Common Wealth: common thinking.

I just got through Jeffrey Sachs' new book, Common Wealth - Economics for a Crowded Planet, and I am beginning to struggle with what I have learned about Sachs in the process. Before I explain why, I should say that I don't mean to detract from any of Sachs' beautiful work at The Earth Institute. On many levels, his organization is a model for academic think tanks to follow. THAT SAID, a number of his major focal points coincidentally align with big lobby interests. In so doing, he has me becoming increasingly convinced that he is keeping alive a strange brand of environmentalism that I apparently mistook for dead when Michael Crichton passed late last year (Crichton, for instance, being a very vocal proponent of distributing DDT to developing countries because, according to Crichton, the cost-benefit was there). As the medical doctor that he was, I can't really put it together why Crichton lacked a true systems approach in his otherwise humanitarian thinking. Sachs, on the other hand, speaks to the fundamental importance of systems in the opening chapters of his book, but I am not terribly persuaded that he's a true practitioner of this kind of thought.

Throughout his book, Sachs speaks to the necessity to develop and deploy controversial technologies, including genetically engineered seed varieties, clean coal and nuclear energy. Sure, these are exemplary solutions if the goal is to evoke incremental change. But, as part of an organization such as The Earth Institute where its mission is to promote many of the Millennium Development Goals, I question why these types of patch jobs are part of the discussion. You can't push biodiversity with one hand and GMO with the other...