|
Yes, it was Berger. Thank you very much, Bob.
Ed Weick
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Gaia
again
Hi Ed:
This must be the Berger Commission. I have
read the Report [and still have my copy] and was mightily impressed by the
ecological perspective and respect for Native Values. I tip my hat to
you.
Bob Bowd
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 9:54
AM
Subject: [Futurework] Gaia again
Thursday June 19, 2003
The Guardian
Science needs specialists. When a puzzling new result appears, or
some startling claim is advanced, call on the genuine expert, narrowly
but deeply trained, who really knows what they are talking about.
On the other hand, unbeatable prowess in solving one kind of
problem often limits a researcher's outlook. The expert can become a
mere pedant or, worse, a narrow obsessive, knowing everything about
nothing. He has a fine collection of hammers for nails of all sizes, but
screws are not his department. Useful in the lab, maybe, but hopeless in
the real world, where problems are multi-faceted, complex, hard to pin
down.
Gaia theory, the idea that all life on Earth is part of one giant
system which shapes its own environment, is the best recent illustration
of the tensions this creates.
About thirty years ago, I was a member of a team of
environmental and social science specialists assembled to study the impact
of a major pipeline that was being proposed for northern Canada. There
were some fifteen of us borrowed from various government departments.
Each member had a very good knowledge of his field, had field experience
etc. We worked together for a year, producing chapters on communities,
permafrost, migratory wildlife, unique habitats, etc. We considered it
to be one of the best things of its kind ever produced, and our bureaucratic
masters were pleased. Nevertheless, something unexpected happened at
the political level; there were calls for a public inquiry into the
impacts of the pipeline and, much to the bureaucracy's dismay, the
government of the day decided to hold one. The inquiry lasted for
three years, and at its end, many of the things that the specialists had
written were no longer either valid or important. The processes that
we had studied and relationships that we had proposed proved far more
complex than we had suspected. A holistic picture in which social and
environmental issues were intertwined and inseparable emerged.
Unfulfilled ancient grievances and obligations concerning Aboriginal land
rights became dominant issues. At the end of the inquiry, we had
assembled a substantial chunk of the northern Canadian Gaia, enough to
understand the dominant issues and troublespots, though by no means all of
it. For those of us who had written the original report, it was an
exercise in humility, but a gratifying one.
Understanding Gaia is not easy. It can be very time
consuming and costly. But there are times when it is important to make
the attempt, and it can be very worthwhile.
Ed Weick
|
