 <ICLE-SW-LND-0008.1> 
The conflict between modern civilization and nature has been obvious for a long time. Complaints about air - and water pollution has been frequent ever since the first industrial towns were developed in 19th-century England. In this country, concern about wild nature in the beginning of this century resulted in the setting up of "National parks" in the mountains of Lappland and at the same time there was an animated debate on Swedish forestry, which threatened to empty the country of its wide forests. In our own age the environmental issues have increased in numbers and in urgency, extermination of species and ecosystems, the greenhouse effect, ozone depletion in the stratosphere, acid rain and desert formation being the most important ones .
There has been a growing consciousness concerning these matters during the past few decades with "green" political groups obtaining parliamentary seats throughout Europe. Still, the changes made are hardly noticable. We still demand economic growth while the earth's natural resources are diminishing by the hour. There is a pervading assumption that human ingenuity will solve all problems as they appear or that we somehow can do without nature .
But even in today's highly urbanised industrial countries we eat, drink and breathe and are likely to continue having to do so in the future. Food, water and air - these are our primary needs, not technological innovations, however fascinating. The green plants provide us with food and oxygen, they are the world's primary producers. What happens if increased ultraviolet radiation (as a result of the ozone layer destruction) makes the terrestrial part of the world uninhabitable for plants? Life would have to slip back to where it came from - the ocean. Before this happens, man will indeed have had a hard time surviving .
Scenarios of this kind are certain to be called alarmist, by laymen because of their lack of knowledge and by many scientists because of their caution of making predictions as a matter of principle. Still, near the Antarctic ozone "hole", ultraviolet radiation makes the sheep blind (Patagonia) and increases human skin cancer incidence dramatically (Tasmania).
The changes we see now are almost completely a result of the sins of the industrial nations. Should the developing countries use our present standards of living as a model for the future, hope for mankind will be very slight. With this global suicide exploitation scene near at hand, the absurdity of present views of "progress" are, or should be, obvious .
Then, what can be done to avoid this gloomy prospect? Should we force the developing countries to abstain from improving their living-standards while continuing ourselves to suck the last drops of wealth out of the earth? This will hardly be feasable. The answer must be to realise that the era of unlimited economic growth is unretreavibly over and that instead of forever increasing our standards of living, we might even have to lower them a bit and be happy with a more relaxed, less frontier-breaking attitude towards life. It is difficult to visualise this happening all over the world but the intention must be achieve this change of mind. Perhaps there is still time to learn the message of the Native Americans that we are only borrowing the earth from our children .
