Forgot Password?
Written by Miranda Huey   
Share |
Wednesday, 07 October 2009

Overpopulation

All environmentalists want to curb the effects of wasteful and damaging human activity on the environment, but some environmentalists believe the root of major environmental problems is simply the rapid growth in the number of humans on Earth. This phenomenon is otherwise known as overpopulation. As demonstrated by the recent food crises, energy crises, and resource disputes, people have already experienced the strain on the earth's natural resources. At the same time, the world's population continues to grow by the billions.1

Overpopulation is strongly correlated with the monumental changes of the planet's forests, fisheries, and atmosphere, says Robert Engleman of Population Action International.2 While industrialized countries with more economic resources tend to have declining populations, poorer countries without the infrastructural capacity to deal with population growth are experiencing it the most.3 The United Kingdom's chief government scientist predicts that, by 2030, global population growth will create a perfect storm of food, water, and energy shortages.4

However, other environmentalists strongly criticize the theory of overpopulation, pointing to a similar theory which had been once proposed by Thomas Malthus in 1798. Malthus had argued that, people were reproducing exponentially and that agriculture could only advance at a linear pace, which would lead to an imminent food shortage and decreasing standards of living for everyone. Because of this, he proposed that there should be no food subsidies for the poor, since population would only be significantly reduced by the famines produced from too much demand on too little resources. Contrary to his prediction, even as birth rates increased, living standards actually increased, thanks to advances in agricultural and industrial production.5

Many Neo-Malthusians have continued this same argument. Paul Ehrlich predicted massive famine in the 1970's, then again in the 1980's, neither of which occurred due to advances in technology. Instead, environmental critics counter, not that famines and natural resource depletion cannot occur, but that they are not usually correlated with population increases.6 In fact, the world today technically produces more food per-capita than at any point in human history, but now 70-80% of the world's grains are fed to livestock, catering to the world's ever-growing appetite for meat.7

This isn't just a problem with crops; most of the world's depleting natural resources, such as clean water, energy, and land, are being consumed by the world's most industrialized nations.8 For example, while 1.1 billion people lack access to safe drinking water, 12% of the world's richest citizens are using up to 85% of the world's clean water. Despite often being in water-rich regions, the poor often pay more for water than the rich.9 Therefore, these environmentalists counter, the real problem is not of physical limits on resources but of resource distribution. Most of the world's natural resources are exported right out of poorer countries to consumers in developed ones.10

On the other hand, some counter that policymakers cannot ignore the role of population entirely. Even if, for 20 years, the world completely stabilized its per-capita energy consumption and North America and Western Europe cut their per-capita energy consumption in half, the population would still grow such that energy consumption would just be the same as it is now.11 Even this is optimistic, since as poorer countries develop their economies, their consumers begin to use resources at rates similar to consumers in more developed nations.12 If the worst-case scenario happens, and efficiency gains or alternative resources can't make up for the gap this time, there is a possibility that resource prices could spike, which could cause untold economic and social consequences.

Fortunately, demographers are starting to have some idea regarding why birth rates go down. On one side, people without a social safety net tend to want to have many children who can support them economically in old age or in case of illness. On the other, educational opportunities for women allow them to pursue their own careers, delay marriage, and have more control over when they want to give birth. If their children have better healthcare and a higher chance of survival, women are more content with having fewer kids.13 All of these benefits should be pursued in their own right, and if they are, they may drastically reduce population growth.

Unfortunately, an over-emphasis on population control can sometimes lead to more drastic and detrimental methods. As Malthus proposed, when families are so poor that they cannot afford to have kids, they will try not to. Birth control has been advocated even when it would be economically detrimental for families to do so, leaving them without a family safety net. Worst of all, even as recent as the 1990's, countries like Peru forcefully sterilized over a hundred thousand of its poorest citizens.14

That is why it is so imperative that environmentalists determine exactly how much of an impact population growth will have on the environment. Blaming resource scarcity only on population growth has proven faulty, but ignoring it completely can be just as irresponsible. This issue only reinforces the idea that the environment cannot just be treated as an afterthought in economics, and vice versa. Rather, they are both intricately intertwined in the complex social and political relations governing our lives.

Browse all Greeniacs Articles Browse all Greeniacs Guides        Browse all Greeniacs Articles
_______________________________________________________________________________

1http://environment.about.com/b/2009/03/23/population-growth-expected-to-cause-a-food-water-
and-energy-crisis-by-2030.htm.
2http://environment.about.com/od/biodiversityconservation/a/population_grow.htm.
3http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-03/2006-03-07-voa1.cfm?CFID=293146846&CFTOKEN=62962190&jsessionid=de304768370f436c725055717d1d2f604247.
4http://environment.about.com/b/2009/03/23/population-growth-expected-to-cause-a-food-water-
and-energy-crisis-by-2030.htm.
5http://www.stanford.edu/~ranabr/Malthusian%20and%20Neo%20Malthusian1%20for%20
webpage%20040731.pdf.
6http://www.opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110005103.
7http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article.cfm?id=5088.
8http://www.stwr.org/land-energy-water/overview.html.
9http://www.alternet.org/water/84145/latin_america:_why_there%27s_a_water_crisis_in_the_
most_water-rich_region/.
10http://www.ied.info/books/economic-democracy/worldwars.
11http://www.motherearthnews.com/richfolkscantfixitalone.aspx.
12http://www.ur.umich.edu/0809/Jan19_09/12.php.
13http://www.globalissues.org/article/207/good-and-bad-fertility-decline.
14http://www.cwpe.org/node/49.




Add your comment
RSS comments

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Click here to Register.  Click here to login.
Last Updated ( Thursday, 10 February 2011 )

SEARCH GREENIACS.COM

Green Facts

  • A laptop consumes five times less electricity than a desktop computer.

  • A tree that provides a home with shade from the sun can reduce the energy required to run the air conditioner and save an additional 200 to 2,000 pounds of carbon over its lifetime.

  • A steel mill using recycled scrap reduces related water pollution, air pollution, and mining wastes by about 70%.

  • It takes 6,000,000 trees to make 1 year's worth of tissues for the world.

  • Less than 1% of electricity in the United States is generated from solar power.

  • A single quart of motor oil, if disposed of improperly, can contaminate up to 2,000,000 gallons of fresh water.

  • Americans throw away enough aluminum to rebuild our entire commercial fleet of airplanes every 3 months

  • Every week about 20 species of plants and animals become extinct.

  • Recycling 100 million cell phones can save enough energy to power 18,500 homes in the U.S. for a year.

  • You will save 100 pounds of carbon for each incandescent bulb that you replace with a compact fluorescent bulb (CFL), over the life of the bulb.

  • Shaving 10 miles off of your weekly driving pattern can eliminate about 500 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions a year.

  • One recycled aluminum can will save enough energy to run a 100-watt bulb for 20 hours, a computer for 3 hours, or a TV for 2 hours.

  • 77% of people who commute to work by car drive alone.

  • If every U.S. household turned the thermostat down by 10 degrees for seven hours each night during the cold months, and seven hours each weekday, it would prevent nearly gas emissions.

  • Recycling aluminum saves 95% of the energy used to make the material from scratch.

  • Americans throw away more than 120 million cell phones each year, which contribute 60,000 tons of waste to landfills annually.

  • The World Health Organization estimates that 2 million people die prematurely worldwide every year due to air pollution.

  • Plastic bags and other plastic garbage thrown into the ocean kill as many as 1,000,000 sea creatures every year.

  • For every 38,000 bills consumers pay online instead of by mail, 5,058 pounds of greenhouse gases are avoided and two tons of trees are preserved.

  • Bamboo absorbs 35% more carbon dioxide than equivalent stands of trees.

  • Nudge your thermostat up two degrees in the summer and down two degrees in the winter to prevent 2,000 pounds of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere.

  • Glass can be recycled over and over again without ever wearing down.

  • Washing your clothes in cold or warm instead of hot water saves 500 pounds of carbon dioxide a year, and drying your clothes on a clothesline six months out of the year would save another 700 pounds.

  • You will save 300 pounds of carbon dioxide for every 10,000 miles you drive if you always keep your car’s tires fully inflated.

  • Recycling 1 million laptop computers can save the amount of energy used by 3,657 homes in the U.S. over the course of a year.

  • 82 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. come from burning fossil fuels.

  • States with bottle deposit laws have 35-40% less litter by volume.

  • In California homes, about 10% of energy usage is related to TVs, DVRs, cable and satellite boxes, and DVD players.

  • Rainforests are being cut down at the rate of 100 acres per minute.

  • Recycling for one year at Stanford University saved the equivalent of 33,913 trees and the need for 636 tons of iron ore, coal, and limestone.

  • Americans use 100 million tin and steel cans every day.

  • An aluminum can that is thrown away instead of recycled will still be a can 500 years from now!

  • Turning off the tap when brushing your teeth can save as much as 10 gallons a day per person.

  • American workers spend an average of 47 hours per year commuting through rush hour traffic. This adds up to 23 billion gallons of gas wasted in traffic each year.

  • Refrigerators built in 1975 used 4 times more energy than current models.

  • In the United States, automobiles produce over 20 percent of total carbon emissions. Walk or bike and you'll save one pound of carbon for every mile you travel.

  • You’ll save two pounds of carbon for every 20 glass bottles that you recycle.

  • Current sea ice levels are at least 47% lower than they were in 1979.

  • Due to tiger poaching, habitat destruction, and other human-tiger conflicts, tigers now number around 3,200—a decrease in population by about 70% from 100 years ago.