Support our Kickstarter

Population Overload

Kate Findley
overpopulation.jpg

Things have been getting cozier here on Earth as the population balloons at exponential rates.  By 2050, personal space might be a thing of the past.  At the same time, we’re running out of land and burning through resources.  According to Jason Clay of the World Wildlife Fund, “We will need to produce as much food in the next 40 years as we have in the last 8,000.” 

John Bongaarts of the Population Council predicts that the earth will hold nine billion people in 2050, “with almost all of the growth occurring in poor countries, particularly Africa and South Asia.”  It’s hard to imagine the strain that this growth will place on these countries, where starvation is already rampant.  At the same time, incomes are expected to rise, quintupling in developed countries.  When people make more money, they tend to consume more food. 

“More people, more money, more consumption,” says Clay.  And the Earth isn’t getting any bigger.

It’s interesting to note that in countries such as the U.S.A., overpopulation is not a big issue, in contrast to it being a hot topic in the 70s, when the world was nearly half the size it is now.  As Planned Parenthood continues to lose funding and fights to stay afloat, everything we see, on television, on billboards and on magazine covers continue to celebrate the excessive outpouring of humans, from Jon and Kate Plus 8 to 19 Kids and Counting.   

 

Image by liz on Flickr courtesy of Creative Commons Licensing

 

 

Tags:

Comments

What can be done?

Submitted by isis714 on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 20:10.
Great article, I really enjoyed reading it. This is an important issue that everyone all over the world should be considering. I just have a few questions about the population issue in general.. Even if the world participated in Planned Parenthood programs and the rate of children being born slowed to an appropriate level, would it be enough to "save" the world of problems caused by overpopulation? Would we not be in the same situation we are in now with limited resources, etc.? Something must be done, there is no question about that, but what can the world really do to help these massive problems? It is a sad situation from humanity...

women must take control

Submitted by Kelpie Wilson on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 21:20.
What prevents us from choosing smaller families and ending population growth? Patriarchal culture demands that women stay "barefoot and pregnant" and has stigmatized women who choose birth control and abortion, turning them and their health care providers into objects of hatred and persecution. Because birth control and abortion require physical intervention in "natural reproduction," some people have a hard time facing the fact that their actions may have prevented a birth. We need spiritual tools, ie, stories and images, that can help us come to terms with our actions. Here are some ideas: In Many Cultures Angels and Spirits Represent Fetuses A survey of 400 ancient cultures found evidence that nearly every one practiced abortion. Without effective contraceptives, women who did not have the food, love and other resources to give to an additional child often had no other choice but abortion. Aborted fetuses were seen as messengers to the gods and many cultures have venerated the still born, the miscarriage and the abortion as angel, fairy or water spirit. Cherubs, Polynesian Tiki gods and the Jizo dolls of Buddhist Japan are examples. Read my article, "A History of Angels," for the in-depth story. You will find it here at http://www.earthislandangels.com/

Rules of Ecology

Submitted by JAI88 on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 01:03.
I think food is more correlated with population than contraceptive or abortion availability. An increase in food production leads to a greater population which in turn creates a need for more food. Creating more food again boosts the population, which creates the need for even more food. This is true of all species on the planet, including humans. Sadly, this cycle will continue unless food production is cut down. I do not know if cutting down food production would actually lead to an increase in starvation since food production is at an all time high, yet starvation continues in horrifying numbers.

food and people

Submitted by Kelpie Wilson on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 13:53.
JAI88 - your comments on ecology have some truth, food is the ultimate constraint (or in some cases, water), but the point is that humans are able to manage ecological constraints by our use of culture. One example from our past is Taboo. A tribe might place certain animals or parts of the forest or waters off limits from hunting or fishing. By constraining food gathering activities, tribes preserved abundance. In those days we were used to the idea that feast could become famine quite suddenly and we tried to leave buffer zones where Nature could replenish life. Many people also consciously limited population growth using every kind of technique from abortion and infanticide to taboos on sex.These days, we have lost all respect for Nature's limits and we are attempting to turn the whole planet into food for people. This will end badly unless we remember how to consciously restrain ourselves through cultural and spiritual ways.

culture

Submitted by JAI88 on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 16:01.
Right, our problem is the globe is turning into one giant monotone of a culture with no new ideas allowed or adapted. Ours is a culture devoid of spirit. We spend all our time on petty moral argument while ignoring transparent solutions.

If everyone was enlightened, this wouldn't be an issue!

Submitted by JennErickson on Wed, 03/09/2011 - 02:43.
If people weren't so stupid they would have kids for all the right reasons, instead of all the wrong reasons. If everyone was enlightened there wouldn't be a population problem. Everyone just needs to sustain themselves. Back to the primal ways. Farms, trading....come on now! AND NO there should be no form of population control. Not even a law to have only 2 kids. The world will work for us if only we worked for the world.

I think that education about

Submitted by Cassius23 on Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:47.
I think that education about children would help a lot. The big thing that everyone seems to miss when talking about population is how much it costs to have a children. Let's set aside the actual financial costs. Those are pretty obvious. What about the huge loss of independence? Loss of sleep? The frequent judgement calls with few easy answers and loads of consequences(don't be too timid or the child will be spoiled rotten. Don't be too harsh or that's abuse.) The Scylla of being overshadowed by your child and Charybdis of your child falling into ruin. And don't forget that there is just a good a chance of your child viciously turning against you as there is of your child loving and supporting you when you are old. I think that the more people who really, truly, and fully understand that would have less kids. Also if you looked at the potential advantages of having children and gave people non-child ways to gain these advantages(i.e., someone to take care of you when you are old) then that would also reduce the birth rate. So, in a nutshell, I think education is primary.

Would he were fatter! But I fear him not:
Yet if my name were liable to fear, 
 I do not know the man I should avoid
So soon as that spare Cassius. He reads much;
He is a great observer

The population explosion is over

Submitted by dlaliberte on Fri, 03/11/2011 - 10:36.

It appears most people here missed the news that the population explosion is over. Although we will probably reach 9 billion by 2050, what reports of that figure often leave out is that the rate of growth has been decreasing starting around 1980, and the growth is expected to level out (i.e. reach zero growth) around that same time. So it is no longer true that the population is growing exponentially.

I have written much more about this subject in my blog article: World Population is Stabilizing.

Note that I am *not* saying that we don't have to be concerned about population issues.  We do! But the issues are much more complex and interesting than the over-simplified extremes on both sides, so if you want to effectively address the concerns, it doesn't help your case to be making incorrect arguments that are easily defeated.