Environmental Challenges: Scarcity and Conflict – Introducing the principle

We live on a finite planet. It is a nearly spherical ball of rock hurtling through the vacuum of space, in orbit around a small star we call the sun.

The sun provides energy in the form of heat and electromagnetic radiation such as light. Organic life in the planet’s thin blue and green layer uses the energy to convert simple inorganic molecules to more complex molecules. If humans are to live sustainably on the planet, then we need circular economies so that we can exist within planetary limits. When Jon first started to learn about environmental economics twenty-five years ago, he was advised to read Ken Boulding’s essay: ‘The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth’. Boulding starts with fundamental physical principles regarding matter, energy and entropy, and makes the case for moving to a closed economic system. The date of Boulding’s essay, 1966, is significant. The 1960s were a time of outstanding technical progress. The technology gave us the ability to exploit natural resources at an unprecedented scale. It ultimately led to conflict over the fossil fuel resources that powered an economic boom.

Video Transcrip:

The 1960s were a decade of change. Emerging from post-war austerity, the USA and Europe entered an economic boom underpinned by technological advances, many of which came from innovation in the war. In 1963, the prime minister of Great Britain, Harold Wilson, delivered a speech to the labour party conference calling for a new Britain to be forged in the white heat of a technological and scientific revolution. He observed that we are living at a time of such rapid scientific change that our children are accepting as part of their everyday life things which would have been dismissed as science fiction a few years ago.

The revolution was expressed by feats of engineering and endeavour, such as the astronaut John Glenn's flight to space and orbit of the Earth. In 1969, Neil Armstrong became the first human to walk on the moon. The scientific revolution meant that production could become automated. The quantity and skill of human labour was no longer a limit in industry, as technology became a major factor of production. Countries were competing with each other for ever more efficient processing of raw materials into manufactured goods. Technology not only enabled a giant leap to be made in manufacturing, but also in resource extraction. Mining, agriculture, timber harvesting, and fishing could be done by machines. In consequence, prices decreased and demand increased.

Consumer society expected abundant cheap goods. The economist, philosopher, poet, and Quaker, Ken Boulding, wrote an essay in 1966 called "The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth". It was inspired by exploration of space and the fact that we could now view the planet as a discrete, astral entity, a spaceship in its own right. He divided economic systems into two types. He called an open economy the 'cowboy economy', and said that the name derives from the cowboy being symbolic of the illimitable plains, and also associated with reckless, exploitative, romantic, and violent behaviour, which is characteristic of open societies. In the cowboy system, economic increase is measured by throughput and output. The more that is produced, the greater the economic wealth.

Consumption is a good thing. The closed economy he called the 'spaceman economy' on spaceship Earth. It is characterised by a cyclical, ecological system. Measures of success lie in the nature, extent, quality, and complexity of a total capital stock-- including in this, the state of human bodies and minds included in the system. Production and consumption are not measured at all, and consumption should be minimised. The primary concern is maintenance of the stock. The 'cowboy economy' can be expensive in other ways. In addition to using up the Earth's capital stock, a mechanised automated consumer society requires abundant fuel.

And as demand for oil grew in the 1960s, so did the role of oil in national security, culminating in the oil crisis of 1973. A group of oil producing nations declared an export embargo following the US's military assistance to Israel in the Yom Kippur War. The price of oil rose from $3 a barrel to $12 a barrel and led to an increasingly military foreign policy in the region by the USA. President Jimmy Carter, in his State of the Union address in 1980, said, "Let our position be absolutely clear. An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interest of the United States of America.

And such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force." But it wasn't only the USA that had an increasing military policy. The 1973 oil crisis led to oil producing nations gaining control of their own production. Increasing oil prices meant that they had a lot of money to spend. And they spent a lot of it on weapons. As Toby Craig Jones points out in his 2012 article, "America, Oil, and War in the Middle East," between 1975 and 1979, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia purchased 56% of all the weapons sold in the Middle East and made almost one quarter of all global arms purchases. The legacy of Middle Eastern militarisation is very much with us today. And those wars are a consequence of the 'cowboy economy', with its focus on consumerism and its demand for environmental resources.

Answer this question in 90 seconds: Have your say: What opportunities and challenges might result from changes towards a ‘spaceman’ economy? Do you think that resource scarcity inevitably leads to conflict in ‘cowboy’ economies?

Consider the following:

Eden: The amazing thing about humans is our ability to innovate; we shouldn’t worry about scarcity of natural resources because we’ll develop new technologies that will supply our needs.

Sadiki: No! We live on a finite planet and we have to be careful with what we have. We need to change our lifestyles to live sustainably, within the limits of the resources we have.

How do you think humans should respond to resource scarcity? State a short response (in 90 seconds) to the comments above.

    Consider the following:

    Padma: When resources become scarce we need to defend our rights to exploit them and so protect our economies, even if they are in other countries.

Jacey: No! If resources are scarce then we should use diplomacy to negotiate with the countries where the resources are and trade will become an agent of peace and cooperation.

Will resource scarcity result in conflict? Explain your thoughts. State some reasons and examples, a short response (90 seconds).
Consider the following:

Kaden: Biodiversity should be protected at all costs, even if establishing national parks creates conflict; if species become extinct they are irreplaceable.

Aala: No! We should put justice for people first, and conservation of biodiversity should be a by-product of human rights rather than the primary aim.

Give reasons and explain which you think should be the priority. A short response (90 seconds).

Let’s wrap it up.

Conflict over biodiversity conservation has a long history. For example, populations of game have been preserved for hunting by elites, rather than for protection for the intrinsic worth of the animals. In England, the punishment for poachers taking game from landowners could be severe. A poacher camouflaged with a blackened face could be hanged under the 1723 Black Act, and even being in possession of poaching equipment could mean a year in prison. In modern times Ivory and Rhino horn poachers in Africa are often armed and enter into gun battles with rangers protecting the animals, with deaths on both sides. 

Aside from conflicts related to poaching, there are also conflicts related to access to land put aside for biodiversity conservation. A possible solution is to develop integrated solutions that combine conservation with enterprises that bring benefits to local communities. This might be tourism and might also include hunting. Indigenous communities are often exempt from hunting restrictions for traditionally hunted species, such as hunting for whales and seals. If the law is changed so that access to game animals by local communities is allowed, then it ceases to be poaching and becomes management.

The Spaceship and the Cowboy: An Economic Love Story. For the video, see the link: https://vimeo.com

Despite the fact that many commentators predict increasing conflict over water, the reality is that in many cases water rights are allocated peacefully. Indeed, agreements about jointly accessed water can lead to collaboration and cooperation.

Have your say:

Do think that the next wars will be caused by disputes regarding the access rights to water? State your thoughts and use information to support your response to that question.

Materials from the source:

https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/environmental-ethics-scarcity-conflict