My best guess is that more humans reduces wild terrestrial invertebrate populations in the near term / on Earth (so ignoring space colonization), largely through agricultural land use.[1] If you think:
these wild invertebrates or even just wild insects matter a decent amount, say about as much as RP does/would (interpolating their estimates), and
they have lives worth preventing, because you’re suffering-focused or just think they have net negative lives, say, due to their high fertility and mortality rates,
then increasing human populations could be good for animals in the near term, with the effect on wild animals outweighing those on farmed animals.
See especially Tables 3 and 4 fromAttwood et al., 2008. Net primary productivity is also typically lower in crops, across crops, based on “Land Use Change” greenhouse gas emissions from OWID / Poore & Nemecek, 2018. Gross primary productivity decreases when replacing forest with crops, but increases if replacing grassland with crops, according to the globally representative study Krause et al., 2022. Some other studies support increased and others decreased net productivity in crops compared to nature (Tomasik, 2013–2022, a, b) But pesticides and fertilizers also plausibly reduce arthropod populations based on my lit reviews (but less clear in the long run with repeated use), so even if primary productivity increased, arthropod populations could still be lower overall.
Great point! Though I think it’s unless clear what the impact of more humans on wild terrestrial invertebrate populations is. Developed countries have mostly stopped clearing land for human living spaces. I could imagine that a higher human population could induce demand for agriculture and increased trash output which could increase terrestrial invertebrate populations.
I could imagine that a higher human population could induce demand for agriculture and increased trash output which could increase terrestrial invertebrate populations.
So this would be more food/net primary productivity available for terrestrial invertebrates to eat, and agriculture would have to increase net primary productivity overall (EDIT: or transform it into a more useful form for invertebrates), right?
Ok, I missed the citation to your source initially because the citation wasn’t in your comment when you first posted it. The source does say less insect abundance in land converted to agricultural use from natural space. So then what i said about increased agricultural use supports your point rather than mine.
My best guess is that more humans reduces wild terrestrial invertebrate populations in the near term / on Earth (so ignoring space colonization), largely through agricultural land use.[1] If you think:
these wild invertebrates or even just wild insects matter a decent amount, say about as much as RP does/would (interpolating their estimates), and
they have lives worth preventing, because you’re suffering-focused or just think they have net negative lives, say, due to their high fertility and mortality rates,
then increasing human populations could be good for animals in the near term, with the effect on wild animals outweighing those on farmed animals.
It’s unclear to me what’s going on with wild aquatic animals.
See especially Tables 3 and 4 from Attwood et al., 2008.
Net primary productivity is also typically lower in crops, across crops, based on “Land Use Change” greenhouse gas emissions from OWID / Poore & Nemecek, 2018.
Gross primary productivity decreases when replacing forest with crops, but increases if replacing grassland with crops, according to the globally representative study Krause et al., 2022.
Some other studies support increased and others decreased net productivity in crops compared to nature (Tomasik, 2013–2022, a, b)
But pesticides and fertilizers also plausibly reduce arthropod populations based on my lit reviews (but less clear in the long run with repeated use), so even if primary productivity increased, arthropod populations could still be lower overall.
Great point! Though I think it’s unless clear what the impact of more humans on wild terrestrial invertebrate populations is. Developed countries have mostly stopped clearing land for human living spaces. I could imagine that a higher human population could induce demand for agriculture and increased trash output which could increase terrestrial invertebrate populations.
So this would be more food/net primary productivity available for terrestrial invertebrates to eat, and agriculture would have to increase net primary productivity overall (EDIT: or transform it into a more useful form for invertebrates), right?
Ok, I missed the citation to your source initially because the citation wasn’t in your comment when you first posted it. The source does say less insect abundance in land converted to agricultural use from natural space. So then what i said about increased agricultural use supports your point rather than mine.
Yes I think so.