Well, I recently heard an interview with E.O. Wilson where he stated very matter of fact that birth-rate will decrease and overpopulation will become a non-issue (in the long run) as female education increases. As women become informed they are likely to choose (and know how to) delay childbearing as well as limit the number of kids. Western societies are a good example.
Educated women = slow down in population growth. What a win-win situation! Dina On 11/8/06 5:25 PM, "Elaine Joyal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Fellow listserv folks, > > Perhaps I'm missing something in this thread but I have a question which I > don't believe has been addressed. Namely, why is it in discussion of human > population growth do we discuss limiting fecundity as a way to limiting > population and the relative impact of adding babies in the USA vs Third > World countries yet there never seems to be discussion of the long-term > impact of increasing or decreasing generation time? This isn't my research > area but I've thought about it and it seems that although it's part of any > population model when we start talking about people we ignore this part of > the equation (correct me if I'm wrong, please). > >> From what I've read the increase in population growth in some of the > countries with the highest population growth rates is due in part to the > relatively early age at which girls start having babies and not simply the > total number of babies they have in a lifetime. I haven't done the math > but if two women each have only two children but one has them as a teenager > and the other not until her mid to late 20's their total number of offspring > after 100-200 years will be very different. > > I see at least two added benefits to this scenario in addition to > population decline. One, from a public health perspective I suspect that > many if not most of the girls bearing children at a very young age would > benefit given the risks associated with pregnancy at an early age - I also > suspect that many of them are relatively poor and uneducated and that > delaying child-bearing would help them achieve higher status. Second, when > people talk about the problem of low fecundity and replacement (and > increased longevity) in certain European countries it seems that shifting > regeneration time would smooth out the tail of the curve and make this less > of an issue long-term. > > This sort of shift would require a lot of social change but others on the > list have commented on places where the number of children per woman has > dropped surprisingly fast over a relatively short time interval. So why not > consider a new approach and recommend that girls wait until their 20's to > have children? > > In the interest of full disclosure I have [only] one child. His birth late > in my reproductive life hopefully minimizes some of the negative impact of > his arrival in our world. As his parent I also hope that he becomes a > productive member of society whose positive impacts in someway offset the > negative. > > Comments? > > Thanks, > > Elaine > > > > -- Dina M. Fonseca, Ph.D. Assistant Curator Academy of Natural Sciences 1900 Ben Franklin Parkway Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone: (215) 299 1177 (1195 lab) Fax: (215) 299 1182 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
