The issue of economic development versus environmental conservation can also be seen as the First World vs. the Third World. Industrial- ized nations, ironically those that are most responsible for current environmental problems, fear that unregulated economic development in the Third World will have disastrous long-term environmental effects on the planet. They point out that massive clearing of tropical forests for farmland is threatening biodiversity and may impact world climate, while a reliance on heavy industry to fuel economic growth adds more pollutants to the air, ground, and water. Developing countries counter that they must make industrialization and economic develop- ment a priority because they have to support their growing populations. Developing countries must address current problems; they cannot afford to worry about the distant future.
PROS
Taking care of the millions of people who are starving is more important than saving natural resources, most of which are renewable anyway.
The industrialized world’s emphasis on protecting the environment shackles developing countries and contrib- utes to and widens the great divide between the First and Third Worlds. By limiting the development of profitable but polluting industries like steel or oil refining, we are sentencing nations to remain economically backward. Economic development is vital for meeting the basic needs of the growing populations of Third World coun- tries. If we do not permit industrialization, these nations will have to implement measures to limit population growth just to preserve vital resources such as water. Obviously the world would be better if all nations abided by strict environmental rules. The reality is that for many nations such adherence is not in their larger interests. For example, closing China’s massive Capital Iron and Steelworks, which ecologists point to as a major polluter, would cost 40,000 jobs. The uniform applica- tion of strict environmental policies would create insur- mountable barriers to economic progress.
CONS
We have wasted and destroyed vast amounts of natural resources, and in so doing have put Earth in jeopardy. We must preserve Earth for future generations.
No one wants to stop economic progress that could give millions better lives. But we must insist on sustainable development that integrates environmental stewardship, social justice, and economic growth. Earth cannot sup- port unrestricted growth.
Unchecked population growth has a deleterious effect on any nation and on the entire planet. Limiting popula- tion growth will result in a higher standard of living and will preserve the environment.
Nations are losing more from polluting than they are gaining from industrialization. China is a perfect exam- ple. Twenty years of uncontrolled economic develop- ment have created serious, chronic air pollution that has increased health problems and resulted in annual agri- cultural losses of billions of dollars. Thus, uncontrolled growth is not only destructive to the environment, it is also unsound economically.
Web Links:
• Reported Drug Use by Potential Targets of Random School Drug Testing Policies. <http://www.drugs.indiana.edu/publs/archive/ pdfs/drugtesting_athlete.pdf> Short essay presenting evidence that random drug testing in schools is unlikely to detect much drug use.
• Substance Abuse Resource Center. <http://www.jointogether.org/plugin.jtml?siteID=AMBIOMED&P=1> General site offering links to current news on drug-related topics as well as resources on issues, laws, and government policy.
Further Reading:
Ligocki, Kenneth B. Drug Testing: What We All Need to Know. Scarborough, 1996.
2|The Debatabase Book
Sample Motions:
This House believes that environmental concerns should always take precedence over economic development in both the First and Third Worlds.
This House believes that economic growth, even at the expense of some environmental degradation, is justified by the need to feed the rising world population.
Web Links:
• Center for International Environmental Law. <http://www.ciel.org> Offers a review of major international environmental agree- ments as well as information on the impact of globalization and free trade on sustainable development.
• International Institute for Sustainable Development. <http://www.iisd.org> Describes institute activities and offers reports and re- search materials on different aspects of sustainable development.
• United Nations Environmental Programme: Division of Technology, Industry and Economics. <http://www.uneptie.org> Presents information on UN programs associated with sustainable development.
Further Reading:
Cherni, Judith A. Economic Growth Versus the Environment: The Politics of Wealth, Health and Air Pollution. Palgrave, 2002. Cole, Matthew A. Trade Liberalisation, Economic Growth and the Environment. Edward Elgar, 2000.
Kageson, Per. Growth Versus the Environment: Is There a Trade-Off? Kluwer, 1998.
Lomborg, Bjorn. The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Technological progress has made people too confident in their abilities to control their environment. In just half a century the world’s nuclear industry has had at least three serious accidents: Windscale (UK, 1957), Three Mile Island (US, 1979), and Chernobyl (USSR, 1986). In addition, the nuclear power industry still cannot store its waste safely.
The Green Revolution is threatening the biodiversity of the Third World by replacing native seeds with hybrids. We do not know what the long-term environmental or economic consequences will be. We do know that in the short run, such hybrid crops can indirectly cause environmental problems. The farmer using hybrid seed, which is expensive, must buy new seed each year because the seed cannot be saved to plant the following year’s crops. Farmers using hybrid seeds in what once was the richest part of India went bankrupt. As a result, fertile lands lay idle and untilled, resulting in droughts and desertification.
Rapid industrialization does not have to put more pres- sure on the environment. Technological advances have made industries much safer for the environment. For example, nuclear generating plants can provide more energy than coal while contributing far less to global warming. We are also exploring alternative, renewable types of fuel.
The “Green Revolution” has doubled the size of grain harvests. Thus, cutting down more forests or endanger- ing fragile ecosystems to provide more space for crops is no longer necessary. We now have the knowledge to feed the world’s increasing population without harming the environment.