Human activity is the primary contributor to many environmental harms. According to the Population Reference Bureau, 1.2 billion people (or 20%) of the global population live in biodiversity hotspots. These areas tend to be in developing nations with high population growth rates and limited reproductive health services. Despite this, the growing population in biodiversity hotspots is not the cause of the issue, as explained by the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Simply curbing population growth is not the key to improving environmental sustainability. It is imperative that we also decouple growth in population and in economic activity from “a further intensification of resource extraction, waste generation, and environmental damage,” as well as our current overreliance on fossil fuels.  

This separation is the reason why the Sustainable Development Goals do not consider curbing population growth as one of their 17 pillars, but rather responsible consumption and production, which is goal #12. Of course, a greater population causes a greater natural resource reliance, however, it does not automatically spell doom for the environment. What truly impacts the environment is how people allocate the natural resources available to them. It is possible to use the IPAT equation to determine who is causing the greatest harm to the environment (Impact = Population + Affluence + Technology). The variables are readily available for developed and developing countries, and it has been proven that it is the most affluent countries that contribute the most harm to the environment. The poorest 20% of the human population accounts for only 5.15% of world income, and 80% of these people live in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. This lowest quintile of the population is seeing the impacts of the climate crisis firsthand, and they are the most affected by it. Yet, it is not them who are causing it. In fact, these people are much more likely to be forced to leave their homes due to environmental disruption, which is the UN definition for ‘climate refugees.’  

For example, while a hurricane in the United States might cause temporary power outages and property damage, a hurricane in Honduras, Guatemala, or El Salvador has a greater potential to cause people to permanently lose their homes, access to clean water, and livelihoods. Less developed countries have significantly less ability to prepare for stronger and more frequent climate disasters, as it is already more difficult for them to deal with the consequences of strong storms and earthquakes. Comparatively, affluent countries with more financial resources have stronger climate resilience. In the case of least developed countries, how could they be expected to prepare for climate change and finance climate resilience projects when it is already difficult for them to ensure their citizens have a good quality of life? Or in the case of corrupt governments with extractive institutions, would they care enough about the wellbeing of their constituents to prepare for the impending climate disasters? It is difficult to create the right incentives for all governments, from federal to municipal, to create solutions and implement action plans to prepare for and prevent climate change. 

The amount of people living in areas considered at high risk of sea level rise has increased by 100 million in the past three decades, with 90% being from developing nations and small island states. When climate risks are compounded, the impacts on people can be made worse as it causes a domino effect. This is already observable during periods where the temperature rises, as it reduces water quality and availability, which in turn increases the spread of disease and crop failures caused by drought, consequently causing reduced incomes and lower food supplies. The Institute for Economics and Peace reported in September 2020 that in the next thirty years, 141 out of 195 total countries will be exposed to at least one ecological threat, and the 19 countries with the highest number of threats account for approximately 25% of the world’s population. The impacts of these ecological threats include increased food insecurity and competition over resources (particularly clean water), which would worsen civil unrest and mass displacement. Since over one billion people reside in places where the country’s ability to withstand and prepare for the impact of ecological events is insufficient, this would mean an even greater influx of refugees to neighboring and more developed countries. When almost the entire world is exposed to ecological harms, there will likely be a huge disruption in every industry. Food production, transportation of consumer goods, and investments may be in jeopardy; water will be scarcer; productivity will be lower due to unworkable heat; every aspect of people's lives will be severely affected. 

The World Health Organization writes, “the climate crisis threatens to undo the last fifty years of progress in development, global health, and poverty reduction, and to further widen existing health inequalities between and within populations.” No one is immune to the impacts of climate change, whether it is because their city is receiving an increasing amount of climate refugees, facing stronger natural disasters, or because they are suffering from a climate related health impact. No man is an island, and in order to dampen the effects of global warming and climate change it is imperative that nations and citizens alike work together and lead with empathy. 

References: 

“Overview: Weather, Global Warming and Climate Change.” NASA. NASA, September 26, 2022. https://climate.nasa.gov/global-warming-vs-climate-change/#:~:text=What%20is%20Climate%20Change%3F,are%20synonymous%20with%20the%20term.

Meyerson, Frederick. “Population Growth and Deforestation: A Critical and Complex Relationship.” PRB, June 1,  2005. https://www.prb.org/resources/population-growth-and-deforestation-a-critical-and-complex-relationship/.  

“Why Population Growth Matters for Sustainable Development.” United Nations. United Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs, February 2022. https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/.  

“There Could Be 1.2 Billion Climate Refugees by 2050. Here’s What You Need to Know.” Zurich, 2022. https://www.zurich.com/en/media/magazine/2022/there-could-be-1-2-billion-climate-refugees-by-2050-here-s-what-you-need-to-know#  

Ecological Threat Register Press Release 2020.” Institute for Economics and Peace, 2020. https://www.economicsandpeace.org/.  

Climate Change and Health.” World Health Organization. World Health Organization, 2021. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health.