Economic Growth as the Limiting Factor for Wildlife Conservation Including Considerations of...

Economic Growth as the Limiting Factor

for Wildlife Conservation

Including Considerations of

Technological Progress

Compliments of Brian CzechBased largely on:

Czech, B. 2000. Shoveling Fuel For A Runaway Train: Errant Economists, Shameful Spenders, And A Plan To Stop Them All. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Czech, B., and P. R. Krausman. 2001. The Endangered Species Act: History, Conservation Biology, and Public Policy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.

Czech, B. 2000. Economic growth as the limiting factor for wildlife conservation. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28(1):4-14.

Czech, B., P. R. Krausman, and P. K. Devers. 2000. Economic associations among causes of species endangerment in the United States. BioScience 50(7):593-601.

Czech, B. Economic growth, technological progress, and biodiversity conservation. Under Review.

Economic Growth

• an increase in the production and

consumption of goods and services

• typically expressed in terms of GDP

• facilitated by increasing:

–population

–per capita consumption

The Theoretical Framework

Time

GN

PK

Natural capital allocated to human economy

Natural capital allocated to wildlife

Czech, B. 2000. Economic growth as the limiting factor for wildlife conservation. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28(1):4-14.

PDF files for these articles available at The Wildlife Society website: www.wildlife.org. (Follow links to Wildlife Society Bulletin.)

Some Empirical Evidence:

Causes of Species Endangerment

as a “Who’s Who”

of the American Economy

Endangerment CausesUrbanization

Agriculture

Water diversions (e.g., reservoirs)

Recreation, tourism development

Pollution

Domestic livestock, ranching

247

205

160

148

143

136

Czech et al. 2000. Bioscience 50(7):593-601.

Causes (cont.)Mineral, gas, oil extraction

Non-native species

Harvest

Modified fire regimes

Road construction/maintenance

Industrial development

134

115

101

83

83

81

Czech et al. 2000. Bioscience 50(7):593-601.

Making sense of the Who’s Who with

Trophic Theory

Basic Population Dynamics

K

Carrying Capacity ScenariosIn

divi

dual

s

Time

r-selection

K-selection

K and r-selected Species

K

Economic Carrying CapacityG

NP

Time

r-selection

K-selection

K and r-selected Economies

American GNP, 1929-1997

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

1929

1932

1935

1938

1941

1944

1947

1950

1953

1956

1959

1962

1965

1968

1971

1974

1977

1980

1983

1986

1989

1992

1995

K or r-selected?

But, for the sake of wildlife conservation, it’s not

enough to hope we’re a

K-selected economy.

K

Wildlife Conservation andSteady State Economy

GN

P

Time

...maintain steady state economy sufficiently below K.

To conserve wildlife...

But what about

Technological

Progress?

Technological Progress

•Vernacular: invention, innovation

•Technical: increasing productive

efficiency resulting from invention

and innovation

KTGNP

Natural capital allocated to human economy

Natural capital allocated to non-human economy

X natural capital allocable

Time

KU

Natural Capital Allocation Revisited

X/2 conserved  K1

K2

GNP

Time

X natural capital remains allocable KU

Economic growth with technology level 2

Economic growth with technology level 1

The Big Hope

The Great Debate: Is There a Limit?

“Yes”• Physiocrats

• Classical economists

• Ecological economists

• Ecologists

“No”• Neoclassical

economists

• Corporations

• Politicians

Why would there not be a limit?

• Substitutability of resources

• Increasing productive efficiency

• Increasing human capital

White Pine, “Big Wheel”

Substituting for white pine,

employing more efficient

technology.

Sitka Spruce,Timbco 435 “Feller Buncher”

Why would there be a limit?

• Carrying capacity

• Thermodynamics

• Trophic levels

Carrying Capacity

• Consumers

• Products

• Byproducts

Thermodynamics

• Fixed amount of matter

• Entropy

• Fixed amount of energy

Another look at trophic

levels, this time in light of

thermodynamics.

Clear to All

• Without technological progress,

GNP limited

• GNP growth faster than

technological progress = trouble

Unclear to Many

• Technological progress: raising the

bar or accelerating the approach?

• Does technological progress occur

without increased consumption?

Consider the Sources

• Research and development

• Corporate profit

• Economies of scale

KTGNP

Natural capital allocated to human economy

Natural capital allocated to non-human economy

X natural capital allocable

Time

KU

One More Look at Allocation

X/2 conserved  K1

K2

GNP

Time

X natural capital remains allocableKU

Economic growth with technology level 2

Economic growth with technology level 1

Remember the Big Hope?

K1

K2

GNP

Time

X/2 natural capital allocable KU

X/2 converted 

Economic growth with technology level 2

Economic growth with technology level 1

The Apparent Reality

Red Herring Alert!

Red Herring Alert!

Red Herring Alert!

The “Information” Economy

But just ask 2 questions:• What is the information

used for?

• How does one come to

afford the information?

To say that an economy may grow perpetually on a finite land mass is to say that a stable economy may occupy a perpetually diminishing land mass!

Fallacy Buster

=$

$

$$

Real Questions

• What is the limit?

• How do we know when we’re approaching the limit?

• What do we do to prevent breaching the limit?

And yet we hear:“Some people just don’t get it. There is

no conflict between economic growth

and environmental protection!”

Why do they persist?

(As described by Brian Czech in Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train: Errant Economists, Shameful Spenders, and a Plan to Stop Them All. Published by University of California Press, 2000)