Global Climate Change: Three Policy Perspectives IV

CONTENTS FOR THIS SECTION

Ecological Approach

Background
Application to Global Climate Change

Ecological Approach

Background. The development of environmental protection as a national policy concern reflects three factors: (1) the development of an environmental consciousness among the electorate, (2) a change in the climate of decision-making among individuals, businesses, and government at all levels, (3) the availability of opportunities to make concrete decisions based on environmental grounds (either in addition to or in opposition to economic criteria).

The underlying basis of an environmental consciousness is an understanding of the interconnectedness of the planet's biological processes, and a recognition that changes caused by humans may have ecological effects beyond those intended or foreseen. From this perspective, it is in humanity's self-interest (as well as in the interests of non-human life) to protect the basic biological processes that are the foundation of all life; humans can protect those processes by being conscious of humanity's environmental impact and by avoiding or mitigating that impact to the greatest extent necessary (accepting that some impact is unavoidable, and that ecological science has a crucial role in discovering the effects of human activities).

A seminal characterization of the ecological perspective is A Sand County Almanac, by Aldo Leopold.⁽⁴⁰⁾ He suggests that humankind has developed two ethical dimensions -- the first dealing with the relation between individuals and the second with the relation between the individual and society. But, says Leopold:

There is as yet no ethic dealing with man's relation to land and to the animals and plants which grow upon it.... The extension of ethics to this third element in human environment is, if I read the evidence correctly, an evolutionary possibility and an ecological necessity.⁽⁴¹⁾

Describing the need for an "ecological conscience," Leopold concluded that the environmental problem "is one of attitudes and implements"; the development of a "land ethic" requires "an internal change in our intellectual emphasis, loyalties, affections, and convictions."⁽⁴²⁾

The challenge of the ecological approach was given global scope by the "Brundtland Report" of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Articulating the goal of "sustainable development," its forward describes the challenge this way:

If we do not succeed in putting our message of urgency through to today's parents and decision makers, we risk undermining our children's fundamental right to a healthy, life-enhancing environment. Unless we are able to translate our words into a language that can reach the minds and hearts of people young and old, we shall not be able to undertake the extensive social changes needed to correct the course of development.

.... We call for a common endeavor and for new norms of behavior at all levels and in the interests of all. The changes in attitudes, in social values, and in aspirations that the report urges will depend on vast campaigns of education, debate, and public participation.⁽⁴³⁾

The idea of "sustainable development" suggests future generations should enjoy the same opportunities for meaningful and fulfilling lives as the current generation. A sustainable society has been defined as "one that satisfies its needs without jeopardizing the prospects of future generations."⁽⁴⁴⁾ The concept thus serves as an umbrella to encourage development of renewable resources and conservation of non-renewable resources.⁽⁴⁵⁾

The emergence of the ecological perspective (or the "land ethic" or "sustainable development") is manifest in new values and practices of individuals, businesses, and Government.

Within the Federal Government, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 represented a watershed in establishing the principle that major federal decisions should publically disclose and take into account environmental impacts. Originally resisted by many agencies, the idea of assessing the environmental consequences of decisions through "Environmental Impact Statements" has now become routine. Also, over the past two decades, the Federal Government also has taken steps to foster public awareness of environmental values through support for environmental education. In addition, the Federal Government has used procurement policies to support environmental goals; for example, by requiring purchases of paper of minimal recycling content and authorizing payment of a premium for it, and has revised statutes to make Federal facilities subject to these requirements.

The change in societal values resulting from an increased ecological consciousness also affects the perspectives of corporate decision-makers. Despite the often confrontational relationship between federal environmental policymakers and industry, a consequence often attributable to the command-and-control regulatory approach to environmental policy, industry itself has increasingly recognized that community environmental values are part of the social milieu in which industrial production occurs.

A 1994 article in the chemical industry publication Chemical Week reviewed the industry's perceptions of pollution control. It noted that, in the early 1970s, most corporations viewed environmental management as a "threat" and that pollution control expenditures were "nonrecoverable investments."⁽⁴⁶⁾ The article observed that, in 1970, "economist Milton Friedman described the actions of any company making pollution control expenditures beyond that 'required by law in order to contribute to the social objective of improving the environment' as 'pure and unadulterated socialism'." In contrast, today, major corporations are espousing the benefits of proactive environmental management, stewardship, and environmental leadership. The chemical industry, which was suffering from poor public perceptions, particularly after the Bhopal incident, has been at the forefront of this shift, as indicated by remarks of Robert Luft, Senior Vice President of Du Pont Chemicals: "Our continued existence requires that we excel in safety and environmental performance.... We must shift our mindset from 'meeting regulations' to 'meeting public expectations'."⁽⁴⁷⁾

This new attitude, or climate, of decision-making is providing many businesses and individuals with new alternatives and opportunities to choose environmentally preferred options either in concert with more traditionally based economic criteria or in opposition to such "self-interest"-based criteria. For example, the chemical industry today sponsors a "Responsible Care" campaign⁽⁴⁸⁾; and prodded by environmental groups and EPA, the Chemical Manufacturers Association has committed the industry to testing of high-use chemicals.⁽⁴⁹⁾ An independent but related initiative is the Green Chemistry Institute, a nonprofit organization with the mission of promoting pollution prevention using "economically sustainable clean production technologies."⁽⁵⁰⁾ In addition, EPA and the American Chemical Society jointly sponsor annual "Green Chemistry Challenge Awards" to recognize pollution prevention through innovative chemistry; the first Green Chemistry Award was presented in 1996.

Individuals, as consumers and citizens, are also exercising options to express an environmental consciousness that extends beyond immediate economic self-interest. Consumers' responses to such environmental problems as solid waste disposal indicate that individual behavior and community programs can and will reflect environmental values. For example, recycling programs have increased in recent years, despite questionable economics and the significant consumer inconveniences involved. Such a trend suggests the power of aesthetics and the perceived intrinsic value of the environment as a force which influences people's preferences and priorities.

The ecological lens magnifies elements that are psychological, philosophical, and theological.⁽⁵¹⁾ A policy decision to address a pollution problem generally involves a sophisticated and sometimes lengthy educational process of which economics and technological availability are only components. In this view, environmental education, Smokey the Bear, and environmental interest groups from Audubon to Greenpeace to Zero Population Growth represent efforts to inculcate the sense of moral obligation toward the environment -- to acculturate people to the importance of the environment as essential to long-term human health and welfare. Such efforts can promote a climate of opinion in which environmentally responsible decisions are socially endorsed and environmentally irresponsible decisions are stigmatized as not socially acceptable. Pollution protection gets on the national agenda not on the basis of affordability or whether control technology exists, but because an environmental problem is recognized as a threat to human health or welfare. The ecological approach understands the problem of environmental policy implementation to be the moral education of individuals and institutions to the dimensions of the ecological crisis, changing the climate in which decisions are made, and providing opportunities for individuals and institutions to make decisions based on ecological concerns, rather than having those choices limited to alternatives dictated solely by economic criteria.

Application to Global Climate Change. In some ways, global climate change is the quintessential issue for an ecological lens, as it so clearly involves far-reaching dimensions including the standing of future generations, non-human life, and distributional justice around the globe. The ecological lens provides a decision criterion in the face of uncertainty or of competing preferences. Aldo Leopold observed that the land ethic "may be regarded as a mode of guidance for meeting ecological situations so new or intricate, or involving such deferred reactions, that the path of social expediency is not discernible to the average individual."⁽⁵²⁾ No situation is better described as "so new and intricate" or as having "such deferred reactions" than global climate change.

An ecological perspective on global climate change focuses attention on an enlightened public to implement stewardship through a changed value system. Numerous international and domestic entities are supporting activities to foster governmental, corporate, and public awareness of the global climate change issue and to encourage remedial actions. (Other entities provide "neutral" information and analysis on the issue, and still others actively lobby against the viewpoint that action is justified at this time.⁽⁵³⁾) These organizations support activities that translate into concrete actions through a variety of mechanisms, including voluntary programs for businesses and alternative "green" options that allow for individual consumers to make ecologically responsible decisions even when they cost more than do traditional choices.

The current umbrella for activities to foster action is the U.N. Framework Convention on Global Climate Change, under which a range of activities, from research and development to education, are sponsored. Manifesting the ecological perspective, the Framework Convention defines the signatories' objective to be the protection of ecosystems from "dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system ... to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner."⁽⁵⁴⁾ Economic and human concerns are seen as interdependent with ecological processes. The potential policy agenda could include virtually all human endeavors and relationships, from industrial policy to North-South equity, from population policy to energy policy, from domestic concerns to the restructuring of international institutions. The Kyoto Protocol, completed in December 1997, is indicative of the breadth of effects that controlling global climate change may entail.

From the ecological perspective, achieving such a broad policy agenda would require an active federal governmental role that involves educating the citizenry about the need to act on the risk of global climate change, providing the public with a role model in terms of government's own decisions and priorities, and developing opportunities for individuals to make ecologically responsible decisions even if those decisions are not economic in a traditional sense. At this stage of the climate change debate, the federal role has included four kinds of activities that reflect environmental stewardship.

• First, making decisions that take into account potential consequences for global climate change and taking actions that support and promote environmentally "friendly" products or processes (for example, through procurement policies or through product labeling).
• Second, internationally exploring the possibilities of achieving consensus on further reductions and on inter-related economic and human issues.
• Third, supporting education of the public on environmental concerns generally and about global climate change specifically, and fostering the inculcation of environmental values in educational programs.
• Fourth, developing mechanisms that permit the public to express their environmental values in everyday decision-making.

Similar activities are being promoted through various corporate and nonprofit initiatives, as well. For example, a 1998 corporate initiative under the auspices of The Pew Center On Global Climate Change⁽⁵⁵⁾ is designed to bring "a new cooperative approach and critical scientific, economic and technological expertise to the global debate on climate change." Accepting "the views of scientists that enough is known about the science and environmental impacts of climate change for us to take actions to address its consequences," the Center believes "businesses can and should take concrete steps now in the U.S. and abroad to assess their opportunities for emission reductions, establish and meet their emission reduction objectives, and invest in new, more efficient products, practices and technologies." Besides this commitment to stewardship, "major companies and other organizations are working together through the Center to educate the public on the risks, challenges and solutions to climate change"; undertaking "studies and policy analyses that will add new facts and perspectives to the climate change debate in key areas such as economic and environmental impacts, and equity issues"; and engaging in an international effort designed to increase the global understanding of market mechanisms, and to work with developing countries to assess emission reduction opportunities."

The ecological perspective emerges from individual actions both in terms of support for educational endeavors -- as in support for environmental interest groups -- as well as through market choices based on ecological impacts rather than on pure economic costs. Indeed, these actions can go against prevailing economic or technological trends. For example, people may choose to pay more for a product or a service because it is perceived as being more "green" or "climate friendly" than alternatives based on traditional economic or technological considerations. In a sense, customer preferences can outrun the marketplace by creating a demand for a product that producers did not anticipate. In such cases, economic and technological mechanisms follow the ecological imperative, rather than defining limits to it.

An example of such a mechanism is "green pricing," currently being introduced in California.⁽⁵⁶⁾ Developed within the context of the continuing restructuring of the electric utility industry, green pricing permits consumers to choose their electricity supplies according to the environmental impact of their generation. Because some renewable resources and other "green" sources of electricity currently cost more to produce than more conventional sources, consumers would have to pay more for it. However, early indications from pilot programs in New England indicate a potential market for such power, particularly among residential consumers.⁽⁵⁷⁾ This indication is also coming from California where several companies are providing consumers with the option of cleaner electricity than the current mix of generation.⁽⁵⁸⁾ These options come at some additional costs for consumers, but it appears that for some consumers, at least, environmental considerations may compete with cost in deciding on electricity supplies. Time will tell how many consumers will trade off costs for environmental values, and how large a premium they will be willing to pay -- but in any event provision of such alternatives requires governmental initiatives.⁽⁵⁹⁾

Many actions to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases serve multiple social ends -- such as energy conservation and pollution prevention that improve the efficiency with which human needs are met. Governments and corporations have taken a lead in fostering energy conservation and efficiency in use, particularly in developed countries. In the U.S., EPA and DOE sponsor a range of energy efficiency programs, including "Green Lights," "Energy Star Buildings," "Energy Star Products," "Climate Wise," "Consumer Labeling," and others. These programs include public-private partnerships that promote energy-efficient lighting, buildings, and office equipment.⁽⁶⁰⁾ DOE funds research and demonstration, pursuing energy efficiency in transportation, industry, utility, and buildings sectors.⁽⁶¹⁾ There is also an Alliance to Save Energy, a nonprofit coalition of prominent business, government, environmental, and consumer leaders who promote the efficient and clean use of energy worldwide, arguing benefits for the environment, the economy, and national security.⁽⁶²⁾

These EPA and DOE activities fall within the Administration's Climate Change Technology Initiative. While technological in thrust, a key element of many of these programs involves education of prospective consumers to persuade them not only of potential cost savings but also of social benefits to be gained. Thus technology (and markets) can be the tool for effectuating the moral imperative driven by the ecological perspective.⁽⁶³⁾

Similarly, government and corporate initiatives for pollution prevention, through, for example, source reduction and product stewardship, foster systematic changes that have the potential to reduce global climate change risks.

With a public more aware of the problem of global climate change and with the availability of relevant technological and/or economic alternatives, the implementation of the broader agenda through appropriate measures becomes possible: making available options that permit people to exercise their moral obligation.

Footnotes

40. ^(back) Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac, with Essays on Conservation from Round River (New York: Ballantine Books, 1970), pp. 237-264.

41. ^(back) Ibid., p. 239.

42. ^(back) Ibid., pp. 263, 246. Some, viewing global climate change through the ecological lens, see in the long-term risks an indictment of the lifestyle and economic structure of Western society -- a viewpoint profoundly disturbing to others who do not look through the same lens. As noted by Leopold, an environmental ethic imposes new obligations, calls for sacrifice, and changes existing values.

43. ^(back) Our Common Future (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), p. xiv.

44. ^(back) Lester R. Brown, et al. State of the World, 1990 (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1990), p. 171.

45. ^(back) See, for example, Richard B. Norgaard and Richard B. Howarth, "Climate Rights of Future Generations, Economic Analysis, and the Policy Process," in U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Technologies and Strategies for Addressing Global Climate Change, Hearings, 17 July 1991 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1992), pp. 160-173.

46. ^(back) "34 Years of Environmental Strategy," Chemical Week (August 24, 1994), 27.

47. ^(back) Robert v.d. Luft, "Protecting the Environment: It's Good Business," Remarks, at the National Petroleum Refiners Association International Conference, San Antonio, Texas (26 March 1991), p. 9. For recent views of chemical industry corporate managers, see "Respon-sible Care--An Industry Takes Its Bearings," Chemical Week (July 1/8, 1998), 85-104.

48. ^(back) "Responsible Care--A Revolution Hits the 10-Year Mark," Chemical Week (July 1/8, 1998), 33-129.

49. ^(back) Peter Fairley, "CMA Confirms Extensive Testing Gaps for Major Chemicals," Chemical Week (June 24, 1998), 9.

50. ^(back) Bette Hileman, "Virtually Green," Chemical & Engineering News (June 8, 1998), 31-32.

51. ^(back) Leopold noted that Ezekiel and Isaiah decried the despoliation of the land.

52. ^(back) Leopold, p. 239.

53. ^(back) For links to diverse efforts to inform the public about global climate change, see the CRS Global Climate Change Briefing Book, at: http://www.cnie.org/nle/clim-7/ebgcctop.html

54. ^(back) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, article 2.

55. ^(back) The efforts are spearheaded by the Center's Business Environmental Leadership Council whose members include: American Electric Power, Boeing, Company, BP America, Enron Corp, Intercontinental Energy Corporation, Lockheed, Maytag, The Sun Company, 3M, Toyota, United Technologies, U.S. Generating, Whirlpool Corporation. The quotations in this paragraph are from the Pew Center on Global Climate Change's website: http://www.pewclimate.org/home.html

56. ^(back) For a general discussion of green pricing, see Steve Pickle and Ryan Wiser, "Green Power Marketing, Public Utilities Fortnightly, December 1977, pp. 30-35.

57. ^(back) Ibid., p. 31.

58. ^(back) For a description of alternatives available in California, see the Natural Resources Defense Council web site at http://www.igc.org/nrdc/howto/encagp.html#results

59. ^(back) Alexi Clarke, "Buyer Beware," New Scientist (13 June 1998), 49.

60. ^(back) See, for example, the White House Initiative on Global Climate Change, "Fact Sheet on Potential Industry Sector Savings" (October 22, 1997), at http://www.epa.gov/oppeoee1/globalwarming/actions/global/clinton/savings.html

61. ^(back) Fred Sissine, Energy Efficiency: The Road to Sustainable Energy Use? CRS Issue Brief IB97027.

62. ^(back) http://www.ase.org

63. ^(back) However, some "deep ecologists" reject technological fixes and the use of market mechanisms on the grounds that they merely further a nonsustainable system that needs to be replaced.

.........