Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:55:47.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ecology Politics and Liberal Democracy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Extract

OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS, ECOLOGY HAS MADE ITS ENTRANCE INTO politics. At first the main concern was with pollution; but soon it broadened, and today the watchword is energy. In both cases the underlying phenomenon is that of economic growth. Not that all growth is incompatible with ecological balance; but over the last few decades normally there was a conflict, and industrial and urban growth in particular have led to a significant deterioration of the environment. Hence the importance of the controversy surrounding industrialization and economic growth, which has taken on an increasing importance in the politics of several Western European countries.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Gross Domestic Product… appears to provide the most convenient measure of ecological demand’ (Blueprint for Survival, special issue of the Ecologist, 1972, p. 3). But it has to be kept in mind that the GDP above all reflects an increase in value, and its content is subject to change. Some technologically very advanced products (such as computers) have a minimal environmental impact.

2 Beckerman, Wilfred, Two Cheers for the Affluent Society , St Martin’s Press, New York, 1974, pp. 36 and 203204.Google Scholar Pavitt, Keith, ‘A European View of the “Environmental Crisis”’, in Axtmann, Robert C., ed., Rescuing Man’s Environment , Princeton University Council on Environmental Studies, Princeton, N. J., 1972, p. 129. 129.Google Scholar

3 Beckerman, Two Cheers, p. 36; Pavitt, quoted ibid.

4 Heilbroner, Robert L., An Inquiry into the Human Prospect , Norton, New York, 1974, pp. 89 ff.Google Scholar

5 Hirsch, Fred, Social Limits to Growth , Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar His argument is more complex; but he holds that market capitalism, combined with political democracy (universal participation) and pyramid‐shaped income distribution result in uncontrollable pressures for growth, and that at least one of those has to give. See in particular p. 165.

6 Ophuls, William, Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity , Freeman, San Francisco, 1977, p. 145.Google Scholar

7 Ibid., p. 152.

8 Macpherson, C. B., Democratic Theory , Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1973.Google Scholar

9 Inglehart, Ronald, ‘The Silent Revolution in Europe: Intergenerational Change in Post‐Industrial Societies,’ American Political Science Review , LXV, no. 4, 12, 1971, pp. 9911017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 The Wall Street Journal, 1 March 1976, p. I.

11 Fred Hirsch, op. cit., e. g., pp. 3–4.

12 Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy , 3rd ed., Harper & Row, New York, 1950.Google Scholar

13 Mishan, E. J., Technology and Growth , Praeger, New York, 1969.Google Scholar Schumacher, E. F., Small is Beautiful , Harper & Row, New York, 1973.Google Scholar

14 Jouvenel, Bertrand de, ‘Sur la croissance économique’, edited in Economie et société humaine , Denoel, Paris, 1972, pp. 4394.Google Scholar

15 Science, Growth and Policy. Report of the Secretary‐General’s Ad Hoc Group on New Concepts of Science Policy, OECD, Paris, 1971, frequently referred to as the ‘Brooks Report’, p. 29.

16 Ibid., p. 26.

17 Shonfield, Andrew, Modern Capitalism , Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1965, p. 211.Google Scholar

18 Zarka, Claude, Redundancy Procedures in Selected Western European Countries , ILO, Geneva, 1966, p. 4.Google Scholar

19 Stillman, Edmund O., L’envol de la France , Hachette, Paris, 1973, pp. 51 and 64.Google Scholar

20 Survey conducted 13–15 May 1969: Modernization of the Economy. Source: Institut français de l’opinion publique. Modernization has to be as fast as possible because foreign competition does not wait The economy has to be modernized without delay even if this means temporary dificulties such as the closing down of nonprofitable businesses and localized unemployment.

21 Shonfield writes: ‘I remember the undisguised glee of a member of the staff of the Commissariat du Plan in Paris who was describing the success of a plan to change the structure of an industry in which there was a proliferation of small, backward firms: they were being killed off ‐“un vrai holocauste!” he said.’

As to the idea that industrialization systematically enhances the development of discrepancies and inequalities in French society, see the quasi‐official study Une image de la France en l’an 2000. Scénario de l’inacceptable, La documentation française, Paris, 1971, in particular pp. 43–8.

22 Delouvrier, Paul, et al., 1985. La France face au choc du futur , Armand Colin, Paris, 1972, p. 164.Google Scholar

23 The ‘little Neddies’ (Economic Development Committees, the nickname being derived from that of the National Economic Development Council) were to serve as the link between government economic policy and individual trades and industries. Shonfield writes that ‘the original intention was to achieve a close and effective two‐way dialogue between private industry and the government, with the progressive elements in the industry taking the lead.… But… the British obsession with representation… began to take over and rapidly ruined the whole project’. Shonfield, Modern Capitalism, pp. 159–60.

24 Buttel, Frederick H. and Flinn, William L., ‘Economic Growth versus the Environment: Survey Evidence’, Social Science Quarterly, 57, no. 2, 09, 1976, p. 418.Google Scholar

25 Jouvenel, Bertrand de, Du principat , Hachette, Paris, 1973, pp. 77–9.Google Scholar

26 McLennan, Malcolm, Forsyth, Murray and Denton, Geoffroy, Economic Planning and Policies in Britain, France, and Germany , Praeger, New York, 1968, p. 16.Google Scholar

27 Ibid., p. 29.

28 Andrew Shonfield, op. cit.

29 Heilbroner, op. cit., p. 83.

30 The technostructure are all those who have power in the corporation and are therefore committed ‐ according to Galbraith ‐ to the corporation’s expansion. See Galbraith, John Kenneth, The New Industrial State , Houghton, Mifflin, Boston, 1971.Google Scholar

31 See, e. g., Knorr, Klaus, Power and Wealth ‐The Political Economy of International Power , Basic Books, New York, 1973, pp. V‐VII (editor’s preface, by Benjamin Cohen, which sums up this point).Google Scholar

32 Blake, David H. and Walters, Robert S., The Politics of Global Economic Relations , Prentice‐Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1976, particularly pp. 1726.Google Scholar

33 Kolko, Gabriel, The Politics of War , Random House, New York, 1968, p. 328.Google Scholar

34 Dahl, Robert A., ‘Governing the Giant Corporation’, in Nader, Ralph and Green, Mark, eds., Corporate Power in America , Grossman, New York, 1973, pp. 23–4.Google Scholar

35 Hayek, F. A., The Road to Serfdom , University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1944.Google Scholar

36 Shonfield, op. cit., Part 4.

37 Ibid., pp. 119–20.

38 Ibid., p. 112.

39 On the authoritarian aspect of Bismarck’s welfare system, see Dahrendorf, Ralf, Society and Democracy in Germany , Doubleday, Garden City, N. Y., 1967, pp. 5860.Google Scholar

40 See the description by Adam Ulam in Beer, Samuel, et al., Patterns of Government , 3rd ed., Random House, New York, 1973, pp. 636–43.Google Scholar

41 Shonfield writes that some of the Nazi industrial planning methods foreshadowed methods commonly adopted in postwar Europe, such as a planned investment programme covering a whole industry and an effort to achieve more collaboration in research aimed at accelerating technical development. Shonfield, op. cit., pp. 243–4.

42 Thus, General Hugh Johnson of the NRA (National Recovery Administration). Quoted by Shonfield, op. cit., p. 310.

43 Huntington, Samuel, Political Order in Changing Societies , Yale University Press, New Haven, 1968.Google Scholar

44 Ralf Dahrendorf, The New Liberty, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1975. P. 29.

45 Illich, Ivan, Tools for Conviviaity , Harper & Row, New York, 1973, pp. 1617.Google Scholar

46 At least as far as the corporate sector is concerned. See Galbraith, John K., Economics and the Public Purpose , New American Library, New York, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

47 See footnote 29.

48 Shonfield, op. cit., pp. 176–98.

49 In Marckolsheim (on the French side of the Rhine), a chemical plant (with danger of lead pollution) was at stake; after very strong and well‐organized local protest, the government revoked the permit for the installation. In Wyhl (on the German side of the Rhine), the permit for a nuclear power plant was finally suspended in court, but only after a history of local protests and administrative and judicial proceedings.

50 Thoreau, Essay on Civil Disobedience.

51 The Economist, 19 March 1977, p. 12.

52 Ibid., 13 November 1976, p. 63.

53 In France, the Electricité de France and the Atomic Energy Commission are not only conducting a publicity campaign for nuclear energy but the latter has also forbidden all its employees and all personnel under contract to publish anything about nuclear energy without its previous clearance. See Samuel, Pierre, Le nucléaire en question , Entente, Paris, 1975, p. 95.Google Scholar

54 See Heilbroner, op. cit., p. 89; and also his review of Fred Hirsch’s Social Limits to Growth, where he writes: ‘The necessary remedy may be beyond our grasp, for it requires nothing less than an abandonment of the primary behavioral premise of capitalism ‐that is, the replacement of the individualistic acquisitive ethos by a social, communally oriented perspective. Can this be achieved without falling into Chinese thought control?’ Heilbroner, Robert L., ‘The False Promise of Growth’, The New York Review of Books, 3 03 1977, p. 10. Konrad Lorenz has similarly argued for a ‘dictatorship of the good’ to save the world from ecological disaster. And many have wondered about the political nature of the Club of Rome’s proposals; there is a strong suspicion of authoritarian politics. See Dahrendorf, op. cit., pp. 9–10.Google Scholar

55 Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation , Beacon Press, Boston, 1957.Google Scholar