Chapter 8 Environment And Natural Resources

This chapter examines the growing significance of **environmental and natural resource issues** in the context of global politics. It analyzes important environmental movements and discusses concepts like common property resources and the global commons. The chapter also looks at India's position in recent environmental debates and explores the geopolitics of resource competition. Finally, it considers the concerns and voices of indigenous peoples within contemporary world politics.

The 1992 Earth Summit helped place environmental issues, which impact vital ecosystems like rainforests and mangroves (shown above), at the forefront of global political discussions.

Environmental Concerns In Global Politics

While traditionally world politics focused on state interactions, war, and treaties, the scope has expanded to include non-traditional security issues like poverty and epidemics. Environmental issues also fall within the domain of contemporary world politics because they have significant political consequences and often require international cooperation.

Numerous environmental problems have global implications:

• Agricultural Land: Cultivable land expansion has stalled, and existing farmland is losing fertility.
• Overexploitation: Grasslands are overgrazed, and fisheries are overharvested.
• Water Issues: Water bodies are depleted and polluted, hindering food production. Millions lack access to safe water and sanitation, leading to preventable deaths, especially among children.
• Deforestation and Biodiversity Loss: Natural forests, vital for climate stability, water cycles, and biodiversity, are being cut down, displacing communities. Loss of biodiversity continues due to habitat destruction in species-rich areas.
• Ozone Depletion: The thinning of the ozone layer in the stratosphere poses risks to ecosystems and human health.
• Coastal Pollution: Increasing pollution in coastal waters, largely from land-based human activities, threatens marine environments.

These issues are not merely 'natural phenomena' studied in geography; they are deeply political. Addressing environmental degradation requires government action, which has political consequences. Many problems are transnational, requiring international cooperation, making them part of 'world politics'. More fundamentally, environmental issues raise questions about power:

• Who is responsible for causing environmental degradation?
• Who bears the costs or consequences?
• Who should take corrective action?
• Who has the right to use Earth's natural resources, and how much?

These are inherently questions about the distribution and exercise of power, making them core political concerns.

The disaster at the Aral Sea, where excessive water diversion for irrigation caused the sea to shrink dramatically, leading to toxic conditions, collapse of industries, and displacement of communities, is a stark example of how environmental mismanagement creates profound political, economic, and social crises.

Awareness of the political dimensions of environmental issues grew significantly from the 1960s. In 1972, the Club of Rome's report, **"Limits to Growth,"** highlighted concerns about resource depletion amidst population growth. International bodies like the **United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)** began organizing conferences and studies to coordinate responses.

Environmental issues were firmly established on the global political agenda at the **Earth Summit (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development)** held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in June 1992. Attended by 170 states, NGOs, and corporations, the summit acknowledged warnings like the 1987 Brundtland Report ("Our Common Future") about unsustainable economic growth, especially given development needs in the South.

A key difference emerged between the priorities of the developed countries ('global North') and developing countries ('global South'). The North focused on issues like ozone depletion and global warming, while the South emphasized the link between economic development and environmental management.

This cartoon uses striking imagery – fingers shaped like smoking chimneys igniting the world like a lighter – to powerfully illustrate human industrial activity (burning fossil fuels) as the direct cause of global warming, highlighting the urgency of addressing this environmental threat.

The Rio Summit produced agreements on climate change, biodiversity, and forestry, and recommended development practices in **'Agenda 21'**. It achieved consensus on **'sustainable development'** – combining economic growth with ecological responsibility – but left disagreements on how to achieve this. Some critics argued Agenda 21 favored economic growth over ecological conservation.

The Protection Of Global Commons

'Commons' are resources owned by a community rather than an individual, like a shared room or park. Extending this concept, **'global commons'** refer to areas or resources located outside the sovereign jurisdiction of any single state, requiring collective governance by the international community. These are also known as *res communis humanitatis* (common to humanity). Examples include:

• The Earth's atmosphere.
• Antarctica.
• The ocean floor.
• Outer space.

Achieving cooperation over global commons is challenging, but significant agreements exist, such as the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, the 1987 Montreal Protocol (regulating ozone-depleting substances), and the 1991 Antarctic Environmental Protocol. A major difficulty in tackling global environmental issues lies in reaching consensus based on often uncertain scientific data and timelines.

This cartoon humorously suggests the potential for human activity to extend environmental degradation even to celestial bodies like the moon, highlighting concerns about resource exploitation and pollution beyond Earth and reinforcing the idea that even outer space is a global commons facing potential threats.

Information about Antarctica:

Antarctica is a vast continental region covering 14 million sq km, representing 26% of global wilderness, 90% of terrestrial ice, and 70% of planetary freshwater. It also includes 36 million sq km of ocean. Its ecosystem is unique, with limited land life but a highly productive marine environment centered around krill. Antarctica is crucial for climate regulation, and its ice cores provide historical climate data.

Ownership claims over Antarctica are disputed. Some countries (UK, Argentina, Chile, Norway, France, Australia, New Zealand) claim sovereign rights, while most other states view it as a global commons. Despite disagreements, the 1959 Antarctic Treaty and subsequent protocols have established rules focused on environmental protection. Activities have been limited to scientific research, fishing, and tourism, but even these have caused some degradation, such as from oil spills.

The management of outer space as a global commons, like the atmosphere and ocean floor, is heavily influenced by North-South inequalities. Developed countries with advanced technology are better positioned to exploit resources or conduct activities in these areas, raising questions about equitable benefits for current and future generations.

Common But Differentiated Responsibilities

A key point of contention in global environmental politics is the differing perspectives between the global North (developed countries) and the global South (developing countries).

Developed countries argue for equal responsibility in environmental conservation, focusing on current degradation. Developing countries counter that historical industrial development by the North is primarily responsible for current ecological problems. Therefore, the North should bear greater responsibility for both rectifying past damage and leading current efforts. They argue that developing countries, still undergoing industrialization, should not face the same restrictions as the developed world. The principle of **'common but differentiated responsibilities'** recognizes this difference, acknowledging the special needs and contexts of developing nations in international environmental law.

This principle was formally accepted in the **Rio Declaration** at the 1992 Earth Summit. It states that countries should cooperate to protect Earth's ecosystem, acknowledging developed countries' greater responsibility due to their historical contribution to degradation and their technological and financial resources.

The **1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)** further elaborated this, stating that parties should act based on equity and "common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities." The UNFCCC explicitly recognized that developed countries are responsible for the largest share of historical and current greenhouse gas emissions and that per capita emissions in developing countries are still low.

Consequently, countries like China, India, and other developing nations were exempted from the mandatory emission reduction targets under the **Kyoto Protocol**, an international agreement reached in 1997 based on UNFCCC principles. The Kyoto Protocol set binding targets for industrialized countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions (like CO2, Methane), which are linked to global warming. This exemption reflects the principle that those who contributed most to the problem historically bear the primary responsibility for fixing it.

This cartoon likens the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" to a reservation policy, suggesting that the concept of differing obligations based on historical context and development level is similar to affirmative action policies that account for past inequalities.

Common Property Resources

While global commons are shared by humanity, **common property resources** are shared by a specific community. These resources are not privately owned, but members of the community have both rights regarding their use and duties regarding their maintenance and sustainable management. Traditional practices, developed over centuries, often govern how communities manage these resources.

Examples in India include village common lands or sacred groves, where community norms dictate access and use. However, factors like privatization, agricultural intensification, population growth, and environmental degradation have led to a decline in the size, quality, and availability of common property resources in many parts of the world, particularly impacting poorer communities.

Information about Sacred Groves in India:

Sacred groves are parcels of forest vegetation preserved for religious reasons, often dedicated to deities or spirits. This ancient practice, common in traditional societies including village communities in India, serves as a form of community-based resource management. Sacred groves embody practices that encourage ecologically sustainable harvesting and resource preservation. They are considered important not only for biodiversity and ecological functions but also for cultural diversity.

Historically, sacred groves were valued for their spiritual and cultural significance, often linked to religious reverence for nature rather than solely resource scarcity. Many temples originated from sacred groves. However, in recent times, encroachment due to human settlement and expansion threatens these forests. Challenges in managing sacred groves arise when legal ownership (often with the state) and operational control (traditionally with the community) are separate, as their policy norms and motivations for using the land may differ.

This cartoon depicting the act of selling a river highlights the conflict between traditional concepts of natural resources as common property or vital public goods and the forces of privatization and marketization that seek to turn them into commodities, raising fundamental questions about ownership and access to essential resources.

India’s Stand On Environmental Issues

India's position in international environmental debates is significantly shaped by the principle of 'common but differentiated responsibilities'. India signed and ratified the 1997 Kyoto Protocol in August 2002. Along with China and other developing countries, India was exempted from the binding emission reduction targets because its contribution to the accumulation of greenhouse gases historically, during the industrialization phase, was considered negligible compared to developed nations.

India strongly argues that developed countries, having been the major historical contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and possessing significantly higher per capita emissions rates, bear the primary responsibility for curbing emissions and leading the effort to combat climate change. India points out that its per capita emission rates are only a fraction of those in the developed world.

India's negotiating stance emphasizes the principle of **historical responsibility**, as enshrined in UNFCCC, which prioritizes economic and social development for developing countries. India is cautious about proposals to impose binding emission reduction commitments on rapidly industrializing developing countries (like Brazil, China, and India), viewing this as contrary to the spirit of UNFCCC and unfair given their relatively low per capita emissions compared to developed nations, even with projected future increases.

This cartoon satirizes the argument that because developed nations caused environmental damage during their industrialization, it is now the turn of developing nations like India to pursue development even if it means similar environmental costs. It oversimplifies India's stance, which emphasizes differentiated responsibilities and sustainable development efforts, not a desire for environmental destruction.

Despite emphasizing the North's responsibility, the Indian government is actively participating in global environmental efforts through domestic programs:

• Implementing a National Auto-fuel Policy for cleaner vehicle fuels.
• Passing the Energy Conservation Act (2001) to improve energy efficiency.
• Promoting renewable energy through the Electricity Act (2003).
• Increasing imports of natural gas and encouraging clean coal technologies.
• Planning initiatives like a National Mission on Biodiesel.
• Ratifying the **Paris Climate Agreement** on 2 October 2016.
• Developing one of the world's largest renewable energy programs.

India has noted that progress on commitments made at the Earth Summit in Rio (1992) regarding the transfer of financial resources and environmentally sound technology to developing nations has been insufficient. India advocates for developed countries to provide necessary financial aid and clean technologies to help developing countries meet their commitments under UNFCCC. India also suggests that SAARC countries adopt a unified stance on global environmental issues to enhance the region's collective voice.

Environmental Movements: One Or Many?

Significant responses to environmental degradation also originate from **non-governmental actors**, particularly environmental movements comprising environmentally conscious volunteers and organizations working globally and locally. These movements are diverse, vibrant, and powerful social forces today, often pioneering new forms of political action and proposing long-term visions for addressing environmental challenges.

Examples of diverse environmental movements include:

• Forest Movements: Active globally, particularly in the South (e.g., Mexico, Brazil, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Africa). These movements often work to protect forests facing alarming rates of destruction, including the world's remaining grand forests.
• Anti-Mining Movements: Found in many regions resisting the powerful minerals industry. They protest against the environmental impact of mineral extraction, chemical use, water and land pollution, habitat destruction, and displacement of communities. An example is the campaign against Western Mining Corporation (WMC) in the Philippines and Australia, linked to anti-nuclear sentiments and indigenous rights advocacy.
• Anti-Dam Movements: Present in countries globally where mega-dams are planned or built. These movements often evolve into 'pro-river' campaigns advocating for sustainable and equitable management of river systems. Examples include the campaign to save the Franklin River in Australia (early 1980s) and prominent movements in the South (Turkey, Thailand, India, China). India's **Narmada Bachao Andolan** is a well-known example. A shared principle among many Indian environmental movements, including anti-dam struggles, is **non-violence**.

This image shows a protest by women and children in Phulbari, Bangladesh, against a proposed coal mine project, illustrating a local environmental movement raising concerns about the social and environmental impacts of industrial activities.

Information about 'Are Forests "Wilderness?"':

This section highlights a difference in perspective regarding forests, particularly between the global North and South. In the North, where forests may be perceived as largely uninhabited, the concept of 'wilderness' often views humans as separate from nature, emphasizing protection *from* humans through parks and reserves. In contrast, environmental issues in the South often acknowledge that people inhabit and depend on forests. While wilderness campaigns exist in the South (e.g., protecting eagles in the Philippines, tigers in India, elephants in Africa), they often focus on specific species and their habitats and are sometimes renamed 'biodiversity issues'. These campaigns may be initiated and funded by international NGOs (like WWF) in collaboration with local communities.

This cartoon appears to critique or question the role of 'ecologists', potentially portraying a disconnect between those (perhaps in developed/urban areas) who advocate for ecology while the source of environmental problems (industrial activity, pollution) is shown alongside its impact (dying fish) and the affected innocent (child). It might question the effectiveness or sincerity of certain environmental efforts in tackling the root causes of degradation caused by powerful economic interests.

Resource Geopolitics

Resource geopolitics concerns the power dynamics involved in controlling, accessing, and distributing natural resources globally ("who gets what, when, where and how"). Resources have been both a motive and a means for power expansion throughout history, particularly for European powers. Western geopolitical thought has often linked resources to trade, war, and power, focusing on control of overseas resources and maritime routes.

For instance, naval power historically depended on timber, making its supply a strategic priority for European powers. The critical importance of securing strategic resources, especially **oil**, became evident during World Wars I and II. During the Cold War, industrialized countries used various methods to ensure resource flows, including military presence near extraction sites and sea lanes, stockpiling resources, supporting friendly governments in producing countries, and favorable agreements with multinational corporations. Western strategists were concerned about Soviet threats to their access to oil in the Gulf and minerals in Southern and Central Africa. Post-Cold War, oil remains the most crucial resource in global strategy, though concerns about radioactive materials and other minerals persist.

Oil: The global economy heavily relies on oil. The immense wealth and strategic importance of oil production and reserves drive political struggles for control, making the history of oil intertwined with conflict. This is particularly true in **West Asia (the Gulf region)**, which holds about 64% of the world's known oil reserves and is crucial for meeting rising demand, and Central Asia. Saudi Arabia is the largest producer with a quarter of global reserves, and Iraq holds the second largest known reserves (potentially larger). Major consumer nations (US, Europe, Japan, and increasingly India, China) are located far from these production centers, highlighting the geopolitical significance of securing supply lines.

Information about "Everyone is Playing Crude!":

This section uses characters ("Sheikh Petrodollah," "Mr. Bigoil," "Mr & Mrs Gobbledoo," "Errorists") to satirize the complex, often cynical, and conflict-laden world of resource geopolitics, particularly centered around oil. * **Sheikh Petrodollah** represents an oil-rich state ruler who benefits immensely from oil wealth, maintains power with external military support (from "Mr. Bigoil"), and sacrifices democratic principles in exchange for security and riches. * **Mr. Bigoil** represents a powerful multinational oil company CEO, driven by profit and market access, willing to deal with authoritarian regimes and support foreign policy that secures resources, seemingly disconnected from democratic values or environmental concerns. * **Mr & Mrs Gobbledoo** represent wealthy consumers in industrialized nations who enjoy the benefits of cheap oil (cars, technology) and express superficial concern about environmental issues while actively consuming resources. * **Errorists** represent groups using violence, sometimes originating from conflicts over resources or external interference, highlighting how resource politics can fuel instability and anti-Western sentiment.

Collectively, the narrative critiques how the pursuit of oil involves deals with non-democratic regimes, fuels conflict, prioritizes profit over environmental and human costs, and creates complex power dynamics and resentments.

Water: Another critical resource with significant geopolitical relevance. Uneven distribution and increasing scarcity in some areas raise the potential for disputes over shared water resources to become a source of conflict in the 21st century, sometimes referred to as 'water wars'. Countries sharing rivers can disagree on issues like pollution, excessive upstream usage (irrigation, dams) that reduce water availability or quality downstream. States have resorted to force to protect or seize freshwater resources.

Historical examples of water-related tensions and conflicts include disputes between Israel, Syria, and Jordan in the 1950s-60s over river diversion attempts, and more recent threats between Turkey, Syria, and Iraq concerning dam construction on the Euphrates River. Studies show that many countries sharing rivers have faced military conflicts related to water issues.

This cartoon depicts the Earth with a disproportionately large amount of land compared to water, visually emphasizing the scarcity of freshwater resources despite the planet being largely covered by water (mostly saltwater), highlighting why competition and potential conflict over this vital resource are growing concerns in global politics.

The Indigenous Peoples And Their Rights

The issue of indigenous peoples brings together concerns about the environment, resources, and politics from the perspective of marginalized groups. The UN defines indigenous populations as descendants of those who inhabited a territory when people of different origin arrived and overcame them. Indigenous peoples often maintain distinct social, economic, and cultural traditions compared to the dominant institutions of their country.

Globally, there are approximately 300 million indigenous people with diverse cultures but often sharing common interests and struggles. Examples include indigenous groups in the Philippines, Chile, Bangladesh, North America, Panama, and the Russian Arctic. Indigenous voices advocate for equal recognition within the global community and for governments to acknowledge their enduring existence as distinct nations with unique identities and historical ties to their traditional lands, often emphasizing "since times immemorial."

Indigenous worldviews often share a deep connection to the land. The loss of land is a significant threat to their survival, as it represents the loss of their economic base and cultural continuity. The question arises whether political autonomy is meaningful without control over the means of physical survival linked to land.

This cartoon likely suggests that the voices and concerns of indigenous peoples are often overlooked or ignored in mainstream political discourse and media, despite their significant connection to environmental and resource issues and their struggles for recognition and rights.

In India, the term 'indigenous people' is often applied to the **Scheduled Tribes**, who constitute about 8% of the population. Historically, most depended on land cultivation with relatively free access. British colonial rule subjected their areas to external control. While they have constitutional protection regarding political representation, they have often not fully benefited from development and have disproportionately borne its costs, being the largest group displaced by development projects since India's independence.

Issues concerning indigenous communities' rights have been historically neglected in both domestic and international politics. However, increased global interaction among indigenous leaders from the 1970s fostered a sense of shared concerns and experiences. The **World Council of Indigenous Peoples**, formed in 1975, was among the first indigenous NGOs to gain consultative status at the UN, raising their visibility on the international stage. Many movements against globalization have also highlighted and supported the rights of indigenous peoples.