By: Usman Torwali
Is doomsday upon us?
The problem arises from the fact that individual herders graze their animals on the commons. Any additional animal to the herd benefits only the herder however, the costs are shared by all. This provides a rational incentive to the herders to increase the size of their herds, irrespective of the fact that private increase of the herds destroys the commons. Natural resources to sustain human life on earth, such as energy, food, forests, clean air, and water, are the commons being depleted so rapidly by overgrazing instigated by the herders of the Global North.
Thomas Malthus predicted a very dreadful future for humans in 1789. For Thomas, the basic problem of population growth was that population grew geometrically, whereas the earth’s productive capacity for food was utilized arithmetically, resulting in a future where population would far exceed the limits of food. The world will face famines, social and political chaos. In 1968, another group of scientists known as the Club of Rome “brought together existing knowledge of population growth, technology development, food production, the environment, energy supplies, and consumption examine the present and future predicament of humankind”.
The Club of Rome study differed from Malthus in that Malthus stressed food alone, while the Club of Rome brought together many other concerns. The study concluded that a world based on the consumption of nonrenewable resources cannot sustain an unlimited population. As Jason Hickel notes, the Earth’s capacity to renew resources by natural processes is about 50 billion tons a year. However, at present, humankind consumes 70 billion tons a year. By 2050, the annual consumption will exceed 100 billion tons.
Moreover, in the 1970s, a controversial figure, Garrett Hardin, said that the overuse of a resource costs all actors alike, invoking the tragedy of the commons. The ones who are benefiting from a resource do not care for its depletion as long as it fulfils their greed for more. Garett stated that the world needs balance in the use and replenishment of its resources and that can only be achieved through the relinquishment of our freedom to breed. The explosion of population means many people are breeding many children, exceeding the earth’s carrying capacity.
No technological or technical support could save us from the misery of overpopulation; that’s why the government must intervene in the luxury of procreation. Nature requires rational and consistent integrity for long-term survival. The problem is that human beings are self-proclaimed righteous creatures in the belief that catastrophes are unpredictable; however, given the loss of biodiversity, climate change, and ecological disasters in recent decades, it shows our planet is already on the verge of being inhabited.
The world’s hundred largest corporations, mainly in the global north, account for 75 percent of the global carbon emissions, and these countries; governments keep encouraging their citizens not to use plastic straws. Governments and environmentalists in the global north delude theirselves in the belief that they are doing something for ecocide, ranging from campaigns for forestation, recycling of disposable, and adaptability. However, the lingering catastrophic doom persists. The world leaders are not united over the core causes of renewable resources exhaustion, ranging from overpopulation to the lack of concrete actions.
Since the Club of Rome study regarding the depletion of resources and population explosion, a debate has surged between the neotraditionalists and modernists. Neotraditionalists believe that humankind is subject to natural limitations and needs to adjust to the inherent limits to growth, whereas modernists hold that man has the intellectual and technological capacity to overcome natural limits in the achievement of human and economic growth. The modernists do not deem that there is a limit to population growth, or that we are anywhere close to that limit. However, the environmental consequences associated with economic growth and population challenge the modernists; positivism. We are heading towards a total collapse, and only by speculating on the costs of unexamined growth and overuse of natural resources can the ecological disasters be mitigated.
The biggest question is how far the often-repeated buzz words of green growth, sustainable development, inclusive growth, and green economy etc are considered when economic growth is tabled? Is unlimited growth possible over a limited Earth? The economists of the neoliberal world relentlessly argue for growth and high per capita income. Irresponsible grazing endangers the lives of others. The commons are both the source of cooperation and conflict. The greed of unrelenting economic growth messes with the environment, causing irrevocable damage to ecosystems, plummeting biodiversity, habitat loss, and desertification.
Pakistan contributes less than one percent to global GHG emissions and is one of the least per capita consumption countries. It is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change and is overburdened by the growing population. Pakistan will likely exhaust its water by 2050, along with the neighboring country India. India also suffers from the ecological onslaught, and despite the neoliberal reforms and impressive growth rate, lacks a coherent action regarding climate change. The growing foreign exchange reserves of India will be of no use in the same way as nuclear bombs of Pakistan will become irrelevant and futile once the looming ecocides unleash
their havoc, and the habitability of the region evaporates. Therefore, it is high time that India and Pakistan put aside their hostility and cooperate on regional survival plans.
Also read: Mother tongue matters: How language barriers are failing Swat’s students
