| Bryan Norton's Convergence Hypothesis asserts that environmentalists "of all stripes" can achieve consensus over environmental policy if only minimal constraints are applied to the dialogue. Norton challenges that his proposition has not been falsified as yet (as of 1997). 1 test the hypothesis against the dialogue over the environmental use of biotechnology (genetic engineering). I discuss the environmental ethical issues raised by biotechnology and show that the Convergence Hypothesis is either unreasonable---applying its constraints to a environmental policy dialogue is too restrictive for environmental radicals, or can be falsified---applying its constraints does not lessen the divergence between positions in the dialogue over biotech policy. I conclude that the Convergence Hypothesis is an overgeneralization: the global claim of "unity among environmentalists of all stripes" cannot be upheld.;I discuss practical consequences of this observation---how it affects risk management (and the risk/ethics boundary), biotech risk communication, the comprehensiveness of the ecosystem health concept, and the application to international agreements. |
