Am I an alarmist?

The other day, I read a scholar in the field of resource scarcity who is a professor at the University of Toronto in Canada. In his book "Environment, Resources and Violence," Homer-Dixon argues that resource scarcity can cause severe social stress, especially in the developing nations such as migration and goes on to suggest that violence may be the ultimate consequence of resource scarcity. As I read through the book and his arguments, I began to think seriously about his line of reasoning. Being a scholar in the environmental field myself, I was aware and convinced of the economic and environmental impacts resource scarcity can have in the days ahead of us. But never had I even thought of the social bearings of resource crisis.

Even though Homer-Dixon does not give much importance to population rise, I believe that, it is or will be the single most contributing factor for resource scarcity. As the current trend of population explosion continues and resources are being depleted at the current rate, there is no doubt that the future generation will have to survive with a very little resource stock. Some argue that technology will provide solutions to all of our resource scarcity problems and that the future generation will live a better life despite the growing population. However, I argue that the social and economic consequences of resource scarcity will leave little room for technological improvement. The marginally poor segment of the society will be adversely affected by social impacts such as migration, and the chances of technological improvement in those segments, where it is most needed, are very low. Thus, I can see a case where the economic pressure created by resource scarcity will prevent technological advancement.

I then, suggest that instead of relying on the prospect of technological solution that is not even guaranteed we should explore other alternatives before us to minimize the adverse impacts of scarcity. It is also very important to realize that there is no one single solution to the problem of scarcity and its consequences. A check in population growth rate can bring about enormous alterations in both demand and supply of resources. That has to be the primary concern of the nation states, especially the developing nations whose increasing population is creating considerable pressures on economic, social and environmental fronts. I also think that changes of consumption behavior is especially vital. Such a drift in industrialized nations, for instance can reduce the energy demand by a significant amount.

I also want everyone to keep in mind that the problem of resource scarcity is being exacerbated because of absence of a global monitoring body. While there is no single body to check the resource use of nations, the notion of sovereignty also prohibits such a mechanism at the same time. Hence, I propose policy making through bilateral or multilateral treaties that are market based and that provide incentives for resource conservation.

I also feel that we need a set of guidelines for resource conservation. Our experience in the environmental arena so far has shown that regulatory tools are usually more effective for pollution control but not for resource conservation. A set of global guidelines such as the Agenda 21 but specifically addressing the issue of resource scarcity by means of resource conservation and population control is required. The nation states can then devise specific policies relevant to their resource availability, geophysical, political and economic aspects. By and large, the most important thing for the humans and particularly the policy makers is to recognize the weight of the issue and act quickly before the impacts of resource scarcity severely hit the global populations.

Astu