Two environmentalists and two economists squared off last week in a debate at the Earthwatch annual meeting at the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

The speakers discussed whether there is a limit to the planet's ability to sustain the world's industrial products and whether market forces help or a hinder the environment.

Environmentalists argued that market forces have led to the elimination of the rain forests and increased steel and farm production. The free market has contributed to the loss of hundreds of animal and plant species, as well as to the rapid increase in the output of CO2 and PCP's into the environment, they said.

"Present day economics does not and cannot take into account the value of biological wealth," said Baird Professor of Science Edward O. Wilson '55. "There are signs we have reached a watershed in that the next generation will be worse off than the generation before."

The economists countered by saying most dire predictions made by environmentalists have not come to pass.

"The shortages of oil and the depletion of energy is not occurring. Instead of an oil crunch, we have an oil glut and population growth has slowed. Economic factors are part of all of these," said Allen Sinai, chief economist of The Boston Company, Inc. "The doomsday scene and devastating shortages predicted have never come to pass."

The two groups did agree that human effort will play a large role in improving the quality of life on Earth in the future.

Sinai said she foresees the world turning its attention to the environment as the Cold War ends and billions of dollars can be diverted.