In 1950, the world had 2.5 billion people; and in 2005, the world had 6.5 billion people. By 2050, this number could rise to more than 9 billion.” The fact that the population of humans on Earth could be over 10 billion people in a hundred years is shocking to me. Many projections say our global population could become unsustainable due to lack of energy sources. “Given the unequivocal relation between energy use and fertility, stabilizing the global population by mid-century will require vastly more energy than is currently projected to be available.”(DeLong 6) If those projections are even close to accurate, it can only mean problems for us and our planet. We need to start reducing the population growth rate now. That statement, at first, should make anyone a little uncomfortable. Slowing down the rate at which people reproduce is something that seems impossible to do without severely violating our natural human
In “The Tragedy of the Common,” Garrett Hardin discusses the problem of overpopulation. He argues that unlike other dilemmas in the world, the current crisis of overpopulation is a complex problem without a technical solution. The exponential growth of the human race will, as Hardin asserts is to be, the downfall of humanity. Unfortunately, this tragedy is unavoidable as there are too many variables in the mix to effectively solve the problem of overpopulation and avoid the destruction and extinction of the human race. In society, individuals think within their own bubble. They act on their beliefs, on their wants, and on their needs; not the needs of the rest of the world. Most people fail to recognize the serious consequences of “adding one
As a society, we are currently sitting in a position of increasing pressure to act on the issue of overpopulation. To develop a plan of action on long term sustainability solutions for our planet, the fundamental problems that arise from overpopulation must be explained and understood. Overpopulation brings a multitude of consequences for society as well as the environment. Individuals of rapidly growing countries experience lower education levels, inability for economic success, and an increased chance of contracting diseases. Similarly, the environment is affected by overpopulation through loss of habitat and freshwater, climate change, and intensive agricultural practices. The answers to these issues will have to be centered around two main
Today, as we near the 21st century, overpopulation, as some may call it, still seems to be a concern. There have been reports that, if the current rate of population growth were maintained, the world will be home to some 694 trillion people by the year 2150, almost 125 times that of today's population (Bender, p. 65). On October 12th, 1999, the world was presented with the associated press headline that the world population counter at the UN topped 6 billion. It is evident that our society is still concerned about the increasing population. The intent of this paper is to prove that there is not, and will never be, according to long-term trends, a situation in which it is impossible to provide everyone on earth a living standard at the subsistence level.
Of all of the environmental issues we perceive on the planet today, overpopulation is one that can be easily overlooked. Challenges such as pollution, climate change and global warming all seem to take priority in coverage, education and discovering solutions, but the majority of key environmental issues flow from the very fact that humans are over populating the globe. Overpopulation is the rapid increase of the human population, which is gradually exceeding the capacity of the globe.
In Thomas Malthus’ Essay on the Principle of Population, the scholar describes what he believes to be the constant pressures on the growth of human populations. Though he postulates that populations are checked by the “means of subsistence,” or amount of food that must be produced for everyone in a population to survive, he is unable to correctly predict the technological advances that allow for more production to occur in smaller areas of land. His linear versus exponential growth models for food production and population, respectively, were also largely approximated and did not take into account the continued progress of civilization and the ability of humanity to innovate and solve problems. Furthermore, while his assumption that the attraction between the sexes will never be removed from society still holds true today, he is unable to foresee scientific advancements such as contraception that decrease the number of children per
Critics are warning that at almost six and a half billion people currently inhabiting the world, we are coming dangerously close to the sustainable capacity of planet Earth. Overpopulation and attempts to control the whirlwind of reproduction that is plaguing both developing and developed nations has been dog-eared as one of the major concerns for the United Nations at the recent summit in Johannesburg. Both Edwin Dolan and Charles Southwick have cited the population explosion that started post-industrialization in their respective excerpts; "TANSTAAFL: The Economic Strategy for Economic Crisis" and Global Ecology and Human Perspective - as a problem deserving serious attention both in academia and the international front. However, both men's arguments contain some rather significant holes for several reasons. The first is perhaps often overlooked when discussing the Earth's ultimate capacity in terms of human population. What is a sustainable number of persons on the Earth? How is it to be measured? What basic human rights should be ensured to every man, woman, and child, and how can these rights be ensured without a redistribution of wealth? In essence, can overpopulation and economic disparity be separated? Southwick discusses this, but gives no decisive verdict on how the two are actually related, while Dolan claims that the issue is of less urgency than commonly perceived.
Among the first main publications considering at the ability of the earth to withstand its population was ‘An essay on the principle of population’ written in 1798 by Thomas Malthus. In this article, Mathus suggested that the future population growth was unsustainable As population grew more than resources , the population out grew the resources accessible to them leading to famine, diseases and war.This was unpredicted due to advances in technology, sanitation, population growth slowing down and food distribution, however the general theory is still relevant in the 21st century.
Overpopulation is when the demand of humans is too high for the supply of the earth. Many people do not consider this a threat or have even considered it. Many scientists believe that the world can hold up to 10 billion people which will be in the next 100 years. (Wolchover, 4) Will you or even your children be alive? To many of you the answer is yes. If the world’s fertility rate is above 2.1 children per woman then it is something we need to be conscious about. We can look at the history, present, and future of overpopulation to decide what the next step will be.
The world’s population is rising rapidly from seven billion to the estimated nine billion in 2050 (Ellis, Overpopulation is Not the Problem). Every human being adds stress to the Earth’s resources. Numerous places like Africa and China maintain a copious amount starvation and poverty. There are days when people go without food, water, or shelter. There is even such happening in the United States. In such places, it is difficult to find contraception, or birth control, which leads to unplanned pregnancies. These situations are rooted down to overpopulation, which is when there are too many humans. However, there is a multitude of ways to reverse such negative effects. Population control is a necessary act that will benefit the world through sparing natural resources, decreasing famine, and controlling unplanned pregnancies. A worldwide effort would have to take effect in order for a successful future.