Book re�iews132

and, indeed, nearly all other countries must focusattention on population policies. The number ofpeople in a country, perhaps more than any othervariable, determines the extent of the pressureswe place on natural resources and the opportuni-ties available to others.

A second and, from my viewpoint, a morepowerful message arising from this book is thepotential of quantitative spatio-temporal model-ing that combines biophysical and economicunderstanding. The messages are clear. There isno substitute for disciplined modeling. Before Iread this book, I had always thought that CostaRica, at least from an environmental perspective,was one of Latin America’s better-managedcountries. This book has forced me to rethinkthat position. There is a huge difference betweenselective rhetoric and careful, thorough quantita-tive analysis. Yes, we have the data and, yes, weall should use it to check the claims we make sofreely.

A third message is that there is normally suffi-cient data to begin quantitative modelling—evenin developing countries like Costa Rica. But it isalso clear that countries should invest more indata collection and storage. Scattered through thebook are lovely stories about the huge amount ofdata that is available when one starts to searchfor it.

On top of all these wonderful insights, thebook includes a set of very comprehensive anddetailed chapters about ways to build spatio-tem-poral models of an economy that is dependentupon its natural resource base.

Overall, the question that must be asked, ‘‘IsDaly right? Is this a book that ecologicaleconomists cannot afford to ignore? My conclu-sion is, ‘‘Yes, Daly is right’’. Hall and his col-leagues are offering something that is new and asignificant advancement in the evolution of eco-logical economics from theory to quantitativeanalysis. It is time for the development of inte-grated spatio-temporal models in all countries. Itis time for the profession to move from the emo-tive statements and fundamental beliefs to analy-sis of realities. Over the next decade, I hope thatmany more people will follow the path beingpaved in Costa Rica and build quantitative mod-

els that enable people to explore. I recommendthe book to all readers of this journal.

Mike D. Young*Policy and Economic Research Unit,

CSIRO Land and Water,Adelaide,

Australia 5064

* Present address: CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology,P.O. Box 84, Lyneham, Canberra 2602, Australia.

PII: S0921 -8009 (01 )00241 -5

Fish, Markets and Fishermen. The Economics ofOverfishingSuzanne Ludicello, Michael Weber and RobertWieland (Eds.), Earthscan Publications Ltd.,1999. ISBN 1-85383-651-6 (pb) and 1-85383-652-4(hb); pp. 192. UK£14.95.

This book is about the fisheries problem, i.e.the failure of many fisheries to realize their eco-nomic potential. More precisely, the authors seekto provide what one might call a layman’s intro-duction to the topic. As stated in the Preface, they‘‘...hope to fill the need for an understandablebook that is not only about economic theory andnot only about fisheries management but links thetwo with real-world case studies’’.

The authors attempt to achieve their objectiveby a two-pronged approach. On the one hand,they devote the first half of the book to recount-ing some of the elementary theory of fisherieseconomics and management. On the other hand,in the second half of the book, they illustrate thissame theory by a number of case studies.

The theoretical part of the book is, unfortu-nately, much inferior to the material in standardtextbooks on the topic (Clark, 1976; Anderson,1986; Hannesson, 1993) and, as far as I can see,not much more accessible to the layman. Mostseriously, it suffers from far too many errors andinaccuracies. A few examples should suffice toillustrate this: early on in the book it is asserted

Book re�iews134

on Biodiversity Loss’’, and the second, a frame-work for analyzing biodiversity loss. The next twochapters provide an overview of the case studiesand summarize their main findings, respectively.Chapter 5 presents recommendations derivedfrom the case studies. The remaining chapterssummarize case studies of the Cerrado of Brazil,the bushmeat and wildlife trade in Cameroon,southwestern forests in China, wetlands andforests of the Danube basin, Chilika Lake inIndia, the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve in Mex-ico, Mangroves in Pakistan, the Philippine islandsof Cebu, Negros, and Palawan, mangroves inthree areas of Tanzania, and the north and centralhighlands of Vietnam.

While there are the differences of focus andstyle one would expect among 10 chapters pre-pared by 10 different teams on 10 widely dis-parate regions, each of the case study chaptersprovides a wealth of information on the regionunder consideration. The descriptions are, in mostcases, informative and detailed, with considerablesocial, institutional, and historical analysis com-plementing the biological information reported.Individual case studies will be of interest to re-searchers or practitioners contemplating activitiesin or near the regions studied. Comparisons andcontrasts among the different experiences re-ported in the different regions may be helpful alsoto those planning conservation policy morebroadly.

The introductory and summary material is lesssatisfying. It is, in fact, difficult for this reader toprovide a dispassionate review of material withwhich he feels so strong a temptation to argue. Atthe most basic level, one has to question theutility of identifying ‘root causes’ at all. It isundoubtedly true that factors such as demo-graphic change, poverty and inequality, andmacroeconomic policy drive biodiversity loss. It isless evident what can or should be done aboutthem, especially when the focus is on actionsappropriate to conservation organizations. Suchactors must allocate their limited resources care-fully, and devote them only to activities withcertain and demonstrable effects. Recommenda-tions to, for example, ‘require all biodiversityconservation and sustainable use projects to

clearly address root causes of biodiversity loss inproject documents’ strike this reviewer as sugges-tions for dubious spending.

It is ironic that this study emerged fromWWF’s Macroeconomics Program Office, as it islargely devoid of, and occasionally at variancewith, received economic thought. Some mighttake exception with the first chapter’s articulationof an ‘emerging consensus’, including especiallythe perceived emphasis on assembling multidisci-plinary teams to implement integrated solutions.Another approach, implemented by, among oth-ers, Conservation International and articulatedmost clearly by Paul Ferraro in Conser�ation Biol-ogy, calls for a more direct approach. Biodiversitycan best be protected not by identifying its ‘rootcauses’ and attempting to manipulate them, butrather by providing clear and direct incentives forthe conservation of specific habitats. The econom-ics of a direct approach are impeccable; in com-mon language, ‘‘You get what you pay for’’. It isfar less clear what the consequences of manipulat-ing many of the root causes this volume identifieswould be.

There is, perhaps, some common ground to befound in the criticism of poorly considered gov-ernment policies. Subsidies to destructive activi-ties, state appropriation of resources, and lack ofsecure tenure are frequently cited in the casestudies. There can be little doubt that reversingthese policies would be wise. By the same token,however, there is likely to be considerable contro-versy over the assertion implicit in much of thebook that national and local decision makers needto be apprised of the benefits they stand to derivefrom biodiversity. One of the editors writes that‘‘Since much of the value of biodiversity is reallyunknowable, it has little meaning for people try-ing to make a living today’’ (p. 68). Similarly, theauthors of the Cameroon case study write, ‘‘Thepotential for appreciating the beauty of nature isonly possible when one has a full stomach. At thispoint, the loss of biodiversity is essentially a con-cern of the developed world’’ (p. 150). The au-thors of another case study write, ‘‘The reasonsfor biodiversity loss … [are] widespread and per-sistent failure to properly understand, quantify, orvalue the goods, services, functions and capital

Book re�iews 135

value of natural resources’’ (p. 209). If this is thecase, one might ask whether the real ‘root cause’of biodiversity loss is to be found in the circum-stances of the 10 regions studied, or rather, in theunwillingness of the wealthy nations to compen-sate the poor for providing services the formervalue far more highly at present.

David SimpsonEnergy and Natural Resources Di�ision,

Resources for the Future,Washington,

DC USA

E-mail: simpson@rff.org

PII: S 0921 -8009 (01 )00258 -0

Eco-socialism or eco-capitalism? A critical analysisof humanity’s fundamental choicesSaral Sarkar, Zed books, London and New York,1999, 304 pp. ISBN 1-856-49600-7

Does anybody remember socialism? In case youhave forgotten, the essence of socialism is aboutliberty and human equality. Socialism is a dreamof the world turned upside down, of a truedemocracy for all humanity that extends into theeconomic realm, and does not depend on moneyand power. This interpretation of socialism, whichhas strong connections to Marx and 19th centurysocialism (see e.g. Francis Wheelan’s recent Marxbiography), means that most of the so-called ex-isting ‘socialism’ of the 20th century, with itseconomical and environmental disasters in theformer Eastern block, was not socialism at all.Saral Sarkar’s main reason for attempting tobuild an eco-socialist alternative to capitalism(and its ecological version eco-capitalism) is be-cause he rejects the values capitalism represents:‘exploitation, brutal competition, worship ofmammon, profit and greed as motive’.

If you have already had enough, you can stopreading here. This book will be tough reading foranyone who is not interested in questioning capi-talist market economy. But for those who are

willing to do this, Sarkar has written an impor-tant book. Before reading the book, I knew noth-ing about Saral Sarkar. He has since the early1980s been involved in the Green movement inGermany, where he is now living. Sarkar’s mainpoint in the book is that a truly ecological econ-omy is possible only within a socialist socio-polit-ical set-up. Socialism has a future, he argues,because of the values it represents—equality, co-operation, solidarity, freedom and democracy.But socialism must learn from its mistakes. And itmust ‘learn the ecological lesson’.

Learning the ecological lesson is where thisbook connects to natural resource managementand ecological economy. In much of ecologicaleconomics, there is an implicit assumption thatthe market forces, properly handled, can help ustowards a sustainable society with low resourceuse intensity. One of the book’s strengths is point-ing out that, because of the fundamental forcesdriving capitalist markets, this trick may not bepossible within a capitalistic system. In fact, thereis a strong contradiction between a ‘low-intensity’world and the inherent growth pressure of thecapitalistic enterprise. This is nowhere more evi-dent than when people use the ludicrous term‘sustainable growth’ without understanding thatwith respect to resources this requires an infiniteworld. However, the solution to this problem isanother question, on which Sarkar has no finalword but a lot to offer in the discussion. Hesuggests that the world is closer to ‘the limits togrowth’ than is usually assumed.

Sarkar’s main points can be summarized in afew statements. He insightfully argues that thedemise of Soviet empire was caused by a combina-tion of encountering the limits to growth, e.g.exploiting natural resources in remote areas andfacing ecological degradation, and an inflexiblepolitical system with a degenerate political elitethat inevitably would fail to create the ‘new man’necessary to tackle the limits to growth problem.Then he points out that the prospects are bleak toobtain the cheap energy sources necessary to runthe capitalist system in the future. In particular,oil is a unique energy source that is (or has been)both cheap to obtain and has an unusually highenergy content. None of the proposed alternatives