Environmental Management: Principles and practice

18
♦ The implications of human population
growth
19
♦ Limits to growth, sustainable development
and environmental ethics
22
♦ Environmental management: problems and
needs
25
♦ Recommended reading
27

---

18
In 1975 Sewell (1975:ix) felt the environmental manager should ‘be able to manipulate
both social institutions and appropriate technologies but must do this with the
sensitivity of an artist, the insights of a poet, and, perhaps, the moral purity and
determination of a religious zealot’.
The nature of environmental management
Environmental management is an approach to environmental stewardship which
integrates ecology, policy making, planning and social development. Its goals include:
♦
the prevention and resolution of environmental problems;
♦
establishing limits;
♦
establishing and nurturing institutions that effectively support environmental
research, monitoring and management;
♦
warning of threats and identifying opportunities;
♦
sustaining and, if possible improving, existing resources;
♦
where possible improving ‘quality of life’;
♦
identifying new technology or policies that are useful.
It is clear that these goals conceal a wealth of issues. Clearly, short-term goals must
be embedded within an overall vision (Dorney, 1989:5). Without overall vision it is
difficult to avoid fragmented decision making, or to adopt a long-term view, or to
prioritize and identify urgent tasks. Environmental management thus demands
‘scoping’ (deciding goals and setting limits on efforts) before acting. However, this
is often neglected.
Since the early 1970s popular texts have often published variants of ‘Laws of
Ecology’ (based on four ‘laws’ published by Commoner (1971) (environmental
management implications are in parenthesis):
1
Any intrusion into nature has numerous effects, many of which are unpredictable
(environmental management must cope with the unexpected).
2
Because ‘everything is connected’, humans and nature are inextricably bound
together; what one person does affects others (environmental management must
consider chains of causation, looking beyond the local and short term).
3
Care needs to be taken that substances produced by humans do not interfere
with any of the Earth’s biogeochemical processes (environmental management
must monitor natural processes and human activities to ensure no crucial
process is upset).

---

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FUNDAMENTALS
19
In recent years some environmental managers have begun to express their
overall vision and goals by publishing an environmental policy statement—to show
intent, identify priorities and principles, and give a sense of purpose. While this
informs the public, it does not guarantee sound environmental management.
Environmental managers must assume there is an optimum balance between
environmental protection and allowing human activities. Establishing where that
balance lies depends largely on ethics. Clark (1989) argued that at its core
environmental management asks two questions: (1) What kind of planet do we
want? (2) What kind of planet can we get? Even if agreement on an optimum
balance can be reached, the approach to environmental management goals can
take different paths.
Environmental management has not evolved in isolation: regional planners
often adopt a human ecology approach, other planners a systems analysis or an
ecosystem approach. For example, McHarg (1969) used river basins, and Doxiadis
(1977) tried to develop a science of planning settlement in balance with nature—
ekistics. Rapoport (1993:175) recognized two main groupings: those who adopt a
horticultural metaphor—Garden Earth—and those who prefer one that is more
technological—Spaceship Earth. The variety of challenges, and the fact that many
different actors are involved (e.g. the public, commercial interests, professions, local
and national government, special-interest groups, the voluntary sector), means that
in practice environmental managers often focus on a region, ecosystem, sector of
activity, or resource (Box 2.1).
Environmental managers may not achieve their objectives, might be criticized
(or sued), fall into disrepute with those who employ them, and lose public trust. So,
like most administrators, environmental managers are likely to follow risk-aversion
strategies, including:
♦
working to safe minimum standards;
♦
adopting sustainability constraints;
♦
following a ‘win-win’ or ‘least regrets’ approach (i.e. actions which seek
benefits whatever the outcome; actions which seek to reduce unwanted impacts,
respectively).
Effectively, these all conserve or protect the environment unless social costs are very
high. Following the precautionary principle is not costless. In many situations it has
high costs as some things have to be forgone to keep open escape options (Earll,
1992; Pearce, 1994:1337).