Instead of fear of overpopulation, we should focus on overconsumption of resources by wealthiest among us, say experts
\n UNITED NATIONS
\nAre eight billion humans too many for planet Earth? As we reach this milestone on November 15, most experts say the bigger problem is the overconsumption of resources by the wealthiest residents.
\n\u201cEight billion people, it is a momentous milestone for humanity,\u201d said United Nations Population Fund chief Natalia Kanem, hailing an increase in life expectancy and fewer maternal and child deaths.
\n\u201cYet, I realise this moment might not be celebrated by all. Some express concerns that our world is overpopulated. I am here to say clearly that the sheer number of human lives is not a cause for fear.\u201d
\nSo, are there too many of us for Earth to sustain?
\nMany experts say that this is the wrong question. Instead of the fear of overpopulation, we should focus on the overconsumption of the planet\u2019s resources by the wealthiest among us.
\n\u201cToo many for whom, too many for what? If you ask me, am I too many? I don\u2019t think so,\u201d Joel Cohen of Rockefeller University\u2019s Laboratory of Populations told AFP.
\nHe said the question of how many people Earth can support has two sides: natural limits and human choices.
\n\u2018Stupid and greedy\u2019
\nOur choices result in humans consuming far more biological resources, such as forests and land, than the planet can regenerate each year.
\nThe overconsumption of fossil fuels, for example, leads to more carbon dioxide emissions, responsible for global warming.
\nWe would need the biocapacity of 1.75 Earths to sustainably meet the needs of the current population, according to the Global Footprint Network and WWF NGOs.
\nThe most recent UN climate report mentions population growth as one of the main drivers of an increase in greenhouse gases. However, it plays a smaller role than economic growth.
\n\u201cWe are stupid. We lacked foresight. We are greedy. We don\u2019t use the information we have. That\u2019s where the choices and the problems lie,\u201d said Cohen.
\nHowever, he rejects the idea that humans are a curse on the planet, saying people should be given better choices.
\n\u201cOur impact on the planet is driven far more by our behavior than by our numbers,\u201d said Jennifer Sciubba, a researcher at the Wilson Center, a think tank.
\n\u201cIt\u2019s lazy and damaging to keep going back to overpopulation,\u201d she added, as this allows people in wealthy nations, who consume the most, to cast the blame for the planet\u2019s woes onto developing countries where population growth is highest.
\n\u201cReally, it\u2019s us. It\u2019s me and you, the air conditioning I enjoy, the pool I have outside, and the meat I eat at night that causes so much more damage.\u201d
\nIf everyone on the planet lived like a citizen of India, we would only need the capacity of 0.8 Earths a year, according to the Global Footprint Network and WWF. If we all consumed like a resident of the United States, we would need five Earths a year.
\nThe United Nations estimates that our planet will be home to 9.7 billion people by 2050.
\nWomen\u2019s rights
\nOne of the trickiest questions that arise when discussing population is that of controlling fertility. Even those who believe we need to lower the Earth\u2019s population are adamant about protecting women\u2019s rights.
\nRobin Maynard, the executive director of the NGO Population Matters, says there needs to be a decrease in the population, but \u201conly through positive, voluntary, rights-respecting means\u201d and not \u201cdeplorable examples\u201d of population control.
\nThe NGO Project Drawdown lists education and family planning among the top 100 solutions to halt global warming.
\n\u201cA smaller population with sustainable levels of consumption would reduce demands on energy, transportation, materials, food, and natural systems.\u201d
\nVanessa Perez of the World Resources Institute agrees that \u201cevery person that is born on the planet puts additional stress on the planet.\u201d
\n\u201cIt is a very thorny issue,\u201d she said, adding that we should reject \u201cthis idea that the elite capture this narrative and say we need to cap population growth in the South.\u201d
\nShe believes the most interesting debate is not about the number of people but \u201cdistribution and equity.\u201d
\nCohen points out that even if we currently produce enough food for 8 billion people, there are still 800 million people who are \u201cchronically undernourished.\u201d
\n\u201cThe concept of \u2018too many\u2019 avoids the much more difficult problem, which is: are we using what we know to make the human beings we have as healthy, productive, happy, peaceful, and prosperous as we could?\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Instead of fear of overpopulation, we should focus on overconsumption of resources by wealthiest among us, say experts UNITED NATIONS Are eight billion humans too many for planet Earth? As we reach this milestone on November 15, most experts say the bigger problem is the overconsumption of resources by the wealthiest residents. \u201cEight billion people, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":293874,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-293848","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-world"},"yoast_head":"\n