Professional Documents
Culture Documents
I Pat
I Pat
population
matters
Sustainability and the Ehrlich equation
A sustainable activity is one that is capable of It is self-evident that excessive levels of per-
going on for an indefinite period of time. sonal consumption and inefficient or dirty
technology are unsustainable.
Unfortunately, the term sustainable has been
widely abused, as illustrated by the com-
monly used contradiction sustainable growth:
growth can never be truly sustainable in a The quantity of resources we use
finite world. and our impact on the environment
effectively depend on three main
A simple example illustrates the concept of
factors:
sustainability: If reliable rainfall adds 100 litres
of rainwater to a tank every day, it is sustainable Population
to use up to 100 litres of this water per day. If the how many of us there are consum-
tank is large and is full to begin with, for a while ing resources and creating waste
it may be possible to use considerably more
than 100 litres per day. However, if the daily Affluence (consumption)
input from rainfall remains only 100 litres, even the average amount of goods and
starting with a full 10,000-litre tank, one can’t services we each use
use more than 100 litres per day sustainably.
The tank will eventually run dry. Technology
The IPAT relationship has another impor- that all three factors in the IPAT relationship
tant message. Provided none of the individ- are addressed.
ual factors are too extreme, there are many
alternative versions of sustainable future
available to us. Let’s suppose that the most
environmentally friendly technology possible
is developed and put into practice (sadly not a We have the choice whether to live
foregone conclusion). Sustainable options will on a very crowded planet with people
range from the maximum possible number of at minimum subsistence standards of
people living at subsistence levels to a very living, or to opt for smaller populations
much smaller population living very comfort- and enough resources for everyone
ably. So long as the total impact of P x A x T is
to aspire to a good quality of life – and
not excessive, any of these alternatives would
more space for other species.
be sustainable.
For future generations to have a good quality
of life, it is essential that we humans ensure
Technology
Technology can be defined as ‘the practical distance it travels, and the resources impli-
application of science to commerce or indus- cated at the end of an item’s useful life, e.g.
try’ or ‘the discipline dealing with the art or how much energy is required to recycle pulp
science of applying scientific knowledge to from old newspapers.
practical problems’. In the context of sustain-
Technology uses a wide range of scarce or
ability, technology is the way that we convert
potentially scarce resources, including many
natural resources into real goods and serv-
that are non-renewable, such as rare metals
ices that we can eat, drink, wear, live in, travel
and fossil fuels. Others may be renewable but
on, etc.
only to a limited extent. For example, sustain-
Resource-efficient technology gives the great- ably managed forestry is only sustainable in
est benefit for the smallest input of resources quantities that can be supported by the land
over the full lifecycle of the ‘product’. This available without resort to non-renewable
applies to the resources needed to make the inputs.
goods in the first place, e.g. how much iron
ore and energy go into making a steel bridge, In many cases, it isn’t obvious to the con-
the resources needed to use the goods, e.g. sumer what resources go into making a par-
how much fuel a car consumes relative to the ticular product, cornflakes for example. Some
manufacturers have already invested heavily Technology will continue to improve but it
in improving the resource efficiency of their is irresponsible to rely on technology that
technology and supply chains. Others could hasn’t yet been practically proven. Some new
still do much better. But even with the best technologies which few of us even dreamed
available technology, an industrial way of life about a decade or two ago are already in
is inevitably resource-intensive. widespread use; others, long considered to
be ‘just round the corner’, still seem no nearer
The environmental impact of waste is a
to fruition, a prime example being technically
consideration for many types of technology.
and economically viable nuclear fusion power.
This applies to the waste from manufacturing
However important it undoubtedly is to deve-
processes themselves, packaging, products
lop more efficient and appropriate technology,
that are surplus to requirements, such as
the inescapable conclusion is that this on
excess food, and items that are worn out,
its own will be insufficient to assure us a
broken-down, technologically obsolete or
sustainable and prosperous future.
otherwise no longer useful. Finally, what
happens to the manufacturing equipment
itself when it is no longer required?
Many companies are now making major
efforts to minimise waste and to recycle end-
Using the best available technology
of-life materials and equipment. Indeed, some
are designing their products to be easier to will help reduce human impact on
recycle and to be less harmful if they do end the environment but technology on
up in the environment. But this is not always its own is not enough to make us
easy and recycling often incurs additional sustainable.
energy demand.
The IPAT equation shows clearly:
The overall message is that whereas industri-
ally developed technological economies still • we need to reduce our
need to improve the efficiency of the technol- individual consumption.
ogy they employ, the law of diminishing returns
• we need to stabilise our
applies. It will become increasingly difficult to
populations at sustainable
manufacture and supply goods using progres-
sively smaller amounts of resources: levels.
Affluence (consumption) maintain the status quo longer term. Not only
Many environmental campaigners exhort us are large disparities between rich and poor
to adopt simpler lifestyles in order to save the inconsistent with human rights but almost
planet. They are of course correct. Many of inevitably they eventually lead to conflict.
the goods and services we use do relatively
Even within individual nations, too wide a
little to enhance our lives, whilst having a dis-
spread between rich and poor makes it very
proportionate impact on the environment.
difficult to moderate consumption. The combi-
Unfortunately many people do not see fit to nation of celebrity culture and mass consumer
moderate their own lifestyles for the sake of marketing encourages people to aspire to life-
posterity. These include ‘enviro-sceptics’ who styles beyond the resources available. We
do not acknowledge that an anthropogenic do not advocate poverty as a way of life; on
environmental and resources crisis is looming the other hand, there is evidence that once
and ‘techno-fixers’ who believe that better peoples’ basic needs have been met, relative
technology is a panacea for all environmental affluence (their perception of themselves as
problems. being better or worse off than others) usually
has more effect on their sense of well-being
Although Population Matters stresses the
than their absolute standard of living.
importance of population size, we do also
believe that individuals in economically devel-
oped countries need to moderate their life-
styles and that these countries as a whole
must be more frugal in their use of resources
in order to protect the environment. One Reduced levels of personal consump-
way to achieve this might be to apply the tion are a necessary step towards sus-
Contraction and Convergence concept pro- tainability, but we would need to return
posed as an equitable basis for rich countries to minimum subsistence lifestyles for
to restrain their consumption in an increas- this to be sufficient on its own. For a
ingly resources-constrained environment. decent quality of life the other two
factors in the IPAT equation must also
It is completely unsustainable for the whole be taken into account:
world population to enjoy high-consumption
western lifestyles. Global Footprinting Network • the most environmentally efficient
data show that between three and four planet technology needs to be made
earths would be needed to support the exist- available and applied on a world-
ing world population at the present per-capita wide basis.
consumption levels of the UK. It is unrealis- • population numbers, globally
tic to expect better technology to overcome a and for individual countries, need
deficit on this scale. to be stabilised and fall to levels
which can be supported at decent
Clearly it is unethical for rich countries to insist
standards of living for everyone.
on maintaining consumption levels that are
impossible for other peoples to attain. Even if
this were not the case, it is still unrealistic to