population explosion
Thailand is seen as the No 1 developing country when it comes to family planning. Even in places traditionally associated with rapid population growth, such as Bangladesh, birth rates have fallen considerably over the last generation, yet remain well above the natural replenishment rate of just above two children per woman. Frosya: Gimme it, move! Malnutrition, disease, and war will follow to the point of reducing the population to a sustainable number.
If you want to keep stuffing people in, you'll have to pay the price. Squirrel population explosion strikes japanese перевод I copy the text from the text-book now. As a print, waves develop to an extremely great height.
population explosion - This means that Yandex will not be able to remember you in the future. If you come across any problems or wish to ask a question, please do not hesitate to contact our Support service using the.
Later this year — on 31 October, to be precise — a boy will be born in a rural village in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. His parents will not know it, but his birth will prove to be a considerable landmark for our species as his arrival will mark the moment when the human population reaches 7 billion. There is no way of knowing for sure, of course, the identity of this baby boy. But demographers say that this date, place and gender are the most likely. India has the largest number of births each year — 27 million, roughly one in five of all global births — and Uttar Pradesh, India's most populous state with nearly 200 million citizens, would be the sixth most-populated country in the world if it were a nation. The majority of the state's births occur in the rural areas and the natural sex ratio at birth favours boys by a narrow margin. We do not need a guiding star to direct us to the symbolism of this boy's birth: the world has known about this approaching milestone for many years. After all, it is only 12 years since the six billion mark was reached. And just 100 years ago, the human population stood at 1. Every generation since has seen a prophet predicting doom for our species if we don't curtail our numbers. And yet the rise in headcount has continued inexorably and exponentially. But with rising greenhouse gas emissions and resource depletion ever-growing concerns, the approach of this year's population landmark has become an awkward, even unwelcome presence in the environmental debate. No one likes to talk about it, for there are no easy answers. Even a mention of it can see the questioner accused of racism, colonialism or misanthropy. Increasingly, environmental thinkers such as , and have made the case that population growth is not, in fact, the real problem the UN predicts before slowly starting to fall , rather that a rapid rise in consumption is our most pressing environmental issue. There are more than enough resources to feed the world, they say, even in 2050 when numbers peak — a point made this week by. The problem is that we see huge inequities in consumption whereby, for example, the average American has the same carbon footprint as 250 Ethiopians. Stood shoulder to shoulder, the entire human population could fit within the city limits of Los Angeles. We've got more than enough land upon which to collectively sustain ourselves, we just need to use it more wisely and fairly. But, given the stubborn realities of global inequalities, the question remains: are there too many of us to achieve a sustainable future? Reducing consumption , the , has been a figurehead of this debate ever since his still highly controversial book The Population Bomb was published in 1968, when the human population stood at 3. They're having all kinds of problems, just like everybody else. Could technological innovations facilitate our continued expansion? The working parts of our life support system are going down the drain at thousands of times the rate that has been the norm over the past millions and millions of years. But both multiply together. We utterly transformed our consumption habits and patterns of economy in the US between 1941 and 1945, and then back again. If you've got the right incentives, you can change patterns of consumption very rapidly. First, we know what to do about it. If you educate women about their means to control reproduction, the odds are you will see a decline in fertility rates. Second, everyone understands the problem: you can't keep growing the number of people on a finite planet. We also don't have what I'd call 'consumption condoms'. One of my colleagues once joked that the government ought to send round a truck to your home the day after you've been on a spending spree and offer to take everything you've bought back to the store. It would be the equivalent of a consumption morning-after pill. For example, population growth in developed nations has largely stagnated. Even in places traditionally associated with rapid population growth, such as Bangladesh, birth rates have fallen considerably over the last generation, yet remain well above the natural replenishment rate of just above two children per woman. The only place where birth rates still remain at pre-industrial-age rates — six or more children per woman — is sub-Saharan Africa. Every region requires its own solution, says Ehrlich. But, in general, in the rich countries where population growth has stopped or fallen, we should now be concentrating on reducing per capita consumption levels. But technological rabbits pulled out of the hat often have very nasty droppings. Frankly, I don't think most people are even remotely aware of what needs to be done to make our world a pleasant place to live in by, say, 2050. I expect we'll muddle through for the next 50 years, but sooner or later it will catch up with us. We do grow quite a bit of our food, so we should be OK, provided our climate doesn't change drastically. We could drop our calorie intake without noticing it in health terms. In fact, we'd improve our health like we did in the second world war. The average American has about 10 times as much land as we do. We're one of the most densely populated places in the world. In some respects, England is one large city. If you want to keep stuffing people in, you'll have to pay the price. I see us as a lifeboat with the person in charge saying: 'We can't take any more, or else we'll all sink. Not politically, perhaps, but in terms of shared resources and land. Inside, a DJ ups the pace of the music as new arrivals browse the finger buffet. Business cards are being swapped as a speaker calls for hush. A promotional video begins to play. The Silahtaraga Power Station — now an energy museum on the campus at Istanbul Bilgi University — could be the venue for a product launch anywhere in the world. But the crowd of business leaders, media and government officials has gathered for the launch of a report called. But, in contrast to the pessimism offered by Lovelock and Ehrlich, there is a sense of pragmatism, even optimism, about both the opportunities and challenges a rising population will bring. And it's no accident that Istanbul has been chosen as the launch city. Dr Tim Jones, the British author of Future Agenda, believes that by 2050, 75% of us will be living in cities. They want to move where they perceive there to be opportunities. This means large cities. Immigration is a difficult political subject at the moment all over the world, but I believe migration will ultimately come to be seen in a positive light as the realisation is finally made that immigrants are a necessity to maintain ageing populations. Hong Kong and Paris are good examples where densities are key to success. They are seen as successful cities. For example, just 5% of Hong Kong's personal income is spent on transportation whereas in Houston it is 20% because everyone drives such huge distances commuting. Paris, with its six- and seven-storey housing, open spaces and street-based cafe culture is a model to aspire to. The Japanese are also role models when it comes to living densities. We must aspire to be like them. For example, we can't let China shoot past Japan and attempt to live like the Americans. In Mumbai, the rich want the inner-city slums to remain because they want the cheap labour close by. Equally, when slum dwellers have been given land on the outskirts of the city to tempt them away from the inner-city slums, many people have sold the land and moved back to the slum areas because they are closer to the work. I see far more political action being enacted by city mayors in the future. Retired, older people are moving further out and the young are moving in, but birth rates are falling. Traffic and environmental pollution is where the growth is most felt. The Conrad Taeuber chair of population information at the Population Reference Bureau in Washington DC and author of the World Population Data Sheet, an internationally respected annual report that provides population, health and environmental indicators for more than 200 countries, he has near-total recall of the myriad figures that underpin 2011's seven-billion landmark. For example, everyone is pessimistic about sub-Saharan Africa where birth rates overall are not coming down at all. The political situation is key. Both Zimbabwe and Cote d'Ivoire were seen as bright spots by demographers, but now things are much bleaker. Sub-Saharan Africa will double in size by 2050. Nigeria is 158 million now, but will be 326 million by 2050 and will continue rising. Starvation is actually quite rare at the moment in sub-Saharan Africa, but standards of living will continue to fall. And without Aids, there would be 200-300 million more people in Africa by 2050. Many people in the west just don't understand what the standard of living is like in these countries. Some of the consequences are invisible to us in the west, but for how long? In Japan, where ageing is a huge problem, they are now having a major nursing crisis with very few young women wanting to be nurses. They're having to import them from Vietnam and the Philippines. Once in the city, the need to have lots of children to work the land disappears, they become expensive to support and access to family planning is readily available. But migration inevitably brings with it political tensions. Turks and Slavs were tolerated in Germany for a long period, but not now. The chancellor Angela Merkel recently said that assimilation is not working. The birth rate in Germany is very low — about 1. In cities such as Frankfurt, where there is a very sizeable Turkish population, there is now a fear of radicalism amid isolated communities. And then there is religion, of course. But, in general, I see this as a decreasing influence when it comes to family planning. In Africa, for example, cultural norms have a much greater impact. Here we see issues such as polygamy and men boasting about how many children they have. But there are some developing countries where the birth rate is under control. Thailand is seen as the No 1 developing country when it comes to family planning. The birth rate there is 1. Indonesia also has a very efficient family-planning system. South Korea has a birth rate of 1. It is the lowest in the world and means the country is literally dying. If you do want a reduced birth rate, then well organised family planning campaigns are much more important than economic growth. It might be unfashionable to say so, but international aid acts as a catalyst for this. Monetary assistance is key at the beginning to get these campaigns going. The challenge for the 21st century is different: it's all about managing birth rates.
Supply and demand will cause food prices to continue to rise. Many people in the west just don't understand what the standard of living is like in these countries. Turks and Slavs were tolerated in Germany for a long period, but not now. Malnutrition, disease, and war will follow to the point of reducing the population to a sustainable number. South Korea has a birth rate of 1. The population of Europe as a whole shot up from roughly 120 million to about 190 million during the same period. The political situation is key. The more we damage our ecosystem the sooner we will deplete our ability to produce food with the resulting effect of less food. Поиск по предложениям, переведенным пользователями Сведения об источнике - Компьютерные переводы являются сочетанием результатов нашего статистического машинного переводчика и переводчиков, Systran и Worldlingo.