FFWD Weekly
Copyright © 2000. All Rights Reserved
Books
by Timothy WildMaurice Strong has been on both sides of the struggle between the energy industry and the environmentalists, and has a message about the direction – or lack of – society is choosing.
"If the egosystems do not reconcile themselves to ecosystems, the ecosystems will have the last word," suggests Strong, who was in Calgary recently to promote his new book, Where On Earth Are We Going?
He argues that avoiding "self-inflicted" ecological catastrophe involves making difficult political and, more importantly, economic choices. Strong, however, also recognizes that the choices necessary to save the planet are fundamentally at odds with the short-term, profit-driven focus paramount in the increasingly unregulated capitalism of so-called developed nations.
By itself this argument is hardly new. Even families with gas-guzzling minivans and SUVs are usually aware of the obvious incongruency between unfettered market-based individualism and the survival of Earth. But what makes Strong’s articulation particularly novel is the fact that he can be considered the "consummate insider" – his curriculum vitae covers seven closely typed pages at the end of the book.
At first glance, then, such environmental views seem odd for a man who has been the CEO of both Petro-Canada and Ontario Hydro. He also spent a brief period of time as a candidate for the Federal Liberal Party. However, the views become less peculiar when one recalls that Strong has had a long and varied history with the United Nations and international development organizations, and was instrumental in the creation of monumental initiatives on the environment, including both the Stockholm Summit in 1972 and, more recently, the Earth Summit in 1992.
At one level, Where On Earth Are We Going? provides an interesting chronology of aspects of Strong’s life. The volume shows how a Manitoba boy who left school at 14 (and didn’t return) carved a niche in the international "establishment" by a combination of skill, verve and the use of back doors. For example, his first job at the United Nations was as a security guard.
But rather than being strictly a memoir in the sense of "when I had lunch with the Queen...," the book is more an attempt by Strong to illustrate lessons learned from his 70-plus years. At its core is a consideration of the tension between establishment norms and values on one hand, and a recognition of the imperative to balance economic, global development and environmental considerations on the other. Overall, this is a balance that Strong has been able to achieve, but certainly not without difficulty.
And although the volume is interesting in a number of areas, particularly those dealing with the internal policies of the United Nations, the real worth of the book can be found in the simple argument that if we don’t act quickly, we will face a terminal environmental crisis.
"(If) we don’t change, radically, thoroughly, systematically, we ensure our own downfall," Strong suggests.
Yet as obvious as that seems, and as available as the scientific information and the technology for effective change are, civil society and governments are not acting in a decisive enough manner to achieve this – if they are acting at all.
We still choose to follow environmentally disastrous lifestyles – consequences be damned. And we are slow in implementing agreements and protocols that would slow down massive degradation. In fact, a former provincial energy minister proudly informed Albertans that our province will not be a party to the Kyoto Agreement to reduce CO2 emissions.
"We care about our children, but we push it to the back of our minds and hope that it will work out. But it won’t work out unless we take responsibility," argues Strong.
And basically that’s what the book is about – it is simply a call to take responsibility... now. Civil society must press both government and business for sustainable change. Strong does offer some guidelines on how this can be achieved, but the book is more a general manifesto calling for change rather than a blueprint for specific action. But, once again, the point is action.
"Analytically, I could be very pessimistic, but operationally, we have to be optimistic. Doomsday is not inevitable, but we have to work for change," he says.
"I think there is hope, but this hope rests on the premise that we are going to smarten up."
Unfortunately, I’m not so optimistic. But I did vote for the Green Party in the 1997 federal election, and surely that’s a start?
| Back To This Issue Table of Contents | Back To Main Index |