Environmental Problems: Over population and Forest Degradation

Thomas Malthus in 1798 perceived that the rate of childbirth were a lot speedier than mortality rate. He rationalized that if the human population carried on at the rate it is going, if it will remain unchecked, in next to no time there would be inadequate room and food for everyone (Miller & Levine 377). The magnitude of the human population has a propensity to amplify with time. Approximately 500 years ago, the human population started rising more briskly, but, only at the level of advances in technology, agriculture and industry. Nonetheless, intensity of escalation must not be sustained forever as the earth’s resources are limited (Miller & Levine 130). On the other hand, forests on earth as an important resource for the goods they supply, for the environmental roles they carry out are nonrenewable resources yet they are lost and gone to urbanization.
In the 19th century, reduction in birth and death rates in the United States, Japan and much of Europe was sluggish due to completion of demographic transition. As nations took to updates, improved in nourishment, hygiene, and medicine, survival rates of children became higher moving on to adulthood, subsequently living to old age (Miller & Levine 130). It has become a common knowledge that to date India ranks first and China is second in terms of population boom. For this very reason, Indians and Chinese nationals were permitted to emigrate and made life outside of their respective countries. They can be seen in almost all countries of the world. Besides the natural result of overpopulation which is the lack of resources, and deforestation as needs increased, India and China as a country suffered the most from natural calamities like massive flooding and soil erosion. Their respective governments enhanced and intensified productivity of high value goods in terms of exportable, accepted foreign sub-contracts on re-exportable goods, and intensified trading and business entrepreneurship. Birth control methods acceptable to other countries is a taboo in India and China as it goes against religious beliefs culture and tradition, thus, population control would come only through the natural cycle of life. To minimize the destructive influence of overpopulation and extensive deforestation in India and China, the external entities like the internet technology which is likewise in its heightened usage in these areas can very well be an efficient medium of inter-cultural inspiration. It could feature the success of the Westerners and even some Asian countries like Singapore and Japan in population control culture for its well known fast phase life, high standard of living which is very limiting, and priorities in keeping old age securities thus discouraging the idea of patronage in families. In other words, the concepts and principles of independence at puberty to inculcate the value of responsibility should be driven in. It may be manipulative though to some extents and long term involvement is required. Otherwise, one of the laudable initiatives is the formulated sustainable development paradigm. In June 3 to 14, 1992 the Earth Summit or the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janiero, Brazil, enacted, upon the agreement of its members led by 110 heads of states, the implementation of a comprehensive action from then until the 21st century. Under the Global Agenda 21, United Nations General Assembly, 12 August 1992, governments were required to prepare national sustainable development strategies. Basically sustainable development promotes multi-stakeholder participation in making decisions. All sections of society must be afforded a chance to participate in decision making. It is also called people empowerment. This is only feasible however, in a government with the political will to implement. The following principles of sustainable development must be well defined as such: 1.) Primacy of developing full human potential; 2.) Holistic science and appropriate technology; 3.) Cultural, moral and spiritual sensitivity; 4.) Self-determination; 5.) National sovereignty; 6.) Gender sensitivity; 7.) Peace, order and national unity; 8.) Social justice, inter and intra-generational equity and spatial equity; 9.) Participatory democracy; 10.) Institutional viability; 11.) Viable, sound and broad-based economic development; 12.) Sustainable population; 13.) Ecological soundness; 14.) Bio-geographical equity and community-based resource management; and 15.) Global cooperation. There are at least six dimensions of sustainable development: Physical dimension which over the last two decades the earth’s biological riches have been rapidly and irreversibly diminished (Flavin, 1997); Economic dimension which includes safer and cleaner production technologies, effective waste recycling and reduction; Human dimension; Political dimension; Environmental dimension; and Technological dimension, which is something new as a result of modern scientific progress (Renzetti & Curran 1998).
The extensive goals of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janiero were laid out in the Global Agenda 21. This document provided the plan of action for achieving sustainable development (Flavin 1997). It was adopted by the Philippines having its groundwork’s founded on the principles of sustainable development enumerated above. However, the country has not fully met the challenges of integrating environmental strategies into economic policy. The path towards enhancing the integrity of the country’s ecological domain will have to involve heightened and sustained implementation of environmental laws, as well as the continued pursuit of resource conservation and environmental restoration or development programs. Otherwise, the commitment remains a set of elusive goals. Ten years after the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the world leaders gathered in Johannesburg, South Africa for the World Summit on Sustainable Development with the Philippines reiterating its commitment to sustainable development. As a result, an enhanced Philippine Agenda 21 took considerations of the fact that the rise of globalization and the creation of an external environment of finance, markets and technology did not seem conducive to sustainable development. The role of the civil society was underscored. The commitments and contributions of the civil society in achieving sustainable development were emphasized. However, it stipulated that government departments must adopt sustainable development perspective within which to handle issues properly, thus the National Economic Development Board came up with five goals: 1.) poverty reduction as the central concern included measures to create an enabling economic environment for sustained and broad- based growth; improve employment; productivity and income; and attain food security; 2.) Social equity would be the allocation of resources on the basis of efficiency and equity to achieve balance development. Efficiency and equity means the channeling of resources to developing areas where greater economic benefits accumulate and where there is greater need, distribution being dependent on the practicality and urgency of needs; 3.) Empowerment and good governance; 4.) Peace and solidarity; and 5.) Ecological integrity.



References:
Flavin, C. (1997). The Legacy of Rio. State of the World 1997: a Worldwatch
InstituteReport on Progress Toward Sustainable Society. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
Miller, K. and Levine, J. (2003). Biology. Prentice Hall: Singapore.
Renzetti, C. and Curran, D. (1998). Living Sociology. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn
and Bacon, a Viacom Company.
United Nations. (1977). Agenda 21: The United Nations Program of Action from Rio.
New York: UN Publications.