MAX KUMMEROWC U R T I N U N I V E R S I T Y, P E R T H , A U S T R A L I A ( E C O N O M I C S )

VICKI WATSONU N I V E R S I T Y O F M O N TA N A M I S S O U L A ( E N V I R O N M E N TA L S T U D I E S )

m a x k u m m e r o w @ y a h o o . c o mv i c k i . w a t s o n @ u m o n t a n a . e d u

Implementing K* Choosing and moving towards optimum global carrying capacity for humans

Observe or choose?

Positivism: change beliefs if they differ from factsEthics: try to change facts, where they differ from

beliefs Scott Gordon History and Philosophy of the Social Sciences

Natural sciences: Observe & reportSocial sciences: Observe, design, create, choose, act

“economics is a moral science….it involves introspection and judgments of value”

J.M. Keynes Letter to Harrod

Choose K* (optimum) < K (maximum) ?

Humanity can adjust reproduction behaviors to target a preferred population level, K* (K star)

Feasible (and cheap) via birth control, abortion, sterilization, education, economic incentives

Implement via institutional changes Cultural family size preferences Health care & family planning technology & delivery Education & empowerment of women Pro or anti natalist policies & incentives

Choice of K* depends on many factors:

Desired standard of living for self and others Dietary trophic level (how much meat to eat?) Expected rate of technology innovations

(increases K) Exhaustion of natural capital stocks (decreases K) Space allocated to other species Worry about risks of changing the planet too much Aesthetics & preferences for space, congestion,

freedom, wildness Worry about future generations

Human Fertility

2.1 = replacement rate with low mortality12-14 = “natural” fertility rate without

contraception Before 20th century, child and infant mortality

rates (~500/1000), TFR ~5-72012 country fertility rates range from <1 to

>7

Demographic momentum

Populations increase for 40+ years after fertility falls One child policy 1979, 900 m., China peaks 2040, 1.4

b. Births exceed deaths after fertility falls

Between 1972 and 2012 World growth fell from 2% to 1% But population doubled from 3.5 billion to 7 billion.

Growth 80 million per year, 1 billion in 12 years

World Fertility Experiment Results

28 peaceful countries TFR 1.6, 28 violent countries TFR 4.7

(41% low,43% mid, 16% high)

Source: U.N & World Bank 2006-2008 figures

Fertility Category Countries

Total Pop. (billions)

Years life

Infant deaths/1000

Per Capita Income

2006 GDP Growth

Low (<2.1) 73 2.72 76.6 9 25,589$ 4.7%Mid (2.1-4.1) 67 2.88 70.1 24 12,797$ 4.6%High (>4.1) 62 1.09 55.6 67 5,037$ 3.6%

Backlash against family planning

Reagan & Bush opposed abortion, cut family planning budgets

Birth control linked to environmentalists, opposed by polluters

Labeled racist by political left (Marx opposed Malthus)

Some assumed problem solved due to falling fertilityFocus on “growth” and “jobs” disregards ecological

limits, assumes population growth a goalMale opposition to empowering women (key to lower

fertility) Population almost a taboo subject, even at ecology

meetings

Theoretical v Actual Demographic Transitions

Assumption: Occurs automatically with modernization

Reality:Requires empowerment of women, education, legal abortion, leadership, PR campaigns, funding, major cultural changes, not at all certain to be completed

1 billion to 10 billion in 250 years, 1800-2050 (7.2 b. now)

Growth in poor, high fertility countries = migration pressures

Projections contingent on future fertility

Medium, low and high fertility differ by 1/2 child/couple

Medium assumes convergence of all countries to near 2.1 (replacement) by 2050.

Current country TFR ranges from < 1 to > 7U.N. Population Projections 2012, billions

Constant Low High Medium

2050

11.1

8.3

10.9 9.5

2100

28.6

6.7

16.6 10.8

Culture as an evolutionary selection factor

“In developed countries, family size preferences make “cultural selection” the strongest driver of evolutionary change. Moreover, Lamarckian transmission of acquired characteristics does occur with “memes.”” Kaufman, Eric Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth, 2010

Fundamentalists of all religions have more children, even in the context of developed countries

2 Mormons 1829, 14.1 million 2012 = 9% growth rate

Fertility differences change population proportions fast

>2.1 exponential growth, <2.1 exponential decay

 

Secular 1.5 kids

Fundamentalist 3 kids

%Secular

% Fundamentalist

Total Population

Weighted avg Fertility

Gen 1 1.00

1.00 50.0% 50.0%

2.0

2.25

Gen 2 0.75

1.50 33.3% 66.7%

2.3

2.50

Gen 3 0.56

2.25 20.0% 80.0%

2.8

2.70

Gen 4 0.42

3.38 11.1% 88.9%

3.8

2.83

Gen 5 0.32

5.06 5.9% 94.1%

5.4

2.91

Gen 10

0.08

38.44 0.2% 99.8%

38.5

3.00

Current economy unsustainable

Species holocaust, ecological instablityClimate changeHalf of world’s food from natural gas

(N2+CH4)Soil loss exceeds soil formation on crop lands

“Energy slaves” from fossil fuels) increase output multiplying Labor in production function by 200 Y =f(T,K,L*200)

In 1800 small economy, big world

Now big economy small world

30-50% over long term carrying capacity

Exponential growth, fixed resource

http://www.csc.noaa.gov/coastal/economics/images/sa7_fig06.gif

Herman Daly: Steady State Economy

Reproduction a fundamental human right

All must have equal childbearing rights Reject racism of early Social Darwinists

But reproduction creates external effects on others

And emergent effects—climate change, extinctionIndividual rationality causes collective irrationality

Game Theory Prisoner’s Dilemma “Tragedy of the commons”

So regulation of family size by society justified

Elizabeth Kolbert’s “The Case Against KidsNew Yorker, April 12, 2012

Some additional people add to quality of life, but too many make life poorer, less safe

In biology, too much is as bad as too little (like number of people in a lifeboat)

Personal rationale for K*

Check your ecological footprint: http://www.myfootprint.org/ (author’s takes 7 earths to support everybody at my level)

So multiply current population by 1/7 Multiply by ½ to allow slack in the system and allow ecosystems

to recover Conclusion: K* = about half a billion people

Allows scale economies, high energy urban lifestyles 10 cities 10 m, 20 cities 5 m, small cities 200 m, 100 m rural

Feasible paths to 500 millionGlobal one child for 4 generations (or faster or

slower) 8 (in year 2025), 4, 2, 1, .5 (by 2125?) )

Or higher mortality & permanent decrease in K Lovelock predicts 1 billion by 2100 Limits to growth predicts collapse, 10 billion to 5 billion

by 2100

Fertility transitions implemented by:

Choose target population and path to K* via public debate

Top level government leadershipEmpowerment and education of womenCultural change (via education, research, etc.)Public relations campaigns (Mexican novellas)Legal abortionSubsidies for birth control“One child” or “two child” policiesSubsidize first child, internalize external costs of

third child World Bank The Global Family Planning Revolution

Family planning alone not enough to save the earth

Reform media and education Inform not sell (current mass media profit motivated) Educated public essential for democracy to function

Reduce population Transition half done, needs completion

Steady state economy Huge cultural change (less greed, less consumption, more “leisure”) Cuban and “happiness research” development model—salsa & relationships , not stuff

Protect environment Carbon tax, protect bio-diversity

Social justice Universal human rights & equality

Synergy, interdependence & simultaneity

Low fertility K* feasible utopia

Operate economy on current solar energy inputsEnd depletion of natural capital stocksEconomy of abundance rather than scarcityLong lives, high energy lifestyles, peace

Reality check: Sweden: kids do not starve, peaceful, forests, TFR

1.8 Afghanistan : TFR 5.5, violence, infant mortality

120/1000

21st century moral choices

Standard of living? (How much energy use?)

Do future generations count?

Do other species matter?

Can the world be stable & peaceful half rich and half poor?

Low birth rates/long lives or

High birth rates/short lives?

Astronaut’s insight:

“It’s a long way to the

next waterhole”The Home Planet,

Kevin Kelley, editor.