Economic Growth, Environmental Scarcity, and Conºict • Rafael Reuveny RafaelEconomic Reuveny Growth, Environmental Scarcity, and Conºict Introduction The global population is expected to reach nine billion by 2050, intensifying pressures on renewable and nonrenewable natural resources and degrading the environment. I use the term “environmental scarcity” to denote these develop- ments. Environmental scarcity is currently more prevalent in less developed countries (LDCs) than in developed countries (DCs). Many authors argue that environmental scarcity increasingly promotes armed conºicts in LDCs. Such conºicts are referred to here as “environmental conºicts.”1 The environmental scarcity literature has focused on the environmental causes of conºict, but has devoted relatively little attention to the issue of conºict prevention.2 This issue is central to my paper. My premise is that environmental scarcity promotes armed conºict in LDCs. However, this premise is controversial. Reviewing the controversy, I ªrst demonstrate that many scholars and policy-makers support my premise. The following section shows that the effects of armed conºicts on LDCs are devastat- ing. Many scholars and policy-makers also believe that economic growth is the ultimate solution to environmental scarcity and conºict. It is argued that as LDCs’ income per capita rises to the level of that of DCs, their environmental scarcity and poverty will decline, preventing conºict and building peace. My goal is to evaluate the implications of this view for environmental conºict. The environment-conºict nexus is complex. To gain clarity, I develop a stylized mathematical model describing a society that exhibits conºict over re- sources. I use the model as a lens through which to observe empirical data and as a tool to evaluate scenarios heuristically. The picture conveyed by the data in- dicates an increasing tendency toward global income inequality, environmental scarcity, and environmental conºict in LDCs. The remainder of this paper illustrates that the economic growth solution to environmental conºict prevention will probably fail because the biosphere 1. Citations for views stated in the introduction are provided later. 2. Diehl 1998. Global Environmental Politics 2:1, February 2002 © 2002 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 83 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/152638002317261481 by guest on 28 September 2021 84 • Economic Growth, Environmental Scarcity, and Conºict would not be able to support a DC-level standard of living for all nations, at least not at the current state of technology. The growth approach is likely to bring the system ever closer to its ecological limits. The resulting intensiªcation of pressures on the ecosystem is likely to induce more, not less, environmental conºict. As long as the system’s limits are not reached, economic growth is via- ble. However, without technological “magic,” as the system gets ever closer to the limits, it may collapse. Whether such magic is feasible currently is not known. This paper is not against economic growth in LDCs. The morality of growth in LDCs is undisputed. Growth in LDCs also is important based on prac- tical grounds. Historically, highly skewed national distributions of income have been politically unstable.3 Should the DC-LDC income gap continue to widen, global political instability could rise. Thus, we are facing a dilemma. Growth in LDCs is important, but may not be ecologically sustainable at the global level. Nevertheless, I believe that economic growth in LDCs is feasible, provided that it is compensated by economic contraction in DCs.4 This approach obviously faces considerable obstacles and will probably be rejected by DCs. It might be initiated eventually in response to some global ecological-social-political crisis. Environmental Scarcity and Conºict The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) observes that “nations have often fought to assert or resist control over war materials, en- ergy supplies, land, river basins, sea passages and other key environmental re- sources.”5 This argument can be traced back to Malthus6 who expected that pop- ulation growth eventually would lead to resource depletion, economic decline and conºict over resources. Wright7 and his contemporaries also studied the role of resources in conºict. However, during the Cold War these issues were not at the forefront of research. In the 1990s, a growing number of scholars returned to the Malthusian story. By now, this literature has grown so much that it is not possible to fully review it within a few pages. I will focus on representative studies. Environmental scarcity can cause conºict through interrelated social, eco- nomic, and political channels.8 A decline in the quality or quantity of natural re- sources may lead to economic decline. Another channel involves contests over scarce resources, particularly when they do not have readily available substi- tutes. Environmental scarcity may erode the people’s support of institutions, 3. For example, skewed income distributions have promoted the French and the Russian Revolu- tions (Kennedy 1993) as well as social strife in many LDCs (Nafziger 1997). 4. Economic contraction involves reducing real output per capita. 5. World Commission on Environment and Development 1987, 290. 6. Malthus 1798. 7. Wright 1965. 8. This discussion is based on Myers 1993; Homer-Dixon 1999; Lietzmann and Vest 1999; Baechler 1999; Gleditsch 1998 and 2001; and Maxwell and Reuveny 2000. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/152638002317261481 by guest on 28 September 2021 Rafael Reuveny • 85 leading to internal turmoil, which can, in turn, weaken the economy and pro- mote more conºict. As environmental scarcity rises, groups may be dislocated or migrate. Immigrants and nationals may clash over diverse issues, including the resources of the land. Finally, we can place the above channels within a setup that is already politically unstable, where environmental scarcity exacer- bates tensions. The Malthusian paradigm is controversial. Scholars have criticized Mal- thus for ignoring the role of markets, trade, institutions and human ingenuity in alleviating environmental constraints. For example, as resources are depleted, their prices rise, inducing a move to substitutes. Scarcity also could lead to coop- eration (e.g., curbing usage of scarce resources, halting environmental degrada- tion).9 Simon10 argues that population is the ultimate resource, not the root of the problem. A large population implies more human ingenuity and economic growth, alleviating resource scarcity.11 Others suggest that the scope of environ- mental problems is greatly exaggerated.12 Finally, it is argued that environmen- tal scarcity is not relevant to conºict and is not crucial to US national security.13 Diehl14 notes that much of the controversy is political in nature. Be that as it may, the literature provides a strong impression that environmental scarcities cause conºict in LDCs.15 This is also the view of many policy-makers.16 This is not to say that environmental scarcity is the only cause of conºict in LDCs or is present in all conºicts. It also is possible that some conºicts in LDCs are associ- ated with resource abundance.17 However, environmental scarcity is visible in many LDCs, and it may well increase in the future for two reasons. First, LDC populations are expected to grow signiªcantly in the coming decades, increas- ing pressure on the environment.18 Second, LDCs are likely to suffer more from 9. See, for example, North 1995; Moore 1995; Simon 1996; Deudney 1999; and Conca 2001. 10. Simon 1989 and 1996. 11. Similarly, Boserup 1981 emphasizes the beneªts of population density in industrialization and innovation. But Dasgupta 1995 argues that the ideas of Simon and Boserup are not applicable to LDCs. 12. Bailey 1993, and Adler 1998 argue that global warming is not a threat. Simon and Wildavsky 1995 and Beckerman 1995 argue that the loss of biodiversity is not a problem, and Simon 1996 argues that resources are not scarce. Lomborg 2001 makes similar arguments. 13. Levy 1995. 14. Diehl 1998. 15. Gleditsch 1998; Payne 1998; and Midlarsky 1998. 16. For example, the US Department of Defense has a Deputy Undersecretary for Environmental Security. NATO’s Science Committee (Gleditsch 1998), NATO’s Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (Lietzmann and Vest 1999), former US Vice President Gore (Gore 1992), and Germany’s Environment Minister (Trittin 2000) argue that environmental scarcity causes conºict in LDCs. US Senator Nunn seeks to put the environment on the US security agenda (Butts 1999). The administrator of the US Agency for International Development says that in the 1990s environmental scarcity has become the largest threat to US security (Sherbinin 1995). The Chairman of the Global Environment Facility says the world faces the prospect of wars over scarce resources (Payne 1998). 17. Collier 2000 argues that resource abundance can lead to conºict in LDCs by ªnancing the war effort, but Collier and Hoefºer 1998 ªnd that resource plenty reduces the likelihood of conºict. 18. Bongaarts and Bulatao 2000. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/152638002317261481 by guest on 28 September 2021 86 • Economic Growth, Environmental Scarcity, and Conºict climate change than DCs since they are less able to adapt to it, and the damage could be substantial.19 Thus, environmental conºict could become even more