Why environmentalists are not effective- they don't talk things out!.
The book "Death of environmentalism" didn't get quite get to the heart of the matter. Too much env debate is shallow and unfinished. The greens got a hiding in the Aust election here too, partly because they, and those polys who listen to em, are now seen as "running off half cocked". If its worth doing, its worth doing well (dogood)

Real progress is made by supporting those who know how to cut where it counts --supporting professionals first-- ensuring peer review actually happens. http://productionecologists.blogspot.com It is unproductive in the longer term to rely on legislature , quick fix media methods, more meetings or the mad myopic views of governance that surround us.
Shellenberger seem to miss the point about professionalism, even though he mentions it in passing There is no place for public debate in the environmental movement. Even librarians have much fiercer public debates and dialogues than the environmental community. Or look at the AIDS movement, where public-health organizations and government agencies have fantastic debates every year. They have peer-reviewed journals and panel discussions at international conferences. Look at the intense debates over how to stem the flow of HIV/AIDS in Africa. The environmental movement needs a national or international forum to debate strategy.
Having another b meeting will do nothing . Before you can create debate you have to know why there is no debate -
Some us know exactly why there is no debate - whether we will sayanything more here is another matter . see quickfiz.blogspot.com