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 1972The 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 ModelJay 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

Through-put outputinput

SYSTEM:CLOSEDOR OPEN

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/fuller3.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.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100

Year

1 billion in 1800

4 billion in 1975

2 billion in 1920

6.5 billion in 2005

World Population (billions)

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.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100

Year

$1 trillion in 1900

$10 trillion in 1967

$52 trillion in 2003

World GDP (trillion 1990 dollars)

Source: DeLong 1998

New York City’s SolarEnergy Future

The Center for Sustainable Energyat 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 curvecrash

Phantom Capacity & Overshoot

Catton: carrying capacity illusions x reality

Prosthetic/Tech Fix

Unlimited CC

cc CC

load loadload

Unrealisms realism

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100

Year

1 billion in 1800

4 billion in 1975

2 billion in 1920

6.5 billion in 2005

World Population (billions)

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, 1992http://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 PointMessarovic and Pestel 1974

To address criticism that world regions differ2nd 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 crash3. 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 DOSUS govt. lacked a tradition of long term

planningTrend 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 non-renewable 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