Looking at the Arctic and Antarctic through the lens of environmental history seems to have been a long time coming, given the extensive publications in this field for much of the rest of the world. Environmental history developed from the growth in environmental concerns that began back in the 1970s when the environmental movement became exercised first by conservation issues and then environmental management and sustainability. The interplay between environment and human uses, between perception of wilderness and its protection, and between how human history has forcibly changed the Earth burgeoned into a broad field of study across all the continents except Antarctica, perhaps because it was seen as a pristine wilderness without any lasting human interactions. Possibly the first major attempts to look at the poles through environmental history were Stephen Pyne’s The ice in 1986 and Robert McGhee’s book on the Arctic in Reference McGhee2005 but there had been other papers and books looking at some aspects earlier than this. What we have in the present volume is a more coherent and carefully constructed approach to both poles in one book, leaning heavily on comparisons and contrasts, and weaving exploration, science, geopolitics and usage into a complex framework.

In his six chapters, Howkins fully exploits the contrasts by using thematic elements to both heighten the differences but also to draw some interesting connections through the way both regions link into global processes, be they political myth making or international markets. His first chapter ‘Myth and History’ looks at some aspects of the early history through to 1800. Whilst there is considerable material on the history of the Inuit and other native Arctic people for the North, the Antarctic, except for Cook’s writings, existed only in speculation and myth making. Suggesting that the history as written has been politically contingent on the later aspirations of countries like Britain allows him to question its factual basis and reduces the early explorers to what he describes as ‘mythical figures’. Chapter 2 deals with marine exploitation and here there is much more robust material to work with, not least in the history of the whaling and sealing industries. I am not convinced that Antarctic sealing played a substantive role in the sale of Alaska by Russia as he suggests, and I did feel that he could have made some reference both to the protection afforded to fur seals on South Georgia and to the implementation of successful sustainable elephant sealing based on scientific principles. The history of the Discovery Investigations also shows that the scientific concerns about overfishing were a major element in developing the political response for managing whaling, which was, however, confounded by a general Treasury principle that British colonies should make money! Whilst he makes much of the political importance of the Discovery Investigations I feel that he underplays the major role of this science in developing our understanding of the marine food webs and in many ways providing the historical underpinning for CCAMLR. It is not without significance that the Russian research vessels in the 1960s carried Discovery Reports on board as a guide in planning their cruise tracks. In Chapter 3 Howkins explores the environmental history concepts embedded in polar exploration and uses this to examine how technology, like the use of aircraft, changed the concept of exploration both in terms of what explorers could do and in diluting the exceptionalism of the polar regions in the public mind. I especially liked the way he used particular explorers, like Wilkins and Amundsen, to underscore the changing political emphases of exploration. In Chapter 4 ‘Dreams and realities: economic development’, Howkins examines the differing visions of the polar regions projected by Stefansson (opportunities for development) and Amundsen (a place for adventure). Whilst his analysis of the economic activities in Svalbard and Greenland seems sensible, the attempt to extend this to the Antarctic through Byrd’s activities and the political writings of South Americans seems stretching comparisons rather too far. Inexplicably he ignores fishing in both polar regions and thus the pioneering attempts by CCAMLR at sustainable management and ecosystem protection, which is now being copied elsewhere in the world. In the final two chapters, he examines first the effects of the Cold War and here he provides a clear linkage between the hostilities and the Antarctic Treaty, and sets in context the militarization of the Arctic by both the USSR and the USA. The inclusion of whaling in this chapter seems odd and it would seem to be better located with the earlier economic arguments. In his final chapter on exploitation, he tries to connect oil spills, climate change and polar tourism with conservation, governance and politics; a tall order, yet actually quite successful. All of the chapters are heavily referenced with 30 pages of end notes and a 16 page bibliography.

He writes in the Conclusions about the geographies of despair and hope. Given the environmental damage throughout the rest of the world, I see the polar regions still as geographies of hope. Howkins provides us with thought provoking comparisons, not all of which work well for me, and some very depressing facts, but in general the polar regions seem have fared much better than elsewhere, and in conservation and governance terms have pioneered new initiatives in conservation and sustainability, shown the value of science in policy development and illustrated that consensus between widely differing national approaches is possible for a common goal. Of course, we can do better and this very interesting book provides much worth thinking about on how to shape the future.