The Silent Destruction

by: Hervé Kempf   |  Reporterre

The Silent Destruction
As France loses the surface equivalent of a large US county to development every decade, it remains to be seen how much longer fields of wild poppy like this one in Normandy will continue to exist. (Photo: pimousse3000 / Flickr)

Oh, splendid surge! Magnificent concert! The first trills are rising, preparing the choir of weepers; soon the tenor's heroic voice will move on to the mobilization aria: "Biodiversity, bio, bio, bio-diversity, biodiversity, it's here, it's heere, the year, oh, the yeeear, the year of bio, bio, bio-di-ver-si-ty!" The finale is in the offing: "Let us save, save, save, biooooo, biooooo, let us save, yes, let us save, yes, it's the year, let us save bio-di-ver-si-teeeee!" Boom!

We shall weep over the fate of Brazil's manatee, Papua-Asia's forests, the Galapagos' hammerhead shark; we shall rush off to see "Oceans" and "Avatar." But while we're looking elsewhere, the massacre continues here.

Biodiversity in the France of 2010 - what's that? Fields of grass, ground where the water penetrates, where seeds take root, where earthworms swarm ... Well, then, these fields, these grasses, these lands, we are covering them over by the thousands of hectares with concrete and cement and a reckless lack of awareness that borders on the criminal. That's what a brief from Campagnes solidaires, the Peasant Federation's monthly magazine, reminds us. France wastes land by artificializing it at a frenzied pace.

Artificialization of the ground? A complicated word, but a sadly ordinary reality: parking lots, industrial zones, TGV routes, highways, airports, logistical bases, solar electricity generators, individual houses, recreational centers ... Philippe Pointereau, in one study (a detailed version of which may be read in INRA's "Courrier de l’environnement," n° 57, 2009), shows that the transformation of agricultural lands into urbanization in all its forms is continuing at the rate of 66,000 hectares a year, or more than the surface of an average department over ten years.

Demography does not explain the phenomenon: "consumption" of natural space is growing far more rapidly than population. The primary source of the problem: private homes, which push urban sprawl and new transportation infrastructure and other cemented surfaces. Also involved is a general indifference to space, landscapes, nature. Without forgetting that it is always easier for an elected official - due, certainly, to his constituents' indifference - to "develop" his territory through urbanization than to attempt to focus on habitat and keep agricultural concerns alive. As for biodiversity, that ordinary nature that is indispensable to the ecosystem's balance, that simple respiration of the soil, no one could care less; even as people moan over the fate of the tropics - which has the great advantage of not getting in the way of real estate speculation here.

When will we understand that space is a scarce resource? Pointereau points out that if we take agricultural imports into account, France is no longer truly self-sufficient. International trade and concrete: they're good for growth, no?

Translation: Truthout French Language Editor Leslie Thatcher with permission from the author.

Reporterre.net is the site of Hervé Kempf, author of  "How the Rich Are Destroying the Planet" and "Pour Sauver La Planète, Sortez du Capitalisme" (not yet available in English), and journalist at Le Monde.

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.





     

»




Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



What is happening in France

What is happening in France is happening in the USA, only more so? Will we take advantage of the bursting of a housing bubble to stop constructing monster houses on large lots, chewing up the remaining arable land? And how many families really want a monster house if they could buy a well-made smaller home for their own use (as opposed to speculation)? How many new shopping malls do we need to replace perfectly functional ten-year-old malls? Must decisions about land use always be made to increase the profit of some person (i.e. corporation)?



While I agree with the

While I agree with the environmental concerns voiced by Mr. Herve Kempf, I find his rude sarcasm quite counterproductive. "Choir of weepers" for "bio-diversity" indeed! With or without Mr. Kempf's permission, I shall continue to weep for the manatee of Florida, the loss of the rain forests of South America and Indonesia, and yes, even the ruin of healthy land in France to "artificialization" carried out by the greedy rich. I shall do these things while continuing to support the Land Conservation and Development Commission here in Oregon which is struggling to protect our own natural environment and rural resource land from developers . It's not a choice between local concerns and problems "overseas." Wise people care about both. As the cliche goes, "think globally and act locally." It works here, France should try it.
thanks, Doug from Eugene



Small houses are now the

Small houses are now the rage in some U.S. places with high heating/ventilating/air-conditioning requirements. People don't want to clean or heat big houses, and then there's George Carlin's famous rant about stuff. A quick search showed talk shows talking about it. This is one of those topics where I was pretty sure I was living in a mini-culture bubble, but it appears not. Some of the comments on the sites were from the Southwest and other places. As for plants, living roofs are also a rage, with living walls on the upswing as well. Portland has a DePave project, where they carve asphalt into squares, pry it up with crowbars and toss the brownies (nickname) into drop boxes. I have worked on this myself, and it is fun. Neighborhood people come out and help, and then we eat. The stuff gets recycled, but at least we know plants will go where we got rid of the stuff. You can view the sweaty YouTubes to see what you think.



To get to DePave, you have

To get to DePave, you have to go to Mark Lakeman The Chronology of City Repair, where it has bit spots. I don't know where the dedicated DePave YouTube went. I guess it got eaten by City Repair, which is the larger organization to which it belongs. The City Repair Tubes are also about integrating plants and animals, saving water, and growing good stuff near where the people are who want to eat the stuff, so it is of interest perhaps as well. It is also a bit wicked, because people seem to sneak in the night, drill holes and plant grapes by power poles, that sort of thing. In segment 11, Mark refers to old-growth asparagus. I rather liked that part.



Development is encouraged in

Development is encouraged in America in some peculiar ways. One guerrilla tactic for discouraging mall building and housing sprawl would be to change the tax code. You might be surprised how developers actually make money, and it isn't by building something useful, practical, and permanent. Why is your mortgage interest tax deductible? Why is a mall depreciated in only seven years, by which time all the original investors are long gone, on to the next "project." Indeed, why is empty land called "unimproved" and land with man made structures appraised according to "highest and best use." Just like giving tax breaks to families for having lots of children, giving tax breaks to speculators and developers only encourages long term planetary destruction.



"Current extinction rates

"Current extinction rates are at least 100 to 1000 times higher than natural rates found in the fossil record," according to the World Conservation Union in 2004 (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6502368/). This is mainly because of habitat destruction and degradation. But in coming decades global warming will make the problem much worse. The same habitat destruction that directly kill off species also makes it impossible for many to migrate when the climate changes. Most humans seem to think that we don't need any species, other than the few plants and animals that we eat. But this is not correct. There are many other interdependencies between species. Even if we have no respect for life other than our own, we should be extremely worried about the mass extinction that has begun, and especially of pushing it into overdrive with global warming. We had better wake up and smell the roses before they and we are extinct.



In the rural part of

In the rural part of Normandy where I live development is rampant. The farmers are so desperate for money they are selling off their land for development or building on it like there is no tomorrow - which there will not be at this rate. You cannot eat concrete. The English like me come over here relieved to find the whole country is not one great suburb like the UK has become and then see aghast the French follow the English mistakes. Since coming over here 9 years ago, build build build seems to be the mantra - c'est fou!

Instead, farming and agriculture must be supported so the farmers can make a decent living - without them we all starve.