The Independent recently released an article that says birth rates must be curbed to win war on global poverty:
The earth’s population will approach an unsustainable total of 10.5 billion unless contraception is put back at the top of the agenda for international efforts to alleviate global poverty. A report by MPs released today challenges world leaders to put the contraceptive pill and the condom at the centre of their efforts to alleviate global poverty, tackle starvation and even help to avert global warming.
Unfair distribution causes the world hunger and poverty problem, not overpopulation. We know this, because the world currently has more than enough food to feed everyone on the planet. However, population growth puts that reality at risk. Continued population growth may hinder the world’s ability to reach the goals of ending poverty and hunger.
Unfortunately, growth seems highest among the poorest groups and in poorest and most desolate places. This happens for many reasons. For one, many poor people lack education and/or access to birth control. Also, many poor people see childbirth as an asset, because they can use the extra pair of hands to put to work on farms and such. In places with high infant and child mortality rates, parents need to give birth to more children as to make up for the ones that will likely die.
What do you think?
I think you have it about right. Too often, people dismiss the population-food issues because, for the moment, we have enough food and the problem is distribution. However, while total world grain production has continued to rise (though it’s hard to tell if it’s leveling out now), per person production peaked in the mid 1980s and has declined slightly since.
http://www.acunu.org/millennium/Global_Challenges/Fig-3.jpg
And, as population continues to grow (a conservative estimate would see another 40% increase in world population in the next 60 years) there are serious issues developing concerning per-hectare yield plateaus in important grains, water issues, soil erosion, and projections of the amount of land needed to feed the increasing population. We could easily reach or exceed even the number we can feed “in theory.”
Bottom line is there is a limit to the number of people the earth will support at a decent standard of living. (consider “social carrying capacity,” not just biophysical) According to a great many estimates we are near or beyond that number already.
There are humane, empowering solutions available:
http://growthmadness.org/2006/12/31/population-solutions-a-snapshot/
But they often go overlooked by those who jump to the conclusion that stabilizing population growth means some sort of draconian measures.