Title: Population and Sustainable Development I do believe there is a relationship between population and sustainable development, and that there is an impact on the ecosystem which is dependent on the population. To arrive at the Impact on the Ecosystem, we see that the total population is multiplied by a per Capita Impact on Environment. However this formula cannot be applied universally due to the complexities of the relationships between resources, impact on environment and economic power for each country. Population is the biggest enemy to sustainable development in growing economies such as India currently. However, based on the readings, population is not the most critical factor in developed countries such as US. As per the reading the population factor in US has only increased in marginally, but the consumption per capita has increased disproportionately. In the article by Coale he says, “since 1940 population has increased by 50 percent, but per capita use of electricity has been multiplied several times." (Elrich, Paul and Holdren, John, Page 1212) Consumption in developed countries such as US, with advent of technology, rising economy, power to access of abundant resources, is very high compared to developing countries. In India, population has been a deterrent and a challenge. As per the document submitted by the Prime Minister of India at the UN Framework Convention of Climate Change, COP 21 at Paris, in the next thirty years India needs to double the infrastructure and resource requirement so as to sustain the projected population. Water, waste, electricity, infrastructure etc, everything needs to be doubled so as to ensure the people have access to the food, water and shelter. This however is not sustainable by any standards. India does not have the money to double the infrastructure. The Prime Minister has clearly stated that unless there is financial assistance from the developed countries, the country will not be able to sustain its population. Assuming India receives international support, in my opinion this would not be a sustainable development. This would lead to consuming more natural resources, that the nature can regenerate. The waste generated would not be absorbed by the ecosystem. India will then have to outsource similar to what developed countries are doing today.
To cite and example, currently in Bangalore, the hitech city in Bangalore which has seen unprecedented increased in growth, is not able to provide water for all, electricity for 24 hours a day or manage the waste generated. With regards to sewage, only 40 percent of the sewage as per Center for Science and Environment study in 2015 reaches the Sewage Treatment Plant. The other 60 percent are left untreated to enter into the ground or enter the lakes and rivers. With regards to waste, we read in the newspapers of the illegal dumping of waste in neighbouring villages which is causes deteriorating health conditions in the surrounding neighbourhoods. The city was not planned for a sudden influx of population with the advent of IT. China was able to develop infrastructure for its rise in population with the vision of the government. However in India, being a democratic country, there is a tremendous gap between vision and implementation, with money power becoming a key factor. Thus when it comes to India, population has been the key factor for many cities to move in the direction of becoming un-livable. Growth and technology alone cannot contribute to a sustainable future. With the same example of the city of Bangalore, unless population is controlled, technology and growth cannot play a significant role. With technology, the city will only be able to slow down the inevitable which is the depletion of the finite natural resources. “When the economy’s expansion encroaches too much on its surrounding ecosystem, we will begin to sacrifice natural capital (such as fish, minerals and fossil fuels) that is worth more than the man-made capital (such as roads, factories and appliances) added by the growth.” (Daly, Herman, Page 100). With particular reference to India, the international financial assistance would be help in creating the man made capital such as roads, factories, etc. This would be what Daly calls an uneconomic growth. The country is focused on economic growth, without giving due respect and understanding to the limited resource pool the earth has. The country needs to understand that, “once we pass the optimal scale, growth becomes stupid in the short run and impossible to maintain in the long run.”(Herman E Daly, Page 100)
My definition of sustainable future would be where the natural finite resources we have inherited from our ancestors is passed on to the future generations without compromise. A sustainable future would be where the ecosystem is able to absorb the waste, and able to regenerate at the same rate as the consumption of the natural resource. For a truly sustainable growth, population must be curtailed in India. The prime reasons for an unsustainable growth and economy are related to population. Tried and tested methods from developed countries and implementing the same systems in India will not ensure a sustainable growth. The relationships are more complex in India with a large percentage of people living under poverty line. Currently nearly 263 million people are dependent on agriculture and nearly 276 million live below the poverty line. Farmlands are being encroached upon in the name of economic growth and development, which is reducing available land for agriculture. The policies to be introduced to ensure path of sustainability has to be indigenous. For example we cannot expect the city of Bangalore to lay the balance 4000km of sewage pipelines required in the next 1 year, so that the sewage can reach the Sewage Treatment Plant. It may take several years to achieve the same, and in the meantime may continue to kill the remaining lakes, since the untreated sewage and waste may end up in these lakes. To ensure a sustainable growth in India, with population curtailment as key, natural methods for treating of waste, de-centralised collection of rainwater, raising awareness of the relationship between health and ecosystem, upliftment of the slums would be key. In addition to population control, education on the finite nature of the ecosystem is important, as industries and common man are under the optimistic notion of natural resources being unlimited. “Investigation of synergistic effects is one of the most neglected areas of environmental evaluation.� (Holdren and Elrich, Pg 1213) If the synergistic effects for India can be studied in depth, the relationship between the various factors and their proportionate impact towards depletion of natural resources can be arrived at.
To achieve a sustainable future globally, we cannot look at sustainable ecosystem in isolation. Globalisation has made the World flat, and effect of an unsustainable act in one country can be felt in another country. There are no boundaries for the ecosystem. The ecosystem is one, and to achieve a sustainable world, each country has to accept the finiteness of the ecosystem and be responsible so as to ensure future generations are not derived of the same. The relationship between developed and undeveloped has to also change, in the understanding that the developed needs to provide knowledge, know how and financial assistance to enable a sustainable development in the developing countries. As rightly said in the article, “the correction of ghetto conditions in Detroit, is neither more nor less important than saving the Great Lakes-both are imperative.” (Holdren and Elrich, Page 1215) To summarise, “weak sustainability would suggest that the lack of fish can be dealt with by building more fishing boats. Strong sustainability recognizes that more fishing boats are useless if there are too few fish in the ocean and insists that catches must be limited to ensure maintenance of adequate fish populations for tomorrow’s fishers.” (Herman E Daly, Page 103) Sustainable growth is no longer an option, it is a necessity and the world needs to accept it. Most countries accept the urgency of preventive measures to be implemented to avoid a catastrophe, however the pace and the level of commitment from many nations is currently questionable. References 1. Paul R. Ehrlich and John P. Holdren, (1971), Impact of Population Growth, Published by American Association for the Advancement of Science 2. Herman E Daly, (2005) Economics in a Full World, Published by Scientific American 3. Jared Diamond, (1998), Collapse, Published by Penguin Books 4. (2009), A safe operating space for humanity, September, Nature, Volume 461, Page 472 -475, Published by Macmillan Publishers Limited