Conclusion:
Environmental Politics
environmental
history: story of change over time in human beings' relationship with
our environment
- what is the biological
relationship of human beings to the environment?
- what are our ideas about
our relationship with our environment?
- how technology has changed
it
- what do we care to do as
individuals? (This is part of politics if broadly defined)
- what does the government do
about environmental issues? (policy)
- not just about what
happened but what can we learn from that to do better in the future
in a course about environmental
history--how important is politics? (how do we do something)
- politics includes several
different things:
- political system--how
decisions are made
- policies--what do we want
to achieve and what do we think is the best approach
- working out the details
of laws and enforcement
- partisan politics--the
debate between political parties and candidates
- public opinion and public
action
- public opinion drives what
happens though it doesn't shape all the details
- the political system is a
major way we do things collectively--it allows us to take action on
topics where people disagree
- we use laws to make a
commitment to do things differently
- regulation can be fairer
than voluntary standards
- but how laws are written
and how they work is the result of a lot of decisions
- how important are
environmental issues in political debate (between Democrats and
Republicans)?
- our changing sense of
rights and responsibilities--how much can the government tell you what
you are allowed to do with your land? what do you think we should
do
What are the possible approaches
to getting people to wear seatbelts?
- persuade people to wear
seatbelts (probably by advertising)
- some people ignore the
arguments
- some people focus on the
few examples where it might hurt instead of help
- pass a law requiring people
to wear seatbelts (can this be the only reason for a traffic stop--law
in sometimes says not)
- design the car so the
driver has to wear a seatbelt
- give people incentives
Laws are effective, but if we try
to do everything by laws we take away too much freedom.
For some things we have to persuade individuals to behave differently
by their own choice.
- get people to care
- persuade people that their
actions do make a difference
- teach people what will make
a difference
- show people the benefits
If individual choices are as
important as government policies, the larger issue is concern
- something like recycling
requires both government services and individual action
- how much should be required
by law, how much do we leave to individuals to do the right thing
what has changed?
- attitudes
- individual values and
behavior
- public opinion
- government policies
History in a nutshell
- In 1929 most people simply
thought that technological progress was good
- the Great Depression raised
some questions--it was in part due to overproduction
- the atomic bomb and fallout
from nuclear tests raised more questions
- the prosperity of the 1950s
started people thinking about quality of life but environmental
problems were usually seen as the cost of progress
- in the 1960s these issues
become clearer (we are harming the environment and need to change
that), eg. Silent
Spring
- by 1970 the environment was
in fashion--Earth
Day
- by the 1980s practices were
changing radically, for example at the Forest Service
- by the 1990s interest had
stabilized (no longer growing)
- environmental movement
split apart and declined
- today concern over global
warming is leading people to focus again on action, both individual and
global
what the government can do to
help the environment is limited by: public opinion, property rights,
costs, what is scientifically feasible...
Could you write a history of the
environment in the last 40 years
around the key laws? You would leave out an awful lot.
- laws matter, they shape
what we do and don't do (eg. endangered species act)
- but public opinion is a key
force in what laws are passed
- our views of rights and
responsibilities affect what laws can do
- it won't do you any good to
pass a law to do what is scientifically impossible at along
- you need science to figure
out what actions will best help a problem
- science is always changing
- experts disagree
- if you want to prevent a
problem it is usually necessary to act before all the scientific
answers are in
We want contradictory things--
- we want a nice environment
but we don't want to pay more taxes
- lots of people want to live
outside the city so you get sprawl
- we don't want to face that
we don't have unlimited resources
Are we ready to face limits?--we
can't continue to go on using more and more energy and resources, we
are going to have to accept at some point that we need to make do with
less
- we do have the idea of
preserving wilderness and open space before it is gone
- we accept limits on hunting
and fishing
- we haven't fully absorbed
the idea that the world can absorb only so much pollution
- related area--rationing medical care
(example: until the late 1980s if you were over 50 you generally
weren't eligible for kidney dialysis in England)
- are we going to run out of
oil?
- look at known reserves and
calculate when that will run out
- we are about at the peak,
production is going to start to decline
- some people say there
is a lot more oil that we can discover and learn to extract
- oil is still a finite
resource (except according to one weird theory)
- consumption keeps going
up so we are using it up faster and faster
- U.S. has 3% of world's
population and uses 25% of the world's oil
- 20% of the world's
population uses 80% of its energy
- global warming may stop us
from using so much oil before we actually run out
- consumption cannot continue
to increase indefinitely--we don't face that