Last Updated on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 | Population Growth
If you are one of those people who get overly anxious, you might have thought about the impact of the continuous population growth of human beings on the ecosystem and natural resources. While your fears might be genuine, having fewer babies cannot solve the climate-change problems we are currently facing.
The truth of the matter is that overpopulation is not even close to the main global climatic-change problem, because the global human population is not exponentially growing, rather it is slowing down and it is projected to stabilize by 2100 at around 11 billion.
Focusing on the numbers of human bodies residing on the planet actually obscures the real driver of most of our environmental problems. That is industrial waste and the disparity caused by modern capitalism and its focus on continuous growth and profit accumulation.
It all started in the 18th century in Britain with the industrial revolution, which helped spur economic growth with burning fossil fuels. The effects of fossil fuels on the environment were slow down momentarily by the two world wars, but soon after things returned to normal, the world witnessed an eruption of economic activity under the Great Acceleration, which leads to the emissions to soar many folds.
This occurred mostly in the Global North –the developed societies of North America and Europe, which today are characterized by established equality, wealth, political stability, aging population, zero population growth, technological advancement, and dominance of the world trade and politics.
So countries that shouldn’t tuck away from the path of responsibility of historical emissions are the UK and the United States.
Today, the global top emitters are China and North America, who have jointly accounted for almost half of the global carbon dioxide emissions. Studies have actually found that the high rates of consumption in these two regions produce so much carbon dioxide compared to their counterparts in low-income countries, that an additional four billion people in the latter regions would not have any effect on global emissions.
Corporations also have their share of the burden of global emissions. Studies have found that only twenty fossil fuel companies have contributed to more than a third of all modern carbon dioxide emissions. This happens despite the leaders of these companies being aware of climate changes as back as 1977.
The real causes of environmental degradation are not population growth, instead, it is the inequalities in wealth, power, and access to resources.
According to recent studies, the high carbon consumption habits of the wealthiest 10 percent population in the world contribute up to 50 percent of the global consumption-based carbon dioxide, while the poorest population only produces 10 percent. This trend is not expected to slow down any time soon, especially when considering the number of billionaires on the planet is increasing.
Social justice and ecological issues are intertwined and directly related. So blaming the population growth of humans only fuels racism while displacing the blame from the powerful industrial countries that continue to pollute the environment.
Usually, the blame for environmental pollution is directed towards developing countries, especially in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. And even the saddest part is that it is these regions that always face the brunt of ecological and climate catastrophes, despite that fact they contribute the least in terms of emissions and carbon consumption.
How to curb climate change
The number one and most important thing humanity must do in the coming years to help reduce climate change is limiting the use of fossil fuels like carbon, oil, and natural gas and replacing them with renewable and cleaner energy sources.
Humans need to cut the emission of carbon dioxide gas in almost half by the end of this decade if we stand a chance of making a significant climatic difference.
Luckily, we can all participate in creating a change, including flying and driving less, switching to a green energy source, and changing what we buy and eat. However, this alone can’t help solve though scientists believe that these can be important steps and can spur others to also make changes. But other large-scale changes are needed such as revamping our subsidy system for food and energy industries, which as we speak, continues to recompense fossil fuels. Another change that can help significantly is setting new regulations and incentives for sectors such as deforestation, farming, and waste management.
One study found that individual actions on ecological change are ranked 148 according to their effect. Avoiding cars is the single most effective action an individual could take to help prevent climate change. Cares produce more pollution to the environment than other methods of transportation such as biking, walking, and public transport.
Luckily, cutting fossil fuel will not have a major economic impact since renewable energy such as solar and wind are actually cheaper.
The bottom line is, overpopulation is the least responsible for climatic changes we are facing today.
Was this article helpful?
