- Email: [email protected]
ECE Symposium on problems relating to environment
238
Biological Conservation
'Under relaxed conditions . . . . mammals are incredibly peaceful and, so to speak, civilised. Under population pressure, their societies are brutally unequal, cruel, tense, and violent', Claire and W. M. S. Russell argue. All this prompts one to ask if the ecological movement is not starting to evolve the first new radical political philosophy since Marxism. But there are things which this book could have done and does not. Its authors seem to have been so carried away, understandably enough, by the importance of their subject, that they have not worked out who the book was aimed a t - - t h e converted or the unconverted? 'Can Britain Survive?' has too much that is familiar for the faithful, and too much that is recondite for the heathen. Above all, it tends to preach doom rather than answer the inevitable question: 'What should we do?' Preaching doom is an effective tactic for a short time, but becomes counterproductive. It depresses the faithful, who know, and makes the heathen want to know even less. Moreover, logically, it seems that either we are doomed because of things that have already happened--poisons released, people b o r n - or we are not. If not, then we need to apply ourselves to what will improve our chances of survival. This is important now, because what happens in the year 2,000 and beyond appears to depend largely on what we do over the next five or ten years. So we need to ask not only: 'What shall we do?', but also 'What kinds of technology and institution are most appropriate to our situation ? Are we in a mess because our decision-making machinery is inadequate? If so, what institutions do we need? How can we make good decisions?' If it is true, as J. David George says, that 'only a sick society' would throw things away which could be recycled on the grounds that it was 'economical', what would be involved in not being sick? If energy is wasted, where and how should we redirect it? Goldsmith might have developed an idea put forward recently by Arthur Tamplin and John Goffman of the US Atomic Energy Commission. They urge the need for a 'reprisal-free system of adversary assessment of technology' on the grounds that 'The heavy hand of economic and job reprisal is so well appreciated that few actually involved in the technology will speak out against it'. In other words, we need a new kind of institution--what might be called a 'loyal technological opposition'.
with new initiatives and thus paving the way for comprehensive and effective work in the environmental field.' He also reported that 'public discussion had shifted to potential conflicts between maximum increase of material products on the one hand and general welfare, including the satisfactory quality of the environment, on the o t h e r . . . it was becoming increasingly clear that technological advances could not always be regarded as an improvement of our society.' Several years of intense preparatory work culminated in the convening of this Symposium. Nearly 300 delegates from virtually all UN/ECE countries, six countries from other parts of the world, and about 40 international organizations, attended. The documentation comprised some 100 papers especially prepared for this purpose on a subject-by-subject as well as a country-by-country basis. The Symposium surveyed the present environmental situation, which included a detailed examination of problem-sectors as generators of environmental deterioration and of problem-areas affected by environmental changes. There emerged from this debate a series of general and tentative conclusions. Next, the Symposium discussed various means of environmental improvement at national and international levels. These included questions of environmental planning and management such as: governmental policies and strategies relating to environment; organizational and institutional arrangements, procedures, and operating measures at different government levels; environmental research and diffusion of knowledge; training in environmental disciplines and public education, information, and participation; cost of financing and other economic aspects of environmental improvement; and the need for improved environmental information facilities at national and international levels. An innovation at the Symposium was a panel discussion led by eminent specialists from different U N / E C E countries on major socio-economic questions related to environment. The Symposium thus took a major step forward in encouraging governments to carry out their fundamental responsibilities in this critically important field. It should also be recalled that the Economic Commission for Europe has made institutional arrangements for continuing inter-governmental cooperation in this field by setting up a new inter-governmental subsidiary body called 'Senior Advisers to ECE Governments on Environmental Problems'. An announcement by the UN/ECE Executive MICHAEL DENNY (London, England) Secretary on the convening of the first session of this Body is expected fairly early in 1972.
ECE Symposium on Problems Relating to Environment. ST/ECE/ENV/I. U N Sales No. E.71.II.E.6. United Nations, New York & Geneva: vii + 386, figures, 28 x 21-4 cm, paper covers, US $6.50, 1971.
Fabricated Man, the Ethics of Genetic Control, by P. RAMSEY. Yale University Press, New Haven & London: 174 pp., 20.3 x 13.0 cm, 90p, 1970.
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe has issued the complete proceedings of the first intergovernmental meeting dealing comprehensively with environmental problems (ECE Symposium on Problems Relating to Environment, held in Prague, Czechoslovakia, 2-15 May 1971). The book is available in English, with French and Russian editions to follow. In the words of UN/ECE Executive Secretary, Mr Janez Stanovnik, this marked a 'landmark for the UN/ECE, combining the efforts made by the U N / E C E in the past
This short book consists of three essays, two of which have appeared in print before, and, since the issues raised are of wider significance than the title suggests, it is worthy of the careful attention of all who concern themselves seriously with the future of Man. In the first essay (Moral and Religious Implications of Genetic Control), the author accepts the reality of genetic deterioration and examines the ethical problems of genetic engineering and phenotypic selection, particularly the views of H. J. Muller (he does not seem to consider the morality of doing nothing about
Biological Conservation
'Under relaxed conditions . . . . mammals are incredibly peaceful and, so to speak, civilised. Under population pressure, their societies are brutally unequal, cruel, tense, and violent', Claire and W. M. S. Russell argue. All this prompts one to ask if the ecological movement is not starting to evolve the first new radical political philosophy since Marxism. But there are things which this book could have done and does not. Its authors seem to have been so carried away, understandably enough, by the importance of their subject, that they have not worked out who the book was aimed a t - - t h e converted or the unconverted? 'Can Britain Survive?' has too much that is familiar for the faithful, and too much that is recondite for the heathen. Above all, it tends to preach doom rather than answer the inevitable question: 'What should we do?' Preaching doom is an effective tactic for a short time, but becomes counterproductive. It depresses the faithful, who know, and makes the heathen want to know even less. Moreover, logically, it seems that either we are doomed because of things that have already happened--poisons released, people b o r n - or we are not. If not, then we need to apply ourselves to what will improve our chances of survival. This is important now, because what happens in the year 2,000 and beyond appears to depend largely on what we do over the next five or ten years. So we need to ask not only: 'What shall we do?', but also 'What kinds of technology and institution are most appropriate to our situation ? Are we in a mess because our decision-making machinery is inadequate? If so, what institutions do we need? How can we make good decisions?' If it is true, as J. David George says, that 'only a sick society' would throw things away which could be recycled on the grounds that it was 'economical', what would be involved in not being sick? If energy is wasted, where and how should we redirect it? Goldsmith might have developed an idea put forward recently by Arthur Tamplin and John Goffman of the US Atomic Energy Commission. They urge the need for a 'reprisal-free system of adversary assessment of technology' on the grounds that 'The heavy hand of economic and job reprisal is so well appreciated that few actually involved in the technology will speak out against it'. In other words, we need a new kind of institution--what might be called a 'loyal technological opposition'.
with new initiatives and thus paving the way for comprehensive and effective work in the environmental field.' He also reported that 'public discussion had shifted to potential conflicts between maximum increase of material products on the one hand and general welfare, including the satisfactory quality of the environment, on the o t h e r . . . it was becoming increasingly clear that technological advances could not always be regarded as an improvement of our society.' Several years of intense preparatory work culminated in the convening of this Symposium. Nearly 300 delegates from virtually all UN/ECE countries, six countries from other parts of the world, and about 40 international organizations, attended. The documentation comprised some 100 papers especially prepared for this purpose on a subject-by-subject as well as a country-by-country basis. The Symposium surveyed the present environmental situation, which included a detailed examination of problem-sectors as generators of environmental deterioration and of problem-areas affected by environmental changes. There emerged from this debate a series of general and tentative conclusions. Next, the Symposium discussed various means of environmental improvement at national and international levels. These included questions of environmental planning and management such as: governmental policies and strategies relating to environment; organizational and institutional arrangements, procedures, and operating measures at different government levels; environmental research and diffusion of knowledge; training in environmental disciplines and public education, information, and participation; cost of financing and other economic aspects of environmental improvement; and the need for improved environmental information facilities at national and international levels. An innovation at the Symposium was a panel discussion led by eminent specialists from different U N / E C E countries on major socio-economic questions related to environment. The Symposium thus took a major step forward in encouraging governments to carry out their fundamental responsibilities in this critically important field. It should also be recalled that the Economic Commission for Europe has made institutional arrangements for continuing inter-governmental cooperation in this field by setting up a new inter-governmental subsidiary body called 'Senior Advisers to ECE Governments on Environmental Problems'. An announcement by the UN/ECE Executive MICHAEL DENNY (London, England) Secretary on the convening of the first session of this Body is expected fairly early in 1972.
ECE Symposium on Problems Relating to Environment. ST/ECE/ENV/I. U N Sales No. E.71.II.E.6. United Nations, New York & Geneva: vii + 386, figures, 28 x 21-4 cm, paper covers, US $6.50, 1971.
Fabricated Man, the Ethics of Genetic Control, by P. RAMSEY. Yale University Press, New Haven & London: 174 pp., 20.3 x 13.0 cm, 90p, 1970.
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe has issued the complete proceedings of the first intergovernmental meeting dealing comprehensively with environmental problems (ECE Symposium on Problems Relating to Environment, held in Prague, Czechoslovakia, 2-15 May 1971). The book is available in English, with French and Russian editions to follow. In the words of UN/ECE Executive Secretary, Mr Janez Stanovnik, this marked a 'landmark for the UN/ECE, combining the efforts made by the U N / E C E in the past
This short book consists of three essays, two of which have appeared in print before, and, since the issues raised are of wider significance than the title suggests, it is worthy of the careful attention of all who concern themselves seriously with the future of Man. In the first essay (Moral and Religious Implications of Genetic Control), the author accepts the reality of genetic deterioration and examines the ethical problems of genetic engineering and phenotypic selection, particularly the views of H. J. Muller (he does not seem to consider the morality of doing nothing about