On May 9, 2023, the following article by aiESG researcher Takato Nagano, reviewing the relationship between climate change impacts and conflict, was published.

【【Review of Vulnerability Factors Linking Climate Change and Conflict]
　https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/11/5/104

This report will explain the contents of the above paper.

This study analyzes the vulnerability conditions in societies where climate change impacts lead to armed conflict. There is no common understanding of the mechanisms by which climate change leads to conflict in the climate security field. This study reviewed existing papers and proposed a new framework that adds gender and geographic conditions.

background

In one of the few review papers on societal vulnerability linking climate change and conflict, Pearson & Newman (2019) proposed understanding vulnerability in terms of three dimensions: sensitivity, adaptive capacity, and general conflict risk. However, given their focus on the African agricultural sector, vulnerability in other contexts is not necessarily in scope. It is also not fully clear what factors are included in these three aspects in the first place.

The link between climate change and armed conflict has been discussed in earnest since the UN Security Council first addressed the issue of climate change in 2007. Therefore, this study comprehensively reviewed 53 quantitative, qualitative, and mixed studies that mention vulnerability conditions in articles published between 2007 and 2022 on the link between climate change and armed conflict, in order to determine which conditions to climate change and armed conflict, we have identified which conditions influence each society's vulnerability to climate change.

result

Based on the results of the review, the figure above provides an overview of existing research on social vulnerabilities that lead to climate change-induced conflict. In total, the following 15 types of social vulnerability conditions that link climate change to armed conflict were identified in the 53 articles reviewed.

1. access to and dependence on natural resources; 2. dependence on agriculture; 3. land degradation/cover status; 4. gender; 5. good governance; 6. economic system development status; 7. access to (climate change adaptation) technology; 8. customs; 9. level of economic and social development; 10. economic stagnation; 11. undemocratic regime; 12. high Population density; 13. Recent conflicts and confrontations; 14. Political and ethnic marginalization; 15. Geographical conditions

Conditions that received a particularly high number of mentions in the quantitative literature are, from the top, high population density (18 mentions), economic stagnation (12 mentions), recent conflicts and tensions (11 mentions), and good governance (11 mentions). On the other hand, the vulnerability conditions that received particularly few mentions were, from the bottom, gender (0 mentions), customs (2 mentions), and land degradation/cover status (3 mentions).

Conditions that received a particularly high number of mentions in the qualitative literature were, from the top, good governance (10 mentions) and access to or dependence on natural resources (6 mentions). On the other hand, the vulnerability conditions with particularly few mentions were gender (0 mentions), non-democracy (1 mention), and economic stagnation (1 mention).

Thus, the qualitative literature was less abundant than the quantitative literature.

discussion

Two issues emerged from our review of existing research on vulnerability conditions in accordance with the existing vulnerability framework by Pearson &Newman. First, the existing vulnerability framework by Pearson & Newman may not correctly classify vulnerability conditions. Second, it fails to account for the newly identified vulnerability conditions that link climate change and conflict. To overcome these challenges, we have developed a new framework of vulnerability conditions under which climate change leads to conflict. The following six factors are proposed from the previous framework.

(1) Land degradation and land cover
(2) Gender
(iii) Habits
Low level of economic and social development
(5) Geographical conditions
(6) Political and ethnic marginalization

In addition, we proposed five directions for future research in the field of climate security. First, since conventional research has focused less on qualitative than on quantitative analysis, it is necessary to accumulate case studies on the particular vulnerability conditions in each country and region that lead to conflict due to climate change. Second, there are cases where conflict-prone vulnerability conditions did not lead to conflict, or where cooperative relationships were formed, and more research needs to be conducted on these cases. Third, there is a need for more research on the less-studied conditions in the existing framework and on the vulnerability conditions that could not be explained by the existing framework by Pearson & Newman. Fourth, each vulnerability condition does not lead to conflict in isolation, but rather interacts with each other to cause it, and thus, research needs to be conducted on the interconnectedness of these conditions. Finally, case studies will need to be accumulated on vulnerability conditions in countries and regions that are experiencing the effects of climate change but have not experienced conflict.

This research clarifies the causal factors of the occurrence of armed conflict and contributes to the construction of a theory on the mechanism of climate change-induced conflict occurrence. In addition to its academic significance in deepening research on climate change-induced conflicts, this research has practical significance in enabling the study and formulation of effective and detailed armed conflict prevention policies, as it provides empirical evidence for the armed conflicts that are feared to occur in the future. Especially for regions that are vulnerable to climate change, have low climate change adaptive capacity, and are at high risk of conflict, this research is a touchstone for the investigation of measures that can lead to the avoidance of conflict. We believe that the findings of this study can be used to formulate adaptation (good practices) that take into account local conditions in the direction of restructuring and transforming resource management and grassroots movements to prevent future climate change-induced armed conflicts.

These results will be incorporated into aiESG's comprehensive human rights, governance, and climate change assessment services.

Review of Vulnerability Factors Linking Climate Change and Conflict

Nagano, T., & Sekiyama, T. (2023). Review of Vulnerability Factors Linking Climate Change and Conflict. Climate, 11(5), 104. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cli11050104