1. CPD 532, Unit 1, sub unit d From Conflict to Peace in Natural Resource

2. NR Conflict  NR Peace
Acceptance of linkage between NR and Conflict and violence (mechanisms may differ)
CC will change the resource dynamics and hence change the linkage
The recognition that environmental issues can contribute to violent conflict underscores their potential significance as pathways for cooperation, transformation and the consolidation of peace in war- torn societies.
Natural resources and the environment can contribute to peace- building through the economic development and through the generation of employment, while cooperation over the management of shared natural resources provides new opportunities for peace- building.
Understanding Natural Resource - Peace
Analytical (Saleem Ali, 2007, Intro chapter of the book Peace Parks)
Practical / policy aspect (UNEP 2009, From Conflict to Peacebuilding..)

3. Context of Natural Resource Peace
Nobel Peace Prize (2004) given to environmentalist Wangari Mathai (Kenya) surprised many
Economist magazine asked the question “What does planting trees would have to do with peace?”
Editors of Journal of Peace Research, Nils P. Gledistch, a renowned peace scholar from Norway, questioned the rationale for the prize.

4. The Economists Oct 14, 2004
Kenya's Nobel laureat: The woman who planted trees
Wangari Maathai is sound on reforestation; less so on AIDS
THIS year's Nobel Peace Prize was awarded last week to Wangari Maathai, a Kenyan environmentalist-turned-politician, for planting 30m trees. Thanks to Ms Maathai, Kenya is a greener and more pleasant place than it would otherwise be. For this, she deserves our warmest congratulations. But what does planting trees have to do with peace?
A lot, say Ms Maathai's supporters. Conflict often springs from competition for water or fertile land. As deserts expand and populations soar, such competition can turn violent. The war in the Darfur region of western Sudan, for example, has its roots in the struggle between black farmers and Arab pastoralists over a slab of increasingly arid soil. By reforesting Kenya, Ms Maathai has made it less likely to go the way of Sudan. And the way she did it—by paying peasant women to plant seedlings in their own villages—empowers women, and so promotes peace even more.
This is a bit of a stretch. Ms Maathai's work, though admirable, is only distantly related to the prevention of war. Skirmishes over pasture are common, but there is little evidence that environmental factors cause full-scale wars. Darfur is in flames more for political reasons. A group of guerrillas rebelled against an oppressive regime, which responded by slaughtering the rebels' ethnic kin. Planting trees in Darfur would not have saved its people.
The Peace Prize is often controversial. Those who stop wars are usually politicians; sometimes the same people who started them. Henry Kissinger's award in 1973 still angers many. Today, the politician who has arguably done the most to end the world's worst wars is South Africa's president, Thabo Mbeki, who was instrumental in pushing Congo and Burundi from utter mayhem to shaky peace. Ah yes, you say, but he has controversial views on AIDS.
So does Ms Maathai, as it happens. As she reiterated last week, she thinks the virus was created by “evil-minded scientists” to kill blacks: “It is created by a scientist for biological warfare.” Ms Maathai also argues that condoms cannot prevent transmission of the virus. Coming from one of the first women in east Africa to earn a doctorate, Ms Maathai's views might be seen as surprising. Coming from a freshly crowned Nobel laureate, they might be considered inexcusable.

5. Framework to understand connection between Ecology and Peace Saleem Ali, 2007, Peace Parks
Environmental security literature:
There is a linkage between resource scarcity, ecological degradation and conflict.
Solution for them: Improve the environmental condition
Skeptics:
Environmental play minor role in conflict, if any.
But even for them: regardless of role of environment in the conflict, environmental issues can play role in cooperation.
E.g. Economist contended Mathai that Darfur crisis is about ethnic and political, not environmental…but addressing the issue of desertification, a common threat to both sides of conflict, can be a means of bringing parties together.

6. Framework

7. Framework
Two causal links that could lead from environmental scarcity and abundance to conflict and cooperation.
Environmental peace-building narrative suggests that mutual knowledge of resource depletion and a positive aversion to such depletion leads to cooperation (Pathway A)
Classic tragedy of the commons scenario will occur when scarcity leads to conflict because of an absence of trusts and relative uncertainty about accruing future benefits (Pathway B)
Resource abundance may lead to conflict if there is a breakdown of governance and resource is lootable (Pathway C)
There are win-win prospects of abundant resource usage leading to cooperative outcomes under ideal governance regimes (Pathway D).

8. More on the framework…
Political ecologists and environmental justice movement argue that the outcome is most sustainable if power relations among the players are balanced and there are enough opportunities to allow for constructive competition (that spurs creativity and deters conflict).
Here is the importance of good governance systems to allow emergence of cooperative mechanisms more effectively, but beyond the usual confines of nation-state, particularly through the proliferation of deliberative global policy networks. Some of them may seem contentious political movements, but the tension they exert often cause positive transformation of the existing institutions.
Is environmental cooperation sufficient for ending conflict?
Environmental issues can be an important entry point for conversation between adversaries and can also provide a valuable exit strategy from intractable deadlocks because of their global appeal. However, they cannot be taken in strategic isolation and are usually not a sufficient condition for conflict resolution.
Positive exchanges and trust-building gestures are a consequence of realizing common environmental threats.
Often a focus on common environmental harms (or aversions) is psychologically more successful in leading to cooperative outcomes than focusing on common interests (which may lead to competitive behavior).

9. Implementation of the framework Peace Parks
Conservation itself is a contentious issue. How can we think about promoting peace by establishing a ‘protected areas’!
Contentions are mainly on the management and implementation of conservation plans rather than on the concept of conservation itself.
Example:
Trans-boundary protected areas (TBPA) or trans-frontier conservation areas (TFCA) developed independent of their potential instrumental use in conflict mitigation by IUCN. Later renewed them as ‘peace parks’ in order to connote TBPA for promoting peace and cooperation
First use of ‘peace parks’ to describe memorials in Nagasako, then for conservation zones used for ecotourism and livelihoods.
Peace-Park Foundation in South Africa (for eco-tourism): A brief documentary
Five types of TBPA by IUCN, World Park Congress 2003:
Two or more contiguous protected areas across a national boundary
A cluster of protected areas and the intervening land
A cluster of separated protected areas without intervening land
A trans-border area including proposed protected areas
A protected area in one country aided by sympathetic land use over the border
Peace Parks: Trans-boundary protected areas that are formally dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity and of natural and associated cultural resources, and to the promotion of peace and cooperation (TBPA Network)

10. Conservation for conflict resolution Peace park (Cordillera del Condor, Ecuador and Peru)
Peace park for resolving armed conflict is in early state of conceptualization and implementation, but there are few examples.
First attempt: Cordillera del Condor between Ecuador and Peru which depicts first formal efforts of conservation group actively involved in international conflict resolution
Long territorial dispute between Peru and Ecuador
Armed conflict in 1995 ended in peace agreement with commitment to withdraw the forces far from the disputed zone, overseen by four guarantor countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile and USA.
Conservation group became active to establish a peace park (Conservation International done documentation of biodiversity in the region with the support with military in 1993) and influenced the policy makers.
In 1997, two countries agreed a declaration with four mandates; addressed all but the last one which was about demarcation of the land border
Again conflict emerged in 1998, to control the disputed zone
US and guarantor countries brokered a deal for border demarcation, later, with the influence of conservation groups, the zone was designated for conservation purpose considering it as international border.
First both claimed the PA area lying in their territory, however later conservation group in partnership with local communities established a bio-regional management regime which resulted into Condor – Kotuku conservation corridor.

11. …but needs to be more careful while implementing “peace-parks” (Skeptics) by Rosaleen Duffy, Centre for International Politics, Manchester University, Woodraw Wilson Center Presentation.
Scientific rationale provides a technical and politically neutral justification…but they are highly political interventions eg land registration for buffer zones
Neoliberal rationale through appeals to making conservation and community development pay its way through tourism development…but highly problematic
Local communities identified as participants, partners and stakeholders. Such depoliticised language may mask important power dynamics
Local communities expected to negotiate with networks of external actors. Can mean that communities are then ‘partners’ in a top down and market oriented approach – does that fit with their interests?
Peace parks justified in terms of environmental co-operation as a pathway to wider conflict resolution. But Peace Parks can produce new forms of conflict over access to and control over natural resources (violent and non violent).
Borderlands are often already used by illicit networks: drugs, cars, human trafficking, trade in endangered species. An analysis of the importance of these interest groups is often lacking.
They are not neutral, technical and scientific interventions. Peace Parks are inherently political interventions and there is a need to recognise the complex networks of actors involved and the power relations among them if they are to succeed.

12. Natural resource for peace-building UNEP 2009
Issues of environment and natural resource are often considered as less-priority issue in the post-conflict situation…This is mistaken view as this undermines people’s livelihoods and health.
Need to integrate environmental and natural resource issues across the range of peace-building activities, not in isolation, but as part of analyses and assessments that guide peace-building interventions.
Natural resources and the environment can contribute to peace- building through economic development, employment generation and sustainable livelihoods. Cooperation over the management of natural resources and the environment provides new opportunities for peace-building that should also be pursued.
Environment for peace by:
Addressing environmental issues that have the role on the conflict
Providing basis for initiate and maintain dialogue between parties in the conflict
Create the sustainable basis for peace (economy and livelihoods)

13. UNEP (2009: 11)

15. Natural resource for peace-building
Three reasons for considering natural resource issues in peace-building process:
To support economic recovery
To develop sustainable livelihoods
To contribute to dialogue, cooperation and confidence-building

17. UNEP (2009) recommendations
UNEP’s Expert Advisory Group on Environment, Conflict and Peace-building recommends UN Peace-building Commission and wider international community consider following six areas for priority action:
Further develop UN capacities for early warning and early action
Improve oversight and protection of natural resources during conflicts
Address natural resources and the environment as part of the peacemaking and peacekeeping process
Integrate natural resource and environmental issues into post- conflict planning
Carefully harness natural resource for economic recovery
Capitalize on the potential for environmental cooperation to contribute to peace-building