Comment by Emma Webb
There is a view amongst a section of the green movement
that Australian immigration must be slashed. The idea that solving
Australia's environmental crisis means closing off our borders
from the rest of the world is a particularly selfish twist to
the slogan "Think globally, act locally".
A long letter by Pete Johnson in Green Left Weekly (March
2) claims that the organisation Australians for an Ecologically
Sustainable Population (AESP) offers "real and workable solutions"
to the environmental crisis. He quotes their brochure. "The
damage to our continent can not be arrested or reduced while
governments pursue growth of population and per capita consumption".
But what exactly is an "ecologically sustainable" population?
Is it, as AESP says, simply a smaller population which consumes
less? Arguing this position puts the impact of people on out
environment purely on the level of a numbers game - as if we
all had the same impact on the environment. It also assumes
that we all have a negative impact on the environment because
the standard of living of the population in general, not just
a small section of society, is too high.
These notions ignore the vast disparities in the distribution
of society's wealth and the lack of access to political and
economic power by most people. The green movement cannot ignore
the fact that a minority of people make all the decisions about
what and how things are produced. It is this minority - not
the average person - which has by far the greatest impact on
the environment through its drive to maximise profits.
In fact, lowering population would not necessarily make any
difference to the "affluence" of Australian society. Much of
this affluence is concentrated in the hands of a few.
For instance, Victoria's production of greenhouse gases is
high by world standards. Yet even if all Victorians burned candles,
its overall electricity use would hardly be affected. The electricity
consumption of the aluminium industry alone equals the total
private consumption. The times when carbon dioxide emissions
have risen the most have coincided with a decline in living
standards for Victorians.
We live in an irrational and wasteful society because goods
are produced to make profit rather than to satisfy human and
environmental needs.
AESP's view of achieving an "ecologically sustainable" population
in Australia through fewer people and less consumption inevitably
impacts on how it views Third World population growth. The logical
conclusions are:
- immigrants from Third World countries take on First World
consumer habits and so should not be allowed into countries
like Australia.
- The raising of the standard of living in the Third World
would have a similarly negative impact on the environment.
- We have to find ways of controlling population growth in
the Third World without raising the standard of living there
to the level of the First World.
It is impossible to analyse or find solutions to population
growth on the environment crisis in general, in isolation from
the social and economic factors that shape our society.
Back...
Source:
Green Left Weekly, 23rd March 1994
