17

Education, education, education. Also healthcare, and access to contraception. I don't have any references available, I'm afraid, but repeatedly we have seen that when standards of education are improved in a community - especially education of women - birth rates go down. When child mortality goes down, so does fertility, but that has little effect on ...


12

Currently we have over 7.7 billion people in the world (data from April 2019). In 2010 the UN made several projections for world population growth. World population estimates from 1800 to 2100, based on "high", "medium" and "low" United Nations projections in 2010 (source wikipedia). The worst case scenario (red line) is that the world population will ...


5

A few trends which help explain why population growth may not receive significant attention as part of climate change discussions (all charts from Our World in Data): Per capita emissions rise with GDP Source Fertility rates decrease with GDP Source GDP per capita is rising around the world Source The conclusion from this data (whether ...


4

It may sound contradictory, but according to scientist and statistician Hans Rosling, the main criterion to limit population growth is a reduction of the child mortality rate (see also his Ted Talk on the topic and the stats below). Child mortality rate vs Country population growth rate (including migration) in 2011, Each bubble is a country, bubble color ...


4

They didn't. The (much reduced) population is still there. They went through a very bad time with wars and starvation, and records of the time were lost with the last people who could read the writing system. Wikipedia says: Polynesian people most likely settled on Easter Island sometime between 700 and 1100 CE, and created a thriving and industrious ...


4

I think this is question is difficult to answer for several reasons: There is no agreed upon carrying capacity of the Earth. The Global Footprint Network organization does a nice job estimating the Earth's capacity in terms of land usage (biocapacity), but their ecological footprint is a very rough estimate and is not suitable for decision-making. For ...


3

Though it does not make the situation easier, population is not the elephant in the room when it comes to CO2 emissions: we might afford 10 billion with low lifestyles, but the habits of the less than 1 billion Western inhabitants on the planet already make the situation unmanageable. This is the elephant in the room. 10% of the population drives 50% of the ...


3

There are a couple of errors in your question. Firstly regarding environmental damage in pre-industrial times, in the Middle East they ran out of trees over two thousand years ago and had to import timber. Easter Island had similar problems. Over-use of resources has existed since time immemorial, not just due to industrial revolution. Secondly, regarding ...


3

The IPAT equation can be useful as a tool to describe the high-level factors involved in assessing sustainability world wide or for a particular good or service. The letters stem from the I=PAT equation which says that: Impact = Population x Affluence x Technology Here affluence is the consumption of goods or services of a person in the population, and ...


3

It has already been stated that population growth decreases in countries that experience an increase in prosperity. It seems clear to me that this goes hand-in-hand with access to education for all members of the population. To encourage a decrease in number of births per woman in the developing countries, it would seem that the primary goal would be to keep ...


2

Fight to poverty. In fact this is the main goal of the UN agency for sustainable development. People living in poor countries use to have more children because they need somebody to take care of them when they'll be old and they rely on their family and cluster to help eachother. It's too easy to thingk that they don't do contraception because of their ...


2

The core problem is the scale of pollution overall. Let's take excess anthropogenic greenhouse gas releases as being our single worst problem, which, broadly speaking, it is. We know we need to get to zero net emissions, (and, for a period, net negative emissions), quickly - within 25 years or so - to avoid even worse catastrophic consequences than those ...


2

You don't need a "scientific consensus", you just need "math". Consumerism (the exploitation and consumption of natural resources to support modern/unsustainable lifestyles) is what produces pollution and environmental/ecological degradation. The magnitude of the damage done (D) is thus the product of the lifestyle (L) and the number of people living it (P)...


2

Even though I agree with most of the previous answers that education and economic equality would be the most efficient mechanics in the long-run, I feel like they do not directly answer your question as it seemed you wanted to have an instrumental answer in the style of IF-THEN. Given the fact that a multidimensional problem such as over-population ...


2

Many population growth estimates actually suggest that the growth will slow down in the future. The main arguments are that the global fertility rate is decreasing and that the median age of the world population is going up. Reference: World population growth is expected to nearly stop by 2100


1

Population control programs have always been controversial. Many compulsory sterilization programs have been implemented by various countries over time. China's now abandoned one child policy was decried around the world because of its social impacts. One result of population control measures was female infanticide, which was also decried. The other ...


1

I'm not a demographer, but I attempted a first order approximation based on what I could find. World-O-Meter has a page with world age structure grouped into buckets of 5 years (eg. 20-24). I roughly calculated the total population over the next 100 years by assuming everyone survives until about age 100, so I just zero out one bucket every 5 years. Annual ...


1

Whether serious studies have occurred I do not know, but you surely can answer your question yourself without much effort. For the effect of over-population of an area go visit a beef-stockyard, where the beeves are fattened before slaughter. Cattle practice a completely pre-technological lifestyle. For the effects of technology, consider the currently ...


1

The largest issue with answering this question is that it depends heavily on other factors, some of which are quite hard to predict. Consider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_intensity , which measures how efficient nations are at powering their needs. Consider all environmental impacts (not just energy & climate change), this is a popular formula: ...


1

The answer by Jean-Paul Calderone correctly specified how much population the food can support. I'm not focusing on that at all in my answer; I'm only focusing on energy. This answer, however, did not take into account energy aspects, only mentioning than an unlimited supply of natural gas is needed. That is most certainly false: methane can be created with ...


1

Since this is a homework question I will help you, but not give away the answer (which I cannot do anyway, because you didn't include the necessary information for that). You are correct that you only want to harvest part of the population. Harvesting all fish will indeed wipe out the population and harvesting most of the fish will slow down population ...


1

Increase broadcast coverage of television soap operas From the abstract of a research paper titled "Soap Operas and Fertility: Evidence from Brazil" (pdf): We estimate the effect of television on fertility in Brazil, where soap operas portray small families. We exploit differences in the timing of entry into different markets of Globo, the main novela ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible