Political, social and institutional barriers to environmental information

Abstract

Since this meeting is in the context of sustainable development, I would like to begin by saying that I regard the term 'sustainable development' as an oxymoron two opposites put together with a promotional intent. It is like 'Jumbo Shrimp' or 'United Nations'. I like the term as a technique to bring industrialists and ecologists together; but I do not believe that, as a concept, it is implementable. Development means growth, and sustainable growth on a finite planet is self-destructive. One of the barriers to the flow of environmental information in a social-political context is the word environment itself. Literally, environment means surroundings without saying what it is the surroundings of. It is not a holistic concept. To become a holistic concept it needs to be combined with two other elements social and economic. Considered jointly, social, economic and environmental interests make up human dominated ecosystems. Environment must be examined in an ecosystem context, not a narrowly defined political context. My impression in dealing with the interface between environmental and political issues is that most decisions are made intuitively on the basis of inadequate information. Rationality comes afterwards as a rationalization, primarily based on the preservation of image. The Muir-Sudar Report referred to by Dr. Bregha was primarily shelved because it constituted a denial of the effectiveness of federal programs related to environmental and human health, and also because it infringed on departmental territories. Dr. Bregha cited the barrier as 'Splintered Mandates'; I suggest that the barrier is overly zealous protection of images and territories. I concur with Dr. Bregha's recommendation for a Parliamentary Commisioner, but would modify his other two recommendations. Rather than indicators of sustainable development, I would prefer a focus on indicators of health of the Canadian Ecosystem. As to the creation of networks, I agree with Dr. Nelson that the focus should be on local networks. I have two additional suggestions (1) that the circle be widened to include children (which would have the salutary effect of simplifying the language and focussing on the future for those who will be in it); and (2) that attention be focused on the concept of downward causation as a means to foster integrative patterns of thought and action.