Monday, March 22, 2010

Is the real problem people, or what they use?

Arguments about overpopulation have gone on for decades, starting with regional concerns back even in the 18th and 19th centuries, and then going global in the 20th century. A provocative article argues that the real problem is not the number of people, it's what people use (that's called "consumption") -- and thus the problem is not the total number of people, it's the total number of wealthy people in wealthy nations using too much stuff and eating too much and driving too much and wasting too much, etc. (And when bluefin tuna is off the sushi menu in Japan because none can be found, then the rich Japanese nation will know who to point their collective finger at -- themselves.)

So here's the article:

The overpopulation myth


"Here are the numbers. Forty years ago, the average woman had between five and six kids. Now she has 2.6. This is getting close to the replacement level which, allowing for girls who don’t make it to adulthood, is around 2.3. As I show in my new book, Peoplequake, half the world already has a fertility rate below the long-term replacement level."

The reason?

"Women are doing this because, for the first time in history, they can. Better healthcare and sanitation mean that most babies now live to grow up. It is no longer necessary to have five or six children to ensure the next generation—so they don’t."

So the real problem is...

"... because the second myth about population growth is that it is the driving force behind our wrecking of the planet.

In fact, rising consumption today far outstrips the rising headcount as a threat to the planet. And most of the extra consumption has been in rich countries that have long since given up adding substantial numbers to their population, while most of the remaining population growth is in countries with a very small impact on the planet. By almost any measure you choose, a small proportion of the world’s people take the majority of the world’s resources and produce the majority of its pollution."
And this message is strong:

"But let’s be clear about the scale of the difference involved. The carbon emissions
of one American today are equivalent to those of around four Chinese, 20 Indians,
30 Pakistanis, 40 Nigerians or 250 Ethiopians."

If you care (and I try to), the first tactic is to consume less and conserve more.

No comments: