The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World

Cambridge University Press, , pp. Lomborg presents himself as a former member of Greenpeace who has become enlightened about the real, more upbeat state of the world through the work of the late economist Julian Simon and his own re-analysis of official data. An Associate Professor of Statistics in the Department of Political Science at the University of Aarhus, Denmark, Lomborg has published on game theory and computer simulations but admits to having no environmental expertise.

Individuals with such expertise have written detailed critiques of the substance of the book. Although he has done an impressive survey it is undermined by omissions, a failure to cite leading authority, and dubious analyses. Rather, it is a strawman that comes from diverse sources including public opinion polls, decades-old publications such as Silent Spring , 7 advocacy group websites, and popular magazines. He seems driven by a belief that environmentalists rule the world or have exclusive access to those who do. But one need only consider the environmental and energy policies of the sitting US president and vice president to realize that there must be more than one environmental litany going around.

Similarly, although Lomborg has suggestions about how a world not in the grips of the Litany should be run his answer, for the most part: In this way, Lomborg often presents matters no one actually disputes as if they were controversial, but misses related, longer-term, global issues e. Lomborg takes pains to highlight projections that have turned out to be off-the-mark and risks that have proved overestimated, and in general criticizes the precautionary principle, suggesting environmentalists use it to trump other social priorities.

Of course, further research clarifies uncertainties about risk—in both directions. Using statistical information from internationally recognized research institutes, Lomborg systematically examines Cambridge University Press Bolero Ozon.

Measuring the Real State of the World. Using statistical information from internationally recognized research institutes, Lomborg systematically examines a range of major environmental issues that feature prominently in headline news around the world, including pollution, biodiversity, fear of chemicals, and the greenhouse effect, and documents that the world has actually improved.

He supports his arguments with over footnotes, allowing readers to check his sources. Lomborg criticizes the way many environmental organizations make selective and misleading use of scientific evidence and argues that we are making decisions about the use of our limited resources based on inaccurate or incomplete information. Concluding that there are more reasons for optimism than pessimism, he stresses the need for clear-headed prioritization of resources to tackle real, not imagined, problems. The Skeptical Environmentalist offers readers a non-partisan evaluation that serves as a useful corrective to the more alarmist accounts favored by campaign groups and the media.

Lomborg points out that, given the amount of greenhouse gas reduction required to combat global warming, the current Kyoto protocol is grossly insufficient. He argues that the economic costs of legislative restrictions that aim to slow or reverse global warming are far higher than the alternative of international coordination.

1. Review: The Skeptical Environmentalist | Books | The Guardian?
2. The Skeptical Environmentalist | Bjorn Lomborg.
3. Saint Benny Strikes Again.
4. The Foot Soldier?
5. ;
6. Short Stories of the West!
7. Lamour à lépreuve du couple (Philosopher) (French Edition).

Moreover, he asserts that the cost of combating global warming would be disproportionately shouldered by developing countries. Lomborg proposes that since the Kyoto agreement limits economic activities, developing countries that suffer from pollution and poverty most, will be perpetually handicapped economically. Lomborg proposes that the importance of global warming in terms of policy priority is low compared to other policy issues such as fighting poverty, disease and aiding poor countries, which has direct and more immediate impact both in terms of welfare and the environment.

He therefore suggests that a global cost-benefit analysis be undertaken before deciding on future measures. The Copenhagen Consensus that Lomborg later organized concluded that combating global warming does have a benefit but its priority compared to other issues is "poor" ranked 13th and three projects addressing climate change optimal carbon tax, the Kyoto protocol and value-at-risk carbon tax , are the least cost-efficient of its proposals. Lomborg concludes his book by once again reviewing the Litany, and noting that the real state of the world is much better than the Litany claims.

• Symbiosis and Ambiguity: A Psychoanalytic Study (The New Library of Psychoanalysis)!
• Democracy Hijacked: How Foreign Nations are Using Our Own Political System Against Us!
• References.
• !

According to Lomborg, this discrepancy poses a problem, as it focuses public attention on relatively unimportant issues, while ignoring those that are paramount. In the worst case, The Skeptical Environmentalist argues, the global community is pressured to adopt inappropriate policies which have adverse effects on humanity, wasting resources that could be put to better use in aiding poor countries or fighting diseases such as AIDS.

Lomborg thus urges us to look at what he calls the true problems of the world, since solving those will also solve the Litany. The Skeptical Environmentalist was controversial even before its English-language release, with anti-publication efforts launched against Cambridge University Press. Once in the public arena, the book elicited strong reactions in scientific circles and in the mainstream media.

Opinion was largely polarized. Environmental groups were generally critical. The January issue of Scientific American contained, under the heading "Misleading Math about the Earth", a set of essays by several scientists, which maintain that Lomborg and The Skeptical Environmentalist misrepresent both scientific evidence and scientific opinion. The magazine then refused Lomborg's request to print a lengthy point-by-point rebuttal in his own defence, on the grounds that the 32 pages would have taken a disproportionate share of the month's installment. Scientific American allowed Lomborg a one-page defense in the May edition, [5] and then attempted to remove Lomborg's publication of his complete response online, citing a copyright violation.

The "separately written expert reviews" further detail the various expert opinions.

Account Options

Peter Gleick 's assessment, for example, states: Jerry Mahlman 's appraisal of the chapter he was asked to evaluate, states:. David Pimentel , who was repeatedly criticized in the book, also wrote a critical review. One critical article, "The Skeptical Environmentalist: A Case Study in the Manufacture of News", [14] attributes this media success to its initial, influential supporters:. The media was criticized for the biased selection of reviewers and not informing readers of reviewers' background.

Bell, writing for Worldwatch noted that the Wall Street Journal, "instead of seeking scientists with a critical perspective," like many publications "put out reviews by people who were closely associated with Lomborg", with the Journal soliciting a review from the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Ronald Bailey, someone "who had earlier written a book called The True State of the World, from which much of Lomborg's claims were taken.

It was hardly surprising that Dutton anointed Lomborg's book as 'the most significant work on the environment since the appearance of its polar opposite, Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, in It's a magnificent achievement. Some critics of The Skeptical Environmentalist took issue not with the statistical investigation of Lomborg's Litany, but with the suggestions and conclusions for which they were the foundation. This line of criticism considered the book as a contribution to the policy debate over environment rather than the work of natural science.

You've never had it so good

Kirby's first concern was not with the extensive research and statistical analysis, but the conclusions drawn from them:. On September 5, , at a Lomborg book reading in England, British environmentalist author Mark Lynas threw a cream pie in Lomborg's face. The December 12, issue of Grist devoted an issue to The Skeptical Environmentalist , [4] with a series of essays from various scientists challenging individual sections. A separate article examining the book's overall approach took issue with the framing of Lomborg's conclusions:.

Addressing the apparent difficulty of scientists opposing The Skeptical Environmentalist in criticizing the book strictly on the basis of statistics and challenging the conclusions about areas of environmental sciences that were drawn from them, Lynas contends:.

The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World ~ D0wnLoad PDF & Audio Book

Influential UK newsweekly The Economist weighed in at the start with heavy support, publishing an advance essay by Lomborg in which he detailed his Litany, and following up with a highly favorable review and supportive coverage. It stated that "This is one of the most valuable books on public policy—not merely environmental policy— to have been written for the intelligent general reader in the past ten years The Skeptical Environmentalist is a triumph. Among the general media, The New York Times stated that "The primary target of the book, a substantial work of analysis with almost 3, footnotes, are statements made by environmental organizations like the Worldwatch Institute, the World Wildlife Fund and Greenpeace.

His richly informative, lucid book is now the place from which environmental policy decisions must be argued.

Navigation menu

In fact, The Skeptical Environmentalist is the most significant work on the environment since the appearance of its polar opposite, Rachel Carson's Silent Spring , in The authors take the perspective of a court faced with an argument against hearing an expert witness in order to evaluate whether Lomborg was credible as an expert, and whether his testimony is valid to his expertise.

They classify the types of criticisms leveled at Lomborg and his arguments, and proceed to evaluate each of the reasons given for disqualifying Lomborg. They conclude that a court should accept Lomborg as a credible expert in the field of statistics, and that his testimony was appropriately restricted to his area of expertise. Of course, Professor Shoenbrod and Wilson note, Mr. Lomborg's factual conclusions may not be correct, nor his policy proposals effective, but his criticisms should be addressed, not merely dismissed out of hand.

The Union of Concerned Scientists and the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty raised concern about the responses of certain sections of the scientific community to a peer reviewed book published under the category of environmental economics. The groups worried that the receptions to Lomborg were a politicization of science by scientists. This unease was reflected in the involvement of the Union of Concerned Scientists and Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty in "When scientists politicize science: The use of science by scientists as a means of negotiating for desired political outcomes — the politicization of science by scientists — threatens the development of effective policies in contested issues.

By tying themselves to politics, rather than policy, scientists necessarily restrict their value and the value of their science. The Skeptical Environmentalist obviously should be held to high standards of accuracy, but to insist that it read like a scientific paper is both specious and disingenuous. The book is essentially a response to such popular environmentalist tracts as the State of the World report and the reams of misinformation disseminated by Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, the Union of Concerned Scientists, The Ecologist, the Turning Point Project, Grist, Wild Earth, and the rest of the sprawling eco-media propaganda complex.