To list of
chapters
Previous page
Organised opposition
During the spring of 1998, several people suggested
to Politiken that they should print a coordinated criticism of
Lomborg´s postulates, e.g. by contacting experts in various
fields and gathering their contributions on a few whole newspaper
pages. However, the editor-in-chief stopped all such plans.
Instead, the Danish "Ecological Council" became the
organ that gathered the criticism. The Ecological Council is an
independent organ which issues recommendations on environmental
matters, e.g. by publishing books and booklets. At that time it
received support from the government. (This support was ended in 2002.
The Council has survived up to now on project money supplemented with
earnings from book sales and voluntary contributions. However, its
continued existence is now threatened by lack of finance.).
At a meeting in June 1998, the Ecological Council
decided in principle to take up the task, but concrete action was not
taken until Lomborg´s book appeared in September. When the book
came out, the need for a counter-publication became obvious. An
editorial board of four was formed. I (Kåre Fog) had no previous
affiliation with the Ecological Council, but I had urged them to take
up the task, and as a result of this I was appointed to the editorial
board.
The editorial board contacted various experts
and asked them if they would write chapters in a Lomborg-correcting
book. Persons who could not be considered neutral in relation to
Lomborg (e.g. persons affiliated with WWF) were not contacted. Most
contributors were scientists holding positions at universities. The
idea was that the contributions should not be anti-Lomborg, but as
neutral as possible, i.e. they should state what was wrong and what was
right within the fields covered by Lomborg. However, in practice little
could be said to support Lomborg, and all chapters became very critical
of him.
No funding was available to publish the book, but a
humanitarian organisation (Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke) agreed to pay for
the publishing.
The book came out at the beginning of May 1999. The
Danish title (Fremtidens Pris) means "The Price of the Future". It ran
to 329 pages, with contributions from 18 authors from a wide range of
fields. 6 of the contributors were from the social sciences - mainly
economists - and their contributions document that Lomborg´s
claims are not only at variance with what is believed within the
environmental movements and the natural sciences, but also within the
social sciences. Other topics covered were a range of biological issues
(biodiversity, deforestation, acid rain, fisheries, and agriculture).
There were also contributions on mineral resources, poverty, population
growth, and chemical pollution.
Finally there were chapters on Lomborg´s
methods (the way he uses his sources and his journalistic methods) and
on his role in the public debate. As to the latter topic, many experts
had been contacted by the editorial board, and all those that had tried
to oppose Lomborg in the public debate reported unfair treatment by
Lomborg and by the media. The extent of unfair treatment could
therefore be documented.
In view of the fact that Lomborg himself had
completely omitted evaluation by peers, we wanted the book to function
as a sort of peer review. In cooperation with the newspaper
"Information", public meetings were arranged at the start of May 1999
at the two largest Danish universities. At each of these meetings, four
experts advanced their criticisms, whereupon Lomborg advanced his
defense. Although the criticism of Lomborg was extremely severe, he
refused to admit any errors at all, except for just two letters in a
single word in his book. These meetings thus demonstrated that an
approach towards clarification and mutual understanding was impossible.
In addition Lomborg and one of his students produced
a defence text within only 3 weeks. This was formulated as a book, but
only published on the internet. Its title (Godhedens Pris) means "The
Price of Goodness" and refers to Lomborg´s claim that people who
try to be "good" persons are very costly to society. The book has many
long quotes and contains practically no new argumentation. It shows
what points of criticism Lomborg has focused on, but he does not admit
a single error, and it has not become part of a meaningful dialogue
between Lomborg and his critics.
Next page