In: Economics
Most scholars agree there are fundamental connections between poverty, population growth, overconsumption, and sustainable development. For example, for poor people, many environmental problems are problems of poverty.
There is a debate on the extent of population problem. On one side are those who foresee a "natural" demographic transition to a stable global population as economic progress proceeds in poor countries (as societies grow wealthier, families may have fewer children). This side predicts that population will rise in the next 100 years to 9 to 10 billion.
On the other side, neo-Malthusians have argued that a vicious cycle is developing in which poverty leads to higher population growth rates that engender more poverty. That cycle had already begun to overwhelm the beneficial effects of economic growth in many less developed countries. This side predicts that population will rise in the next 100 years to 13 to 15 billion.
Both sides agree that noncoercive population control methods should be implemented to speed up the demographic transition.
Critically evaluate both sides of the argument and discuss possible solutions of population growth as part of the solution to the environmental problems.
Build your argument
Introduction
Demographic transition, is the scenario when the population changes over time with respect to the birth rate or death rate. The model for the clarity of understanding and easy distinction was divided into four stages by an economists.
Stage 1: Pre-Mordern
Stage 2: Urbanisation/ Mordernisation
Stage 3: Mature Industrial
Stage 4: Post industrial
Arguments
The debate or the argument stated above in the question stands in two different stages of the transition. The argument forseen as a "natural" believes that there exists a stable population growth, thus their vision lies under stage one, Pre- Mordern wherein the balance between birth rate and death rate is stated to be constant. Whereas the argument stated by neo-Malthusains is in respect to stage two, where there is decline in death rate and birth rate is high due to which the rate of population growth is high and the gap widens.
The difference in the argument lies due to various factors that affect the population growth,
The site of the natural visioners are that the economic is stable and is in or near to ideal picture thus has a stable growth, where as in reality the concept of stable economy is imaginary. And no economy can have stable factors that affect the population growth, even the basic factor of literacy rate that promotes family planning differs with place to place.
Thus the argument stated by the neo-Malthusian are viable according to me.
According to me the soltuon to accelerate the population growth in the right direction are,