It’s still the case that most “progressive” development experts think that “addressing poverty first” remains the best response, and that most environmentalists, in a reprehensibly politically-correct way, think it is exclusively about over-consumption in the rich world, than over-population in the poor world.
But exactly what kind of world are these people living in? Certainly not in a world where water consumption is doubling every 20 years, more than twice the rate of human population growth, where available arable land continues to decline year on year, where many of the world’s biodiversity hotspots are increasingly at risk specifically because of rapid population growth, where oil at $139 a barrel is already having a devastating effect on hundreds of millions of very poor people, and where accelerating climate change and rising sea levels are going to cause havoc over the next 20-30 years. That’s our world – not some make believe cornucopian world that some still dream of, where the number of people on it is of no material significance."
I'd previouslybeen unconcerned about population growth due to this monologue. However, time changes everything and new evidence- such as Jonathon's point about the Millennium Development Goals- leads me to reconsider.
George is concerned about overpopulation too. But not overly.