- cross-posted to:
- science@mander.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- science@mander.xyz
cross-posted from: https://feddit.dk/post/9778976
Abstract
The disparity in environmental impacts across different countries has been widely acknowledged1,2. However, ascertaining the specific responsibility within the complex interactions of economies and consumption groups remains a challenging endeavour3,4,5. Here, using an expenditure database that includes up to 201 consumption groups across 168 countries, we investigate the distribution of 6 environmental footprint indicators and assess the impact of specific consumption expenditures on planetary boundary transgressions. We show that 31–67% and 51–91% of the planetary boundary breaching responsibility could be attributed to the global top 10% and top 20% of consumers, respectively, from both developed and developing countries. By following an effective mitigation pathway, the global top 20% of consumers could adopt the consumption levels and patterns that have the lowest environmental impacts within their quintile, yielding a reduction of 25–53% in environmental pressure. In this scenario, actions focused solely on the food and services sectors would reduce environmental pressure enough to bring land-system change and biosphere integrity back within their respective planetary boundaries. Our study highlights the critical need to focus on high-expenditure consumers for effectively addressing planetary boundary transgressions.
From the paper - definition of the top global consumers:
The global 10th percentile level of final demand is about US$27,000 per year, equivalent to the European average in 2017. The global 20th percentile level is about US$12,000 per year, comparable to the threshold of high-income countries defined by the United Nations in 2017.
This is why I think our real gloval population limit is about a billion. Its because I expect us to work to allow all humans who want to to lead a modern lifestyle. Don’t get me wrong not a wasteful one full of unnecessary plastic but a nice education, access to computers, a home with modern amenities. I don’t think a proper population limit is how much food we can produce if we consider all areable land is maximally used to produce calories.
Humanity did not limit its population to a sustainable level. Only a small minority acted differently. Collectively we are still as dumb as 50 years ago. So, we will continue toward the collapse until it’s conclusion.
After the collapse the world will be very different and the population will be way below 1 billion … I bet, maybe, a few million people.