Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
He refers to composite goods for which natural resources constitute a significant input
as developed natural resources. Moreover, because human activity might also decrease
the value of natural resources - e.g. pollution can cause a reduction in the value of
otherwise pristine land, water and air - Mazor (2009) labels resources with values
reduced by human activity as degraded natural resources.
So there we are: composite goods and degraded natural resources are the terms to
be used the moment labour or human activities take away the virginity of the natural
resource. Using an instrumentalist approach, natural resources of interest are those
that are valuable or 'useful for the attainment of human goals'. Having significantly
reduced the number of 'pure' natural resources, Mazor (2009: 41) proceeds by defining
a resource as “anything that is useful for the attainment of human goals.'' That means
that he excludes the so-called inherent value of a natural resource, at least for some of
the natural resources - e.g. animals and landscapes. This leaves only a limited number
of resources that can be considered useful as well as natural - e.g., oil in the Arctic
seabed.
Interesting in Mazor's approach is the centrality of the issue of property rights in
developed and degraded natural resources. He questions, “Who (if anyone) was justly
entitled to develop and degrade them in the first place. The answer to this question may
have important consequences for how we view current property rights in developed
natural resources'' (Mazor 2009: 42). Especially in relation to an understanding of why
and how conflicts over natural resources erupt, the issue of property rights deserves
special attention.
According to Kok et al. (2006: 8), “a large proportion of Africans are dependent
on natural resources and the environment to subsist.'' Continuing, they explain that
the latter of these two assets “is the foundation of livelihoods based on subsistence and
commercial farming, animal husbandry, trade and mining. These activities are inextri-
cably linked to the availability of natural resources and the sustainable management
of those resources'' (Kok et al. 2006: 8). The authors stress that natural resources and
the environment are different concepts. Natural resource factors are defined as non-
renewable extractable resources such as minerals, oil and diamonds. Environmental
factors are categorised as renewable sources of livelihood that allow a person to make
a living. Environmental factors such as land, water, fish stocks and timber may not
be accessible to all people in a geographical area, and may be degraded by use or
mismanagement.
Both Mazor (2009) and Kok et al. (2006) acknowledge the need to relate natural
resources to their utility for making a living, but they use fundamentally different con-
cepts of natural resources. Where Mazor (2009) would dismiss the distinction between
natural resources and environmental factors since both are linked to people's liveli-
hoods, the distinction serves a specific purpose for Kok et al. (2006). For the latter, it
allows the distinction of two categories of motivations for conflicts, also known as the
concept of greed (linked to natural resources) and grievance (linked to environmental
factors). In addition, they indicate an overlap between greed and grievance similar to
an overlap between environmental factors (land, water) and natural resources (min-
erals, metals, diamonds). In this overlap, factors such as timber, oil and fish feature
prominently (see Kok et al 2006: 14). The advantage of this approach is that it recog-
nises specific qualities of the resources and the extent to which these explain certain
conflict characteristics.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search