Search

Nuclear weapons and global warming stand out as two principal threats to the survival of humanity. In each of these existential cases, two strategies born during the Cold War years are competing: abandon the respective systems, or defend against the consequences, once the harmful effects produced by those systems occur. The first approach to the nuclear and climate threat focuses on arms control, non-proliferation and disarmament and on greenhouse gas emission reductions and mitigation. The second approach involves active defense: in the nuclear realm, missile defenses against nuclear-armed delivery systems; for climate change, geoengineering that removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or changes the Earth's radiation balance. The more policies fail to reduce and constrain the underlying drivers of the nuclear and climate threats, the more measures to defend against the physical effects may seem justified. Ultimately, the overarching policy question centers on whether nuclear war and catastrophic climate change can be dealt with solely through reductions in the drivers of those threats, or if active defenses against them will be requested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews the conflict potential of climate engineering (CE) against the background of possible security implications of climate change. A conceptual framework is used to compare the technologies for carbon removal and solar radiation management regarding different characteristics and to assess the causes and drivers of potential conflict. Although CE measures may possibly reduce climate-related conflicts, they could also intensify already existing international conflict structures or add new dimensions of conflict, in particular if their impacts are high]y uncertain, quick, strong and heterogeneous, where the severity can vary regionally. While carbon engineering requires large resources and thus may contribute to resource conflicts, solar engineering is usually less costly and more efficient, but has numerous anticipated side-effects that could cause novel conflicts and security implications in the international system. To avoid serious conflicts, regulative mechanisms and institutional structures are needed, building on the ENMOD-Convention that restrains military or hostile use of environmental modification. Given the high uncertainties, anticipative and adaptive governance structures that involve stakeholders and their perspectives are necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global warming poses serious risks to the environment, communities, and international peace and security. Significant concerns have been raised that, in the case of climate policy failures, the world may enter a Warming War, threatening the future viability of the planet and its life-sustaining ecosystems. While the regime of treaties and agreements governing climate change acknowledges the science and threats posed by global warming, it is not well positioned to constrain the securitization of climate change. A function of international law is to prevent armed conflict by resolving disputes through the judicial application of principles and norms governing relations between States. However, to date, it has been ineffective in addressing the impacts of climate change on armed conflict, because the treaties applicable to climate change fail to provide preventative, enforcement, and dispute resolution mechanisms. It is time for international law to establish judicial bodies with jurisdiction for conflict resolution and response capacities in the pre-phase to a Warming War. The challenge is to develop soft security measures to avoid climate conflict risks turning violent and becoming a hard security issue, attracting the use of force by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The establishment of an International Court for the Environment (ICE) is proposed as an entity that could enforce legally binding norms and resolve climate-induced disputes, opening an avenue for stakeholders to bring climate loss and damage cases to court. Aside from the reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) to limit global warming, and the establishment of new legal regimes, alternative actions can be undertaken to protect the environment and communities, by mitigating climate-related risks. There is growing discourse surrounding climate change as a threat multiplier, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities. In the pre-phase to conflict, there is an urgent need to identify these vulnerabilities and their levels of influence on the compound effects of climate and conflict risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports that the renewable energy production plays an important role in northern Germany. It notes that the use of renewables is still expanding, with varied associated challenges for land use. It adds that energy production from renewable sources has much more pronounced land-use requirements than energy production from fossil resources.

The Horn of Africa region stands out amongst the planet's territories that are most volatile and vulnerable to armed violence. Conflicts have greatly affected the region over the past 50 years. The conflicts have disrupted the lives of people as well as the environment in ways that are not fully understood. Although armed conflict has generally had a negative impact on the environment, the environmental impact of conflict within the Horn of Africa has barely been evaluated. Similarly, our understanding that climate variability as well as change could have played a role in increasing or decreasing the impacts of conflicts within the Horn of Africa is insufficient. Therefore, this paper looks at the environmental impacts of conflict in the Horn of Africa since 1970 and also the role of climate variability in increasing or decreasing the impacts of conflict. Scientific publications as well as grey literature were reviewed with the aim to understand the status of past and present conflicts in the Horn of Africa, environmental impacts of conflict and the role of climate variability in decreasing or increasing impacts of conflict. The review demonstrates that conflict has extensive negative impacts on the environment in the Horn of Africa with main causes like grievances, government behaviour and interests, resource scarcity and transborder conflict as well as internal migration and climate variability. Similarly, climate variability plays a great role in exacerbating the impacts of conflict in the region. However, further research is needed to clearly show the impact of conflict and climate variability on the environment in the Horn of Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the highlights of the international workshop on "Climate, Land Use, and Conflict in Northern Africa" held in Lübeck, Germany on September 22 to 24, 2014. Topics include the event's focus on the interactions of humans and climate in the area, the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5), and the impact of changes in land use on humans. It also discusses the need for an integrative framework for the analysis of climate change, land use, and conflict.