32
GERALD L. YOUNG
is the notion that there is a fundamental contradiction between economic growth and the quality of life as expressed, for instance, by
environmentalists and conservationists. It is true that there is, a t least
in America, a deep faith in economic growth as a fundamental part of
the American Dream. Every American hopes for a better life; and as he
strives to attain it, faith in the value of economic growth becomes a
sacred assumption. “TO question it is to threaten the American dream
itself.” President Nixon in his first state of the union address reaffirmed
his belief in economic growth: “Continued vigorous economic growth
provides us with the means to enrich life itself and to enhance our planet
as a place hospitable to man”. Ecologists used to cycles of growth that
repeatedly increase, level off, and then decrease, only to increase once
again, question this assumption so basic to American economic theory.
Ecologists have long accepted the impact of the limits of a system on the
growth within the system as well as the impact of externalities; economists, such as those noted above, are beginning to accept the same
limitations and are starting to strive toward realistic measures of limits
and of externalities. To accomplish the integration of such ideas into the
mainstream of economic thought is to accomplish a closer parallel of
economics and ecology, if not an actual integration.
5. Geography as human ecology
A rather erratic ecological tradition exists in geography, but one that
can be traced back into antiquity, as far back as the earliest of the Greek
geographers. The German geographer, Alexander von Humboldt, stated
in 1807 that “in the great chain of causes and effects no thing and no
activity should be regarded in isolation”, an early recognition of the
(eco)system concept. Many other instances of the notion if not the name
can be isolated. The antiquity of the concept is noted (even though it is
contemporary geography that is of concern here) only to substantiate
the claim that geography’s environmental-ecological tradition is very
ancient indeed.
The erraticism is admittedly stronger than the tradition but there has
been, recently, a resurgence of interest in ecology by geographers.
Zelinsky (1970) has labeled the need for an ecological approach in
geography as self-evident, an axiom needing no defense. He “unabashedly subscribes” to the “idea of the ecosystem as an entirely new
social philosophy . . . of supreme importance in all our calculations . . .
productive especially in reaching optimal decisions for maintaining
viable [human] habitats in the immediate future”. Even Brian Berry
(1964), the supreme advocate of an almost environmental-less central
place theory, has claimed that “geography’s integrating concepts and
processes concern the world-wide ecosystem of which man is the
GERALD L. YOUNG
is the notion that there is a fundamental contradiction between economic growth and the quality of life as expressed, for instance, by
environmentalists and conservationists. It is true that there is, a t least
in America, a deep faith in economic growth as a fundamental part of
the American Dream. Every American hopes for a better life; and as he
strives to attain it, faith in the value of economic growth becomes a
sacred assumption. “TO question it is to threaten the American dream
itself.” President Nixon in his first state of the union address reaffirmed
his belief in economic growth: “Continued vigorous economic growth
provides us with the means to enrich life itself and to enhance our planet
as a place hospitable to man”. Ecologists used to cycles of growth that
repeatedly increase, level off, and then decrease, only to increase once
again, question this assumption so basic to American economic theory.
Ecologists have long accepted the impact of the limits of a system on the
growth within the system as well as the impact of externalities; economists, such as those noted above, are beginning to accept the same
limitations and are starting to strive toward realistic measures of limits
and of externalities. To accomplish the integration of such ideas into the
mainstream of economic thought is to accomplish a closer parallel of
economics and ecology, if not an actual integration.
5. Geography as human ecology
A rather erratic ecological tradition exists in geography, but one that
can be traced back into antiquity, as far back as the earliest of the Greek
geographers. The German geographer, Alexander von Humboldt, stated
in 1807 that “in the great chain of causes and effects no thing and no
activity should be regarded in isolation”, an early recognition of the
(eco)system concept. Many other instances of the notion if not the name
can be isolated. The antiquity of the concept is noted (even though it is
contemporary geography that is of concern here) only to substantiate
the claim that geography’s environmental-ecological tradition is very
ancient indeed.
The erraticism is admittedly stronger than the tradition but there has
been, recently, a resurgence of interest in ecology by geographers.
Zelinsky (1970) has labeled the need for an ecological approach in
geography as self-evident, an axiom needing no defense. He “unabashedly subscribes” to the “idea of the ecosystem as an entirely new
social philosophy . . . of supreme importance in all our calculations . . .
productive especially in reaching optimal decisions for maintaining
viable [human] habitats in the immediate future”. Even Brian Berry
(1964), the supreme advocate of an almost environmental-less central
place theory, has claimed that “geography’s integrating concepts and
processes concern the world-wide ecosystem of which man is the