Climate migration, as an image of people moving due to sea-level rise and increased drought, has been presented as one of the main security risks of global warming. The rationale is that climate change will cause mass movements of climate refugees, causing tensions and even violent conflict. Through the lens of climate change politics and securitisation theory, Ingrid Boas examines how and why climate migration has been presented in terms of security and reviews the political consequences of such framing exercises. This study is done through a macro-micro analysis and concentrates on the period of the early 2000s until the end of September 2014. The macro-level analysis provides an overview of the coalitions of states that favour or oppose security framings on climate migration. It shows how European states and the Small Island States have been key actors to present climate migration as a matter of security, while the emerging developing countries have actively opposed such a framing. The book argues that much of the division between these states alliances can be traced back to climate change politics. As a next step, the book delves into UK-India interactions to provide an in-depth analysis of these security framings and their connection with climate change politics. This micro-level analysis demonstrates how the UK has strategically used security framings on climate migration to persuade India to commit to binding targets to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The book examines how and why such a strategy has emerged, and most importantly, to what extent it has been successful. Climate Migration and Security is the first book of its kind to examine the strategic usage of security arguments on climate migration as a political tool in climate change politics. Original theoretical, empirical, and policy-related insights will provide students, scholars, and policy makers with the necessary tools to review the effectiveness of these framing strategies for the purpose of climate change diplomacy and delve into the wider implications of these framing strategies for the governance of climate change.
The Middle East and Globalization discusses past and contemporary political, societal, economic, and cultural trends in the Middle East against the background of comprehensive theories of globalization. The chapters draw on a shared methodological approach, looking at the fractures and horizons of globalization that are shaping the Middle East.
This report is the Committee's annual review of how the FCO is managing its resources, examining the departmental annual report for 2007-08 (Cm. 7398, ISBN 9780101739825). Chapters cover: new strategic framework; performance measurement; global network; essential services; FCO Services; personnel issues; transparency and openness; financial management; public diplomacy and communication; the British Council; the BBC World Service. The Committee is concerned that the FCO is facing serious financial pressures in this financial year due to the Treasury's withdrawal of its support for the Overseas Pricing Mechanism (OPM) which used to protect departments from the weakening of sterling. There is a risk that the FCO may not be able to meet higher international subscriptions over the next two financial years, causing its performance against Public Service Agreement targets to suffer. The likely increase in the UN Regular Budget and other international subscriptions will push this figure even higher. The FCO should have to shoulder the financial burden from within its already tight budget to pay for subscriptions which also benefit other Government departments. The Committee recommends that additional nondiscretionary costs should properly be met by the Treasury.
In two volumes. Vol 1 contains progress on priorities and organisational changes; Vol 2 contains financial information. On title pages: Better world, better Britain
This report focusses on the FCO's financial situation and the implications of the Spending Review 2010 for its work and performance, and that of its associated body, the British Council. The FCO is one of the major departmental 'losers' in the Spending Review. Reductions in spending on the FCO, if they result in shortfalls in skilled personnel and technical support in key countries and regions, can have a serious effect in terms of the UK's relations with foreign countries, out of all proportion to the amounts of money involved, especially in relation to the UK's security and that of its Overseas Territories. Cuts to the core FCO budget of even 10% may have a damaging effect on the Department's ability to promote UK interests overseas. The FCO will also face cuts of 55% to its capital budget. The target of raising £50 million per year through selling existing buildings may be difficult to achieve, and may not secure savings in the long-term. A further reduction in the opportunities for more junior UK-based staff to serve in overseas posts, and a consequent diminishing of experience and morale among FCO employees, could over time have a damaging effect on the quality of British diplomacy and the effectiveness of the FCO. The British Council, facing a 25% cut in spending, should give detailed information on its strategy for implementing the cut, which may well trigger fundamental rethinking of the role and work of the Council.