disadvantages of overpopulation essay

Advantages and disadvantages of population growth

Over the course of history, the world has seen rapid population growth. It has enabled a rich diversity of culture, technology and improved living standards. However, population growth is increasingly coming at a cost – in particular to the environment. High population levels are contributing to the depletion of natural resources and causing widespread pollution. Some fear population growth is now deeply damaging for both the planet and even the survival of many natural habitats. However, others argue that fears other population growth are misplaced with the planet having room for more people, so long as we learn to live more in harmony with nature and more efficiently in big cities.

Advantages of population growth

1. More people leads to greater human capital . If there are more people, the probability of finding a genius like Einsterin, Marie Curie, Beethoven increase. These exceptional people can lead to technological and cultural masterpieces which enrich our lives. The past 200 years have shown exponential growth in technical development and innovation. There are many factors behind this, but the world’s growing population means we have a bigger pool of human capital and the possibility of these cutting edge discoveries increase.

2. Higher economic growth . Population growth will lead to economic growth with more people able to produce more goods. It will lead to higher tax revenues which can be spent on public goods, such as health care and environmental projects.

• The obvious evaluation is to say, the crucial thing is not GDP, but GDP per capita . If economic growth is at the same rate as population growth, average living standards will not increase. However, it is possible population growth can also improve per capita incomes. As the population increases, the economy can benefit from a bigger talent pool, economies of scale and greater specialisation. All this can enable higher per capita income, which we have seen in major developed economies.

3. Economies of scale . Farming and industry have been able to benefit from economies of scale, which means as the population grows, food output and manufacturing output have been able to grow even faster than population growth. For example, at the turn of the nineteenth century, Thomas Malthus predicted population growth would lead to famine as we would be unable to feed the growing population. However, his dire predictions failed to materialise because he failed to understand, that the productivity of land, labour and capital could all increase more than proportionately. 300 years ago, most of the population worked on the land. Technological innovation and economies of scale , mean productivity of land has vastly increased as farmers make use of mechanisation and economies of scale for increased food production.

4. The efficiency of higher population density . In terms of per capita carbon footprint, areas with a high population density are significantly more efficient than rural areas and places with a low population. When people live in densely populated areas, they are more likely to use public transport, live in apartment buildings which are easier to heat. In big cities, transport and the delivery of goods is much more efficient, whereas for low population densities, the average cost and environmental footprint are much higher.  Therefore, population growth which leads to growth in city connurbations (which is a feature of global growth in past) is not as environmentally damaging as we may think. In Green Metropolis , by David Owen he argues living in closer proximity in cities is a key aspect of sustainability

• Urban areas account for only 3% of the world’s land surface. But, more than 50% of the population. By 2050, the United Nations predict this will rise to 70%. Therefore, population growth doesn’t have to lead to an equivalent fall in natural habitats.

5. The improved demographic structure of society. Many western economies are now experiencing a falling population, with the result that their population demographic is being skewed to old, retired people. This is imposing costs on society as we struggle to pay for health care and pensions. Moderate population growth helps to rebalance the population with a higher share of young, working people.

6. Critical mass . Higher populations can enable a critical mass of people to enable a sider, more vibrant society. With low populations, there is less scope for diversity. But, when the population grows, it can enable the support of a broader cultural range of activities.

Disadvantages of population growth

1. Cost to the environment. Population growth exacerbates many of the existing environmental problems

• Trying to reduce carbon and methane emissions to reduce global warming is relatively more difficult as the population.
• There will be greater threat on natural habitats as a greater population has greater demand for housing and farmland. This will increase pressure to cut down forests to make way for farming and housing.
• Higher population will lead to a greater consumption of non-renewable resources, leading to a faster depletion of natural resources.
• Higher population will lead to greater pollution levels in air, water and land. Higher pollution is associated with a range of health issues, such as cancer and asthma. The pollution also harms animals and plants.
• Soil degradation. To feed a growing planet, we have seen serious degrading of farmland (according to UN estimates) about 12 million hectares of farmland every year. This is due to factors, such as overgrazing, use of chemicals, climate change and use of chemicals.

2. Congestion . Too many people in a small space will lead to various types of congestion. Road congestion is a major problem across the world. One study suggested congestion cost the EU €111bn (1% of GDP) in 2012. WIth population growth, the costs of congestion will only increase leading to time lost, more pollution and lost output.

3. Water shortages . Already up to 40% of the world’s population face water scarcity and the risk of drought. According to  the UN water shortages could lead to 700 million people at the risk of displacement. A growing population will put pressure on scarce water supplies and this is a factor behind many minor and major conflicts with countries having to find ways around the shortage of water.

4. Generating unsustainable waste . We are currently generating non-biodegradable rubbish that we are struggling to process. It tends to end in landfill, causing methane emissions and other toxic problems.

• Factors that affect population size and growth
• Impact of rising population in the UK

14 thoughts on “Advantages and disadvantages of population growth”

very much helpful

i agree with this statement as poulation increae = gods bible

very helpful

thank you very helpful

That’s much appreciating. Its indeed a wonderful differentiation 👏.

wow amazing I feel like this should be global

Wow,this will enable students learn more

All I want to say is thank u for presenting this minor topic so efficiently:)

Thx 🙏 4 the help we really appreciate.Student Am really thankful for d Answers

I enjoyed reading your article on the pros and cons of population growth. It was well-written and informative.

I agree with your points about the potential benefits of population growth, such as increased economic growth and innovation. However, I also think it’s important to be aware of the potential challenges, such as increased pressure on resources and the environment.

I think it’s important to find a balance between the benefits and challenges of population growth. We need to find ways to ensure that population growth is sustainable and that it doesn’t lead to negative consequences for the environment or society.

For more information on population growth, I recommend checking out Exam Notes. The website has a wealth of information on the topic, including articles, blog posts, and videos.

Good, very clear and easy to understand

This was so good of importance to my studies. thank you.

Very good thank you

Comments are closed.

Overpopulation Essay

500 words essay on overpopulation.

Overpopulation refers to an undesirable condition in which the number of existing human being exceeds the actual carrying capacity of the earth. It has many causes which range from a decline in the death rate to early marriages and more. The overpopulation essay will throw light on this issue.

Ill-Effects of Overpopulation

The ill-effects of overpopulation are quite severe. The first one is that natural resources deplete at a faster level. Our planet can produce only a limited amount of water and food . Thus, overpopulation causes environmental damage including deforestation, pollution, etc.

Similarly, there is the degradation of the environment which happens because of the overuse of resources like coal, oil, natural gases and more. As a result, the quality of air also gets affected in this manner.

In developing countries, overpopulation puts a strain on resources. Thus, it gives rise to conflicts and tension. It also causes more diseases that become harder to control. Next up, we have the issue of unemployment.

Moreover, it rises due to overpopulation. There is more number of people than job opportunities. As a result, unemployment gives rise to crimes like theft and more. We also have pandemics and epidemics which happen due to overpopulation.

It is because overcrowded and unhygienic living gives rise to infectious diseases . Another ill-effect is malnutrition and starvation. When there are scarce resources, these diseases will likely to be on the rise.

Most importantly, we have a shortage of water which makes it tougher for people to get access to clean water. Similarly, lower life expectancy also happens because of the boom in population, especially in less-developed nations.

We also witness faster climate change as nations continue to develop their industrial capacities. Thus, they emit industrial waste which gives rise to global temperatures . It will keep getting worse if things are not checked immediately.

Solutions of Overpopulation

There are many solutions which we may take up to prevent overpopulation. The best measure is family planning to keep the overpopulation check. In order to do that, one can ensure proper spacing between the births of the children.

Further, limiting the number of children as per income and resources must also be important. Similarly, it is essential to increase resources. The government must make the horrors of overpopulation reach the public through the use of media.

Moreover, better education can help implement social change which can curb overpopulation. Next up, knowledge of sex education must be made mandatory in schools so students learn young about everything they need to know.

Most importantly, it is essential to empower women so they can break out of poverty. This way, they can learn about reproductive health and make better decisions. Another solution can be government incentives.

Many governments of countries already have various policies which relate to tax exemptions for curbing overpopulation. For instance, some waive a certain part of income tax for married couples with one or two children.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Conclusion of Overpopulation Essay

All in all, overpopulation is no less than a curse that poses a permanent threat to the development of any country. It is essential to stop the flood of population. In order to do that, one must indulge in proper family planning and creating balance in society for a better world.

FAQ of Overpopulation Essay

Question 1: What is the main cause of overpopulation?

Answer 1: It is believed that the main cause of overpopulation is poverty. When there is a lack of education resource which coupled with high death rates, it results in impoverished areas witnessing large booms in population.

Question 2: How is overpopulation affecting the world?

Answer 2: Overpopulation is affecting the world as it is outpacing the ability of the planet earth to support it. It also has environmental and economic outcomes which range from the impacts of over-farming on global warming.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Overpopulation: Cause and Effect

Conversations about overpopulation can quickly become controversial because they beg the question: Who exactly is the cause of the problem and what, if anything, should be done about it? Many population experts worry discussions around overpopulation will be abused by small-minded people to suggest some are the “right people” to be on the planet (like themselves), and some people are “the wrong people” (usually people in poverty, people of color, foreigners, and so on—you get the drift). But there are no “right” or “wrong” people on the planet, and discussing the problems of global overpopulation can never be an excuse, or in any way provide a platform, for having that type of conversation.

Each human being has a legitimate claim on a sufficient and fair amount of Earth’s resources. But with a population approaching 8 billion, even if everyone adopted a relatively low material standard of living like the one currently found in Papua New Guinea , it would still push Earth to its ecological breaking point. Unfortunately, the “average person” on Earth consumes at a rate over 50% above a sustainable level. Incredibly, the average person in the United States uses almost five times more than the sustainable yield of the planet.

When we use the term “overpopulation,” we specifically mean a situation in which the Earth cannot regenerate the resources used by the world’s population each year. Experts say this has been the case every year since 1970, with each successive year becoming more and more damaging. To help temper this wildly unsustainable situation, we need to understand what’s contributing to overpopulation and overconsumption and how these trends are affecting everything from climate change to sociopolitical unrest.

Download our free whitepaper

The causes of overpopulation.

Today the Earth is home to more than 7.8 billion people . By 2100 the population is on track to hit 10.8 billion , according to the United Nations — and that’s assuming steady fertility declines in many countries. Interestingly, if extra progress is made in women’s reproductive self-determination, and fertility falls more than the United Nations assumes is likely, the population in 2100 might be a relatively smaller 7.3 billion.

For now, the world’s population is still increasing in huge annual increments (about 80 million per year), and our supply of vital non-renewable resources are being exhausted. Many factors contribute to these unsustainable trends , including falling mortality rates, underutilized contraception, and a lack of education for girls.

Falling Mortality Rate

The primary (and perhaps most obvious) cause of population growth is an imbalance between births and deaths. The infant mortality rate has decreased globally, with 4.1 million infant deaths in 2017 compared to 8.8 million in 1990, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). This is welcome public health news, of course.

At the same time, lifespans are increasing around the world. Those of us who are alive today will likely live much longer than most of our ancestors. Global average life expectancy has more than doubled since 1900 , thanks to advancements in medicine, technology, and general hygiene. Falling mortality rates are certainly nothing to complain about either, but widespread longevity does contribute to the mathematics of increasing population numbers.

Underutilized Contraception 

The global fertility rate has fallen steadily over the years, down from an average of 5 children per woman in 1950 to 2.4 children per woman today, according to the UN Population Division . Along with that promising trend, contraceptive use has slowly but steadily increased globally, rising from 54% in 1990 to 57.4% in 2015. Yet, on the whole, contraceptive use is still underutilized. For example, according to the WHO, an estimated 214 million women in developing countries who want to avoid pregnancy are not using modern contraceptives.

These women aren’t using contraceptives for a variety of reasons, including social norms or religious beliefs that discourage birth control, misconceptions about adverse side effects, and a lack of agency for women to make decisions around sex and family planning. An estimated 44% of pregnancies were unintended worldwide between 2010-2014. Getting more women the access and agency to utilize family planning methods could go a long way in flattening the population curve.

Lack of Female Education    

Although female access to education has increased over the years, the gender gap remains. Roughly 130 million girls worldwide are out of school currently, and an estimated 15 million girls of primary school age will never   learn to read and write, compared with 10 million boys.

Increasing and encouraging education among women and girls can have a number of positive ripple effects, including delayed childbearing , healthier children, and an increase in workforce participation. Plenty of evidence suggests a negative correlation between female education and fertility rates.

If increased female education can delay or decrease fertility and provide girls with opportunities beyond an early marriage, it could also help to mitigate current population trends. 

The Effects of Overpopulation

It is only logical that an increase in the world’s population will cause additional strains on resources. More people means an increased demand for food, water, housing, energy, healthcare, transportation, and more. And all that consumption contributes to ecological degradation, increased conflicts, and a higher risk of large-scale disasters like pandemics.  

Ecological Degradation 

An increase in population will inevitably create pressures leading to more deforestation, decreased biodiversity, and spikes in pollution and emissions, which will exacerbate climate change . Ultimately, unless we take action to help minimize further population growth heading into the remainder of this century, many scientists believe the additional stress on the planet will lead to ecological disruption and collapse so severe it threatens the viability of life on Earth as we know it. 

Each spike in the global population has a measurable impact on the planet’s health. According to estimates in a study by Wynes and Nicholas (2017) , a family having one fewer child could reduce emissions by 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent per year in developed countries.

Increased Conflicts 

The scarcity brought about by environmental disruption and overpopulation has the potential to trigger an increase in violence and political unrest. We’re already seeing wars fought over water, land, and energy resources in the Middle East and other regions, and the turmoil is likely to increase as the global population grows even larger.

Higher Risk of Disasters and Pandemics 

Many of the recent novel pathogens that have devastated humans around the world, including COVID-19, Zika virus, Ebola, and West Nile virus, originated in animals or insects before passing to humans. Part of the reason the world is entering “ a period of increased outbreak activity ” is because humans are destroying wildlife habitats and coming into contact with wild animals on a more regular basis. Now that we’re in the midst of a pandemic, it has become clear how difficult it is to social distance in a world occupied by nearly 8 billion people.   

Discover the real causes and effects of overpopulation

What can be done about overpopulation.

When addressing overpopulation, it’s crucial to take an approach of providing empowerment while mobilizing against anybody advocating for the use of coercion or violence to solve our problems. The combined efforts of spreading knowledge about family planning, increasing agency among women , and debunking widely held myths about contraception will measurably change the trajectory of the world’s population.

As we carry out our work at Population Media Center (PMC), we see first-hand that spreading awareness about family planning methods and the ecological and economic benefits of having smaller families can change reproductive behavior. For example, listeners of our Burundian radio show Agashi (“Hey! Look Again!”) were 1.7 times more likely than non-listeners to confirm that they were willing to negotiate condom use with a sexual partner and 1.8 times more likely than non-listeners to say that they generally approve of family planning for limiting the number of children.

At PMC we harness the power of storytelling to empower listeners to live healthier and more prosperous lives, which in turn contributes to stabilizing the global population so that people can live sustainably with the world’s renewable resources. Discover how PMC is taking action against overpopulation today!

We’re Focused on Making an Impact. Learn More About Our Work.

Global sustainability.

Women’s Rights

More Readings

How do overpopulation and overconsumption damage the environment what you need to know.

How Is Population Growth Responsible for the Growing Problem of Water Scarcity

What lies ahead after the world’s population reaches 8 billion , how does overpopulation affect the economy.

Can We Talk About Overpopulation?

As numbers soar, scholars revisit a thorny debate.

Twenty years ago, farmers looked out at the tropical woodlands and savannahs of Uganda and saw endless virgin territory. A young man, upon starting a family, would clear a patch of wilderness near where he was raised and plant his own fields of sorghum, millet, groundnut, plantains, or cassava.

Now, after decades of unprecedented population growth, the land is running out. In southern Uganda, as in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, farm communities are bumping up against one another and against dry lands, mountains, and rain forests. Pockets of arable land can still be found, but only in malaria-ridden hinterlands where nobody wants to live. Many farmers, rather than relocating long distances, are clearing rain forests near their homes, despite the fact that a tropical forest’s acidic soil is poorly suited to growing grains, fruits, and vegetables. Other farmers are subdividing their parents’ land, reducing the typical-sized farm plot in some parts of Africa to half an acre.

“That’s too small to feed a family,” says economist Jeffrey D. Sachs, who directs Columbia’s Earth Institute.

Africans will never be able to grow enough food for themselves, Sachs argues in his latest book, Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet , unless they start having fewer babies. Subsistence farmers in sub-Saharan Africa today raise an average of six children, which is causing the populations of some nations to double every 20 years. Few of these farmers are able to feed their children properly, let alone afford their education. Children thus grow up desperately poor and have huge families of their own. Shrinking farm plots add yet another burden: Food production on a per-capita basis is declining and malnutrition is worsening, which means that children are likely to grow up even less healthy and less productive.

“The poorest places in the world right now are stuck in a demographic trap,” says Sachs. “A family of subsistence farmers with six or seven kids doesn’t stand a chance.”

The only way to break this cycle of overpopulation and misery, Sachs writes in Common Wealth , is for wealthy nations to provide birth control to the world’s poor. Sachs recommends that rich countries quadruple foreign assistance for reproductive health programs to roughly $25 billion annually. That’s enough money, he estimates, to provide birth control, as well as maternal health care and STD treatment, to some 200 million women who lack it; most of them live in rural Africa.

The prospect of giving poor people contraceptives so they can lift themselves out of poverty might not seem particularly controversial, aside from the opposition that might be expected from some religious conservatives. Yet Sachs is the first mainstream economist in decades to formally propose this idea. Since the 1980s, family planning programs have been promoted strictly as a human right, not as a way to kick-start economic development. That’s because Western family planners in the 1960s and 1970s, in their zeal to slow population growth and to spur development in Asia, supported forced sterilizations, slum demolitions, and other abuses. Women’s rights advocates subsequently wrested control of international family-planning programs and made sure they never again aimed explicitly to lower birthrates.

The days of promoting birth control purely as a way to empower women, however, may be ending. There is a growing sense among scholars that the topic of overpopulation — which has faded from public consciousness as the world’s population growth rate has declined from its mid-1960s peak of 2 percent annually down to about 1.2 percent — is going to reemerge as a hot topic. Recently, the Sierra Club, the Worldwatch Institute, and other environmental groups have offered recommendations similar to those in Common Wealth , in which Sachs urges that we halt world population at 8 billion by 2050, rather than allowing it to grow to 9 billion from today’s 6.7 billion, as the UN projects.

Still, many population experts wonder: Is the marriage bed really the place to address economic and environmental problems? Is it even possible to manage people as numbers while respecting them as human beings?

Don’t blame the victim

Joel E. Cohen, a Columbia demographer, is an expert on population growth and environmental sustainability. He cringes at the term overpopulation .

“I have no idea what that word means, and you’ll never hear me use it,” he says. “It suggests that the size of a population can become so big that it starts causing problems in itself. That’s not the way it works. I’d put the situation this way: Rapid population growth makes it trickier for a poor country to deal with every problem that it faces, from distributing food and water during a drought to providing education and health care in rural areas. But it doesn’t cause these problems.”

There’s wide agreement among economists and demographers today that rapid population growth is troublesome. A report published in April by the UN Population Division concludes that high birthrates are hampering economic development across sub-Saharan Africa, mainly by limiting per-capita investments in education and health care. (Columbia economist Xavier Sala-i-Martin has shown that high birthrates typically stunt economic development.) The UN report also states that population pressure is worsening food and water shortages in the region. Environmental concerns also are real: rain forests in sub-Saharan Africa and in South America are being destroyed primarily by subsistence farming, according to NASA data, and deforestation is reducing local rainfall and exacerbating global climate change.

Cohen’s concern is that people often imagine a direct causal link between population growth and problems like hunger, poverty, and environmental degradation. It’s easy to think this way when visceral images of teeming third-world slums and starving masses invite human-scale explanations: Why do these people have so many babies? Cohen says we then may ignore political factors that contribute to these problems. For instance, agriculture subsidies in rich nations contribute to hunger by driving down farm incomes in the developing world; and African governments are famous for mismanaging food and water supplies. “During the Ethiopian famines of the 1980s, cash croppers in that country were allowed to export alfalfa to Japan as cattle feed,” he says. “Is that a population problem? I don’t think so.”

Cohen agrees with Sachs that international family-planning programs are underfunded. But he says that family planning should continue to be promoted — both to Western donors and to government officials in developing countries — strictly as a human right. To advance birth control as a means to slow population growth, Cohen says, implies that poor people need to solve their societies’ problems through private choices of childbearing. Might this cause the West to back away from other aid obligations, or inspire poor countries to implement coercive methods of population control?

Cohen hesitates. “It’s not as if a developing country’s problems are going to vanish if it manages to lower birthrates,” he says. “I would say that until the West has done its utmost to give poor people access to education, health care, job training, and family planning for the purpose of giving them more control over their lives, it’s premature to talk about trying to convince them to have fewer babies.”

Dirt to dust

Sachs insists that we speak clearly about population pressures. The problem of dwindling farmland in sub-Saharan Africa, he says, is insurmountable without a major effort to slow population growth.

As arable land in Africa has vanished, Sachs explains in Common Wealth , farmers have abandoned land-management techniques they used previously to sustain the long-term fertility of their fields, such as allowing one of the fields to lie fallow each season. Three-quarters of all arable land in sub-Saharan Africa today is severely depleted of nutrients because it has been overused, according to a recent study by the International Center for Soil Fertility and Agricultural Development.

A doubling of the region’s population since the early 1980s helps explain why almost all of sub-Saharan African countries now depend on foreign food aid. Until a few years ago, most were food exporters . “There’s a tyranny of the present at work,” Sachs writes, “and the poor, in their desperation to survive, are often contributing to massive local environmental degradation.”

Population control isn’t the only way to address food shortages, of course. Sachs points out that farmers in sub-Saharan Africa can’t afford chemical fertilizers, high-yield seed varieties, or modern irrigation. He and colleagues at the Earth Institute, as part of the United Nations Millennium Villages project, which Sachs initiated, are helping the governments of a dozen nations in Africa introduce modern farm technologies. They’ve had some remarkable success: The tiny, famine-prone nation of Malawi has tripled its grain yields in the past two years by subsidizing chemical fertilizer for all farmers.

“The problem is that these kinds of agricultural improvements never will produce gains to keep pace with a doubling of population every generation,” Sachs says.

Other types of foreign aid, such as for education or health care, also will bring diminishing returns if population growth rates don’t decline, says Sachs, who is academia’s most influential proponent of aid to Africa. He says that countries in sub-Saharan Africa now must spend huge portions of their budgets providing basic services, which leaves little money for the type of agricultural investment that Malawi is making in its fertilizer program. Economists thus say that countries experiencing explosive population growth must expend their budgets on “service widening,” to deliver basic services to more and more people, rather than on “service deepening,” to improve average services per person.

“If people continue having huge numbers of kids, and if farm sizes continue to shrink,” Sachs says, “I can’t imagine how the next generation is going to make it.”

Sordid history

Back in the 1960s, the populations of many poor countries in Asia, Latin America, and North Africa were growing as rapidly as the populations in sub-Saharan African countries are today. International health programs had gone into former colonies in these areas following World War II with antibiotic drugs, vaccines, and pesticides, which lowered mortality rates dramatically. Farmers in poor countries had always had lots of babies: They needed to, in order to ensure that at least one son grew up to work their fields and to take care of them in their old age. The problem was that while more of their children were surviving, rural people retained a cultural proclivity for huge families. Furthermore, they had little or no access to modern birth control, so they ended up with even more kids than they would have otherwise chosen.

Population growth soon was outpacing food production, especially in Asia, causing Western officials to fear that widespread famine would destabilize the continent, Columbia history professor Matthew Connelly explains in his latest book, Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population . President Lyndon B. Johnson and his advisers viewed the situation through a lens of Cold War–inspired paranoia: Johnson, speaking to U.S. troops stationed in South Korea in 1966, warned that hordes of starving Asians might one day “sweep over the United States and take what we have.” His fear didn’t seem so irrational: 19 Nobel laureate scientists in 1960 had issued a public letter decrying how overpopulation could push the world into “a Dark Age of human misery, famine, and under-education, which could generate growing panic, exploding into wars.”

So in the late 1960s, the U.S. government began pouring tens of millions of dollars annually into international family-planning programs. The programs were administered primarily by Planned Parenthood, under the auspices of the newly formed United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which was financed largely by U.S. dollars and which claimed that its programs provided contraceptives, sterilization procedures, and abortions on a voluntary basis. In reality, American and British economists and demographers had designed these programs to slow population growth by nearly any means necessary, according to Connelly.

South Asian countries with caste systems were willing to push family planning most aggressively, Connelly writes, because many ruling-class Hindus feared social unrest among the hungry lower castes. So Indian officials, under the guidance of Western family planners, agreed to pay famished people small sums of money to be sterilized; they also agreed to fire doctors who didn’t meet sterilization quotas. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka implanted in women a type of intrauterine contraceptive device that was proven to cause infections and the rupturing of the uterine wall. Couples in all of these countries lost medical, housing, and education benefits for having more than a designated number of children. When local health officials balked at implementing aggressive programs, the U.S. Agency for International Development and the UN threatened to shut off Western food aid.

The endgame for this chapter of family planning started to unfold in 1975, when Indira Gandhi’s government bulldozed entire blocks of Delhi slums where large numbers of residents refused to be sterilized. Around the same time, police rounded up at gunpoint all of the men in the Indian village of Uttawar and forced them to get vasectomies. These atrocities drew international outrage and led to Gandhi’s being voted out of power the following year. They also prompted a backlash from feminists and women’s rights advocates who were assuming leadership roles within the NGO community in the 1970s.

International family-planning programs, which by this time had spread throughout Latin America and North Africa, gradually abandoned coercive methods over the next few years. The population control movement would have one last gasp, though, when UNFPA and Planned Parenthood helped China launch its draconian one-child policy in 1979.

Women’s choice

By the late 1980s, the UNFPA and Planned Parenthood had cleaned up their programs so that medical workers on the ground no longer were expected to lower birthrates. Clinicians now concentrated on helping women make informed choices about their sex lives and childbearing. If family planning executives discussed the prospect of slowing population growth in public, Connelly says, it was only as an ancillary benefit of giving women more control over their bodies.

“The term population control has since had a negative connotation, as well it should,” Connelly tells Columbia .

The economic benefits of slowing population growth, though, were apparent: as birthrates plummeted in most of the developing world, prosperity and modernization typically arrived. The governments of many countries in Asia and Latin America, now that they had proportionately fewer poor people to care for, could afford to invest in industry and modern agricultural methods, which boosted grain production 300 percent in some nations between the 1960s and the 1980s. (Connelly, in Fatal Misconception , makes the controversial argument that family planning programs have received too much credit for declining birthrates, and hence for development; see sidebar to the left.)

The good news for women’s rights advocates was that voluntary family-planning programs seemed to have lowered birthrates just as much as had coercive programs. For instance, a UN-sponsored program that had offered birth control pills to all poor women in Thailand in the 1960s, on the advice of a young field-worker named Allan Rosenfield, who later became dean of Columbia’s public health school, helped to halve the number of children born per woman in that country, from six to three, in less than 20 years. Across the developing world, birthrates declined where family planners provided a range of safe contraceptives and taught people the benefits of limiting their family size — not only where they bribed people to be sterilized or threatened tax penalties.

Yet, just as family planning programs were beginning to define a new humanitarian mission, funding stagnated. The trouble started during Ronald Reagan’s first term as president, Connelly writes, when the emerging pro-life movement in the U.S. launched a major lobbying effort against international family-planning programs. Abortion opponents called attention to the fact that Planned Parenthood and UNFPA were providing technical assistance to China for its country’s one-child policy, which in the mid-1980s was in its most coercive phase, allegedly requiring some women to have abortions and to be implanted with intrauterine devices. “It was not much,” writes Connelly, “but it was enough of a perch to permit pro-lifers to pile calumny upon calumny on China’s program and all who could be associated with it.” Since then, every Republican president has refused to contribute to UNFPA, which is the primary source of funding for international family-planning services. Partly as a result, financial support for international family planning has remained flat, which means that the funding hasn’t kept pace with increasing demand as populations in poor countries continue to climb.

Sub-Saharan Africa is home to most women who lack access to birth control today in part because family planning programs arrived to the region late, in the 1980s, when the money had already begun to dry up, say family planning executives. Family planning came to Africa late, they say, because international health programs, with their ensuing population boom, had arrived late, too.

A lack of money isn’t the only thing that has kept family planning from many Africans, though: “There is mistrust in some nations about family planning programs because of their checkered past,” Connelly says. “In African countries where there are ethnic tensions, for instance, it can be politically difficult for leaders to implement family planning programs because many people fear that they’ll be used to reduce the populations of some groups, and not others.”

Counting backward

Today, UN-backed family-planning programs operate in nearly all developing countries. If the UNFPA were better funded, say its proponents, birth control would be more available in rural Africa as well as in many Muslim and Catholic countries, where Western family planners must work hard to educate local leaders about the benefits of reproductive health services.

How to raise the money? Advocates for family planning are doing a lot of soul-searching these days. Many leaders in the NGO community believe that family planning organizations would be better financed if they once again promoted their work as a way to slow population growth, says Suzanne Petroni, a researcher who monitors funding for reproductive health programs at the Summit Foundation, a Washington, D.C.–based nonprofit that promotes environmental sustainability.

“The sense among many family planners is that they’re getting less money than they used to from Western donors, in part because their programs are no longer connected to a practical purpose,” says Petroni. “They believe that the human rights pitch hasn’t worked.”

Particularly tempting to some family planners, Petroni says, is the prospect of exploiting public concerns about global warming. The sales pitch would go something like this: if we limit the number of people on earth, we limit the number of carbon footprints. (Sachs validates this logic in Common Wealth , warning that decades from now, when the crowded nations of sub-Saharan Africa modernize — and Sachs is optimistic that they will modernize eventually — energy consumption on the continent will skyrocket.)

Many women’s rights advocates fear that if family planning programs are positioned once again as a means to combat overpopulation, the door will open for more human rights abuses, Petroni says. This debate within the aid community is contentious because there remains distrust between feminists and some older environmentalists who backed the original population-control movement.

Matthew Connelly sides with the women’s rights advocates. He was convinced in writing Fatal Misconception , he says, that family planning programs that aim to lower birthrates are bound to commit abuses. He found, for instance, that crimes occurred in the 1960s and 1970s even when Western family planners tried to operate their programs ethically: medical workers in several South Asian countries strong-armed patients into accepting sterilizations because they thought that lowering birthrates was good for their own careers, and family planning programs inevitably devoted more resources to sterilization procedures and to abortions than to follow-up care.

Connelly worries that Western nations, if their aid programs once again were promoted as a means to slow population growth, would be tempted to withhold other forms of development aid from countries if they don’t lower birthrates to specified levels.

Lynn Freedman, a Columbia public health professor and an attorney who is an expert on population issues, concurs. “The idea that foreign aid could be linked to a country’s success at lowering birthrates is not wildly unlikely,” she says. “Aid agencies today are in the habit of designing all sorts of performance targets in order to account for the efficiency of their programs, and these targets can easily be misused in a way that violates people’s rights. The ’60s weren’t that long ago.”

Sachs doesn’t see that happening. “The worst I could imagine is that an agency might attempt to link a country’s family- planning money to birthrate reductions,” he says, “but I don’t think that other kinds of foreign aid would be linked in this way.” He also dismisses as unrealistic the possibility that international family-planning programs could once again employ coercive methods. Family planning programs must, and will, remain voluntary, he believes.

The greater moral danger today, Sachs argues, is that large numbers of women will continue to want for birth control, and populations will continue to grow rapidly in sub-Saharan Africa and in places like Haiti, Bolivia, Venezuela, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Myanmar, in part because Western scholars and aid workers insist on tiptoeing around the subject of overpopulation for fear of being seen as insensitive to the abuses of the past. In Common Wealth , Sachs even advances the term population control, which has long been considered impolitic among scholars, because he says he wants to break the taboo.

“For years people have been telling me, ‘Don’t talk about population, talk instead about access to reproductive health services,’” Sachs says. “And I’ve said, ‘No, I want to talk about population, because it’s a serious problem.’ I think it’s time we take this subject out of the whispers.”

Birth control, under audit

Columbia professor Matthew Connelly’s Fatal Misconception, a history of the population-control movement of the 1960s and 1970s, is shocking for its parade of morally compromised scholars and diplomats who spread birth control around the world. There’s Planned Parenthood head and ecologist William Vogt, who thought that starving people in the developing world should be left to die and therefore opposed food aid; there’s Robert McNamara, who, as head of the World Bank, resisted funding healthcare programs in poor countries because they saved lives and contributed to overpopulation; there are the Planned Parenthood doctors who at a 1963 UN conference decided that a female contraceptive’s tendency to pierce the uterus, causing sterilization, was to be considered a side benefit.

Fatal Misconception was among the most controversial scholarly monographs of 2008, not just because Connelly calls out early family planners as xenophobic and racist, however. His most startling critique is that these programs didn’t even lower birthrates as designed: he says that between 1950 and 2000, the dozen or so developing nations that employed the most aggressive family- planning tactics reduced birthrates little more than did other countries. Relying on UN data, Connelly notes that China, for instance, reduced the number of children per woman from 6.2 to 1.7 during that 50-year period. In Brazil, where little effort was made to encourage family planning, the numbers fell from 6.2 to 2.3 children during the same period. Connelly lists half a dozen such examples to make his point. He then argues that girls’ education, women’s employment, and other social factors affected birthrates more so than did family planning programs.

“In many poor countries where birthrates declined dramatically,” Connelly tells Columbia, “the declines actually started before family planning programs even showed up.”

How could people have managed to have fewer babies without contraception? The same way they did in early-19th-century Europe, where birthrates plummeted a full century before modern birth control became available, Connelly says: They used traditional forms of birth control like the rhythm method.

Connelly charges that UN and Planned Parenthood officials who administered most family-planning programs in the 1960s and 1970s knew that data on the ground weren’t validating their efforts. They soldiered on, he says, because of institutional inertia. “These programs gave jobs to millions of people, and administrators weren’t interested in scrutinizing the numbers,” he says. “They were interested in making payroll.”

Many contemporary family planners are apoplectic over Connelly’s assertion that birth control programs don’t lower birthrates. Steven Sinding, a professor at Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health and past director-general of Planned Parenthood International, has blasted Connelly over his book’s conclusions. Sinding claims that about 50 percent of birthrate declines in poor countries are attributable to family planning programs.

Columbia called T. Paul Schultz, a Yale economics professor who has spent his career studying birthrate dynamics. This subject invites confusion, he says, because no long-term controlled studies have ever been conducted. That’s partly because there are a multitude of factors that influence birthrates, so aid agencies whose programs target any one of these areas are reluctant to fund expensive, long-term studies to showcase the relatively small impact that their work likely has on fertility. The dearth of data, Schultz says, allows both advocates and opponents of family planning to cherry-pick statistics.

But the most sophisticated data available, collected over two decades in Bangladesh, Schultz says, suggest that the availability of free contraception accounted for about 20 percent of the region’s birthrate decline. That’s a strong relationship, considering how many variables were tested, he says. “The intuition of development experts has always been that family planning must slow population growth,” Schultz says, “and I’ve never seen any good data that suggest otherwise.”

More From Health & Medicine

Sign up for our newsletter.

General Data Protection Regulation

Columbia University Privacy Notice

• Ideas for Action
• Join the MAHB
• Why Join the MAHB?
• Current Associates
• Current Nodes
• What is the MAHB?
• Who is the MAHB?
• Acknowledgments

A Brief on Overpopulation – Why it Matters and What You Can Do About It

Erin Brown | April 4, 2023 | Leave a Comment

Photo by Candace McDaniel on StockSnap

As humanity has surpassed the 8 billion people milestone, it is more important now than ever to talk about population. What will we do if we continue to grow at exponential rates? What are ethical, viable strategies to decrease population?

“First off, let me get this straight, discussing addressing overpopulation does not mean discussing killing people. The goal is actually to prevent it.” – Dr. Jane O’Sullivan

Current world population in January 2023: 8 billion

The current rate of population growth is around 80 million people per year. There are over 8 billion people on the planet, the last billion added in less than the last 12 years. 

The Earth’s first billion people milestone took from the beginning of human history until the 1800s to be achieved. Then, due to the industrial revolution, humanity reached the second billion mark by 1930 (taking only 130 years), reached the third billion in 1960 (only took 30 years), then reached the fourth billion by 1974 (only took 14 years), and the fifth billion by 1987 (only took 13 years). We hit 6 billion in 1999 (which took 12 years) and hit 7 billion in 2011 (which took about 12 years). At the current growth rate, the world population will reach 9 billion by 2037 and 10 billion by 2057.

The growth rate is declining, but not at a fast enough rate to combat the exponential compound growth. The growth rate was 2% in the 1970s. Now it is 1.05%. Any growth rate above 1% means we are still adding more people to the planet every year. 

What is overpopulation? 

Overpopulation is a human population in numbers high enough to cause environmental deterioration, impaired quality of life, or population crash. 

Why is overpopulation an issue? 

Overrun natural resources can only lead to death by starvation, conflict, and disease, and the only viable alternative is voluntary restraint on human births.

What is carrying capacity?

Carrying capacity is defined as the maximum population of a species that an area will support without undergoing deterioration. 

Paul R. Ehrlich and other scientists estimate the world’s optimum population for carrying capacity (at a comfortable standard of living – editor’s note) to be less than two billion people – 6 billion fewer than on the planet today. “But the longer humanity pursues business as usual, the smaller the sustainable society is likely to prove to be. We’re continuously harvesting the low-hanging fruit, for example by driving fisheries stocks to extinction” – Paul Ehrlich says.

How do we revert population overshoot to a sustainable population level? 

Geologist Art Berman explains population overshoot this way: “Overshoot means that humans are using natural resources and polluting at rates beyond the planet’s capacity to recover. The main cause of overshoot is the extraordinary growth of the human population made possible by fossil energy. Concerns about overshoot and population raised more than 40 years ago were dismissed. Climate change has captured public awareness more recently although many doubt that it is an emergency. Overshoot is more difficult to dispute; it destroys rainforests, leads to the extinction of other species, the pollution of land, rivers, and seas, the acidification of the oceans, and the loss of fisheries and coral reefs. People understandably want to know the solutions. Overshoot is the problem we must address. Any plan that includes continued growth is doomed to fail.”

What can we do?  Jane O’Sullivan outlines the two options for addressing population overshoot – i ncrease the Earth’s carrying capacity or decrease population.

Increasing Earth’s carrying capacity

We are already doing this by (a) using fewer natural resources per person, or (b) increasing productivity by finding more ways to use resources. This only defers the problem and creates collateral damage. 

Decreasing population numbers

If we talk about this now, the hope is to increase our options for solutions. One of the biggest challenges to facing overpopulation head-on and discussing a decreasing population are the stigmas and myths associated with reducing human population numbers. An elaborate set of myths has emerged in opposition to reducing population levels. These myths may prevent even environmentalists from viewing overpopulation as an issue.  Jane O’Sullivan elucidates on the following six myths that make inaction a virtue.

Myth 1 – The human population is stabilizing, and birth rates are decreasing

Truth – Birth rates started declining in the 1970s-90s due to family planning, but not low enough. The number of mothers is still increasing faster than family planning is decreasing the birth rate .  We are still having more births per year than ever before. The total fertility rate has decreased, but as fertility decline has slowed to a trickle, the number of total births has continued to increase. 

Myth 2  – China is the only one with the problem and they used cruel methods (one-child policy)

Truth – Family planning programs have helped many countries successfully reduce births through voluntary means, including China, before the one-child policy.

Myth 3 – Poverty causes population growth, therefore development is the best contraceptive

I.e., family planning is unnecessary and inefficient as long as there is development.

Truth – If this was true, we would see the population decline as development increases. However, it is the decrease in fertility rates that drove economic development, not the other way around. This myth is therefore “correlation implying causation” in the wrong direction. The poorest countries could lower their population by family planning just as quickly as rich countries if they choose to prioritize it.

Countries of families with four or more children, on average, have the lowest level of development; in families with 3 children or fewer the level goes up by some degree, and with two or fewer children development soars. The current focus should be on expanding provisions for teachers, doctors, equality, etc. instead of just giving people what they need. 

Myth 4 – Educating girls is the key to ending population growth

Truth – Another indirect approach that excludes a discussion on the benefit of small families and ending population growth. Educating girls helps but not much unless it is also flanked by family planning efforts. Family planning has a stronger effect on women regulating their fertility, decreasing the fertility gap between the educated and uneducated, and with family planning, girls are more likely to stay in school.

Myth 5 – Population growth is good for the economy

Truth – This makes people poorer as shown under Myth #3. 

Myth 6 – Population growth in poor nations does not matter because of their “tiny carbon footprint”

Truth –  Population growth is a greater threat than climate change. The best way for anyone to decrease their carbon footprint is to have one less kid.

Therefore, family planning is the most economical way to a sustainable future.

What action can each of us take?

1. Discuss smaller family sizes with your partner, family, and friends – how do we aim for birth rates lower than two children per couple?

2. Share information about the environmental impacts of population growth with friends and family. Advocate for action to reduce and reverse population growth.

3. Reassess concerns about aging   – how can we shift away from worshipping eternal youth, to accepting and valuing the entire life cycle? 

4. Celebrate population decline – what are possible depopulation dividends? 

5. Support organizations and efforts that support family planning and women’s education.

Damien Carrington, an environmental editor at The Guardian, interviewed Prof. Paul Ehrlich about the solutions:

“The solutions are tough,” Ehrlich says. “To start, make modern contraception and backup abortion available to all and give women full equal rights, pay, and opportunities with men. Focus on overconsumption and equity issues. Specifically women’s rights and the explicit countering of racism.”

Ehrlich also says that an unprecedented redistribution of wealth is needed to end the over-consumption of resources, but “the rich who now run the global system – that hold the annual ‘world destroyer’ meetings in Davos – are unlikely to let it happen…Too many rich people in the world is a major threat to the human future, and cultural and genetic diversity are great human resources… It is a near certainty in the next few decades, and the risk is increasing continually as long as the perpetual growth of the human enterprise remains the goal of economic and political systems. As I’ve said many times, ‘perpetual growth is the creed of the cancer cell’.”

If cultural and genetic diversity are great human resources, how can the rich and the poor come together across the world to solve this issue?

Anne and Paul Ehrlich expand on their “vision for a cure” :

“Rich white people love to hold meetings to discuss the ‘population problem’ which always ends up focusing on the very real demographic difficulties of those with darker skin tones, especially people who live in Africa and Latin America. But isn’t it really time for the poor people of the world, especially those not in need of tanning beds, to extend a helping hand to the major villains of the destruction of humanity’s life-support systems? Could they not hold an educational conference in Washington, D.C. to explain why civilization is going down the drain, to the per-capita most environmentally destructive giant nation on the planet? Leaders from the “South” could both organize the event and supply experts to educate the wealthy and middle class on their ethical responsibilities and ways to meet them. We envision learning sessions on topics such as:

• Avoiding the second child.
• The population problem beyond numbers: inequality and waste of talent. 
• Are borders ethical?
• Population shrinkage for politicians.
• GDP shrinkage for economists.
• Do Trump and his colleagues prove that the lighter your skin, the lighter your brain?
• Citizens United: It’s time for euthanasia for corporations.
• Redistribution and survival.
• Disbanding “Murder Incorporated”: gun manufacturers and big pharma.
• How to end plastic production.
• The historical contributions of the global South to the food enjoyed by the North.
• How biodiversity loss is accompanied by the loss of human cultural diversity.
• We know our populations are growing too fast; how to help us help ourselves?
• Why anti-abortion laws kill poor women.

You can doubtless think of others. The possibilities are endless”.

References: 

Berman, Art. The Climate-Change Trip to Abilene. July 13, 2022.  https://mahb.stanford.edu/library-item/the-climate-change-trip-to-abilene/

Carrington, Damien. Interview with Paul Ehrlich: Collapse of civilization is a near certainty within decades. July 9, 2020.  https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/mar/22/collapse-civilisation-near-certain-decades-population-bomb-paul-ehrlich

Ehrlich, Anne H.; Ehrlich, Paul R. Overpopulation In America -And Its Cures. November 14, 2019.  https://mahb.stanford.edu/blog/overpopulation-america-cures/

O’Sullivan, Jane. The tenth presentation at the Delivering the Human Future Conference. Titled: The Future of the Human Population. March 21, 2021.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shUNJPLpXpQ

Population Statistics.  https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

The MAHB Blog is a venture of the Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere. Questions should be directed to [email protected]

• Writing Correction
• Online Prep Platform
• Online Course
• Speaking Assessment
• Ace The IELTS
• Target Band 7
• Practice Tests Downloads
• IELTS Success Formula
• Essays Band 9 IELTS Writing Task 2 samples – IELTS Band 9 essays
• Essays Band 8 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS essays of Band 8
• Essays Band 7 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS essays of Band 7
• Essays Band 6 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS essays of Band 6
• Essays Band 5 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS essays of Band 5
• Reports Band 9 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS reports of Band 9 (Academic Writing Task 1)
• Reports Band 8 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS reports of Band 8
• Reports Band 7 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS reports of Band 7
• Letters Band 9 IELTS Writing Task 1 – samples of IELTS letters of Band 9
• Letters Band 8 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS letters of Band 8
• Letters Band 7 IELTS Writing – samples of IELTS letters of Band 7
• Speaking Samples
• Tests Samples
• 2023, 2024 IELTS questions
• 2022 IELTS questions
• 2021 IELTS questions
• 2020 IELTS questions
• High Scorer’s Advice IELTS high achievers share their secrets
• IELTS Results Competition
• IELTS-Blog App

IELTS Essay, topic: Overpopulation

• IELTS Essays - Band 6

The world is experiencing a dramatic increase in population, which is causing problems not only for poor, undeveloped countries, but also for industrialized and developed nations. Describe some of the problems that overpopulation causes, and suggest at least one possible solution. You should write at least 250 words. You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Nowadays, the population dramatically in most countries around the world. This is true for the developed and developing nations. Overpopulation a different number of problems. However, the government can these problems in many .

There are different problems that overpopulation causes in rich nations. Firstly, it is very difficult for governments to provide helpful public services in overcrowded cities. Moreover, there is generally a higher level of crimes being committed, such as drugs abuse, murders, thefts, . often cause by the high rates of unemployment.

However, overpopulation problems in nations have two main which they are by governments. Firstly, the government must educate people about limiting the size of the family. For example, in China they have a policy called “one child policy” which limits the size of the family to one or two children, and this is beginning to have an effect on the world’s most crowded nation.

To sum up, if the impulsive population increase continues, many more people will die of hunger in the poor countries. Also, in rich nations, the life in the cities will become more and more difficult.

This essay covers the task and has a good content. However there are several areas to improve. The grammar needs more attention (see comments underlined in blue). In the first paragraph, the last sentence has instances of repetition of solve and solution, you could say instead “can find many solutions to those problems”. In the third paragraph, the last sentence has poor structure and looks unfinished. Overall, this looks like a Band 6 – 6.5 essay.

Click here to see more IELTS essays of band 6

Related posts:

• IELTS essay, topic: Should school children be given homework (opinion)? This is a model response to a Writing Task 2...
• IELTS essay, topic: Having a salaried job is better than being self-employed (agree/disagree) This is a model response to a Writing Task 2...
• IELTS essay, topic: What is the best motivation for workers – salary, job satisfaction or helping others? This is a model response to a Writing Task 2...
• IELTS essay, topic: Is studying at university better than getting a job straight after school (opinion)? This is a model response to a Writing Task 2...
• IELTS essay, topic: Some people like to own their home while others prefer to rent it (discuss) This is a model response to a Writing Task 2...

2 thoughts on “IELTS Essay, topic: Overpopulation”

Pingback:  IELTS Essay Samples of Band 6 | IELTS-Blog

In some countries young people are encouraged to work or travel for a year between finishing high school and starting university. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages for young people who decide to do this

Travelling unprecedented states after completing high school predominantly, crutches young people on acquiring knowledge and experience.When young people gain knowledge, it does favour for them in upcoming curriculum.Beside this, visiting in other countries assist young people for dealing with the lifestyles and cultures of others.To cite an instance,last year me and my friend had visited African countries resulting in, being familiar with african lifestyles.This not only, wides the knowledge and skill but also, contributes massively in freshing our minds and providing pleasure.

On the other hand,while travelling other countries,it rises some sort of cons. Initially,it mesmarises young people toward those countries. Nevertheless, going other places have a major obligation in gaining knowledge,it could fascinate young people in those countries.For example,young people of developing countries are migrating day by day in western lands in sue of better life styles and accommodations.More importantantly, this scenario is leading in shortage of manpower in native province.Therefore, day by day it is fabricating huge scarcity of skill human resources in developing nations.

In a gist, it is optimal for visiting other countries during vacation but, it is awful in shifting towards those countries.In my opinion, young people should not lure those countries in shake of better life.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• IELTS Scores
• Life Skills Test
• Find a Test Centre
• Alternatives to IELTS
• Find Student Housing
• General Training
• Academic Word List
• Topic Vocabulary
• Collocation
• Phrasal Verbs
• Writing eBooks
• Reading eBook
• All eBooks & Courses
• Sample Essays
• Overpopulation Essay

IELTS Overpopulation Essay

This model essay is about  overpopulation in cities . You specifically have to talk about the  problems  of overpopulation, and suggest some  solutions  to this problem.

Note that this question specifically asks you what governments and individuals can do.

Here is the question:

Overpopulation of urban areas has led to numerous problems.

Identify one or two serious ones and suggest ways that governments and individuals can tackle these problems.

Organising a Problems & Solutions Essay

Note that this overpopulation essay question specifically asks you what governments and individuals can do.

You MUST, therefore, write about what both of these can do in order to fully answer the question.

Note as well that you must talk about  serious  problems.

The easiest way to organize a problems and solutions essay is as follows:

Body 1: Problems

Body 2: Solutions

In this essay, a separate paragraph has been written about government and individual solutions, so it is organized as follows:

Body 2: Solutions - Government

Body 3: Solutions - Individuals

Model Essay

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Write about the following topic:

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own experience or knowledge.

Write at least 250 words.

IELTS Overpopulation Essay - Sample Answer

Many countries of the world are currently experiencing problems caused by rapidly growing populations in urban areas, and both governments and individuals have a duty to find ways to overcome these problems.

Overpopulation can lead to overcrowding and poor quality housing in many large cities. Poorly heated or damp housing could cause significant health problems, resulting in illness, such as bronchitis or pneumonia. Another serious consequence of overcrowding is a rising crime rate as poor living conditions may lead young people in particular to take desperate measures and turn to crime or drugs.

In terms of solutions, I believe the government should be largely responsible. Firstly, it is vital that the state provides essential housing and healthcare for all its citizens. Secondly, setting up community projects to help foster more community spirit and help keep young people off the street is a good idea. For example, youth clubs or evening classes for teenagers would keep them occupied. Finally, more effective policing of inner city areas would also be beneficial.

Naturally, individuals should also try to address these problems. One way is to put pressure on the government to ensure they tackle the problems by, for instance, forming action groups to lobby the government and request intervention and adequate funding. They could also form Neighbourhood Watch areas to try and help reduce the high levels of crime.

Therefore, it is clear that the problems caused by overpopulation in urban areas are very serious. Yet if governments and individuals share a collective responsibility, then it may well become possible to offer some solutions.

(260 words)

<<< Back

Next >>>

More Problems & Solutions Essays:

Competing for Jobs Essay

Competing for Jobs Essay: This is a model essay about the problems arising when older people have to compete with younger people for jobs. you need to write about the problems that arise if older people have to compete for jobs with younger people.

IELTS Problem Solution Essay Example: Why is immigration problematic?

This problem solution essay example is about the increasing number of professionals who are leaving their own poorer countries to work in developed countries

Any comments or questions about this page or about IELTS? Post them here. Your email will not be published or shared.

Before you go...

Check out the ielts buddy band 7+ ebooks & courses.

Would you prefer to share this page with others by linking to it?

• Click on the HTML link code below.
• Copy and paste it, adding a note of your own, into your blog, a Web page, forums, a blog comment, your Facebook account, or anywhere that someone would find this page valuable.

Band 7+ eBooks

"I think these eBooks are FANTASTIC!!! I know that's not academic language, but it's the truth!"

Linda, from Italy, Scored Band 7.5

IELTS Modules:

Other resources:.

• All Lessons
• Band Score Calculator
• Writing Feedback
• Speaking Feedback
• Teacher Resources
• Free Downloads
• Recent Essay Exam Questions
• Books for IELTS Prep
• Student Housing
• Useful Links

Recent Articles

Decreasing House Sizes Essay

Apr 06, 24 10:22 AM

Latest IELTS Writing Topics - Recent Exam Questions

Apr 04, 24 02:36 AM

IELTS Essay: English as a Global Language

Apr 03, 24 03:49 PM

Important pages

IELTS Writing IELTS Speaking IELTS Listening   IELTS Reading All Lessons Vocabulary Academic Task 1 Academic Task 2 Practice Tests

Connect with us

Copyright © 2022- IELTSbuddy All Rights Reserved

IELTS is a registered trademark of University of Cambridge, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia. This site and its owners are not affiliated, approved or endorsed by the University of Cambridge ESOL, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia.

• EssayBasics.com
• Pay For Essay
• Write My Essay
• Homework Writing Help
• Essay Editing Service
• Thesis Writing Help
• Write My College Essay
• Do My Essay
• Term Paper Writing Service
• Coursework Writing Service
• Write My Research Paper
• Assignment Writing Help
• Essay Writing Help
• Call Now! (USA) Login Order now
• EssayBasics.com Call Now! (USA) Order now
• Writing Guides

Disadvantages Of Overpopulation (Essay Sample)

Disadvantages of overpopulation.

Overpopulation refers to the condition whereby the number of living persons in a given region exceeds the capacity of the given region or state to satisfactorily cater for the needs of the occupants. This condition is caused by a number of reasons among which includes increased birth rates, low mortality rates, inward immigration, lack of proper education, cultural beliefs, and many other factors. There are a myriad of shortcomings that are brought about by overpopulation and the following section discusses some of these.

Depletion of natural habitats: As the population of the people in a given region grows it reaches to the point where the originally available space for the people to settle on is no longer enough hence forcing them to move to regions originally occupied by other living species. This consequently forces the other species to relocate to other areas that could be less favorable in terms of their survival requirements and some have as a result gone extinct.

Overpopulation leads to increased organic and inorganic wastes. This has emerged as a major cause of deaths from diseases that are in one way or the other associated with organic wastes. Heavily populated areas tend to consume great amounts of energy hence producing great amounts of toxic waste to the environment such as Carbon Dioxide emissions which is a major contributing factor to the ozone layer depletion.

The rise in crime rates can also be linked to overpopulation. When the population exceeds the capacity of the available resources to cater for the basic needs, many will resort to illegal activities as they strive to make ends meet. They will often involve themselves in crimes such as robbery, drug trafficking and other crime related activities.

Poor education; With the occurrence of massive populations in given regions, it becomes very hard to cater for the standard teacher-to-pupil ratio that ensures that the student will receive the best quality of education required. It is also a very great challenge for the government to build enough learning facilities to cater for the needs of the great numbers of young children who need to learn in the densely populated zones.

Poor access to quality health: Just as in the case of education, health is one very important basic need that every citizen should be assured of. However, if the population of a given region or country exceeds the support capability of the country in terms of medical equipment, doctors, nurses or medical supplies; the lives and health quality of the people in the overpopulated areas is at stake.

Depletion of fresh water resources is the other disadvantage of overpopulation. Fresh water is one of the most essential need to the human existence. Over the years, human activity has threatened the sources of fresh water in the planet. Human activity such as logging, charcoal burning, and encroachment to rainforest and water tower zones is continuously posing a major threat to the source of this limited commodity in the human existence.

Increased farming activities: As the human masses inhabit the earth, the attempts to meet the food needs is on the rise. This forces the people to find means by which to proficiently cater for the need for food. Farming is predominantly the most preferred method to the production of food. Increased farming activities lead to deforestation and degradation of the soils on the lands that farming activities have been carried out for a long time. This could lead to the question of where the people will source their foodstuff if all the farming lands is rendered barren and cannot produce any crop anymore.

Increased rate of population and overpopulation leads to emergence and speedy outbreaks of new types of diseases, pandemics and epidemics. The spread of these diseases is even catalyzed by the crowding of people in overpopulated areas, as there are no sufficient means to control such outbreaks. Some examples of these diseases that spread the fastest in overpopulated areas are Tuberculosis, HIV, malaria and cholera.

Overpopulation and Limit on Number of Children Essay

With the world facing the issue of overpopulation, there has been discussion of implementing limits on the number of children households can have. Although officially such policy has only existed in China, it is likely that as resource scarcity worsens, other countries may consider such steps. Limits on the number of children should be implemented yet introduced in a way that focuses on family planning and government support rather than draconic interventions.

The primary argument on limitation is overpopulation. The global population is expected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030 and 9.7 billion in 2050 (United Nations, 2022). Scientists and experts are increasingly emphasizing that the human population is becoming too large to be sustained by the planet. Furthermore, hundreds of millions of people are living in insecure conditions on unsuitable land and homes, often struggling to meet their basic needs such as food and water. Due to climate change, many places in the earth are expected to become virtually unhabitable, while food production is expected to become more difficult. The impacts of overpopulation are long-lasting and far-reaching, and it is a vicious cycle as rising birth rates are seeing greater resource consumption, which in turn, leads to an environment where these resources are limited (Khan, 2021).

Another supporting factor of limiting the number of children is that it allows for more resources to be dedicated to each child both within microenvironments of the family and the macro considerations of the national economy. There should not be a one-child policy as occurred in China as this was socially detrimental, but a limit of 2 children (or 3 with evident of financial resources to support it) is more appropriate. Evidence suggests that fewer kids made families happier and provided more opportunities for education and other development until maturity. The costs of raising children are substantial from a financial standpoint, particularly if they are highly successful in a specific field (athletics or academics) (Pinsker, 2019). Furthermore, publicly, there are limited resources that the government can provide (resulting in larger class sizes in schools and other inconveniences). Therefore, limiting the number of children can focus more resources on a single child, potentially ensuring their successful upbringing.

The main counterargument is that population control is unethical and violates fundamental freedoms in democracies such as the US. That is not unfounded but can be countered with the evidence that unrestrained population growth goes in conflict with most of commonly accepted human rights. Overpopulation will directly threat the stability of society in every way, from a lack of resources to civil unrest as people will fight to fulfill their needs. Ethics of population control are generally perceived as negative but if done correctly, can be implemented in a safe manner. Responsible reproduction goes beyond supporting one’s children, it is considering their future and the world the next generations will live in, so ethically carefully limiting numbers without discrimination or eugenics is appropriate.

There are increasing pressures and arguments towards creating policies on limiting the number of children. However, it has to be done ethically and correctly to avoid pitfalls seen in China’s experiment where there is a tremendous gender discrepancy due to cultural differences and a number of highly unethical practices were implemented. Population control should be done through family planning and incentives for families to limit childbirth on their own accord. The limits will not only begin to gradually resolve the issues of overpopulation, but will allow for a greater amount of resources, such as education and opportunities, to be distributed for each child.

Khan, C. (2021). Is our planet overpopulated? We ask the expert. The Guardian . Web.

Pinsker, J. (2019). What number of kids makes parents happiest? The Atlantic . Web.

United Nations. (2022). Population . Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, April 5). Overpopulation and Limit on Number of Children. https://ivypanda.com/essays/overpopulation-and-limit-on-number-of-children/

"Overpopulation and Limit on Number of Children." IvyPanda , 5 Apr. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/overpopulation-and-limit-on-number-of-children/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Overpopulation and Limit on Number of Children'. 5 April.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Overpopulation and Limit on Number of Children." April 5, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/overpopulation-and-limit-on-number-of-children/.

1. IvyPanda . "Overpopulation and Limit on Number of Children." April 5, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/overpopulation-and-limit-on-number-of-children/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Overpopulation and Limit on Number of Children." April 5, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/overpopulation-and-limit-on-number-of-children/.

• Overpopulation Benefits
• Overpopulation: Causes, Effects and Consequences
• The Problem of Overpopulation
• Human Overpopulation and Its Global Impact
• Overpopulation: Causes, Effects, and Solutions
• Birth Control Against Overpopulation
• How Overpopulation Affects Our Economy
• The Impact of Overpopulation on the Global Environment
• Overpopulation Challenges in China
• Impacts of Overpopulation on the Environment
• Overpopulation: Is the Small World Getting Smaller?
• Managing Overpopulation in India and Caused Problems
• Overpopulation and Food Production Problem
• World Population Could Peak Decades Ahead of the UN Forecast
• Global Population Growth and Increased Demand for Food