ENV 5203-Global

Environmental
Issues, Policy and
Negotiation
FARIHA TAHSIN MERCY
ID: 2153381043
SILENT SPRING
Silent Spring is an environmental science book by Rachel Carson, published on September 27, 1962,
documenting the adverse environmental effects caused by the indiscriminate use of pesticides. Carson
accused the chemical industry of spreading disinformation, and public officials of accepting the
industry's marketing claims unquestioningly.
Silent Spring questioned the safety of pesticide use in the United States. The most famous pesticide at
the time was DDT, a chemical that had saved millions of lives in World War II from insect-borne
disease and was thought to be safe.
 It was found that DDT was poisoning birds and represented a real threat to humans as well.

The book states that Carson was not against the use of chemicals altogether; rather, she thought the
chemical industry was pushing their overuse for its economic gain, at the expense of health and the
environment.
 What are the impact of chemical
use in field?
It articulates the impacts of widespread chemical use for insect and plant control. The
writer emphasizes the ways that humans disregard the interrelation of species on earth,
and argues that as a result, humans are at a critical moment. If methods of insect control
are not adjusted, humans will likely poison both the environment and their bodies
beyond repair.
The chemicals most widely used as pesticides have far-reaching effects. Further, a wide
range of cases were documented in which these pesticides do not achieve their intended
purpose. As Carson illustrates the numerous failed or damaging examples of chemical
pest control, she develops the argument that it is unreasonable to continue attempting to
use these methods to control plants, animals, and insects.
Why pesticides should not be
used?
The reasons for this are manifold-
First, through the use of these chemical compounds, the environment is often weakened,
damaging other relationships and eventually causing widespread harm.
Second, humans are often impacted either firsthand or indirectly by these chemicals,
causing diseases, including cancer, and often leading to death for people who are in
frequent contact with chemicals.
Finally, the use of chemicals to control insect populations often leads to the resurgence of
those very populations, so all of the damage done is not justifiable by an end to the means.
TRAGEDY OF THE COMMON
Garrett Hardin's 1968 essay "The Tragedy of the Commons" argues overpopulation is depleting
the earth's resources. He warns without countermeasures, humans are doomed to misery.
In the article Hardin reports that open resources such as game animals or rivers, “commons”, will
be destroyed due to natural human selfishness by the individual.
Tragedy of the commons is often cited in connection with sustainable development, meshing
economic growth and environmental protection, as well as in the debate over global warming. It
has also been used in analyzing behavior in the fields of economics, evolutionary psychology,
anthropology, game theory, politics, taxation, and sociology.
 . Example
In 1833, economist William Forster Lloyd used the
example of farmers sharing a piece of land for grazing.
If one farmer makes the economically rational
decision to add cattle to his herd, the others lose out. If
all the farmers make this decision, the resource will be
depleted much faster and everyone loses out.
Examples of tragedies of the commons in modern
society, such as overfishing, noise pollution, visual
pollution, and atmospheric pollution.
What is the core problem?

The core of the problem is that unregulated human breeding is considered a human
right. He criticizes both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for enshrining this
idea and the welfare state for enabling parents to have as many children as they desire
without real consequences. Combining this freedom to breed with the freedom to use
common resources is a recipe for catastrophe.
If there are no controls or limits in place for the use of a common resource, people will take
advantage of this for selfish gain until it is depleted.
What Shall We Maximize?
Hardin argues we must assume the world's resources are finite so we can work toward a solution,
and he rejects colonization of other planets as an option. He next challenges the belief the earth's
resources have the capacity to support still more people. Hardin argues there is a difference
between maximum and optimum population. Maximum population simply means having as
many people on Earth as possible. Optimum population implies a level of quality of life. The
more people there are, the fewer nutritional and natural resources there are per person.
Supporting the maximum population means surrendering the possibility of pleasure, leisure, or
any other activity beyond basic survival.
Concluding Remarks

In Conclusion an individual acts with selfish motives and utilizes resources –
often excessively – that belong to a bigger group. In time, the more often the
process is repeated, the more damage that is done and the more people who are
affected. Depending on the resources being overused, the long-term effects can
be felt on a massive, even global, scale.