Related Articles
How does the environment create public health issues ?
|
How to reduce the carbon you generate
|
How does tree planting help tackle the climate crisis ?
|
How is overpopulation affecting the climate?
As this topic requires us to examine how economics affects the climate change situation we must first understand the growth of the human population. As economics is essentially “the story of what people do” as stated by Paul Krugman in his economics Masterclass classes (2018). Continuing with the theme of economics the first census was taken, in the USA, on the 2nd of August 1790 subsequently the first census in the UK was taken on the 10th March 1801 and was conducted because of the growing alarmist view of the future in parliament.
At present the global population stands at, approximately, 7.87 billion people and because of the steady global average increase of 1% every year means that by the year 2030 we will have a global population of approximately 10 billion. To examine this question, we need to consider what economic theorists such as Thomas Malthus said about population increase in relation to supply of products in comparison with what environmental activists such as Dr Jane Goodall advise us on the ramifications of over population.
As the industrial revolution was picking up pace in the 18th century and as the smoke and smog enveloped the Capital as well as the production and manufacturing hotspots throughout the country there were those individuals, mostly economists, who predicted how the rapid increase in population would impact society.
Three centuries later his book "An essay on the Principle of Population" still holds water even if naysayers would say that it has no modern relevance given that it was written in 1798 currently in print by Oxford university press Inc (i,2008).
Malthus theorised that populations would continue expanding until growth is stopped or reversed by disease, famine, war or calamity. Not an up-beat theory but the theory basically sates that as the population grows the world will need to react accordingly with the production of more food and commodities with which to sustain the current volume of demand and maintain the population. On a similar line of thought was Adam Smith’s notion that each individual’s economic self-interest can contribute to the greater economic good under certain market conditions. Therefore, it will only be when the market realises the necessity to conserve and protect the environment that anything will be put into action. As such, it is necessary to encourage the education of the global market in order to preserve the environment.
Therefore, we can see that even 300 years ago people were aware of the damage the exponential increase in the national and so global population would have on the world’s resources available to the human population and as intelligence has grown it would have been expected that humans would have realised the necessity to strive for sustainability.
At present the global population stands at, approximately, 7.87 billion people and because of the steady global average increase of 1% every year means that by the year 2030 we will have a global population of approximately 10 billion. To examine this question, we need to consider what economic theorists such as Thomas Malthus said about population increase in relation to supply of products in comparison with what environmental activists such as Dr Jane Goodall advise us on the ramifications of over population.
As the industrial revolution was picking up pace in the 18th century and as the smoke and smog enveloped the Capital as well as the production and manufacturing hotspots throughout the country there were those individuals, mostly economists, who predicted how the rapid increase in population would impact society.
Three centuries later his book "An essay on the Principle of Population" still holds water even if naysayers would say that it has no modern relevance given that it was written in 1798 currently in print by Oxford university press Inc (i,2008).
Malthus theorised that populations would continue expanding until growth is stopped or reversed by disease, famine, war or calamity. Not an up-beat theory but the theory basically sates that as the population grows the world will need to react accordingly with the production of more food and commodities with which to sustain the current volume of demand and maintain the population. On a similar line of thought was Adam Smith’s notion that each individual’s economic self-interest can contribute to the greater economic good under certain market conditions. Therefore, it will only be when the market realises the necessity to conserve and protect the environment that anything will be put into action. As such, it is necessary to encourage the education of the global market in order to preserve the environment.
Therefore, we can see that even 300 years ago people were aware of the damage the exponential increase in the national and so global population would have on the world’s resources available to the human population and as intelligence has grown it would have been expected that humans would have realised the necessity to strive for sustainability.
It had been a conversation with Dr Jane Goodall via Masterclass.com (2018) on humans and the environment we had learnt about her work with the chimpanzees of the Gombe Stream National Park in Tanzania in 1960 and how this experience would turn her into an environmental activist. We had learned that it was during her study of chimpanzees she had learnt about the hunger, lack of education and poverty of people living in the world caused by the destruction and greed of mankind caused and exemplified by the competition over rapidly diminishing resources, she had asked, quite rhetorically “how can we begin to save the chimpanzees when people are living around the borders of their habitat at the park in this terrible situation? “. More on the topic of macro-economics, she had said that it was “the growth of the human population which was damaging not only their habitat but also their livelihoods”. Key to answering the title question Dr Goodall raised the point of Human intellect saying that “even though we are the most intelligent creature that has walked on the Earth how is it possible that we are destroying our home? “.
“It seems that there has been some disconnect between the clever mind and the human heart, love and compassion. Instead of making a major decision based on how it will affect generations ahead, affect the world in the future when we’re not here the criteria today are; how will the decision affect me and my family or now will it affect the next shareholders meeting or affect my next political campaign? We have become caught up in a materialistic and greedy world! So, many of us and this has dire consequences for the future!” which does rather contradict what Adam Smith had said that Society would increase productivity levels in relation to levels of population which in turn assumes that the global society would be cooperative towards each other in order to achieve a workable global economy.
We have learned that the theories of economics have predicted the current situation and having learned from Dr Jane Goodall about her experience with how the environmental situation has worsened through the self-centred and profit focused incarnation of the economy
We can conclude that it is through the actions of the human race we can protect ourselves by protecting the environment and therefore protecting the economy. So, it can be concluded that the economy has a direct impact on climate change and in order to, at least in part, rectify the situation we need to augment how we use and benefit from the environment
Because whilst the planting of trees to counteract the damage done by pollutants is a fantastic step in the right direction we must press for Carbon negativity rather than carbon neutrality.
“It seems that there has been some disconnect between the clever mind and the human heart, love and compassion. Instead of making a major decision based on how it will affect generations ahead, affect the world in the future when we’re not here the criteria today are; how will the decision affect me and my family or now will it affect the next shareholders meeting or affect my next political campaign? We have become caught up in a materialistic and greedy world! So, many of us and this has dire consequences for the future!” which does rather contradict what Adam Smith had said that Society would increase productivity levels in relation to levels of population which in turn assumes that the global society would be cooperative towards each other in order to achieve a workable global economy.
We have learned that the theories of economics have predicted the current situation and having learned from Dr Jane Goodall about her experience with how the environmental situation has worsened through the self-centred and profit focused incarnation of the economy
We can conclude that it is through the actions of the human race we can protect ourselves by protecting the environment and therefore protecting the economy. So, it can be concluded that the economy has a direct impact on climate change and in order to, at least in part, rectify the situation we need to augment how we use and benefit from the environment
Because whilst the planting of trees to counteract the damage done by pollutants is a fantastic step in the right direction we must press for Carbon negativity rather than carbon neutrality.
