|
|
Chapter Five: The Problem
of Population Growth
America and other
rich nations have a clear choice today. They can continue to ignore the population problem
and their own massive contributions to it. Then they will be trapped in a downward spiral
that may well lead to the end of civilization in a few decades. More frequent droughts,
more damaged crops and famines, more dying forests, more smog, more international
conflicts, more epidemics, more gridlock, more drugs, more crime, more sewage swimming,
and other extreme unpleasantness will mark our course. It is a route
already traveled by too many of our less fortunate fellow human beings.
Paul Ehrlich and
Anne Ehrlich, The Population Explosion
So why did the
policies concerning population and family planning programs change so drastically in the
last [few] decade[s]? As in late eighteenth century Britain, population has been growing
rapidly. The expanding numbers of third world people, who are no longer dutiful subjects
toiling in their mines and fields are not consumers either for an ever-expanding flow of
manufactured products, have become a burden for the industrial powers. They are not only a
burden, but also a threat, for, as in the time of Malthus, a great revolution is taking
place.
Steven Polgar, Birth Planning
Some modern research on the genetic structure of human populations
suggests that we are all descended from a relatively small number of individuals, and no
more than a few families, who lived in Central Africa as recently as 100,000200,000
years ago. By 15,000 years ago their progeny numbered 15 million (the present population
of Mexico City). The world population at the time of Christ had increased to about 250
million (a little less than the present population of the United States) and on the eve of
the Industrial Revolution had tripled to about 700 million (a little less than the current
population of Indonesia). In the following two centuries the population increased at an
annual growth rate of 6 per 1,000, reaching 2.5 billion by 1950. In the following five
decades it has more than doubled, at a growth rate of 18 per 1,000, today approaching 6
billion. In spite of signs that the growth rate is slowing, barring some demographic
catastrophe, the world population will reach 8 to 10 billion by the year 2030 (Livi-Bacci
1992:3132). Growth in world population is summarized in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1:
Population, Annual Growth, and Doubling Time (10,000 BC to-1990)
| Demographic index |
10,000 BC |
0 |
1750 |
1950 |
1990 |
2000 (projected) |
| Population (Millions) |
16 |
252 |
771 |
2530 |
5292 |
6200 |
| Annual growth (%) |
0.008 |
0.037 |
0.064 |
0.596 |
1.845 |
1.3000 |
| Doubling time (years) |
8369 |
1854 |
1083 |
116 |
38 |
25 |
Adapted from Massimo Livi-Bacci, A Concise History of Population
Here are some interesting facts and projections
about world population growth:
The rate of population increase, now approximately 1.7 percent per
year, is expected to decline to a little less than 1 percent sometime during
20202025.
Since the rate of population increase applies
to an increasing population, the actual increase will be 8897 million people per
year in 19952000 before falling to 81 million per year in 2025.
Developing countries will account for 95
percent of the worlds population increase during 20002025.
Between 1950 and 2025 the core
countries share of world population will have decreased from 33.1 percent to 15.9
percent; Europes share will decrease from 15.6 percent to 6.1 percent.
Also during 19502025, Latin
Americas share of the worlds population will increase from 6.6 percent to 8.9
percent, Asia from 54.7 percent to 57.8 percent, and Africas share from 8.9 percent
to 18.8 percent.
The rapid rise in the rate of population growth has prompted concern that
the world is poised on the brink of disaster, that we are running out of enough food to
sustain the growing population and that population growth is responsible for poverty,
environmental destruction, and social unrest. Moreover, so the argument goes, economic
development in poor countries is impossible as long as populations continue to rise,
because any increase in economic output must be used to sustain the increased population
instead of being invested to create new jobs and wealth. These concerns have led to
concerted efforts by international agencies and governments to control population growth,
especially in peripheral countries where it is highest.
However, a number of people seriously question
whether population growth is a problem. Some economists argue that population growth is a
positive factor in economic development; some environmentalists claim that environmental
destruction is a result of rapid industrialization and capitalist consumption patterns,
not population growth; and some religious authorities are opposed to any form of birth
control.
In 1994 the United Nations sponsored a conference in
Cairo to examine the problem of population growth and propose measures to control it. The
Cairo conference debated several approaches to controlling fertility; these included
promoting modern contraception, promoting economic development, improving survival rate of
infants and children, improving womens status, educating men, and various
combinations of these. Except for the religious objections to promoting decreased
fertility, few people questioned that there was a population problem, that it was a
problem primarily of the poor nations, and that the solution required women to limit their
fertility. Yet few if any of the assumptions underlying the issue of population growth and
control were seriously questioned or examined. Some of these assumptions are as follows.
Population growth contributes to economic decline and stagnation in the periphery and thus
is responsible for global poverty, hunger, environmental devastation, and political
unrest.
Population increase in the periphery
historically resulted from decreased mortality (death) rates, especially of infants,
attributable to medical advancements, better nutrition, and improved sanitation.
Population stability before the rapid
population growth beginning in the eighteenth century was solely the result of a high
mortality rate balanced by a high fertility rate.
Efforts to control population growth in the
periphery are hampered by religious beliefs that promote large families and lack of
education for women.
The only way to slow the birth rate is
through birth control techniques and educational programs developed in Western countries.
These assumptions comprise
part of the ideology of the culture of capitalism, which assumes that the problem of
population growth is a problem of the periphery. This ideology drives not only public
perception of the issue of population growth but also the policies of governments and
international agencies such as the United Nations. Population growth, so the ideology
goes, is a problem in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, and if the problem is to be solved
these countries are the ones that must do it. These assumptions are given legitimacy by
scientific theories that purport to explain population growth. Furthermore,
this ideology leads us to blame the victim, to assume the people who suffer
from the supposed evils of population growthhunger, poverty, environmental
devastation, and political unrestare the ones who have caused the problem.
However, as we shall see, the situation is more
complex than that. To understand better the demographic and ideological issues involved in
the population debate, we need first to examine the major frameworks used to explain
population growth, the Malthusian or neo-Malthusian position, and the
framework provided by demographic transition theory. We will try to show how they
are seriously flawed, ethnocentric, and self-serving for core nations. Then we examine
some of the factors known to determine how many children are born and specifically examine
what anthropology can contribute to the debate over population growth.
Click here to go to the introduction to
Chapter Six
|