Dear ECOLOG Colleagues.
The content/theory discussion about the economic
growth statement has been interesting so far.
Let me provide some other thoughts and
information to consider in terms of strategy for
adoption of whatever visionary statement we might
want to achieve. (I am one of the Czech group.)
First, the ESA committee that is considering the
economic growth statement is the Pubic Affairs
Committee. From the ESA webpage, the committee
members are:
Rich Pouyat (2005-2008), Chair and ESA VP of Public Affairs
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Patricia Bonito (2004-2007)
David Lodge (2004-2007)
Christy Johnson (2003-2006)
Ann Kinzig (2004-2007)
Jianguo "Jack" Liu (2004-2007)
Robert Manson (2004-2007)
Evan Notman (2004-2007)
Thomas Sick (2004-2007)
ex-officio:
Nadine Lynn, Annie Drinkard, Laura Lipps
I assume Christy Johnson has rotated off and has
been replaced by someone else by now. Not sure
about the others. Clearly the website is out of
date. Pouyat should still be VP for PA until the
end of this year's annual meeting in Wisconsin.
I wouldn't start carpet bombing the committee
with emails yet, but I would suggest that if any
of you know these folks personally, you might ask
them if they are still on the committee or if
they know who their replacements were. (Or if
you are one of the committee members, you might
enlighten us...)
Second, one concern that ESA governing board will
likely have is that a statement calling for
strong curbs on economic growth and consumption
will be unpalatable to membership in developing
nations. ESA is, after all, trying to expand its
reach outside of the USA (as it should IMO). Of
course, this potential concern overlooks the fact
that growth can come from increased consumption
or from increased population. To that end, any
final statement should address both issues. But
we should keep in mind the top priority with a
position on economic growth: ESA will accomplish
a good deal by simply describing the conflict
between economic growth and environmental
protection, without necessarily getting into
details on policy reforms. Before any policy
reforms are possible, ecologically unfounded
"win-win" political rhetoric must be thoroughly
debunked. Ideally though, both the conflict and
basic policy reforms should be addressed, and I
would suggest that our colleagues from developing
nations that are ESA members contact Pouyat
directly and tell him that you DO support the
statement. If you are an ESA member, please
indicate so. Concurrently, I agree with the
comments posted previously that it is best to
focus "at home" and ensure that the economic
growth/consumption issues are well explained and
addressed in a tactful but straightforward manner
without mincing words and leaving the door open
for misinterpretation.
Finally, the proposing group has requested
representation on the committee. In my reading
of the ESA constitution and by laws, it appears
to me that the committee chair can add members to
the committee to consider specific issues. It
may be helpful for the broader ESA community also
to request that the proposing group be
represented on the committee.
Cheers,
--
Dr. Skip J. Van Bloem
Depto Agronomía y Suelos
Universidad de Puerto Rico
PO Box 9030
Mayagüez, PR 00681-9030
USA
Phone:
O: 787-832-4040 x 2218 (my office, shared with another professor)
x 3899, 2442, 3851 Department office for messages
F: 787-833-7765 or 787-265-3851
Or Skype: username vanbloem
