The historic record is abysmal. Mining is notorious for its lasting ill effects on land and water and the relative laxness of applicable environmental regulation. Alaskans, in Pebble, now face the development of one of the largest mines in the world, ever, in an area famous for the bounty of the rivers and streams that flow in the runoff zone from the mine. What should we do? Thousands of people ask, can these people be any different?
"Externalities," a very dry word of extraordinary importance in the modern world, describes the incidental burdens that an activity may lay on land, water, air and people. Externalities were not taken much into account in early human affairs. Changes in scale and volume have made externalities central in today's economic calculus.
In the simpler agricultural society of the early 19th century, a nation of small farms, the impact of one family's activities on its neighbors was marginal and individually negotiable. But as industry became the dominant activity, these externalities -- the burdens, the costs incidentally thrust on the neighbors -- could not be ignored. The new manufacturing class tried to ignore externalities, emphasizing the good their activities brought to the neighborhood and the principle of economic freedom. The inequality in distribution of benefits and burdens was ignored. As plant size grew exponentially, externalities spread through the entire world, creating huge environmental and health deficits from toxic smoke, spoiled water and associated social ills.
Recognition of externalities comes hard to us. American concepts of liberty were formed in an era where a man's conduct had much less impact on his neighbors. Businesses were small. Side effects could be ignored or were taken for granted, if sometimes with resentment. The common law of "nuisance' took care of extreme cases.
Early mining in Alaska was carried out in remote places, usually on a small scale. The Alaska Natives who depended on the fisheries lacked political power to bring force to any objection.
We were less safety- and health-conscious because we did not know better. The 18th century man would have scoffed at the notion of a law requiring the wearing of protective head gear when riding a horse (or motorcycle). The world was just a place where accidents happened and where no hospitals existed capable of repairing the most serious damage. Medical costs were low and the injured usually just took it in the chops.
The Environmental Protection Act of 1970, steered through the Congress by Sen. Scoop Jackson of Washington state, was a giant step in requiring the recognition of externalities and in forcing the mitigation of the worst effects. Clean Air and Water acts forced expensive cleanups and generated new processing capabilities meeting resistance all the way from those whose free speech included the right to deny the damage from tiny fractions of particulate.
This new world of externalities is now not just recognized but accountable through the EPA and elsewhere and has set a threshold for the Pebble Mine developers (what a great name for a project to blast a mountain-sized hole in the ground!). Big mines do not just cause temporary disturbances to habitat, fading over a decade or two. They may create ills of indefinite duration. Still, the environmental cost accruing from the development of any giant mine must be measured against the benefits that accrue, not just to the owner, but to the users of the product, to the people who get jobs, to the public in tax revenue for public services and other benefits.
Under pressure from concerned citizens, environmental groups, the state and the U.S., unprecedented demands for measures to preserve the natural environment will be made through the EPA process.
But what of the impacts on the people of the area if things "go wrong," not withstanding mitigation measures undertaken? What happens if the fishery fails or is significantly reduced? What happens if thousands are thrown out of work? In the second section to this column, an outline of some of the issues in an income stabilization program will be described.
John Havelock has taught public policy at UAA since his retirement as a professor of justice. He also is a former Alaska attorney general.
Important warning about e-mails purporting to be from the adn.com staff.