23 August 2010
We've gone into the ecological red
Andrew Simms
nef fellow
At the weekend, Saturday 21 August to be precise, the world as a whole went into "ecological debt".
That means in effect that from now until the end of the year, humanity will be consuming more natural resources and producing more waste than the forests, fields and fisheries of the world can replace and absorb. By doing so, the life -support systems that we all depend on are worn ever thinner. Farms become less productive, fish populations crash and climate regulating forests decline. All become less resilient in the face of extreme weather events.
The date is arrived at by comparing our annual environmental resource budget with our ecological footprint – the rate at which we spend it.
The more we overshoot the available budget, the earlier in the year we start to go into the ecological red. Collectively we started to live beyond our means in the 1980s. Since then the date has crept earlier and earlier in the year. Improved measurement and data bring the latest date forward by a whole month in comparison with last year's date. It now takes about 18 months for the planet to generate what we consume in just 12.
The worse news is that this also assumes that the whole of nature is there for human exploitation. Any farmer or ecologist will tell you that for ecosystems to function healthily fallow portions and periods are essential.
In a worst case economic scenario, like the banking crisis, governments can, and did, intervene to ensure that money still comes out of the cash machines. But if ecosystems crash, they cant print more planet.
The same data used to produce the date above also reveal a creeping vulnerability for the UK. We have become more dependent on both food and fuel imports. Worsening self-sufficiency carries a high economic cost as the price of both essentials is rising. But it also undermines national security in other ways.
It was only two years ago that we lived through another food and fuel crisis when prices for both rose suddenly and dramatically. At the time, the severity of the bank failures distracted many from the long-term signals. Increased competition for declining oil reserves and a global agricultural system increasingly vulnerable to climatic upheaval, mean that such events are likely to become much more common.
The price of oil is now again on an upward curve (and events in the Gulf of Mexico lay bare the difficulties of extracting the remaining, more marginal oil fields). Significant crop failures this year have triggered a rise in "food nationalism".
Following serious droughts, Russia, one of the world's major grain baskets, banned grain exports in order to guarantee their domestic food security. Ukraine, one of the world's other major producers, is likely to follow.
Every week seems to bring news of new "land grabbing" initiatives in which wealthy nations or corporations buy or take long-term leaseholds on productive farmland in poorer countries, motivated either by concerns over feeding their own people, or with a speculative eye sharply focused on the money to be made from a combination of demand and scarcity rising hand in hand.
By coincidence the day we overshoot the world's biocapacity happens to fall in a month, August, that seems to have become synonymous with spectacular "natural" disasters. No self-respecting climate scientist will claim a direct cause and effect link between a single weather event and the warming climate. But there is a very high level of confidence in saying that we will face more and more extreme events of the kind that have caused massive upheaval this month, from the vast floods in Pakistan to the mudslides in China.
Greater climatic disruption is one side-effect of over-consumption as we pour more waste greenhouse gases from fossil fuels into the atmosphere than can be safely absorbed. Our danger now is that these dynamics feed off each other. Overstretched and denuded by our over-consumption, the productive ecosystems that we depend upon, and rely upon to meet rising demand, are becoming more vulnerable to a destabilised climate.
We need to start scrutinising and acting to correct our ecological debts with at least the same seriousness as is being given to our private and public financial debts. Banks were saved at the point of collapse after several years of ignored warnings. If we leave it that long to correct our environmental deficit, it will be too late.
This article was originally published at Comment is Free.
Connect with us
Recent blog posts
-
Clinging to economic growth suffocates the imagination
3 February 2012
-
Move Your Money - time to take matters into our own hands
1 February 2012
-
Cap bonuses, not benefits
24 January 2012
-
Financial Times' Economists Survey: Monetary Policy
3 January 2012
-
Ed Miliband is not the leader of the opposition
3 January 2012
-
We must bank local to get the UK back on track
19 December 2011
-
George Osborne – a greener, bolder alternative is right behind you
1 December 2011
-
Small is beautiful... but Schumacher's economics of scale runs deeper
15 November 2011
-
Video: Andrew Simms on equality at Occupy London
31 October 2011
-
Occupy London is cleaning up the big bang's mess
28 October 2011












Comments
23 Aug 2010 at 10:36
Jericoa
I am continually impressed with NEF's well researched, un-leveraged and logically robust assessment of the current world economic and resource dynamic in the context of trying to improve the experience of life most people have. We are, collectively, it seems, embarking on taking all our astonishing and hard won technological advances and using them, not for a greater good, but to trash our own home and our own future prospects in a self destructive regressive cycle fed by a re-emergence of our most basic instincts to accumulate instead of using what we now know and can do to reach tentatively towards a more utopian goal. The quantum of my positive impression of NEF is equally tainted by the chronic lack of penetration into the mainstream media these robustly substantiated and logically coherent views obtain. Collectively we seem to be locked into a dance of death with vested interests whom via leverage (be it consciously or subconsciously) monopolise the popular view towards maintaining the status quo and marginalise the much more intellectually robust position as presented by NEF. I think NEF has enough well researched documentation on-stream already, perhaps what NEF needs to do now is focus on getting that message into the mainstream to switch from the 'thinking' and into more of the 'doing'. A common mistake in a world where we now live so much of our lives in our heads is to believe that thinking and writing is change. It is not. It is only the precursor to it. 'knowing is not enough, you must take action to facilitate a change''. If you are serious about NEF's stated mission perhaps NEF needs to have a shift of emphasis, the baseline intellectual arguments are already there and will not substantially change for the foreseeable future. As an organisation please don't make the mistake of focusing on making more and more documents, which will simply be variations on the same core themes, instead switch emphasis to actively promoting the established core themes. You will probably need a different type of team dynamic to do that than the one you have created to do the facilitating research. Change is something that is naturally (subconsciously) avoided by individuals and organisations of individuals. If you guys cant move it to the next stage as the people whom have (in my opinion) best captured the emerging world dynamic, how do you expect anyone else to be able to implement the types of policy NEF advocates? I will continue to support NEF on the basis that NEF begins to move into a different mode of operating but I will withdraw support if NEF now chooses to drift within the confines of its organisational comfort zone into becoming a publishing house of ever more complex theoretical variations surrounding the same core themes underpinning the current world woes. That will do no one any good and presemnts a challenge to NEF organisation I hope it will embrace and not shy away from.23 Aug 2010 at 10:39
Jericoa
Where did all my paragraphs go in the above comment? For anyone patient enough to read it in its undivided form as above I comment you. Otherwise, what ever it is in NEF's blog package that removes paragraphs from postings, for paragraph lovers like me I urge you to seek out said sub-routine and remove it.23 Aug 2010 at 22:54
DJA
So we have had 'Peak Human' day?