Geography 302: Introduction to Resource Analysis

Dr. Joseph Teye

(Strictly not for sale)

Lecture 1
DEFINITION OF RESOURCES
Resources can be defined as means of attaining individual wants and social objectives
(Roy, 1997:13). From this definition, it is clear that for any element of the natural
environment to be considered as a resource it must have the ability to satisfy human
wants. Thus, a natural resource is any physical substance or material that is useful to
man. Can you mention any element of the natural environment that is useful to you? I
am sure you will not forget to mention water, since you drink it everyday. So water is
a natural resource. Petroleum and gold are also seen as important resources because
they are useful to man. As mentioned already, one cannot regard any element of the
natural environment as a resource unless that element is useful to man. Zimmermann
provided one of the best interpretations of resources in this context when he wrote:
A man-less universe is void of resources; for resources are inseparable from man
and his wants. They are the environment in the service of man. Usefulness to
man, capacity to satisfy human wants, stamps environmental aspects as
resources Neither the environment as such nor parts or features of the
environment per se are resources; they become resources only if, when, and in
so far as they are, or are considered to be, capable of serving mans needs
(Zimmermann, 1933: 3, emphasis in original).
The above statement shows that as the ultimate consumer of goods, it is man who
determines which elements of the environment are resources. This resonates with the
assertion of Rees (1990:12) that resources are defined by man, not nature. CiriacyWantrup (1952: 28) also emphasised this point when he stated that: the concept of
resource presupposes that a planning agent is appraising the usefulness of his
environment for the purpose of obtaining a certain end. In resource studies, any
substance of the natural environment which cannot function to satisfy human wants is
referred to as neutral stuff (Zimmermann, 1951). Bruce Mitchell (1989) asserted
that before any element can be regarded as a resource two important preconditions
must be satisfied: first, the knowledge and technology must exist to allow its
extraction and utilisation; and, second, there must be a demand for the materials
or services produced. He explained further that attributes of nature are no more than
neutral stuff until man is able to perceive their presence, to recognise their capacity
to satisfy human wants, and to devise means to utilise them (Mitchell, 1989: 2).
In illustrating the argument that elements of the environment can only become
resources when man has developed the technology to utilise them, Zimmerman noted
that coal becomes a resource because man possesses wants which can be satisfied by
it and also because man has the technology to utilise coal in that manner. You may
also be aware that petroleum was not considered as an important resource in the
ancient times when man did not have the technology to convert it into energy. These
examples demonstrate that ideas on what constitutes resources vary over time. Any
substance which is a neutral stuff today can become a resource if man develops the

technology to transform that substance into a useful product. Conversely, a substance

seen as a resource today may become a neutral stuff if it is no longer considered
useful to man. It is in this regard that Zimmerman wrote that: Resources are not, they
become, they are not static but expand and contract in response to human wants and
human actions (Zimmermann, 1951: 15, emphasis in original).
The definition of resources also varies over space. In fact, the development of
spatially distinct cultural groups meant that, even at any one period of time, there is
no single definition of the resource base; a substance with a high resource value in
one society could be neutral stuff in others (Rees, 1990). For instance, frog is an
important food resource in some societies. However, it is a neutral stuff in societies
which do not consume it. Thus, culture is an important factor in the definition of
resources. In this regards, Sauer (1952; 2-3) wrote that natural resources are in fact
cultural appraisals. It must be stressed that, even within the same society, different
people may define resources differently. This situation commonly occurs in the
definition of environmental resources, such as forests and wetlands. What may be a
resource of great intrinsic value to one person can be irrelevant to others. For
example, a waterlogged stretch of marshy land may be regarded as a crucial nature
conservancy area by the ecologist, but a nuisance which reduces agricultural
productivity by a farmer (Rees, 1990). It is clear from the preceding discussion that
natural resources evolve from an interaction of three factors: nature, man and
culture.
DYNAMIC CONCEPT OF RESOURCES
The dynamic concept of resources implies that although the total physical
endowment of the earth is fixed, resources are dynamic with no known limits.
Natural resources are dynamic, becoming available to society through a combination
of expanding technology and changing societal needs and objectives (Mitchell 1989).
The history of resource use to date has been one of continuous discovery, with an ever
widening definition of resource base. Palaeolithic man perceived of a few resources,
notably water, stone, wood and naturally available animals and plants. Subsequent
changes in the structure and organisation of society brought in new set of demand for
goods and services, which in turn stimulated technological innovation and led to
reappraisal of the usefulness of the elements of the natural environment. Rees (1990)
has demonstrated how technological innovations have suddenly created resources
from previously unvalued physical substances. She explained, for instance, that
Bauxite owes its resource status to the invention, in 1886, of the Hall-Heroult
electrolytic refining process, which made possible the commercial extraction of
aluminium. She also noted further that, more recently, the development of nuclear
power, both for electricity generation and military purposes, has created the resource
value of uranium ores.
As already explained the definition of resources also varies spatially. A substance with
a high resource value in one society could be neutral stuff in others (Zimmermann,
1951). I want to stress that although there are spatial variations in the way resources
are appraised, some substances have great value in almost all societies. For instance,
water and air are valuable resources in all societies as they satisfy basic human wants.
RESOURCE CREATION

As already mentioned, although the physical endowment of the earth is essentially

fixed, technological advancement often leads to the creation of new resources to
satisfy human wants. In resource studies, anything or any process that prevents a
substance from becoming a resource is called resistance. In order to create a resource,
knowledge and technology must exist to overcome the resistances which prevents the
neutral stuff from functioning in the process of human wants satisfaction. Hence,
knowledge is the greatest human resource whilst ignorance is the worst type of
resistance. Given that knowledge and technology vary over time and space (Rees,
1990), then resource creation is also a function time and space. To a primitive man,
resistance plays a dominant role where nature poses obstacle for resource creation
(Roy, 1997). As societies advance technologically and economically, they are able to
overcome the various obstacles or resistances to resource creation. Developed
countries have been able to minimise resistances and maximise resource creation. In
contrast, developing countries are unable to create more resources even when they
have significant physical endowment. For instance, a number of countries in Africa
(e.g. Ghana and Nigeria) have many big rivers that could be relied upon to generate
Hydro Electric Power, yet they are facing energy problems. In contrast, some
developed countries like Norway and Japan have been able to produce huge energy
from far less water resources. Again, many countries in Africa are unable to tap solar
energy for domestic and industrial use.
Factors of Resource Creation
As mentioned already, nature, culture and man are the most important factors,
whose interaction leads to the creation of resources.
Nature sets the limits within which man can employ his technology to create
resources to satisfy his wants. Natural resources are usually developed from the
endowment of nature or elements of the physical environment (Mitchell, 1989). For
instance, aluminium is produced from bauxite a substance that exists naturally.
Again, man relies on his technology to produce various useful petroleum products
(e.g. kerosene, diesel) from crude oil, which is a free gift of nature. In effect, nature is
the storehouse of all natural resources.
Man plays a dual role of a producer and a consumer of resources. As an ultimate
consumer of products, it is man who gives utility value to resources. As a producer,
man provides his labour (both mental and physical) to overcome resistances
(obstacles) and thereby create resources. For instance, it is the technology developed
by man that allows the extraction of aluminium from bauxite. Without such a
technology, bauxite will be a neutral stuff. Man also contributes physical labour and
technical skills to produce energy from a river. Again, using culture as a tool, man
rectifies some of the defects of nature in the process of resource creation. For
instance, man has developed fertilizers to improve the productivity of soils that are
not fertile.
Culture entails such things as education, law, experience, religion, knowledge,
civilised behaviour, co-operation etc (Zimmerman 1951). I have already explained
that culture partly influences the definition of what constitutes resources. Besides,
culture acts as a tool by which man reduces resistances to create resources. As we

have discussed already, knowledge and technological innovations, both elements of

culture, are useful in resource creation. Cultural innovation is an important tool by
which man corrects the drawbacks or defects of nature. Roy (1997: 33) has argued
that as far as resource creation is concerned, nature has the following defects: (a)
Insufficient production; (b) Production in the wrong place; (c) Production at the
wrong time. These defects can be seen as natural resistances. As the most dynamic
force in the resource creation process, man seeks to rectify these defects by culture. I
wish to now explain to you how each of these defects is corrected through the
interaction of man and culture.
Insufficient production: As mentioned already, one of the major defects of nature is
insufficient production of resources. For instance, naturally growing food resources
are inadequate for rising global population. Although soil is a natural resource for
food production, not all soils are fertile for the cultivation of food. In this case, man
has developed fertilizer to improve upon the productivity of soil. Again, through
cultural innovations, irrigation systems are relied upon to produce food in areas
without sufficient water. Animals are also tamed and domesticated to increase the
production of animal products (eg. meat and milk) for human consumption.
Production at the wrong place: Another defect of nature that is corrected by cultural
innovation is production at wrong place or maldistribution of resources. Cultural
innovation seeks to reallocate natural resources from wrong place of occurrence to
right place of consumption (Roy, 1997). For instance, where as water is an essential
commodity for all humans. Naturally flowing water bodies are sometimes found in
thick forested areas that are thinly populated. In the past, people were forced to site
their houses close to rivers so as to get supply of water always. Man has, however,
now created systems for transporting water to far places. So it cultural innovations
that have made it possible for people in Accra and Tema to get water from the river
Volta. Similar, cultural innovations (e.g. effective transportation facilities) have
permitted people in Ghana to enjoy many food items produced in temperate regions.
In other words, transportation, which is a cultural phenomenon, helps man to expand
the resource base.
Production at the wrong time: Another important function of culture is to rectify the
problem of production of goods and services at a wrong time. Cereals and vegetables,
for instance, are produced only seasonally, yet they are required to be consumed
throughout the year. Man has, therefore, built storehouses, cold-storages and
refrigeration systems to overcome the problem of producing goods at the wrong time.
With these storage facilities, the product is made available throughout the year. It is
clear that the ability of man to overcome these resistances is a function of knowledge
and technology which are all cultural phenomenon.
Natural Resource Distribution and Development
Natural resources such as minerals, fertile soils and water are unevenly distributed.
Globally, some small countries like Norway and Kuwait have huge amounts of
petroleum than some large countries like Ethiopia and India. Unequal distribution of
natural resources also occurs within countries. For instance, in Ghana, most of the

traditional mineral resources (i.e. gold, bauxite etc) are found only within some
specific regions.
While it is an undisputable fact that there may be a relationship between natural
resource reserves and level of development, it is difficult to explain variations in level
of development only in terms of variations in the natural resource endowments of the
various countries. For instance, some African countries, including Ghana and Nigeria,
have more natural resources than some developed countries. Most of these poor
countries are unable to maximise resource creation, partly due to inferior technology.
Again, unequal distribution of technology partly accounts for differences in economic
development. Developing countries tend to rely on foreign technology and capital to
extract most of their natural resources and as such they get only a small proportion of
the natural resource revenue.
The management of natural resources is also another factor that determines whether
natural resources of a specific country can promote socioeconomic development.
Many developing countries have a lot of valuable natural resources but these are used
to satisfy the wants of only a few greed politicians. In some cases, the exploitation of
these natural resources has rather created serious environmental problems for the poor
citizens. Sometimes too disagreement over how resource benefits must be shared has
brought about several conflicts the world over. This situation is usually referred to as
the resource curse. There are also situations whereby the discovery of a valuable
resource such as oil has led to the neglect of other important productive sectors, such
as agriculture. Agricultural production may then decline as more investments are
made in the oil industry. When the oil reserves are later depleted, the country may
suffer economically. This is refered to as the Dutch Disease.
In a nutshell, resource endowment can help promote economic development, but one
cannot conclude that a country will develop once it has discovered large quantities
valuable natural resources.
Lecture 2: CLASSIFICATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Classifying Natural Resources on the basis of renewability
Natural resources can be classified according to a number of criteria. One of the most
useful classification schemes is based on renewability criteria. This system classifies
natural resources on the basis of the timescales over which they develop. Using this
criteria, natural resources can be divided into two major types, namely stock or nonrenewable and flow or renewable.
Stock Resources
According to Rees (1990), stock resources are substances which have taken
million of years to form and so from a human perspective are now fixed in
supply. In other words, these resources are not renewable in a short timespan. Stock
resources are also referred to as fund or exhaustible resources. Specifically, the
stock resource category entails all minerals and land. As these resources are
relatively non-renewable, there must be a limit to the quantity which can ultimately be
used, although we neither know where this limit lies nor whether the material will be

regarded as a resource if this limit is reached. The stock resource category can further
be divided into two sub-categories. The first set is made up of those stock resources
which are consumed by use, while the second set entails those which can be
recycled or reused.
The consumed by use set includes all the fossil fuels (e.g. oil, gas and coal). These
resources are destroyed forever after use. In other words, they are not recoverable
after use. For instance, petrol or diesel that has been used by a vehicle is not
recoverable. Thus, in the case of the consumed by use set current rates of
consumption are expected to affect future availability. In view of this, a key
management question, which has been debated in the literature, is what is the
optimal rate of use over time? We shall go through some of the theoretical
perspectives on this issue in section 5.
The second set of stock resources are those that can be reused many times over with
little loss of quality. Metallic minerals fall within this class of stock resources. As
they are recyclable, it is possible to reuse them. In principle then, the total stock must
remain constant over time, taking accounts of both metal remaining in the earths
crust and that temporary stored in products. It must be stressed, however, that the idea
of complete recycling is a theoretical one. Minerals may eventually become too
dispersed and mixed with impurities during use to be fully recoverable. This is
especially the case in developing countries where recycling of minerals is not
pervasive.
Apart from metallic minerals, all non-metallic elemental minerals, such as potash,
also fall within the category of resources that can be reused. Although it is relatively
more difficult to recover the non-metallic elemental minerals than metallic minerals,
the former is also theoretically recoverable.
Flow Resources
These are resources which are naturally renewed within a sufficiently short period of
time to be of relevance to human beings. Examples of flow resources include air,
water, soil, solar radiation, animals, plants, wind power and tidal energy. The flow
resource category is not a homogenous one; a distinction can be made between
critical zone flow resources and non- critical zone flow resources.
Critical zone flow resources can be exploited to exhaustion. Thus, although these
resources are renewable, they can still be totally depleted if used unsustainably. The
critical zone is the point at which the depletion process is so advanced that natural
recovery of the supply flows fails to take place, even when all exploitation has ceased.
Biological resources (e.g. animals, fish, birds and forests) obviously fall under this
category. For instance, forest is self-renewable resource but indiscriminate and
unsustainable exploitation of forest products has degraded significant portions of
Ghanas forests beyond recovery (Hawthorne and Abu Juam, 1995). Similarly,
hunting and the destruction of natural habitats has already drastically reduced the
renewal capacity of many animal species. Some animal species too have gone extinct
due to human activities.

Apart from biological resources, soils and some aquifers may also have critical
zones. For example, when soil has been so severely damaged by erosion and
desertification, recovery may not take place within timescales of relevance to human
activity. Again, when aquifers (such as those underlying the Sahel) are relic features,
products of past climate regimes, they too may be exploited to exhaustion, with no
hope of recovery in hundreds of years (Rees, 1990).
Non-critical zone resources include river water, tides, wind, air, waves, and solar
energy. These resources remain renewable irrespective of the activities of human
beings, although some can be depleted temporary by overuse. For instance, the
capacity of water bodies to degrade waste products can be ruined by extremely high
levels of sewage discharge. Similarly, river flows may be reduced by over-pumping.
Further, the quality of local air resources may decline due to pollution. In these cases,
flow and quality levels are naturally and speedily restored once the rate of
exploitation is controlled within the regenerative or assimilative capacity of the
system.
I want you to remember therefore that while the distinction between stock resources
and flow resources is essential, both categories of resources can ultimately be affected
by human activities. The quality of non-critical zone resources, such as air, can be
reduced temporary by human activities such as pollution. In view of this, it can be
stated that no renewable resource flows is beyond the influence of human activity.

MEASURES OF RESOURCE AVAILABILITY: STOCK RESOURCES

The Resource Base
This is defined as the total quantity of a substance within the geosystem. Although
this concept provides the most comprehensive view of potential resource availability,
it is quite difficult to employ it for the purpose of estimating resource availability. The
concept is particularly extremely difficult to use for renewable resources (e.g. sun)
since, by definition, their availability is not static. Even for mineral resources,
estimating the resource base is still quite problematic given that some stock resources
(e.g. the metallic and elemental minerals) can be reused.
Proven or known Reserves
Proven reserves are deposits already discovered and known to be economically
extractable under current demand, price and technological conditions (Rees,
1990: 18-19). With specific reference to oil resources, proven reserve can also be
defined as the estimated quantities of the resource which geological data demonstrate
with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs
under current economic and operating conditions. The definition of proven reserves as
deposits already discovered does not imply that at any point in time there is one
agreed figure for the proven reserves within any specified geographical region or
country. In fact, given that what is economically extractable is a function of the
judgements and profit requirements of producers, there are sometimes major

disagreements between private extraction companies and producer governments about

reserve levels. For instance, if a private extraction company regards as economically
viable a deposit which yields at least 20% net return investment, then this limits the
number of proven reserve sites. A lower return requirement would increase proven
reserves if technology and economic factors (i.e. demand and price) were held
constant. Given that required private rates of return vary from one country to another,
what is regarded as proven reserve in one country may not be so regarded, if the
deposit happened to occur in a different country. For instance, an oil deposit that is
regarded as a proven reserve in the United States would not necessarily be so regarded
if the same oil deposit happened to be located in Ghana.
Again, since the production objectives of governments is usually different from those
of private companies, proven reserve evaluations can change significantly if the
government takes over mineral exploitation within a country. Thus, there is no one
objectively derived figure for the proven reserve of any resource. Suppose a deposit of
a precious mineral in the Yilo Krobo District of Ghana can yield only 5% net return
investment, private extracting companies may not consider this as economically
viable to be considered as a proven reserve. However, the government of Ghana may
still go ahead to exploit this resource, if it believes that such a move can help generate
employment for the youth in the area. Thus, while the private company may solely be
interested in profit margins, government may have different interests. Governments
objectives such as employment generation and import reduction may allow deposits to
attain a proven reserve status, which they would not have reached if the market
system had operated freely.
It must be stressed that governments and companies may deliberately report lower
sizes of their proven reserves or exaggerate their sizes for some political and
economic reasons. For instance, private companies may wish to limit the size of the
reserves discovered in the public statements so as to minimise competing companies
interests in possible new concessions in the vicinity of a field. It has also been argued
that some private companies may deliberately limit the size of their proven reserves
because they are taxed on them as company assets (Tanzer, 1980). Some governments
may deliberately report lower sizes of their proven reserves so as to curb premature
pressures from local interest groups. On the other hand, some companies may
intentionally exaggerate their proven reserves so as to help their stock-market status.
In the same way, some countries may deliberately exaggerate reserves declarations to
attract investors and or enhance national borrowing opportunities from international
banks for which the oil in the ground can provide the collateral for loans.
I want you to also remember that whenever the concept of proven reserve is used to
forecast a resource life, an assumption is made that there will be no new discoveries,
no technological changes, no changes in production objectives and no price
changes. In practice, the exact extent of a proven reserve is likely to be revaluated
upward or downward as production continues. The case of oil can be used to explain
this point better. In fact all crude oil discoveries are initially appraised for their size in
terms of oil in place. Based on probabilistic estimates derived from a number of
parameters there will subsequently be an initial declaration of recoverable oil which
geological and engineering information indicates can be recovered in the future under
prevailing technology and market forces. These constitute the proven reserves of the
field at that particular time. The production process itself, however, generates a

continuing flow of information which enables regular re-evaluations of the

recoverable reserves of a field to be made. Though some fields reserves are
downgraded, as a result of production experience, upward evaluation of reserves over
time is more usual. This process often leads to a situation in which the declarations of
the proven reserves of oil in a field trend upwards over time, in spite of the on-going
extraction of oil in the production process. It must be stressed that these geological or
engineering based changes in the reserves estimates may also be modified further by
changes in the economic system. For instance, higher prices and/or lower costs will
stimulate additional interest in the reservoirs exploitation and enhance the level of
recoverable reserves.
Since, reserves are only proved after huge sums of money have been spent on surveys
and test borings. The current reserve level in many developing countries may bear
very little relationship to the real resource endowment, since these countries are
unable to undertake comprehensive mineral surveys. In fact, most developing
countries continue to import the same resource that they may have, due to the fact that
they do not have the capital and technology to undertake comprehensive explorations.
For instance, Ghana was thought to have oil deposits that could be exploited not only
for local consumption but also for export. However, it was only recently that some
foreign extraction companies were able to actually discover some of these oil reserves
along the coast of Ghana. It is obvious that financial constraints and lack of
technology delayed the discovery of these oil deposits in Ghana.
Conditional or subeconomic reserves
Conditional reserves are defined as deposits which have already been discovered,
but they are not economic to work at present-day price levels with currently
available technologies. As hinted already, the relationship between economic and
uneconomic deposits is a complex one that depends on political and economic factors
(i.e. price and demand conditions) as well as level of technology. Rising demands and
prices as well as improvements in technology can cause a deposit to cross the
economic viability boundary. For instance, at the beginning of 20 th century, copper
ores with less than a 10% metal content could not be used in most smelters and were,
therefore , virtually valueless. Forty years later technological changes, coupled with
significant demand increases, had allowed deposits with only 1% metal to be defined
as proven reserves (Warren, 1973). I want to stress also that availability of relevant
infrastructure also determines whether a conditional reserve crosses the economic
viability boundary. In developing countries, deposits must be higher in grade to
counterbalance additional infrastructure costs.
Hypothetical Resources
Hypothetical resources are not known deposits, but are those which are expected to
be found in the future, in the areas which today have been only partially
surveyed or developed. For instance, the area around Cape Three Points in Ghana is
known to have oil but not all the potentially oil-bearing strata have been test-drilled;
we can therefore state that this area contains hypothetical oil resources.

A common method used to estimate the extent of hypothetical resources is to

extrapolate from past discovery rate per foot of drilling. Such a method is based on
the assumption that all the variables (i.e. technical, political and economic) which
have affected past discovery rates will continue to operate as they have done in the
past. As these variables are dynamic, the mechanical extrapolation method is not
reliable. Another way of finding the exact extent of hypothetical resources is to ask
panel of experts to forecast likely discoveries and then taking the mean of their range
of estimates. This approach has also been criticised for being too subjective. Experts
from oil companies, for example, are known to make conservative estimates so as to
paint a picture of scarcity and thus maintain high prices (Barnet, 1980; Tanzer, 1980).
Hypothetical resources, if tested and proven, become either conditional or proven
resources. In some cases, the testing exercise may prove that resources are there but
then the quantity is not as high as previously thought. On the other hand, the test may
also prove that there is no resource deposit over there after all. Thus, further tests and
reappraisal of hypothetical deposits could lead to upward or downward adjustments of
their actual sizes. For instance, following the discovery oil in the Jubilee Oil Field
offshore Ghana, analysts have expected that hypothetical oil resources exist in the
area. In December 2009, Tullow Oil PLC reported mixed success in the latest
appraisal on its Jubilee Oil Field. A deep well that the company has created, namely
Mahogany Deep-2 well, led to the discovery of two new light oil reservoirs, but the
deepest section of reservoir that the well was targeting contained only water.
Speculative Resources
The line between hypothetical resources and speculative resources is so thin that some
scholars even use the concepts synonymously (See, for instance, Mitchell, 1989).
However, Rees (1990) use the concepts to imply different resource categories. She
defines speculative resources as deposits which could be found in hitherto
unexplored or little-explored areas where reasonably favourable geological
conditions are thought to exist. What you must understand here is that in the case of
hypothetical resources, some appreciable level of exploration and discoveries would
have already been made in the area. It is based on previous findings in the area that
we expect to find more deposits. However, an area can be designated as having a
speculative status even if the area has never been explored, but it is known to have
favourable geological conditions. For instance, in the world there are several
sedimentary basins where oil and gas could exist. However, most of them, especially
those in Africa and Asia have not been explored for oil. We can just speculate that
these unexplored basins contain oil.
Speculative resource estimates are also done by extrapolating from past discovery
patterns in explored areas. This is based on the assumption that the currently
unexplored areas will be as physically productive and financially rewarding as those
developed in the past. Since such assumptions are unrealistic, then estimates of
speculative resources are even more unreliable than estimates of hypothetical
resources. Once drilling has taken place the potential resource status of these areas
may change. If crude oil is found, the areas may now be assigned a conditional or
even proven resource status. On the other hand, if extensive drilling fails to establish
the presence of crude oil, such areas may even lose their speculative status. Thus,

10

speculative resource fields could cross to the hypothetical, conditional and or proven
reserve category. Some few years back, the area around Cape Three Points in Ghana
was an area where only speculative resources might exist. Today parts of that area are
assumed to have proven resources. Other parts are assumed to have hypothetical
resources, which will be located in time.

MEASURES OF RESOURCE AVAILABILITY: RENEWABLE RESOURCES

Maximum Resource Capacity
The Maximum Resource Capacity of a natural system is the maximum amount of
useful products or services that the system can generate within a period of time.
This notion has been employed in attempts to estimate the future availability of
renewable resources. For instance, estimates of the maximum energy potentials have
been made for various renewable energy resources, such as solar, tidal or wind power.
Such estimates tend to paint highly comforting pictures of availability of resources in
the future. For instance, the total energy received from the sun could theoretically
provide for world energy consumption about 10 million times greater than those of
today. These estimates are of very little practical relevance, given that availability will
really be determined by human ability to convert these potentials into actual energy
resources (Rees, 1990). The concept of maximum resource potential has also been
employed to estimate the total biological capacity of land and sea (Gerasimov, 1983).
As hinted already, the notion of maximum resource potential is of little practical
relevance. This is because potential calculations are based on the physical output of
natural systems, neglecting the constraints imposed by the capacity of human
economic and political systems. In reality, economic factors may make it difficult to
run these natural systems to the maximum. For instance, Ghana is facing acute energy
shortage, despite the fact that it could theoretically produce enough energy from the
sun alone. Here, although it is possible to generate enough energy from renewable
sources such as the sun and wind, the country lacks the capital and the technology to
do so. Again, estimates of the maximum capacity of land to produce food are based on
the assumption that advanced farming technologies (e.g the use of irrigation systems,
machines and fertilizers) will be employed. However, in reality most farmers in Africa
still rely on traditional farming techniques.
Another weakness of the concept of Maximum Resource Potential is that estimates
are based on the notion of running the earths natural systems as though they were
machines. Such estimates ignore environmental considerations. Besides, these
estimates are unrealistic because technological changes affect them. Thus, factors
such as level of technology, economic systems, government policies and
environmental considerations may limit the maximum resource potential.
Sustainable Capacity

11

According to Rees (1990), the concept of sustainable capacity is employed whenever

the physical potential of a renewable resource is tempered by the requirement that its
use must be allocated over time to give equality of opportunity to future generations.
Sustainable capacity could, therefore, be seen as the maximum output of goods
and services that a natural system can produce without compromising its
capacity to give equality of opportunity to future generations. Thus, once the
sustainable capacity is exceeded, the natural system is no longer able to give future
generations the same equal opportunities as the current generations. For instance, it is
possible to maintain a set yield of fish over time by controlling the level of fishing. In
this case, the annual output that allows the fish stock to be maintained at a level which
can produce that same output in future years is the sustainable capacity. If the quantity
of fish harvested annually is higher than the sustainable capacity, then annual yield
will begin to decline. There are also sustainable yield levels for water resources. For
instance, it is theorised that to preserve aquifers for future generations, the pumping
rate must not be higher than the annual average rate of replenishment.
It is important to point out that the maintenance of sustainable yields is a tough
management goal, given that such a management rule implies that current levels of
consumption must be reduced for many resources. In some cases, this may lead to a
decline in development. In situations where there are no substitutes, the current
generation will have to sacrifice its happiness in order to ensure that future
generations get the same opportunity. For instance, we may need to reduce the level of
consumption of fish to help future generations. Maintaining the happiness of the
current generation is a challenge here. For instance, in areas where water is very
scarce, people critically dependent on the artesian basins for their survival are
unlikely to be willing to sacrifice their livelihood to maintain water stock intact for
future generations. I want to stress that limiting resource use to sustainable limits must
be considered in relation to development goals. Sometimes the adoption of the policy
could affect development. For instance, using the artesian well example, it can be
stated that if the policy to limit pumping to sustainable yield levels results in a decline
in economic development in those areas, then future generations may have plentiful
water stocks but considerably less of everything else that growth could have
produced. The fears of decline in development and living standards are also a major
problem that makes it difficult to enforce conventions on environment. There have
been a number of protocols and conventions on environmental resource use. For
instance, the Kyoto protocol aims at reducing the emission of greenhouse gases so as
to maintain healthy climate for future generations. However, the implementation of
the guidelines of this protocol means that countries will have to reduce the level of
industrial activities in some sectors. It is feared that this will affect the level of
economic development. The dilemma here is that by cutting production, future
generation could have a cleaner environment, but considerable less of other things
else which growth would have produced. These examples aptly demonstrate that the
adoption of sustainable capacity policy depends on value judgements and priorities.
Carrying Capacity
This concept is analogous to the notions of sustainable and absorptive capacity, in that
it too is based on the premise that resource use should be limited to levels where no
appreciable environmental changes occur. The concept has been applied in different

12

situations. Hence, it has been defined differently by different researchers. One area
where the concept has been widely used is the determination of appropriate man-land
ratios. In this context, the carrying capacity has been defined as the number of people
that a unit area of land can support (Ramanaiah and Reddy, 1983). In order words,
carrying capacity refers to the number of any population that can be supported by the
resources of a given land area without compromising the integrity of the land. When
applied to the earth, carrying capacity is the total number of human population that
can be sustained by the earth (Hare, 1980).
Another area where the concept of carrying capacity has been used in geographical
research is the establishment of biophysical capacity. Here, researchers have sought
to determine critical thresholds beyond which physical (water, soil) and biological
(vegetation, wildlife) resources are altered by human activity. For instance, some
researchers have examined the effects of skiing on mountain slopes. Others have
examined user impacts on parks. The concept is also sometimes applied to measure
the capacity of recreation areas. In this case, limits to recreational activity are
established not only by physical damage criteria, but also by the perception of the
visitors (see Mitchell, 1989).
In all its application, it is not possible to establish one absolute value for carrying
capacity. This is because any estimates are significantly dependent on a number of
factors, such as the objectives of management and the standards of living.

13