Thanks. You are right. Books like these are a tough read in that they don’t leave much room for hope given the current trajectory of our consumerism and resource consumption. America’s history of plentiful resources and westward expansion makes it difficult for us to view the situation as a zero sum set of choices.

David:

Well reasoned and well stated, as always. Thanks. Of course, the problem with your choice number two is that, where global warming is concerned, waiting until we reach the crisis point will result in severe environmental and economic consequences. I’m still hopeful that the general approach that resulted in The Montreal Protocol will serve as a basic model for global action. Time will tell.

“‘Wicked problem’ is a phrase used in social planning to describe a problem that is difficult or impossible to solve because of incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements that are often difficult to recognize. Moreover, because of complex interdependencies, the effort to solve one aspect of a wicked problem may reveal or create other problems.”

Given that it seems highly unlikely that this is a “have your cake and eat it too” situation. It also seems highly unlikely it can be successfully addressed through incrementalism. The fundamentals of what is leading us to this global problem are so flawed that small changes probably won’t save the day.

That leaves 2 choices: 1)nations make bold and difficult decisions now to make meaningful change; or 2) the situation reaches a crisis point where urgent action is required. Human nature tends to go with Choice #2 since in the first choice there is always the chance or hope that things will get better without taking drastic action.

Another book we reviewed recently in Crosslands Bulletin, The Myth of Resource Efficiency, is less dogmatic but more commanding. It is tough reading even for academic economists. The authors evaluate the Jevons paradox: increase in efficiency in using a resource leads to an increase in the consumption of that resource rather than to a reduction.

The authors draw a conclusion I find pertinent to your question. They say, ““Humans have to accept losing something in order to be able to retain something else.”