Cortner, Hanna J.

English

University of New Mexico

Volume 23 
Issue 4 Fall 1983 
Fall 1983 
The Individual vs. the Public Interest: Political Ideology and 
National Forest Policy, Richard M. Alston 
Hanna J. Cortner 
Recommended Citation 
Hanna J. Cortner, The Individual vs. the Public Interest: Political Ideology and National Forest Policy, 
Richard M. Alston, 23 Nat. Resources J. 941 (1983). 
Available at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nrj/vol23/iss4/12 
This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UNM Digital Repository. It has 
been accepted for inclusion in Natural Resources Journal by an authorized editor of UNM Digital Repository. For 
more information, please contact amywinter@unm.edu, lsloane@salud.unm.edu, sarahrk@unm.edu. 
lSUUK KI-VIl-Wb
THE INDIVIDUAL VS. THE PUBLIC INTEREST:
POLITICAL IDEOLOGY AND NATIONAL FOREST
POLICY
RICHARD M. ALSTON
Boulder: Westview Press. 1983. Pp. xiii + 250. $20, s.c.
Discussions surrounding the Sagebrush Rebellion and its offspring, the
concepts of "privatization" and "asset management," have underscored
the point that at the core of many issues of forest policy are different
assumptions about the proper scope of governmental authority and the
relationship between individual and societal interests. The main protag-
onists-foresters, economists, and environmentalists-talk past one an-
other often without recognizing the ideological, indeed religious, tenor
of their arguments. In a provocative book, Richard Alston sheds light on
the origins and evolution of these competing and conflicting ideologies
and examines the possibility of creating a new, integrating ideology ca-
pable of striking a balance between a strictly individualistic and a strictly
ecological point of view.
Beginning with the views of Plato and Aristotle on the ideal state,
Alston takes his reader on a well-documented journey through the cen-
turies, exploring the social and political changes that led from a traditional
to a market society in the 16th and 17th centuries to the changes that
today are marking the transition to an age of organization and information.
Also explored in depth are the implications of the neoclassical economists'
position that the public interest is nothing more than the sum of individual
interests and is best served by unfettered markets. The atomistic soiety
of the neoclassical economists is contrasted with the German influence
on both forestry and economics, which lent credence to the view that
society is an entity understandable apart from its individual members and
that the state has a positive role to play in pursuing social objectives.
The clash of these schools of thought is described in the emergence of
modern forest economics and its struggles to define itself and the analytical
contribution the new profession could make to resource management.
This history of ideas serves to illustrate the fact that facts do not speak
for themselves; "truth" is a reflection of subjective analysis that is shaped
and guided by ideological biases, biases that are rooted deeply in historical
experiences and social development. In one respect, there is nothing new
about Alston's message. Many other commentators have pointed out the
consequences of analysts' failure to understand the value-laden assump-
tions of their disciplines. Why then should forest economists and other
members of the natural resource community find Alston's book of value?
Because the lesson apparently has not yet been learned. At a recent
NATURAL RESOURCES JOURNAL
meeting of forest economists, for example, repeated statements could be
heard that the major problems of forest policy could be solved if only
"correct" economic analysis could be applied. As Alston would reply:
which economics, whose economics?
Because we are in an era of congressionally mandated interdisciplinary
planning, there are cogent reasons to be aware of and sensitive to the
different styles of thinking represented in multi-resource decisionmaking.
If effective communication is to occur and a foundation laid for compro-
mise and bargaining, members of interdisciplinary teams must be mindful
of their own blind spots as well as of the motivations and cognitive modes
of others. Alston provides an effective catalyst for such introspective
examinations.
The problem for forest policy, however, is not just one of understanding
the ideological heritage which divides foresters, economists, and envi-
ronmentalists. For as Alston points out, while disciples of each ideology
cling tenaciously to their beliefs, the ideologies are no longer applicable
to the changing realities of the age of information and organization. What
is needed is a new integration of ideas.
Alston places his faith in the planning process mandated by the Re-
sources Planning Act and the National Forest Management Act (RPA/
NFMA)--albeit recast significantly from current implementing prac-
tices-to accomplish the needed transformation. For example, Alston
suggests that the Forest Service refocus public input from project to
program (national) level decisions. But at risk of showing one's own
disciplinary prejudices, significant institutional barriers stand in the way
of such a proposal. Public input focuses on the project level precisely
because it is here that tradeoffs are visible enough to enable public groups
to muster the resources they need (large numbrs of people with intensely
held opinions, expertise on local needs and conditions, etc.) for effective
participation. Moreover, debates surrounding project decisions also reflect
a political system response to another philosophical dilemma in our so-
ciety: how to reconcile national versus local interests.
While quibbling with Alston over the efficacy of certain aspects of his
proposed solution, this is nevertheless a timely and readable work that
should prompt healthy discussion and debate, and further the integrative
learning process that RPA/NFMA planning has already begun.
HANNA J. CORTNER
George Banzhaf & Company
Tucson, Arizona
[Vol. 23


The Individual vs. the Public Interest: Political Ideology and National Forest Policy, Richard M. Alston

https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2712&amp;context=nrj

The Individual vs. the Public Interest: Political Ideology and National Forest Policy, Richard M. Alston

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of New Mexico