Environmental Security and Climate Change: A Link to Homeland Security

Author(s):  
Kent Hughes Butts

AbstractIt is time to broaden our thinking on the concept of homeland security and recognize the degree to which environmental security, and in particular climate change, affects US homeland security equities. Understanding how environmental security became a national security issue may be beneficial as the homeland security community seeks to understand the emerging issue of climate change and strategic documents linking climate change and homeland security.

Author(s):  
Terrence M. O’Sullivan ◽  
Jim Ramsay

AbstractThe worsening effects of human-caused climate change, as well as issues most American view as “homeland security” (HS) can be seen in the news almost every day. Yet most in the general public and even many in security-related fields do not connect the two arenas, even though climate change, and interrelated resource competition and conflicts that together make up the growing field of environmental security (ES), are increasingly important risk and response variables for homeland security and emergency management. Current climate change effects are already destructive and volatile, but the future projected impacts are likely to be severe and costly to the economic, political, and social health of many nations as well as to a large proportion of the world’s population. The focus of this paper is to describe and connect the evolving concepts of environmental security, homeland security, and national security (NS). Definitions and missions for each concept are discussed, consistent with current, even if contested, practice and theory. Better comparative analysis of these unique but intimately connected realms will help advance the development of more comprehensive and sustainable security policy and strategy.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1532673X2110532
Author(s):  
Jason Gainous ◽  
Melissa K. Merry

Research suggests that framing climate change as a national security issue can shape opinion about climate change. This research is less clear about what exactly constitutes a “national security frame” and what aspects of this frame are most persuasive. We use a survey experiment to compare the relative effects of three types of national security frames we identify. Results show that a frame centered on energy dependence had the strongest effect and was the most consistent across partisanship. Surprisingly, the effects ran in the opposite direction for Democrats and Republicans on both outcomes—negative for Democrats and positive for Republicans. We also show that the energy dependence frame moderated the influence of respondents’ affect toward political candidates and parties on their climate change attitudes. The results suggest that the energy dependence frame can shape public opinion, but that it must be tailored to particular audiences to avoid backfire effects.


Author(s):  
Felix Dodds

The emergence of environment as a security imperative is something that could have been avoided. Early indications showed that if governments did not pay attention to critical environmental issues, these would move up the security agenda. As far back as the Club of Rome 1972 report, Limits to Growth, variables highlighted for policy makers included world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion, all of which impact how we live on this planet. The term environmental security didn’t come into general use until the 2000s. It had its first substantive framing in 1977, with the Lester Brown Worldwatch Paper 14, “Redefining Security.” Brown argued that the traditional view of national security was based on the “assumption that the principal threat to security comes from other nations.” He went on to argue that future security “may now arise less from the relationship of nation to nation and more from the relationship between man to nature.” Of the major documents to come out of the Earth Summit in 1992, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development is probably the first time governments have tried to frame environmental security. Principle 2 says: “States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and developmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national.” In 1994, the UN Development Program defined Human Security into distinct categories, including: • Economic security (assured and adequate basic incomes). • Food security (physical and affordable access to food). • Health security. • Environmental security (access to safe water, clean air and non-degraded land). By the time of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, in 2002, water had begun to be identified as a security issue, first at the Rio+5 conference, and as a food security issue at the 1996 FAO Summit. In 2003, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan set up a High-Level Panel on “Threats, Challenges, and Change,” to help the UN prevent and remove threats to peace. It started to lay down new concepts on collective security, identifying six clusters for member states to consider. These included economic and social threats, such as poverty, infectious disease, and environmental degradation. By 2007, health was being recognized as a part of the environmental security discourse, with World Health Day celebrating “International Health Security (IHS).” In particular, it looked at emerging diseases, economic stability, international crises, humanitarian emergencies, and chemical, radioactive, and biological terror threats. Environmental and climate changes have a growing impact on health. The 2007 Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) identified climate security as a key challenge for the 21st century. This was followed up in 2009 by the UCL-Lancet Commission on Managing the Health Effects of Climate Change—linking health and climate change. In the run-up to Rio+20 and the launch of the Sustainable Development Goals, the issue of the climate-food-water-energy nexus, or rather, inter-linkages, between these issues was highlighted. The dialogue on environmental security has moved from a fringe discussion to being central to our political discourse—this is because of the lack of implementation of previous international agreements.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 90-104
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Kantemnidis

Environmental security was established academically in the early 1980s in the United States. The threat of environmental issues to national security has been the dominant approach among the many distinct interpretations. In 2008, environmental concerns, particularly climate change, were addressed for the first time in the context of EU security. The European security community frequently considers environmental aspects; however, this is usually limited to a strategic level before moving to implementation. In this article, we illustrate how environmental security has evolved, how it has permeated the European security community, and how it might advance further to secure the security of European citizens better.


2019 ◽  
Vol 05 (01) ◽  
pp. 97-116
Author(s):  
Maria Julia Trombetta

Despite the traditional resistance to consider climate change as a national security issue, the security impact of climate change has been increasingly recognized by official discourses in China over the past few years. The Chinese perception on climate change has shifted from a development issue to a security topic; and two driving forces are behind the emergence of the climate security discourse: the shift of China’s economy towards a “New Normal” and the commitments China made in the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Meanwhile, two modalities of discourse that characterize the Chinese context are also discerned. One that involves national security has a rather fixed procedure about how security can be spoken of and by whom; the other is more relevant for issues like climate change and air pollution. In both cases, even if the language of security is used with regard to climate issues, they are handled as normal politics and governmental actions are legitimized by the use of security language. Although China has taken on more climate responsibilities, it seems unprepared for global climate leadership because security considerations not only determine the country’s participation but also limit its international commitments in global climate governance.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-21
Author(s):  
Ta Dinh Thi ◽  
Ta Van Trung ◽  
Phan Thi Kim Oanh ◽  
Do Nam Thang ◽  
Dinh Thi Nga

Affected strongly by climate change, Mekong Delta faces lots of challenges in the development process. By means of inheritance, synthesis and statistics, and sociological investigation methods, the article has figured out that Mekong Delta is a vulnerable area due to climate change and exogenous factors, such as water security; environmental pollution; degradation of forest resources and biodiversity. It is necessary to establish a long-term framework for climate change adaptation and national security towards sustainable development.


Author(s):  
Kathleen A. Mahoney-Norris ◽  
Derek S. Reveron

We now find an increasingly strong worldwide consensus that the phenomenon of climate change is real, fostered at least in part by human activities. This trend will have profound effects not only on local communities, societies, and regions but also on U.S. national security. Whereas the United States may have the resources to at least mitigate the effects of climate change within its own territory, most developing countries and their populations do not, and climate change will inevitably worsen already existing problems such as rising sea levels, desertification, and access to scarce water resources. This enhances the potential for conflict between societies and an unstable world order. The chapter defines and assesses the scope of environmental security concerns, focusing on important events, issues, and actors with implications for national and international security.


2021 ◽  
Vol 880 (1) ◽  
pp. 012052
Author(s):  
L M Popova ◽  
S A Skochko ◽  
O V Nesterenko

Abstract One of the priorities of the national interests of each country is to ensure environmental security as a component of national security. At the same time, among the current and projected threats to national security and national interests of almost all countries of the world are the consequences of climate change and the growth of man-made pressure on the environment. Therefore, today it is necessary to find ways to solve modern problems of environmental safety, including climate safety, which is the purpose of this scientific work. A promising way to reduce the risks of global climate threat is to ensure the environmental security of each country, which provides for the introduction of green technologies on the principle of construction of biopower plants in combination with poultry and livestock farms, as well as in combination with organic raw materials from the population, agricultural enterprises, utilities. In addition, it is planned to obtain biogas as an “alternative fuel”, which will produce electricity and heat, which will be used in lighting and heating of buildings. To prevent the complication of the environmental situation and reduce the intensity of climate change, it is proposed to reduce the area of landfills for organic raw materials. Analysis of soil contamination was conducted near the landfill for solid waste in Lozova city (Ukraine), from which the results of research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document