 |
| Previous Image | Next Image |
| Description: 1700s – more children meant better support in old age and more labour for factory work 1766: Thomas Malthus – growing population is eventually checked by limits on births or increases in deaths 1968: Paul Ehrlich – population is growing too fast and must be controlled Disastrous effects on the environment and human welfare Ehrlich and other neo-Malthusians have argued that population is growing much faster than our ability to produce and distribute food and that population control is the only way to prevent: Massive starvation Environmental degradation Civil strife Population growth results from technology, sanitation, food Death rates drop, but not birth rates Some people say growth is no problem New resources will replace depleted ones But, some resources (i.e., biodiversity) are irreplaceable Quality of life will suffer with unchecked growth Less food, space, wealth per person Sheldon Richman – humans find potential stuff and human intelligence turns it into resources Humankind will always be able to save itself with a “technological fix” Yet not all resources can be replaced or reinvented once they are depleted (e.g. extinct species, land) Population growth is much more strongly correlated with poverty than with wealth Policymakers believe growth increases economic, political, military strength They offer incentives for more children 3 out of 5 of European nations think their birth rates are too low Picture Stats: Views: 245 Filesize: 142.58kB Height: 659 Width: 1397 Source: https://biology-forums.com/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=35698 |