CONTINUING DEBATE

The optimism of the 1980s that ecological limits could be overcome is as easy to refute as the predictions of imminent catastrophe of the 1970s. It is becoming increasingly clear that the environment is deteriorating and that rather than depletion of resources providing the limits to growth, it is the pollution and environmental degradation resulting from ever­increasing production and consumption that is the real threat to the planet's future.

In 1996, respected economist Robert U Ayres (1996: 117) said, 'I have changed my view radically. Today I have deep misgivings about eco­nomic growth per se.' His reasoning was as follows:

[E]vidence is growing that economic growth (such as it is) in the western world today is benefiting only the richest people alive now, at the expense of nearly everybody else, especially the poor and the powerless in this and future generations. To those who follow us we are bequeathing a more and more potent technology and significant investment in productive machinery and equipment and infrastruc­ture. But these benefits may not compensate for a depleted natural resource base, a gravely damaged environment and a broken social contract.

It is theoretically possible that economic growth could be achieved without additional impacts on the environment, but this would mean many activities that might otherwise provide economic growth would have to be forgone - which will not happen while priority is given to achieving economic growth. Whether they believe economic growth and environmental protection are compatible, almost everyone agrees that there will inevitably be situations in which the goals of economic growth and environmental protection are irreconcilable and choices will have to be made.

Also, as Paul Ekins (1992: 280-1) noted in his review of the shift from limits to growth to sustainable development, whether one is a technolog­ical optimist or pessimist, the technological changes that are necessary require 'adoption of ecological sustainability as the principle economic objective in place of economic growth'.

Further Reading

Chambers, N, C Simmons & M Wackernagel (2000) Sharing Nature's Interest: Ecological Footprints as an Indicator of Sustainability, Earthscan, London.

Ekins, P (1992) 'Limits to growth' and 'sustainable development': grappling with ecological realities, Ecological Economics, 8: 269-88.

Hardin, Garrett (1986) Cultural carrying capacity: a biological approach to human prob­lems, Die Off Web Site, viewed 15 March 2006, Meadows, DH, DL Meadows, J Randers & WW Behrens (1972) The Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on the Predicament of Mankind, Pan, London.

Rees, WE (1996) Revisiting carrying capacity: area-based indicators of sustainability, Population and Environment, 17(3).

Reid, WV et al. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, Island Press, Washington DC.

Wackernagel, M, NB Schulz, D Deumling, A Callejas Linares, M Jenkins, V Kapos, C Monfreda, J Loh, N Myers, R Norgaard, & J Randers (2002) Tracking the ecolog­ical overshoot of the human economy, PNAS, 99(14): 9266-71.