When I was a kid the number of people in the world was considered a major issue. Overpopulation, we were told, was a real problem facing humanity - and we were a generation that grew up pretty much expecting a nuclear holocaust at any time.
We were heading for five billion people on planet Earth, with a growing awareness of environmental issues and concern over how so many people could all live the quality of life they would aspire to. It felt like we were reaching a natural sort of upper limit, beyond which it would be impossible to feed and support the population of the world.
New Zealand had a population of three million, that number was ingrained in my brain for a long time. Like there being nine planets. Auckland had 800,000 people and I remember seeing an exhibition at the museum on what life would be like when the city reached a million people in the future.
There was much discussion of reducing family sizes. The education of third world countries to have fewer children in a way that probably wouldn’t be viewed as politically correct these days, given the concern seemed to be of too many people from poor countries wanting to come and live in wealthy countries. China of course had their one child policy, implemented in 1980, to stop their population expanding further.
We no longer needed to have large numbers of children to cater for the fact that we needed their physical labour but many wouldn’t reach adulthood. Most of us were no longer interested in making sure that our God had the most followers.
July 11, 1987 when I was 16 years old, we reached that figure - five billion people. The size our species had expanded to over the entire course of history. Less than 30 years later on April 24, 2017 the population reached seven and a half billion. An increase of 50% in just three decades. Last November we reached eight billion.
The UN predicts that the world’s population will reach 10 billion people in 2057. At this time, India will be the most populous country with almost 1.7 billion inhabitants followed by China with 1.35 billion, and Nigeria with 454 million.
For someone turning 100 in the next five years the world’s population has increased 400% during their lifetime. From fewer than 2 billion people when they were born to now more than four times that. It made me wonder, have we decided not to worry about population size any more?
A rapidly expanding population, coupled with diminishing resources, and rising sea levels - what could possibly go wrong? Well rather a lot, as I suspect we’re about to find out.
World Population Day is observed every year on July 11, the date we reached that figure of five billion people on the planet, to raise awareness of global population issues. Problems that continue to grow as the world population increases by 100 million approximately every 14 months.
What will the world be like when the population reaches ten billion? What will life be like?
As I’m writing this I can see out the window my neighbour and a small child under their grapefruit tree picking up the fruit and laughing at how much there is. My brain calculates the proportion of the land area that the large tree is occupying. Based on what developers have been paying in the area it equates to about $100,000 worth of land. Those are some mighty expensive grapefruit!
Is that where we’re headed? Where a backyard with a fruit tree is the preserve of the wealthy?
Of course for billions of people not having a tree in their garden is the absolute least of their worries. Already we see food shortages, energy shortages, issues with supply, that are leaving countries and people in very precarious positions.
What will the future look like? Dystopian over crowded cities where people struggle for enough? While other people struggle to get in, making the original habitants fearful and resentful? Certainly between climate change and population expansion we are in for an explosion of refugees. Not to mention those that will result from wars that will be fought over resources.
We are somewhat removed here in Aotearoa. People are crossing the Mediterranean on scarcely seaworthy craft now, but they won’t be doing that across the Tasman. Plus we have big brother Australia, our more immigrant phobic cousins across the way who don’t take kindly to foreigners walking across their yard. Still this is a global problem, it continues to grow, and we will have to do our bit.
When did we as a species decide that the problem was just too big, too hard, and just forget about a goal of everyone on the planet having a decent standard of living? Did we do that? It seems like that’s what we’ve done, no one talks about overpopulation with any real sense of addressing the issue any more.
Did we just decide that an awful lot of people would be born into poverty, have lives of poverty with few prospects of escape, and in all likelihood die as a result of shortages or the climate? I don’t remember us deciding that. I don’t recall anyone standing up and saying that’s what the plan is now.
So what is happening now, what is the plan? How are we limiting the population growth which is going to exacerbate the other issues we are facing? Are we doing anything? Even China stopped their one-child policy back in 2016.
Well having done some reading it turns out the consensus is that overpopulation isn’t the problem, but a rather convenient scapegoat. Population growth is not what is causing massive inequality, or the damage to the environment. Which is probably just as well, population control seems to have gotten a bad rap in some quarters lately.
Consumerism is a problem. One we are struggling with now, and which will only be made worse by an additional two billion people. Even if the rate of population growth then begins to decline, some predict the global population will peak between 10 and 12 billion.
We are addicted to buying things that we don’t need. Such has been our appetite and need to follow through on the marketing messages constantly bombarding our brains that we have created great mountains and oceans full of our waste as we discard perfectly good products for the latest thing.
With technology we should actually produce less short lived stuff. Who wants magazines or DVDs or even books these days? Ok, not books I was just checking you were listening, although in the last decade I’d say 95% of the books or newspapers I’ve read have been online.
When I talk about consumerism being a problem, it is not an evenly spread one. The issue is we in the west have consumed far too much since industrialisation, as billions of people aspire to the same quality of life one of the answers has to be to greatly reduce consumerism in the first world.
The following graph indicates the date during the year on which demand for resources by a country exceeds the resources the earth can re-generate in that year. So, for example, if we all consumed at the same rate as the US does the world could only support approximately two billion people.
Not only is this an issue in terms of the availability of resources to a growing population but this over consumerism has a major impact on the environment. The richest 10% of the world’s population are responsible for more than 50% of global emissions. If that’s not bad enough there is a growing trend for the first world to ship our waste off to the third world for them to take care of it.
Then we have the cheek to act like overpopulation is a third world problem.
While many believe it is quite possible for us to live with ten billion people that is with the proviso that we change our behaviour, what we consume, and the way we live to make it sustainable. Hmm managing resources in a fairer way and reducing waste, that sounds like a pretty familiar problem. So lets’s not get too carried away.
Firstly, just because we identify the cause of the problem doesn’t mean it will get solved. The people responsible for the inequality and for trashing the planet aren’t going to turn around and say ahh, it’s a fair cop, you caught us red handed, we won’t do it again.
Secondly, we do still live on a planet with finite resources and whilst technology has enabled enormous population growth through the consumption of fossil fuels, increases in food production (we already produce 1.5 times the amount of food the current population needs - hunger is caused by poverty, not a global lack of food), and medical advances extending lifespans, there has to be some practical limit. For starters, where are we going to put everyone?
Well we do have some fairly large areas on the planet that are quite under populated. There are big bits in the middle of the US that have hardly anyone there, I’m sure they could do with becoming a bit more multi cultural. Speaking of which, there is hardly anyone in the South Island.
I’m just kidding South Islanders. There are some fairly large areas in the middle of the North Island where hardly anyone lives too. But to put things into perspective, I mentioned earlier that the population of the world is increasing by 100 million every fourteen months. That is the equivalent of the entire population of New Zealand, all five million - not three million like it used to be, every three weeks!
We may not have refugees arriving on our shores, and the terrible sights we have seen in other parts of the world, but this is a global issue. If we face it without addressing the causes of inequality and economic damage it will be a whole lot worse.
We can’t do that for the whole world, but we can do it here, and we can expect quite a few more human beings. We have capacity for them in terms of space and resources, finding room for them in our hearts may be the biggest challenge.
A GREAT piece of writing Nick.
The problem, that humans choose to ignore, has a solution by default.
It has been decided for us - the planet is slowly demonstrating its limits, which we continue to ignore, out of greed and stupidity.
Humans will die - in large numbers - in the most climate impacted regions.
I can imagine life-in-the-2050s. While I wont be around to experience it, humans from my son's generation and down will.
Everything we do now will determine how 'liveable' it will be, especially who we vote for to lead Aotearoa-nz into the certain future of a climate changed world.
Yes - well written and a succinct summary of the issues Nick.Thank you. I was browsing an online clothing site before reading your blog. About to make an order for something I would like to have but don't really need.Guilt has set in,and I haven't placed the order- I've decided instead to review my quite ample clothing collection, including the ones I have packed away. Fashion does go around in circles- I know I have a dress packed away that is very similar to those I have just been looking at.! I do have a couple of friends who buy most of their clothes second hand to reduce waste. Your comments about inequality, and greed are very pertinent. If NACT are elected at our elections later this year we are going to see an escalation in inequality in this country..