WWF says over-consumption threatens planet

People can eat less meat and have fewer babies. That's a start.

How about for a start all the wealthy, royalty and elite give up their private jets, caviar meals and lavish lifestyles first, especially those that are telling the rest of us who are on a much meagre diet, how to live our lives.

BTW, the WWF was founded by Julian Huxely, brother of Aldous Huxely (the guy who wrote Brave New World). They come from one of the richest families in England.

I wonder how austerely his descendants live.

Step right up.

Nice little press release full of propaganda to condition people for something that will precipitate a large fall in population. Not sure what it willl be, but it won't be natural.

Watch Rio+20 carefully, and read up on the UN's Agenda 21 for a peek at what's in store. We in the developed world will be made to feel increasingly guilty about our ecological footprint, convenient justification for carbon taxes like Autralia's plus others such as carbon levies on airline flights. But the crooks at the top will be exempt from all this, of course.

For a moment I was angry and confused about why the World Wrestling Federation was doing studies on global consumption, then I realized I was an idiot. I'm going to bed.

haha! had to look up what wwf was...thought it was wrestling at first wich really confused me at first look, but its just a eco group stating the obvious about the world lol, unfortunitally i dont think itll make much difference

How about for a start all the wealthy, royalty and elite give up their private jets, caviar meals and lavish lifestyles first, especially those that are telling the rest of us who are on a much meagre diet, how to live our lives.

I agree.

The Chinese are just getting started in showing the rest of the world how to consume.

If you prefer the real WWF, gimme a hell yeah.

Sad to see the WWF destroy its credibility with hysterical claims just to stand out and try to get some attention and donations.

Soylent green is people?

Cubic-hell yeah!

No doubt, if the WWF had it's way we'd all be living in tiny cubicle apartments and eating Soylent Green. But of course the billionaire elitists who fund the WWF would be exempt from all the rules and restrictions that are to be imposed on us.

The WWF wants to see more efficient production systems that would reduce human demand for land, water and energy and a change in governmental policy that would measure a country’s success beyond its GDP figure.

This is in direct opposition to the business model of "make them want more and more, at higher prices" . The reason for new car models every year.

The decline has been most rapid in lower income countries, “demonstrating how the poorest and most vulnerable nations are subsidising the lifestyles of wealthier countries.

This is exactly the model the world (controlled by the super wealthy) has run on since the start of business and banking. Substitute "people" for "nations" in the above, and "people" for "countries".

We could limit one child per family for the entire planet. Reduce the Global population in half and over consumption will be a thing of the past.

Darren brannan,

At least in Australia we actually get some choice in the supermarkets not like the pitiful things here. And you make me envious cant wait to get home in a couple of months and actually do the same as you with the veg garden

Regarding one-child policies, they are an outright intrusion on reproductive rights.

The number of children a couple chooses to have is strictly their own private choice. Government has no right forcing families to limit themselves to one child. By doing so they would deprive all children the possibility of having a brother or sister.

Overpopulation and the subsequent depletion of resources is a serious, serious issue.

We really don't need people making inane comments about the people at the top changing their habits 'first' as if them doing so will somehow trigger all the rest of us to follow.

We don't have the luxury of time to wait.

What is obviously needed is for the masses to change their habits and reduce their ecological footprints.

NeverSubmit - "Regarding one-child policies, they are an outright intrusion on reproductive rights."

I can guess where this is going...

"The number of children a couple chooses to have is strictly their own private choice. Government has no right forcing families to limit themselves to one child. By doing so they would deprive all children the possibility of having a brother or sister."

Let me put this nicely.

Would you prefer millions of people to suffer the agony of slow starvation because people with attitudes like yours think that the global population should continue to grow exponentially so that no one's rights are "trodden on"?

Q: if everyone had as many kids as they liked, where is the food going to come from to feed them all?

Simple question.

No, population control is the elephant in the china shop in terms of this issue.

People need to talk about it openly, and religious and human-rights based rights issues have got to be relegated to 2nd place, imo.

The alternative is a slow, mass starvation epidemic when food supplies gradually run out and the ongoing effects of climate change continue to disrupt regular farming conditions and lead to more crop failures.

To me, the very high risk that critical resources that sustain life itself will collapse - in our lifetimes - is THE. Most critical issue our species faces.

Everything else - including the economy - pales in comparison to the urgency of this issue

The/A solution?

Encourage people to have 1 child and stop there.

For the sake of the children.

Alternatively, do what the Chinese government did and provide no or next to no welfare payments to parents for any child beyond the first.