Ecological Economics 35 (2000) 271 – 287 ANALYSIS Easter Island: historical anecdote or warning for the future? Rafael Reuveny a, *, Christopher S. Decker b,1 a School of Public and En6ironmental Affairs, Suite 430, Indiana Uni6ersity, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA b Kelley School of Business, Suite 451, Indiana Uni6ersity, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA Received 5 October 1999; received in revised form 11 April 2000; accepted 16 May 2000 Abstract Two standard solutions for the ‘Malthusian Trap’ involve institutional reforms and technological progress. Using Easter Island as an example, we investigate the hypothetical role that technological progress and population management reform might have played in preventing the collapse of the island’s civilization. The model includes a composite manufactured good and a composite harvested renewable resource. Fertility is assumed to rise with per capita income. The resource’s carrying capacity and intrinsic growth rate as well as labor’s harvesting productivity are subject to technological progress. Fertility is subject to population management reform. The model yields a system of two simultaneous, nonlinear, non-autonomous differential equations. We first study the system’s steady states. The system is then parameterized for Easter Island and its comparative dynamics are investigated in simulations. We find that technological progress can generate large fluctuations in population, renewable resources, and per capita utility, sometimes resulting in system collapse. With high fertility rates, the population and the resource vanish. None of the simulations investigated here exhibit a constantly growing per capita utility over time. Finally, we evaluate the applicability of these results to contemporary societies. © 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon 1. Introduction Concerns regarding the Earth’s population ex- plosion and the pressure it places on natural resources have rekindled interest in the sustain- ability of economic prosperity, an issue that seems particularly relevant as we enter a new millen- nium. Brown and Flavin (1999) explain, ‘‘the key limits as we approach the twenty-first century are fresh water, forests, rangelands, oceanic fisheries, biological diversity, and the global atmosphere.’’ They go on to ask, ‘‘Will we recognize the world’s natural limits and adjust our economies accord- ingly, or will we proceed to expand our ecological footprint until it is too late to turn back?’’ These concerns can be traced back to the work of Malthus (1798), who argued that population growth would eventually lead to natural resource * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-812-8554944; fax: +1- 812-8557802. E-mail addresses: rreuveny@indiana.edu (R. Reuveny), chrdecke@indiana.edu (C.S. Decker). 1 Tel.: +1-812-8559219; fax: 1-812-8553345. 0921-8009/00/$ - see front matter © 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII:S0921-8009(00)00202-0