework for the article. Similarly, the term ‘norms’ defined as ‘shared political convictions that influence policy discourse/content’ is introduced in order to explain expanding security debates and contextualize this study of regional environmental security. Finally, ‘development’ is referred to as a process that affects our understanding and levels of security within and between polities.

2. Literature Review: How the Globalization of Security Norms Contrasts Trends in Security Policies

As stated in the introduction above, security paradigms have shifted considerably since the 1980s. Scholars such as Thomas (2001), Newman (2001), and Owen (2004) have documented the historical development of this paradigm since the Brandt Commission’s Report opened a debate on the relationship between development and security in 1980 and the United Nations Development Program’s (UNDP) 1994 Human Development Report brought the concept of human security to the forefront of international affairs. Specifically, these milestone reports questioned our very understanding of ‘security’ all the way to its foundations. They focus on three fundamental questions: (1) What is security? (2) For whom is security? and (3) What threatens security?

2.1. The Emergence of Human Security as a Conceptual Paradigm

The immediate answers to these questions have created an inseparable link between security, development, and governance. In response to question one: human security has been defined by the UNDP as ‘freedom from fear and freedom from want’ (see UNDP, 1994 Human Development Report). As Thomas (2001) argues in her seminal work on human security, this concept entails two facets, one quantitative, and one qualitative. In quantitative terms, ‘freedom from want’ includes the provision of all material needs for human life, including food, health, education, etc. Conversely, qualitative aspects of human security are related to ‘freedom from fear’ through the protection of human rights, the protection of physical safety and autonomous control over one’s life course. For Thomas,

…human security describes a condition of existence in which basic material needs are met, and in which human dignity, including meaningful participation in the life of the community, can be realized. Such human security is indivisible; it cannot be pursued by or for one group at the expense of another. (p. 162)

Of course, these discourses affect question two: for whom is security? The major shift created by this paradigm is the emphasis on the individual, or people if considered collectively, as the referent(s) for security (see Khong, 2001). No longer do security debates exclusively address territories or states but people-centered policies are promoted.

This of course affected policy responses to question three focusing on threats to security. First, coercive threats to security have been redefined to include non-state actors (organized crime, cartels, terrorism, etc.) and intra-state conflict (civil wars, revolutions, rebellions, etc.) Second, non-coercive threats to security have been incorporated into policy strategies. These include poverty, corruption, discrimination, and of course, environmental issues such as climate change and access to water which are the focus of the next sub-section.

2.2. Environmental Security: What Place in Security Debates?

Within the ever-broadening international agenda, environmental security has emerged as pillars of rights-based security norms. Environmental security refers to threats posed by environmental events and conditions to the well-being of individuals, communities, or states (see Barnett, 2011). The development of the early literature on environmental security in the 1990s (see Dabelko & Dabelko, 1995; Homer-Dixon, 1994) often focused on conflicts and violence generated by competition for natural resources. In this regard, scholarship and policies identified and theorized the relationship between environment and security in classical terms. According to Floyd (2008), environmental security emerged as a paradigm because it ‘linked to the military’. Floyd specifically identifies the emergence of budget lines for environmental issues in US military spending.

The emergence of environmental security as a global norm is important because it recognizes the role of environmental resources in transnational conflicts. These resources include water (see Conde, 2010), minerals (see Puerta, 2013), and land (see Zoomers, 2010), among others and they have been central elements of recent conflicts in the Middle East (i.e. the Israel–Palestine conflict) and Africa (i.e. the conflicts in Darfur and Congo). In fact, ‘environmental security’ has shifted the focus in environmental agendas from conservationist discourse aimed at protecting the environment for its inherent moral value, to strategic discussions of how environmental conflicts are inherently human-made and thus, the language utilized in this paradigm reflects the realpolitik approach that has traditionally characterized international security debates (see Zeitoun & Warner, 2006; Koff & Maganda, 2014). Floyd (2008) states that environmental issues have reached the ‘equivalent of military problems’.

In terms of these global security debates, for example, threats to environmental securit...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Citation Information
• Notes on Contributors
• Introduction: Environmental Security in Transnational Contexts: What Relevance for Regional Human Security Regimes?
• 1. Reconciling Competing Globalizations through Regionalisms? Environmental Security in the Framework of Expanding Security Norms and Narrowing Security Policies
• 2. Water Security Debates in ‘Safe’ Water Security Frameworks: Moving Beyond the Limits of Scarcity
• 3. Scarcity and Power in US–Mexico Transboundary Water Governance: Has the Architecture Changed since NAFTA?
• 4. Many Faces of Security: Discursive Framing in Cross-border Natural Resource Governance in the Mekong River Commission
• 5. Of River Linkage and Issue Linkage: Transboundary Conflict and Cooperation on the River Meuse
• 6. Escaping the Border, Debordering the Nature: Protected Areas, Participatory Management, and Environmental Security in Northern Patagonia (i.e. Chile and Argentina)
• Index