Patrick Kupper

The "1970 Diagnosis": Reflections on a Turning-Point in Environmental History

Can one speak of the time around 1970 as turning-point in environmental history? Or were the changes in these years rather of a gradual sort? When we put the social perception of the environment at the centre of our analysis we realise that in the years after 1970 there was indeed a clear break in environmental-historical developments. This break can be called, employing a medical metaphor, the "1970 diagnosis" in analogy to the "1950 syndrome," a metaphor introduced into the debate by Christian Pfister. Accordingly, the "1970 diagnosis" stands for an all-encompassing reinterpretation of the man-environment relationship in the years immediately following 1970. The decisive point is that this reinterpretation, which took place amazingly quickly, cannot just be explained by increasing pollution (which admittedly grew exponentially after about 1950). Rather, the social perception of these changes must be at the centre of the analysis. The author suggests that one can understand the change in perception as a fundamental social learning process.

Two contexts were of central importance for this learning process. First, in the 1970s there was an effective coordination of activities that previously had taken place independently. As a result synergies were set free and once unrelated discourses began to converge. Even more significant was a second context. The reinterpretation of the environment took place at the same time as a deep social crisis of orientation. The "1970 diagnosis" was able to develop its force thanks to a social climate characterised by the questioning of time-honoured certainties and truisms. The "1970 diagnosis" was an important stimulus to the debate on how one should treat the environment. Still, it would be incorrect to speak of a turning point. The evidence on the amount of danger to or destruction of the environment could be interpreted in different ways. Accordingly, the suggestions of the last thirty years concerning what should be done were varied and often incompatible. It appears inappropriate for another reason to speak of a historical turning point. This concept should not be used in an inflationary manner, rather it should remain reserved for historical revolutions or upheavals.