Talk:Climate security

July 2016

Any reason why this page is not simply called "Climate security"? The current title seems needlessly wordy and "climate security" is a widely used and accepted term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Locutus4242 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 18 July 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved, supported. (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 20:22, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

---

Climate change and national security → Climate security – The title of this article is needlessly wordy and "climate security" is a commonly used phrase that describes the topic discussed on this page. Currently there is a page for "Climate security" that redirects back to "Climate change and national security" and another page for "Climate Security" (both words capitalized) that does the same thing. For simplicity the one page should be "Climate security" with "Climate Security" redirected (or deleted) and "Climate change and national security" redirected to "climate security". Thank you. – Locutus42 (talk) 00:10, 18 July 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. Omni Flames (talk) 08:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:24, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

• @Locutus42 and Music1201: Do you have a reference proving that Climate Security is a commonly used phrase? — Music1201 ^talk 02:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure what criteria is called for, but I work in the field and "climate security" is the common parlance over "climate change and national security" which is a clunky expression and not a succinct name for the field of study. It is not hard to find "climate change and national security" but it is not used in the context of a singular subject but talking about the combination of two separate topics, climate change, and national security. The guidance for Wikipedia:Article titles reads "Conciseness – The title is no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects." "Climate security" is more concise. Here are just a few of the many examples of its common use: http://www.americansecurityproject.org/climate-security/, https://climatesecurity101.org/, https://www.e3g.org/showcase/climate-security/, http://www.c2es.org/publications/degrees-risk-defining-risk-management-framework-climate-security, http://securityandsustainabilityforum.org/climate-security-and-the-4ds-of-foreign-policy-2-7342, http://cpd.org.au/2015/06/new-cpd-report-on-australias-climate-security-challenge/, https://www.sei-international.org/projects?prid=1669, http://www.brookings.edu/research/testimony/2014/07/22-us-energy-climate-security-goldwyn Locutus42 (talk) 04:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
• Weak Support - I would say that it is the subject that is not commonly talked. Climate security makes about 100'000 hits. --Robertiki (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Climate security. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090320054750/http://www.climate.org/PDF/clim_change_scenario.pdf to http://www.climate.org/PDF/clim_change_scenario.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:10, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Making edits and improvements to the entire page

Hi all,

I am very interested in the area of climate security and I have written some articles myself on the topic (both academic and non-academic) and I have some ideas for improving the page and wanted to get feedback/ideas from you all on my suggestions:

- First of all, there are a few repetitions throughout the page and I would like to clean that a little bit.

- I would like to include more up to date information on climate security (eg more recent IPCC reports; recent national security plans)

- I would like to expand on the Academia section to include scholar Matt Mcdonalds' arguments on climate security which, in my opinion, really break down the discourses on climate security. Here's the source: McDonald, Matt. “Discourses of Climate Security.” Political Geography, vol. 33, Mar. 2013, pp. 42–51. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2013.01.002

- In the 'Impact' section I would like to emphasize the disproportionate effects of climate change on the Global South and emphasize the environmental justice aspect of it

- I would like to remove, if possible, the "Health" section as it talks about the impacts of climate change on health rather than about security

- Under Adaptation, in the 'Energy' I would like to include about US and UK military emissions and militaries' plans to 'green' their operations

-I would like to rename 'Political discourse' Political approaches' and expand on United States and NATO sections. In the United Nations Security Council I would like to add low and middle income countries (LMICs)'s approach to climate security since most of the page focuses on the Global North. I would like expand on the United Kingdom section to include more recent plans on climate security and mention the role of UK’s former Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) (now the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, FCDO)

- In the section 'Climate Security in Africa' I would like to include a section that shows that conflict in the region is not necessarily tied to climate change making the case of the Lake Chad Basin

- I would like to create a new section titled 'Critiques and Alternatives to Climate Security' that presents critiques of the climate security approach and alternatives to it put forth by organizations and social movements based on ideas of climate justice and environmental justice. The idea of this section is to emphasize that framing climate change as a security issue can be problematic as it could increase solutions that rely on militaries which can worsen the injustices of those most affected by the climate crisis.

- Last but not least, I wonder if the section on 'Culture' could be removed since it is not very relevant to the subject of climate security.

I know this is a lot but I would like to get feedback on the community.

Thanks.

Dyeditor (talk) 10:34, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi User:Dyeditor, welcome to Wikipedia! Have you also seen WikiProject Climate Change yet? You might want to become a participant there. Regarding this article, firstly I notice that it has very low pageviews (see here). Secondly, I see outdated content (I think most was created in 2016) and overlap with other articles, like with effects of climate change. I also wonder how this article really differs with climate risk (that one has also low pageviews). Is climate security not just the opposite of climate risk? If so, could it be merged with climate risk? If not, I would favour shrinking it right down to the bare minimum and referring readers to the relevant sub-articles for details. Pinging a few people who might be interested in discussing the way forward with this article: User:Richarit, User:InformationToKnowledge, User:Prototyperspective, and User:RCraig09. EMsmile (talk) 11:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for the suggestion of joining WikiProject Climate Change, I will join it.

In terms of your question, I think it's important to keep a separate climate security page because it is an actual policy and political framework ( as well as a larger academic field) around which policies and climate agendas are formed. Climate risk more generally refers to risks of climate change which inform risk management and risk assessment. Climate security also refers to national security which climate risk is not necessarily directly concerned with. So I don't see a clear link between climate security and climate risk.

I am happy to do the shrinking and clean up work as I am very familiar with the subject as I think it's important to keep this page as the debate of climate security is also becoming increasingly talked about in mainstream media as well. Dyeditor (talk) 11:56, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

OK, I am all for shrinking, updating and condensing. And ensuring it interlinks well with other related Wikipedia articles. There are also things like climate change vulnerability, climate resilience and climate justice which are probably overlapping or closely related. If you can explain to people how all these related concepts fit together that would be great! (I've been working on many climate change articles as part of this project). EMsmile (talk) 15:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi!

I already have a draft that interlinks with other related Wikipedia articles, especially climate justice and environmental justice . For instance, how different organizations and social movements call for a bigger emphasis on climate justice and environmental justice rather than climate security and many proponents of climate justice call for bigger support for Indigenous people and other frontline communities that are fighting for climate change and also already  protecting 80% of Earth’s biodiversity.

And regarding climate vulnerability, I want to emphasize there may be a disproportionately harsher effects of climate change in fragile contexts and/or socially vulnerable and marginalized groups. Dyeditor (talk) 09:30, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

This shrinking and cleanup will make major edits to the existing article, how do I make sure it gets approved by other Wikipedia editors? Dyeditor (talk) 09:33, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Now that you have explained your plan for changes here on the talk page it should be fine. You can be bold (WP:BOLD) and go ahead. Important: make small incremental changes and explain each time in the edit summary what you have changed and why. Do not make huge changes all in one go! I would say save frequently (meaning: click on "publish changes" frequently). Also make sure you use reliable sources for any new content that you are adding. See WP:SCIRS. Ask here on the talk page if you have any questions. In general: Follow WP guidelines, see e.g. WP:MOS. Turn on e-mail notifications for any pages that you have put on your watchlist (like this one). More tips for new editors in the climate change arena: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Meetup/SDGs/Communication_of_environment_SDGs EMsmile (talk) 10:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! In terms of cutting entire sections out, I should be fine as soon as I explain my reasoning? Thanks again for all the tips Dyeditor (talk) 15:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes you can but what I usually do about that is to move the cut-out text block to the talk page for (potentially) further discussion. See on the talk page of climate justice for example, e.g. here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Climate_justice#Removed_a_section_called_%22Responsibility_and_causes%22 EMsmile (talk) 07:13, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you that's helpful! Dyeditor (talk) 09:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Also, I recommend using the tool Who Wrote That. With that tool you can easily find out when a certain sentence or paragraph was added to the Wikipedia article and by whom. EMsmile (talk) 09:14, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

thanks for all your help! I started editing the page and adding my explanation in the edit summary. Dyeditor (talk) 09:30, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Update on this:

I have now made my edits. The page is pretty long but I think very comprehensive on the topic and helpful for those interested. I moved around sections, deleted repetitive paragraphs, added relevant sections and so on. The editing was pretty major so if anyone here has questions on my editing, I will make sure to explain. I have published bits by bits gradually and have provided explanations in the edit summary as well. Dyeditor (talk) 09:45, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Some quick feedback on further work that is needed (thanks for your work so far!):

• Remove all external links that are currently scattered in the main text. There should be no external links in the main text at all. Convert them to references that go at the end of the sentence if needed.
• You have added some new text without sources. I have indicated where sources are missing with the "citation needed" tags. However, I haven't reviewed everything so please check whereever you have added new text if you have reliable sources for it.
• Weed out wording such as "As Brown, Hammill and McLeman suggest" - this would be OK for a literature review but not for an encyclopedic entry.
• The lead should be made longer and be a good summary. Should be about 4 paragraphs long.
• I don't understand what the section entitled "Academia" is meant to be for? Think of a better section heading.
• Could you think of more images that could be added? You can find them on Wikimedia Commons.
• This one was flagged to me as an unreliable source: https://politicsecology.wordpress.com/2019/07/12/mach-et-al/ This one is also unreliable and broken: Reynard Loki (May 20, 2015). "4 Reasons Climate Change Affects National Security". AlterNet. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
• I am not sure about the section on Impacts. If this is just about the effects of climate change in general, why don't we just use an excerpt instead? I am not sure if it's reasonable to single out that one particular example of the Bay of Bengal. - The issue of rich versus poor for GHG emissions is explained in depth at climate justice EMsmile (talk) 10:19, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

• Hi

  Thanks for the suggestions.I will respond to your questions in the same sequence

  - I will remove external links. I did not know that it's better to keep them as references.

  - I will add more sources to support my text

  - I did not add "As Brown, Hammill and McLeman suggest" but I will make sure to change

  - The lead should be longer. What do you mean by the lead? The opening section?

  - Maybe Academia could be changed to Academic background? Climate security emerges as an academic field foremost and some background should be given on climate security in the academic field

  -I can work on adding images in the next days

  - This source was not added by me: https://politicsecology.wordpress.com/2019/07/12/mach-et-al/ This one is also unreliable and broken: Reynard Loki (May 20, 2015).We can remove it.

  - I understand your point on Impacts. I wanted to keep the example of the Bay of Bengal to have some practical example and also show the disproportionate effects of climate change on vulnerable regions . Dyeditor (talk) 11:09, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for being open to my feedback. Just a few quick notes back:

• if you can, please improve the article in its entirety, not just the new content you have added. That would be great. Don't be scared to remove other people's things if it's outdated, wrong, not due weight, not sourced and so forth. Anything that reads like this "As Brown, Hammill and McLeman suggest" needs to be reworded. Even things like "According to xxx" is to be avoided.
• The lead is the part that comes at the very start, before the first section heading. It's like the abstract of a paper. Please see here for further guidance: WP:LEAD. Not many people/readers seem to know about that. Wikipedia really ought to put a little "summary heading" there...
• I think it would be very hard to pick a suitable example for the impacts on vulnerable people/regions. Aren't we better off referring readers across to climate change vulnerability or perhaps copy something from there? But if not, the Bengal example can stay if it has a better reference to go with it, and to explain how it relates to climate security, not just to climate change vulnerability and climate justice.
• "Background" instead of "Academia" would be better although we hesitate to use "background" as a heading in Wikipedia articles. The "background" could become massive, talk about climate change in general, GHG emissions and so forth. Compare a bit with other similar Wikipedia articles like climate justice or climate change adaptation. I would prefer something like "Rationale", "Objectives", "Challenges", "History", "Development of the concept", "Issues under debate" or something like that. I call that "generic headings". Not all Wikipedia articles follow that but many of the better ones do, and most of the ones that I've edited do use such generic headings. Sometimes it's also useful to have a section heading called "Related concepts".
• Oh and how about a section heading called "Definition" or "Terminology"? I think that would be useful. EMsmile (talk) 12:17, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for all of this!

In the next days I'll focus on:

-improving the entire article. I have already removed old parts that were not relevant so I have done a fair bit of this but will see if other things need to edited/removed. I will also focus on rephrasing all the things that read "as X suggests" etc

-I think we can retitle "Academia" to "History of the concept" so that we keep it separate from the "Background" section

-I will try to expand the lead part. I kept it short because the rest is very long and I thought those two paragraphs summarized the concept of climate security pretty well. But if you think it should be longer, I will do that.

- what would you like to see under the "Definition" or "Terminology"? New content or add something from other sections under there? Dyeditor (talk) 13:07, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please make the lead longer. It should summarise the entire Wikipedia article, not just the concept but also e.g. challenges, alternatives, critiques and so forth.

Regarding the definition or terminology section: if there is suitable content that is already in the article, you could simply move those sentences. If the content doesn't exist yet, then you could add new content. It doesn't have to be long. Compare e.g. with the definition section at climate change vulnerability or the definition and scope section at climate change mitigation or at climate change adaptation. EMsmile (talk) 07:51, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I made these updates, per your suggestion. Thanks again! I am contemplating the idea to translate this page into Italian. I am an Italian native speaker. Do you have any tips and suggestions how to go about it? Dyeditor (talk) 09:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for my delayed response. I've just made some further edits. There are quite a few unsourced statements: I have marked those with "citation needed". Please add reliable sources for those statements. I think it's too early to translate it into Italian. The English version should be optimised first. You could try and attract more eyes and brain power to this, e.g. by showing this article to academic colleagues you might have; and also by posting about it on the talk page of WikiProject Climate Change: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Climate_change . EMsmile (talk) 06:47, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Removed quote by The US Department for National Intelligence 2018

I have removed this quote as I found it not very clear, no specific about the concept of climate security. Also that last sentence about tipping points was strange and I don't think it matches with what the IPCC reports are saying:

+++++

The US Department for National Intelligence 2018 Worldwide Threat Assessment report states:

The past 115 years have been the warmest period in the history of modern civilization, and the past few years have been the warmest years on record. Extreme weather events in a warmer world have the potential for greater impacts and can compound with other drivers to raise the risk of humanitarian disasters, conflict, water and food shortages, population migration, labor shortfalls, price shocks, and power outages. Research has not identified indicators of tipping points in climate-linked Earth systems, suggesting a possibility of abrupt climate change.

EMsmile (talk) 08:07, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

References

EMsmile (talk) 08:07, 26 May 2023 (UTC)