Population and Consumption: Environmental Problems as Problems of Scale

Ethics and the Environment,5(1)23-45 ISSN: 1085-6633 Copyright © 2000 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. Bryan G. Norton Population and Consumption: Environmental Problems as Problems of Scale Almost every time I teach environmental topics to undergraduate students, at least one student confidently states the opinion that environmental problems are most basically caused by human population growth, and that if we could control population growth, that would be the end of the problems. Although I try never to show how appalled I am by ignorance among students—especially when they are volunteering opinions in a process of thinking through problems—I admit that in these cases I must consciously restrain myself from rebuking the student aloud. What is more appalling is that I fear that this belief is shared by many adults in the United States and perhaps throughout the developed world. This woefully oversimplified formula for understanding environmental problems is not just oversimplified, it is also morally dangerous. When used in conjunction with the apparent fact that industrially developed nations are bringing their population growth under control, the reduction of environmental problems to population problems brings about a not-so-subtle shift of responsibility for existing and emerging environmental problems to the less-developed world. In class, I try to shake the students' complacency about their own role, pointing out to them that, if the blame for environmental damage can be located in the act of parenting, they should realize that each American child born (given current consumption patterns) has 40 to 50 times the environmental impact of a child born in poorer nations. Huge proportions of that consumption are made possible by material flows from less-developed nations of the South into the industrialized North. Even when these material flows bring rapid economic growth, as in Indonesia, for example , the environmental and cultural costs are enormous, and it is often the case that only elites benefit from this growth. Direct all correspondence to: Bryan G. Norton, School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology , Atlanta, GA 30332; E-mail: bryan.norton@pubpolicy.gatech.edu 23 24 ETHICS AND THE ENVIRONMENT Vol. 5, No. 1, 2000 My point here is not to deny that overpopulation is among the factors that affect environmental problems; indeed it is one important and often-neglected factor. Aside from noting the highly differential impact of individual consumption patterns around the world, my main point is that the equation of environmental problems with population is a moral oversimplification because population growth cannot be considered an independent driver of the social changes that result in environmental degradation In this paper, I adopt as my first task to show that there is a quite real sense in which the developed world has responsibility, indirectly—and in some cases, directly —for the cycles of poverty, population growth, and increased poverty that have gripped those unfortunate countries that have been caught in the midst of the demographic transition. Unable to lower their birth rate to match lower death rates instituted by medical and health advances, these societies seem trapped in a hopeless spiral of population growth and poverty. In Part 1, I discuss the question of intergenerational responsibilities and summarize my answer to anyone who thinks environmental problems are due mainly to population growth in developing nations. In Part 2, I argue that developed nations and societies have an important obligation to help deal with problems of population growth, famine, and deteriorating environments in developing nations. It will turn out, however, that it is much easier to establish a general responsibility to help; and much more difficult to specify exactly what kind of help would be efficacious. So, in Part 3,1 will begin to explore the nature of the obligation of wealthy nations to the poor and to the future, arguing that there is an important sense in which environmental and resource use problems are problems of scale and that, given this insight, we can begin to understand these obligations more clearly by interpreting them as cross-scalar obligations to protect options and opportunities for people today and in the future. Finally, in Part 4,1 briefly explore what is...