The Struggle Between Economics And Ecology

Economic growth comes form the use of natural resources. In the 1930’s, natural resources are what fueled the growth of the U.S. economy. The use of resources such as water, timber, coal, oil, and minerals were in very high demand. Even now there is still a market for these resources. The use of natural resources was very high in the 1930’s and the possible damage that the use of these resources was of little concern, or not even known at the time. In the 1930s the growth of the U.S. economy would become a burden due to the use of natural resources, how the resources were collected and extracted, and the impact that harvesting had on the environment. The main point of this article, is that the mass consumption and mass production is not always ideal.

Since the early 20th century the environmentalism movement has migrated from the struggles of consumers versus producers, or saving the planet as a whole as shown by Donald Worster in Nature’s Economy to a more socio-economic view based on urban growth and industrial health. Robert Gottlieb’s book Forcing the Spring: The Transformation of the American Environmental Movement argues that as society goes so too does the environmental movement. As the emphasis on working environments and commercial goods we buy including food changes so too does the environmental movements. It did not matter whether it was large politically prominent environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club or the Audubon Societies or any other numbers of local grassroots

To understand where the motivation and passion to protect the environment was developed, one looks to the rapid deforestation of East Coast old-growth forests at the turn of the century. “As Gifford Pinchot expressed it, ‘The American Colossus was fiercely at work turning natural resources into money.’ ‘A

1. Karl Jacoby book brings the remarkable accounting of the negative aspects of conservation movement to the sunlight. Jacoby uses the early years of Adirondack Park, Yellowstone National Park, and the Grand Canyon Forest Preserve to demonstrate his theme of the locals’ reactions to the creation of the park and the actions from the conservationists. And the fantasies the early conservationists’ promulgated of the locals of being satanic rapists of the environment are dispelled (193).

“American seemed to think nothing of remarking nature for the sake of progress”, Alexis de Tocqueville, a French diplomat commented when he was visiting the United States in 1831. While the American people were overwhelmed by pride and pleasure from their achievement in making industrial and economic progress, the environment was harmed in an alarming speed. Landscape was transformed, and forests were destroyed due to industrialization. By 1990, only a fraction of the United States Virgin forests were still standing. Farmers cleared trees to plant crops, and loggers cut down large areas of woodland for business profits. More than that, the most horrific thing was the government was willing to encourage loggers to exploit the forests resources by selling them large plots of land in the North West. In other words, the government was inviting loggers to destroy the landscape. Besides the loss of forests, the increasing number of ranching boosted the erosion of landscape. Crops were

As Professor Foster explained the core of the needed ecological revolution is in viewing the world ecologically, which involves recognizing that modern human societies are ecosystem-dependent and thus rejecting the assumption that societies are “exempt” from the forces of nature. The wrong conceptual thinking that our technology and economic system can find solutions to our problems, recalls the Midas Effect in which Gold (THE CAPITAL) becomes more important than Life (Human beings and Planet Earth), where “the logic of capital accumulation runs in direct opposition to environmental sustainability” (The Ecological Rift, Foster,

Jobs and protecting the environment, important or not? George Will wrote his essay, “What Price Clean Air?” to convey the message that most of the Navajo Nation run and work at the power plants in Arizona, but as the growing change in protecting the environment, those Native Americans are forced to alter their livelihoods. George Will directs his essay to the American people, to persuade them to help find a change. Using the best equipment and spending billions of dollars on new technology may be affected by the uncertain environmental movement. With ethos, logos, and pathos, George Will effectively uses the rhetorical devices to convey his argument about the social and economic damage brought on by the federal government.

In the piece “Selling out on nature” (McCauley, 2006), Douglas J. McCauley describes how conservation efforts are fueled by the economic advantages it possesses and are carried out solely for the purpose of benefiting our economic markets. McCauley states that ecosystem services are “economic benefits provided by natural ecosystems” (27), arguing that the only incentive for mankind to save nature depends on how profitable nature can be. He emphasizes that our attention should not be put forth in commodifying nature but rather, inculcating respect and love for it so that we can preserve it for many years to come. I oppose McCauley’s argument because it’s impractical and unachievable. Humanity will

Economic analysis that weighs all costs and benefits of a particular model must include environmental considerations. That is to say, the potential for short-term economic losses caused by conservation in the present, should be measured against the dividends that conservation will pay in the future (Nordhaus, 2007). If the earth is truly our most valuable commodity, then analysis under these conditions should recognize that if a “dollar value” were placed on environmental sustainability, more often than not it would outweigh any initial monetary loss resultant of the implementation of more sustainable practices.

Since the formation of the U.S.A in the 1776, environmental policies have changed from anthropocentric to more biocentric and heading to ecocentric in the future. In the past, American were utilitarian and focused on expanding to the west and they did not realize the importance of ecological values. They misunderstood the values of aesthetic and thought that human was the center in the environment relationship. Americans had an anthropocentric worldview and wanted to protect anything could bring up the economic benefits so they mined and create settlements for their own benefits and ignored the impact to the environment. With the wealthy natural resources in the west, the U.S government passed many different

Environmental conservation has made major advancements throughout history. While its focus during the 1940s was very limited due to World War II, the effects of the war and industrialization led to the environmental deterioration and many significant events that increased the public’s attention on pollution. While many minor policies were passed as a way to appease the people, the major shift for environmentalism was during the 1960s after many pieces of writing were published that exposed the harmful effects of pollution and toxins that were contaminating the earth. The public’s outrage toward the government 's lack of involvement led to major legislations to be passed and a noticeable shift in importance to the government. While environmental policies were generally weak and unable to be consistently enforced from 1940-2000, a series of focused legislative acts led to a change in the standardization of working conditions through safety and health regulations and accountability of nationally funded programs on conservation of the environment.

Beginning in the late 1800’s, efforts to protect scenic and untouched land all across America were set in motion. From the 1800’s to mid 1900’s, many national parks were created under premises of preserving history and nature. During that period of time, Franklin Delano Roosevelt branched the National Parks Service (NPS) to manage all national parks. Now, in the current day, biological problems and resource scarcity persistently cause harm to the parks, and make it difficult for both the NPS and park management to regulate the parks. As such, current measures to ensure the longevity and well-being of the parks are not enough to keep up with the persisting financial and biological problems that the parks face. These problems entail disturbances in the ecosystem and pollution to environment, as well as a lack of resources to parks. However, each of these problems can be remedied, and possibly cured through the use of comprehensive models of action, and the participation of several parties.

In today’s society, much of the resistance for finding ecological solutions comes from those who would be required to drastically change their policies and business models. “In general, an environmental problem proves politically less difficult to resolve if a marketable solution exists,” says Janicke. “In contrast,” he says, “if a solution to an environmental problem requires an intervention in the established patterns of production, consumption, or transport, it is likely to meet resistance.” Furthermore, Ecological Modernization states that ecological innovations must meet the following three qualifications to succeed: First, the solution they propose needs to be to a problem that affects the global level. Second, it needs to

To begin with, James Meadowcraft’s solution can best be described as reshaping political systems to be more ecologically conscious states. An ecological state, according to Meadowcraft, is one that hugely considers the impact that every facet of the entire nation has on

Numerous sensitization campaigns have been launched, all over the world, with the aim of promoting awareness of the rising cases of ecological destruction. These campaigns have not only targeted human activities but also business operations. Shaw (22), highlights the major environmental challenges faced in the modern world; most notoriously, water and air pollution, which he says, kills crops and vegetation, damages the ozone layer and threatens people’s lives and health. Businesses play a massive role in contributing towards ecological damage. According to Shaw (22), “businesses damage the environment when they take natural resources from the earth and dispose of waste” (4). Most sensitization campaigns, however, argue on environmental conservation from a human interest perspective. Shaw, for example, states that industrial chemicals harm animals and plants which consequently causes poisoning and possible death to human beings (75). This article, therefore, aims at establishing that, apart from their interest to human beings, plants and animal’s rights should also be conserved for their own sole interest.