[Taxacom] Pro-natalism vs. biodiversity

[Richard Jensen]

David's point about educating women is right on target. But it's only 
part of the solution.

As I see it, attempts to decrease each individual's impact are far 
outpaced by the increase in the number of individuals. Thus, population 
growth continues and resource overuse/abuse is a direct or indirect 
consequence. Until we are able to establish exactly what standard of 
living each person should have, at a minimum, there will continue to be 
disparities in resource use and allocation and those disparities will 
lead to greater habitat destruction.

Cheers(?)

Dick J

Richard Jensen, Professor
Department of Biology
Saint Mary’s College
Notre Dame, IN 46556
Tel: 574-284-4674



Dr. David Campbell wrote:
> This is getting off-topic...
>
>   
>> the main reason for today's
>> biodiversity decline is mainly due to humans advocating pronatalist
>> policies, 
>>     
>
> More genocide needed?  Or maybe a good epidemic?  There are some 
> significant ethical issues related to population control.  
>
> The main reason for today's biodiversity declines is habitat 
> destruction, which is related to population growth but more directly a 
> function of economic activity (s.l.-many projects are not in fact 
> economically viable but are marketed politically as helping the 
> economy).  On the one hand, there are the "make as much cash as 
> possible right now without regard to sustainability" activities (e.g., 
> global warming denial); on the other, those who are impoverished, often 
> reflecting economic injustice, who have no obvious chioce but to use up 
> the local forest, etc.  Population control is valuable, but the most 
> effective long-term approach is improving the education and social 
> status, especially of women.  
>
> China's policies controlled population growth, but they are still 
> losing species at an alarming rate because of unfettered environmental 
> exploitation for economic gain.  Decreasing the impact of each 
> individual on the environment does more than decreasing the number of 
> individuals.  
>
>