Center for American Awesomeness

Dealing with Overpopulation: Education as the First Step

Alex Hudock April 9th, 2013
Introduction Is our world really overpopulated? Could we reach the point where we'd have to fight for resources? Would thousands of people be left to die without food, shelter, or water? To put it simply, yes. With the recent population explosion, resources are being consumed much faster than they should be. And this population increase isn't slowing down, either. In fact, data collected by various organizations have shown a trend of the world's population growing exponentially over the past 200 years. Figure 1 (right) shows this trend all too clear, revealing the startling truth that we are growing much faster than we should be.1 If left unsolved, humans will have to fight for resources, leaving the weak and poor without any hope for survival. Waiting for this to happen is not the answer. Figure 1: World Population Something must be done now if true change is going to occur in the future, and that something is education. Most people don't think about overpopulation at all, which has to change. By educating people on the threat of overpopulation, they will become more aware of the issue and support its resolution, which is the first step towards managing population growth. Looking at census data is the best way to understand why overpopulation has become such an issue over the past few centuries. According to the United States Census Bureau, the world's population was about 7.037 billion as of March 12, 2012.2 Just five months before that, the United Nations Population Fund stated that the world's population had reached the 7 billion mark.3 To put things into perspective, the world's population was measured at only 1 billion in 1800. 127 years later it doubled, and 47 years after that it doubled again. Advancements in medicine, clean drinking water, and better living
1 Center for American Awesomeness | Dealing with Overpopulation: Education as the First Step

conditions have stimulated this population growth in an unprecedented way, leaving many analysts worried about future growth. First Concerns of Overpopulation Although it seems like this issue has only recently been serious, the first warning dates back to 1798 when Thomas Malthus published "An Essay on the Principle of Population."4 In this piece, Malthus brought to light the truth that human beings reproduce at a geometric rate while food is only produced at an arithmetic rate. Recalling theories from calculus, a geometric rate refers to something increasing exponentially while arithmetic means it increases through addition or multiplication. Since population grows faster than food production, at some point there will not be enough food for everyone. If this became the case, what would we do about it? Malthus proposed that at some point, there would be no other option than let those without access to food die. Of course, this solution violates the basic human right to life, making it no practical solution at all. Consequences of Overpopulation While Malthus argued that overpopulation would deplete the food supply, there are many more implications than simply not being able to produce enough food. According to Paul and Anne Ehrlich, an area is considered overpopulated if it cannot be maintained without rapidly depleting natural resources.5 Most places in the United States already rapidly deplete resources, so allowing the population to increase even more would only make things worse. If left unchecked, our enormous resource use may cause our food supply to run out faster than anyone could have imagined. One of the biggest natural resources overpopulation affects is forests, and subsequently plants and animals. The more people there are, the more houses there are. If our population continues to increase, deforestation to produce these houses will as well. Wood acquired from deforestation isn't only used for housing, however, because it is used to make paper, furniture, cardboard, and more. As our population grows, so does the demand for these products and the wood necessary to produce them. This increased deforestation destroys animals' natural habitats and damages soil necessary for plants. In the long run, increased deforestation leaves areas incapable of plant and animal life, making farming or hunting for food impossible. Another devastation implication is the depletion of the ozone layer. Although known for decades, global warming was brought to the public's attention in 2006 with Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth."6 As long as humans have lived on earth, they have used resources freely. Reckless oil use has released large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, depleting the ozone layer. This is bad because the ozone layer protects us from the sun's ultraviolet rays. The weaker the ozone layer, the more ultraviolet rays that reach earth. This means increased temperature, harsher sun poisoning, melting of the polar ice caps, and more. Altogether this depletion of the ozone layer is known as global warming, which could change life as we know it if not carefully monitored. Who's to Blame? While the world as a whole is responsible for overpopulation, the largest countries are more responsible than the others. The top three largest populated countries are China, India, and the United States.7 China is first, with a population of about 1,343,239,923.8
2 Center for American Awesomeness | Dealing with Overpopulation: Education as the First Step

Altogether that accounts for 19.09% (almost 1/5) of the world's population. Next is India with 1,205,073,612 people, or 17.12% of the world's population.9 The United States is notably smaller than both China and India with 313,847,465 people, or 4.46% of the world's population.10 Altogether, the top three countries total 40.67% (almost half) of the world's population. Population size is certainly an indicator of resource consumption, as Figure 2 (below) shows. As the world's population increased, total consumption did as well. However, a country's population doesn't specifically define anything. According to the World Watch Institute, China and India are responsible for 20% of all consumer products purchased.11 Only two countries purchase one-fifth of all consumer purchases, which is absurd. The World Watch Institute also said that the United States, which is only 4.46% of the world's population, consumes nearly 25% of all fossil fuel resources.12 To put this resource use into perspective, if underdeveloped countries consumed resources at the same rate as the U.S., four other planets the size of earth would be necessary to support them.13 As these facts show, nation's with larger populations also have larger resource consumption. This correlation makes a lot of sense anyways, because larger countries tend to be the most powerful and industrialized. By reducing population size, total resource consumption decreases too. But how can a population be controlled?

Figure 2: World Fuel Consumption from 1965-2012 (From BP's 2012 Statistical Review of World Energy data)14

A Look at China's Unique One-Child Policy Few countries have taken steps to quell their population growth. Perhaps the most well-known for attempting it is China. Known as the "one-child policy", China requires that all families are only allowed to have one child.15 By having such a policy, the nation's population would shrink at a constant yet very slow rate. The policy was first introduced in 1978 by the People's Republic of China (PRC) and officially applied in 1979.16 According to Chinese authorities, the policy has prevented 400 million births from 1979 to 2011.17 Although China's one-child policy has been largely successful, it has obvious social implications. Perhaps the most apparent is its infringement on the basic human right of choice. Citizens are stripped of the choice of how many children they wish to have, which
3 Center for American Awesomeness | Dealing with Overpopulation: Education as the First Step

many would argue is wrong. In addition to this, the policy has psychological implications, brought forth by forced abortions and female infanticide.18 If a Chinese woman becomes pregnant with a second child, the law requires she have an abortion. No matter what the situation, the woman has no choice but to have her child killed. Being forced to kill your own child is unimaginable, but it is a common occurrence in China. While most of these second children have been prevented, a few have obviously been born. For some of these mothers, however, the stress of being arrested or fined has caused them to kill their own babies. The psychological stress that brings such an action on coupled with the following mental damage is horrific. Finding a Solution While China may be helping control its population, are the social implications really worth it? Surprisingly, a 2008 Pew Research Center survey reported that 76% of the Chinese population supports the policy.19 Regardless of whether these results are legitimate, a policy like China's is just not the answer. Limiting a person's basic human rights is anything but a successful solution, even if it does solve the issue. Looking at a different situation in the same way reveals the flaws of having restrictive policies. For example, if a farm owner had a shortage of workers, would having slaves be the right solution? Sure, it would solve his problem, but it's wrong. It infringes on the basic human right of freedom, just as the one-child policy does. Unfortunately, overpopulation is an extremely tricky issue. Forcing people to cooperate won't work, and leaving the problem alone won't do anything either. The only way to get people involved is by encouraging them to do so. There are many ways to do this, but one possible method would be providing benefits to those with only one child, such as tax breaks. As families increase in size, the taxes they'd pay would increase as well. Depending on the size of the tax break, people would begin having smaller families, slowing population growth and even potentially shrinking it. While tax breaks are an obvious benefit, the benefits provided to one child families are only limited to the government's creativity. Depending on how necessary it is to slow population growth, governments could provide benefits as wild as allowing parents of one child the opportunity to retire much earlier than those with more children. Varying both the number and value of benefits provided by the government would provide a means of controlling population growth as slow or as fast as necessary. While encouraging people to cooperate against overpopulation is the best solution, it isn't immediately feasible. If the government began putting benefits in place, there would be a huge uproar. Instead, the first step is education. By educating people on overpopulation, their mindset changes. If made aware of the implications of their own actions, they will change. Instead of having three, four, or five children, people will only have one or two. This is because people do what they want to do. If they understand the threat of overpopulation, they will want to make a change and will accept steps taken by the government to do so. Education won't change things overnight, but it does begin the process. In the same way that Al Gore made global warming a relevant issue to people, education on overpopulation will do the same. People will talk about it, people will make changes to help it, people will study it, and one day people will be able to manage it. Until then, discussing the issue and educating others takes the first step towards a change. The more people that know about the problem, the better. Spreading information can be as simple as educating peers, yet there are more effective methods. Some other
4 Center for American Awesomeness | Dealing with Overpopulation: Education as the First Step

methods include sending professional speakers to schools, putting advertisements on television, or even creating a film similar to "An Inconvenient Truth." By spreading knowledge to the public, awareness and care about overpopulation will occur. A true positive change may not occur for decades, but by establishing a solid knowledge base and genuine support in the public, it will happen.

5 Center for American Awesomeness | Dealing with Overpopulation: Education as the First Step

Notes 1 U.S. Census Bureau (USCB), 2008, "Total Midyear Population for the World: 1950-2050", Data updated 12-15-2008, http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpop.html 2 "U.S. Census Bureau World POPClock Projection". July 2012July 2013 data. 3 "Population seven billion: UN sets out challenges". BBC. October 26, 2011. 4 Okafor, Theresa. "Looking to the Future: Overpopulation or Global Depopulation." WPF Dialogue of Civilizations. World Public Forum Dialogue of Civilizations, 23 Oct. 2012. Web. 04 Apr. 2013. <http://wpfdc.org/society/1027-looking-to-the-future-overpopulation-orglobal-depopulation>. 5 Ehrlich, Paul and Anne Ehrlich. (1990). THE POPULATION EXPLOSION; Simon and Schuster, 37-40 6 "NY Times: An Inconvenient Truth". The New York Times. 7 CIA World Factbook. 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. 11 "The State of Consumption Today." Worldwatch Institute. Worldwatch Institute - Vision for a Sustainable World, 2013. Web. 05 Apr. 2013. <http://www.worldwatch.org/node/810>. 12 Ibid. 13 "Consumption by the United States." Mindfully.org. Mindfully.org, n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2013. <http://www.mindfully.org/Sustainability/Americans-Consume-24percent.htm>. 14 BPs 2012 Statistical Review of World Energy data. 15 Information Office of the State Council Of the People's Republic of China (August 1995). "Family Planning in China". Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Lithuania. Section III paragraph 2. 16 Ibid. 17 "400 million births prevented by one-child policy". People's daily online. October 2011. 18 Damien Mcelroy (2001-04-08). "Chinese region 'must conduct 20,000 abortions'". London: Telegraph. 19 "The Chinese Celebrate Their Roaring Economy, As They Struggle With Its Costs". 200807-22.

6 Center for American Awesomeness | Dealing with Overpopulation: Education as the First Step