www.elsevier.com/locate/earscirev

Earth-Science Reviews 66 (2004) 389–390

Book review

Creeping Environmental Problems and

Sustainable Development in the Aral Sea Basin

edited by Glantz, M.H., Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1999. Hardcover,

XII+291 pp., Price £50.00., ISBN 0-521-62086-4

The demise of the Aral Sea has been described as

‘the world’s largest man-made disaster’ (Tanton and

Heaven, 1999) and ‘perhaps the most notorious eco-

logical catastrophe of human making’ (Stone, 1999).

The publication of this volume is therefore of more

than usual interest, since it contains some of the most

detailed accounts so far available in English summa-

rising a wealth of long-term research on hydrology,

ecology and human health issues within the basin. This

volume complements the excellent monographs by

Babaev (1996) and by Micklin and Williams (1996)

dealing with environmental degradation of the Aral

Sea Basin and is a fitting companion to these studies.

Independent studies of the palaeohydrology and

palaeolimnology of the Aral Sea and its drainage

basin enable us to place the present crisis into context

(Boomer et al., 2000; Glazirin and Trofimov, 1999).

The two major rivers that flow into the Aral Sea (the

Amudarya and the Syrdarya) have fluctuated greatly

over the past 20,000 years, with the sea drying out and

refilling on a number of occasions. In its present form,

the Aral Sea is a Holocene lake, dating back to about

10,000 years.

One of the major aims of the present volume is to

show how the environmental crisis in the Aral Sea and

its surrounding region (Priaraliye in Russian) devel-

oped very gradually during the past half century, a

theme also explored by Spoor (1998). Glantz defines

creeping environmental change as ‘long-term, low-

grade, incremental but cumulative environmental

problems’ and specifically asked his fellow authors

to identify possible thresholds of change. Since they

had often worked for many decades within the basin,

their conclusions carry some authority.

doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2004.01.006

The coverage is impressive in scope and compre-

hensive in detail. Four chapters deal with climatic

fluctuations in the basin, with desertification process-

es in the region, with changes in water quantity and

quality and with flow variability in the Amudarya

and Syrdarya. Two chapters discuss the recent eco-

logical changes to the priaraliye and the delta. Later

chapters focus on fish biology and changes to other

biological communities in the Aral Sea, human health

and the political ideology that gave rise to the crisis.

The climate appears to be changing to one of even

colder winters and hotter summers, although there is

some sign of an increase in river runoff in recent

years. The inception of the crisis goes back to the

grand ideas of Lenin and Stalin and the search for

self-sufficiency in cotton from Central Asia. Abstrac-

tion of water from the inflowing rivers for irrigation

initiated the problem. Construction of the 1400-km-

long Karakum Canal (which deprives the Aral Sea of

some 15 km3 each year) has aggravated the problem.

What was once the fourth largest lake in the world

has shrunk to over half its former size, and its volume

has dwindled by over two-thirds—unsustainable by

any measure.

The consequences include exposure of saline land,

contamination of water with salt and pesticides, a

sharp drop in human health, accelerated loss of soil,

a change towards a more salt and drought-tolerant

plant cover and collapse of the regional fishing

industry. All of these issues are documented with

precise detail and admirable objectivity in this volume

and have been debated elsewhere (Saiko, 1998; Saiko

and Zonn, 2000).

What lessons may we draw from this sobering

analysis? First, big environmental problems have

small beginnings, imperceptible to none but a few

prescient observers. Second, major development proj-

ects imposed from above with too little attention to

local hydrology and ecology are seldom successful.

Third, we need to take much more account of those

Book review390

biological indicators that give early warning of major

environmental change or we will all be the losers.

References

Babaev, A.G., 1996. Problems of Arid Land Development. Moscow

Univ. Press, Moscow (see chapter 2.3 The Aral Basin—a region

of an ecological calamity).

Boomer, I., Aladin, N., Plotnikov, I., Whatley, R., 2000. The palae-

olimnolgy of the Aral Sea: a review. Quaternary Science Reviews

19, 1259–1278.

Glazirin, G.E., Trofimov, G.N., 1999. Changes in Aral Sea level

and the run-off of main rivers in central Asia for the last 20,000

years. Science Reports of Tohoku University 7th Series (Geog-

raphy) 49 (2), 135–142.

Micklin, P.P., Williams, W.D., 1996. The Aral Sea Basin. NATO

ASI Series. 2. Environment, vol. 12. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

Saiko, T.A., 1998. Geographical and socio-economic dimensions of

the Aral Sea crisis and their impact on the potential for commu-

nity action. Journal of Arid Environments 39, 225–238.

Saiko, T.A., Zonn, I.S., 2000. Irrigation expansion and dynamics of

desertification in the Circum-Aral region of Central Asia. Ap-

plied Geography 20, 349–367.

Spoor, M., 1998. The Aral Sea Basin crisis: transition and environ-

ment in former Soviet Central Asia. Development and Change

29, 409–435.

Stone, R., 1999. Coming to grips with Aral Sea’s grim legacy.

Science 284, 30–32.

Tanton, T.W., Heaven, S., 1999 (November–December). Worsen-

ing of the Aral Basin crisis: can there be a solution? Journal of

Water Resources Planning and Management, 363–368.

Martin Williams

University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia

E-mail address: martin.williams@adelaide.edu.au