Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323151002
label
Closing Address to White House Conference on Science & Economics Research Related to Global Change 4/18/90 [OA 4729] [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323151002
contentType
document
title
Closing Address to White House Conference on Science & Economics Research Related to Global Change 4/18/90 [OA 4729] [2]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13527-006
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Draft Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323151002
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
680f8e8d86ac28d2
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Draft Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13527
Folder ID Number:
13527-006
Folder Title:
Closing Address to White House Conference on Science & Economics Research Related to Global
Change 4/18/90 [OA 4729] [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
16
2
5
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
so MAR 13 P12: 16
April 13, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR CHRISS WINSTON
DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT
FOR COMMUNICATIONS
FROM:
JEFFREY R. HOLMSTEAD
jest
ASSISTANT COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Address to White House Conference on
Global Change, April 18
Attached are the comments of Counsel's Office on the Presidential
Remarks referenced above.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this matter.
Attachment
CC: James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President and
Deputy to the Chief of Staff
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
:
DATE:
4/12/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
4/13/90
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
BROMLEY
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
CLOSE HOLD
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 FH 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements...]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration to landmark legislation. But it is also
-
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye, to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power --- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
with
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
Ours is a prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
exp
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
for the first time, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
sense in which
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty and that is
determining whether identified environmental threats
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
pue
are if real and,
There are several things that the climate change debate
is
so,
to
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" -- the two are
inseparably interdependent, as the destructive experience of so
many developing nations has shown. We must clearly understand
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Environmentalists." Only in the most primitive minds has it
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean counters and
tree huggers
The President should
not be using turs term.
when
variety to address of environmental reat the they
4
a
calcerns,
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action"
for we have never considered research
any substitute for action.
We already know enough to act
and we are takeng action
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
administration about action the United States is already taking
-- our leading investment in climate change research and response
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
kn
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
of GUV based X0
our
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
ma 14c0m
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
carto
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost-effective.
Pullo hion
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
that would
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
sinks as a whole
We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come ].
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
Some of these actions enhause our unders tanding of the
issue of climate change
in the event a decision is made that international
action should be taken to reduce net a kah hova hemissions of
gases
5
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
premature policy-making will be reflected in life-threatening
competition for limited resources, In political instability )
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
it will imperil us all. We know that changes in G.N.P. growth
a few tenths of a percent-often means the difference between
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
stewardship allows But/only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth -- which would never
survive human nature -- but by catalyzing environmental
protection through more intelligent, more informed, more
efficient growth.
possibility
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
offer
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
gave birth to a movement symbolized 7
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
But
productive economy and protective ecology we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
forests burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
, especially when marketplace incentives
ave ) narvessed in support of
environmental protection.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith.
The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health and the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #.
And let US forge ahead to understand discover
what you do not yet Knew
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 13, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR CHRISS WINSTON
FROM:
ROGER B. PORTER
RBP
SUBJECT:
Presidential Remarks: Address to White House
Conference on Global Change, April 18
I have several comments on this draft and have discussed
them on the telephone with Chriss. Attached are the comments
as noted on the draft that was provided me. As usual, thanks
for your patience and accommodating response.
If I can help in any other way, please let me know.
CC: James W. Cicconi
12 : 9d EI MAR 06
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE: 4/12/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
4/13/90
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
DEMAREST
BROMLEY
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
CLOSE HOLD
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 PH 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements... ]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye, to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
CAN
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
SREAT
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
RHETORIC
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
ANDASERY.
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
WITH WHOM
environment we share, and the humanity/ we share it ,with
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
Ours is a prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
for the first time, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope, that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know, through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
SOUND ANALYSIS AND SOUND POLICIES.
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
the
GOOD
not about. It is not "Jobs versus L Environment" -- the two are
inseparably interdependent, as the destructive experience of so
many developing nations has shown. We must clearly understand
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Environmentalists.' Only in the most primitive minds has it
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers.] THIS LANGUAGE IS LESS THAN ELEGANT.
MORE IMPORTANTES, IT IS CRITICAL (AND WILL
BE INTER PRETED AS SUCH) OF BORY
ECONOMISTS 4 ENVIRONMENTANESTS.
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" -- for we have never considered research
A
WHERE
any substitute for action. h We already know enough to act --
TAKING ACTON.
and we are,
Over the last two days you've heard from key I members of this
administration about action the United States is already taking
TO ENHANCE THE ENVIRONMENT
-- our leading investment in climate change research and response
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
HIS IS STILL
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
ON DRAWING THE
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
BOARDS.
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
EFFICIENT.
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost-effective.
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
THAT WOULD
of a comprehensive approach/addressing the system, sources, and
IF A DECISION IS MADE THAT INTERNATIONAL ACTION IS NEEDED
sinks as a whole!
We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come 1.
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
GASES.
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
35NOHN33719 SNOISSIVE _L7N 01
5
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
premature policy-making will be reflected in life-threatening
competition for limited resources. In political instability --
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
EVEN SMALL
it will imperil us all. We know that change 5 in G.N.P. of even
GROWTH RATES
a few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
FOR MILMONS AND MILLIONS
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
OF PEOPLE.
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
THAT IS
stewardship allows -- but/only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in/partnerships;ef CONSTRUCTIVE every kind? scientific,
AND
economic, technical, agricultural, /environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth which would never
TOO CONG,
survive human nature but by catalyzing environmental
AWKWARD
protection through more intelligent, more informed, more
efficient growth.
ADMIT THAT I AM PUZZLED By THE POSITIONS of SOME.
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that FOR developing
nations. might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we re
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
GAVE
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
BIRTH TO A
SYMBOLIZED By
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
IN6
forests burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
490MAR 13 P | : OACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: 4/13/90
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
DEMAREST
BROMLEY
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
CLOSE HOLD
good betoric minor comments DD
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 PM 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements...)
]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye, to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
Ours is a prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
for the first time, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope, that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know, through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" -- the two are
inseparably interdependent, as the destructive experience of so
many developing nations has shown. We must clearly understand
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Environmentalists." Only in the most primitive minds has it
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers.
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" -- for we have never considered research
any substitute for action. We already know enough to act --
and we are.
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
administration about action the United States is already taking
-- our leading investment in climate change research and response
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost-effective.
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
sinks as a whole. We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come ].
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
5
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
premature policy-making will be reflected in life-threatening
will be rellated Perhaps,
competition for limited resources.
In political instability --
certamly
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
it will imperil us all. We know that a change in G.N.P. of even
a few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
stewardship allows -- but only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth -- which would never
survive human nature -- but by catalyzing environmental
protection through more intelligent, more informed, more
efficient growth.
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
forests burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
story
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE: 4/12/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
4/13/90 12 NOON
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
DEMAREST
BROMLEY
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
CLOSE HOLD
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 PM 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements...]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's leopard eye, to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
women
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
Can
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
The importance of
best
Global stewardship can only be understood, in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
we also recognize that
Ours is an prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
increasingly
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an enduring unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
quality of life.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by the
intemperate action
unintended consequences of noble intentions.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
they are
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here
have
for the first time we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
addressed both
and
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
and your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
we
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
50wnd analynes and sand piolicies,
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" -- the two are
Stat
as the Common Global experience
inseparably interdependent® as the destructive experience of so
of so mony mations has shown.
many developing nations has shown. We must clearly understand
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Too often, that debate )
An
Environmentalists. Only in the most primitive minds has it,
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers
Strong economies foster a healthy environment and
a healthy environment IS the hellmork of a strong
economy.
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" -- for we have never considered research
a
We are action movern now Evenas m areas
any substitute for action. We already know enough to act --
sesearch proceeds where research has already led to
and we are.
action.
Formally and in formally
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
that
moving forward.
administration about action the United States is already taking
you've heardabaut
our action to
Mour leading investment in climate change research, and response
Stabilize and reduce green house gas emissions our use of mirket based incentives
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
to control pollution
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
efficient
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost effective.
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
that would
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
sinks as a whole
We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
decision ,Fat mode that
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come ].
All of you here today understand climate change as one
S
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
before
biological
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
to
net
Each will have great impact,
Some will we can predict
and regre Helly, some with
the lobal environment.
5
Cant be easily antic pated
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
uninformed
clamage to pressus
premature policy-making will be reflected in life-threatening
and-life-qiuma
Perhaps,
competition for limited resources. In political instability --
certainly in
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the growth needs of developing nations,
even osmall
growth rate
it will imperil us all. We know that a change in G.N.P. of even
threaton
a
few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
stet
bormules admillions
adequate shelter, food, and health care and human
sperple
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
They must extend a helping hand.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
This D
stewardship allows M but only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
are contrary
community, not by seeking limits to growth
which would never
survive human nature -- but by achieving catalyzing environmental
protection through more intelligent more informed, more
and cleaner
efficient growth.
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage. most A
Environmentally sound economic offer
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations. might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
some
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
there was an impact
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice
was
a movement Sym bolized by
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
healthy
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
to developng
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
societies around the world.
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of.
and grass lando
ultimately trojic economic
forests, burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
neglect
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
neglect
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
in the story foces? ?
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #
Sunuru het us act ingood faith
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
4-13-90
Chriss:
Secretary Watkins' general comment
on this speech was that it seemed
disjointed and non-cohesive. Said
maybe this speech was one that
could not actually be written until
after the conference has taken place.
He just wasn't sure what it was
trying to say to the audience.
Thanks.
Holly Williamson
re: Presidential Remarks:
Address to WH Conference on
Global Change, April 18
DE : 2d E1 MAR 06
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
:
DATE: 4/12/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
4/13/90
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
DEMAREST
BROMLEY
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
CLOSE HOLD
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
STUDENTS OFFICE OF THE THE PRESIDENT DUALITY THE UNITED
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20500
April 13, 1990
Michael R. Deland
(202)395-5080
Chairman
Mark/Chriss:
Another good solid job. Again, attached are our
specific comments.
In general, we need to emphasize the
interdependence of environmental and economic
concerns. A growing economy requires a sound,
safe environment and vice versa.
Also the President's overriding theme of global
stewardship needs to be highlighted --
particularly at the conclusion.
MiL
Mike
Enclosure
CC: Jim Cicconi
Would be delighted to talk This
through if is MAR be helpful -
good job !
Recycled Paper
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 FM 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements.. ]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye, to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
Ours is a prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
the firstitime, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope, that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know, through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" the two are
our common an global
inseparably interdependent, as the
experience
of
01
nations has shown. We must clearly understand that a
a clean and wholesome environment is not possible without storg economy, just as a
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
strong economy depends on a clean and wholesome environment.
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Environmentalists." Only in the most primitive minds has it
rood
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers.
If anyone objects to this,
they are defining themselves sinctive.
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" -- for we have never considered research
any substitute for action. We already know enough to act --
and we are.
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
administration about action the United States is already taking.
not only are we
We are talcing action
leading investment in climate change research, and
supposed
now to stabilize and reduce greenhouse gas emissions
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost effective.
and efficient.
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
sinks as a whole. We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come 1.
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
5
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
uninformed policy-making will be reflected in damage life threatening to precious and
life-giving life giving
competition for limited resources. In political instability --
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
it will imperil us all. We know that a change in G.N.P. of even
a few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb. They must extend a helping hand.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costo And it suggests that the best policies are those of well
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
stewardship allows but only possible if the nations of the
must be
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
Delond
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth -- which would never
survive human nature -- but by catalyzing environmental
protection through moro intelligent more informed,
me
and cleaner
efficient growth.
Hero, ¥ must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
and environmental protection
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
By the sametoken, those who value economic development most highly
should he the most ardent defenders of the environment,
which provider the natural resources have for a healthy economy
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
to developing societies around the world.
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
forests burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
?
but man made.
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. L An oppressor Not man
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived/invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
countless throughout the centuries
emperers, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #
take this idea - which isgood-
But link it back into the
overanching theme of
global Stewardship
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE: 4/12/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
4/13/90
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
BROMLEY
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
CLOSE HOLD
Bob X4844 Grady will call in comments
91 : Id EI MAR 06 James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 PM 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements... ]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye, to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
Ours is a prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
for the first time, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope, that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know, through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" -- the two are
inseparably interdependent, as the destructive experience of so
many developing nations has shown. We must clearly understand
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Environmentalists.' Only in the most primitive minds has it
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers.
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" -- for we have never considered research
any substitute for action. We already know enough to act --
and we are.
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
administration about action the United States is already taking
-- our leading investment in climate change research and response
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost-effective.
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
sinks as a whole. We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come ].
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
5
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
premature policy-making will be reflected in life-threatening
competition for limited resources. In political instability --
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
it will imperil us all. We know that a change in G.N.P. of even
a few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
stewardship allows -- but only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth -- which would never
survive human nature -- but by catalyzing environmental
protection through more intelligent, more informed, more
efficient growth.
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
forests burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE: 4/12/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
4/13/90
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
DEMAREST
BROMLEY
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
CLOSE HOLD
I I : 2 EI MAR 06
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 PM 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements...]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
in a mountain stream,
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
e
an animal's
Extraverall
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye, to stand in silent
But
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
derivative.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small. e
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
an increasingly
world
Ours is R prosperous plane# -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected enduring peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
for the first time, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope, that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know, through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" the two are
Strong economics foster a
Wealthy
inseparably interdependent as the destructive experience of so
environment, and a healthy environment is the hallmark of a strong economy.
many developing nations has shown.
We must clearly understand
Example
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
cTear.
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
press?
no!
Environmentalists." Only in the most primitive minds has it
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers.
In the press, it has after
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" -- for we have never considered research
any substitute for action. We already know enough to act --
and we are.
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
administration about action the United States is already taking
-- our leading investment in climate change research and response
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost-effective.
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
sinks as a whole. We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come ].
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
5
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
premature policy-making will be reflected in life-threatening
competition for limited resources. In political instability --
human
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
it will imperil us all. We know that a change in G.N.P. of even
a few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
stewardship allows -- but only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth -- which would never
survive human nature -- but by catalyzing environmental
protection through more intelligent, more informed, more
efficient growth.
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
Thirusing
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
m hashe or a been impetrou They
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
know
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
Ilikethis.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
forests burned for compelling economic reasons have
but Aimately tragic
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
neglect
not
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
regurance
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #
I think this is
avery good speech.
quat! 2 Maynord
-Steve Olson
000B in
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE: 4/12/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
4/13/90 Noon
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
DEMAREST
BROMLEY
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
CLOSE HOLD
EPA Wathington
Wathin multime
€0 :2d EI MAR 06
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
MPJ
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 PM 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements... ]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye) to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
EPA - I believe panther Signtings
are very rare. Might want to
check or find another animal,
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
and women (EPA)
mausoleums to great men^and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
Ours is a prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
for the first time, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope, that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know, through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" -- the two are
inseparably interdependent, as the destructive experience of so
many developing nations has shown. We must clearly understand
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Environmentalists." Only in the most primitive minds has it
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers.
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" -- for we have never considered research
any substitute for action. We already know enough to act --
and we are.
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
S
administration about actionAthe United States is already taking
our leading investment in climate change research and response
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and
technical
Bradnermin-
assistance programs to developing nations.
IS istration
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
.-
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost-effective.
Thoughs was
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
work
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
there
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
not
sinks as a whole. We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
clear
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come ].
(EPA)
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
biological diversity (EPA)
deforestation, biodiversity, pópulation change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
environmentally sound (EPA) 5
sustainable ^ development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
any ill-considered growth stifling policy will be reflected. (EPA)
premature policy making will be reflected in life threatening
competition for limited resources. In political instability --
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
growth
nete careful
It
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
Be signal of coned be of a
anees",
it will imperil us all. We know that a change in G.N.P. of even
a few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
willingness to fund
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
castastrophe.
Environmental
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
(OCA)
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
stewardship allows -- but only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth -- which would never
achieving (EPA)
survive human nature -- but by catalyzing environmental
protection through more intelligent, more informed, more
efficient growth.
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
Environmentally sound economic (EPA)
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
healthy (EPA)
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
provedby
tocontrol ozone
and more than merely possible, as^the Montreal Protocol^proved. depleting
chlorofluor-
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
Carbons,
open
(EPA)
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
(EPA)
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
forests burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian ?(EPA)
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
bounty's
generation, while preserving the earth/for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE: 4/12/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
4/13/90
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ADDRESS TO WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
SUBJECT:
GLOBAL CHANGE, APRIL 18
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
BATES
UNTERMEYER
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
BOSKIN
BROMLEY
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
DELAND
GRAY
ADAIR, Doug
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to Chriss Winston, Rm. 122,
x2930, no later than NOON, Friday, April 13, with a copy to my
office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
Oks
2:5
CLOSE HOLD
90 MAR 13 All : 52
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
1990 APR 12 PM 6: 24
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements...]
After all of the work that has taken place here -- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye, to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
Ours is a prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
for the first time, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope, that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know, through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" -- the two are
inseparably interdependent, as the destructive experience of so
many developing nations has shown. We must clearly understand
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Environmentalists." Only in the most primitive minds has it
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers.
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" -- for we have never considered research
any substitute for action. We already know enough to act --
and we are.
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
administration about action the United States is already taking
-- our leading investment in climate change research and response
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost-effective.
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
sinks as a whole. We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come 1.
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
5
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
premature policy-making will be reflected in life-threatening
competition for limited resources. In political instability --
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
it will imperil us all. We know that a change in G.N.P. of even
a few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
stewardship allows -- but only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth -- which would never
survive human nature -- but by catalyzing environmental
protection through more intelligent, more informed, more
efficient growth.
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
forests burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #
Carolyn's As
(Lange/Cawley)
April 12, 1990
5:45 P.M.
[GLOBAL.DOC]
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON GLOBAL CHANGE
J. W. Marriott, Grand Ballroom
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990
2:30 P.M.
[Acknowledgements... ]
After all of the work that has taken place here --- in what
I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with
thanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is
profoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate
of mankind.
Your presence offers hope for a new era of environmental
cooperation around the world -- and the promise of a quieter,
more thoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy
to humanity.
A growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to
host this conference. It is a sense of stewardship shared by
all of you, and by the nations you represent. And it arises
out of a natural sense of obligation. An understanding that
we owe our existence, all that we know and are, to this
miraculous sphere that sustains us.
Such stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from
public demonstration, to landmark legislation. But it is also
rewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.
To feel the cold rush of water falling from an ancient glacier,
to see the glint of light in a panther's eye, to stand in silent
witness to the timeless beauty of a heron's flight: Such moments
2
are among the most precious mankind might know on this abundant
earth.
Such moments also have a special power -- a resonance that
at once elevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.
Before such beauty the works of humanity seem somehow small.
We may build cathedrals, temples and mosques; monuments and
mausoleums to great men and high ideals. And still we know we
can build no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest
creations cannot equal God's smallest.
Yet as our tools and intellects advance, we've learned of
our power to alter the earth. We understand that small actions,
taken together, have profound global consequences for the
environment we share, and the humanity we share it with.
Global stewardship can only be understood in human terms.
That is the reason we have held this conference.
Ours is a prosperous planet -- with greater hopes now than
ever before that more of our people may come to know
an unexpected peace, and an unprecedented prosperity.
So we are called upon to ensure that both the earth's
integrity -- and mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace,
and in some regions, even survival -- are not put at risk by
intemperate action.
The minds at work here are among the very best we have --
and the best insurance that our actions are sound. Here,
for the first time, we gathered talent from around the world --
scientists, economists, environmentalists, energy ministers,
3
policy-makers -- to assess the environmental and developmental
future of the planet. An unprecedented cross-fertilization of
disciplines -- and of nations. That alone is reason for hope.
If you have raised more questions than conclusions here,
your work has been worthwhile. But if diversity of perspective
is expected, unity of purpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of
uncertainty, we must foster a climate of good will -- and a
stubborn hope, that we might forge solutions without the
excessive heat of politics.
Among all of the challenges in our tenancy of the planet,
climate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. You are
helping us work from what we know, through the uncertainty of
both the science and the economics of climate change. But there
is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and that is
our commitment to finding solutions that work.
There are several things that the climate change debate is
not about. It is not "Jobs versus Environment" -- the two are
inseparably interdependent, as the destructive experience of so
many developing nations has shown. We must clearly understand
both environmental cause and economic effect. For if we cannot
see the forest for the trees, we risk losing both.
Nor is the climate change debate about "Economists versus
Environmentalists." Only in the most primitive minds has it
been reduced to a rhetorical holy-war between bean-counters and
tree-huggers.
4
But above all, the climate change debate is not about
"Research versus Action" --- for we have never considered research
any substitute for action. We already know enough to act --
and we are.
Over the last two days you've heard from key members of this
administration about action the United States is already taking
-- our leading investment in climate change research and response
strategies, our Clean Air legislation, our comprehensive national
energy strategy, our search for alternative and more efficient
energy sources, our re-forestation initiatives, and technical
assistance programs to developing nations.
What bears emphasis is that we are committed to -- moving on
-- and out front with -- domestic and international policies that
are environmentally aggressive, effective, and cost-effective.
And we are deeply committed to an international partnership,
through the I.P.C.C. process. We look forward to its Interim
Assessment -- and would encourage a framework convention as part
of a comprehensive approach addressing the system, sources, and
sinks as a whole. We hope to host the first negotiating sessions
here in the U.S. -- and we've just [ insert to come ].
All of you here today understand climate change as one
of many challenges in the call to global stewardship. Ozone
depletion, water supply, ocean pollution, wetlands,
deforestation, biodiversity, population change, hunger,
energy demand -- in short, all of the interrelated issues of
5
sustainable development: Each demands our attention. And each
has a human dimension we must never forget.
Understand the choices we are making. They affect us all,
but in profoundly different ways.
In too many developing countries, the consequences of
premature policy-making will be reflected in life-threatening
competition for limited resources. In political instability --
and man-made limits to prosperity. And it will be most painfully
reflected in the hollow eyes of hungry children, and their
prospects for survival.
If developed nations ignore the needs of developing nations,
it will imperil us all, We know that a change in G.N.P. of even
a few tenths of a percent often means the difference between
adequate shelter, food, and health care -- and human
castastrophe.
To bear this in mind is no barrier to action. It merely
suggests that those who have ascended the economic hill must
think twice before building walls that would prevent others
from making the climb.
It is a reminder that economic limits have serious human
costs. And it suggests that the best policies are those of well-
managed growth: The only kind of growth that true global
stewardship allows -- but only possible if the nations of the
world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,
economic, technical, agricultural, environmental.
6
Developing nations will contribute a growing share of the
world's emissions in the coming decades. They face the greatest
threats from environmental degradation of every kind -- and can
least afford the consequences.
But pollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable
by-product of progress. The developed nations of the world will
better serve their own interests, and those of the world
community, not by seeking limits to growth -- which would never
survive human nature -- but by catalyzing environmental
protection through more intelligent, more informed, more
efficient growth.
Here, I must confess to some confusion. Those who value
environmental quality most highly, should be the most ardent
supporters of strategies that tap the power of free wills and
free markets, that turn human nature to environmental advantage.
Efficient strategies are the only realistic hope that developing
nations might avoid making the mistakes that developed nations
have made.
And we have made mistakes. When America made its transition
from an agrarian to an industrial economy, we paid a price. What
we learned, we learned the hard way. And in some ways, we're
still fighting our way back. But over the past century we've
made tremendous progress -- especially in the last twenty years.
Two decades ago, this nation -- holding to its birth-right
of free expression and the value of the dissenting voice -- was
home to one protest movement in an era of protests, called Earth
it was not necessarily a protest movement is itself.
It was au expression of concern, through campus reach -145
that led to protest movements that led to Earth Day.
7
Day. It motivated President Nixon to sign into law "a national
policy [to] encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between
man and his environment." And it set in motion a new sense of
conscience, that a few idealists hoped would change the world.
It did. What began as an isolated American movement twenty
"over 130
years ago is now shared by 135 countries on seven continents.
And while many thought our experiment in environmental protection
would prove impossible -- that you couldn't maintain both a
productive economy and protective ecology -- we've learned that
economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand.
And we understand no nation can act effectively alone.
Unilateral action is futile. But united action? Essential --
and more than merely possible, as the Montreal Protocol proved.
Around the world, America and other nations now extend an
offered hand to emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and in
this hemisphere. And only now do we see the extent of the
challenge we share.
In this hemisphere and in Africa, the raging fires of
add "and grasslands
forests burned for compelling but mistaken economic reasons have
been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the
struggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the
resources that sustain life.
And whether through the tyranny of ignorance, or the
ignorance of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one of
Eastern Europe's cruelest dictators. An oppressor. Not man --
but man-made.
8
In the majestic city of Krakow, monuments to great men,
statues that survived invasions by Swedish Kings and Austrian
emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been defaced by
pollution, as their medieval majesty is reduced to shapeless
lumps of stone.
If mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's smallest,
some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at times
upon ourselves. And we may not see much hope in the faces of the
starving, or the faces of ancient monuments. But we can find
cause for optimism among the men and women in this room.
Let us act on what we know, and in good faith. The earth
cannot, must not be sacrificed to blind material ambition -- nor
can the health, the very survival of millions be sacrificed by
intemperate policies. Let us work to meet the needs of this
generation, while preserving the earth for the next, and all that
follow.
# # #