权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Environmental Peacemaking? An Empirical Investigation of the Impact of Environmental Agreements on Interstate Reconciliation

环境和平？

基本信息

批准号：
283629920
负责人：
Privatdozent Dr. Tobias Ide
金额：
--
依托单位：
Department of Resource Management and Geography
依托单位国家：
德国
项目类别：
Research Fellowships
财政年份：
2015
资助国家：
德国
起止时间：
2014-12-31 至 2016-12-31
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/283629920?language=en
关键词：
Environmental Peacemaking Empirical Investigation Impact

项目摘要

In the last two decades, it has become increasingly clear that global environmental problems will negatively affect the lives of millions of people. A large amount of literature deals with the question whether these environmental challenges fuel state failure, competition for scarce resources, and ultimately armed conflicts. However, this research has been criticized for having contra-productive policy implications and producing self-fulfilling prophecies of future conflicts. An alternative body of literature on environmental peacemaking suggests that adverse environmental changes bear the potential to stimulate cooperative interactions between hostile parties in order to cope with these changes more efficiently. Such interactions, in turn, can pave the way for further cooperation and eventual reconciliation. However, despite its high policy relevance, research on environmental peacemaking is still at an early stage and has produced few consensual results yet.Hence, the main research question of this project is: Do shared environmental problems provide incentives for cooperation between rival states, thus improving the general relationship between them? But how do we know that states acknowledge the existence of an environmental problem and perceive it as urgent enough to cooperate on it? And how to account for cases in which the hostility between the respective states is strong enough to prevent them from cooperating on environmental problems? Both the acknowledgement of urgent environmental problems and the willingness to solve them together with other (rival) states are indicated by the existence of mini-lateral environmental agreements. According to environmental peacemaking theory, such agreements should facilitate communication and further cooperation, trust building, and mutual understanding between competing states. In the middle- to long-term, rivalries should then be reduced. However, can such environmental peacemaking processes be empirically observed, and if so, under which circumstances do they occur?In order to answer this question, a comprehensive list of all interstate rivalries after World War Two will be created. Then, it will be determined whether and when the rival states concluded a mini-lateral environmental agreement in the form of either a river or a transboundary conservation area treaty. Based on this data, the circumstances under which the establishment of environmental treaties contributes to reconciliation between rival states in the medium- to long term will be investigated. In order to integrate quantitative and qualitative data and to account for important context factors, Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) will be the preferred method. The results of the QCA will be verified and refined by conducting two to four case studies along the lines of set-theoretic multi-method research.

在过去20年中，全球环境问题将对数百万人的生活产生负面影响，这一点已变得越来越清楚。大量的文献探讨了这些环境挑战是否会助长国家失败、争夺稀缺资源并最终导致武装冲突的问题。然而，这项研究被批评为具有适得其反的政策影响，并产生自我实现的未来冲突的预言。另一组关于环境缔造和平的文献表明，不利的环境变化有可能刺激敌对各方之间的合作互动，以便更有效地科普这些变化。反过来，这种互动可以为进一步合作和最终和解铺平道路。然而，尽管环境问题具有很高的政策相关性，但对环境问题的研究仍处于初期阶段，并没有产生多少共识性的成果。因此，本项目的主要研究问题是：共同的环境问题是否为敌对国家之间的合作提供了动力，从而改善了它们之间的总体关系？但是，我们如何知道各国承认环境问题的存在，并认为它是紧迫的，足以合作解决这个问题？如何解释两国之间的敌意足以阻止它们在环境问题上合作的情况？小型多边环境协定的存在表明了对紧迫的环境问题的认识以及与其他（竞争）国家共同解决这些问题的意愿。根据环境和平理论，这种协议应该促进相互竞争的国家之间的沟通和进一步合作，建立信任和相互理解。从中长期来看，应减少竞争。然而，能否从经验上观察到这种环境促成和平的过程，如果可以，它们是在什么情况下发生的？为了回答这个问题，一个全面的清单，所有国家间的竞争后，第二次世界大战将创建。然后，将确定敌对国家是否以及何时缔结了一项以河流或跨界保护区条约为形式的小型横向环境协定。根据这些数据，将调查在何种情况下，环境条约的制定有助于敌对国家之间的中长期和解。为了整合定量和定性数据，并考虑到重要的背景因素，定性比较分析（QCA）将是首选方法。QCA的结果将通过沿着集合论多方法研究的路线进行两到四个案例研究来验证和改进。