Global Environmental Change 1994 4 (3) 179-184

VIEWPOINT

An attempt is made to identify some of the main reasons why actions de- signed to reduce environmental de- gradation are both slow and insuffi- cient. Scientists do not always present their results in a form that can easily be interpreted by policy makers. The general public is receiving insufficient objective information and therefore re- mains largely ignorant of what is at stake, making it more difficult to achieve a solid political base for ac- tion. For one reason or another, some scientists argue that present know- ledge is insufficient for response mea- sures. Even if they represent a minor- ity opinion, their views are often favoured by governments.

Professor D66s was Director of the Global Atmospheric Research Programme (GARP) during 1971-82, and in 1981-82 he was also Director of the World Climate Programme (WCP). More recently he has been Deputy Director of IIASA. At present he is Chairman of Global Environmental Management, Jordangasse 7/l 3, A-l 010 Vienna, Austria.

Why is environmenta protection so slow?

Bo R. Diiiis

Some of the more serious environ- mental problems now confronting us were identified about a century ago. As can be seen in Table 1, for exam- ple, in 1896 Arrhenius’ realized that the increased burning of fossil fuel would lead to a higher atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, thereby reinforcing the natural green- house effect and causing a climatic change. His calculation of the ex- pected global warming is indeed very much in agreement with what is now being obtained with complex climate models. Nevertheless, it was not until the mid-1970s that this problem was given any serious attention.

The acidification of soils and lakes was also identified in the last century

as a potential environmental problem, but this was not taken seriously Until observational evidence of harmful effects was presented in the late 1960s.’ Similarly, the decline of global forests and land degradation were rec- ognized more than a hundred years ago.

In spite of these early recognitions that the environment was not an inex- haustible resource, little or no atten- tion was paid to the need for its pro- tection before the Stockholm Environ- mental Conference in 1972. Since then, new environmental threats have appeared every few years (see Table 1). For example, in 1974 it was real- ized that the emission of chlorofluoro- carbons led to a depletion of the stra-

Table 1. Timetable of major political acceptance of some currently known environmental issues and the dates when they were first identified as potential problems.

Year

1960

Environmental issue

Pollution of air and water Tropical deforestation Acidification of lakes

1970

1980

Stratospheric ozone depletion Carbon dioxide induced climatic change

Additional greenhouse gases Acidification and decline of forests

1990 ?

First identification as a potential problem

1962 Carson” 1874 Marshb 1872 SmithC

1974 Molina-Rowland” 1896 Arrheniuse

1976 Wang et a!

‘S. Arrhenius, ‘On the influence of carbo- nic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground’, Philosophical Magazine, Vol 41, April 1896, pp 237-276. *S. Oden, The Acidification of Air and Precipitation and its Consequences in the Natural Environment, Bulletin No 1, Ecolo- gy Committee, Swedish National Science Research Council, Stockholm, 1968.

Source: 60 Ft. Dbds, ‘How crittcal is the state of the global environment?‘, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Environmental Cooperation in Europe, Austria, 1993. Notes: a Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, Houghton Mifflin, Boston. MA, 1962; b G.P. Marsh, The Earth as Modified by Human Actions, Sampson Low, London and New York, 1874; ’ R.A. Smith, Air and Rain, Longmans Green, London, 1872; d M.J. Molina and F. S. Rowland, ‘Stratospheric sink chlorofluoromethanes: chlorine atom catalyzed destruction of ozone’, Nature, Vol 249, 1974. pp 810-814; ’ S. Arrhenius, ‘On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground’, Philosophical Magazine, Vol41, April 1896, pp 237-276; ’ W.C. Wang, Y.L. Yung, A.A. Lacis, T. MO and J.E. Hansen, ‘Greenhouse effect due to manmade perturbations of other gases’, Science, Vol 194, 1976, pp 685-690.

0959-3780/94/030179-06 0 1994 Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd 179

Why is environmental protection so slow? B R D86s

3J.T. Houghton, G.J. Jenkins and J.J. Ephraums, eds, Scientific Assessment, Report prepared for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change by Working Group 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990. 4H. Rodhe, E. Cowling, I.E. Galbally, J.N. Galloway and R. Herrera, ‘Acidification and regional air pollution in the Tropics’, in H. Rodhe and R. Herrera, eds, Acidifica- tion in Tropical Countries, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 1988, pp 3-39. ‘World Resources Institute, ‘Dimensions of sustainable development’, in World Fle- sources 1992-93, Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 1992. ‘Food and Agricultural Organization and United Nations Environment Programme, Tropical Forest Resources Project, FAO, Rome, 1981. ‘Food and Agriculture Organization, ‘Forest Resources Assessment 1990 pro- ject’, Second Interim Report on the State of Tropical Forest, paper presented at the 10th World Forestry Congress, Paris, September 1991 (revised 15 October 1991).

Although scientific knowledge of the various environmental problems is im- perfect in many respects, it has no doubt been sufficient to raise wide- spread attention and concern. Indeed, this has been demonstrated by the numerous conferences and meetings organized by the scientific community, international organizations and gov- ernments; the extensive media space given to the environment; and the concern expressed by politicians. In the light of this, one would expect the prospects of decisive action for its protection to be promising. However, in relation to what is needed, compa- ratively little is being done. Consider the following:

l The greenhouse gas issue. The atmospheric concentration of radiatively active gases continues to increase. The reduction of the anthropogenic emission of carbon dioxide planned by some countries represents only a few per cent of total global emissions. This minor reduction should be compared with the reduction of the net emissions by more than 60% that would be required to stabilize concentration at today’s levels, according to the WMO/UNEP Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change (IPCC).’

tospheric ozone layer causing in- creased harmful ultraviolet radiation at Earth’s surface, and, as recently as the early 1980s it became clear that in addition to carbon dioxide there were several other anthropogenetically in- duced trace gases contributing sub- stantially to the greenhouse effect.

Given such recent detection of new environmental problems one may ask whether we now are aware of all se- rious threats to the environment. There may be others lurking in the wings. Unfortunately, this question cannot be answered here. Instead I will summarize briefly what is being done to reduce the currently identified environmental stresses, and suggest some of the main reasons why the response to them has been so slow.

Continued degradation of the environment

Acidification of terrestrial and

aquatic ecosystems. Progress has been made in Europe, both in accepting that scientific know- ledge, although not perfect, is suffi- ciently convincing for corrective ac- tion to be taken, and in agreeing on a lowering of emissions of sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxides. It should be recognized, however, that the present commitments are far from adequate. At the same time it can be expected that acidi- fication will gradually become a serious problem in other parts of the world, including the tropics.4 Depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer. Recent measurements have revealed that the peak ozone des- truction (during the southern hemisphere polar spring) has reached 60% over Antarctica, and that significant ozone losses have also been found at both northern and southern mid-latitudes. For this particular environmental prob- lem it has been possible to reach a remarkably effective international agreement on a phase-out of these chemicals (the Montreal-London Protocol). Nevertheless, even if the production and use of these che- micals are rapidly eliminated, the ozone losses are expected to in- crease at least through this century, and full recovery of the ozone layer cannot be expected until the end of the next century.’ Tropical deforestation. In the tro- pics deforestation has increased alarmingly during the past decade. In 1980 it was estimated that the loss of the total (open and closed) tropical forest was about 11 million hectares per year.6 During the years 1981-90 the annual rate of deforestation has increased to 16.9 million hectares.7 Unless this accelerated rate can be substantial- ly reduced in the near future, the main parts of the tropical forests are bound to disappear by the mid- dle of the next century.

Problems encountered in attempts to reduce environmental degradation

There are many reasons why actions

180 Global Environmental Change 1994 Volume 4 Number 3

Why is environmental protection so slow? B R DiiLis

‘Op tit, Ref 3. ‘R. Grove-White, S.P. Kapitza and V. Shi- va, ‘Public awareness, science and the environment’, in J.C.I. Dooge, G.T. Good- man, J.W.M. la Riviere, J. Marton-Lefevre. T. O’Riordan, and F. Praderie, eds, Ai Agenda of Science and Development into the 27st Century, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992.

Global Environmenral Change 1994 Volume 4 Number 3

to date have been slow and insuffi- cient. Examples are discussed below.

Communication between the scientific community and society

The state of scientific knowledge ab- out the various environmental prob- lems is communicated from the scien- tific community to the rest of society directly or indirectly in a complex and interactive way. As in all communica- tion processes there is always a risk that some information will be lost, garbled or misinterpreted.

The communication problem actually begins at the source of the information and is caused by a tenden- cy among scientists to underestimate the reliability of their findings by emphasizing the uncertainties due to insufficient observational data and the need to introduce simplifying assump- tions. They often fail to present their results in terms which can easily be understood by policy makers. A way in which this situation can be im- proved has been demonstrated with the IPCC assessment of the expected climatic change caused by the en- hanced greenhouse effect.’ In the IPCC summary for policy makers the status of the scientific knowledge has been grouped into different levels of certainty:

l ‘We are certain of the following . . .

l ‘We conclude with confidence that . . .

l ‘Based on current model results, we predict . .’

l ‘Our judgment is that . .’

Another type of communication prob- lem occurs frequently in the flow of information from the scientific com- munity, via the various forms of news media, to the political community and the general public. Although this has improved during the past few years it is still not easy for the largely ignorant public to obtain a clear picture of major environmental problems - their causes, their impacts, and what needs to be done. Too often the media are more interested in sensational news rather than in providing objective and factual reports on the progress of sci- ence. This causes difficulties in raising public awareness of what is at stake,

and in turn reduces the possibilities of a solid political base for action.

Certainly, governments could play a much more active role in improving this important communication link. By making use of their ministries and agencies for the environment, they could provide objective and balanced information about the various issues in a form suitable for a wide audience.

Deliberate neglect of scientific information

It should be recognized that the scien- tific community is not always indepen- dent and objective in its assessments. This problem has been discussed by Grove-White et a1,9 and may be summarized as follows: given the pre- sent system of funding of research, comparatively few scientists feel they can work in splendid isolation from pressures exerted by government poli- cies or research goals required by in- dustry which may have very particular ends in view. In effect, he who pays the piper tends to call the tune.

For example, as a consequence of this a portion of the scientific com- munity tends to argue that present knowledge is inconclusive and that more research is needed. Even if they represent a minority opinion their views are often favoured by industry and government because they provide a good excuse for delaying the imple- mentation of response measures. There have even been cases where governments (to some extent influ- enced by particular industries) have selected scientists from whom they know they can elicit the desired opin- ion. This type of manipulation of the scientific community functions as a ‘negative feedback process’ in de- veloping and implementing response measures.

How robust must the scientific basis be for governments to take corrective action?

Given that it will never be possible to eliminate completely the uncertainties in predicting the future magnitude of the various environmental problems and their consequences, to what de- gree must the present uncertainties be reduced before decisive and sufficient response measures can be introduced?

181

Why is environmental protection so slow? B R Dbtis

Range of uncertainty in prediction

Range of uncertainty about tolerable stress

Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the predicted development of an arbitrary environmental stress factor. Despite the large uncertainty in the prediction, the maximum tolerable stress limit will be exceeded sooner or later.

I I I

I I l

5 t2

Time

Clearly, it is not possible here to pro- quires a decade, or more, to narrow

vide detailed answers, but certain substantially the range of uncertainty

points can be made that have to be of their predicted developments, with

taken into account when judging the regard to both their magnitude and

timeliness of action. geographical distribution.

Response measures cun be introduced

despite large uncertainties. Even if the prediction of a future environmental problem suffers from large errors, this may not necessarily imply that re- sponse action is premature. The valid- ity of this statement is schematically illustrated in Figure 1 which shows a characteristic predicted development of an environmental stress factor with a comparatively wide range of uncer- tainty. The figure also indicates the maximum level of tolerable stress (with its own range of uncertainty) beyond which the degradation of the environment and its impacts rapidly become harmful.

Indeed, there will always be a limit to the predictability of environmental stresses and degradation. It is often argued that it is premature to develop and implement policies aimed at re- ducing the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases as long as it is not possible to produce realistic predictions of their influence on cli- mate on a regional scale. In reality, it may never be possible to make such predictions on the geographical scale

demanded.

The obvious but not trivial conclu- sion is that, in spite of considerable uncertainty in the predicted develop- ment of the environmental stress, it is clear that the level of tolerable stress will be exceeded sooner or later unless effective counter-measures are being implemented.

Long lead time before response mea-

sures become effective Response mea- sures aimed at reducing environmen- tal degradation generally take a long time to produce a noticeable effect. Contributing to this delay are the time lags caused by:

The complex and tedious process of developing and reaching nation- al and international agreement on response measures - for example emission reductions.

Long lead time before uncertuinties can

be significantly reduced. To increase fundamental knowledge about indi- vidual environmental issues, their im- pacts, and their interactions will take time. Given past experience it re-

The fact that new (or even existing) technologies are not applied exten- sively for a considerable time after their introduction. The long residence time in the atmosphere of some of the environ-

182 Global Environmrmul Change 1994 Volume 4 Number 3

Why is environmental protection so slow? B R DdSs

Figure 2. Schematic illustration of fac- tors contributing to the decrease in the rate at which the atmospheric concen- tration of greenhouse gases can be reduced.

Source: Bo R. D66s, ‘Environmental issues requiring international action’, in W. Lang, H. Neuhold, and K. Zemanek, eds, Environmental Protection and International Law, Graham and TrotmanIMartinus Ni- jhoff, London, 1991.

Observed change

$Att2tri First noticeable effect

I Widespread implementation of response measures

International convention

ec . response measures

Expected :hange

/

/0’ 1

Modified

change

Resulting effect

Time

Atp political processes (national and international)

Attf technological and financial causes

Atf residence time of the greenhouse gas

mentally harmful gases - for exam- ple, carbon dioxide and chlorof- luorocarbons contributing to the greenhouse effect, the latter also to the depletion of the stratospheric l

ozone layer.

Figure 2 illustrates schematically how these three kinds of time lag contri- . bute to the delay in reducing the atmospheric concentration of green- house gases.

Concluding remarks

I am well aware that the above analy- sis is simplified and incomplete. Nevertheless, it provides an indication of what can be done to improve the efficiency of the response process, thereby minimizing the risk of serious- ly harmful consequences. In particu- lar, the analysis suggests that:

l Scientists ought to present their l The urgency of response action is findings in a way that describes accentuated by the fact that the more accurately the current state of advancement of scientific know-

knowledge. To help policy makers, it is important that they make clear what is predicated with a high de- gree of confidence. The mass media have both an obligation and an opportunity to improve their presentation of the results in a less haphazard way. Representatives of environmental- ly oriented groups could improve their strategies to influence govern- ments y being more constructive in the way they nr,y ,nt their argu- ments. In many cases, response measures can be motivated even if there is considerable uncertainty in the pre- dicted development of an environ- mental problem. The decisive fac- tor is whether it can be predicted that the maximum tolerable limit of the stress will be exceeded in the near future.

Global Environmental Change 1994 Volume 4 Number 3 183

Why is environmental protection so slow? 3 R DBiis

ledge is a slow process - and re- sponse measures require a long time to become effective.

As a final point, it should be men- tioned that in the longer term the most serious threat to the global environ- ment will probably arise from the

rapid growth of the world’s popula- tion. This growth is concentrated in countries which, due to their limited resources, are unable to assign high priority to environmental issues. It seems that the more developed coun- tries have not yet fully recognized the need to take this into account in their long-term planning.

184 Global Environmental Change 1994 V&me 4 Number 3