‘il i i Hl I | Lehi ie h iy ih it depends TERED? Tn rEEebpacy il ' aa | ae qlee ll i competent technologists, put them to the job of trying to anticipate developments in their fields of expertise, and there is a very good chance that they will fist 2 substantial fraction of the important things that will indeed happes in the period that they indicate, ‘Technology, it seems, has a. crystal ball—that works, One reason that technologists tend to be ao certain smbout the technological future is suggested by ove of ‘the most astute observers of the social role. of techool- ‘ogy, John Kenneth Galbeaith, who states: In this brief statement, Galbraith has brilliantly charac- verized technology: it is built on faith—in itself. Indeed, | the power of technology is so evideat and overwhelming. ‘as seemingly to intimidate even its critics. Thus Jacques-Eilsl, one of the severest critics of effects of technology on human values, writes: ‘Technique has become autonomous; it has fash joned en omnivorous world which ebcys tts own lawn ad which has renounced all irdliion. ‘bas progressively mastered all the elemenis of civiliza- tion . , . man Dimself is overpowered by technique sand becomes its object, ‘Thus both the proponents of technology and those ‘who favor the “cotmtercalture™ seem to look on tech= nology as a kind of self-sufficient, autonomous jugyer= ‘tant, relatively immune to human falliblity and somo= ‘how ungovernable by human wil. Those who sdmire the ‘competcace of technology suggest that human beings ‘need to accommodate to it. Thus, according to Ramo: ‘We must now plan on sharing the earth with ma- chines. .... We become partners, The machines re- quire, for their optimum performance, certain pst tem of sociery. We too have preferred arrangements. ‘But we want what the machines can furnish, and 30° ‘we must compromise. We matt alter the rales of sa siety, #0 that we and they ean be compatible. {THE SOCIAL ISSUES After Hiroshima it was obioun that the loyalty of acience was tot to humanity bot to truth—its own trath—and thit the iw of sckence was nat the aw of the good—what humanity thinks of ax good, mesn- ing moral, decent, humane—but the Iaw of the pos: sible. What it is possible for science to know science ‘must know. What it is posible for technology to do technology Will have done. .. . The frtsiration—and ‘eal and debasing frustration—in which we are mired today will not leave us until we believe in our- selves again, assume again the mastery of our lives, the management of our means, Against this background, i is significant that the fall- Bifity of technology has become an important issue in the environmental crisis, Thus, when. President Nixon surprised the people who had elected him on a plat- form that eruphasized “crime in the streets" by devoting ‘most of his first State of the Union message to the environmental crisis, he proposed to salve it by mobiliz- ing tho cnergy “of the same reservoir of inventive genins that created those problems in the first place.” ‘While President Nixon's staicment is 2 welcome con- firmation of the ecological failure of modern technology ‘which nas been documented in previous chaptors, it would seem pradent to examine his proposed solution ‘Father closely, For, if technology is indeed to blame for ‘the environmental crisis, it might be wise to discover ‘wherein its “inventive genius” has failed us—and to ‘correct that faw—before entrusting our future survival to technology's faith in itself. It would be prudcat, then, to examine the past record of technological efforts ‘tnd to discover why they have failed so often in the senvironment. ‘The technology of sewage treatment is a good ex 179‘rae scan 8808 ‘that will collapse if stressed anywhere, This same fault Ties behind every ecological failure of modern technol- ‘ogy: attention to a single facet of what in nature is a rates am inordinate demand for oxygen, which pemplex whole, ta era ‘Consider another examplo—detergents. Here the technological aim was solely to develop a synthetic ‘eleaning agent to replace soap. Research on the original he the 4 bende i comment Gee he cna Sop ot I cast Nt nies nt Rese oe ii jae wes tthe aquatic cycle of self-purification. |) ‘vestion: relevant to this single sim: is the detergent a Enter the sanitation technologist. First the technologi- good washing agent? Is it soft on milady’s hands? Will it turn linen whiter than white? Will it sell? No one pevrage be reduced before it enters sartace waters? Thad ‘asked about the fate of the detergeat when it goes down tat 2 the drain and emerges into the ccosystem. Many “con- Momanidcated: ‘spatial ‘sumer acceptability" tests were performed oa deter men cae ened ay SE pete. Ba thc obec corsumers of the detergents the date the cntering organic matter, What is released from |) bacteria in surface waters and sewage disposal systems, ‘the treatment plant is largely the inorganic residues of 9) WET fenored. The result was a technological failure, ‘bacterial action. Since these have no oxygen demand, the |p fF the original nondegradable detergents had to be problem, as stated, has been solved; modern sewage (4g “ithdrnen from the market treatment ‘Even with this unhappy experience in public view, ‘briefly, ‘technological scenario—a ctergent technologists persisted in their narrow- ing ele — ‘Visioned ways. I recall an experience several years ago following. 2 discusion of the eutrophication problem "work Guise I before a group of chemical engincers. After 1 hnd poloted out how nitrate and phosphate entering surface inorganic residues: of decay—carbon diaxide, nitric, (ff) Waters stimulate algal overgrowths and the importance ‘and phosphato—which in the natural cycle support the |g Of removing phosphates from detergents, an employee ‘of a large detergent manufacturer spoke up. His firm, the ssid, wes working hard to find # substitute for de- “tergent phosphate, When | asked whether their research “hed uncovered any good leads, he replied engerly: "Yes, a polyitrate.” Later, the industry actually began to build plants ‘We manufacture a nitrate-basied substitute for phosphate, 1 Feason for this failure is clear: the technologist defined his problem too narrowly, taking into his Geld of vision ‘only one segment of what in nature is an endless cycle 180‘rum secu, msues tion ditches om the spread of a serious dise NTA, only to suspen the project when NTA was ee ea nila Mercury wax introduced ints chemical manufsetering replace monde to take advantage of its special electrical and chemical their br: Properties; that waste mercury would move through ee a the aquatic ecosystem and accumulate in fish came as a ‘om this single difficulty and produced unbranched “= guiden, unpleasant surprise. ‘pradable” detergent: molecules, They ignored the Nuclear bombs were designed as explosives; for a Tong time—until forced by outside pressure—the re- sponsible government agencies tried to evade the fact that they had designed not merely a new explosive, but fan Instrument of global ecological catastrophe. ‘These pollution problems arise not out of some ‘minor inadequacies in the new technologies, but because Of their very success in accomplishing their designed fims. A modem sewage treatment plant causes algal overgrowth: and resultant pollution because it pro- oces, as it is designed to do, so much plant nutrient in ‘is effivent, Moder, highly concentrated, nitrogen fer- ‘tikzers result in the drainage of nitrate pollutants into reams and lakes just because they succeed in the aim 6f raising the nutrient level of the soil, The modern high-compression gasoline engine contributes to smog fatd citrate pollution becaure it successfully meets its esign criverion—the development of 1 high level of ower. Modern synthetic insecticides kill bids, fsb, and iaseful insects just because they are successfully absorbed bby insects and kill them, 2s they are intended to do. Plastics clutter the landscape hecause they are un- [netural, synthetic substances designed to resist degrada- ‘surface water may be converted to phenol, a loitic au stance. tbulat vision isto responsible forth cof the excess nitrate in the ecosystem, until the re pollution of surface waters was upon us, Pesticide technology was aimed solely at the pest, ignoring its inevitable effects on the insects” p ators—which in mature control the peste—on and on man. ‘The modem high-powered automobile is to @ single-minded technology which called for ee but power, igaoring the inevitable effect on th enviroament of the resultant, noxious combustion pr tueis produced by the heat of high-compression Synthetic plastics are the end products of amount of claborate research and- development, focused exclusively on a particular use for which (f plastic i intended: as a fiber, bottle, or m terial, No one troubled over the fate of the mat ‘when it has outlived its usefulness and is intraded in ve eet te propees ta ae the bea of te The Aswan Dam, tike many other large THlere we can begin to sense an explanation of the Projects, was designed to produce power [Eentradiction between the supposcd infallibility of ‘water for & permanent irrigation system; 183,THE CULL Issue whole or even on the manufacture of a body or chassis It can only be applied if the task is 40 sub- divided thal it begins to be coterminous with, some extablisbed area of scientific or engineering know!- edge, Though metallurgical knowledge cannot be applied to the manufacture of the whole vehicle, it can be used in the denign of the the engine block. While knowled engineering cannot be brought to bear on the maau- facture of the vehicle, it can be applied to the smochining of the crankshaft. While chemistry eannot be applied to the composition of the car as a whole, it can be wed to decide on the composition of the finish ot trim, . .. Nearly all of the consequences of fechnology, and much of the shape of modern indus tay, derive from this need to divide and subdivide tasks, ‘Now the reason for the ecological failure of technol Ibraith’s description of haw technology is applied to the Production of an zutomobile—fragment by fragment— is precisely how it has been used in the series of bhun- ders that have genorated the environmental crisis. It ‘explains why technology can design a useful fertilizer, 8 powerful automobile, or an eicient nuclear bombs, But since technology, as presently construed, can- ‘Bot cope with the whole system oa which the fertilize, ‘the automobile, or the nuclear bomb intrudes, disas- ‘trous ecological surprises—water pollution, sinog, and Pobal radicactive fallou'—are inevitable, Ecological ass‘ogy properly guided by ‘ean be successful in the ecosystem, if its aims are d ‘rected toward the system as a whole rather than at THE SOCIAL ISSUES von the aquatic cycle. The urban population is then no Jonger extemal to the soil cycle and is therefore incap- able citer of generating a negative. biological stress upon it or of exerting a positive biological stress on the aquatic ecosystem. But note that this state ‘of ero en vironmental impact is not achieved by a return to priml= tive conditions; it is not the people who are retumed, to the land, but the sewage. This requires a new techno- logical advance: the construction of 2 sewage pipeline system, Ecological survival does not mean the abandonment of technology. Rather, it requires that technology be Selentific base. For, to cite Galbraith ooce more, the fragmented natere of technology is dictated by the need to make the technological task “coterminous with some éstablished areas of scientific or engineering knowl- edge." The fault in technology, then, appears to derive from the fragmented nature of its scientific base. ‘There is, indeed, a specific fault in our system of science, and in the resultant understanding of the aatural world, which, I believe, helps to explain the search, is not an effective means of analyzing the vast matural systems that are threatened by degradation. For example, water pollutants stress # total ecological web and its niimerous organisms; the effects on thesystems that are at risk in the environment. Biology has ‘become a flourishing and. science in the understand Ife is to discover a specific molecular event biologist. {Tak help to phn cre Frei i ese cof environmental science in the United States. Since: THE SOCIAL ISSUES aly recently and are still inadequate, In the absence of such baseline data it is difficult to interpret the present pollution levels I once asked a government esearch official to explain this deficiency, The answer was forthright: proposals for research to measure the Aevels of eavironmental pollutants were nearly always ejected under the rubric “pedestrian research.” After all, what could such data contribute to “fundamental” fes-tube data? Fortastey, in tho Tas fow year, in ircct response to the environmental crisis, the National Science Foundation has taken the leadership to ine ‘stitute a wholly new kind of program of research sup- port: Research Applied to National Needs, That we must now develop n major new research program oo “national needs,” is tragic evidence that previous pro= grams have failed to meet them. Nor is reductionism limited to biology; it is, rather, the dominant viewpoint of modera science. as a whole, It often leads sociologists to become psychologists, psy- chologists to become physiologists, physiologists to be- come cellular biologists, and tums cellular biologists into chemists, chemists into physicists, and physicists into mathematicians. Reductionism tends to isolate scientific disciplines from esch other, and all of them from the real world. In cach case, the discipline ap- Pears to be moving away from observation of the mat- Jwral, rex] object: biologists tend wo stady not the mat ‘ural Living organism, but cells and ultimately molecules iolated from therm. One result of this approach is that communication among the disciplines becomes difficult Uunleis the subject is reduced to the simplest common Wenominator; the biologist is unable to communicate 1897 THE socut issues pers analytical fists mny sometimes tend to translate intellectual inde- ical problem to a molecillar one. But the problem is pendence ino 2 kind of mandstory avoidance of all Hkely to become irrelevant to the real world. The failure - problems that do not arise in their own minds—un ap- among [proach that may cut them off from the nesl and urgent ‘ences is an important source of dificulty in understand- ) heeds of society, and often from their students ax well, ing envireomental As a result, science has become too Isolated from the real problems of the world and a poor instrument for ‘understanding the threats to its survival. In vum, we can tract the origin of the environmental cetisis through the following sequence. Environmental dogradation largely results from the introduction of new: industrial ond agricultural production technologies, ‘These technologies are ecologically faulty becwuse they ‘are designed to solve singular, separate problems and {all to. take into account the inevitable “side-effects” ‘that arise because, in nature, no part is isolated from ‘the whole ecological fabric. In tum, the fragmented. design of technology reflects its scientific fousdstion, for science is divided into disciplines that are largely -govemed by the notion that complex systems can be ‘understood only if they art first broken into their ‘separate component parts. Thiz reductionist biat has also tended to shield basic science from a concern for ‘reallife problems, such as environmental degradation. ‘The isolation of science from such practical problems hhas another unfortunate consequence, Most people are Tess interested in the discipline of science than they are fn its practical effects on their daily lives. And the separation between science and the problems that con- fem people has tended to limit what most people know about the scientific background of environmental ‘tasues, Yet such public knowledge is essential to the ‘solution of every environmental problem. For these de- end not only on scientific data, but wltimately on 3 in independence ‘we often have to battle to maintain it—bow this independence is to the search for truth, But 190‘me cosmo cmcis public judgment which balances the benefits gained from a particilar technology against <= socinted environmental hazards. om, " question about modern technology: docs it pay? Whether we ask this [Power companies seem enger to build plants for suctear fuels rather than fossil ones and farmers rapidly adopt fl Hy i fii i ih 4 i Bi iscovered that there are other corts and. ‘gun to put a dollar value upon them, ‘We now know thst a coal-burning power duces not only electricity, but also & | i I i i Bar i Ere ¢ i i : : li it i i | ii ‘Tem SCL Huts We pay the price—not only in dollars, but fn human anguish—of some number of cases of lung ‘cancer. ‘Some of these costs can be converted to dollar values. ‘The United States Public Henlth Service estimates the ‘over-all cost of air pollution at about $60 per person Pet year. About one third of urban air pollution is due to power production from fossil fuels, representing about ($20 per person per year. This means that we must add fo the cost of power production, for each urban family fof four, about $80 per year—an appreciable sum rela- five to the annual bill for electricity. ‘The point of this calculation is abviows. The hidden fosis of power production, such as air pollution, are focial costs; they are met, not by a single producer, but ‘by the public. To discover the true cost of the many fbenefits of modem technology, we need to look for, and ‘Evaluate, all the ‘hidden social costs represented by gavircamental pollution. ‘Every environmental decision therefore involves a ‘balance between benefits and hazards, This is expressed fin the official United States policy regarding allowable Poblic exposure to radiation from atomic operations ‘which states: involves a balancing of the benefits to be derived from the controlled use of radiation and atomic ‘energy agaiest the risk of radiation exposure. ‘This principle is bused on the position adapted by the Federal Radiation Cousell that any radiation ex= posure involves some risk, the magnitude of which incteases with the expostire . .. the various benefite i be expected as a result of the expovure, as evalu 193‘Tim socraL sues ‘are cheaper to buy and to spread, crop production costs ‘would rise, Urban pollution involves many cost/benefit decisions. For example, smog levels cannot be re- duced without supplanting urban automotive traffic ‘with electric-powered mass transit systems, or possibly ‘by introducing new types of vehicles, The first of these actions would impose a massive economic burden ‘on cities that are alrendy unable to mect their social ‘obligations; the second course would mean a serious Gisruption of one of the mainstays of our economy, the automobile industry. In the same way, the government's catininte: “daly: Wr 50’ pk babk Sabeebae-ta @ecisfon in 1970 to close the biological warfare arsenal = db aren fst Pine Biufl, Arkansas, was protested by the local , if we sccopt as the peice of maclear power, mies ai cxpesare | ff chamber of commerce, which expressed a readiness to to thelr thyroids, then some people, at some time, will | Sccept the possible environmental hazard—and to enjoy % the benefits of the 200 jobs associated with the arsenal —for the sake of “deterring” an enemy with the threat any effort to reduce an environmental hazard will com~ J of bacterial sitack. ‘We come then to a crucial question: whe is to be the: ‘process that produces it, If radiation emission standards |) Solomon of modern technology and weigh in the bale ‘ance all the good that comca of it against the ecologi- power operations could be reduced, but the added ex- ff} cal, social costs? Or, who will strike the balance be- ‘tween the concem of the prudent manager of a nuclear ipower and might render the nuclear industry Incapsble |) power plant for economy and the concera of « mother ‘of competing with fossil-fuel power plants. This would J] over the health of her child? ‘THe close CIRCLE ae ated by the appropriate reepacsitie group, outweigh the potential hazardorrisk, = ‘On this basis, the government has adopted as a fine that a particular radiation exposure—for 10 rads to the thyrold gland—is “acceptable” for general public, But since every increase in radiation ‘posure thereby increases the risk to health, there is nite risk associated with a 10-rad dose to the thyre ‘Ono calculation suggests that it mizht increase the ‘ional incideace of thyroid cancer about tenfold; anther severely curtall a major federally financed technological] ‘Confronted by decisions on nuclear power, radiation, program and raise secious political issues. Similarly, nitrate levels, photochemical smog, bacterial warfare, ‘it would be possible to reduce nitrate pollution from ‘and all the other technicalities of environmental prob- feedilots by returning the wastes to the land, where ia J lems, it is tempting to call in the scientific expert nature they belong. But this would reduce the economy J} Scientists can, of course, evaluate the relevant benefits: se- | how many kilowati-hours of electricity a nuclear power Plant can deliver and at what price, or the yield of com to be expected from nitrogen fertilizer. They can also ralunio the related risks: the radiation dose to people 198‘THE soctAL msuxs a | community owe it to our fellow citizens to help inform wcihpboceee sind : Iie tical hes che ie epecmmend i ‘ ‘This partnership between scientist and citizen is, T believe, the clue to the remarkable upsurge of public action on environmental issues that we have witnessed im the United States in recent years, Here are some ‘examples: 1, The Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963, a major reversal of United States forcign policy, is per haps the first of the great ecological victories achieved by the partnership between the Americen public und the scientific community. For nearly a decade after Hiro- shima, while the United States, the USSR, and Great ‘Britain rapidly developed and tested nuclear weapons, “the American public was kept in ignorance of the “Grvcisl environmental facts, Noone knew that every explosion produced massive amounts of strontium 90 ‘and other radioisotopes; that strontium 90 would be ‘curried through the food chain end lodge in the develop- jing bones of children; that any increaso in rndioactive ‘exposure increases the risk of cancer and other radia- fion hazards. Rigid secrecy kept these facts from. the public; the American people were paying the biological price of nuclear tests not even knowing that it had beca asked of them. ‘However, beginning in about 1953, the independent scientific community began to agitate for the release cof government-held data oa fallout, By 1956 sufficient J} information had been relessed to provide scientists with 4 |e efccive understanding cf what was happening. At H) this point, led by Linus Pauling, scientists, first in the 1 | United States and later throughout the world, appecied b} through a petition for action to halt nuclcar tests and js) the spread of fallout, This appcal brought no immediate 197 portutlon orto biological warfare. These are intern ‘morality, of social and political judgment. In a demo racy they belong not in the hands of “experts,” et te Innds of the people and their eected sep ves, ‘The environmental crisis: is the legacy of our: ‘witting assauit on the natural sysiems that support ms. It represents hidden costs that are: mounting to featastrophe. Tf It is to be resolved, these costs mu bbe made explicit and balanced against the benefits technology in open, public debate. But this debate wil ‘hot come easily, For the public has little access necessary scientific data, Much of the needed informa | ee rere ‘AS the cxstodlaas of this Kaowedg, we In thst 196‘began to understand the nuclear peril ‘There then developed in tho United Siates | information effort (referred to 2. A more recent example is the public victory 198. ‘THE socuAL sssuEs ‘the Pentagon on the matter of disposal of nerve gas, For years a buge deadly supply of nerve gas was stored in issued to the public a factual statement ‘which pointed out that aa unlucky plane erash might ‘wipe out most of the Denver population. This, and other explanations by independent scieatists in Environment, ‘ot how nerve gas had killed 6,000 sheep in Utah (a fact long denied by the Army) and the resultant public ‘outcry, finally persuaded the government to remove the gas. On the advice of its experts, the Army began to bal the gas by rail across the country in onder t0 dump it in the Atlantic, At once rcientists of the St, ‘Committee for Environmental Information selentific community—and them not long ago when, despite the constraints of military secrecy, 0 few crucial facts about their uncon trollable dangers—if they were ever tised—were brought thome to the public by independent scientists: Matthew ‘Mesehoa of Harvard, E. G. Pfeifler of the University of 199‘Tim SOCIAL ISSUES action. On March 19, 1970, he wrote to the Cansdisn of Fisheries and Forestry to report that he had found 7.09 ppm of mercury—a value fourteen fimes greater than the allowable limit—in pickerel from waters that feed Lake Eris, The Canadian govern- ment retponded at once. Within a month chloralkall plants were pinpointed as 2 source of the mercury; they hhave been forced to change their operations. Meanwhile the Canadian government has banned the taking of fish in the area; sport and commercial fishing have been halted and the polluters are threatened with legal ac- ton, ‘There are many other examples: the nuclear reactor planned for Bodega Bay, California, and abandoned ‘when a local citizens® committee, aided by the St. Louis Commitice for Environmental Information, ‘helped publicize x report that showed that, since it sat on the ‘great San Andreas fnult, the reactor might rupture in an ‘earthquake; the Minnesota Committee for Environ meatal Information which made a study that led the size of Minnesota to adopt new reactor emission sstandards—much more stringent than AEC standards; ‘the Northern California Committee for Environmental Information, which was instrumental in making Berke- Jey the first city to commit iteelf to natural, biological ‘control of insects in its parks and streets; the scientists ‘of the Rochester Committee for Environmental Informa- ion, who collected water samples that revealed the in- adequacy of the city's sewage treatment—a new bond issue resulted; the New York Scientists’ Committee for Public Information which unearthed an official report that showed that a new cross-town expressway, about to be adopted, would probably generate enough care 201i Ulin Ht HEH dit reli idtek i I 8 # i i li & se i H il Ef rll a Faye tal ! ia : i Hey 3 e ui i whe f 1 if | F : i i LF z i Hi ll Pillay iu ultlie {THE SociAL ISstES Benefits to be derived from a wide range of activitics. ‘The benefit/risk insue fs associated with many aspects Of personal fife: driving a car, traveling fn a train or aa aircraft, siding, working in an industrial plant or liv- ing near lt, the use of x-rays for medical diagnosis, ‘watching a color television set, using:a microwave oven ‘oF a synthetic Insecticide, These are personal, voluntary ets. Other benefit/risk issues relate to large-scale socal ‘enterprises in which the risks are taken involuntarily. ‘These include the widespread use of pesticides and fertilizers in agriculture, all forms of power production, ‘tir pollution due: to urban traffic, and indeed all of the massive souress of environmental pollution, Recently efforts have been made to evaluate, from ‘the available statistics, the quantitative balance between the benefits end risks associated with such sctivities that has been acepted by the general public. For a num bet of such nctivities, Chauncey Starr bas evaluated the tisk (which be defines ax “the statistical probability of fatalities per hour of exposure of the individual to the ‘activity considered") and the benefit, calculated from ‘the dollar equivalent value derived by the individual from the activity. The ratio of benefit to risk that is ‘Acceptable to the public can be seen from a plot of the Tisk against the benefit, calculated in those terms, ‘The results of uch a plot are quite striking, When tho value of the benefit Is small, the acceptable risk is ‘ko relatively low; as the value increases, the acceptable Tsk also riscs—but at a rate that Is very lange relative ‘o the increase in value (the noceptabie risk rises, ap- proximately, in proportion to the cube af the benefit). Also, as the beneficial value of various activities in- Greases, the acceptable risk reaches am upper timit. Siace n wide variety of activities fit this general formula, eee‘THE CLosnea cmcuH ‘we must conclude that thero as beca, deeply inherent ‘im our society, some general standard of public judg ‘ment regarding the acceptable balance between beaeflt cand risk. Moreover, the influence of a purely moral factor such as the distinction betweea an involuntary Now, however, t has become apparent that we area. the midst of a revolution in public attitude towand the acceptability of levels of environmental deterioration ‘which have for a Yong time been tolerated without gen ehepecpepiieg nyaryrry seemless | : | rim sociAL msuEs ot yet bor and therefore utterly defenseless. In re- sponse, the public isin the process of establishing a new set af acceptable benefit/risk ratios. For a given benefit, ‘the new ratio will accept only a risk that is far below ‘even that acceptable for involuntary risks imposed on ‘the present population. This, then, i the moral ro- sponte to the assaults on the integrity of the environment ‘which threaten the well-being and even the survival of succeeding generations. Ja potitics, enviroamental protection is sometimes re= garded os 2 “motherhood” issue; no one ean really op- (Pose it. In fact, it is often suggested that environmental ‘issues are so innocuous that they serve to divert people from more serious, controversial issues—a kind of teers, or oem. te protien ot. porary, acial discrimination, and war, In practice, ‘quite tured out that way; as a political issve, environ- mental protection is neither innocuous not unrelated Tbasic questions of social justice, For example, in the ghetto, environmental protection fis sometimes regarded an an imrelovant diversion from athe plight of the blacks. Some approsches to environ~ mental action give substance to this view. ‘Thin was dramatized during Earth Week 1970 at San Jose State College in California, where a student environmental Program was climared by the burial of a brand new ar, as a symbol of environmental rebellion. The event. ‘wns picketed by black students who believed that the $2,500 paid for the car could have been better spent fin the ghetto. The San Jose burial reficcts a kind of personalized appronch to the environmental crisis which fis sometimes adopted by ecological crusaders, They rea- S0n—erroneotisly, as wo have scen—that pollution is Saumed by the excessive consumption of goods and 205TH SOCAL ISSUES Wided by the recent events at Hilton Head, South Carolina, ‘There, on 2 beautiful shoreline site, adjacent to large, well-kept estates, a chemical company pro- posed te build a large plant which, in the absence of Waprecedented, expensive environmental controls, ‘would certsinly degrade the local environment. Opposed fo the plant were the estate owners, conservationists, | and shrimp fishermen who feared the aesthetic and eco- Topical effects of the plant's efftuents. In support of the ‘plant were the chemical company and many of the ‘poor people in the area, who saw the opportunity to “relieve their long-standing unemployment, Where Ties justice in this matter? It might be possible to compute the economic benefits of the plant and compare them ‘with the economic costs of the effects of pollutants on ‘Shrimp fxhing and on the local natural ambiance. Would Ht thea be suflicient to compare the benefits With the costs and decide in favor of the more economical action? Clearly the matter cannot end there, Mot the cavironmental problem, even if “solved” in this way, raises other, more fundamental issues which are aot solved by environmental action. For example, if the plant is blocked (which is in fact what happened), this action, in effect, says to the unemployed that their ight to a job is less important than the integrity of the environment, The appropriate response may well be that ‘a society that can find the means to save a marsh ought fo be equally capable of finding the means to employ its ‘citizens, ‘A similar situation arose in connection with the SST; Junlons strongly supported the project because its aban- donment would throw some thousands of workers out of jobs, To a person thus unemployed, the immediate "response may well be anger directed against the “eco- . 207 wm ciomea cmcem fesources by the United States population, ‘wastes generated by this intense out environment, the éco-activiet it advised to “conss ess” In the absence of the added statistic that ‘United States the per capita consumption by blacks ‘much less than that of the white population, such many ways blacks are the special victims of pall A. white ruburbanite ean eseape from the city's smog, carbon monoride, lead, and poise when ‘home; the ghetto dweller not only works in ‘environment, be lives in it, And in the ghetto he fronts his own, added environmental problems: and other vermin, the danger of lead polsoning children eat bits of ancient, peeling paint, And, throug its history, the black community can be a powerfal all fn the fight gninst environmental degradation. Tho | ‘have not yet Jeamed how to face soch a su threat; wimess our continued failure to appreciate the existence of ready-armed nuclear weapons means -deal of experience that may be enormously valuable, to a society that, now as a whole, must face the thre of extinction, Bincks need the environmental movement, ‘and the movement needs the blacks, Ei ‘There is also a close relationship between environ- | ‘mental issues aad poverty. A. classic Mastration it pro 206 = gill‘HR SOCIAL TSSUES quid military bluaders in the United States war in Southeast Se een ee eee Asia, Ik raises the momentous issue of at last freeing Perma ee atone OCR coankind from the threst of annihilation, from the in ‘economic system that forces a person to fight for a HP tolerable burden of living, cvery day, within mimics of ‘ith the knowiedgo thatthe product would wnke bableg) | S'S" ae ee ee eee a The environmental crisis is hardly a “motherhood” meee. Wad equally dcdé tek fisuc. Nor is it a diversion from other social questions. ae at rae ee aa | For ax we bogin to act on the environmental crisis, oar sues peace, a ‘Geeper issues emesge which reach to the core of our ee eis Sok eee gyviem of social justice and challenge basic political ee ee caer The fore ofthis challenge is reveaed by the implica- scaantige end Sestiey- a! fions of two alternative routss of environmental action: erceiareaaiet rt fction of the public and action By the public. Those who: bobpradagedfigs sates favor the first route, march under Pogo's banner: “We Ihave met the enemy and be is us.” They are committed. to personal acts that lessea caviroamental impact: they walk oc bicycle rather than drive s car, they use Te IJ turmable bottics and phosphatc-tree detergents; they produce no more than two children, These are. the Tudiments of a new, ecology-minded personal life-style, ‘penden ‘At is designed to minimize the two factors that intensify pollution that are under personal control: consumption ‘ind population size. Ta contrast, action directed toward the third source of eavironmeatal impact—the counterecological design of production technology—is nocessarily social, rather than personal. As indicated earlicr, this factor has a far moro powerful effect on pollution levels than the Other two, It will be recalled that, as measured by the ratios of the logarithms, in the United States, Population rise accounts for 12 to 20 per cent of the Increases in postwar environmental impact, while the Technological factor accounts for 40 to 85 per cent of these increases. If, to take a conservative illustration, the In the same way, the Pentagon replied to an from the AAAS that it would not use herbicides in ‘Tt seems to me that these ecological insights ral very profound questions about the competence of o military to defend the nation, as they are charged toTHE SOCIAL ISSUES ithe reduction of population growth as a basis of environ mental But there is more then logic and ecology at work ‘here. For this same principle caa be applied with equal logis to neatly every social problem. Indeed, under the impetus of recent environmental concer, it has been. Hore are two examples: A Secretary of Labor spends his years in office futilely to fight unemployment by creating fobs; and only later, freed of the inhibitions of ‘and politica’ restraints, faces the truth that fre too few jobs because there are too many Tuy ai idering the problems of elr and water pollu Hon, poverty, clogged highways, overcrowded schools, courts and jails, urbun bight, and 20 on, ‘This, it scoms to me, sets the problem in its proper context: the nation’s social eystem is grossly incapable of supporting the people who created it in their present and expected oumbers; they are therefore suffering poverty, unemployment, environmental pollution, in- ‘adequate schooling, injustice, and the tyranay of war. Now, if the reason for this incompetence is that, even with maximum efficiency and complete social equity, the nation no longer has sufficient resources to support the expected population, we have mo choice but to eon trol Its size, However, according to the United States Commission on Population Growth and the American Future: 20‘Tim soctaL msus ‘Nor is it possible to disguise this ugly fact by notions ‘such as “mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon.” It a majotity of the United States population voluntarily practiced birth contro! adequate to population stabili- ‘of the population refuses voluntarily to practice ade= ‘quate birth control, This means that the majority would need to be everced by the minority. This ix, indeed, political repression, ‘Ina way, it is fortunate that the environmental crisis thas generated so much discussion of the population problem. The nation has for many years been tor- mented by the contrast between its unparalleled: wealth and its inability to provide for its people an adequate ‘environment, employment, schooling, health and. social services, and a peactful life. Fora long time, this stark: Seren has now, tomchow, been penetrated by the en- vironmental crisis, We ean now sce more clearly that the multiple national crisis. of which it is a part, in MacLeish’s words, ‘will not leave ua until we believe in ourselves agaia, sume again the mastery of our lives, the mannge- ‘ment of our means, 213