| Climate was the dominant influence on geopolitical theory and international relations before the industrial revolution. Early scholars, such as Aristotle and Montesquieu, divided the world into temperature zones and the climatic forces in these zones were thought to be major influences on the political, social, and economic institutions that developed. Modern innovations like air conditioning and disease vaccines contributed to a process that dramatically lessened the influence of climate on international relations. However, other modern innovations such as coal-fired electric plants and gasoline-powered automobiles, as major factors contributing to global climate change, may reverse that process.; The consensus of most of the world's climatologists is that global climate change is essentially an anthropogenic process that will probably cause the world to warm from 2.2°F--10°F (1.4°C--5.8°C) by the year 2100. As a consequence, sea levels will probably rise and some plants and animals could become extinct. Overall, researchers conclude most effects of climate change will probably not be benign, climate change cannot be stopped, and as a result global efforts are needed to mitigate or adapt to the consequences. As a result, the costs of mitigation or adaptation could be substantial or the costs could be moderate, depending on how the challenge is addressed. In effect, global climate change may become an environmental force, a catalyst for international relations change that must be reckoned with soon---very soon.; The changing climate could be an environmental catalyst that may precipitate political, social, and economic transformations. Politically, the outcomes of global warming could initiate replacement of the dominant international relations paradigm. Realism may be replaced by liberalism as the preeminent theory of international relations. Socially, the impacts of global climate change might drive the dominant social paradigm from its perch as the most applicable social environmental paradigm, replaced by ecological modernization theories. Last, the reign of the neo-classical economic paradigm may come to an end. Essentially, ecological economics may answer the environmental-economic puzzles created by global warming more completely than conventional, neo-classical economics. If the political, social, economic, and environmental forces associated with global climate change hastens paradigm changes a new equilibrium may be established based on a synthesis of the paradigm change winners, liberalism, ecological modernization, and ecological economics, perhaps described as liberal economic ecology. In conclusion, global climate change is one of the most powerful political, social, economic, and environmental forces that man has ever encountered and could potentially catalyze profound global changes in one form or another. |
