A Poverty of Reason: Sustainable Development and Economic Growth

by Wilfred Beckerman

In this detailed economic investigation of sustainable development, a noted professor of economics argues that many of the alarms commonly sounded by environmentalists are, in fact, unfounded, and that current sustainable development policies should be reconsidered in light of their effects on the earth's human population, such as increased poverty and environmental degradation in developing countries. In a rare balanced counterpoint to popular sustainable development rhetoric, Professor Beckerman forces policy makers to consider whether future generations have rights that morally constrain and trump the claims of those alive today, particularly the masses of people living in dire poverty, arguing that the current sustainable development program is a menace to the prosperity and freedom of both current and future generations.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Environment, Economics

110 pages, Paperback

First published September 1, 2002

Reviews

[Sara Christians · Rating 4 out of 5]

Beckerman makes some good points regarding sustainable development. As a grad student, I took a course in sustainable engineering and my eyes were opened then to the arbitrary standards involved in "sustainability" and that they generally benefit the most elite in society. Most, however, don't understand this, as it is fashionable and considered compassionate and progressive to support environmental sustainability. I appreciated Beckerman's approach from an economic standpoint, which is highly rational. I wish he had expanded more on some of his arguments rather than have such a condensed booklet, but overall, this was an interesting read.

[Laura Woodyard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Intriguing read

[J.S. · Rating 3 out of 5]

A popular idea lately with government and the media has been "sustainable development," which is that we are rapidly depleting essential natural resources and are thus short-changing future generations. Beckerman contends that the whole notion is false and, in spite of regular predictions throughout history of shortages, we haven't run out of such resources, but even if we did there are free market mechanisms to counter such conditions. Also, since future generations are likely to be more prosperous than we are now, we have no such obligations to sacrifice for benefits of dubious value. He goes on to argue that projections of climate change are likewise not worrisome, because technology will allow us to adapt, and any precautions taken now should be cost-effective or should not be attempted (the "Precautionary Principle"). Overall, he advocates more for the poor of the world and improving their conditions as the best way to ensure future improvements in the environment. He argues that they need access to sufficient energy supplies (regardless of carbon emissions) to improve their lot and to deny it to them is a form of imperialism, and points out that developed nations take much better care of the environment than developing nations.

Much of his logic is persuasive, especially as he explains how market mechanisms will deal with possible fuel shortages in the future. For example, if known reserves of oil become depleted (and known reserves are ample for a long time yet) prices will increase which will encourage the discovery of more sources, and technology will find a way to obtain the oil from sources that were previously too expensive to mine (such as the tar sands in Canada). Technology is an important part of the equation, because future advances will also improve renewable sources of energy such as solar and wind which are currently not economically viable. He also points out that numerous and repeated past predictions of shortages of essential materials (such as lead, tin, and oil among many others) have never come true.

The weakest point of the book (and maybe I just failed to properly understand his reasoning) was that he looks at everything from an economic perspective. He acknowledges that there are aesthetic or spiritual values associated with wilderness and natural environments that are difficult to quantify with simple monetary values, but he dismisses such things as simple failures in allocating property rights (such as placing a value on clean air or water, and charging polluters for fouling such public resources). I found his arguments that species biodiversity has value to us only for the potential of future medicines to be unconvincing, and his argument that caution in proceeding with genetically-modified foods only harms the poor of the world to be reckless (although I'll agree that current policies are overly cautious). Also, he limits his critique of sustainable development mostly to mineral and energy resources where the extent of reserves is poorly known, and fails to address how it might be applied in situations such as fishing, where numbers can be more easily estimated and depletion more readily observed.

Overall, the book brings up many interesting points that are seldom thought through properly in the current debates over our responsibilities regarding climate change and preserving the environment - and our responsibilities for meeting the needs of the poor of the world. Good reading for anyone who is seriously concerned about such important issues and willing to keep an open mind.

[Tami · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really only read the first chapter. It is anti-sustainable development. Well, she says we don't need to worry about it. That is a normal republican view and I want a different perspective so I posted it at paperbackswap.com and somebody else can enjoy it.