Too big for the planet?
Joanna Moorhead
August 06, 2007
Having more than two children is bad for the environment, a new British report says. But are large families really that damaging? Joanna Moorhead asks three of them to make their case.
参与讨论 COMMENTS
参与讨论
我想我能做的就是不再购买。生养孩子并不是不道德的事情。但是在地球面临这样的危机时还不断让人口增长，那就是自私。我本人正在考虑不生孩子，但是我对那些自私以及自我的人毫无顾忌的行为表示离奇的愤怒。
I'm afraid I simply don't buy it. Having children is not unethical. But continuing to increase the population of the planet at this time of emergency is. It is simply selfish. I am considering not having children at all. I become very very angry when selfish and egotistical people will not consider their actions.
我不认为孩子多会加重地球的负担，关键还在于我们的生活方式。我们小时候都有不少的兄弟姐妹，但是除了食物是必须有很多份的，其它用具、衣服都是传递使用。而且兄弟姐妹之间的感情有助于一个人情感的丰富。
我们需要重视的是我们的生活方式，是否生产了不必要的垃圾、是否造成了浪费，说实话，我不认为人多少的问题。很明显的例子就是美国，看看美国人口和他们的消费量就明白了。
I don't think large families will increase the burdens on the planet and damage the environment. The key issue is the lifestyle we've chosen. We had siblings when we were young, we shared clothes and other things, except that food had to be prepared for everyone. Affection between children is good for their growth. What we need to pay attention to is our lifestyle. Is it causing excessive waste? Honestly, I don't think the population is the problem. You will get my point when you take the US as an example to consider their consumption by the population.
难道食物不是足以让人担心的问题吗？人口膨胀造成的食物供应压力，在全球已经造成严重的危害了，尤其是在非洲。而欧美最近还在兴起有机食物（或绿色食物）的浪潮，意味着需要更多的土地来生产同样的粮食。这的确有益健康，也能保护环境，但我想知道以这样的方式生产粮食全球能养活多少人？有多少人需要被饿死？
朱门酒肉臭，路有冻死骨，不是只在杜甫的时代！
除了食物，很多消费品，都会因为人口的增加而增加，同时随着生活水平提高而增加。仅靠觉悟和道义来约束人们的消费是远远不够的，也太迟了。用美国来做例子的确很说明问题，但不要忘了即使是在发达国家中环保做的最好的德国和日本，人均消费仍然远高于发展中国家。中国的确在过去有很多家庭都会兄弟姐妹传递衣服使用，但那是因为经济原因还是为了节省资源？现在中国家庭一个孩子的消费能力就远超以前几个小孩的总和了。结合到本文提到的几个例子，那些节约的行为，有多少是因为经济原因，有多少是真正出于资源节约？老实说，我没有看到多少人能在经济条件宽裕的情况下仍然把大孩子的旧衣服给小孩子穿的。不可否认，世界的人口正在逼近世界承受的极限，每多一个人口，每个人脖子上的绳子就紧一分。
我同意如果“我们现在必须遵循的行为规范变得越来越狭隘，这令人羞愧”。我们需要在很多地方尊重人选择的自由，而不是设立越来越多条框。我们不应该在一个号称追求个人自由的世界中去不断限制人的选择权利。就像有些人素食，有些人肉食；有些人喜欢大家庭，有些人喜欢小家庭；有些人喜欢享受阳光，有些人喜欢荫凉；有些人喜欢宠物，有些人不喜欢，我们不应该给政府或社会太多的权利去干涉个人的选择，那样只会让所有人都变成一条生产线上的产品。我们在保护生物多样性，同样也应该保护人类的多样性。靠硬性的条文或道德谴责来约束社会就像计划经济一样僵硬不化。
更重要的是，让人们意识到自己选择的后果，在选择的时候多一些考虑。错置的资源和被忽略的成本导致扭曲的价格（不仅仅是金钱上的价格），误导人们的选择。社会应该帮助人们意识到自己做了什么，会有什么后果，并去承担相应的社会责任而不是扔给社会。在这样的情况下，选择是固然人的自由，而需要承担的责任是人的义务。经济手段与道德督促相结合，才能让人充分意识到并为自己的选择负责。
王韬 Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
Shouldn’t the availability of food be a concern to all? Population expansion has already increased the pressure on food supply. Recently, organic food has gained popularity in Europe and America. This means more land is needed to produce the same amount of food as before. Surely, organic food is good for heath and the environment, but I wonder how many people could this way of production sustain? and how many people will be short of food supply and starving to death in the end?
Besides food, the demand for other consumer goods will increase along with the rise in population and the living standards.
Consciousness and morality are far from strong enough to restrain people’s desire for consumption. It is also too late to resort to them to achieve this goal. The US is a good example.
Also please do not forget that even in Germany and Japan, which lead other developed nations in environmental protection, per capita consumption is much higher than that of developing countries.
That is true that in the past siblings of many Chinese families wore clothes passed down from their elders. But was it because of poverty or for the purpose of saving resources? Nowadays, consumption of a Chinese child is much higher than the total of several kids in the past.
Among the examples on frugality given in the article, how many are due to poor economic situation and how many are for the purpose of saving resources?
Undoubtedly, the world’s population is growing to challenge the limit that our planet is capable of accommodate. I agree that it is a shame that we are having to conform to narrower and narrower norms.
We should respect the freedom of choices by individuals. In a so-called free world, people’s right to make a choice is supposed not to be limited, just like some people choose to be vegetarian, some others like to meat people; some people like to have a big family, while some others prefer a small family.
The most important is that we need make people realize the consequences of their choices, their responsibility to the society. The combination of economic and moral means is the best way to make people make a responsible choice. Wang Tao from Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
我不禁感到奇怪作者怎么写出了这篇文章，它读起来像个精致的恶作剧。一、采访只谈到了有许多孩子的家庭，一点儿没有另外一方面的观点。为什么有些人觉得不超过两个甚至更少的孩子是必要的？这个故事是建立在单方面观点的基础上吗？二、正如在文章开头两段指出的，对于有太多孩子的我们来说，主要的影响在于下一代人将对资源和环境产生压力。可是，文章其他部分几乎没有再强调这一点，而是集中描述在一个大家庭成长的感觉以及这种感觉如何令人珍惜。作为我们家的独子，我也非常想念那种感觉，并且遗憾没有兄弟或姐妹和我一起成长。幸运的是，我的堂兄弟们住得十分近，他们一定程度上补偿了这种遗憾。我承认生活在一个大家庭中是一个伟大的经历，会有更多的乐趣，更多被陪伴和被支持的感觉。每个孩子受的教育也可能比小家庭被宠坏的孩子（们）更好更有效。然而，我们都知道我们是否应该选择生许多孩子并不是最重要的。在开头提出一个问题而在文章其余的部分对它避而不谈，我个人对这篇文章十分失望。Tao Wang, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
I cannot help feeling confused about how the writer constructs this article. To me it reads like a delicately crafted trick.
1. The interview only goes as far as the family with many children, no words from the other side at all. Why some people would feel necessary to have no more than 2 children, or even less? Is the story therefore biased by the one-side words?
2. The major concerns for us to have too many children in the next generation are the pressure they would impose on resources and environment, as pointed out in the first two paragraphs. However, the rest of the article hardly addresses this anymore, but focusing on the sense of being accompanied by a large family and how cherishing that is. As single son of my family, I very much miss that feeling too, and being regretful not having brothers or sisters growing up with me. Luckily our cousins stay together very closely, and they somehow compensate the regret. I certainly admit that living in a large family will be a great experience and having more fun and more sense of being accompanied and supported. Education of each child is also possible to be better and more effective than spoiled child/children in small family. However, we all know that is not the most important concern of whether or not we should choose to have many children.
Raise the problem at the beginning and make a way to bypass it in the rest of the article, I personally am very disappointed to this article.
Tao Wang, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
我同意你英文评论中的观点。人口问题是不能以个人情感、家庭纽带这样的个别因素来衡量的。我们现在所处的严峻形势下，实际上是难以把满足每个家庭的情感需求作为首要事宜的。情况远较此复杂，真正要探索、讨论出一个结果，远远不是一篇新闻能够完成的。遗憾的是，当看到各个国家就京都议定书达成一致都如此困难，我们也不能奢望每个家庭现在就高瞻远瞩、承担责任。久仰廷德尔中心，能否请问你的联系方式？ Angie Lee, UNIDO-ITPC bluesky[A]unido-itpc.org
I agree with the points in your English comment. The population issue can not be evaluated by individual factors such as personal feeling or family bond. And since we now have this severe context, we may not be in the situation to satisfy the emotional need of each family. The situation is much more complex, and the reseach and debate required may go far beyond the range of this article.
But now that it is so hard for all countries to join in the Kyoto Framework, we can not expect all couples to be considerate and responsible at this moment.
By the way, you work for Tyndall in Norwich? Can I ask for your contact information for further exchange?
Angie Lee, UNIDO-ITPC
bluesky[A]unido-itpc.org
我为苏塞克斯大学的苏塞克斯延德尔中心工作.该中心由6个不同大学的核心机构组成,同时也包括总部位于诺威治的一些其它合作伙伴.希望我们保持联系,很高兴能和你交流学习.
我的邮箱是tao.wang@sussex.ac.uk.
我试着给你写邮件但是都被退回来了。如果可能的话，请给我发邮件好吗？王韬
I am working for Tyndall Centre Sussex, based at SPRU, University of Sussex. The Tyndall Centre is an invisible centre consisting of 6 core institutions at different universities as well as many other partners headquartered at Norwich. Keep in touch and I will be very happy to exchange ideas with you.
You can contact me at tao.wang@sussex.ac.uk
I tried to send emails to your directly but they kept bouncing back. If possible could you please send me an email? Tao Wang
虽然在英国执行限制生育的措施是困难和错误的, 然而夫妻/个人最好是自愿达成协议，养育不超过一个或者两个孩子。这是使我们不再出现目前的人口状况而所能做到的事(至少在英国是这样）。这将允许人们选择不养育孩子，因此来削减人口。在中国，人口是否是减少了？
Whilst it would be difficult/ wrong to impose limits in the UK. It would be good for couples/ individuals to sign a voluntary agreement not to have more than one or two children. This way we would do no more than replicate current population (at least in the UK). It would also allow people to make the choice not to have children, thus reducing the population. In China has the population decreased?
Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated.
我们建议你在评论后署名, 以便其他浏览者能更好地与你交流。你没有必要使用真名，但你的署名将会协助我们维护网站的信息交流畅通。
We suggest you add your name to your comments so that other readers can respond to you more easily. You don’t have to use your real name, but providing a name will help make communication clearer for other forum participants.
