Environmental Security and Governance at the Water–Energy Nexus: Greenpeace in China and India
| DOI | 10.1177/2347797014551265 |
| Author | J. Scott Hauger,Lora Saalman,Michael Daniels |
| Published date | 01 December 2014 |
| Date | 01 December 2014 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Environmental Security
Journal of Asian Security
and International Affairs
and Governance at the
1(3) 235–261
2014 SAGE Publications India
Water–Energy Nexus:
Private Limited
SAGE Publications
Greenpeace in China
Los Angeles, London,
New Delhi, Singapore,
and India
Washington DC
DOI: 10.1177/2347797014551265
http://aia.sagepub.com
J. Scott Hauger
Michael Daniels
Lora Saalman
Abstract
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) provide an important resource to
good governance involving complex issues of environmental security. We explore
that role by looking at recent campaigns concerned with security at the coal–
water nexus in India and China, undertaken by regional arms of Greenpeace, an
important international NGO. We find that, at the national level, the impact of
NGOs on environmental governance depends deeply on an organization’s rela-
tion to government. In China, Greenpeace East Asia serves the government’s
interest by providing an external source of information on activities and percep-
tions at the provincial level. An NGO such as Greenpeace East Asia is perceived
as valuable and is tolerated as long as it acts in accordance with the unwrit-
ten rules of engagement with the government, as practiced by domestic NGOs.
Greenpeace India, by comparison, is one among many NGOs, tolerated as a
matter of democratic principle, but suspect because of its international con-
nections. Greenpeace India has yet to have a meaningful impact on governance
at the coal–water nexus. Greenpeace East Asia, on the other hand, appears to
have found a role that can impact environmental governance, but is dependent
upon operating within bounds that are set by the Chinese model of government.
Keywords
China, India, environmental security, governance, NGOs, Greenpeace
J. Scott Hauger, College of Security Studies, Asia Pacific Center for Security Studies,
Honolulu, HI, USA. E-mail: haugers@apcss.org
Michael Daniels, Independent Scholar, Honolulu, HI, USA. E-mail: Mikedaniels98@
gmail.com
Lora Saalman, Associate Professor, College of Security Studies, Asia-Pacific Center for
Security Studies, Honolulu, HI, USA. E-mail: saalmanl@apcss.org
236
J. Scott Hauger, Michael Daniels and Lora Saalman
Introduction
In August 2012, Greenpeace India and Greenpeace East Asia released coordi-
nated but independent reports that addressed the impacts of energy sector devel-
opment on national water security in India and China, respectively. Each of these
reports argued that ongoing and planned construction of coal-based power plants
for economic development was unsustainable at the expense of finite water
resources for agriculture, industry and domestic consumption.1 Each report was
followed in 2013, with a more specific case study of environmental security at the
coal–water nexus.
Issues of environmental security are both emergent and highly complex. They
are emergent because of the interactive impacts on environmental security of
dynamic global and regional trends. In the Asia-Pacific region, these include rapid
economic development and the demand for natural resources, population growth
(especially in South Asia), pollution, poverty and climate change. They are com-
plex because the issues of environmental security and governance are multi-
minded, with many independent decision-makers impacting one another, and
because they are characterized by patterns of circular causation, or feedback,
leading to possible tipping points which can rapidly change the state of the envi-
ronmental security system (Dasgupta & Ehrlich, 2013).
The coal–water nexus provides an example of that complexity, wherein
increased burning of coal for electric power increases the demand for water in
extraction, transportation, cooling and pollution abatement, while increasing
atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations that can impact the hydrologic cycle
and the availability of water for agriculture or human consumption. Thus, socie-
ties must mediate demands for industrial development and economic security, on
the one hand, and for environmental security, on the other, posing evolving chal-
lenges to institutions for security governance.
The concept of comprehensive security provides a frame for understanding
issues of environmental security at the coal–water nexus. Hsiung provides a con-
cise description of the concept:
A nation’s security is no longer the traditional ‘national defense’ (military security) but
has economic, environmental, and human dimensions as well (separately known as eco-
nomic security, environmental security, and human security). All three dimensions may
be subsumed under the rubric of ‘comprehensive security’, a new umbrella concept
that grew out of the post-Cold War debate over the ramifications of security and over
security studies as a field of inquiry. (2004, p. 1)
Associated with the concept of comprehensive security is an emerging theo-
retical perspective of security governance that ‘…describes the development from
the centralized security system of the Cold War era to the increasingly fragmented
and complex security structures of today’ (Krahman, 2003, p. 5). Much of the
literature on security governance addresses the growing role of non-state actors in
areas of international governance. Krahman, for example, notes that, although
Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, 1, 3 (2014): 235–261
Environmental Security and Governance at the Water–Energy Nexus
237
states retain a central role in international security, ‘…governments seem increas-
ingly willing to rely on the cooperation and resources of non-state actors’ (p. 6).
Specific to environmental security, Bernhardt and Vanderheiden argue that ‘It is
now common to speak of “governance without government” in reference to the
role played by non-state actors in global environmental politics…’ (2012, p. 1).
Certain large environmental NGOs, including Greenpeace, operate across levels
of governance from local to national to international.
Hanggi recognizes that governance at the state and provincial levels is exer-
cised mostly by governments, but then elaborates that
…governance is more encompassing than government; it helps to grapple with the
complex reality of the contemporary world in which governments are still the central
actors in domestic and international affairs though they increasingly are seen to share
authority with non-state actors on multiple levels of interaction. (2003, pp. 6–7)
At the level of the nation-state then, governments may govern, but good govern-
ance implies the ability of non-state actors to influence government policies to the
benefit of the public interest. This is consistent with the understanding of the
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
(UNESCAP), which has described good governance as an (ideal) process of
decision-making that is participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, trans-
parent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive, while respon-
sive to both the present and future needs of society.
By encouraging governments’ transparency, responsiveness and inclusivity,
then, NGOs can comprise an important element of good governance in managing
the complex issues of environmental security at multiple levels. We can explore that
role by looking at two recent campaigns concerned with the coal–water nexus in
India and China, undertaken by the regional arms of an important international
NGO. In August 2012, the Greenpeace India Society (2012c) produced a report
entitled Endangered Waters: Impacts of Coal-fired Power Plants on Water Supply,
which argued that, ‘by choosing thermal power in an increasingly water-stressed
nation, India is endangering its energy security’ (p. 5). That same month,
Greenpeace East Asia released its report Thirsty Coal: A Water Crisis Exacerbated
by China’s New Mega Coal Power Bases, which concluded that ‘…these water
intensive projects will inevitably trigger a serious water crisis and exacerbate
existing water scarcity problems’ (2012a, p. 1).
As the world’s largest developing nations, India and China face similar chal-
lenges to governance in balancing economic and environmental security. Both
nations face significant concerns about fresh water availability. Both are support-
ing their economic development by rapidly building large, coal-burning power
plants that will place significant additional demands on water resources. In both
nations, national, provincial and municipal governments play sometimes conflict-
ing roles in representing stakeholders and in addressing environmental and eco-
nomic development needs. Governmental decisions in both nations will impact
Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, 1, 3 (2014): 235–261
238
J. Scott Hauger, Michael Daniels and Lora Saalman
local people, communities and livelihoods in the areas being developed. In both
countries, as described below, civil sector organizations are playing an evolving
role in informing and influencing environmental security governance at the coal–
water nexus.
India is the world’s largest democracy with a robust civil sector and a history
of NGOs predating independence in 1947 (Taneja, 2010). China is a one-party
state, where NGOs were largely unknown before 1995, and where ‘…the legal
framework for NGOs is rather hampering than fostering their development’
(Lehrack, 2006, p. 12). A comparative look at the ways in which NGOs have
sought to influence and inform governments...
To continue reading
Request your trial