1. Theories on the relationship between population and resources

2. Thomas Malthus 1766-1834. Born near Guildford, UK Wrote ‘An essay in the First Principle of population’ first published in 1798 The world population in 1798 was at 790 million people. We have now passed the six billion mark.

3. and therefore he said…. War, famine, disease.

4. Malthus recognised that population if unchecked, grows at a geometric rate: 1 2 4 8 16 32 However, food only increases at an arithmetic rate, as land is finite. 1 2 3 4 5 6

5. Malthus in Detail Population increases exponentially whilst resources (specifically food supply) only increase arithmetically. Eventually the number of people exceeds the available resources (food) and checks set in.

6. Negative checks (decreased birth rate)…. Negative Checks were used to limit the population growth. It included abstinence/ postponement of marriage which lowered the fertility rate. Malthus favoured moral restraint (including late marriage and sexual abstinence) as a check on population growth. However, it is worth noting that Malthus proposed this only for the working and poor classes!

8. Positive checks (increased death rate) Positive Checks were ways to reduce population size by events such as famine, disease, war - increasing the mortality rate and reducing life expectancy.

9. 'J' Curve - Population Crash Model Where do famine etc. fit?

10. The Club of Rome (Neo Malthusian) Group of industrialists, scientists, economists and statesmen from 10 countries Published ‘The Limits to Growth’ in 1972

11. The Club of Rome

12. The Club of Rome – basic conclusion…. If present growth trends in world population continue and if associated industrialisation, pollution, food production and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime in the next 100 years. The most probable result will be sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity

13. Malthus and the Club of Rome – are they right? What evidence is there to support their ideas?

14. Esther Boserup 1965 Boserup believed that people have resources of knowledge and technology and that “necessity is the mother of invention”, thus as populations grow towards the carrying capacity they develop new ways to use resources (food) more productively. Can you think of real life examples?

15. Thus……. Demographic pressure (population density) promotes innovation and higher productivity in use of land (irrigation, weeding, crop intensification, better seeds) and labour (tools, better techniques).

16. Population and resource relationship after Boserup

17. Was Boserup Right? What about resource degradation and pollution? Can we continue to innovate to overcome these issues?

18. The debate goes on…….

19. Ehrlich (Neo Malthusian) Paul Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist, wrote his book The Population Bomb in 1968. In it he warned of doom and gloom - resource depletion, species extinction and a human population so large that as a species we would face mass poverty, famine, starvation and death. According to Ehrlich, the Earth had reached its carrying capacity long ago and we were living on borrowed time.

20. Simon (Free market approach) Julian Simon, a University of Maryland economist, has written several books on population most famously The Ultimate Resource. Simon thought that all of the doom and gloom of Ehrlich was nothing but nonsense. He claimed that resources are infinite in the sense that human beings will never run out of them for whatever purpose they decide to use them for. Essentially, Simon considered humans to be the “ultimate resource”

21. In 1980, Simon was sick of hearing all this talk of the end of the world from doomsayers like Paul Ehrlich so he offered Ehrlich a bet. Ehrlich could choose any five commodities he wanted. If the prices increased over the next ten years, Simon would pay Ehrlich. If the prices decreased over the same time period, Ehrlich would have to pay Simon. The famous Simon and Ehrlich wager

22. Ehrlich chose five metals: copper, chrome, nickel, tin and tungsten. The bet was on…..

23. Why did Ehrlich predict the prices of resources would increase? Why did Simon predict the price of resources would decrease over time?

24. Ten years later, after adjusting for inflation, the prices of all five metals…….

25. went down!

26. Ehrlich had lost. He sent Simon a cheque and nothing else. Simon offered to bet again and up the ante to $20,000; Ehrlich declined.

27. Down but not out Ehrlich realised that commodity prices are not a good indicator of resource depletion. Of course the resources become depleted as we use them. But their price goes down as new technologies use other resources. Copper replacing fibre optic wire in communications and plastic replacing copper pipes in plumbing. Moreover, the recent trend of increasing demand from China and India has led to an increase in the price of commodities.

28. Then Ehrlich offered Simon a bet. That these trends in environmental quality and human welfare would continue from 1994 to 2004. 1.The three years 2002-2004 will on average be warmer than 1992-1994. 2.There will be more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in 2004 than in 1994. 3.There will be more nitrous oxide in the atmosphere in 2004 than in 1994. 4.The concentration of ozone in the lower atmosphere (the troposphere) will be greater in 2004 than in 1994. 5.Emissions of the air pollutant sulfur dioxide in Asia will be significantly greater in 2004 than in 1994. 6.There will be less fertile cropland per person in 2004 than in 1994. 7.There will be less agricultural soil per person in 2004 than in 1994. 8.There will be on average less rice and wheat grown per person in 2002-2004 than in1992-1994. 9.In developing nations there will be less firewood available per person in 2004 than in 1994. 10.The remaining area of virgin tropical moist forests will be significantly smaller in 2004 than in 1994. 11.The oceanic fisheries harvest per person will continue its downward trend and thus in 2004 will be smaller than in 1994. 12.There will be fewer plant and animal species still extant in 2004 than in 1994. 13.More people will die of AIDS in 2004 than did in 1994 14.Between 1994 and 2004, sperm counts of human males will continue to decline and reproductive disorders will continue to increase. 15.The gap in wealth between the richest 10 percent of humanity and the poorest 10 percent will be greater in 2004 than in 1994.

29. Then Ehrlich offered Simon a bet. That these trends in environmental quality and human welfare would continue from 1994 to 2004. 1.The three years 2002-2004 will on average be warmer than 1992-1994. 2.There will be more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in 2004 than in 1994. 3.There will be more nitrous oxide in the atmosphere in 2004 than in 1994. 4.The concentration of ozone in the lower atmosphere (the troposphere) will be greater in 2004 than in 1994. 5.Emissions of the air pollutant sulfur dioxide in Asia will be significantly greater in 2004 than in 1994. 6.There will be less fertile cropland per person in 2004 than in 1994. 7.There will be less agricultural soil per person in 2004 than in 1994. 8.There will be on average less rice and wheat grown per person in 2002-2004 than in1992-1994. 9.In developing nations there will be less firewood available per person in 2004 than in 1994. 10.The remaining area of virgin tropical moist forests will be significantly smaller in 2004 than in 1994. 11.The oceanic fisheries harvest per person will continue its downward trend and thus in 2004 will be smaller than in 1994. 12.There will be fewer plant and animal species still extant in 2004 than in 1994. 13.More people will die of AIDS in 2004 than did in 1994 14.Between 1994 and 2004, sperm counts of human males will continue to decline and reproductive disorders will continue to increase. 15.The gap in wealth between the richest 10 percent of humanity and the poorest 10 percent will be greater in 2004 than in 1994. Simon did not take the bet.

30. If he had, he would have lost. But where does this leave us? Neo Malthusian v Anti Malthusian

31. Demand for resources and the resulting waste and pollution depends on 3 factors. Population - How many people are there? Consumption – How much each person consumes? Intensity – How efficiently we use resources? Key Point

32. Are we heading for catastrophe? Can we keep going the way we have been - the business as usual approach - and rely on tech and markets and creativity? Or is a radically different world view required?

33. Key Question Where do you stand on this continuum? Eco-centric Deep Ecologists (Doomsters) believe that rapid population growth and increased levels of development have led to a situation where there are insufficient resources and too much waste and pollution. Techno-centric Cornucopians (Boomsters) champion the ability of humans to innovate, develop and adapt, as the solution to the issues associated with population growth, resource consumption and waste.

34. Key Question What policies or ideas would you propose for population management, consumption, waste and pollution, resource intensity and resource conservation? Eco-centric Deep Ecologists (Doomsters) believe that rapid population growth and increased levels of development have led to a situation where there are insufficient resources and too much waste and pollution. Techno-centric Cornucopians (Boomsters) champion the ability of humans to innovate, develop and adapt, as the solution to the issues associated with population growth, resource consumption and waste.