Book Review: Whole Earth Discipline: An Ecopragmatist Manifesto by Stewart Brand
Hardcover: 336 page
Publisher: Viking Adult (October 15, 2009)
Stewart Brand is an invigorating and challenging writer. He has a long history in the environmental movement. His green credentials are undeniable. But he is not afraid to think outside the box. To challenge current environmental thinking. And to fight against the destructive role of ideology which can be such a limitation in political movements.
This book has two clear messages for environmentalists and “greens”:
1: Discard ideology.
2: Cities are green, nuclear energy is green, genetic engineering is green.
Brand proposes a pragmatic, non-ideological approach to the ecological and environmental problems we face today. In the process he has to critique some ideas he formerly promoted, and some of his allies still promote.
The book effectively deals with four areas. The role of cities, shanty towns and slums, the problem of anthropological contributions to climate change, the problem of energy and the role of nuclear power, and the resistance to solutions using genetic engineering.
Cities, countryside and slums
Brands discussion of the role of cities, slums and shanty towns is fascinating. It’s easily to be concerned about slums and shanty towns. But Brandt takes a positive view. He sees them as an important step in urbanisation. And urbanisation as an important step in improving the standing of living and cultural life of humanity. He opposes any romantic vision of villages which he describes as traps of ignorance and poverty.
Slums and shanty towns can be a hive of fervent commercial activity. Where people are busy making a living, carrying out a business (usually illegal or using illegal resources), educating their children and improving their income. All to enable them to make a transition to the city. To improve and incorporate technology into their own lives. “The worlds slums are the first urban environments to shape themselves around the cellphone”.
Sure, these areas can be breeding grounds for crime. But governments should do what they can to inhibit this and encourage the positive features. Another problem is that religions play a stronger role in slums than often realised. Brand refers to Planet of Slums by Mike Davis who says that:
“Populist Islam and Pentecostal Christianity (and in Bombay, the cult of Shivaji) occupy a social space analogous to that of early-twentieth-century socialism and anarchism.”
Such groups can often be the real government and supplier of services in the slums.
Greenhouse gas emissions
On the climate change issue Brand is clear. It is a real problem that humanity must confront. Market forces cannot solve the problem for us. We do need to take action. We need to intervene.
I liked his warning that underground sequestration of CO2 is not a solution. Personally, I would like someone to argue for diversion of CO2 away from emission into other manufacturing processes as a raw material. I find it silly that we could be considering underground storage of CO2 while effectively continuing to burn natural gas to produce CO2 in the manufacture of urea and methanol.
To my surprise, he argues for consideration of geoengineering solutions to global warming. Thankfully, he doesn’t deny the huge problems with this approach, the high possibility of unforeseen outcomes. However, his point is that this shouldn’t stop research in this area. After all, despite our best attempts we may be unable to exert enough control of greenhouse gas emission to prevent unavoidable disastrous outcomes. It would be wise to have geoengineering technology we could fall back on.
Brand likens this to the fact that people often resort to abortions when all attempts at normal birth control methods fail. A necessary evil.
I loved his speculation at the end of the book where Brand puts geoenginnering into context by considering possible future “solar system engineering.” We may, for example, mine for raw materials outside the earth, particularly in asteroids. We could also do much of our processing of minerals off the planet.
Energy and nuclear power
Brand promotes nuclear power as an essential contributor to humanity’s energy needs. This is often a controversial issue in the environmental movement. However, more and more greens are changing their minds on this, in the face of the contribution of fossil fuel emissions to global warming. Many now see it as a “necessary evil.”
I found Brand’s reassessment of the nuclear waste problem convincing. He criticises the fallacy of long-term planning. That we should do things today that solves every future problem. Currently we don’t have a reliable, safe way of eliminating or disposing of nuclear waste. So he recommends a policy of retrievable underground storage. This is a medium term solution. Storage until we have the technology enabling final solutions for recovery and treatment of the waste. Future solutions could include reactor processing, efficient recovery of useful components or long-term effective disposal methods. Obviously security is an issue but this new perspective does reduce the importance of the waste issue.
The possible proliferation of nuclear weapons and material is also a problem with nuclear power. Brand believes we are making progress on antiproliferation treaties. I have also been heartened by US President Obama’s willingness to make progress on nuclear disarmament – which links directly to the proliferation issue.
Development of new and safer technologies, such as microreactors also makes nuclear power more acceptable. However, I feel that Brand in this book may be playing down the health risk of radiation leaks. He argues that we may have been overestimating the harmful effects of radiation. Or that low radiation doses may even have beneficial effects. Maybe he is right, but we shouldn’t be too quick to lower standards in this area.
This is the area where Brand is the most critical of his green colleagues. He sees their fear here as based mainly on an attitude that we shouldn’t play god, we shouldn’t interfere with nature, rather than any real evidence of dangers.
This has also motivated opposition to stem cell research and use of transgenic DNA. Brand argues that while commercial and field applications of the technologies must be properly evaluated we should get past the understandable overcautious approach adopted during the early days of research in these areas. He argues that genetic engineering can play an important role in producing more sustainable agriculture products, reducing the use of agricultural chemicals, increasing production and providing much needed nutrition for the world’s population. It is a cure for environmental problems rather than a cause of them.
Brand recognises problems that have arisen through corporate control and intellectual property issues. But he can foresee a time when environmentally oriented people promote genetic engineering. For example he sees a strong possibility of farmers markets promoting GE products and organic farmers adopting this technology.
Brand summarises his book with discussion of the problem of ideological agendas in the green movement. This has been the main factor inhibiting the ability of the movement to adjust to new realities like global warming, nuclear power and genetic engineering.
He sees a problem of attitudes aimed at changing behaviours rather than solving problems. Activists who are too prone to confirmation bias. Too willing to harness science to a political agenda.
Personally I don’t think this problem is in any way isolated to the green movement. It’s a common feature of all political movements. And has similar outcomes. People naturally resort to confirmation biases. They develop loyalty to preconceived ideas and political agendas. Natural human intuitions like judgementalism and loyalty get co-opted.
Political movements easily become like religions. This is true of parts of the environmental movement. It’s also true of conservative groups, such as the climate change deniers, who come out against the environmental movement.
Brand’s point is that it is always more important to be right than consistent. One should be prepared to changes one’s previous ideas on things like nuclear energy and genetic engineering. We have to learn to question fables.
I liked Brands parable about the fox and the hedgehog.
“”How you think matters more than what you think,” says political scientist Philip Tetlock. The most important distinction in quality of judgment, he declares, was first expressed by the ancient Greek poet Archilochus: “The fox knows many things; the hedgehog one great thing.” Hedgehogs have a grand theory they are happy to extend into many domains, relishing its parsimony, expressing their views with great confidence. Foxes, on the other hand, are skeptical about grand theories, diffident in their forecasts, and ready to adjust their ideas based on actual events. Hedgehogs don’t notice or care when they’re wrong. Foxes learn. Hedgehogs are great proponents, but foxes are invariably better forecasters and policy makers.”
So, Brand argues that in fact – cities are green, nuclear energy is green and genetic engineering is green. He opposes cultural pessimism and believes science is imbued with optimism.
Maybe you doubt this. Maybe you already agree. Either way you will find this book a stimulating read.
For a an overview of the book have a look at the videos below.
See also: Another video presentation by Stewart Brand at the Q2C Festival, October 2009: The Whole Earth Discipline