Is the Earth overpopulated?
According to the United Nations report entitled, "World Population Prospects: 2012," the current population of 7.2 billion people is expected to increase to over 9 billion by the year 2050 (World population projected to reach 9.6 billion by 2050 – UN report). Although this does sounds like an overwhelming number of people living today and in the future, the question in determining whether we are overpopulated has many viewpoints. According to 2008 The Economist article, "Malthus' Blues," there is no concise answer in determining whether or not the Earth has reached its carrying capacity for humans. It all depends on how people use their resources efficiently (Layton, 2008).
For example, in HowStuffWorks, the writer mentions that, "...if everyone on Earth lived like a middle-class American, consuming roughly 3.3 times the subsistence level of food and about 250 times the subsistence level of clean water, the Earth could only support about 2 billion people (McConeghy). On the other hand, if everyone on the planet consumed only what he or she needed, 40 billion would be a feasible number (McConeghy). In other words, the Earth can support many people depending if everyone of its inhabitants use a certain amount of resources to survive on instead of using excess amount of resources and not let others benefit from them not to mention the fact that the Earth needs time to produce the supplies that were used.
As I mentioned before, Thomas Malthus's prediction about the Earth becoming overpopulated based on his research with arithmetic growth of food and the exponential growth of the human population claiming that the world wouldn't be able to sustain every human being was rejected due to the new innovations that caused the world to produce more food from the Green Revolution, a period of time where inventions like pesticides, water irrigation systems, genetically engineered crops, etc. increased crop yield (Layton, 2008).
In the end, is it safe to conclude whether the Earth is or is not overpopulated? It depends on our consumption of natural resources, the birth rate and death rate around the world, technological inventions, and other factors.
For example, in HowStuffWorks, the writer mentions that, "...if everyone on Earth lived like a middle-class American, consuming roughly 3.3 times the subsistence level of food and about 250 times the subsistence level of clean water, the Earth could only support about 2 billion people (McConeghy). On the other hand, if everyone on the planet consumed only what he or she needed, 40 billion would be a feasible number (McConeghy). In other words, the Earth can support many people depending if everyone of its inhabitants use a certain amount of resources to survive on instead of using excess amount of resources and not let others benefit from them not to mention the fact that the Earth needs time to produce the supplies that were used.
As I mentioned before, Thomas Malthus's prediction about the Earth becoming overpopulated based on his research with arithmetic growth of food and the exponential growth of the human population claiming that the world wouldn't be able to sustain every human being was rejected due to the new innovations that caused the world to produce more food from the Green Revolution, a period of time where inventions like pesticides, water irrigation systems, genetically engineered crops, etc. increased crop yield (Layton, 2008).
In the end, is it safe to conclude whether the Earth is or is not overpopulated? It depends on our consumption of natural resources, the birth rate and death rate around the world, technological inventions, and other factors.