So what is the Whale on the Atoll? Unsustainable, unmanaged, human population growth and its associated unsustainable implications of urbanisation, rural and outer islands to main centres migration, demographics and associated coats. The Elephant in the Room is an idiomatic expression referring to the clearly obvious, uncomfortable but silent issue that many fearing a backlash, or are distracted from, simply wish to be invisible but is not going away. The Whale on the Atoll… simply brings it to the Pacific, the Caribbean, Indian Ocean and the many atolls and islands… It is that much larger, clearly awkward, out of place, with potential to undertake significant impact damaged, often far understated, overlooked or diverted by misguided, well-meaning entities, not focusing on such true causes, their impacts or potential solutions. This is not just reserved to the atolls but the coastal and urban areas of many parts of the world.This concept paper is one of the first to contemplate the under-voiced, unanswered repercussions of how promising blue economy progress and addressing the most phenomenal challenges of our era is jeopardised by these. More and more people are simply unsustainable. It threatens progress on the quality of health and life. It challenges addressing emergent threats… It causes risks to the exploitation to opportunities. It deters from progress on ecological restoration, climate change, green economy and other solutions. We have exceeded our ecological footprint, our fish stocks and capacity to absorb carbon. Many coral reefs face collapse. Freshwater lenses and aquifers are running out… Sand is being utilised or eroded in many coastal areas. Saline intrusion, pollution and others simply threaten major food sources, whilst fisheries are on the verge of collapsing based on too many volumes, radical bycatch, too few breathing spaces, enforcement challenges… and , market demand that needs resources. People and other species are vying for space. Communities and organisations are equally doing so -and too often, the planet is further trying to breathe. There may be other causes of war, but an outlet for so many people and their pent-up energy, needing alternative sources of outlets can reduce so much pressure.
What challenges does the world and its pursuance of a truly sustainable Blue-Green-Circular Economy Future face? Aside from population, urbanisation, development and associated pressures calling for more and more resources, great pollution, collapsing fisheries, dying reefs, mangroves and seagrass, alien and invasive species, conflict, epidemics, famine, apathy, poverty, crime, violence, social, loss of traditional knowledge and culture, biodiversity and species loss, and the ability to be resilient in the next Black Swan event -whether a financial crisis, major wars -such as Russia and the Ukraine, the COVID19 pandemic or some other attention seeking catastrophe? Which constraints do African, Caribbean and Asia Pacific Islands and emerging states face? Funding, access to data, trained and experienced people, overpopulation, food, energy, water and other resources insecurity, ocean and land/coastal development pressures, enforcement, monitoring, health, education, loss of traditional culture, issues of increasing urbanisation on main islands and depopulation on outer islands, issues of poor communication, awareness and action, high aid dependency and debt levels and pressure to consider external interests towards resolving all of those. This applies to countries and territories from the Maldives and Sri Lanka to Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, French Polynesia to Montserrat, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and others. It also extends to challenges faced by Kenya, Nigeria, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Pakistan, Bangladesh and larger coastal nations. Which of these could not be diminished by addressing the population problem, considering urbanisation, migration and the associated impact cost consequences need to be made? Too many people competing with the planet -and each other…. Unless you can expand the planet’s capacity to adequately replenish those resources, plan and allocate those scarce resources accordingly… simply will not work.
Unless more extreme solutions and immediate pivotal decisions are targeted and that specific agencies are tasked with recognising the problem exists, vocalising it, irrespective of the political consequences, such problems will only be amplified, facing far more struggles and probability of defeat just on sheer volumes of people demanding more and more, fuelled by mass media and social media. Any part of the school curriculum, media, social media, budgets, development aid, investment flows, institutional capacity, policies, projects and programmes mobilising people for any aspect of the environment, the blue, green and general economy is highly recommended to think of the problems -the fact that this cannot simply be ignored… and to think of the solutions. It may be unpopular… But the world has too many people for the ecosystem and our oceans/blue economy to sustain at the present means unless we radically restructure our lifestyle, our politics, economy, ecosystem, behaviour, education, aspirations…Urbanisation and migration. More and more countries are experiencing unprecedented mass movements of people towards major settlements and existing highly popu lated islands/coastal areas for myriad pull factors towards them and/or push factors, away from others. This has been well documented -there are myriad causes and implications -economic, social, environmental, family, political, draw of health, education, quality of life, diversity of food and experiences, among others. However, what is less valued is the extent to which this migration has direct and indirect/more hidden impact costs that are seldom quantified or linked back to population growth and distribution. Nevertheless, the higher the population density per square kilometre, the greater pressure on its associated ecological footprint and interdependent ecosystem services, interdependent supply chain and economy. The more likely too, are the potential risk consequences with associated neighbouring stakeholders including tensions and conflicts/competition -to extract the last cod in the Atlantic or tuna in the Pacific.
This debate focuses more on the blue economy. But there are broader implications for which few are exempt If the “Developed World” thinks it can be immune from this and impervious to its consequences as an ostrich burying its head in the sand it is poorly mistaken. Economic and welfare opportunism, failed states, civic unrest, family connections, language, culture and media may have their roots in migration… Whilst focusing on the Pacific, one is reminded of how climate change and other pressures are being amplified by population numbers and growth rates in parts of Western Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Central/South America that are providing spillover effects into the United States, Europe, Australia, Sub-Saharan Africa and others This is not about attacking migration and population growth… Certain migrants have roles and can be merited. Its if they are willing to contribute meaningfully to their host countries and their descendants, and if local ecosystems, economies and societies can adjust – excluding the corresponding gaps left behind, and reduced chances of solving certain problems in potential countries left behind… i.e. refugees. Whilst certain parts of migration may have their benefits, it is the sheer volume, linked back to population growth rates that is triggering many impact and opportunity cost consequences, especially for sources of income, security, social welfare, culture and making local, more established residents feeling alienated. It is only a matter of years before certain parts of these countries, those who have been there historically are in the minority… More extreme politics, tensions and conflicts are already ascending to the forefront. People fleeing from failed states, ecological and other pressures are not contributing towards solving many of the hurdles their own homes faced, whether or not they contributed to the causes or the impacts. Then there are those who are more qualified and skilled -creating a brain drain and significant loss of revenue, who may not necessarily be faulted entirely for searching for a better life… but do cause significant drain of expertise and capital -in health, education and other expenditure invested in them by their governments and others….
This presents even more challenges not just for other areas but for the blue economy… There remains the unexamined implications that many of our world’s leadership are not examining the implications if they wish to pursue this and take it seriously. How often is population growth, urbanisation and migration truly examined, especially through quantifiable, verifiable data and future projections, plans and projects. It is at the baseline narrative of many ocean/marine or blue economy narratives, perceiving the ocean as the next great economic frontier of opportunism. This assumes infinite levels of extraction, seldom referring to the need for conservation and restoration, or how it may be compatible with increasing human demand appetites, low levels of resource recovery and recycling, along with actual population numbers. Our planet’s ecological carrying capacity limit is being breached in so many regions. Many of our nation’s current leadership may be wary or even referring to the problem, however, silence and fear are pathetic and ineffectual responses. Therefore, any true attempt at contemplating if there needs to be any solutions or inaction, must make action their reaction.
Whilst Pacific Island population birth rates, may match many sub–Saharan African and Europe/Japan/China, overall rates are still being higher than the capacity of many local ecosystems and blue/ocean economies to adequately absorb, without factoring migration in many examples. When resources are abundant and local ecosystems, social, cultural and economic systems are capable absorbing changes, then that should be fine. However, such assessments for population growth need to be factored into any current or future generations, policies, initiatives and associated allocations of resources. For the Pacific; Figure 1.2.1 indicates that even if population growth were to stabilise at 0, previous growth rates and high existing population volumes can exert too many pressures on local coastal environments, resident economies and social systems. Yet no Pacific nation has implemented formal population control figures. For other countries, only international logistics, certain technology and/or humanitarian aid manage to sustain a portion of the local populations, especially where desertification, climate and water pressure shortages have exerted such significant pressure. Projected Population Growth in the South Pacific to 2050 2 is expected to increase from 10,810,000 in 2000 to 16,442,000 excluding Australia and New Zealand according to the SPC Data Hub online.
Whilst many cities and nations may have higher population density numbers, where land is scarce, atolls and other small island states experience even greater pressure to value their land and preserve supporting ecosystems, water, soil and fisheries/other resources. Mahe in the Maldives managed a population density of 19,000/km2 (49,000/square mile). In the Marshall Islands Majuro has a total land mass of 3.75 square miles with a population of 27,797 (7,413 people/m2). In Kiribati, South Tarawa has 10-15,000 per km2. As more countries favour moves towards the global blue/ocean, green and circular economies, the extent to which population growth and resources consumed can be sustainable, without allowing for mass conservation, ecosystem, migration and population control measures as constraints to finite growth, has to play a far more increasingly more centralised component of the blue economy… For example, there remain the ecological, economic, social and geopolitical/legal risks and associated impact cost implications of significant fluctuations in population, especially when not embedded in official policies and factored into resource allocation, ecosystem risk pressures and planning. The higher the population density or growth rate, the greater the corresponding demand impact on finite aquifers, desalination and rain harvesting facilities, for water security, the need for potentially imported fuel and energy and the greater the risks to food security and importation. It limits the capacity of mangroves, wetlands, forests and reef ecosystems to thrive with higher probability of pollution, sand and coral extraction leading to erosion and increasingly higher fisheries pressures in the search for subsistence livelihoods and external income or trade. It hinders many ecosystem functions and values, with higher risks of emissions and fossil fuel needs.
Population growth was a massive contributor towards food insecurity in the Maldives for example, with rapidly increasing export and tourism revenue diverted to significant increases in general imports from 32,705,614,000 rupees to 53,660,566 from 2016 to 2022, with up to 270% increase in food imports. Simultaneously, rural to urban migration reduces existing uptake of agriculture supporting urban settlements It requires increasingly valuable and often scarce foreign exchange to be diverted, aside from increasing rapidly the volumes of associated waste and vessel emissions in many coastal and island states, irrespective of their level of comparative prosperity and development. This extends requirements for ports and shipping services -even when less viable, requiring increasing subsidisation for remoter islands such as Fiji, Tuvalu, the Cook Islands and others, all running supported franchise or government operated shipping and ferry services. There are other geopolitical as well as socioeconomic impact costs for pursuing the blue economy. Increased population growth and migration also presents maritime security risks to exerting control and sovereignty of a nation’s EEZ. For example, it may amplify potential people/drug/weapons smuggling, piracy and illegal fisheries, pollution, oil spills, alien/invasive species from increased vessels/biofouling, sound/light pollution, disputes and even conflicts, locally and internationally as evidenced by fighting over rocks -and the territory and resources around them in the South China Seas. Overpopulation has caused tensions in the Middle East, most recently in the competing settlements of Israel and Palestine for the Gaza Strip and environs. It amplifies already latent tensions in the Pacific region over access to total allowable catch limits for tuna and more challenges for the average of 1-3 patrol boats for 15 Pacific nations including Papua New Guinea but not Australia and New Zealand, often with only a couple of handfuls or so of actual maritime police/enforcement officers. It amplifies local conflicts including disputes over allocated fisheries access rights/those of other marine resources. I.e. in Bougainville. -3.7% growth rate from 49,000 pre World War 2 to 650,000 in 2023 despite civil war. It causes questions of fairness and equity for new resources when discovered. As populations expand it presents heightened social risks of poverty, crime, social security, migrations, tension and violence as more chase ever fewer fish/other marine resources. It threatens restoration and conservation goals of 30% of land and coasts/oceans protected by 2030. As numbers propagate, more pressure will exist for alternative sources of income -heedless of the cost -as the ever increasingly powerful fossil fuel campaign lobby for more oil and gas; the controversies of seabed mining and exploiting marine genetic resources/biotechnology from indigenous knowledge. It could amplify existing pressures for Nations with government perceived fewer alternatives e.g. the Cook Islands, Nauru and others.
More cost-benefit analysis and field research need to consider whether increasing population really is always a long-term pragmatic aspiration for every country at present, when history has proven increased prosperity for the mass population generally rises with education, access to healthcare and falling birth rates. The same applies to migration. Migration can only be part of the solution, if it is not matched by a corresponding investment and attention to the ocean, air, soil, freshwater, species and other components of the ecological footprint that sustain a person. Additionally, to what extent can increased technology and innovation in the blue economy, and in general, reduce the actual requirement for so many people, is a question many governments and educational providers, along with regional organisations, communities and individuals need to ask. This may seem like common sense but there is a noted gap in published academic record, in mainstream media and among policymakers… Solutions to population growth are seldom voiced outside a few specialists. It is irrefutable that population growth and migration pressures; will severely escalate current and forthcoming risks-the challenge remains by how much? Volumes of waste are already threatening to drown many nations. Many rivers and oceans face the status of more plastic in the waterways than marine life -and we survived thousands of years without it… This is amplified further for those tourism dependent nations where up to 99% of everything is imported, recycling and physical space is virtually non-existent. More people, demanding a higher quality of life increasingly require a cash-based income. Many Pacific islands are increasingly relying on tinned food, sugar, rice and other imported staples rather than kumara, coconut, fruit, seafood, taro, cassava and other traditional foodstuff. The local basic stores on many atolls are often contributors to plastic, tins, cans and other sources including junk food, as convenience and overpopulation dominate.
Climate change and natural disaster risks amplify existing vulnerability of communities -including from massive development pressures to construct on floodplains and coastal areas, with increasingly fewer natural vegetation, sand dune or other buffers. It requires increasingly higher volumes towards coastal defences, providing options against droughts and water insecurity, along with climate change mitigation and adaptation. Whilst certain aspects of climate change are natural, human accelerated emissions growth corresponds to more people -every birth and subsequent survival, compounds the problems to potential catastrophe, unless it were possible for all people to be completely carbon neutral or negative, but is a promising start. Natural Disasters, along with climate change provide even more impetus for involuntary or compelled migration from outer islands only to more central islands -further compounding high urbanisation issues. For example, the Manaro volcanic eruption on Ambae in September 2017 and July 2018 on both times called for mass evacuation of the entire island -11,000 people. On 14 January 2022, Tonga pushed for evacuation and resettlement of 3 villages and associated ecotourism resorts. Fiji has already planned for mass migration inland with guidelines for 676 villages and potential implications of climate change.
The blue economy does not just depend upon access towards healthy biomes and fisheries, but the ecological carrying capacity of those systems. It is not just in relation towards population numbers but in the proportion of those economically active and geographical distribution of population. Among those trends is the combination of factors which is placing unprecedent constraints on coastal ecosystems, associated fisheries and soil, crime, social tensions and threats to traditional knowledge along with social services and infrastructure in the capitals and larger settlements on more connected or main islands/regions. Urbanisation amplifies pressure on various resources including development pressures and integrated coastal zone management. Not just in the Pacific but in many parts of Africa and offshore, the Caribbean and Middle East, not to mention many developed areas are such population concentrations emerging, without consideration for how coastal protection, blue economy and ecosystem balances are not following true marine spatial planning and development occurs. Areas need to be considered for true protection, conservation, research, food and physical security or resilience against natural disasters and other threats. Nothing to encourage a population reversal to rural areas or outer islands exists in any single Pacific Island and Territory and surprisingly few globally, in modern society at present. In contrast is the role of rural areas…
From the Pacific perspective, how will changes in population, urbanisation and migration affect the viability of ecosystems, trade, cultural knowledge, responding to threats, development of alternative sustainable livelihoods/opportunities and functioning of essential services, along with food, fuel, energy, water and physical security? Might it be worth encouraging given possible less gravity on those ecosystems. Or will it merely pressurise and collapse the social, ecological and economic stability and basis upon which these ultimately depend? The Pacific in particular is also fascinating as according to UNDESA in 2020, out of 41,800,000 people including Australia, Papua New Guinea and New Zealand, -9,100,000 were migrants, the highest proportion of migrants to locals of any region in the world or 22%. Up to 30% of Australia’s population, 29% of New Zealand, 28% in Palau and Nauru 20% (from a major income source of hosting refugee camps including converted shipping containers). In other Pacific countries, migrants flow outwards.
So what are the solutions to emerging concerns over this Whale on the Atoll or population growth pressures? Whilst this concept paper does not profess to provide a comprehensive analysis of the solutions increasingly there are several that could be explored further. The foremost is mass awareness, communication and engagement, getting more and more people to be increasingly conscious and sensitive of this Whale on the Atoll and that there are very real threats and impact costs manifesting to virtually every sector of the environment, biodiversity, blue economy, cultural-social structure, enforcement capacity, monitoring and resources to respond to any issue. In doing so, this will provide a further basis to justify reasons for controlling population growth, urbanisation, migration and outer islands/rural population structures. Whilst often certain religious and cultural practises may encourage higher fertility as well as belief in need to care for people in old age can be reduced by increasing education, awareness, access to social security and other incentives, especially empowerment of girls and women via education and access to finance/vocational opportunities. More financial and other incentives could follow China’s One Child Policy which from the 1980’s until 2016 when dropped, corresponded to unprecedented levels of measurable wealth creation and distribution towards the population. It is worth noting for China that such inducements included an extra month's salary every year until the child is 14 . . . , higher wages, interest-free loans, retirement funds, cheap fertilizer, better housing, better health care, and priority in school enrolment” for their child. Such measures were found to be far cheaper than the alternative….
From the blue economy perspective is the need to increase natural ecological capital, fisheries and marine ecosystem biomass, economic, social, cultural and other values. This extends to intensifying land and marine protected areas and nature based solutions, along with ocean accounting and MRV systems to monitor and enforce accountability/tracking more progress towards solving the population problem. It provides more incentives to consider access to education, suitable healthcare and ways of exerting precautions. More traceable sustainable fisheries, hydroponic, intense agriculture, more aquaculture and mariculture deploying integrated multitrophic systems and cultured reefs can address food security and marine biotechnology/valorisation potential. This excludes the global population considering desalination, rainwater harvesting, alternative fuels, decarbonised transport, offshore renewable energy and eco/experience based tourism. There is also waste to fuel/energy, considering carbon dioxide removal, rewilding and protecting indigenous knowledge/marine genetic resources for bioprospecting/biotechnology options. It can also motivate for pursuing alternative forms of financing such as blue bonds, biodiversity and carbon funding
In conclusion, for how long can the Pacific sustain the unspoken whale on the atoll? The same question can be asked of how the world will intend to respond to the global population growth, migration and urbanisation questions and impact cost consequences, which are currently being ignored, especially as every indicator confirms our aquifers, carbon, water, nutrient, soil, biodiversity, fisheries stocks, ecosystems, many traditional cultural activities and economic livelihoods are all threatened. Globally, human population growth presents a ticking time bomb fraught with development and other challenges and is never raised. As stated, despite my comparative youth in the past few years I can confirm personal experience in contributing to them and engaging with thousands of stakeholders, that it is entirely missing from the narrative of any risk and seldom are solutions mentioned, with evidence of specific risks for those countries that are notionally or seriously committing towards the blue economy.
This article is conscious of far more thought of how such questions will intensify the challenges of any aspect of sustainable development, including preserving and restoring ecosystems via ecosystem restoration, marine protected areas and other solutions. Controlling migration directly and indirectly may not seem popular now but as with population growth rates, demographics may require attention. With aging populations -simply raising retirement age and relying more on changing education and benefit systems to favour certain vocations, combined with more efficiency, technology and recycling, with short term access for migration may be among the more stabilising, simpler solutions. However, the foremost priority is for the Whale on the Atoll to avoid being ignored -given its currently beached status, is that of increased communication and awareness, prior to considering population and migration control measures or accelerating incentives towards considering the environment. Involving and empowering more to realise the implications and solutions can aid more people to feel as if they have more of a voice in determining pathways for more viable pathways that ensure that is people are born or migrate, attention is given to the reactions of others, their interests, the supporting supply chains and associated ecosystems.
In the Pacific, comparatively smaller numbers and the structures of the economy/cultural integration have for the moment mitigated against part of the risks of increasing population numbers, without addressing the fundamental structural distortions such as employment, housing and social security -overall sustainability of such a process in the long term, no factored in what it might mean to nations truly considering the blue economy as well. From the 1920’s Australia and New Zealand had mutual free labour in the Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement and Australia-New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Treaty Agreement. New Zealand has certain other options for the Pacific Access Category, a maximum of 650 applicants with a job offer can migrate permanently to New Zealand from Fiji, Tonga, Tuvalu and Kiribati. In addition, 1,100 visas are issued to Samoan citizens under the Samoa Quota annually. Both Australia and New Zealand have indicated some willingness to potentially shelter certain Pacific Islanders from climate change risks such as the Cook Islands, Niue and Tokelau. Pacific Islands are generally free to move around with minimal visa restrictions. Retaining scarce skills, the capacity to monitor, enforce, protect, restore, trade, preserve culture and meaningfully contribute -only partially offset by remittances, volunteers from abroad (including tourism/conservation) and growing service industry of consultants may cause increasing uncertain issues. Thus, are the true hidden costs of a cost-benefit analysis of migration, urbanisation, population growth and the true demographics challenge towards implementing the blue economy. There may be a need for more integration into policies and planning, devotion of specific budget funding and population control resources, developing media, social media and trained advocates towards endorsing these measures, accelerating ecosystem restoration/marine protected area conservation. More migration patterns and their implications should be regularly monitored and explored for potential risks. These need prioritising to minimise disruption risks towards a truly sustainable blue economy future.