Can environmental degradation ignite international conflict? This paper critically analyzes the environment-conflict thesis, a prominent idea in international studies and environmental security. It tackles concerns about wars over scarce resources, water wars, and population growth's role in sparking conflicts. Delving into the Project on Environment, Population and Security, the analysis reveals the thesis is theoretically driven rather than empirically supported, reflecting a Northern security agenda more than real-world scenarios. The environment–conflict thesis suggests that as resources dwindle due to degradation, societies will inevitably clash over access. However, the author argues that the evidence backing this claim is weak. The analysis underscores that the argument is theoretically rather than empirically driven. Ultimately, this perspective serves as a product of Northern security agendas, potentially overshadowing other complex factors that fuel conflict. The paper urges for a more nuanced and empirically grounded approach to understanding conflict, moving beyond simplified environmental determinism and security concerns, emphasizing the need for broader, more inclusive security frameworks.
Published in Review of International Studies, a leading journal in political science, this paper aligns with the journal's focus on international relations and security. By critically examining the environment–conflict thesis, the paper contributes to ongoing debates about the causes of conflict and the role of environmental factors in shaping global politics. Citations from other sources may further connect the paper to related discussions within the journal's network of scholars.