Main page content

Why can’t academics agree whether climate change causes wars?

A fight between rival academics over climate change and conflict has important messages for peacekeepers, says Alex Randall.

This week a fight has broken out between rival academics about the relationship between climate change and conflict.

Neither side disputes the physical science of climate change. Neither disputes that there is a relationship between climate change and conflict. Both sides agree that the climate change is not one of biggest drivers of conflict.

The disagreement is about how powerful the climate-conflict link is.

On one side we have Burke and Hsiang.

They have produced several meta-studies on the connection between climate and conflict. Each of these studies shows a significant and powerful relationship between altered weather patterns and conflict. The most recent – a working paper published in October – combines data from 55 different peer reviewed papers.

On the other side we have a group of 26 researchers who think the connection is not as powerful and Burke and Hsiang make out.

They argue that Burke and Hsiang have not analysed the data correctly, and have omitted several studies that have skewed their results. They argue that this explains why their conclusions differ from the rest of the academic community, and from the conclusions of the IPCC.

Crime

The most recent Burke and Hsiang study uses a very broad definition of conflict.

For the compete article, please see RTCC.