It's always been funny to me how Bjorn Lomberg sounds like one
of the most reasonable and intelligent people, yet he's often excoriated
by enviroweenies as in the pay of big oil. His book the skeptical
environmentalist approaches the global warming problem as an
economic problem, how much does the kyoto approach spend for
achieving what amount of mitigation? It finds kyoto lacking and
suggests our money would be better spent fixing worse problems.
There's a great article in the WSJ opinion journal that includes an
interview with Mr Lomberg and discusses his latest project that
attempts to bring together world leaders to prioritize problems.
Turns out, without the hypsters, global warming tends to be at the
bottom of the list.
Prioritization, cost-effectiveness, efficiency--these are the ultimate in rational thinking. (It strikes me they are the ultimate in "free markets," though Mr. Lomborg studiously avoids that term.) They are also nearly unheard-of concepts among the governments, international bodies and aid groups that oversee good works.
Mr. Lomborg's approach has been to organize events around the globe in which leaders are forced to think in new ways. His task is certainly timely, with groups like the U.N. engaged in debate over "reform," and philanthropists such as Warren Buffett throwing billions at charitable foundations. But, I ask, can the world really become more rational? "It's no use just talking about all the great things you'd like to accomplish--we've got to get there," says Mr. Lomborg.
This kind of approach is what we need to begin to move away from the fuzzy thinking that currently fills the world. not in magic magic land but in the real world how do we solve problems. In the real world we're not feeding at infinitely large government troughs, we need to show value for money. Government should be held to the same standard which I believe will lead to a better overall result.