Book re6iews
334
In examining corporate environmentalism, Kar-liner tends to endorse the perspective known as ‘greenwashing’ which occurs when TNCs ac-knowledge environmental problems, but in reality only treat symptoms rather than invest in preven-tion (p. 37). Karliner points to the ways in which corporations and TNCs have had to be forced into making concessions through popular protests and he quite rightly highlights the circumstances by which US corporations in the 1970s under-mined pollution controls by forcing through ‘end-of-the-pipe’ regulations as against mandated changes to production processes (pp. 31 – 36). Karliner acknowledges that there have been some promising attempts at corporate greening, though these are seen as too marginal, given the strength of TNCs. Yet, his examination of these processes of ‘semi-legitimate’ corporate environmentalism is not very nuanced and relies principally on one source: the Business Council for Sustainable De-velopment’sChanging Course. The debate around this issue is perhaps a little more complex than given credit; for instance, how should we regard the decision by all the leading British supermar-kets not to stock genetically-modified foods? The point here is that large, multinational companies are making a decision (primarily profit-driven) that is environmentally and socially beneficial to a whole series of groups along the food chain. It is, of course, not beneficial to the likes of Monsanto and the US government, among others. In this case we can see that TNCs do not necessarily share interests, but often compete in manner which can literally destroy each other’s profit base. This leads to my second reservation with the book.
Karliner’s tendency to endorse the local and communitarian as against the global and interna-tional poses contradictions. He recognizes that many neofascist and chauvinist groups, such as France’s Front National and India’s Hindu-na-tionalist BJP, share much rhetoric with progres-sive groups fighting economic globalization (p. 216). However, the endorsement of local commu-nities possessing inherently ‘spiritual and tangible connection[s] with the earth and her resources’ (p. 218) is no less of a myth-making exercise than that of reactionaries who speak in the mindless
fashion of defending ties to ‘homelands’. More-over, the kinds of alternatives Karliner offers are a hodge-podge of progressive and conservative hopes: ecologically-oriented market economies, small-businesses, municipal corporations, ‘dedi-cated’ banks and ‘greater equity between North and South’ (p. 218). Karliner does recognize the need to create much greater levels of democracy and accountability at local, national and global levels, but it is incremental changes to institutions at the various levels which is endorsed, rather than a root and branch transformation. Impor-tantly, there is the recognition for a necessary redistribution of the world’s resources, but Kar-liner sees the mechanism for doing this as an international tax (p. 221).
These criticisms of Karliner’s work should not detract from its overall scope, nor the important case studies it highlights; but, by offering a radical critique with liberal solutions there is a slight sense of incompleteness to the work. I will admit to being overly optimistic, but surely the conse-quences of capitalism necessitate a global associa-tion of humans ‘in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.’
Jasper Goss Science Policy Research Centre, Griffith Uni6ersity,
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
PII: S 0 9 2 1 - 8 0 0 9 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 1 0 4 - 4
Sustainability and Global En7ironmental Policy:
New Perspecti7es, by Dragun and Jakobsson,
Ed-ward Elgar, 1997. ISBN 1858986303
When asked to review this book, I decided to use it to prepare my Presidential Address to ANZSEE’s 1999 Conference. The theme for that conference was ‘Grounding the Paradigm’. Eco-logical Economics is searching for a new perspec-tive, a new paradigm. The book is by a ‘Who’s
Book re6iews 335 Who’ in Ecological Economics. There are a few
gaps but many of the stars are there. A few outsiders are included.
For me, the most powerful chapter is that by Jack Knetsch. This chapter draws attention to the chasm between conventional neo-classical eco-nomic theory and recent findings in behavioural research. People’s preferences, for example, are not consistent with constant and invariant dis-count rates. Knetsch concludes that the continued use of constant discount rates distorts environ-mental policy design and choice. Similarly, he reminds us of the existence of kinked value func-tions which are much steeper in the domain of losses than in the domain of gains. Experimental studies reveal, repeatedly, that losses are widely regarded as being more onerous than gains. I was left wondering why so much of the literature ignores such observations. Knetsch ends the chap-ter with the stunning observation that ‘given present incentives, there may be some margin for poor science, as well as poor policy to survive.’ The chapter is a stunning critique of traditional economics. It should be read by all economists.
An interesting chapter is that by Shogren and Hurley on ‘Tournament Incentives’. Tournament Incentives provide large payoffs for leading edge performance (best management practice). The idea comes from the sporting world. The psycho-logical and monetary payoffs for a winner in a golf game, for example, are much, much greater than those received by the runner up — even though there may be only one stroke between the two players. ‘Should Tournament Incentives be-come part of environmental policy?’ ‘Are signals more important than monetary payoffs?’ ‘Or should, as the text books say, incentives be used to equate marginal cost with marginal revenue?’ Perhaps we would be better off if polluters were forced to pay well in excess of the marginal cost of their actions? Shogren and Hurley recommend the much wider use of Tournament Incentives. The idea is interesting and worthy of serious consideration, especially as an instrument to en-courage the widespread adoption of best manage-ment practice.
Another useful chapter is that by Hodge on the capacity of institutions to conserve biodiversity.
Hodge believes that non-profit organisations may, in many circumstances, be able to deliver more conservation benefits per dollar invested than gov-ernment departments. If this is the case, then what is the role for national governments? Is it only to create the institutional conditions? Should most conservation work be outsourced to non-govern-ment organisations?
Jumping, as this book does, from idea to idea, Costanza and Ruth summarise their work on dynamic systems modeling as a means to achieve broad community consensus and scope policy al-ternatives. The chapter, usefully, describes their experience in both soft systems modeling and quantitative modeling of complex adaptive sys-tems. The technique appears to be a powerful way of working with small groups of people cost-effectively.
The book opens with a Summary and Review of all the chapters followed by the synthesis by Herman Daly of his work on Sustainable Devel-opment. Daly makes a series of points similar to those he has made elsewhere. The chapter is not new but is a good read. There is an interesting appendix that develops Georgescu-Roegen’s work. It closes by challenging Solow and Stiglitz to answer the question: Are we, or are we not going to continue to discover new sources of energy, that can be safely used? I assume by the words ‘safely used’, Daly rejects the option of the widespread use of nuclear power.
Another interesting chapter is that by Faucheux. She is interested in the drivers of tech-nological change. Faucheux focuses on technolog-ical ‘lock in’. Is the world locked-in to fossil fuel dependence? Do we reject appropriate new tech-nologies simply because they are incompatible with current social institutions? Faucheux, has not yet found the answers, but this is a useful, chal-lenging area for inquiry.
Faucheux is followed by chapters that collec-tively explore questions about valuation and pro-ject assessment. The first is by O’Connor and the second by the book’s editors, Dragun and Jakob-sson. Both chapters explore problems associated with distributional and allocative efficiency, defin-ition of property rights, and compensation. The deeper one delves into these problems, the harder
Book re6iews
336
it seems to find the right answer! I perceive we are still searching for something better than cost-benefit analysis.
Overall, I found the subtitle to the book appro-priate. New perspectives are offered. Turning to my original challenge, however, I found the book lacking in two ways. The Presidential address I gave to ANZSEE linked three books together, the subject of this review ‘Rethinking the Future’ (Gibson, 1996) and the more recent ‘Future-mak-ers, Future-takers’ (Cocks, 1999). The result was a powerful trio of ideas. My conclusion was that ecological economics has to become more positive in its vision and more pragmatic in its orientation. When I read Cocks or Gibson, I get excited and start seeing ways forward. When I read ecological economics textbooks, I get depressed; real solu-tions, the powerful convincing paradigm that will either replace or correct the traditional rhetoric
has still to emerge. We are not there yet but I am encouraged.
References
Cocks, K.D., 1999. Future Makers Future Tak-ers: Life in Australia in 2050. University of New South Wales Press, Sydney.
Gibson, R., 1996. Rethinking the Future. Nicholas Brealey Publishing, London.
M.D. Young Australia New Zealand Society for Ecological Economics, PMB2,CSIRO Land and Water, Glen Osmond5064, Australia
PII: S 0 9 2 1 - 8 0 0 9 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 1 2 3 - 8
