Let’s look at the phrase again. “to divide less resources with more people”. The second part of the phrase “with more people” can mean two things, first:, the size of the population has grown or is growing, secondly: an equal sized population has an increased need (development). Of course a combination of the two is possible as well. “More people” addresses a group that can be any scale: a family, community, country, or globally.

Now look at the resources side. What comes to mind In a demand for resources, we only head for an unsustainable situation when:
- when the demand is growing and there is no increase possible in the supply of resources.
- a growing demand addresses fields of resources that become too expensive to harvest, rising prices.
- there is a danger of depletion of the non-manufacturable resources.
- a change occurs in environment in which the resources are ‘manufactured’.
- the resources are not distributed equally within the group while demand is up.
- …..

In global terms we have to deal with a growing global need of resource due to development of new regions while these resources are getting harder to harvest. But to who is this unsustainable? You could argue that in a free market the rich can afford whatever they want to consume, while the poor get nothing. In that case the progress of the rich or developed might be slowed down a bit, or stop, but not necessarily decline, which is not unsustainable. The rich and developed normally also have the means to protect their interest.

However, the poorer side of the group probably feels left behind. Due to information technologies everyone know what the others do, fueling the feeling of inequality to especially the poor.

But the balance seems fragile. Not much is needed to disturb the wealth of the rich when the poor uproar. Every chinese government has fallen during a farmer uprise, America’s power is financed largely by other parts of the world, oil is harvested in area’s of great variety; very different bodies of thought and value systems. Core knowledge needed for development and prosperity is starting to be created in places outside the current powerhouses. So point being is that the rich and developed need to think about their self-sufficiency and relationship abroad as well to maintain sustainable.

So my first cautious conclusion is that the phrase “to divide less with more” is likely to affect all the members in the group.

We see that further development in new regions mean an increase in demand of global resources. An increase of demand in global resources can only be true when at the same time the already developed world is continuously consuming the same or bigger amount of the same resources as it has done so in their own developing. When the supply side is equal or declining, the pressure of the demand rises, causing raised prices. Having raised prices also increases the crisis that is necessary to realize change, because as in all change systems, change only happens when crisis is high enough. High crisis and high prices make room for new previously non attractive alternative developments. When new technologies come online they potentially take away the pressure on old resources. Wind energy reduces the use of oil. However, new technologies are expensive in their installment phase and only available to those who can afford them. Also, new technologies are likely to be knowledge intensive, so these technologies are likely to be owned by and available to the developed. Money made from these new technologies, making them commercially attractive, therefor flows to the developed.

So my second conclusion is that the crisis for change in a global problem is highest in poor groups who suffer the consequences of inequality the most. However, it are the rich and developed who are able to produce the technology to manage the change necessary.