Understanding the co-existence of conflict and cooperation: Transboundary ecosystem management in the Virunga Massif

Abstract

This article contributes to our understanding of transboundary environmental management regimes through the application of an analytical framework that facilitates an exploration of the co-existence of conflict and cooperation. Rather than framing conflict and cooperation as mutually exclusive states at opposite ends of a spectrum, we seek to understand the ways in which cooperation can exist at the same time as conflict. We apply this framework to a study of conservation management in a transboundary area at the intersection of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda and Uganda. We identify two actual and one hypothetical phase of conflict-cooperation relations, in a landscape notorious for some of the worst violence of the last two decades. We map the evolution of phases of transboundary protected area management against the evolving security context, and we find that this approach has greater explanatory power than previous approaches that polarize conflict and cooperation. In particular, it helps us to understand the drivers of environmental cooperation, including the evolving characteristics of that cooperation. This new way of understanding the relationship between environmental management and security also enables us to reconsider the potential for environmental management to be instrumental in working towards interstate security objectives, for example through peace parks. We don't find that the 'low politics' of environmental management should be seen as a predictable and manageable determinant of international relations. But an understanding of the coexistence of conflict and cooperation does also point to a more complex, non-linear relationship between low and high politics.

Powering or sharing water in the Brahmaputra River basin

“…Another reason for favouring bilateralism is the higher transaction costs associated with multilateral treaties. This is because negotiation becomes complex and long, due to a diversity of interests, as the number of states increases (Martin, Rutagarama, Cascão, Gray, & Chhotray, 2011). If the states involved in negotiations have different legal systems, this may raise the cost further.…”

Unpacking the complex nature of cooperative interactions: case studies of Israeli–Palestinian environmental cooperation in the greater Bethlehem area

“…Since the mid-1980s, in response to alarmist notions of 'resource wars' and environmentally induced violent conflict that dominated environmental security literature, a more liberal counter-discourse emerged which argued that the environment is more often an inducer of co-operation rather than conflict, and that it could be a potential catalyst for promoting stable relations/peacebuilding (Martin et al 2011). Indeed, Wolf et al stated in (2005), that in the previous 50 years, there had been 507 conflict-related transboundary events over water compared to 1228 cooperative events.…”

African societies, nation-states, governance, human migration, xenophobia and cultural contestations: Editorial framing

“…This territorialisation of sovereignty has enabled conceptions and treatment of African immigrants on the continent as "out-groups" and enemies of nationstates (Adjai & Lazaridis, 2013;Lunstrum, 2013;Jolly & DiGiusto, 2014;Dallimer & 1 iv Strange, 2015). The preeminence of the Western economic philosophy in this "bordering, ordering and othering" of international relations governance is apparent in the ironic dominance of the interpretation of African Renaissance through the globalist modernist, rather than Africanist, perspectives (Moilanen & Arponen, 2011;van Amerom & Buscher, 2005;Martin, Rutagarama, Cascao, Gray & Chhotray, 2011;Dallimer & Strange, 2015). The understanding of sovereignty through state exercise of power over defined territory is universal, notwithstanding the reality of its complexity and inconsistency (Devine, 2014, Duffy, 2014Lunstrum, 2014;Dallimer & Strange, 2015;Massé & Lunstrum, 2015).…”

“…Importantly, South African political elite has championed the vision of African Renaissance, which should be founded on the ideals of pan-Africanism such as continental unity, reaffirmation of African cultures, emancipation, cooperation, sustainable economic development and democratisation (van Amerom & Buscher, 2005Muzeza, Schuttle & Snyman, 2013Barquet et al, 2014;Kark et al, 2015;Sibanda, 2015). Also, the recent hype about the Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs) or "Peace Parks" raised hopes of building peace and security in the continent, especially in Southern Africa (van Amerom & Buscher, 2005;Martin et al, 2011;Muzeza, Schuttle & Snyman, 2013;Barquet et al, 2014;Kark et al, 2015;Sibanda, 2015). In practice, though, the establishment of "Peace Parks" was based on the securitisation of wildlife conservation that enables Western economic philosophy of capital accumulation by dispossession of lands of the most vulnerable sections of the population whilst simultaneously characterising "others", specifically African immigrants, as dangerously armed poachers and enemies of the nation-state (van Amerom & Buscher, 2005;Martin et al, 2011;Massé & Lunstrum, 2015).…”

“…Also, the recent hype about the Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs) or "Peace Parks" raised hopes of building peace and security in the continent, especially in Southern Africa (van Amerom & Buscher, 2005;Martin et al, 2011;Muzeza, Schuttle & Snyman, 2013;Barquet et al, 2014;Kark et al, 2015;Sibanda, 2015). In practice, though, the establishment of "Peace Parks" was based on the securitisation of wildlife conservation that enables Western economic philosophy of capital accumulation by dispossession of lands of the most vulnerable sections of the population whilst simultaneously characterising "others", specifically African immigrants, as dangerously armed poachers and enemies of the nation-state (van Amerom & Buscher, 2005;Martin et al, 2011;Massé & Lunstrum, 2015). These narratives has meant that international migration in Southern Africa is met with local society hostilities, animosities, antagonisms and violent abuses in South Africa.…”