Trends | Theory | Facts | Food | Environment | Aging | Elderly | Immigration | Urbanization | Family | Women

"Will Population Growth Lead to Catastrophe? The Case of Global Warming"

by Peter Albro

In recent decades there have been significant increases in the average global temperature. Scientists have become concerned about the potential problems associated with global warming. It is necessary to explore the various components of global warming: why does global warming occur? While some scientists equate the increasing temperatures with normal fluctuating patterns as seen throughout history, many scientists blame global warming on the "greenhouse effect"- an increase in the average global temperature as a result of the accumulation of manmade gases in the atmosphere.


Potential consequences of global warming are changes in land conditions, changes in weather patterns, and a rise in the sea level. Governments around the world are uniting in efforts to control the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases; at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, member countries signed contracts designed to limit emissions of such gases. Among participating countries there was a general consensus regarding the nature of greenhouse gases: significant global warming will continue if countries do not limit their emissions of greenhouse gases. By emissions of greenhouse gases, scientists are mostly referring to the burning of fossil fuels. There are many different possibilities for controlling emissions of greenhouse gases, but these scientific debates are beyond the scope of the paper. The specific effects of global warming are highly debatable; in the remainder of this paper, I will discuss how population growth relates to certain environmental problems. The meat of this paper will draw on three separate articles, three different perspectives on the global warming debate.


In "Population Growth and Global Warming" (1992), John Bongaarts identifies a simple "chain of causation" to characterize the nature of global warming, and its future implications. Human production and consumption activities lead to the emission of greenhouse gases; hence, there is an increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The ultimate result of this chain is global warming. Of course, there are extremely complex functions and models that more clearly define the various steps in the chain of causation, but this paper will focus on those factors associated with population growth. One detail worth noting is that "annual emission rates of carbon dioxide are expected to approximately double by the year 2025 and then double again by the year 2100." This influx of gases certainly will boost the average global temperature significantly in the next century: how much the temperature will rise is unclear, but somewhere near 4°C, according to previous projections. So, what exactly are the determinants of greenhouse gas emission rates? Bongaart identifies six factors that contribute to emission rates: population size, gross domestic product per capita, energy intensity of GDP, carbon intensity of energy consumption, and tropical deforestation. As the population grows, obviously the demand for energy increases; hence, population is an important determining factor of the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Discounting any possibilities of intervention, scientists predict that population size will increase (1986 to 2100) from 3.6 to 9.0 billion in the developing countries and from 1.2 to 1.5 billion in developed countries. Coupled with economic development (a rise in GDP per capita), population growth will stimulate the growth of emission rates.


There are many possible ways of controlling greenhouse gas emission rates, but the most feasible option revolves around stabilizing future CO2 emissions. But Bongaarts insists that the "effectiveness of any such policy would of course depend on the level and timing of stabilization and on the degree of participation of different countries." Of course, the process of stabilization will much more difficult to execute in less developed countries than in the more developed world. With lower education levels, less technology and weaker organization among their leaders, less developed countries will require assistance from more developed countries in order to achieve desired emission levels. Global conferences and agreements regarding population control and fossil fuel emissions will help to facilitate this stabilization process. Bongaarts stresses that stabilization in developing countries will be especially difficult, because efforts to limit emissions will contradict efforts to stimulate economic growth; less developed countries will have to sacrifice much more than developed countries. Although population is not necessarily the most important determinant of harmful emissions, it is extremely important to continue to implement population control policies in order to reduce future global warming. Hence, the global community must incorporate such "population policies" with supplemental measures that help to control other determinants of emissions, of global warming.


All of the models regarding global warming and population are complicated, and they are based on various projections of economic conditions and population trends. How exactly do economists and scientists generate these projections? In "World Population, Economic 1, and Energy Demand, 1990-2100" (1995), Bernard Gilland evaluates the process by which the UN and World Energy Council (WEC) determine projections of world population, economic growth, energy consumption and CO2 emissions. These predictions serve as the basis for policies implemented in the global community, regarding the control of global warming and other potential problems of the future. In order to generate these projections successfully, the various global organizations have to place countries in various groupings: namely, less developed versus more developed countries. These classifications are ambiguous, depending on how the organizations make their distinctions among different countries. For example, the UN has a broad classification, designating a small list of more developed countries, and labeling the rest of the nations as less developed countries. The more developed countries include the United States, Europe, Commonwealth of Independent States, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and Australia. The WEC alternatively has generated two classifications. The first category places countries in three separate groupings: Developing countries, Central and Eastern Europe and CIS, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The WEC secondary classification applies to countries' location, grouping various countries together that comprise distinctive regions of the world. While the further details of UN and WEC classifications are not necessarily relevant to the topic of this paper, it is important to realize that there are different ways of characterizing and interpreting an individual country's relative status.


Of course it is difficult to determine which classification most appropriately categorizes various countries, given their economic, demographic and political characteristics. Given the different classifications, there are some ambiguous projections for population, economic growth, energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Often the organizations project low, medium and high projections, in order to account for ambiguity and uncertainty. Gilland provides a summary of the different methods of calculating the individual figures-of course there are subcategories for each of the general economic and demographic indicators. For example there many different forms of energy, and they each have much different effects on the environment; each source merits an individual projection. In the end, it is very difficult to determine which set of results best predicts the future economic and demographic levels. Some projections more plausible than others, scientists, economists and politicians can use such figures as a rough guide for policies.
These projections are useful in assessments of and responses to environmental problems, such as global warming. In "Population, Households, and CO2 Emissions" (1995), Landis MacKeller et al explore different ways of defining and assessing environmental impacts. There are two general equations that express the factors contributing to environmental impacts:


I = PAT (I = environmental impact, P = population, A = affluence, and T= technical efficiency)
I = HAT (I = environmental impact, H = households, A = affluence, and T = technical efficiency)
The important distinction between the equations is use of households (H) in the second equation, as opposed to population (P) in the first equation. MacKeller et al are especially interested in the household as a demographic unit, more specifically in patterns of household structure in the last half-century. In other words, perhaps the household is a better starting point for studying changes in consumption of energy throughout the world; of course, households in different countries have much different dynamics, given various cultural and economic identities. Using the I = PAT identity, about one-third of the growth of energy consumptions was a byproduct of demographic change; whereas, using the I = HAT identity, about "three-quarters of the rate of growth of energy consumption is accounted for by demographic increase as measured by the rate of growth of the number of households."


From 1950 to 1990, average household sizes in developed countries decreased significantly. [These changes are much more modest in developing countries.] According to MacKeller et al, "this was due more-or-less equally to changes in population age structure (mostly aging) and to increases in age-specific household headship rates." Children were beginning to move away from home earlier than in past years, and the aged population was living more independently. Hence, accompanying this decrease in the size of households was an increase in the numbers of households. Of course, there are many reasons behind these changes in the structure household: both economic and psychological factors. A chief marker of these changes is "modernization," which has changed the individual's role in the household, as well as in society.


So, how will such changes in households and fertility rates apply to environmental problems? The implications are ambiguous. While the decrease in fertility rates potentially will cause a decrease in future energy consumption, the aging population will translate to more households. More households will increase energy demands. It is clear in this example that both impact identities (I = PAT and I = HAT) have their shortcomings as expressions of environmental stress. However, MacKeller et al have demonstrated how important it is to consider different demographic units when trying to determine factors that contribute to environmental problems, namely global warming. In the future, "the proportion of the population aged under 15 is expected to decline and the proportion of the population aged over 60 is expected to rise." Furthermore, the number of households will continue to grow rapidly; the household growth rate will exceed the individual growth rate. MacKeller et al highlighted some important considerations about population growth and environmental problems. Population can mean three different things: individual, household, and community.


As we can see, environmental problems are extremely complicated, as it is difficult to determine their causes and as well as their effects. Furthermore, it is difficult to come up with solutions to these problems, given their ambiguous nature. Certainly, global warming will continue to threat the natural environment, and it is in the best interest of the global community to consider specific measures to control this environmental problem. This paper focused primarily on population growth as a large factor of global warming. It is important to realize that there are many other important factors that contribute to global warming, and that population as a demographic unit is ambiguous. Certainly scientists and economists will have to continue researching and analyzing environmental, demographic and economic conditions around the world. They have demonstrated much progress in the last fifty years but will need to continue exploring new perspectives on environmental impacts. The best policies in the future will incorporate measures monitoring as many of the factors contributing to global warming as possible: greenhouse gas emissions, population growth, and GDP per capita to new a few.


REFERENCES


John Bongaarts, "Population Growth and Global Warming" in Population and Development Review, Vol. 18, No. 2, June 1992, pp. 299-319.

Bernard Gilland, "World Population, Economic Growth and Energy Demand, 1900-2100" in Population and Development Review, Vol. 21, No. 3, September 1995, pp. 507-540.

MacKellar, F. Landis, W. Lutz, C. Prinz and A. Goujon, "Population and Households, and CO2 Emissions", Population and Development Review, Vol. 21, 1995, pp. 849-865.