Portfolio

Master of Science

Environmental Policy & Management

University of Denver – University College

Abstract

Overpopulation is a well coined term in ecology, but does it apply to humans? Rampant population growth threatens our way of life and needs to be addressed across the globe. Overpopulation is the main cause of ecological damage and the main reason why sustainable development remains out of reach (Cassils 2004, 172). Food shortages will be a severe problem in the future. Agricultural production will need to increase 70-100% to meet the demands of the growing population by the year 2050 (Ehrlich & Erhlich 2012, 559). Another factor contributing to overpopulation is the unfair and unequal treatment of women across the globe. In general, empowered and liberated women have fewer children and produce other social benefits (Ehrlich & Ehrlich 2012, 560).  Coupled with women empowerment, family planning and access to contraceptives is vital give us more time to find better solutions (Trevors 2009, S114). Overpopulation poses a severe threat to humanity, but improvements in agricultural technology and culture shifts towards women empowerment; along with pushing the limits on what is ethically acceptable, can allow humanity to cope with a rapidly growing population.

Introduction

Overpopulation is a multi-faceted dilemma, which will inevitably become a serious problem for all humans on Earth. The main problem that will be associated with overpopulation is severe cases of famine. The human population has exploded over the last 100 years, and with this comes an increase in consumption and development. Overpopulation has been on the radar recently, but when discussing solutions, it turns into a controversial topic. One aspect affecting global overpopulation is religion, which many of them promote procreation while also opposing birth control and migration to developed countries or cities (Cassils 2004, 173-174). Overpopulation is also slowing down progress in other areas of sustainability, including restoration projects due to extensive human influence and cultivation of land (Hayward 2009, 766). Currently the human population on Earth is around 7.5 billion and is expected to be 10 to 12 billion by the year 2100 (Hwang 2018). 

The earth’s carrying capacity can be estimated through several options. It can be calculated based on regional geography and population density, food supply per person, and water supply per person (Cohen 1995, 342).  The calculation for population that can be fed is food supply divided by individual food requirement, which simply provides an estimate for carrying capacity based off food per person. Calculating the amount of food, a person needs is the weakness of this equation, since that varies drastically from person to person (Cohen 1995, 341). Either way, through these calculations and estimates it is predicted that human carrying capacity on earth is reaching its limit, or it will soon. Along with food shortages, water shortages will become worse as our population increases. Water shortages have been linked to rapid population growth in urban centers and areas with low rainfall. This problem is a two headed monster due to climate change decreasing the volume of fresh water available while rising population increases the demand of water (Bryant, Carver, Butler, & Anage 2009, 853).

Along with water, natural resource depletion increases with rise in human population. An example is Uganda and deforestation, it is predicted that Uganda will lose all if not most of its forests due to the deforestation. This would spark drastic changes in the environment, causing desertification, loss of biodiversity, increase the severity of climate change, and hurt the rural economies (Bryant et al. 2009, 854).

There are multiple approaches to remediate the current issues stemming from overpopulation along with solutions to future problems. There is an emphasis on developing new technology while upgrading existing technology. The new technologies start with agriculture, ranging from improvements in efficiency and product yield. Another approach to overpopulation is to slow or stop population growth. This could be either through educating women and men, promoting the use of contraceptives, improving the status of women across the globe, improving infant mortality, and improving the economic status of all nations especially developing countries.

This paper will focus two possible solutions to the problem of overpopulation. The first being improvements in technology, mainly improvements in food production and efficiency. Whether it be improvements in agricultural processes to improvements in genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) to better suit the needs of our growing population. GMO’s are met with scrutiny and opposition among the general public; strong negative emotions are associated with GMO’s (Cinici 2016, 3). GMO’s could help with improving farming efficiency and crop yields, which would help fight against overconsumption and food shortages. Developed countries over consume, the idea of consumerism has been promoted in these countries. Which has led to over consumption of all resources, ranging from food and goods. A dramatic culture shift is necessary to lower the consumerism, which would help with ever growing human population.

Second solution involves a more controversial approach to family planning and use of contraceptives and abortion. If needed, a more aggressive form of family planning could be implemented; limits on family size and mandates using contraceptives. These potential solutions will be met with strong opposition and would take a catastrophic situation or event occurring to gain support among the public. Religions and cultural values will be challenges to family planning initiatives, where contraceptives are considered taboo and having large families is of high value. The moral issues with abortion would be challenged and brought to the front lines of this battle against family planning. This solution also brings up the idea of empowering women along with further education, which is desperately needed across the globe. There is evidence proving women empowerment and education lowers birth rates, along with access to health care and establishing women in the workforce. Although this solution has had some success, it is difficult to implement and can take many years to come to fruition. Ecofeminists believe a wide spreading culture shift is required to make steps toward progress.

Technology and Consumerism

In developing countries, it is estimated 30 million babies will be born undernourished, based off a report from Sub-Committee of Nutrition (Underwood 2000, 357). There is a need for agriculture to develop more micronutrient dense crops, which would help developing countries fight their undernourishment problems.  In the Philippines, the Catholic church and members were opposed to the use of biotechnology and genetic modification in foods, while the government was in support due to the sustainable benefits and need for technological renovation (Cabanilla 2007, 178). Maria Arroyo, the president of the Philippines from 2001 to 2010, met with the Pope John Paul II to discuss the use of GMO’s. This was due to the Catholic Church having a strong hold on a lot of decision making in the Philippines and the rest of the world. President Arroyo emphasized the importance of the Pope’s opinion on GMO’s despite what current government administration was implementing (Cabanilla 2007. 179). The Pope and the Vatican eventually stated that the use of GMOs’ was immoral despite research proving it is not harmful to consume.

Along with strong religious opposition to GMO’s, public perception of them is also negative. GMO’s are viewed negatively by citizens of the EU and United States, despite widespread use of them in agriculture. This negative perception of GMO’s is still occurring despite scientists and physicians proving there is no harm from everyday consumption (Kwiecinski 2009, 1187).

This animosity towards GMO’s can be attributed to our overall slow acceptance of new technologies. Another reason was poor communication between scientists and the public, resulting in a severe lack of knowledge surroundings GMO’s. The opposition to GMO’s can be faith based, with an emphasis on how the food was created and the sanctity of creation in general. The fear of humans “playing god” is another reason many people oppose the use of GMO’s. Another criticism is the intended reason for making GMO’s which is to increase yields of staple foods; when alleviating poverty should the main objective of this technology (Sanford 2014,  985-986). Sanford also mentions how an emphasis on wasting less food should be adopted by developing countries, especially in the United States where excessive consumerism runs rampant.

Family Planning/Women Empowerment

Family planning and use of contraceptives is a highly controversial topic across the globe; both with developed and developing countries. In the United States there has been a surprising increase in opposition to contraceptives and other family planning methods. Legislation providing funding for family planning like Planned Parenthood and Title X signed by President Nixon is now under attack. Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of reproductive health and family planning services in the United States. The Affordable Care Act required employers to cover contraceptives through the insurance plans provided; along with the FDA allowing over the counter contraceptives met strong opposition as well. Unfortunately, the removal of funding for policies supporting family planning will affect the poorer communities the most (Aiken 2016). There is little research done on why these beliefs appear to be changing course over the last 15 years, one theory is that is turning into a partisan issue.

Abortion is a controversial topic and has been gaining traction in the political world currently and has led to a big divide on this issue. The issue of moral standing or moral considerability come into play when talking about a fetus and if it has rights or can it be considered a moral person? The debate on moral standing can be brought for a multitude of situations, ranging from objects, animals, or people with serious impairments (Desjardins 2014, 106). The problem with this debate, is the lack of a compromise between both sides. One side views a fetus as having moral standing, which means abortions should never happen and be made illegal. The other side views abortion as a women’s choice. There does not appear to be a middle ground on this issue. Based on the argument I made in the previous paragraph, this divide is on full display in United States politics. We are not united on this front, and women not allowed access to family planning services in specific states. This ideology is not unique to just the United States, this influence and belief system are prevalent in developing countries as well; which only adds fuel to the fire to the overpopulation problem. Ecofeminists would want women empowerment to include abortion being a women’s choice.

There is also research exploring how much religion plays a role in contraceptive usage. The research showed how religion has a strong social influence on many people, especially younger people. These values tend to promote non-sexual relationships before marriage and result in younger people having less sex compared to other non-religious people their age. This trend is correlated with less contraceptive use and a spread of simplified information about contraceptives and fertility (Burdette et al. 2013, 708). This research also showed how religious families tend to promote abstinence, while also saying pregnancy can occur with only one sexual act. Leading to a false understanding of fertility and the increase of young people not knowing enough about family planning and contraceptives, and further spreading potentially false information.

There is opposition to family planning from cultural standpoints and religious views. Family planning can be viewed as only a women’s problem, despite men still dominating the decision making in households. Another issue with implementing family planning is the lack of knowledge surrounding these methods. Many people are under the impression that birth control can permanently prevent pregnancies, and that is why they do not use them. (Dansereau 2017). Single women can oftentimes be uninformed when it comes to family planning, neither their parents or school discuss or teach about family planning decisions. Many clinics also do not have all the options available which limits a woman from making the best situation for her future. (Dansereau 2017).

Of course, the examples I mentioned earlier can be applied to some nations or countries, but the status of women varies throughout the globe. In low to middle income countries the status of women has not changed much, and as I mentioned earlier, men are still the dominant decision makers in most families. In India specifically, cultural norms still slow down progress towards effective family planning, despite accessibility to family planning improving since 1952 (Garg and Singh 2014). The cultural views of India bring up the idea of gender roles and how those vary across all nations. The typical roles for women revolve around reproduction and child rearing, while men have more productive roles; this along with men typically having more power than women across all nations leads to ineffective implementation of family planning initiatives.

Discussion

(Sanford 2014) is correct that the United States wastes a tremendous amount of food each day. She also recommends a culture shift and establish limits on our consumption. Although I agree with her assessment on consumerism in the United States, I do believe it would be a great challenge to change the culture of consumerism we have already established in the United States. The belief that humans only act through self-interest would challenge these methods to combat food shortages. Psychological egoism would be something to abolish regarding consumerism. The idea behind caring about the wellbeing of future generations needs to be pushed for in our society. Consumerism can be viewed through a sustainable economic lens, which factors in three main questions to answer when discussing the economy. First is how resources are allocated, second is how are the goods or services being distributed, and third is considering the rate of goods and resources flowing through the economy (Desjardins 2014, 90). This third aspect of economics would reject consumer demand and allocate natural resources at a rate where they can be replenished. This would conflict harshly with how consumerism is in developed countries. The idea of sustainable development fits in well with sustainable economics. Sustainable development focuses on current societal growth, but without hurting future generations’ chances at meeting their own needs. This philosophy needs to be adopted by world leaders to ensure sustainability is on the forefront; this would require an eradication of psychological egoism. Williams Blackstone argues for a new human right, the “right to a livable environment” (Desjardins 2014, 103); I believe this can be applied to future generations as well; which would outright reject psychological egoism and embrace utilitarianism

Regarding GMO’s being considered “playing god”, Sanford mentioned how debating this aspect of GMO’s is too controversial and does not lead to progress in this discussion. She did not however provide any solutions to that belief system with GMO’s. This would be on the same level of culture shift as United States consumerism. I believe a catastrophic event or a drastic change to our daily lives would be the quickest way to start a culture change. Other than that, education and awareness are a great start to improving public perception on GMO’s.

Scientists and politicians need to collaborate and find a way to communicate all the benefits of GMO’s to the general public; this goes for all nations. Despite all the research indicating GMO’s are safe to consume, they still are viewed negatively. With public perception improved, it could be possible for research on GMO’s to receive more funding either through private investors or government funding. The more GMO’s are accepted by the public across the globe, the more food we can produce to combat shortages due to overpopulation. This could allow for improvements in crop yield, resistance to weather and pests, and also in the grand scheme of things, improve the status of food shortages across the globe. This solution would hopefully allow consumerism to maintain its current rate, without asking developed countries to reduce their consumerism.

So how do we solve this problem of family planning and cultural indifference? Ecofeminism is defined as the idea of connecting domination of women to domination of the natural world (Desjardins 2014, 206). Ecofeminists believe there are deep cultural ties as to why women still do not have equal rights in all countries. They would also support the need for a sweeping social change to get to the base of all environmental problems; which includes women equality. Radical feminists believe abolishing typical gender roles can end women oppression, which I believe is correct in most situations. It has been proven that providing women with basic education, more productive roles, equal rights, and access to contraceptives leads to them having less children through their own choice. Establishing this role for women across the globe would be a long and challenging process. There was more success in India with lowering birth rates compared to China. China established policies mandating family sizes be within a specific range. India promoted women equality, expanded access to family planning services, and slowly changed the culture. Both initiatives lowered birth rates, but India was more effective. The only problem is that India’s method required a widespread effort over many years to see results. This would be proof that removing the traditional gender roles can be effective in solving this problem, despite some success on the Chinese approach. The main problem with policies dictating how many children families can have, is the violation of human rights concerns. Although offering incentives or penalties for following the family size policies can be immediately implemented and see results, it would be met with strong opposition from both conservative, religious, and liberal sectors (Kates 2004).  The issue with cultural and religious beliefs preventing women’s path towards equality is a huge problem, and ways to solve this problem must be tailored to the country specifically. A strategy that could work for China, most likely would not work for Uganda, for example.

The ethical side of this problem is government dictating how many children a couple can have. Should the government be able to oversee such intimate aspects of peoples’ lives? This problem revolves around the idea of greater good, a more utilitarian perspective on the issue. It would be selfish of couples to have many children while there could be millions of children across the globe who are starving. This could be considered reckless and irresponsible. I believe a more incentive based program should be used to counteract the problem of overpopulation. A more pragmatic approach to this problem would be received better by the public compared to one sided agenda. Punishment or penalties would be too harsh and, in my opinion, not be as effective. The incentives could be as simple as tax credits for having only one child or two, depending on how many kids a couple can have based on the government policy. Another incentive and penalty system that could be used would be to provide financial aid for parents who have one child, like school and health care, but make it clear any children after that will not receive such aid. These two methods could work to help slow down the risk of overpopulation, but these strategies could only work for developed countries. If these strategies are not as effective as anticipated, then I believe governments need to intervene and instill harsh punishments for parents who have multiple children. These punishments could be severe tax costs for multiple children after one for example. I believe these harsh punishments should only be used as absolutely necessary and if all other measures have been adequately attempted.

Overall, I believe the arguments made GMO’s should be instilled on society. There is enough research and science backing these initiatives to prove they are effective and safe. Although they are perceived negatively by many people, I do believe the public will eventually learn the benefits far outweigh the cons. Embracing GMO’s would allow consumerism to continue, which I believe would be received better than telling citizens of developed countries to limit resource consumption.

With women empowerment and access to contraceptives, countries will need to assess their own cultures and religions and start working towards implementing policies and plans to

give women more power and rights, and access to education and family planning programs. This has proven to be successful and is a more ethical approach to family planning compared to government mandates.  This ecofeminist movement will be met with strong opposition, but it also has a track record of success and needs to be pushed by each nation’s government. All the topics I discussed today are viewed as controversial, and we may be reaching a point where these initiatives need to be fully invested in to slow down our path towards an overpopulated and starving Earth despite their controversial nature.

References

Bryant, Leo, Louise Carver, Colin D. Butler, and Ababu Anage. “Climate Change and Family Planning: Least Developed Countries Define the Agenda.” Bulletin of the World Health Organization87, no. 11 (2009): 852-57. doi:10.2471/blt.08.062562.

Burdette, Amy M., Stacy H. Haynes, Terrence D. Hill, and John P. Bartkowski. “Religious Variations in Perceived Infertility and Inconsistent Contraceptive Use Among Unmarried Young Adults in the United States.” Journal of Adolescent Health54, no. 6 (2014): 704-09. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.11.002.

Cabanilla, Liborio S. “Socio-Economic and Political Concerns for GM Foods and Biotechnology Adoption in the Philippines.” AgBioForum10, no. 3 (2007): 178-83.

Cinici, Ayhan. “Balancing the Pros and Cons of GMOs: Socio-scientific Argumentation in Pre-service Teacher Education.” International Journal of Science Education38, no. 11 (2016): 1841-866. doi:10.1080/09500693.2016.1220033.

Cohen, J. “Population Growth and Earths Human Carrying Capacity.” Science269, no. 5222 (1995): 341-46. doi:10.1126/science.7618100.

Dansereau, Emily, Alexandra Schaefer, Bernardo Hernández, Jennifer Nelson, Erin Palmisano, Diego Ríos-Zertuche, Alex Woldeab, Maria Paola Zúñiga, Emma Margarita Iriarte, Ali H. Mokdad, and Charbel El Bcheraoui. “Perceptions of and Barriers to Family Planning Services in the Poorest Regions of Chiapas, Mexico: A Qualitative Study of Men, Women, and Adolescents.” Reproductive Health14, no. 1 (2017). doi:10.1186/s12978-017-0392-4.

Desjardins, Joseph R. 2013. Environmental Ethics: An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy. 5th Edition. Wadsworth: Belmont, CA.

Ehrlich, Paul R., and Anne H. Ehrlich. “Solving the Human Predicament.” International Journal of Environmental Studies69, no. 4 (2012): 557-65. doi:10.1080/00207233.2012.693281.

Garg, Suneela, and Ritesh Singh. “Need for Integration of Gender Equity in Family Planning Services.” Indian Journal of Medical Research, November 2014, S147-151. doi:25673536.

Hayward, Matt W. “Conservation Management for the Past, Present and Future.” Biodiversity and Conservation18, no. 4 (2008): 765-75. doi:10.1007/s10531-008-9436-y.

Hwang, Andrew D. “7.5 Billion and Counting-how Many Humans Can the Earth Support?” Phys.org – News and Articles on Science and Technology. Accessed February 25, 2019. https://phys.org/news/2018-07-billion-countinghow-humans-earth.htm

Kates, Carol A. “Reproductive Liberty and Overpopulation.” Environmental Values13, no. 1 (2004): 51-79. doi:10.3197/096327104772444776.

Kwieciński, Jakub. “Genetically Modified Abominations?” EMBO Reports10, no. 11 (2009): 1187-190. doi:10.1038/embor.2009.230.

Sanford, A. Whitney. “Why We Need Religion To Solve The World Food Crisis.” Zygon®49, no. 4 (2014): 977-91. doi:10.1111/zygo.12133.

Trevors, J. T. “Total Abuse of the Earth: Human Overpopulation and Climate Change.” Water, Air, and Soil Pollution205, no. S1 (2009): 113-14. doi:10.1007/s11270-009-0232-4.

Underwood, Barbara A. “Overcoming Micronutrient Deficiencies in Developing Countries: Is There a Role for Agriculture?” Food and Nutrition Bulletin21, no. 4 (2000): 356-60. doi:10.1177/156482650002100403.