Book Review

Climate Change and Displacement: Multidisciplinary Perspective tries to argue that the way we are handling environmental displacement and migration is insufficient and will not resolve the issues at hand. McAdam wants to bring in people of many different fields and professions to contribute to this book. He believes that a multidisciplinary perspective is needed to better understand the problem. The book brings a holistic analyze of the issue at hand and that this can't be answered from just one single field alone. This excerpt from the introduction creates the foundation of the arguments presented in the book. "Governments have not been prepared to take a leading role in developing responses to the issue, in large part due to the absence of strong theoretical and empirical frameworks from which sound policy can be constructed. The specialist expertise of the authors in this book means that each chapter identifies key issues that need to be considered in shaping domestic, regional and international responses, including the complex causes of movement" (McAdam 2010, 1)  

 The book also goes into great detail about some of the most prevalent states that are and will continue to deal with climate change and environmental displacement. That being Asia and the Pacific area. It states the attachment they have to their land, and the complex issues that arise from being forced to leave your land. The book also goes into detail about the history of the Pacific Island States and how they are trying to combat this issue. With Chapter 4 talking about the importance of land to these people and Chapter 6 talking about the concept of disappearing States and how they are trying to combat the issue. Some specific examples are that of the Maldive government trying on multiple occasions to encourage their many islanders to leave their homes and live in a specific list of islands. At first it was 85 and now the goal is about 20 to 25 islands with actual civilians in them. The idea being that it would be much easier, economically, to manage these people if they were more together, rather than spread out on hundreds of islands. Another option is the buying of land from other states such as Australia or New Zealand. 

The book as a whole does a wonderful job presenting all the information in a coherent manner. It starts off with what existing frameworks there are about migration, then goes into specific areas that are heavily affected by the issue. Since there are so much authors with proficiency in different fields it gives you a nice outlook on how people of these particular field think of the same issue. Then it shows and encourages the uses of these multiple perspectives and disciplines to create new normative frameworks. The book does end on a semi negative note; this is due to the time frame in which to book was published. It being 2010, there was the very unsuccessful 2009 Copenhagen Climate Summit. This is due to the fact that it didn't properly address any of the issues and no consensus was made at that time. It had over 115 states and there were high hopes for its success. The book concludes with a need of more research needing to be done on this issue. It is encouraging more micro-level empirical research to better understand the complexity of the issue and at the same time the gathering of people of different fields to add to the debate. It wants the powerful states that are the main contributors of the rise in climate change to take a proactive stance and for it to be a more prevalent topic in future United Nation Conferences

Bibliography - 

McAdam. Climate Change and Displacement: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Hart Publishing Limited, 2010. 

Regarding staying consistent with the overall idea of the paper and a little added section to the paper

Monday Professor Cocozzelli stated that when it comes to writing you have to stay consistent with your argument. Taking one argument and truly presenting it. I find that when writing I tend to add other arguments and it muddles the overall paper. So I have been taking the time to go back and make sure there is a focus to the paper. I still thing it is important to acknowledge other arguments and what they have to offer. Especially when it comes to migration and the concept of environmental refugees. This issue is one that doesn't seem to like it is going to be resolved anytime soon and seems like it will be a critical issue topic in the near future. They can only migrate further inland for so long, before it becomes pointless. I believe a more holistic view is needed when tackling this issue. We can't make progress if we just continue with empirical research alone.

There is also many layers in the international system that makes taking steps to actually solve this issue inefficient. While efforts are being made to help lighten the burden of the south pacific islands, such as aid and technology there is actually an issue with that as well. The main one is that it is only a temporary fix. I equate it to getting shot and then having someone come up and put a band-aid adhesive pad over it. The wound is no longer visible and blood isn't coming out from that area, but you are still internally bleeding and will still die. It is still needed as a way to slow the damage, but at the same time a long term more permanent solution is needed as well.

Some of my kinks during the writing process

Currently some of the issues I'm currently facing with my paper is meshing institutional approach with particularly more recent issues that have occurred in Haiti (such as the 2010 earthquake and government aid from the US). After finally posing a question that I aim to answer within my paper I have found a lot more arguments to make. However, at the same time I've also realized that focusing to heavily on the historical context of Haiti and DR may not be in my best interest if I don't remain focused on my institutional argument. Due to this I have contemplated either focusing on only more recent issues between DR and Haiti. Or even going as far to only focus on Haiti alone. Which brings another issue I have been facing. A lot of the sources I have been researching for this project have been noticeably biased. Either one side being partisan to Haiti or DR. There are a few ways around this but again it has been tough trying to mesh it all together while staying on the topic of strictly black identity.

Chicago Style Citation Troubles

I was recently reminded by a classmate that we have to cite the paper in Chicago Style. This has become a slight problem for me, as I am currently going back in my paper and reformatting. That is not a huge issue, the real problem is that this is my first time citing in this fashion. I am in the process of issuing footnotes for all of my quotes and cited sources, but am being sucked into the Purdue OWL site because I have no experience with this. I actually just stopped into the Writing Center for help with it, as I was not sure footnotes should be listed chronologically or if the multiple citations from the same source should be listed in the same clump (i.e. 1,2 not 1____3). My advice to those who have this same issue, stop into the Writing Center. I was in and out within a minute because of the helpful receptionist type workers.

Syrian Partition

This is a crude map I made that represents what a partitioned Syria might look like. 

Rabab Mushtaq

                                                Book Review

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is an intergovernmental economic organization with 35 member countries, aiming to promote policies that will improve the economic and social well being of people around the world. OECD has a series called Recruiting Immigrant Workers, which focuses on countries labor migration policies. With an institutional and economical approach, each volume analyzes whether a country is effectively using migration policies to help meet its labor needs in response to their institutional forces, as well as limiting any unfavorable effects on their national economic growth.

As Germany is one of the member countries of OECD, in 2013 the organization published Recruiting Immigrant Workers: Germany, which argued that Germany is dealing with a detrimental shrink in their working age population. Germany being one of the fastest aging countries in the OECD, it is destructive, economically, if the working age-population starts to decline sharply. As a result, the nation is in dire need to recruit workers, however, the demand cannot be met at a domestic level because of the nation’s demographics. Labor shortages in Germany are noticeable with the rising numbers of vacancies, which OECD discusses. Shortages according to OECD, are expected in all levels of skilled workers from high to low and are expected to increase with time. With employment levels in Germany being generally high in comparison to other countries, the labor market is promising for vast peoples such as women, refugees, and older workers.

Although the book heavily focuses on Germany’s labor migration policy, such as working permits and student visas, there is immense amount of information in regards Germany’s labor needs. I chose OECD’s Recruiting Immigrant Workers: Germany as a means to find adequate information on how refugees will become a catalyst to improve the shortage in Germany’s labor force and stabilize their economy. “According to the United Nations population projections, there will be about 60% more people leaving the working age population in Germany than entering it in 2020. Part of this decline is due to much lower levels of immigration in Germany” (OECD, 35). This information strengthens my research by affirming that Germany will reap economical benefits from opening their doors for refugees. However, being written in 2013, there is no explicit discussion of the refugees in regards to Germany’s recent open door policy. Furthermore, Germany being a member of the OECD organization can raise concerns upon the organization ability to publish an unbiased critical analysis of Germany. However, this book is informative due to the enormous amount of tables and figures displaying trends that correlate to the content within the text. Additionally, the detailed reference has become essential in obtaining work correlated to my research.               

The book is separated into five chapters, addressing key areas such as, demographics (discussing the declining working age population), Germany’s labor force (vacant occupations), German employer demands (highly skilled to low skilled workers), Germany’s labor migration policy in response to the labor shortage, and more. Throughout the book, the contributors show a detailed declination of the labor force in various fields with the support from the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Federal Employment Agency, and the Central Foreigners Registry Division of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees. One example is the following, “the German Federal Employment Agency forecasts-in the absence of change—a skilled—labor shortage of about 5.4 million by 2025” (OECD, 45). Another example was an analysis done by the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, which concluded that labor shortages in specific occupations occur not only in highly qualified occupations, but also in a number of apprenticeship-level occupations. “The largest number of shortages for apprenticeships was in service occupations, such as merchants, sales personnel, cooks, waiters, hotel clerks, and hairdressers” (OECD, 36).

 Recruiting Immigrant Workers: Germany contains extensive statistical data. It can be argued that refugees entering Germany have an opportunity to obtain an occupation, which can benefit economical stability in regards to labor shortage. With the support of the institutions mentioned earlier, such as the Federal Employment Agency and the Central Foreigners Registry Division of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, the book contains valuable data that supports OECD’s argument on Germany facing a labor crisis and their need of migrants to stabilize their economy.

Bibliography

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Recruiting Immigrant Workers: Germany. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2013.

-->

  

My Paper Abstract

Since I haven't posted it on this blog yet, I thought I'd provide a summary of my research project:

Working from a neorealist perspective, I offer an interpretation of the Syrian Civil War in terms of ethnic partition theory. However, in order to reasonably interpret the Syrian situation through the lens of ethnic partition theory, the theory’s central conceptual model of the proliferation of sectarian violence—the ethnic security dilemma—must be revised. I propose a nuanced account of the ethnic security dilemma referred to as the heterogeneity time bomb hypothesis. I submit that this modified account of the ethnic security dilemma will supply the theoretical equipment necessary to defend an ethnic partition theory-based interpretation of the Syrian Civil War from the critics of such an interpretation, in particular, Erin K. Jenne.

There are at least three problems with applying ethnic partition theory to the case of Syria. More generally, these three problems prevent the application of ethnic partition theory, and consequently, its policy implications of population transfer and new borders, to more than a small handful of particular cases. I refer to these problems as the problem of elites, the problem of the threshold, and the problem of other causes. These three problems facing ethnic partition theory can be summarized by three questions, respectively. (1) What if it is the case that ethnic cleansing and sectarian violence are carried out by malevolent offensively-oriented opportunists rather than rational defensively-oriented security-seekers? (2) How can we know the point at which an ethnic security dilemma is occurring, and if we can, at what point does it warrant partition? (3) If it is the case that sectarian violence is caused by a source other than interethnic animosities, what good will new borders and population transfer do?

          The heterogeneity time bomb hypothesis, I believe, provides a defense to ethnic partition theory in light of these problems. The hypothesis may be stated thus: given x level of ethnic heterogeneity within a state, any civil conflict necessarily approaches the ethnic security dilemma. The subtlety of this hypothesis stresses the temporal dimension of the security dilemma phenomenon as well as the requirement for sufficient ethnic heterogeneity. So long as a violent civil conflict is ongoing, a state will invariably approach conditions of anarchy, and consequently, the security dilemma.  The hypothetical syllogism implied by the heterogeneity time bomb hypothesis can be stated thus: If a civil conflict emerges, then a state of x ethnic heterogeneity will approach anarchy. If a state of x ethnic heterogeneity approaches anarchy, then it approaches the ethnic security dilemma. Therefore, if a civil conflict emerges, then a state of x ethnic heterogeneity will approach the ethnic security dilemma.

            Thus, the project endeavors to complete four goals: (a) provide an overview of ethnic partition theory as articulated most prominently by Chaim Kaufmann as well as common objections to it, (b) identify the current weaknesses of ethnic partition theory that preclude its reasonable application to cases more generally, (c) propose and articulate a nuanced account of the ethnic security dilemma that can address the weaknesses faced by ethnic partition theory and better defend it from its critics, and (d) offer an interpretation of the Syrian Civil War in terms of such a nuanced account of the ethnic security dilemma.