Moving Toward a Stable World Population

Slowing world population growth may be the most urgent item on the global agenda, and the costs of doing so are small compared to the benefits.


| Jan. 21, 2009




United Nations projections show world population growth under three different assumptions about fertility levels. The medium projection, which is the one most commonly used, has the world population reaching 9.2 billion by 2050. The high projection reaches 10.8 billion. The low projection, which assumes that the world will quickly move below replacement-level fertility to 1.6 children per couple, has population peaking at just under 8 billion in 2041 and then declining.


Photo By Fotolia/denis_pc

Forty-three countries now have populations that are either essentially stable or declining slowly. In countries with the lowest fertility rates — including Japan, Russia, Germany and Italy — populations will likely decline somewhat over the next half-century. A larger group of countries has reduced fertility to the replacement level, or just below it. They are headed for population stability after large numbers of young people move through their reproductive years. Included in this group are China and the United States. A third group of countries is projected to more than double their populations by 2050, including Ethiopia, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

United Nations projections show world population growth under three different assumptions about fertility levels. The medium projection, which is the one most commonly used, has the world population reaching 9.2 billion by 2050. The high projection reaches 10.8 billion. The low projection, which assumes that the world will quickly move below replacement-level fertility to 1.6 children per couple, has population peaking at just under 8 billion in 2041 and then declining. If the goal is to eradicate poverty, hunger and illiteracy, and lessen pressures on already strained natural resources, we have little choice but to strive for the lower projection.

Slowing world population growth means that all women who want to plan their families should have access to the family planning services they need. Unfortunately, at present, 201 million couples cannot obtain the services they need. Former U.S. Agency for International Development official J. Joseph Speidel notes, “If you ask anthropologists who live and work with poor people at the village level...they often say that women live in fear of their next pregnancy. They just do not want to get pregnant.” Filling the family planning gap may be the most urgent item on the global agenda. The benefits are enormous and the costs are minimal.

The good news is that countries that want to help couples reduce family size can do so quickly. In just one decade, Iran dropped its near-record population growth rate to one of the lowest in the developing world.

When Ayatollah Khomeini assumed leadership in Iran in 1979, he immediately dismantled the well-established family planning programs and instead advocated large families. In response to his pleas, fertility levels climbed, pushing Iran’s annual population growth to peak at 4.2 percent in the early 1980s, a level approaching the biological maximum. As this enormous growth began to burden the economy and the environment, the country’s leaders realized that overcrowding, environmental degradation and unemployment were undermining Iran’s future.

In 1989, the government did an about-face and restored its family planning program. In May 1993, a national family planning law was passed. The resources of several government ministries — including education, culture, and health — were mobilized to encourage smaller families. Iran Broadcasting was given responsibility for raising awareness of population issues and of the availability of family planning services. Fifteen thousand “health houses” or clinics were established to provide rural populations with health and family planning services.

mike_65
3/15/2009 10:48:29 PM

Perhaps the Iran Iraq war from 1980 to 1988 had a more direct effect on population growth than social enlightenment. This from GlobalSecurity.org.... Casualty figures are highly uncertain, though estimates suggest more than one and a half million war and war-related casualties -- perhaps as many as a million people died, many more were wounded, and millions were made refugees. Iran acknowledged that nearly 300,000 people died in the war...... ..The war claimed at least 300,000 Iranian lives and injured more than 500,000, out of a total population which by the war's end was nearly 60 million....


ed zyskowski
3/14/2009 9:33:18 PM

We are the only species on the planet that needs to create its' environment yet in the same time we destroy it. Why? Because of ignorance. We hold ourselves out to be the be all and end all of the entire planet yet we cannot see the evidence before us. Let's look at the basics. If you take 2 people and put them on 4 acres of land they can probably make a go of it. Now take that same 4 acres and put 6 people on it. What happens? It's really very simple. You cannot overpopulate your given resources and that is where we are at. I am childless by choice yet everyday I am reminded that so many have a "RIGHT" to further populate our overburdened planet. Now I am not against children but when it is pushed on to me that a supposed intelligent mass of people just keeps on procreating with no regard for supportive resources I have a problem with that. My household of 2 grows a considerable amount of food. We can dehydrate, can,we freeze in order to guarantee edibles. When I die, I will go via a burial shroud... No embalming poison. Just a body in a natural cotton shroud.... Giving back... rather than a casket, vault and embalming poisons. The whole problem is.... How many people, ever, actually look at their impact on the planet ? Having kids?? We take so much for granted. We must now stop and look to see if tomorrow can support what is a right. Overpopulation can be controlled by education.


scott heidenreich
3/13/2009 3:32:03 PM

When governments start looking to set family planning policy aimed at reducing population they often stray into extreme violations of human rights and personal liberties. This is absolutely unacceptable. In country after country the most effective methods for reducing population growth have shown to be for the mortality rate to decrease so parents aren't afraid of losing so many of their children that they will have few or none to take care of them in their old age. Some of the items discussed in this article lead to that end naturally, without any coercive actions by the government. Primarily, for population to stabilize or decrease the economic situation of individuals needs to improve so they have enough resources to provide for their basic needs, maintain health through safe water and food, obtain health care, and improve the quality of education overall, not just on contraception. If these things are in place then the population of the country will naturally reduce. Coercive government involvement in this issue must absolutely be avoided, otherwise it will lead to atrocities as we have seen in modern history due to eugenics, forced sterilization, infanticide, and involuntary euthanasia.






dairy goat

MOTHER EARTH NEWS FAIR

Aug. 5-6, 2017
Albany, Ore.

Discover a dazzling array of workshops and lectures designed to get you further down the path to independence and self-reliance.

LEARN MORE