Section 10.3 of the textbook presented what is considered to be the generalized theoretical model of the neo-Malthusian school on the causes for the continued deterioration of the environment. This theoretical model identifies three key variables that are considered to be important in understanding the total damage (impacts) that human inflict on the environment. These variables are: population, affluence, and technology. However, leading neo-Malthusian scholars have been shown to disagree on the relative importance of these three variables in explaining the total impacts (damage) humans have on the environment. Here is the nature of some of the debates:

- The connection between population and environmental damage is undeniable Continued increase in human populations inflicts increasing damage to the environment more profoundly than any other human-induced factors.

- The modern environmental crisis is predominantly a consequence of affluence or increased levels of per capita consumption.

- "The predominant factor in our industrial society's increased environmental degradation is neither population nor affluence but the increasing environmental impact per unit of production due to technological changes."

Did you find the above scholarly debates to be productive? Why, or why not? If you have to take a position in this debate, which one will you support? Defend your position.

Data from Section 10.3

Transcribed Image Text:

The era after the Second World War was known for spectacular economic and population growth. During the same period, what emerged were worrisome signs of the health and integ- rity of the natural environment. Water and air pollutions were emerging as serious problems in many major industrial cities. Furthermore, the significant increase observed in the prod- ucts from chemical processing industries and, in particular, the widespread use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides in agriculture were making the pollution problem (because of their toxicity) ominously threatening. This apparent fear of environmental misuse and abuse was forcefully articulated by the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring (1962). Carson's defense of the environment was not based on the romantic feeling she might have had toward nature. She was a scientist who studiously collected the necessary data to clearly and systematically explain the insidious damaging effects that human-made chemicals-particularly pesticides such as DDT-have had on the natural world. Most importantly, it was Carson's vividly imaginative portrayal of the barren landscape that made this publication so instrumental in establishing the modern environmental movement: the landscape where no birds sang. In addition to concerns about industrial toxic waste and their devastating effects on the environment, it was in the 1960s that many scholars began to sound the alarm over the dan- ger associated with a rapid rate of human population growth, exceeding 2 percent annually in many parts of the world (a doubling of population in 35 years or less). A human population that stood at 2 billion in 1930 had reached 3 billion by 1960. This was a startling increase in population when one noticed human population first hit the 1 billion mark in about 1800. In other words, it took many thousands of years for the world's population to reach its first billion, 130 years to reach its second billion, and 30 years for the next billion.