one page reaction paper.3

Understanding Robbins “The implications [of Malthusian thinking] for contemporary global environmentalism are equally programmatic. Environmental crises as demographic problems exist at the site of resource use, in and amongst the world’s poor, who are simply too numerous. Subsidies of the poor do little to alleviate the crisis, since they only serve to reinforce the demographic trend. Population control, rather than reconfiguration of global distributions of power and goods, is the solution to ecological crisis. The continued advocacy of an apolitical natural-limits argument, therefore, is implicitly political, since it holds implications for the distribution and control of resources.” Malthus (via Elwell) and Robbins disagree about the role that population growth plays in resource consumption. After discussing the competing arguments among your group, make sure that ALL members of your group understand the two arguments and their finer points.

Now, imagine that your small group comprises a team of advisors at the United Nations, which is struggling to respond to a looming environmental and economic crisis. The country of Fredonia is notable for its wide range of valuable natural resources, indigenous wildlife that exists nowhere else in the world, and deep inequality and uneven wealth distribution. Also, like many such places, it is among the group of “less-developed” countries whose populations have grown significantly over the past several decades, despite declines in population growth among “more- developed” countries. The current crisis emerged as poor farmers have begun to encroach into protected wildlife areas to expand their agricultural lands in order to produce more food. Several species, already on the verge of extinction, are facing increased pressure as habitat is rapidly converted to farmland. The question is, how should the UN respond? What kinds of solutions will help address the problem at its core? Half of the UN member states (who take a Malthusian view) have argued that the problem is simply to do with Fredonia’s growing population. They have suggested several measures, like educational programs advocating contraception and “family planning”, to address the problem over the long-term. Hard-liners in this camp have also advocated increasing border enforcement at wildlife parks to prevent extinctions, but otherwise allowing "natural" population restraints (hunger, poverty) to solve the problem. The other half of member states (who take Robbins’s view) have argued that the crisis is a product of much deeper problems, related to inequality, a lack of economic opportunity, and a much broader problem of high consumption rates among wealthier populations, and that population grown is not a sufficient explanation for what’s happening in Fredonia.