Unraveling the Surge of Humanity: Understanding Overpopulation

The world has never seen a population size like the one we have today. Our numbers have soared from 1 billion in 1800, to 2.3 billion in 1940, 3.7 billion in 1970, 7.4 billion in 2016, and approximately 8 billion in 2022. The past century saw a fourfold increase in global population. What does the future hold for us? What implications does this dramatic population increase have for our collective future? Could we face mass migrations, sprawling slums, and cities that blanket entire continents? Could we grapple with rampant diseases and pollution, unrest and conflict over essential resources like energy, water, and food? Could we become a species solely focused on its own survival?

Could burgeoning population growth spell the end of our lifestyle? Or are these forebodings just baseless anxiety? The 1960s witnessed an unparalleled rate of population growth, sparking doomsday predictions. The poor would multiply inexorably and swamp the developed world, thus birthing the myth of overpopulation. However, it turns out that high fertility rates and the population explosion aren't perpetual traits of certain cultures or nations, but are part of a four-stage process that the entire world is undergoing – the demographic transition. Most developed nations have already completed this transition, while others are currently in the midst of it.

Let's rewind to the 18th century when the entire world, including Europe, was in the first stage of the demographic transition. By today's measures, Europe was in a worse state than many of today's developing regions, grappling with inadequate sanitation, poor diets, and rudimentary medicine. A large number of people were born, but many died just as quickly, resulting in meager population growth. Women birthed between 4 and 6 children, but only two would typically reach adulthood. Then came the Industrial Revolution in the UK, bringing about the most significant transformation in human living conditions since the Agricultural Revolution. Individuals transitioned from being peasants to workers. Manufactured goods were produced en masse and became widely accessible. Sciences thrived, leading to advancements in transportation, communication, and medicine. The role of women in society began to shift, laying the groundwork for their emancipation. Gradually, this economic progress didn't just form a middle class but also elevated living standards and healthcare access for the impoverished working population.

The second stage of the transition commenced. Improved food supplies, sanitation, and medical care resulted in decreased mortality rates, particularly among the young. This led to a population surge, doubling the UK's population between 1750 and 1850. The primary reason families used to have many children was that only a handful were likely to survive. Now that this reality had shifted, the third stage of transition was triggered. Fewer babies were being born, and population growth started to decelerate. Ultimately, equilibrium was reached: fewer people were dying, and fewer children were being born, leading to a stable death rate and birth rate. Britain had arrived at the fourth stage of the demographic transition. This phenomenon was not exclusive to the UK; an increasing number of countries underwent these four stages.

Initially, there are numerous births and deaths due to poor living conditions. Secondly, improved living conditions lead to fewer deaths, resulting in a population boom. Thirdly, fewer deaths lead to fewer births, effectively halting population growth. But if birth rates have plummeted, why is the overall population still growing rapidly? The reason is that the children born during the population boom of the 70s and 80s are now starting families of their own, causing a noticeable surge in the total population. However, on average, they are having significantly fewer children than their parents. The current average is 2.5, down from 5, 40 years ago. So as this generation ages, and fertility rates continue to decline, the rate of population growth will progressively slow down. This pattern holds true for every country. Often in the West, we tend to disregard the advancements made in other parts of the world. However, in reality, most countries globally have reached the fourth stage.

Consider Bangladesh as an example. In 1971, the average woman bore seven children, but tragically, 25% of them would not survive past the age of five. By 2015, the mortality rate had significantly dropped to 3.8%, and women were having an average of just 2.2 children. This scenario is more the norm than the exception, we're not unique, we merely had an early start. Developed countries took about 80 years to reduce fertility from more than six children to less than three. However, other nations are rapidly narrowing this gap. Malaysia and South Africa accomplished this in merely 34 years; Bangladesh in only 20, while Iran did it in a staggering 10 years. These rapidly developing countries didn't have to begin from zero, and the more assistance they receive, the quicker they progress. That's why programs aimed at reducing child mortality or aiding poor nations' development are so crucial. Regardless of your driving incentive, whether you envision a world where all individuals live in prosperity and freedom, or you simply desire fewer refugees entering your country, these programs are essential.

The straightforward reality is that it's advantageous for you personally if individuals on the other side of the world can lead a fulfilling life. And we are making progress; the proportion of people living in extreme poverty has never been lower than it is today. Therefore, the future of global population growth should not be viewed as a doomsday prophecy, but rather as a promise! Population growth will eventually halt. The United Nations predicts that the 12th billionth human will never be born. Moreover, as the global development level improves, the number of individuals receiving higher education will multiply tenfold. Countries that were once in need will instead contribute to advancing development. A larger population will mean more individuals capable of propelling our species forward.