The current news is the resignation of Michael Falzon from parliamentary secretary following the Gaffarena scandal. I will be taking up this story in my next blog, as events are still unfolding, since workers at the GPD were today reported by the Malta Independent to have been treated as criminals. My solidarity goes to all of them.
At this stage, I wish to focus on another news that was on the Malta Independent portal on Tuesday, 22nd January. It was about Malta’s demographic trends. Clearly Malta has now entered into the depopulation phase. I will explore the meaning of the published statistics in relation to climate change. In Malta, these topics have not yet started to be discussed, even if the parliamentary reply of Edward Scicluna to Jason Azzopardi about the composition of our population shows that Malta has now a ballooning population. This means that we need to stop thinking in terms of a growing population. While the size of our population is still growing, this is no longer linked to births and high fertility but to immigration and the fact that people are living longer.
Therefore, one of the future challenges for Malta, will be the prospect of depopulation. This is the case with the rest of those countries, which in the past three decades have prospered economically.
Throughout the 20th century Malta, like the rest of the industrial world, experienced a rapid population growth and urban expansion. This was most significant when after Independence, industrialization followed. Like the rest of the world, Malta did not bother about greenhouse gas emissions. These issues only started to be publicly discussed in the 1980s. Those who started mentioning these themes in public were literally ridiculed, if not physically mobbed. They risked being labeled enemies of the working classes.
Thirty years later, issues related to greenhouse effects are part of the political agenda of the day. Malta, like the rest of Europe and the advanced world, is experiencing at first hand how difficult it is to meet the set emission targets. Personally, I am intrigued by the relationship between what is being referred to as a hyper-aged society and climate change. While climate change is normally associated with under-developed countries and the consumption of fossil fuels by countries with an expanding population, little or no interest is being shown to an inverse situation; the relationship between climate change and a decreasing or imploding population. Perhaps, very few would think that a decreasing population can still affect negatively climate change.
At least, this is the main thought that is emerging from studies that are being conducted on advanced countries like Japan and China. Incidentally, China has now reversed its one child policy. Japan and South Korea are two Pacific countries that are experiencing depopulation. Even if what is happening may appear remote, it is of relevance to us, as it can show us the urban processes that are expected to take place in Malta in the future.
What is becoming too obvious is that those countries with a shrinking population are finding it difficult to meet the challenges offered by climate change. This is happening despite the fact that they have an advanced economy. Like the rest of the world, Malta is going to face multiple challenges in the 21st century. The wrong environmental decisions taken in the 20th century, some of which facilitated a rapid economic expansion, will be bearing their negative effects in the present century. What scholars are previewing now is that those countries with a shrinking population will still face difficulty to meet the targets of greenhouse gas emissions.
More importantly, population decrease can lead to what some are calling “dramatic” demographic transformations. Yet, one needs to qualify what is meant by the term “dramatic”. Normally, this is understood as the continuing expansion of the world’s big cities while towns and villages will shrink. In a way, this phenomenon has already started in Malta. There are a number of historic towns that have shrunk in population.
The current administrators need to stop thinking that there is no relationship between depopulation and environmental gains. Depopulation does not necessarily lead to a quick improvement in the local environment. An ageing society also has its environmental challenges. I am not taking into the equation here the social, economic and culture challenges which old age brings. Old age too requires high-cost infrastructure. It can lead to abandoned houses, which also have a cost on the urban and rural environment. It is normal for disused infrastructure to fall into decay. The collapse of industry in Europe is in part related to an ageing society. Governments need to start thinking about the future of collapsed industrial centres. Smart City in Malta was a response to one such type of reality. Yet, what was proposed, that is, a technological hub, failed to materialize. I am sure that other industrial centres will fall into disuse in the near future.
Industrial centres in America, such as Detroit, had urban areas, which turned into ghost towns. Some of the latter, however, are being turned round as a result of intelligent planning. Japan is starting to have its own ghost towns. Ghost towns are not new to history. Even Malta had its own ghost towns in the past. Mellieħa and Dingli, for example, became depopulated in the late Middle Ages. There is no guarantee that Malta or Gozo will not start reliving this past demographic experience.
The first benefit that is normally associated with population decline is that there is a reduction in the use of energy, water, food and consumption resources. However, this is not necessarily true. Per capita, a western man consumes more than one entire family in Africa. This is not an issue of race but of capitalism. Any human individual, who enters into this phase of capitalism, starts consuming more than those who are not part of this production or pre-industrial cycle. To-day, as individuals, we are consuming more than our forefathers. Therefore, there is little gain for biodiversity with population decrease. Even old people today consume more than their counterparts did, twenty or thirty years ago.
Ironically, the environment can only benefit if depopulation occurs in times of struggle or war. If it occurs in peacetime and through, what is known in history, as non-coercive measures, there is very little gain from depopulation. More importantly, studies are showing that immigration is not a solution in such instances of population loss. First, there are not going to be enough immigrants to fill the void. Secondly, the migratory processes follow established laws. It is very difficult for migrants to emigrate to those towns or countries that are going through a depopulation process, in particular if depopulation is not only due to natural processes linked to old age but is also followed by emigration.
For these reasons, I welcome the decisions taken at the Paris Summit on climate change. I don’t know what was Malta’s contribution during this summit, but judging from the way the French media prodded the Maltese delegation, Malta failed to leave any impact at this world gathering.
Unfortunately the issue of depopulation was not a subject of the Paris meeting as the main focus was that climate change is solely a problem being caused primarily by developing countries with an expanding population. Depopulation and climate change is an area where Malta can start working on to give its positive contribution. There exists an urgent need for an international coordinated effort if we really want depopulation to have a positive effect on the environment. Will and money needs to start being invested by Malta in this area of research. It is an area, where Malta can make an academic breakthrough.