A Tale of Three Islands...and 7 BILLION Mouths

I've been trying to catch up on my Economists recently, and I came across an article today called "A Tale of Three Islands" (pretty good coincidence actually) about how the world population is estimated to welcome its 7 billionth person to the world today. I guess there's nothing scarier than an exploding world population? Trick or treat?

So apparently the story goes something like this.... Back in 1968, a book entitled "Stand on Zanzibar" was published by a man named John Brunner. This was witty (I'm sure he took forever to think about this) because it was estimated that in 1968, the population of the world (3.5M) could stand shoulder to shoulder and fit onto the Isle of Man (572 square kms in the Irish sea). However, being the forward looking man that he was, John also estimated that by 2010, when the population would have reached 7 billion, we would need a bigger island. Hence, Zanzibar, (1,554 square kms off the coast of Africa). Although there are conflicting reports (the American Census Bureau reports that the 7 billionth person won't be born until March 2012), the United Nations population division estimates that the world will reach its 7 billionth person today! Hooray!

So a lot of people are probably freaking out at this point, imagining doom and gloom...Overpopulation leads to disease right? Wide-spread famine? Wars over resources? General discomfort because it means that many more people will sweat on you on the bus in the summer? Well "Nay!" says the Economist. They actually bring up a couple of very interesting points.

1. The rate of growth is actually declining. Contrary to popular belief, almost half of the world's population (3.2B) lives in countries with a fertility rate of 2.1 or less (that's the magical replacement number that we've identified and China got a little overexcited about...Think about it....think about it. Yup, it's because that's how many people it takes to replace your mom and your dad. Morbid but true). Worldwide, the fertility rate is 2.45, with most of weight being placed in Africa (4.64) and Oceania (aka Australia and related islands, with 2.49)
2. Pollution is very concentrated among a select few. And by a select few I mean mostly the U.S., Australia and China. Surprise! Most of the world's population growth in the next 20 years will occur in countries that make the smallest impact on the climate. While global pollution is more affected by economic growth as countries become more energy intensive, currently, most pollution occurs in U.S., Australia and China
3. But what about food? Well actually, this is one thing that population does impact, but improvements in farming could keep up with population...The argument here is that if we increased output by two-thirds, we would be in the clear. The Economist cites that between 1970-2010 we increased by much more than this, so how hard could it be?

So here's where I land...I know that population explosion is going to be much more gradual and probably less catastrophic than the sensationalist journalists would like me to believe, but I just can't buy this. Okay I buy that population rate is declining, but by absolute numbers (ah-ha! GMAT studying was good for something), 7 billion is more than 6 billion. Period. And you know what happens when there's more population? Countries have more manpower. You know what happens then? Crazy things. Demand for basic goods goes up, demand for employment increases, a middle class develops, before you know it, you might even have a developing society. And that's when the pollution comes in.
Alright so the food issue. Everyone wants it, usually every day. Although we could improve farming techniques to produce more food, you usually need more land to do that. Going back to my original theory that 7 billion is greater than 6 billion, this could be a problem, because people also take up space, leaving less room for farming. Even The Economist concedes that "The growth in agricultural yields seems to be slowing down. There is little new farmland available. Water shortages are chronic and fertilizers are over-used. All these-plus the yield-reductions that may come from climate change, and wastefulness in getting food to markets- mean that the big problems are to do with supply, not demand". Take that The Economist. FACE.

Bottom line? Population growth is pretty scary. But it's not really exploding. It's more of a slow expansion- the viscosity is different. Visually, think about is more like honey in a saucepan than the aftermath of stars colliding. Is it still scary though? Yes. Happy Halloween! (PS- Stars colliding is also a very scary, real thing that should stay in your mind if you plan on living for a few thousand more years because you'll get radiated to death)