More handpicked essays just for you.
Effect of overpopulation on the environment
Overpopulation effects on the environment
In essay about lifeboat ethics by garrett hardin
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effect of overpopulation on the environment
Garrett Hardin, an American ecologist, warned of the dangers of overpopulation. In Hardin’s best-known works, “The tragedy of the Commons” and “Lifeboat Ethics,” he talks about the importance of sustainability and requiring everyone to take action. Hardin stresses the importance of evaluating our environment to maintain a high quality of life without sacrificing future generations ability to do the same. Sustainability is having a healthy balance between economic, social, and ecological issues. In my essay, I will expand on these issues and how they are addressed in Hardin’s writings.
Sustainability is Economic. Economically, sustainability involves: Providing sufficient goods and services for a high quality of life, creating worldwide economic justice, and providing meaningful employment. The “spaceship” metaphor from “Lifeboat Ethics” refers to the Earth with a limited amount of resources. It is our duty to develop technological solutions to reduce, reuse, and recycle our raw materials and natural resources. The Earth as a lifeboat, at our rate of consumption, will eventually run o...
The majority of this piece is dedicated to the author stating his opinion in regards to civilization expanding beyond its sustainable limits. The author makes it clear that he believes that humans have failed the natural environment and are in the process of eliminating all traces of wilderness from the planet. Nash points out facts that strengthen his argument, and quotes famous theologians on their similar views on environmental issues and policies. The combination of these facts and quotes validates the author’s opinion.
Garret Hardin’s “Tragedy of the Commons” is an article that identifies the nation’s current problems and predicaments that can’t be resolved through the use of technical solutions. Hardin’s work heavily focuses on overpopulation, a prominent and unceasing issue that significantly distorts and affects the stability of the Earth and the abundance of the planet’s resources. In his article, he mentioned some reasonable and important solutions to overpopulation, but he also explained its downside and how the said solutions may not be ideal and practical. “Tragedy of the Commons” revealed that the human population will continue to flourish and how it will be greatly detrimental to our society unless individuals get the education that they need and
Hardin states that throughout most of history there's been no need for concern about population control. Nature would come along with epidemic diseases and take care of the matter for us. Disease has been the primary population controller in the past. Because widespread disease and famine no longer exist, we have to find other means to stop population increases (Spencer 1992, pp.61-2).
It is a known fact that the world population is increasing without bound; however, there is a debate if this increase is a good thing or if it will prove catastrophic. The article “The Tragedy of the Commons” by Garrett Hardin discusses how the ever-increasing world population will exhaust the world of its natural resources, and eliminate human’s capability for survival. On the other side of the argument is Julian L. Simon who wrote “More People, Greater Wealth, More Resources, Healthier Environment.” This article proposes the theory that with an increase in population, humans’s quality of life is amplified. One particular issue that they both mention and have drastically different views on is the future of agriculture and human’s ability to sustain it.
For quite some time, life on earth has been nothing but peaches and cream for several people and because of people who live a non-sustainable life, it has left others with an indistinct outlook on earth’s future. Sustainability to me is doing things that will help prevent harmful things from happening to the environment now and in the future. With the support of the sustainability and more quality ways of living, the Earth Charter is gradually introduced. Through key research I will explain what the Earth Charter is and why it was founded, describe one of its four parts along with the goals and overarching philosophy, and share the impact it has on my life now and in the future.
Sustainability is a concept with a diverse array of meanings and definitions – a widely used glamorous, ambiguous, ambivalent and vague concept that is used by different stakeholder groups in various ways. Presumably to avoid noodling over a terminology or to avoid the confrontation with a definition, most widely the concept is broken down a planning process (c.f. e.g. Döring & Muraca, 2010). That is why most common sustainability is understood as sustainable development.1
“We are consuming the Earth’s natural resources beyond its sustainable capacity of renewal” said by Herman Daly, Beyond Growth, Boston 1996, 61[1] .
Humans have been destroying the planet since we were able to stand on two legs. As a society, we need to work to reverse these terrible effects that our existence has on the planet. Sustainability is one way to begin reversing these effects, while still living our daily lives. In 2006, Al Gore presented his documentary, “ An Inconvenient Truth”, as a way to show the world the evidence behind global warming, climate change and the destruction of our planet. This documentary shocked the world. It was clear that changes needed to be made, but the destruction was more intense than previously thought. SInce this revelation in 2006, companies have tried to cut down on their greenhouse emissions, as well as offered sustainable products to their customers. Through a debate of morals and
People have to start off understanding what environmental sustainability means. Allie Sibole author of, The Ethics of Sustainability: Why Should We Care?, shares a perfect example, “Sustainability is a moral response to an incredible gift” (Sibole 1). What she explains is, our planet is the beloved gift. People need to not take
Ecologists formulate their scientific theories influenced by ethical values, and in turn, environmental ethicists value nature based on scientific theories. Darwinian evolutionary theory provides clear examples of these complex links, illustrating how these reciprocal relationships do not constitute a closed system, but are undetermined and open to the influences of two broader worlds: the sociocultural and the natural environment. On the one hand, the Darwinian conception of a common evolutionary origin and ecological connectedness has promoted a respect for all forms of life. On the other hand, the metaphors of struggle for existence and natural selection appear as problematic because they foist onto nature the Hobbesian model of a liberal state, a Malthusian model of the economy, and the productive practice of artificial selection, all of which reaffirm modern individualism and the profit motive that are at the roots of our current environmental crisis. These metaphors were included in the original definitions of ecology and environmental ethics by Haeckel and Leopold respectively, and are still pervasive among both ecologists and ethicists. To suppose that these Darwinian notions, derived from a modern-liberal worldview, are a fact of nature constitutes a misleading interpretation. Such supposition represents a serious impediment to our aim of transforming our relationship with the natural world in order to overcome the environmental crisis. To achieve a radical transformation in environmental ethics, we need a new vision of nature.
A human induced global ecological crisis is occurring, threatening the stability of this earth and its inhabitants. The best path to address environmental issues both effectively and morally is a dilemma that raises concerns over which political values are needed to stop the deterioration of the natural environment. Climate change; depletion of resources; overpopulation; rising sea levels; pollution; extinction of species is just to mention a few of the damages that are occurring. The variety of environmental issues and who and how they affect people and other species is varied, however the nature of environmental issues has the potential to cause great devastation. The ecological crisis we face has been caused through anthropocentric behavior that is advantageous to humans, but whether or not anthropocentric attitudes can solve environmental issues effectively is up for debate. Ecologism in theory claims that in order for the ecological crisis to be dealt with absolutely, value and equality has to be placed in the natural world as well as for humans. This is contrasting to many of the dominant principles people in the contemporary world hold, which are more suited to the standards of environmentalism and less radical approaches to conserving the earth. I will argue in this essay that whilst ecologism could most effectively tackle environmental problems, the moral code of ecologism has practical and ethical defects that threaten the values and progress of anthropocentricism and liberal democracy.
When faced with the issue of alleviating poverty or saving nature, many would agree with the following statement: as a society we ought to use available resources and funds to help the poor. In his article “Feeding people versus Saving Nature” Rolston opposes this position and asserts his view that there are times when we ought to choose to save nature instead of feeding the poor. I will argue in favor of Rolston’s argument and against those such as Singer, who strongly opposes the notion that preserving nature and allowing people to unnecessarily die is morally wrong. In reality there are many ways in which we can address the issue of global poverty without resorting to destroying natural ecosystems that we are dependent on.
Sustainability simply defined to me as balancing act between the development of sustainability is necessary for both planet Earth and humans to survive. This is reinforced in the World Commission on Environment and Development report (1987) that sustainable development must meet the needs of the present without compromising the well-being of future generations”. The Earth Charter Organization widened the idea of sustainability to respect for a culture of peace, universal human rights, nature, and economic justice (What is sustainability?, n.d.).
Ayres (2008) advances the concept of ‘sustainability economics’, which deals with the issue of maintaining economic growth while paying special attention to environmental concerns of energy utilization and resource exhaustion, especially carbon fuel consumption and its relation to climate change.
...contemporary environmental crisis, we are able to gather a concise understanding of issues that are often hard to explain yet alone understand. Wealth has become a power system evoking dualism of the western and third world. Power and quality of life is measured against the wealth of an individual. This is a result of human’s tendency to over utilize and eventually deplete the resources available to them inevitably leading to overpopulation. In the next fifty years, the success of the environmental movement may depend much more on its ability to change ethics and values. Environmental philosophy gives an invaluable lens into the issues of overpopulation by deconstructing complex dynamics within society. By spreading ideas within environmental philosophy to all different corners of the globe then everyone will have a chance to learn how to live rightly in the world.