European Union statistics identify Latvia as one of the poorest countries in Europe, and one of the most problematic in terms of mortality, corruption, and labour productivity. You must agree, this is not an appealing national image. It is therefore important to find areas in which we can take pride. One such area is our desire to be the greenest country in the world and to set an example for other nations. This is why the central theme of the economic breakthrough of the National Development Plan 2014-2020 (NAP) green vision is "Latvia in 2020 - the greenest country in the world" [1], while the Sustainable Development Strategy of Latvia until 2030 states: ...to create and maintain the image of Latvia as a “green” country - an essential component of the country’s international profile [2]. Have politicians truly understood these challenges, or have they perhaps simply not delved into the essence of the matter? It rather seems to be the latter. This is evidenced by Latvia's position in Yale University's research on environmental quality worldwide, which uses the Environmental Performance Index (EPI) to compare countries [3]. As the authors of the methodology claim, it was developed to evaluate the results of policies implemented in countries around the world in relation to the goals of the UN 2015 Sustainable Development Agenda and the Paris Climate Agreement, characterising the nature conservation system, environmental health, and ecosystem vitality. According to the results, in 2018, Latvia ranked 37th, lagging behind many of the most developed European countries. In the 2008 study, Latvia ranked 8th, and in 2010, it was 21st in the world. Switzerland tops this year's list, followed by France and Denmark. Denmark is particularly surprising, as we are accustomed to considering it a land of intensive agriculture with a small forest area. Thus, the question arises: what could be the reasons for such a decline for Latvia? Is the cause a different understanding of the solutions required to achieve the stated goal?

To answer this question, let us look back into history. The thesis regarding the dependence of civilisation on available resources was first published in the 1798 "An Essay on the Principle of Population". The author of the essay was the English political scientist and demographer Thomas Malthus. The core of Thomas Malthus's ideas was the belief that the world's population grows faster than the quantity of available resources, and therefore wars, epidemics, and other phenomena arise to regulate human numbers, normalising the population of the world. Malthus saw similarities in human population dynamics with the factors limiting the population size of other species living on Earth, where the main influencing factor is the food base and living conditions. Malthus's theory led to the perceived necessity of regulating human population size to reduce its impact on the environment and ensure sustainable existence. This idea was adopted by Nazi Germany in its racist ideology, justifying the need to expand the "master race's" living space at the expense of "inferior race" nations by destroying or displacing them (the German expansion of living space, "Lebensraum"). Even today, this approach of artificially limiting available resources in the name of a green ideal in order to reduce population size persists. Politically, this is achieved by restricting or prohibiting economic activity in a region, as well as by worsening socio-economic conditions (eliminating jobs, schools, and failing to develop infrastructure).

However, the history of the 20th century proved that Thomas Malthus's theory has flaws. Thanks to scientific development, land management efficiency has increased significantly over the last century, ensuring higher yields and the availability of renewable resources in the future. New technologies provide for more efficient and sustainable resource use. Meanwhile, effective resource management planning and accounting solutions ensure balanced and sustainable resource management and the preservation of biodiversity. For this reason, it is precisely the developed European countries that are considered the greenest in the world. Conversely, countries where "green policy" is implemented by banning and unreasonably restricting development, as well as by using outdated technologies, are rated lower.

[1] http://www.varam.gov.lv/lat/pol/ppd/ilgtsp_att/?doc=13858

[2] file:///C:/Users/Lietotajs/Downloads/Saeima_100610_Latv_ilgtsp_att_strategija_Latvija2030.pdf

[3] https://epi.envirocenter.yale.edu/2018-epi-report/introduction