_______________________________________________________
********************************************************
GLOBAL FUTURES BULLETIN #83
---01 May, 1999--- ISSN
1328-5157
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institute for Global Futures Research (IGFR).
P.O. Box 263E, Earlville, QLD 4870, Australia.
E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This bulletin is for the use of IGFR members and GFB subscribers
only and is not to be re-posted.
________________________________________________________
********************************************************
*
*
INDEX
. Realpolitik versus the ICJ
. Mothers Against War
. Corridor VIII
. Energy price trends
. Decline of tropical forests (part 1)
*
*
REALPOLITIK VERSUS THE ICJ
Yugoslavia has initiated proceedings against 10 NATO countries
(US, UK, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada,
Portugal and Spain) in the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
In its Applications, Yugoslavia maintains that the above-mentioned
States have committed 'acts by which [they] have violated [their]
international obligation[s] not to use force against another State, not
to intervene in [that State's] internal affairs' and 'not to violate [its]
sovereignty'; 'the obligation to protect the civilian population and
civilian objects in wartime, [and] to protect the environment; the
obligation relating to free navigation on international rivers'; the
obligation 'regarding the fundamental rights and freedoms; and the
obligation[s] not to use prohibited weapons [and] not to deliberately
inflict conditions of life calculated to cause the physical destruction of
a national group.' [1]
As the legal basis for its claims, Yugoslavia cites
- Geneva Convention of 1949
- Additional Protocol No. 1 of 1977 on the Protection of Civilians and
Civilian Objects in Time of War,
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
- 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights,
- Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide.
- Charter of the United Nations Article 53, paragraph 1
Arguing in support of the NATO bombing, one analyst cautions
'..against legal absolutism in an international legal order in which,
sad to say, states disregard 'the law' at will... [I]f the bombing is
illegal, so also is ethnic cleansing' [2].
The analyst emphasises he is not putting forward a general argument
for military intervention in humanitarian crises.
'...the issue isn't so much upholding international law or resolving
humanitarian crises as the interests of both the United States and the
rest of the world in political stability... [I]f a conflict is causing the
displacement of large numbers of people, and could destabilize and
eventually involve other states, including NATO military allies, then
NATO has a legitimate and vital national interest in taking action,
including military action if [their] goals can best be attained in that
way. I am less certain that the other cases [eg Kurds in Turkey etc]
meet [these] realist criteria for intervention.
'Great powers have always acted thus...[3] This behavior has been
the most successful guarantor of whatever peace this planet has
managed to attain. None of us like that unpleasant truth - sometimes
its logical consequences make me cringe along with everyone else,
and I look forward to the day when 'Realpolitik' [4] can be replaced
with a better system. That day, unfortunately, is not yet upon us.
'Moreover, from a realist point of view, it is exactly the refusal of
states to renounce the use of force that conduces to stability in the
international system. Stability in the system comes about through
states' balancing each others' power, militarily and otherwise (there
are lots of complexities and ambiguities about how and whether this
actually takes place, but for the moment I give you a realist
[perspective]).'
The 'realist' perspective is based on the Waltzian notion that states
seek to increase their capabilities relative to other states in order to
survive and achieve whatever other goals they have. In so doing,
they act in ways which produce balances of power over time. [5]
*
[1] International Court of Justice - Press Communique 99/17 29
April 1999 http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/iwhats.htm
[2] The Other Economic Summit, TOES97 list, 29 April 1999
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[3] Major examples: the Thirty Years' War, the Congress of Vienna.
[4] For more on the 'realpolitik' perspective see, for example, Hans
Morgenthau, and also The Center for Security Policy. For a 'realist'
perspective see Kenneth Waltz. For a variant view see Robert
Keohane.
[5] see Waltz, Kenneth 'Theory of International Politics' (1979)
*
*
COMMENT
The day when Realpolitik will be replaced with a better system, ie
general consensus and enforcement of international law in a
geopolitical environment and ethos characterised by cooperation and
trust rather than competition and distrust, will not suddenly arrive of
its own accord. It is a process the international community must
undertake, and a goal we must strive for.
To say that the current (relatively peaceful ?) world order depends on
a balance or arms is perplexing in the light of the US and NATO's
overwhelming military advantage in relation to Yugoslavia (or
Serbia's armed forces in relation to the KLA). It is precisely this
exaggerated military imbalance which provided the opportunity for
the US/NATO to act within international law.
Why did the US/NATO not attempt to massively increase the OSCE
presence in Kosovo, backed by UN peacekeepers and with the active
involvement of Russia ? (It has been suggested that the US/NATO
would rather avoid a peacekeeping presence involving Russian
troops, ie a Russian military presence in Yugoslavia which Russia
never achieved under Tito). A range of other incentives and
disincentives could have been used to come to a negotiated settlement
of relative autonomy and guaranteed rights for the Serbian minority.
These options had not even been attempted, let alone exhausted.
(The Rambouillet offer was highly inflexible, and appears to be either
an embarrassing lapse in judgment, or an offer designed to be
refused) [1].
A possible response relates to game theory. NATO very much
needed to demonstrate its resolve (follow through on its bluff) - not so
much to produce an outcome for the Kosovo crisis, but to deter such
'adventurism' in other countries. While the bombing campaign is
expensive (US$5-10 billion ?), protracted peacekeeping operations
can also be very expensive. The developed countries are already
investing heavily in peacekeeping in Bosnia. The strategy would
soon collapse if a number of major peacekeeping operations were
required in various parts of the world.
The Clinton Administration openly states that the NATO bombing is
not only a humanitarian response, but is a strategy to maintain
regional stability.
*
[1] see Appendix B of the proposed Rambouillet agreement
www.balkanaction.org/pubs/kia299.html
*
{33. global conventions and international law; 2. peace and conflict
resolution; 5. evolving world order}
*
*
*
MOTHERS AGAINST WAR
A group of over 150 people affiliated with the German NGO 'Mothers
Against War' and including doctors and journalists, has entered
Yugoslavia and is proceeding to Belgrade in protest over the ongoing
violence in Kosovo and Serbia. Their vehicles, with Picasso's peace
dove painted on the rooves, were left at the border.
*
{2. peace and conflict resolution}
*
*
*
CORRIDOR VIII
Eva Charkiewicz
Adding to the many possible drivers of the Kosovo/Serbia crisis we
could include another factor. The NATO involvement may be also
driven by the need to secure the so called 'Corridor VIII', in order to
help stabilise the transport route for oil and other resources that go
from Central Asia through Balkan countries to Western Europe.
Opening, for instance, the pipeline-rail link between Almaty, (capital
of Kazakhstan), and Hamburg in Germany breaks Russia's monopoly
on transport of resources from Central Asia [1]. The link will also
prevent oil and freight going through Iran.
*
[1] More on the rail link see the Economist 17April 1999, pp. 39-40.
*
{37. world systems theory; 5. evolving world order; 2. peace and
conflict resolution}
*
*
*
ENERGY PRICE TRENDS
Chris Watkins
In GFB #82 [1] it was stated that: 'It is fairly likely that energy will
become more expensive, particularly around 2010-2020, but by no
means certain'.
This seems to go against historical trends for both energy resources
and other mineral resources. As is noted in the second article [2]:
'..the falling price of oil, from US$35/barrel in 1982, to US$15 in
1998.'
If energy becomes more expensive, it will be most probably be due to
a CO2 tax or the like.
*
[1] Global Futures Bulletin #82 15 April 1999 'Cities, energy and
nutrients - Comment'
[2] GFB #82 op cit 'Energy scenarios, biomass and CO2'
*
*
COMMENT
The reduction in price for oil has been due to many factors including
a more competitive world oil market with the (until now at least)
declining influence of OPEC. Energy costs to the consumer have not
declined in all cases, but where they have, this can be attributed to a
more competitive (deregulated) domestic energy market, and
improved technology for new power plants.
There is evidence to suggest that OPEC countries' share of oil
production is likely to increase again, thereby increasing their
leverage on pricing. Meanwhile, Russia and Iran are said to have
combined control of 49% of world natural gas reserves [1]
OPEC share of oil supply [2]:
1960 40%
1970 53% (high oil prices)
1982 50%
1994 41%
2010 53% ? (high oil prices)
A continuation of the general trend toward decreasing energy prices,
or at least stabilisation of energy prices, is dependent on the ability of
renewables to meet the rising demand (even with further energy
conservation and efficiency gains), as the supply of oil peaks. At
present, the prospect for this seems unlikely, at least within the next
30 years.
As is suggested above, limits of CO2 emissions (eg by carbon tax or
tradable emission rights), and therefore suppression of coal energy,
(still relatively abundant) would be an important factor in the
equation.
*
[1] Global Futures Bulletin #33 01 Apr '97 'Energy statistics
discrepancy'
[2] Global Futures Bulletin #11 01 May '96 'Oil trends' Note: it has
also been argued that the high prices were not due to OPEC alone,
but were also due to lack of investment in new wells in the face of
diminishing returns.
*
{4. energy}
*
*
*
DECLINE OF TROPICAL FORESTS (Part 1)
There is currently a precipitous decline in tropical rainforests. Latest
studies have shown the Amazon rainforest disappearing at twice the
rate previously calculated, conflicting with another estimate
suggesting the annual loss of tropical forest globally may be
decreasing slightly [1].
Million hectares of tropical forests (global, extant) [2]
year billion hectares.
1800 2.9
1850 2.8
1900 2.7
1950 2.5
2000 2.0
Tropical rainforest loss [3]
1979 1989
56% of prehistoric cover 49% of prehistoric cover
loss 7.5m ha/an loss 14.2m ha/an
loss 1% remaining cover/an loss 1.8% remaining cover/an
Another estimate (FAO) puts tropical forest loss (including
'rainforest') [4] at:
1980-1990 1990-95
av 15.5m ha/an av 13.7m ha/an
This suggests the area cleared each year may be diminishing slightly.
The area of tropical forest lost 1980-95 was approx 200m ha, greater
than the total land area of Mexico.
Earth land area
(billion hectares) WCMC [5] FAO [6]
cropland and pasture 4.8
tropical forest 2.0 1.4
other forest 2.0 1.84
other land area* 4.2
total Earth land area 13.0
* includes desert, mountainous, heathland, ice sheet, urban etc
Note the significant discrepancy between the estimates of remaining
tropical rainforest between the World Conservation Monitoring
Centre (WCMC) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).
Total forest cover 8,000 years ago is estimated at 5.2 - 6.0 billion
hectares (compared to 3.24 - 4.0 b ha today).
Approx 8% of the world's forests are protected.
Tropical rainforests can take many centuries to fully recover from
clearing. The forests which have grown at Angkor Wat in Cambodia
since the abandonment of this ancient capital in 1431 are still
structurally different from older forests in the same region. [7]
Recovery may occur with sufficient surrounding forest. In many
instances of clearing, recovery, even over centuries, is impossible.
Temperate forest in developed countries are said to have expanded
slightly in the last two decades, particularly in Canada [8].
Between 70%-95% of the Earth's species are contained in the world's
disappearing tropical forests (wet and dry) [9]. Another
estimate locates 70% of the world's plants and animals, 70% of
vascular plants, 30% of bird species, and 90% of invertebrates in
tropical forests [10].
The land area of Europe which is still unmodified habitat is ~400,000
hectares, effectively zero percent. In the US unmodified habitat is
about 5%. In the period 1978-1987, Paraguay converted 97.2% of its
remaining natural habitat to cropland and pastureland while Ecuador
converted 61.5% of its remaining habitat to pastureland [11].
Of 500m people living in close proximity to tropical forests, 150m
are indigenous who depend on the forest for their way of life.
Fuelwood and charcoal make up 56% of global wood production. In
developing countries it accounts for 89% of wood production.
Worldwide almost 3 billion people (50% world's population) use
wood as their primary energy source [12].
The IUCN has defined 25 types of forest [13]:
m ha. % protected
Tropical
lowland rainforest 649 13.1%
deciduous/semi-deciduous broadleaf 305 11.9%
sparse trees and parkland 286 5.1%
semi-evergreen moist broadleaf forest 198 0.8%
disturbed natural forest 85 3.8%
upper montane forest 69 17.8%
lower montane forest 69 12.7%
sclerophyll forest 47 3.4%
freshwater swamp forest 44 8.1%
mangrove 16 13.3%
thorn forest 27 5.8%
needleleaf forest 8 10.5%
mixed needleleaf/broadleaf forest neg 2.5%
exotic species plantations neg 4.6%
native species plantations neg 6.3%
Non-tropical
evergreen needleleaf forest 789 7.8%
deciduous broadleaf forest 374 5.0%
deciduous needleleaf forest 363 0.9%
sparse trees and parkland 256 5.9%
mixed needleleaf/broadleaf forest 181 7.1%
sclerophyll dry forest 71 7.6%
evergreen broadleaf forest 38 22.6%
freshwater swamp forest 14 2.7%
disturbed forest 8 13.3%
exotic species plantations 8 4.3%
total 3905 m ha (IUCN)
3249 m ha (FAO)
FAO information is mostly derived from national forest departments
which is often based on old inventory. Sometimes data on
deforestation is deliberately underestimated for political-economic
reasons, (ie remaining forest cover could be even less !)
Forest area WCMC [14] FAO [15]
m ha % protected m ha % protected
South America 840m 10.7% 663m 12.5%
North America 850m 8.2% 685m 8.9%
Russia 825m 1.9%
Africa 570m 8.8% 460m 8.9%
Both South America and Africa have a higher percentage of forest
protected than North America.
Top 10 Deforesting Countries in 1995 ('000 hectares/an) [16]
Brazil -2550 Venezuela -500
Indonesia -1080 Malaysia -400
P.R Congo - 740 Myanmar -390
Bolivia - 580 Sudan -350
Mexico - 510 Thailand -330
Top 10 Deforesting countries in terms of % 1995 ('000 ha/an) [17]
Philippines -3.5% Central America -2.1%
Sierra Leone -3.1% Caribbean Is -1.7%
Pakistan -2.9% Cambodia -1.6%
Thailand -2.6% Ecuador -1.6%
Paraguay -2.6% Myanmar -1.6%
Almost 14% (50m ha) of the Brazilian Amazon rainforest has been
cleared in the period 1979-1999 [18].
Most African countries no longer have any significant tracts of
undisturbed frontier forest left (exceptions include P R Congo and
Nigeria), but only degraded forest. Other developing countries in this
condition are Paraguay, El Salvador, Haiti, Philippines and Pakistan
[19].
Of the approx 13.7 million hectares (m ha) of tropical forest
destroyed annually, 66% or 9m ha is attributable to slash-and-burn
farmers [20]. An estimated 6m ha of tropical forest are logged each
year [21]. Only a small percentage of this is clear-felling so that
forests, while degraded, cannot be said to have been destroyed. The
rate of logging is increasing in SE Asia and Latin America, but stable
in Africa. Logging intensity and clear-felling is highest in SE Asia
leading to serious degradation and some destruction of the 'diptocarp
forests'.
Guestimates of annual destruction of tropical forests (m ha)
slash-and-burn [22] 9.0
cattle ranching 1.5 ?
commercial farming 1.5 ?
tree plantations [23] 1.3 ? (0.6 - 2.0)
logging 0.3 ? (6m ha logged annually)
mining and hydro 0.1 ?
total 13.7
This 13.7m ha loss in forest natural capital has been estimated to be
worth US$45 billion [24], or US$3,285/ha.
(Part 2 of 'Decline of Tropical Forests' follows in GFB #84)
*
*
[1] FAO, 1997; State of the World's Forests 1997, Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, p.200
[2] CIDA Forestry Advisers Network (CFAN)
http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-3.html
[3] Wilson E O, 'The Diversity of Life', Harvard University Press,
Camb., Mass, USA (1992) p274-275 quoted in GFB #43/#44 op cit.
[4] FAO, 1997 op cit.
[5] Global Futures Bulletin #3 01 Jan 1999 'Photosynthetic
appropriation'; World Conservation Monitoring Centre
http://www.wcmc.org.uk/forest/data/cdrom2/world.htm
[6] FAOSTAT FAO statistics database - <<www.fao.org>> 1996.
quoted in Global Futures Bulletin #70/#71 01 Nov 1998
[7] Global Futures Bulletin #43/#44 15 Sep 97 'Early human-induced
extinction'
[8] CIDA op cit
[9] Global Futures Bulletin #2 15 Dec 1999 'Rate of species
extinction.'
[10] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-2.html
[11] World Resources Institute and IIED (1990) quoted in Global
Futures Bulletin #49 01 Dec 97 'Conserving habitat and species'
[12] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-5.html
[13] International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) cited
http://www.wcmc.org.uk/forest/data/cdrom2/gchts.htm#Chart 3
[14] World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) op cit
[15] FAOSTAT op cit.
[16] FAO 1997 op cit
[17] FAO 1997 op cit
[18] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-3.html
[19] Bryant, D; Nielsen, Tangley, 1997; 'The Last Frontier Forests'
World Resources Institute p.42
[20] Rowe, R; Sharma, Browder, in Sharma N (Ed) 'Managing the
World's Forests: Looking for Balance Between Conservation and
Development' Kendall/Hunt Pub (1992) pp.33-45
[21] FAO, 1993; Forest Resource Assessment 1990: Tropical
Countries, FAO Forestry Paper 112, Rome
[22] Rowe op cit.
[23] FAO 1997 op cit
[24] Hansen, Karl (1997); Final Report: Draft Chapter 1, Background
Paper No. 1, World Commission on Forests and Sustainable
Development, p.8
*
{6. biodiversity and habitat; 1. development issues, theory and
paradigms}
*
*
*
CALENDAR
17-28 May 1999 Preparatory Committee for the General Assembly
special session on follow-up to the Social Summit, New York.
www.un.org/News/devupdate/latest.htm
18-25 July 1999 'San Francisco Conference', 1999 World Summit of
Children Project - involving youth from around the world, San
Francisco, US E-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19 July 1999 world population will reach 6,000,000,000 (based on
UN statistics - symbolic, unlikely to be the day, but according to
statistics and model) http://opr.princeton.edu/popclock/
27 July - 01 Aug 1999 World Future Society 9th General Assembly
Washington DC http://www.wfs.org/9ga.htm
29-31 July 'First Global Forum on Human Development' UN
Headquarters, New York. Participants include Oscar Arias,
Meghnad Desai, Khadija Haq, Gustav Ranis, Amartya Sen.
http://www.undp.org/
*
*
________________________________________________________
********************************************************
The Global Futures Bulletin is produced by the Institute for Global
Futures Research (IGFR) twice monthly. Readers are welcome to
submit material such as succinct letters, articles and other useful
information. Indicate whether you would like your name attached to
the submitted material. All communications should be directed to the
Editor, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Copyright (c) 1998 Institute for
Global Futures Research (IGFR). All rights reserved.
________________________________________________________
********************************************************
********************************************************
PUBLICATIONS OF THE MONTH.- (Order form is included below)
********************************************************
CRITICAL DEVELOPMENT THEORY
'Critical Development Theory - Contributions to a New Paradigm'
Ronaldo Munck and Denis O'Hearn (Eds) (1999) 224 pages
Addresses the considerable rethinking of the whole concept of
development, including a growing awareness of its gender, cultural
and environmental dimensions, and the impact of globalisation which
has occurred in recent years. Seeks to extend these debates to a more
fundamental level, tackling such issues as the crisis of development
as an intellectual and practical project, the need for a break with
development as a Eurocentric concept, and the viability of alternative,
non-Western forms of development.
Preface - Ronaldo Munck and Denis O'Hearn. 1. The Myth of
Development - Vincent Tucker. Part I: Critical Perspectives. 2. On
Oppositional Postmodernism - Boaventura de Sousa Santos. 3.
Development and the Locations of Eurocentrism - Ziauddin Sardar.
4. Critical Holism and the Tao of Development - Jan Nederveen
Pieterse. Part II: Political Economy. 5. Integrating Production and
Consumption, or Why Political Economy Still Matters - Diane
Perrons. 6. Tigers and Transnationals: Pathways from the Periphery?
- Denis O'Hearn. 7. The Place of Development in Theories of
Imperialism and Globalisation - Bob Sutcliffe. Part III: Polemical
Perspectives. 8. Is it Possible to Build a Sustainable World? - Richard
Douthwaite. 9. Cultural Politics and (Post) Development Paradigm(s)
- Honor Fagan. 10. Deconstructing Development Discourses: of
Impasses, Alternatives and Politics - Ronaldo Munck.
AUD$38 inc post, US$24 inc post, UKPnd 16 inc post.
Add US$3 for post for orders outside Australia, US/Canada or UK.
********************************************************
'Life Out of Bounds - Bio-Invasions in a Borderless World'
Chris Bright (1999) 256 pages
Conservation biologists are raising the alarm about a global threat to
biodiversity that is unfolding largely unnoticed - bioinvasion, the
spread of alien, 'exotic' organisms. There has been little public
recognition of the dangers posed by these invading species. But
exotic species are injuring our biological wealth on virtually every
level - from the genetic (when exotics interbreed with native species)
to the wholesale transformation of landscapes. 'Life Out of Bounds'
shows that this 'biological pollution' is now beginning to corrode the
world's economies as well - and provides a compelling outline of the
social and economic implications if these invasions are allowed to
continue unchecked.
Contents: Evolution in Reverse; The Geography of Invasion; The
Fields; The Forests; The Waters; Islands; The Culture of Invasion;
Colonists; Accidents; Economic Invasions; Remedies; Toward an
Ecologically Literate Society
AUD$45 inc post, US$28 inc post, UKPnd 15 inc post.
Add US$3 for post for orders outside Australia, US/Canada or UK.
*******************************************************
'Rescuing All Our Futures - The Future of Futures Studies' (1999)
Ziauddin Sardar (Ed) 280 pages
'Futures studies' has abandoned its goal of exploring diverse and
alternative futures. Its over-emphasis on forecasting and prediction,
its over-preoccupation with technology and its neglect of non-western
cultures and concerns have all transformed it into an instrument for
the colonisation of the future. The future is being colonised by a
single, dominant but myopic vision that is incapable of seeing outside
the framework of western thought and action. Are we being
gridlocked into a single monolithic future ?
How can we bring multiculturalism and plurality to the heart of
futures studies?
Contributers include Ashis Nandy, Eleonora Masini, Sohail
Inayatuallah, Graham May, Ivana Milojevic, Susantha Goonatilake,
Steve Fuller, S P Udayakumar, Anne Jenkins, Sean Cubitt, Jan
Nederveen Pieterse, Richard Slaughter, Ted Fuller, Vinay Lal, Jerry
Ravetz, Kirk W Junker, Morgan Witzel and Merryl Wyn Davies.
Ziauddin Sardar - internationally renowned futurist, editor of the
journal 'Futures', author of over 30 books.
AUD$48 inc post, US$32 inc post, UKPnd 16 inc post.
Add US$3 for post for orders outside Australia, US/Canada or UK.
********************************************************
PUBLICATION REQUEST FORM
Please fill out the following and return it to
e-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, or
fax: 61 7 4033 6881, or
post: IGFR, PO Box 263E, Earlville, Qld 4870, Australia
My name
is..........................................................................
............
My organisation (if any)
is...............................................................
My e-mail address
is........................................................................
My mailing address
is......................................................................
............................................................................
............................
I wish to purchase the publication entitled:
............................................................................
............................
My credit card is [place an X in a) or b) or c)]
a)............Visa,
or
b)...........Mastercard,
or
c)..........American Express
Name on creditcard is
.....................................................................
Date of expiry
is..........................................................................
.....
Creditcard number is .. .. .. .. - .. .. .. .. - .. .. .. .. - .. .. .. ..
Amount I am paying is:...................................
******************************************************
Note: If you are paying by personal cheque from outside Australia,
please add US$5 to cover bank processing charges.
******************************************************
The IGFR is a not-for-profit organisation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institute for Global Futures Research (IGFR).
P.O. Box 263E, Earlville, QLD 4870, Australia.
E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Global Futures Bulletin #83
Institute for Global Futures Research (IGFR) Fri, 7 May 1999 07:01:30 -0700
