環境紛争の事例による紛争解決過程の分析 : マレーシアにおける環境紛争の事例を中心にして
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
Environmental conflicts are caused by competition over scarce natural resources and environmentally polluting activities. Although an environmental conflict is an unfortunate incident, it may have a number of positive effects. The process of conflict resolution can be regarded as a process of building consensus in a society. To understand this process, it is necessary to look at actual cases of environmental conflict and to analyze how a solution was reached. Such an analysis will help us understand the process of resolving environmental conflicts. Analyses of the environmental conflict resolution processes were undertaken on a number of environmental conflicts in Malaysia. The cases included natural resource uses such as Batu Caves quarrying, logging of Endau-Rompin, the Penang Hill development and the Tembeling dam; and industrial development such as the Prai Industrial Estate and the Asian Rare Earth issue. The analyses focused on the activities of various actors including polluters, victims, non-governmental organizations, the state governments, and the federal government; and the roles of each of these actors in the process of conflict resolution. The cases analyzed in this paper were ones in which environmental polluters stopped their activities after facing the opposition of environmental victims and citizens. A number of important findings were made. First, local people, especially victims, performed a vital role at the beginning of the conflict and throughout the process. Second, the victims usually formed a group to achieve collective power, and the group became the core of an environmental movement. Third, nongovernmental organizations played a major role in helping the victims by publicizing the issue and mobilizing various resources. The authorities responsible for the environmental conflict then made a decision to stop the pollution or the natural resource development. The state governments were found often to play the role of the resource developer, whilst the federal government became the mediator in the environmental dispute. As the judiciary process tends to escalate confrontation and to take longer to reach a conclusion, a public forum and a closed committee may be useful in finding a solution. Such committees were established in some of the cases analyzed, but in the main proved ineffectual. It is argued that the relevant authority must make more efforts to establish an effective forum to discuss an environmental issue.
- 1995-03-31