Creating Sustainable Cross-Border Capacities for Environmental Security

1. Creating Sustainable Cross-Border Capacities for Environmental Security A Discussion on �Enhancing� Sovereignty and Environmental Security through Mediated Cross-Border Communities Jay Singh, PhD jsingh@ardinc.com

2. Two-Part Agenda Sovereignty and environmental security cooperation � conceptual framework Understanding �mediated� state capacity

3. Conceptual Framework:Sovereignty Empirical (ability to project state control) vs. juridical (legal) sovereignty Empirical sovereignty vs. regional security Bargaining and creative cooperation to enhance empirical sovereignty along asymmetrical borders (state-building)

4. Environmental Security & National Security Environmental security of a nation or group of nations that shares common natural resources or are within the same eco-region or biome refers to the stability of ecological processes on which people�s well-being depends (Singh & Jackson, 1999). Any threat of damage from violence to and conflict over these natural resources has serious ramifications on the national and regional political security environment as well as public health and well-being. Any threat of damage from violence to and conflict over these natural resources has serious ramifications on the national and regional political security environment as well as public health and well-being.

5. Weak Frontiers with Strong Centers Borders are well-defined High state transaction costs to project power Communities are politically and socio-economically marginalized Poor security and social services delivery Frontier economies defined by natural resources use/capture and migrant labor

6. Mediated State Form of governance that accounts for �messy realities.� Center relies on diverse local actors/ stakeholders to execute core functions of government and �mediate� relations between state and local communities. Allows for local practices to be incorporated (including traditional systems) Allows for cross-border solutions that are locally-owned and supported by state actors.

7. Caveats of a Mediated State Must be a reality not a policy choice � this arrangement is extra-constitutional This is not state-building Empirical sovereignty may be considered to be �sub-contracted� and local entities require a great deal of independence �Sub-contractors� must be legitimate and act in public interest (locally and nationally) Short to medium term process allowing the center to develop more robust response to border areas.

8. Concerns Human rights abuses in the name of traditional law Traditional law often over-whelmed by global and external realities Lack of and uneven capacities and legitimate actors Potential for being politically compromised Often ineffective in addressing regional factors of environmental security that require state action

9. Addressing Underlying Factors of Insecurity through Mediated States Support for mediated state as a form of governance to address underlying factors Establish and support cross-border development committees Creating specific roles and objectives (rangeland management, security, social services, etc.) Training and financial support Assistance to harmonize local practices with national laws/codes

10. Factors Influencing Cross-Border Cooperation with Mediated States The �idea� of transboundary cooperation and the degree to which it is valued by the adjoining areas. The availability of modern communication technology � phones and faxes. Leadership (even just on one side) with vision, technical expertise and will. Personal contact. Face-to-face meetings are one of the most instrumental factors of cooperation.

11. Conclusion US-Mexico Border � a possible mediated state on the Mexican-side Role of local groups in promoting national security Need for an interagency support on the US-side for this approach