Book Reviews
Huda, Mirza Sadaqat. 2020. Energy Cooperation in South Asia: Utilising Natural Resources for
Peace and Sustainable Development. New York, NY: Routledge.
Reviewed by Juliann Emmons Allison
University of California, Riverside
Mirza Sadaqat Huda addresses the “energy, environment, and growth nexus” that
is among the central concerns of contemporary global environmental politics
(GEP). Huda recognizes that energy shortages are due to the widening gap
between increasing demand for energy in the region and lagging supply. He
argues that while regional demand for energy is due to economic growth, large
and urbanizing economies and technical inefficiencies, domestic political conflicts,
ineffective economic policies, and bureaucratic delays all contribute to insufficient
energy supplies. These shortages impede education, health care, income, gender
equity, and other social policy goals. The socioeconomic consequences for South
Asian peoples render energy insecurity in the region a major nontraditional
(human) security risk. Huda identifies regional energy cooperation as essential to
the provision of adequate and affordable energy to communities throughout South
Asia without undue environmental harm or social injustice.
The book responds directly to a relatively sparse literature on energy in
South Asia that remains dominated by security-centric analyses. Huda argues that
because the foundation of energy politics in Southern Asia lies in the region’s
rapid economic development, maldistribution of economic and political power,
territorial disputes, separatist movements and insurgencies, varied political
systems and cultures, and weak economic and security integration, it is essential
to incorporate environmental and social, as well as security, aspects of energy.
This approach is consistent with the broader literature on regional governance
of energy resources. This analysis is premised on the greater efficiency of regional,
as opposed to national or bilateral, energy—that is, electricity and oil and gas
pipeline—transmission infrastructures; regional energy market integration; and
the regional impacts of air and water pollution and other environmental external-
ities associated with energy production, transmission, and local distribution. It
also reflects the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation’s own recog-
nition of the significance of energy among the organization’s other concerns,
which include poverty alleviation, broader economic cooperation, and common
security threats. These theoretical and practical concerns contextualize Huda’s
effort to explain why, despite extensive and ongoing economic and technical
cooperation and market-based initiatives, not one cooperative energy project
has been completed in South Asia.
Global Environmental Politics 21:2, May 2021
© 2021 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
165
l
D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
i
r
e
c
t
.
m
i
t
.
l
/
/
e
d
u
g
e
p
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d
l
f
/
/
/
/
2
1
2
1
6
5
1
9
1
1
3
9
3
g
e
p
_
r
_
0
0
6
0
1
p
d
.
/
l
f
b
y
g
u
e
s
t
t
o
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3
166 (cid:129) Book Reviews
Huda argues that the political and security challenges to South Asian energy
cooperation identified by GEP scholars and regional actors alike have not been
thoroughly analyzed. The conventional geopolitical view fails to adequately incor-
porate nonstate and extraregional stakeholders, climate change and other environ-
mental concerns related to ensuring energy security, and social justice. In response to
this considerable lacuna, Huda develops a constructivist theoretical framework to
guide a multimethod analysis of four cooperative energy projects in South Asia: the
failure of the Myanmar–Bangladesh–India (MBI) gas pipeline; the Turkmenistan–
Afghanistan–Pakistan–India (TAPI or “Trans-Afghanistan” gas pipeline) to begin
construction in 2021; the proposed Tipaimukh Dam; and subregional, Bangladesh–
Bhutan–India–Nepal (BBIN), cooperative hydroelectric power initiatives. Con-
structivism provides a “conceptual umbrella” (37) for Huda’s use of subsidiary
theories—stakeholder analysis, energy diplomacy, environmental peacebuilding,
and cooperative security—to analyze these case studies of regional cooperation on
gas pipelines and hydroelectric power generation. Together, these analyses illumi-
nate multiple and varied obstacles to energy cooperation in South Asia that Huda
argues might be mitigated by more effective and inclusive leadership and planning.
Energy Cooperation in South Asia succeeds in providing a comprehensive over-
view of the history and current state of energy cooperation in South Asia. Detailed
case studies illuminate the ways that apparently extraneous issues—for example,
hostility around historically normalized India–Bangladesh border crossings in
the MBI pipeline case and food and human security risks associated with Tipaimukh
Dam—have complicated and forestalled energy cooperation regarded as essential
for meeting current and future demands for conventional fuels and electrical power
in the region. Such deep and compelling substantive insights come at high theoret-
ical price. Huda’s effective integration and evaluation of multiple international and
subnational processes (stakeholder analysis and methods of reducing tensions to
facilitate cooperation), tools (diplomacy to manage the transition to lower carbon
energy sources), and strategies (environmental cooperation to build peace)
demonstrate the value of constructivist analyses for understanding individual cases.
This assessment substantiates Huda’s claim that weak systems of governance in
South Asia undermine the capacity of any single, Western theoretical framework
premised on the sovereign nation-state to account for lagging energy cooperation
in the region. Yet it is easy to feel let down by the monograph’s failure to, at least,
suggest a compelling regionally specific alternative.
Overall, the book provides a clear, concise history and analysis of energy coop-
eration in South Asia, featuring in-depth analyses of key cases that will be useful for
researchers and practitioners concerned with regional governance of energy resources.
The region’s political leaders and policy makers are likely to find Huda’s articulation
of specific recommendations for improving leadership and planning to support
successful energy cooperation in South Asia particularly important. South Asian spe-
cialists and GEP scholars will appreciate Huda’s critique of facile applications of realist
and liberal theories to energy governance in South Asia and elsewhere, as well as his
use of constructivism to elucidate pathways to energy cooperation in the region.
l
D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
i
r
e
c
t
.
m
i
t
.
l
/
/
e
d
u
g
e
p
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d
l
f
/
/
/
/
2
1
2
1
6
5
1
9
1
1
3
9
3
g
e
p
_
r
_
0
0
6
0
1
p
d
.
/
l
f
b
y
g
u
e
s
t
t
o
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3
Casey Stevens (cid:129) 167
Barandiarán, Javiera. 2018. Science and Environment in Chile: The Politics of Expert Advice in
a Neoliberal Democracy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Reviewed by Casey Stevens
Providence College
Javiera Barandiarán’s Science and Environment in Chile presents an empirically rich
analysis of conflicts related to environmental impact assessments (EIAs) in Chile.
Investigating “what kinds of democratic states [are] produced alongside EIAs”
(25), the book engages in a thorough investigation of four case studies in Chile,
each of which explores the politics of neoliberal environmental policy making.
The book adds to existing literatures about the politics of scientific expertise with
an exploration of a country case that exemplifies the separate pulls of neoliberal-
ism and democratic demands for accountable governance. The central insight of
the book’s four case studies—dealing with salmon farming, a paper and pulp
mill, a gold mine, and a dam project—is that environmental policy making in
neoliberalism is defined by tensions that rarely increase and often pull away from
“the kind of institutionalized, reflexive, and critical intellectual capacities needed
for long-term environmental protections” (30).
The book methodically examines two key themes throughout the case stud-
ies: the construction of scientific expertise and the “umpire state.” The book builds
from the science and technology studies (STS) perspective in exploring boundary
work and the relationship between scientific expertise and other social actors like
the private sector and activist networks. It argues that Chile, as a democratizing
state that embraced neoliberal policy positions, is an ideal case for using this
approach. While many institutions, such as the National Commission for the
Environment, play a central role in the story, they operate differently than the
adversarial administrative proceedings or advisory committees that other studies
have emphasized. Barandiarán shows that choices about legitimation strategies
matter in the Chilean context. One example, highlighted in the case study about
the Valdivia Paper and Pulp Mill, is in the choice of scientific experts from Chile or
from outside the country. Foreign scientists are preferred because they lack local
conflicts of interest, but the result is further weakening of domestic environmental
science capacity. In other instances, scientists demonstrate their independence by
highlighting results that go against funders’ preferences, which only reinforces
the view that scientific work is largely directed by funders in the first place. The
empirical work reveals the variety of tensions that occurs with the construction of
scientific expertise.
The second focus is on the role of state institutions through this process,
conceptualizing an umpire state as one “that sees itself as a broker between
competing parties that produce their own knowledge claims” (6). The concept
is exemplified clearly with the example of maps provided for an EIA related to
the construction of five dams in the Aysén province. The massive EIA undertaken
by Endesa, the company that owned the dam project, was undermined by the
submission of illegible maps. When the legibility was addressed, the resulting
l
D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
i
r
e
c
t
.
m
i
t
.
l
/
/
e
d
u
g
e
p
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d
l
f
/
/
/
/
2
1
2
1
6
5
1
9
1
1
3
9
3
g
e
p
_
r
_
0
0
6
0
1
p
d
.
/
l
f
b
y
g
u
e
s
t
t
o
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3
168 (cid:129) Book Reviews
downloadable file was an unsearchable PDF that caused computers to overheat.
In contrast to an “empire” conception of the state, where effective maps are seen
as a tool of state control, the umpire state sees “mapmaking … [as] a privatized
formality—another box to check on the long list of requirements” (168). The idea
of the umpire state is demonstrated in other case studies as well. In the example of
salmon aquaculture, “state officials have to make decisions using data they are
skeptical of and are also limited in how to change the conditions that underpin
their distrust” (90). The umpire state is an excellent conceptualization of state action
that highlights the complexities of the cases studied but also has comparative sig-
nificance for scholarship on state power, sustainability, and scientific expertise.
The strength of the book is its empirically detailed case studies, but one weak-
ness is that the theoretical contributions are limited in comparison. For example,
the case study of the Pascua Lama Gold Mine finds that scientization, the practice of
science-based claims crowding out other types of knowledge claims, does not
explain the findings; the study instead contends that “scientific and non-scientific
claims coexisted” (155). An alternative lens would emphasize the normative con-
tent of the scientific expertise that created the opportunity for space to be opened
for nonscientific claims. Similarly, the HydroAysén case concludes by arguing that
there may be an upward limit to the umpire state where it cannot remain a neutral
referee due to social pressure. Where this upward limit is, how it manifests, and
how the state, scientists, and other actors understand it are not analyzed in depth.
Comparative work concerned with the construction of science or the neoliberal
state and environmental policy making can nevertheless extend the concepts and
explore new terrain.
Barandiarán’s careful empirical unpacking opens space for deeper reflec-
tions on the interrelationship between a neoliberal state and politics of science
legitimation. It is an insightful and important read that takes existing concepts
in studies of neoliberal states and STS and develops them methodically and care-
fully. The preface begins by seeking an intervention into the politics of “alterna-
tive facts” that many right-wing populist movements have brought to the fore; on
those terms, the book achieves its goal with careful exploration but its analysis
also provides tools for moving past those politics.
Bryant, Gareth. 2019. Carbon Markets in a Climate-Changing Capitalism. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Reviewed by Jongeun You
University of Colorado Denver
The world is likely not on track to achieve the considerable carbon emissions reductions
required to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. Carbon markets, imposing
a price on the carbon content of fossil fuels, are feasible and durable tools to control
carbon emissions, despite political challenges (Rabe 2018). Through carbon markets,
l
D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
i
r
e
c
t
.
m
i
t
.
l
/
/
e
d
u
g
e
p
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d
l
f
/
/
/
/
2
1
2
1
6
5
1
9
1
1
3
9
3
g
e
p
_
r
_
0
0
6
0
1
p
d
.
/
l
f
b
y
g
u
e
s
t
t
o
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3
Jongeun You
(cid:129) 169
such as carbon taxation or cap-and-trade programs, policy makers aim to internalize
the negative externalities of fossil fuel usage and to redistribute revenues to low-
carbon innovation and communities that have been impacted by climate change.
Carbon Markets in a Climate-Changing Capitalism argues that the fossil fuel
industry has exercised excessive influence over the European Union Emissions
Trading System (EU ETS); this influence inhibits the beneficial role of the world’s
largest carbon market in addressing the climate crisis. Carbon emissions in the EU
during the last decade showed a decline, but the environmental benefit of the EU
ETS should have been higher and more dispersed than now, according to Bryant.
He argues that adequate regulatory intervention by governments over carbon
emissions and fossil fuel industries is needed to maximize the effectiveness of
carbon market policy. This complementary measure is expected to mitigate the
limitation of the EU ETS, obsessively relying on dominant economic discourses.
The book contextualizes the relationship between capitalism and climate
change. Capitalism—a political-economic system characterized by capitalization,
property rights, and voluntary exchange—has resulted in a drastic change in climate
and environment beyond nature’s resilience capacity. Simultaneously, a changing
climate has enabled capitalism to respond to global warming and social pressures
on the industry. This response can be made by altering its value chain to be climate-
friendly or by bolstering capitalism’s dependence on fossil fuels and creating addi-
tional damages to nature.
Bryant’s concept of “climate-changing capitalism” may help researchers
better understand and evaluate competing climate policies. Using this lens, the
book suggests three contradictions and tensions embedded in the EU ETS. First,
capitalism produces climate change unevenly. Though a small number of compa-
nies and governments contributed to a large proportion of emissions (the twenty
biggest emitters contributed half of emissions in the EU ETS during 2005–2012),
the responsibility for reducing emissions was distributed across many other actors
of the EU ETS (including more than 3,500 companies). Carbon commodification
that separates emissions from installations led heavy emitters to internalize emis-
sion inequalities.
Second, carbon markets depend on fossil fuel use. From a financial sector
standpoint, market viability and interest hinge on stringent emission caps and high
carbon prices. However, governance issues (e.g., the inflow of international carbon
credits, an oversupply of carbon allowances) and once-low European carbon prices
(less than A10 per metric ton of CO2 emissions between November 2011 and
February 2018) promoted the exit of financial investors from the market.
Third, capitalism constrains climate change responses. Owing to the inertia
of policy implementation and limited resources, EU governments and related
stakeholders tend to privilege a carbon market–based approach over climate
policy alternatives because there is an existing, legitimate institution. Instead of
transformative climate policies, the EU ETS members have preferred to reform the
system itself (via, e.g., market stability reserve and revised free allocation rules)
while undermining the diverse debate on climate policy.
l
D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
i
r
e
c
t
.
m
i
t
.
l
/
/
e
d
u
g
e
p
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d
l
f
/
/
/
/
2
1
2
1
6
5
1
9
1
1
3
9
3
g
e
p
_
r
_
0
0
6
0
1
p
d
/
.
l
f
b
y
g
u
e
s
t
t
o
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3
170 (cid:129) Book Reviews
A weakness of Bryant’s book lies in its focus on the fossil fuel industry,
demonstrating a slight anti-industry bias. Bryant firmly criticizes some heavy
emitters for lobbying the EU, seeking favorable treatment, and trading carbon
allowances and offset credits. Furthermore, he claims that those emitters were
reluctant to expand renewable energy supplies by exploiting the EU ETS, delaying
the transition to a low-carbon economy. These arguments warrant further inves-
tigation and updated evidence. For instance, while Bryant used 2015 data in
judging practices of RWE, the company reduced its emissions by one-third from
2012 to 2018, and even declared in 2019 its intention to achieve carbon neutrality
by 2040 (RWE AG 2019). Another company, E.ON, also provided 100 percent
renewable electricity supply to its residential customers in the United Kingdom
in 2019 (E.ON SE 2019). Corroborating evidence demonstrates the fossil fuel
industry undergoing a structural change with reduced emissions, while the industry
optimizes its management strategy for given conditions and closely collaborates
with the public and civil sectors. The book also lacks a detailed discussion of the
impact of the EU ETS on low-carbon technology advancement. Whether and how
the EU ETS encourages research and development of low-carbon technologies are
essential for appreciating capitalism’s role in carbon markets.
The EU ETS is a fundamental component of the EU’s roadmap to a low-
carbon economy by 2050. Recognizing the importance of the system designed to
incentivize emission reductions while making the emitters pay for their social costs,
this book raises awareness of the system’s socioecological, economic, and political
problems in its current form. Bryant’s arguments reflect the theoretical and empir-
ical developments on carbon markets. As the fourth trading period of the EU ETS
started in 2021, the book may help strengthen the main instrument of European
climate policy by revealing implementation issues in the context of a climate-
changing capitalism. Additionally, considering the relatively long history of the
EU ETS, the book may provide insights to other carbon markets worldwide by
delineating the contradictions of carbon markets.
References
E.ON SE. 2019. 100% of Homes, 100% Renewable Electricity. E.ON Blog. Available at
https://www.eonenergy.com/ blog/2019/ July/renewable-electricity-as-standard,
last accessed January 1, 2021.
Rabe, Barry. 2018. Can We Price Carbon? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi
.org/10.7551/mitpress/11316.001.0001
RWE AG. 2019. The New RWE: Carbon Neutral by 2040 and One of the World’s Leading
Renewable Energy Companies. Available at https://www.group.rwe/en/press/rwe-ag
/2019-09-30-the-new-rwe, last accessed January 1, 2021.
l
D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
i
r
e
c
t
.
m
i
t
.
l
/
/
e
d
u
g
e
p
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d
l
f
/
/
/
/
2
1
2
1
6
5
1
9
1
1
3
9
3
g
e
p
_
r
_
0
0
6
0
1
p
d
/
.
l
f
b
y
g
u
e
s
t
t
o
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3
Download pdf