Review: Climate change is an industry and, as with any industry, there's going to be differences of opinion. There is the danger that in focussing so closely on the temperature changes that may (or of course may not) happen that we forget that there are legitimate areas for discussion. It is possible that these areas could suggest some radical change. The aim of this text is to challenge some of the basic assumptions and show that there are unanswered questions behind the rhetoric. In some ways the sub-title 'illusion and reality in the coming war on climate change' says it all. We are, argues the author, labouring under a mis-understanding of the nature of both sustainability and the debate which is run around it. Unless we start to re-think then we may be applying a solution too late to a different issue to the one that is actually needed.

The book is divided into three and starts with an exploration of the nature of sustainable development. Chapter one tries to outline some of the development of these ideas. Taken literally, sustainable development is a contradiction in terms since development must be bounded and 'sustainability' suggests otherwise. We start with an brief historical overview and soon tackle a crucial issue - the gap between reality and rhetoric. Using the UK Sustainable Development Strategy as a starting point, we are shown how the basic tenets are not possible in the form they are written. It is not that they are badly drafted, it's just that they beg more questions than they answer. There is also the issue raised that the sustainability debate is really a question of ethics rather than some obvious result of a scientific observation. Chapter two continues with this. It argues that climate models are uncertain and yet although we know this we still rely on them as a serious benchmark of change. Much of this relies on the ethics of the case. Since sustainable development was founded with ideas of inter/intra-generational equity, it has been put forward as an ethical choice (although this is false - we cannot speak for future generations). Chapter three continues the argument and looks at the ways in which the sustainability argument is subverted by the idea that we never quite reach the target but always strive towards it. In effect we are being told that we can both have our cake and eat it - we can have sustainability but under business-as-usual rules. The next set of chapters takes the argument one stage further by suggesting ways we could reformulate politics to avoid such traps. Chapter four suggests that we focus on the present and not try to move towards some utopian future. We don't know what might happen but we can make small positive steps with what we have now. One of the best ways of doing this would be to look at the quality of life. However, even that might not produce enough action and so we might need to look deeper - to the actual fundamental needs of society. Here, as chapter five points out, we get just what we need allowing the resources so 'freed' to be used for other people raising their standards or for future generations. It's a save rather than spend policy. The final three chapters try to put this new view into practice. Taken as a set they argue that we must reform the way that politics is carried out and that part of this reformation is the change in the way things are managed and governed. At this point there are a number of different arguments as to how this might happen but the overall theme is one of differentiation. There is a need for a multiplicity of viewpoints that allows us to choose the best option. In some ways this mirrors the energy debate where a range of generating options is needed but where only a few centralised forms are offered.

This is a thought provoking book. It's most useful for those trying to delve deeper into the debate on sustainability because it presupposes some familiarity with the debate. At a time when the sustainability debate seems to be moving in one direction there's much to be said for a view which demands we stop and find out what we are really following.