[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2-PREDICTIONS[/FONT] [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Clearly, we have many evidences that the population should stabilize between 2050 and 2100 and will begin to decline after. However, there are a lot of uncertainties about this trend and its consequences.
21-Global projections
According to the updated projections of the United Nations ( revision 2004 ) and to its medium scenario, the world population will stabilize between 2050 and 2100. Go to www.un.org. and www.un.org/esa/population/unpop.htm[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Consider the next drawing (In million):
DRAWING 8
Years----------------- 2005--- 2030--- 2050--- 2100
Medium scenario------6464----8199-- 9075-- 9000
High scenario-----------6464-----8784-- 10696--18000
Low scenario ---------- 6464---- 7618--- 7679--- 5000
To explain this evolution the demographers use the demographic transition theory. It postulates that all nations will move to a fertility rate of about 2.1 children per woman (Replacement level). In accordance with the theory, the medium scenario predicts 9 billion in 2005 and 2100. Go to [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
www.prb.org[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
and the read the article about the "transition in world population".
There could be an higher increase as indicated by the "high" variant UN projection: If worldwide fertility would drop to only about 2.6 children, we would have a global population of 10.5 billion by 2050 and 18 by 2100. On the contrary, the U.N.'s "low variant" projection is based on 1.6 children ( It is yet the current rate in the developed nations ). It should mean a decline of population ( 5 billion in 2100 ).
22-Detailed Projections
We have checked for you the detailed fertility rates by regions and by countries. In short, we can say that the recent evolution tends to confirm the medium scenario. We have just made some adjustments explained below.
1-Regarding Europe and the Eastern Asia ( Japan, China, Koreas and Mongolia ) we have chosen the lower projection because the medium supposes an increase of the fertility rate between 2005 and 2050. We do not see any reason for this increase except to justify the theory about the convergence!
2-Regarding South Central Asia ( India, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka ), we have adopted the higher variant for Pakistan and Afghanistan due to their present fertility rate ( Respectively 4.27 and 7.48 in 2005 ).
3-Regarding Western Asia ( The Middle East ), we have adopted for the same reason the higher variant for Iraq, Saudi and Yemen ( Respectively 4.8, 4 and 6.2 in 2005 )
4-Regarding Northern Africa, we have chosen the higher variant for Sudan (4.45 in 2005)
5-Regarding Sub saharan Africa, we have chosen the high variant except for Southern Africa for which we have chosen the lower variant ( HIV disease ).
6-For 2100, we have kept the medium variant for all countries.
Globally, these changes do not impact the gross result. Consider the next drawing (in Million)
DRAWING 9
Years---------------2005-------- 2030---------- 2050-------- 2100
-------------------------------UN---- FWA----- UN-- FWA
Europe--------------- 728----- 698----- 651----- 653-- 556------ 536
North America-------- 330----- 400----- 400----- 437-- 437------ 473
Latin America--------- 561----- 722----- 722----- 782-- 782------ 726
Oceania--------------- 33------ 42-------42------ 47----47------- 49
Sub total------------1652---- 1862---- 1815---- 1919-- 1822---1784
Eastern Asia--------- 1524---- 1655---- 1542---- 1586--- 1338--- 1340
South eastern Asia---- 555----- 700----- 700------ 752----752---- 730
South central Asia----1610---- 2197---- 2217----- 2495---2556--- 2460
Western Asia----------214------318----- 328------ 383--- 410----- 445
Sub total------------3903----4870---- 4787----- 5216---5056-- 4975
Northern Africa-------- 190-----269----- 272------- 311---- 323--- 307
Sub saharan Africa ---- 751----1248---- 1320------1691--- 1927-- 1931
Sub total--------------941 ---1517---- 1592------2002---2250-- 2238
Gross total-----------6496--- 8249---- 8194------9137---9128-- 8997
This drawing shows some evolutions in the share of the different regions:
1-The share of Europe will fall from 11.2% in 2005 to 6% in 2100.The evolution of the main areas of Europe is given below:
DRAWING 10[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Years------------------- 2005------ 2030---- 2050----- 2100[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Russia, Ukraine
Belarus and Moldova----- 203-------- 158------121------- 111
Balkans -------------------53--------- 45------ 36-------- 27
Europe-25--------------- 472-------- 448----- 399------- 398
Total------------------- 728-------- 651----- 556------- 536[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
However, if we take in account North and Latin America + Australia, the share of ethnic Europeans attains 25% in 2005 and nearly 20% in 2100. It means that in 2100 "ethnic Europe" will have the same share of the world population as in 1750 (See above). Thanks to the growth of Latin america, the Latin descent ( Hispanic, Portuguese, French and Italian ) will increase at the detriment of Anglo Saxons, German and slav descent.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
2-The share of Asia (60% in 2005) will diminish in 2100 (55%). Inside Asia, Indian, Arabs and Malays will increase at the detriment of Chinese.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
3-The share of Africa (15.5% in 2005) will increase to 25% in 2050 and 2100. Sub saharan Africa will have an higher growth than any other region. ( Go to Africa ). [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
4-The ten most populated countries are/or will be (In million):[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
-2005: China (1315), India (1103), the European Union enlarged to the Balkans (525), the USA (29, Indonesia (222), Brazil (186), Pakistan (157), Russia (143), Bangladesh (141), Nigeria (131).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
-In 2030: India (1449), China (1346), the European Union (493), the USA (360), Indonesia (270), Pakistan (262), Brazil (235), Nigeria (217), Bangladesh (205), Ethiopia (136).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
-In 2050: India (1592), China (1392), the European Union (435), the USA (395), Pakistan (352), Nigeria (296), Indonesia (284), Brazil (253), Bangladesh (242), Ethiopia (194).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
-In 2100: India (145, China (1189), the USA (437), the European Union (425), Pakistan (409), Nigeria (302), Indonesia (273), Bangladesh (260), Ethiopia (222), Brazil (212).
23-Uncertainties and consequences
Are we sure that the fertility decline will continue in the developing countries? Are we sure that it will converge with those yet reached in the developed countries? Anyway, what could be the consequences of the population growth yet to come?
231-Uncertainties
The main uncertainties are related to the demographic transition theory itself: Why should the fall of the fertility rate always follow the fall of the mortality rate? Why should all the fertility rates converge to the replacement level? Where is the magic wand which authorizes such predictions? [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Regarding the mortality rates[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
, the causes of the fall are obvious: Vaccinations and drugs crush the infant mortality and raise life expectancy: Firstly, everybody tries to avoid pain and death. Secondly, although vaccination is a western invention even the islamists are not preaching to forbid it ( Thanks to colonization, vaccinations were rapidly implemented in the developing countries ).
Regarding the fall of the fertility rate, the causes should be obvious too: Contraceptives and family planning are the drivers of the fall: There is a close correlation between the use of contraceptives and the fall of the fertility rate. Just consider the next drawing showing the percentage of married women using modern contraceptives in different regions.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
DRAWING 11[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
World--China--North America--Latin America--Western Asia--Sub saharan Africa[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
-53%-- 83%------ 72%----------- 62%-------- 30%---------- 14%[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Clearly, the regions with low contraceptive rates are those which more increase their population such as Western Asia and Sub saharan Africa ( Report to drawing 9 ). On the contrary, in China where compulsory contraception was effective, the fertility rates have declined from 4.2 births per woman in 1974 to 1.85 births in 1995. Go to www.prb.org[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Nevertheless, there is a difference between the two technical process applied to mortality and fertility. Regarding mortality, there are compulsory vaccinations. So the technical progress plays like a mechanical fact. On the contrary, whatever education or wealth, the decision to use contraceptive finally depends on the social structure and cultural habits ( Go to Gender ). It means that you cannot project a constant fall of the fertility rate. Maybe, the fertility rate observed in some developing countries has yet reached a permanent level. Maybe, it will continue to fall. By the same token, we are not sure that the fertility rate will rise in the countries that are yet below the replacement level ( Such as Spain, Italy and Bulgaria with only 1.2 ). [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Despite these evidences, many scholars contend that development ( Economic growth and urbanization ) is the best contraceptive! In fact, it does not seem obvious: In the olden times, the rich nobility favored larges families. In Muslim countries, the rich Saudi Arabs procreate much faster than the poor Turks. On the other hand, it's well known that urbanization should incite families to reduce their children number. However, it would be difficult to establish a real correlation between urbanization and the fall of fertility: For example Africa has the highest annual urban growth rate and the higher growth of fertility.
Why are these evidences neglected? Simply because many developing countries are opposed to contraceptives for religious reasons. Of course, the UN does not want to hurt them. It means that the demographic transition theory is not a science. It is just a wishful thinking with a politically correct background!
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
232-Consequences
1-Consequences of the growth yet to come in developing countries.
Malthus postulated that the human population would grow exponentially while food production would increase linearly. In fact this notion based on the scarcity of natural resources is an out dated economic model. It is fruitless to repeat here what you have already learnt on this site ( See New growth theory ).
However, creativity remains limited to the West until now. As a result, many countries ( Notably African ) would fall in the Malthusian trap. Right now, some countries are experiencing rapid declines in the availability of natural resources ( Crop land or fresh water ). What is more, the increase of population in poor rural areas will boost deforestation. Clearly, it is more a political problem ( Democracy, creativity ) than a demographic one.
2-Consequences of the decline in developed countries
Between 2005 and 2050, the ratio of elderly persons to working age persons ( Aged 15-64 ) will double in more developed regions ( Notably Europe and Japan ). It is said that people are eroding the population base that should pay for their pensions in their old age. Third world activists suggest a massive immigration in order to restore an acceptable ratio between the working population and the pensioners. In fact, we just have to work longer and to compensate the weight of the pensions on the active population by a decrease of taxes ( See international migrations ).
It is also said that demographic decline could impede the economic future: Once again this argument is fruitless: Firstly, the belief that an economy needs a large worker and consumer base belongs to the same outdated theories as indicated above. Secondly, even with a zero economic growth, you can improve your income per capita: Since the population declines while the size of the cake remains constant, the number of dinners diminish and consequently each slice of the cake increases! Thirdly, as we have seen above, the expected decline of the European population would only be an adjustment, compared to the rapid growth occurring in the past. What is more, this decline would be a good new: Western Europe is crowded and less population will mean a better living and less pollution. Thanks to their creativity, a constant Gross Domestic product, and a limited population, the Europeans would enjoy the living standards of the ancient aristocracy. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Unfortunately, the vacuum could attract silent invaders and predators! Once again, it's a political problem and not an demographic or economic one.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
In short, all these expected consequences do not represent a true challenge. In fact, there is only one absolute certainty: The Islamic population will rapidly increase its share of the world population.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1-PAST EVOLUTION[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] 2-PREDICTIONS 3-ISLAMIC BOMB[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
3-ONE CERTAINTY: THE "ISLAMIC BOMB"[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Instead of the Paul Ehrlich Population bomb, we are yet experiencing an "Islamic bomb" with serious consequences for many countries. ( Go to www.islamicpopulation.com which provides with the data in 2005 ).
31-Increase of the muslim share
The world population will increase by 2.5 Billion between 2005 and 2100. On this amount, muslims will bring 1.75 billion ( 70% of the growth of population yet to come ). Muslims represent 24% of world population in 2005 ( One man out of four). This figure will attain 33% in 2050 ( One man out of three ). It could reach 37% in 2100 ( One man out of 2,7). Consider the next drawing ( In million ): It shows the evolution of muslim population in the main regions.
DRAWING 12
Years------------------ 2005---- 2030---- 2050----- 2100
South eastern Asia-------388------ 510------564----- 572
South central Asia------- 321------ 507------671----- 677
Western Asia------------ 214------ 328------410----- 445
Northern Africa---------- 190------ 272------323------307
Sub saharan Africa-------228-------417------618----- 841
Minorities----------------241------ 330------ 395-----502
Total-------------------1582----- 2364-----2981---3344
World------------------6496----- 8194-----9128---8997
The number of muslims is expected to double in South central Asia and in Western Asia and to rise fourfold in Sub saharan Africa. Some muslim countries will have exponential rates of growth until 2100. Yemen ( 21 million in 2005 ) will have 144 million by 2100! Niger, a poor country ( Today 12 million ) will get 98 million by 2100! (A larger population than Germany or Russia ).
The causes of this situation are well known:
-Firstly, the muslim countries led by Algeria have constantly been reluctant toward family planning and contraceptives ( Conference of Bucharest ). They stated that family planning was a Western conspiracy for reducing the power of the developing countries. This situation explains that the fall of the fertility rates happened later and less rapidly in muslim countries than in no muslim ( With similar level of income ).
-Secondly, many muslim religious leaders are opposed to contraceptives and this situation is not likely to improve with the surge of radical Islamism. Just consider the next drawing showing the five countries with the lowest percentages of married women using modern contraceptives ( In the world ) : All enjoy a muslim majority![/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
DRAWING 13[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
World----- Somalia---- Chad---- Niger---- Guinea--- Afghanistan [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
53% -------1%--------2%----- 4%-------4%--------4%
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
In the 1980, faced with the problems resulting from overpopulation, many Islamic countries like Iran, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Pakistan have officially promoted Family planning. Indeed, they have reduced the population growth ( Notably Iran ). However, there are some doubts about the sustainability of this process. Due to gender problem, many people tend to favor large families. Anyway, despite some recent declining rates of fertility, the population momentum remains very important and will matter until 2100.
32-Increasing Minorities and conflicts.
The drawing 12 also pictures the increase of the main muslim minorities notably in India, China, and Russia. Many evidences show that the rise of the muslim communities is faster than those of the other components in non islamic countries.
In India, the Muslim share of population has risen from 10 % in 1951 to 15 % in 2001. Indian complain that muslims do not follow the official family planning line because of their religious beliefs. In Lebanon, the Maronite Christians, who constituted a majority were reduced to a minority within a few decades. By now, their percentage is believed to have come down to 25%. In Bosnia, between 1961 and 1991, the Serbian percentage of the population declined from 43 % to 31 % while the Muslim percentage increased from 26 to 44 %. In Macedonia ( The land of Alexander the Great ) the Christians accounted for 90% of the population by 1900. Today, the Muslims constitute almost one-third of the population.
You may ask: Why does it matter? Religious worship depends on individual free choices and the increase of a religion is not a demographic topic. In fact, it matters because many examples show that an increasing muslim minority inside a no muslim country, may lead to a claim for secession and can culminate in a civil war. That has been the history of India, Cyprus, Lebanon, Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya, the Philippines and today Thailand. For example, Lebanon became a Muslim majority country amidst a raging civil war: Nearly 5 million Maronite Christians migrated out of Lebanon within two years. The wars in the Balkans are also the outcomes of these rapid demographic changes. In Philippines and Thailand, the terrorism and its claim for a secession are also based on rising muslim communities.
Of course, its not a scientific law. However, we just observe that all these countries have endured the same scenario: When the Islamists are only a minority, they present themselves as victims and constantly complain ( Such as in India ). When this minority is growing and concentrating in some areas, some people begin to create troubles. Very often, they campaign for the secession of one part of the territory ( Such as in Thailand ). By the end, the unrest only ceases when they gain the entire majority over a country. In this case, they ask for the implementation of the islamic laws. [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]