The futurologist: an interview with climate conflict expert Ian Shields
- 10 Aug 2012, 15:30
- Ros Donald
The next few decades may be unsettled ones. Global stability
looks under threat as new global powers rise and a changing climate
puts pressure on populations in vulnerable areas. That's part of
the conclusion of the latest report from the UK MInistry of
Defence's
Global Strategic Trends programme, which aims to map the
threats and opportunities of the future world.
If you thought climate change was just going to be
warmer summers and fewer winter deaths, it makes for sobering
reading.
The report says higher temperatures and food and water shortages
exacerbated by climate change could play a part in bringing
tensions between different groups to a head. But it's not easy
predict where or how it might happen. The limited literature on
climate change and conflict suggests it's premature to make a
direct link between the changing climate and increased geopolitical
tension. So we spoke to Ian Shields, a former MoD forecaster who
worked on the report, about how researchers and the military try to
make sense of the relationship between climate change and
conflict.
Future planning
Shields spent 32 years in the Royal Air Force as an aviator before
becoming an academic later in his career. At the Global Strategic
Trends programme, he worked on long term strategic planning, of
which climate change forms a major theme. The findings of the
programme are used to inform MoD planning, says Shields, and also
broader governmental planning, "since only the MoD appears to
undertake this sort of long-range analysis."
Shields says the programme considered three key climate issues:
"The impacts of changing rainfall and how that will affect food
production, with hunger possibly leading to instability and
conflict. Desertification is another key issue that will have a
profound effect on North Africa, a region that is already unstable
and close to Europe. Finally, we also looked at melting Arctic ice,
which has profound implications for access to resources and to
shipping lanes and again may lead to disputes over borders and
ownership of resources."
The MoD worked closely with the Hadley Research Centre at the Met
Office to undertake the work, and it was noticeable, says Shields,
that when they compared their findings with similar surveys from
across the world - including the USA, Canada and Japan - the
outcomes were very similar.
A threat multiplier
A recent literature
review published in the journal Science suggests there isn't
enough research to directly link climate change to conflict.
Shields agrees that we may not be able to link climate change and
conflict directly at the moment, but believes that this will
change: "The impacts of climate change are insidious and may not
directly cause conflict, but as evidence grows and the impacts of
climate change increasingly threaten human security, I anticipate
that this will change."
Global Strategic Trends calls climate change a "threat multiplier"
in an attempt to capture that it can exacerbate the pre-existing
issues that cause conflict. Shields explains: "While it is too
early to attribute conflict directly to climate change as the sole,
or main, driver for conflict, what is already true is that the
worst effects of climate change are affecting areas of the world
already stressed. It's likely to add yet more threats to human
security, increasing the likelihood of conflict. So while
climate change in itself may not - yet - cause conflict, its
impacts multiply the threat of conflict by increasing pressures and
making conflict more common."
One of the studies in the review suggests that at the moment
existing legal structures, like water treaties or the international
laws governing the Arctic, may be restraining some areas of
potential tension. But Shields says that's not guaranteed to
continue. "These treaties will only avert conflict if the potential
disputing parties recognise and abide by the treaties, or the
international community is willing and able to enforce the
treaties. To date, water treaties seem to be holding good in
general, and give some cause for satisfaction, if not optimism," he
says.
The Arctic
Following rapid sea ice loss in the Arctic over the past five
years, the world's attention has focused on the region as symbolic
of the changes the planet is experiencing. In geopolitical terms,
Shields sees the Arctic as a special case because as the region
loses ice countries are showing ever more interest in issues such
as oil exploration, fish stocks and transport. He says:
"Given that the Arctic has several cases of disputed boundaries
and is a very fragile eco-system on one hand, and the rapacious
appetites of some of the Arctic nations on the other, I see this as
a potential flashpoint for conflict in future decades.
"Will [current] treaties themselves be enough to avert
climate-related threats in the future? That's unlikely, but
it is a good thing that they exist as they offer both a structure
and a degree of stability in the international order, and offer at
least a partial way forward."
The future - a new face of war
Looking to the future, Shields believes we face a new kind of
conflict. The wars between states that abounded in the last two
centuries will be less common, but conflicts will still be at least
as likely to break out as they were then, he thinks. The new face
of war will be "multi-faceted and far more complex in both origin
and solution,"he says.
"We presently have a relatively stable international order based
on the state. But as demographics and the impacts of climate change
challenge demand for resources - including food, water and living
space, the dichotomy of national interests and needs versus
international cooperation and the interdependencies of the
globalised world offers both threats - and great
opportunities."
Ian Shields is a tutor on the Global Energy and Climate Policy
course at the School of Oriental and African Studies, and is in the
final year of his PhD in International Relations at Cambridge
University. He is the founder of Cambridge Advanced Strategic
Training.