ECOLOGICAL ISSUES
A further area of concern lies in the fact that in many places, rampant population growth is concurrently accompanied by an exodus of greater and greater numbers from rural districts to the cities, again particularly in the less developed parts of the world. This has resulted in the unbridled growth of a number of "megacities," containing extremely large and thus unmanageable numbers of residents; as well as instantaneous giant rings of slum neighborhoods (known in some quarters as "") around their outskirts.
Of course, we are all aware that increased population is usually accompanied by increased poverty within the locale of such growth. Moreover, efforts on the part of peoples of a region to improve the sustainability of the agriculture, forestry, or fisheries within these locales are usually thwarted by this very population explosion that is simultaneously taking place there.
Witness, for example, Bangladesh. An enormous population, confined within the bounds of an insufficient land area, being also an area subject to frequent disastrous flooding, is thereby often devastated by famine as well. As a result, even in comparatively better years, there persists an ever-present problem of providing a decent minimum standard of living to the majority of that country's citizens. These sorts of conditions, whereby people are compelled to live upon, and attempt to cultivate, lands that are often visited by disaster, are referred to as "land hunger." It is obvious that, as populations grow within our present system of national boundaries, larger and larger numbers of people in more and more parts of the world will be forced to endure the same tragic circumstances. Meanwhile, in other parts of the world, there are areas where population density is quite light, and living conditions very favorable. The real "problem" boils down to the existence of national boundaries--which in some places is the cause of "demographic masses" enduring crowded conditions at the very boundaries which separate them from what might be comparatively thinly populated regions.
If the strictures of national boundaries were released, there would follow a natural, somewhat predictable, adjustment of the world's demographic situation. There would of course need to be some restrictions or controls so as to prevent things like a flood of immigration into but a few places regarded as the most desirable to live within. Among other things, these restrictions would additionally need to prevent the formation of the aforementioned fringe slum-dwellings, or "favelas," within or on the outskirrts of cities (although it is my prediction that this aforesaid single change would probably automatically result in an end to such places). And, of course, the concept of private ownership of real estate and other resources, as well as zoning and other regulatory principles, would have to be respected and upheld by law.
Beyond this, however, it seems self-evident that the final, permanent, means of stemming excessive population growth can only be via limitation of the birth rate. This should always be voluntary in nature; that is, a decision of individual parents. I do not wish to become a participant in the debates about birth control or abortion. Nor do I recommend any form of governmental control or restriction concerning childbearing. For these determinations are private, or religious, or cultural, in nature And I would never endorse any interference with private life, or religions, or cultures (unless they are clearly and objectively harmful to the participants or others). Instead, it is hoped, and seems likely, that the intermingling of people the world over, which my suggestions, if followed, would naturally bring about, would promote an eventual sensible approach to these issues on the part of all. Moreover, and more to the point, it is deemed likely that the expanded educational and vocational opportunities, as well as the general atmosphere of improvement in human rights--especially for women--per that which I advocate, would eventually themselves lead to a natural voluntary reduction in the birth rate everywhere.
* * * * *
Another ecological problem that affects all of us, regardless of where we live, is the fact that our planet has exhibited clear signs of warming during the past century. This has been said to have produced the increased temperatures, the more numerous and intense storms, and the more tempestuous conditions in general, that have prevailed worldwide during recent years. Scientific analyses indicate that further significant global warming and climate change are likely during the next several decades; and that if things are permitted to so continue, we may all need to very shortly adapt to catastrophic climatic conditions.
It has been determined that a major contributor to this environmental threat is the destruction of the earth's ozone layer, due in part from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil, as well as various other everyday mechanical, industrial, and agricultural functions that occur around the world on a nonstop basis. The net result is carbon dioxide trapping the sun's radiation, causing unnatural warming of the earth's surface; and destruction of the ozone layer that surrounds our planet by chlorofluorocarbons, causing greater and greater exposure of all of us to lethal ultraviolet radiation.
In 1989, it was reported that the hole in the ozone layer that had been thus produced over Antartica was rapidly enlarging. The same year, it was realized that a similar hole was forming in the ozone layer over the North Pole as well. These kinds of umnnatural conditions can precipitate, and to an extent have already caused, extreme events, such as hurricanes, droughts, and floods--which in turn have the potential to destabilize agriculture and destroy human settlements. One direful warning, pertaining to the North American region, is the prediction that a small further change in average global temperatutre could, over a relatively short period of time, cause further melting of the Greenland ice cap and the West Artic ice sheet, bringing about a consequent rise in sea levels of as much as twenty feet. This would place island and shoreline cities and residential regions at risk of inundation, reduction of land area, and consequent displacement of large numbers of residents and businesses.
We read that international meetings and conferences are every so often held to discuss this challenge; and that various nation-states agree--and disagree--regarding the taking of steps, to various extents, to reduce the causes of this looming disaster. But the plain and simple fact is that global warming and its causes will never be effectively dealt with as long as we are a world composed of separate nations. Many, if not most, nation-states have their own economic agendas, which usually take priority over worldwide environmental welfare. Thus, the fate of the earth is presently governed in large part by irregular, independently arrived at, decisions of numerous individual countries. In the wealthier nations, decisions appear to result, at least in large part, from the various influences of business interests within said states. The United States is one of these very nations. In addition, many smaller, less economically developed, countries have business-related needs or aspirations that leave no choice but to conduct or permit activities that damage the atmosphere which belongs to all of us.
There is still hope, however. Nuclear power, carefully and prudently regulated and handled, could be a more sensible source of energy. Better yet, wind and sunlight are widely abundant and useful as sources of electricity and heat in most parts of the world. It's been estimated, in fact, that wind alone can furnish five times today's global demand for electricity.
What is necessary is the shedding of sovereign states' attachment to the vainglory of sovereignty in deciding whether and to what extent steps will be taken by each in efforts to repair the damage that has been done, and to prevent further, possibly fatal, harm to our world. Instead, a single unified body of members of the appropriate scientific disciplenes must determine what remedies and practices are specifically needed; and a single unified governing entity must impose these necessary steps upon the entire world community. An enforceable international approach to these issues is our only hope--before it is too late. And this will only happen when a single international governing body is at the helm.
* * * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment