Abstract
During the last decades, the global environmental imbalance has reached an intolerable peak, producing devastating impacts on vulnerable regions and populations, historically considered as less responsible for its underlying causes. The growing scientific consensus on anthropogenic environmental change has led to the creation of some paradigmatic approaches aimed to address this issue, such as the ‘sustainable development’ principle and, more recently, the green economy. Nevertheless, policy responses to environmental change have been largely grounded in the dominant development models, those that are arguably to blame for this situation. The present chapter suggests that the global economic system is still unable to propose workable alternatives to reconsider the structural drivers that give rise to the environmental crisis and increasing social inequalities. It discusses the interrelations between environmental change and dominant development pathways, and demonstrates how the environmental discourse is still disregarding human and social issues or, more precisely, the inter-linkages between the growing social injustice and the ever-increasing environmental crisis. By recognizing that social and structural inequalities are among the important drivers of ecological crisis, this research emphasizes this tight relationship, and shows, in the meantime, how the environmental crisis is further widening the rich-poor gaps and creates new grounds for additional vulnerabilities. This leads to the conclusion that fighting social vulnerabilities must be at the heart of policy responses to the global environmental change. Based on this mutual interaction, this chapter argues that the latter is predominantly a human-security issue and, therefore, related responses should be people-centered.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Man and nature; or, Physical geography as modified by human action written by Georges Perkins Marsh in 1864 was one of the first books to argue about the impact of human action onthe environment.
- 2.
According to Global Climate Risk Index 2015: “Of the ten most affected countries by extreme weather events (1994–2013), nine were developing countries in the low income or lower-middle income country group, while only one was classified as an upper-middle income country”.
- 3.
Climate Change Vulnerability Index 2013 shows that the most vulnerable regions to climate change are situated in Africa, South Asia and Latin America.
- 4.
For instance the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress created by French government in 2009 chaired by the economist J.E. Stiglitz.
- 5.
Invoking their ‘right to development’.
- 6.
The failure of Copenhagen Summit in 2009 was an obvious illustration of these divergences.
- 7.
According to Maibach et al. (2014), “Human-caused climate change is happening and is accelerating; dangerous impacts are becoming evident around the world, and are projected to get worse in the decades to come, possibly much worse […]. Nearly all climate scientists are convinced of these basic facts, but more than half of Americans do not currently understand that this scientific consensus has been reached […]. Americans are not alone in this regard, although relatively less is known about the views of people in other nations. While 57 % of Britons aged 15 and older agreed with the statement ‘most scientists agree that humans are causing climate change’ […], a separate 16-nation World Public Opinion Poll (Public attitudes toward climate change: Findings from a multi-country poll, 2009, http://worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/btenvironmentra/649.php?lb=brglmandpnt=649andnid=andid=) found that only a minority of citizens in seven nations said ‘most scientists think the problem is urgent and enough is known to take action’; these were the United States (38 %), Russia (23 %), Indonesia (33 %), Japan (43 %), Brazil (44 %), India (48 %), and Mexico (48 %). Across all 16 nations, 51 % selected this response option, while 16 % said ‘most (scientists) think the problem is not urgent, and not enough is known yet to take action’, and 24 % said ‘views are pretty evenly divided’, another 10 % indicated ‘don’t know’”.
- 8.
While originally launched in the United States, this disinformation campaign has been pursued in Canada, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand as well (Dunlap and McCright 2011).
- 9.
According to the conventional environmental economic thought, economic growth can be sustainable so long as efficiency gains allow the economy to dematerialize by at least the same rate as it grows.
- 10.
For instance, the UNEP focuses on the ‘green economy’ while the OECD and the World Bank refer sometimes to ‘sustainable growth’ and ‘green growth’.
- 11.
For more details: http://www.tni.org/report/green-economy-wolf-sheeps-clothing.
- 12.
For more details: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015
- 13.
Canada, Japan and Norway are the leading countries for this modern view of human security.
- 14.
The 1994 UNDP Human Development Report has broadly defined human security as ‘freedom from fear’ and ‘freedom from want’.
- 15.
According to a study published by the National Science Foundation in 2015, an extreme drought in Syria between 2006 and 2009 was most likely due to climate change, and that the drought was a factor behind the violent uprising that began there in 2011. For more details see the article appeared in New York Times on March 3, 2015. URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/science/earth/study-links-syria-conflict-to-drought-caused-by-climate-change.html?_r=0
- 16.
If we consider the most optimistic scenario of global warming (according to IPCC), the surface temperature will still increase by 2–4 °Cby the year 2100.
- 17.
- 18.
As an illustration of this situation, it was reported by Gillis and Davenport (2014) that during the last two years, The US president and his aides have pushed for citizens to increase the pressure for governmental action, based on the premise that only popular protest can overcome the resistance in Congress.
References
Ackerman, F., DeCanio, S. J., Howarth, R. B., & Sheera, K. (2008). Limitations of integrated assessment models of climate change. http://www.e3network.org/resources/DeCanio,%20Ackerman,%20Howarth,%20and%20Sheeran%20LimitsOfIAMsOfClimateChange.pdf. Accessed 4 Sept 2014.
Alcott, B. (2008). The sufficiency strategy: Would rich-world frugality lowed environmental impact? Ecological Economics 64, 770–786. http://blakealcott.org/pdf/Alcott+2008+Sufficiency+strategy.pdf
Anderegg, W. R. L., Prall, J. W., Harold, J., & Schneider, S. H. (2010). Expert credibility in climate change. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 12107–12109.
Annan, K. (2015). Africa progress panel 2015.
Ayres, R., & Gowdy, J. (1998). Viewpoint: Weak versus strong sustainability. http://kisi.deu.edu.tr/sedef.akgungor/ayres.pdf
Barnett, J. (2001). Security and climate change Tyndall Centre Working Paper (7). www.tyndall.ac.uk/publications/working_papers/wp7.pdf.
Barnett, J., & Adger, W. N. (2007). Climate change, human security and violent conflict. Political Geography, 26, 639–655. http://waterwiki.net/images/7/77/Climate_change,_human_security_and_violent_conflict.pdf
Barnett, J. (2008). Peace and development: Towards a new synthesis. Journal of Peace Research 45(1), 75–89.
Barnett, J., Matthew, R. A., & O’Brien, K. L. (2010). Global environmental change and human security: An introduction. Cambridge, MA/London: The MIT Press.
Baumgartner, S., Becker, C., Faber, M., & Manstetten, R. (2006). Relative and absolute scarcity of nature. Ecological Economics, 59(4), 487.
Bauwens, M. (2011, August 9). Private property is not the right solution for the natural commons. http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/private-property-is-not-the-right-solution-for-the-natural-commons/2011/08/09#comment-733672. Accessed 4 Sept 2014.
Bergmann, B. (2011). Is prosperity possible without growth? Unpublished paper, American University Department of Economics, Washington, DC
Brauch, H. G. (2012). Climate change, human security, and violent conflict in the anthropocene. In Climate change, human security and violent conflict challenges for societal stability, State-of-the art assesment of research on climate change-security links. Heidelberg: Springer.
Brown, L. (1977). Redefining national security. Washington, DC: WorldWatch Institute.
Disclosure Project. (2014). Why companies need emissions reduction targets. The key to a low carbon economy.
Climate Change Vulnerability Index 2013
Cook, J. (2013). Closing the consensus gap a key to increasing support for climate action. Global Change Institute, University of Queensland.
Cook, J., et al. (2013a). Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature. Environmental Research Letters, 8, 024024.
Cook, J., Nuccitelli, D., Green, S. A., Richardson, M., Winkler, B., Painting, R., Way, R., Jacobs, P., & Skuce, A. (Eds.). (2013b). Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature. Environmental Research Letters, 8, 024024.
Crutzen, P. J. (2002). Geology of mankind. Nature, 415, 23.
Crutzen, P. J., & Steffen, W. (2003). How long have we been in the anthropocene era? Climate change, December 2003, 61(3), 251–257.
Dalby, S. (2002, March). Environmental security: Ecology or international relations? Paper presented at the annual convention of the International Studies Association, New Orleans.
Daly, H. E. (1979). Entropy, growth and political economy of scarcity. In V. K. Smith (Ed.), Scarcity and growth reconsidered (pp. 67–94). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Daly, H. E. (1991). Elements of environmental macroeconomics. In R. Costanza (Ed.), Ecological economics: The science and management of sustainablitiy. New York: Columbia University Press.
Daly, H. E. (1996). Beyond growth. The economics of sustainable development. Boston: Beacon.
Daly, H. E. (2005, September). Economics in a full world. Scientific America, pp. 100–107. Accessed at: http://steadystate.org/wpcontent/uploads/Daly_SciAmerican_FullWorldEconomics(1).pdf
Davidson, C. (2000). Economic growth and the environment: Alternatives to the limits paradigm. BioScience, 50(5), 433–440.
Dietz, S., & Stern, N. (2008). Why economic analys is supports strong action on climate change: A response to the Stern Review’s critics. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2(1), 94–113.
Dokos, T (Ed.), Afifi, T., Bogardi, J., Dankelman, I., Dun, O., Goodman, D. L., Huq, S., Iltus, S., Pearl, R., Pettengell, C., Schmidl, S., Stal, M., Warner, K., Xenarios, S. (2008). Climate change: Addressing the impact on human security. Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) and Hellenic Ministry of Foreign Affairs. http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?id=91296andlng=en
Donohoe, M. (2003). Causes and health consequences of environmental degradation and social injustice. Social Science and Medicine, 56, 573–587.
Doppelt, B. (2006). An economic view of global warming. University of Oregon, Climate Change Integration Group. http://www.oregon.gov/energy/GBLWRM/docs/Economics_of_ClimateChange.ppt
Doran, P., & Zimmerman, M. (2009). Examining the scientific consensus on climate change. Eos, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 90, 22.
Dunlap, R. E., & McCright, A. M. (2011). Organized climate change denial. In J. S. Dryzek, R. B. Norgaard, & D. Schlosberg (Eds.), The oxford handbook of climate change and society (pp. 144–160). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Duroy, Q. M. (2005). The determinants of environmental awareness and behavior. Rensselear polytechnic Institute. URL: http://www.economics.rpi.edu/workingpapers/rpi0501.pdf
Fifth Assessment Report – Climate Change 2013 – Intergovernemental Panel on Climate Change
Floro, M. S. (2012). The crises of environment and social reproduction: Understanding their linkages. American University, Department of Economics working papers.
Gasper, D. (2005). Securing humanity: Situating ‘‘human security’’ as concept and discourse. Journal of Human Development 6(2), 221–245.
GECHS. (1999). Global environmental change and human security: GECHS science plan. Bonn: IHDP.
Gillis, J. (2014, September 21). Global rise reported in 2013 greenhouse gas emissions, New York Times.
Gillis, J., & Davenport C. (2014, September 20). Push for new pact on climate change is plagued by old divide of wealth. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/science/earth/push-for-new-pact-on-climate-change-is-plagued-by-old-divide-of-wealth.html. Accessed 11 Jan 2015.
Global Climate Risk Index (2015). published by German Watch. URL: https://germanwatch.org/en/download/10333.pdf
Gunderson, L., & Holling, C. S. (Eds.). (2001). Panarchy: Understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Hamilton, C. (2014). Moral collapse in a warming world. Ethics and International Affairs, 28(3), 335–342.
Homer Dixon, T. F., & Blitt, J. (1998). Introduction, Chapter 1. In T. F. Homer-Dixon, & J. Blitt (Eds.), Ecoviolence: Links among environment, population, and security. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic and political change in 43 societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
IPCC. (2012). Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation (A special report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). In: C. B. Field, V. Barros, T. F. Stocker, D. Qin, D. J. Dokken, K. L. Ebi, M. D. Mastrandrea, K. J. Mach, G.K. Plattner, S. K. Allen, M. Tignor, & P. M. Midgley (Eds.). Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 582 pp.
IPCC. (2013). Fifth assessment report, summary for policy makers. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf
Jessop, B. (2011). From green economy to green society bringing the social to rio+20. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, UNRISD conference 2011.
King, G., & Murray, C. J. L. (2002). Rethinking human security. Political Science Quarterly, 116(4), 585–610.
Lander, E. (2011). The green economy: The wolf in sheep’s clothing. Transnational Institute. http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/green-economy.pdf. Accessed 9 Jan 2015.
Lawn, P. (2010). On the Ehrlich-Simon bet: Both were unskilled and Simon was lucky. Ecological Economics, 69, 2045–2046.
Magdoff, F. (2002, September). Capitalism’s twin crises. Economic and Environmental, Monthly Review, 54(04). http://monthlyreview.org/2002/09/01/capitalisms-twin-crises/
Maibach, E., Myers, T., & Leiserowitz, A. (2014, May). Climate scientists need to set the record straight: There is a scientific consensus that human-caused climate change is happening. Earth’s Future, 2(5), 295–298.
McCright, A. M., Dunlap, R. E., & Xiao, C. (2013). Perceived scientific agreement and support for action on climate change in the USA. Climate Change, 119, 511–518.
Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., & Randers, J. (1992). Beyond the limits: Confronting global collapse, envisioning a sustainable future. Post Mills: Chelsea Green.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. (1999). Diplomatic bluebook 1999: Japan’s diplomacy with leadership toward a new century. Tokyo: Urban Connections Inc.
Nordhaus, W. D. (1992a). Lethal model-2 – The limits to growth revisited. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2, 1–43.
Nordhaus, W. D. (1992b, November 20). An optimal transition path for controlling GHG. Bioscience, 258. http://www.econ.yale.edu/~nordhaus/homepage/Optimal.science.1192.pdf. Accessed 6 Sept 2014.
O’brien, K. (2006). Are we missing the point? Global environmental change as an issue of human security. Global Environmental Change, 16, 1–3. http://cstpr.colorado.edu/admin/announcement_files/996-uploaded/announcement-996-1790.pdf
Oreskes, N. (2004). Beyond the Ivory Tower: The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 306, 1686.
Puregess, P. (2009). The ethical challenges of human security in the age of globalization. In M. Goucha & J. Crowley (Eds.), Rethinking human security (International Social Science Journal Monograph Series, pp. 49–63). Chichester: Wiley.
Reid, W. V., & Miller, K. R. (1989). Keeping options alive: The scientific basis for conserving biodiversity. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
Roach, B. (2007). Corporate power in a global economy. Global Development and Environment Institute. http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/education_materials/modules/Corporate_Power_in_a_Global_Economy.pdf. Accessed 22 Aug 2014.
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., & Folke, C. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472–475.
Sanders, R. (2012). The flawed paradigms of economics and sustainable development. World Economics Association (WEA), conferences, 2012, sustainability – Missing points in the development dialogue, 24th September to 21st October. http://sustainabilityconference2012.worldeconomicsassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/WEASustainabilityConference2012_Sanders.pdf. Accessed 9 Jan 2014.
Schandl, H., & West, J. (2010). Resource use and resource efficiency in the Asia-Pacific Region. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), 636–647.
Schellnhuber, H. J., et al. (Eds.). (2006). Avoiding dangerous climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stern, P. C., Young, O. R., & Daniel, D. (Eds.). (1992). Global environmental change: Understanding the human dimensions. Washington, DC: National Research Council. ISBN 978-0-309-04494-3.
Tainter, J. A. (1990). The collapse of complex societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ul Haq, M. (1996). Reflections on human development. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ullman, R. (1993). Redefining security. International Security, 8, 129–153.
UNDP. (1994). Human Development Report 1994. New York: UNDP.
UNDP. (2014). Human development report 2014: Sustaining human progress: Reducing vulnerabilities and building resilience. New York: United Nations Development Programme.
UNEP. (2011). Towards a green economy: Pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication. www.unep.org/greeneconomy
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC 1992).
Unmüßig, B., Sachs, W., & Fatheuer, T. (2012). Critique of the green economy: Toward social and environmental equity (Publication series on ecology, Vol. 22). Berlin: Heinrich Böll Foundation.
Valantin, J M. (2013). Climate change, a geostrategic issue? Yes! Environment and Security.
van der Linden, S. L., Leiserowitz, A. A., Feinberg, G. D., & Maibach, E. W. (2015). The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: Experimental evidence. PloS One, 10(2), e0118489. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118489.
Watson, M. (2014). Uneconomic economics and the crisis of the model world (Palgrave Pivot Edition). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wilson, E. O. (1992). The diversity of life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
World Commission on Environment and Development(WCED). (1987). Our common future, United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Steffen, W., Crutzen, P. (2010). The new world of the anthropocene, Environmental Science and Technology Viewpoint, 44, 2228–2231. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es903118j
Zokaei, K., Lovins, H., Wood, A., & Hines, P. (2013). Creating a lean and green business system, techniques for improving profits and sustainability. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
El Fellah, R., Behnassi, M. (2017). Global Environmental Change and the Crisis of Dominant Development Models: A Human Security-Centered Analysis. In: Behnassi, M., McGlade, K. (eds) Environmental Change and Human Security in Africa and the Middle East. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45648-5_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45648-5_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45646-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45648-5
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)