Taking Sides

PART 1. General Philosophical and Political Issues

ISSUE 1. Should a Price Be Put on the Goods and Services Provided by the World's Ecosystems?

YES: Janet N. Abramovitz, from Putting a Value on Nature's `Free' Services, World Watch

NO: Mark Sagoff, from Can We Put a Price on Nature's Services?" Report from the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy

Worldwatch Institute senior researcher Janet N. Abramovitz argues that failing to assign an appropriate economic value to the free" services provided by the ecosystem encourages the misuse and destruction of the systems that provide these services. Environmental ethicist and philosopher Mark Sagoff agrees that it is important to recognize the great value of nature's services, but he rejects efforts to attach a price to them as futile attempts to legitimize the standard cost-benefit policy framework, which he believes undermines the struggle to protect the natural environment.

ISSUE 2. Does Wilderness Have Intrinsic Value?

YES: Rick Bass, from On Wilderness and Wallace Stegner, The Amicus Journal

NO: William Tucker, from Is Nature Too Good for Us?" Harper's Magazine

Nature writer Rick Bass defends the need for true wildlands, rather than managed ecosystems, if we are to preserve our ecological heritage and the cultural treasures that it inspires. William Tucker, a writer and social critic, asserts that wilderness areas are elitist preserves designed to keep people out.

ISSUE 3. Is the U.S. Endangered Species Act Fundamentally Sound?

YES: David Langhorst, from Is the Endangered Species Act Fundamentally Sound? Pro, Congressional Digest

NO: Mark L. Plummer, from Is the Endangered Species Act Fundamentally Sound? Con, Congressional Digest

David Langhorst, executive board member of the Idaho Wildlife Federation, asserts that the Endangered Species Act has saved hundreds of plant and animal species that were in serious decline and that reauthorization of the act is in the public interest. Mark L. Plummer, an environmental economist, argues that the act's goal of bringing listed species to full recovery is not achievable.

ISSUE 4. Is the Precautionary Principle a Sound Basis for Environmental Policy?

YES: Patti Goldman and J. Martin Wagner, from Trading Away Public Health: WTO Obstacles to Effective Toxics Controls, Multinational Monitor

NO: Ronald Bailey, from Precautionary Tale, Reason

Environmental attorneys Patti Goldman and J. Martin Wagner argue that the precautionary principle is essential to protecting public health and the environment; it must not be abandoned in the pursuit of international policy. Science correspondent Ronald Bailey counters that the precautionary principle slows development and is a luxury affordable only by those who live in societies already replete with technology.

ISSUE 5. Does Environmental Regulation Unnecessarily Limit Private Property Rights?

YES: Bruce Yandle, from Property Rights and Constitutional Order: Paradoxes and Environmental Regulation, Vital Speeches of the Day

NO: Doug Harbrecht, from A Question of Property Rights and Wrongs, National Wildlife

Bruce Yandle, a professor of economics and legal studies, argues that technological development is transforming the world into a Garden of Eden. He maintains that environmental regulation is an unnecessary, misguided effort that threatens private property rights. Business Week's Washington correspondent Doug Harbrecht contends that it is absurd to have to pay owners of private property for obeying environmental regulations.

ISSUE 6. Should Environmental Policy Attempt to Cure Environmental Racism?

YES: Jan Marie Fritz, from Searching for Environmental Justice: National Stories, Global Possibilities, Social Justice

NO: David Friedman, from The `Environmental Racism' Hoax, The American Enterprise

Health planning sociologist Jan Marie Fritz discusses the national and international manifestations of environmental racism and the global imperative in the search for environmental justice. Writer and social analyst David Friedman denies the evidence of environmental racism. He argues that the environmental justice movement is a government-sanctioned political ploy that will hurt urban minorities by driving away industrial jobs.

ISSUE 7. Is Limiting Population Growth a Key Factor in Protecting the Global Environment?

YES: Paul Harrison, from Sex and the Single Planet: Need, Greed, and Earthly Limits, The Amicus Journal

NO: Betsy Hartmann, from Population Fictions: The Malthusians Are Back in Town, Dollars and Sense

Author Paul Harrison argues that family planning programs should be implemented to prevent world population from exceeding carrying capacity. Betsy Hartmann, director of the Hampshire College Population and Development Program, argues that the real problem is not how many people there are but that controls over resource consumption are inadequate.

ISSUE 8. Will Pollution Rights Trading Effectively Control Environmental Problems?

YES: Byron Swift, from A Low-Cost Way to Control Climate Change, Issues in Science and Technology

NO: Brian Tokar, from Trading Away the Earth: Pollution Credits and the Perils of `Free Market Environmentalism,'" Dollars and Sense

Environmental attorney Byron Swift advocates the use of emission trading systems, such as those contained in the Kyoto Protocol, to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases and other pollutants. Author, college teacher, and environmental activist Brian Tokar maintains that pollution credits and other market-oriented environmental protection policies do nothing to reduce pollution while transferring the power to protect the environment from the public to large corporate polluters.

PART 2. The Environment and Technology

ISSUE 9. Should Pollution Prevention and Reduction Be a Focus of Agricultural Policy?

YES: David E. Ervin, from Shaping a Smarter Environmental Policy for Farming, Issues in Science and Technology

NO: Dennis T. Avery, from Saving Nature's Legacy Through Better Farming, Issues in Science and Technology

David E. Ervin, policy studies director at the Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, advocates a variety of new agricultural policies designed to prevent and reduce pollution, including setting ambient water quality standards and using market incentives to encourage farmers to reduce chemical use. Dennis T. Avery, director of the Hudson Institute's Center for Global Food Issues, maintains that without higher-yielding crops that depend on fertilizers and pesticides, remaining forest lands will have to be used for agriculture, thus threatening biodiversity.

ISSUE 10. Is Biotechnology an Environmentally Sound Way to Increase Food Production?

YES: International Food Information Council, from Food Biotechnology and the Environment,

NO: Brian Halweil, from The Emperor's New Crops, World Watch

The International Food Information Council, a food industry-supported education organization, asserts that biotechnology can safely modify crops in ways that will help feed the increasing world population while reducing the resulting toll on the environment. Worldwatch Institute researcher Brian Halweil argues that the genetic modification of crops threatens to produce pesticide-resistant insect pests and herbicide-resistant weeds, will victimize poor farmers, and is unlikely to feed the world.

ISSUE 11. Do Environmental Hormone Mimics Pose a Potentially Serious Health Threat?

YES: Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski, and John Peterson Myers, from Hormone Imposters, Sierra

NO: Stephen H. Safe, from Environmental and Dietary Estrogens and Human Health: Is There a Problem?" Environmental Health Perspectives

Zoologist Theo Colborn, journalist Dianne Dumanoski, and John Peterson Myers, director of the W. Alton Jones Foundation, present evidence suggesting that low environmental levels of hormone-mimicking chemicals may threaten the health of humans and other animals. Toxicologist Stephen H. Safe argues that the suggestion that industrial estrogenic compounds contribute to increased cancer incidence and reproductive problems in humans is not plausible.

ISSUE 12. Is the Environmental Protection Agency's Decision to Tighten Air Quality Standards for Ozone and Particulates Justified?

YES: Carol M. Browner, from Statement Before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate

NO: Daniel B. Menzel, from Statement Before the Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety, Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate

Carol M. Browner, administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), summarizes the evidence and arguments that were the basis for the EPA's proposal for more stringent standards for ozone and particulates. Daniel B. Menzel, a professor of environmental medicine and a researcher on air pollution toxicology, argues that adequate research has not been done to demonstrate that the new standards will result in the additional public health benefits that would justify the difficulty and expense associated with their implementation.

PART 3. Disposing of Wastes

ISSUE 13. Hazardous Waste: Should the Polluter Pays" Provision of Superfund Be Weakened?

YES: Bernard J. Reilly, from Stop Superfund Waste, Issues in Science and Technology

NO: Ted Williams, from The Sabotage of Superfund, Audubon

DuPont corporate counsel Bernard J. Reilly argues that the Superfund legislation has led to unfair standards and waste cleanup cost delegation. Audubon contributing editor Ted Williams warns against turning Superfund into a public welfare program for polluters.

ISSUE 14. Municipal Waste: Is Recycling an Environmentally and Economically Sound Waste Management Strategy?

YES: Richard A. Denison and John F. Ruston, from Recycling Is Not Garbage, Technology Review

NO: Chris Hendrickson, Lester Lave, and Francis McMichael, from Time to Dump Recycling?" Issues in Science and Technology

Environmental Defense Fund scientist Richard A. Denison and economic analyst John F. Ruston rebut a series of myths that they say have been promoted by industrial opponents in an effort to undermine the environmentally valuable and successful recycling movement. Engineering and economics researchers Chris Hendrickson, Lester Lave, and Francis McMichael assert that ambitious recycling programs are often too costly and are of dubious environmental value.

ISSUE 15. Nuclear Waste: Should the United States Continue to Focus Plans for Permanent Nuclear Waste Disposal Exclusively at Yucca Mountain?

YES: Luther J. Carter and Thomas H. Pigford, from Getting Yucca Mountain Right, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

NO: D. Warner North, from Unresolved Problems of Radioactive Waste: Motivation for a New Paradigm, Physics Today

Science writer Luther J. Carter and nuclear engineer Thomas H. Pigford argue that establishing clear goals that would culminate in a safe, permanent nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain is a realistic and sensible strategy. Risk assessment expert D. Warner North discusses the many formidable technical and political problems with the current strategy to site a permanent nuclear waste facility at Yucca Mountain and argues that a new, more open and flexible paradigm is needed to deal with disposal of radioactive materials.

PART 4. The Environment and the Future

ISSUE 16. Is Sustainable Development Compatible With Human Welfare?

YES: Julie L. Davidson, from Sustainable Development: Business as Usual or a New Way of Living?" Environmental Ethics

NO: Jacqueline R. Kasun, from Doomsday Every Day: Sustainable Economics, Sustainable Tyranny, The Independent Review

Researcher Julie L. Davidson argues that a radical conversion to sustainable development offers a way to make future human freedom possible and consistent with the wider social and ecological good. Economics professor Jacqueline R. Kasun asserts that sustainable development poses threats to human freedom, dignity, and material welfare.

ISSUE 17. Will Voluntary Action by Industry Reduce the Need for Future Environmental Regulation?

YES: Raymond J. Patchak and William R. Smith, from ISO 14000 Perspective: So Long! Command and Control… Hello! ISO 14000

NO: Linda Greer and Christopher van Löben Sels, from When Pollution Prevention Meets the Bottom Line, Environmental Science and Technology

Certified hazardous materials managers Raymond J. Patchak and William R. Smith describe the voluntary ISO 14000 environmental program developed by the International Organization for Standardization. They assert that this initiative will result in increased environmental protection by permitting industry more flexibility in achieving pollution prevention than current command and control" regulations do. Environmental Defense Fund scientist Linda Greer and project analyst Christopher van Löben Sels conclude from a case study of a Dow Chemical facility that not even projected cost savings will ensure that a corporation will adopt a voluntary pollution prevention plan.

ISSUE 18. Are Aggressive International Efforts Needed to Slow Global Warming?

YES: Christopher Flavin, from Last Tango in Buenos Aires, World Watch

NO: Jerry Taylor, from Global Warming: The Anatomy of a Debate, Vital Speeches of the Day

Worldwatch Institute vice president Christopher Flavin cites evidence that human-induced global warming has begun. He calls for decisive action based on a new approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Jerry Taylor, the Cato Institute's natural resource studies director, contends that the uncertainties regarding the likely magnitude and consequences of global warming makes the implementation of an expensive agreement that he believes will have little effect on the future climate an unwise gamble.

ISSUE 19. Are Major Changes Needed to Avert a Global Environmental Crisis?

YES: Chris Bright, from Anticipating Environmental `Surprise,'" in Lester R. Brown et al., State of the World 2000: A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society

NO: Julian L. Simon, from More People, Greater Wealth, More Resources, Healthier Environment, Economic Affairs

Chris Bright argues that human impacts on the environment are so extensive that we face an era of catastrophic surprises unless we learn to think of the world as a complex system and behave accordingly. The late professor of economics and business administration Julian L. Simon predicts that over the long term, the brainpower of more people coupled with the market forces of a free economy will lead to improved standards of living and a healthier environment.

The New copy of this book will include any supplemental materials advertised. Please check the title of the book to determine if it should include any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.

The Used, Rental and eBook copies of this book are not guaranteed to include any supplemental materials. Typically, only the book itself is included. This is true even if the title states it includes any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.