I
EDITORIAL Assistance for a developing world This journal reported in its March issue that President George Bush had signed a bill that forbids U .S . support for international lending projects unless their environmental impact is assessed. It is essential that the intent of this bill be fully implemented if developing countries are to solve their major environmental and public health problems. The purpose of the bill, which was introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg as the National Environmental Policy on International Financing Act of 1989, is to put pressure on lending agencies such as the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank to take into account potential environmental consequences of development projects in emerging countries. Too often in the past, U.S. aid has been used for projects that have not taken environmental protection into account or that have assumed solutions would be forthcoming from local authorities. The United States and its allies cannot take on the responsibility for protection of the natural environment of the entire planet, but we cannot turn our backs on reality either. If a project has the potential to severely harm natural systems, it should not be funded by international agencies until it can be shown that that impact can be mitigated. As this new policy is implemented, there are several considerations that should be kept in mind. First, protection of the environment does not merely mean control of greenhouse gases or CFCs. These are very important issues-perhaps more important than we realize-but there are other environmental and public health problems in developing countries that cannot he ignored. Safe drinking water, the control of pesticides and other chemical toxins, and the need for wastewater treatment are classical problems that are still unaddressed in many developing countries. We risk damaging our credibility among our neighbors if we seek solutions to our problems while ignoring theirs. Secondly, we must acknowledge that poverty is a constraint on environmental protection that cannot be ignored. It simply will not be possible for us to impose policies that restrict the clearing of forests-to use one example-without assisting local governments in find0013-936X/90/0924~0593$02.50/0
1990 American Chemical Society
ing substitutes for income that forestry produces. Nor can we expect the people of the megacities in the developing world to pay for pollution control in the same proportion as citizens in developed countries. Finally, we cannot impose our solutions on other countries. Whatever is done with funds derived from the Lautenberg bill or other sources must be the will of the country affected. We will best serve the global community if we include in this initiative substantial funds for public education, technical assistance, and shared problem solving. Unfortunately, this and many other affluent countries do not have in place the infrastructure to support technical assistance to developing countries on the scale that is required. Throwing money at the problem is not the answer. What is needed is a new approach within developed countries to elevate scientific and technical assistance-including environmental protection-to a level of priority equal to that given to military assistance in the past. Let us use some of the human resources at our disposal to help these countries understand and solve their problems-resources such as the massive talent that lies within our population of retired people. In short, what is needed is new thinking about environmental protection in the developing world in the context of a new approach to foreign assistance.
Environ. Sci. Technol., Voi. 24, No. 5,1990
593
