Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics

Living Edition
| Editors: David M. Kaplan

Population Growth

  • Thomas Dietz
  • Jessica Bell
  • Christina Leshko
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6167-4_443-1

Introduction

Debates about population, environmental quality, and resource adequacy stretch back to classical writers but are usually identified with Thomas Malthus’s Essay(s) on Population (Dietz and Rosa 1994; Malthus 1803/1992). The basic argument is that human population will grow at a pace faster than increases in the production of food or other resources. This leads to poverty, disease, malnutrition, and other social and environmental ills. Concern with population pressure on natural resources also underpinned Garrett Hardin’s much cited but problematic analysis of the tragedy of the commons (Dietz,et al. 2003; Hardin 1968). Hardin argued that common pool resources, such as fisheries or pastures, cannot be managed by communities because continuous population growth will increase demand for resources and encourage self-interested rather than altruistic behavior. The commons collapses. The argument that population growth will lead to problems has been applied to many resources,...

Keywords

Food Production Food Waste Virtue Ethic Fertility Control Increase Food Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Arrhenius, G., Ryberg, J., & Tännsjö, T. (2014). The Repugnant Conclusion. In E. M. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved from, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/repugnant-conclusion/
  2. Cohen, J. E. (1995). How many people can the earth support? New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  3. Derringhi, F. W. (2001). Is coerced fertility reduction to preserve nature justifiable? Philosophy in the Contemporary World, 8(1), 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dietz, T., & Rosa, E. A. (1994). Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence and technology. Human Ecology Review, 1, 277–300.Google Scholar
  5. Dietz, T., Ostrom, E., & Stern, P. C. (2003). The struggle to govern the commons. Science, 301(5652), 1907–1912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Erb, K.-H., Mayer, A., Kastner, T., Sallet, K.-E., & Haberl, H. (2012). The impact of industrial grain fed livestock production on food security: An extended literature review. In Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Commissioned by Compassion in World Farming, The Tubney Charitable Trust and World Society for the Protection of Animals, UK. Vienna. Retrieved from, http://uni-klu.ac.at/socec/eng/downloads/WP136_Webversion.pdf
  7. Food and Agricultural Organization, (2013). The state of food and agriculture 2013: Food systems for better nutrition. Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization.Google Scholar
  8. Fox, M. A. (2013). Vegetarianism and veganism. In LaFollette (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of ethics (pp. 5310–5316). Hoboken, New Jersey: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  9. Frey, R. G. (2011). Utilitarianism and animals. In T. L. Beauchamp & R. G. Frey (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of animal ethics (pp. 172–197). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S. M., & Toulmin, C. (2010). Food security: The challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 327, 812–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoff, D. S. (2012). The state and the stork: The population debate and policy making in U.S. History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Malthus, T. R. (1803/1992). An essay on the principle of population. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Mares, T. M., & Pena, D. G. (2011). Environmental and food justice: Toward local, slow, and deep food systems. In A. H. Alkon & J. Agyeman (Eds.), Cultivating food justice: Race, class, and sustainability (pp. 197–220). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Nussbaum, M. C. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Parfit, D. (1984). Reasons and persons. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  17. Ravallion, M. (1997). Famines and economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(3), 1205–1242.Google Scholar
  18. Rosa, E. A., & Dietz, T. (2010). Global transformations: PaSSAGE to a new ecological era. In E. A. Rosa, A. Diekmann, T. Dietz, & C. C. Jaeger (Eds.), Human footprints on the global environment: Threats to sustainability (pp. 1–45). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., & de Haan, C. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow: Environmental issues and options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
  20. Thompson, P. (2010). The agrarian vision: Sustainability and environmental ethics. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. United States Census Bureau. 2013. International Database. “World Population: 1950–2050.” Accessed from, http://www.census.gov/population/international/data/idb/worldpopgraph.php. Accessed 6 Mar 2014
  22. World Bank. (2012). World development report 2012: Gender equality and development. Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sociology, Environmental Science and Policy, and Animal StudiesMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA