Transcript Feb 15 RK - University of San Diego

I.
Population Dynamics - Trends
Population Projections – UN
F.
•
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
Population – Environmental Effects
II.
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
Population – Environmental Effects
II.
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 250x impact of child born in subSaharan 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)
Population – Environmental Effects
II.
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 1940s
•
•
•
•
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
Female Literacy – Kerala (Case Study)
D.
•
•
•
•
Kerala – State in SW India; high population density
Per-capita GDP 63% of national average
Pre-1970s – 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