I found Speth’s article gave a wonderful overview of the nature of the environmental movement. I think it is important to take a step back, as Speth has done, and review the movement as a whole to attempt to determine what has or has not worked and why. I was a little frustrated, however, at the lack of suggestions for improvement in the article. I am sure, or would really hope, that those came later in the book. An analysis of the movement like Speth has done would really not be effective without suggestions of how to fix the issues which he highlighted so well.

There were two specific things which jumped out at me from this article. One was the issue we discussed after Jen’s visit to class, about grassroots vs. legislative support. Speth spoke to the fact that organizations that were created to lobby and influence policy (such as the Maryland League of Conservation Voters) are not necessarily the most fit to create grassroots support. However, Speth also discussed the “absence of a huge, complementary investment of time and energy in other approaches to change…” Here, Speth says that organizations such as the MLCV are to blame, for not recognizing or investing in alternative approaches. I think I agree with this analysis, that all components are necessary, but if groups have had a specific focus for years now, it is time to branch out and recognize the necessity of a multi-faceted approach.

Another issues present in this and almost all of our readings has been the environment vs. economy debate. Almost all the readings frame these two ends as incompatible with one another. If it is good for the environment, then it is bad for the economy, and visa versa. Especially in light of Speth’s article about the need to change the nature of the environmental movement, I think this is one of, if not the most important shift necessary. There have to be ways for these two forces to be more compatible with each other, and not in a way that requires compromises from the environment. Even if it is just an issue framing question, but something needs to change to prevent the environment and economy from coming to a head on every issue, because the economy has won almost every time and will most likely continue to do so.