|
When the world’s population hit 6 billion last month, most of
the media coverage delivered the message you’ve probably
heard all your life: the world is overpopulated, it can’t survive
this rate of growth, the birth rate must be cut now before it’s
too late, etc. Most Americans have been told this so long and
so often it doesn’t even occur to them to question it; it’s just
one of those things everybody knows.
Well, as Will Rogers reputedly said, the biggest problem isn’t all
the things people don’t know; it’s all the things they know that
ain’t so.
The fact is, though the world’s population has doubled since
1960, global food and resource population are at all-time
highs, with plenty of room for more growth.
Consider food. According to a 1993 U.S. Department of
Agriculture report, per-person food production intake
worldwide rose more than 11 percent (from 2,436 calories daily
to 2,706) between 1970 and 1990. Production rose even more
during that span among major product groups like cereal (62
percent), fruit (47 percent), vegetables (68 percent) and meat
(76 percent) — all outstripping the rate of population growth
during the same period (43 percent).
Prospects for the future are even brighter. As the World Bank
notes, less than half the world’s land area suitable for crop
production is being used for that purpose and only 15 percent
of cropland is irrigated. Perhaps even more important, dramatic
advances in biotechnology — the genetic manipulation of plants
and animals — are opening the door to massive increases in
productivity.
Other natural resources also remain abundant. "Given current
economic conditions and technologies," the World Resources
Institute reported in 1994, "proven reserves alone could supply
petroleum needs for 40 years, natural gas for 50 years, and
coal for well over 200 years; there is also the expectation that
new fossil reserves will be discovered in the coming years."
Again, as with food, we’ve barely begun to tap into other
sources of energy; for example, the World Resources Institute
notes that in 1990, only 15 percent of the world’s exploitable
hydroelectric potential was used. And solar energy is limitless.
None of this is to say that there are no parts of the world that
face a shortage of some resources. But the correlation between
population and economic well-being just doesn’t pan out. The
populations of some of the most densely packed countries in
the world (Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Netherlands) are
among the most prosperous, while those in some lightly
populated areas (like sub-Saharan Africa) are among the
poorest. Factors like weather, wars and oppressive
political/economic/social regimes tend to be the real culprits of
poverty.
Even if you think overpopulation is a problem, the idea that it’s
out of control is out of date. Citing United Nations numbers,
the Population
Research Institute think tank notes that in the developing
world, women’s fertility has dropped from an average of six
children in the 1950s to just over three today. This number is
hardly cause for alarm over a "population bomb."
Up to now I’ve given you a lot of good news. I readily admit
there are real population problems, but they’re not necessarily
the ones you’ve heard about. In many countries — including
ours — the threat on the horizon is not that too many babies
are being born, but too few.
In Europe, China, Japan and the United States, among other
places, fertility rates have fallen below replacement level —
sometimes far below. Paul Mitchell, author of the book
Agequake, adds up these countries and finds they
represent more than half the world’s current population.
This trend means big trouble down the line, starting around
2010, when the post-World War II baby boom generation
begins to retire, and worsening in the decades to come.
Between lengthening life spans and declining birth rates,
countries like ours face a future where more and more retirees
will need support from fewer and fewer working people. That’s
an untenable situation, and it’s setting the stage for fierce
political conflicts between the generations.
How did we get to this point? A lot of things played a role,
including anti-family government policies that raised the tax
burden on families to the point where it discouraged
childbearing — except among single girls and women, whose
childbearing was subsidized by the welfare state. But perhaps
the largest share of the blame should be placed on a shift in
cultural attitudes. We’ve gone from being a society that viewed
children as a blessing from God and family obligations as a
sacred trust, to one which emphasizes prosperity and self-
indulgence. To all too many people, the responsibilities of
families — especially large families — are just a drag.
How do we get out of this situation? To some extent, we can’t.
It’s too late for Americans to start having enough children to
forestall the coming generational conflict. And that conflict will
likely be all the more intense because older Americans will
increasingly rely for support not on their own children, who
might be moved by love and a sense of duty, but on distant
strangers whose income is conscripted by the government.
In the long run, we may yet rediscover the basic truth well
known to our ancestors — that children really are a blessing
from God, bringing not only material benefits but emotional
and spiritual ones. It’d be nice to see the day again when that’s
just one of those things everybody knows.
|