Friday 26 July 2013

Collapse (2005)



Environmentalists can sometimes be accused of fear mongering.  And it’s true that nothing rallies the troops like a bit of imminent dread.  With that in mind, here's hoping that my review of the fatalistic, Collapse, can present a balanced approach to a scary subject.

No society lasts forever.  For every society that adapts and prospers, marking their dominance with the building of complex structures and systems, there is an inescapable demise.  The only pertinent question is how long can you survive?

Jared Diamond, professor of geography at the University of California, Los Angeles, and author of the Pulitzer Prize winning, Guns, Germs and Steel (1997) - an examination of the factors that have historically caused societies to prosper - takes a historical look at how environmental factors are inextricably connected to the collapse of almost all societies.  Lest we get carried away with melancholia and fatality, I think it is important for me to note that Diamond has written a scary historical account of the world, but it is a nonetheless a tale of cautious optimism; by better understanding the past we can endeavour to do better in the future.
   
Diamond approaches the task of learning from the past by laying out a distinct five-point framework from which to approach each case study:

  1. Environmental Damage – here we are talking about the way which we exploit our natural resources for gain and whether an environment is naturally fragile or resilient to such exploitation.  Diamond makes the point that the reversibility of such damage is dependent on both a society’s decisions (e.g. the number of trees cut don per acre per year) and the characteristics of the given ecosystem (e.g. the number of seedlings that germinate per year or the sapling growth rate).  Thus, what is a sustainable rate of exploitation in one area will not always be sustainable in another.
  2. Climate Change – it is refreshing to get to use this term in a neutrally political sense, as Diamond is more expansively referring to the natural variations in the climate that effect the conditions in which we live.  These are exclusively non man-made (e.g. volcanic eruptions, changes in the orientation of the Earth’s axis effecting local temperatures, wet versus dry decades, etc.)
  3. Hostile Neighbours – the effect of intermittent or chronically hostile neighbours is perhaps the first factor you may have thought of when considering the collapse of past societies, however, Diamond presents compelling evidence to suggest that hostile neighbours are usually the proximate, not the ultimate, cause of collapse.  That is to say that, ecological factors usually weaken a society to the point where military conquest is possible (i.e. the straw that broke that the camel’s back).
  4. Friendly Trade Partners – the ability to trade with neighbouring states greatly affects a society’s ability to provide everything that it needs, as no environment provides an abundance of all natural resources.  Consequently, the economics of competitive advantage and opportunity cost have been used for centuries to provide an improved standard of living.
  5. Societal Response to Environmental Problems – obviously this is the factor most clearly separating the winners from the losers, and Diamond makes his way through the following case studies with a keen focus on human decisions.

Diamond devotes a lot of time carefully dissecting the collapse of the Easter Islanders (in South America circa 1600 A.D.), The Anasazi (in the Southwestern U.S. circa 1300 A.D.), The Mayans (in Mexico circa 1300 A.D.), The Vikings and The Norse (in Scandinavia circa 1100 A.D.).  At this point I could expand on the all the nuances of the above collapses, but for the purposes of this article I will very quickly skim over these investigations (which take up a good 300 pages) and briefly summarise the findings so that I can focus on the more modern topics explored in the book.

The three recurring reasons for the societal collapse of historic civilisations, that I noted, were:
  1. Deforestation,
  2. Soil Erosion, and
  3. High Population Density

Short-term exploitation of forests decreases the availability of natural resources that are vital to many areas of the economy, increases your need to import raw materials thus weakening your trading position, drastically reduces your ability to control forest fires and destroys habitats and jobs.  Soil erosion (generally caused by working the land too hard, failing to rotate crops and farming on too steep a gradient) seriously undermines a society’s ability to feed itself and strengthen its economy as farming becomes harder and harder.  And high population density causes any problem to become exacerbated as the fight for resources, food and money becomes more intensified.

These factors appear time and again in Diamond’s analysis of the past societies and create a clear platform from which to view modern societies.  Diamond’s analysis of past societies is educational and thorough, but I must admit that I found the second half of the book (regarding modern societies) much more compelling and engaging.

While the collapse of previous societies had felt slightly impersonal and distant, the magnitude of the topic was really brought home when Diamond explored how environmental factors played a crucial role in the Rwandan genocide.

In 1994, almost 1,000,000 people (close to 20% of the entire population) were savagely murdered in Rwanda.  The motivation for such savagery has traditionally been attributed to ethnic cleansing.  The rivalry between the Hutu and Tutsi people was said to have provided the kindling and the plane crash that killed the Rwandan and Burundian presidents on April 6, 1994, the spark that ignited the horrific atrocities.  Yet Diamond unearths the compelling environmental factors that explain how the tensions were not so cut and dry as first thought.

Firstly, for several decades prior to 1994, Rwanda had been experiencing unprecedented population growth.  By 1994 the population density had reached 760 people per square mile (for comparison, the UK is approximately 600 people/m2 and Canada 10 people/m2) leading to the average farm being a meagre 0.07 acres.  Furthermore, a high percentage of the population were farmers for subsistence and unlike industrialised nations could not harness efficient and mechanised agricultural methods.  Consequently, farmers struggled to feed their families, soil erosion and soil fertility loss exploded as farmers tried harder to survive on smaller plots of land and deforestation rates increased as farmers searched for new arable farmland.    In short, the ground could not feed the country and disputes over land and resources became common and violence and theft sky-rocketed.

Consequently, when the global price of coffee and tea (Rwanda’s primary exports) declined and a severe drought swept the nation in the beginning of 1994 we can see how tensions must have reached an all-time high.  The assertion that this was a genocide led to by the Hutu people against the Tutsi is not supported by the fact that nearly 5% of the entire Hutu population died.  What is more telling is the fact that the prevailing link between those who died, is that they were almost all landowners. 

Such devastation is truly saddening and hard to comprehend.  When I think of the face of genocide I think of people like Idi Amin (Uganda), Pol Pot (Cambodia) and Slobodan Milošević (Serbia) and it easy to think that bad people cause such tragedies, but Diamond really brings home just how serious mismanagement of the environment can be when stating, “it is not rare, even today, to hear Rwandans argue that a war is necessary to wipe out an excess of population and to bring numbers into line with the available land resources.”  This is the ultimate Malthusian nightmare and a truly haunting chapter that stuck with me for a long time.

While Diamond’s harrowing exploration of Rwanda’s circumstances unveiled the humanitarian consequences of mismanaging the environment, the comparison between the Dominican Republic and Haiti underscores just how deeply it can affect a nation’s economy.  The point is strikingly brought home by presenting these two nations who share one island.

Historically, Haiti had been the much richer and more powerful of the two island nations.  Unfortunately, the 20th century was marred for both countries as they suffered under oppressive dictators.  Haiti was ruled by Francois “Papa Doc” Duvallier from 1957 to 1971 and then by his son, Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvallier from 1971 to 1986.  Similarly, Rafael “El Jefe” Trujillo and then Joaquin Balaguer brutally ruled the Dominican Republic from 1930 to 1996.

While all four dictators cannot be commended for their perpetual abuse of human rights, it is interesting to note how the Dominican dictators’ approaches (primarily those of Balaguer) to the environment has left a stronger economy for two nations sharing extremely similar characteristics.  Only 1% of Haiti is still forested following the aggressive deforestation policy and accelerated use of charcoal advanced by the Duvalliers’ policy in order to continually prop up the economy in the short-term.  In contrast, 28% of the Dominican Republic remains forested due to Trujillo and Balaguer’s concentration on modernisation (building dams and hydro-electric facilities, though it is said that their motivations were purely political) and importing fuel.  The effect is astonishing:  the economy of the Dominic Republic is now five times larger than that of Haiti.  Haiti’s leadership has continually undermined its own ability by squandering its own resources and failing to come up with a long-term plan.

Lastly, Diamond inspects the most fragile environment in the First World, Australia, to underline how this is not a problem exclusive to Third World countries.  Australia is the most unproductive land continent in the world.  Australian soil is in a state of crisis, supporting the lowest nutrient levels and the slowest plant growth rate in the world.  This is because nutrient rich soil is created in one of three ways: volcanic eruptions, glacial movement or tectonic uplift, and none of these have occurred on Australian soil in thousands of years.  Consequently, its agriculture, forestry and fisheries are all becoming decreasingly competitive.  Coupled with the fact that Australia has traditionally traded with the West (despite its Eastern location) due to Colonial ties and suffers with geographic isolation, Australia’s agriculture is becoming less globally competitive and its land management is increasingly becoming a cycle of land clearance, investment, bankruptcy and abandonment.

Consequently, Australia is at a cross roads and must make some very difficult and personal decisions about how to move forward.  As Diamond states, “It would be a ‘first’ for the modern world if a government voluntarily decided to phase out much of its agricultural enterprise, in anticipation of future problems, before being forced in desperation to do so,” however, these are going to being discussions that will become increasingly prevalent as the 21st century progresses and Australia may very well set the tone.

Diamond argues that the development of public environmental concern and governmental countermeasures is accelerating, and rightly so.  Unfortunately, the development of environmental problems (as the modern examples of Rwanda, Haiti and Australia demonstrated) are accelerating exponentially.  Even in the fastest growing economy in the world, China, Diamond outlines the multitude of problems that may serve as their downfall: air pollution, soil erosion, soil salinization, disappearing wetlands, biodiversity loss, invasive species and megaprojects (and trust me, the list goes on).

In the end Diamond provides the poignant reminder that all societies (and therefore, economies) are built on the use of a mixture of renewable and non-renewable resources.  Consequently, we must seriously ask ourselves, where, in what amount and by what means we use these resources if we are to avoid (or at least prolong the time before) collapse.

Diamond provides a stark warning when he summarises that his analysis of past collapses has made him realise that, “a society’s steep decline may begin only a decade or two after the society reaches its peak numbers, wealth and power.”  The truly modern realisation is that Globalisation is a double edged sword.  While we have created networks in which we can better support each other, we have also exponentially sped up the pace at which we are working and decreased the time we have to react.

I will conclude by presenting a map showcased in the book (apologies for the quality) that depicts the world’s most politically troubled nations.  This is then followed by a map of the world’s most environmentally endangered countries.




The conclusions are so obvious I barely feel the need to comment.  What is left to say is that Collapse is a serious and thought-provoking book that raises a timely reminder that in a world of fast-paced, global competition, it is not worth winning in the short term if we sacrifice future generations.  All countries have a responsibility to plan long-term and must engender a willingness to reconsider core values if they are to avoid collapse.


Score: 75

No comments:

Post a Comment