In my opinion, population growth is one of the problems developing countries are facing that make it extremely difficult to improve their economies. Other problems are the weak government structure, corruption at all levels, wrong economic development model, lack of natural resources, or adequate exploitation, among others.

There are several reasons why population growth in developing countries is today a greater economic burden than it once was in today's developed countries:

1-Population growth is now much more rapid than in the past. In industrializing Europe, it seldom exceeded 1.5% a year, compared with the 2-4% that most developing countries have averaged since World War II.

2- Unlike nineteenth-century Europe, large-scale emigration from today's developing countries is not possible.

3-Compared with Europe, Japan, and North America in their periods of fastest population growth, income in developing countries is still low, human and physical capital are less built up, and in some countries, political and social institutions are less well established.

4-Many developing countries whose economies are still largely dependent on agriculture can no longer draw on large tracts of unused land.

You are absolutely right, The high population growth rate is one of the huge challenge for under developing as well as developing countries.

Thank you to the researcher for the question. I do not think this analysis is accurate, and the evidence for that is that China is the most populous country in the world - around 1.4 billion - and yet it has the largest global economy after the United States and the first in terms of economic growth rate, if not the increase Population is the cause of poverty or backwardness, but the economic policy pursued by the state and the degree of financial and administrative corruption that prevails in the state, and the evidence for that is my country, Iraq, which has the third oil reserves in the world and exports up to 4 million barrels per month in exchange for the budget deficit and unemployment of up to 50% And 30% of the population is below the poverty line, all of this is a result of the corrupt government of foreign countries - Iran and America - so it can be said that poverty or backwardness is not caused by overpopulation.

Yes, for poor and less developed countries, population growth is a curse. If the country is poor, increased population growth means increased number of people who are poor with less access to social services leading to less human capital development which is key for growth and development). Furthermore, increased population (with no parallel economic growth) in poor countries would cause conflict/war and competition over meagre resources, unemployed/underemployed mass, chronic food insecurity at household level, and increased number of malnourished children (as less land, skilled labor and technology is available to boost productivity). These all would in turn lead to intergenerational transfer of poverty or to vicious cycle of poverty for decades or generations to come. Furthermore increased population in poor countries without parallel growth in other economic sectors would create pressure on environment (causing increased land degradation/unsustainable exploitations of natural resources and pollutions). Checked/balanced population growth is a dividend for a nation only when the country's economy is growing absorbing additional labor in its various economic sectors and when we have in place and implement the right economic, social, and environmental policies and have the right institutions, governance as well as competent, dedicated and accountable leaders and workforces at all levels that work tirelessly for the development of their people and country.

Dear Dr. Mohammed jassam Aljnabi ,

Population growth rate of China is very very low. Presently it is 0.39%!!!!

Please have a look at the following website:

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CHN/china/population-growth-rate

Thanks,

Yes, at least from the analysis of economic history, e.g. youth bulge is the reason of many wars.

We are still part of nature, where only sustainability counts, which is an original term of forestry.

Some rational and ethical balance has to be found, in terms of resources.

We decided to remain with 3 children in a metropolitan area, with respect to our private resources and capacities to not depend on the state or welfare, for example.

However, I do not support the ongoing 'war on the family', where singles and double income-no kids have advantages in the race for affordable housing, etc.

Many metropolitan regions in the EU have a singularization level of ~50% per household, which is also an unhealthy trend.

To sum it up: population dynamics can be the decisive factor of the fall and rise of nations, but is still not very well understood.

Yes, it is true. The high population growth rate is the main cause of poverty, deforestation, environmental pollution and land degradation in developing countries of the world.

More population, more are the chances that family resources will end up in feeding more and more mouth. though it is not assured the food will be healthy and adequate. For poor families, all amenities needed for civilised living will have to be compromised: housing, healthcare, education would be the serious casualty. It has serious implications for gender justice: women are supposed to satisfy the perverted male ego of bearing children (preferably son); for girl child, the only mobility-option is marriage, then whatever her luck would be. Boys must also get to work for increase earnings: limited educational opportunities would make them either frustrated and restless; or, they would be selfish enough to break these chains of family obligations. In a word, a total recipe for establishment of a dehumanised society

Yes, I agree. Because, high population rate is a curse for a developing nation if they are not properly made as human resource. So, the govt must fall in problem of providing the basic needs of overpopulation and they won't get proper facilities to become as human resource.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, population grew rapidly in countries receiving large numbers of immigrants especially in N. America and Australasia. This assisted economic growth, not retarded it. But where the population is growing but the proceeds of economic growth are narrowly shared, as in the kleptocracies and military dictatorships of contemporary sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, it is one factor aggravating poverty and low growth. Much more important are issues of bad governance, corruption, and foreign domination and extraction of wealth.

Hello Mr Shibabrata,

We should not generalize what is often observed to be the outcome of the abundance of a factor of production as it is in this case of labor due population growth . Whether a country is poor depends on various factors in addition to population growth (labor). It all depends on other factors of production such as land and natural resources as well as technology and know how. Even for the labor which may be in abundance, whether it is unskilled or skilled it makes a difference. We may think that each country has a production function OUTPUT=F(LABOR, CAPITA, TECHNOLOGY.,ENERGY..). So the ratios of the inputs in the production functions play a role. In reality there are many production functions one in each sector of the economy and this is where productivity is determine and by taking into consideration the relative scarcity of the factors of production the factor prices are determined, and the international competitiveness of the countries. Countries with high international competitiveness in the global economy end up becoming wealthy.

I hope this helps

George K Zestos

I believe the statement is wrong today. In China, Brazil and other countries, the population growth rate has already fallen dramatically and the fight against poverty continues. In Brazil, for example, the population growth rate was 0.79% in 2019 and is falling. According to projections, the rate will be 0.47% in 2030. Brazil is a developing country with high levels of poverty and inequality. About 1/4 of the population is poor when the $ 5.50 / day poverty line is used. The biggest challenges continue to be the social and economic inclusion of the population, the acquisition of human capital (schooling), the generation of jobs where the person can acquire knowledge and expertise, the provision of public services in an organized manner at low cost, the creation of incentives that facilitate savings, investments and insurance by the poor.

Yes, I agree with you

There are some excellent texts on combating poverty and behavior. I would like to highlight "poor economics" by Banerjee and Duflo. This book covers several topics like health, education, food, incentives and family planning. In chapter 5, Banerjee and Duflo explain how many attempts to impose "family planning programs" can lead to disasters, distortions, discrimination between girls and boys that perpetuate inequality and poverty. They also explain the importance of the access to contraceptive methods. Its important for women and poorest families to be able to plan the future. Lack of access can reveal a lot about other problems faced by the poorest. Problems that need to be solved or mitigated by at some point by society. As I wrote earlier, population growth rates are falling in many countries that (1) still poor or (2) have mean per capita income but still have many poor people. In Brazil, for example, low growth rate and many poor people, as stated before. Só Brazil have other challenges. Thus, Brazil has other important challenges.

Dear Dr. Leonardo Oliveira and all other colleagues,

In India, it is a common observation that there is a direct relationship between the poverty and number of offspring of the people. The poorest section of the people is having highest birth rate and least interest to use of any birth control mean.

People with particular caste/culture/religion are also having such trend.

What is your comment on that observation? How that tendency can be changed?

Thanks.

The lack of food is a fallacy, given the emergence of Precision Agriculture (or 4.0). Thus, the problem is the opposite: a drop in population growth or even a drop in population will have a major impact on a country's economy: fewer people working and more retired people.

I agree with the above statement of @Roberto_Minadeo

Hi. In my opinion George K. Zestos diagnosis is correct. Human capital is one of the production factors that must be skillfully "used". Improper management of the factors of production (land, capital, work - understood as a population that can work) contributes to the dysfunction of the economic system, and thus to the dysfunction of its most important beneficiary, which is the population.

Dear Shibabrata Pattanayak ,

We know that in poor households the number of people and children tend to be greater. However, even poor households have decreased in size in Brazil and other countries. To understand family decisions and break the circle of poverty, we need to know at least 5 important elements. (1) To what extent the poorest were able to freely choose or plan the size of the family, with women being protagonists in the decision. (2) The extent to which insurance, microfinancing, social security, private pensions and savings mechanisms target the poorest. (3) The extent to which quality education, health and basic sanitation services are available and accessible to the poorest (either through public provision or private subsidized / government-funded provision). (4) If there are income transfer policies that can raise the income of the poorest and reduce income volatility. (5) To what extent are modern education and training services able to engage children, youth, parents and teachers, and able to teach both "what to do" and "how to do" individual and group duties and tasks. (6) If there are institutions capable of "keeping" the previous 5 elements or if there are social, cultural, political or institutional norms that harm or prevent any of the 5 elements. Families make decisions based on these elements, including family planning. For example, when contraceptive methods are not accessible for the exercise of free choice, it is very likely that cultural, social or institutional factors are impairing or limiting choices. In this sense, a larger or smaller family member may be more a reflection of social structures than the cause of poverty. Banerjee and Duflo's book "Poor economics" has many results from experiments done in India and other countries. It is worth reading. It is also worth reading some Amartya Sen classics "Development as freedom" and "The idea of ​​Justice"; Acemoglu and Robinson "Why Nations Fail"; Deaton "The great escape"; Secondi "The development Economics Reader". On Inequality, it is also worth reading Milanovic "The haves and have-nots".

Very often the existence of poverty in large families is quoted to justify this thesis. Maybe it is the already existing poverty in these families that is the cause of having many children (through unkind planning of offspring), not having many children the cause of poverty?

Rather, this population growth could be a source of the sources or causes of the economic growth of these countries if it was directed in a deliberate manner.

📷

Dear Colleagues,

In the poor as well as developing countries, due to various reasons, a very high percentage of people are capable only for the works of UNSKILLED LABOURS. Due to poverty and a high to a very high number of offspring, the children neither get the proper environment of mental development nor proper education required to gather skills for the present-day world. Many of such people may be considered as some sort of burden to the concerned society/ies.

What is your observation in your country and /or other countries?

Regards,

I see that there are experiences in countries that were called underdeveloped countries in previous periods of time, and at the same time countries with high population growth were able to achieve a balance between this growth and the capacity for economic, cultural and educational growth. Korea Indonesia Malaysia.

📷

The main enemy of the poor in the developing countries are the countries' depraved political elites. The high population growth rate is a problem but not the main enemy of the poor. The main enemy of the poor in these countries are the power elite.

High population growth rate can be a contributing factor. However if the nation provides opportunities such as education, employment and growth those could be compensating factors

Artur Braun Am in full line with the impressive argumentation of Mr. Braun.

When economy is stable and growth rate is increasing day by day, in such case, the condition may be worse.

Thank you very much Shibabrata Pattanayak for the interesting question. And to all the participants for their valuable contributions.

I take the liberty of mentioning a few elements in line with the issue.

Between 1970 and 2008, wealth in the world has grown at an average rate of 3.4% per year, or equivalently we can say that world production increased by 2.7 times. During this same period of time, two neighbouring countries stand out for their high economic growth, firstly China with an average annual growth rate (AAGR) of 6.9% - increasing its wealth thirteen times - and secondly India with an AAGR of 5.2% - a country that multiplied its production a little more than six times. Taking into account the evolution of GDP per capita between 1970 and 2008, in the case of China the increase was 7.6 times during this period, while in India individual income increased only 2.4 times. Continuing the merely superficial description, the gaps in GDP per capita between the two countries are mostly due to differences in population growth. Some economists tend to use the human development index (HDI) as an estimator of individual well-being. Taking into account the world ranking of HDI by the United Nations, China was ranked No. 92 in 1980 and No. 91 in 2013. India was ranked No. 100 in the world ranking in 1980 and fell back to No. 135 in 2013. The economic growth of China and India does not represent an objective in itself for the increase in the quality of life of the population.

In demographic science, knowledge of changes in the structure of the population as a result of demographic trends is longstanding.

population structure as a result of demographic trends has been known for a long time. However, the concept of the "demographic bonus", which refers to the increase in the participation of potentially productive age groups as an opportunity for developing countries, has been proposed for many years.

of potentially productive age groups as an opportunity for developing countries was first proposed in 1998.

During the second half of the 20th century, taking the Latin American region as a target. Of the 20 countries that make up the region, only four have had a receiving migration behaviour, half of the countries in the region have negative migration balances, and the remaining six countries present a volatile situation over time in terms of their value in the migration rate. This unequal situation of migration dynamics within the region affects population growth and the age structure of the region's countries differently. However, the conceptualisation of the demographic bonus establishes regularities, and omits precisions, making it difficult to adapt it to the high heterogeneity that exists between the demographic behaviour of Latin American countries - with a predominant tendency towards divergence in terms of the values and behaviour of their fertility and mortality levels. The latter is characterised by the diversity of demographic transitions presented by its countries, requiring an analysis of cases in order to interpret the particularities of the socio-economic evolutions of each country.

With respect to the theoretical elements for analysing the relationship between population and production. The period of the classical authors of economics stands out as the one in which this problem was of greatest importance. However, with the passage of time, the analysis of the relationship between population and economic growth became less relevant in economic theory. The causes of this fact are varied, the main ones being the decrease in the share of agricultural production in total production and the specialisation of economic theory over time, which increasingly confined its object of study to the private market. It is also evident that with the passage of time, economic research has increasingly neglected the analysis of the non-economically active population, and has tended to concentrate only on the study of the population that has a link to the labour market.

Within the economic field, one of the last positive mentions between population growth and economic growth appears to be the

population growth and economic growth appears in the work of Schumpeter (1963), where it is stated that innovations in productive processes would generate increases in economic growth that would far exceed population growth. Later, recovering the Schumpeterian spirit, the Danish economist Boserup argues that population changes are determinants of economic growth and, therefore, there would be a causal relationship between population size and technological innovations.

Today, there is less consensus on the definition of economic growth than in the past. The contradictions regarding the crucially important determinants of economic growth between the different economic schools have been increasing and they have only agreed on trying to appropriate the monopoly of the economic growth paradigm. One of the central problems in economic theory is the different considerations about the role assigned to the individual and the population among the different economic paradigms. At present, this issue divides the waters between the two major schools of thought, the neoclassicals and the Keynesians.

We look forward to contributions from colleagues who are working on these issues, to sort out the ideas.

Best regards and thanks

Fernando (from Argentina)

Muchas gracias Shibabrata por la interesante pregunta. Y a todos los participantes por sus valiosos aportes.

Me tomo el atrevimiento de hacer mención a algunos elementos en línea con la problemática.

Entre 1970 y 2008 la riqueza en el mundo ha crecido a un ritmo de 3,4% promedio al año, o de manera equivalente podemos decir que la producción mundial aumentó en 2,7 veces. Durante este mismo periodo de tiempo, dos países vecinos se destacan por su alto crecimiento económico, en primer lugar, China con una tasa de crecimiento medio anual (TCMA) de 6,9% -incrementando su riqueza trece veces-, y en segundo lugar la India con una TCMA de 5,2% -país que multiplicó su producción algo más de seis veces-. Teniendo en cuenta la evolución del PBI per-cápita entre el año 1970 y 2008, en el caso de China el aumento fue de 7,6 veces durante este periodo, mientras que en la India el ingreso individual se incrementó tan sólo 2,4 veces. Continuando la descripción meramente superficial, las brechas en el PBI per-cápita entre ambos países, se debe mayoritariamente a las diferencias en el crecimiento demográfico. Algunos economistas suelen utilizar como estimador del bienestar de los individuos, al índice de desarrollo humano (IDH). Teniendo en cuenta el ranking mundial de IDH realizado por Naciones Unidas, en año 1980 China se encontraba en el puesto N° 92 mientras que en el año 2013 se ubica en el puesto N° 91. En el caso de la India se encontraba en el puesto N° 100 en el ranking mundial en el año 1980, y alcanzado el año 2013 retrocede al puesto número N° 135. Para los economistas que consideran al desarrollo humano como consecuencia del crecimiento económico, así como también para aquellos que suponen la causalidad inversa. El crecimiento económico de China e India, no representaría un objetivó en sí mismo para el incremento de la calidad de vida de la población.

En la ciencia demográfica, el conocimiento de las modificaciones en la estructura de

la población como resultado de las tendencias demográficas, es de larga data. Sin embargo, el concepto de “bono demográfico” que alude al aumento de la participación

de los grupos en edades potencialmente productivas, como una oportunidad para los países en desarrollo, fue propuesto por primera vez en el año 1998.

Durante la segunda mitad del siglo XX, tomando como objeto la región de América Latina. De los 20 países que conforman la región, sólo cuatro han tenido un comportamiento migratorio receptor, la mitad de los países de la región tienen saldos migratorios negativos, y los restantes seis países presentan una situación volátil en el tiempo en cuanto a su valor en la tasa de migración. Esta situación desigual de la dinámica migratoria al interior de la región, afecta de manera diferencial el crecimiento demográfico y la estructura de edades de los países de la región. No obstante, la conceptualización del bono demográfico establece regularidades, y omite precisiones, dificultando la adaptación del mismo a la alta heterogeneidad existente entre los comportamientos demográficos de los países de América Latina – predominando la tendencia a la divergencia, en lo que respecta a los valores y comportamientos de sus niveles de fecundidad y mortalidad–. Esta última se caracteriza, por la diversidad de transiciones demográficas que presentan sus países, requiriendo de un análisis de casos, para interpretar las particularidades de las evoluciones socio-económicas de cada país.

Respeto a los elementos teóricos para analizar la relación entre población y producción. Se destaca el periodo de los autores clásicos de la economía donde esta problemática tuvo la mayor importancia. Mientras que con el paso del tiempo dentro de la teoría económica fue perdiendo relevancia el análisis entre el crecimiento demográfico y económico. Las causas de este hecho son variadas, se destacan principalmente el descenso de la participación de la producción agraria en la producción total y la especialización de la teoría económica en el tiempo, que fue circunscribiendo cada vez más su objeto de estudio al mercado privado. También se evidencia que con el paso del tiempo las investigaciones económicas fueron dejando de lado el análisis de la población no económicamente activa, y tendieron a concentrarse solamente en el estudio de la población que tiene un vínculo con el mercado laboral.

Dentro del campo económico, una de las últimas menciones positivas entre el crecimiento

poblacional y el crecimiento económico aparece en el trabajo de Schumpeter (1963), en donde se afirma que las innovaciones en los procesos productivos generarían aumentos de crecimiento económico que superarían ampliamente al crecimiento de la población. Más tarde, recuperando el espíritu schumpeteriano, la economista danesa Boserup, sostiene que los cambios de población son determinantes del crecimiento económico y por tanto, existiría una relación de causalidad entre el tamaño de la población y las innovaciones tecnológicas.

En la actualidad, con respecto a la definición de crecimiento económico, existe un menor consenso que en el pasado. Las contradicciones con respecto a cuáles son los factores determinantes que generan el crecimiento económico –tema de crucial relevancia–, entre las diferentes escuelas económicas han ido en aumento y sólo se han puesto de acuerdo en tratar de apropiarse del monopolio del paradigma sobre el crecimiento económico. Uno de los problemas centrales en la teoría económica, son las consideraciones diversas que se hacen sobre el rol asignado al individuo y a la población, entre los diferentes paradigmas económicos. En la actualidad, esta cuestión divide las aguas entre las dos escuelas más importantes, los neoclásicos y los keynesianos.

Esperamos los aportes de colegas que están trabajando estos temas, para que ordenen las ideas.

Un saludo y gracias

Fernando (desde Argentina)

Greetings Mrs. Barbara:

I do not agree with you, and the evidence for this is that I am from Iraq, and my country suffers from mismanagement, administrative corruption, and unemployment with a high poverty rate, although the population of Iraq is not large, around 35 million people, with large oil revenues estimated at about 3-4 billion dinars per month, yet we have a poverty rate High, poor education and services, compared to China and India, which has a population of more than 1.3 billion people, and yet has a good economy, growth and good services.

With all due respect to you.

Muhammad Al-Janabi, Iraq

High population growth rate does not allow to raise living standard. If such rate attains highest population density, stress on natural habitats increases drastically.

Effect of the high density of population at a limited space/ country definitely having a negative impact on early evaporation of natural resources like underground water, gathering of plastics and other toxic materials, rapid deforestation, destruction of the environment, reduction of the living standard of the people along with the reduction of per capita income.

YES, the level of corruption of the ruler of the country and their brothers- the military, administators, and other officials have some very deep impact on the economy of a country and the condition of the common people of that country, isn't it??

Mohammed jassam Aljnabi : Population growth can't be considered as only reason for stress on the environment and poverty. But as a general, highest density of population is not good for society and environment also.

In India, eastern states have higher population density and more poverty and unemployment too.

Anwar Ismail : Your assumptions are true; however in present time, children need more education and training and it becomes hard to provide the same to more children.

Hello. We have been talking about the main causes of poverty for some time. I invite participants to do a little exercise with me to identify whether their views on the main causes of poverty have changed during this conversation. Within the list below, we can place many of the reasons mentioned above. Could you answer which were the 4 most important causes at the beginning of the conversation and which are the 4 most important for you now?Then we can tabulate the results and create some statistics.

Causes of poverty:

1) poor access to school;

2) few years of schooling;

3) low quality education;

4) ignorance of contraceptive methods;

5) financial / social / cultural impediment to the use of contraceptive methods;

6) desire for a large family;

7) lack of credit mechanisms for the poorest;

8) lack of insurance mechanisms for the poorest;

9) lack of savings and retirement mechanisms for the poorest;

10) difficulties to stay healthy due to lack of food;

11) difficulties to stay healthy due to lack of basic sanitation;

12) difficulty in staying healthy due to the lack of health services for the poorest;

13) difficulty in staying healthy due to lack of access to medicines or equipment (ex mosquito net);

14) difficulty in staying healthy due to lack;

15) lack of income transfer programs that reduce the income volatility of the poor and increase their ability to consume;

16) corruption;

17) institutional designs that do not work even when there is no corruption;

18) inability to tax the wealthiest;

19) pollution and environmental degradation;

20) inadequate consumption of finite natural resources;

21) legal / institutional framework that limits the generation of jobs;

22) legal / institutional framework that limits the creation of high quality jobs and wages;

23) lack of property rights for the poor;

24) Violence and risks to the itegrigade of the body and mind of the poorest.

Esteemed,

What are the main causes of poverty in this conversation?

To organize the exercise, I created an excel file with the contents of the previous message. I encourage you to download the file, select the 4 main causes and inform your field of action. Then send it to [email protected]. I will gather the information and make the data available in a new file without identifying the respondent. With the material we can have some fun posting statistics about the causes listed in the group. I'm counting on you!!!! So we can understand more about ourselves and what we believe. Sincerely, Leonardo

I don't agree, some countries have less population but they have not developed. Development is in the mind and the people in the developing countries can believe in themselves they will develop and become rich.

I would rather say one of the enemies...

Population growth has its negative impacts as well as positive effects as far as economic develepment is concerned.

High population proving to be a major factor in propelling economic development by providing ready market, providing cheap labor in the labor market hence reducing the cost of production is quite positive for any developing country.

High population has its negative effects for instance, it leads to environmental degradation and over stretching the available resources.

Population growth in poor and developing countries will only make matters worse Because of the lack of resources that made these countries poor! Developed countries in Europe are experiencing population decline that is being addressed through immigration.

Not, the worst enemy is the lack of education and instruction, the high population rate is a consequence, but not a reason.

important resource for everything, but the problem is how to manage this resource. Is not China, for example, a successful model in human resource management?

I agree with the idea that development is in the mind, but for having a mind ready for development it is needed education. From education depend all the conditions: righ distribution of resources, a lower population growth, successful model in human resource management (before to manage it is needed the formation of human resources), scientific, agricultural, industrial development, and so on ....

Although I do not agree with all of the opinions expressed on this RG discussion thread to date, it is informative to see listed some of the many issues raised by the main RG discussion question, which is, in my view, the number one causative factor, which, one way or another, gives rise to all of the other answers to the question that are being given. I definitely and unequivocally answer YES: "The high population growth rate is the main enemy of the poor and developing countries"! I AGREE because when there are too many people of all ages, governments cannot respond, or can respond only partially and incompletely, to the right of all of the people to have food, shelter, and clothing, not to mention proper medical care. It is a "vicious cycle" or "vicious circle" because it is globally "politically incorrect" to advise people to take measures to stop out-of-control population growth. For example, when China made it illegal and a criminal act for couples to have more than one child per family, the rest of the world took this governmental restriction as a sign of dictatorial inhumanity and cruel repression of the people by their government.

I would like to add that it is my considered opinion that high population growth is a big problem not only for poor and developing countries, but possibly even a much bigger problem in the industrially advanced nations. In my view, the threats to planet Earth, her natural flora and fauna, ecosystem, and even her human inhabitants, is caused first and foremost by prosperous nations and peoples, as indicated in other, different ResearchGate discussion questions and threads which are devoted to such related overpopulation and excessive population growth rate issues as excessive burning of fossil fuels to energize homes, factories, and transportation systems (cars, buses, trains, ships, planes, etc.), Global Warming, Climate Change, and even the clear and present danger of the novel COVID-19 global pandemic, which rages out of control because the distribution of the vaccines is unable to keep up pace with the astronomically high numbers of people who want and/or need them and because of the numbers of people who clamor to return to normalcy yet are victims of psychological claustrophobia, which impels them to make the problem worse by failing to practice social distancing, wearing facial protective masks, and observing cautionary measures, including frequently washing hands and avoiding contact with nonmembers of their household and also avoiding contact with crowds. All of these problems, and more could be listed, are definitely traceable to the root cause of uncontrollable population growth! The reason that people are losing their freedom in myriad different ways may very well be attributed to problems being caused because of too many people, everywhere.

Thank you to Shibabrata Pattanayak , for your commendable, and possibly even, I might say, courageous, ResearchGate discussion thread question.

With my very best regards.

China releases white paper on poverty alleviation - Bing

Consider reading this paper

Dear colleagues,

It is not a very good habit to trust all the official statements of China as undoubtedly true.

Do you know, during 1960-61, @ 4 crores of Chinese people died due to created famine by the Chinese govt. (The great leap forward)?

To turn the eyes to other aspects, China attacked India in 1962.

This information was outside the idea of all the global people for a few decades!

So, you should not trust official statements of that country about poverty elimination also blindly.

Thanks.

Dear Shibabrata, population growth is a cause-and-effect relationship. It is interesting to observe that with growing wealth population growth will decline – worldwide. On the many trips to many different countries and culture’s I discovered that people produce kids as a life insurance. If wealth, revenue, and job security for families increases population growth declines. In the above discussion I hear a lot about corruption. I don’t think the poor are corrupt. They trie to survive. I believe that educated scientist and technicians have knowledge that could be used to create economic activity. Economic activity will create wealth and revenue. Thus, life scientist (Phyto-chemist, Ethno-pharmacists, Biologists etc.) have the skills to show the poor farmers how to improve their productivity. This would improve in a first step their subsistence. In a second step they could build together export markets and to mutually prosper. Unfortunately, many scientists try to migrate to the capitalistic western world and do not realize that scientist in the west are being retired early. Those people in the emerging countries that start early to build and improve their local world will not be retiredby the system. They themselves decide how long they will be active and to build their wealth.

Mohammed jassam Aljnabi : It is in reference to your reply dated January 13. It may be surely agreed that corruption and poor management push the people downwards as in the case of Iran. However, I may not agree with your example of China. China has a huge economy and fastest growth rate. It is populous country too, but it has a strict policy on population growth.

Excess population growth results into untrained human force which is inappropriate for development and growth.

That is my opinion.

Your statement could be true in countries like Bangladesh and India but not in many parts of Africa. In addition to corruption, illiteracy, and a range of other enemies, leadership crisis is the main problem in Africa. Evidence shows that poor African countries that got good leaders managed to develop well since most African countries have abundant (or at least enough) resources to develop if utilized properly.

Dear Dr. Muhumed,

I have not having clear idea about African countries. Like India, these countries will get huge economic boost if the resources are properly used. One aspect of my research (use of succulent parts of medicinal plants, fruits etc. directly in capsular form as medicine and fruit pulp/ juice throughout the globe) is related with that target.

But there are some sorts of effects of old inter group fighting mentality between different section of the people is still playing in the mind of the people there in these countries, I think. And the activities of organisations like Boco Haram etc. attract only hate from us.

Why people tolerate these things?

Thanks.

Article THE IGNORED PANDEMIC OF PUBLIC HEALTH CORRUPTION: A CALL FOR...

Yes, it is True...

Professor Emeritus Al Bartlett drove attention to two necessary -but not sufficient- conditions for sustainability: stopping population growth and getting under control the growth of rates of consumption of natural resources. Because the two issues are interconnected, sustainability should be a priority for EVERYBODY; therefore population growth does not only impact poor people or developed countries.

Obviously the three Ps are the main issues - Population, Pollution and Poverty

Pollution is the result of increased production that started with the industrial revolution. This started in Europe, now developed countries are mainly responsible for pollution. Developing countries whe they pollute is the result of Foreign Direct Investment by developed countries to less developed countries.