Ecological Footprint, Population and Income

Name:

Course:

Institution:

Tutor:

Date:

Ecological Footprint, Population and Income

Many countries have different population footprints. In a report released in the year 2006, India had an ecological footprint of 0.8, China had 1.5, Canada had 6.4, France had 5.8, Japan had 4.3, Mexico had 2.5, Brazil had 2.2 and Kenya had 20.9 global hectares per person (“Footprints for Nations”, 2007). In this year, the United Arab Emirates had the highest ecological footprint. However, the statistics have changed since then. A report released by the Living Planet Report in the year 2010 shows that the ecological footprints of China, India and the United States have increased. However, the ecological footprint in the U.S is more than the one in China, India and other countries with a higher population. Similarly, the population footprint in China is less than the one in Canada even though Canada has less population. Due to its rapid economic growth, China ranks second after the United States in GDP and so its population has high-income earners as compared to a country such as India. Therefore, the income seems to affect the environment the most.

China has a total population of approximately 1,330,141,295 people while India has a population of 1,189,172,906 people. The gross national income in china is $6,890 while that of India is $3,280. The GNI of Canada, which has a population of 34,108,752 people, is $37,280. With these statistics, it is clear that the ecological footprint of a country is more dependent on the income than the population.

A population earns income by engaging in many economic activities. China has engaged in many economic activities thus being a leading importer of products globally. Due to the increase of these activities so that it may be able to support its population and export other products, it is forced to take up many of the environmental resources (Sonnenfeld & Mol, 2006). China was rated to have the highest ranking in emissions thus constituting the increase in resource consumption. Similarly, India has a high population, and a high economic growth. However, the country’s income is almost half that of China thus it ranks low in ecological footprint having 0.91 global hectares per person.

Canada, on the other hand, has a very high gross income. According to the research carried out by Mackenzie, Messinger and Smith (2008), the high-income Canadian earners played a greater role in influencing the environment as compared to the subsequent earners. This is because an individual’s increase in income prompts them to increase their expenditure thus they do more traveling and consume more. Although high populations make a significant impact on the environment, if their income is not as high, their impact will be less than that of the high earning populations.

The issue of the ecological footprints of the countries has become a crucial topic in most environmental forums. Most countries are consuming more than the environment can offer yet little is being done in order to control this problem/challenge. As earlier mentioned, one of the countries increasing the ecological footprint at an alarming rate is China. However, China’s feedback states that the people of this country have a right of enjoying economic prosperity. Such arguments pose a challenge for countries to regulate this rapid degradation of the existing resources in the environment. It is feared that it will take two planets to support the planets activities by the year 2035 if control strategies are not effectively implemented.

According to the study carried out by Mackenzie, Messinger and Smith (2008), the ecological footprint of the Canadians who were high earners was significantly larger in goods, mobility, housing and other services as compared to the rest of the earners. The only constancy was found in the food consumption. Most of these things, which the high earning Canadians spend on play a crucial role in degrading the environment. Cars have a significant role to play in global warming, and so are some goods and services. These same activities are taking place in China and India although their only limitation is that the Indians and the Chinese have a lesser gross national income.

In other words, the correlation coefficient in this circumstance is that the ecological footprint is more dependent on the income levels of the people than it is on the population. In order to avoid the extreme repercussions, countries should implement policies that control the earning levels of the people. This may be done indirectly so that the rights of the people are not interfered with. The countries should engage in implementing and ensuring that the environmental policies are followed so that the environment is not exhausted of its resources.

The income of a population has more impact on the ecological footprint as compared to the population of a country. The Chinese and the Indians may not have the highest ecological footprint now, but their consumption of environmental resources id rapidly increasing as they increase their economic activities. As people continue to earn more, so do their desires increase thus spending more on the activities that degrade the environmental resources, and the cycle continues.

References

“Footprints for Nations” (2007). Global Footprint Network. Retrieved from http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/footprint_for_nations/

Mackenzie, H., Messinger, H. & Smith R. (2008). Size Matters: Canada’s Ecological Footprint, By Income. Policy Alternatives. Retrieved from http://www.policyalternatives.ca/documents/National_Office_Pubs/2008/Size_Matters_Canadas_Ecological_Footprint_By_Income.pdf

Sonnenfeld, D., & Mol, A. (January 01, 2006). Environmental Reform in Asia. The Journal of Environment & Development, 15, 2, 112-137.