Ecolog Forum: "Growth" is another term that has been transmogrified over the years, hijacked by hucksters and used as a club with which the populace can be both baited and frightened. Or, if you prefer, a double-edged sword that slashes on both strokes, not to mention its piercing potential.
Growth in a biological sense means something far different from "growth" in an "economic" sense. To put it briefly, "growth" in biology is a cyclical process, whereas the popular conception of growth is, despite economic "cycles," thought of as a linear progression rather than an integrated process of formation, reformation, and synergistic relationships that are mutually beneficial. Life goes on because of this regardless of how the human mind conceives it, so while an argument in favor of linear progression can be made if the statistical blinders are narrow enough (or if the change takes longer, if the feedback loop is large enough) to mask the interaction of unknown quantites, in ecology/biology or economics, Nature will ultimately "bat last." Students of economic systems might do well to study how life forms adapt to change, and the consequences of failing to adapt. Adaptations themselves create change, and the final analysis for any system is the trend resulting from the reconciliations of adaptations in the face of truly external changes and constants. WT I invite critical analysis. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neil K Dawe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 1:18 PM Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Failure in the Chesapeake Bay Another nail in the coffin of economic growth, and its fundamental conflict with biodiversity conservation, should we choose to wield the hammer. *Restoration of the Bay a failure and will remain so,”* *argues environmental writer Tom Horton*** “The restoration of the Chesapeake Bay is a failure after 25 years and will remain so until political and environmental leaders stop embracing rapid, unending growth,” says environmental writer Tom Horton. In his study he argues: “A fatal blind spot remains in the best strategies to save the Bay. The blind spot is our allegiance--some would say addiction--to perpetual economic growth, and to encouraging an ever-expanding population of human consumers to support it. “This is our mantra: Growth is good, or necessary, or at least inevitable. So unchallenged is this premise that we discuss it little more than the gravitational force that holds us to the planet." In the study the longtime Baltimore /Sun/ environmental reporter and columnist details how both government and environmentalists focus “only on the impacts of our lifestyles, acting as if it does not matter how many of us are living around the Bay.” He makes the point that this approach, though it is vital to the Bay's restoration, is a half-measure, doomed to fail so long as rapid growth continues. He challenges the myth that growth is inevitable, or necessary to achieve economic prosperity, and talks candidly about foreign immigration, the largest source of population growth. "By an end to growth," Horton writes, "we do not mean an end to capitalism, stock markets, innovation, or even greed and corruption, but rather a shift to economic /development/ to better serve those already here versus making endless and expensive accommodations for all who might be induced to come. “Ending growth is a debate needing to happen. Once we begin to shift the lens, to dare to consider alternatives to the current, growth-is-good mentality, many ‘goods’ will become ‘bads.’ “Spending on wider roads, more power plants, bigger sewage treatment plants, now seen as necessary investments to accommodate growth, will look like taxpayer subsidies to a few sectors of the economy that are growth's only real beneficiaries.” Horton argues: “It will be virtually impossible to reclaim our numerous environmental messes as population continues rising from the current 304 million Americans to a projected half billion shortly after 2050; the Bay watershed, currently with 17 million people, is adding 1.7 million every decade.” A stable population and a steady state economy will not guarantee environmental or social Utopia, he argues, "but it will give us breathing room, leave us options we will not otherwise have. "There is scarcely a problem facing us that can't be solved easier in the absence of rapid growth." The report has been prepared on a grant from The Abell Foundation and can be downloaded from www.abell.org <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.15/1835 - Release Date: 12/7/2008 4:56 PM
