The Age of Sustainable Development

In the first chapter of “The Age of Sustainable Development”, I feel like Sachs does a good job laying out the basic information about sustainability, how to achieve sustainability goals, and how sustainability is connected to other global factors such as economic development. When Sachs establishes Brundtland’s definition of sustainability, I tend to agree with her. Her idea that “sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,” covers the general idea that globally consumption and other environmental impacts need to be kept in check in order to provide for the world now and in the future. I think this concept is useful normatively. It provides the desirable goal of sustainable development. Without this, there would be no baseline for what wise-use was. Even with this definition though, it allows for a lose interpretation of what is necessary to meet the global needs. The sustainable development goals that Sachs introduces to us in the chapter do help to provide some parameters to this definition. Overall, his chapter provided a useful introduction of sustainability and its interconnectedness globally.

For the research paper, I was thinking about researching either Iceland or Sweden.

Book Reviews of "The Bet"

In the book review of The Bet by Michael R. Greenberg, he begins by first introducing The Bet to the reader, summarizing the main points and giving background information on Ehrlich and Simon. Greenberg goes on to discuss the risk analysis that is seen in the book, pointing out the lack of focus on the aspect of uncertainty taking place in both Ehrlich and Simon's works. Greenberg also critiques the way in which Ehrlich and Simon went about debating their opinions. The review takes the position that their debating was not only unprofessional, but also led to the continued polarization of society on these issues. Overall, Greenberg liked how Sabin wrote the material, but he took a bigger moral picture from the writing than simply a historical view of the bet.
I tend to agree with Greenberg's views in his book review. When Greenberg says the reader learns " the political and personal issues behind the arguments [as well as] the wisdom of using abusive language and tactics in delivering arguments," in conjunction with his previous statement that the extremes can lead to polarizing problems, I think that logically summarizes Sabin's final chapter. Sabin leaves the final conclusion to the reader after providing a neutral basis for learning about Ehrlich and Simon and numerous risk-related debates of the past.

Reactions to the Bet

I felt that the Bet was an interesting way to learn about the environmental debates that went on in the past and how they reflect those that are going on today. While reading the book, it was very easy to see the similarities between ideology then and now, and how these debates set the tone for the political parties today. In the final two chapters, it was clear that the neo-Malthusian ideas of Ehrlich and the economic, technological views of Simon greatly changed how people viewed the environment and essentially split the nation in two. As Sabin wrote, the propaganda and intense opposition between Ehrlich and Simon greatly changed how people viewed these issues. Simon's argument made it seem as though the Earth's environment was magically improving, yet it was people like Ehrlich who were helping to influence those improvements. I thought Sabin eloquently provided both sides to the debate, but still provided his own insight to the situation in the final chapter. Sabin ended the book simply asking what type of world we desired which helped connect the reader to the book. This changed the book from informative to a self-reflection that puts the power in not just two men debating the environment, but the totality of the population.

Environment in the News

In the article, Americans Appear Willing to Pay for a Carbon Tax Policy, published in The New York Times on September 15th, the author Michael Greenstone discusses American's willingness to pay a carbon tax in order to help with carbon and climate mitigation techniques. In this article, Greenstone details that The Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago (EPIC), which he directs, is the entity who ran the poll. In this poll, 43% of Americans were unwilling to pay a carbon tax while the other 57% were willing to contribute one to fifty dollars a month to the tax. While this strategy could be useful for mitigation purposes, when looking further into the author of the article, this could be considered to not be in the best interest of the public, but the author and his colleagues. Greenstone not only runs EPIC, but he is also director of the International Growth Center's Energy Research Program, as well as a member of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, and a member of the Task Force on the Future of Nuclear Power. Greenstone seems to have self-interests in other forms of energy which a carbon tax could provide funding for. This could also cut down on the competition of other forms of energy and make nuclear power seem like a better option than it has in the past. I cannot argue with Greenstone's statement that politically the major road block, "for confronting climate change has perpetually been the economic challenge," but I also cannot deny the fact that the passing of legislation like this seems like it would greatly benefit Greenstone and the programs he is involved in.

The article "Scientists See Push From Climate Change in Louisiana Flooding", published in the New York Times on September 7th, describes the use of attribution studies in climate modeling. Climate attribution studies are a scientific way of discovering the physical explanations for climatic events. The article takes the position that attribution studies provide sufficient information to deduce whether an event is linked to climate change or not. In regard to the recent flooding in Louisiana, attribution modeling was used to determine a connection to climate change. The warming of the atmosphere and oceans, as stated in the article, contribute to the intensity and length of storms. The scientists who ran this study believe this to be true and their information to be accurate although there are opponents to the idea. The author, as well as the New York Times, takes a liberal view on climate change issues which is reflected in the article's push that climate change was in fact a factor in the flooding. Though I agree with the idea that climate change offers a push in climatic events like the Louisiana Flooding, I do not necessarily agree with the speed at which these attribution studies have been accepted among some in the scientific community. Like most science, there needs to be a period of trial and error before a conclusion can be reached or a method to be proven effective.

Reactions to Malthus

While reading the first two chapters of “The Bet”, which primarily focus on Paul Ehrlich and Julian Simon’s respective origins and ideas, I was amazed at the influence their upbringing had on them, as well as by the convincing nature of their arguments either for or against population growth. For Ehrlich specifically, he used his own experiences, such as the overcrowding he witnessed in Delhi as a way to personalize overpopulation (Sabin 2014, p. 22). Reading that excerpt from “The Population Bomb” was rather convincing to me in that densely populated areas, especially in less developed areas, are intimidating and often not seen as the most civilized or most hygienic. Once Ehrlich had introduced the idea of overpopulation, he could then use it as leverage to promote his own agenda in terms of population control. Not only does Ehrlich talk about “the need for action”, but he also acted on those thoughts (Sabin 2014, p.36). Representing a typical Malthusian idea, Ehrlich suggested the organization aptly named “Zero Population Growth”. This quickly became a neo-Malthusian idea when he began to target the population through birth control and limits on reproduction (Sabin 2014, p. 37).  Ehrlich urged anything that would limit population growth, whether it was through traditional birth control, abortion, vasectomies, or even the hypothetical proposal of “mandatory sterilizations, or temporary infertility imposed through pills or public drinking water” (Sabin 2014, p. 38/40). I agree to some extent with the Malthusian ideas, but not to the extremes that Ehrlich takes it. From a biological standpoint, every species has a certain carrying capacity in their habitat and an equilibrium which they will reach to live comfortably. I agree with the idea that genetically modifying crops, using pesticides, and assorted other technologies will only delay the inevitable, but I also find it to be extreme to use neo-Malthusian tactics. There needs to be a middle ground in this debate. Extreme consumption and overpopulation is a problem for our environment, but invoking harsh regulation on reproduction and aid to countries that cannot support themselves in unnecessary.

For more information about Paul Ehrlich's neo-Malthusian views, click here.

For a brief summary of the bet between Julian Simon and Paul Ehrlich, click here.

Sabin, Paul. 2014. The Bet: Paul Ehrlich, Julian Simon, and Our Gamble over Earth’s Future. New Haven: Yale UP.