The Skeptical Environmentalist

In this book, Bjorn Lomborg claims to be addressing the real state of the world. Measuring the real state of the world is the book's sub-title. The environment, is it getting worse, heading for calamities, even 'doomsday'? Or is it in fact getting better? He begins by explaining that he had been an 'old left-wing Greenpeace member' and for a long time had been concerned about environmental questions. But he had been challenged to establish whether commonly held views about the rapidly deteriorating environment are based on real evidence or are mainly rhetoric and hype. During the past few years, therefore, he researched to evaluate the evidence. The result is this book with nearly 3,000 references and 170 diagrams. His investigations have, in fact, turned his view around. The world has been getting better and still is, he argues. The constantly repeated 'Litany' (as he describes it) of our deteriorating environment is largely the result of gross misrepresentation of the real situation by environmental groups and others. He quotes many examples. No environmental body, even the most respected, escapes his rebuke for misquoting or misusing statistics suggesting things are a lot worse than they really are. He looks at human health and welfare, the availability of food, water and other resources, the loss of forests, air and water pollution, problems of waste, dangerous chemicals, biodiversity and climate change. While acknowledging that problems remain he argues that in all these areas the real situation is very different from that commonly portrayed and that in many of them things are actually getting better. All this makes salutary reading especially for environmental organisations who so frequently exaggerate, embellish or even deliberately misinterpret the facts. To overcome the problem of the 'Litany', he argues that we need to establish the facts. Lomborg has tried to do just that. He presents a great deal of information. But facts on their own are not very helpful; facts need interpretation especially when complex environmental problems are concerned where evidence with appropriate selection can be assembled seemingly to support a wide range of preconceptions or conclusions. What it is necessary to do is to look honestly at all the evidence and come up with a balanced view. That cannot be done by one person alone. I have been deeply involved in the science of Global Warming working with hundreds of scientists in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to produce such a balanced assessment by the world scientific community. I looked, therefore, particularly at Lomborg's section on Global Warming. To a large extent he accepts the IPCC's findings but he also works to water them down so as to strengthen the particular thesis he has now espoused. I give just one from many possible examples. He states sweepingly that the expected sea level rise of about half a metre this century will not be much of a problem because we will all be rich enough to build sea defences to match the rise. That is probably true for the UK and even for Holland. But for millions in Bangladesh and a large area of southern China and for hundreds of islands in the Indian and Pacific oceans, sea defences on the scale required are neither practical nor economic. Almost inevitably many millions will be displaced from the rich delta agricultural land they farm. And where do they go? Lomborg is, in fact, in danger of abandoning one 'Litany' only to replace it by another with set of different messages, namely that things are looking much better than is generally thought, no strong action is required and normal progress and innovation will largely look after the problems. Renewable sources of energy, preferably stimulated by extra R & D money, will inevitably begin to take over and replace fossil fuel sources. The Kyoto Protocol, he states, is ill conceived, will hardly make any difference and its implementation will cost far too much. He gives no careful analysis of the various cost studies with their wide range of results, nor does he consider the importance of the Protocol's political aspects, in particular mechanisms for binding agreements on carbon emissions that nations have laboriously hammered out. A further example where his new Litany has taken over and balanced analysis of 'facts' abandoned. This new litany is in fact potentially more dangerous than the one he wants to replace because the human will is involved. Greedy and selfish humans are only too willing to be persuaded to do nothing; sins of omission may not be so exposed but are often more damaging. There is a further Litany that pervades Lomborg's book, consisting of frequently cited pieces of simplistic economic dogma. For instance, statements like: the overriding priority is to ensure high economic growth because only then can resources to care for the environment or to combat poverty be available; or, increasing energy efficiency cannot be effective at leading to savings because if it were it would already be implemented (like the argument about the £5 note lying on the pavement - it cannot be a £5 note because if it were it would already have been picked up); or, 'what matters to our and our children's future is not primarily decided within the IPCC framework but within the framework of the World Trade Organisation.' Presentations of statistics and costs (the book has many such) need to be put in a framework of debate and judgements about values. How can we responsibly use the Earth's resources placed under our care? What should be the relationship between humans and the rest of creation? How can we care for the poor or take a responsible attitude to future generations? We need to develop a thoroughly integrated approach that includes values, facts and analyses (scientific, technical, socio-economic) and balanced judgements. In the Judaeo-Christian scriptures the correct approach is called Wisdom with a capital W – a recipe for practical living while giving an appropriate place to the Creator. Lomborg started the book by explaining his devotion to facts, careful analysis and rigour. He began well by applying such to the exaggerated offerings of many environmental bodies. But until he applies these standards to his own assessments of the issues or to his own proposals for future action, they will not provide much in the way of guidance towards a balanced approach to the key environmental problems of our time.