Australia is overpopulated (sustainable population is 8-12 million versus current 21 million (July 2008). The reasons are high level of immigration and high level of reproduction (1.6% annual population growth by mid-2008). Despite the warnings of environmentalists and some of government's advisers (e.g. Tim Flannery, Ross Garnaut etc.), the government and media continue to support the belief that AU can sustain much more people: more people mean more taxes for the state and more consumers for companies. Property development businesses support politicians and force them to boost “growth-at-all-costs”.
Although the book is written a bit in a spy mania manner, it is very convincing. Everybody want to consume on a rate he/she can afford (somebody consumes even more!). The history of international environmental law tells that developing countries eager to develop despite the possible ecological consequences to increase the quality of life for their citizens (Stockholm – Rio – Johannesburg conferences show the consecutive shift of priorities from conservation to development). I assume that given the strong incentives (penalties + benefits + opportunity of contraception, i.e. cardinal), most people can be persuaded (or forced) to limit their family, especially in urban areas, where they don't need so much working hands. It will be easier than to force them to limit their lifestyle (especially when it's almost nothing to limit – India, Africa etc.).
This post is a reprint of the original assignment for ENVM7202 Course, UQ, Semester 1 2009
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment