Environmental Conflict: Neomalthusians vs. Cornucopians

The end of the Cold War and the rise in environmental consciousness have stimulated renewed interest in environmental security. Much of the work in this area has been conceptual. Environmental security was seen as part of a broader concept of comprehensive security or, more recently, of human security (Møller ch. 12). Environmental security was in part a slogan used explicitly to place the environment on the agenda of ‘high politics’ (Lodgaard 1992: 115). If one adopts a broad notion of security as “the assurance people have that they will continue to enjoy those things that are most important to their survival and well-being” (Soroos 1997: 236), it can plausibly be argued that serious environmental degradation can indeed threaten security. Caution should be exercised about labelling every form of pollution or human-induced scarcity as a threat to security. But if the most serious warnings about global warming turn out to be correct, mankind faces a security problem on par with great-power war. Even more traditional environmental concerns like air and water pollution kill more people than wars and armed conflicts in most years, although more gradually and not in a dramatic fashion suitable for daily news coverage. Ethically and politically it makes sense to give such issues very high priority.