Is overpopulation a problem? How many people leading which type of life can this planet sustain indefinitely? The latter is a question that has been asked surprisingly seldom. Clear however is that throughout the recent history of our planet, human population has grown significantly, whilst environmental resilience has declined. Since environmental science has shown that our planet is under stress the majority of the literature focuses on reducing consumption whilst forgetting that only the “lack of a consumer means no consumption at all.” Indeed, for practically purposes it makes sense to define a human being as someone who consumes.
Nonetheless, there is debate surrounding the question of how many people this planet can support. It has to be noted that 20% of the world's peoples are consuming 80% of the earth’s resources which raises the question of quality of life. It thus becomes apparent that population itself is not the sole problem since technology, industry, culture, policy, economics and everything that constitutes the entire global society comes into play. Thus the actual studies into the question of the earth’s carrying capacity yield a tremendously broad spectrum of answers ranging from 1 billion to 1000 billion . Further complicating the issue is the disagreement amongst mainstream and neo-Malthusian economists in determining to what degree and under what conditions rational family planning will increase population. Illustrative of the interconnectedness of the population problem with other issues are cities in developing countries; places where pollution is rampant and populations explode. Many thinkers argue that once these countries have achieved a certain level of affluence they will pass through a “demographic transition” and the population will decrease as it is currently in for instance Germany; thus in turn relating population trends to currents in economics, politics and culture. As is well known, the United Nations predicts population to stabilize globally at about 2050.
Clear, however, as the oft cited IPAT equation suggests (environmental impact (I) = population (P) x affluence (A) x technology (T)) population is a part of the equation and by dismissing population as part of environmental trends the environmental community lets, for instance, the pope dominate the population discourse by calling for people to reproduce more. Indeed, if overpopulation is not on the table, then an increase in the world population should have no impact on the environment which patently is not the case.
How does population relate to Biodiversity? The most immediate connection is that population is growing in the developing world whilst biodiversity is likewise being predominantly lost in developing countries. There is a clear relationship between population levels and biodiversity. Habit destruction is the prime cause of biodiversity extinction. In developing countries (where populations are growing ) most biologically diverse regions are cleared for agriculture. At the same time, human population has increased in direct proportion to agricultural yields. Thus, in view of my definition of biodiversity loss as an index of sustainability, it becomes clear very quickly that we are overpopulated and that overpopulation is determinative of extinction. The argument that 20% of the world’s peoples consume 80% of the world’s resources only underlines the importance of factoring population growth into policies aimed at mitigating environmental decline since poor countries are developing towards the western (more destructive) model. The argument that merely the rich are responsible for destroying the earth overlooks the fact that they are made wealthier by virtue of the practices of the people. The cause of environmental decline is thus more systemic and deeper.



Anup Shah, Ecology and The Crisis of Overpopulation (Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 1998), xxx
Ron Nielson, The Little Green Handbook.
Daniel Chiras, Environmental Science (Redwood City: Benjamin/Cummings Publications, 1991) 93.
John Feney, “Sowing the seeds of a future society” in Growth is Madness (United States, 2008) http://growthmadness.org/2008/01/17/sowing-the-seeds-of-a-future-society/ (accessed March 26, 2008)
Joel E Cohen, How Many People Can the Earth Support? (New York: Norton and Company, 1995), 368.
Anup Shah, Ecology and The Crisis of Overpopulation (Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 1998), 283.
Daniel Chiras, Environmental Science (Redwood City: Benjamin/Cummings Publications, 1991) 142.
James Gustav Speth, Red Sky at Morning: America and the Crisis of the Global Environment (Yale: Yale University Press, 2004), 12.
United Nations, “Population to 2300” in Economic and Social Affairs (United Nations, 2004) http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/longrange2/WorldPop2300final.pdf (accessed March 28, 2009)
Anup Shah, Ecology and The Crisis of Overpopulation (Northanpton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 1998), 283.
John L Gittleman and Mathew E Gomper, “What You Don’t Know Will Hurt You,” Science Vol. 291. no. 5506, (2001) 997 – 999 http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/sci;291/5506/997?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=causes+of+extinction&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT (accessed March 20, 2009)
Stuart Mudd The Population Crisis and the Use of World Resources (The Hague: Dr. W. Junk Publishers, 1964) 16.
National Research Council Population, Land Use, and Environment (Washington: National Academy of Sciences, 2005), 157.
Wolfgang Lutz, Population and Environment (New York: Population Council, 2002), 96.