Name_______________________________________AP HG 2.9

Date______________

POPULATION & MIGRATION

What other methods control population growth?

DO NOW:

Thomas Malthus believed the world was facing an overpopulation problem.

Is he correct?

______ YES

______ NO

Provide one example or argument to support your answer.

Population Control

· LOW CBR

· HIGH CDR

Epidemiology: branch of medical science concerned with incidence, distribution, and control of diseases that affect large numbers of people.

Lowers CBRs have been responsible for declining NIRs in most countries. However, in some countries of sub-Saharan Africa, lower NIRs have also resulted from higher CDRs, especially through the diffusion of AIDS. Medical researchers have identified an epidemiologic transition that focuses on distinctive causes of death in each stage of the demographic model.

Epidemiologic Transition in Stage 1

Stage 1 of the epidemiologic transition has been called the stage of pestilence and famine. Infectious diseases were principal causes of human deaths, along with accidents and attacks but animals and other humans. Malthus called these causes of deaths “natural checks” on the growth of human population.

Black Plague:

·

·

·

Epidemiologic Transition in Stage 2

Stage 2 has been called the stage of receding pandemics. A pandemic is disease that occurs over a wide geographic area and affects a very high proportion of the population. Improved sanitation, nutrition, and medicine during the Industrial Revolution reduced the spread of such diseases.

Cholera:

·

·

·

Epidemiologic Transition in Stage 3 & 4

Stage 3, the stage of degenerative and human-created diseases, is characterized by a decrease in deaths from infectious diseases and an increase in chronic disorders associated with aging. The decline in infectious diseases, such as polio and measles, has been sharp in stage 3 countries. Two especially important chronic disorders in stage 3 are cardiovascular diseases, such as has heart attacks, and various forms of cancer. In stage 4 these two main causes of death linger, but life expectancy of older people is extended through medical advances.

Epidemiologic Transition Possibly Stage 5

Some medical analysts argue that the world is moving into stage 5 of the epidemiologic transition, the stage of reemergence of infectious and parasitic diseases. Infectious diseases thought to have been eradicated or controlled have returned, and new ones have emerged. Others dismiss recent trends as temporary setbacks in a long process.

Three reasons explain the possible emergence of a stage 5 in the epidemiologic transition:

Evolution:

Poverty:

Improved Travel:

AIDS. The most lethal epidemic in recent years has been AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome). Worldwide 20 million people have died of AIDS as of 2006, and 40 million were living with HIV (human immunodeficiency virus, the cause of AIDS).

95% of people living with HIV and 99% of new areas during the past decide come from LDCs. The impact of AIDS has been felt most strongly in sub-Saharan Africa (2/3 of the world’s total HIV-positive population and 9/10 of the world’s infected children). South Africa has the most cases (6 million), whereas Botswana and Zimbabwe had the highest rates of infection. Other than South Africa, the country with the highest number of HIV-positive people in 2005 was India, with 5 million. The second highest rate of infection was in Caribbean countries such as Haiti.

CDRs in many sub-Saharan Africa countries rose sharply during the 1990s as a result of AIDS. The populations of Botswana, Lesotho, and Swaziland are forest to decline between now and 2050 as a result of AIDS. Life expectancy has declined in these countries from the mid-50s during the 1980s to the mid-30s now.

Education has been linked time and again to delaying women’s child bearing years, providing opportunities to women outside the home, and increasing a woman’s knowledge about her body and her health – all of which lead to smaller family sizes and ultimately a decrease in birth rate.

Additionally, women who pursue advanced education are more likely to plan for smaller families or decide to never give birth.

The combination of a shortened period for child bearing along with the ability to limit family size, whether by delay or contraception, together lower the birth rate within a country. For some countries sex and reproductive education is new to the public discourse and as its reach expands more women become knowledgeable to available care.

WOMEN’S EDUCATION & FERTILITY

Women’s rights are key to slowing population growth

By Laurie Mazur on Oct 3, 2011

https://grist.org/population/2011-10-03-womens-rights-are-key-to-slowing-population-growth/

As human numbers approach 7 billion, the question is, “Where do we go from here?”

The U.N. recently published new population projections, which envision a range of possibilities for the 21st century. In the U.N.’s low projection, our numbers peak at 8 billion by mid-century, then decline to 6 billion by 2100. By contrast, the medium and high projections envision continued growth for the foreseeable future. According to the medium projection, the world’s population would reach 10 billion by 2100; according to the high projection, nearly 16 billion.

Now, I don’t believe there is an optimal size for the human population; greater equity and more efficient use of resources would greatly extend the planet’s “carrying capacity.” Yet, when you consider the resource challenges of the 21st century, 8 billion certainly looks more sustainable than 16 billion.

Take water, for example. While there is no global shortage of water, a growing number of regions are chronically parched. And many of those regions are also where population is growing most rapidly. In the world’s most “water poor” countries, population is expected to double by 2050. Slower growth is not a panacea for the world’s water problems, but it could ease pressure on scarce resources and buy time to craft solutions.

The good news is that we know how to slow population growth. Over the last half century, we’ve learned that the best way to slow growth is not through coercive “population control,” but by ensuring that all people are able to make real choices about childbearing.

Women’s rights are key. Fertility rates remain high where women’s status is low. Fewer than one-fifth of the world’s countries will account for nearly all of the world’s population growth this century. Not coincidentally, those countries — the least developed nations in sub-Saharan Africa, south Asia, and elsewhere — are also where girls are less likely to attend school, where child marriage is common, and where women lack basic rights.

That can change. Nations can raise women’s status by educating girls, by enforcing laws that prohibit child marriage, and by improving women’s access to credit, land, training, and jobs. Where women enjoy these fundamental rights, smaller (and healthier) families become the norm.

At the same time, women need the means to make choices: family planning and other reproductive health services. Around the world, some 215 million want to avoid pregnancy, but aren’t using effective methods of contraception. Fulfilling that “unmet need” for family planning would require an additional $3.6 billion[PDF] annually; the U.S. share of the cost (based on a formula developed by the U.N. Population Fund) is about $1 billion.

And the potential benefits are huge: Improved access to family planning could prevent 53 million unintended pregnancies, 150,000 maternal deaths, and 25 million abortions each year.

Women’s rights and reproductive health are vitally important in their own right, as a matter of public health and social justice. They can also help slow population growth and help ensure a sustainable future.