Putting the Lid On Population Growth

Hans Rosling gave a TED talk in 2010 that addresses the rising (soaring) global population. In 1960 our population was at 3 billion. In 2010, we hit 7 billion. By 2050 most statisticians believe that we will hit a global population of over 9 billion people. Barring nuclear war, extreme drought or famine, or a new plague our population will have increased 300% in just over a century.

This sort of exponential growth is staggering, and completely nonviable. We simply cannot sustain a population of that size – we do not have enough resources, especially if we continue to consume resources at our current rate. We are like bacteria growing in a petri dish: the bacteria grow and grow, forming colonies and consuming food and nutrients from the world around us. However, eventually the environment can no longer support the sheer numbers of bacteria and they begin to die off, smothered by their own waste.

Rosling argues that the only way of reducing our population growth is by increasing global child survival rates to at least 90%. It sounds backwards when you first hear it, but he does provide the data to back his claim. As childhood survival gets better, families will have less children. Education, family planning, healthcare, and access to basic necessities (food, clean water, shelter, etc.) are all aspects that influence if a person will live past childhood. As of right now the countries with the quickest expanding populations are not the affluent ‘western world’, but poor, underdeveloped countries. We have to first elevate these countries so that their children survive infancy. As child survival rates go up, the number of children had per woman goes down, and the population growth will slow or stagnate.

He ends his talk with a quote about our role in the global future: “The role of the old west (western countries) in the new world is to become the foundation of the new world. Nothing more, nothing less.” We need to be the base for these burgeoning countries to meet our standard of living, instead of simply leading the globe in consumption.

The largest impact we have on our environment is population growth. As more people are born, every other influence on the environment (global warming, deforestation, over-fishing, etc.) is simply compounded. Ethically we must stem the never-ending tide of humans first and foremost if we ever want to truly preserve our environment and our world.


  • Jennifer Brees

4 thoughts on “Putting the Lid On Population Growth

  1. Interesting a scary topic. Defiantly agree that this is a problem but, still confused of how the solution is increasing child survival rates. Just seems to contradictory even if there are some benefits.


  2. It’s funny that you make the analogy of us to bacteria because when you look at the human body we’re composed of more bacteria than not. Also the movie Matrix references how people are like bacteria and they just continue to multiply by the numbers consuming everything in their path. And I couldn’t agree with you anymore on the overpopulation thing, but when you look at big business and corporations that own the land, own the resources, etc. they can do anything they want with it no matter if there’s more people or less, so I do believe this is a big problem that needs to be addressed as well.

    Jaiden Deal


  3. Elizabeth Mullett
    I’m glad you brought this up because population growth has been an environmental issue for awhile. We have surpassed our carrying capacity at least 3 times now and this is not a natural or normal population growth. Normally you would have a boom and bust, but with us, we just continually boom and at some point, we will inevitably bust. Now I don’t know if I agree that increasing child morality is the best way to do this, handing out birth control and limiting how many children you can have seems more like the most efficient way to do this but it is an interesting idea. I can see how child morality would be a problem in developing countries, where a woman might decide to have more than one child with worry that one or all of the children will die but in developed countries where child morality is a lot higher and cost of taking care of more than one child is not as big as an issue, I don’t see this having much of an effect on the rocketing rates of children being born.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s