Growth or survival?

Balance can only be restored to the ecosystem by effectively wiping out the human species.

Growth or survival?

Sunday 30 March 2011It’s official. If we can’t abandon the habit of growth we have scant few years left as a species.

Being fruitful and multiplying comes naturally to every species. The consequences of over-population are equally natural; the ecosystem automatically restores balance.

In the case of the human species, whose numbers are expected to double in the next fifty years, global warming is a direct consequence of growth. Had world population leveled out at the start of the twentieth century, climate change wouldn’t be on the radar.

Population isn’t the only growth factor at work. We all want to better ourselves; it’s only human to strive for more than survival. Commerce is built on this principle and capitalism has accelerated it. Because we have the technology to leverage continuing growth, we carry on growing without a thought for the consequences. In consumer societies the basic premise is never questioned: growth is regarded as fundamentally good.

Is it too late?

  • World population will hit 9 billion by 2050
  • Glaciers which supply water to much of the world are disappearing rapidly
  • Scientists say global temperatures can no longer be held to safe levels
  • Increased droughts, flood and storms are predicted
  • Infectious diseases are expected to worsen as the atmosphere becomes wetter
  • Every one degree rise in global temperature decreases grain harvests by 10%
The consequences are going to be unfortunate. So far we’ve raised the average temperature of the planet by one degree celcius and the resulting extreme weather events and disrupted harvests are obvious. As warming accelerates we’ll witness a dramatic increase in disease and scarcity of potable water.

The ultimate result will be depopulation of much of the planet. Regrettably for all of us, the least developed nations will be the first victims; the consumer societies making the greatest contribution to the problem have the technology to survive the longest. This dynamic means balance can only be restored to the ecosystem by effectively wiping out the human species.

The saddest note in this swansong is that it’s all unnecessary. We’ve been on the wrong kind of quest all along. We’ve expended the planet’s resources and our own genius chasing growth in the quantity of life: there’s no satisfaction there. But growth in the quality of life? Making that our goal might have saved us.

It’s not too late … yet

But are we willing to make the changes needed? They include stopping world population growth within a generation and ending our reliance on fossil fuels. Just as importantly, we need to refocus our growth agenda on quality, not quantity. Even then, life will change dramatically over the next century as we seek to stabilise humankind’s effect on the planet.

What do you think?

Comments are aggressively moderated. Your best chance is reasoned disagreement.

*