Planet Of The Year: Hands Across the Sea

• Share

(2 of 3)

Much of the current environmental crisis is rooted in, and exacerbated by, the widening gap between rich and poor nations. Industrialized countries contain only 23% of the world's population, yet they control 80% of the world's goods and are also responsible for the bulk of its pollution. On the other hand, it is the developing countries that are hardest hit by overpopulation, malnutrition and disease. As these nations struggle to catch up with the developed world, a vicious circle begins: their efforts at rapid industrialization poison their cities, while their attempts to boost agricultural production often result in the destruction of their forests and the depletion of their soils.

The greatest obstacle to economic and environmental improvements in the developing countries is their mammoth foreign debt. Collectively, the Third World owes $1.2 trillion to the banks and governments of industrialized countries. A new World Bank report estimates that in 1988 the developing countries made net payments of $43 billion to the industrial nations, up from $38 billion in 1987. How can the rich nations expect poor countries to launch environmental programs while struggling to pay off those crippling loans? Clearly, the Third World's debt payments will have to be lightened or postponed. The best way of doing that seems to be using debt forgiveness as leverage for winning environmental concessions.

One approach that has already been pursued successfully on a small scale is the so-called debt-for-nature swaps. Conceived by the Smithsonian Institution's Thomas Lovejoy in 1984, these innovative deals often involve the cooperation of governments, bankers and conservation groups. In a typical debt-for-nature swap earlier this year, the World Wildlife Fund, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, bought $1 million worth of Ecuadoran debt held by Bankers Trust at the discounted price of $354,500. The bank was happy to get the troublesome loan off its books, while the World Wildlife Fund gained the power to improve that country's environment. The fund accomplishes this by transferring the loan payments to Fundacion Natura, a conservation group in Ecuador. Fundacion Natura, in turn, uses the money to protect and maintain national parks and wildlife preserves.

However it is accomplished, a greater share of the world's capital will have to flow into developing countries. What they need, said Senator Albert Gore, is a new Marshall Plan for economic development and environmental preservation. But where will the money come from? For starters, the U.S. and the Soviet Union could reduce military spending in order to boost aid for environmental programs. Nobel laureate Murray Gell-Mann, a professor of theoretical physics at the California Institute of Technology, argued that the superpowers should redefine "global security" to include "the issues of population, environment and sustainable development." Yet the U.S., the + world's largest debtor, can no longer supply the bulk of aid to the Third World. Nor can the economically strapped Soviet Union provide much financial help.