The Case for Slowing Population Growth
By: OpinionGLOBAL debates about population policy are confusing. One side argues that rising human populations threaten our environment and prosperity.
Land, water, energy, and biodiversity all seem to be under greater
stress than ever, and population growth appears to be a major
source of that stress.
The other side of the debate, mainly in rich countries, argues
that households are now having so few children that there won't be
enough to care for aging parents.
Those who fret about population growth have the better
argument.
Issues confronting Europe, Japan, and to a lesser extent the
United States and some middle-income countries concerning aging
populations are manageable.
Moreover, the benefits of slower population growth outweigh the
adjustment costs.
By contrast, if global populations continue to rise rapidly, the
stresses on the world's resources will worsen.
Governments should therefore refrain from deliberate policies to
raise birthrates, even in places where birth rates are low.
Part of the confusion of the public debate reflects different
population trends in different parts of the world.
The fastest population growth is taking place in the poorest
regions.
Poor people, especially poor people living on farms, tend to
have the most children (often six or more per woman), and therefore
the highest rates of population growth.
Poor farm families rely on their children for farm chores and
for security when parents reach old age.
Poor families lack access to contraception and family
planning.
Finally, poor families have many children as a kind of insurance
policy against high child mortality rates.
As a result of high fertility rates in Africa, the UN Population
Division predicts a doubling of Africa's population from around 900
million today to around 1.8 billion in 2050.
Rapidly growing populations are also young populations, because
of the high number of children per household.
In Africa, the median age is now a mere 19 years and is
projected to rise to around 28 years in 2050.
In Europe, the trends run in the other direction.
The UN projects a decline in population to around 630 million in
2050, from around 725 million people today.
With few children and longer life expectancy, the median age of
the population rises sharply in this forecast, from 39 years in
2005 to around 48 years in 2050.
For the world as a whole, population is expected to continue to
grow by another 2.5 billion people from 2005 to 2050.
All of that growth will be in the developing world: 1.3 billion
more people in Asia, 900 million more in Africa, the rest in Latin
America and other regions.
Adding another 2.5 billion people to the planet will put
enormous strains not only on societies with rising populations, but
on the entire planet.
Total energy use is soaring, reflecting the combined effect of
rising per capita incomes - and thus rising per capita energy use -
and population growth.
Higher energy use is already changing the world's climate in
dangerous ways.
Furthermore, the strains of increased global populations,
combined with income growth, are leading to rapid deforestation,
depletion of fisheries, land degradation, and the loss of habitat
and extinction of a vast number of animal and plant species.
Population growth in developing regions - especially Africa,
India, and other parts of Asia - needs to slow.
Public policies can play an important role by extending access
to family planning services to the poor, expanding social security
systems, reducing child mortality through public health
investments, and improving education and job opportunities for
women.
A part of the European public, looking at Europe's looming
population decline, wants to head in the other direction, promoting
a return to larger families.
That would be a big mistake.
Advocates of faster European population growth worry that there
won't be enough young workers to pay for public pensions.
But this concern can be met through increased saving by today's
young and middle-aged as they prepare for retirement, and by
working past the age of 65.
These workers will reap large benefits from living in societies
with stable or gradually declining populations.
Most obviously, they will spend much less in direct household
expenditures to raise children.
They will also save on investments in new roads, power plants,
schools, and other public services.
They will enjoy less congested cities and fewer environmental
pressures on the countryside.
European economies will face lower costs in limiting emissions
of greenhouse gases from energy use, leading to more effective
control of climate change.
The quality of life, in short, will tend to improve as Europe's
population declines in coming decades.
There is nothing radical in calling for slower population
growth.
For tens of thousands of years, the human population tended to
rise and fall without a substantial long-term trend.
Only in the past two centuries, with the rise of modern economic
life, did the world's population soar, from around one billion
people in 1820 to 6.3 billion today and around 9 billion by
2050.
This explosive growth was made possible by huge advances in
science and technology.
But this unprecedented growth has also put tremendous pressures
on the planet.
We should intensify our efforts to slow population growth
through voluntary means, and we should recognize that leveling off
of the Earth's population now would add to human happiness and
strengthen environmental sustainability later.
- Jeffrey D. Sachs
* Jeffrey D. Sachs is Professor of Economics and Director of the
Earth Institute at Columbia University
The other side of the debate, mainly in rich countries, argues that
households are now having so few children that there won't be
enough to care for aging parents.Those who fret about population
growth have the better argument.Issues confronting Europe, Japan,
and to a lesser extent the United States and some middle-income
countries concerning aging populations are manageable.Moreover, the
benefits of slower population growth outweigh the adjustment
costs.By contrast, if global populations continue to rise rapidly,
the stresses on the world's resources will worsen.Governments
should therefore refrain from deliberate policies to raise
birthrates, even in places where birth rates are low.Part of the
confusion of the public debate reflects different population trends
in different parts of the world.The fastest population growth is
taking place in the poorest regions.Poor people, especially poor
people living on farms, tend to have the most children (often six
or more per woman), and therefore the highest rates of population
growth.Poor farm families rely on their children for farm chores
and for security when parents reach old age.Poor families lack
access to contraception and family planning.Finally, poor families
have many children as a kind of insurance policy against high child
mortality rates.As a result of high fertility rates in Africa, the
UN Population Division predicts a doubling of Africa's population
from around 900 million today to around 1.8 billion in 2050.Rapidly
growing populations are also young populations, because of the high
number of children per household.In Africa, the median age is now a
mere 19 years and is projected to rise to around 28 years in
2050.In Europe, the trends run in the other direction.The UN
projects a decline in population to around 630 million in 2050,
from around 725 million people today.With few children and longer
life expectancy, the median age of the population rises sharply in
this forecast, from 39 years in 2005 to around 48 years in 2050.For
the world as a whole, population is expected to continue to grow by
another 2.5 billion people from 2005 to 2050.All of that growth
will be in the developing world: 1.3 billion more people in Asia,
900 million more in Africa, the rest in Latin America and other
regions.Adding another 2.5 billion people to the planet will put
enormous strains not only on societies with rising populations, but
on the entire planet.Total energy use is soaring, reflecting the
combined effect of rising per capita incomes - and thus rising per
capita energy use - and population growth.Higher energy use is
already changing the world's climate in dangerous ways.Furthermore,
the strains of increased global populations, combined with income
growth, are leading to rapid deforestation, depletion of fisheries,
land degradation, and the loss of habitat and extinction of a vast
number of animal and plant species.Population growth in developing
regions - especially Africa, India, and other parts of Asia - needs
to slow.Public policies can play an important role by extending
access to family planning services to the poor, expanding social
security systems, reducing child mortality through public health
investments, and improving education and job opportunities for
women.A part of the European public, looking at Europe's looming
population decline, wants to head in the other direction, promoting
a return to larger families.That would be a big mistake.Advocates
of faster European population growth worry that there won't be
enough young workers to pay for public pensions.But this concern
can be met through increased saving by today's young and
middle-aged as they prepare for retirement, and by working past the
age of 65.These workers will reap large benefits from living in
societies with stable or gradually declining populations.Most
obviously, they will spend much less in direct household
expenditures to raise children.They will also save on investments
in new roads, power plants, schools, and other public services.They
will enjoy less congested cities and fewer environmental pressures
on the countryside.European economies will face lower costs in
limiting emissions of greenhouse gases from energy use, leading to
more effective control of climate change.The quality of life, in
short, will tend to improve as Europe's population declines in
coming decades.There is nothing radical in calling for slower
population growth.For tens of thousands of years, the human
population tended to rise and fall without a substantial long-term
trend.Only in the past two centuries, with the rise of modern
economic life, did the world's population soar, from around one
billion people in 1820 to 6.3 billion today and around 9 billion by
2050.This explosive growth was made possible by huge advances in
science and technology.But this unprecedented growth has also put
tremendous pressures on the planet.We should intensify our efforts
to slow population growth through voluntary means, and we should
recognize that leveling off of the Earth's population now would add
to human happiness and strengthen environmental sustainability
later.- Jeffrey D. Sachs* Jeffrey D. Sachs is Professor of
Economics and Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia
University