I'd like to know which is the next valley to be flooded because if we have a greater population, we'll need more water, something the Jersey Water company has already warned about, especially with Climate Change bringing potentially longer spells of dry weather. Where are the new schools to be built for the rising population? And as the new population coming in grows old in turn, where are the extra care homes to come from? On a small island, with limited resources, one can either adopt a "Population Ponzi Scheme", or learn to live within constraints.
In fact, globally, despite the rise in food production which has delayed Malthusian constraints, the impact on climate change on food crops and their environment should give us due warning that we cannot continue with unrestrained growth of the planet's population. Something will give, and it usually takes the form of poverty, famine, civil wars and refugees. At present such concerns seem far from us, but at the very least they will impact us with higher food prices, even if we shut our eyes to those suffering elsewhere.
Extract from Population sustainability and inward migration Submission by Mark Boleat, 20 April 2009
Generally, economic prosperity and a rising population go hand in hand. Towns and whole communities in economic decline are characterised by falling population, which in turn adds to economic decline in particular through the impact on property prices and therefore on the wealth of the remaining population. Prosperous communities are places where people want to live and are characterised by rising population
A given area that is not naturally inhospitable or inaccessible can accommodate almost any size of population. Sustainability depends on the productive capacity of the people combined with income derived from outside the community, for example from investments.
If Jersey was as densely populated as the leafy London borough of Bromley it would have a population of 224,000; if it had Bermuda’s or Malta’s density the population would be 149,000, Gibraltar’s density would give it a population of 464,000 while Singapore’s density would give it a population of 779,000.
Could Jersey sustain these population levels? The answer is clearly yes. There would be significant transitional issues that would need to be managed, and as with other communities that have expanded rapidly the use of reclaimed land would mitigate the impact on existing land use.
This analysis is not suggesting that Jersey should aim for a substantial increase in its population; it is pointing out that the issue is not one of sustainability. A rapidly rising population, if properly managed, would generate additional wealth for the native community, but this would need to be balanced against the short term disruption and a significant change in land use. Dubai provides an excellent case study of a community deliberately increasing its population so as to increase the wealth of native population – to such an extent that Dubai nationals are given free housing and the majority, in practice, do not have to work.
If the elderly have income from outside Jersey, for example from pensions or investments in the UK, not only are they not dependent on the working population in Jersey but they may also help to support that population through their spending and the taxes that they pay. Wealthy immigrants can make a significant contribution to the sustainability of the population.
Extract from text of speech by Mark Boleat at IoD Debate, Jersey, 25 September 2014
The change to net immigration since then is closely associated with Jersey’s economic success. In short, rising prosperity goes hand in hand with a rising population. A falling population is both a sign of economic stress and a cause of further economic decline.
Present policies force businesses, some global in their nature, to seek to recruit locally, often a futile exercise. The undue preference for locals has a cost in terms of efficiency.
There is no resource constraint on the size of the island’s population. The resources that Jersey needs are people; in general immigrants are a resource not a drain on resources. Of course there are infrastructure and land use issues that must be addressed, but it is quite wrong to suggest that somehow the island does not have the resources to accommodate more people.
A given area that is not naturally inhospitable or inaccessible can accommodate almost any size of population. Sustainability depends on the productive capacity of the people combined with income derived from outside the community, for example from investments.
If Jersey was as densely populated as the leafy London borough of Bromley it would have a population of 224,000; if it had Bermuda’s or Malta’s density the population would be 149,000, Gibraltar’s density would give it a population of 464,000 while Singapore’s density would give it a population of 779,000.
Could Jersey sustain these population levels? The answer is clearly yes. There would be significant transitional issues that would need to be managed, and as with other communities that have expanded rapidly the use of reclaimed land would mitigate the impact on existing land use.
This analysis is not suggesting that Jersey should aim for a substantial increase in its population; it is pointing out that the issue is not one of sustainability. A rapidly rising population, if properly managed, would generate additional wealth for the native community, but this would need to be balanced against the short term disruption and a significant change in land use. Dubai provides an excellent case study of a community deliberately increasing its population so as to increase the wealth of native population – to such an extent that Dubai nationals are given free housing and the majority, in practice, do not have to work.
If the elderly have income from outside Jersey, for example from pensions or investments in the UK, not only are they not dependent on the working population in Jersey but they may also help to support that population through their spending and the taxes that they pay. Wealthy immigrants can make a significant contribution to the sustainability of the population.
Extract from text of speech by Mark Boleat at IoD Debate, Jersey, 25 September 2014
The change to net immigration since then is closely associated with Jersey’s economic success. In short, rising prosperity goes hand in hand with a rising population. A falling population is both a sign of economic stress and a cause of further economic decline.
Present policies force businesses, some global in their nature, to seek to recruit locally, often a futile exercise. The undue preference for locals has a cost in terms of efficiency.
There is no resource constraint on the size of the island’s population. The resources that Jersey needs are people; in general immigrants are a resource not a drain on resources. Of course there are infrastructure and land use issues that must be addressed, but it is quite wrong to suggest that somehow the island does not have the resources to accommodate more people.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment