Patterns+of+resource+consumption

Resources can be defined as features of the environment which are needed and used by people. It usually refers to the natural resources in the air, water or land. They include raw materials, climate, vegetation and soil. It may include human resources such as labor, skills, machinery and capital, which is more of Economics than Geography.


 * Classification of Resources **


 * Growing significance of non-renewable  and renewable energy supplies **

People in [|MEDCs] need a lot of resources to sustain their high levels of consumption, whereas people in [|LEDCs] sometimes have limited access to basic resources such as food and water. LEDCs often have rich natural resources, such as large forests and deep deposits of valuable metals and minerals. To come out of poverty, LEDCs extract and sell their resources to MEDCs. MEDCs convert these resources into finished products that are sold back to LEDCs. This situation has serious implications for the environment. There is an increasing demand for goods and services from a growing global population, especially those in MEDCs. As more and more resources are required to fuel the economies of MEDCs and emerging economies, money is made available for LEDCs to improve living standards. This however, leads to environmental degradation of various forms, ranging from soil erosion to water pollution, air pollution, over extraction of resource, depletion of the ozone, etc. This leads us to the concept of the Ecological Footprint.


 * Definitions: **
 * **Global Hectare:** The measurement of bio-capacity and ecological footprint.
 * **Ecological Debtor:** Country's whose ecological footprint is higher than their bio-capacity.
 * **Ecological Creditor:** Country's whose ecological footprint is lower than their bio-capacity.
 * **Bio capacity** - is the capacity of an area to provide resources and absorb wastes. When the area's ecological footprint exceeds its bio-capacity, an ecological deficit occurs.

It defined as //the theoretical measurement of the amount of land and water a population requires to produce the resources it consumes and to absorb its waste under prevailing technology.// It examines the theoretical relationship between population size and resource consumption**.** Mathias Wackernagel and William Rees at the British Colombia University in Canada first developed this concept. You may want to listen to him: media type="youtube" key="94tYMWz_Ia4" width="319" height="255" The ecological footprint measures or calculates (in acres or hectares) the amount of the earth’s productive space needed to keep a population at its current level of resource consumption. Units of bio-productive area are used to assess the nature and scale of the environmental impact of a country, region, or community etc. It takes in account the following areas: · Arable land · forests, · pasture lands, · oceans, · infrastructure needs and energy costs (land required for absorbing carbon dioxide emissions and other energy wastes) · Other factors such as species extinction, toxic pollution of air, water and other energy resources are not taken into account here.
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Ecological footprint **
 * //<span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Calculating the ecological footprint //**

<span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">It is estimated that the current average bio-productive area required per person worldwide is 2.7 global hectares (gha). On the other hand, the global bio-capacity (i.e the ability of the resource to regenerate) is 2.1 gha per person. This leaves a deficit of 0.6 hectares per person.
 * //<span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Ecological footprint at a global scale //**

<span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">According to the Global Footprint Network, it takes one year and four months to regenerate the resources that are used annually. The average ecological footprint for a person in the United States is 9.57 gha (the highest in the world), whilst Bangladesh has an ecological footprint of 0.5 global hectares. This implies that by United States consumption standards, the planet’s bio-capacity could only support 1.2 billion people. This shows a failing natural ecosystem.

<span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">On the other hand, by Bangladeshi consumption standards, the earth could support 22 billion people. If the global population trend continues, the ecological footprint per person will reduce to 1.5 gha by 2050. Global ecological footprints went up by 70% of the earth’s planet capacity in 1961 to 120% in 1999. The following videos will help you to understand the concept of ecological footprint in a broader context:

<span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Graph showing global ecological footprints per person.

<span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">It is estimated that about half of the average ecological footprint is caused by the use of hydro-carbon fuels. This leads to the development of the a new indicator for measuring ecological footprint known as the //“carbon footprint”.//

<span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">The carbon footprint is defined as //‘the total quantity of greenhouse gas emissions caused by an individual, organization, event, product or nation, expressed in units of tons of carbon emitted’.// Carbon footprints have led to the introduction of //carbon offset// schemes as a way of assessing the how individuals and organizations identify the carbon footprint of their actions and pay to a company that absorbs an equivalent quantity of carbon. Carbon offset projects include re-afforestation, afforestation, using energy efficient technology etc. What is carbon footprint How to reduce carbon footprint

media type="youtube" key="EjyrAHzthTo" width="322" height="223"media type="youtube" key="fTznEIZRkLg" width="303" height="214" media type="youtube" key="7cJQ_8mwSew" width="315" height="220"


 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">International variations in ecological footprints: **

media type="custom" key="27483084" width="143" height="143" This map compares each country's total consumption footprint with the bio-capacity available within its own borders.
 * World Total Bio-capacity: **1.78 gha per capita**
 * World Ecological Footprint of Consumption: **2.69 gha per capita** (i.e. we are using more resources than the Earth can provide.)

Currently less than **20 percent** of the **world's population is living in countries that can keep up with their own bio-capacity**.
 * Data source:** Global Footprint Network's 2010 Edition.


 * The two opposing views (neo-Malthusian and anti-Malthusian) of the relationship between population size and resource consumption**

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">1. **Thomas Malthus**
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">1766-1834. Born near Guildford, in England.
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Occupation: Priest, Demographer, Economist
 * <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Wrote ‘ __An E__ __<span class="s28" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">ssay on the Principle of Population __<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">’ first published in 1798.
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">It is debatable whether the principles of Malthus 200 years ago have any relevance to the modern world.
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">At the time of writing his essay, the population of the United Kingdom was approximately 10 million.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">The Core Principles of Malthus:
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;"> Food is necessary for human existence
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Human population
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">The effects of these two unequal powers must be kept equal
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Since humans tend not to limit their population size voluntarily - “preventive checks” in Malthus’ terminology.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Malthus noted that human population <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">tends to grow at a geometric rate: 1, 2, 4 8, 16, 32, 64... <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">However, he noted that food only increases at an arithmetic rate, 1 2 3 4 5 6... Thus, whilst food production was likely to increase in the arithmetic progression, population tends to grow at an exponential rate in a series of 25 years interval. This means that in the future there would arise a situation where humans would lack resources on which to survive, leading to a catastrophic situation characterised by severe food shortage and too many people.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">To solve this problem, Malthus suggested that once this ceiling (catastrophe) had been reached, further growth in population would be prevented by **<span class="s29" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">negative <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);"> and <span class="s29" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">positive **<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);"> **checks.** He saw these checks as methods of population control. They can be split up into 2 groups…. **Negative checks** (decreased birth rate), which were used to limit the population growth. According to Malthus these checks include, a//bstinence before marriage, postponement of marriage, abstinence within marriage// which lowered the fertility rate. Malthus favoured moral restraint (including late marriage and sexual abstinence) as a check on population growth. This was meant to reduce population growth with sustainable levels. He, however, opposed birth control measures such as the use of contraceptives, as he saw this as ungodly, hence he did not place any restriction on the number of children born to married couples. It is worth noting that Malthus proposed this only for the working and poor classes!

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">**Positive checks** (increased death rate) were ways to reduce population size by events such as famine, disease, war - increasing the mortality rate and reducing life expectancy. He included poor sanitation in this category of checks, noting that this could give rise to the outbreak of diseases such as cholera, as well as reduce people's immune system.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Was Malthus right? <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">• There has been a population explosion in developing countries.. <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">• Africa –with repeated famines, wars, food crisis, environmental degradation, soil erosion, crop failure and disastrous floods; yet high population – so was he right? <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">• Technological improvements which he could not have foreseen <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">• The increased amount of crop land due to irrigation and larges scale mechanized farming <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">• Reduced population growth as countries move through the DTM These have come to negate Malthus' principles in the case of the advanced countries. For more on Malthus' theory visit: Malthus’s Population Principle Explained Malthusian Theory of Population

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">**2. Esther Boserup’s Theory** <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">In contrast to Malthus, instead of too many mouths to feed, Boserup emphasized the positive aspects of a large population. In simple terms, Boserup suggested that the more people there are, the more hands there are to work. She argued that as population increases, more pressure is placed on the existing agricultural system, which stimulates invention. The changes in technology allow for improved crop strains and increased yields. Demographic pressure (population density) promotes innovation and higher productivity in use of land (irrigation, weeding, crop intensification, better seeds) and labour (tools, better techniques). In short, Boserup saw an increase in population as an impetus for intensive agriculture.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Was she right? Today, there have been many ways by which food production has increased, including: <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">However, Boserup admits overpopulation can lead to unsuitable farming practices which may degrade the land. e.g. population pressure as one of the reasons for desertification in the Sahel region (so fragile environments are at risk). Boserup’s theory is based on the assumption of a ‘closed’ society - which is not the case in reality (migration).
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Draining marshlands
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Cross-breeding of cattle
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Sophisticated irrigation methods
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Use of artificial fertilizers
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">GM crops
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Green revolution


 * <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Neo-Malthusians– anti-populationist/ population pessimists/antiatalists **

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Echoed in recent debates by Paul Ehrlich, author of <span class="s28" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">__The Population Bomb__ <span class="s29" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">. He maintained that population growth would exceed agricultural production and the ability of the earth's natural resources to regenerate. <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Ehrlich believed that the earth’s carrying capacity would quickly be exceeded, resulting in widespread famine and population reductions. <span class="s29" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">He added that "the battle for humanity was over" and predicted a situation where millions of people would starve to death despite the attempts being made to provide food for the starving population. His main opponent was Julian Simon. <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Paul Ehrlich: Neo-Malthusian
 * <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">a. Paul Erhlich **

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">**b. The Club of Rome** <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">A group of industrialists, scientists, economists and statesmen from 10 countries published ‘The Limits to Growth’ in 1972. They examined five factors that determined and limit growth on the planet. These include:


 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Natural resources
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Industrial production
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Industrial pollution
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Agricultural production
 * <span style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0); line-height: 1.5;">Population

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">They argued that most of these factors grew exponentially. The Club of Rome – basic conclusion:

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);"> //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 by 2070.// //The most probable result will be sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacit//y.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Club of Rome - Limits to Growth

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);"> <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Is the Club of Rome right? <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">They may not have taken human ingenuity sufficiently into account. Human beings are dynamic and creative; they are able to adapt to a given situation and find solutions to problems. Human responses have changed – e.g. alternative sources of fuel (to replace fossil fuels), HYVs seeds to prevent starvation in parts of Asia, etc.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Concerns about the predictions of the club of Rome leads to the study of the consumption and production of oil globally. So which of these scholars is right?


 * <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Boserup– pronatalist/anti-Malthusians/ Population optimist **
 * Anti-Malthusian: ** school of thought that disagrees with Malthus's pessimism and is more aligned to Boserup's optimism i.e. that humans will always find solutions to shortages.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Echoed in recent debates by Julian Simon, who opposed Ehrlich by using economic theories; ie. Resources needed to support populations are becoming more abundant, not scarcer. Ehrlich published two books: T//he Economics of Population Growth (1977)// and //The Ultimate Resource (1981).// He strongly opposed the views expressed by Julian Simon and noted that the relationship that exists between population and food supply was more complicated than Simon thought, adding that Simon overestimated the effects of an increasing population of resource supply. Simon's main idea was that there is no limit to the number of people the resources available could support; rather a large population size was necessary as humans are capable of using their imagination to find solutions to their problems.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">The following presentation is a summary of the relationship between population growth and food supply: <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">media type="prezi" key="wz1h6va5cbya" width="326" height="268"

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">It defined as the number of plants or animals or humans which can be adequately supported by land. The maximum carrying capacity of any environment is referred to as the “saturation level”. In population studies the maximum number of people a given environment is capable of carrying is called the “population ceiling”. This concept was first postulated by Thomas Malthus. According to Malthus when population ceiling is reached, three possible scenarios could be observed:
 * <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Carrying Capacity **

//<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Instantaneous adjustment curve // <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">The rate of increase may remain unchanged until the carrying capacity is reached. Not likely to occur under human situations.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">//Gradual adjustment – ‘S’// The two opposing views (neo-Malthusian and anti-Malthusian) of the relationship between population size and resource consumption. <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">The increase in population begins to taper off as the carrying capacity is reached. This is more realistic, esp in areas of rapid population growth, with high life expectancy and low fertility.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">//Fluctuating, gradual adjustment curve: ‘J’curve// <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">The rapid increase in population overshoots the carrying capacity which results in sudden population control e.g use of contraceptive. <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Afterwards, the population declines and begins to increase, fluctuates and settle at the carrying capacity. This scenario is likely in areas with small population, low life expectancy and high fertility rates

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">**Optimum, over and under Population** <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">//Optimum population:// <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">It is a theoretical measure of the number of people, who, working with available resources, will produce the highest per capita economic return. The highest standard of living and quality of life is experienced with an optimum population and an increase or decrease in population will result in changes in the standard of living (SOL) and quality of life (QOL). The concept is dynamic and subject to changes in resources, technology, and population.

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">Expressed as SOL= <span class="s30" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">__Natural resource x technology__ <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);"> population

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);"> //Overpopulation:// <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">This occurs when there are too many people relative to the resources and technology available, to maintain an adequate standard of living. E.g Bangladesh, an overpopulated country (1062/sqkm)

<span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">//Underpopulation//: <span class="s3" style="background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0);">It occurs where there are far more resources in an area than can be used by the people living there. E.g Canada (3/sqkm).