Environmental Security with Dr Mara Oliva

This project looks at the environmental security dimensions of US foreign policy since the end of the Cold War.

Environmental security is a problematic concept and still lacks an exhaustive definition. It incorporates the following perspectives:

• Geopolitically, environmental security refers to the threats to national security posed by environmental change. For example, in recent years, melting ice in the Arctic has ignited a new power struggle among the US, Russia and China to gain access to natural resources and new trade routes.
• It is also linked to economic security, as environmental degradation can impact economic growth.
• Environmental degradation is also a matter of human security. It can lead to social unrest and influxes of environmental refugees, impacting people’s right to live in a safe and healthy environment and their right to environmental justice.
• Finally, environmental security is also often referred to as ecological security, meaning the protection of our planet from human activities.

Environmental security has been a US foreign policy priority since 1991. It was initially perceived as a national security threat linked to violent conflict, terrorism and the disturbance of global markets generated by the loss of stability that had characterised the geopolitical bipolar order of the Cold War. In the last two decades, this limited view has evolved into a greater awareness that environmental security is a transnational threat which goes beyond political and territorial borders. This is reflected in America’s increased efforts to lead international environmental diplomacy initiatives and in the  recognition that environmental security equals human security. It has also led to a significant expansion of foreign aid policies that now include family planning and education.

This project also examines how US politicians and media (including social media) have portrayed the environmental security debate and their impact on public opinion’s perceptions and understanding of it. It scrutinizes, first of all, presidential rhetoric. The existence of a clear Communist threat throughout the Cold War made it easier for any US president (and their administrations) to present a convincing, black and white case in support of their foreign policy agendas. But environmental security is a much more complex concept to explain. Rhetorical strategies have, therefore, changed. Similarly, the arrival of new media has transformed the way people access and process information.

This interdisciplinary project combines methodological and theoretical insights from different academic fields. Historical analysis of each US administration’s private and public documents is combined with oral history interviews of individuals involved in the foreign policy making process within the executive, congress, media, business and scientific community.

This is supported by three IR theories:

1. Systemic, which emphasizes the influence of the international system and the distribution of power within it;
2. Societal, which focuses attention on US domestic politics and American culture;
3. State-centric, which finds answers to question about foreign policy within the state and within the individuals that work therein.

Presidential rhetoric analysis provides a variety of tools to study not just the discourse, but the agent of political language and context within which this language emerges too. This ultimately provides a better understanding of how global environmental security is communicated and perceived.

Digital Humanities methods are also employed to capture and code interviews, media content and other on-line material (NVivo). The software R-Studio is being used to model the American people’s sense of environmental security. Such methods allow us to survey a broader section of the population and, therefore, obtain a more realistic assessment of popular feelings.