Your Centre for New Zealand News

Join the Newsletter

Time to reevaluate the ecological footprint debate? 

Summarised by the Centrist 

The “ecological footprint” (EF) coined by Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees has ruffled feathers, being criticised as fundamentally flawed, oversimplified, and leaning heavily into pessimism. It paints a grim future, suggesting an impending ecological collapse, which ultimately necessitates coercive population control measures. 

Furthermore, in “Correction, coercion, or collapse”, Alex Trembath writes that while the EF concept holds valid concerns about overconsumption and environmental degradation, it might be underestimating our technological prowess and adaptability.

Some staunch EF supporters argue for a drastic population reduction to save civilization, suggesting numbers as low as 100 million. But is this perspective too rigid and catastrophic? There’s signs this sort of thinking is starting to go out of fashion with the environmental movement. 

It may be time to reevaluate whether popular frameworks in environmentalism, like EF, are too gloomy.  

Read more over at The Breakthrough Institute

Image: Parradee

Enjoyed this story? Share it around.​

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Read More

Watch

Chris Trotter reacts to new coalition Government
David Seymour responds to criticism suggesting new Government is against Māori

Listen

NEWS STORIES

Sign up for our free newsletter

Receive curated lists of news links and easy-to-digest summaries from independent, alternative and mainstream media about issues affect New Zealanders.

FEATURED TOPICS

Sign up for our free newsletter

Receive curated lists of news summaries from independent, alternative and mainstream media about issues affecting New Zealanders.

You’ll also receive our NZ News Essentials newsletter. You can unsubscribe from either at any time.