Remembering Malthus III: Implementing a global population reduction

Smail, J. Kenneth

doi:10.1002/ajpa.10341

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As Malthus's many intellectual inheritors have pointed out, starvation is just one of the consequences of a large and ever-growing population. Although predictions of a population peak at or under 10 billion people by the year 2100 have been shown to be relatively robust (Lutz et al 2001;O'Neill 2005), it has been proposed that the world cannot sustainably support more than 2 or 3 billion people, carrying grave implications for earth's biodiversity (Daly 1996;Wackernagel and Rees 1996;Pimentel et al 1999;Smail 2003). Many researchers have concluded that the only or best way to meet these challenges is to produce more food with less land (i.e., agricultural intensification), likely coupled with population control and reduction (Ehrlich et al 1993;Budiansky 2002;Fresco 2003;Balmford et al 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Food security and biodiversity: can we have both? An agroecological analysis

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an extensive literature review exploring the relationships between food insecurity and rapid biodiversity loss, and the competing methods proposed to address each of these serious problems. Given a large and growing human population, the persistence of widespread malnutrition, and the direct and significant threats the expanding agricultural system poses to biodiversity, the goals of providing universal food security and protecting biodiversity seem incompatible. Examining the literature shows that the current agricultural system already provides sufficient food on a worldwide basis, but in doing so methodically undermines the capacity of agroecosystems to preserve biodiversity. However, the available evidence emphasizes the interdependence of biodiversity and agriculture, and the important role each plays in the maintenance of the other. Thus, our review supports the claim that the solutions to the problems of widespread food insecurity and biodiversity loss need not be mutually exclusive, and that it may be possible to address both using appropriate alternative agricultural practices.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Food security and biodiversity: can we have both? An agroecological analysis

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A growing human population tends to exacerbate the problem of resource scarcity (Bateson 1972;Smail 2003). While in the past, small population densities and simpler technologies of production did indeed allow for 'sustainable communities' to effectively manage their resources, this situation has drastically changed (Sponsel 2013).…”

Section: Demographic and Life-style Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nobody Likes Dichotomies (But Sometimes You Need Them)

Kopnina¹

2016

Anthropological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental anthropologists attempt to accommodate social justice while seeking to reconcile more-than-human relations and responsibilities towards their habitats. This article acknowledges areas of tension between local livelihoods and international conservation efforts, between indigenous peoples and wildlife, between traditional lifeways and development, and finally between different types of ethical assumptions that underlie anthropological advocacy. A number of dichotomies that are inherent in these tensions are discussed. With regard to the ecocentric/anthropocentric dichotomy, I argue that while human and environmental interests are sometimes intertwined, ecocentrism is necessary if non-humans are to be protected outside of utilitarian interests. With regard to the 'neoliberal conservation/local communities' dichotomy, I argue that blaming conservation for the violation of social justice depoliticises the issue of ecological injustice. Through a critical discussion of these dichotomies, this article examines the role of environmental anthropology in addressing today's pressing environmental issues, particularly the loss of biodiversity, with respect to the 'conservation' of communities and that of protected areas.

show abstract

“…Smail (2003a) fleshed out the footprint notion with the I = PCT formula of Holdren and Ehrlich (1974): Impact = Population × Consumption × Technological Efficiency. Yet he emphatically stated that “ Population stabilization and subsequent reduction is undoubtedly the primary issue facing humanity; all other matters are subordinate ” (Smail, 2003b; italics his). Are consumption and efficiency indeed subordinate?…”

Section: Subordinate Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent series of News and Views essays, Smail (2002, 2003a,b) broached the dilemmas faced by humanity as our population continues to grow by over 200,000 people per day. It can be shown that our burgeoning population also poses a dilemma, and indeed a severe threat, for numerous other species of plants and animals that get pushed aside in the wake of ever more humans.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%