I Population Dynamics Trends F Population Projections UN

I. Population Dynamics - Trends F. Population Projections – UN • All scenarios include shifts in geographic distribution of population Medium variant • • Africa – 21. 4% of population in 2050 (14. 0% today) Asia – 57. 5% in 2050 vs. 60. 4% today Europe – 7. 2% in 2050 vs. 11. 3% today N. America – 4. 8% in 2050 vs. 5. 1% today Latin America – 8. 6% in 2050 vs. 8. 7% today Shifts in age structure

II. Population – Environmental Effects B. I = PAT (Ehrlich and Holdren) • • I = Environmental Impact of nation P = Population A = Affluence (reflects consumption) T = Technology (reflected in pollution) • • • Ex – Changes in CFC emissions related to technology, not population Developments in technology historically not directed toward environmental preservation “Ecological Footprint” • • Area per capita to provide resources utilized Compare to area available per capita in nation

II. Population – Environmental Effects B. I = PAT (Ehrlich and Holdren) • I for one American equals • • • 20 Costa Ricans 70 Bangladeshis UN Children’s Fund – Child born today in US will have 250 x impact of child born in sub. Saharan Africa over their lifetimes • • Different consumption patterns and life expectancies Annual US Population increase = 2. 9 million • • 58 million Costa Ricans (pop 4. 1 million) 203 million Bangladeshis (pop 150 million)

II. Population – Environmental Effects B. I = PAT (Ehrlich and Holdren) • Energy Usage - 1 American = • • • 2 Japanese 6 Mexicans 13 Chinese 32 Indians 372 Ethiopians Annual population increase in US – 2. 9 million people • Equivalent in energy usage to adding • 92. 8 million Indians (actual – 18 million) • 1. 079 billion Ethiopians!

III. Regulation of Population Growth India A. Background • 1952 – First country to institute national policy to limit population growth Family planning – 13% of national health budget Result – Annual population growth rate 1. 7% today vs. 1. 3% in 1940 s • • Why didn’t the methods work? India very diverse, yet government selected blanket population control method for entire country

III. Regulation of Population Growth - India B. Methods • Voluntary sterilization • • • Pre-1977 – Vasectomies (male) Post-1977 – Tubal ligation (female) • Followed change in political regime precipitated in part by anger over coercive nature of vasectomy program Cash incentives to • • Medical personnel Program managers Individuals accepting sterilization • Equivalent to ~three weeks of average wages ($150) Problems • • Sterilization method offers little flexibility Chosen largely by older women who already had children and weren’t planning to have more

III. Regulation of Population Growth - India C. Alternatives • Suggestion that increasing economic prosperity should lead to a decline in population growth rate • • Most important social factor affecting TFR seems to be female literacy rate Female literacy rate correlated positively with • • • Correlation between GDP and TFR is weak Higher age at marriage Greater contraceptive use Lower IMR All correlated with lower TFR

III. Regulation of Population Growth - India D. Female Literacy – Kerala (Case Study) • • Kerala – State in SW India; high population density Per-capita GDP 63% of national average Pre-1970 s – higher growth rate than national average Between 1972 and 1991, TFR in Kerala dropped from 4. 6 to 1. 8, the lowest in India (Why? ) Reasons • • Higher social status for women than is typical for India. Leads to increased education, higher literacy rate (83% vs. 48% nationally) Better family planning services Marxist government that fosters egalitarianism (belief in individual equality) and imposes high taxation that supports education, health care and small family norm