A Lot of Talk, But Little Action—The Blind Spots of Nordic Environmental Security Policy

Abstract

Despite an increasing recognition that environmental change may have implications for security, there only are few policies to address the issue. This article will look at environmental security policies in Finland and Sweden and propose ways to develop more effective measures. It relies on a three-level framework that aims to enable the identification of environmental security impacts by categorising them into local, geopolitical and structural ones. The article will examine present environmental security strategies and policies in Finland and Sweden, consider their efficacy for addressing various kinds of impacts and point out approaches that are currently missing. Based on the discussion, it argues that a comprehensive policy approach is needed to tackle environmental security impacts. This requires closer coordination and interchange between sectors as well as strategic intent. In addition, further research is needed on the structural impacts of mitigating and adapting to environmental change.

Northern Warning Lights: Ambiguities of Environmental Security in Finland and Sweden

“…Practical policy measures are required to achieve any kind of preparedness to deal with environmental security impacts. The current presence and implementation of policies for local environmental security impacts in Finland and Sweden is explored in another article written by us [71]. On the basis of the analysis here, it can be argued that an adequate level of knowledge exists in both countries to form the groundwork for policy.…”

Enhancing Security, Sustainability and Resilience in Energy, Food and Water

“…Third, the findings documented in the articles support the idea that addressing security and sustainability, particularly if addressed together, requires systemic views and comprehensive policy approaches. While both security and sustainability cross several sectors and scales, the current policies focus too easily on local and national scale implications and largely neglect broader (and more complex) geopolitical and structural/systemic aspects [53]. Such a focus is, as such, understandable, as assessing comprehensively just one thematic area, such as water security [54], requires a major effort that is also subject to many interpretations and therefore easily contested.…”

“…In their second article, Hakala et al use their three-level framework to study environmental security policies in Finland and Sweden and propose practical ways for developing more effective measures to tackle environment-related threats [53]. While acknowledging that environmental issues-and first and foremost, climate change-have become an increasingly established part of security and foreign policy discourse, the authors argue that the value of environmental security as a concept for policy practice has not gained the momentum it would deserve.…”

Travels and Trials of Climate Knowledge in Finnish Municipalities

“…Recently, there have also been attempts to broaden these framings in terms of comprehensive security, resilience, and preparedness and a consequent emphasis on the role of non-governmental organisations and citizens in tackling these challenges. Nonetheless, national security and risk management framings predominate the discourse on resilience, while successful efforts to include longterm climate change and sustainable development issues have thus far remained sparse (Hakala et al, 2019a(Hakala et al, , 2019bMinistry of Interior of Finland, 2019;Reinekoski et al, under review;Räisänen et al, under review).…”