________________________________________________________
********************************************************
GLOBAL FUTURES BULLETIN #84
---15 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
. Heightened risk of nuclear war
. NATO/Serbia war crimes
. Reconciling �green city� and �low-energy city�
. Energy base, not money base, of Civilisation
. Decline of tropical forests (part 2)
*
*
HEIGHTENED RISK OF NUCLEAR WAR
Dr Mary-Wynne Ashford, co-president of International Physicians for
the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), an organisation which was
awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, has just returned from seminars in
Moscow and the Olof Palme Institute in Stockholm:
�The meetings have convinced me we are on the brink of nuclear war
by the unintentional escalation of the war against Yugoslavia�.
What we are failing to appreciate is the profound change in public
opinion in Russia, shared even by Russian members of the IPPNW.
Dr. Serguei Kapitsa, a scientist famous for his weekly television
show, claims that Russians feel a sense of betrayal by the West, and a
profound loss of confidence in treaties and in the United Nations
because NATO took this action outside the UN.
Consider:
- Russia will not ratify START II and claim it is dead, with 10 years
of wasted opportunities during disarmament talks
- a number of leading advocates of nuclear disarmament are now
advocating nuclear deterrence for Russia.
- a wide spectrum of Russian scientists, doctors and politicians have
expressed the view that the disarmament process has been set back
20 years.
A scenario has been put forward that Russia will not tolerate another
month of bombing, and must rely on its nuclear weapons to back its
stance, as Russia�s conventional forces are no match for NATO.
Only Dr Evgenie Chazov, cofounder of IPPNW with American
cardiologist Dr Bernard Lown, expressed the need to push on with
disarmament efforts, despite having to start again from square one.
The consequences of nuclear war are so catastrophic that even slight
increases in risk require serious consideration and review.
*
{2. peace and conflict resolution}
*
*
*
NATO/SERBIA WAR CRIMES
Mary Robinson, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has
denounced the euphemism �collateral damage� and insisted that both
Serbia and NATO both be subject to investigation for war crimes.
One could argue this represents the contrast of World Systems
paradigms based on �political realism� and �international democracy
and law.� (see Global Futures Bulletin #83, 01 May 1999
�Realpolitik versus the ICJ�)
*
{33. global conventions and international law; 37. world systems theory}
*
*
*
RECONCILING �GREEN CITY� AND �LOW-ENERGY CITY�
Peter Newman [1]
Folke Gunther believes we should try to rebuild our cities as places
for food production using 'ruralisation' (GFB #82) [2] . This view
has been used to exert quite a lot of policy influence even though it
can be said to be highly unrealistic given the massive global
urbanisation process which has been characteristic of the 20th C. [3].
The reasons this view is unrealistic are:
First, the energy involved in agriculture is worth addressing but it is
only a few percent of the general transport energy. The whole of the
urban freight system in most US cities is around 10% of the total
urban transport system energy. Even though transporting food is
only a small part of the total problem it should also be part of the
solution. However the ruralisation of cities has been used by green
activists to prevent the bigger problem from being solved - auto-
dependence. The most important thing we can do to save fuel and
create a less auto-dependent city is to create urban villages which are
dense nodes of development that are transit-oriented, mixed in use
and have a strong commitment to walkability. You cannot create
local self-sufficiency, low-energy and alternative modes by scattering
development.
The rural-values oriented people are often those who are most
adamant about stopping dense nodes of development, concerned that
it will destroy rural/environmental values.
Second, the best places for creating more 'urban ecology' with the
kind of projects Gunther would like, are in denser urban
environments. There are a number of good such innovations in
Copenhagen because there is a community structure for such vision
and work [4]. Community is painfully difficult in low-density car-
based areas, unless it is a planned community, some of which I have
examined and found to be very good on all ecological indicators apart
from car use which is usually far higher than average for the city.
The concepts of the �green city� and the �low-energy city� are not
inherently in conflict, provided density increase in nodes is designed
to overcome auto-dependence, and then ensuring that urban ecology
is addressed in all parts of the city, even enabling some areas away
from the centres to be reduced in density. The new car-free centres
being built in Europe are able to have far more space devoted to
urban ecology, and are perhaps a good example of how the dilemma
can be overcome.
*
[1] Peter Newman is professor at the Institute for Science and
Technology Policy, Murdoch University
http://www.istp.murdoch.edu.au and Visiting Professor, City and
Regional Planning, University of Pennsylvania
[2] Global Futures Bulletin #82 15 Apr 99 Gunther Folke �Cities,
energy and nutrients�
[3] see Chap 5 of 'Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile
Dependence' Peter Newman and Jeffrey Kenworthy (1998). This
book is available through IGFR. For more information, e-mail
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[4] numerous innovations in Copenhagen are included in
'Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence' op
cit.
*
*
COMMENT
Let us first compare what appear as conflicting claims:
Gunther Frank [1] :
�A low estimate is that the food system requires ten times the energy
[than is contained] in the food, probably more..... Since the average
food energy needed to sustain a person is about 1,000 kWh/an, this
means that the food related energy requirements of a person (10,000
kWh/an) are larger than those of transportation (3,500 kWh/an) or
space heating/cooling (4,000 kWh/yr).�
Peter Newman [2] :
�First, the energy involved in agriculture is worth addressing but it is
only a few percent of the general transport energy. The whole of the
urban freight system in most US cities is around 10% of the total
urban transport system energy.�
It must be that �transportation� in Frank�s claim of energy
requirements (3,500 kWh/an) refers to personal petrol consumption,
rather than the per capita average of all energy used in all
transportation.
On the otherhand, Newman�s urban freight energy use does not
include cost of driving to and from the supermarket, or transport
costs of municipal collection of garbage resulting from the
consumption of food products etc.
The importance of bringing people and food production together,
(possibly by reducing density) relative to the importance of reducing
energy consumption - and pollution - (by increasing density) is still
difficult to determine.
What is the optimum density for the urban-ecology approach ? What
is the optimum density for pedestrian-based dense node approach ?
There will likely still be those who will opt for suburban lifestyles,
even when innovative community-oriented dense node development
becomes more available.
Consider the following scenario:
- more people will be attracted to innovative community-oriented
dense node development. Sprawl will stabilise.
- outlying suburbs will have improved public transit links to both the
city centre and other outlying areas.
- new freeway construction will be restricted, giving greater
importance to community values, spatial coherence (not
fragmentation), natural environment (fauna corridors) etc
- greater restrictions on exhaust pollution (CO2., particulates etc)
- new opportunities for telecommuting
- what auto-use remains will utilize vehicles with much greater
energy efficiency (eg factor 4), and far less pollution (eg EVs,
hybrid, hydrogen-powered)
- better terms and facilities for hiring vehicles for occasional use
- what outlying suburbs remain will be better designed (eg
teleshopping and home delivery).
But as Newman points out, a strong focus on enlightened dense node
development is required to attract a significant number of people to a
pedestrian-based lifestyle - while continuing to monitor for social,
economic and environmental benefits and drawbacks.
The greatest challenge remains to intervene in the development
process where planning authorities (eg in North America, Australia)
merely respond to private developer interest and are scarcely
proactive (or worse, are captured by private developer interest to
serve the needs of private capital). Powerful private developers have
shown they have little or no interest in innovation and sustainable
development. Private capital has increasing influence in developing
countries also. International institutions such as the UN Commission
on Habitat and Settlement (UNCHS) need to be strengthened to, in
turn, strengthen a global (pluralist) movement toward conscious
urban planning and development.
*
[1] Global Futures Bulletin #82 15 Apr 99 Gunter Folke �Cities,
energy and nutrients�
[2] Global Futures Bulletin #84 15 May 99 Peter Newman
�Reconciling �green city� and �low-energy city�.
*
{18. urban development}
*
*
*
ENERGY BASE, NOT MONEY BASE, OF CIVILISATION
Jay Hanson
Around 2005, global oil production is expected to peak and change
our lives forever [1]. Studies show that nothing can replace
conventional oil in the next few decades.
Energy or minerals ?
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has embarked on a so-called
�reliable, objective assessment of the world's energy resources�.[2]
Unfortunately, the USGS is using a flawed methodology which
guarantees that it will NOT be an �energy� assessment but a �mineral�
assessment instead. Here's why:
A mineral is a mineral no matter how much energy is required to
mine it. But by definition, energy �sources� must produce more
energy than they consume, otherwise they are called �sinks�. USGS
assessments report resources in three different ways - �in place�, as
�technically recoverable�, and as �economically recoverable�. But
neither �technically recoverable� energy nor �economically
recoverable� energy are relevant for anyone who is not in the energy
business. On the other hand, we average citizens are vitally
concerned about �energetically recoverable� energy. For example, if
it takes more energy to search for and mine a barrel of oil than the
energy recovered, then it makes no energy sense to look for that
barrel - no matter how high the money price of oil goes. It will make
no energy sense to look for oil in America after 2005 [3]. Domestic
coal is expected to be thermodynamically unrecoverable by 2040.
Using its present methodology, USGS won't know �source� from
�sink�! Unfortunately, this is not the first time that the USGS has
been misguided. One is reminded of the Hubbert-Zapp fiasco where
Hubbert estimated proven and unproven reserves in the US at 150-
200 billion barrels, while Zapp, director of the USGS, predicted 590
billion barrels, but based on an obsolete model that ultimately was
proven wrong and which led to Zapp�s resignation [4].
It is absolutely imperative to introduce policymakers to these real-
world energy concepts because the coming peak in global oil
production marks the end of the consumer economy.
A good analogy is like having a motor scooter with a five-gallon
tank, but with the nearest gas station is 10 gallons away. You cannot
fill your tank with trips to the gas station because you burn more than
you can bring back. It is impossible for you to cover your overhead.
(The size of your bankroll and the price of the gas are irrelevant).
You might as well put your scooter up on blocks because you are �out
of gas� - forever.
It is the same with the global economy: If we must spend more than
one unit of energy to produce enough goods and services to buy one
unit of energy, it is impossible for us to cover our overhead. At that
point, the world economic machine is �out of gas� - forever.
Pollsters with an attitude.
Economists are trained to believe that capitalism is powered by
money. But scientists pointed out over a hundred years ago that
capitalism is powered by energy. [5]
Even after a hundred years, economists still do not study energy -
they study money and prices. Money isn't a measure of anything real,
like tons or gallons. Money is social power because it �empowers�
people to buy and do the things they want - including buying and
doing other people. Money is, in a word, �coercion�,[6] and
�economic efficiency� is correctly seen as a political concept designed
to conserve power for those who have it - to make the rich richer, and
the poor poorer.
Economists frequently point to prices and make claims about the real
world. Like a Tibetan monk spinning a prayer wheel, this or that is
�better off� they say, and go on their way. But the price of a thing
does not reveal its quantity nor its quality. How much is $10 worth of
oil? (It depends upon when and where you bought it). What is the
net energy of $10 worth of oil? If oil costs $10 a barrel, how much is
left in the ground? Who knows?
Prices simply measure states of mind. This means that economists
issue opinions on opinions. In short, economists are pollsters with an
attitude.
Social �collapse� is defined as the rapid transformation to a lower
degree of complexity, typically involving significantly less energy
consumption [7]. Societies �collapse� when they become too complex
for their energy base. Thus, the collapse of capitalism is inevitable
because capitalism must grow to survive - must become more and
more complex and consume more and more energy.
*
[1] Campbell, Colin J; Laherrere, Jean H �The End of Cheap Oil�,
Scientific American, March 1998 http://dieoff.com/page140.htm
[2] USGS Fact Sheet FS-007-97: The USGS World Energy Program
http://energy.usgs.gov/factsheets/worldenergy/world.html
[3] �Titanic Sinks�, http://dieoff.com/page143.htm
[4] �Hubbert, the Persistent Prophet�, by Garrett Hardin
http://dieoff.com/page143.htm#HubbertZapp
[5] �The , http://dieoff.com/page168.htm
[6] To �coerce� is to compel one to act in a certain way - either by
reward or punishment. When I use �politics� or �political�, I simply
mean �one coercing another� in the broadest sense. When I use the
term �economists�, I mean �standard� (or neoclassical) economists.
[7] Tainter, Joseph A �Complexity, Problem Solving, and Sustainable
Societies� 1996; http://dieoff.com/page134.htm
*
{4. energy; 23. global parameters, scenarios, new dimensions}
*
*
*
DECLINE OF TROPICAL FORESTS (Part 2)
It is important to distinguish between agents of deforestation and
causes.
Main agents of deforestation (in order of significance) [1]
Latin America and Caribbean:
slash-and-burn farmers
cattle ranchers
commercial farmers
loggers
infrastructure developers
Asia/Oceania:
commercial farmers
slash-and-burn farmers
loggers
commercial tree planters
infrastructure developers
Africa:
slash-and-burn farmers
commercial farmers
loggers
livestock herders
refugees from civil disturbances
Major causes of deforestation in developing countries:
- population growth - up to 3 billion more people in 3rd W by 2050.
- poverty - 800 million currently in abject poverty in 3rd W.
- greed for economic and political power, individual/corporate
- unregulated land use
- monopolistic markets favor elite - ranchers, plantations, logging
- debt burden and servicing
- concentration of land ownership and need for land reform
- IMF Structural Adjustment Programs encourage export - meat,
crops, timber.
- national fiscal and development policies, eg providing subsidies, tax
concession for forest clearance.
- market demand for products from deforested land or timber
products
- undervaluation of natural forests, agroforestry, carbon sequestration,
water cycle, soil conservation, ecotourism, cultural value, etc
- weak government institutions, underfunded departments,
susceptibility to corruption
- deforestation as a safety valve to reduce socieconomic pressure in
other areas
- lack of appreciation of the forests in general population
- agribusiness displacing small farmers who then resort to clearing
forest.
- mining operations used vast tracts of forest for fuel for smelting
operations eg Carajas in Brazil (now eucalyptus plantations) and
Zambia copper belt.
- short term interests and lack of sustainable management
- roads opened by logging and mining companies or government
projects lead to influx of small farmers, agribusiness etc with more
serious deforestation.
Slash-and-burn farming includes short fallow shifting cultivation,
long fallow shifting cultivation, and pioneer farming, and accounts
for approx 66% of the destruction of tropical forests. However, many
of these small farmers have been displaced from established
agricultural land by agribusiness.
Ecotourism and pharmaceutical potential of tropical forests can be
important alternatives to slash and burn at the local level, but are said
to have limited impact potential on global land use. On the
otherhand, the economic potential derived from carbon sequestration
and storage capacity under Joint Implementation Agreements from
the Climate Change Convention could be far more significant
according to CIDA. [2]
Oil palm plantations have expanded rapidly in Indonesia since the
mid-80s.
Population pressures are often cited as a major factor. Consider,
however, that high population density in Java has not resulted in
elimination or even substantial reduction of forest cover. On the
otherhand, the Indonesian government may perceive it as in their
interests to prevent clearing of Javanese forests, to encourage poor
farmers to emigrate to other areas of Indonesia (transmigrasi
program) which are experiencing high rates of deforestation.
Deforestation due to timber exports is most significant in Indonesia,
Malaysia and Myanmar (exports are 50%+ of sawn timber
production). However, in general, the national demand for paper and
timber products in developing countries is far more significant than
demand from international markets [3].
Similarly, beef production in Brazil, which contributes significantly
to deforestation, is still growing, but exports peaked in the mid-1980s
at around 500,000 tonnes (15% of production) and had dropped to
less than 270,000 tonnes (5% of production) by 1995 [4]. In Central
America % for export has dropped from 45% in 1970s to approx 25%
in the 1990s.
Deforestation causes
- loss of biodiversity (extinction rates estimates range 1-150 species
per day)
- acceleration of global warming.
- destruction of indigenous communities
- loss of soil
- faster water run-off and hence more susceptability to flooding, and
drought conditions. (Forests slow water flows which may therefore
may continue during dry conditions).
The consensus is that global emissions of carbon (in the form of
CO2) is 6 billion tonnes. According to one report, a further 2 billion
tonnes of carbon is emitted as a result of deforestation and forest
fires, bringing a total of 8b tonnes of anthropogenic Carbon
emissions [5].
It is important to be careful with simplistic statements. The carbon
cycle is complex. Consider:
Anthropogenic CO2 production is about 31 b tonnes/an, or 6b tonnes
Carbon/an (6btC/an).
Amounts of this 6btC/an that is[6]:
absorbed by biosphere 2.0 +/- 0.9
added to atmosphere 2.3
absorbed by oceans 1.7 +/- 0.9
___
Total 6.0
Consider also that timber that is harvested for building, furniture etc
and remains a store of carbon for some time, and moreover, a
regrowth forest has net CO2 absorption while mature forests have no
net CO2 absorption (or emission). Other ecological issues aside,
harvesting timber can actually reduce net emissions of CO2, provided
the regrowth is faster than the decay of the timber products. This, of
course, is not the case for forest *clearance*, ie deforestation, unless
replaced by plantation forest.
An estimated 100-200 million hectares of new forest is required to
sequester 1 billion tonnes of Carbon (note net anthropogenic Carbon
addition to atmosphere suggested above is 2.3 billion tonnes /an).
However it is estimated an extra 250-300m hectares of agricultural
land (for commercial farming, subsistence cropping, pasture and
rangelands) may be required 1999-2024. Nearly all of this is
expected to come from clearing of tropical forests. That is, unless
there is a change toward more intensive agriculture (plenty of scope
for this), the current destruction rate of tropical forests (13.7m ha/an)
can be expected to continue. Approx 75% of current deforestation is
due to agriculture [7].
Current forest area is 3,200-4,000 million hectares. Current total
land surface area 13,000 million hectares.
Current forest loss approx 14 million hectares per annum (nearly all
of which is tropical forest), - approx 0.35-0.43%/an of total, or 0.7-
1.0%/an of remaining tropical forests. Note previous figure of
1.8%/an destruction rate of tropical forests [8] seems high, but note
also new revised estimates including destruction from logging and
fires.
Satellite photos reveal the extent of forest clearance. What they do
not reveal is the extensive damage to forests caused by the logging
industry. In the Amazon, for example, 1 - 1.5 million hectares of
severely damaged forest from logging per annum has so far not been
included in estimates of deforestation (suggesting destruction rates be
increased from 13.7m ha/an to at least 14.7-15.2m ha/an, but possibly
more to take into account of logging in other regions) [9].
Logging can reduce canopy cover by 50%, which cause sunlight to dry
out forest floor, resulting in more fires. Burnt areas are more prone to
future fire. Global warming can exacerbate this.
Approx 5 million hectares of plantation forest are being planted each
year.
The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED) endorsed the goal that all countries protect at least 12% of
their land area for natural habitat.
Currently world average of protected forest is 8.5% of total forest.
But this figure would be less if measured against total forested areas
of 1992 (the year of UNCED), and similarly is rising due to
deforestation.
Forest covers 30% of total land area [10]. Most protected areas of
habitat are forest. Therefore, % of total land area which is protected
could be currently around 2.6% - a far cry from UNCED goal of 12%.
Forest area - % protected.
WCMC [11] FAO [12]
m ha m ha
South America 10.7% 12.5%
North America 8.2% 8.9%
Russia 1.9%
Africa 8.8% 8.9%
Asia 11.9%
Oceania 6.1%
Europe 2.9%
World 8.5%
(The low percentage of protected forest in Europe is puzzling and
requires further inquiry).
Major international initiatives on sustainable forest management
include the Montreal and Helsinki Processes (boreal and temperate
forests), the Tarapoto Proposal (Amazonia) and the Lepaterique
Process (Central America). The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is
an international NGO which provides certification, (green label).
The National Forest Programme (NFP) is an internationally
coordinated movement to bring governments, forest industry, NGOs
and the community together to work out strategies for sustainable
forest management.
The Tropical Forest Action Program (TFAP) was another
international effort to encourage sustainable forestry management,
but is now considered a failure, in part because of weak leadership by
FAO, because it was donor-driven and lacked adequate grassroots
participation [13].
UNCED led to the creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Forests, the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests, and the World
Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development.
Development assistance for forestry programs has dropped
significantly in recent years.
*
[1] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-4.html
[2] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-5.html
[3] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-5.html
[4] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-5.html
[5] World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development,
(1998); �Our Forests . . . Our Future�, March report, WCFSD
Secretariat, Winnipeg p.126
[6] Keeling R et al, Nature v381 16 May 1996 p218 cited in Global
Futures Bulletin #31 01 Mar 1997 �The carbon cycle�
[7] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-9.html
[8] Wilson E O, 'The Diversity of Life', Harvard University Press,
Camb., Mass, USA (1992) p274-275 quoted in GFB #43/#44 op cit.
[9] Woods Hole Research Center, Massachusetts et al, cited in
Nature, 6 April 1999.
[10] Global Futures Bulletin #3 01 Jan 1999 'Photosynthetic
appropriation'; World Conservation Monitoring Centre
http://www.wcmc.org.uk/forest/data/cdrom2/world.htm
[11] Global Futures Bulletin #3 01 Jan 1999 'Photosynthetic
appropriation'; World Conservation Monitoring Centre
http://www.wcmc.org.uk/forest/data/cdrom2/world.htm
[12] FAOSTAT FAO statistics database - <<www.fao.org>> 1996.
quoted in Global Futures Bulletin #70/#71 01 Nov 1998
[13] CIDA op cit http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/English/issues.12-8.html
*
{6. biodiversity and habitat}
*
*
________________________________________________________
********************************************************
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 #84
Institute for Global Futures Research (IGFR) Thu, 20 May 1999 07:09:55 -0700
