It
is now a year since I made the first projections into the future
using my population-consumption
model. At that time, I had identified three representative
scenarios
of what would happen after 2008, when the model showed humanity using
up all of the valuable ecological resources that weren't already
enlisted in maintaining civilization (technically, the number of
"environments" people had created equaled the number of
possible environments using available resources). A newly published
academic
study indicates that consumption of major resources other than
energy reached a peak around 2006, apparently corroborating this
critical point in the model's projection (which was later refined to
2009).
A
few months ago, the WWF's latest Living
Planet Report famously highlighted the fact that animal
populations dropped by little more than half between 1970 and 2010.
This too is consistent with my model, which in its last iteration
showed a 55% drop in the Living Planet Index (LPI) over the same
period. The model uses the LPI as a proxy for the amount of available
ecological resources, and the amount of resources we are using as
proportional to the global ecological footprint, so this and the
consumption study are significant data points in validation of the
model.
One
other aspect of the model appears to have been partly validated over
the past year, which I referred to in a previous
blog post. As happiness increases, it takes more resources to
become happier; and above a certain threshold (82%), consumption (of
ecological resources) becomes negative, which
I interpret as the consumption of virtual resources. My model
includes the observation that our economy is based on the valuation
of environments that theoretically would provide maximum happiness,
and in one of its first
validation exercises, reproduced our unequal distribution of
wealth as a result of the economy's positive valuation of the
excessive happiness of a few people. Since money is used to trade
real things, that money is expected to represent real resources (even
though they are in fact virtual) and therefore it appears that the
rich are hoarding a lot of resources and effectively stealing from
everyone else. It is logical to assume that the excessive happiness
is likely met by using other people rather than other parts of
Nature, and this would manifest as what the rest of us would consider
antisocial behavior, with an associated reduction in conscience and
empathy that enables people to be treated as things to be used for
gratification (what I've called the root of all evil). The studies
I learned about seem to verify this assessment. For me, the
scariest part of this analysis has been the capacity of a few people
to own everything, especially given the complexity of the systems we
all operate under and the physical limitations we all have in
comprehending, much less managing, what's around us; that they would
become sociopaths makes it even worse.
The
three projection scenarios I started with a year ago were based on
simple extrapolations of happiness over time, and its effects on
population and consumption. Those with the most physical credibility
resulted in a catastrophic decrease in population, starting soon. I
followed those projections with a series of simulations,
producing theoretical versions of the world using random values of
variables my model had identified based on research into the past,
and then generalized
the results which I have since considered more reliable and used
as the basis for the projections and recommendations that I've
presented since then. Given how sensitive the projections are over
the next two to five years, we should know soon whether the model is
truly valid. As a scientist, I can't wait. As a person, I wish I
could wait forever.
No comments:
Post a Comment