Prescient Planning

That would be no surprise. When it comes to the sometimes contentious matter of economic development versus environmental protection, Asian and Western views tend to diverge widely. Asians are often admonished, for the sake of the entire world, to be environmentally responsible in a way Western nations were never required to be during similar phases of their own economic development earlier this century. Such advice from developed countries usually falls on deaf ears in the region, whose leaders almost unanimously attach greater priority to development than to ecology. The calculus is simple: would the bulk of Asians rather have cleaner air to breathe or enough food to eat, clothing to wear and a roof to keep out the elements?

But the choice need not be so stark. Increasingly, savvy defenders of the environment are trying to convince government and business leaders to adopt cheaper, more efficient industrial processes that are also environmentally friendly. One such advocate is Jakarta-based Mr. Maurice Knight of Hagler Bailly Inc., a U.S. consulting firm that advises companies on how to be less wasteful. "When I'm talking to a firm, I couldn't care less if the word 'environment' never comes up," he says. One example is a food-packaging concern. Because of out-of-date, inefficient manufacturing processes and equipment, says Mr. Knight, the company produces huge amounts of packaging, often made of non-biodegradable plastics and aluminum foil, that is "off-spec" and rejected by the customer. That adds up to a lot of waste -- and a big drain on the bottom line. "It all has to be thrown away," notes Mr. Knight. "So I'm talking money here, not the environment."

He has a point -- though ecological benefits would be a bonus. And time is of the essence. Some experts believe Indonesia's manufacturing capacity will expand fivefold by 2010. In many other Asian economies, the growth numbers -- and therefore the potential environmental damage -- are just as big. That is why it is important that the region's planners consider effective ways to limit the ecological costs even as they plot its continuing economic advance.

Will governments be able to persuade industry to go along? Both business leaders and politicians are more likely to respond to practical, concrete arguments that are backed by hard data. In 1994, Governor Chris Patten of Hong Kong promised to "end the damage done to our environment by past neglect and prevent future abuse." He also pledged to reduce air pollution by 20% within two years, and asked the local legislature to authorize $220 million in government spending to get it done. But even environmentalists thought the government's plan too vague and optimistic. Said Ms. Lisa Hopkinson, Friends of the Earth co-ordinator in Hong Kong: "There are too many variables that can go wrong. This policy is a big disappointment for us." For their part, legislators overwhelmingly rejected a more practicable bill that would have required taxi and minibus operators to switch from diesel fuel to cleaner gasoline, urging only a voluntary changeover instead.

Other governments in Asia have been able to adopt environmentally friendly measures. Japan is notably successful in its clean-up efforts -- Tokyo's air quality is 16 times better than Beijing's, for instance. Singapore has been actively fighting air pollution since the early 1970s, when it established a Ministry of the Environment. In fact, the government has long been concerned about "sustainable development." The goal, explains a ministry spokesman, is to "keep the environment clean and maintain a high standard of public health while pursuing economic growth."

That objective is not typical in Asia, though. More representative are the views of officials in Thailand and Malaysia, who see the costs of environmental activism as greater than the benefits. Few politicians have been willing to say outright that ecological considerations need to take a back seat to development. But that attitude is evident from the general unwillingness to take significant action to reduce, for example, automobile use, which is a major polluter. As measured by dust particles, air quality in Bangkok last year was about 15 times worse than the level deemed acceptable by the World Health Organization. One in six Bangkok residents reportedly suffers from allergies because of the bad air.

Malaysia has heavily promoted its program to plant trees in Kuala Lumpur. But it does not require that its domestically marketed Proton cars carry pollution-reducing catalytic converters. The story is similar in Jakarta, where measures to reduce emissions from older autos, and cut the number of vehicles on the roads, have failed -- in part from a lack of political will. One regulation did require autos entering a commuting artery during rush hour to carry at least three passengers. It only created a thriving industry for car "jockeys," young boys who rent their services to commuters needing to fill their load quota.

When they consider legislation, politicians need to have complete, accurate and up-to-date data on the costs and benefits of anti-pollution measures. Only then can they weigh the pros and cons properly. This is one area where the West may be able to help, given the wealth of its own experiences. Unlike lectures about ecological imperatives, technical assistance that lays out the many hidden costs of pollution -- to the health of citizens, to their productivity, to the learning ability of their children, even to weather patterns -- will likely be welcomed by Asian leaders as valuable decision-making aids.

It is probable, once the numbers have been crunched, that some efforts to clean up the environment will be deemed too expensive. So be it. But as Asia becomes richer and its environment gets dirtier, the priorities will need to be continually re-assessed. Certainly, the experience of developed countries suggests that Asia's governments would be wise to consider, sooner rather than later, ways to minimize the ecological costs of rapid growth. If they do not, the damage will become far more expensive, if not impossible, to reverse when the days of reckoning come.