{"id":10324,"date":"2011-02-10T12:32:42","date_gmt":"2011-02-10T18:32:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.sustainablog.org\/?p=10324"},"modified":"2011-02-10T12:32:42","modified_gmt":"2011-02-10T18:32:42","slug":"failing-states-environment-demographics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/failing-states-environment-demographics\/","title":{"rendered":"Environmental and Demographic Forces Threaten State Failure"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/a> Uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, and across the Middle East at the start of 2011 have reminded the world just how politically fragile some countries are. But the focus of international politics has been shifting for some time now. After a half-century of forming new states from former colonies and from the breakup of the Soviet Union, the international community is today faced with the opposite situation: the disintegration of states. As an article<\/a> in Foreign Policy<\/em> observes, \u201cFailed states have made a remarkable odyssey from the periphery to the very center of global politics.\u201d<\/p>\n The Failed States Index, undertaken by the Fund for Peace<\/a> and published in each July\/August issue of Foreign Policy<\/a><\/em>, ranks 177 countries according to \u201ctheir vulnerability to violent internal conflict and societal deterioration,\u201d based on 12 social, economic, and political indicators. In 2005, just 7 countries had scores of 100 or more out of 120. (A score of 120 would mean that a society is failing totally by every measure.) By 2010, it was 15. Higher scores for countries at the top and the doubling of countries with scores of 100 or higher suggest that state failure is both spreading and deepening. States fail when national governments lose control of part or all of their territory and can no longer ensure people\u2019s security. Failing states often degenerate into civil war as opposing groups vie for power. In Afghanistan, for example, the local warlords or the Taliban, not the central government, control the country outside of Kabul.<\/p>\n One reason for government breakdowns that has become more relevant recently is the inability to provide food security — not necessarily because the government is less competent but because obtaining enough food is becoming more difficult. Providing sufficient food has proved to be particularly challenging since the rise in food prices that began in early 2007. Although grain prices subsided again for a while, they have remained well above historical levels and, at the beginning of 2011, are fast approaching levels similar to the spring 2008 peak.<\/p>\n Among the top 20 countries <\/a>on the 2010 Failed States list, all but a few are losing the race between food production and population growth. The populations in 15 of the top 20 failing states are growing between 2 and 4 percent a year. Many governments are suffering from demographic fatigue, unable to cope with the steady shrinkage in cropland and freshwater supply per person or to build schools fast enough for the swelling ranks of children.<\/p>\n In 14 of the top 20 failing states, at least 40 percent of the population is under 15, a demographic indicator<\/a> that raises the likelihood of future political instability. Many are caught in the demographic trap: they have developed enough economically and socially to reduce mortality but not enough to lower fertility. As a result, large families beget poverty and poverty begets large families.<\/p>\n
\n By Lester R. Brown<\/strong><\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\nFailing States: The Causes<\/h2>\n