Population
Should Governments Act To Reduce Their Populations?
Instructions:
Introduction
More than any other species, living or extinct, human beings have had a major impact on the natural systems of the Earth. Population growth along with industrialisation, technological advances, economic growth and consumption, around the world has dramatically altered the planet, on land, on sea, and in the air. These changes are widely expected to continue into the future.
The degradation of the natural environment as a result of human activity has led to calls by some groups, such as Population Matters (2013), for governments to act to reduce their populations in order to allow the Earth’s ecosystems an opportunity to re-establish their former size and biodiversity. For others, however, the human population should be allowed to find its own level naturally without interference by governments. This together with the introduction of new environmentally friendly technologies and resource saving strategies would protect the environment without the requirement of lifestyle sacrifices by modern societies.
However, given the “frightening explosion in human numbers” (Attenborough cited in Sir David Attenborough backs campaign to limit human population, 2009), the pressure the Earth is currently under, and the increasingly alarming predictions by scientists around the world, there may not be sufficient time for the world population to reach a healthy equilibrium on its own. Therefore, governments should act now to reduce their populations.
The Current Situation
According to the United Nations (2013), there are currently 7.2 billion people in the world, including approximately 1.4 billion in China, 1.25 billion in India, 320,000 in the United States and 250,000 in Indonesia. By 2050, the world population is expected to reach 9.6 billion, with much of the increase occurring in Africa (United Nations, 2013). This can be compared to a world population figure of only approximately 2.5 billion in 1950 and 790,000 in 1750 (United Nations, 2013).
The growth of the world’s population has been accompanied by growth in economic activity and an increase in the size of the world economy. From 1950 to 2010 World Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita increased from Int$2104 to Int$6516 (Bolt & van Zanden, 2013). As economies have grown around the world, people’s living standards have also risen. Today, millions more people own cars, computers and televisions, and can afford to travel abroad. They can power their homes, and enjoy access to clean water and the Internet. They can also afford to eat more meat and buy imported food from distant countries. More can buy luxury items, such as designer clothes, handbags and shoes.
Growing populations and rising living standards have placed great pressure on the planet’s natural resources and ecosystems and this has damaged the environment in a number of ways. According to Morgan (1995), deforestation for agriculture has, together with pollution, has reduced the world’s forests by as much as 33%. Large areas of forest have been destroyed to provide land for raising cattle or growing single crops, such as palm oil or maize, to feed the human population. Areas have also been cleared for human settlement. This destruction of complex ecosystems and their replacement by monocultures has contributed to extinctions of plant and animal species, global warming and desertification. According to Wilson (n.d. cited in Morgan), deprived of their habitat, 20,000 to 30,000 species of plants and animals are lost each year. The World Wildlife Fund reports that the number of tigers in the wild, for example, fell by seventy percent from 1972 to 2012 (2012, p.27). The reduction in the number of trees means that less carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere, thereby contributing to global warming. The loss of tree cover and grazing by livestock, such as sheep and cattle, can also result in the drying out of the soil, a reduction in rainfall and a spread of desert areas, such as that of the Gobi Desert in north-western China (Overgrazing turning parts of Mongolian Steppe into desert, 2013).
The burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, used to power industry and homes, as well as for transport has resulted in an increase in the levels of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, in the atmosphere and to rising temperatures. Melting polar ice caps and glaciers are leading to higher sea levels, which are eroding coastal areas (Environmental Agency, n.d.) and threatening ecosystems and human populations in low-lying areas. Global warming is also having an impact on sea currents and weather patterns, which is affecting agricultural production in many parts of the world and the migration patterns of many animal species, such as birds and fish (Natural Resources Defense Council, n.d.). As the rate of change is so rapid, many plants and animals, such as the polar bear, may be unable to adapt quickly enough and face a challenge to survive. Global warming is not only affecting the atmosphere but also the oceans. As the sea absorbs more carbon dioxide, it is becoming more acidic. According to the World Wildlife Fund (2012, p.84), ocean acidity has increased by 30% since the industrial revolution. This is having a negative impact on the world’s coral reefs, which are beginning to die as the water becomes less alkaline. It is thought that an eighty percent reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases is necessary to limit the increase in global temperatures to 2°C above pre-industrial levels by the end of the end 21st century (World Wildlife Fund, 2012, p.13).
Other human activity is also having a detrimental impact. Fish stocks, for example, have declined as a result of overfishing. In 2005, 87m tonnes of fish were caught, compared to 19m tonnes in 1950 (World Wildlife Fund, 2012, p.13). Pollution of the air also leads to acid rain, which harms forests (National Geographic, n.d.). On land, the use of pesticides and chemical fertilisers in agriculture has affected insect populations, killed large numbers of fish in rivers and caused algal blooms in coastal areas (Researchers Monitor ‘Red Tides’ in Chesapeake Bay Waters, 2012). Industrial pollution has led to increasing amounts of mercury in the ocean food chain. There is also the danger of nuclear pollution, as the current situation in Japan demonstrates following the earthquake and tsunami in 2011.
Therefore, it can be seen that rising human populations and higher consumption mean that pressure on the natural world is mounting all the time. These changes may have serious consequences in the future. Ecosystems, which have evolved slowly over hundreds of thousands of years, are in danger of being lost forever with no chance of recovery. The world’s resources are finite and current trends are not sustainable. The planet is simply not large enough to support so many people with such unsustainable lifestyles.
The Case for No Action
There are two broad groups of opinion against the idea of deliberate population control. The first believes that an increasing population is not a problem. This group includes some religious groups, such as the Catholic Church, for whom population control runs counter to the will of God. There are also those who say that an increasing population may be necessary to maintain economic growth to repay the debts of previous generations (Sanjeev, 2011). Many countries, such as the United Kingdom, owe large sums of money and rely on future generations to repay them. Most public pension funds in developed countries, for example, are seriously underfunded, and retirees rely increasingly on younger workers to support them through their contributions. With fewer young people, these countries may default on their debts.
This group also includes those who point to the difficulty of having all of the world’s countries agree on reducing their populations. Countries with larger populations tend to have larger economies and therefore greater political influence. It may not be realistic to expect the UAE government, for example, to attempt to reduce its population when it has an Emirati population of under one million (Salama, 2011) compared to Pakistan with a population of approximately 180 million (World Bank, 2013).
The second group, while recognising the problem of overpopulation and over-consumption, remains optimistic about the future and believes that no action is required. Some, such as Sanjeev (2011), predict that the world’s population will peak and begin to fall naturally without direct intervention. In most parts of the developed world, such as western Europe, Korea and Japan, birth rates are already below the level necessary to sustain the population and, as a result, their populations are now falling. It is well understood that with increasing economic prosperity, birth rates fall. According to Sanjeev (2011), what is happening today in developed countries, such as Japan and Italy, will also soon happen in developing countries, including India, and has even already begun in China, Brazil and Russia. Even in the United Arab Emirates, the birth rate fell from 4.4 children per woman in 1990 to 2.3 children per woman in 2007 (Underwood, 2009) and is projected to fall further.
There is also the belief that, in the future, solutions to the world’s current problems will emerge. Many point to new environmentally friendly technologies and techniques. Despite previous gloomy predictions (Malthus, 1798; Ehrlich, 1968) developments in agriculture, such as the Green Revolution in the 1960s and 1970s, have until now ensured that the world has enough food. New food technologies, such as genetically modified crops, and meat grown from stem cells, may ensure that future generations will remain fed. Other new technologies, including wind and solar energy, are being developed to reduce human reliance on fossil fuels, such as oil and coal, and contribute to a reduction in global warming.
Greater education about and awareness of environmental issues are also having an effect. Governments are facing pressure from their citizens on environmental issues. Environmental concerns are a major consideration in decision-making in almost every country around the world today and a large amount of money is being spent limiting the impact of development on the world’s ecosystems. According to Morgan (1995), today there are over 3,831 national parks around the world, in which ecosystems are protected from human activity. There is also greater recycling and a movement towards sustainable living. In many countries, efforts are being made to reduce consumption and waste. DNA banks may ensure that it will be possible to reintroduce vulnerable and extinct species in the future.
Therefore, for the above reasons, opponents of government intervention believe that population control is not necessary.
The Case for Action
Nevertheless, however true the above may be, the human race does not have time to simply relax in the hope that solutions will be found in the future. The situation facing the planet today is simply too urgent. According to the World Wildlife Fund (2012, p.12), in 2008, humanity’s use of the world’s resources, or its ecological footprint, exceeded the planet’s biocapacity by fifty percent. This means that the human race would need one and a half Earths to maintain its current lifestyles. If everyone on the planet enjoyed a material lifestyle equivalent to the average American, the human race would require four Earths. For the average UAE resident, the figure is 8.5 Earths, and for Qatar, it is almost twelve (World Wildlife Fund, 2012, p.44). These figures are predicted to increase further and clearly the situation is unsustainable. The world cannot support ever-increasing numbers of people and for these people to continue to consume in the way they do today. The Earth is finite. There is not enough space and there are not enough resources.
It is clear that if the human population continues to increase and living standards continue to rise, global warming will also continue. Predictions of global temperature increase by the end of the century range from 1.1°C and 6.4°C (World Wildlife Fund, n.d.). Millions of people living in coastal areas may be displaced by rising sea levels. Water supplies may decrease as glaciers disappear and rivers dry up. Changes in weather patterns may also lead to crop failures and increased desertification. Extreme weather events, such as hurricane Katrina in 2005, may become more common. The loss of the world’s ecosystems will also continue as there is more pressure on the natural world to provide farmland and other land for human development. More species will become extinct, including those that may be of future use to humans, to develop new medicines for example. The world will become a less beautiful and more dangerous place.
The changes to the natural world may also lead to famine and conflicts over resources. If climate change results in crop failures, food prices will rise and millions will be at risk of famine. There may be large-scale migration of populations, as people leave areas that have become uninhabitable, leading to conflict. There may be wars over dwindling food and water supplies.
Reducing the human population would be relatively easy to achieve. It is clear that those countries with lower birth rates are those in which women have access to education, employment and control over their own bodies. Governments need to encourage women to join the workforce and help empower them to control their own reproduction. If a woman does not want to have more children, she should be allowed to refuse. If couples do not want to have more children, they should be allowed access to contraception. This would require a change in the policy of religious groups and in the attitudes of men. Governments could also offer tax incentives for smaller families. They could also make efforts to improve public health and reduce child mortality so that parents have more confidence that their children will survive into adulthood.
Conclusion
Therefore, in order to protect the planet’s ecosystems and guarantee a secure and sustainable future for coming generations, it is vital that governments act to control the human population. There is not enough time to wait for new technologies to provide sustainable lifestyles for the world and the risks of doing nothing are too great. If governments do not reduce their populations, “the natural world will do it” and “is doing it… right now” (Attenborough cited in Gray, 2013). New generations are facing a future of floods, drought, crop failures, famine, disease and war.
By reducing the population and ensuring the survival of the world’s ecosystems, the human race would not only be helping the planet. It would also be helping itself. Nobody wants to live in an ugly, overheated, overcrowded, hostile world. A clean, healthy and beautiful environment is also an essential condition for humanity. Natural ecosystems regulate the climate, recycle nutrients, pollinate plants, decompose waste and filter water. They are also important to feed the human soul. If they are destroyed, life for people will be immeasurably poorer.
(2434 words)
References
Bolt, J. and J. L. van Zanden. ( 2013). The First Update of the Maddison Project; Re-Estimating
Growth Before 1820. Maddison Project Working Paper 4. Retrieved from http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/maddison-project/publications/wp4.pdf
Environmental Agency. (n.d). Retrieved January 5, 2012 from http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/107550.aspx
Ehrlich, P. (1968). The Population Bomb. New York. Buccaneer Books
Gray, L. (2013, January 22). Humans are plague on Earth – Attenborough. The Daily Telegraph.
Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9815862/Humans-are-plague-on-Earth-Attenborough.html
Malthus, T. (1798). An Essay on the Principle of Population. London. J. Johnson
Morgan, S. (1995). Ecology and the Environment: the Cycles of Life. New York. Oxford
University Press. pp.136-143.
National Geographic. (n.d.). Retrieved September 14, 2013 from http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/acid-rain-overview/
Natural Resources Defense Council. (n.d). Retrieved January 5, 2012 from http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/climate-change-impacts/
Overgrazing turning parts of Mongolian Steppe into desert. (2013, September 5). Oregon State
University. Retrieved from http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2013/sep/overgrazing-turning-parts-mongolian-steppe-desert
Population Matters. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.populationmatters.org
Researchers Monitor ‘Red Tides’ in Chesapeake Bay Waters. (2012, July 28). Science Daily.
Retrieved from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120728150834.htm
Salama, S. (2011, April 5). Influx of foreigners spikes UAE population to 8.3m. Gulf News.
Retrieved from http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/general/influx-of-foreigners-spikes-uae-population-to-8-3m-1.787518
Sanjeev, S. (2011, October 30). The End of Population Growth. Project Syndicate. Retrieved
from http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-end-of-population-growth
Sir David Attenborough backs campaign to limit human population. (2009, April 14). The Daily
Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5151747/Sir-David-Attenborough-backs-campaign-to-limit-human-population.html
Underwood, M. (2009, June 21). UAE birthrate falls by nearly 50%. The National. Retrieved from http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/health/uae-birth-rate-falls-by-nearly-50
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division, Population
Estimates and Projections Section. (2013, June 13). Retrieved from http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Documentation/publications.htm
World Bank. (2013). Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/country/pakistan
World Wildlife Fund. (n.d.). Retrieved September 14, 2013 from http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/aboutcc/problems/rising_temperatures/
World Wildlife Fund. (2012). Living Planet Report 2012. Retrieved from http://awsassets.panda.org/downloads/1_lpr_2012_online_full_size_single_pages_final_120516.pdf
Solution
Should Governments Act To Reduce Their Populations?
| Name: | Section: | XXX | |
| Research Topic | Internet Kills Communication | ||
| Thesis | How virtual communication adversely affects real life communication | ||
| SUPPORT Section 1 | Replacing real life communication with rapid evolving virtual communication | ||
| Idea 1 | – The History of Internet and Communication | Sources | |
| Idea 2 | – Increased internet usage and variety of available innovations | Idea 1 –Leiner et al., (2004) “The long term ramifications of the increasingly evolving nature of Internet networking is impossible to predict the same way it is difficult to predict the outcome of the evolving nature of a society”( p.29). Idea 2 –Zickuhr& Smith (2013) “98% of the households live where they can access internet connection and broadband”…“a rise in number for individuals of the age of 18 and above is investing on home based high speed broadband”… “Adults consider the house holds that do not have access to broadband as highly disadvantaged” (p. 6). Idea 3 – Rideout, Foehr, & Roberts(2010) “the explosion of online and mobile media has contributed to the increase in media use among young people”… As such “the mobile and online revolutions are present in the lives and pockets of the youth”… “try waking an 8 year old to their teens and it is evident that a cell phone will be tucked below their pillow, a mobile device is the last thing they interact with before they sleep and the first thing they touch as soon as they are awake.” (p. 3). Idea 4–Wei and LO (2006) “The invention of telephone found its place inclined to the social and instrumental motivation that included the aspect of calling to socialize, gossip, acquire a sense of security and keeping the family bond (Noble 1987). The additional element of entertainment has changed the view of the youth to regard phoning as fun (Claisse and Rowe, 1987).(p. 56). Idea 4- Campbell &Kwak,(2011) “The innovation of mobile communication has changed the nature of public forums, the platform offers the opportunity to communicate with absent others”… “The intensive mobile interception that facilitates contact with friends and family works against open public communication among autonomous individuals hence it has replaced the natural and basic way of communication with enclaves of perceived strong virtual bonds which characterizes as monadic clusters.”(Gergen, 2008). (p. 208) | |
| Idea 3 | – Impact of high dependence of the Internet among the youth | ||
| Idea 4 | Separation from physical interaction to virtual interaction | ||
| SUPPORT Section 2 | High Dependence of Internet impact communication | ||
| Idea 1 | -Lack of confidence in expressing self in a real life situation | Sources | |
| Idea 2 | -Shift in social expectation | Idea 1 –Howard, Rainie and Jones (n.d) “Internet tools are increasingly becoming significant channels of social life and professional life. The internet introduces new forms of human relations that are deprived of good friendship and social support” (p. 54) Idea 2 – Turkle (2012) “Human contact is easy to engage and also easier to avoid”… “We expect and demand more from technology than we expect from each other”” (para. 13). Idea 3- Kim, LaRose & Peng, (2009) “Internet is continually being used as a tool to relieve psychosocial issues”… “individuals with relatively poor social skills are known to develop compulsive use of internet that may result to negative results and outcome in life.” Idea 4- Baym, (2015) “Individuals no longer prefer two way communication when they require advice, the internet gives a one way communication hence doing away with the valuable human contact and communication”… “high reliance of the information from the internet may result to dishonest and misleading guidance towards life compared to social communication that is coupled with accountability.” | |
| Idea 3 | Difficulties in developing social skills | ||
| Idea 4 | Loss of value of social interaction and access to authentic advice | ||
| SUPPORT Section 3 | Face to face communication considered as the ideal way of communicating | ||
| Idea 1 | Advanced communication interferes with the values of face to face communication | Sources | |
| Idea 2 | Expected changes in communication are inclined towards advanced communication and reduced face to face communication | Idea 1- Howard (n.d) “Communication is considered as a basic human right”… “face to face communication is considered as the ideal way of communicating.” Idea 2-Wei and Lo (2006) “Eliminating electronic communication for a period of time indicates that there is more value in human interaction than mobile or electronic communication” Idea 3-Campbell & Kwak, (2011). “The internet platform provides unending stream of entertainment that has caused the youth and the old alike to constantly indulge in virtual communication, it has overtaken the factor of social and face to face communication.” Idea 4- Zickuhr & Smith (2013) “There is a significant increase of introduction to advanced internet usage; most of the residence in any given region considers internet access as a vital aspect before they settle in any region.” | |
| Idea 3 | Internet provides a platform of full time engagement and increase entertainment | ||
| Idea 4 | The internet changes are considered rapid and moving away from real life communication | ||
| SUPPORT Section 4 | Loss of value in real world communication | ||
| Idea 1 | Virtual communication replaces the need for physical communication | Sources | |
| Idea 2 | Adverse effect of internet involvement in academic performance and social interaction | Idea 1: Wei & Lo (2006) “Physical interaction enriches communication, the value attained cannot be compared with virtual communication, and increased virtual engagement means a silent disassociation with the reality.” | |
| Idea 3 | Lack of integrity is highly promoted in virtual connection than in physical contact | Idea 2: Rideout, Foehr, & Roberts, (2010) “Overusing internet has adversely affected the academic performance as well as social interaction.” | |
| Idea 3- Van et al., (2008) “Students are unable to detach from the internet, they have failed multiple times when they tried to disassociate themselves from the internet for a short period of time” | |||
| COUNTERARGUMENTS | Possible positive effects of the Internet | ||
| Idea 1 | Positive effect of the internet on societal advancement | Sources | |
| Rebuttal | The society can be empowered only if they use the internet platform to enhance communication. ( Ensure positive use of the internet as a learning tool for young people exchanging ideas with people on a global platform) | Idea 1 –Deshpandeand Basil (2006) “In commercial marketing, a youngster switches a glass of lemonade for money”…As such, this comment relates to the definition of social marketing ,“social marketing “ a way of managing behavior by availing benefits and minimizing costs in exchange for pleasing behavior.”…“Due to the emphasis on customer focus, social marketing principles could be directed to satisfy the wishes of inactive adults, and by availing desirable opportunities and minimized barriers, promote their contribution in youth development”(p.211). Idea 2 –Sin et al., (2010) “Service based SME’s suggest that they are likely to easily adopt internet based information communication technology compared to the rate of intention allocated to manufacturing based SME’s”.”(p.27-55) | |
| Idea 2 | Positive effect of Internet on business growth | ||
| Rebuttal | Potential loss of business due to dishonesty on virtual communication positive effect on business due to expanded virtual platform only if the businesses communicate with integrity> need legal policies to monitor and protect economic interest | ||
| Idea 3 | Positive effect of the internet on skill enhancement and provision for innovation platform | ||
| Rebuttal | Both the young and the old can access equal opportunities on the innovative platform, a section individuals that have less confidence in expressing their idea can be empowered if only they focus in presenting their positive skills to the global platform. (ensure positive engagement of skills over the internet) | Idea 3-Brown , (2009) “Individuals on the internet want more than just talk; they have the need to connect on a global platform with people that will offer them a place of common interest.” (P. 48) | |
| Idea 4 | Positive chance towards self expression | ||
| Rebuttal | Internet fulfils the most needed aspect of communication in self expression, one can communicate with others freely and there is access to infinite space for expression because one is appealing to a global audience. (ensure the expression is kept at a safe level) | Idea 4: Jones (2008) “The internet can be used as a place for expressing ones thoughts freely and in a formal and informal way; students are able to supplement their academic activities.” (p. 57) |
References
Baym, N. K. (2015). Personal connections in the digital age. John Wiley & Sons.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design.
Campbell, S. W., &Kwak, N. (2011). Mobile communication and civil society: Linking patterns and places of use to engagement with others in public. Human Communication Research, 37(2), 207-222.
Deshpande, S., & Basil, M. (2006). Lessons from research on social marketing for mobilizing adults for positive youth development. In Mobilizing Adults for Positive Youth Development (pp. 211-231). Springer US.
Howard, P. E., Rainie, L., & Jones, S. Days and Nights on the Internet. The Internet in Everyday Life, 43-73.
Jones, S. (2008). Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today’s technology. Diane Publishing
Leiner, B. M., Cerf, V. G., Clark, D. D., Kahn, R. E., Kleinrock, L., Lynch, D. C., … & Wolff, S. (2009). A brief history of the Internet.ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 39(5), 22-31.
Jones, S. (2008). Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today’s technology. Diane Publishing
Leiner, B. M., Cerf, V. G., Clark, D. D., Kahn, R. E., Kleinrock, L., Lynch, D. C., … & Wolff, S. (2009). A brief history of the Internet.ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 39(5), 22-31.
Mansell, R. (2012). Imagining the Internet: Communication, innovation, and governance.Oxford University Press.
Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M [superscript 2]: Media in the Lives of 8-to 18-Year-Olds. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
Sin Tan, K., Choy Chong, S., Lin, B., & Cyril Eze, U. (2010). Internet-based ICT adoption among SMEs: Demographic versus benefits, barriers, and adoption intention. Journal of enterprise information management, 23(1), 27-55. Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2013). Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 237-246.
Turkle, S. (2012).Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic books
Wei, R., & Lo, V. H. (2006). Staying connected while on the move Cell phone use and social connectedness. New Media & Society, 8(1), 53-72.
van den Eijnden, R. J., Meerkerk, G. J., Vermulst, A. A., Spijkerman, R., & Engels, R. C. (2008). Online communication, compulsive Internet use, and psychosocial well-being among adolescents: a longitudinal study. Developmental psychology, 44(3), 655.
Zickuhr, K., & Smith, A. (2013).Home broadband 2013.2013-08-26)[2014-07-01]. http://www. pewinternet. org/2013/08/26/home-broadband-2013/.