Human conflict and ecosystem services: finding the environmental price of warfare

Environmental degradation resulting from warfare is a growing concern, particularly with increasing recognition of humanity's dependence on healthy ecosystems. Though environmental legislation does exist that seeks to prevent or mitigate environmental harm before, during and after conflict, it has limited scope and effectiveness. This may be one reason why the environmental laws of war are so rarely applied in attempts to bring parties responsible for environmental harm to justice. Enforcement of such legal instruments also requires appropriate quantification of environmental damage, which is particularly difficult in a warfare context. A focus on the loss of environmental resources, habitats or ecosystems is only part of the story—the real cost of environmental damage is in the loss of ecosystem services that such resources provide, both now and in the future, and which regional and global human societies depend upon. The ecosystem services framework, wherein the costs of damage to ecosystem services are quantified in economic terms, may prove a more effective way of highlighting the environmental damage resulting from warfare. Moreover, quantification along monetary lines is potentially more likely to establish a solid case for justifiable reparations than criteria relating to loss of biodiversity or ecosystem health, which are more difficult for society and governmental agencies to place specific values on. This article discusses the ecosystem services framework in the context of warfare, and highlights both the potential and the challenges that may accompany adoption of such a framework by the international community.     

Missions on the Frontiers of Spanish America

This article examines missions as a colonial institution on the fringes of Spanish America. The Spanish Crown employed the mission as a cost-effective form of converting to Catholicism native peoples living on the frontiers of Spanish America, and incorporating them into the new colonial social and economic order. The article compares missions in northern Mexico, the Río de la Plata region, and eastern Bolivia.     

Source water protection in a landscape of 'New Era' deregulation

The concept of source water protection (SWP) has gained prominence in the water resource literature. SWP consists of watershed and groundwater management for the protection of drinking water supplies. The logic behind SWP is that it is easier, cheaper and safer to protect a drinking water source from contamination than it is to remediate after contamination. SWP is largely a regulatory activity, requiring provincial government policy commitments. This research investigates the degree to which recent provincial deregulation plays a role in constraining SWP implementation at the local water utility level. The research was undertaken in British Columbia (BC) where, after 2001, the provincial government advanced widespread 'New Era' deregulation of social and environmental legislation. The apparent contradiction between government deregulation and government commitment to safe drinking water is interrogated. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and document review in the Okanagan Basin. This article reveals that New Era deregulation initiatives have constrained local efforts to implement SWP on the ground. This article recommends that a single provincial agency should oversee drinking water in BC and that greater attention be given to regional governance for drinking water management in the Okanagan Basin.