Understanding the impact of natural resources
We live in a finite world that we are consuming at a rate this is unsustainable. This is not a new concept. In 1798 Thomas Malthus forecast that the world would run short of food. He based this prediction on the fact that there was limited agricultural land in the world and so food supply would fail to rise as rapidly as population. Changes in technology and agricultural production prevented this from happening. 200 years after he made his prediction of imminent famine, the world population is 6 times larger and still growing, and so abundantly fed that obesity is a major health risk in the western world.
Humanity’s ability through innovation to avert Malthus’ intelligently calculated catastrophe has been held up as a counter argument against any prediction of impending doom ever since. In particular the pace at which we are consuming fossil fuels and other non-renewable energies, and more recently climate change. What is often overlooked in this argument is the degree of social disruption and economic upheaval that accompanied the changes that enabled this catastrophe to be avoided. In 1798 the majority of the world’s population was employed or at least participated in primary industry – farming, fishing and forestry. The rise and fall of food production was closely connected to everyone. Even 100 years later, in 1900, well after the industrial revolution and railways had become part of the landscape, over 40% of Americans still worked in agriculture. Roll forward another century to the year 2000 and only 1% of Americans still worked in agriculture. The change in economic ecosystems through each of the intervening generations has been huge and often painful. The change in the natural ecosystem over the same period has often been devastating. Innumerable species have become extinct, and many more endangered as they fail or struggle to adapt to a changing world. Now humanity is confronted by a changing climate that may require cooperation as much as innovation if disaster is to be averted. It is a challenge that humanity appears unprepared for.
The management of our oceans is indicative of the cooperation required in order to avoid disaster. Many parts of the oceans have been over-fished, with some of the most abundant fisheries fished beyond a point from which they could recover. With government intervention others were given a reprieve from fishing, that is fishing was banned, until stocks could recover. Once the fisheries had recovered, restrictions were put in place, (maximum numbers and minimum fish sizes) to ensure the fish stocks were sustainable. It may seem obvious, but it takes a collective will to do the right thing, and this is often only obtained when it is plain for all to see that disaster is imminent.
Global warming is now upon us. The consumption of fossil fuels is making it worse. The modern western lifestyle consumes a great deal of energy. More and more people want to live the modern western lifestyle. Efforts are being made to make this lifestyle more energy efficient. However the increase in energy efficiency is currently slower than the increase in the number of people adopting the modern western lifestyle. It is widely accepted that disaster is imminent, there is a collective will that action is required, but meaningful collective action is yet to occur.
Recap
- Reward for effort – energy makes modern western lifestyle possible
- Value is relative – today’s lifestyle is currently worth more than tomorrow’s world
- Trade requires difference in value – the environment does not value money
- Money is a catalyst – Money has no moral value
- Trade creates economic ecosystems – economic ecosystems are a human construct and don’t include the environment
- Economic measurements are incomplete – economic measurements do not take into account environmental degradation.