Will human population and economic activity exceed the Planets carrying capacity?

[Jokodo]

Christianity pouches procreation. There is a 'replenishment movement' in Christianity promoting large white families to counter minority growth, especially Latinos.
.

That sounds rather convoluted. You do know that a much, much higher percentage of Latinos are Christians than U.S. "white folks" are Christians don't you? Blacks have "white folks" way outnumbered in their respective Christian percentages too.

Are you perhaps suggesting that the churches are secretly telling this to only some select members of their congregation?

I believe it is published demographics, in part attributed to their being highly Catholic.

Among the countries with the world's lowest birthrate are: Highly Catholic Spain, highly Catholic Poland, highly Catholic Portugal, highly Catholic Slovakia and highly Catholic Croatia.

Hispanics/Latinos within a few decades will become the majority based on birthrates.

And based on the growth rate of his company, this friend of mine who opened a shop two years ago and now has a full time employee since the summer, will be able to employ every single one of them.

 

[skepticalbip]

Christianity pouches procreation. There is a 'replenishment movement' in Christianity promoting large white families to counter minority growth, especially Latinos.
.

That sounds rather convoluted. You do know that a much, much higher percentage of Latinos are Christians than U.S. "white folks" are Christians don't you? Blacks have "white folks" way outnumbered in their respective Christian percentages too.

Are you perhaps suggesting that the churches are secretly telling this to only some select members of their congregation?

I believe it is published demographics, in part attributed to their being highly Catholic. Hispanics/Latinos within a few decades will become the majority based on birthrates.

No defend than early waves of Irish Catholics up through the 60s.

Indeed, the demographic percentage of Hispanic in the U.S. population is increasing due, in great part, through immigration. I know quite a few of them. That is a completely different thing than your assertion that the churches are trying to convince "white folks" to have more children. Do these churches secretly tell only the whites in their congregation to have more children? Where did you get this information?

 

[DBT]

Population growth is expected to surge in developing nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

Expected by who? Under what definition of the word "surge"?

Various studies predict population growth for Africa.

The information and its sources being readily available.

An example based on a United Nations report;
“More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa,” says the United Nations report. “Of the additional 2.4 billion people projected to be added to the global population between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa.”

After 2050, Africa is projected to be the only major area that has a continually growing population, meaning that it will house 25% of the global population in 2010 and 39% in 2100.

In 1950, only 9% of the world’s population was African.''

 

[skepticalbip]

Population growth is expected to surge in developing nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

Expected by who? Under what definition of the word "surge"?

Various studies predict population growth for Africa.

The information and its sources being readily available.

An example based on a United Nations report;
“More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa,” says the United Nations report. “Of the additional 2.4 billion people projected to be added to the global population between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa.”

After 2050, Africa is projected to be the only major area that has a continually growing population, meaning that it will house 25% of the global population in 2010 and 39% in 2100.

In 1950, only 9% of the world’s population was African.''

From your linked article

Of course, it’s difficult to do this kind of large-scale modelling over a long period of time with great precision. As with any continent, there’s going to be variance.

Doh, ya think?

Including the error bars on their projected population numbers would have made for an interesting, if not humorous, addition. It would be of interest to know what they could possibly base a population projection almost a hundred years into the future on.

 

[DBT]

Various studies predict population growth for Africa.

The information and its sources being readily available.

An example based on a United Nations report;
“More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa,” says the United Nations report. “Of the additional 2.4 billion people projected to be added to the global population between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa.”

After 2050, Africa is projected to be the only major area that has a continually growing population, meaning that it will house 25% of the global population in 2010 and 39% in 2100.

In 1950, only 9% of the world’s population was African.''

From your linked article

Of course, it’s difficult to do this kind of large-scale modelling over a long period of time with great precision. As with any continent, there’s going to be variance.

Doh, ya think?

Including the error bars on their projected population numbers would have made for an interesting, if not humorous, addition. It would be of interest to know what they could possibly base a population projection almost a hundred years into the future on.

Sure, projections are never certain. But that's true of multiple scenarios. World population may stabilize as some studies predict, continue to grow at a slower rate, or increase due to government stimulus economic growth, have more babies programs/payments, or some other factor.

What remains true regardless of how population stats pan out is that we are currently putting a strain on ecosystems - as already mentioned - habitat loss, urbanization of prime farm land, over fishing, land degradation, etc, etc.....and that this can only get worse as living standards in developing nations rise, billions more consuming resources at ever higher rates.

And of course, the issue of climate change and the possibility that conditions may not be as conducive to agriculture, severe drought, severe storms.

Maybe this is manageable, but the will to act does not appear to be there. Many deny that there even is a problem.

 

[Jokodo]

Population growth is expected to surge in developing nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

Expected by who? Under what definition of the word "surge"?

Various studies predict population growth for Africa.

The information and its sources being readily available.

An example based on a United Nations report;
“More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa,” says the United Nations report. “Of the additional 2.4 billion people projected to be added to the global population between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa.”

After 2050, Africa is projected to be the only major area that has a continually growing population, meaning that it will house 25% of the global population in 2010 and 39% in 2100.

In 1950, only 9% of the world’s population was African.''

'population growth surges' has not the same meaning as 'the population surges'. What you're presenting is, at best, an example of the latter. If the population keeps growing (though at a decelerating rate) while the growth rate is in sharp decline, talking of a surge in population growth is frankly misleading.

"in developing nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa" also has a different meaning from "in sub-Saharan Africa, though not so much in the rest of the developing world".

 

[DBT]

Various studies predict population growth for Africa.

The information and its sources being readily available.

An example based on a United Nations report;
“More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa,” says the United Nations report. “Of the additional 2.4 billion people projected to be added to the global population between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa.”

After 2050, Africa is projected to be the only major area that has a continually growing population, meaning that it will house 25% of the global population in 2010 and 39% in 2100.

In 1950, only 9% of the world’s population was African.''

'population growth surges' has not the same meaning as 'the population surges'. What you're presenting is, at best, an example of the latter. If the population keeps growing (though at a decelerating rate) while the growth rate is in sharp decline, talking of a surge in population growth is frankly misleading.

"in developing nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa" also has a different meaning from "in sub-Saharan Africa, though not so much in the rest of the developing world".

The objection doesn't make any difference to the overall picture being painted by the UN, and related studies. Sure, there are distinctions to be made between individual developing nations, some may indeed stabilize or even reduce their population numbers. That's not being disputed.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Population growth is expected to surge in developing nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

Expected by who? Under what definition of the word "surge"?

Various studies predict population growth for Africa.

The information and its sources being readily available.

An example based on a United Nations report;
“More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa,” says the United Nations report. “Of the additional 2.4 billion people projected to be added to the global population between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa.”

After 2050, Africa is projected to be the only major area that has a continually growing population, meaning that it will house 25% of the global population in 2010 and 39% in 2100.

In 1950, only 9% of the world’s population was African.''

It's projections based on everything staying the same at the moment. We have no reason to think that's the case

 

[ruby sparks]

The objection doesn't make any difference to the overall picture being painted by the UN, and related studies. Sure, there are distinctions to be made between individual developing nations, some may indeed stabilize or even reduce their population numbers. That's not being disputed.

Yes. I have seen numerous similar graphs. It is estimated that Africa will contribute 80% of the projected increases in world population by 2050.

It is also the continent where there is the greatest unmet need for Family Planning and where many women (for example) want it.

Put the two together and you get the potential for 16-27% savings in total CO2 by 2050.

Obviously, I am not saying that population growth control is the only or main countermeasure.

 

[DBT]

Various studies predict population growth for Africa.

The information and its sources being readily available.

An example based on a United Nations report;
“More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa,” says the United Nations report. “Of the additional 2.4 billion people projected to be added to the global population between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa.”

After 2050, Africa is projected to be the only major area that has a continually growing population, meaning that it will house 25% of the global population in 2010 and 39% in 2100.

In 1950, only 9% of the world’s population was African.''

It's projections based on everything staying the same at the moment. We have no reason to think that's the case

I was asked to provide stats for Africa, the purple line is a projection of Africa's future population growth. Birth rates in developed nations are generally not rising by much, and may even fall after 2050, as the graph shows....of course, that may change.

 

[Jokodo]

'population growth surges' has not the same meaning as 'the population surges'. What you're presenting is, at best, an example of the latter. If the population keeps growing (though at a decelerating rate) while the growth rate is in sharp decline, talking of a surge in population growth is frankly misleading.

"in developing nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa" also has a different meaning from "in sub-Saharan Africa, though not so much in the rest of the developing world".

The objection doesn't make any difference to the overall picture being painted by the UN, and related studies.

If you have to distort reality to make a point, this says a lot about your point.

- - - Updated - - -

It's projections based on everything staying the same at the moment. We have no reason to think that's the case

I was asked to provide stats for Africa, the purple line is a projection of Africa's future population growth. Birth rates in developed nations are generally not rising by much, and may even fall after 2050, as the graph shows....of course, that may change.

No, you were asked to provide reasoning for expecting a surge in growth in "developing nations". Not for a continued, though decelerating growth in a small subset of them.

 

[ruby sparks]

I was asked to provide stats for Africa, the purple line is a projection of Africa's future population growth. Birth rates in developed nations are generally not rising by much, and may even fall after 2050, as the graph shows....of course, that may change.

Asia is an interesting region. Most people know about China's infamous one-child experiment, but less well-known have been the successes in places like Japan, Thailand, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Indonesia, etc, where non-coercive Family Planning policies helped to effectively defuse a potential population explosion in East Asia between 1960 and 1990 and in many cases contributed to economic development, which in turn had a moderatiing effect on population growth. The phrase 'virtuous circle' recurs.

Thailand: A Family Planning Success Story
https://www.context.org/iclib/ic31/frazer/

Population Policies and Programs in East Asia
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~amason/Research/POPop123.pdf

 

[ruby sparks]

As for population projections for Developing Countries generally:

97% of population growth to be in developing world
https://www.consultancy.uk/news/2191/97-percent-of-population-growth-to-be-in-developing-world

"The highest population growth rates will continue to be in developing regions, accounting for 97% of the increase to 2030. The worlds developing regions will see 1.2 billion people added, a 20.7% increase; while the population of developed countries will increase a mere 3.3% adding 41 million to the current 1.3 billion people."

India's rates in particular seem to be very significant.

One of the reasons that population may continue to grow strongly outside the 'west', even after fertility rates decline, is Population Momentum, where prior growth, large base numbers and other demographic features such as relatively young populations (and drops in mortality rates) have a continuing effect.

Population Momentum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_momentum

 

[ruby sparks]

An interesting article on Africa:


Population growth in Africa: grasping the scale of the challenge
https://www.theguardian.com/global-...in-africa-grasping-the-scale-of-the-challenge

Strong national family planning programmes in various parts of the world jump-started a virtuous circle: fertility declines allowed more educational and other resources to be deployed per capita than otherwise would have been possible. In turn, relatively more educated girls and women were able to increase their economic value and societal status – allowing for even greater agency to access and use contraception. Unfortunately, since the early 1990s, family planning programmes in Africa have not had the same attention, resulting in slow, sometimes negligible, fertility declines. In a handful of countries, previous declines have stalled altogether and are reversing.






Once again, it is worth stressing that population growth control is only one of a number of possible countermeasures and not the main one.

 

[Jokodo]

As for population projections for Developing Countries generally:

97% of population growth to be in developing world
https://www.consultancy.uk/news/2191/97-percent-of-population-growth-to-be-in-developing-world

"The highest population growth rates will continue to be in developing regions, accounting for 97% of the increase to 2030. The worlds developing regions will see 1.2 billion people added, a 20.7% increase; while the population of developed countries will increase a mere 3.3% adding 41 million to the current 1.3 billion people."

Sure.

And if your brother goes on a killing spree, your family will be responsible for 97% of the murders in your district this decade.

India's rates in particular seem to be very significant.

Most of India's population increase is concentrated in a few states, and in the rural areas there. Urban areas already have fertility rates below replacement level - and urbanization continues. From your link: "It is not merely that people will migrate to other regions, within regions migration from rural areas to cities is also expected to increase rapidly over the coming 20 years."

 

[ruby sparks]

India's rates in particular seem to be very significant.

Most of India's population increase is concentrated in a few states, and in the rural areas there. Urban areas already have fertility rates below replacement level - and urbanization continues. From your link: "It is not merely that people will migrate to other regions, within regions migration from rural areas to cities is also expected to increase rapidly over the coming 20 years."

Yes there are regional and urban/rural variations, but overall the statement in bold stands, and India is set to become the world's most populous country, overtaking China, in about 5-10 years.

 

[Jokodo]

Most of India's population increase is concentrated in a few states, and in the rural areas there. Urban areas already have fertility rates below replacement level - and urbanization continues. From your link: "It is not merely that people will migrate to other regions, within regions migration from rural areas to cities is also expected to increase rapidly over the coming 20 years."

Yes there are regional and urban/rural variations, but overall the statement in bold stands, and India is set to become the world's most populous country, overtaking China, in about 5-10 years.

Yes, and with the fertility rates of the year 2000, this might already have happened a couple years ago. The demographic landscape of India has changed quite significantly in the last two decades (and before, basically since the 1980s), and not in a way that justifies the expression "population growth is surging".

ETA: Also worth noting, most of that population growth is due to a timelag effect from earlier high fertility rates, not due to today's: Indians aren't having particularly many children, there simply aren't enough old Indians dying to balance what births there are because they weren't born in the first place - there weren't nearly as many births in the 1930s- 50s.

 

[ruby sparks]

As you said, it varies. Some regions still have a fertility rate of 4. But I read that the overall fertility rate is 2.2 and is as you say declining.

Replacement level fertility rates are of course only one target. It doesn't mean further decline wouldn't be even more helpful, or that we should be complacent after reaching replacement levels, especially if each child born has a growing carbon footprint. To that end, children born in currently highly developed countries with a below replacement level TFR still add a significantly higher burden than those in developing or undeveloped countries, in some cases by factors in the hundreds.

 

[Jokodo]

As you said, it varies. Some regions still have a fertility rate of 4. But I read that the overall fertility rate is 2.2 and is as you say declining.

Replacement level fertility rates is of course only one target. It doesn't mean further decline wouldn't be even more helpful, especially if each child born has a growing carbon footprint. To that end, children born in currently highly developed countries add a significantly higher burden than those in developing or undeveloped countries.

Irrespective of the merits of what what you bring up here, none of that subtracts from the fact that the claim "population growth is surging in the developing world" is plainly misleading.

It could have been true. It doesn't violate any laws of physics. It was true 50 years ago, if we're generous 35 years ago. As a matter of historical contingency, isn't today.

 

[ruby sparks]

Irrespective of the merits of what what you bring up here, none of that subtracts from the fact that the claim "population growth is surging in the developing world" is plainly misleading.

Well it's still growing quite rapidly. Whether 'surge' is or isn't the right word I don't know. It's not an entirely inappropriate word imo, if we defined it as 'significantly increasing' or 'actively rising'. There are degrees though, yes, of course. If we defined it as 'suddenly increasing' then no, it wouldn't be the right word.

But both types of definition are offered in various dictionaries.