In some third world countries, each person is limited to as little as 13 liters of water per day. Here in Canada, every time we use the toilet here, we flush 13 liters of water in one sitting! Imagine limiting yourself to going to the washroom once per day as well as not drink any water or wash your hands for the rest of the day. The article Toilets Help Stop Overpopulation uses the precautionary principle by stating how an issue such as overpopulation can be reduced by simply adding more accessible toilets in schools in developing countries. The implementation of these toilets is perceived to be harmless thus is a fine example of precautionary thinking. In the targeted country that Adam Shake, the author, concentrated his research on, Kenya, men and women had to share the washroom. Women were being harassed by men because of their menstrual period and defecation and they were likely to drop out of school. Statistics show that women that drop out of school are twice as likely to have children compared to women enrolled in school.
The increase in these sanitary areas will definitely help keep women enrolled in school which helps contribute to their self esteem and their ability to care for themselves. Now in contrast to what I believe some may say that the increase of these hygienic areas will cost too much and maybe be unrealistic because toilets cannot just be placed anywhere. Sewers must be in place, running water and proper resources must be available. I am going to have to agree that this strategy may be a little bit too ambitious unless these developing countries begin to start improve their way of life. In conclusion, the addition of toilets is a good starting point for developing countries to reduce their population rates because out of the whole world it is estimated that at least 90% of the world’s population growth will be in developing countries.
Resources
Shake, Adam http://www.twilightearth.com/children/toilets-help-stop-overpopulation-heres-how/, Accessed October 20, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Limits Limits Limits
Overpopulation is a major problem facing the world. The author Frosty Wooldridge claims that as a result of overpopulation there has been a reduction of natural resources and increased pollution of water supplies in the United States. In the article “Sometimes it smells like a barn coming out of the faucet: overpopulation in America” Wooldridge argues that if limits are not put on immigration rates, the lack of resources and water pollution will only get worse.
According to the precautionary principle, the lack of scientific proof should not be a reason to delay taking action. Wooldridge uses the precautionary principle, and urges that the government “must enact a ‘U.S. Sustainable Immigration Policy’ of less than 100,000 annually.” (Wooldridge 2009) He argues that if we don’t take action now, overpopulation will grow “worse as we add 3.4 million people to the U.S. annually, predominantly by immigration.” (Wooldridge 2009) He claims that the extra population increases waste that could pollute our waters, and our resources are being used at a faster rate.
The argument could be made that instead of limiting immigration we should adopt new water filtration methods to ensure that our water is clean. This method would require an unrealistic about of money to introduce nationwide. Others may say that those immigrants are escaping harsh lives, and they deserve to have equal life quality. We will not be able to offer them a “new life” if we have polluted waters, excess waste, and minute amounts of resources. North America will become just as bad as the nation they are escaping.
There is no scientific evidence to prove that overpopulation causes these negative effects, but it can be seen more and more as the years pass and our population grows. This evidence is reason enough to take action before it is too late.
Reference
Wooldridge, F (2009, September 21). Sometimes it smells like a barn coming out of the faucet: overpopulation in America. Retrieved from http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/Sometimes-it-smells-like-a-by-Frosty-Wooldridge-090918-686.html
According to the precautionary principle, the lack of scientific proof should not be a reason to delay taking action. Wooldridge uses the precautionary principle, and urges that the government “must enact a ‘U.S. Sustainable Immigration Policy’ of less than 100,000 annually.” (Wooldridge 2009) He argues that if we don’t take action now, overpopulation will grow “worse as we add 3.4 million people to the U.S. annually, predominantly by immigration.” (Wooldridge 2009) He claims that the extra population increases waste that could pollute our waters, and our resources are being used at a faster rate.
The argument could be made that instead of limiting immigration we should adopt new water filtration methods to ensure that our water is clean. This method would require an unrealistic about of money to introduce nationwide. Others may say that those immigrants are escaping harsh lives, and they deserve to have equal life quality. We will not be able to offer them a “new life” if we have polluted waters, excess waste, and minute amounts of resources. North America will become just as bad as the nation they are escaping.
There is no scientific evidence to prove that overpopulation causes these negative effects, but it can be seen more and more as the years pass and our population grows. This evidence is reason enough to take action before it is too late.
Reference
Wooldridge, F (2009, September 21). Sometimes it smells like a barn coming out of the faucet: overpopulation in America. Retrieved from http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/Sometimes-it-smells-like-a-by-Frosty-Wooldridge-090918-686.html
Population Growth Driving Climate Change and Poverty
In David’s article Population growth driving climate change, poverty: experts, wingspread precautionary principle is used. He believes that the population of the earth will grow to an unstable level and birth rates need to be lowed through voluntary family planning and contraceptives. Meaning that, threats of overpopulation are present so we need to take action even if we are unsure of how dire the consequences of taking action or not may be. I agree with his reasoning, and unlike some proposed solutions to overpopulation such as the one child policy in China David’s proposition is less drastic. He states that “Ninety-eight percent of the expected population growth will occur in developing countries, especially in Africa, where numbers are set to double to almost two billion by 2050.” (David 2009) I believe that informing the public of their options, especially in the previously mentioned countries will be an effective way to significantly lower the world’s birth rate because some woman have children because they have no other options available. Critiques may say that family planning and contraceptives will not help people in developing countries because it is an economic necessity to have a large number of children. But without restricting the number of children people can have there is little that can be done other than inform them of their options. So other than financially there can be no harm done by David’s proposition making it an acceptable solution. The article is explicit in its use of the precautionary principle by stating that “Unless birth rates are lowered sharply through voluntary family-planning programmes and easy access to contraceptives, the tally of humans on Earth could swell to an unsustainable 11 billion by 2050, they warned.” (David 2009) I agree that something needs to be done soon to cease overpopulation and I believe that David’s solution would be a logical start.
"Population Growth Driving Climate Change, Poverty: Experts." New Heaven New Earth 21 Sep 2009: n. pag. Web. 19 Oct 2009..
"Population Growth Driving Climate Change, Poverty: Experts." New Heaven New Earth 21 Sep 2009: n. pag. Web. 19 Oct 2009.
Blog #4
Will it be Necessary to Get Our Resources from Space?
The answer, as said by some scientists, is yes, “In future, there would probably be need to search for resources outside the planet.” According to the article, “RATIONAL USE OF SPACE RESOURCES TO PROTECT EARTH'S BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY” from the Third United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, it states that if action is not taken to prevent further human overpopulation the diversity of Earth will suffer irreversible damage. This therefore is an example of explicit precautionary thinking.
Although some may argue about its effects or even its existence, I believe that the United Nations is justified in saying that irreversible damage will result from our lack of action against overpopulation. The article describes the possible harm that could arise from overpopulation as irreversible damage by the loss of biodiversity and resources; I agree that these consequences are very plausible. It is possible that these consequences can be avoided in other ways however, by using the precautionary principle now and preventing overpopulation, these consequences may be avoided all together.
The precautionary thinking in this case is used to promote action against overpopulation because the consequences are severe and irreversible. Since the article contains the fundamental properties of an argument that uses precaution in an effort to avoid future harm, the article therefore uses the precautionary principle in an effective way.
In Conclusion, the Precautionary Principle is an effective way to approach the issue of overpopulation in this case. The effects of overpopulation are not entirely known but the loss of biodiversity is expected and that is an example of severe, irreversible damage. By taking action now, as suggested in the article, the possibility of harm to our planet and our own species may be avoidable. With this in mind, precautionary thinking is an effective approach in this case.
References:
Author, Unknown. “RATIONAL USE OF SPACE RESOURCES TO PROTECT EARTH'S BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY.” The Third United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. UNISPACE III, Space Vol. 6. July 21, 1999.
http://www.un.org/events/unispace3/pressrel/e21pm.htm
Accessed, Oct.-19-09.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
World Population Growing by over 2,300,000,000 by 2050.
World population is now reaching epic proportions. This July, the world population reached 6,800,000,000. The United Nations World Population Prospect states that by 2050 the world population will surpass 9,000,000,000 inhabitants all of whom will have rejected positive population growth in favor of below-replacement fertility rates.
The growing population will mainly affect developing countries, where 82% of the 6,800,000,000 people reside. Food has a direct correlation to population growth and where there is a multitude of people, a copious amount of food is needed. Where there is poverty, there is a lack of food, and where there is a lack of food for a growing population, there will be famine and war. The “world population will grow by some 2,300,000,000 between now and 2050…” according to the UN. At this growth rate, which is roughly equal to the combined current population of both China and India the situation will call to be one of the most pressing environmental issues in the world since 1970.
“We need to achieve a sizable reduction in high population growth rates, especially in Asia, Africa, and Latin America “ says Paul Ehrlich, author of best seller The Population Bomb. “The battle to feed humanity is over, and hundreds of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs undertaken upon now…” he says. Ehrlich models the gloomy political economist Thomas Malthus whose belief is that the race between population growth and human survival is never ending.
As it may, population is highly dependent on fertility rate. The UN’s recent study shows that if fertility rates fall from 2.56 children per woman, to 2.02 children per woman, the world population will fall to 9,000,000,000, however if this rate is only one half above this current figure, the world population will exceed the predicted number by over one billion inhabitants by 2050. “If we can control the fertility rate, the population would remain stable…” states Ehrlich. “This average number is what we need to focus on.”
If there is any reason to believe that the population will ever decline, the time is now. Fertility rates are already underway mostly in developed nations. These developed nations will need to accept a large number of immigrants into their countries, and developing countries will need to model these developed nations; use tangible tactics to achieve sustainability in their own communities and stabilize their fertility rates as a result.
It seems as though we are lucky as the UN predicts the fertility rate will actually decline after 2050. Even so, it might take years afterwards before the global population begins to diminish.
THE WORLD TODAY; James W. Thomson, June 2009, Accessed October 11, 2009: http://web.ebscohost.com.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=104&sid=d150cd46-142c-4eef-84cd5d6dafb6bb17%40sessionmgr110&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPWlwJmxvZ2lucGFnZT1Mb2dpbi5hc3Amc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZlJnNjb3BlPXNpdGU%3d#db=aph&AN=43237199
World population, world health and security: 20th century trends
Overpopulation is a growing problem that has come to the attention of the media and government in recent years. This seems like a true statement, but in fact overpopulation has been a pressing issue throughout history. In A. Bashford’s report entitled “World population, world health and security: 20th century trends” from the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health the author uses population statistics from the last century to support his claim that overpopulation, and its connection to security, resource management and world health has been a problem for many years that needs to be properly addressed in modern politics.
The author’s states that in 1928 “The common argument that linked population to security and international relations was that nations would become, simply, too crowded, and that standards of living would drop in a way that created unstable social environments.”(Bashford, 2008) Throughout the first and second world wars overpopulation was an economic security problem and less of a health one. People of that time believed that more people increased the chance of wars and communism. This concerns Bashford and his belief that world health is of the utmost importance instead of world security.
After the wars the concentrated efforts of the world leaders tended towards the fear of our planet’s limited resources and space. “Rather like the current urgency of climate change debate, earlier generations discussed world overpopulation in catastrophic terms: not just war or peace, but incapacity of the planet to sustain the species.” (Bashford, 2008) People were finally starting to realize the effects of overpopulation on the planet as a whole instead of just security to the human race. This was a turning point for the subject but work still needed to be done to reverse and stop the effects of overpopulation.
The view of overpopulation as a cause to dwindling resources stayed present but solutions began to be proposed. “And in 1968 the World Health Assembly endorsed family planning as a basic component of primary health care” (Bashford, 2008) This was implemented when birth control was a new product and awareness around the subject was on the rise. Thus by the 1970’s the security and resource management concerns of overpopulation had changed to a woman’s rights movement that advocated informing the public to keep them and their world secure. This was the first time when serious action had been taken. By the late 1960’s: “It was a standard argument to link developments in public health and infectious disease control to increasing rates of population growth for the world as a whole.” (Bashford, 2008) Even now the effect of this statement can be seen with the H1N1 flu.
So the questions that begs so be asked is if for decades the effects and trends of overpopulation have been studied and analysed why has so little been done to change it? Maybe the largest problem with today’s society is not the fact that we are overpopulated but the lack of awareness and action for solution to this problem.
Bashford, A. (2008). World population, world health and security: 20th century trends. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health , 62(3), Retrieved from http://jech.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/62/3/187 doi: 10.1136/jech.2006.055608
The author’s states that in 1928 “The common argument that linked population to security and international relations was that nations would become, simply, too crowded, and that standards of living would drop in a way that created unstable social environments.”(Bashford, 2008) Throughout the first and second world wars overpopulation was an economic security problem and less of a health one. People of that time believed that more people increased the chance of wars and communism. This concerns Bashford and his belief that world health is of the utmost importance instead of world security.
After the wars the concentrated efforts of the world leaders tended towards the fear of our planet’s limited resources and space. “Rather like the current urgency of climate change debate, earlier generations discussed world overpopulation in catastrophic terms: not just war or peace, but incapacity of the planet to sustain the species.” (Bashford, 2008) People were finally starting to realize the effects of overpopulation on the planet as a whole instead of just security to the human race. This was a turning point for the subject but work still needed to be done to reverse and stop the effects of overpopulation.
The view of overpopulation as a cause to dwindling resources stayed present but solutions began to be proposed. “And in 1968 the World Health Assembly endorsed family planning as a basic component of primary health care” (Bashford, 2008) This was implemented when birth control was a new product and awareness around the subject was on the rise. Thus by the 1970’s the security and resource management concerns of overpopulation had changed to a woman’s rights movement that advocated informing the public to keep them and their world secure. This was the first time when serious action had been taken. By the late 1960’s: “It was a standard argument to link developments in public health and infectious disease control to increasing rates of population growth for the world as a whole.” (Bashford, 2008) Even now the effect of this statement can be seen with the H1N1 flu.
So the questions that begs so be asked is if for decades the effects and trends of overpopulation have been studied and analysed why has so little been done to change it? Maybe the largest problem with today’s society is not the fact that we are overpopulated but the lack of awareness and action for solution to this problem.
Bashford, A. (2008). World population, world health and security: 20th century trends. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health , 62(3), Retrieved from http://jech.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/62/3/187 doi: 10.1136/jech.2006.055608
Blog 3
Trading Children; a decent proposal?
For decades overpopulation has been an issue, similarly under population in certain areas can be just as detrimental. It is easy to see the problems that arise from overpopulation if you look at the situation in China, the overcrowding is so intense that a “One-child policy” (Greenhalgh, 2003) was put in place. Under population becomes a problem when cultures have low fertility rates and have “the need to be numerous enough to support an endangered cultural identity.”(De La Croix and Gosseries, 2009). In many areas, if it is not cultural identity, it’s a pension plan or the health care system that is at risk. The solution to both problems of over and under population is simple; child trade.
Although this method of population control may seem crude, in actual fact it could quite possibly become the standard procedure for managing population issues according to David De La Croix and Axel Gosseries co-authors of “Population Policy through Tradable Procreation Entitlements.”(2009). First of all, let it be made clear that this article is not promoting child trafficking or unlawful adoptions, simply the revolutionary idea to manage population size by coupons. Yes, coupons also referred to as “procreation entitlements” that share the same function as any ticket or coupon and would be given the value of a percentage of a child. Procreation entitlements can cause increase, decrease, or just maintain a population size, and by doing so becomes a very effective way of managing any population.
How Procreation Entitlements work:
Procreation Entitlements would be used to manage population size by creating a quota for the production of children. Since these entitlements are only worth a fraction of a child the owner would therefore need to collect a number of these in order to be permitted to have one. The study proposes that each mature female would be given one certificate and must inherit or buy the remaining entitlements until a child can be obtained.
“The unit of these certificates might be the “deci-child,” and accumulation of ten of these units by purchase, inheritance, or gift would permit a woman in maturity to have one legal child.”(De La Croix et. al., 2009)
Although this system seems complicated and difficult it will not only be beneficial in controlling population size it will also ensure that every child is wanted and taken care of. De La Croix and Gosseries determine their numbers by using equations that take into account the fertility rates, education, wealth, and the target population of the population in their interest.
Quotas provide optimal population size:
The benefits of quotas are all around us, milk production, fishing, and hunting are all maintained by quotas; it is not unreasonable to believe that our own population can also benefit from it. If all populations can be controlled by procreation entitlements then the problem of over and under population can be easily solved. A tradable procreation policy is our answer to the world’s population problem.
De La Croix, David. Gosseries, Axel. “Population Policy through Tradable Procreation Entitlements.” Inernational Economic Review Vol. 50, No. 2, May 2009. http://journals1.scholarsportal.info/tmp/5639715077738306198.pdf Accessed Oct. 8, 2009
Greenhalgh, S., “Science, Modernity, and the Making of China’s One-child Policy,” Population
and Development Review 29 (2003), 163–96.
For decades overpopulation has been an issue, similarly under population in certain areas can be just as detrimental. It is easy to see the problems that arise from overpopulation if you look at the situation in China, the overcrowding is so intense that a “One-child policy” (Greenhalgh, 2003) was put in place. Under population becomes a problem when cultures have low fertility rates and have “the need to be numerous enough to support an endangered cultural identity.”(De La Croix and Gosseries, 2009). In many areas, if it is not cultural identity, it’s a pension plan or the health care system that is at risk. The solution to both problems of over and under population is simple; child trade.
Although this method of population control may seem crude, in actual fact it could quite possibly become the standard procedure for managing population issues according to David De La Croix and Axel Gosseries co-authors of “Population Policy through Tradable Procreation Entitlements.”(2009). First of all, let it be made clear that this article is not promoting child trafficking or unlawful adoptions, simply the revolutionary idea to manage population size by coupons. Yes, coupons also referred to as “procreation entitlements” that share the same function as any ticket or coupon and would be given the value of a percentage of a child. Procreation entitlements can cause increase, decrease, or just maintain a population size, and by doing so becomes a very effective way of managing any population.
How Procreation Entitlements work:
Procreation Entitlements would be used to manage population size by creating a quota for the production of children. Since these entitlements are only worth a fraction of a child the owner would therefore need to collect a number of these in order to be permitted to have one. The study proposes that each mature female would be given one certificate and must inherit or buy the remaining entitlements until a child can be obtained.
“The unit of these certificates might be the “deci-child,” and accumulation of ten of these units by purchase, inheritance, or gift would permit a woman in maturity to have one legal child.”(De La Croix et. al., 2009)
Although this system seems complicated and difficult it will not only be beneficial in controlling population size it will also ensure that every child is wanted and taken care of. De La Croix and Gosseries determine their numbers by using equations that take into account the fertility rates, education, wealth, and the target population of the population in their interest.
Quotas provide optimal population size:
The benefits of quotas are all around us, milk production, fishing, and hunting are all maintained by quotas; it is not unreasonable to believe that our own population can also benefit from it. If all populations can be controlled by procreation entitlements then the problem of over and under population can be easily solved. A tradable procreation policy is our answer to the world’s population problem.
De La Croix, David. Gosseries, Axel. “Population Policy through Tradable Procreation Entitlements.” Inernational Economic Review Vol. 50, No. 2, May 2009. http://journals1.scholarsportal.info/tmp/5639715077738306198.pdf Accessed Oct. 8, 2009
Greenhalgh, S., “Science, Modernity, and the Making of China’s One-child Policy,” Population
and Development Review 29 (2003), 163–96.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
