He started off on a quest to debunk Julian Simon, then tried to prioritize the world’s environmental issues, and concluded it was all about quality of life.
No, I am not writing about German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, but rather the skeptical environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg.
Lomborg’s conclusions are similar to the conclusion from Yale University’s latest Environmental Sustainability Index which determined that countries with a strong economy, and communities that enjoy a high quality of life, generally have a stronger environmental stewardship ethic and look after their environment better.
Good governance and low population density are also apparently significant determinants of environmental performance.
So the new Pope Benedict XVI and his views on contraception will matter to the environment.
Access to effective birth control potentially puts women in control of their lives, generally improves their health, reduces infant mortality and improves the standard of living of their families and communities. This all also contributes to a lower birth rate that potentially means a lower population density. In short empowering women is good for the environment.
But I wonder if any of the men in the Sistine Chapel pondered any of these issues as they voted for the new Pope.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
“I wonder if any of the men in the Sistine Chapel pondered any of these issues as they voted for the new Pope”
No. But what do you expect from a religion lead by male eunuchs?
Certainly there are big parallels between income levels & stable government (security of living standards)and family size.
Catholicism is more complex than the pope making a decree.
The question of what ways we make choices about our reproductive responsibilities affecting the environment appears to me more reactive than proactive (i.e. we reduce our family size after we are secure, not before). Therefore the question should be how do we make societies more stable & affluent (to help the environment)- rather than influencing papal decrees – (Do you notice “well to do”, (western) catholics also have smaller families than poorer catholics).
hi jennifer,
Tim Worstall writes “Our long-term goals, therefore, must be to unite economics and ecology.”
http://www.techcentralstation.com/042205.htm
It may also be worth bearing in mind that more developed countries tend to have a considerably larger ‘ecological footprint’ compared with less developed countries, due to a much greater demand for, and consumption of, goods/materials and energy. This suggests that our “environmental stewardship ethic” bears a flipside. However, to what degree this factor affects the environment is debatable.