Table Of ContentSustainable Development and
the Limitation of Growth
FutureProspectsforWorldCivilization
Victor I. Danilov-Danil’yan, Kim S. Losev, and
Igor E. Reyf
Sustainable
Development and
the Limitation
of Growth
Future Prospects for World Civilization
Published inassociationwith
PPrraaxxiiss PPuubblliisshhiinngg
Chichester, UK
Dr Victor I. Danilov-Danil’yan
Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Director of the Water
Institute at the Russian Academy of Sciences
Moscow
Russia
Professor Dr Kim S. Losev
Ecologist/Hydrologist
AllRussian Institute of Scientific & Technical Information of the Russian Academy of
Sciences
Moscow
Russia
Igor E. Reyf
Journalist
Frankfurt am Main
Germany
Translator:AssociateProfessorVladimirTumanov,DepartmentofModernLanguages
and Literatures, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
SPRINGER–PRAXIS BOOKS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
SUBJECTADVISORYEDITOR:JohnMasonB.Sc.,M.Sc.,Ph.D.
ISBN 978-3-540-75249-3 Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York
Springer is part of Springer-Science+Business Media (springer.com)
Library of Congress Control Number: 2008939852
Apartfrom any fair dealing for the purposes of research orprivate study, or criticism
or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this
publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any
means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of
reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the
Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those terms
should be sent to the publishers.
# Praxis Publishing Ltd, Chichester, UK, 2009
Printed in Germany
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such
namesareexemptfromtherelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefree
for general use.
Cover design: Jim Wilkie
Translation editor: Dr Donald Rapp
Project management: OPS Ltd, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK
Printed on acid-free paper
Contents
Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
List of figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv
List of tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii
List of abbreviations and acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xix
PART I CIVILIZATION IN CRISIS: ON THE EDGE OF AN ABYSS
. . . . . . 1
1 Global ecological situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2 Critically overpopulated planet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3 The ecological equivalents of modern man. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
PART II CIVILIZATION TEETERING OVER THE ABYSS OF CRISIS
(CONCLUSION)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4 The social dimension of the crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
vi Contents
5 The role of centralized and market economies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
6 The crisis of values as the main cause of the ecological challenge. . . . . 71
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
PART III THE WORLD COMMUNITY: POLITICIANS AND SCIENTISTS IN
SEARCH OF A SOLUTION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
7 The mission of the Club of Rome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
8 Programs for change: Stockholm–Rio–Johannesburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
9 Toward a systemic understanding of the biosphere. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
10 The constancy of the planetary environment in light of the biotic
regulation mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
10.1 Abiotic factors in the formation of the Earth’s climate. . . . . . . 117
10.2 A few examples of the biota’s directed influence on the environ-
ment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
10.3 The theory of biotic regulation and the stabilizing role of biota . 139
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
PART IV SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: BETWEEN COMPLACENCY AND
REALITY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
11 The basis of sustainability in nature and in civilization. . . . . . . . . . . . 163
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
12 The national colors of sustainable development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
13 Co-evolution of nature and society: Fact or fiction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
PART V ON THE SCALE OF A SCIENTIFIC APPROACH
. . . . . . . . . . . . 185
14 Sustainable development in relation to the carrying capacity of the
biosphere. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
Contents vii
15 The starting conditions of sustainable development and the preservation of
ecosystems by country and continent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
16 Navigation directions: Indicators of sustainable development . . . . . . . . 223
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
PART VI ‘‘IS THERE ENOUGH COMMUNITY, RESPONSIBILITY,
DISCIPLINE AND LOVE?’’
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
17 The barricades of old thinking in the way of sustainable development . . 235
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
18 What the market economy can and cannot accomplish . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
19 Sustainable development and the ‘‘real human condition’’ . . . . . . . . . . 245
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
20 The social premises of sustainable development and the globalization
problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
Preface
By now everyone has heard of the current ecological crisis. Some see it as the main
challengetomoderncivilization.Thereareotherchallengesaswell:forexample,the
waveofglobalterrorismunleashedbythe9/11attacksinNewYork,overpopulation,
war,poverty,etc.Withouttryingtotrivializethesignificanceofproblemsoutsidethe
immediatesphereoftheircompetence(ecology),theauthorsofthisbookwouldliketo
propose a systemic ecological approach that offers an integrated view of the critical
stateinwhichmoderncivilizationfindsitself.Theaimisnewinsightintotheprofound
invisible links between seemingly unrelated surface manifestations of one complex
problem.
Thatthecrisishasattaineddangerousproportionsshouldbeobviouseventothe
mostuninitiatedobserver.Anditmayverywellbethattheupsurgeininternational
terrorism—arguably the most conspicuous phenomenon today—is just one of the
many symptoms of the general malaise, along with calamitous changes in the
environment, explosive population growth in developing countries, large-scale tech-
nologicallygenerateddisastersandepidemicsinvolvinghithertounknowninfections.
Andalltheseissuesconstituteathreatnotmerelytoindividualnationsorstatesbutto
worldcivilization,tohumanityasawhole.Theplanetaryscaleofthechallengebefore
uscannotbeignored—nomatterhowstrongthetemptationtohideone’sheadinthe
sand.
Generally speaking, the notion of challenge in its philosophical and historical
aspectswasintroducedinthemiddleofthe20thcenturybyBritishhistorianArnold
Toynbee in his famous 12-volume work entitled A Study of History. As a Christian
religious thinker, Toynbee understood challenge as a constantly renewed dialogue
betweenhumanityandDivineReason(Logos)thatrevealstopeopletheirtrueessence
and supreme historical purpose. Essentially, every endurance test—be it a challenge
fromnatureorfromahostilehumancommunity—is,accordingtoToynbee,thereal
engine of the historical process. This is the mechanism that awakens a human
community’screativeenergyandraisesittoanewstageofdevelopment,occasionally
x Preface
also facilitating the emergence of sub-civilizations. A challenge prompts growth, as
Toynbeeargues.Inresponsetoachallenge,societysolvesagivenproblemthatitfaces
and in so doing moves to a higher and better state characterized by a more sophis-
ticated structure.
And yet, in the infinitely long challenge–response succession going back to the
dawnofantiquity—whetherthisisseenastrialssentfromaboveorstagesinnatural
historicalprogress—thecurrentenvironmentalchallengeoccupiesaspecialplace.For
thefirsttimeinthepastfewmillenniaasacramentalquestionhasbeenraisedbefore
thehumanraceorhumanityasabiologicalspecies:‘‘Tobeornottobe?’’Andweare
not talking about the threat of a collision between the Earth and an asteroid—an
extremelyunlikelyeventthatmayoccuronceinmanythousandsorevenmillionsof
years—butratheraboutthemostmundaneprocessofenvironmentdegradationand
destruction through man’s economic activity that has reached a critical limit in the
course of its headlong acceleration.
To what extent are the more than 6 billion humans living on the planet aware
of this? Not counting professional ecologists, how much is truly known by the
proverbial ‘‘man in the street’’ or even the majority of politicians and a substantial
proportionoftheculturalandbusinesselite?Tobesure,suchactivistsasAlGorehave
awakened the globe’s slumbering ecological consciousness to a considerable extent.
However,isthecurrentlevelofknowledgeenoughtotranslate‘‘understanding’’into
action?Itistheanswertothisquestionthat willlargelydeterminethefateoffuture
generations.
The truth is that people know both much and little at the same time. ‘‘Much’’
thanks to the media which keep bombarding us with various apocalyptic warnings
about the growing greenhouse effect and the resultant widening holes in the ozone
layerorthemercilessdecimationofthetropicalrainforestbeltknownasthelungsof
theEarth.‘‘Little’’ thankstothesurprisingabilityofourworkadayconsciousnessto
retreatfromthiskindofinformationintothecozyshadeofideasandmythsaboutthe
allegedly extreme remoteness of these sinister prophecies or about the possibility of
finding shelter behind the secure armor of so-called technological progress.
Givenallthis,istheecologists’hopeofreachingheartsandmindsrealistic?After
all,theirspecializedscientificknowledgeisaccessible,oratanyratecomprehensible,
to a fairly narrow circle of experts while forecasts and conclusions that follow from
thisknowledgearedirectedatpeoplewhohavenothingtodowithecologyasabasic
science. However, it is these non-specialists who will ultimately determine the effec-
tiveness or ineffectiveness of a message meant to have a tremendous effect on the
destiny of the world.
Andyet,itappearsthathistoryhasalreadyseenprecedentsorperhapsanalogues
ofasimilarsituation.In1939AlbertEinstein,pressedbyhise´migre´ colleaguesfrom
WesternEurope,wrotealettertothepresidentoftheUnitedStates,urgingFranklin
D. Roosevelt tolauncha full-scale projectforthedevelopment ofnuclear weapons.
Nothingdefinitewasknownaboutthismatteratthetime.Therewasnoreliable
information beyond guesses and suppositions as to whether Nazi Germany was
workingonasimilarproject.Notonephysicistcouldguaranteethatthetheoretically
predicted chain fission reaction of uranium-235 would indeed result in a nuclear
Preface xi
explosion. Furthermore, in those years the physicists engaged in researching the
atomic nucleus had no influence to speak of and were unknown outside narrow
academic circles.
Muchwasatstakethenalthoughtheresponsibilityformakingapoliticaldecision
rested not with scientists but with the president and his team who possessed no
specialized knowledge in nuclear physics. Nevertheless, the momentous decision
was made after all. Its eventual effect on the political makeup of the world went
considerablybeyondthelimitsofWorldWarII,yieldingfar-reachingpositiveresults
intheformofthenucleardeterrentfactor,aswellasnegativeonesintheshapeofthe
nuclear arms race and the modern threat of nuclear terrorism.
Thisvirtually‘‘textbook’’exampleisrelevantbecausetoday’secologicalscientists
findthemselvesinasituationsomewhatreminiscentofwhatwasfacedbythenuclear
physicistsinthelate1930s.Afterall,ecologistsarealsonotinapositiontoproduce
the‘‘bomb’’tickingawayunderthefoundationofmoderncivilization.Theirpredic-
tionsandestimatesarebasednotonsomeknownprecedents,butratheronthelogicof
biosphericprocessesthatwillsoonerorlaterbring(iftheyhavenotdonesoalready)
irreversible change.
Thetroubleisthatwhenthisirreversibilitybecomesapparenttothemajority,the
time needed to make vital decisionswill most likely have run out. And only trust in
anticipatoryscientificknowledge,aswasthecasewiththeAmericannuclearproject,
canserveasamoreorlessreliablebasisforthepreventionoftheecologicaldisasterin
question. In this sense the scientists’ responsibility, so often mentioned in different
respects, is today heavier than ever before. This applies to the responsibility of the
world’s political, cultural, and business elite, as well as that of all those commonly
referredtoaspeopleofgoodwill.Thereisprobablynotaskmorepressingthanforall
these human beings to take a significant step toward one another. Hopefully, this
book too will do its part in making a contribution to the solution of the urgent
problem at hand.
This book is divided into six parts.
PartI:Civilizationincrisis:Ontheedgeofanabyssbeginswithanoverviewofthe
ecological, demographic, and other aspects of the global crisis. The global environ-
mentalsituationinvolvesunprecedentedatmosphericchange.Destructionofnatural
ecosystemsisshowntobetheprimarycauseofthecrisis.Withthechemicalizationof
the Earth’s biosphere (48 tons of waste per capita) the global cost of local environ-
mentalcleanupishuge.Theplanetiscriticallyoverpopulated.Demographicgrowthis
discussedinthelightofbiologicalconstraintsonthenumbersofspecies.Theenergy
and resource components of demographic growth are explored. Anthropogenic
pressure is viewed through the prism of human ecological equivalents.
PartII:Civilizationteeteringovertheabyssofcrisis(conclusion)bringsPartItoa
conclusion.Thesocialdimensionsofthecrisisareexplored,anditisconcludedthat
poverty is a cause of pollution. The problems of hunger and malnutrition, and the
harmful environment of the megalopolis are discussed. The ‘‘contribution’’ of the
centralizedeconomyandtheprosandconsofthemarketeconomyarediscussed,as
wellasthemarket’sunreceptivenesstolong-termstrategies.Thelimitationsplacedon
