|
Humans have been altering their environment for thousands of years. The process probably began with the setting of fires in savannah grassland to aid hunting. Most forests contain the marks of human-set fires, clearance and tree planting, and little strictly virgin vegetated land surface now remains. In the past 10 000 years the dominant technological influences have been
the use of timber During this period the burning of fossil fuels has for the first time had a major impact on ecosystems, through pollution and, most recently, climate change. In the past three decades, the widespread saturation of ecosystems with nitrogen compounds, such as ammonia and nitrogen oxides from agricultural fertilizers and air pollution, has emerged as a new global-scale threat. The extent of ecosystem loss and alteration is closely related to population density, which is very uneven across the planet. Today, one half of the human population lives on less than 10 percent of the Earths land, and three quarters on only 20 percent1. For much of human history, the most heavily populated regions of the planet, and the most ecologically disturbed, have been Europe and South and East Asia and that remains the case. The population densities of the Americas and Africa have only now risen to those achieved in Europe and India by 17502. In India today, population density is more than 300 people per square kilometer, seven times the global average; little land is unused by humans; and almost 80 percent of the original forest cover has been lost. In particularly uninhabitable parts of the planet population density is very low. In Alaska, for example, it is less than a tenth of the global average, and most of the landscape remains untouched. Land affected by human activity can be divided into areas transformed
notably by agriculture, which in some parts of the world such as
the North American prairies is characterized by low The extent of forests, which once covered a large part of the planet, is one good measure of ecosystem survival. Overall, at least half of the worlds forests have disappeared at the hand of humankind three quarters of these in the past 300 years and the majority within the past century.
Their survival is lowest where population density is highest. The Asia/Pacific region has lost 76 percent of its original forest cover, mostly to agricultural development but also to urbanization and mineral exploitation. Losses in Europe (excluding Russia) average 75 percent, in Russia 24 percent, in Africa 68 percent, and in the Americas 35 percent, but with much higher rates in more densely populated areas such as the coastal regions and Central America3. The largest tracts of wilderness survive only in the less populated areas
of the world, which for various reasons have proved hard for humans to
colonize in any numbers. These include the jungles of the Amazon basin
and Central Africa; the frozen taiga regions of Siberia and remote areas
of North America; and some desert, mountain and wetland regions. Examples
of the latter types include the African Sahara, the mountainous Himalayan
regions of otherwise densely populated South Asia, and the Florida Everglades,
natures largest preserve on the eastern coast of the United States4.
Often, rising wealth and economic activity among human
populations intensify their impact on local ecosystems by increasing demand
for natural resources and generating pollution from industry and energy
generation. But not always. Wealth can provide the resources for a clean-up
of pollution, as occurred with a number of European rivers in recent years.
Likewise, many European countries are replacing farmland and old industrial
developments with quasi-natural forests. This is possible because they
have the wealth to buy food from elsewhere or to invest in high-input
intensive agriculture to grow more food from less land, and have the desire
to restore ancient habitats5.
The United Kingdom, for instance, is planting a national forest
in the heart of a former Midlands mining and industrial zone. Some technological advances are more ambiguous. The development of coal
burning in the The link between population density and environmental damage is also disrupted when prosperous or powerful communities, either deliberately or accidentally, buy local ecological conservation at the expense of damage to other areas. Such transference has a long history. The ancient city of Rome turned North Africa into a grain-growing breadbasket to supply its million-plus population, until most African soils were exhausted. The grain, meanwhile, was transported across the Mediterranean aboard a fleet of a thousand ships made of wood cut from the Levant. In the modern era, Japans demand for timber has deforested much
of Southeast Asia, while East African forests have been cleared to grow
tea, coffee and other cash crops for export to Europe, and South American
pampas grasslands have all but disappeared to provide pasture for meat
supplying Europe and North America6.
Additionally, ecological damage may occur despite low
population densities where key environmental resources are in locally
short supply. One example is the extreme stress on fluvial ecosystems
resulting from water shortages in the arid Middle East where, despite
recent increases, overall population density is low by world standards.
Human activity has also created a series of long-distance threats to ecosystems, some of them global in extent. These include acid deposition, the thinning ozone layer, the spread of persistent organic pollutants (POPs), climate change and the spread of nitrogen compounds through soils and fluvial ecosystems7.
|
||||||||||
|
Copyright AAAS 2000. |