“certain sections ofthe chemicaleconomy present avirtually uniquepotential to causemassive loss of life”

“humanity as a wholeis increasingly boundtogether as a sharedcommunity of fate”

6 9 12

issue12“green alliance...

TRACKINS

IDE

winter 06

“prudent use ofnatural capital is anissue of nationalsecurity as importantas vigilance againstterrorism orprotection fromrogue states”

ENVIRONMENTAND SECURITYInterwoven or overspun?

ENVIRONMENTAND SECURITYInterwoven or overspun?

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 1

The quarterly magazine of Green Alliance

Edited by Hannah HislopDesigned by Carruthers and Hobbs LtdPrinted by Seacourt Press Ltd

© February 2006 Green Alliance

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of GreenAlliance. Within the UK, exceptions are allowed in respect of any fair dealing for the purposes of private research or study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Design and Patent Act, 1988, or in the case of reprographicreproduction in accordance with the terms of thelicences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency.

TRACKINS

IDE

contentscomment 2

Green Alliance news

a new vision for energy 3can the baby boomers save the planet? 4closing the loop 5

the communication challenge Tim Hirsch 6

terror, accidents and the US chemicals debateRichard Falkenrath 8

great transitionsPaul Raskin & Orion Kriegman 12

environmental securityNasser Yassin 14

Front cover photo by Alan Bauer www.alanbauer.com

The views of contributors are not necessarily

those of Green Alliance.

Produced with support from the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation.

comment

2005 will probably be remembered for its natural disasters. Theyexposed human vulnerability, including in the richest country in theworld, and highlighted the connection between our survival and theprotection and restoration of natural defences like mangroves. Securitycan be defined in many ways but academic argument aside, last yearexposed its dependence on ecosystem services in the most extremecircumstances.

While not necessarily making the headlines, other forms ofenvironmental degradation are underlying factors in many situations ofconflict and instability around the world, and will assume moreimportance as the 21st century wears on. From the depletion andpollution of water resources, desertification and collapse of fishingstocks to global warming, it is clear that policy-makers need to take afresh look at the environmental problems that will make achievingpoverty, development and security goals increasingly difficult.

This issue of Inside Track shines different lights on environment andsecurity. Tim Hirsch writes about the Millennium Ecosystem Assessmentand uses Hurricanes Katrina and Rita to make the compelling case forbetter communicating the value of ecosystem services; RichardFalkenrath provides a US perspective on chemical safety and security,testing the environmentalists’ case for a joined-up approach; and PaulRaskin and Orion Kriegman explain the work of the Great TransitionInitiative in setting out citizens’ scenarios for an interconnected world.Finally, Nasser Yassin and Peter Ritchie highlight the work of GreenGlobe Network (GGN) in this area. GGN has embarked on a project withthe Institute of Environmental Security to identify how policy makersview the linkages at national and international levels.

Also in this issue, you can read about Green Alliance’s energy season, aseries of events and publications aimed at ensuring that the environmentis at the heart of the current energy debate; our work in the pipe-line onthe potential clout of the green baby boomers; and our continuingefforts to move the UK towards a ‘closed loop’ economy.

Kate now works at Climate Change Capital. We are currently recruitingfor a new Convenor: please see our website www.green-alliance.org.ukfor details.

Kate Hamptonconvenor, green globe network 2003 – 2005

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 2

The last couple of years have seenenergy prices rise, and a tight winterwas predicted in terms of gas supplyas both a primary fuel and forgenerating electricity. This year, the UKmoves from being a net exporter to anet importer of energy and by 2020 theUK could be importing up to 80 percent of its gas needs. Equally by 2020,one third of UK generating capacitywill need to be replaced.

The nuclear industry is using thispolicy window to push the need forincreased ‘home-grown’ nuclearcapacity. And on top of the argumentsthat nuclear is the only reliable optionavailable to fill the energy gap and willensure our energy comes from ‘secure’sources rather than unstable oil-richoligarchies, comes the environmentalone: that nuclear is the only way thatBritain can meet its targets forreducing carbon emissions.

The UK is currently set to miss itsdomestic target of a ten per centreduction in carbon dioxide emissionsby 2010 (on 1990 levels) and latestfigures show that the UK is only just oncourse to meet its Kyoto target,provided emissions don’t continue torise.

Amongst the furore over energy, GreenAlliance is working to ensure that theenvironmental impact of energygeneration does not get lost, but nordoes the environment argument getused inappropriately.

Is nuclear as clean as it claims? Letalone the waste issue, there isemerging evidence that the mining and

processing of second-grade uraniumore requires large amounts of carbondioxide emitting energy. Furthermore,punting for nuclear power couldactually undermine the fledglinginvestment in renewables we have inthe UK, so could end up increasingemissions from the rest of the energygeneration sector.

Will nuclear solve our supply issues? At best, the current nuclear powerplants generate about 20 per cent ofelectricity, which equates to only eightper cent of total energy use. Replacingthese stations would have no effect onthe gas supply that provides our heat.In a centralised electricity grid systemwhere 67 per cent of the energy put inis wasted as heat, can we really affordto build new power stations from whichthe heat produced is not captured?

These questions, and more, will beexamined during Green Alliance’senergy season in the first half of 2006.A series of events and publications willaccompany the culmination of monthsof work on various aspects of energypolicy, ending in the publication of ourNew Vision for Energy at a high-profilediscussion summit in the summer.

First up will be an externallycommissioned report that will feed in tothe Energy Review on the effect that adecision to support nuclear might haveon the renewables market andemissions in the UK. It asks whether afocus on nuclear power might actuallyhinder the UK’s ability to meet itsemissions targets.

We will examine what the governmentneeds to do in the short-term to meetits carbon dioxide targets. Bridging theCarbon Gap will focus on progress onthe 2003 energy white paper. It willconsider how support for renewableenergy can be increased and energyefficiency promoted further.

We are also looking at whether carboncapture and storage can be a viableenvironmental option, both for the UKand abroad, and how it can besupported without taking the focusaway from energy efficiency andrenewables. Our work will feed intoboth DTI and Treasury reviews. Thisproject links in with our advocacy workpromoting a more robust EU EmissionsTrading Scheme, which we believe isthe main vehicle by which low-carbontechnologies should be promoted.

For the longer-term, building on A Microgeneration Manifesto and inconsultation with the EnergyEntrepreneurs network which GreenAlliance still coordinates, we willexamine the case for a decentralisedenergy model, connecting domestichouseholds with their energy use andsupply.

The direction of the UK’s energymarkets is going to be decided in thecoming year with the playing out of theEnergy Review and Green Alliance aimsto ensure that the environment is at theheart of this debate.

For more information contact RebekahPhillips, rphillips@green-alliance.org.uk

We are grateful to BP, Centrica, TheCarbon Trust, Greenpeace Trust, Friendsof the Earth, Shell and WWF forsupporting this work.

a new vision for energy

“3

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 3

“4

So much green imagery centres aroundchildren and young people. Ask peopleto picture an environmentalist, andthey will conjure up an image ofsomeone young, urban and counter-cultural. But the truth may be verydifferent. According to research byMORI, the true environmental activistsare not the young but the old: “whilstyounger people are often said to caremore about the environment comparedwith older people, in practice olderpeople are more likely to say theyrecycle or participate in otherenvironmentally-friendly activities.”

This environmental awareness andaction amongst older generationsmight in part stem from a ‘wareconomy’ mentality. The (young)environmentalist Andrew Simms writesof his mother’s habitual fuel saving,food conserving and recycling, “I thinkshe was mildly perplexed that a newgeneration had re-invented values thatwere second nature to her own.” Itseems likely that older people withchildren and grandchildren will have amore acute sense of our responsibilitytowards future generations and, as aresult, may have a different attitudetowards the environment.

It may also be because older peopletend to have more time, often moredisposable income, and less familyresponsibilities – so are more likely totake action and participate in their

community. In the words of the marketresearch company Experian, “In earliergenerations the epithet ‘energetic’would seldom have been used todescribe pensioners who, on theirretirement, were expected to spendtheir declining health sitting indeckchairs in quiet retirement‘resorts’. Today a more healthy and amore demanding generation of emptynesters often see the immediate postretirement years as an exciting periodof liberation from work and family.” Nosurprise, then, that the National Trusthas put time and effort intoencouraging ‘third-age volunteering’ –in doing so, the Trust can recruit acadre of knowledgeable andcommitted supporters.

Work by Demos shows that the babyboomer generation could become a

powerfulpoliticalconstituency.But if theattention ofgovernmentand greengroups iselsewhere, aretheenvironmentalconcerns of

older people being ignored? Could amore explicit focus on this age grouplead to better support for governmentaction on the environment?

Green Alliance is hoping to answerthese questions. Through a process ofqualitative research we will exploreenvironmental attitudes and actionsamongst older people. Using theoutcomes of this process we will lookto establish a ‘third-age task force,’highlighting the issues of mostconcern, and setting out whatgovernment should do to help. Thiswill culminate in the development of amanifesto for change to be presentedto government.

This work is in the development stage,for more information contact RussellMarsh, rmarsh@green-alliance.org.uk

can

the

baby

boo

mer

s

save

the

pla

net? Green Alliance examines

environmentalism in thethird age

“she was mildlyperplexed that a newgeneration had re-invented valuesthat were secondnature to her own.”

Photos courtesy of Help the Aged.

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 4

“5

both debate and action. However, willthey deliver the policy frameworks thatare needed to transform ourunsustainable resource use?

Green Alliance’s project Closing theloop - transforming UK resource useand delivering a sustainable resourceeconomy, which has been runningsince April 2005, will address thisquestion. It is a three-year projectaiming to develop and build supportfor policy recommendations that couldtransform the way we use resources.An ambitious objective perhaps, butone that needs to be addressed all thesame.

Moving towards a ‘closed loop’economy has the potential to reducethe impacts of resource extraction andwaste disposal. The principle is simpleenough – waste and resources are thesame thing, just at different ends ofthe economy. One is an output fromthe economy, the other an input. Makethe output an input and you haveclosed the loop. In reality it’s not quiteso easy, as the UK’s slow progresstowards 23 per cent householdrecycling has demonstrated.

The need to change the way we useresources is evident. Extracting them,

using them once and then throwingthem in a hole in the ground isn’t asustainable model, especially in thecontext of the desire for developingcountries to emulate our consumptionhabits.

We conducted a scoping exercise togain input from a wide range of groupson the specific issues the project couldwork on under the closed loopeconomy theme. The results can beseen in the summary scoping paperwhich is available on Green Alliance’swebsite, which gives some backgroundon the concept of the closed loopeconomy and the current policy andenvironmental context relevant to theproject. In the next few months we willbe holding a series of events andpublishing briefings on the themesidentified in the scoping exercisecovering:

• International examples of closedloop economy approaches;

• Economic instruments for furtheringa closed loop economy;

• Procurement, construction and theclosed loop economy;

• Closing the biomass loop – issuesaround food waste and biomassderived materials.

We are also feeding ideas from theproject into the review of WasteStrategy 2000.

So watch this space for developments,as the next edition of Inside Track willfeature a series of articles on thesethemes from Green Alliance staff andexternal authors.

For more information on this workcontact Ben Shaw, bshaw@green-alliance.org.uk.

We are grateful for the support thisproject has received from Biffa, Defra’sEnvironmental Action Fund, the EdenProject, the Environmental ServicesAssociation, Friends of the Earth,Greenpeace, Interface Europe, JohnsonMatthey, Marks & Spencer, Sainsbury’sand Skanska.

closing the loop…a new agenda for resource use in the UK

“Extracting resources,using them once andthen throwing them ina hole in the groundisn’t a sustainablemodel, especiallygiven the desire fordeveloping countriesto emulate ourconsumption habits.”

There is plenty goingin the areas of waste,resource and productpolicy at the moment.Waste Strategy 2000is being reviewed, theEuropean

Commission has just published itsThematic Strategy on Waste Preventionand Recycling, which proposeschanges to the Waste FrameworkDirective, and a consultation on theneed for a UK body to take forwardproduct policy came out in December.And this is just for starters. As everthere are plenty of opportunities for

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 5

“6

Journalists and environmental groupsoften struggle to communicate thecomplex linkages betweenecosystems, security and human well-being. It all just seems too hard, so wego for the easy option and rely on theemotional response to images ofpandas or orang-utans to conveyissues such as deforestation.

I am not criticising this – theseemingly-inexorable slide towardextinction of all the great ape species(excluding one, of course, homosapiens) is something with deepresonance to millions of people, andcan offer a valuable hook with which todraw the public into some of the widerissues.

The danger of relying too heavily onthis approach is that it can easily leadto crude arguments that animals are insome way being valued above humanbeings. How often have we seen news

stories mocking the delay of a roadproject or industrial developmentpromising new jobs because of onerare newt or beetle?

Yet for the past six months, we havehad in our hands a rock-solid body ofresearch, in the form of the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment (MA), whichdocuments in compelling detail thedirect links between the essentialservices provided by ecosystems andthe well-being of human societies – akey component of which is security.

So the way should now be open forthose trying to promote more prudentuse of natural capital to claim this asan issue of national security asimportant to the peace of mind ofcitizens as vigilance against terrorismor protection from rogue states.

The trouble is, this all still soundsrather far-fetched when expressed inabstract generalities, even when it isbacked up with references to soundscientific analysis such as the MA.

It seemed a much more tangibleconcept, however, when I paid a recentvisit to the Mississippi Delta to reporton some of the environmental issuesraised by Hurricanes Katrina and Ritaand their aftermath.

Most of the commentary on thissubject has, understandably, focussedon the debate surrounding theconnection between the intensity ofthis year’s hurricane season and theinfluence of human-induced climatechange. While fascinating andimportant, this does not get very faronce you acknowledge that yes, therecent science suggests that tropicalstorms will on average become moreintense as sea temperatures rise, butno, you can never attribute anyindividual storm to global warming.

Much less widely reported, however,has been the connection between theloss of natural energy barriers such ascypress swamps over recent decadesdue to a range of human activities, and

the vulnerability of coastalcommunities – not just the city of NewOrleans itself – to the full force of thestorm surges created by thehurricanes.

The concept of this being a securityissue occurred to me as I chatted to afisherman called Wayne Menendez ashe set about the task of righting his90-tonne shrimping boat left lying onits side on dry land in Empire,Louisiana, a community on the narrowfinger of land pushing out into the Gulfof Mexico as the Mississippi Rivercompletes its marathon journey to thesea.

On the journey to this wreckedboatyard, I had passed through mileupon mile of utter devastation, seeinglorries propped halfway up trees (thiswas more than two months afterKatrina), wooden houses sitting in themiddle of the highway and entireneighbourhoods reduced tomatchwood.

It is a cliché to say the area resembleda war zone, but there is no other wayto describe it. And the analogy is anapposite one – Menendez clearly felthis life and livelihood had beenjeopardised through a collective failureof security by those responsible for themanagement of the delta in recentdecades.

Firstly, he blamed the intensiveextraction of oil and gas from the rocklayers underneath the Delta since theSecond World War for accelerating thesubsidence of the entire area. This maysound far-fetched, but it is aphenomenon widely accepted byscientists including researchers fromthe US Geological Survey.

Second, Menendez recalled thechanges in the management of theriver since his childhood, when lowlevees allowed the Mississippi to floodnaturally, depositing new layers of siltonto the land and counteracting thenatural sinking of the delta. Sincethen, the levees had been built up

The MillenniumEcosystemAssessment makesexplicit our relianceon the natural world for our well-being and, ultimately,our survival. BBC EnvironmentCorrespondent Tim Hirsch has directexperience of itsconclusions

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 6

“7

high, and the dredged sedimentsdumped deep out to sea instead ofreplenishing the wetland habitatswhich have been disappearing at analarming rate.

In the area to the East of New Orleans,the vulnerability had been made evenmore intense through the constructionof a wide shipping canal, theMississippi River Gult Outlet. Driventhrough an area of dense swamplandin the 1960s, the canal is only verylightly used by the deep-draughtshipping for which it was designed toprovide a shortcut.

Scientists at Louisiana State Universityhave developed models estimatingthat the outlet, together with anothercanal with which it merges, combinedto funnel the storm surge of Katrinainto a weapon of 20 per cent greaterintensity and at least double the speedas it raced toward New Orleans.

As he mused about the future nowfacing his family and community,Wayne Menendez mentioned that hisboat had in fact been tied up for a yearprior to being hoisted onto thedockside by Hurricane Katrina –shrimping had become uneconomicdue to rising fuel prices combined witha drop in the price of shrimp due tocheap imports.

And where had those cheap importslargely come from? Shrimp farms onthe Indian Ocean coastline, in manycases displacing mangrove swampsand exposing other communities to thefull impact of marine forces – such asthe tsunami.

Listening to this story and speaking tothe dedicated scientists engaged infrustrating attempts over many yearsto get proper investment in restoringthe natural infrastructure of SouthernLouisiana, the links between the

proper valuation of ecosystems andthe security of human communitiesseemed far less abstract.

The challenge is to persuade decision-makers and the public to recognisethat value without the need of adisaster to demonstrate the costs ofenvironmental neglect.

Tim Hirsch has been environmentcorrespondent for BBC News since1997. A history graduate from theUniversity of Cambridge, he hasworked for the corporation for nearly20 years. During a sabbatical last yearhe acted as a consultant for theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment,helping to draft the statement from itsBoard, entitled Living Beyond OurMeans: Natural Assets and HumanWell-Being.

the communication challenge

“Much less widely reportedhas been the connectionbetween the loss of naturalbarriers such as cypressswamps and the vulnerabilityof coastal communities ”

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 7

“8

It is sometimes a good thing whennational-security experts andenvironmentalists turn their attentionto the same issue, but not always. It is,however, almost always interesting.

One debate now taking place in theUnited States - what to do about thesusceptibility of toxic industrialchemicals to terrorist attack - clearlyillustrates the dilemmas and confusionthat occur at the nexus of security andenvironmentalism. At the moment, thisdebate has not yet been seriouslytaken up in any other country, but thatis only a matter of time given thenature of this particular danger.

Chemical safety is of course a long-standing concern of the environmentalcommunity. The modern era of USactivism in this area began in the mid-1970s as a result of increasing publicawareness of the health risksassociated with a variety of differentcommercial chemical processes, aswell as a number of high-profilerevelations of commercial negligenceand extreme cases of environmentalcontamination, such as Love Canal inupstate New York. These events led tothe passage of the unprecedentedComprehensive EnvironmentalResponse, Compensation and LiabilityAct of 1980, also known as Superfund.The Act established federal authorityto respond directly to the actual orpotential release of substances thatmay endanger public health or theenvironment, regularised the liabilityof companies responsible for such

releases, and created a tax onpetroleum and chemical industries todefray federal cleanup costs.

The chemical safety debate intensifiedafter the accidental release of fortytons of gaseous methyl isocyanatefrom Union Carbide Corporation'spesticide factory in Bhopal, India, onDecember 2-3, 1984. Most casualtyestimates suggest that some 3,000people perished shortly after theaccident, another 150,000-600,000were seriously injured, and at least15,000 of those who were injured laterdied. This horrific event raisedawareness of chemical dangersworldwide (including in theboardrooms of major chemicalcorporations) and increased publicpressure on governments to moreeffectively and thoroughly regulatetheir chemical industries. The result inthe United States was the EmergencyPlanning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986, which requiredcompanies to publicise informationabout hazardous materials on theirsites. A 1990 amendment to the CleanAir Act in 1990 took this process one

terror, accidents an

Chemical safety andchemical securityshould be treateddifferently, arguesRichard Falkenrath

“The debate…clearlyillustrates the dilemmasand confusion that occur atthe nexus of security andenvironmentalism.”

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 8

“9

step further by requiring companies todevelop detailed ‘risk managementplans’ (RMPs) for their facilities andsubmit these plans (by 1999) to the USEnvironmental Protection Agency(EPA), which then made theinformation available to the publicthough the Internet and, for the mostsensitive information, controlledreading rooms.

For the past three decades in theUnited States, the issue of chemicalsafety, and the federal regulation ofthe industry, has been bitterly andemotionally contested. The debate haspitted the chemical industry and itsallies against the environmentalcommunity. Environmentalistsgenerally believe that the existingfederal legislation and regulations donot go far enough to protect publicwelfare, and possess extensiveevidence of corporate malfeasance andgovernmental laxity. The industry is byno means monolithic – the views ofindividual companies depend greatlyon their size, products and productionprocesses, histories, and corporatecultures – and has becomesignificantly more responsible sincethe 1970s, but has clearly sought tominimise additional costs associatedwith federal regulation and the latitudeof the EPA. There is precious littlecommon ground between the twosides.

The terrorist attacks of September 11,2001, injected a new element into thisacrimonious setting. The attacks

transformed American politics.Suddenly, any issue with a plausibleconnection to homeland securitygained a new sense of urgency, andinterested parties could from time totime translate this heightenedattention into real-world action.

There is no question that certainsections of the chemical economypresent a virtually unique potential tocause massive loss of life if attackedby terrorists in the right way, at theright time. The most dangerouscategory of chemicals are toxicinhalation hazards (TIH) substances,such as chlorine, ammonia,hydrochloric and other acids,phosgene, and methyl bromide.1

The manufacture and shipment of TIHsubstances are integral to all moderneconomies: one trade group, forinstance, estimates that chlorine or itsderivatives are used to produce 45 percent of the US gross domestic product.As a result, they are routinelyproduced and shipped in vast multi-tonquantities, often by rail through majormetropolitan areas. Conservativeestimates of the effects of a singleterrorist attack on a fully loadedchlorine rail car near a dense, down-wind population typically put fatalitiesin the high thousands to low tens ofthousands; some models estimatecasualities in the hundreds ofthousands. The security of TIHproduction and storage facilities, andof TIH conveyance systems, is highlyuneven: at certain times, and in certainplaces, massive quantities of TIH

chemicals can be found in closeproximity to a population centre withno security whatsoever. This generallylow level of security, combined withmind-numbing casualty potential, putsTIH chemicals in a class by themselveswhen it comes to an assessment of thevulnerabilities of the homeland.

For a long time, only industryspecialists really understood the mass-casualty potential of TIH chemicals(Don DeLillo’s White Noise, publishedin 1984, was ahead of its time). In thefour years since 9/11, however, arelatively small number ofenvironmental groups, most notablythe Greenpeace Toxics Campaign, havesucceeded in drawing significantpublic and political attention to thecatastrophic terrorist risks associatedwith TIH chemicals. Using the RMPdata provided to the EPA by chemicalcompanies and other information,these groups have graphicallyillustrated the areas that are atgreatest risk of massive loss of life inthe event of a terrorist attack against aparticular, nearby chemical facility.

Given the danger associated with TIHchemicals and the increasing publicattention to the issue, one would haveexpected that the post-9/11 USgovernment would have moveddecisively to improve chemicalsecurity, at least in the TIH domain, asit did with security of passengeraviation. Shortly after September 11,the Administration did act to restrictaccess to information that could assist

nd the US chemicals debate

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 9

“10

terrorist targeting of high-risk chemicalfacilities, a move that made goodsense from a security perspective butthat has been criticised by someenvironmental groups. Chemicalsecurity has not, however, been anarea of great federal activism sinceSeptember 11, 2001. In January 2005, I testified before a Senate Committeethat “to date, the federal governmenthas made no material reduction in theinherent vulnerability of hazardouschemical targets inside the UnitedStates.” This statement remains truetoday. One question is why, but aneven more interesting one is what todo from here.

First, on the question of why so littlehas been accomplished, it is useful toseparate the areas in which the federalgovernment has current powerfulregulatory authority from the area inwhich the statutory authority of thefederal government are more tightlycircumscribed, particularly withregards to internal industrial processesand security systems.

The federal government currently hasthe statutory authority to set andenforce regular standards for chemicaltransport. Indeed, the shipment ofhazardous materials by road, rail, andwaterway is already regulated by theUS Department of Transportation.These regulations, however, focus onsafety and the risk of accidents; theyare in no way optimised to safeguardagainst the threat of deliberateterrorist attack.

So why has the government not movedout sharply with enhanced securityregulation of hazardous material, or atleast TIH, transportation? It iscommonly alleged that the chemicalindustry has successfully lobbied theAdministration against such an effort; Ido not believe this to be so. Instead, Ibelieve that the answer lies with senioradministration officials responsible forsecurity who have afforded higherpriority to other more immediate andurgent issues that were directlyimplicated in 9/11, such as aviationsecurity, counterterrorism at home andabroad, border security, andintelligence reform. This lack of high-level attention has been compoundedby the post-9/11 bureaucratic churn inthe US government: hazardousmaterial regulation is a long-standingDOT responsibility, but DOT wasdistracted by the start-up of the newTransportation Security Administration(TSA). The creation of the Departmentof Homeland Security, which includedTSA, further complicated the situation,since responsibility for chemicalsecurity fell into the seam betweenTSA and an all-new infrastructureprotection entity.

In the absence of significant federalaction on TIH transportation security,several municipal governments havebegun to take matters into their ownhands. So far, the District of ColumbiaCity Council has taken this effort thefurthest by passing an ordinanceforbidding the shipment of the mostdangerous TIH chemicals through

downtown Washington. This action hasbeen opposed by the federalgovernment as well as the railroad andchemical industry, and is currentlybeing litigated in federal court. Giventhe significant issues of interstatecommerce at stake, the fragmentedmunicipal regulation of TIH shipmentsis an extremely problematic approachto the problem, but the vacuum at thefederal level makes these municipalactions at least understandable.

The federal government does notcurrently have sufficient statutoryauthority to set and enforce securitystandards at chemical plants andstorage facilities.2 To do this, theadministration requires newlegislation. President Bush has saidseveral times that he supports suchlegislation, though his subordinateshave from time to time given mixedmessages and his Administration hasnot expended political capital to pressthe matter. Several US Senators,notably Susan Collins, Joe Lieberman,and Jon Corzine, have also prominentlysupported chemical site securitylegislation. Even in the Senate,however, it is clear that the issue is atbest a middle-tier legislative priority. Inthe House, such legislation has almostno support whatsoever, particularly inthe very busy committee of primaryjurisdiction, the Energy and CommerceCommittee.

Unless there is an attack against achemical target in the next year, it ishighly unlikely that the 109th Congress

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 10

“11

will pass chemical site securitylegislation. Again, the obstacle is notprincipally direct industry opposition:the American Chemistry Councilsupports chemical site securitylegislation. The main problems are thatthe throughput of the US legislativeprocess is quite limited and that noneof the key “gatekeepers” (the majorleaders in the House and Senate aswell as the chairman of the committeeof primary jurisdiction in the House)attach high priority to new chemicalsite security legislation; their positionsprobably range from “not persuaded”to “opposed in general principle.”

There is, however, a more fundamentalissue slowing the progress of chemicalsite security legislation through the USCongress. Many in the chemicalindustry, and many of their politicalallies, fear that chemical site securitylegislation will lead to the morepowerful and extensive chemical sitesafety regulations that have long beensought by the environmentalcommunity. This concern hasmanifested itself in the debate overwhether new chemical site security

legislation should confer to the federalgovernment the authority to requirethe adoption of “inherently safetechnology” at any particular facility:the industry generally opposes suchpower, while environmental groupsgenerally support it.

If the US Congress is to pass chemicalsite security legislation in the absenceof a terrorist attack against such atarget, it is critical that the legislatorsuntangle chemical site security fromchemical site safety. This is no simpletask – the dividing line betweensecurity and safety is an artificial,blurry one at best – but it is politicallyessential. The key is to design aregulatory framework that reflects thefact that the most dangerous potentialterrorist targets, such as TIH storagetanks and railcars, represent only avery small percentage of the totalchemical economy, and thus can bepowerfully regulated at acceptablecost. Risk varies greatly acrossdifferent chemical sites andconveyances; the securityrequirements imposed on each site orconveyance should be calibrated to the terrorist risk of mass-casualtysecondary effect it presents (I haveoutlined one proposal for doing so in my aforementioned Senate testimony 3). While complex,legislation along these lines could over time significantly reduce thevulnerability of the US homeland tomass-casualty terrorist attacks – andmight just muster sufficient support to make it through the US Congress.

The environmentalists who have longsupported more comprehensive federalregulation of the chemical industry willprobably have significant reservationswith a tightly focused approach of thissort. I have no doubt that there aresignificant and important issues ofchemical safety and environmentalcontamination that require furtherattention and governmental action: therecent benzene and nitrobenzene spillinto the Songhua River in China makesthis clear enough. My expertise,however, is in protecting the homelandfrom catastrophic terrorist attacks, andfrom this perspective it is clear to methat there is no more urgent protectivepriority than improving the security ofmass-casualty potential targets, mostnotably TIH chemicals. This relativelynew agenda should be decoupled fromthe long-standing agenda of chemicalsafety, environmental contamination,and public health. Both agendas areimportant, but progress on one shouldnot be held back by problems with theother. Chemical security shouldproceed on one legislative andregulatory track, chemical safety onanother.

Richard Falkenrath is a Senior Fellow inforeign policy studies at the BrookingsInstitute in Washington DC. He is alsoManaging Director of the Civitas GroupLLC, and a security analyst for theCable News Network (CNN). Previously,Richard was Deputy Assistant toPresident Bush and Deputy HomelandSecurity Advisor.

“After September 112001…any issue with aplausible connection tohomeland security gained a new sense of urgency”

1. Flammable and explosive substances are aseparate category. These too present significantdangers, though not in the same class as TIHchemicals.2. Some have argued that the general duty clauseof the Clean Air Act confers sufficient authority onthe federal government; I do not agree. 3. http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/SHSGACTestimonyonHazmat042705.pdf

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 11

“12

great People and the biosphere are growingmore connected, and humanity as awhole is increasingly bound togetheras a shared community of fate. Out ofthe turbulence of transition, verydifferent forms of global society couldemerge. The future is both deeplyuncertain and highly contested. It isnot difficult to imagine a gloomy timeof social and ecological crises for thecoming decades. Yet, it is also possibleto turn toward a global society thatreflects universal social and ecologicalvalues, respects differences, anddefeats the scourges of destitution,war, and environmental destruction.Getting there depends on theemergence of an aware and engagedglobal citizenry acting together. To thatend, the Great Transition Initiativedevelops and communicates scenariosthat bring a message of hope andpossibility for this planetary phase ofcivilisation.

Alternative FuturesA scenario is a story rooted inquantitative and qualitative analysis,constructed with detail, rigour, andimagination. GTI organises alternativescenarios into three broad categories:Conventional Worlds, Barbarisation,and Great Transitions.

Conventional Worlds are futures thatevolve gradually from today’sdominant forces of globalisation –

economic interdependence deepens,dominant values spread anddeveloping regions converge towardrich-country patterns of production andconsumption. Two variations areMarket Forces, a neo-liberal vision inwhich powerful global actors advancethe priority of economic growth, andPolicy Reform, in which governmentsare able to harmonise economicgrowth with sustainable developmentobjectives, such as the MillenniumDevelopment Goals.

But if market and policy adaptationsare not sufficient to blunt socialpolarisation, environmentaldegradation, and economic instability,the danger of a deepening global crisislooms. Out of the turbulence, someform of Barbarisation scenario couldconsolidate. This could take the formof an authoritarian Fortress Worldscenario, a kind of global apartheidwith elites in protected enclaves andan impoverished majority outside.Another is Breakdown, where conflictsand crises spiral out of control, wavesof disorder spread across countriesand regions, and institutions collapse.

Great Transitions are transformativescenarios. Their defining feature is theascendancy of a new suite of values –human solidarity, quality-of-life, andrespect for nature – that support arevision of the meaning of

transitions…Paul Raskin and Orion Kriegman, Founderand Organiser of the GreatTransition Initiative, set out visions and pathwaysfor a hopeful future

“Great Transitions aretransformative scenarios…that support a revision ofthe meaning ofdevelopment”

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 12

“13

development. Human solidarity is thefoundation for a more egalitariansocial contract, the eradication ofpoverty, and democratic politicalengagement at all levels. Theemphasis on quality-of-life brings anemphasis on human fulfillment in allits dimensions, rather than the falsemetric of GDP. Deep respect for naturefosters a sensibility that understandshumanity as part of a vibrantcommunity of life, and the basis fortrue sustainability. Finally, this is apluralistic vision that, within a sharedcommitment to global citizenship,celebrates diverse regional forms ofdevelopment and multiple pathways tomodernity.

Global actors Many social actors are shaping thecharacter of globalisation. Twopowerful agents of change –intergovernmental organisations andthe private sector – are beginning toconsider the challenge ofsustainability. But will governmentaland business organisations re-inventthemselves in time? Global civilsociety, another critical actor, hasexploded over the past two decades.Today, thousands of internationalNGOs address an immense range ofissues, while the annual World SocialForum, which attracts over 100,000each year, is an expression of globalrumblings for “another world”.

But despite its achievements andpromise, global civil society lacks unityof vision, a shared identity, andstrategic sophistication. Today’s civilsociety efforts remain too dispersed,diffused, and small scale. Successstories of community action do not

scale up to new pathways for globaldevelopment. The general public isincreasingly aware of emergingdangers, but in the absence ofcompelling alternative visions andsystemic movements, apprehensioncan lead to apathy and resignation.

The formation of a coherent globalcitizens movement for a GreatTransition remains a work-in-progress.It would connect across issues,themes, and regions as it growsincreasingly clear that incrementalthinking and action are insufficient foraddressing challenges. Those fightingfor human rights, and those fightingfor ecosystem protections, thoseseeking to forestall global warming,and those struggling to escape frompoverty must all recognise that theirsuccess is interdependent and requiresa systemic shift. The energy for such amovement comes from both the pushof necessity and the pull of desire:concern over the perilous drift ofglobal development and the hope offorging an attractive future for oneself,one’s descendants, one’s fellow humanbeings, and the community of life.

Crystallising Hope How will a global citizens movementtake shape? This is the question thatGTI aims to address by providing asystemic and long-range framework forthinking, analysis, and action. Forevery person mobilised by theirpriority issue, thousands more areconcerned about the future but lackthe context to express that concern.This we call the “latency hypothesis”.Like a super-saturated liquid, in whicha mere tap on the glass precipitatessugar crystals, we live in a super-

saturated cultural moment. GTI’s ideashave resonated with people all overthe world, tapping into the latenthunger for hope, unity and vision. Byoffering rigorous and inspiringscenarios, GTI responds to themanifest desire among many engagedpeople, and the latent desire amongmany more yet to be engaged, forplausible visions of hope.

Launched in 2003, GTI is a growingnetwork that draws on the richexperience of its diverse internationalparticipants, now numbering about200. A Coordinating Unit at the TellusInstitute in Boston facilitates a two-prong program of research to deepenthe scenarios and outreach to bringthe message to world-wide audiences.A GTI Paper Series, Frontiers of a GreatTransition, will be published in 2006that will articulate a Great Transitionvision and pathways for getting there,while taking a fresh look at suchcritical issues as economic visions,global governance, ecology, gender,values, human well-being, andsustainable communities. To find outmore about GTI go towww.GTInitiative.org where you canread Great Transition: The Promise andLure of the Times Ahead.

Dr Paul Raskin is President of theTellus Institute which he founded in1976. He also founded the GlobalScenario Group in 1995 and the GreatTransition Initiative in 2003. His path-breaking work with the GSGculminated in the influential essayGreat Transition: The Promise and Lureof the Times Ahead, which offers arigorously grounded case for analternative paradigm for globaldevelopment in the 21st century.

Orion Kriegman, the Organiser for theGreat Transition Initiative, has focusedhis career on organising internationalcivil society networks for socialchange. Orion holds a Masters inPublic Policy and Urban Planning fromthe Kennedy School of Government,Harvard University.

“Despite its achievementsand promise, global civil society lacks unity of vision, a shared identity, and strategicsophistication”

“For every person mobilisedby their priority issue,thousands more areconcerned about the futurebut lack the context toexpress that concern”

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 13

“14

It is estimated that seventeen conflictsbetween 1990 and 2002 were relatedto the exploitation of naturalresources, and nine of these were inAfrica. Whether scarce or abundant,natural resources can be a triggeringagent or a fuelling factor for conflictsbetween and within states and acrosssub-regions.

When resources are stressed andscarce, two resulting phenomenaemerge: ‘resource capture’ and‘ecological marginalisation’ 1. Resourcecapture develops when the powerfulgroup shift resource distribution intheir favour resulting in conflict anddisputes as in the case of Darfur,Sudan, where conflict has eruptedbetween herders seeking pastoral landand farmers maintaining their farms.Ecological marginalisation, on theother hand, is manifested in unequalaccess to resources leading eventuallyto migration of people to a fragileregion and thus chronic poverty as inthe case of Ethiopia.

Where resources are abundant, theavailability of mineral wealth is apotent predictor of conflict andeconomies with around a quarter of

GDP coming from natural resourceexports are ‘acutely’ at risk of civilconflict 2. The basis of this approach toconflicts can be summarised in Indrade Soysa’s 3 words that civil wars have“fewer martyrs than opportunists”. InSierra Leone, for example, diamondshave been associated withdictatorship, civil war and one of thelowest per capita incomes in the world($140).

A 2005 OECD report lists resourcesthat are feeding or have fed conflict:natural gas in the Indonesian provinceof Aceh; diamonds in Angola, theDemocratic Republic of Congo, Liberia,and Sierra Leone; oil in Angola, CentralAsia, Chad and Nigeria; timber inBrazil, Cambodia, Indonesia andMalaysia; and illegal drugs inAfghanistan and Colombia.

Another key dimension forenvironment and security is the issueof climate change. There is anoverwhelming consensus that climatechange and the rapid warming inEarth's atmosphere will have seriousimplications for human security. TheUN Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change envisages that “global

environmentalsecurity

The Institute forEnvironmental Securitydescribes the environmentas “the most transnationalof transnational issues”.Nasser Yassin, of GreenGlobe Network, explains

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 14

“15

warming will trigger enormousphysical and social changes”.Shortfalls in water, for example, willhave drastic effects on irrigation anddrinking water, jeopardisingagricultural productivity and foodsecurity of many nations, principallyvulnerable ones.

Since the Bruntland Report in 1987,the area of environment and securityhas attracted a wealth of researchersand NGOs looking at the linkagesbetween these two areas. Nosystematic explanation for theenvironment-security nexus hasemerged yet. But there is amomentous consensus that theoutcomes of environmentaldegradation on human and nations’security could be disastrous.

Green Globe Network’s work States and governments haveprioritised the security agenda overthe environment. This has becomeclearer in the last three years since 11September 2001 brought high ‘securityanxiety’ into the world. There is apressing need to mainstream theissues of environment and securityinto government policies and practices.Among the priorities is to create thespace for the environment,development, foreign policy, disasterand security policy communities tointeract and cooperate, and it is in thisarena that the Green Globe Networkhas been getting involved.

In 2004, GGN co-convened The HagueConference on Environment, Securityand Sustainable Development thatsuccessfully moved the environmentand security agenda out of the purelyacademic realm into a more policy-

oriented arena. GGN is now workingwith leading international think tanksto develop a cooperative, policy-relevant research programme to assessenvironment and security policies,programmes and projects funded byselect OECD countries andInternational GovernmentOrganisations. The project will focuson examining the approaches thatgovernment departments make andbringing the right people together atthe right time to provide substantiveand strategic contributions to work inthis important area.

1. See Homer-Dixon and publications of the Project on Environment, Security and Population2. See Paul Collier and the Conflict Program at the World Bank3. Journal of Peace Research 2002; Volume 39:4

“civil wars have fewermartyrs than opportunists”

“climate change willjeopardise the food securityof many nations,principally vulnerable ones”

What is Green Globe Network?

GGN was founded in 1997 as agroup of independent advisorswhose mission is to help the UKGovernment achieve internationalsustainable developmentobjectives. Funded by the Foreignand Commonwealth Office (FCO), inthe last few years GGN has madetimely, objective and value addedcontributions to the developmentand practice of UK policy and hasbeen successful in its role as acatalyst for cooperation amonggovernment departments and otherstakeholders.

Recent work during the G8 and EUPresidencies focused on climatechange, with one governmentparticipant saying that themeetings held by GGN during thisperiod were “essential”. Onerecommendation, to hold an EnergySecurity and Climate ChangeSummit co-hosted by China,informed the decision to hold anEnergy and Environment MinisterialRoundtable. A GGN seminar wasalso a major factor in theannouncement by Secretary ofState Hilary Benn of a doubling ofthe UK contribution to African waterand sanitation.

The new GGN work programme for2006-2008 puts emphasis onmainstreaming sustainabledevelopment in decision-makingacross all government departments.This objective will be achievedusing already established processand policy frameworks, for examplea review of the impact of theMillennium Ecosystem Assessmenton multilateral investment funds.

For more information contact PeterRitchie or Nasser Yassin at theGreen Globe Network secretariat:pritchie@green-alliance.org.uk ornyassin@green-alliance.org.uk.Recruitment is currently underwayfor a new Convenor of Green GlobeNetwork. Please go to www.green-alliance.org.uk fordetails.

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 15

Green Alliance is an independent

charity. Our mission is to promotesustainable developmentby ensuring that the environment is at the heart of decision-making. We work

with senior people in government,

business and the environmental

movement to encourage new ideas,

dialogue and constructive solutions.

staff

director Guy Thompson

head of policy Russell Marsh

principal policy adviser Ben Shaw

policy officers Tracy Carty

Hannah Hislop

Rebekah Philips

head of resources Louise Humphrey

fundraising andcommunications manager Rachel Butterworth

office manager/PA to the director Paula Hollings

Karen Crane is currently on maternity leave

Green Globe Network

assistant convenors Nasser Yassin

Peter Ritchie

contact each staff member at:intialsurname@green-alliance.org.uk

associates Ian Christie

Julie Hill

Jiggy Lloyd

Derek Smith

Rebecca Willis

officeGreen Alliance, 36 Buckingham Palace Road,London SW1W 0RE

t: 020 7233 7433 f: 020 7233 9033e: ga@green-alliance.org.uk w: www.green-alliance.org.uk

Green Alliance is a registered charity number 1045395,

company limited by guarantee, registered number 3037633.

staff newsThe last few months have seen anumber of changes in the GreenAlliance team. In the summer we said goodbye to Caroline Read, who returned to New Zealand, andCatherine Pamplin, who is nowworking for Medicins Sans Frontiersin Uganda. In September, LouiseHumphrey joined as our Head ofResources to replace Karen Crane,who is on maternity leave. HannahHislop and Rebekah Phillips bothjoined the policy team.

We also welcome Jiggy Lloyd, whohas joined us as an associate. Jiggy isan independent consultant in publicpolicy, corporate strategy andsustainable development and hasspent twelve years in policy-relatedroles in leading utility companies(Vivendi, Severn Trent and AWG).

member newsWe welcome: Clive Bates, SarahDandy, Sophie Evans, Louise Every,Kathryn Fairhead, Briony Greenhill,Henry Hicks, Robert Lowson, LeonieMiller, Dr Catherine Mitchell, Dr DougParr, Hazel Phillips, Sally Powell,Jonathan Proctor, Dr Kate Rawles, Liz Reason, Nicci Russell, Sanjeeb

Seal, Jonathan Startup, AlexiaWellbelove.

Special thanks to our new donormembers: Brendan May, RupertNabarro and Matt Thomas.

richard sandbrookIt was with great sadness that welearned of the death of GreenAlliance and Green Globe Networkmember Richard Sandbrook on 11thDecember 2005. Richard was one ofthe environment movement’s mostinfluential and inspirational figures.

He was a founder member of Friendsof the Earth, and as ExecutiveDirector of the International Instituteof Environment and Development inthe run-up to the Rio Earth Summithe played a pivotal role in thepolitical shaping of the notion of‘sustainable development’.

He was also among the firstenvironmentalists to harnessbusinesses to the cause. Morerecently he was a non-executivedirector of the Eden Project inCornwall, and helped to build a ‘post-mining alliance’ to demonstrate thepower of regeneration. He will begreatly missed by colleagues, friendsand family.

what’s on… a look at the next six months at Green Alliancefebruary • New report on nuclear and renewables

march • Briefing and seminar on EU Emissions Trading Scheme• Briefing and seminar on carbon capture and storage• New pamphlet on decentralised energy• Seminar: is the future of packaging recyclable or compostable?• Seminar: is there a case for a levy on environmentally-

damaging products?• New pamphlet on ODPM and climate change

april • New report: Bridging the carbon gap

may • Spring reception 2006 with keynote speaker David MilibandMP, Minister of Communities and Local Government

• New pamphlet: why nutrient disruption is the next big issue

june • Energy summit: a new vision for energy

Printed by the environmental Waterless Offset process usingvegetable-oil based inks on totally chlorine free paper using at least75% post consumer waste. Seacourt Ltd holds ISO14001 and EMASenvironmental accreditations, the Biodiversity Benchmark and is acarbon-neutral company part powered by renewable energy.

S1652.qxp 3/2/06 11:06 am Page 16