In almost all of the discussions about population and environment I have observed or been a party to, someone will take the stand that the problem is not too many people, especially not too many poor people, but rather the problem is too much consumption by the rich.
I have been having a discussion over at Dot Earth with Lou Gold and others about the population and resources conundrum. During some back and forth with Lou (see previous post and comments) I think I have finally found a way to express my thoughts on the conundrum and have presented a convincing argument for focusing on women's health and empowerment to reduce births as a matter of the highest priority. Here's the nub of it:
Regarding
the population vs. consumption debate, it may be true that at a given
point in time, smaller, more urban families have a bigger footprint on
the earth than extremely poor but large families. But in the long run,
the smaller families bring us closer to a stable population. The large
families ensure that population pressure will continue to threaten
biodiversity and other planetary resources, no matter how green and
energy efficient technology becomes.
Development must accompany population stabilization in Brazil and everywhere else. Development in poor nations and de-development in rich nations need to both converge on a green path of efficient energy use and equal distribution of resources. Simple in concept, but again, another one that is devilish in its details.
Development must accompany population stabilization in Brazil and everywhere else. Development in poor nations and de-development in rich nations need to both converge on a green path of efficient energy use and equal distribution of resources. Simple in concept, but again, another one that is devilish in its details.
Just dipping in here Kelpie as I emerge from the forest for a rare day online.
I did want to clarify that I'm not among the gang saying "...the problem is not too many people, especially not too many poor people, but rather the problem is too much consumption by the rich."
Yes, the consumption by the rich countries is beyond any justification. And I'm not saying that there are too many poor people. I am saying that there is a huge emerging market of poorer people who want to consume as much as they can (following the bad habit of the rich) and that they will reduce family size in order to do so, creating an even bigger cumulative ecological footprint. Just look at China and India and Brazil.
Posted by: Lou Gold | 03/06/2009 at 08:21 PM