A column about us, “Optimistic about our environmental future”, is syndicated in many newspapers across the country.
By MITZI PERDUE, Scripps Howard News Service
September 11, 2000
As director of the Program for the Human Environment at Rockefeller
University, Jesse Ausubel doesn’t have a lot of faith in man’s
capacity for sacrifice and responsibility. Nevertheless, he’s
optimistic about our environmental future.
We’ll get to the reasons for his optimism in a moment. But first, why
is he so pessimistic about changing human behavior?
“Human nature hasn’t changed much since biblical times,” he points
out. “We have to be very cautious in expecting abstinence or
self-control.”
And he goes on to remind us, “The seven deadly sins are still very
much with us today. It doesn’t matter whether we’re talking about the
president or a local auto mechanic, people are still driven by
avarice, envy, jealousy, pride and so on.”
In Ausubel’s view, there’s a biological reason why these kinds of
behaviors are difficult to change. It has to do with how our brains
are structured.
The most primitive part of our brains has structures and functions
that closely resemble a reptile’s brain. This reptilelike part
controls such things as self-preservation, aggression, patrolling
territory and displays of dominance or submission.
A second, less primitive, part of the human brain has a lot in common
with the brains of other mammals. This section controls emotions and
behaviors such as care of the young and mutual grooming.
The third and largest area of our brains, the neocortex, is the part
that makes humans unique. The neocortex makes possible intellectual
tasks such as reading, writing or abstract thinking.
Unfortunately, the reptilelike part of our brain is resistant to
change. It’s extremely difficult to change, for example, the instinct
for territoriality. The instinct to maximize territory, whether actual
territory or physical possessions, is deeply wired into our brains and
not easily satisfied. “Bill Gates may have $100 billion,” Ausubel
points out, “but he hasn’t run out of ideas on how to spend his
money.”
Ausubel can imagine a time when people may no longer have an innate
desire for space and mobility and possessions, but unfortunately, the
time scale for this could be a million years. He’d rather see us rely
on changing technology instead of hoping that the human brain will
change.
The good news is that technology is enabling us to have less impact on
the environment. For example, improved agricultural technology means
less land needs to be cultivated.
“If, during the next 60 to 70 years the world farmer reaches the
average yield of today’s USA corn grower, the 10 billion people likely
to live on Earth will need only half of today’s cropland.”
To show how this has already worked, he noted that since 1966 wheat
farmers in India have increased yields so much that they have been
able to save 50 million hectares of land from being plowed. That’s an
area equivalent to the size of Spain.
Or take energy production. “The total efficiency of the energy system,
from extracting a kilo of coal to the light it ultimately generates so
you can read Harry Potter, is only about 5 percent. We’re far from
the potential performance of what we could do,” he says.
Ausubel hopes that environmental engineers will help change technology
since our brains aren’t going to change anytime soon. If you know of a
young person who is looking for a career where he or she could make a
difference, why not suggest environmental engineering?
On the Net: https://phe.rockefeller.edu.
(Mitzi Perdue writes about environmentally related matters for Scripps
Howard News Service.)
SCRIPPS HOWARD NEWS SERVICE
1090 Vermont Ave. N.W. Suite 1000
Washington, D.C. USA 20005
GENERAL LINE: 1.202.408.1484
FAX: 1.202.408.5950