Hey guys, sorry I didn't get this together earlier, to be honest it kind of slipped my mind earlier in the week.
I'm still working on my own figure for Australia's sustainable population, but one that I've heard before is around 400,000 (I'm afraid I can't remember the source but I think that this was the estimated figure for the number of indigenous people living here before european settlement).
Obvious limits to population are water and food. While space wouldn't seem an immediate problem in Australia, I would suggest that the availability of arable land is a major factor, as much of th land in Australia is unusable to grow food with a typical European farming method.
An issue I have with this exercise is that the sustainable population limit will be dependant on the lifestyle of the population. If the population were to continue living as most Australians now do, I'm sure the figure would be very low, as it requires an enourmous energy input, but if a population were to adopt a more communal, less energy intensive way of living, there would no doubt be 'room' for more poeple.
So perhaps, while not a resource, community mindset is a integral part of how large a population can sustainably be.
I look forward to hearing what you guys think. Sorry again for the late start.
4 comments:
Hey hey no worries!
Singapore has a land area of only 710.2sq km and a population density of 6814 people/ sqkm and is the 2nd most densely populated country in the world, behind only to Monaco. Over the years planners have projected the carrying capacity of Singapore from 4 million to a future 6.5million as possible numbers being thrown out by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA). What makes me wonder would be on what basis have these figures been projected upon? How could Singapore, a country without a rural hinterland and many natural resources be able to sustain our current 4.8million people, not to even mention the 6.5million in the future?
In our module GE3239, we have been exposed to various issues on environmental sustainability and have been made aware what are the basic issues and criteria we should be looking out for when making a guess on the population that Singapore could possibly sustain. State of the Environment reports have been analyzed, criteria on determining overpopulation has been looked at and technology and greening operations have been touched upon as well. Considering all these factors, it is impossible to come up with a reliable concrete number but to see it for a utopic point of view; I would say we are on the verge of being overpopulated.
Overpopulation becomes a factor when the resources we have are stretched and environmental problems start to set in. Should we assess Singapore as a closed border economy or country, we would not even be able to support a population of more than 1.5million but due to the intensive trade and cooperation with international partners, we are able to sustain population figures of more than 4 million. Singapore is not water self sufficient and do not have much agricultural land; the basic food and water requirements have already been compromised, what more to talk about the assess to nature, cutting down on pollution, greening of places etc so as to lead a more comprehensive and sustainable lifestyle? Hence I am assessing my viewpoint based on Singapore remaining status quo in trade and production that we are on the verge of over population.
Singapore aims to be water sufficient by 2061 but this figure will definitely change (could be earlier or later) as population figures are not fixed annually, while lifestyle changes and technological advancement have not been accounted for. All these predictions thus are seldom accurate and at most best estimates. In Singapore, factors such as the increase in energy consumption, the continued degradation of natural environments and the increasing affluent but unsustainable lifestyles would all contribute to determining the carrying capacity of Singapore. Hence what I want to point out is the dynamism and uncertainty of the factors in deciding the optimal population. I believe any figure that anybody gives would have objections as everyone has their own set of ideas and yardsticks on how overpopulation should be viewed as and no one is right or wrong about this. Based on what I see now, Singapore’s population will continue to rise, but coupled with increased awareness and action on the environment, we would be able to withstand a higher population but yet could be hampered by the affluent lifestyles (air-con, private transport, increase in meat consumption etc) and other factors (global environmental change like temperature increase, sea level increase, haze etc).
Yup and if i am not wrong, i took up like 3 worlds in the eco-footprint exercise and that is based on the productivity of the whole world which when put in Singapore's urbanized context, means we are really in danger should security be an issue!
Well said Andy. I also do think that there is no ideal population figure. Simply put, optimal population is a ‘myth’. There are too many uncertainties around to accurately estimate future population figures. I have tried to check up on what the 6.5mil population prediction was based on, but sadly, I can’t find much information about it. When this figure was announced, it created quite a heated debate among Singaporean, especially when the government is opening doors to foreigners so as to make up for the low birth rate in the country.
The government seems to be gearing up to accommodate this extra 1.6mil or so people. Space is perhaps THE TOP most important issue when it comes to this whole talk about increase in population. The government is tearing down older apartments and buildings to make way for newer and higher buildings. The new units have also shrunk in size or floor space as compared to the old units. Land reclamation has been ongoing as usual to create more land. Plans to increase the number of MRT (subway rail equivalent) stations are underway, so as to increase accessibility and to soothe the foreseen traffic congestion. More roads and highway are built and construction is still ongoing. When all surface land is used up, we go underground. More things are going underground, such as larger basement carparks , MRT stations, and even shopping malls. All these are an effort to utilize and maximize land. More medical hospitals are in the midst of construction too. We can see that all these activities listed are targeted to accommodate the projected population. Land intensification is the policy adopted by the government. All the improvements seem to aim at enhancing the capacity of physical amenities. The human factors seem to have been neglected in the picture. How is the government going to cope with employment issues? Will there be enough food to feed the people? There are more that the government needs to consider.
Fairus here
Optimum population? I'd think that it should be at about 2.5 million to be honest. While we have the standard aspects about factors that control population like land size, and amount of food resources, i think one of the most neglected aspects is the qualitative aspects of lives in spaces.
At 4 mill, i feel that the situation in Singapore is largely overcrowded, or it feels overcrowded. I'll just use the example of housing in Singapore. With the government very keen to maximise land space, the size of flats, while the amount of rooms have increased, flats have actually become much smaller, to maximise land space further.
just a thought, i mean we have the quantitative aspects....but the qualitative aspects is somewhat ignored sometimes
Hello me again,
We went thru the tutorial and some of the key points we talked about were the differences and similarities Singapore and Australia had. We touched on natural hazards as a key difference as due to Australia's vulnerability to hazards, policies such as land zoning have to be considered, affecting the amount of land available.
In addition, the threat of global environmental problems such as increasing temperatures and rising sea water levels also have an impact, especially for Singapore, which is not only small but also a low-lying island city.
Lastly, we also touched on the narrow discussion on optimal population because to assess sustainability we need to look beyond ust environmental aspects but also social and economic aspects, which thus could lead to very different numbers.
So hopefully Chris can tell us what other differences could exist between the 2 countries! Thanks!
Post a Comment