A population problem?

Overpopulation must be one of the most sensitive issues in environmental discussions. While some people believe it is one of the most important issues that environmentalists should address, others are triggered by it, often swiftly pushing back with claims of eco-fascism (in case you missed it, go and read the TGF original article, When is it Right to Denounce Someone as an “Eco-fascist”?) that immediately shuts the discussion down, and probably harms the ongoing relationship of those having the discussion. However, there is a way through this problem: Following are three simple steps that can help us have a mindful and compassionate discussion about overpopulation.

First, we need to uncouple the abstract issue of overpopulation from the reality of the world’s current population. It is a simple fact that the environment has a limited carrying capacity, beyond which it begins to deteriorate. We should all be able to agree on this, and anybody who does not agree with it really needs to take a long hard look at the methods through which they reach conclusions. Once we’ve agreed on the fact that the environment has a limited carrying capacity, we can take a breather and acknowledge that we have established some common ground (no need to denounce anyone as an eco-fascist, yet!).

Second, we can begin to explore to what extent the world’s current population is a problem, and the nature of that problem. Certainly, some parts of the world — particularly those that are less economically privileged — seem to have a carrying capacity problem, inasmuch as these countries do not appear to be able to sustain their populations. But is that the same as “overpopulation”? If we accept the inevitability of today’s socioeconomic reality, then the answer is probably: yes, these places suffer overpopulation. However, if we entertain the possibility that today’s socioeconomic reality could be altered (through some form of wealth redistribution, for example), then the answer is probably: no, these places do not suffer overpopulation, rather inequality at both a national and international level.

Third — and this is where it gets more difficult — let’s assume that no such solution to today’s socioeconomic reality is forthcoming (which appears to be the case), and that we have to acknowledge that the environment does indeed have a limited carrying capacity. What do we do about it? Let’s cut to the chase: if you believe that the answer to this question is the active culling of the human race, it is justified to denounce you as an eco-fascist. However, that is not the same thing as accepting the unfortunate reality that people are going to die as a result of any number of variables in the ongoing environmental crisis: sorry, but this is tragically unavoidable.

In our socioeconomic reality of inequality in which the privileged show no signs of reducing their use of resources so that some form of global “resource equality” might be achieved, we have to accept that a smaller population would be beneficial. That does not mean actively culling the population, nor does it mean passively allowing people to die. It does mean living with the population we currently have, implementing whatever economic justice measures we can today, and taking measures to scale the population back over future generations.

While that sounds a bit scary, it is actually simple to achieve: all we need to do is to keep girls in education longer, give them free and easy access to contraception, and change social norms about family size expectations. This method of population control is straight out of the progressive feminist playbook and is free from ethical problems. Indeed, if you took migration out of the equation, a number of economically developed nations are already on this path to a reduced population.

So certainly, when people bring up the issue of overpopulation it is understandable that we should be cautious, as there is a small minority that use it as a vehicle to pursue other unsavory agendas. However, overpopulation is a genuine sustainability issue, and we should be able to discuss it mindfully and compassionately as part of the suite of measures that will ensure a Total Green Future.