Environmental and natural resources economics

1.0. INTRODUCTION

Population, Poverty and Environment nexus is worldwide ongoing debate that try to establish
causal and effect relationship and empirical links between Population, Poverty and
Environment. This debate is very important because by only knowing these links is where the
solution of this problem can be found.

Different scholars hold different opinions on this debate; some are in views that Population is
the cause, while Poverty and Environment are the effects. These scholars argues that there is
unmatched proportional increase between population and food production as it had been
suggested by famous economists Thomas Malthus in his publication concern an Essay on the
Principle of Population (1798). This unmatched proportion is the one that lead into excessive
poverty and environmental problems that faces this world at present. Other scholars argue
that Environmental degradation is the cause that pushes poor people into worse situation.
These scholars argue that the environmental degradations that are done mainly by rich
industrialized countries are the major cause of poverty in developing countries because they
pollute environment and cause climate changes that affect mostly poor people that depend
very much on natural resources (Mei, F 1992). Also, others believe that Poverty is the
principal cause that leads into population and environmental degradation. They give an
argument that poor people especially in African countries take number of children as a means
of obtaining social status and manpower of working in their pieces of land that have very low
marginal returns due to poor technology. Moreover, they argue that because poor people
depend mainly on natural resources for food, fuel and buildings, large population means
over-exploitation of natural resources that lead into environmental degradations

In other hand, there are scholars who argue that the relationship between Population, Poverty
and Environment is complex one and more interactive. It has been observed that the
relationship cannot be looked in simple cause and effect relationship but complex reversible
and interlinked one, therefore, poverty is the cause and effect of population and
Environmental degradation. Jalal (1993) also argued that environmental degradation, poverty,
rapid population growth and stagnant population are closely linked with the fast spread of
acute poverty in many Asian countries.

Before examining this nexus between Population, Poverty and Environment, it is necessary to
define key terms of poverty and environment as they are used in this paper, and discuss in
detail the problem of Environmental degradation in Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and
the whole world in general.

1.1 DEFINITION OF IMPORTANT TERMS

1.1.1 Poverty

Poverty has been defined in many ways by different scholars; Coudouel and Hentschel
(2000), a person is poor when his/her personal income or consumption is below a specified
‘poverty line’. Poverty is deprivation in the most essential capabilities of life including
leading a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable, having adequate economic
provisioning and participating fully in the life of the community' (UNDP, 1997). But in
actual life it is difficult to say some one is poor or a certain country is poor since poverty is
dynamic and it vary from one person to another, it can change year to year. Poor people

normally depend much on their informal sector and production of goods which have got low
value, this makes difficult for them to reach a point where they can earn more and hence
graduate from extreme poverty to the less poverty (World Bank, 2000a). The poor are not a
homogeneous group, but experience poverty in different ways, requiring a range of policy
responses and measurements. In terms of the linkages between poverty and environment,
these are inevitably complex and diverse, reflecting the diversity of poverty dimensions and
experiences Many poor people rely on their own production and informal-sector activities in
which the concept of profit is unclear, rather than on a formal income (Glewwe and Van der
Gaag, 1988).

1.1.2 Environment

Environment can be defined as to what surrounding human being. Environment is an external
conditions and surroundings, especially those affect the life of plants, animals, and human
beings (Dale .D, 2006). There is different ways of defining environment, but majority have
defined environment with reference to the human beings. The term ‘environment’ may be
used narrowly, with reference to green issues concerned with nature such as pollution control,
biodiversity and climate change; or more broadly, including issues such as drinking water and
sanitation provision often known as the ‘brown agenda’. Neefjes (2000) uses the term in a
broad sense, referring to the environment as 'a vehicle for analyzing and describing
relationships between people and their surroundings, now and in the future. Bucknall (2000)
notes that the environment generally refers to a natural resource base that provides sources
and performs sink functions.

1.1.3 Population

The term population refers to the total human inhabitants of a specified area, such as a city,
country, or continent, at a given time. Population study as a discipline is known as
demography. It is concerned with the size, composition, and distribution of populations; their
patterns change over time through births, deaths, and migration; and the determinants and
consequences of such changes. Population studies yield knowledge important for planning,
particularly by governments, in fields such as health, education, housing, social security,
employment, and environmental preservation. Such studies also provide information needed
to formulate government population policies, which seek to modify demographic trends in
order to achieve economic and social objectives (Encarta, 2009).

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION

Environmental degradation is among of the major problem to both developed and developing
countries although it affects mostly developing countries. Environmental degradation during
the past few decades has come to prominence as one of the most important current global
issues (Desta, 1999). This is because its effects have been started to be witnessed in different
parts of the world. Things like climate change increase in temperature, severe drought, el-
Nino increase in water level in the seas and oceans as well as eruption of environmental
related diseases are the some of the effects that linked directly to the Environmental

degradation. Environmental degradation includes water pollution, land pollution, and air
pollution. The major results of environmental degradation problems include severe soil
erosion that lead into soil infertility, deforestation, and conversion of wetlands (Wanga, et al.,
2010). These problems have been associated with ecological degradation. Low crop
productivity, poor water quality and severe health problems facing millions of people in the
world especially poor countries. Degradation of environment can be done by natural
calamities like floods, and earthquakes, but also can be caused by human activities like
industrialization and deforestation. In this paper, only environmental problems that are linked
with poverty and population will be discussed. Environmental degradation can be caused by
rich as well as poor countries. The issues like Industrialization is done mostly by developed
countries that pollute air and destruct ozone layer which leads to the global warming, but its
effects harm badly developing countries than developed one. Also these countries used to
dispose industrial wastes in the ocean where they destruct the generations of various aquatic
species (Ndalawa, 2005). While the bad practices like deforestation and shifting cultivation
mostly are done by developing countries like Tanzania, Uganda, Congo, Angola etc where
majority depend on wood energy for cooking due to excessive poverty among those societies.

Below is the discussion about empirical nexus between Population, Poverty and
Environmental degradation;

2.1 THE INTERACTION BETWEEN POVERTY AND ENVIRONMENT

There is obvious link between poverty and environmental degradation. This link can be said
to be two way reversible links. This means that each one between the two can be cause and
effect of the other. Poverty can be a cause as well as effect of environmental degradation. The
same applied to environmental degradation.

According to World Commission on Environment and Development, (1987). Poverty is one
of the greatest threats to the environment (UNDP, 1990). Jalal (1993) also argued that
environmental degradation, rapid population growth and stagnant population are closely
linked with the fast spread of acute poverty in many Asian countries. Poverty seems to
contribute much to the environmental degradation since the majorities depend much on
agriculture in which they are practicing poor farming method like shifting cultivation and
over grazing which lead to soil erosion. In addition, World Bank (1992) stated that poor
families who have to meet short-term needs mine the natural capital by excessive cutting of
trees for firewood and failure to replace soil nutrients. The situation mirrors what has been
happening in most developing countries, namely simultaneous increase in poverty and
environmental degradation (Duraiappah, 1998). Housing investments are major user of wood
products, has been rapidly growing and causing widespread of deforestation (World Bank
1992). Some studies reveal that due to deforestation, agricultural expansion and overgrazing
of livestock there has been widespread destruction of grasslands causing environmental
problems (Lieu et al 1991). Environment degradation lead to poor soil quality, low rainfall,
lack of salinity water, and diseases which are caused by sunrays, all these lead to the low
productivity which in the long run lead to the shortage of food security, eruption of diseases,
and hence lead to the poverty. Degradation of environment caused either by the poor or the
rich has both direct and indirect impacts not only on the cost of production but also on the
productivity of crops and thus on the income of the people (P.Nayak, 2004).

The poor people in particular and poor countries in general have traditionally taken the brunt
of the blame for causing society’s many problems including, more recently environmental
degradation (.Duraiappah, 1996). Many people and various institutions have been arguing
that still poverty is big challenge to the environment. It is obvious that poor people depend
much on the use of natural environment for their day to day life, this include for economic
and social activities. Poverty is a major cause of environmental problems and eradication of
poverty is a necessary and central condition for any effective programme that addresses the
environment problems (Ibid).

Generally, environmental degradation can take different forms. But the common ones are
deforestation, water pollution, air pollution and land degradation. The discussion below,
dwell on the relationship between poverty and each of the above form of environmental
degradation.

2.1.1 Poverty and Deforestation

Deforestation involves cutting trees down; it can be for the aim of cultivating, construction or
for economic activities. Deforestation is normally done by the poor people in the rural areas;
this is to try to make their life better. The theoretical literature of sustainable development
tends to suggest that rapid population growth will seriously impair the chances of truly
sustainable development (Khatun, 2000). Often, poor people have no money which can make
them spend on alternative power apart from charcoal and fire wood, they rely much on
deforestation of the trees which they are using as fire wood or they go further by making
charcoal. Also because of the problem of unemployment in the rural and urban areas, most of
the people of the rural areas used to make charcoal as a source of their income.

According to Poverty and Human Development Report (PHDR, 2009), more than 95% of
rural population in Tanzania, use firewood and charcoal for cooking. This indicates that there
are thousands of trees that are cut daily to meet this extremely huge demand of fuel. People in
poverty are forced to deplete resources to survive, and this degradation of environment
further impoverishes people (Ostrom et al., 1999). Poverty constrained options may induce
the poor to deplete resources at rates that are incompatible with long-term sustainability
(Holden et al., 1996).

In most of the rural areas people depend much on crop cultivation and livestock production.
But the problem is that they don’t want to change by keeping few livestock instead they still
overgrazing in their area. Over grazing is among of the problems which lead to the
environmental degradation especially deforestation by killing growing trees and cause soil
erosion. The problem of the soil erosion together with deforestation lead to the soil infertility
and hence low productivity, this also leads to the poverty because people continuing to suffer
from famine. Some studies reveal that due to deforestation, agricultural expansion and
overgrazing of livestock there has been widespread destruction of grasslands causing
environmental problems (Lieu et al 1991). In developing countries majority of people are
living in rural areas and few of them are living in urban areas, since those who live in rural
areas are much depend on agriculture cultivation and livestock as a source of their income as
explained earlier, they have to clear large area of forest for cultivation to meet their food
demand and by doing so they act as agents of the environmental degradation.

Poor people especially those who live in rural areas usually forced to exploit marginal areas,
such as steep hillsides, or derive resources from protected areas and therefore cause
deforestation. Also, most of poor people have no enough knowledge about conservation of
environment, so sometimes they cause bushfire unnecessarily. Due to the impact of
population growth, they often lack the incentives to intensify their production and are forced
to exploit new, fragile lands so that to cope up with the increasing demand of food, they solve
this problem on the expenses of deforestation (Ndalawa, 2005)

Poor rural people especially livestock keepers are always at great risk of being victim of
hunger; therefore they keep a large herds. Hence the poor themselves will aggravate the
process of environmental degradation and hence act as an agent of environmental
degradation. This causal-effect relationship between Poverty and Environmental degradation
also was observed by the Bruntland Commission report that insists that, poverty is a major
cause of environmental problems (WCED, 1987). Deforestation itself is not a problem and in
fact may be a necessary condition for economic development. However, when deforestation
occurs at rates which set into motion negative feedback effects which risk both the ecological
as well as economic systems both at the regional and global level, then it becomes imperative
to understand why unsustainable deforestation activities are being pursued (Duraiappah,
1996).

Despite the fact that there are many factors which cause deforestation but there are factors
which are very common in the worldwide, those factors are like agriculture activities, fuel
collection, and logging activities. For agriculture purposes, poor people always do practice
shifting cultivation and pastoralism that contribute very much in deforestation problem. Cruz
(1990), argue that shifting cultivators, agricultural and pastoral encroachment in the wake of
logging trails were the major causes of deforestation. Another way through which poverty
contributes to deforestation is by using building materials. Most of poor communities use
trees either as building materials or in burning bricks. Usually, their houses are not durable
that make them to build now and then and therefore to add more the problem of deforestation.

Apart from poverty, there are factors that are believed to accelerate this problem of
deforestation. Davidson (1993) cites conversion of forests for cattle ranching as well as the
cultivation of cash crops as responsible for 50% of the deforestation in the tropics.
Jaganathan (1989) cites the Haskoning study in 1987 which highlighted market forces as the
main factors causing deforestation in Indonesia. Southgate and Pierce (1988) cite the small
farmer as the main agent responsible for unsustainable deforestation activities. Also as
mentioned above logging activities cause a serious problem on environment; this is by
undergoing deforestation it leads to the soil erosion and change of the climate.

Also, it is argued that deforestation is a result of market economy, this means the market has
been failed to allocate the scarce resources. The study estimates that of the 17.6 to 19.2
million hectares of forest that were cleared in Brazil’s Amazon basin, 5 million was attributed
to commercial logging, 2 million to fuel wood gathering and the remainder to small
farms(Ibid).

In general, it can be concluded that poverty is the principle cause of deforestation, although
for some extent poverty can be fuelled by deforestation and bad exploitation of natural
resources that do not keep into consideration principles of sustainable use of those resources.

It can be observed from the picture below how poor people depend much on fuel wood as
their sources of energy.

A simple wood stove in a traditional home in KwaZula, Natal, South Africa.

Reproduced from Bruce et al (2000)

2.1.2 Poverty and Water pollution

Water is the major important natural resource in the whole world; it is used for domestic and
industrial activities. Water pollution is mainly done by developed countries by dumping their
waste discharges and plastic debris along the coasts of developing countries. But poor people
also pollute water even though for small percent. Poor people especially those who live in
towns engage in urban vegetable production. In these activities they apply chemicals and
fertilizers. When it rains, through leaching process some of chemicals contaminated with
water tend to flow towards the direction of rivers where it reach and pollute water and kills
various aquatic spices and cause water bone diseases (Mei, F, 1992). Since most of poor
people along the coast areas and near big rivers and lakes depend on small scale fishing,
decrease in quantity and quality of fishes affect their economic situation and push them
deeper into the pond of poverty.

Also, there are some of fishermen especially those who have no enough education and poor
therefore they have no modern fishing equipments; they decide using chemicals that kill large
amount of fishes. By doing so, they pollute water and disturb aquatic ecology system. As a
result, the outbreak of water borne diseases occurs such as diarrhea disease, which is in turn a
major cause of infant mortality in developing countries and fishes become scarce. This causes
increase in excessive poverty among poor fishing societies (Wanga et al, 2010.

What can be leant from above explanations is that, apart from causing water pollution,
poverty also can be accelerated by water pollution. In simple way, it can be said that like in
deforestation, poverty is cause and effect of water pollution. Therefore any intervention that
aimed in solving water pollution problem should go simultaneously with alleviation of
poverty or vice versa.

2.1.3 Poverty and Land degradation
Land includes not only the soil resource, but also the water, vegetation, landscape, and
microclimatic components of an ecosystem. Land degradation can be defined as the process
of disvaluing the value of the land; the process is much caused by overgrazing, deforestation,
application of fertilizer in the agriculture activities, and burning activities. Land degradation
refers to a temporary or permanent decline in the productive capacity of the land or its
potential for environmental management (Yadav at el, 1996). Blaikie and Brookfield (1987)
very rightly state that the term land degradation is a perceptual word and the definitions vary
according to the researcher’s intent and purpose. Productivity has been impaired due to
anthropogenic activities (Duraiappah, 1996). Land degradation is a result of human activities,
this include deforestation, overgrazing and application of fertilizers in the agriculture
activities. It is estimated that 0.3 to 0.5% (5-7 million hectares) of total world arable land is
lost annually due to land degradation (Duraiappah, 1996). Dudal (1982), estimates that this
figure would double by the year 2000 if present trends continue.

There are several reasons for land degradation; this involves various soil exhaustion,
salinisation, and desertification. But all of the above reasons have direct link with poverty.
For example, poor small farmers are being blamed as people who are mostly committed to
the exhaustion of the soil. Southgate (1988), argues that small farmers have been the main
agents responsible for land Degradation activities. Poor farmers usually apply poor traditional

technology of cultivation. The methods such as monoculture and monocroping contribute
much in this problem.

Another way by which poor people in particular and poverty in general lead into land
degradation is through overgrazing and pastoralism. Due to lack of education, poor livestock
keepers are holding large herds compared to available areas of grazing. Therefore lack of
pastures force them to move from one area to another causing conflict between them and
farmers as well as land degradation. The degraded land usually is infertile and therefore
cannot grow crops or pastures that cause poverty to them.

However, there are other reasons of land degradation like the market and institutional failure.
Mlambiti (1998) argues that government price controls on agricultural goods and land tenure
system in Tanzania do not provide enough incentives for the small and poor farmers to
conserve their land but to “mine” it for maximum output.

2.1.4 Poverty and Air pollution

Air pollution can be defined as the presence of impurities in the air, it can be carbon dioxide,
sulphur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide. Globally, almost 3 billion people rely on bio mass
(wood, charcoal, crop residues, and dung) and coal as their primary source of domestic
energy (Ezzati and Kamme, 2002). An estimated 2.5 to 3 billion people worldwide rely on
biomass fuels to meet their household energy needs, burning wood, animal dung, crop wastes
in simple stoves, these households typically generate high levels of indoor air pollution that
adversely affect health, especially of women and young children (Yeh, 2004). Biomass
accounts for more than half of domestic energy use in many least and developing countries
and for as much as 95% in some lower- income nations (Ibid). It has been hypothesized that
with increasing income, house hold switch to cleaner fuels, moving up an energy ladder.

Air pollution mostly is caused by human activities like burning, agriculture activities and
industrial activities together with natural factors like earthquakes, storm, and volcano
eruptions .One half of the world’s households, and up to 95% of people in poor countries,
burn wood, dung, peat and other biomass fuels, as well as coal, for energy (CIT). As women
are primarily responsible for cooking, and children often spend time with their mothers,
women and young children are disproportionately affected by the indoor air pollution caused
by the use of solid fuels and traditional stoves (Ibid). Moreover, these activities take much of
their times that otherwise would be used for economic activities and therefore add to the
problem of poverty.

Acute respiratory infection is one of the leading causes of child mortality in the world,
accounting for up to 20% of fatalities among children under five, almost all of them in
developing countries (Ibid). In the rural areas of developing and least developed countries air
pollution exposures tend to be highest indoors where majority of households use unprocessed
solid fuels (biomass and coal) for cooking and space heating(Mishra, 2003).

But despite the mentioned factors above most of the causes of the problem are human
activities. Small farmers normally use poor farming methods like bushfire. Farmers are
preparing their farms by burning various wastes in the farm, also the practice of shifting
cultivation using the burning of the trees to prepare land. When burning process is going
ahead carbon dioxide gas is given out to air which pollute air, this problem in the long run
can lead to the global warming simply because it destroy ozone layer. Indoor air pollution is

also affecting the health and environment, especially in the rural areas (Khatu, 2000). In
Bangladesh about 70 percent of total energy is provided by the traditional sources, such as
agricultural residue, fuel wood and animal dung (Ibid). Concentration from indoor cooking
has been observed to be very high and in the absence of any measures of this we do not know
the extent of the pollution (Ibid).

Also poor people depend much on fire wood and charcoal as their only source of energy, this
also cause air pollution. Biomass is still the dominating form of fuel used for cooking and
heating in the least developed and developing countries (Tolba et al., 1993). Although
substitute fuels are available, the possibility of the poor gaining access to them are negligible,
due to both price and income effects (Duraiappah, 1996). In the process of preparing
charcoal, carbon dioxide gas is given out and cause air pollution. By using direct firewood as
source of energy, the problem of air pollution is worsening since firewood or most of the
plants give out carbon dioxide gas when burnt. The problem become more worse when it
comes to poor families because they have no money to spend on alternative sources of energy
like electricity and other non pollutant gases. For the least developed countries the
accessibility of alternative sources of energy is very little, this means that even those people
who have enough money to use other sources of energy like electricity fail to do so because
this services is not reliable for these countries, so this people are forced to go ahead to the
usage of charcoal and firewood.

2.2 LINK BETWEEN POPULATION, POVERTY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
DEGRADATION.

2.2.1 Population and Poverty

The link between population and poverty can be trace from Malthus work entitled “An Essay
on the Principle of Population” which has been published in 1798. According to Malthus,
population tends to increase faster than the supply of food available for its needs. Whenever a
relative gain occurs in food production over population growth, a higher rate of population
increase is stimulated; on the other hand, if population grows too much faster than food
production, the growth is checked by famine, disease, and war. Malthus's theory contradicted
the optimistic belief prevailing in the early 19th century that a society's fertility would lead to
economic progress. Malthus's theory won supporters and was often used as an argument
against efforts to better the condition of the poor (Encarta, 2009). However, Malthus’s theory
is not perfectly right, but there some evidences from reality that support his argument.
Increase of the number of people who suffer from hunger and absolute poverty is one of these
evidences. Rapid population growth in most of poor countries of Africa, Asia and South
America brings very big challenges to their economic development. It seems that the rate of
population growth outpace that of national production. Therefore, governments of the poor
countries cannot manage to provide necessary social services such as water supply, quality
education and health services that can be used to improve the welfare of the people. Also,
governments of the poor countries cannot manage to develop well and quality infrastructures
such as reliable transportation networks and energy supply system which is a key factor to the
economic development.

At family level, large number of children usually associated by poverty. This is because
parents normally fail to meet day to day necessities of their family. For example they cannot

afford to send all their kids to school to get education. Not only that but also, they fail to
provide daily meals and treatments. All of the above lead to the vicious cycle of poverty
between parents and their children.

2.2.2 The interaction between population and environment.

Development economists have been concerned about the impact of population growth and
related demographic transition on the rate of economic growth, while neoclassical economists
sought to redress the classical economists’ concern of whether it is possible to maintain an
increasing or even steady standard of living in the face of finite resources and a growing
population (Panayotou, 2000).
High population growth is said to be among of the causes of the environmental degradation,
this has been observed in various places where is common to see the population growth rate
is increasing at high rate. Increasing in the population either by high birth rate or migration
from one place to another force people to look for the land where they can build their houses
and the places where they conduct their business, because of the high population people will
be forced to find the virgin land by cutting trees and build their houses or conducting their
business. Also some people will be forced to clear the land by cutting trees in order to have
more land for cultivation for the purpose of having more food for their own life. Rapid
population growth rate in the face of finite environmental resources will have catastrophic
effect on human well being (Ehrlich and Ehrlich, 1970).

Population growth affects land use mainly through strengthening of agricultural production.
There is both historical and empirical evidence that different population densities and
different population growth rates produce different land use patterns and changes over time.
Logically, more people need more food, which can come only from either expansion of
agriculture into new lands, or use of existing agricultural land more intensively, or a
combination of the two depending on relative costs, themselves a function of technological,
institutional and ecological factors. Evanson (1993) argued that there is enough evidence
from India that shows how population growth induced people to cultivate additional land as
well as to use existing land more productively. Mink (1993) argued that there are some
associations between the average annual change in population and average annual change in
the agricultural land. The relationship between expanding human populations and receding
forests, especially in the tropics, has received considerable attention, since forests play a key
role in water and soil conservation, wildlife habitat, biodiversity protection and the carbon
cycle, as well as being a source of raw material for the timber industry and livelihood for
Local communities (Panayotou, 2000). Each year, 70 million people are added to world
population, mostly in developing countries and 15 million square kilometers of forests
disappear (Ibid).

Increase in population in various areas also becomes a problem to the places where people
are living near by the rivers where they depend much on rivers for domestic activities and
other productive activities like cultivation near the rivers and sometimes removing sand for
the construction activities, all these activities destroy environment and gearing to the lost of
biodiversity. This is because people in those areas sometimes make their activities like
cultivation very close to the river and sometimes their activities they force they to inter in the
rivers, this is like fishing activities by using ballot, and removing those sand as building
materials. In a number of developing countries, the rapidly growing number of impoverished

people is a key factor in environmental degradation due to urban expansion, deforestation and
cultivation of marginal lands. Unsustainable patterns of consumption by more affluent groups
in both developed and developing countries constitute another crucial factor in degradation of
the global environment (UN, 1994).

There are various countries which have been mentioned by different researchers on the
problem of the environmental degradation due to the increasing in the population, these are
like the forested uplands of Indonesia, Nepal, the Philippines and Thailand, the forests of
Central America, the arid regions of Sub-Saharan Africa, and the small island states in the
South Pacific -- describing the major ways that human activity and growing populations
impact on natural resources in each (Ibid). The mangrove forests which are available in
various countries, a major economic resource base and a rich source of biodiversity, are
threatened by increased harvesting of wood, aggravating flooding and soil erosion. The
expansion of land under cultivation is damaging sensitive coastal ecosystems; all these
processes bear a direct relationship to population growth (Ibid).

The problem of overpopulation also is said to be the problems to the environmental
conservation, this is because overpopulation cause the demand for goods to be high and this
economically lead to the quantity of goods and services demanded to be very high than
supply and lead to the people in various to engage in production of those goods and transport
to the place where those goods are being demanded at that time. This process is achieved by
people to expand areas for cultivation, and for the fishermen to fish more in order to meet the
demand of the particular people where there is a deficit of those products. The explained
process is the most problem to the environmental. Deforestation in the Asian tropics, the
report demonstrates, is also integrally linked to population growth (although the precise
relationship is the subject of much debate (UN, 1994).

Population growth it has been observed as the cause of air pollution, this can be emission of
different gases like fluorocarbon, carbon dioxide gases, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide.
Harrison (1994), observed that, 36% of the annual emissions growth between 1965 and 1989
to population growth and 64 percent to per capita consumption of energy, while technology
helped offset part of the emissions growth. The emission of gas is a problem to both
developed and developing countries, theses gases are normally from industrial activities in
developed countries and few from least developed and developing countries. Lutz (1993), on
the other hand, taking into account regional differences in population growth, energy
consumption and deforestation found a smaller role for population growth in the total growth
of industrial CO2 emissions and a larger role for population growth for CO2 and methane
emissions from land use changes.

On the other hand population growth can lead to increase the Gross Domestic Product of the
country, this is through increase in the availability of labour which could be employed in
different sectors and hence increase national output. Alternatively, increased population can
indirectly enhance output and productivity (Thirwall, 1986), and, therefore, it could be that
the sustainable development explains, some pessimism as it does not capture the complex
interactions that exist between population growth, technology and productivity. More people
may bring higher number of entrepreneurs in different sectors like agriculture, manufacturing
industries and services sectors. Also there may be a pressure for more efficient provision of
Infrastructure for bigger population (Simon, 1986).

Improvement of technology can manage to reduce or protect of high population and increase
productivity, this can be in the ways that since people have access to improved technology it
can be easy for them to practice good agricultural cultivation on a small portion of land and
harvest more produces. Dasgupta (1993) found a positive relationship between rural poverty,
population fertility and environmental resource base degradation and concludes his study by
stating that it was not only poverty but also institutional failures that were the root causes of
environmental degradation. Jeganathan (1989), and Jodha (1989) both disagree with
Dasgupta’s conclusion, and assert that the poor do not have the resources to degrade the
environment; and have the short time preference which propels them to destroy a resource
which they regard as safety buffers during time of destitution. However, they do agree with
Dasgupta on the role institutional and market failure plays in providing incentives to the poor
to have short time preferences; and the rich to exploit the resource base at unsustainable rates.

In other ways population is not necessarily a cause of environmental degradation and
increased population means stimulate to technological change (Khatun.A, 2000). It is
suggested that land intensification ceases as good land is exhausted, or as other factors
prevent further development of new lands, then intensification occurs. In fact the evidence is
that intensification occurs before this point of exhaustion and the two often run in parallel
(Ibid). The resulting farmer-induced technological change is sufficient to support the new
population level; the argument goes, although others doubt that farmer technology alone
could support high rates of population growth (Ibid). Tiffen and Mortimore (1994) work on
Land Resources Management in Machakos District, Kenya 1930-1990 is perhaps the most
widely cited modern study (Ibid). Machakos in east central Kenya in1930s was regarded as a
seriously degraded area which is inhabited by the kamba people; the area today has five times
as many people as in the 1930a and a real per capita agricultural output that is three times as
many people as in the 1930s level (Ibid). A study of 23 Latin American countries in the
1980s found that agricultural area expansion was positively related to population growth
(Southgate, 1990). Examining the case of Colombia, Heath and Binswanger (1995) conclude
that eliminating the adverse policy nexus should be the highest priority rather than the
reduction of population growth. Various reviews have suggested that reducing population
growth cannot be demonstrated to have major impacts on economic growth and economic
development, because reduce population means reduce working class which automatically
lead to the scarcity of labour and hence low domestic gross product(GDP). If there are
impacts of high population on the environment, they are modest, and hence the high profile
given to population changes as a cause of poor economic and environmental performance is
not warranted (Kelley, 1988).

Many scholars observed population in a positive way; they argued that high population
growth rate implies increasing in the labour which is to be used in the productive sectors in
order to increase economic growth. According to Simon (1986)”human inventiveness is the
ultimate resource; more people means more brains devising solutions to emerging problems”
More people mean more ideas, bigger markets, economies of scale which the country it can
enjoy, more specialization and easier communications and eventually more resources (Ibid).
George (1879) saw population growth as a source of wealth and overpopulation not as a
cause but a consequence of poverty. Population growth and population density are catalysts
of wealth through increased cooperation and specialization, extra labor results in extra
productivity of land and this results in more food, more than sufficient to feed the additional
population; hence the Malthusian prediction of overpopulation and famines does (Ibid).

3.0 RICH COUNTRIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION.

One theory postulates that poverty is a direct cause of environmental degradation (Durning,
1989). In the other hands some experts do not agree the concept that environmental
degradation are caused by the poverty instead they argued that since poor people who most
found in least developing countries and developing countries have no any resources or heavy
industries which can lead to destroy environment in large extent instead those countries from
first world countries are most destroyers of the environment since they produce gases which
cause global warming, and some wastes are being disposed in the oceans where they destroy
aquatic species . Somonathan (1991) argues that the poor do not have the resources or the
means to cause environmental degradation. Jeganathan (1989), and Jodha (1989) both give
the following argument, poor people cannot cause environmental degradation because they
do not: 1) have the resources to degrade the environment; and 2) have the short time
preference which propels them to destroy a resource which they regard as safety buffers
during time of destitution. However, they do agree with Dasgupta on the role institutional and
market failure plays in providing incentives to: 1) the poor to have short time preferences;
and 2) the rich to exploit the resource base at unsustainable rates.

The discussion below focuses on different ways through which developed countries pollute
environment as a result pushes more people into ocean of poverty.

3.1 Conquests and Colonization

Most of poor countries are lying within the tropical belt in which always they are rich in
natural wealth and biodiversity and they always attracted the eyes of other nations to possess
this wealth - to provide raw material for wars and to fuel their own economies (Nath 2000).
Imperialism sowed the seeds of environmental unsustainability in these countries that were to
later emerge as developing countries. Under the imperial rule, the Colonialists forced farmers
in poor countries to cultivate indigo, cotton and tobacco as it was a very profitable crop for
them but it totally degraded the farm land and rendered it unfit for cultivation of other crops.
In the course of this agrarian revolution, there was a clear felling of economically profitable
forests in many parts of poor nations. In the most of African poor countries, the destruction of
forests caused a warming of the region within a few decades. It led to a drop in the water
table, followed by salinization of the flatlands between the rivers. This had far reaching
consequences for the quality of the soil, the amount of available water and finally the fertility
of the area. Within a few years the soil had suffered degradation which was compounded by
the intensive farming of cash crops. When Colonialists left, there was a total breakdown of
the indigenous systems for preservation of natural wealth, traditional seed storage, and
community forest management systems. There was a loss of biodiversity wealth and there
was a greater commercialization of its natural resource based activities as against their earlier
household (Ibid). These environment degrading activities led to excessive poverty among
individuals and all poor countries in general.

3.2 Dumping of harmful wastes in poor countries’ coasts

In the 1980s, the environmental regulations governing waste treatment in the developed
world became tighter and the costs of domestic safe disposal increased (Nath, 2000). This
saw a simultaneous increase in the activities of the toxic terrorists in shipping waste to the
developing countries. A significant amount of hazardous waste generated in industrialized

countries has ended up in poor developing countries in the 1980s as a result of legal (or
illegal) contracts to accept waste in exchange for cash. Although the Basel Convention on the
‘Control of Trans boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal’ did come
into effect in 1992 but it was not a total ban. It allowed trans boundary movements if it could
be shown that the wastes were needed for recycling in the state of destination and there was
prior informed consent (Ibid). Due to irresponsible leadership from some of Africans’
countries, rich countries take advantage by bringing them in order to allow them to dump
their harmful byproducts in poor counties’ soil. Often, these wastes endanger health of poor
people and drain a little resource they have in treatment and spending more time in caring for
patients instead of producing. In other hand, the governments of poor countries spend a huge
proportion of their funds to curb health related problems that have been caused by
environmental pollution instead of concentrating into fight against poverty in their countries.
From the above links, it’s obvious that by dumping their Hazardous Wastes into soil of poor
countries, rich countries accelerate the problem of poverty. More over truth about developed
countries in their participation in environmental degradation and accelerating poverty in least
and developing countries has been summarized in the figure 1 below.

Figure 1 how developed countries accelerate poverty in least and developing countries.

Developed countries

Industrial activities

Externalities

Developing countries Least developed

Low production

Poverty

4.0 CONCLUSSION

From the discussion above it has been observed that poverty, population and environment
they interlink each other. Some argue poverty as a cause of environment degradation through
environment media which include water, air, and land. It is argued that rapid population leads
to a higher proportion of young people dependent on the older working population. The latter
have to divert resources to services such as care, food, housing and education. In poor
countries the dependency ratio is at least one dependent per worker (Khatun.A, 2000). And if
the older population fails to divert resources the young suffer from sickness and poor
education. Thus growth worsens.

Some argued that high population lead to lower marginal productivity of labour and hence
cause low gross domestic product which accelerate poverty, this can be so because when
there is over population while land is fixed and development of technology keep constant,
marginal product of labour becomes zero and hence it lower gross domestic product therefore
lead poverty. Population growth was thought to lower the ratio of capital to labour and hence
lower the marginal product of labour, thus lowering the wages. To keep pace capital must be
widened and this may have harmful effect elsewhere, for example, reducing funds available
for infrastructure. Slow population growth permits a rising capital labour ratio, capital
deepening and hence rising productivity and wages. This link between population growth and
capital went out of fashion when capital was thought to be less important in growth. Given
the reappearance of the role of capital and the capital theoretic base of the environmental
economics literature where environment is considered as a capital, this view may be due for
reappraisal.

And in other side it is argued that poverty causes environment degradation through
deforestation, water pollution, overgrazing and burning. But others argued environment
degradation is the one which causes poverty through people who cultivate on degraded land
(infertile land) in which the probability of harvesting is very low and sometimes they get
nothing, this makes them to lack money to purchase the basics needs and other social services
like education, medical services, water, and electricity. Therefore, poverty, population and
environmental degradation interlink as illustrated by figure 1 below;

Fig. 2 Relationships between land degradation, population and poverty

Increase in
Land shortage
population

Limited land
Land Poverty
resource
degradation

Non-sustainable land
management practices

REFERENCES

Blaikie and Brookfield (1987). Land Degradation and Society. London: Routledge.
Boserup and Ester (1981), Population and Technological Change: A Case Study of Long
Term trend, University of Chicago, Chicago.
Dasgupta P (1993). An Inquiry into Well-Being and Destitution. Oxford Clarendon Press.
Dasgupta, P and K.G. Maler (1994): “Poverty, Institutions and the Environmental
Resource Base”, World Bank Environmental Paper 9, World Bank.
Desta, A., 1999. Environmentally Sustainable Economic Development. Praeger Publishers,
ISBN: 0275966283.
Duraiappah, A., 1998. Poverty and environmental degradation: A literature review and
Analysis of the nexus. World Dev., 26(12): 2169-2179.
Durning, A.B., 1989. Poverty and the environment: Reversing the downward spiral. World
Ezzati, M. and D Kammen (2001). Indoor air pollution from biomass combustion as a risk
Factor for acute respiratory infections in Kenya: an exposure-response study. Lancet,
358(9281): 619- 624.
George.H, (1879), Progress and poverty.
Jaganathan, N.V (1989) Poverty, Public Policies and the Environment. The World Bank
Environment Working Paper No.24. Washington, DC: the World Bank
Jalal, K., 1993. Sustainable development, environment and poverty nexus. Occasional Paper
No.7. Asia Development Bank. Watch Paper No. 92. World Watch Institute,
Washington, DC.
Khatun, Fahmida A (1996), `the Economic Cost of Natural Resource Depreciation and
Environmental Degradation in Bangladesh’ Ph.D. Dissertation, University College
London, University
Lieu, Z et al (1991): “Collective Resource Management in China: The Raw Wool
Industry” in C. Findlay (eds.) Challenges of Economic Reform and Industrial Growth:
China’s Wool War, Unwin, Sydney, pp.14-162.
Malthus, T. R. 1798. An Essay on the Principal of Population. Everyman's Library
Edition ed. London.
Mei, F (1992): “Sustainable Agriculture and the Sustainable Development of China’s
Agriculture”, Unpublished Conference Paper, Beijing.
Mink, S.D (1993): “Poverty, Population and the Environment”, World Bank Discussion
Paper 189, World Bank.
Pearce, D.W and J.J. Warford (1993): World without End: Economics, Environment
And Sustainable Development, Oxford University Press, New York.
Panayotou.T (2000) Environment and development
Simon, J (1981). The Ultimate Resource. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Simon, J. (1986), Theory of Population and Economic Growth. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Somanathan, E (1991). Deforestation, property rights and Incentives in central Himalayas.
Econ. Polit. Weekly, 26: 37-46. Of London, U.K.
UNDP (1990): Human Development Report 1990, Oxford University Press, New York.
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987): Our Common Future,
Oxford University Press, Oxford
World Bank (1992): China’s Environmental Strategy Paper, Washington DC.

Environmental and natural resources economics

Environmental and natural resources economics

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Environmental and natural resources economics

Recently uploaded

Environmental and natural resources economics