“Across the globe, people are having fewer and fewer children.
Fertility rates have dropped by half since 1972, from six children per
woman to 2.9. And demographers say they're still falling, faster than
ever. The world's population will continue to grow from today's 6.4
billion to around 9 billion in 2050. But after that, it will go sharply
into decline. Indeed, a phenomenon that we're destined to learn much
more about depopulation has already begun in a number of countries.”
However, births per woman vary greatly, depending on where the woman
lives (Note that two children per woman is necessary to replace an existing
population) :
| country |
average no. of children per woman
[estimated as at 2007] |
| Mali |
7.38 |
| Niger |
7.37 |
| Afghanistan |
6.64 |
| Gaza Strip |
5.64 |
| Saudi Arabia |
3.94 |
| Paraguay |
3.84 |
| India |
2.81 |
| U.S.A. |
2.09 |
| France |
1.98 |
| China |
1.75 |
| Russia |
1.39 |
| Italy/Spain |
1.29 |
| Hong Kong |
0.98 |
source: full list obtainable at
CIA
Factbook [Total fertility rate] |
“[...] it takes a T.F.R. [total fertility rate] of 2.1 or 2.2
to replace each generation — this number is called the replacement
rate — because some children will die before they grow
up to have their own two children. In countries with low life expectancies,
the replacement rate is even higher (2.3–3).” [Kimball]
It is all very well to go on about world population declining , but meanwhile
poverty continues, while resources are limited and the world is probably over-populated. Thus worrying about such a decline in world population
is not pointed.
“If you heard the recent reports that the world's population
growth has slowed, don't breathe a sigh of relief just yet. The number
of people on the planet is still rising rapidly - and in the places
that can least support the growth.”
—
“The Population
Reference Bureau forecasts that much of humanity's future growth
will occur in its poorest areas. Today, 5.2 billion people, 80 percent
of the global population, live in less-developed countries.[1] By 2050, those countries will be home to 8 billion people, with little
prospect for improvement in basic living conditions for most of them.”
—
“At the other end of the spectrum, industrialized nations are
on the brink of controlling population growth too well. The coming pressure
from American baby boomers on Social Security and Medicare is nothing
compared to the problems Japan and some European countries are having
with too few young workers to contribute to the needs of an aging population.”
[from
KRT Wire]
shrinking
workforce pool and aging western populations
To cope with a smaller work-force pool resulting a decreasing population,
concerned regions can use incentives for child production, similar to
those of Singapore. Better to reward more capable parents than to give
bonuses to young uneducated girls, paid for with money taken from from
the more able who are then unable to afford to raise children of their
own.
There are also concerns that an aging population will not be able to
maintain a reasonable standard of living as the proportion of young workers
falls. This is a nonsense because the healthy life-span is steadily extending
with improved health education and health care, while productivity is
also improving. People are capable and, for the most part, are willing
to work well beyond arbitrary retirement age. Further, increased productivity,
together with increasing automation, mean that more work can be done with
less people.
related document
Power, ownership and freedom
a sustainable world
population
There are concerns that the world’s population is growing too large
for the planet to sustain. Discussion of world energy resources can be
found in the suite of
energy briefing documents.
It is reckoned that individual
‘happiness’ increases until an annual income of
approximately US$13,000 is reached [as at 2003], whence basic needs
are met. I am defining “an annual income of approximately
US$13,000” as a reasonable
standard of living.
At such an income level, ‘happiness’
then remains stable, even though the income level becomes higher.
(For a simple outline, see this PDF
document.)
According to statistics from Nationmaster.com, there
are 36
countries which reach an average PPP level of at least $13,000 per individual [2003].
They are (in order from highest PPP down) :
Luxembourg, United States of America, Norway, Iceland, Ireland,
Switzerland, Denmark, Belgium, Japan, Canada, Austria, Netherlands,
Germany, Australia, Finland, Sweden, France, Italy, United Kingdom,
Israel, Cyprus, Singapore, United Arab Emirates, New Zealand, Spain,
Slovenia, The Bahamas, Portugal, South Korea, Malta, Greece, Bahrain,
Barbados, Kuwait, Czech Republic, Equatorial Guinea.
Their total
population was about 1, 484,972,000 in July 2003. This is 24%
of the world’s population.
The population of the world was 6,300,000,000 in
December 2003; in mid-2004 it was 6,396,000,000.
Obviously there are both very
rich and rather poor people in most countries, and the PPP level
given above can only provide an approximate idea of the proportion
of people in the world living at this “reasonable” standard
of living. |
|
