What’s at Stake in Securitising Climate Change? Towards a Differentiated Approach

Lucke, Franziskus von; Wellmann, Zehra; Diez, Thomas

doi:10.1080/14650045.2014.913028

Cited by 69 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Numerous publications have addressed the issue of climate security, including journal papers, governmental documents, and conference reports. Many studies have also aimed at categorizing definitions and approaches of climate security (Gleditsch 1998; Kawashima and Akino 2001;Levy 1995;McDonald 2013;Trombetta 2008;von Lucke et al 2014;WBGU 2007). Four types of approaches emerged from our study of the existing literature.…”

Section: Climate Security Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of climate security discourse in Japan

Kameyama

Keishi

2020

Sustain Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the level of understanding about climate change has increased, the term “climate security” has been increasingly used in the rapidly growing literature on this subject. Although Japan has officially acknowledged the importance of tackling climate change, discussion of climate security has been almost nonexistent among Japanese governmental officials, politicians, and academics. Our aim was to trace discourses related to climate security in Japan to determine why so little exists in Japan and whether or not such discourse could suggest new areas for consideration to more comprehensively respond to the climate change problem. Because of different interpretations and uses of the term “climate security” in the existing literature, we first categorized existing approaches to climate security into four types and used this categorization to examine Japan’s discourse from these perspectives. Two of the approaches, namely “long-term irreversible planetary changes” and “short-term abrupt risks to individuals”, had been considered in Japan previously but without specific reference to the term climate security. The other two, “cause of conflict and violence” and “impacts to military and defense organizations”, however, had not been used and need to be included in discussions of climate change in Japan. Some of the topics not discussed in Japan include indirect economic losses of Japanese industries via supply chains, loss of Japan’s exclusive economic zone due to sea-level rise, and the potential inflow of refugees resulting from extreme weather patterns outside of Japan.

show abstract

Section: Climate Security Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of climate security discourse in Japan

Kameyama

Keishi

2020

Sustain Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These ideas have not gone unchallenged. Several studies suggesting a link between climate change and conflict have been extensively critiqued on both theoretical and empirical grounds as either being climate-centric with disproportionate focus on environmental determinism (Raleigh et al, 2014), or framed around threats posed to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the nationstate to promote the political and military interests and development agendas of certain governments (Von Lucke et al, 2014). Yet, these ideas have remained dominant in academic and policy circles, and mainstream scholarship oriented to critiquing the ideas has been less concerned about Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspectives on contextual vulnerability in discourses of climate conflict

Okpara¹,

Stringer²,

Dougill³

2015

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The science of climate security and conflict is replete with controversies. Yet the increasing vulnerability of politically fragile countries to the security consequences of climate change is widely acknowledged. Although climate conflict reflects a continuum of conditional forces that coalesce around the notion of vulnerability, how different portrayals of vulnerability influence the discursive formation of climate conflict relations remains an exceptional but under-researched issue. This paper combines a systematic discourse analysis with a vulnerability interpretation diagnostic tool to explore: (i) how discourses of climate conflict are constructed and represented, (ii) how vulnerability is communicated across discourse lines, and (iii) the strength of contextual vulnerability against a deterministic narrative of scarcity-induced conflict, such as that pertaining to land. Systematically characterising climate conflict discourses based on the central issues constructed, assumptions about mechanistic relationships, implicit normative judgements and vulnerability portrayals, provides a useful way of understanding where discourses differ. While discourses show a wide range of opinions "for" and "against" climate conflict relations, engagement with vulnerability has been less pronounced – except for the dominant context centrism discourse concerned about human security (particularly in Africa). In exploring this discourse, we observe an increasing sense of contextual vulnerability that is oriented towards a concern for complexity rather than predictability. The article concludes by illustrating that a turn towards contextual vulnerability thinking will help advance a constructivist theory-informed climate conflict scholarship that recognises historicity, specificity and variability as crucial elements of contextual totalities of any area affected by climate conflict.

show abstract

“…Resilience and vulnerability are inextricably linked -since to reduce vulnerability to climate conflict is to strengthen resilience (Busby et al, 2014a). Indeed, vulnerability seems to have emerged alongside resilience in climate conflict debates (Von Lucke et al, 2014). Considering differences in research interests, we note that vulnerability seems to have relevance when the focus is about understanding climate conflict transmission mechanisms or facilitating factors (see Fjelde and von Uexkull, 2012;.…”

Section: Portrayals Of Vulnerability Across Climate Conflict Discoursmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These ideas have not gone unchallenged. Several studies suggesting a link between climate change and conflict have been extensively critiqued on both theoretical and empirical grounds as either being climate-centric with disproportionate focus on environmental determinism , or framed around threats posed to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the nationstate to promote the political and military interests and development agendas of certain governments (Von Lucke et al, 2014). Yet, these ideas have remained dominant in academic and policy circles, and mainstream scholarship oriented to critiquing the ideas has been less concerned about…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspectives on contextual vulnerability in discourses of climate conflict

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The science of climate security and conflict is replete with controversies. Yet the increasing vulnerability of politically fragile countries to the security consequences of climate change is widely acknowledged. Although climate conflict reflects a continuum of conditional forces that coalesce around the notion of vulnerability, how different portrayals of vulnerability influence the discursive formation of climate conflict relations remains an exceptional but under-researched issue. This paper combines a systematic discourse analysis with a vulnerability interpretation diagnostic tool to explore (i) how discourses of climate conflict are constructed and represented, (ii) how vulnerability is communicated across discourse lines, and (iii) the strength of contextual vulnerability against a deterministic narrative of scarcity-induced conflict, such as that pertaining to land. Systematically characterising climate conflict discourses based on the central issues constructed, assumptions about mechanistic relationships, implicit normative judgements and vulnerability portrayals, provides a useful way of understanding where discourses differ. While discourses show a wide range of opinions "for" and "against" climate conflict relations, engagement with vulnerability has been less pronounced -except for the dominant context centrism discourse concerned about human security (particularly in Africa). In exploring this discourse, we observe an increasing sense of contextual vulnerability that is oriented towards a concern for complexity rather than predictability. The article concludes by illustrating that a turn towards contextual vulnerability thinking will help advance a constructivist theory-informed climate conflict scholarship that recognises historicity, specificity, and variability as crucial elements of contextual totalities of any area affected by climate conflict.

show abstract

What’s at Stake in Securitising Climate Change? Towards a Differentiated Approach

Cited by 69 publications

References 35 publications

The development of climate security discourse in Japan

The development of climate security discourse in Japan

Perspectives on contextual vulnerability in discourses of climate conflict

Perspectives on contextual vulnerability in discourses of climate conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About