Final answer:
The Limits to Growth differs from the works of Hardin and Ehrlich by including a broader range of ecological and economic variables using computer models and positing various scenarios for the future, suggesting systemic policy changes. Hardin focused on collective action to manage commons, while Ehrlich emphasized population control for avoiding environmental collapse.
Step-by-step explanation:
The policy implications of The Limits to Growth, a 1972 report by Donella Meadows and others from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, contrast with the works of Garrett Hardin and Paul Ehrlich in several ways. The Limits to Growth focused on a broader range of factors beyond just population control, including industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion. It used sophisticated computer models to forecast three potential futures, showing complex interactions of these factors. Hardin, famous for his essay 'The Tragedy of the Commons,' argued for mutual coercion mutually agreed upon to manage commons. His focus was on the need for collective action to manage shared resources. In contrast, Ehrlich, in The Population Bomb, highlighted the dangers of overpopulation and advocated for immediate action to achieve zero population growth (ZPG) to prevent environmental collapse.
While both Hardin and Ehrlich focused largely on population control as a necessary measure to prevent ecological disasters, The Limits to Growth explored system dynamics and posited that societal growth would eventually lead to 'overshoot and collapse' unless a stabilized world system was achieved. It implied the need for systemic changes in the global economic and ecological processes, rather than focusing predominantly on the control of population growth.
In 2008, a review of The Limits to Growth models showed that early predictions were aligning with real-world data, suggesting that although not definitively proven, there may be merit to their longer-term warnings and that further research might be warranted. Therefore, the policy implications of their work suggest the importance of considering a complex array of interacting variables when planning sustainable development and managing resources.