Losing Ground: American Environmentalism at the Close of the Twentieth Century

by Mark Dowie

Book Overview

A recent history replete with compromise and capitulation has pushed a once promising and effective political movement to the brink of irrelevance. So states Mark Dowie in this provocative critique of... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0262041472
• Release Date: January 1995
• Publisher: Mit Pr
• Length: 400 Pages
• Weight: 1.48 lbs.
• Dimensions: 9.3" x 1.0" x 6.3"

Customer Reviews

What goes around, comes around.

Although this book is now 7 years old, it seems more relevant today than when Dowie wrote it. I keep hoping for a new, revised, edition. The elections of 2000 and 2002 have shown that the mainstream environmental organizations in the U.S. have lost most of their strength in the political arena. Despite major attempts to influence elections. . .the Senatorial race in Colorado for example. . .their efforts were either not effective or salient to the electorate. The Green Party seems to have filtered off those voters who are primarily concerned with environmental issues and most indications are that those voters are not impressed with the mainstream environmental establishment in the U.S. The Green Parties of Europe seem to be making a resurgence, but progress in the U.S. is not evident. Dowie's main critique is of the established, major environmental organizations; those groups who enjoyed so much growth during the Reagan era as a reaction to James Watt and others in the Reagan Cabinet. While Gale Norton is from the same mold as Watt, and Christy Todd Whitman is not far removed, they do not seem to be provoking the same degree of unrest among America's electorate. Arguable the Administration of George "5-4" W. Bush is even worse than Reagan Administration in Environmental Policy, and seem to be drifting even further since the 2002 elections. However the major environmental organizations do not seem to be able to focus attention, or perhaps interest, on this issue. The reason for that may be changing social and cultural norms, but it also may be due to the perception that these organizations are not relevant.Dowie's book may be a bit out-of-date, but it is well worth the read. I think Dowie was right in 1995 and his ideas still ring true today.

A good history of American environmentalism

I havn't read much about the history of environmentalism so when I saw this at a used bookstore I decided to pick it up. It gave a very good overview about how environmentalism progressed throughout the 20th century and the different groups involved. At the end the author gives his theory about where the environmental movement is heading in the future. Overall I would recommend it to anyone interested in environmental politics and the movement in general.

Good Points

I think Mark Dowie did a great job showing some problems of today. Even though I feel this book was meant to be read in the mid-1990s, Dowie's points are still valid. Dowie also showed how different groups that call themselves *environmentalists* have different areas of concern (not all are out to save the "cute fuzzy animals," but have other important concerns/issues).

Critique of mainstream's blindsiding of the environment.

Perhaps the greatest weakness of individual environmentalists and the environmental "movement" is the absence of public self-examination. While political insiders may clearly see the difference between the National Wildlife Federation and the Sierra Club, the public has few resources to gauge them. Opening the doors is author Mark Dowie, a champion of local activism and the integration of environmental issues with other social movements. Tracing the origins and bureaucratization of the environmental movement, Dowie criticizes the most recent surge of co-option, the "third wave" or economics-based environmentalism. "Regulatory flexibility and 'constructive engagement' with industry have created some business heroes, but they can be counted on one hand," he writes. "The rest, unfortunately, need to be regulated." This is not to say this book is a rant against environmental business. There are no heroes or villains in this book, which makes it a rarity in the environmental lexicon. Instead, Dowie criticizes the corporate structure of environmental groups, and portrays each organization with their individual merits and flaws. Compromising Local Leadership Dowie reminds readers of the decision by the Natural Resources Defense Council and Cultural Survival to negotiate with the Ecuadorian government over oil drilling in the Yasuni Reserve. Arguing that oil drilling would be inevitable, and "[w]ithout consulting the Huaorani people or the appropriate Ecuadorian environmental organizations, [NRDC's] Scherr and Kennedy struck a deal: Conoco could drill on the Huaoroni reserve in return for a $10-million donation to an Ecuadorian foundation created by NRDC and Cultural Survival, an indigenous-rights groups based in Cambridge, Massachusetts." The NAFTA debate saw essentially the same argument made: free trade is inevitable, so environmentalists have to go along and get what they can. NAFTA's "It's a win-win-win situation" argument was accepted by various environmental groups. In the long run, the agreement and side provisions may indeed provide resources and rewards for cross-border environmental planning. But Dowie draws back to review the consequences of increased commerce. "It should be clear to any environmental thinker that free trade can only lead to the globalization of massive, consumer- based economies that are, in the long run, whatever the legislated safeguards, ecologically destructive. But mainstream environmental officials evidently don't think a lot about the distant future. Like the corporations they have come to resemble, they tend to be occupied with the day-to-day imperatives of strategy, competition and survival." From a parochial viewpoint, it would have been interesting had Dowie included a critique of the way in which many D.C. groups finally "discovered" environmental problems along the border and how most of these organizations lost interest in the border after NAFTA passed. It would a

Critique of mainstream's blindsiding of the environment.

Perhaps the greatest weakness of individual environmentalists and the environmental "movement" is the absence of public self-examination. While political insiders may clearly see the difference between the National Wildlife Federation and the Sierra Club, the public has few resources to gauge them. Opening the doors is author Mark Dowie, a champion of local activism and the integration of environmental issues with other social movements. Tracing the origins and bureaucratization of the environmental movement, Dowie criticizes the most recent surge of co-option, the "third wave" or economics-based environmentalism. "Regulatory flexibility and 'constructive engagement' with industry have created some business heroes, but they can be counted on one hand," he writes. "The rest, unfortunately, need to be regulated." This is not to say this book is a rant against environmental business. There are no heroes or villains in this book, which makes it a rarity in the environmental lexicon. Instead, Dowie criticizes the corporate structure of environmental groups, and portrays each organization with their individual merits and flaws. Compromising Local Leadership Dowie reminds readers of the decision by the Natural Resources Defense Council and Cultural Survival to negotiate with the Ecuadorian government over oil drilling in the Yasuni Reserve. Arguing that oil drilling would be inevitable, and "[w]ithout consulting the Huaorani people or the appropriate Ecuadorian environmental organizations, [NRDC's] Scherr and Kennedy struck a deal: Conoco could drill on the Huaoroni reserve in return for a $10-million donation to an Ecuadorian foundation created by NRDC and Cultural Survival, an indigenous-rights groups based in Cambridge, Massachusetts." The NAFTA debate saw essentially the same argument made: free trade is inevitable, so environmentalists have to go along and get what they can. NAFTA's "It's a win-win-win situation" argument was accepted by various environmental groups. In the long run, the agreement and side provisions may indeed provide resources and rewards for cross-border environmental planning. But Dowie draws back to review the consequences of increased commerce. "It should be clear to any environmental thinker that free trade can only lead to the globalization of massive, consumer- based economies that are, in the long run, whatever the legislated safeguards, ecologically destructive. But mainstream environmental officials evidently don't think a lot about the distant future. Like the corporations they have come to resemble, they tend to be occupied with the day-to-day imperatives of strategy, co