Dreyer-Maruyama 1

Diva Dreyer-Maruyama

Geography 017

10/12/2017

Black Gold and the Carrying Capacity of the Middle East

Four main factors influence population size: births per capita, deaths per capita,

emigration, and immigration. These four variables change with a species’ biotic

potential. Biotic potential is the term for the effect that environmental conditions will

alter the species’ survivability. For example, disease, starvation, lifespan, and frequency

of reproduction all will change the biotic potential. This leads into the carrying capacity

of an area. The carrying capacity marks the maximum population that is sustainable

without seriously degrading the natural resources. For Kirchner et al., the purpose of

carrying capacity analysis is to “express the capacity of natural areas (ecosystems) to

support animal life.” (Kirchner) This is simply and concisely defined in most animals,

but becomes difficult in humans due to the impact that capacity may have on cultural

and social wellbeing.

House and Williams in The carrying capacity of a nation: growth and the quality of life

1975), define human carrying capacity as “the level of human activity that a region can

sustain at acceptable quality of life levels,” (House, et al) , meanwhile, Whittaker and

Likens in The Biosphere of Man: Primary productivity of the biosphere, claim that it is
 Dreyer-Maruyama 2

“the size of the human population that can be supported on a long-term, steady-state

basis by the world’s resources without detriment to the biosphere.” (Whittaker et al)

While House and Williams focus on the experience of the human and their state of

being, Whittaker and Likens deem the defining aspect to be the contribution and effect

upon the rest of the environment. For example, if a group of people were travelling on a

bus, the carrying capacity is not simply the presence of food and water, but also the

reliance on the passengers to preserve the integrity of the vehicle. If they begin to

dismantle the systems that keep the bus running, the carrying capacity will begin to

decrease. Hopfenberg in Human Carrying Capacity is determined by Food Availability,

chimes in, urging a shift from ‘the theoretically derived carrying capacity to an

identifiable and quantifiable one.” (Hopfenberg) As it is, qualitative carrying capacity

analysis tends to examine population changes without achieving a numerical or

quantitative result, making it difficult to define concrete limits. To state the limits of

carrying capacity to be where quality of life begins to decline, or where there is an

effect on the environment creates debatable, subjective lines in the sand.

The role of oil in increasing the carrying capacity of humans is noteworthy. When oil

and petroleum products became common place, the population weighed in at around 1.6

billion people. The population has since raised to around 7.5 billion. Correlation does

not prove causation but when considering the technological advancements and quality

of life improvements that came along with the ease of a high-potential, easily stored

fuel, it begins to make more sense. Liquid fuel has been of high value in human society

ever since its discovery and development, examples being kerosene and ethanol. With
 Dreyer-Maruyama 3

increased general access, comes availability of light, heat, cooking, etc. Anthropogenic

change to the given natural environment to better suit the needs of humanity

simultaneously raising the carrying capacity falls in line with Sayre’s claim in The

Genesis, History, and Limits of Carrying Capacity, that, “The quixotic relation to

natural productivity---carrying capacity was at once fixed by nature, yet capable of

being increased by management…” (Sayre pp 125)

Oil allowed the portability of low grade fuels with the high temperature and energy

density of industrial level fuels. There is no additional inertia required to generate

energy production which gave the user previously inaccessible control. “Black Gold”

provided economic growth, jobs, tech development, and the creation of industry. But all

this can only be achieved in the presence of human society. Oil and energy sources

cannot bolster population growth or carrying capacity. Leopold states that “When we

arrived on the scene we raised the carrying capacity of the land for man by means of

tools.” (Leopold) Humanity’s transformation of the raw resources allowed for the

increase in carrying capacity.

However, along with this comes the harsh truth. Oil exporting countries, comparatively

show disproportionate poverty rates, deaths per capita, and lack of sufficient education.

Oil dependent societies have a variable relationship with economic alleviation. This

relates to the lack of access to a constant supply of the resource. When a pocket is first

discovered, the surrounding population often experiences a “boom” where the society

and their carrying capacity can be transformed. One example would be the uncovering
 Dreyer-Maruyama 4

of large oil supplies in the Middle East causing per capita revenues to increase from

approximately $300 to over $2000 in a matter of 10 years. (Karl, pp. 8) This enormous

increase in GDP allowed for the creation of industry that boosted their population. This

increased their carrying capacity for the time being. Residents of non oil-producing

states translocated to the enriched areas seeing the possibility of higher wages,

increased job opportunity, and improved quality of life. (WN}JU/CFET)

As a result of these developments, infant mortality was halved and life expectancy rose.

Children in the areas such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, UAE, and their neighboring

states of Jordan, Egypt, Yemen, and Palestine showed substantial school enrollment and

even the adult literacy rates rose nearly 20% from the 1970s to 1990s.(WJU/CFET)

When the cyclical nature of such a limited resource was realized, the per capita

revenues plummeted. Over production of a resource results in the oversaturation of the

market which leads to price drops. The international money stopped flowing and their

ability to support the increase in workers and births showed a drastic decrease. Not only

does the GDP drop with the lack of income, but employment is downsized on a massive

scale. Large sectors of the infrastructure were lost which displaced thousands of

workers. One estimate states that in 2000, an approximate one million new workers

searched for employment following the Oil price fall in 1986, but only around 200,000

jobs were currently available. With a 20% employment rate, the economic stability of

the region comes into question. With an inability to support larger numbers, the

carrying capacity is decreased.

 Dreyer-Maruyama 5

“To conceive of environmental limits in abstraction from time and history--as somehow

intrinsic to an idealized nature—is to mistake the model of reality for reality itself.”

(Sayre, pp 132) This statement stands as an indication. To believe that the carrying

capacity of an area is static and unchangeable is foolish. Natural experiments are just

that, subject to nature. A number based entirely off of variables that change drastically

over time is unlikely to remain constant. And just as everything else, carrying capacity

is subject to alteration by influencers. It can be useful as an approximator, but as Sayre

states “is a dull tool for understanding the complex interrelations of humans with the

face of the earth.”(Sayre, pp. 132)

 Dreyer-Maruyama 6

Hopfenberg, R. (2003) Human Carrying Capacity Is Determined by Food

Availability. Population & Environment, 25, 109-117.
House, P. W. & Williams, E. R. (1975) The carrying capacity of a nation: growth and
the quality of life, Lexington, Mass., Lexington Books.
Karl, Terry L. (2007) Oil-Led Development: Social, Political, and Economic
Consequences. Center on Democracy, Development, and he Rule of Law Freeman
Spogli Institute for International Studies. (p. 8)
Kirchner, James W., George Ledec, Robert J., A. Goodland, and Janet M. Drake. 1985,
Carrying Capacity, population growth, and sustainable development. In rapid
population growth and human carrying capacity. Two perspectives, ed. (p. 45)
Leopold, A., Flader, S. L. & Callicott, J. B. ([1941] 1992) The River of the Mother of
God: And Other Essays by Aldo Leopold, University of Wisconsin Press.

Sayre, N. F. (2008) The Genesis, History, and Limits of Carrying Capacity. Annals of
the Association of American Geographers, 98,120-134.

Wheeling Jesuit University/Center for Educational Technologies (1999) Global

Perspectives: Economic Growth and Decline in the Middle East. Retrieved from
http://www.cotf.edu
Whittaker, R. H. & Likens, G. E. (1975) The Biosphere of Man. IN Lieth, H. &
Whittaker, R. H. (Eds.) Primary productivity of the biosphere. New York, Springer-
Verlag.