The Politics of the Environment: Ideas, Activism, Policy, 2nd Edition

Green political thought

3.6 Greens and technology

Greens believe that thecontrol of technologyis

a prerequisite for effective environmental

protection. A suspicion of ‘high’ technology has

been a constant theme of modern

environmentalism, from Rachel Carson’s ( 1962 )

warnings about poisonous synthetic chemicals

and pesticides, through fears about nuclear

power, to contemporary concern about

genetically modified organisms. Greens

question the widespread assumption that

technological solutions will always be found to

environmental problems and that the benefits

of technology always outweigh its costs.

Greens are not simply Luddite opponents of

all forms of technological progress. They

recognise that some technologies, such as

medical advances, have dramatically improved

the quality of life. Some greens see modern

information technology playing a key role in a

green society characterised by small, high-tech

cottage industries, although others point out

that the production and use of these

technologies massively deplete resources and

generate pollution.

What all greens seek is greater democratic

control over the development and use of

technology. So, consistent with their

commitment to economic and political

decentralisation, greens would remove the

control of technology from central government

and big corporations and place it in the hands

of the community. Following the ideas of

Gandhi and Schumacher, they advocate wider

use of intermediate and appropriate

technologies, such as wind power and other

forms of renewable energy, which are

congruent with the needs, skills, culture and

environment of local communities.

and cutting pollution. Environmental damage from production can be min-
imised by using renewable resources, reusing goods, recycling materials and
adopting cleaner technologies.
Greens also believe that the rejection of the consumer society will improve
thequality of life because a society based on material acquisition is, at best,
undesirable, at worst, ethically wrong. As Trainer ( 1985 )putsit:‘Our main
problem is that most people hold the disastrously mistaken belief that afflu-
ence and growth are possible – and worse still that they are important. Our
chief taskistospreadtheunderstandingthat being able to buy and use
up more and more expensive things is hollow and senseless’ (p. 249). Fur-
thermore, in asociety dominated by the pursuit of economic growth and
consumption, there is little time for active citizen participation in the demo-
cratic activities of the polity (Barry1999a:175). Thus consumerism restricts
theopportunity for liberty and self-determination. On either count, greens
believe that any quantitative reduction in the overall material standard of
life in the sustainable economy will be more than compensated for by the
resulting benefits, both material, such as improved craftsmanship, healthier
food and safer communities, and ‘spiritual’ in terms of personal happiness,
individual fulfilment and a more co-operative society.
Greens are firmly committed to the ‘small is beautiful’ philosophy of Fritz
Schumacher ( 1975 ). The sheer size and complexity of large-scale produc-
tion and modern technologies damage the environment in many ways (see
Box3.6). For example, pollution is concentrated in one area so that ‘hotspots’