Customer Reviews

Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train: Errant Economists, Shameful Spenders, and a Plan to Stop Them All

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

It is a curiosity of modern economic thought that some people--Brian Czech identifies them as "neoclassical" economists, led in part by the late Julian Simon--think there is no end to economic growth. When I first became aware of this idea some years ago I dismissed it out of hand along with what I saw as a couple of similar delusions, that of perpetual population growth and an ever-increasing agricultural yield. But maybe the seemingly impossible is possible after all!

To get right to the heart of the matter--which Czech does after noting that economic growth is a national goal; that is, a political and (one might say) an emotional goal somewhat in the manner of "manifest destiny" from the nineteenth century--we need to ask why Simon (and other respected economists) think that such a fantastic thing as perpetual economic growth is possible.

First they start with "substitutability," the idea that when we run short of some resource another will be developed or otherwise come along to take the place of the now scare resource. Thus plastic replaces wood; coal will replace oil, wind power and mirrors in space will replace coal, and farmed fish will take the place of the wild variety. Second, there is the notion that the efficiency of engines and other technological developments will increase endlessly. And third, there is the relatively new idea of "human capital," a kind of fuzzy--one is tempted to say mystical--belief that human intelligence, education and knowledge will just keep right on growing and growing and growing, getting more and more from less and less.

Perhaps these guys never heard of entropy or diminishing returns--or they think that such things are so far in the future that they needn't be mentioned. I suppose somewhere along the way the neoclassicists do recognize that in the very long run even the universe will grow cold, and economic growth will become but a faint and very distant cosmic whisper.

What Czech observes, as he convincingly destroys Simon's perpetual growth arguments as Simon articulated them in The Ultimate Resources 2 (1996), is that "Eventually they will recharge their arguments...by resorting to the topic of space travel" (p. 44)--meaning that if we run out of resources on earth, we'll just go to the moon, to Mars, to Alpha Centauri!

So what Julian L. Simon and the others are really saying is not clear. What is clear is that they want no limits on economic growth, and they especially do not like to hear sob stories about what we are doing to the environment in pursuit of an ever expanding economy. But what Brian Czech does in this sprightly tome is throw a kind of Niagra Falls flood of water on America's love affair with what he calls "liquidation"--that is, the liquidation of natural capital for present consumption to the impoverishment of future generations.

As others have pointed out he does a good job of demolishing what he dubs "the Ptolemaic theory of perpetual economic growth" (p. 51) in favor of "a more Copernican economics...in which economic growth is limited." (p. 49) He calls this new paradigm, "steady state economics" or "ecological economics," in which the natural resources of the planet are not wantonly wasted and destroyed by greedy "liquidators" bent only on self-gratification and status display, but instead maintained by more frugal steady-staters seeking self-actualization as their primary goal in life. This recall of psychiatrist Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs fits right in with Czech's hope for a sustainable economy since self-actualization need not require more fuel than the planet has.

What Czech does not do well is convince this reader that his steady state plan has a snowball's chance in the boiler room of his runaway train of becoming the accepted paradigm before we use up most of the world's non-renewable resources. What with the acquisitive nature of the human animal (which Czech delineates very well in his portrait of the "Liquidating Class") and the need of corporations and government leaders to go from "ups to upper ups" economically-speaking (to recall Lucy's words in the Peanuts comic strip), there is little prospect that conservation-minded individuals will have enough influence to stop the train before it crashes.

What is terrible about this--and this is what Czech is warning us about--is that it will be our grandchildren who will pay the price as the rain forests turn to burgers and the ocean's fisheries to a whopping fish story in the memory of the last fisherman. What kind of world will it be? I don't think that the Bush administration and the present political leaders of most of the world really care. They see it as somebody else's problem downstream. Czech's optimism that the train can be stopped seems like so much whistling Dixie in the dark.

I think the deeper issue here is that of the capitalist/corporate economic system itself. Capitalism defeated communism, and we can say hurrah for that. But can a planet with finite resources survive an economic system that seems to function well only when it is spiraling upward? Since capitalism is the current paradigm, to suggest that it needs replacing amounts to something like blasphemy. Consequently Czech does not target capitalism per se. After all he has a career and a reputation to consider. However, I have neither to worry about, and I can say it: capitalism as an economic system is becoming a cancer on the planet. Perhaps the system that will replace it (still awaiting its genius) will build on Czech's steady state ideas.

Czech, a wildlife biologist who later did post-graduate work in economics, provides an interesting analysis and critique of the concept of economic growth in the U.S. He challenges the notion that economic growth can continue unabated, as all resources, however abundant at one point, are finite, and all economic activity, down to the most tertiary of service sectors, depends to some extent on production (use, consumption, processing of natural resources). He also quite plausibly refutes an argument often made by economists who support the growth theory that lower prices of raw materials or resources bascially mean an abundance thereof (often it simply means that extraction or labor costs have gone down). Like any good ecologist, he also stresses that market costs of a given economic activity rarely reflect the real cost to things like the potable water supply, air quality, etc. Czech also introduces some interesting new terms to environmental economic parlance, such as economic bloating as a substitute for economic growth, or `liquidating class' to refer to that section of the population that consumes conspicuously and needlessly. Czech calls for a transition to a zero-growth or steady-state economy (hardly a new concept) which does not entail dismantling or even radically changing the current capitalist system. The main problem is that this requires a major attitude change, nothing short of a revolution, in the way people think about the economy, growth and the future (if they do at all). While some of the conclusions about how this can be achieved are questionable, this is generally a very thought-provoking book. Czech does a good job of blending economic theory with his knowledge of the natural sciences, and making it all quite readable and understandable. If you can get past his constant use of the rather annoying rhetorical device about "the grandkids," this is a very worthwhile read.

There are some very harsh truths in this book, in which a very thoughtful Conservation Biologist takes on the very hard challenge of defining a political and economic model that is survivable.

From his early doctrine of "competitive exclusion" (one species can benefit only at the expense of others) to his methodical and progressive dismantling of economic growth as an unquestioned political goal, of the prevailing economic theories as being totally insane (efficiency does not prevent the depletion of natural capital from a limited earth), to his sensible and moral and provocative outlining of the ecological economics (or the economics of environmental survival), this is a book that teaches and this is a man I would trust to counsel a future President....

This book will appeal to anyone who considers himself or herself a Cultural Creative, and I hope it appeals to the "silent majority" that could yet make a difference in "political economy." Whether we save the Earth for future generations boils down to this: are the citizens of the various nations, the employees of the various corporations, prepared to think for themselves? Are they prepared to join the global grid of free thinkers and cyber-advocates that are finding that the Internet is the lever that will move the world and empower the people once again? The author argues, in a compelling, academically sound and morally encouraging way, that America above all nations finds itself in a new civil war, a war between the "liquidating class" and the "steady state" class.

Besides citizens, this book will provoke and enlighten venture fund managers, political action campaign managers, and leaders of any organization. Others have certainly been down this road, the Club of Rome being especially noteworthy as an early attempt to establish trade-off values, but I believe this gentle, capable professional (with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Refugees) has written a timely book that is in its own way the "Silent Spring" of this generation. Perhaps more to the point, he makes it clear that all environmental issues, all economic issues, are inherently political, and we the voters have a choice in every election: between the candidate indebted to corporate carpetbaggers, and the candidate beholden to the people.

Brian Czech is a wildlife bioligist by profession and it is interesting that he should choose to write this book on the topic of steady-state economics. He notes in the prologue that his epiphany came while on a trawling boat in the Bering Sea. He wondered how the ship could hold the enormous catch it was bringing in until it dawned on him that the fish were being caught for their roe and then pumped out to sea "as a sort of ichthyological hamburger." It was the beginning of the realisation that the real roots of environmental destruction lay in economic growth and that if he wanted to save the forests and wildlife that he loved he would have to work on the challenging the assumptions of neo-classical economics.

Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled "The Runaway Train" and it details the problems with economic growth and neo-classical economics and gives an overview of ecological economics. The second part is entitled "Stopping the Train" and it details Czech's model for a "Steady State Revolution" which would transform the growth economy to a steady state economy.

Czech does an exceptional job of explaining the problems of neo-classical economics and its obsession with growth. He cleverly redefines economic growth as "economic bloating" and he avoids bogging the reader down with technical terms. This makes the book accessible and interesting to readers of all backgrounds.

He argues that there is need for a Copernican revolution in the world view of neo-classical economists. "Only when we have a more Copernican economics will economists live in a world in which economic growth is limited, where the rest of us common folk are already stuck," Czech writes. Just as the universe does not revolve around the world, neither can limitless economic growth occur in a finite world. Indeed Czech rightly points out that this is simply common sense, but he is also aware of the power of the paradigm and also the power of politics which both seek to maintain the status quo.

In the last chapter of part one Czech introduces ecological economics. The chapter is entitled "Copernicus, are you out there?" which again alludes to the need for a paradigm shift. He notes that many of the great discoveries in science have been made by people working outside their field. This is because they work with fewer assumptions and "do not suffer the tunnel vision of the paradigm." This is the reason why many of those who challenge the economic growth model come from a background in the physical and biological sciences.

It is also noted that the contribution of scientists alone to ecological economics is not sufficient. Those devoted to the study of economics still have an important role to play for it is they who truly understand the nuances of what makes an economy work. It is here that the work of Daly and others is significant.

Having spelled out the problem and given an overview of the solution, Czech delivers his manifesto for a "steady state revolution" in part two of the book. He asserts that there is a need for "nothing less than a revolution, a social revolution to match the academic revolution of ecological economics." (p. 111)

The target of Czech's revolution is over consumption or more specifically what he defines as conspicuous consumption. This is the indulgences of the very rich which go way beyond any kinds of need.

The steady state revolution is based on a radical definition of the classes (although it should be noted it has nothing to do with Marxism). Three new classes are defined-the liquidating class, the amorphic class and the steady state class.

There are some interesting reasons for targeting the super rich and perhaps one of the best ones is that a vastly disproportionate share of the additional wealth created by economic growth goes to those in the liquidating and amorphic classes. This statistic is interesting: "The average income of the 80 percent of Americans who are non-managerial has declined over the past twenty years." Another interesting statistic is that "approximately 99 percent of the annual increase in American's wealth goes to the 20 percent that is most wealthy.

While I see there are some problems with Czech's idea for a steady state revolution they do not really detract that much from the book overall. Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train is an engaging read and provides much food for thought. It is a welcome addition to the body of literature that explore alternatives to the current economic system.

If you have the least interest in the direction that the USA is headed ecologically and economically, this book is a must read. Czech has taken a politically charged, difficult subject and turned it into an adventure in creative solutions. With skill and wit that make entertaining and delightful reading, he takes on a serious problem and hands it not to the politicians, economists, or powerful of the world - but to us, the everyday folk who have to live with their decisions. If I were a teacher, I would make this required reading for every student, and as a parent I've passed it on to my kids. Oh - and if you have NO interest in the direction that we are headed - then I suggest you buy two copies. One for yourself, and one for your grandkids.

Written by a wildlife biologist whose personal history is a fascinating patchwork of educational pursuits and jobs that have taken him into cities and wildernesses, as well as onto the high seas, the reader gets the feeling that this book was written from convictions borne in personal experience and verified by academia.

Czech addresses the most pervasive and threatening problem of the modern world - our consumerism. This problem is so large and so intimately woven into the fabric of our society that it is easy to get discouraged by it. Czech offers a solution and a reason to feel optimistic, a plan for a nonviolent revolution in public opinion that will stop conspicuous consumption.

"Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train" is written in popular style, accessible and interesting for the reader who may have studied economics at one time in their life and either detested or forgot it. Anyone concerned about the unsustainable extraction of natural resources should read this book; it offers an effective alternative to the impossible task of inducing restraint among capitalists in a global marketplace.

Czech's treatise on the steady-state revolution should give pause to anyone who is concerned about the future our younger generations will inherit. Other alternative economic paradigms have been proposed, but few are as relevant to long-term sustainability. After reading Shoveling Fuel, one cannot help but stop chanting the perpetual growth mantra at least temporarily.

I started reading "Shovelling Fuel..." again as soon as I finished it to be sure I got every detail! This is a fun and easy read that puts any textbook on economics to shame; and it's 100 times more compelling! Ironically, I covered the last two chapters while sipping an eggnog latte at Starbucks in Seattle's uppity University Village. As a steady-stater I wanted to be amongst our country's finest amorphs and liquidators for Czech's inspirational closing call-to-arms for the environment and our grandchildren.

Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train will educate, enlighten, and even entertain you --- an accomplishment for any book, but an especially notable achievement when you consider that this is a book about economics.

This is a book that will forever change your perspective of the world in which we live. It works kind of like "Find the Hidden Picture" in the children's magazine, Highlights: at first you don't see the shoe, the spoon and the puppy, but once you discover them, there is no way to stop seeing them. In the tradition of New World, New Mind by Robert Ornstein and Paul Ehrlich, Shoveling Fuel takes us past the point of no return on the road of increased awareness.

Specifically Brian Czech teaches us the fallacy of neoclassical economics, explaining that our pursuit of the illogical and predictably elusive goal of constant and infinite economic growth will result in devastating consequences to be paid by generations to come. Czech makes this a little more personal by referring to the generations who will pay the piper for our foolishness as "the grandkids."

Czech outlines a new economics, what he calls "steady state economics," and he explains himself so clearly that even a guy who can't balance a checkbook (like me) can understand.

As a psychotherapist and writer of social/political commentary I love what Czech has to say about how the necessary changes must come as a result of social, rather than political, revolution --- his term is "a revolution of public opinion." Translation: the politicians who are supposed to represent us will not change until we do.

I am inspired by what Czech has to say on this subject because I believe that his thinking is applicable to issues even broader than the economy. The lesson essentially is that if we don't invest the time and effort into thinking through the big issues of the day, those found under the umbrella of globalization, we might as well start preparing to hand over a complete mess --- our train wreck --- to "the grandkids."

Read this book. You won' be sorry. You will be smarter --- no, you will be more enlightened.

- Thom Rutledge, author of Embracing Fear (HarperSanFrancisco)

This book is an excellent introduction to the steady state economy. The idea of the steady state economy has been around for decades, but I think it may finally be gaining some traction (note the recent appearance of an article by ecological economist Herman Daly in Scientific American).

Czech is a lively writer. I especially liked the chapter giving responses to the cornucopian Julian Simon's arguments. Part of the problem I see with modern environmentalism is that it spends nearly all of its time preaching to the converted, with the result that evidence and arguments against truly wrongheaded ideas don't get properly developed. This book takes on the best arguments that the mainstream economists have to offer, and demolishes them. Bravo!

I appreciated Czech's suggestion to use the phrase "economic bloating" instead of economic growth. Words do count in this kind of high-stakes contest.

Czech's ideas about using social disapproval to influence the consumption habits of the top 1% of society (the liquidating class) are interesting. I like the fact that it puts the influence of women on public opinion front and center. Whether it will really work or not, I'm not sure, but it might be worth trying.

Czech talks about investment being bad because it will just waste more. I don't agree with this. I think the problem is that due to the enormous externalities in our economic system, resources are not being allocated correctly. This is what causes the waste, not investment as such. Investment in something that will provide long-lasting benefits or help in the conversion to a steady-state economy is GOOD, not bad. Czech also contrasts "bad" investment with "good" contributions to charity. I think he is correct that charity is more likely to benefit society, but this is not always true. Some charities engage in poorly-thought-out schemes that only encourage population growth beyond what an area can sustain. This helps no one in the long run.