Source
(Warning: long text)
The U.S. Census predicts the population will reach nine billion by 2048. What will happen once too many people occupy Earth? Some people speculate overpopulation will lead to political and economic problems such as elevated crime rates, food and water shortages, and depletion of oil. Others do not believe it is a problem as growing technology will accommodate the issue. However, despite both sides assuming one solution to the problem, there is no definite solution. Society can only hope to alleviate overpopulation through education.
Overpopulation can be defined as occurring “when a population has exceeded its carrying capacity.” Carrying capacity is the “maximum number of individuals of a species that can exist in a habitat indefinitely without threatening other species in that habitat” (Lin). Doris Lin, who has a Bachelor of Science degree in Applied Biological Sciences from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Juris Doctor from the University of Southern California Law Center, defines overpopulation using scientific terms. Defining overpopulation gives one of many interpretations of how to solve overpopulation as well as its importance.
However, why is overpopulation important? Opposition arguments against overpopulation’s importance assume technology will solve the problem. Professor Erle C. Ellis of Geography and Environmental Systems cites the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, which “has estimated that the more than nine billion people expected by 2050…could be supported as long as necessary investments in infrastructure and conducive trade, anti-poverty and food security policies are in place.” He refers to historical evidence of the carrying capacity for prehistoric human hunter-gathers being no more than 100 million, but without Paleolithic technology, he says “the number would be far less — perhaps a few tens of millions” (Ellis). Ellis uses historical evidence and the United Nation’s testimonial to show that overpopulation is not a concern.
However, Ellis’s argument assumes the grounds that technology will progress far enough to sufficiently meet carrying capacity. However, there is no factual evidence guaranteeing technological progression. His historical evidence is met with a counter-example from Lin. Lin uses an example on Easter Island “where a human population with finite resources was nearly wiped out when their consumption increased beyond what the island could sustain.” Lin notes a cascading effect of deforestation:
The islanders lacked the resources necessary to make ropes and seaworthy canoes. Fishing from shore was not as effective as fishing out on the ocean… without canoes, the islanders had nowhere to go. They wiped out sea birds, land birds, lizards and snails. Deforestation also led to erosion, which made it difficult to grow crops. Without adequate food, the population crashed. A rich and complex society…was reduced to living in caves and resorted to cannibalism.
Thus, the society felt the effects of having no resources left due to overpopulation and degraded. She draws on the speculation of Jared Diamond, who is a professor of geography and was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his published book Guns, Germs, and Steel, to draw inference on this historical collapse:
The forest the islanders depended on for rollers and rope didn't simply disappear one day-it vanished slowly, over decades . . . any islander who tried to warn about the dangers of progressive deforestation would have been overridden by vested interests of carvers, bureaucrats, and chiefs, whose jobs depended on continued deforestation.
Diamond’s interpretation of the cause of Easter Island’s societal collapse focuses on political reasons behind ignoring the effects of overpopulation. Lin uses a historical example to illustrate human bureaucracy acting as a barrier to technological progression to continue sustaining humans. If people continue to ignore overpopulation’s growing importance, history, like Easter Island’s society collapsing, could repeat itself. Hoping for technology to solve overpopulation is a great mindset, but optimism can only go so far and is not a feasible solution to overpopulation.
Anne Roback Morse and Steven W. Mosher presents a different perspective on overpopulation. Morse is a graduate from the University of California, Berkeley and majored in Political Economy with a concentration in the Economics of Human Rights, while Mosher is an American social scientist who specializes in demography and is he president of the Population Research Institute. Morse and Mosher define overpopulation as “a problem created by the numbers of people, not their behaviors.” They provide the hypothetical scenario of every person occupying an island or continent and consequently causing artificial “overpopulation” (Morse and Mosher). They believe overpopulation occurs in a closed environment, which is not the case on Earth (Morse and Mosher). Thus, they consider the effects of overpopulation solvable.
With this perspective on overpopulation, Morse and Mosher argue that policies solve problems created by overpopulation such as water shortage and excess food consumption. For water shortages particularly in the Sahel, they say, “Water is expensive to transport, requiring large-scale capital investments…which act as an effective barrier,” and emphasize more dams, canals, and pipelines are the solution (Morse and Mosher). For excessive consumption of food, Morse and Mosher argue, “falling price of high energy foods indicates that they are becoming more plentiful.” They also cite the World Education Service, who estimates that “’world agriculture produces 17% more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago...This is enough to provide everyone in the world with at least 2,720 kilocalories (kcal) per person per day’” (Morse and Mosher). Morse and Mosher provide economic reasons of why there are water shortages and refute the increased consumption of food with a statistic showing the accommodation for this increase.
To summarize their argument, Morse and Mosher provide the following picture (see fig. 1).
(Warning: long text)
The U.S. Census predicts the population will reach nine billion by 2048. What will happen once too many people occupy Earth? Some people speculate overpopulation will lead to political and economic problems such as elevated crime rates, food and water shortages, and depletion of oil. Others do not believe it is a problem as growing technology will accommodate the issue. However, despite both sides assuming one solution to the problem, there is no definite solution. Society can only hope to alleviate overpopulation through education.
Overpopulation can be defined as occurring “when a population has exceeded its carrying capacity.” Carrying capacity is the “maximum number of individuals of a species that can exist in a habitat indefinitely without threatening other species in that habitat” (Lin). Doris Lin, who has a Bachelor of Science degree in Applied Biological Sciences from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Juris Doctor from the University of Southern California Law Center, defines overpopulation using scientific terms. Defining overpopulation gives one of many interpretations of how to solve overpopulation as well as its importance.
However, why is overpopulation important? Opposition arguments against overpopulation’s importance assume technology will solve the problem. Professor Erle C. Ellis of Geography and Environmental Systems cites the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, which “has estimated that the more than nine billion people expected by 2050…could be supported as long as necessary investments in infrastructure and conducive trade, anti-poverty and food security policies are in place.” He refers to historical evidence of the carrying capacity for prehistoric human hunter-gathers being no more than 100 million, but without Paleolithic technology, he says “the number would be far less — perhaps a few tens of millions” (Ellis). Ellis uses historical evidence and the United Nation’s testimonial to show that overpopulation is not a concern.
However, Ellis’s argument assumes the grounds that technology will progress far enough to sufficiently meet carrying capacity. However, there is no factual evidence guaranteeing technological progression. His historical evidence is met with a counter-example from Lin. Lin uses an example on Easter Island “where a human population with finite resources was nearly wiped out when their consumption increased beyond what the island could sustain.” Lin notes a cascading effect of deforestation:
The islanders lacked the resources necessary to make ropes and seaworthy canoes. Fishing from shore was not as effective as fishing out on the ocean… without canoes, the islanders had nowhere to go. They wiped out sea birds, land birds, lizards and snails. Deforestation also led to erosion, which made it difficult to grow crops. Without adequate food, the population crashed. A rich and complex society…was reduced to living in caves and resorted to cannibalism.
Thus, the society felt the effects of having no resources left due to overpopulation and degraded. She draws on the speculation of Jared Diamond, who is a professor of geography and was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his published book Guns, Germs, and Steel, to draw inference on this historical collapse:
The forest the islanders depended on for rollers and rope didn't simply disappear one day-it vanished slowly, over decades . . . any islander who tried to warn about the dangers of progressive deforestation would have been overridden by vested interests of carvers, bureaucrats, and chiefs, whose jobs depended on continued deforestation.
Diamond’s interpretation of the cause of Easter Island’s societal collapse focuses on political reasons behind ignoring the effects of overpopulation. Lin uses a historical example to illustrate human bureaucracy acting as a barrier to technological progression to continue sustaining humans. If people continue to ignore overpopulation’s growing importance, history, like Easter Island’s society collapsing, could repeat itself. Hoping for technology to solve overpopulation is a great mindset, but optimism can only go so far and is not a feasible solution to overpopulation.
Anne Roback Morse and Steven W. Mosher presents a different perspective on overpopulation. Morse is a graduate from the University of California, Berkeley and majored in Political Economy with a concentration in the Economics of Human Rights, while Mosher is an American social scientist who specializes in demography and is he president of the Population Research Institute. Morse and Mosher define overpopulation as “a problem created by the numbers of people, not their behaviors.” They provide the hypothetical scenario of every person occupying an island or continent and consequently causing artificial “overpopulation” (Morse and Mosher). They believe overpopulation occurs in a closed environment, which is not the case on Earth (Morse and Mosher). Thus, they consider the effects of overpopulation solvable.
With this perspective on overpopulation, Morse and Mosher argue that policies solve problems created by overpopulation such as water shortage and excess food consumption. For water shortages particularly in the Sahel, they say, “Water is expensive to transport, requiring large-scale capital investments…which act as an effective barrier,” and emphasize more dams, canals, and pipelines are the solution (Morse and Mosher). For excessive consumption of food, Morse and Mosher argue, “falling price of high energy foods indicates that they are becoming more plentiful.” They also cite the World Education Service, who estimates that “’world agriculture produces 17% more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago...This is enough to provide everyone in the world with at least 2,720 kilocalories (kcal) per person per day’” (Morse and Mosher). Morse and Mosher provide economic reasons of why there are water shortages and refute the increased consumption of food with a statistic showing the accommodation for this increase.
To summarize their argument, Morse and Mosher provide the following picture (see fig. 1).
Fig. 1. Overcrowding is not Overpopulation. “Debunking the Myth of Overpopulation.” The Population Research Institute. Population Research Institute, 30 Sept. 2013. Web. 25 Apr. 2016.
This picture shows Morse and Mosher putting the responsibilities of overcrowding to city planners. Morse and Mosher provide great rebuttals to the importance of overpopulation. Unfortunately, their grounds assume policies will get the food and water to the needy easily. Their statistic also assumes 2720 kilocalories suffices for everyone, which is not necessarily true. Lastly, their picture presents an ultimatum of the burden of the solution going to city planners or population controllers. This false dilemma fallacy ignores a solution involving neither or both of them and assumes the population can not contribute to the effort of reducing overpopulation.
To demonstrate a weakness in this solution and how it does not always work, Hannah Gais introduces a failed controversial U.S. policy of family planning to alleviate overpopulation. Gais, who was a former assistant editor at the Foreign Policy Association and is currently a fellow at Young Professionals in Foreign Policy, states, “family planning programs have faced numerous hurdles in the past, though, most of them stemming from the domestic debate within the U.S. over abortion rights.” She introduces former University of Arizona professor Alan Weisman to comment on the issue: “During the Reagan administration…much of our funding stopped. It was called the '[global] gag rule' – we refused to fund any program anywhere that even talked about abortion as a possible alternative for a woman.”
Analogous to Lin’s historical example, human bureaucracy consisting of controversy over policies and political correctness made family planning difficult to support. This failure to implement family planning shows how policies can fail just like possible policies implemented to solve excess food consumption and water shortages. Presented evidence proves these issues will face the same inefficiency of human bureaucracy and political correctness. With these barriers existing in society, implementing government policies to solve overpopulation is not the efficient solution.
With no solution in mind, how is overpopulation addressed? Freelance Marketing Consultant & Content Strategist and graduate from Syracuse University Adria Saracino addresses some negative effects of overpopulation being loss of arable land, food and water shortages, unsustainable debt-based economies, elevated crime rates, and other detriments. Saracino shows that people the devastating effects of overpopulation. Since it cannot be ignored, without incurring economic and environmental issues, people must combat overpopulation.
Despite proposed solutions of decreasing consumption of food and water to live within planet’s carrying capacity, these plans would not work. As Professor of Population Studies for Biological Sciences Paul Ehrlich and Associate Director of the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford University Anne Ehrlich explains, “Overpopulation is defined by the animals that occupy the turf, behaving as they naturally behave, not by a hypothetical group that might be substituted for them” (Lin). The Ehrlichs explain why human behavior can not be easily controlled, so this plan would not solve overpopulation. Lin goes on to explain that the “per capita energy consumption increased from 1990 to 2005” shows reducing consumption is important. Reducing consumption can only stall the inevitable effects of having too many people on one planet, so it cannot be the solution either.
Source
Extreme methods to curb overpopulation can not violate human rights, such as China’s one child policy that “has led to human rights violations ranging from forced sterilizations to forced abortions and infanticide” (Lin). Solutions to overpopulation should be humane and realistic in implementing them. Results of China’s one child policy reiterate evidence of policies failing to consider human behavior.
Consequently, a proposed solution that comes up bearing humane practices is introducing tax policies giving incentives for having fewer children. However, Arjun Kulkarni, who has a Bachelor's in Business Administration, writes that proposing tax policies for not reproducing will face inefficient bureaucracy and may result in “racially and economically disproportionate population control.” Tax policies may also result in various corrupt practices including false registrations for singles and illegal abortions (Kulkarni). Theoretically, this incentive would reduce the population growth in countries such as the U.S and Europe, but since people always love rewards, these incentives would create illegal practices looking to maximize these incentives in any way. These proposed solutions highlight a problem to solutions of overpopulation; no one solution seems to work.
Rather than looking for a solution to overpopulation, targeting a “maintenance” to the issue is more reasonable. Saracino states, “Solution tends to imply ‘fix,’ which in the case of overpopulation the only way to truly fix the problem would be to reduce the number of people. Since that is not a viable option, ‘solution’ really means ‘maintenance’ in this case.” By looking at solution as alleviation of the problem, a different practical perspective of education and awareness emerges to combat overpopulation.
Extreme methods to curb overpopulation can not violate human rights, such as China’s one child policy that “has led to human rights violations ranging from forced sterilizations to forced abortions and infanticide” (Lin). Solutions to overpopulation should be humane and realistic in implementing them. Results of China’s one child policy reiterate evidence of policies failing to consider human behavior.
Consequently, a proposed solution that comes up bearing humane practices is introducing tax policies giving incentives for having fewer children. However, Arjun Kulkarni, who has a Bachelor's in Business Administration, writes that proposing tax policies for not reproducing will face inefficient bureaucracy and may result in “racially and economically disproportionate population control.” Tax policies may also result in various corrupt practices including false registrations for singles and illegal abortions (Kulkarni). Theoretically, this incentive would reduce the population growth in countries such as the U.S and Europe, but since people always love rewards, these incentives would create illegal practices looking to maximize these incentives in any way. These proposed solutions highlight a problem to solutions of overpopulation; no one solution seems to work.
Rather than looking for a solution to overpopulation, targeting a “maintenance” to the issue is more reasonable. Saracino states, “Solution tends to imply ‘fix,’ which in the case of overpopulation the only way to truly fix the problem would be to reduce the number of people. Since that is not a viable option, ‘solution’ really means ‘maintenance’ in this case.” By looking at solution as alleviation of the problem, a different practical perspective of education and awareness emerges to combat overpopulation.
Source
Education makes people more well-informed of personal efforts that can reduce overpopulation’s effects. For example, according to the UNFPA, “Some 200 million women who would like to use contraceptives lack access to them” (Lin). However, by educating these women about the location of contraceptives, they could advantageously utilize them and consequently reduce unintended births and abortions. Once they are educated, women could choose to have fewer children, which alleviates the issue of overpopulation compared to women who have children without careful thought and subsequently doubling their contribution to overpopulation. Statistics show the positive correlation of education to birth rates proven by Gais citing Mali, Niger, and Chad as examples of this connection:
Better education, both general and reproductive… [has] the proven effect of empowering citizens while limiting birth rates. Conversely, poor education and lower primary school completion rates – take, for instance, the 40 percent of adult African women who have no education, compared to 20 percent in Asia and 10 percent in Latin America and the Caribbean – tend to lead to higher fertility rates.
Previous studies presented at the United Nations shows the positive results of education on birth rates. If these growing countries have reduced birth rates with general and reproductive education for women, this same effective and simple solution will work for all growing countries.
While increased education specifically targets women, all individuals should be equally informed. Kulkarni says “a lack of education, coupled with poverty, gives rise to a simple theorem in impoverished classes: ‘More hands, more money’.” This lack of education causes poor classes to seek more income through whatever means, which “leads to the requirement of more land, more food, and more basic resources” (Kulkarni). Kulkarni provides an expert opinion on education’s beneficial effects by noting these classes would become aware of the harm of overpopulation. Also, education “would also provide them and their children better remuneration, eliminating the 'more hands, more money' paradigm” (Kulkarni). With education, people could have higher-paying jobs and not rely on having more children to feed their family.
Without proper education, Kulkarni critiques the procrastination of parents in educating their children about sex resulting in fewer taking advantage of contraceptives. Taking contraceptives will reduce the amount of unwanted births and consequently reducing overpopulation. Besides general individuals, education will help sexually active teenagers be aware of the natural aspects of sex and teach them about contraceptives. These examples show that education is a major factor in lessening overpopulation. Ultimately, however, education should be combined with other solutions to diminish the effects of overpopulation.
No definite solution can solve overpopulation. Overpopulation’s importance can not be ignored without feeling its effects. Possible implemented policies to combat the effects of overpopulation will face issues such as bureaucracy and controversy. Instead, informing individuals of overpopulation and what contributes to it can mitigate its effects.
While an individual can only do so much to alleviate the issues of overpopulation, there are general tips to reduce the contribution to overpopulation. Minimizing consumption of products, taking advantage of contraceptives, and protecting the environment are some ways to ease the effects of overpopulation (Saracino). Besides committing to maintaining this issue, donating to organizations and initiatives such as the United Nations Population Fund and the Worldwatch Institute combating overpopulation is valuable too. Donations, volunteering, and spreading awareness are some ways to support these groups. Despite the multiple perspectives arising from overpopulation, being informed benefits people in making informed choices, so education becomes a practical solution to productively minimizing overpopulation.
Works Cited
Ellis, Erle C. “Overpopulation is not the Problem.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 13 Sept. 2013. Web. 8 May 2016.
Gais, Hannah. “How Many People is Too Many People?” U.S. News Opinion. U.S. News & World Report, 27 Sept. 2013. Web. 8 May 2016.
"Global Population Growth." Census Bureau. United States Census Bureau, 2002. Web. 8 May 2016.
Kulkarni, Arjun. “Solutions to Overpopulation.” Buzzle. Buzzle.com, 11 Jul. 2012. Web. 8 May 2016.
Lin, Doris. “Human Overpopulation.” About. About.com, 3 Feb. 2016. Web. 8 May 2016.
Morse, Anne Roback, and Steven W. Mosher. “Debunking the Myth of Overpopulation.” The Population Research Institute. Population Research Institute, 30 Sept. 2013. Web. 8 May 2016.
Saracino, Adria. “Overpopulation: The Facts and Solutions.” Care2. Care2.com, 8 Apr. 2012. Web. 8 May 2016.
What are your thoughts on overpopulation? What do you think you can do to mitigate its effects?
Education makes people more well-informed of personal efforts that can reduce overpopulation’s effects. For example, according to the UNFPA, “Some 200 million women who would like to use contraceptives lack access to them” (Lin). However, by educating these women about the location of contraceptives, they could advantageously utilize them and consequently reduce unintended births and abortions. Once they are educated, women could choose to have fewer children, which alleviates the issue of overpopulation compared to women who have children without careful thought and subsequently doubling their contribution to overpopulation. Statistics show the positive correlation of education to birth rates proven by Gais citing Mali, Niger, and Chad as examples of this connection:
Better education, both general and reproductive… [has] the proven effect of empowering citizens while limiting birth rates. Conversely, poor education and lower primary school completion rates – take, for instance, the 40 percent of adult African women who have no education, compared to 20 percent in Asia and 10 percent in Latin America and the Caribbean – tend to lead to higher fertility rates.
Previous studies presented at the United Nations shows the positive results of education on birth rates. If these growing countries have reduced birth rates with general and reproductive education for women, this same effective and simple solution will work for all growing countries.
While increased education specifically targets women, all individuals should be equally informed. Kulkarni says “a lack of education, coupled with poverty, gives rise to a simple theorem in impoverished classes: ‘More hands, more money’.” This lack of education causes poor classes to seek more income through whatever means, which “leads to the requirement of more land, more food, and more basic resources” (Kulkarni). Kulkarni provides an expert opinion on education’s beneficial effects by noting these classes would become aware of the harm of overpopulation. Also, education “would also provide them and their children better remuneration, eliminating the 'more hands, more money' paradigm” (Kulkarni). With education, people could have higher-paying jobs and not rely on having more children to feed their family.
Without proper education, Kulkarni critiques the procrastination of parents in educating their children about sex resulting in fewer taking advantage of contraceptives. Taking contraceptives will reduce the amount of unwanted births and consequently reducing overpopulation. Besides general individuals, education will help sexually active teenagers be aware of the natural aspects of sex and teach them about contraceptives. These examples show that education is a major factor in lessening overpopulation. Ultimately, however, education should be combined with other solutions to diminish the effects of overpopulation.
No definite solution can solve overpopulation. Overpopulation’s importance can not be ignored without feeling its effects. Possible implemented policies to combat the effects of overpopulation will face issues such as bureaucracy and controversy. Instead, informing individuals of overpopulation and what contributes to it can mitigate its effects.
While an individual can only do so much to alleviate the issues of overpopulation, there are general tips to reduce the contribution to overpopulation. Minimizing consumption of products, taking advantage of contraceptives, and protecting the environment are some ways to ease the effects of overpopulation (Saracino). Besides committing to maintaining this issue, donating to organizations and initiatives such as the United Nations Population Fund and the Worldwatch Institute combating overpopulation is valuable too. Donations, volunteering, and spreading awareness are some ways to support these groups. Despite the multiple perspectives arising from overpopulation, being informed benefits people in making informed choices, so education becomes a practical solution to productively minimizing overpopulation.
Works Cited
Ellis, Erle C. “Overpopulation is not the Problem.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 13 Sept. 2013. Web. 8 May 2016.
Gais, Hannah. “How Many People is Too Many People?” U.S. News Opinion. U.S. News & World Report, 27 Sept. 2013. Web. 8 May 2016.
"Global Population Growth." Census Bureau. United States Census Bureau, 2002. Web. 8 May 2016.
Kulkarni, Arjun. “Solutions to Overpopulation.” Buzzle. Buzzle.com, 11 Jul. 2012. Web. 8 May 2016.
Lin, Doris. “Human Overpopulation.” About. About.com, 3 Feb. 2016. Web. 8 May 2016.
Morse, Anne Roback, and Steven W. Mosher. “Debunking the Myth of Overpopulation.” The Population Research Institute. Population Research Institute, 30 Sept. 2013. Web. 8 May 2016.
Saracino, Adria. “Overpopulation: The Facts and Solutions.” Care2. Care2.com, 8 Apr. 2012. Web. 8 May 2016.
What are your thoughts on overpopulation? What do you think you can do to mitigate its effects?