Thanks for your feedback. You're right, I've greatly simplified a complicated set of human-environment interactions here. In TED talks we're instructed to avoid techical detail and focus on delivering one key idea we think merits wider consideration. Mine is that climate change will put people in refugee-like situations, but its greater effect will be on labour migration, family-related migration & other voluntary migration. For my technical writings, please see my Google Scholar profile.
Really amazing talk, By the way, are these ideas based on any studies that suggest climate change might cause migration?? even im writing on this, and looking for data sources/data sets to prove or atleast have a good research design on the climate change ---> migration hypothesis
Thanks for your talk, belatedly! I'm starting a dissertation on the interplay between human rights and climate change, trying to focus on those displaced by anthropogenic climate change. This is great contextual information, and very eloquently expressed.
Seems a rather naive point of view to me. At a minimum I think it ignores how close these receiving countries are to their own carrying capacity (which is also subject to material decline amidst future climate change). When it becomes clear that wealthy world living standards must converge with those of the poor world, migration will be resisted forcefully regardless of any consideration of equity or acceptance of proportional contribution to climate change. Migration is far more likely to be cast as an apologist/enabler for localized human overpopulation.
I agree. In addition to councils on climate change we need councils on overpopulation. The Earth population exploded to over seven billion during my lifetime. Obviously this is an excess five billion. That excess was enabled by a one time unsustainable boom from the discovery of fossil fuels. The United States should set a target of perhaps 300 million, or whatever the carrying capacity dictates. India and China should commit to cutting their populations in half. All together the world population should not exceed two billion. Countries should set a good example by not allowing immigration to exceed targeted carrying capacity. If we could all meet and agree on what should be our ;ideal population size, then we could decide on optimum carbon footprint. But this has to be done very quickly. The human race needs a moratorium on reproduction for at least a decade; and this may already be too late. Get ready for mass humanitarian death rates.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 85 | คู่เอก "ยอดเหล็กเพชร vs ผึ้งหลวง"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qq_19bnnxEo/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for your feedback. You're right, I've greatly simplified a complicated set of human-environment interactions here. In TED talks we're instructed to avoid techical detail and focus on delivering one key idea we think merits wider consideration. Mine is that climate change will put people in refugee-like situations, but its greater effect will be on labour migration, family-related migration & other voluntary migration. For my technical writings, please see my Google Scholar profile.
Really amazing talk, By the way, are these ideas based on any studies that suggest climate change might cause migration?? even im writing on this, and looking for data sources/data sets to prove or atleast have a good research design on the climate change ---> migration hypothesis
im also gonna link that on to Migration ---> Conflict
Thanks for your talk, belatedly! I'm starting a dissertation on the interplay between human rights and climate change, trying to focus on those displaced by anthropogenic climate change. This is great contextual information, and very eloquently expressed.
Really interesting! Is there any way that I could access the dissertation and read about that? I am really curious. Thank you.
Out of curiosity, which subject/s was you studying?
Pretty absurdly general statements but still important points that do offer astute and prescient glimpses into our shared future.
Economical, environmental and financial problems are one of the reason why filipino migrate to other countries.
He is way too optimistic.
Seems a rather naive point of view to me. At a minimum I think it ignores how close these receiving countries are to their own carrying capacity (which is also subject to material decline amidst future climate change). When it becomes clear that wealthy world living standards must converge with those of the poor world, migration will be resisted forcefully regardless of any consideration of equity or acceptance of proportional contribution to climate change. Migration is far more likely to be cast as an apologist/enabler for localized human overpopulation.
I agree. In addition to councils on climate change we need councils on overpopulation. The Earth population exploded to over seven billion during my lifetime. Obviously this is an excess five billion. That excess was enabled by a one time unsustainable boom from the discovery of fossil fuels. The United States should set a target of perhaps 300 million, or whatever the carrying capacity dictates. India and China should commit to cutting their populations in half. All together the world population should not exceed two billion. Countries should set a good example by not allowing immigration to exceed targeted carrying capacity.
If we could all meet and agree on what should be our ;ideal population size, then we could decide on optimum carbon footprint. But this has to be done very quickly. The human race needs a moratorium on reproduction for at least a decade; and this may already be too late. Get ready for mass humanitarian death rates.
wath about the the the blood those that material