Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Peace Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Payne, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Limits and Promise of Environmental Conflict Prevention: The Case of the GEF

Rodger A. Payne

Department of Political Science, University of Louisville

Sustainable development practices should be embraced not only to forestall environmental destruction and resource exhaustion, but also to prevent conflicts apparently triggered by these causes. Unfortunately, environmentally-caused conflicts are perhaps most likely to erupt in the world's poorest states, which are least capable of pursuing sustainable development without substantial external aid. The global assistance burden is felt primarily by multilateral developments agencies, such as the World Bank, which distributes more than USD 20 billion annually. Interestingly, the Bank acts as Trustee for the sizable Global Environment Facility (GEF) which was specifically designed to add environmental dimensions to projects funded for more general development purposes. Ironically, before the GEF was created, the World Bank was long criticized for funding unsustainable development, for ignoring its own environmental standards, for making decisions without the input of affected parties or non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and for withholding vital project information from potential critics, such as transnational environmental groups. While the danger of financing unsustainable projects and overlooking environmental standards is obvious, denying access to decision-making and program information also undermines environmental progress. In short, sustainable development depends upon the free flow of information and multiple inputs into decision-making. This article explores whether the GEF can be expected to identify and fund significant environmental projects in conflict-prone regions. It also examines the politics of GEF decision-making, with an emphasis on transparency, accountability, and participation.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 35, No. 3, 363-380 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343398035003006


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
O. Magnus Theisen
Blood and Soil? Resource Scarcity and Internal Armed Conflict Revisited
Journal of Peace Research, November 1, 2008; 45(6): 801 - 818.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
T. A. Benjaminsen
Does Supply-Induced Scarcity Drive Violent Conflicts in the African Sahel? The Case of the Tuareg Rebellion in Northern Mali
Journal of Peace Research, November 1, 2008; 45(6): 819 - 836.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
P. Lujala, N. P. Gleditsch, and E. Gilmore
A Diamond Curse?: Civil War and a Lootable Resource
Journal of Conflict Resolution, August 1, 2005; 49(4): 538 - 562.
[Abstract] [PDF]