As usual, we have an otherwise commendable ecological research effort falling 
just short of potent policy implications by relegating the causes of 
environmental degradation to the phrase “human activities.”  Where in the 
policy arena will anyone find a table where policy makers are dealing in "human 
activities?"  Studies such as this would be much more productive, policy-wise, 
if only they used more policy-relevant framing.

Let’s consider the causes of oceanic degradation that Halpern et al. used to 
produce their map:  several categories of fishing, several categories of 
pollution, invasive species, ocean acidification, benthic structures, 
population pressure, commercial activity, and two categories of climate change. 
 How might we characterize these categories in policy-relevant terms?  As a 
prior president could have said, "It’s the economy, friends."  Now that would 
indeed be policy-relevant, because in the policy arena there is no shortage of 
tables – fiscal and monetary policy tables - with a big sign hanging overhead, 
"economic growth."

Are these causes of oceanic degradation really economic activities?  Let’s take 
them one by one:  Fishing is part of the agricultural/extractive trophic level 
at the base of the human economy.  Pollution is the byproduct of the economic 
production process made inevitable by the second law of thermodynamics.  The 
spread of invasive species is a function of international trade and interstate 
commerce.  Ocean acidification and climate change are each a function of fossil 
fuel combustion in a global economy that is approximately 90% fossil-fueled.  
"Benthic structures" are commercial infrastructure, most notably oil rigs.  
"Population pressure" in policy-relevant terms means an increasing consumer 
base and labor force.  It’s hard to get any more economically relevant than 
with the phrase "commercial activity."  The causes are practically a Who’s Who 
of the global economy, but it won’t get pointed out unless someone does so.

Halpern et al. did a good job of documenting causes, but hopefully the Halperns 
et al. of the future will put their resultsin more policy-relevant terms by 
noting the connection of environmental pressures to the policy goal of economic 
growth.  Meanwhile and just as hopefully, and in supplementary fashion, 
scientifically based professional societies such as the ESA will help to 
“channel” such research by taking positions on economic growth, such as the one 
now proposed by 60 (last count) ESA members.

Cheers, 

Brian Czech, Ph.D., President
Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy
SIGN THE POSITION on economic growth at: 
http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html .

-- "J. Michael Nolan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
An interesting article and map on the state of the world's oceans from NPR. 
Thank you.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19085884&sc=emaf

Mike Nolan

----------

If we are on another line or away from the phone, please leave your number, 
best time to return your call and/or your e-mail address.
 
After hours and weekend phone appointments are available upon request.

Sincerely,

J. Michael Nolan, Director
 
Rainforest and Reef 501 (c)(3) non-profit

**************************************************************************************************
“Outstanding-Affordable Field Courses in Rainforest & Marine Ecology”

“Spanish/Cultural Immersion Programs: Spain, Mexico, Central and South 
America”

Rainforest and Reef 501 (c)(3) non-profit
P.O. Box 141543
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49514-1543 USA
Local/International Phone: 001.616.604.0546
Toll Free U.S. and Canada: 1.877.255.3721
Skype/MS IM: travelwithrandr
AOL IM: buddythemacaw
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Note: Please send inquiries to both e-mail addresses
Web: http://rainforestandreef.org
**************************************************************************************************

Reply via email to