The Limits to

The Limits to Growth The debate on the limits of growth is about the ecological impact of growth and wealth creation. Many of the activities necessary for economic growth make use of nonrenewable energy sources. Many researchers believe that these environmental effects may have continued to turn an effect on global ecosystems. They claim that the cumulative effects on ecosystems impose a theoretical limit to growth. Some resort to archeology to cite examples of cultures that seem to have disappeared because they grew beyond the capacity of ecosystems to house. His prediction is that the limits to growth may end up making it impossible to growth based on consumption of energy sources. Their proposed solution is to apply the principles of the decrease that is, reduce consumption and production to levels at which resources can regenerate naturally, to the pair that distributes wealth from rich countries to the world .This concept should not be confused with sustainable development, since the latter believed that it would be possible to further increase growth, alongside protecting the environment. Others are more optimistic and believe that although local environmental effects can be detected, the large-scale ecological effects are minor. Optimists say that if these global environmental changes exist, human ingenuity will find ways to accommodate them. The pace or rate of economic growth can have important consequences for the environment (climate and ecosystems’ natural capital). Concern about the possible negative effects of growth on the environment and society has led some scientists to defend areas of lower growth levels, hence the idea of economic growth and green parties, who think that national economies are part of a global society and a global ecological system, so can not exploit their natural ability to grow without damaging them.Canadian scientist David Suzuki said in the 90s that ecosystems can only support an annual growth of between 1.5 and 3 annually and therefore any effort to improve performance by agriculture and forests eventually necessarily cannibalize the natural capital of soil and forests. Some believe that this argument can be applied even to more developed economies. Mainstream economists argue that advanced economies due to technological advances, for example, we now have faster computers than a year ago, but not necessarily a larger number of computers. Maybe we got rid of the physical limitations betting more by knowledge than by physical production. On the other hand is a historical fact that in the last two centuries has submitted eocon mico growth fluctuations and cyclical crises in every country and internationally.All coduce finalemte boom to recession and crisis, which eventually open up the conditions for reactivation, which in turn clears the way for a revival. The economic cycle studied by Clement jester, Karl Marx, Wesley Mitchell, Josepf Schumpeter, Nikolai Kondratieff and other notable economists, is a reality to take into account which is impossible without any serious estimate of economic growth. The attempt to promote economic growth above all other considerations measurable is a symptom of what is known as high productivity, a term often used in a contemptuous tone.

Comments are closed.