ABSTRACT
The question of whether human-induced environmental change should be considered a security threat has been an important part of the post-Cold War debate about redefining security.1 Those arguing that security should be redefined to include environmental factors argue that conventional definitions place undue emphasis on the zero-sum character of relative power gain at the expense of potential threats that can have a positive- or negative-sum impact on the welfare of states and of the people in them.2 Opponents, on the other hand, argue that such a broad definition of security is conceptually weak – to the extent that it is almost vacuous – and motivated by politics rather than analysis.3 Several researchers have chosen to side-step this debate and narrow the analytical focus to the possible relationship between human-induced environmental and demographic change and violent conflict. During the 1990s, qualitative research projects in Canada, led by Thomas Homer-Dixon at the University of Toronto (Toronto Group), and in Switzerland, led by Günther Baechler (Bern-Zurich Group), provided a wealth of case studies and hypotheses for researchers to consider.4 This research has been strongly criticized by some scholars.5 Others have proposed alternative hypotheses that they feel better explain the linkages advanced by the Toronto Group and the Bern-Zurich Group.6 In a few cases, scholars have refined and continued research in the tradition of these 1990s qualitative projects.7
