| Abstract: | Issues associated with the phrase “sustainable development” are clarified by careful analysis of the meaning of carrying capacity. In their impressions of carrying capacity's effects, two explanations for the death of a memorable culture (Easter Island) differed fundamentally. One explanation was captive to a premature notion of a carrying capacity ceiling no population growth could ever penetrate. For the other, population was seen as having grown until it did exceed the maximum sustainable load, thus having inflicted environmental damage that reduced carrying capacity. The former view had to imagine a geological catastrophe to account for the culture's death. In the latter view, it was a case of excessive success proving fatal. A proponent of the latter view regarded Easter Island as a “preview in microcosm” of what may be happening globally. As such, the Easter Island experience would have important implications for industrial societies. Comparison of the two autopsies has implications for the social sciences. |
