It is reported that the world population will be exceeding 9 billion by 2050 and the food supply need to double (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/feeding-9-billion/) by then to be able to continue feeding humanity. It seems that countries, world leaders and scientists are no more talking about population control to partly reduce the pressure and balance the demand and supply gaps. Why is this the case? Shouldn't we keep the population control agendum on the Table of global development endeavor to even contribute to climate change and ecological sustainability? Is population pressure not contributing to the global stresses and conflicts here and there?
The problem is not with food production or overpopulation, but with food distribution. At the moment, there is enough arable (and used) land on the planet to feed 120 billion people. Problems are usually connected with overpopulated continents (Africa and Asia) and corrupted/inefficient governments in those countries to redistribute food properly and eventually to organize the whole food chain (from field to fork) system. And the reason for that is again corruption since you use poverty and food to keep yourself in power and you don't care much for your people.
It might be off the table of international development agenda ( I am no expert in that), but the topic is mainstream in so-called conspiracy circles and rather radical (anti-institutional) thinking groups. During the Corona pandemic the narrative of a secret agenda of population control gained popularity also in critical non-mainstream semi-publical spheres (social media etc.) in Germany - in connection with general insecurity, one-sided information and strict measures.
I don't know, if there is a connection between these two observations, but I thought it would be interesting to share.
The term "Population control" implies that there is control over people, similarly to livestock, and it is not a popular term to use in that sense. The world isn't overpopulated in the sense of resource scarcity; there are enough resources to provide food and shelter for everyone; however due to global socioeconomic differences and uneven development and stratification resources aren't evenly distributed. This can be overcome and will with gradual economic development over time. Ailments such as hunger could be solved with introducing genetically modified organisms, such as more nutritious and easier to grow rice or other crops. Many potential solutions are linked to political debates, rather than being academic.
If one were to examine it through the lens of evolutionary science, organisms end up being a certain number, not dissimilarly to the supply/demand classical economic theory where there eventually be an equilibrium(i.e. mass extinction of populations caused by environmental factors such as climate or disease, wars over resources, etc, similarly to thousands of other species of plant and animals on Earth)
Population Control in the sense of reducing the rate of growth of population is now facing an unanticipated challenge. While in the last century, pressure of population growth on world resources prompted measures to bring birth rates in line with the rate of growth of output of food and other essential goods and services, today, the world is faced with the problem of declining and aging population not only in economically advanced, but in most countries. It is estimated that the world population will peak at around 9.7 billion by early 2060s and thereafter, decline in all regions with the temporary exception of Sub-Saharan Africa. This is, of course, accompanied by longer life expectancy and the globalization of the phenomenon of "ageing population". A number of research projects have been done on this, among them a study on baby births by The Institute for Health Metrics, Washington University. For my part, I concede the challenge of lower, or even negative rate of growth and aging of population, but feel that the outcome will not mean the end of human civilization or even its slower pace of progress. It would simply encourage search for more effective technological solutions. In contrast, advocating population boost overlooks dangerous shortages of some vital resources, in particular water.
- Badges
- Science topic