Conservation
through
having
Smaller Families
Nola Stewart 1982
Revised 2012
Part A - MONEY
Are there more people on
Earth than is helpful for the
planet? Most probably ‘Yes’ …
World population is
increasing
Better medical care means
that people now live longer
Babies which once might
have died as infants …
…now live to produce families
of their own.
Each living person has
‘needs’ which the Earth
must supply …
FOOD, CLOTHING, SHELTER and
ENERGY SUPPLIES are the basic
needs.
Money is usually the key to
these things.
But where does the money
come from?
Trade existed before there
was money
Money was developed
as a convenient way of
selling …
… and buying things
But money by itself is useless …
… without things to spend
it on.
And money cannot be
circulated unless it is backed
by …
production from the ground
e.g. mining
or from the soil,
e.g. agriculture
or from the sea, e.g. fishing
or from the bush,
e.g. forestry
So, money has to be backed
by production.
If a government prints money for
nothing, it will cause inflation
Because there is more money,
but not more goods to buy
with it.
Think about where your
money comes from …
Some people have jobs in Primary
Industry, directly related to the Earth’s
provision.
The jobs of other people are in Secondary
Industry and depend on the raw materials
which the Earth supplies.
All other jobs are in the Tertiary sector; some in
the service industries related to goods produced
from the Earth
Some people’s salaries come
from the taxes which are
paid by others.
And some people depend on the
work of others for their financial
support.
When we trace our
money back to where
it came from originally
… we will find it is
from the productivity
of the Earth.
And what will we exchange
it for?
We will spend it on GOODS
and SERVICES …
… all of which flow from the productivity of
the Earth.
Mining
Agriculture
$
Forestry
Fisheries
Food
Shelter
$
Clothing
Energy supplies
All economic activities
come at a cost to Earth’s
natural ecosystems, as
they can be traced back
to Primary Industry
Each child needs the support
of Earth for all its life.
It needs some land to be
under production to give it
food and clothes.
Trees will be cut down to
provide housing, furniture,
books, food packaging.
Each child also needs a source of
energy, for cooking, lighting and
to produce manufactured things.
The parents’ income, and later
the child’s income, will provide
its needs and wants.
… But if we trace that income
back to its origin, it is the Earth
that supports the child …
( … and every child …)
every day, 365 days a year,
for the whole of its life.
Some people have a small
amount of financial support,
while others have a lot.
This means that a SMALL
part of Earth supports
some people (1% for HALF
the population)
...while a comparatively
LARGE part supports the
rest (99% for the other
HALF) .
But 75% of Earth’s
population is in the
underdeveloped
areas
And only 25% in the
developed areas.
So it can be worked out
that 12 children in an
underdeveloped country …
… use about as much of
the Earth’s resources as
one child in a developed
country …
A reduction of one
child in a developed
country is equivalent
to …
… a cutback of 12 children
in an underdeveloped
country, in saving Earth’s
resources.
If we choose to have
smaller families …
… this would help to
save the Earth’s
resources and its
beauty
Statistics vary, but it has been said
that 2.2 children per family would
keep the world’s population …
at its present level, given the
medical care available to us today.
Global footprint
Australians use around 7 gha each
On average Earth’s population
uses 2.7 gha per capita
BUT
There is only 1.7 gha available
GLOBAL HECTARE: An area of one hectare, containing the
average amount of productivity of biologically renewable
resources such as forests, fish, food crops, fibre, firewood etc.,
plus uptake of carbon dioxide emissions in a given year.
In 1986 we began to overshoot Earth’s renewable
resources, just before we reached 5 billion people.
We are now using forests, fish, topsoil etc., faster
than they can be renewed. We need 1.5 ‘earths.’
It’s important to reduce population
because of our consumption.
If we each had the consumption of an
ant, there would be no problem in having
over 7 billion people on the planet.
Which is more effective to tackle –
POPULATION
Or
CONSUMPTION?
In the 20th century, consumption rose X 10.
By 2000 we used ~ 2.7 gha per capita
( In 1900 it would have been ~ 0.27 gha )
In the 20th century, population rose X 4
It was 6 billion in 2000 AD
( In 1900 it was around 1.6 billion)
2 X 3 X 10
Our ecological footprint in global hectares was therefore :
1900 AD - 0.27 X 1,600,000,000 = 432,000,000 gha
2000 AD - 0.27 X 1,600,000,000 X 10 X 4 = 17,280,000,000 gha
Which multiplier has the biggest
effect? The largest multiplier always
does, so for both 1900 and 2000 it is
POPULATION at 1,600,000,000 while
consumption’s importance relates to
the size of our footprint.
World population in Nov. 2015
7,400,000,000
Rate of increase = 1.1%
Doubling time = 64 years
i.e. an additional 7.4 billion
What about recycling?
In the UK, up to 80 lifetimes of responsible recycling is
completely cancelled out by the arrival of one more
person via the airport or maternity ward.
- Population Matters UK
(Hand drawn graph, source: US Census Bureau)
Summary
To counterbalance the environmental impacts of
BETTER MEDICAL CARE and IMPROVED LIVING
STANDARDS, we need to first stabilise, then reduce
global population in order to save resources and
tackle biodiversity loss.
This is a response which is reasonable to aim for ,
given the benefits we receive in modern times better medical care and higher standards of living.
Thank you.
http://ourworldindata.org/data/growth-and-distribution-of-prosperity/gdp-growthover-the-very-long-run/
See graph of Average world GDP per capita in 1990 International Dollars– Bradford
DeLong, at above link.
In 1900 World GDP per capita was Int.$ 679
In 2000 World GDP per capita was Int. $6539
(Basis for saying per capita consumption increased X 10)
http://ourworldindata.org/data/population-growth-vital-statistics/world-populationgrowth/
Interactive graph showing estimates by different sources of world population at
different dates. 1.2 billion around 1850; 1.6 billion lowest estimate around 1900.
(Basis for saying world population increased X 4)