The Environmental Security Discourse: Why, How and its Implications

Itay FischhendlerDepartment of Geography, The Hebrew University of

Jerusalem

What is ‘traditional’ security?

• A requirement to maintain the survival of the nation-state through the use of economic, military and political power and

the exercise of diplomacy

Security for whom? Security from what?

• expectation of years of life without experiencing the state of generalized poverty

• a condition of existence" which entails basic material needs, human dignity, including meaningful participation in the life of the community, and an active and substantive notion of democracy

• Freedom from Fear and Freedom from Want and beyond

What is human security

Securitizing the environment

“We have to prevent further environmental degradation. If we fail these problems will cause terrorism, tension and war” (Clinton, 1994)

“The next war in the Middle East will be fought over water, not politics” (Egyptian Foreign Minister, and later UN Secretary General, Boutrous Ghali)

“The Darfur conflict began as an ecological crisis, arising at least in part from climate change.” (UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, 2007)

“climate change " would challenge US national security in ways that be considered immediately" (Schwartz and Randall, 2003)

The causality between environment and security

environment securityconflictsscarcity

supply demand

abundance

weak society legitimacy

security securityconflictsenvironmentalscarcity

Environmentalthreat

collective action and

trust

securitypeace buildin

g

What are we securitizing:Reliable supply

Energy security is “reliable and adequate supply at a reasonable price" (Bielecki, 2002)

Energy s

ecurity

What are we securitizing:our existence

Ecologica

l secu

rity

Climate se

curity

Climate security is "stable climate or maintaining a rate of change below the dangerous levels for human and ecological systems" (Stripple 2002)

What are we securitizing:our values

Water

and food se

curity

Food security is access by all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life (World Bank, 1986)

Resources securitized

What are we securitizing

What is under threaten

Security instruments

Water Rights and values -food production- hydro energy supply-human hygiene and health

-desalinization; pollution prevention, efficiency uses, virtual water,

Food Entitlements and values

-Food production-employment, welfare state

Self sufficiencyNew food marketsCroup invitations

Energy - Standard and quality of life- Political stability

Reliable energy supply

-energy diversificationgrid supplyrenewable energy

Environment/ecological

- life support systems -Open spaces- biodiversity- earth integrity

Climate -life support systems - Political stabilitystandard and quality of life

- all of the above -energy efficiencyReviewable energyDemand managementTechnology transfer

What resources we securitize

How do we securitize?

• Describe resource provision in existential ways• Associate the resource with conflicts• Use symbols to describe the resource

dependency and volatility• Explain the resource need and use in

emblematic terms• Make connections between the resource and

high-politics issues

Examples of securitized statements

• "“emergency situations “resulting from suddenly either from natural causes or from human conduct and causing or posing an imminent threat of causing serious harm to either the Zambezi Watercourse or to a Member State” (Agreement on the Establishment of the Zambezi Watercourse Commission, 2008 ).

• “Several studies have shown that a temporary decline in rainfall has generally been associated throughout sub-Saharan Africa with a marked rise in the likelihood of violent conflict in the following months.” (Scientific American, July 2006)

• the motivation for the agreement is “… considering their desire to restore security and mutual trust throughout the length of their common frontier” (1979 water treaty between Iran, Iraq)

Why are we securitizing?

Rhetorical device aimed at recruiting greater support

The search for new missions for military institutions

A genuine fear for political instability, conflicts and wars

placing issues ‘beyond normal politics’, that is, ‘beyond public debate’ making decisions on the basis of impulse, urgency, and willingness to

sacrificeremove an issue from both the political and economic field, where

calculation of gains and losses dominates.

The pros of securitization

It puts the environment on the agenda

Some indications that it mobilizes power and policy makers

the underlying assumption is that they will succeed to influence only if they will establish a widespread connections between environmental issues and issues of poverty, housing health and security

The cons of securitization

undercuts the ability to conduct traditional missions that counter explicitly military threats

It increases political frictions within the discourse, which eventually will freeze it

securitization perpetuate the inequalities between those who did manage to put their problems on the agenda and those who not.

It draws attention away from more proximate environmental causes and problems.

Environmental security skeptics

securitizing the environment is a rhetorical device aimed at drumming up greater support for measures to protect the Environment (e.g Levy, 1995)

‘Rhetorical attention-getting' (Deudney, 1990).

Many calls for the de-securitization of natural resources discourse

Institutional development Benefit sharing

Subscribing mechanisms for de-securitization: data sharing, virtual water

directions for research

What resources are we securitizing?

Who is securing the environmental

discourse?

What variables contribute to the

process?

When and what securitized resources

are like to compete?

How can we reconcile between

competing securities?

What are the implications of the use of security jargon?

Test case:the U.N. Commission for Sustainable

Development

Its mission: Reviewing the implementation of Agenda-21

Policy guidance for future Sustainable Development

Promote dialogue and build partnerships

Process: Annual open forum

Each year is devoted to several specific topics

Content analysis of statements (CSD 12 -15) : Identify if the statements are securitized

Identify what is being securitized

Identify the solutions suggested

Qualitative assessment

Methodology & Data

Statistical analysisMultivariate regression

CSD12 & CSD13Water

CSD14 & CSD15Energy

Number of Observations

% of Total

Number of Observations

% of Total

Parties submitting statements 150 100.0 159 100.0

States submitting statements 102 68.0 108 67.9

Non-state actors submitting statements

48 32.0 51 32.1

Statements 366 100.0 696 100.0

Statements submitted by states 233 63.7 430 61.8

Statements submitted by non-state actors

133 36.3 266 38.2

Statements referencing security 70 19.1 130 18.5

Statements by states referencing security

41 11.2 74 10.6

Statements by non-state actors referencing security

29 7.9 56 8.0

Our database

Mentioned Security

Did Not Mention Security

Did Not Submit a Statement

CSD 12 &13 - WATER

Mentioned Security

Did Not Mention Security

Did Not Submit a Statement

CSD 14 &15 - ENERGY

•Around the same securitized water and energy statements •Use of securitization jargon not correlated with scarcity

•Over-representation of Northern, wetter

states

Who Is Securitizing Water?

Who Is Securitizing Water?

38%

65%48%

28%

13%

22%

34%23%30%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

StatesNon-states

Overall

unclear

state

human

What are they securitizing?

Who Is Securitizing Energy?

5%16%10%

37%23%31%

58%61%59%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

StatesNon-states

Overall

unclear

state

human

How Much Are They Securitizing?

What Are They Securitizing in energy?

• addressing political unrest caused by sharp increases in oil prices (Sweden).

• stability in respective regions… are among key factors impacting energy security (Azerbaijan)

• Indonesia support concrete measures at all levels to ensure energy security supply

• The Energy Strategy of Armenia aim is enhancing the energy independence

Examples for securitized statements

Resource at Stake

Insecurities Expressed

Idioms and Language Used

Recommended Strategies

Climate Hunger, disease, flooding, migration, biodiversity loss

Vulnerability, urgent, catastrophic forecasts, disasters, devastation, destruction, misery

Mitigation and adaption finance, emergency disaster response development

Energy Economic destabilization, poverty, lack of development

Concerns, undermining, terrorism

Trade liberalization, financial support, military assurances of open trade zones, development of renewable sources, technology transfer

Food Development, health, hunger, poverty

Urgent, utmost priorities,

Technological support, financial support

Land Poverty, rights, Property rights, institutional reform

Water War, disease, economic hardship, poverty

Looming crisis, grim prospects,

Financial support for infrastructure, trade support,

Insecurities expressed, idioms and language used, and recommended strategies

Which States Are Securitizing?

Logit Regression

Secured = B0 + B1X + ε

Where:

Secured = Binary variable (0,1) indicating if a state mentioned security at least once

X = Vector of variables related to energy and water security

B0 + B1= parameters to be estimated

ε = error term

Variable Type

Variable name Variable Description Units of measurement

Composite WECSEC Aggregate measure of energy security published by the World Energy Council (2009)

Resource Endowment and Use Variables

Energyusecap Fossil fuel energy use per capita kg of oil equivalent

Fossilreservescap Fossil fuel reserves per capita kg of oil equivalent

Fossilusepercent Fossil fuel energy use as share of total energy use %

Energyimports Net energy imports as share of total energy use %

Fuelexports Fuel exports as share of total merchandise exports %

Fuelimports Fuel exports as share of total merchandise imports %

CO2cap Greenhouse gas (carbon) emissions per capita metric tons of CO 2 equivalent

Socio-economic Political

and Geographic Variables

GDPcap Gross Domestic Product per capita 2000 US $

Popgrowth Average annual population growth %

Politicalstability World Governance Indicators (WGI) index of political stability and absence of violence published by the World Bank (2010). Values represent 2005 data

Island a binary variable indicating whether or not the country was an island

0/1

Energy Variables

Variable Type

Variable name Variable Description Units of measurement

Composite

WPI Aggregate water poverty index developed by Sullivan (2002) and Lawrence, Meigh and Sullivan (2002)

0-100

Resource Endowme

nt and Use

Variables

ARWR Annual renewable water resources per capita m3/cap/year

IRWR Internal renewable water resources per capita m3/cap/year

Withdrawals Water withdrawn as share of total IRWR %

Waterdependence Share of IRWR originating in other countries %

Socio-economic

and Political

Variables

Agrpop Population in the agricultural sector %

Agrgdp Agricultural value added as share of overall Gross Domestic Product

%

GDPcap Gross Domestic Product per capita 2000 US$

Popgrowth Annual population growth %

Politicalstability World Governance Indicators (WGI) index of political stability and absence of violence published by the World Bank (2010). Values represent 2003 data.

0-100

Water Variables

Multi-variate logistic regression for water variables

Multi-variate logistic regression for energy variables

Independent Variable

Coefficient Independent Variable

Coefficient

ARWR -3.34E-06 Energyusecap -0.0003

IRWR 1.65E-06 Fossilreservescap 62.151

Withdrawals 0.005* Fossilusepercent -0.0174

Waterdependence 0.029*** Energyimports 0.001

Agrpop 10.693*** Fuelexports -0.01

Agrgdp -0.055 Fuelimports 0.0317

CO2cap 0.151

GDPcap 0.0001*** GDPcap 0.00007

Popgrowth 0.100 Popgrowth -0.726**

Politicalstability 0.175 Politicalstability -0.056

Island 0.826

Constant -3.471 Constant 0.39

Pseudo R2 0.29 Pseudo R2 0.121

Conclusions

•CSD is a venue where sustainability and security discourses meet each other

•Security jargon is often used as an instrument to raise the profile •of energy ad water issues It is often international organizations and• NGOs' that choose to do so

•The issues securitized are not the traditional high political ones

• In energy, it is securing reliable supply while in water it is securing food availability•In water, it is countries that are more dependent on the resource that will discuss it in security terms

38

How to reconcile between competing security discourses:

The case of the solar power plants in the Israeli Negev

39

Security type

Group of environmental security

Storyline Means for achieving security

Food Reliable supply Accessibility to food

Self-grown, preservation of land

Energy Reliable supply Availability and sustainability

local resources

Climate Life support system

Climate that enables life

CO2 reduction

Ecology Life support system

Ecology that enables agriculture

Nature reserves

Traditional Not environmental Protection of the nation

Strong security agencies

The main securities

40

Motivation for research

• Securities compete over same resources.• Politicians and decision makers need to reconcile

between conflicting securities.• What tools they have now available for it?

Land

Food security

Climate security

Ecological security

water/ R&D/ budget/labor

Contextual variables

Implication on policy and decision making

process

Traditional security

Energy security

Competition between resources

Positive feedback

negative feedback

42

Research questions

• Under what conditions does the discourse of competing securities arise?

• How does this discourse affect the decision-making process?

• How can the competing discourses be reconciled?

43

• Case study: Solar power plants promotion in the Israeli Negev

• Analysis of the decision making process:

General methodology

– Classification of protocols

– In-depth interviews

44

Methodology

• Content analysis of protocols according to security statements:

4. Storyline

5. Strategies for reconciliation

6. Explicit or implicit securitization

1. Forum

2. Actor

3. Security raised

45

Explicit/Implicit securitization

Explicit

“Energy is the essence of life of the country”

“

Implicit

“We are required, together with all the nations, to contribute [to the struggle for global climate] “

Results

“Coalition” of securities• Climate and energy securities gain from the solar energy

and act as the pro coalition• Food, ecology and traditional securities act as the anti-

coalition • The “coalitions” compete for land

Land

Climate, energy,

Food

Ecology

Traditional

“Pro” solar power plant “Anti” solar power plant

securities typesby forum

N=47 N=39 N=65

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

ParliamentaryCommittees

LocatingCommittees

National planningcommittees

Ecology

Food

Traditional

Economy

GeneralenvironmentalClimate

Energy

48

Explicit / Implicit securitizationby forum

N=47 N=39 N=65

0%

20%40%

60%80%

100%

ParliamentaryCommittees

LocatingCommittees

National planningcommittees

ExplicitImplicit

Examples for resource securitization

• Israel can no longer remain dependent on energy import for its existence

• The solar farms is a national project as important as tanks

• Marinating the open spaces is our green lungs

50

Type of securityProtocol no. Ener. Ecol. Clim. Econ. Food Trad. Envi.

Par. Cmte.

1 V V V V

2 V V V V

3 V

4 V V V V

5 V V V V V

6 V V N=65

Loc. Cmte. No. of security types to the no. of statements ratio : 0.311 V V V V

2 V V V V

3 V V V V V

4 V V V N=39

Nat. Cmte. No. of security types to the no. of statements ratio : 0.411 V V V

2 V V

3 V

4 V V

5 V V V V

6 V

7 V

8 V V V V

9 V V

10 V V V V

11 V

12 V V V V

13 V V N=47

No. of security types to the no. of statements ratio : 0.61

The security types raised in each protocol

Distribution of security typesby actor

N=76 N=37 N=17 N=12 N=151

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Ecology

Food

Traditional

Economy

GeneralenvironmentalClimate

Energy

51

No. of statementsby actors

1%

11%

25%

50%

3% 2% 8%Acad.

NGO's

Elect. co.

Bus. sec.

Polit.

Pub. serv

Army

N=151

Early solutions to reconcile the competition

• Attach solar farms to existing infrastructure• Solar panels on top of existing infrastructure• To outsource solar farms to Jordan• Solar farms at the buffer zone around the Israeli

nuclear facility• Solar panels on non- arable land

Discussion

• The securitization discourse is used to mobilize the attention of policy makers.

• As a result securities and actors compete over resources such as land but also water and R&D.

• Using securities to frame the discourse creates alliance between actors

• Decision making venues differ in how they use and abuse the security framework

• This is a result of the different nature of venues