The Ecological Crisis
Social Ecology: World
Sustainability
Paradigm Theory
• Cultural Groups Develop “insider” views of the
world---shared sets of assumptions, jargon,
definitions, methods---that cause them to see
the world similarly.
• Resist change
• Anomaly
• Explanation
• Crisis
• Alternative Explanation
• Defense
• Revolution
Raising the Alarm in the 1960s
Murray Bookchin (aka Lewis Herbert) Our
Synthetic Environment, 1962
“to suggest that pesticides, food additives, chemicalized
agriculture, burgeoning urbanization and nuclear
energy were harmful was regarded not merely as
“reactionary” but as a national heresy” given the
sentiment “characteristic of the country as a whole--the equating of progress with mindless growth and
the technocratic ideal of `progress above all.’”
Raising the Alarm in the 1960s
Rachel Carson Our Silent Spring 1962
“the controversy that exploded around Rachel Carson’s
book….highlights the extent to which American
public opinion, orchestrated by corporate interests
and government agencies, adhered to a “grow or die”
economic mentality and a domineering attitude
toward the natural world.” [Bookchin, X11]
Limits to Growth 1972
The Club of Rome
The world first confronts the reality that
resources limits constrain growth.
The Club of Rome---an international
organization of scholars, industrialists and
scientists from 25 nations funded Denis
and Donella Meadows to run a computer
model projecting conditions in 2100 from
known data 1900-1970.
http://www.clubofrome.org/
The World Model
Jay Forrester MIT
• Model complex systems and project outcomes
given specified assumptions
• Overcome humans’ limited ability to handle
complexity and large number of variables.
• Ex. Of simple linear extrapolation:
Herman Kahn The Year 2000 (Hudson Institute) failed
to anticipate energy, pollution or population problems.
Assumed economic and technological growth would
handle all problems.
Modeling Complex Systems Cont.
Complex systems have multiple feedback loops
• Short run, linear decision making fails to
anticipate unexpected results
ex. Iron rule of highways.
• each variable affects all
• Synergistic interactions 2 + 2 = 5
– ex. Drug interactions
• Time Delay
– ex. Ozone hole, climate change
Modeling Complex Systems Cont.
• Von Bertalanffy---General Systems Theory
SYSTEM:
CLOSED
OR OPEN
input
Throughput
output
Buckminister Fuller:
“Make the world work, for 100% of humanity, in the shortest possible time,
through spontaneous cooperation, without ecological offense or the
disadvantage of anyone.”
Operating Manual for
Spaceship Earth 1963
Dymaxion and
Geodesic Dome
http://www.hearingvoices.com/webwork/bucky/ful
ler3.html#botleft
http://www.bfi.org/
Forrester Assumed that Social
Systems:
• Engage in counterintuitive behavior
• The welfare of the system may be contradicted
by subsystems with different goals
• The actions of one subsystem affect all
• Short term improvements conflict with long term
perspectives because consequences invariably
lead to degradation
• Are insensitive to policy changes intended to
change the system’s behavior.
System Dynamic Computer
Modeling
Assume key variables, trends and weighting of
factors plus interactive factors.
Use mathematical equations to simulate multiple
interactions and non-linear relations among
variables.
Clearly specify assumptions.
Can change assumptions as new information
comes to light. Test different scenarios.
Not predicting the future but projecting current
trends to see consequences and allow for
correction.
5 Key Variables Dynamically
Interacted
•
•
•
•
•
Population
Pollution
Natural Resources
Industrial Output per capita
Food per capita
Limitations
Crude---ex. Pollution omitted many types of
pollution and focused only on long lived
types.
Resources lumped all together.
Assume resources last 250 years at 1970
use rates.
6 Major Assumptions
1. Finite stock of exploitable, non-renewable
resources
2. Finite amount of land to grow food
3. Finite capacity of environment to absorb
pollution
4. Technological change is incremental assuming
money and environmental technology to allow.
5. Finite yield of food from any unit of arable land
Thomas Malthus
• 1798 Malthus published On Population.
• Imbalance between population and
resources is inevitable because
– Food increases arithmetically
– Population increases geometrically
“God created a world in which the power of the
eater to reproduce himself is of a superior
order than that of the earth to produce food
because fear of starvation stimulates men to
be industrious.”
Assumptions Continued
6. Exponential growth of population,
pollution and industrial output as long as
resources and their interaction permit.
• Ex. World population increasing at 1.7% 1.8%.
• Population increased more than 6x in 200
years.
14
World Population (billions)
12
10
8
6.5 billion in 2005
6
4 billion in 1975
4
2 billion in 1920
2
1 billion in 1800
0
500
600
700
800
900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100
Year
Source: UN Population Division 2004; Lee, 2003; Population Reference Bureau
Exponential Growth
When a quantity changes exponentially, its
value will double (or halve) in regular time
intervals.
The time it takes to double depends on the
annual percent of growth. You calculate
doubling time by dividing this annual
growth rate into 70.
Doubling time in years = 70/growth rate or
70/1.8=39 years.
60
World GDP (trillion 1990 dollars)
50
$52 trillion in 2003
40
30
20
$10 trillion in 1967
10
$1 trillion in 1900
0
500
700
Source: DeLong 1998
900
1100
1300
Year
1500
1700
1900
2100
New York City’s Solar
Energy Future
The Center for Sustainable Energy
at Bronx Community College, January 2006
NEOMALTHUSIAN INEQUITY
We live in a world where
• 1/5 of people and 1/3 of children are
hungry
• 1/5 of people lack clean water
• 1/5 of people lack adequate housing
• 1/3 of people lack health care and fuel
• ½ of people lack sanitation
• ¼ of adults cannot read and write
Overshoot = Crash
S curve
crash
Phantom Capacity & Overshoot
Catton: carrying capacity illusions x reality
cc
CC
Unlimited
CC
load
load
load
Unrealisms
Prosthetic/
Tech Fix
realism
14
World Population (billions)
12
10
8
6.5 billion in 2005
6
4 billion in 1975
4
2 billion in 1920
2
1 billion in 1800
0
500
600
700
800
900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100
Year
Source: UN Population Division 2004; Lee, 2003; Population Reference Bureau
Findings of Limits to Growth
• If population and industrial growth continue to J
curve, sometime after 2000, nonrenewable
resources will be depleted and a population
crash will follow de to scarcity of food and
medicine.
• If assume technological advance doubles all
resource reserves and you allow 75% recycling,
there will be a sharp increase in pollution
increasing death rates and causing a population
crash.
BEYOND THE LIMITS, Meadows, et al.
Tom Tietenberg; Harper Collins, 1992
http://dieoff.org/page25.htm
Condition of Improving Standard of
Living with Population Increase
• If world averages 2 children per family
• If world industrial output/capita stabilizes at 1975
levels
• If reduce resource consumption and pollution to
¼ of 1970 levels
• If shift consumption from material goods to
services
• If direct capital toward food production, soil
enrichment and erosion control
• If industrial capacity is built to last much longer.
Criticisms of Limits to Growth
• Not Assume technology and ingenuity increases
to solve all problems
• Not assume people can adapt to all conditions
• Not objective; computer replaces humans
• Failure assured given exponential growth and
finite resources
• Fatalistic---lessen hope, self fulfilling prophesy
• Lumps unique regions of the globe together
• See
http://www.clubofrome.org/archive/publications/van_Dieren_Doors_
of_Perceptions.pdf
Mankind at the Turning Point
Messarovic and Pestel 1974
To address criticism that world regions differ
2nd study divided world into ten regions.
Despite assuming technological optimism, more
pessimistic.
1. Unless economy and growth redistributed from
rich to poor nations,
2. Resources and food will collapse by 2050 in
poor nations causing a population crash
3. Interdependency means regional collapse will
pull all down. Ex. Asian Flu 1998
Changed Debate
• Move to neo-malthusian view
– Not just population, but increased resource
use is problem
– Recognize World System---interconnected
– Differences between poor and rich countries
– West plus Japan and Russia --- ¼ population
and 80% resource use
– US 5% world population, 1/3 resource use
and 1/3 pollution
Global 2000
July 1980
In May 1977, President Carter ordered a
study of world population and natural
resources through 2000.
Done by US CEQ and DOS
US govt. lacked a tradition of long term
planning
Trend projection using long term global data
and models employed by federal
agencies.
Global 2000 Conservative Bias
• Used existing long term data and models
of US government
• Data on population, GNP, resources and
environment taken sequentially 1977-1979
• Thus, not interact factors
• Allocate resources repetitiously
• Assume continued growth of earth’s goods
and services without maintenance or
higher costs
Assumptions of Global 2000
• Continuation of public policy
• Continuation of rapid technological
development without resistance
(ex. Continually increasing crop yields)
• Assume that shortages of resources cause
rising prices which will drop demand
• International trade not disturbed by war,
politics or economics, etc.
Sample Findings Global 2000
• As population increases, the gap between the
rich and poor will widen
• Food production increase 90% 1970-2000
assuming constant climate and environment
– Due to energy intensive farming not new land
• Fertilizer, pesticide, machines, irrigation
–
–
–
–
–
Only a 15% per capita increase
Costs of food double
Increase food importation
Bulk of food go to rich
# of malnourished triple to 1.3 billion
Sample Findings Global 2000 #2
• Food Cont.
– 1 hectare of arable land (2.5 acres) support
1970 ---2.6 people
2000 ---4 people LDC 5.5 people
– Soil loses yearly size of Maine; by 2000 lose
1/3 world’s arable land
– Increased use of grain for alcohol fuels
Contradiction—increase production from Green
Revolution ignores degradation from soil loss
Sample Findings Global 2000 #3
Soil Destruction is constraint to food growth:
• Higher yields at cost of soil integrity:
– organic humus—nutrients, water absorption
– inorganic clay and salts---infertile
– rock pieces, bedrock
• Desertification: barren land ex. Sahel
– 3x 1970-2000
– overgrazing, farming on marginal lands
– Drought cycles
Sample Findings Global 2000 #4
• Waterlogging, salinization, alkalinization
– Asia, S. America, California
– collapse of Mesopotamia and Upper Nile
• Deforestration---increased flood and
erosion
• Erosion---corn and marginal land farming
– Loss of organic matter and largest CO2 sink
• Development---urbanization of river
valleys, industrialization, sprawl
Sample Findings Global 2000 #5
Other factors affecting food:
1. Monocultures
2. Loss of diversity
3. Use of hybrids and designer crops
4. Fuel subsidies to agriculture
5. Pollution from pesticides, fertilizers, etc.
Net effect: shift farming from renewable to nonrenewable and unsustainable basis!!!!
Sample Findings Global 2000 #6
Other Conclusions:
• Fisheries overexploited
• Loss of forests ½ California/year
– Particularly in LDCs (40% by 2000), Trop RF
• Severe Water shortages
– doubling with population, irrigation
•
•
•
•
•
Mineral resources no reserves, more $, inequity
Global Climate Change by 2050
Loss of 20% of all species as habitats vanish
Toxics cause health problems
Oil reach maximum capacity despite higher prices
Sample Findings Global 2000 #7
The case of Fuel Wood
• ¼ use wood for fuel “Poor man’s oil”
• By 2000, need exceed supply by 25%
• In Sahel (Sahara border) fuel wood
gathering full time---20-30% family income
• No trees left 50-100 k around cities
• Deforestation, erosion, desertification,
higher costs, less fuel, and substitution of
dung and crop residues.
Refutations of Global 2000
Julian Simon Heritage Foundation, Herman
Kahn Hudson foundation: “A Resourceful
Earth”
“The year 2000 will be less crowded (with
more people), less polluted, more stable
ecologically, less vulnerable to resource
supply disruption. People will be richer and
have more food.”
Refutations of Global 2000
Assumptions made by Simon and Kahn:
• No water shortages
• Spread of cheap nuclear power
• Air & water pollution overblown problem
• US farmland not being urbanized signif.
• More than enough farmland
• No rapid species loss
• More food to feed the hungry
• Birth rate down while life expectancy is up
Refutation of Global 2000
Simon and Kahn’s Magic:
• resource problems become opportunities inviting
entrepreneurs to solve them with ingenuity
– Wood crisis-coal, coal crisis-oil, whale oil-oil
• They spur increases in knowledge which spurs
growth
• Solutions to problems leave us better off
– Ex. Rail to haul coal
• Need stimulus for discovery
Refutations of Global 2000
Simon & Kahn: People are not just the
cause of problems but with training, the
means to solve these problems: WE
NEED MORE AND BIGGER PROBLEMS
Steven Bardwell “The World Needs 10
Billion People” Fusion Sept. 1981
– “Qualitative innovations in technology must be
planned on but cannot be planned for”
– fusion energy will allow more people and
consumption (show chart)
Refutation of Global 2000
Bardwell: Convert J curve of productivity to
linear curve because:
• Higher population leads to increased labor
division, ingenuity, ideas, increased
productivity
• Complex technologies can support more
people
• More people are required for complex
technologies
Our Common Future
World Commission on Environment and
Development (aka. Brundtland Commission) --1984-1987
• Can’t separate economic development from
environmental issues
• Inequality is main env. & devel. Problem
• Problem of the rich over consumption
• Problem of the poor natural disaster over time
– exploit resources for export, debt, dumb aid,
militarization, increase population, unemployment and
cities, loss farmers, loss soil, drought and flood
Our Common Future 2
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:
Meeting the needs of the present without
compromising future generations.
• Need for lifestyles within the planet’s
ecological means; population size and
growth in harmony with environment.
UN Conferences
• 1972 Stockholm conference on the
environment, consensus on problems of
development.
• 1992 United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development---Rio
– Agenda 21
• 2002 World Summit on Sustainable
Development---Johannesburg
Web Sources:
• The (2005) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
• http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Produc
ts.Synthesis.aspx
• Koffi Annan “We The Peoples: The Role of
United Nations in the 21st Century.”
• Chapter 4 : “Sustaining Our Future.”
• http://www.un.org/millennium/sg/report/ch4.pdf
• Al Gore. An Inconvenient Truth.
http://www.climatecrisis.net/
Lovins: Soft Energy Paths
•
•
•
•
•
Renewable energy flows (energy income)
Diverse (many small contributors)
Flexible and low tech
Resilient/ decentralized
Match in scale and geographic distribution
to end use needs
• Match in environmental quality to end use
needs