Population+Geography


 * Population Geography Essential Questions:**
 * 1. What is population geography vs. demography?**
 * 2. How (and why) do populations grow?**
 * 3. What demographic features are particularly relevant in the study of population?**
 * 4. How do we analyze raw population data?**
 * 5. What is overpopulation?**
 * 6. Where is population growth/decline a significant issue and why?**
 * 7. What policies do states invoke regarding population, and why do they even bother?**
 * 8. How are population and migration related?**
 * 9. Why do people move?**
 * 10. What affect do those moves have on source location and destination?**
 * 11. The issue of over population. Will we ever reach a point where the earth can not support its population?**

media type="custom" key="10154273" A thought... "If we don't halt population growth with justice and compassion, it will be done for us by nature, brutally and without pity - and will leave a ravaged world." Nobel Laureate Dr. Henry W. Kendall ([])

__**What is Population Geography?**__ "Population geography is a division of human geography that focuses on how the migration, distribution, and growth of population is affected by the nature of a place." ( [|123Explore] )

Population Geography also looks at the ideas of how many people live where and what impact it has on the world system.

//Population geography// can essentially be split into two categories: demography and spatial demography. //Demography// is the measurement of human characteristics, including not only basic statistics on race, age, and gender, but also measurements of education, housing, income, and employment. Demography also encompasses characteristics of a specific area, like population density, crime rate, and unemployment rate. For example, the City of Detroit, Michigan (population 860,971) had a violent crime rate of 22.9 and a property crime rate of 67.7 in 2007, compared to Lansing, Michigan (population 113,643), which had a violent crime rate of 10.9 and a property crime rate of 36.3 in the same year ([|Detroit News FBI Crime Database]). This measurement of crime may deter some from living within Detroit's city limits because it is twice as high as in Lansing. This natural inclination to live in a safer area leads into the idea of spatial demography. //Spatial demography// shows how these measurements are actually used and how they relate to the world and space around us. For example, spatial demography is used when comparing the crude birth rates of an area to the population, environment, economy, and lifestyle. The crude birth rate in the United States may be lower than it is in a Sub-Saharan African country simply because of cultural differences: women in the United States tend to become mothers at a later age, and having a large number of children is not usually a priority for most women.

__Population Growth – How to Measure It__ Generally, populations grow over an extended period of time. To effectively analyze population growth, geographers use a variety of measurements:
 * __How and why do populations grow?__**

//Crude Birth Rate (CBR)// measures all live births per 1000 people.

//Crude Death Rate (CDR)// measures all deaths per 1000 people. In this case, the age or cause of death does not matter.

//The Rate of Natural Increase (RNI)// is calculated by subtracting the Crude Death Rate from the Crude Birth Rate (CBR – CDR = RNI)

//TFR (Total Fertility Rate)// measures the number of children a woman is potentially able to have. Today, a woman is thought to be able to have fifteen children, although eight children is a more typical limit.

These four measurements provide valuable data to population geographers as to why populations grow or decline in specific time periods. Throughout history, numerous external factors have affected these numbers, such as famine, war, disease, and natural disasters. However, fertility-affecting variables play a role as well, such as the age at first intercourse, frequency of intercourse, and the use of birth control (contraception, sterilization, and induced abortion.)

Population Geography is heavily reliant on data collection in order to make accurate conclusions. The United States Census is a survey given every 10 years to collect various information about the American public. It is required by law to fill out this survey. Though the cost of this program is high (Approximately $11.5 billion for the 2010 Census), it releases valuable information about the demographics of certain areas. For example, the population in 2000 in the city of Detroit, Michigan was 951,270 people, and the estimated population in 2006 was about 871,121 people, showing a population decrease of about -8.4% from April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2006. 26.1% of the population of the city lived below the poverty line in 1999, compared to the rest of the state of Michigan at 10.5% below the poverty line. ([|Census Quickfacts])

The American Community Survey is a division of the Census Bureau, and is given continuously in different divisions of the country. Whereas the Census provides a general "blanket" of information, the American Community Survey replaced the Census "long form" and provides more localized data about specific areas.

All of these measurements contribute to the //Replacement Level//, which states how many children are needed to keep an area’s population at a stable level (i.e. no growth or decline in population.) The world’s replacement level today stands at about 2.8-2.9, although in localized regions this number can vary enormously.

1. [|Population Growth at the Population Reference Bureau] (A great resource for a comprehensive overview of world population growth through history) 2. [|2008 World Population Data Sheet] (This is essentially a compilation of lots of raw data from the PRB that can assist in analyzing why the numbers vary so much in different parts of the world. A great source if one is doing direct research about a country - lots of information for every country in the world) 3. [|Future Growth at the Population Reference Bureau] (Another overview from the PRB about the future of population growth; this page also includes detailed descriptions about the demographic transition and a useful term list at the foot of the page) 4. [|The United States Census] (The Census is a nationwide survey given every 10 years. It is required by law to complete it, and it provides valuable demographic information about the nation as a whole) 5. [|American Community Survey] (The American Community Survey is a division of the Census Bureau. This organization measures data continuously in different parts of the country and thus provides more relevant information year-by-year.) 6. [|International Statistical Agencies] (An interesting site to look at to see many countries' equivalents of the United States Census)
 * For further research:**

The important thing to remember is that all of these measurements are merely statistics; to effectively interpret this data requires further analysis. Location is perhaps the most important feature in the study of population. Location can determine if a woman has easy access to birth control, the development of a certain area (rural, suburban, urban), the local economy, and so on. Cultural traditions are also crucial to understanding these varied statistics. Whether a woman has children starting from a very young age or if she becomes educated and has a career before she starts a family can shed light onto these statistics. For example, the TFR declined from 6 to 2.5 in Brazil because of economic development, better educational resources, and more access to birth control. According to the Demographic and Health Surveys by the Population Reference Bureau (1993-1999), the Total Fertility Rate is directly lowered as the education level of women increases: Picture source: [|Population Reference Bureau]
 * __What demographic features are particularly relevant in the study of population?__**

1. [|United Nations Population Division] (This site is filled with lots of maps, graphs, and data sets ranging from abortion policies to migration all around the world.) 2. [|World Contraceptive Use] (In analyzing the Crude Birth Rates around the world, it may be interesting to look at information and maps about world contraceptive use)
 * For further research:**

__**Birth rate**__ Some factors that influence the birth rate are how educated women are, availability of birth control, religious beliefs, economic background of the parents, and infant mortality rate. Studies show that the more education that a women has, the less children they have. Availability of birth control pills and condoms decreases the birth rate, but only if the user knows how to use these methods of birth control properly. Some religions believe in abstinence, places where these religions are prevalent will have lower birthrates. Also, some religions do not believe in abortion, in places where this belief is strong birth rates may be higher because people keep unplanned pregnancies. In certain parts of the world, people have a lot of children for economic reasons. Children can help bring in money for the family. Children, at a young age, will start working on a family farm or in a family business, helping to provide for the family. Parents want to make sure that they have enough children to take care of them in the future. In countries where the infant mortality rate is high, families will have more children, to make sure some of them outlive their parents and are able to provide for their parents in old age.


 * Stories of Maternal Mortality from the BBC
 * Listen to BBC's Assignment: Dying to Give Birth in its entirety

The following map shows that in the "developed" countries, meaning most of Europe and North America, birth rate is falling. On the contrary, birth rate in the "developing" and "non-developing" countries is very high. This is probably because in the developed countries, a much larger number of women are educated and pursue careers. In addition, the developed countries usually have an industrial economy, unlike the other countries. In the developing/non-developed countries women have more children because 1) the infant fatality rate is higher, 2) the economies are much more focused on agriculture, which leads to a "more people, more efficiency" philosophy and 3) the lack of both education and contraception for many women.
 * __Birth Rates Across The World__**

Picture source: [|http://www.abbrev.com.au/logos/uploaded_images/Fertility_rate_world_map_2-778483.png]

__**How do we analyze raw population data?**__ Raw population data analysis is broken down into a 2 distinct groups: Graphical Analysis, and Tabular Analysis.
 * Graphical Analysis
 * Graph's are a tool to better organize population data into distinct categories
 * The CIA World Factbook uses the following categories, but many more exist
 * Total Population
 * Age Structure
 * Median Age
 * Population Growth Rate
 * Birth Rate
 * Death Rate
 * Sex Ratio
 * Infant Mortality Rate
 * Life Expectancy at Birth
 * Religions
 * Languages
 * Literacy
 * https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/
 * The most common form of graphical analysis for raw population data is the 'Population Pyramid'
 * Population pyramids divide the population by gender and age demographic. They can be organized by any size geographic region as long as an appropriate amount of census data exists
 * The following link is courtesy of the U.S. Census Bureau, it has the vast majority of nations available and will automatically generate a population pyramid with your selected parameters.
 * http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/pyramids.html
 * Graphical analysis is not bound to simply population pyramids
 * These are the most commonly use, but of course many other forms of graphical analysis exist for any kind of statistical data
 * The Bar Chart
 * Pie Graph
 * Histogram
 * Box Plot
 * Ogive
 * Tabular Analysis
 * Tables are often used to simplify large amounts of complex data
 * Tables break raw population data into categories similar to those used by graphs
 * Tables have greater precision for numerical values than any kind of graphic
 * Because of this they are most often used for very specific data or as a back bone to graphical analysis so as to make the graphic easily adjustable with the introduction of new data
 * Linked below is an extremely abbreviated version of what a table might commonly look like. This information was also courtesy of the U.S. Census Bureau. Select a country and press GO
 * http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/summaries.html

__**A short video on Population Pyra**__media type="youtube" key="sSoSYm4AOls" width="542" height="435" align="right"__**mids from PRB!**__

__**What is overpopulation?**__ Overpopulation is when a given habitat no longer has the resources to maintain the population of organisms within it. Most typically this term referes to human beings as the population of organisms and the Earth as the habitat.




 * A common misconception is that overpopulation is measured by density or population size alone
 * Instead overpopulation is merely the ratio of population to available resources
 * This ratio can be adjustable or concrete
 * Open Systems
 * An open system is when the amount of resources is not finite, this implies that the current available resources has the ability to grow or diminish thus directly effecting the available population that the environment can sustain
 * Closed Systems
 * A closed system can function in one of two ways: finite or infinite and non expandable
 * Finite systems have a strict limit to the amount of resources they contain and those resources are non-replaceable. Because of the non-replaceable nature of these resources this system might contain a max population for one lifetime or a very minimal population for an extended amount of generations
 * Infinite systems have the ability to reproduce resources that are used but only at a specific rate therefore creating a maximum for the population. Yet even though the current amount of resources will be replaced at a constant rate the amount of replaceable resources is finite. Meaning that there is a max population that will be permanently sustainable and the population can go no higher than that level.
 * Carrying Capacity as defined by Merriam-Webster: "the maximum population (as of deer) that an area will support without undergoing deterioration"
 * http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/carrying%20capacity
 * Causes of overpopulation
 * 1) Lack of clean water
 * 2) Lack of clean air
 * 3) Food
 * 4) Shelter
 * 5) Migration
 * Even if a given population appears to be infinitely sustainable that determination can never be made because migration is a constantly rotating factor
 * Additionally if a population is particularly rich in resources it creates a "pull factor"
 * Often being to well stocked in resources can serve as a greater overpopulation issue than the gradual approach to overpopulation via natural births and deaths
 * i.e. The 1949 Gold Rush
 * 1) Warmth (Both too hot and too cold)
 * When quality of life is factored in as to overpopulation and not just physical sustainability a new list of causes emerges
 * 1) Medical Care
 * 2) Employment
 * 3) Education
 * 4) Electricity
 * 5) Sewage Treatment
 * 6) Waste Disposal
 * When overpopulation places "competitive stress" on these entities overpopulation might occur despite the fact that the physical resources are available
 * Effects of overpopulation
 * 1) Depletion of natural resources
 * The depletion of resources can also lead to air, water, soil, and noise pollution
 * It might also lead to deforestation and vicariously the destruction of various ecosystems on both land and in the water
 * 1) Species extinction
 * This refers to both the population that becomes overpopulated as well as the surrounding species that might be effected by their overpopulation
 * 1) High infant and child mortality rates
 * This is not to imply that the adult population will not be effected by overpopulation but instead that the effects on the child and infant populations will be exacerbated by poverty. This concept is evidenced by the decreasing trend of child and infant mortalities as the wealth trend increases
 * 1) Increased prevalence of epidemics and pandemics
 * Overcrowding, malnutrition, and inadequate health care all combine to create a breeding ground for disease
 * 1) Malnutrition
 * Malnutrition is the act of being under nourished not underfed, the common misconception is that there is not enough food but in reality there is a lack of balanced diet
 * 1) Lower life expectancy
 * 2) Unhygienic living conditions
 * 3) Elevated crime rates
 * 'Desperate times call for desperate measures'
 * War is merely a nation wide escalation of this elevated crime rate
 * For an additional definition as well as a list of additional resources see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation#Effects_of_overpopulation
 * Also helpful is the U.S. Department of State's background notes page. This thorough encyclopedia is one of the few that also contains a well designed population portion.
 * http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/

media type="custom" key="7072121" align="right"

__Where is population growth/decline a significant issue and why__ Growth and decline can be equally troubling issues for a given population. A significant change in growth, or decline for that matter, can leave a society and ecosystem reeling. The issues of overpopulation have been previously addressed but are not to be confused with rapid population growth. A rapid increase in growth can create temporary instabilities that are so wearing on a society, or ecosystem, that permanent damage can be created.

__**What policies do states invoke regarding population, and why do they even bother?**__
 * What constitutes as a //**significant**//growth or decline?
 * Truly significant growth or decline is a variable statistic. It is such because growth or decline only becomes significant in an overpopulation sense when it takes an effect on the habitat in which it occurs.
 * On this planet nearly every nation struggles with some type of population control, it is incredibly difficult to maintain the proper amount of growth or sustainability without actively controlling the daily activities of your population. For this reason it is more concise and effective to note a few major examples of the effects of significant population growth and decline.
 * Significant Decline
 * This issue can often be overlooked but is becoming a growing problem in many developed countries
 * Nations such as Germany, Italy, Japan, and most of the former Soviet Union will experience a population contraction between now and 2050
 * This becomes problematic because the younger generations are not large enough to support the economy as their predecessors age and retire
 * In China this issue is known as the "4-2-1 Problem", the issue is that for every 4 retired people who require support their is only 2 parents and 1 child
 * This problem becomes especially severe when it occurs between two large demographics because the middle demographic becomes responsible for an aging population as well as the youth population
 * Significant Growth
 * Growth has predictable issues that have been discussed with general overpopulation
 * With that in consideration it is important to note the backlash of overly large growth in a compressed amount of time. Even if a population is capable of withstanding this growth in the long run it can create such critical damage in the near term that it might prevent a habitat from adapting over time.
 * A prime example of this was the sky rocketing of infant mortality rates as Zimbabwe went under a massive expansion, yet did not have the medical facilities or the resources to support this massive new youth population.
 * Globalissues.org has an extensive database on historical occurrences of rapid population growth and decline.
 * Beyond examples this both helpful and credible site also provides an analysis of the issues created and specifically why these changes in fertility rates were so significant to the nation's future
 * http://www.globalissues.org/article/207/good-and-bad-fertility-decline
 * An equally thorough discussion about overpopulation is available via Wikipedia. Also on this wiki-page is a series of available Internet sources that were used in the construction of the page.
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation

There are two main views regarding population growth in the world. Both views connect directly to the economy in one way or another. The first view is Pronatalism.

Pronatalism- is an ideology promoting child birth, which may include limited access to abortion and contraception, as well as financial and social incentives for the population, particularly natives without recent immigrant heritage, to reproduce. (Wikipedia)

Antinatalism- is an ideology that denounces the idea of child birth and population increase. This idea most of the times relates to the economic downfall that could take place if the population increases too drastically. While some countries fight against the idea of multiple child births per family, some encourage it.

France- has employed various policies to try to reconcile family life with women working. It has some of the most extensive state-funded child care in Europe. Mothers can take 16 weeks paid maternity leave for the first child, rising to 26 weeks for the third child. There is also a total of 26 months parental leave. In 2005, the government pledged more money for families with three children in an effort to encourage working women to have more babies. Child care facilities are subsidized by the government. Younger children are entitled to full-day childcare(crèches). For children aged two to three there are pre-school programs for which families pay on a sliding scale. France has a birth rate of 1.9 which is the second highest family fertility rate in Europe. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4837422.stm#france). Even with this climbing birth rate, France may still be in for trouble due to its ageing, declining population.

Relating to antinatilism is the country of China: China- Implemented a one child policy in the 1970s to assure that the country would be able to feed its growing population. Violation of this policy in areas where it is most strictly enforced face mandatory abortions and severe financial penalties (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/worldbalance/campaigns.html).


 * How are population and migration related?**

The act of migrating can be defined as when a person moves from one country or region and settles in another. It is clear that the vast movement of people to or from a place can very much so affect the population of the country both negatively or positively. Whereas the country's population may increase or decrease.

(http://www.indexmundi.com/g/correlation.aspx?v1=21&v2=27&y=2002)
 * ~ Country ||~ Year ||~ Population ||~ Net migration rate ||
 * Saint Pierre and Miquelon || 2002 || 6954 || -4.89 ||
 * Montserrat || 2002 || 8437 || 74.2 ||
 * Anguilla || 2002 || 12446 || 15.02 ||
 * Turks and Caicos Islands || 2002 || 18738 || 12.97 ||
 * Palau || 2002 || 19409 || 3.86 ||
 * British Virgin Islands || 2002 || 21272 || 10.91 ||
 * Gibraltar || 2002 || 27714 || 1 ||
 * San Marino || 2002 || 27730 || 11.29 ||
 * Monaco || 2002 || 31987 || 7.82 ||
 * Liechtenstein || 2002 || 32842 || 4.93 ||
 * Cayman Islands || 2002 || 36273 || 12.08 ||
 * Saint Kitts and Nevis || 2002 || 38736 || -9.5 ||
 * Faroe Islands || 2002 || 46011 || 2.39 ||
 * Greenland || 2002 || 56376 || -8.37 ||
 * Bermuda || 2002 || 63960 || 2.61 ||
 * Guernsey || 2002 || 64587 || 3.87 ||
 * Antigua and Barbuda || 2002 || 67448 || -6.23 ||
 * Andorra || 2002 || 68403 || 6.74 ||
 * American Samoa || 2002 || 68688 || 3.42 ||
 * Dominica || 2002 || 70158 || -18.26 ||
 * Aruba || 2002 || 70441 || 1 ||
 * Man, Isle of || 2002 || 73873 || 5.41 ||
 * Northern Mariana Islands || 2002 || 77311 || 17.02 ||
 * Seychelles || 2002 || 80098 || -5.99 ||
 * Grenada || 2002 || 89211 || -15.21 ||
 * Jersey || 2002 || 89775 || 2.78 ||
 * Saint Vincent and the Grenadines || 2002 || 116394 || -7.69 ||
 * Virgin Islands || 2002 || 123498 || 0.12 ||
 * Saint Lucia || 2002 || 160145 || -3.64 ||
 * Sao Tome and Principe || 2002 || 170372 || -3.15 ||
 * Mayotte || 2002 || 170879 || 9.11 ||
 * Samoa || 2002 || 178631 || -11.64 ||
 * French Guiana || 2002 || 182333 || 8.78 ||
 * Netherlands Antilles || 2002 || 214258 || -0.42 ||
 * French Polynesia || 2002 || 257847 || 3.04 ||
 * Barbados || 2002 || 276607 || -0.31 ||
 * Iceland || 2002 || 279384 || -2.27 ||
 * Bahamas, The || 2002 || 300529 || -2.63 ||
 * Brunei || 2002 || 350898 || 3.91 ||
 * Malta || 2002 || 397499 || 2.36 ||
 * Cape Verde || 2002 || 408760 || -12.26 ||
 * Martinique || 2002 || 422277 || -0.07 ||
 * Guadeloupe || 2002 || 435739 || -0.15 ||
 * Suriname || 2002 || 436494 || -8.82 ||
 * Luxembourg || 2002 || 448569 || 9.26 ||
 * Macau || 2002 || 461833 || 9.08 ||
 * Equatorial Guinea || 2002 || 498144 || 1 ||
 * Comoros || 2002 || 614382 || 1 ||
 * Bahrain || 2002 || 656397 || 1.09 ||
 * Guyana || 2002 || 698209 || -6.28 ||
 * Qatar || 2002 || 793341 || 18.75 ||
 * Fiji || 2002 || 856346 || -3.35 ||
 * East Timor || 2002 || 952618 || 51.07 ||
 * Trinidad and Tobago || 2002 || 1163724 || -10.02 ||
 * Mauritius || 2002 || 1200206 || -0.92 ||
 * Gaza Strip || 2002 || 1225911 || 1.73 ||
 * Guinea-Bissau || 2002 || 1345479 || -1.62 ||
 * Estonia || 2002 || 1415681 || -0.73 ||
 * Gambia, The || 2002 || 1455842 || 2.23 ||
 * Slovenia || 2002 || 1932917 || 2.24 ||
 * Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of || 2002 || 2054800 || -1.49 ||
 * Kuwait || 2002 || 2111561 || 13.88 ||
 * West Bank || 2002 || 2163667 || 3.18 ||
 * Lesotho || 2002 || 2207954 || -0.63 ||
 * Latvia || 2002 || 2366515 || -1.23 ||
 * United Arab Emirates || 2002 || 2445989 || 1.41 ||
 * Jamaica || 2002 || 2680029 || -6.65 ||
 * Oman || 2002 || 2713462 || 0.35 ||
 * Panama || 2002 || 2882329 || -1.04 ||
 * Liberia || 2002 || 3288198 || -10.8 ||
 * Armenia || 2002 || 3330099 || -3.51 ||
 * Uruguay || 2002 || 3386575 || -0.41 ||
 * Albania || 2002 || 3544841 || -1.46 ||
 * Lithuania || 2002 || 3601138 || 0.15 ||
 * Costa Rica || 2002 || 3834934 || 0.52 ||
 * Ireland || 2002 || 3883159 || 4.12 ||
 * New Zealand || 2002 || 3908037 || 4.48 ||
 * Puerto Rico || 2002 || 3957988 || -2.12 ||
 * Bosnia and Herzegovina || 2002 || 3964388 || 2.97 ||
 * Croatia || 2002 || 4390751 || 9.72 ||
 * Moldova || 2002 || 4434547 || -0.28 ||
 * Singapore || 2002 || 4452732 || 26.11 ||
 * Eritrea || 2002 || 4465651 || 7.61 ||
 * Norway || 2002 || 4525116 || 2.1 ||
 * Turkmenistan || 2002 || 4688963 || -0.98 ||
 * Kyrgyzstan || 2002 || 4822166 || -2.51 ||
 * Georgia || 2002 || 4960951 || -2.39 ||
 * Nicaragua || 2002 || 5023818 || -1.3 ||
 * Finland || 2002 || 5183545 || 0.62 ||
 * Jordan || 2002 || 5307470 || 6.97 ||
 * Denmark || 2002 || 5368854 || 2.01 ||
 * Slovakia || 2002 || 5422366 || 0.53 ||
 * Sierra Leone || 2002 || 5614743 || 6.32 ||
 * Paraguay || 2002 || 5884491 || -0.09 ||
 * El Salvador || 2002 || 6353681 || -3.88 ||
 * Honduras || 2002 || 6560608 || -2.07 ||
 * Tajikistan || 2002 || 6719567 || -3.27 ||
 * Haiti || 2002 || 7063722 || -2.31 ||
 * Switzerland || 2002 || 7301994 || 1.37 ||
 * Hong Kong || 2002 || 7303334 || 7.76 ||
 * Rwanda || 2002 || 7398074 || -0.32 ||
 * Bulgaria || 2002 || 7621337 || -4.74 ||
 * Somalia || 2002 || 7753310 || 5.75 ||
 * Azerbaijan || 2002 || 7798497 || -5.41 ||
 * Austria || 2002 || 8169929 || 2.45 ||
 * Bolivia || 2002 || 8445134 || -1.42 ||
 * Dominican Republic || 2002 || 8721594 || -3.59 ||
 * Sweden || 2002 || 8876744 || 0.95 ||
 * Tunisia || 2002 || 9815644 || -0.63 ||
 * Zambia || 2002 || 9959037 || -0.16 ||
 * Hungary || 2002 || 10075034 || 0.76 ||
 * Portugal || 2002 || 10084245 || 0.5 ||
 * Czech Republic || 2002 || 10256760 || 0.96 ||
 * Belgium || 2002 || 10274595 || 0.97 ||
 * Belarus || 2002 || 10335382 || 2.78 ||
 * Senegal || 2002 || 10589571 || 0.21 ||
 * Niger || 2002 || 10639744 || -0.71 ||
 * Greece || 2002 || 10645343 || 1.96 ||
 * Cuba || 2002 || 11224321 || -1.21 ||
 * Mali || 2002 || 11340480 || -0.35 ||
 * Zimbabwe || 2002 || 11376676 || 1 ||
 * Burkina Faso || 2002 || 12603185 || -0.84 ||
 * Guatemala || 2002 || 13314079 || -1.79 ||
 * Ecuador || 2002 || 13447494 || -0.53 ||
 * Netherlands || 2002 || 16067754 || 2.35 ||
 * Kazakhstan || 2002 || 16741519 || -6.16 ||
 * Cote d'Ivoire || 2002 || 16804784 || 1.22 ||
 * Australia || 2002 || 19546792 || 4.12 ||
 * Sri Lanka || 2002 || 19576783 || -1.39 ||
 * Ghana || 2002 || 20244154 || -0.74 ||
 * Romania || 2002 || 22317730 || -0.6 ||
 * Taiwan || 2002 || 22548009 || -0.3 ||
 * Saudi Arabia || 2002 || 23513330 || 1.28 ||
 * Venezuela || 2002 || 24287670 || -0.11 ||
 * Uganda || 2002 || 24699073 || -0.28 ||
 * Uzbekistan || 2002 || 25563441 || -1.94 ||
 * Afghanistan || 2002 || 27755775 || 10.7 ||
 * Peru || 2002 || 27949639 || -1.05 ||
 * Kenya || 2002 || 31138735 || -1.48 ||
 * Morocco || 2002 || 31167783 || -1.09 ||
 * Canada || 2002 || 31902268 || 6.07 ||
 * Algeria || 2002 || 32277942 || -0.42 ||
 * Sudan || 2002 || 37090298 || -0.07 ||
 * Tanzania || 2002 || 37187939 || -0.08 ||
 * Argentina || 2002 || 37812817 || 0.63 ||
 * Poland || 2002 || 38625478 || -0.49 ||
 * Spain || 2002 || 40077100 || 0.87 ||
 * Colombia || 2002 || 41008227 || -0.32 ||
 * Burma || 2002 || 42238224 || -1.83 ||
 * South Africa || 2002 || 43647658 || -1.56 ||
 * Ukraine || 2002 || 48396470 || -0.42 ||
 * Congo, Democratic Republic of the || 2002 || 55225478 || -2.75 ||
 * Italy || 2002 || 57715625 || 1.73 ||
 * France || 2002 || 59765983 || 0.64 ||
 * United Kingdom || 2002 || 59778002 || 1.06 ||
 * Iran || 2002 || 66622704 || -4.46 ||
 * Ethiopia || 2002 || 67673031 || 0.11 ||
 * Egypt || 2002 || 70712345 || -0.24 ||
 * Vietnam || 2002 || 81098416 || -0.47 ||
 * Germany || 2002 || 83251851 || 3.99 ||
 * Philippines || 2002 || 84525639 || -1 ||
 * Mexico || 2002 || 103400165 || -2.71 ||
 * Nigeria || 2002 || 129934911 || 0.27 ||
 * Bangladesh || 2002 || 133376684 || -0.75 ||
 * Russia || 2002 || 144978573 || 0.94 ||
 * Pakistan || 2002 || 147663429 || -0.79 ||
 * Brazil || 2002 || 176029560 || -0.03 ||
 * Indonesia || 2002 || 231328092 || -0.21 ||
 * United States || 2002 || 280562489 || 3.5 ||
 * India || 2002 || 1045845226 || -0.07 ||
 * China || 2002 || 1284303705 || -0.38 ||

Based on the information provided in the graph it can be inferred that the closer a countries Net migration rate is to zero, the bigger the country is population wise.

__**Why do people move?**__

People move for improvements; improvements in living and safety, economy and resources, and political and religious reasons. For Americans most “moves” are due to job relocation, family connections, and retirement. However, for immigrants coming into America or other benefiting nations the reasons are primarily for economics, safety, or political justice. The greatest reason to move in today’s world is safety. Whether it is because of hurricanes or genocide, safe living is man’s main reason for moving. Natural disasters such hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, or landslides are a big reason for humans to relocate. An example of this is the Johnson family. The Johnson family moved from their Gulf shore home in Galveston, Texas to the Midwest City of Cleveland because they did not want to deal with the threat of hurricanes anymore. Safety can also be threatened by other people rather than just nature. War, genocides, and other life threatening occurrences can also cause migration. People flee from their home regions to other safe places in fear of their own and their family’s lives. Another reason for why people move is economics and resources. When people are struggling to come up with money to support their families or to put food on the table, they look for new opportunities to do so. In most cases this results in temporary or permanent relocation. For a person to find new ways to make money they move to places where the economy is stronger resulting in a larger income for themselves and their family. A modern example of this is the act of remittance. A remittance is a transfer of money between an immigrant worker and their family back home. In this act, common with El Salvadorians in America, a person will migrate to a nation of higher economic status to make a strong income and send the made money home. The immigrant will usually stay in the new country for a couple of years, but it is very common to move their family and remain in the new country. The other reason for people to move in this category is resources. When people have no food, water, or any other essential good they move to other places where they can find these resources. People living in regions stricken with famine or drought tend to move away to places where they can access food and water easily. The last main reason for moving is political and religious problems. Living in regions where governmental ways affect a person’s living in a negative way cause people to migrate. Countries with inhumane or unjust political ways to their people or sects of people in their nation have many emigrants flee to nations of more suiting ways. An example is Cuban political refugees migrating to America because of their dislike of political views of their home country. Religion is the other reason for moving. Religious persecution and religious acceptance are major points in migration. People will flee places where they are persecuted and tormented for their beliefs and move to regions accepting of their beliefs. An example of this is the colonial expansion of America, English Catholics were being persecuted at home so they left and migrated to Maryland where their religious practice was accepted. People move for many reasons, however, most if not all reasons have to do with these three categories: safety and living, economics and resources, and politics and religion.



This map shows countries with high immigrant populations (blue), equal immigrant to emigrant rations (green), and high emigrant populations (orange). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Net_migration_rate_world.PNG http://www.refugeesinternational.org/?gclid=CIe_xfzUnZgCFUog3godOV9hmw Class discusions led by Mr. Pickett //Cash Flow Fever.// Prentice Hall Pub.

__What effect do those moves have on source location and destination?__ The reasons of why people move directly affect the source location and destination of their migrations. Source location is where migrants come from, the nation or region they leave from to go to another location. The location that they end up is called the destination. So the reason the migrant wants to leave and their overall move affects their source location and ultimately their destination country. 1. An example of a migrant or in this case a group of migrants, affecting their source location and destination because of their move is the El Salvadorian remittance dilemma. El Salvadorians, one-third of their adult population in fact, leave their source location, El Salvador, and migrate to America, their destination, to make a solid income and send it back home. This affects the source nation by losing one-third of its adult population and working population. The El Salvadorians also affect their destination country, the United States, by creating a larger working immigrant population and transferring money earned in America to the immigrants’ families in El Salvador. a. // Cash Flow Fever //. Prentice Hall Pub. 2. Another example of the affects of relocations and migrations is found in colonization. The American Colonies were an unusual case for migration in which people from the sources location, mainly England, would come to the destination, the New World, in hope for a better life. However, more than just a few ship loads of people came over, thousands and thousands of people voyaged to America. The affect that these migrants had on their source location and eventually their destination were found in population. The acts that these first settlers in America did resulted in America becoming the most popular country for immigrants to migrate to. Through the half millennia of migration to America from European, Asian, African, and other American nations the United States has become the third most populous nation in the world. In this example, the destination, the United States, has had a major affect in its population increase. The main effects of migration are population and economy in both the source location and the destination.

 Population distribution** means the pattern of where people live. World population distribution is uneven. Places which are ** sparsely **populated contain few people. Places which are** densely **populated contain many people. Sparsely populated places tend to be difficult places to live. These are usually places with hostile environments e.g. Antarctica. Places which are densely populated are habitable environments e.g. Europe.**  Population density** is a measurement of the number of people in an area. It is an average number. Population density is calculated by dividing the number of people by area. Population density is usually shown as the number of people per square kilometer. The map below is a choropleth (shading) map and illustrates population density. The darker the colour the greater the population density. **
 * 2006-2007 Percent Change in Population Map:**
 * http://www.ded.mo.gov/researchandplanning/images/indicators/population/2007popest.jpg**
 * [[image:http://www.geography.learnontheinternet.co.uk/images/popn/gpw2small.gif width="432" height="197" caption="[world population density - click to enlarge]" link="http://www.geography.learnontheinternet.co.uk/images/popn/gpw2.gif"]]**
 * Source: [|Columbia University's Center for International Earth Science Information Network]Page URL: http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/plue/gpw/index.html?main.html&2 **


 *  The map above shows that world population distribution is uneven. Some areas have a high population density while others have a low population density. Areas of high population density tend to be located between 20° and 60°N. This area contains a large land area and a relatively temperate climate. **
 * http://www.geography.learnontheinternet.co.uk/topics/popn1.html**



Population Growth and the Problems involved with rapid growth

LONG NARRATIVE, BUT BASICALLY COPIED FROM THIS ONE SOURCE... NOT SURE WHY?? HE GIVES ONE PARTICULAR VIEW ON THIS ISSUE. BETTER TO SIMPLY USE AN ANNOTATED WEBLINK TO THIS SOURCE AND GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE ENTIRE TOPIC AND ITS INHERENT COMPLEXITIES...
 * Increased population growth generally represents problems for a country - it means increased need for food, infrastructure, and services. These are expenses that most high-growth countries have little ability to provide today, let alone if population rises dramatically.**
 * As the world population continues to grow geometrically, great pressure is being placed on arable land, water, energy, and biological resources to provide an adequate supply of food while maintaining the integrity of our ecosystem. According to the World Bank and the United Nations, from 1 to 2 billion humans are now malnourished, indicating a combination of insufficient food, low incomes, and inadequate distribution of food. This is the largest number of hungry humans ever recorded in history. In China about 80 million are now malnourished and hungry. Based on current rates of increase, the world population is projected to double from roughly 6 billion to more than 12 billion in less than 50 years (Pimentel et al., 1994). As the world population expands, the food problem will become increasingly severe, conceivably with the numbers of malnourished reaching 3 billion.**
 * Based on their evaluations of available natural resources, scientists of the Royal Society and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences have issued a joint statement reinforcing the concern about the growing imbalance between the world's population and the resources that support human lives (RS and NAS, 1992).**
 * Reports from the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, numerous other international organizations, and scientific research also confirm the existence of this serious food problem. For example, the per capita availability of world grains, which make up 80 per cent of the world's food, has been declining for the past 15 years (Kendall and Pimentel, 1994). Certainly with a quarter million people being added to the world population each day, the need for grains and all other food will reach unprecedented levels.**
 * More than 99 per cent of the world's food supply comes from the land, while less than 1 per cent is from oceans and other aquatic habitats (Pimentel et al., 1994). The continued production of an adequate food supply is directly dependent on ample fertile land, fresh water, energy, plus the maintenance of biodiversity. As the human population grows, the requirements for these resources also grow. Even if these resources are never depleted, on a per capita basis they will decline significantly because they must be divided among more people.**
 * At present, fertile cropland, is being lost at an alarming rate. For instance, nearly one-third of the world's cropland (1.5 billion hectares) has been abandoned during the past 40 years because erosion has made it unproductive (Pimentel et al., 1995). Solving erosion losses is a long-term problem: it takes 500 years to form 25 mm of soil under agricultural conditions.**
 * Most replacement of eroded agricultural land is now coming from marginal and forest land. The pressure for agricultural land accounts for 60 to 80 percent of the world's deforestation. Despite such land replacement strategies, world cropland per capita has been declining and is now only 0.27 ha per capita; in China only 0.08 ha now is available. This is only 15 per cent of the 0.5 ha per capita considered minimal for a diverse diet similar to that of the U.S. and Europe. The shortage of productive cropland combined with decreasing land productivity is, in part, the cause of current food shortages and associated human malnutrition. Other factors such as political unrest, economic insecurity, and unequal food distribution patterns also contribute to food shortages.**
 * Water is critical for all crops which require and transpire massive amounts of water during the growing season. For example, a hectare of corn will transpire more than 5 million liters of water during one growing season. This means that more than 8 million liters of water per hectare must reach the crop. In total, agricultural production consumes more fresh water than any other human activity. Specifically, about 87 per cent of the world's fresh water is consumed or used up by agriculture and, thus, is not recoverable (Pimentel et al., 1996).**
 * Competition for water resources among individuals, regions, and countries and associated human activities is already occurring with the current world population. About 40 percent of the world's people live in regions that directly compete for shared water resources. In China where more than 300 cities already are short of water, these shortages are intensifying. Worldwide, water shortages are reflected in the per capita decline in irrigation used for food production in all regions of the world during the past twenty years. Water resources, critical for irrigation, are under great stress as populous cities, states, and countries require and withdraw more water from rivers, lakes, and aquifers every year. A major threat to maintaining future water supplies is the continuing over-draft of surface and ground water resources.**
 * Diseases associated with water rob people of health, nutrients, and livelihood. This problem is most serious in developing countries. For example, about 90 per cent of the diseases occurring in developing countries result from a lack of clean water (Pimentel et al., 1996). Worldwide, about 4 billion cases of disease are contracted from water and approximately 6 million deaths are caused by water-borne disease each year. When a person is ill with diarrhea, malaria, or other serious disease, anywhere from 5 to 20 percent of an individual's food intake offsets the stress of the disease.**
 * Disease and malnutrition problems in the third world appear to be as serious in rural areas as they are in urban areas, especially among the poor. This will intensify in the future. Furthermore, the number of people living in urban areas is doubling every 10 to 20 years, creating major environmental problems, including water and air pollution and increased disease and food shortages.**
 * Fossil energy is another prime resource used for food production. Nearly 80 per cent of the world's fossil energy used each year is used by the developed countries, and part of it is expended in producing high animal protein diets. The intensive farming technologies of developed countries use massive amounts of fossil energy for fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, and for machines as a substitute for human labor. In developing countries, fossil energy has been used primarily for fertilizers and irrigation to help maintain yields rather than to reduce human labor inputs (Giampietro and Pimentel, 1993).**
 * Because fossil energy is a finite resource, its depletion accelerates as population needs for food and services escalate. The U.S. is already importing more than 50 per cent of its oil, and projections from the U.S. Department of Energy indicate that the country will exhaust all of its oil reserves within the next 15 to 20 years (Pimentel et al., 1994). Oil imports will then have to increase, worsening the U.S. trade imbalance. As supplies of fossil energy dwindle, the cost of fuel increases everywhere. The impact of this is already a serious problem for developing countries where the high price of imported fossil fuel makes it difficult, if not impossible, for poor farmers to power irrigation and provide for their other agricultural needs. Worldwide, per capita supplies of fossil energy show a significant decline.**
 * In general, developing countries have been relying heavily on fossil energy, especially for fertilizers and irrigation to augment their food supply. The current decline in per capita use of fossil energy, caused by the gradual decline in oil supplies and their relatively high prices, is generating direct competition between developed and developing countries for fossil energy resources.**
 * Economic analyses often overlook the biological and physical constraints that exist in all food production systems. The assumption is that market mechanisms and international trade are effective insurances against future food shortages. A rich economy is expected to guarantee a food supply adequate to meet a country's demand despite existing local ecological constraints. In fact, the contrary is true. When global biological and physical limits to domestic food production are reached, food importation will no longer be a viable option for any country. At that point, food importation for the rich can only be sustained by starvation of the powerless poor.**
 * These concerns about the future are supported by two observations. First, most of the 183 nations of the world are now, to some extent, dependent on food imports. Most of these imports are cereal surpluses produced only in those countries that have relatively low population densities and practice intensive agriculture. For instance, the United States, Canada, Australia, Oceania, and Argentina provide 81 percent of net cereal exports on the world market. If, as projected, the U.S. population doubles in the next 60 years (Pimentel et al., 1994), then its cereal and other food resources would have to be used domestically to feed 520 million hungry Americans. Then the U.S. would cease to be a food exporting country.**
 * In the future, when exporting nations must keep surpluses at home, Egypt, Jordan, and countless other countries in Africa and Asia will be without the food imports that now help them survive. China, which now imports many tons of food, illustrates this problem. As the Worldwatch Institute has pointed out, if China's population increases by 500 million and their soil erosion continues unabated, it will need to import 200-400 million tons of food each year by 2050 (Brown, 1995). But by then, sufficient food imports probably will not be available on the international market.**
 * Certainly improved technology will assist in more effective management and use of resources, but it cannot produce an unlimited flow of those vital natural resources that are the raw materials for sustained agricultural production. For instance, fertilizers enhance the fertility of eroded soils, but humans cannot make topsoil. Indeed, fertilizers made from finite fossil fuels are presently being used to compensate for eroded topsoil. Per capita fish catch has not increased even though the size and speed of fishing vessels has improved. On the contrary, per capita fish production is lower than ever before because greater efficiency led to overfishing. In regions like eastern Canada, overfishing has been so severe that cod fishermen have no fish to catch, and the economy of that region has been devastated. All of the world's fishing grounds are facing overfishing problems.**
 * Consider also the supplies of fresh water that are available not only for agriculture but also for industry and public use. Water withdrawn from the Colorado River in several states for irrigation and other purposes results in the river being nearly dry by the time it reaches the Sea of Cortes, Mexico. No available technology can double the flow of the Colorado River, although effective water conservation would be a help. Similarly, the shrinking ground water resources stored in vast aquifers cannot be refilled by human technology. Rainfall is the only supplier.**
 * A productive and sustainable agricultural system depends on maintaining the integrity of biodiversity. Often small in size, diverse species are natural enemies of pests, degrade wastes, form soil, fix nitrogen, pollinate crops, etc. For example, in New York State on one bright, sunny day in July, the wild and other bees pollinate an estimated 6,000,000 million blossoms of essential fruits and vegetables. Humans have no technology to substitute for many of the services provided by diverse species in our environment.**
 * Strategies for the future must be based first and foremost on the conservation and careful management of land, water, energy, and biological resources needed for food production. Our stewardship of world resources must change and the basic needs of people must be balanced with those resources that sustain human life. The conservation of these resources will require coordinated efforts and incentives from individuals and countries. Once these finite resources are exhausted they cannot be replaced by human technology. Further, more efficient and environmentally sound agricultural technologies must be developed and put into practice to support the continued productivity of agriculture.**
 * Yet none of these measures will be sufficient to ensure adequate food supplies for future generations unless the growth in the human population is simultaneously curtailed. Several studies have confirmed that to maintain a relatively high standard of living, the optimum population should be less than 200 million for the U.S. and less than 2 billion for the world (Pimentel et al., 1994). This assumes that from now until an optimum population is achieved, strategies for the conservation of land, water, energy, and biological resources are successfully implemented and a sound, productive environment is protected.**
 * http://www.dieoff.org/page57.htm**





POPULATION GROWTH Introduction
 * Tomorrow there will be 260,000 more people on the planet. In the year 3400, we will have a shocking world **population **of 10 sextillion (1022) people. Well before that, the amount of land per person will have dropped to less than one square inch (Zuckerman 81, ix). These incredible numbers illustrate that "perpetual physical growth is impossible on a finite planet" (Grant 1). The population problem is "real, immediate, and demands a solution" (Zuckerman vii).**
 * It has been calculated that the human population is currently increasing by two percent each year (Brown, Harrison, and Hutchings 42). This is a much more rapid increase than has ever occurred in the history of the planet (see Figure 1). Especially high rates of population increase occur in India, China, and selected African countries (Brown, Harrison and Hutchings 51). It is clear that population growth must stop sometime within the foreseeable future due to various factors. Among these factors are limited food and water supplies, limited energy and natural resources, pollution, animal and plant extinction, and the contamination and scarcity of many other much needed materials. The two elements that regulate population growth are **birth and death rates**. The question then is whether a slow down in population growth will be a result of a decrease in births or an increase in deaths. If the population continues to grow without bound, nature will take over and the death rate will rise to solve the problem. Unfortunately, this is not the most attractive solution for us. Instead, we would rather control the number of births in order to attack the source of this world problem and save the Earth from being over-capacitated.**

Figure 1: Today, in the modern age, the world's population is growing at a rate of 2% each year.

// Source: Facing the Future,1998 // What Causes Growth?
 * At the beginning of the population increase, there were many factors that caused it to grow. With the industrial revolution came advances in agriculture and industry that gave way to individual families being able to afford more children. In addition, increases in our knowledge about nutrition and medicine helped us to have more healthy babies. When women take care of their bodies better, they are more fertile and therefore can have more children. With cures for fatal diseases including antibiotics and vaccines, these children are also able to live longer. Finally, there has been an increase in fertility due to a number of factors including a reduction in the average age at which menarche occurs and an increase in the number of menstrual cycles a woman has in her lifetime. Menarche refers to the age at which a girl has her first period and it has "been systematically falling over the past 100 years � [and] today is about 13 years or less, on average" (Cartledge 38). This means that a woman � s time of fertility is increasing to include most of her teen years. In addition, as recently as 200 years ago "women in the Western world averaged only 30 menstrual cycles in a life time. Today for women with two children it is nearer to 450" (Cartledge 38). These figures all give women many more opportunities to conceive children in their lifetime. These types of changes seem good for society, and they are in a sense that more people means more development for the world � s societies. Until the middle of the 20th century, the population was not a major problem. People could move to other continents and later out of the cities to rural areas and space did not appear finite. In addition, these technological advancements allowed us to care for all of these people as well. In essence, the population took care of itself. It was around 1950 when the population began to skyrocket (see Figure 2). **

Figure 2: The world population began to increase more rapidly in the middle of the 20th century and if uncontrolled, will continue to do so in the future.

// Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1998 // When Population Becomes a Problem
 * As mentioned earlier, the rapid growth that is leading researchers and environmentalists to worry occurs in developing countries in Asia and Africa (see Figure 3). Because of the lifestyles in these countries, families are very large, and this is the root of the world � s population problem. In the United States and other industrialized countries, we may have the technology to support more children, however the **fertility rates **here are under control due to cultural norms and economic development. Thus, it is not a problem of technology, a lower death rate, or an increase in fertility that is giving us too many people today. The problem lies in the way women are treated in** Third World countries **and a couple � s motivations for having as many children as they do. **

Figure 3: Population distribution map in which the size of the country reflects its relative population.

// Source: Cartledge, 1995 // Population and the Environment Diminishing Food Supply
 * There are many reasons why living in poverty leads to a larger family size. First, there is less formal education available, especially to women. This means that women are unaware of methods of birth control, where to get them, and how to use them. In addition, the status of women in general leads to a desire to have more children. Most women in third world countries are working on **subsistence farms**; doing most of the work to support their families. Also, their low social status means that their work is not acknowledged as such. Women are the "breadwinners" in these societies, but they are not given credit for the work they do, nor are they consulted when problems of diminishing resources occur. These women have learned how to manage forest resources, conserve the soil, and use other resources efficiently; however, their status is so low that only men are able to control how resources are used. The women then feel that having children will give them economic security and a higher social status. Unfortunately, men also see children as a way of achieving social status. When living in poverty, there is no money to buy a big house or luxury car. Instead, couples use many children as a symbol of status. Also, it is thought that the more children one has, the better care one will receive in old age, making large families a form of economic security. These children not only continue the growth of the country � s population problem, but also continue a vicious cycle. Because they are born to help their mothers with farming, many girls are not exposed to any type of formal education. Therefore, these girls are never educated about the effects of their family size on the planet � s resources. In addition, population growth diminishes resources and increases the need for technology, both of which lead to more poverty. Resources are needed for survival, but the use of new technology to increase the supply of resources leads to a decrease in jobs. Because the population growth is highest in impoverished countries, an increase in poverty is detrimental. **
 * "Population growth has had, and at present continues to have, a severe impact on our **environment**" (Zuckerman vii). In fact, it has been said that this growth rate is the primary environmental challenge we face, even though it is much ignored (Zuckerman 1, 81).**
 * With a constantly increasing population, the first and most significant crisis that the world will face is a shortage of food (Brown, Lester, R. and Kane 21). There are many measures of food security from the personal to the global. The two most useful global indicators are **grain production per person **and** carryover stocks of grain **(Brown, Lester, R. and Kane 22). Measuring grain production per person gives a sense of how much grain each person should consume. In other words, it can tell us whether overall food availability is improving or deteriorating. Carryover stocks of grain show if production is exceeding consumption or vice versa. If production does not exceed consumption worldwide, the human population will be on the verge of a hunger crisis. This is worsened by the fact that resources are not equally distributed (see Figure 4).**

Figure 4: Food resources are not equally distributed between industrialized and developing countries.

// Source: Brown, Lester R., and Hal Kane, 1994 // Other Food Sources Soil Erosion and Land Degradation
 * Not only are those in industrialized countries consuming too much, but also the people who do not get enough food are living in areas of poverty with larger populations (Zuckerman 30). Grain is the most useful measure of food security for two reasons. First, grain supplies half of human food energy intake, and it provides part of the remainder indirectly by being feed for livestock (Brown, Lester, R. and Kane 42). Secondly, grain is less perishable than fruits and vegetables and can be stored for later use. During the thirty years for which data are available, world grain stocks have ranged from a low of 159 million tons to 465 million tons (Brown, Lester, R. and Kane 46). As world consumption has doubled, the amount needed to provide an equivalent amount of security has also doubled. Unfortunately the day will come when it is impossible to keep the amount of grain stocks on track with consumption demand due to a lack of land suitable for agriculture and storage space. An agricultural revolution has already begun with the introduction of new high-yielding, fertilizer-responsive varieties of wheat, rice, and other cereals. If it is to continue, though, huge changes and large expenditures for development of irrigation, transportation, storage, food processing, and fertilizers will have to be made. In addition, we need to be careful about becoming too dependent on chemicals whose consequences on humans and the rest of the **ecosystem **are unknown.**
 * Besides relying on grain and agricultural products for sustenance, it is reasonable to say that it might be possible for humans to rely on another food system, like the oceans. Unfortunately, we already know that today � s oceans are our least dependable source of food. There are forms of nutrition such as seaweed and **plankton **that are options for food; however, the popularity of these choices has not been high worldwide. In addition, the most common food source that we do get from the world � s waterways, fish, is becoming less and less of an option as population growth increases. The state of the world � s fisheries have made newspaper headlines that read "Too Few Fish in the Sea" and "Ban on Industrial Fishing Called For" (Brown, Lester, R. and Kane 75). According to marine scientists, all seventeen of the world � s major fishing regions are currently harvested at or beyond capacity (Brown, Lester, R. and Kane 76). So, then, it might be reasonable to ask why don � t we take better advantage of the world � s **rangeland**. Mainly this is because the land is either too dry or too steeply sloping to be cultivated. This land can be used to graze cattle and sheep; however, with the high demand of meat products in the market, our rangelands are also being grazed at capacity and beyond.**
 * The problems dealing with our various food sources also lead to environmental degradation of soil and water causing a handful of other problems. Land degradation is taking a heavy toll on dry lands that already compose 41 percent of the Earth � s land (Ricklefs et al. 9). Land degradation, if unstopped, eventually creates wasteland destroying the soil as well as the vegetation. From damage to agricultural dry lands as well as erosion, the world � s farmers are losing billions of tons of usable topsoil from their cropland each year. As a result, productivity is decreasing as expenditures toward ways of fixing the damaged land are increasing. **Deforestation **is also causing much soil** erosion **around the globe. This erosion then is actually a result of population growth and an increase in the livestock that grazes and the forests that are cleared � we need more wood and more meat (see Figure 5). Erosion occurs as a result of wind and water especially where demand for food is high and crop rotations are exploiting the land. Also, without trees, mineral nutrients are no longer recycled from deep soil layers. This causes soil fertility to go down. Based on the amount of soil that can still be cultivated without a loss of natural ecosystems, we have about 10 million square kilometers left, which is enough to feed the human population for 25 years (Zuckerman 32). After that, we need to find a way to grow more food in the same amount of space. **

Figure 5: Most of the world's land degradation is due to the need for more wood and more meat.

// Source: Facing the Future, 1998 // Water
 * Soil erosion also leads to more problems including flooding, over-nourishment of streams and damage to coral reefs. When trees that hold the soil in place are removed, the soil becomes eroded and it will actually clog waterways. The reservoirs and canals that supply and store water for irrigation are suffering from sedimentation as a result of this eroding soil. **Silt **carried by river water collects in reservoirs behind dams and fills storage basins. As a result, the capacity of water that the storage basin is able to hold declines and at times the basins are even destroyed (Ricklefs et al. 53). Water is not only needed for human survival, but also that of other living things on Earth, and continuing to have a clean supply is critical. As the population increases, not only does the demand for water increase, but the supply of fresh water decreases (see Figure 6). We do have an abundance of salt water; however, we do not have an inexpensive way to** desalinate **it. Pollution of water is mostly due to erosion and** acid rain **that can fall back down in any nation on Earth and can be so concentrated that it kills plants, fish and sometimes even forests. Dams have also been noted as an option for storing supplies of fresh water, however these can become contaminated as well, and they disrupt the natural flow of the waterway.**

Figure 6: The supply of fresh water is continually decreasing.

// Source: Facing the Future, 1993 // Extinction
 * As we have seen, most of our basic needs are being exhausted at a very fast rate and those that are left are becoming unusable. Not only is this food, soil, and water needed for our survival, but also for other plants and animals. In an effort to save ourselves from overpopulation, we sometimes don � t realize that we are causing other living populations to become extinct as well. The most affected places from human activity are known as **"hot spots." **These ecosystems are filled with** endemic species **that are in great danger of becoming extinct. Some of the hot spots include the coast of Chili, southwestern Australia, Cape Floristic Province in South Africa, and Tanzania (see Figure 7). If we are not careful with what we do to the other species that we share this planet with, we will be affecting the food chain more than we realize as well as destroying many potential nutritional and medicinal resources. Instead we need to provide a habitat suitable for "housing the Earth � s living library of genetic information" (Zuckerman 29). If not, we will face immense changes in the ecosystems of which we are a part. According to UCLA professor and biologist Jared Diamond, the next century will cause the extinction of "roughly one-half of the 30 million species that are estimated to exist [on Earth] � courtesy entirely of human beings" (Zuckerman ix). **

Figure 7: Hot spot habitats are those places that house species in the most danger of becoming extinct.

// Source: Zuckerman, 1996 // Energy Sources An Interdependent World
 * The use of various energy sources is the final problem stemming from human population growth. Population growth causes more consumption and exploitation of energy, chemicals, and nonrenewable resources such as coal, petroleum, and natural gas. If we continue to increase our consumption of the latter of these three resources by the same rate and the population continues to grow at the same rate, then we will run out of them entirely in 57, 24, and 31 years respectively (Zuckerman 31). These resources are obviously not going to be available forever, and other potential energy sources such as **fusion **and** fission **are not developed yet. With the technology we have these days, it is difficult to imagine life without cars and machinery. Unfortunately, these, along with factories, need energy and are the greatest polluters of our environment. As the population increases, the demand and usage of automobiles and other machines also goes up. This leads to unavoidable problems like the** greenhouse effect **and depletion of the** ozone layer**. In fact, when these effects occur, it also leads to drying of the soil, declining farm yields, and the attempt to find new sources of water, which then leads to a bigger increase in the need for energy and technology. All of these problems will increase as population continues to increase and more energy, food, and water sources are needed.**
 * This type of interconnectedness is seen not only as a result of energy consumption, but also in every other effect that stems from population growth. The cycle discussed above is known as a **general circulation model **and it shows how a climate change based on greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is likely to lead to a drying of the soils during the summer. These processes in general are referred to as** feedback processes **wherein the consumption or contamination of one resource can lead to both direct and indirect effects, forming a cycle. The use of** fossil fuels**, for example, leads directly to** global warming **and indirectly to the use of more fossil fuels to cool homes that now experience hotter temperatures (see Figure 8). This type of cycle is not uncommon when dealing with such an interconnected system, and the fact that so many exist means for us that population growth as the source of many of these problems needs to be addressed directly before we destroy our planet.**

Figure 8: Known as a general circulation model, this diagram shows how the consumption of energy leads to both a warmer atmosphere and increased use of air conditioning.

// Source: Zuckerman, 1996 // What Can Be Done?
 * In order to fix our population problem there are a number of potential solutions, both short and long-term. Some are fairly common in literature on the population problem and others are more controversial. One thing that is agreed upon is that the projected growth in the world � s population will occur in developing regions (see Figure 9). For this reason, we will begin with the solution that goes right to the cause of the problem: families in Third World countries. **

Figure 9: The increase in the world's population occurs mainly in developing countries and will continue to do so in the future.

// Source: Cartledge, 1995 // Women � s Rights and Economic Development Education Birth Control Government Control Foreign Aid Population Distribution Controversy in Solving the Population Problem What is the Best Solution? Discussion Conclusion ** Population growth is currently one of the biggest problems faced on this planet. Not only does it cause overcrowding in general, but a number of other problems. Many of the resources we take for granted are being diminished and even contaminated. For instance, we are running out of land on which to grow our food, and the land itself is becoming less and less productive. In addition, the erosion that causes this as well as pollution causes the supply of clean, fresh water to decrease. Energy resources are also being used up quickly and there are few alternatives. Finally, as we push more and more life onto this planet, we are leaving less room for other plant and animal species that are useful for nutritional and medicinal purposes as well as simply being a part of a diverse community. The most critical part of all of this damage is that most of it is interconnected. Damage to soil leads to less food and polluted waters. Over-consumption of energy leads to dryer soils and global warming. Without finding a solution to the cause of all of this, a rapid population increase, we will not be able to save the Earth from a continuation of this type of devastation. There are many different views on what solutions are best for action today. However, it is agreed upon for the most part among researchers and environmental groups that some action does need to take place. Because it is not reasonable to increase the death rate in order to control population, it leaves us with only one choice: decrease the world � s birth rate. The amount of action we take will determine exactly how much we decrease the fertility rate and therefore where our population is headed (see Figure 10). Whether this is done through education about birth control methods or the use of technology to determine new ways to use the resources we have left, we need to start today so that there will continue to be a habitable planet tomorrow. "When confronted with the frequently made argument that people are a good thing, so let � s have more of them, we can reply, following Herman Daly: � Yes, let � s have as many people on this planet as possible � but not all at the same time. Let � s populate the world with people for as long into the future as possible, by taking care that we limit population growth now � " (Zuckerman 45).
 * If women in developing countries are given control over their resources and given credit for the work they do, they will not need the security that having so many children brings. Instead they will have a credible social status and control over their education, employment, and family size. When women have an equal share in earnings, independence, and freedom, they can live peacefully with men and will have fewer children by choice without being limited directly in their reproduction rates. Finally, the children they do have will hopefully be formally educated so that they too will have choices in their life and will not be restricted by their social status. This type of change will not only require a change in the status of women, but also in the economic development of these countries. If the economy is given the opportunity to develop, couples will earn money and be able to bring their families out of poverty. This will then give them the ability to develop social status through the goods they possess rather than the number of children they have. This is what Mary Douglas refers to as "oysters and champagne." Acquiring status is a major goal of all humans as seen in all social mammals (Cartledge 40). Whether this status is gained by having a BMW or by having six or seven children depends on the type of society one lives in and the resources that are available. By giving developing countries the opportunity to industrialize and improve their economies, we are not only increasing jobs and decreasing poverty, but also decreasing the fertility rate. People will have a choice in using some of their resources to acquire goods, leaving a smaller amount for the raising of children. In this way, people may "willingly give up having some babies so that they can afford washing machines and motor cars" (Cartledge 42). **
 * A major way that economic development can begin is in the formal education of both men and women in impoverished nations. Education in schools will give way to knowledge that can help people improve their cities and villages economically which will lead to a life where children are not needed for status and financial support. In addition, the education of girls about what large families are doing to the world population and how it can be controlled with contraception will decrease the fertility rate. When women are educated, there is an additional benefit in that they too will want to hold jobs. When women have jobs, this also leads to less children. In countries where no women are enrolled in secondary education, the average woman has seven children, but where 40 per cent of all women have had a secondary education the average drops to three children (Cartledge 3). Once again, status can be gained through a means other than the number of children one has, this time by holding a job. **
 * When couples are given the opportunity to see how their large families are affecting resources and the environment around the world, we can begin to solve our problem by increasing the availability of birth control. This is a much more immediate solution, however it will only work if the couples want to use it. This means that the motivation for having large families must be diminished. If methods of contraception as well as education in terms of family planning are given to men and women in impoverished countries, then the number of children in each family should decrease. In addition, both education about the population problem and an increase in women in the work force will cause women to wait longer to have children. This can also be helpful because "like smaller families, such delays in first births exert a powerful brake on population momentum by lengthening the time span between generations" ("Today � s"). **
 * There are many researchers who have other ideas dealing with how the world and the United States specifically should slow population growth. First, there are some who believe that the above suggestions are not harsh enough. For example, there have been suggestions that we limit the number of children to two per woman in the United States reducing the total fertility rate (TFR) to 1.5 and decreasing the population problem. There are also ways in which we could discourage having more than two children, such as structuring health insurance, welfare, public housing space, schooling, and tax deductions so that benefits are more attractive for the first two children in a family. Of course this solution is not only possible in this country, but also world wide. Another idea for the U.S. is to slow the immigration rate. Even though at this time, high levels of population growth are found in poorer parts of the world, it will not always be the case. The more the world population grows, the more poverty there will be in all countries until sooner or later the death rate starts to increase and naturally stops population growth. Some population researchers who worry about an increase in poverty in the United States believe that we should begin to slow immigration to this country and help other parts of the world through foreign aid. One author in particular, Lindsey Grant, believes that we should "turn off the magnet" making the U.S. less popular as well as making it more difficult to stay here as an illegal immigrant. She goes on to say that a better system of identification would help in controlling our borders and, at least for now, keeping our own country � s population under control (Grant 210-1). **
 * As long as the United States and other industrialized countries are controlling their own populations, it may be up to us to help those without the knowledge and resources to do so. Foreign aid in terms of funding education and providing birth control in impoverished countries will help decrease the birth rate and eventually, when people are more educated, will decrease the poverty level as well. In fact, the U.S. government has been providing citizens in other countries with family planning services for 30 years and the results have been incredible. While the number of citizens in developing countries using contraception "has multiplied tenfold," the average fertility rate "has declined from nearly six to fewer than four" ("Today � s"). In addition, "the U.S. contribution to this success story has cost less than four cents out of every $100 raised in taxes" ("Today � s"). In this way, even though the United States will have to spend money on this issue, they will be doing so for the good of the world. Help from other industrialized nations would also be helpful as the U.S. would not feel the entire burden. Thus, the sacrifice will not be too great and we will still be sharing the wealth. **
 * Foreign aid is not the only way that industrialized countries such as the United States are specifically affected by uncontrolled population growth. Although we mainly look at the rough birth and fertility rate statistics when determining where the population problem is centered, it is also useful to look at population distribution. This type of information tells us the relative numbers of people for each sex and age group. For example, in most industrialized countries, there are a lot of people who are middle-aged and very few younger and older people. In developing countries, on the other hand, the distribution takes on a pyramidal shape with younger generations forming the larger base of the pyramid (Mackenzie 223). This large number of young people means that in the near future more people will be having babies, increasing the excessively high birth rates. Alternatively, for the U.S., this means that our future will hold a larger population of older people not middle-aged parents. Distribution is not always considered when analyzing the world � s population growth, however, it could mean extra expenses for industrialized countries in terms of medical care. This also means a potential controversy over how much should be done to keep people alive and reduce our death rates. Although it does not cause the population problem in itself, distribution of populations can affect what solutions can be best applied. **
 * It is obvious that solutions are necessary to slow the rapid rate of population growth all over the world, but there are opposing viewpoints that lead to different theories about methods of controlling population growth. In developing countries, as well as those in which people are not poverty stricken, religion can play an active role. One of the most popular solutions currently for decreasing the birth rate is to increase use of birth control. Some people including Catholics who are against the use of birth control have actually taken a pro-population stance. These people and their beliefs are the cause of controversy behind many of our most promising solutions. They sometimes argue that the extreme population growth today is simply a natural part of the development of the world. In addition, it is thought by some that more people will lead to more technological advancements that will "alleviate poverty and other economic and social ills" (Zuckerman 89). Also, it has been noted that by giving too much support to family planning, we are leaning towards government restrictions of fertility, a severe solution. Most importantly, many of these people feel that abortion and birth control are unacceptable and that if population needs to be controlled, it needs to be done in a different manner. The question is what other way is there to efficiently control population growth that will not interfere with conflicting views in society? **
 * Although there are many opposing views on how much action needs to be taken in relation to our increasing population, it is fairly common to believe that something does need to happen. This requires leadership in governmental offices and environmental groups who are willing to find potential solutions and determine what is best for the future of our planet. **
 * We leave readers with the following analogy of "lifeboat ethics" created by Garret Hardin: **
 * Metaphorically each rich nation amounts to a lifeboat full of comparatively rich people. The poor of the world are in other, much more crowded lifeboats. Continuously, so to speak, the poor fall out of their lifeboats and swim for a while in the water outside, hoping to be admitted to a rich lifeboat, or in some other way to benefit from the goodies on board. What should the passengers of the rich lifeboat do? (Birg 40) **
 * There are many options for these "rich lifeboats" including saving some or all of the poor and only saving themselves. It is a question of how many resources we have for ourselves and how many to spare as well as how much we desire to help others for the good of the planet. We must ask ourselves as an industrialized country and as citizens of planet Earth, what is the best solution for everyone when dealing with the critical overpopulation of our world. **
 * Science and technology have undoubtedly helped us reach this level of rapid population growth that the Earth is experiencing. Many people are now expecting technology to solve this problem; however, we believe that it is highly unlikely that this will happen. Perhaps the theorized notion that the Earth will find a way to save itself is the only way that the human population will stop growing. Whether this is through an exhausted food supply or by humans populating an uninhabitable planet, we don � t know. It is difficult to say how long it will take for our population to decrease even if the most effective solutions are used. That is why it is so essential that we try to solve our population problem now in gradual steps rather than letting the Earth do it for us, which would most likely occur in a quick and devastating manner. **
 * In order to solve this problem, many of the options such as birth control, education, and economic development seem fairly reasonable. By going to the root of the problem and trying to decrease the birth rate especially in impoverished nations, we will not only be decreasing the number of children that are born, but also allowing those who are born to live a healthier life, as resources will not have to be distributed among such a large family. In order to do this, the status of women needs to be improved and education especially in regards to birth control methods needs to be universal. This can be done through foreign aid and later, economic development of these countries until they are more independent. Because these solutions are not immediate, we must also learn to maximize our resources while the population is still at a critical level. This will include technological advancements and activities such as recycling and less overall consumption, which we can all do to help the planet. When these steps are taken, we can move toward a more secure world not only for the present time, but more importantly, for future generations. **

Figure 10: Our future population depends on how much action is taken in solving the population problem. // Source: Facing the Future, 1998 //

[|http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/populationgrowth.htm]