Is this what the world's coming to?

With climate change placing increasing pressure on environmental resources, it is now being viewed as a threat to national security. Amanda Leigh Haag reports.

History is littered with lessons from once-budding civilizations that crashed from their peak of prosperity. From the Anasazi of the southwestern United States to the Mayans of Mesoamerica1 and the ancient dynasties of eastern China2, environmental change has sounded the death knell throughout time for once-thriving civilizations already stressed by factors including high population growth, overexploitation of resources and excessive reliance on external trade. In many cases, severe drought or extreme cold has been enough to push societies to the brink of civil unrest, mass migration and warfare.

Averting disaster
So far, no comprehensive cost estimates exist for the type of global-scale military preparedness that would be needed under severe climate-change scenarios. Yet it appears that, irrespective of conflict and the potential for national-security threats, the goals of assisting vulnerable nations and at-risk regions in the face of climate change are synonymous with the need to achieve global sustainable development. Citing East Timor in southeast Asia as an example, Barnett says "what you would do to reduce vulnerability and adapt to climate change is what you would do to provide sustainable development and improve the lives of people anyway". With the majority of the population having no access to electricity, clean drinking water, shelter or proper food standards, he notes that many of these basic services could be fulfilled through the commitment made by wealthy countries under the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development in 1992. Developed countries vowed long ago to giving 0.7% of their gross domestic product to aid developing countries, but actual contributions fall far short of that, with donations from both the US and Australia hovering around 0.2%, for instance. "For the most part, we're talking about things that we already know how to do, things we already know we should do, things that we've already committed to do, it's just that we don't do them", says Barnett.

However, Fuerth points out that in the case of extreme climate-change outcomes, more radical measures might be needed. He cites examples such as the potential development of superior materials through nanotechnology and suggestions for planetary 'geoengineering', such as erecting mirrors in space to reflect sunlight. There seems to be a "philosophical split" between those who believe that the system can be rebalanced through proper adaptation and mitigation versus those inclined to approach the solution as a "civil-engineering problem on a cosmic scale", Fuerth says. "If it becomes clear that we are headed toward the severe end of the range, then those who have these bigger schemes in mind may get a much more serious hearing."

Amanda Leigh Haag is a freelance writer based in Denver, Colorado
continue