Ferraris for all

Evidently Fareed Zakaria, one of America’s most influential commentators on international relations, expresses concern about the impact of China’s economic growth on the global environment in his new book. Although he welcomes poverty reduction in China he is concerned that rapid growth will lead to such problems as climate change and water shortages. According to Sean Collins writing in the latest spiked review of books:

“In viewing growth as problematic and potentially destructive, Zakaria raises a common theme of our time. Rather than celebrate the benefits of growth, such as a reduction in poverty, Zakaria and others emphasise the downsides that accompany development. This gloomy outlook reveals more about the commentator than the reality on the ground. Zakaria refers to the predicted increase in the number of cars in China from 26million to 120million in 2020 as an environmental problem rather than a cause of celebration, as the Chinese people gain greater freedom of movement. In doing so, Zakaria joins in with today’s growing China-bashing chorus.”

Labels: America, climate, environment, review, spiked

Spiked has published an article by me on the recent documentaries on child labour in India. It argues that ethical consumerism is nauseatingly elitist.

Labels: consumption, ethics, india, spiked, television

Icfai Books in Hyderabad, India, has published Prosperity Index, a collection of articles including my January 2007 spiked essay arguing “There is no paradox of prosperity”. It is edited by Asha B Joshi, a faculty associate at the Icfai Business School Research Centre in Ahmedabad.

Labels: book, happiness, india, spiked

A useful article by Rob Johnston in Tuesday’s spiked on why it is wrong to romanticise the lifestyles of indigenous peoples.

Labels: development, spiked

Tonight watched the Life after people documentary on Channel 4. It was based on an interesting thought experiment: what would happen to the earth if humans suddenly disappeared. The documentary looked at the Earth at different time periods of humanity’s disappearance to see how long signs of humanity would survive. No doubt many environmentalists would see it as showing that humanity is simply a thin veneer on the surface of the earth – nature would quickly reclaim the planet. But it would also be possible to wonder at how much humans have reshaped the planet in their relatively short time on Earth. Josie Appleton also wrote a review article on the same subject for spiked last year.

Last night I watched the 11th Hour, a 2007 environmentalist documentary presented and produced by Leonardo DiCaprio, on Channel 4. The programme was predictably awful but at least it had the virtue of spelling out some of the misanthropic (and often absurd) premises of environmentalist thought. For example, the view that humans are simply part of nature, the hostility to attempts to control nature, the idea that nature should somehow be endowed with rights and the notion of eco-systems services.

Labels: celebrities, environment, film, spiked

Josie Appleton has a perceptive review of Benjamin Barber’s Consumed in the latest (April) spiked review of books. Rather than focus too closely on the book itself she looks at the changing ethic of capitalism. In broad terms her breakdown is the following:

* “The capitalist bookkeeper”. The model was Benjamin Franklin (18th century). Its chief theoritician was Max Weber in his Protestant Ethic (1910).

* “The counter-cultural ethic” of the 1920s and later the 1960s. Analysed by Daniel Bell in his Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (1976).

* “Infantalisation”. Posited as the ethic for 21st century capitalism by Barber. However, Appleton argues it is misleading to talk of an ethic of consumption and that Barber’s is a weaker book than Bell’s. Rather it has taken on a greater importance in society by default. She cites George Simmel in his Philosophy of Money as a useful theorist of consumption.

It is a useful complement to Dolan Cummings’ recent essay on contemporary anti-capitalism (see 9 March 2008 post) which also refers to Barber’s book.

Labels: book, consumption, economics, review, spiked

Spiked has published my essay on why China’s environmental problems do not make it a “green peril”. It is based my talk to the China Development Society of the London School of Economics Students Union and part of a spiked campaign against China-bashing.

Labels: china, environment, speeches, spiked

The cover story of today’s New York Times magazine looks at celebrities and the causes they support. It focuses particularly on Natalie Portman as she is evidently an “ambassador” for the Foundation for International Community Assistance (Finca) a microfinance organisation. Others mentioned in the piece include Bono, George Clooney, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt.

No doubt even many of the critics would argue that at least celebrities do some good by raising “awareness” of important issues. In fact, as Mick Hume has previously argued on spiked, such initiatives are typically based on the assumption that the West has to “save” the people of the third world from themselves. In the case of Natalie Portman she is – inadvertently no doubt – reinforcing low horizons in relation to development when she promotes microfinance.

Labels: development, ethics, film, finance, spiked

Frank Furedi has written a generally positive but critical review of James Heartfield’s Green Capitalism for the February spiked review of books. On the positive side he praises Heartfield’s critique of green consumerism. Furedi endorses the view that the critics of consumerism are as obsessed with consumption as the most ardent brand junkies:

“Ironically, green protest against consumerism doesn’t represent the rejection of consumption, but rather its moralisation. From a sociological perspective, green consumption can be seen as a new form of conspicuous consumption. This is consumption for effect. Consumption apparently must no longer be an impulsive act of buying – rather it has become a massively over-examined experience, and both a moral statement and an affirmation of status and identity. In the nineteenth century, theories of commodity fetishism noted the growing tendency for people to live through things – commodities appeared to acquire a life of their own through the working of the market. In the world of green consumerism, the fetish of commodities acquires an unprecedented significance. Things are assigned human and ethical significance. Thus we have the stigmatisation of certain foods as ‘evil’ and the rendering of other products as ‘ethical’.”

However, in his criticism of the book, Furedi argues that Heartfield is guilty of reading history backwards. Furedi says that it is wrong to portray the capitalist elite as deliberately setting out to engineer scarcity:

“What Green Capitalism characterises as the ‘engineering of scarcity’ could be more usefully described as the creation of new demands. Indeed, what is most striking today is not simply the rise of the celebration of scarcity, but the growing tendency to marketise every aspect of life. Under the banner of green capitalism, more and more features of economic life are being reorganised and restructured. Everything from the emission of carbon to the air we breathe to the water we drink has been transformed into a commodity. Arguments for protecting nature are really a demand for the gradual securitisation of the environment. Powerful forces insist on transforming every object of possible use into a value, in an attempt to subject them all to the influence of market transactions.”

When I get a chance I will read Green Capitalism and make my own mind up.

Labels: book, consumption, economics, environment, review, spiked

Spiked has published a review essay by me on books which see affluence and consumerism as leading to mental illness.

Labels: affluenza, book, happiness, review, spiked

The Arts & Letters Daily website has published a link to my spiked review on John Kenneth Galbraith as the “midwife of miserabilism”.

Labels: media appearances, review, spiked

spiked has published a review by me of John Kenneth Galbraith’s Affluent Society. I argue that the book, which was first published 50 years ago, anticpates many of the key themes of contemporary growth scepticism.

Labels: book, consumption, economics, growth, review, spiked

spiked has run a short article by me on the backdrop to the surprise cut in interest rates by America’s Federal Reserve earlier this week.

Labels: economics, spiked

spiked has published an article article by me on how a narrow consumerist perspective blinds commentators to key trends in the world economy. It is accompanied by a piece by James Heartfield examining the elite disdain for popular consumerism.

Labels: consumption, environment, spiked

By coincidence a review by Helene Guldberg on spiked echoes the points made in my 22 December post. She reviews Shyness by Christopher Lane, a Chicago-based research professor, which evidently shows how the definition of mental illness has widened considerably. Once again this broadening definition is reflected in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. According to Guldberg:

“His [Lane’s] painstaking research shows how the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the bible of the psychiatric profession worldwide, has been transformed – by a handful of psychiatrists behind closed doors – from the thin handbook it was up until the 1980s into the hefty tome it is today, with hundreds of new, poorly specified and poorly researched syndromes being added.”

Labels: affluenza, book, happiness, spiked

William Easterly, perhaps the world’s best-known conservative development economist, has written a critique of the millennium development goals (MDGs) as they apply to Africa. In his view the goals are constructed in an arbitrary way which leads to an underestimation of Africa’s development progress. For example, the 1990s was a bad decade for Africa yet, although the MDGs were officially declared in 2000, the targets are backdated to 1990. Therefore Africa starts at a disadvantage as a result of an arbitrary statistical decision.

Easterly makes some useful points but it is a pity that most criticisms of the MDGs come from the right. The idea that the goals embody and reinforce a climate of low expectations in relation to development is rarely made outside of spiked or Worldwrite.

Labels: Africa, development, spiked, Worldwrite

spiked has run two particularly interesting articles on energy over the past couple of days. Both show how the irrational character of environmentalism leads to arbitrary distinctions.

For example, Rob Johnston, a freelance science writer, argues that:

“Try to sink one 15,000 tonne oil platform in the North Sea (as Shell attempted with the Brent Spar platform in 1995) and Greenpeace will vilify you, but announce a plan to plant 7,000 concrete and steel pylons - each weighing 2,000 tonnes - on the seabed and you will be an eco-hero. Pour 60million tons of concrete across the Severn Estuary to build an energy-generating tidal barrage and Sir Jonathon Porritt and his Sustainable Development Commissioners will carry you in triumph through Jerusalem.”

Meanwhile, James Woudhuysen, professor of forecasting at De Montfort university in Leicester, concludes his article by looking at the UK Department for Business Enterprise & Regulatory Reform (BERR):

“BERR’s ‘Energy Group’ of 29 civil servants is enough to cause concern. Just two of them look after ‘Emerging Energy Technologies’ and ‘Cleaner Fossil Fuels & Hydrogen’. The others deal in strategy, planning, bills, market instruments, regulatory framework, consultations, licensing and liabilities.

“In short, BERR is a department devoted to everything - except actually doing something serious about energy supply.”

Labels: energy, spiked

On Thursday I will be debating the virtues of America at a Manifesto Club event timed to coincide with Thanksgiving. My brief is to talk on the importance of mass consumption and production. I have also contributed to a Spiked article on the subject.

Labels: America, consumption, speeches, spiked

Spiked has published an article by me on the global working class. It relates to the debate I am taking part in on the subject at the Institute of Contemporary Art on 20 November.

Labels: Asia, globalisation, inequality, speeches, spiked

The World Bank has endorsed Bhutan’s goal of pursuing Gross National Happiness rather than economic growth. India’s Economic Times quotes Graeme Wheeler, the World Bank's Managing Director (Operations), on a visit to the Himalayan nation, as saying: "Bhutan has been practising what other countries need to do. We need to extend the concept of gross national happiness to gross international happiness" (“Top World Bank official asks countries to emulate Bhutan”
11 November 2007).

I have previously criticised those who praise Bhutan in an article I wrote for spiked in May 2006. But at some point it deserves a more extensive expose.

Labels: Asia, happiness, spiked

Spiked has run my review of Gregory Clark’s A Farewell to Alms in its monthly review of books.

Labels: Africa, book, progress, review, spiked

I have written a short contribution to the spiked debate on the idea of a mobile “footprint”:

The idea of a mobile footprint is meaningless in practical terms. Just think about how much carbon dioxide it takes to produce a particular mobile phone. If the energy used is generated from nuclear or hydroelectric power it could be zero. If the energy is generated from fossil fuels it will be higher, but the precise amount will depend on the sophistication of the technology used.

A similar argument can be made in relation to the raw materials used in the phone and its manufacture. The processes used to make the same phone can be relatively efficient or inefficient. There is no fixed amount of material used.

Since the quantity can vary so widely the idea of a footprint has no validity as a practical measure. The use of a labelling scheme can only add a spurious air of objectivity to a dubious concept.

The real importance of the idea of an ecological footprint is moral. It is used by environmentalists as a metaphor to suggest that human beings should limit their impact on the environment. It is part of what could be called a morality of self-limitation.

Such a morality is particularly inappropriate to uphold in relation to mobile technology. Surely the appeal of such technology is that it enables people to extend their horizons. It makes it possible to communicate with people we know in new ways as well as broadening our range of contacts. As a result it helps us extend our control over nature still further.

Labels: footprint, spiked, technology

spiked has published a letter by me on the desirability of encouraging Indian villagers to use foot pumps to provide themselves with water. It is in response to an exchange between Brendan O’Neill, who argued that carbon offsets were being used to encourage such primitive technology, and Michael Buick of Climate Care who advocated such technology.

Whether you side with Brendan O’Neill or Michael Buick on the use of foot-powered water pumps in Indian villages depends on what you consider appropriate. Those who believe that Indians should enjoy Western living standards and the best modern technology should side with Brendan. Those who favour a life mired in rural poverty should support Michael.

Michael’s claim that Indian farmers choose pedal pumps of their own free will is ridiculous. It is like asking a person who is starving to death whether they are prepared to eat bread infested with maggots. They would probably eat the bread but only because better options are not available to them.

The real question is whether it is right for Indians to aspire to develop a modern industrialised and urbanised economy. As long as 70% of the population remains in the countryside, typically eking out a meagre living from tiny plots of land, the vast majority of Indians will remain poor. The solution to the lack of development is to change the character of the Indian economy rather than selling foot pumps.

Of course if Michael wants to use a foot pump to provide water for his own home that should be his free choice.

Labels: development, india, spiked, technology

Today spiked has published an important essay by Frank Furedi on environmentalism.

Labels: environment, spiked

Helene Guldberg writing in the latest spiked review of books reviews several works arguing, among other things, that affluence is damaging children’s lives. Guldberg counters that the problems are exaggerated and on balance children have benefited immensely from greater affluence.

A particularly interesting passage looks at how the idea of childhood can be seen as relatively new. She discusses the work of Philippe Aries, a French historian, who she describes as arguing: “In the seventeenth century the modern view of childhood first emerged, but it was not until the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, with the advent and extension of compulsory schooling and a corresponding decline in child labour, that childhood really existed in the modern sense.”

Labels: affluenza, book, health, progress, spiked

My review essay on “Towards an age of abundance” has made it onto the Arts & Letters Daily website.

Labels: book, media appearances, review, spiked

My review essay on “towards an age of abundance” is the lead article in this month’s spiked review of books. It discusses four recent American books on the theme of growth scepticism.

Labels: book, review, spiked

Brendan O’Neill has written a piece on Spiked about the extinction of the Yangtze dolphin in China. He makes the key point that, although the dolphin’s demise may be sad, it has to be set against the enormous advances to humanity from China’s economic development. From this perspective there is no contest: China’s increasing prosperity easily trumps the loss of biodiversity.

Labels: china, development, environment, spiked

James Woudhuysen has written a more extensive article for Spiked on bashing China (see yesterday's post).

Postscript (27 July) - some additional references:

* Brendan O’Neill’s article on the comment is free website on 25 July.

* Edward Burtynsky’s book of photographs on China.

Labels: china, development, environment, spiked

Spiked has published my review of The Bottom Billion by Paul Collier. For earlier discussions of this book see posts of 14 May, 6 June and 1 July.

Labels: Africa, aid, book, development, review, spiked

Spiked has published an article by me on the displacement of GDP as a measure of human welfare by broader social indicators. I argue that the statistical debate hides a more general anxiety about popular prosperity.

Labels: development, economics, growth, spiked

Niall Ferguson, a professor of history at Harvard, had a review of Paul Collier’s The Bottom Billion in today’s New York Times (also see posts of 14 May and 6 June). Ferguson argues that the most high profile recent debate on Africa has been between Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University and William Easterly of New York University – both white men based in New York. Sachs argues for government intervention to help solve the problem whereas Easterly is sceptical about the benefits of aid.

Ferguson goes on: “Now comes another white man, ready to shoulder the burden of saving Africa: Paul Collier, the director of the Centre for the Study of African Economies at Oxford University. A former World Bank economist like Easterly, Collier shares his onetime colleague’s aversion to what he calls the “headless heart” syndrome — meaning the tendency of people in rich countries to approach Africa’s problems with more emotion than empirical evidence. It was Collier who pointed out that nearly two-fifths of Africa’s private wealth is held abroad, much of it in Swiss bank accounts. It was he who exposed the British charity Christian Aid for commissioning dubious Marxist research on free trade. And it was he who pioneered a new and unsentimental approach to the study of civil wars, demonstrating that most rebels in sub-Saharan Africa are not heroic freedom fighters but self-interested brigands.”

Collier argues there are four traps into which the poorest countries tend to fall:

* Civil war.
* The resource curse.
* Being landlocked.
* Bad governance.

His preferred solution, which Ferguson supports, is more Western intervention. This can take the form of the growth of international law and military intervention where necessary.

David Chandler, professor of international relations at the University of Westminster, also refers to Paul Collier, although in passing, in a review article on liberal interventionism in spiked this week. Chandler points out that Collier was the head of a World Bank team on conflict studies which influenced, among others, Paddy Ashdown. Chandler also cites a 2000 book by Collier and a World Bank paper (PDF) he co-authored in 2001.

Meanwhile, William Easterly has an article in the latest issue of Foreign Policy (July / August) attacking “the ideology of development”. His argument is straightforward: “like Communism, Fascism, and the others before it, Developmentalism is a dangerous and deadly failure.” His target is not increasing prosperity as such but the idea it can be promoted by the authorities from above. He names Jeffrey Sachs and Thomas Friedman of the New York Times as key proponents of the developmentalist approach.

Labels: Africa, book, development, review, spiked

Professor Richard Layard has elaborated on his views on teaching happiness in schools. Writing (PDF) in the summer 2007 edition of CentrePiece, a magazine from the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, he argues that schools should place great emphasis on developing good and happy people (see also 9 May 2007 post). The argument is firmly rooted in his book on happiness. His practical conclusions for schools include:

• It should be an explicit aim of every school to teach character and moral education.
• Each secondary school should have specialists in life skills.
• The movement must be grounded in science – specifically positive psychology.
• The curriculum should include managing feelings; loving and serving others; appreciating beauty; love, sex and parenting; work and money; a critical approach to media; political participation and moral philosophy.

The magazine also includes a link to a recent lecture (PDF) that Layard gave on the teaching of values.

Unfortunately the criticism of Layard has been limited. The Financial Times (FT) published a critical leader on 14 June but it did not go far enough. The FT’s reasons for objecting were mainly practical:

“The first problem is that happiness is not a teachable subject. It is famously elusive and may be unattainable. Pursuing it as an aim is difficult since it is more readily gained as a side-product of some other achievement or condition.

“Happiness is also too varied to teach: a single set of tools will not work for everyone. One pupil may derive great pleasure from being kind to others - another from being the person on the receiving end of that kindness. Where one child may be happily fulfilled taking on a tough challenge, another may find more happiness with a less driven approach.

“There is also the question of finding time. The national curriculum already includes provision for personal, social and health education, up to the age of 16, which takes pupils through issues such as forming relationships, taking part in activities with others and discovering what makes them tick.”

However, this fails to question the desirability of transforming education from imparting knowledge to a therapeutic attempt to manage the emotional life of schoolchildren. It is likely to encourage children to be self-obsessed while lowering educational standards at the same time. Frank Furedi has previously written on this topic for spiked.

Labels: happiness, spiked

I have come across so much on happiness in the last few days that I will have to resort to relaying it in bullet point form:

* Happiness debate in the Financial Times. Martin Wolf, the chief economics commentator of the Financial Times, had a belated review of Richard Layard’s 2005 book on happiness published in Wednesday (“Why progressive taxation is not the route to happiness” 6 June). A particularly interesting point he made was that the attack on happiness can be seen as a challenge to modernity itself. Developments such as improvement in life expectancy, the liberation of women from household drudgery or easier divorce do not increase reported happiness.

Two book hitters in the happiness debate replied to Wolf with letters. Layard says that there are some aspects of modernity that should be ameliorated. He gives levels of trust as an example. Meanwhile, Andrew Oswald, professor of economics at the University of Warwick and well-known happiness advocate, makes the familiar point that reported happiness has not increased over time in the rich countries over the last few decades. He goes on to state: “That graph could usefully be pinned up in every minister’s and president’s office”. Why he thinks it should be such a decisive argument is not clear.

* Debating Andrew Oswald at Debating Matters. Talking of Oswald, I will be debating him at the national final of the Debating Matters competition in London on June 29. We will both be “expert witnesses” debating whether happiness should be a goal of national policy. Later on the same motion will be debated by the high school students who are taking part in the competition. In conjunction with the discussion the Debating Matters team has produced a useful topic guide for the debate. (Last year I debated John Hilary of War on Want on globalisation at the same event).

* Quoted in Financieele Dagblad. Yesterday I was also quoted on the happiness debate in a substantial feature in the leading Dutch financial daily newspaper by Esther van Rijswijk. I am hoping to get it translated.

* Paradox of Prosperity essay republished. My spiked essay on the “paradox of prosperity” is to be republished by the Institute of Chartered Financial Analysts of India. The organisation is publishing a book in its professional reference series which is provisionally entitled: Prosperity Index: Assessing Growth Anew. It is due out in November.

* Happiness expert website. Ruud Veenhoven, one of the world’s leading experts on happiness, has a website: here. Evidently he also argues that a “paradox of prosperity” does not exist.

* Parenting-happiness link. A parenting expert made the point to me yesterday that the debates on happiness and parenting are linked. The likes of Oliver James argue there is a clear link between women not looking after children and the outbreak of “affluenza” in society.

Labels: affluenza, growth, happiness, india, media appearances, modernity, speeches, spiked

I do not often refer to Spiked articles on this blog, other than my own, as the site includes so many key pieces. I tend to assume that my readers also follow Spiked. But this week’s article by James Woudhuysen on Rachel Carson is particularly worth reading.

Labels: environment, spiked

Spiked has published an article by me on the campaign to oust Paul Wolfowitz as president of the World Bank. It argues that it is the poorest people of the world who suffer most as a result of the campaign against corruption.

Labels: Africa, America, corruption, spiked

Spiked has published a review by me of a book on Africa in its new monthly review of books. I argue that Giles Bolton’s Poor Story embodies what has become a typical combination of grandiose pronouncements and low horizons

Labels: Africa, book, review, spiked

Professor Lord Richard Layard, British government adviser and chief happiness guru, has argued that the central purpose of schools should be to teach “the secrets of happiness”. He says he supports a new generation of teachers who specialise in “emotional intelligence” - inculcating values to pupils.

The response of the National Union of Teachers is worrying. It says it supports the happiness agenda in principle but it would be difficult to implement because teachers are so concerned with exams nowadays.

Frank Furedi argued on spiked against teaching happiness in schools back in July 2006. However, at that time the proposal was only to pilot “happiness lessons” in state schools. Layard’s suggestion goes a lot further.

Labels: happiness, spiked

Researchers in the economics faculty of the University of Cambridge have confirmed Denmark is the happiest place in the European Union. The research, led by Dr Luisa Corrado, is based on the European Social Survey into well-being, which began in 2002. To quote the press release:

“Women generally classed themselves as happier than men, while the old and young tended to be happier than people in their middle years.

“The Cambridge team has now begun to analyse what makes people in some countries happier than others. One of the most consistent trends is that those with the highest levels of happiness also reported the highest levels of trust in their governments, the police and the justice system, as well as those around them. Happier people also tended to have plenty of friends and acquaintances, as well as at least one very close friend, or a partner.”

A (highly mathematical) paper co-authored by Dr Corrado on the subject is available on the Cambridge University website.

For an earlier reference on Denmark and happiness see my post of 11 August 2006 and my spiked article of 7 August.

Labels: happiness, spiked

I was planning to do a brief review of last night’s television programme on the human footprint. The programme reduces human life to consumption and waste. To quote the Channel 4 website: “From our babyhood – when we get through a massive 3,796 nappies and produce 254 litres of urine – through to our old age and death – by which time we will have had sex 4,239 times, eaten 10,866 carrots, taken 7,163 baths and done an average of 15 farts a day – this extraordinary film tells the story of an average life, the story of our human footprint.”

However, James Heartfield has saved me the trouble with an excellent review on spiked. He points out that humans have a productive and creative side rather than simply being consumers. It also includes a useful reference to his critique of Herbert Giradet on sustainability along with Giradet’s reply.

Labels: footprint, spiked, sustainability, television

Spiked has published my review of the first of this year’s BBC Reith lectures by Jeffrey Sachs.

Labels: Africa, development, economics, environment, spiked

This week’s Economist has an interesting piece on geo-engineering in its technology quarterly (subscription required). Rather than curb emissions such techniques rely on large-scale planetary engineering to counteract climate change. Although the Economist says it was discussed in a report to the American president as far back as 1965 it is generally disliked by environmentalists. However, schemes being currently discussed by top scientists include building a giant sunshade in space, spreading tiny particles in the atmosphere to deflect the sun’s rays and blasting tiny droplets of salt water into the air.

Such ideas have previously already been discussed recently in a New York Times article and a piece on spiked. George Monbiot has also attacked geo-engineering in his Guardian column (and see my 30 August 2006 dispatch).

Labels: climate, environment, geo-engineering, spiked, technology

Spiked has covered extensively two items in this week’s news I would have liked to have written about if I had more time. Brendan O’Neill, spiked’s editor, wrote an article on Channel 4’s the Great Global Warming Swindle. The documentary evidently includes claims that global warming is caused by solar activity while also questioning the relationship between higher temperatures and carbon dioxide concentrations. Whether or not such claims are right is besides the point. Rather than being accepted as a contribution to the debate anything outside the narrow orthodoxy on the subject is increasingly subject to hysterical witch hunts.

Meanwhile, James Woudhuysen did a demolition job on the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution’s report on The Urban Environment. The report apparently argued that, in the most literal sense, cities make people sick.

Labels: cities, climate, environment, spiked

Spiked has published my review of Affluenza by Oliver James. It argues that it is more likely that Oliver James is mentally disturbed rather than, as he implies, the rest of us.

Labels: affluenza, book, happiness, inequality, review, spiked

Today spiked published an article by me on Davos 2007. It argued that the professed concern about the stagnating wages of Western workers at the elite conference was primarily a way of expressing fears about Asian development.

Labels: Asia, development, inequality, spiked

Spiked has published my interview with Indur Goklany, the author of the excellent The Improving State of the World (Cato 2007).

Labels: book, health, progress, spiked

My review of Indur Goklany's Improving the State of the World (Cato 2007) for Fund Strategy magazine (15 January 2007) can be found below. An article based on an interview with Goklany should appear in spiked later on this week:

One of the great tragedies of contemporary life is that we are gripped by what could be called the "miserabilist tendency". There is a pervasive sense that things are generally worse than in the past and the outlook for the future is even more negative. This bleak view is embodied in popular books such as Steve Lowe and Alan McArthur's Is It Just Me Or Is Everything Shit? (Time Warner 2005). Unfortunately, it is not just them. The whiners, who would previously have been assigned the status of pub bore, have become hugely influential in policy making, the media and academia.

Under such circumstances Indur Goklany, an American policy analyst, has written a genuinely important book. From a careful analysis of masses of data he shows that life for human beings is better than ever before. Of course the world is far from perfect. But the combination of economic growth and technological development could make things better still in the future.

The inclusion of so many statistics does not make for easy reading but it is worth the effort. Statistics are not perfect but they are necessary to help overcome impressionism. Too many people rely on a vague sense of how they think life today compares with the past. Far better to look at the hard data. Perhaps the single most important set of statistics relate to life expectancy. It is staggering to realise the average life expectancy in the world before the industrial era was 20-30 years. In other words, the average person would be lucky to reach the age of 30. By 2003 the figure had risen to 66.8 years. So thanks to growing prosperity the average person had more than doubled their lifespan, with an extra 36.8 or more years of life.

Of course there remain inequalities between the rich countries and the developing world. The average person in the developing world today lives 63.4 years - although this is still more than double that in the pre-industrial era - compared with 75.6 years in the developed world. However, today's gap of 12.2 years between the two compares with 25.2 years in the early 1950s. Both sets of populations are living longer, although the gap between the two is narrowing.

A similar trend is apparent in relation to infant mortality. In the pre-industrial era it was more than 200 per thousand live births - more than 20% of babies died before reaching their first birthday. It was a common experience for parents to see their babies die. Today the global average figure is 56.8 and in the developed world it is 7.1

The single most important factor behind these improvements is the spectacular rise in agricultural productivity. Food is cheaper and more easily available than ever despite massive increases in the world's population. For example, average daily food supplies rose from a global average of 2,254 calories per person in 1961 to 2,804 calories in 2002. Whereas food supplies in the developed world rose by 24% over that period, the increase for developing countries was 38%.

The improving trend disguises some remaining tragedies. Globally more than 850 million people are undernourished - they cannot meet their basic needs for energy or protein. About 3.75 million deaths a year can be attributed to insufficient food supplies.

Under such circumstances, Goklany is strongly in favour of genetically modified crops. He argues that such technology could boost agricultural productivity still further, making it possible to feed more people better than ever before.

He also dismisses health and environmental concerns in relation to GM as unfounded. On health he points out that 300 million Americans and tens of millions of visitors have consumed GM food with no apparent ill effects since 1996. If there are any as yet undiscovered problems, they are likely to be hugely outweighed by the benefits of higher agricultural productivity.

The Improving State of the World also argues that greater use of GM crops could be better for the environment. If less land is needed to produce food then more will be available for forestry and other uses. This greater availability of unfarmed land could also bolster biodiversity.

Although Goklany's book is heavy in its use of figures it would be wrong to see it as a statistical almanac. It includes useful and insightful arguments too. For example, it argues that economic development is typically characterised by an "environmental transition". In the early stages of development, as countries industrialise and urbanise, their environments tend to worsen. But then, as they become more prosperous, the environment generally improves.

Most key indicators follow this trend. For instance, British cities were hellish places to live when Charles Dickens was writing in the mid-nineteenth century. Goklany quotes a passage from the The Old Curiosity Shop describing a London darkened by coal dust and factory smoke. It should also be remembered that at that time diseases such as cholera and typhoid, carried by polluted water, were rife. In contrast, London today is an immensely clean and healthy place. And even third-world cities are much better than Victorian London as they have learned from the experience of the developed world.

Goklany uses the concept of environmental transition to draw astute conclusions about future possibilities. He concedes that the world's fish stocks are currently on the wrong side of the environmental transition, with supplies dwindling through over-fishing. However, the conclusion he draws is the need to develop modern aquaculture - farming the sea using modern technology - just as agriculture was developed in the past. That way the productivity of food production from the sea could rise enormously.

The Improving State of the World is an excellent antidote to the painful whining of the miserabilist tendency. The world is far from perfect but complaining about how bad everything is only reinforces cynicism rather than opening the way to improving things further.

Labels: book, economics, Fund Strategy, health, progress, review, spiked

In response to my recent spiked essay on the paradox of prosperity I have been sent two interesting-looking references. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Utility (Imprint Academic 2006) is by the father and son team of Anthony Kenny (philosopher and former master of Balliol college, Oxford) and Charles Kenny (World Bank economist). More details along with extracts can be found here. Utility and Happiness is a 2006 paper by Miles Kimball and Robert Willis, both professors of economics at the University of Michigan.

Labels: happiness, spiked

My spiked essay on the “paradox of prosperity” today features on the excellent Arts & Letters Daily website.

Labels: happiness, spiked

Spiked has published my essay on the myth of the “paradox of prosperity”. Growth sceptics make great play of the fact that, above a certain threshold, economic growth does not seem to make people happier. But who promised it would? Whatever people’s subjective feelings the rise of popular prosperity is immensely beneficial. And wanting even more should be welcomed rather than derided.

Labels: happiness, spiked

Yesterday spiked published an article by me about the panic on household debt levels in Britain. To read the piece click here.

Labels: debt, spiked

Today spiked has published an article by me on the redefinition of equality. In the past it used to be about raising the living standards of the masses to realise their full potential. Today it tends to mean attacks on “over-consumption” and support for various forms of rationing.

The peg for my article is the British Conservative party’s adoption of Polly Toynbee, a journalist with a left wing reputation, as their ideological guru. But the redefinition of equality is a global trend. For example, those who rail against global inequality are usually more concerned to limit consumption in the West than to industrialise the third world.

Labels: inequality, spiked

There follows a review by me of George Monbiot’s Heat (Allen Lane 2006) from the 13 November issue of Fund Strategy magazine. James Heartfield also did a particularly astute review of the book for spiked.

It is almost possible to feel sorry for George Monbiot. The government's Stern report on the economics of climate change has overshadowed the climate campaigner and Guardian columnist's book on the same topic. The report is more thoroughly grounded in mainstream science and certainly more rigorous in its economics.

Nevertheless, there are reasons why it is worth reading Monbiot's book, Heat, alongside Stern. Whereas Sir Nicholas Stern is constrained by diplomatic considerations - he has to be guarded in what he says as his is a government report - Monbiot can be blunt.

Arguably Monbiot is more honest about the impact of a strategy based on curbing energy demand than Stern. Both Stern and Monbiot argue a broadly similar line, although the details and some of the conclusions they draw are different.

Monbiot's starting point is the incorrect assumption that there is a trade-off between popular prosperity and curbing climate change's impact. His premise leads to the conclusion that austerity and authoritarianism are needed to deal with global warming:

"For the campaign against climate change is an odd one. Unlike almost all the public protests which have preceded it, it is a campaign not for abundance but for austerity. It is a campaign not for more freedom but for less. It is a campaign not just against other people, but also against ourselves" (p215).

If humanity's survival depended on accepting austerity and dictatorship, perhaps these twin evils could be justified. But any such case would have to be incredibly strong since the strategy proposed by Monbiot, apart from anything else, would leave much of the world in dire poverty.

It should not be forgotten that, according to World Bank figures, a billion people still live on less than one dollar a day and 2.7 billion live on less than two dollars. Such poverty has terrible consequences for the health, longevity and well-being of the bulk of the world's population. In addition, rationing and curbing democracy are objectionable in principle.

As it happens, Monbiot's science is rather ropey. His argument that by 2030 the rich countries need to cut carbon emissions by 90% seems to be based on calculations by Colin Forrest, "who is not a professional climate scientist but appears to have done his homework" (p15-16). Monbiot does not say who Forrest is but, judging from a search on Google, he appears to be a member of Friends of the Earth in Scotland.

But even if the 90% figure is correct, it does not follow that Monbiot's strategy is right. Imposing austerity means, by definition, making the world poorer. But the reality is that the richer we are, the better a position we will be in to tackle climate change.

Monbiot is wrong to argue that global warming should be seen as a priority above all others. It is not an isolated challenge but linked to the more general struggle for social progress. Mass affluence is good in its own right, while also enabling humanity to have greater control over nature.

The need for more prosperity is particularly acute in the developing world. Not only would the abolition of poverty be good in itself but it would also put such societies in a better position to tackle global warming. They would have more resources at their disposal and more diversified economies.

But Monbiot uses the poor as an argument for austerity in the West. "By turning on the lights, filling the kettle, taking the children to school, driving to the shops, we are condemning other people to death. We do not see ourselves as killers. We perform these acts without passion or intent" (p22). Such moralising is unhelpful and off-putting.

Contrary to Monbiot's argument, it is both possible and desirable to promote prosperity and tackle climate change at the same time. Indeed, the two are inextricably linked.

The key challenge is to find ways of substantially bolstering energy supplies while controlling greenhouse gas emissions. Fortunately, such technologies already exist. Although no doubt they could be considerably improved, it is already possible to supply far more power with existing technology. Scientists and engineers are in the best position to identify the best mix of technologies, but an outline of possibilities is already feasible.

Nuclear power is likely to play a role. Although care must be taken when disposing of the waste, it has the potential to provide huge amounts of electricity without greenhouse emissions.

Further into the future, it might be possible to generate power from nuclear fusion (fusing together atoms) rather than fission (splitting atoms apart). Fusion's advantage is that its waste is water, not heavy radioactive materials.

Hydroelectric power is another existing form of energy that does not emit greenhouse gases. It has lost popularity in recent years as environmentalists have campaigned against it. But in many places it can provide abundant electricity.

Even fossil fuels can be made more green. Carbon capture and storage means emissions can be removed from power stations that use fossil fuels. They can then be stored underground or under the sea bed.

More prosperity would also provide the resources to help humanity adapt to climate change's effects. For example, Bangladesh could have modern flood defences similar to those already used in the Netherlands. Human settlements could be moved to higher ground if threatened by flooding in their present locations.

Monbiot's misanthropic outlook means he either downplays these possibilities or ignores them completely. He has a dim view of human beings and their capacity to use ingenuity to transform their environment for the better.

Rather than seeing the promotion of mass affluence and tackling climate change as contradictory, they should be viewed as part of the same challenge. The drive for popular prosperity puts humanity in a better position to deal with environmental problems.

Labels: book, energy, environment, Fund Strategy, health, review, spiked