-->
ON POPULATION
Introduction
This is meant to be
an article for activist education and therefore on the one hand it
starts with explaining basic concepts; on the other hand it avoids
academic references. The population problem is complex and has been
debated since Marx's time. In the past leftists maintained that it is
not a real problem, but a creation of capitalism. However in the last
few decades resource constraints of the planet earth have been
recognised and the present population of seven billions appears as a
challenge. This article does not give definite ready solutions. It
tries to present the problems and looks at possible solutions in a
particular region.
Population
Growth, Growth Rate and Doubling of Population
Population growth
means increase in population which is computed by subtracting total
deaths from total births per year. For a specific area or country one
has to add total inmigration minus total outmigration.
Population grows at
a 'compound rate' (like compound interest rate that we learn at
school). The doubling of population is a function of growth rate. A
simplified (but fairly accurate) formula is 70/growth rate = No. of
years in which the population will double. Thus if we have 1 percent
growth rate, in 70 years it will double. If we have 2 percent then in
35 years it will double and in 70 years it will be 4 times! If the
growth rate is 10 percent it will double in 7 years - like our fixed
deposits used to double in 7 years when the interest rates were 10
percent.
Zero Population
Growth (ZPG) or Sustainable Population
Zero population rate
(ZPG) means the rate of growth is zero or we have a stable
population. We can even have negative population growths which
results in the decline of the population. This happens at some time
both in nature and in human history.
In nature
sustainable population is based on high child mortality and
normal/low longevity. High child mortality occurs because almost all
animals have predators, which kill the weak and the slow. Also in
nature they don't have 'health care' like humans have today, where
the aim is to save every child and achieve as low child mortality as
possible. High child mortality ensures lower growth rate and more
effective genetic selection and therefore a ‘healthier’
population. Low longevity occurs because the predators kill the weak
and the old because they cannot escape the predators. Animals that do
not have predators (the top of the species) die due to inability to
hunt or digest. For example, tigers die when they become too weak to
hunt whereas elephants die due to losing their teeth.
In early human
history human beings were not very different from other animals as
the population growth charts show below. But human history is
different because humans can modify the environment to suit
themselves to a greater degree than any other species. This ability
kept on increasing and it increased by a leap due to
industrialisation in the last 200 years. That is the root of the
population problem.
The Problem
The population
growth is essentially due to humans’ ability to modify the
environment to suit their needs. While the invention of fire and
other similar inventions were important, a significant change
occurred around 12,000 years ago due to introduction and growth of
agriculture. Agriculture provided food security by increasing the
shelf life of food (mainly grains), made slavery possible and in turn
increased population. The figures are well known. Thus:
World
India
Beginning of
agriculture (10000 B. C.) 1 Million
Introduction of Iron
(500 B. C.) 100 Million
Beginning of
Christian Era 200 Million
1800 A. D. 1000
Million or 1 Billion 260 Million
1900 A. D. 1.6
Billion 300 Million
1950 2.5
Billion 350 Million
2000 6
Billion 1 Billion
Today 7 Billion
+ 1.2 Billion
(All figures and
dates are approximate).
Agriculture also
destroyed forests, grasslands and wetlands endangering the flora and
fauna and in the final analysis it can endanger human species too. We
said above that agriculture created food security. It is debatable
because it also increased population and created slavery thus
creating food insecurity for the slaves. This has happened more
dramatically in the 20th
century.
The 20th
Century
As we see from the
data above, the 20th
century was unique. It had the highest population growth rate in
history. It was the only century in which the global population
doubled and trebled! Several factors contributed to it. The green
revolution (chemical fertilisers, pesticides, seeds, irrigation and
mechanisation of agriculture), which was possible due to availability
of cheap petroleum products, came only after World War I (in India it
came in the 1970s). It contributed significantly to increased
production of commodified food, particularly in the US, Canada and
Australia and contributed to increase of population all over the
world. On the other hand it also increased poverty, hunger and food
insecurity for millions of people, especially in the third world.
Secondly increased
longevity and decreased child mortality occurred due to dramatic
changes in the health care industry. This is opposite to what happens
in nature. In the era of cheap oil longevity increases due to ‘zoo
conditions’ of old people - no predators, assured food supply and a
high eco foot print of old people due to geriatric health care. In
nature, ’zoo conditions’ do not prevail and therefore longevity
is low.
Thirdly, decrease
in the number, intensity and deaths due to famines. So we get a
picture of a 7 billion population with millions of hungry people all
around the world, particularly in the third world. The current UN
data of hunger is around a thousand million or one billion.
Several other things
happened too. A huge meat and poultry industry came up. These animals
did not eat grass or insects as in the past but were fed agricultural
produce (mainly corn in the US). So a greater area came under
agriculture, further reducing grassland, wetland and forest. Several
commercial crops like tobacco, tea, coffee and sugarcane also took up
large agriculture areas. To feed this agriculture other industries
and mining also increased. A huge resource drain occurred.
The 21st
Century
There is a limit to
growth of agriculture. It is limited by land and by input resources.
The limit was artificially raised by cheap oil in the 20th
century. This has ended in the 21st
century.
Oil production peaked (2005-2008), and it is now declining, never to
rise again. This not only ushered an unending crisis of capitalism,
it has also affected food production by increasing the input prices
of agriculture. Today a billion people are starving the world over.
About half of these starving people, that is, 500 Million are likely
to die in this decade. And a full half of them, that is, some 250
Million will be Indians. It is difficult to imagine what other things
will happen along with this catastrophic event. It is an end of era
event - like the Black Death in Medieval Europe.
What else can happen
during this period? With
the arrival of Peak Oil, the curtain has closed on Act 1 of the drama
Petroleum Man. What will happen in Act 2? Chekhov said, 'If
there's a gun on the wall at the beginning of the play, by the end it
must go off.' In the world's nuclear arsenal there are many guns on
the wall. If life copies art, will there be an Act 3 in which the
players, having learned their lesson the hard way, live sustainably?
So
if
we
do
face
a
nuclear
holocaust
then
we may have a situation when the 'living shall envy the dead'.
However
as
humans,
we
are
optimistic
and
so
let us look at some more optimistic scenarios.
What are the
possibilities?
There are two
issues:
- How the current and growing population can feed itself and
- How we can move towards a sustainable population
As we have seen
above in a short term scenario there is going to be a lot of pain and
starvation deaths. In the past due to cheap oil one could transport
large quantities of food quickly. While it did not stop poverty or
starvation, it prevented deaths. This no longer will be possible.
These deaths will occur among vulnerable population, the poor and
tribals. The sad thing is that these very people have many of the
skills needed to sustain us in a post oil world. Various scholars
have given different figures about reduction of population in the
short term. One extreme figure is that the world population will be
only two billion by 2050.
In the long term
there are some possibilities. With the end of oil, economies will
have to grow local because transport costs will be too high. If we do
not destroy ourselves social changes are bound to occur.
A viable future lies
in some kind of non capitalist social formation which is based on:
- Equity
- Scaling down of energy use
- Local self sufficiency
- Eco restoration by using Permaculture/Agro Ecology
This may ensure
enough food for the existing population. Each eco region will have to
become self sufficient. Now different eco regions can support
different levels of populations. Deserts and cold countries support
smaller populations whereas tropical countries and riverine plains
support bigger populations. So over a period the population will have
to decline according to carrying capacity of the region. In the final
analysis they will have to attain zero population growth and may even
have shrinking of population.
Social Formation
We have two existing
models which have tackled the present problems somewhat successfully:
the Cuban model after the collapse of Soviet Union and the Transition
Town Movement in Europe and USA. The latter has an anarchist kind of
social formation.
The erstwhile
socialist/communist countries (former Soviet Union, China, Vietnam
etc.) may learn from Cuba and have their own version of ‘Special
Period’ and come out of the crisis in 5 years.
The advanced
capitalist countries may have some kind of social democracy with
strong ‘Eco Socialism’ inputs and coupled with Transition Town
models may also solve the problem within a relatively short period.
The so called ‘Third
World ‘countries have limited experience of democracy. While they
do have anarchist kind of experiments in pockets, like permaculture
communes that are springing up everywhere, they are also facing lot
of difficulties because the society at large still has an
authoritarian background. So, these countries may have to go through
some kind of revolution resulting in a command economy and then
follow Cuba kind of ‘special period’. This is an optimistic
scenario, but in reality there will be lot of conflict, pain and
misery, particularly before and during the revolution. There is also
a possibility that some countries may not have revolution and may
have a prolonged period of chaos destroying people and resources.
Zero Population
Growth
The new social
formations coupled with organic farming or agro ecology can certainly
feed the present population better. This is due to several factors.
Due to relative equitable distribution people will have a little more
food. A lot of waste due to wasteful consumption by today's rich,
waste due to storage and transport in the present capitalist economy
will also be eliminated.
However as we have
seen organic farming fed only about two billion people in 1921. Can
it feed 7 billion people today? It is a very difficult proposition.
So there will be attempts to limit population growth and take it to
zero population growth (ZPG).
The existing models
of ZPG are based on urbanisation, nuclear family and increased
prosperity. This model cannot be applied to the whole world because
there are not enough resources for the whole world to achieve the
prosperity that the western countries and some richer people in
developing countries have achieved.
However one reason
for the above model to work was the security that this model
provided. It is possible to provide security at a lower level of
consumption if the society is based on equity. So it is possible that
in the new social formations ZPG may be achieved.
But is achieving
ZPG enough?
We have seen that
the sustainable population before agriculture was only one million.
What is the desirable level of population that is actually
sustainable over a long term? Obviously one million, the natural
sustainable population before agriculture, is the lowest limit and
mankind may never go down to that level. Various figures have been
suggested, most of them are around two billion or less. This figure
is arrived at due to the fact that in 1921 when the population was
two billion, all agriculture was organic. For India this figure is
350 million (1950) when practically all agriculture was organic.
However since then the soil has been degraded and without oil even
this population may have difficulties to survive. Will mankind shrink
to such a level? And of course the more pressing question is how the
present population will face the situation when fossil fuel
agriculture comes to an end. As we said above there is a possibility
of large scale famine killing millions of people.
The Future
Will mankind be able
to achieve this reduction of population to two billion? The question
poses several issues. Mankind has developed an ethics that values
life per se and it is unthinkable to allow child mortality to
increase and have higher number of births. Similarly it is difficult
to think of lowering longevity. At best we can think of an option -
making euthanasia legal. But it will be exercised by very few. Only
future generations will be able to think about it more clearly in
changed circumstances. Even if we achieve negative growth rates, it
will take a long time to achieve this kind of reduction. And what is
the way to achieve this? If we decrease birth rate, we will be
saddled with an increasingly aging population, like Japan and France
today. So logically nature's way appears to be best. In organic
farming we say that we should follow Nature's way. Why should it not
be applicable to human society? It remains a challenge to future
generations as to how to achieve this in a humane way.
Think Locally,
Act Locally
In the past the
slogan, 'Think Globally, Act Locally' was very popular. Even in this
article we began looking at the problem globally. But as we have
said, in the future local self sufficiency will be the order of the
day. So we should also be able to think locally and act locally.
Below we look at the Deccan in India as an eco region, look at its
problems and try to look at the solutions that are being attempted.
Historically India
has been endowed with rich natural resources and the country was self
sufficient most of the time except in times of great political
turmoil. Deccan too has been self sufficient. The last great famines
occurred during the closing decades of the 19th
century.
Every eco region has
specific food practices. In Deccan it has been millets, pulses and
ground nut. Agriculture is mainly rain fed with local irrigation from
tanks. Some rice was grown in low lying areas with tank irrigation.
Cotton was the main cash crop. Rearing of sheep and goats has been an
important part of the local economy and meat has been part of the
diet. Some amount of fish and poultry has also been part of the
food. Some communities also eat pork.
A lot of this
changed due to green revolution in other parts of the country and in
Deccan it introduced food insecurity and hunger and in some cases
farmer’s suicide. How did it come about?
Increases of food
production of wheat and rice are concentrated in green revolution
areas. This was brought to the Deccan by the government’s public
distribution system. Popular governments introduced rice at two
rupees per kilo for the poor. This made the local millets expensive
and people got used to eating rice and wheat. Slowly rice and wheat
were introduced as food crops. As these require lot of water, tube
well irrigation was introduced and tanks were neglected. Other cash
crops like sugar cane, soybean and genetically modified Cotton were
also introduced.
This led to a big
disaster within 30 years. Water tables fell and there has been a big
water scarcity in many regions. Commercial agriculture proved
unviable for small and medium farmers and their burden grew to such
an extent that several thousands of farmers had to commit suicide.
Polished rice and white flour consumption affected the health of
local people and possibly caused increased suffering due to diabetes.
Hunger and water scarcity stalks the land.
The
socialist
solution
to
this
situation
is
a
combination
of
the
old
traditions and
new.
The
old
tradition consists
of
struggling for security
of
land
ownership
or
land
to
the
tiller
or
land
reforms.
The
new
is
decentralization,
local
food
security
and
knowledge
based
restoration
of
ecology
and
agriculture
that
has
been
degraded
due
to
the
processes
mentioned
above.
Local
food
security
implies
growing
local
foods
as
per
local
ecology.
In
the Deccan
it
would
mean
reducing rice and wheat and going back to
millets,
pulses
and
ground
nut.
Again the
cash
crop
of sugar
cane
and
soybean
which
are
popular
today
will have to be abandoned or reduced drastically and organic cotton
will
have to be restored.
Agro
ecology
would
be the
key
science
of
the
21st
century
and
rebuilding
local
communities
would
be the
key
social
task.
A large number of
social movements coordinated by NAPM (National Alliance of People’s
Movements), NGOs like Deccan Development Society and several other
organisations, small groups, permaculture farms in the region are
following this path. While the scale is small and the ruling classes
are very powerful, nevertheless they are showing a viable
alternative. With larger political changes these policies and
experiences will prove useful. It is certainly possible to visualise
food self sufficiency for the Deccan region.
Call to Arms
In the face of such
imminent crises there are several people’s movement going - the
Maoists, the ethnic and regional movements in Kashmir and the North
East and scores of movements against large capitalist projects that
take away common property resources such as land and water, existing
livelihoods of poor people and endanger the environment. However
there is a lack of coordination and understanding about the nature of
capitalist crisis. The movements mainly oppose the exploitation and
oppression and demand either immediate relief or improvement of the
system. Many even think that they are fighting a losing battle. They
do not realise that the time has come to fight for a win, to change
the system. There does not seem to be the necessary urgency in the
people’s movement. Partly it is inertia; partly it is the
phenomenon of the boy crying ‘wolf’, that is, in the past, so
many times, capitalism faced crisis and yet we did not have any
revolutionary change in India. So this time around people are tired
of responding. Then there is a divergence in various movements – in
the issues handled – class, ethnicity or opposition to mega
projects. So even though millions of people are actively opposing the
present State and capitalism, there is no dialogue or coordination
between different groups and movements. It is the need of the hour to
have a dialogue, come together for concerted action and avoid the
forthcoming disaster as much as possible. This time around the
chances are better because the edifice of the enemy is weakened, is
crumbling and imploding. Is anyone listening?
Words: 33311
August 11, 2012
Published in
'Frontier' Vol. 45, No. 14 - 17, Oct 14 - Nov 10 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment