Technological Forecasting & Social Change Dynamics of the North – South welfare gap and global sustainability

The vast heterogeneity among nations in terms of economic and demographic characteristics is evident, despite being overlooked in some global studies. In this heterogeneity, it is possible to identify some distinct aggregate classes differing at some very fundamental level: developing (South) nations and developed (North) nations may have very different, asymmetric problems, goals and structures. This study investigates these two distinct groups of socio-economic systems, as they interact in a context of global sustainability. We identify population, economic growth, welfare gap, energy supply and pollution as key issues and analyze them using a systems perspective. A dynamic feedback model, which discriminates the two groups of nations, is constructed to study the dynamics of variables related to the above key issues. The model is tested using extensive data between the years 1980–2005. According to the reference behavior covering the period 1980–2050, it is not viable to close the welfare gap between North and South, given the current prevailing non-renewable-resource-based growth system. A non-renewable-resource-based system adopted by the economic system of growing South would take the global system even closer to its limits. It is observed that indicators like reserve-to-demand ratio fail to provide reliable signals for a timely transition to alternative resources, and a very serious economic recession due to resource scarcity is likely to develop in the next couple of decades. By coupling the demographic and economic dynamics, it is shown that an economic slowdown due to a resource scarcity may have a dramatic widening effect on the already existing welfare gap. Scenario and policy experiments verify the widely accepted importance of stabilizing the population growth in South, transition to alternative energy resources, and investment support to the South in this transition simultaneously in order to reduce the welfare gap between the two blocks. It is observed that enthusiastic targets for an energy transition may have a serious negative impact on the welfare level experienced in South, whereas an energy transition in South supported by North seems to have the most desirable outcome regarding the welfare gap.

[1]  Akira Onishi.  FUGI global modeling system (FGMS200): Integrated global model for sustainable development , 2002 .

[2]  George P. Richardson,et al.  Feedback Thought in Social Science and Systems Theory , 1991 .

[3]  N. Nakicenovic.  Global greenhouse gas emissions scenarios: Integrated modeling approaches , 2000 .

[4]  Shunsuke Mori,et al.  An integrated assessment model for the new energy technologies and food production - an extension of the MARIA model , 1998 .

[5]  Steffen Bayer,et al.  Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world , 2004 .

[6]  J. Olivier,et al.  Model for calculating regional energy use, industrial production and greenhouse gas emissions for evaluating global climate scenarios , 1994 .

[7]  Mihajlo Mesarovic,et al.  Mankind at the Turning Point , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[8]  Khalid Saeed.  Development Planning and Policy Design: A System Dynamics Approach , 1994 .

[9]  R. Costanza.  Limits to growth: The 30-year update , 2006 .

[10]  D. Pimentel,et al.  How many people can the earth support , 1997 .

[11]  G. Fischer,et al.  Socio-economic and climate change impacts on agriculture: an integrated assessment, 1990–2080 , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[12]  Bert de Vries,et al.  Greenhouse Gas Emissions in an Equity-, Environment- and Service-Oriented World: An IMAGE-Based Scenario for the 21st Century , 2000 .

[13]  Akira Onishi,et al.  Futures of global interdependence (FUGI) global modeling system: Integrated global model for sustainable development , 2005 .

[14]  D. Meadows,et al.  The Limits to Growth , 2018, Green Planet Blues.

[15]  Willem P. Nel,et al.  IMPLICATIONS OF FOSSIL FUEL CONSTRAINTS ON ECONOMIC GROWTH AND GLOBAL WARMING , 2009 .

[16]  E. and,et al.  Integrated assessment models of global climate change , 1997 .

[17]  B. Berelson,et al.  Conditions of fertility decline in developing countries, 1965--75. , 1978, Studies in family planning.

[18]  Barry B. Hughes.  International Futures: Choices in the Face of Uncertainty , 1999 .

[19]  K. Arrow.  The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing , 1962 .

[20]  Alexei G. Sankovski,et al.  Special report on emissions scenarios , 2000 .

[21]  M. Parrya,et al.  Effects of climate change on global food production under SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios , 2004 .

[22]  D. Meadows,et al.  Beyond the Limits , 1992 .

[23]  F. Lévy.  Adaptation in the Production Process , 1965 .

[24]  I. Gorst.  Survey of energy resources , 1985 .

[25]  D. Meadows.  Dynamics of Growth in a Finite World , 1974 .

[26]  Paul R. Ehrlich,et al.  Food Security, Population, and Environment , 1993 .

[27]  J. Randers,et al.  Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economy , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  Graciela Chichilnisky,et al.  Catastrophe or new society? : a Latin American world model , 1976 .

[29]  G. Chichilnisky,et al.  A Model of Technology, Domestic Distribution, and North-South Relations : Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 1979 .

[30]  K. Riahi,et al.  Greenhouse Gas Emissions in a Dynamics-as-Usual Scenario of Economic and Energy Development , 2000 .

[31]  John N. Warfield,et al.  World dynamics , 1973 .

[32]  R. R. Russell,et al.  Technological Change, Technological Catch-up, and Capital Deepening: Relative Contributions to Growth and Convergence , 2002 .

[33]  G. R. Brundtland.  Our Common Future World Commission on Environment and Development , 1987 .

[34]  G. Fischer,et al.  Effects of climate change on global food production under SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios , 2004 .

[35]  P. C. Roberts,et al.  Groping in the Dark: The First Decade of Global Modelling , 1982 .

[36]  L. Argote,et al.  Learning Curves in Manufacturing , 1990, Science.

[37]  Paul Collier,et al.  Globalization, Growth, and Poverty: Building an Inclusive World Economy , 2001 .

[38]  K. Mason.  Explaining fertility transitions , 1997, Demography.

[39]  Judith Gurney.  BP Statistical Review of World Energy , 1985 .

[40]  René M.J. Benders,et al.  Modeling Energy and Development: an Evaluation of Models and Concepts , 2008 .

[41]  J. Cleland.  The effects of improved survival on fertility: A reassessment , 2001 .

[42]  John R. Bryant.  Theories of fertility decline and the evidence from development indicators. , 2007 .

[43]  Y. Olesha.  Dynamics of Growth in a Finite World , 1974 .

[44]  D. Vuuren,et al.  Long-term perspectives on world metal use—a system-dynamics model , 1999 .

[45]  Willy Brandt,et al.  North-South, a programme for survival : the report of the Independent Commission on International Development Issues. , 1981 .

[46]  Yaman Barlas,et al.  Formal aspects of model validity and validation in system dynamics , 1996 .

[47]  W. Zangwill,et al.  Toward a Theory of Continuous Improvement and the Learning Curve , 1998 .

[48]  René J. Dubos,et al.  Only one earth : the care and maintenance of a small planet , 1972 .

[49]  N. Thomas,et al.  The role of development in global fertility decline. , 1999 .