Democracy has evolved, now environmental protection needs to evolve

Second, when a new technology is developed it can often be quickly adopted and shared all around the world without waiting for broad community consensus. When people saw how the printing press worked, they could either use it or get left behind.

Democracy has developed slowly for the same reasons in reverse. First, either the consent or the overthrow of those in power is needed to expand democracy. Second, as democracy expanded, Monarchs and dictators in other places developed systems to resist democracy.

As technology improved at a rapid pace, life became easier for the human race and the human population rapidly increased. As population increased we started to make impacts on the natural environment. Impacts on the natural environment are directly linked to the growth in population.

• When people started burning coal for cooking and warmth in small villages, the impacts from smoke were minimal. When villages grew to cities, the smoke from burning coal caused health problems and coal burning had to be outlawed.
• When there were only a few cars in the early 1900's the impact from air emissions was minimal. When city populations increased with everybody driving cars, car engines had to be redesigned to reduce emissions.
• When towns were small, people would simply throw their waste out a window. As towns grew larger, sewers were built to carry waste away and allow it to flow into rivers or the ocean. As cities grew even larger sewage treatment plants had to be built because the untreated sewage was polluting the rivers and oceans.
• As the population has grown we have used up and degraded so much land for human needs that we've left very little for the other species we share the planet with.
• As the population has grown even further, (currently 80 million or one new Germany per year) we are now in conflict with our own species. Refugees who were once welcomed from foreign countries, are now refused entry. Many refugees are escaping countries overstressed by environmental factors.
• As described in the United Nations Environment Programme report Global Environmental Outlook-5 (2012): "The scale, spread and rate of change of global drivers are without precedent. Burgeoning populations and growing economies are pushing environmental systems to destabilizing limits."

The link between population and environmental protection puts us in the position of having to address the growth of population if we want to protect our environment in the future. Addressing the growth of population, though, requires the kind of patience and initiative that it took to develop democracy.

Similar to the development of democracy, population stabilisation measures like reducing immigration and removing tax breaks for more than two children, requires the consent of the full community.

Getting that full consensus for population stabilisation is further complicated because the relationship between population and protection of the environment is very uncomfortable, because of two opposing factors. First our own humanity and our close bond with other humans make it unnatural to want to limit the growth of humans in any way. In opposition, though, we know that we only have this one finite planet and its air, water, soil, biota and other resources to survive with.

These ideas get more uncomfortable when we consider that:

• our current practices are leaving the earth's finite resources in worse condition for our children and grandchildren than when we took control of them, and
• even if we could stabilise the earth's population at 9-10 Billion around 2050-2060, we probably don't have enough resources to provide safe, sustainable, sanitary conditions with access to health care, education and a fair justice system for everybody.

Stabilising the population isn't like inventing the printing press. It can't be done with just a few people. Without a full discussion of the issues, we won't be able to get the kind of consensus needed to change the current policy of high population growth.

In today's world, discussion of the issues goes through the media. Media coverage of high population growth rarely includes protection of the environment. Media organisations are businesses that need readers and viewers to make money. People don't tune in to hear the obvious. Even the biggest boosters of high population growth don't think there will be less pollution produced with higher population. Plus the media hates sad endings.

The first option the media prefers to degradation of the environment, is refugees and racism. That's what sells. Another issue the media prefers, is crowding and congestion. Proponents of fast population growth recognise that crowding and congestion have gotten worse in big cities over the same time that population has increased, but they say it isn't because of the population growth. It is because of poor planning by government.