The interdisciplinary aspect of environmental security

Reading the chapter 7 and 8 really made me realize the multiplicity of subjects and areas that environmental security can deal with.
It is a whole complex topic that needs to be treated through a variety of disciplines, each of them needing to analyze the subject through its own specific lens.
Regarding ecological security, it was interesting to see the questioning of which threats or problems could be related to that particular aspect.
Indeed we now need to think bigger and understand that security is no more a conceptualized military term, this is why ecological threats to human being is a matter of security.
The point made in this chapter is that in the future, the biggest threats will be ecological, regarding our relationship with nature, and not really about aggression or military attacks.
The four human security characteristics are to be reminded :
concern for the well fare of all people
multidimensional concept
easily secured through early prevention
well being of people rather than well being of states

To that extent, changes and the evolution of the population are to be analyzed and watched closely: demography, youth bulges, population growth in Africa but also urbanization and migration. Here again, we can see the mise en abyme of disciplines that only the field of « population » can lead us to.

Therefore, searchers, people, need to develop a better understanding of the environment impact on every single topic. As mentioned : « There is too much money spent on military actions in the Middle East and not enough spent in the preparation for the future ecological challenges ». Which is to say that more means and efforts should be gathered in order to cover the huge spread that environmental security went through and especially within ecological matters.

Regarding the Gender and environmental security, it is also another aspect of this multidisciplinary eye that environmental security needs to acquire.
Indeed what has been seen is that most discussions on the subject mainly high lit the vulnerability of women. Therefore environmental security has to cover different areas of studies but also to cover them through different points of view in order to make it even more accurate.
The point that I did not quite understand about feminist environmental security is : if women/feminists do not want to be « gender categorized » as acting or feeling differently in this specific field, why are they not satisfied with the ESS studies treating human-being as a whole (regardless of gender) ?

Apparently “gendering” environmental security tends into assessing the processes of vulnerability and processes of environmental degradation through gender lenses. The point being to avoid automatically viewing women as victims in the face of environmental change.
I actually find this chapter really paradoxical since the author tries to describe how men and women have unique relationships with the environment due to “socially constructed roles ». To me this claims sounds anti-feminist. This article might lack some deeper explanations on the way gender and environmental security are to be treated, instead of paraphrasing the same point many times. Really redundant.

This entry was posted in Ecological Security and Feminist Environmental Security - Week 3 and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.