THE CLIMAX OF HUMANITY
- 從人口統計和經濟的角度來看，人類現今這個時代是無比獨特的。環境將可永續利用或一夕崩潰，就看接下來幾十年我們如何管理。
- Demographically and economically, our era is unique in human history. Depending on how we manage the next few decades, we could usher in environmental sustainability—or collapse
作者╱馬瑟 ( George Musser )
譯者╱宋宜真
21世紀似乎是個令人失望的世紀。有人保證我們將有會飛的車子、太空殖民、一週工作15小時；日常瑣事 會有機器人代勞（除非它們集體叛變）；疾病應該只出現在歷史書籍裡；可攜式核反應器在量販店正大特賣。而即使是對未來最悲觀的想像，也會預期科技與社會組 織的躍進，能使我們這個世代免於毀滅的命運。
The 21st century feels like a letdown. We were promised flying cars, space colonies and 15-hour workweeks. Robots were supposed to do our chores, except when they were organizing rebellions; children were supposed to learn about disease from history books; portable fusion reactors were supposed to be on sale at the Home Depot. Even dystopian visions of the future predicted leaps of technology and social organization that leave our era in the dust.
即使在一片混亂喧囂之中，只要看得夠遠，這個新世紀還是會成為史上最驚人的時期。工業革命帶來的 三大轉變，已經到達了高峰。數個世紀以來，全球人口以超越指數的速度成長，現在已經逐漸穩定。從目前的趨勢來看，到了本世紀中葉，人口會停滯在90億左 右。與此同時，不論是相對比例或是絕對人口，赤貧的人口都將開始下降。如果中國和印度的經濟持續跟隨日本與韓國的腳步，到了2050年，中國的平均富裕程 度就會跟上現在的瑞士；至於印度，則會跟上現在的以色列。正當人類在人口和財富皆蒸蒸日上的同時，卻相對逼壓著地球所能承受的極限。我們釋放二氧化碳的速 率已經是海洋和陸地吸收速率的三倍，氣候學者認為，到了本世紀中葉，全球暖化的效應將開始反噬。按照這樣的速率，全世界的森林和漁業資源將會以更快的速度 耗竭。
Looking beyond the blinking lights and whirring gizmos, though, the new century is shaping up as one of the most amazing periods in human history. Three great transitions set in motion by the Industrial Revolution are reaching their culmination. After several centuries of faster-than-exponential growth, the world's population is stabilizing. Judging from current trends, it will plateau at around nine billion people toward the middle of this century. Meanwhile extreme poverty is receding both as a percentage of population and in absolute numbers. If China and India continue to follow in the economic footsteps of Japan and South Korea, by 2050 the average Chinese will be as rich as the average Swiss is today; the average Indian, as rich as today's Israeli. As humanity grows in size and wealth, however, it increasingly presses against the limits of the planet. Already we pump out carbon dioxide three times as fast as the oceans and land can absorb it; midcentury is when climatologists think global warming will really begin to bite. At the rate things are going, the world's forests and fisheries will be exhausted even sooner.
人口數量、經濟成長和環境問題，這三大趨勢息息相關，並且將會是未來歷史學家審視我們這個時代的重點。這些趨勢的影響力將無所不在，不 論是政治版圖或是家庭結構。而它們帶來的問題，影響幅度幾乎達人類所未見。一如美國哈佛大學生物學家威爾森（Edward O. Wilson）所言，我們正要通過的這段瓶頸，正是對自然資源以及人類智慧的最大挑戰。
These three concurrent, intertwined transitions—demographic, economic, environmental—are what historians of the future will remember when they look back on our age. They are transforming everything from geopolitics to the structure of families. And they pose problems on a scale that humans have little experience with. As Harvard University biologist E. O. Wilson puts it, we are about to pass through “the bottleneck,” a period of maximum stress on natural resources and human ingenuity.
這股趨勢在日常生活中是顯而易見的。我們很多人都有回 到家鄉卻迷路的經驗，因為家鄉變化太大了。另一方面，人口的成長卻隨著家庭成員的減少而縮減。有越來越多的孩子，是在沒有兄弟姊妹，甚至叔叔阿姨的環境下 成長。（有些人認為這是很糟糕的，但若要維持人口總數穩定，另一個唯一的辦法就是讓死亡率攀升。）中國製的商品上了美國威名百貨的貨架，印度人則開始管理 客服專線，而且，越來越多的亞洲人反過來購買西方商品。拜全球暖化之賜，春天花朵綻放的時間，比50年前提早了一週；餐廳供應的魚也跟以往不一樣了，因為 過去常見的魚類早已被捕撈殆盡。
The trends are evident in everyday life. Many of us have had the experience of getting lost in our hometowns because they have grown so much. But growth is slowing as families shrink. Ever more children grow up not just without siblings but also without aunts, uncles or cousins. (Some people find that sad, but the only other way to have a stable population is for death rates to rise.) Chinese goods line Wal-Mart shelves, Indians handle customer-service calls, and, in turn, ever more Asians buy Western products. Spring flowers bloom a week earlier than they did 50 years ago because of global warming, and restaurants serve different types of fish than they used to because species that were once common have been fished out.
在歷史的脈絡中檢視當下，能夠讓我們透徹地審視世界上眾多問題。這些問題很多是直接或間接因人口增加而衍生出來的。一旦人口停止增加，人類就有可能解決所有的問題。或許要通過瓶頸並不容易，不過一旦我們開始進行，事情只會更好，不會更糟。
Looking at the present era in historical context helps to put the world's myriad problems in perspective. Many of those problems stem, directly or indirectly, from growth. As growth tapers off, humanity will have a chance to close the books on them. A bottleneck may be tough to squeeze through, but once you do, the worst is behind you.
我們正在經歷的轉變，界定了這些挑戰的範圍。科學家至少能夠粗略地估計，未來地球上將會有多少居民、他們需要什麼、有哪些資源可用、到時候又會發生什麼 事情？就在本世紀的後半葉，人類將會進入一個平衡的時期，屆時經濟成長已不再像目前看誰的生產力高、人口和資源較多，而是完全視生產力而定，如此一來，經 濟和環境之間的衝突就會大為減少。舊的挑戰將被新的挑戰取代。在許多國家中，這個過程已經十分明顯，並因此造成轉變。在美國，對於社會安全的論戰重心（一 如歐洲和日本對於養老金制度的憂慮），就在於人口成長之後，能否提出一套健全的社會生活計畫。
The transitions we are undergoing define the scope of the challenges. Scientists can estimate, at least roughly, how many people will inhabit Earth, what they are going to need and want, what resources are available, and when it is all going to happen. By the latter half of this century, humanity could enter an equilibrium in which economic growth, currently driven by the combination of more productivity, more people and more resources, will flow entirely from productivity—which would take much of the edge off conflicts between the economy and the environment. Old challenges will give way to new ones. This process is already evident in countries at the leading edge of the transitions. The Social Security debate in the U.S., like worries about pensions in Europe and Japan, is the sound of a society planning for life after growth.
民眾對人口統計學者的評價不一。30年前，人口 過多的議題沒人不關心吧？當時埃利希（Paul Ehrlich）這本《人口爆炸》可說是最暢銷的著作。由卻爾登希斯頓主演的「超世紀諜殺案」，更將未來描繪成一個人類會被當木材堆放、並被餵以豆腐狀飼 料的世界。然而到了最近，人口稀少反成了最大問題，這項議題是由艾伯斯達特（Nicholas Eberstadt）等新保守份子提出的。他們所關注的焦點，就濃縮在卻爾登希斯頓主演的另一部電影「死亡城」之中；在這部電影中，人類會完全滅絕。所以 現在問題變成：人口會太多還是太少？
In the public's eyes, demographers have a checkered reputation. Thirty years ago, wasn't overpopulation the big concern? Paul Ehrlich's book The Population Bomb was a best seller. The film Soylent Green, starring Charlton Heston, dramatized a future in which people would be stacked like cordwood and fed little squares that looked like tofu but weren't. Lately, though, underpopulation has become the cause célèbre, heralded by neoconservatives such as Nicholas Eberstadt. Their concern is epitomized by another Heston movie: The Omega Man, in which humanity dwindles to nothingness. So which will it be: Too many people or too few?
人口統計學的主流思想並未隨這些極端的描繪而擺盪。開發中國家的家庭數已經縮減得比預期還快，然而， Scientific American在1974年的特刊中對人口數的預測，目前為止都還算準確。事實上，不管是「超世紀諜殺案」或「死亡城」，都道出了部份事實。在絕對數量 上，人類確實繼續大量繁衍；過去人們忽略了人口學家馬爾薩斯對人口膨脹的恐嚇，不代表未來也能成功避開他的預言。但另一方面，人口成長速度的下滑亦值得憂 慮；從歷史上來看，大部份人口穩定或是萎縮中的社會，最後都沒落了。
Mainstream demographers have not swung back and forth nearly as much as these extreme depictions might suggest. Families in the developing world have shrunk faster than expected, but the forecasts described in Scientific American's 1974 special issue on population have largely stood the test of time. In fact, the Soylent Green and Omega Man scenarios each contain an element of truth. Humanity is still growing enormously in absolute terms, and past success at avoiding Malthusian nightmares is no guarantee of future performance. The decline in growth rates is a worry, though. Historically, most stable or shrinking societies have been down at heel.
強烈支持某一立場的人，幾乎都不回應另一方的挑戰，自信滿滿地認為自己可以掌握一切，並不需要去證實自己的立場。然而，一旦你驅散了意識型態的迷霧，行動計畫的整合架構就會浮現（參見左頁〈21世紀行動計畫〉）。這並非向前邁進的唯一途徑，卻可以做為討論的起點。
Partisans of one scenario shrug off the challenges of the other, expressing “confidence” that they can be handled without actually doing much to ensure that they are. Once you blow away the fog of ideology, the outlines of a comprehensive action plan begin to emerge [see box on opposite page]. It is hardly the only way forward, but it can serve as a starting point for discussion.
這計畫有個不斷出現的主旨：商業未必是大自然的敵人；反之亦然。傳統上，我們不會用相似的字眼來描述經濟和環境。最受矚目的經濟統計數據，例如國內生產 毛額（GDP），並未囊括對資源消耗的計算；基本上，它衡量的是資金流量而非資產和債務的平衡。森林是會帶來持續穩定收入的資產，要是你把它砍光了， GDP還是會躍升。
A recurring theme of this plan is that business is not necessarily the enemy of nature, or vice versa. Traditionally the economy and environment have not even been described in like terms. The most-watched economic statistics, such as gross domestic product (GDP), do not measure resource depletion; they are essentially measures of cash flow rather than balance sheets of assets and liabilities. If you clear-cut a forest, GDP jumps even though you have wiped out an asset that could have brought in a steady stream of income.
從更寬廣的角度來看，我們在貨品和服務上所支付的費用，很少會包括相關的環境成本。這筆賬一定有人得埋單，通常就是我們自 己，只不過是透過另一種形式。據估計，美國納稅人平均一年要支付2000美元，來補償開墾、鑽井、挖礦和其他重度影響環境的活動所造成的破壞。扭曲的市場 價值沒有給予消費者和生產者足夠的動力來清理環境。而當環境學者把焦點都放在自然無價的魅力上時，無形中也強化了上述的現象，因為自然界無價的魅力雖然很 有意義，但卻很難與其他更緊迫的事情匹敵。「瀕臨絕種動物法案」中，就提供了律師相互推諉責任的範例。綠色組織將西點林鴞所遭遇的困境歸咎到伐木業者，而 伐木業者則認為，毫無限度的鳥類保護政策會害他們失業。事實上，如果森林不再，這兩方都是受害者。
More broadly, the prices we pay for goods and services seldom include the associated environmental costs. Someone else picks up the tab—and that someone is usually us, in another guise. By one estimate, the average American taxpayer forks out $2,000 a year to subsidize farming, driving, mining and other activities with a heavy environmental footprint. The distorted market gives consumers and producers little incentive to clean up. Environmentalists inadvertently reinforce this tendency when they focus on the priceless attractions of nature, which are deeply meaningful but difficult to weigh against more pressing concerns. The Endangered Species Act has provided iconic examples of advocates talking past one another. Greens blamed the plight of spotted owls on loggers; the loggers blamed unemployment on self-indulgent ornithology. In fact, both were victims of unsustainable forestry.
近年來，經濟學者和環境科學家已共同衡量自 然界所能帶來的益處。從這樣的行動中，我們會發現自己對自然界的依賴，因而不會輕忽它。今年年初出刊的《千禧年生態系統評估》就指出，如果大自然無法再提 供某些服務（諸如從授粉到水質濾淨等功能），那麼人類要自己動手，而且得付出極為昂貴的代價。這份評估還發現，在這24項類別廣泛的項目中，其中有15項 消耗得比再生得還快。
In recent years, economists and environmental scientists have come together to hang a price tag on nature's benefits. Far from demeaning nature, this exercise reveals how much we depend on it. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, published earlier this year, identified services—from pollination to water filtration—that humans would have to provide for themselves, at great cost, if nature did not. Of the 24 broad categories of services, the team found that 15 are being used faster than they regenerate.
如果能夠適當分擔對環境的責任，我們就會發現，對自然界有益的，也會同樣會為經濟、甚至自己的行業帶來益處。舉例來說， 漁民若能將漁獲量限制在某一範圍，收益便能達到最高。要是超過這個範圍，不論是漁獲量或是收益就會開始下滑，因為太多的人去捕太少的魚。可以確信的是，生 活不總是這麼便利，社會有時候必須面對一些犧牲交換的情況。不過，這只是個尋找雙贏局面的開始。
When the environment is properly accounted for, what is good for nature is often what is good for the economy and even for individual business sectors. Fishers, for example, maximize their profits when they harvest fisheries at a sustainable level; beyond that point, both yields and profits decline as more people chase ever fewer fish. To be sure, life is not always so convenient. Society must sometimes make real trade-offs. But it is only beginning to explore the win-win options.
如果決策者可以建構出一個正確的框架，人類的 未來就可以由上千個平凡的決定得到保障：人們有多少孩子？他們在哪裡放牧牛群？他們用哪種絕緣材料幫房子隔熱？通常一些更為深刻的發展，都是由這些平凡事 物來決定。一個市鎮是否富足的指標並非電腦或DVD，因為即使是在貧困的村落，現在都能找到這些東西。污水處理管線、柔軟的床被、對身家安全的概念等，才 是指標。為了將現代化的好處散播給所有的人，科學和科技必須用在一些比建造太空殖民站更偉大的事。
If decision makers can get the framework right, the future of humanity will be secured by thousands of mundane decisions: how many babies people have, where they graze their cattle, how they insulate their houses. It is usually in mundane matters that the most profound advances are made. What makes a community rich is not the computers and the DVDs, which you can find nowadays even in humble villages. It is the sewage pipes, the soft beds, the sense of physical and economic security. By helping to bring these benefits of modernity to all, science and technology will have done something more spectacular than building space colonies.
|
|
留言列表