World Population and Quality of Life

How many times have we heard that the sharp rise in world population will lead to disaster? The population of our planet is now at about 6.4 billion and is projected to shoot up to 9 billion within about four decades. With all of the talk about sustainable use of resources, well, many would argue that with such a rise in human population, sustainable use of resources would be a hard thing to accomplish. Even though some solutions have been put forward, the question is how many people will adopt them? If one were to go out and ask a certain number of people if a declining or exponentially rising population would have the most negative effect on our lives, wouldn't it seem logical to think that most would vote for the latter? The fact of the matter is that many of us deal with the problems of an exponentially growing population. More traffic, higher demand of fuel and products leads to higher prices, a dwindling water supply, etc. But could a declining world population lead to just as many negatives?

Michael Myer, who writes for Newsweek, insists that a decline in world population will lead to a halt in economic growth, a decline in government benefits, a growing senior citizen population which will have to be supported by youth, and a negative impact on the quality of life in general. Mr. Myer points out that many countries will have a sharp decline in population. This large decline in population, he says, will lead to a growing elderly population and a smaller young population. This will have negative impacts on the global economy. Myer believes that China's declining population in the next half century will have a serious impact on the U.S. economy. "What becomes of the vaunted China market," he says, "invested so heavily by U.S. companies, if by 2050 China loses an estimated thirty five percent of its workers and the aged consume an ever-greater share of income?" (240)

David Nicholson-Lord argues that falling birth rates will not have a negative effect on human welfare. He points out all of the positives a declining population would bring. He believes that a less populated country with a higher percentage of older people will be quieter. People will less materialistic and they will work longer and be able to earn and save more money because of less materialism. Also, there would be more room for people to move around and air and water would become cleaner. We wouldn't have to deal with the congested roadways and high crime rates. In regards to the belief that a declining population would lead to labor shortages and a halt in economic growth, well, he feels it's "illusory." If we save our money and spend less, governments create a "real" health care system, the retirement age is raised, and get those unemployed people employed, a sharp decline in economic growth will not occur. Population growth, says Nicholson-Lord, is not the answer.

It would seem reasonable to believe that an exponentially rising population would have (and is already having) many negative effects on peoples lives. When it comes to the issue of whether or not falling birth rates will have a negative effect on human welfare, well, there is a lot of uncertainty. Even Myer himself cites this as a "realm of uncertainty." Will the global population begin to decline by 2070 as Lord points out? One thing is for sure and that is that no one is denying that the Earth's population as a whole is rising at an alarming rate and we are having a very large impact on our planet. With all of the differing projections of how much longer our planet can sustain such a large number of people, it might be best if everyone stays open minded and believes that there may be some truth to every existing projection.

Source:

Easton, T. (Ed.). (2008). Taking sides: Clashing Views on Environmental Issues. Dubuque: McGraw-Hill.