Climate–conflict research : some reflections on the way forward
▻http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1002/wcc.336
Article intéressant sur l’état des études sur le lien climat-conflits, leurs limites et les points sur lesquels il faudrait se pencher plus sérieusement pour améliorer les recherches dans ce domaine.
Je relève ces deux critiques parmi d’autres :
More generally, there is a tendency in this literature to underestimate or outright ignore the importance of institutions and quality of governance and instead place full emphasis on the reductionist and near-deterministic narrative of scarcity-induced competition and conflict among bourgeoning (African) populations.
However, it is not given that any impact of #climate change necessarily will be negative for society. Increased awareness of environmental challenges and adverse ecological changes can also be powerful drivers of positive change, such as innovation and redistribution. Besides, we should not forget that historically cooperation—not conflict—is the modal outcome of growing resource scarcities,[43-45] although the climate change–cooperation connection has received little attention.
Ayant rencontré récemment un thésard financé par Google et le ministère de l’intérieur britannique qui avait pour objectif de développer un modèle de prédiction des émeutes (du genre de ce que fait Hannah Fry à Londres - pour « aider la police » ►http://seenthis.net/messages/157866), en lien avec le changement climatique (ce lien n’étant en fait pas tellement sa priorité vu la complexité du truc), il me semble que la référence au climat tient aussi lieu de #greenwashing de ce genre de recherche-profitable-à-la-police et légitime progressivement une vision sécuritaire de l’adaptation aux changements climatiques (e.g. ▻http://seenthis.net/messages/311027).
Cela dit j’aime beaucoup la conclusion de l’article, qui renverse habilement la perspective dominante sur « le climat déréglant la sécurité du monde ».
Climate change and conflict may be related in other, less controversial and quite possibly much more important ways than those considered here. I therefore end on noting two areas that deserve more scientific attention than presently acknowledged. First, while the impact of climatic changes on conflict risk in stable societies may be negligible (Ref [3], p. 16), armed conflicts, by virtue of their destructive nature, are destined to increase societies’ vulnerability to climate change. Civil war is development in reverse,[47, 48] and many of the negative impacts of conflict on economic activity, education, health, and food security are major drivers of environmental vulnerability.[27, 49] In unstable corners of the world, ending violent conflict may be the most efficient and cost-effective way to improve social resilience to climate change. Second, future research should also consider the conflict potential of climate change adaptation and mitigation. While poverty alleviation is generally considered a no-regret adaptation strategy, policies that imply land-use changes or have far-reaching externalities may constitute significant challenges for affected communities. Ill-advised climate adaptation plans have the potential to trigger resentment and conflict.[50] Adverse impacts of dam construction and hydropower production on biodiversity and livelihood security are well documented.