Published in the Stanford Environmental Law Journal Vol. 20, p.305. Copyright (c) 2001 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University Stanford Environmental Law Journal

---

Something New Under the Sun is a fascinating historical journey that traces the evolution of human impact on the environment during the twentieth century. Author J.R. McNeill argues that twentieth century social, political, economic, and intellectual factors have changed the relationship between humankind and the environment. Professor McNeill develops his argument in two parts. In Part One: The Music of the Spheres, the author analyses the historical evolution of all the ‘spheres’ that surround us - the lithosphere, pedosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere and biosphere - and shows how human action has impacted each. The author also reviews the history of soil, air, and water pollution, climate change, drying wetlands, and land use. McNeill then traces the ways in which human activities have affected the various spheres.

On strength in Professor McNeill's analysis is the specific attention paid to how geographic regions have reacted to human actions. For example, the author outlines the experience of Los Angeles, where air pollution results from the combination of natural factors, such as the daily sea breezes blowing the previous day's pollution back over the city, and political and economic factors, such as the city's reliance on automobiles.[fn1] He then contrasts this situation with that of Mexico City, where air pollution is the consequence of the interaction between the centralizing ambitions of the leadership installed by the Mexican Revolution, and the city's conversion to motorized transportation.[fn2]

In Part Two: Engines of Change, Professor McNeill focuses his analysis on the social, economic, political, and intellectual preferences and patterns that caused the unprecedented environmental changes described in Part One. One particularly interesting section of Part Two was McNeill's description of the effects of social and intellectual forces on the environment. For example, in Italy, Mussolini favored small-scale forestation, believing that such a program would make Italy colder and thus make Italians more warlike.[fn3] [*306] In the USSR, the push towards collective agriculture created huge fields resulting in wind and soil erosion.[fn4] However, more important was the absence of consideration of the environment in intellectuals’ and economists’ thinking. Not until the 1970s, with the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, did environmentalism emerge as an 'antidote' to economic growth.

At this point, it was too late. Due to the actions of humans in the last century, the governing conditions had irreversibly changed. Our society, "patterns of thought, behavior, production, and consumption are adapted to our current circumstances."[fn5] But humans cannot assume that the environment is stable. Like rats and sharks, humans can adapt to changes in the environment. While the rat strategy is to pursue diverse sources of subsistence, the shark strategy is to use only one type of resource. Rats, therefore, can adjust to changed circumstances, but sharks may only be suited to the current circumstances. Traditionally, humans followed the rat strategy, but in the twentieth century "societies often pursued the shark strategy amid a global ecology ever more unstable, and hence more suited for rats." [fn6] The shark strategy is not necessarily bad, but it is effective only as long as circumstances do not change. In McNeill's view, our preferences and behavioral patterns are not easily adaptable should environmental circumstances change, and the order of many societies is probably at risk, even if the biological success of the human species is not.

J.R. McNeill's message is not that environmental changes are bad. Instead, the author warns that our society, and especially the United States - which has been built on cheap energy - is at risk, at least in its social and economic stability. The shark strategy, he warns, is not a good strategy for the future.

The author's message is powerful and constructive. His approach is dispassionate, balanced, and objective. The book is exhaustively researched and carefully written. Apart from the culturally fascinating approach, the compelling arguments, and the constructive message, one of the strengths of the book is the open declaration of its limits. Thus, the reader will not look for analysis outside of the declared scope of the research. The book is anthropocentric, addressing only ecological changes caused by [*307] human actions. Moreover, the book focuses on areas where significant changes occurred, ignoring those that demonstrate continuity. Finally, the author refrains from evaluating the changes themselves, but instead focuses on their effects.

Although technical, the presentation of the material is always accessible. Explanatory charts and photographs are added to the text to highlight some of the key points of the book. Step by step, the reader is guided into the complexity of the forces that affect the environment. Although the book provides an extensive bibliography, the text may have fewer footnotes and references than expected by researchers, and so it may be a less appealing source.

All things considered, these weaknesses do not change the fact that Professor McNeill's work is a positive contribution to the literature. The book is a very helpful reading for environmentalists, economists, and policymakers, who can benefit from its multidisciplinary evaluation of human effects on the environment.

FOOTNOTES:

n1. See pp. 72-73.

n2. See p. 77.

n3. See p. 329.

n4. See p. 333.

n5. P. xxii.

n6. P. xxiii.