Regional conflicts

STRATEGIC FORESIGHT FOR SUCCESSFUL NET-ZERO TRANSITIONS

Regional Conflicts Military spending increases as multiple conflicts fester POSSIBLE 2030-2050 DISRUPTION Several regional conflicts break out on multiple continents in the 2020s and early 2030s that require urgent global action to resolve. Major global powers have interests in supporting opposite sides in all the conflicts that erupt.

Military spending increases substantially in virtually all jurisdictions.

Disinformation and propaganda campaigns have become a growing feature on social media where various sides try to sway public opinion at home and abroad.

Multiple regions of the world are dealing with several millions refugees fleeing wars.

CONTEXT

A T E B

Global climate agreements are built around explicit and implicit assumptions about continued global peace and cooperation. They assume climate change will be a top priority for multilateral action for the coming decades. The IEA’s Net-zero 2050 Framework states that cooperation between nations is essential. However, violence and conflict are currently increasing, and climate change acts as an additional risk factor for armed conflict in fragile states.

Source: Uppsala Conflict Data Program

This series is part of the Strategic Foresight for Successful Net-Zero Transitions toolkit which assists governments and organisations to develop forward-looking, adaptive and future-ready strategies for net-zero emission transitions.

Each part of the series showcases one “Possible Disruption” during the 2030-2050 period that could generate new opportunities or challenges for public policy. Each disruption was developed with foresight, academic and policy experts and represents a plausible extreme in a rapidly changing and uncertain future.

SIGNAL

SIGNAL

SIGNAL

Following Russian aggression in Ukraine, Germany has promised it will increase military spending to over 2 percent of its GDP.

Wars can make shifting to clean energy more difficult and incentivize greater domestic use and production of fossil fuels in Western countries.

At the end of 2021, those displaced by war, violence, and human rights abuses totaled 89.3 million. Double the figure of 10 years prior.

POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS Unavoidable conflicts may lead to the diversion of funding from all sectors towards the military and the militarisation of the economy. Thus, war efforts can either accelerate or undermine green innovation and climate friendly behavioural shifts. Military research and procurement can spur advancements in energy storage, nuclear power, electrification of heavy transport, biofuels, carbon capture, use and storage, and better environmental monitoring through satellites. Investments in renewable energy and equipment could reduce the risk that security interests lead to fossil fuel infrastructure being phased down slowly to preserve energy independence in some regions. Various forms of circular economy initiatives could increase strategic autonomy and supply-chain resilience.

Sanctions imposed because of unavoidable conflict could lead to higher commodity prices globally and potentially have a destabilising effect on some countries. Sanctions may lead to erratic behaviour from some states, for instance if they cannot access global markets to sell products or procure technology or basic necessities. This could lead to overfishing, poaching and the depletion of ecosystems in desperate countries.

Destabilisation of some states could exacerbate internal displacement and refugee crises. In such a situation, investment in green infrastructure and temporary housing may allow communities and countries to sustain a far larger populations than are currently forecasted.

A T E B

Post-conflict rebuilding can either further entrench dirty technologies or hasten a green transition. Aid funding may be tied to green technologies. Buildings could be rebuilt using sustainable materials that are carbon neutral or carbon negative, helping to scale up the low-carbon construction industry. New energy efficient architectural and urban planning approaches that reduce heating or cooling requirements could be used to demonstrate the emissions savings potential of these technologies.

QUESTIONS FOR POLICYMAKERS

POLICY RESPONSES

•

What international humanitarian law and environmental protections need to be updated and strengthened?

•

How can environmental and sustainable development objectives be insulated from the consequences of armed conflicts?

•

In the event of unavoidable conflict, how can military spending contribute to a netzero transition instead of entrenching existing high emissions technologies and operations?

The United Kingdom's Ministry of Defence announced its Climate Change and Sustainable Strategic Approa ch , recognizing the role the armed forces has in a net zero transition. The plan charts a course to increase operational self-sufficiency, reducing remands in low-resource environments. It invests into R&D for new defence technologies and infrastructure and highlights behavioural and systems change through training and educating defence personnel on sustainability. Clear targets and transparent accounting of emissions will create incentives throughout supply chains.

STRATEGIC FORESIGHT FOR SUCCESSFUL NET-ZERO TRANSITIONS www.oecd.org/strategic-foresight | foresight@oecd.org