Facts Everyone Should Know About Population & Population Connection

You dont have to be a demographer to understand or learn the fundamentals of human population growth. In fact, everyone must come to understand these issues if were going to ensure a positive quality of life for generations to come. So, to dispel common misconceptions about population growth, as well as to enhance and refine what you may already know, Population Connection has carefully researched and prepared answers to 21 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about population. In addition to demographic trends and discussions of population issues, we also offer our perspective on several key topics. It is our hope that this document will contribute to your understanding of, and concern for, the critical connection that exists between population and its impact on this planet and on our lives. 1. How many people can the Earth support? There is not an exact number of people the Earth can hold, nor is there an exact date at which the Earth will no longer be able to sustain the world's population. At Population Connection, we focus on quality, not quantity of life. Whether the Earth's population rests at 7 billion, climbs to 12 billion or drops to 3 billion is not, in the end, what matters. But maybe the question we should be asking is, How many people can't the Earth support? For example, at present the Earth can't support the 9.2 million children who die every year, mostly from preventable or treatable diseases.1 The Earth cant support the nearly 900 million people who dont have access to safe drinking water.2 The Earth cant support the 2.5 billion people who dont have access to basic sanitation.3 The Earth cant support its estimated 967 million malnourished people.4 How many people the Earth can support is not a population question, but a social, economic, and political question. More important than trying to figure out how much our Earth can endure, we must ask, do people have access to food and water? Will they be healthy? Safe? Educated? Content? In short, what will the quality of life for those people be? It is within this last question that Population Connection finds its mission. 2. But 1isn't it true that the entire population of the world could fit inside Texas? Yes, and you could fit 20 people in a phone booth, but how comfortable do you think they would be? And you could fit all the cars of the world onto the freeways of Los Angeles, but could they function? Its one thing to fit into an area, and it is an entirely different issue for people to live and thrive in that same space. The Population in Texas fact is often cited by people who do not understand the concept of carrying capacity. Carrying capacity estimates the number of people a certain area of land can sustain without compromising its viability. The carrying capacity of

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

Texass 167,624,960 acres doesnt even come close to accommodating the worlds 2009 population of nearly 6.8 billion. In fact, if the entire population of the world actually lived within the Lone Star borders, each person would have just .025 acres of land on which to drive, live, go to school, grow food, and do everything else a person needs space for. According to Canadian geographer Vaclav Smil, it would take 0.17 acres of arable land just to feed one person a vegetarian diet without the use of pesticides or other chemical bolsters.5 Where would we build our houses, schools, fire stations, and hospitals? How would we ensure proper sanitation and effective waste disposal? Overcrowding, combined with inadequate sewer systems, resource scarcity and lack of infrastructure, is bound to lead to the outbreak of disease, civil unrest, conflict and destitution. The truth is, people need much more than just the land they are standing on. In order to be healthy and safe, they need space that far exceeds the .025 acres that Texas would offer. 3. 1Why should we be concerned about population growth rates of 1, 2 and 3 percent a year? Doesn't that mean that population is growing very slowly? Sure, 1.18% doesnt sound significant, but consider this: a 1.18% growth rate works out to almost 80 million more people annually, or about the population of Germany! Each additional person will need housing, food, education, employment, a clean environment and a decent quality of life. Presently, over three billion people around the world do not have access to these basics, such as clean water and sanitation.6 If we cant adequately provide for these people now, what will we do in the future with more people? Perhaps a more understandable way to see the impact of growth rates is to consider the doubling time of a population. While doubling time cannot absolutely forecast future population size (due to changing life expectancies, fertility rates, and factors such as the spread of HIV/AIDS), the concept still has value in illustrating the impact of a small growth rate. For example, in the African country of Chad, the population is growing at a rate of 2.77 percent. If this rate continues, the countrys population will double in just 25 years. That isn't much time to build roads, houses, schools and sanitation facilities to accommodate twice as many people. If the worlds present growth rate of 1.188 percent were to remain constant, the Earths population would double in just 58 years to over 13 billion people.
In order to calculate the doubling time of a population, divide the annual growth rate into 69.3. For example: 69.3 divided by 1.188 (annual growth rate) = 58.333 years The doubling time for the worlds population is 58.333 years.
69.3 is the equivalent of 100 times the natural logarithm of 2, which is used to determine doubling time (Some demographers round up to 70).

4. Is overpopulation a problem only in areas where population density is high?

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

No. High population density, as found in many urban areas, does not necessarily indicate overpopulation. To the contrary, urban areas offer hope for human development and protection of natural resources because they can support large numbers of people while limiting the impact on the natural environment. The expansion of cities is inevitable, offering many economic, social, and cultural benefits. Urban migration can be used to the advantage of the environment through intelligent city planning--meaning appropriate infrastructure, proper solid waste management and sanitation systems, and efficient and reliable public transportation. Increasingly, cities develop sprawl whereby populations spread to the peripheral areas of a city, live in expansive spaces, and commute to city centers for employment. These low-density, suburban areas can be particularly pernicious to the environment and our limited resourcesthey use up larger tracts of land, necessitate a high degree of automobile usage, and require more building materials, water lines, and roads than compact cities. Having a well-planned city therefore not only improves the standard of living but decreases damage done on the environment. As explained by a presenter at the American College of Sports and Medicines Health & Fitness Summit and Exposition in 2008, cities like Portland that have walkable areas nare beneficial for both community health and the environment. Lots of transportation funding is spent on building roadssomewhere around 95 percent of allocated funds," Jim Sallis, Ph.D. said. "It won't cost more money to build activity-friendly environments; it will just require money to be spent differently. More spending on things like sidewalks and trails that accommodate pedestrians and cyclists should reduce the need for expand the road network.7" This example illustrates the vital relationship between smart growth and forward thinking. A well-planned, high-density city is crucial to the health and well being of its citizens.8 5. Why should Americans be concerned about population growth in other parts of the world? The environmental and social impacts of population growth do not recognize national boundaries. The U.S. economy is interdependent with the global economy and our environment is affected by and affects environmental factors in other parts of the world. What occurs in one part of the world can have a major impact on life around the globe. An example of the interconnectedness of our planet's environment is the rapid destruction of tropical rainforests, which is exacerbated by increased human population growth. The "lungs of the Earth," rainforests benefit everyone through their climate control capacity and the countless products they provide. As population increases, so too does the demand on rainforests to sustain these lives. Yet, like the rainforests uses, the effects of the rainforests overuse can be felt by all. Here i1n the U.S., these effects might be felt somewhat minimally in increased costs of paper goods, or in increased building prices as wood costs increase. They will almost certainly manifest in other ways: hotter summers due to global warming, fewer available medicines as plant sources are depleted.

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

However, closer to the rainforests, communities will experience famine as the topsoil deteriorates, no longer fortified and anchored by tree roots. Without fields or forests to work for food, laborers will travel farther and farther to find income and subsistence. While facing new hardships from poverty, the compounding environmental problems continue to cause difficulties: loss of a water source, lack of fuel wood for heat, and increased disease and malnutrition. Add to this list ensuing social problems (increased incidences of domestic violence, infanticide, and STDs as people travel farther and interact with more people in the search for work), and the vitality of community members is greatly threatened. So, comparatively, the effects of population demands on the rainforest are unequally felt around the world. However, just as disproportionate are the causes of these problems. While accounting for just about 21% of the worlds population, North America, Japan, and Europe use 70 percent of the worlds paper and over half its wood.9 The U.S. is using more than its share of resources, and our interconnectedness means this consumption directly impacts others across the world, sometimes in very grave ways. Population issues are about more than the number of people living; its about how theyre living. As Americans, we should be concerned about population because of the connections: of our lives to those of others and of our choices to the quality of life another person can live. 6. What role does the U.S. play in population issues? The U.S. could potentially play a leading role in population issues by providing funding and support for family planning initiatives, domestically and internationally. Both domestically and abroad the U.S. is failing to represent The Chicago Council on Foreign Relations found in a 2004 peoples beliefs about the necessity of study that 76% favor providing aid for womens education in comprehensive family planning poor countries to help reduce population growth. Likewise, a survey conducted by Belden Russonello & Stewart reported that programs. While there is a strong 92% agreed that "All couples and individuals should have the consensus that the U.S. government right to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and should fund and support family planning timing of their children and to have the information and the means to do so." programs around the world, we have barely begun to address these issues. The U.S. is lagging domestically, despite the fact that most Americans feel the government should provide voluntary family planning services as part of low-income womens health care. In response, Population Connection lobbies for Title X funding which aims to reduce unintended pregnancies by providing contraceptives and related reproductive health care services to lowincome women. Additionally, 76% of voters supported efforts like Title X that aim to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies in the United States through measures like comprehensive sex education and access to contraction.10 When weighed against the fact that most insurance companies claim that prescription contraceptives are not medically necessary, it is clear that there is a discrepancy between government policy and the wants and needs of the people.

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

Population Connection is trying to address this gap by lobbying for contraceptive coverage laws to increase funding for family planning among insurance companies. With an overwhelming 80% of people (across the demographic spectrum) in support of family planning programs in developing countries, it is hard to believe that in 2009 the government dedicated a mere 0.015% of the total U.S. budget to international family planning assistance.11 The U.S. spends less on international family planning as a proportion of GNP than any other industrialized nation. Even on an individual level the cost of population assistance to each American is negligible. In 1995, before the 30% budget cut imposed by Congress, the U.S. family planning cost of $577 million, amounted to little more than $2 for every American; Danes and Norwegians contribute the most, about $10 per capita.12 (Note: Please see the box below of information about 2009 U.S. funding changes.) U.S. politicians need to represent the people in their decision-making by not only allocating more funding for population assistance activities, but by fulfilling promises of aid. International family planning programs depend on U.S. money, and failing to stand by our word and proffering promised funds has serious ramifications on thousands of lives overseas, lives that have been trapped in political pandering by U.S. politicians. Both abroad and at home, American politicians need to represent the wishes of their constituents.
UNFPA FUNDING STRUGGLE The Bush Administration withheld funding to UNFPA for seven consecutive years, despite overwhelming evidence of UNFPAs success and strong bipartisan support in both houses of Congress and within Bushs own cabinet. The Obama Administration has committed $50 million in its 2009 fiscal year Omnibus spending bill. In a press release, UNFPA Executive Director Thoraya Ahmed Obaid said, we warmly applaud this action by President Obama, which underlines his support to the protection of the lives and human dignity of women and girls in the poorest countries. [This support] will allow UNFPA to maintain its life-saving work, particularly improving maternal and reproductive health, in the world's

7. Why are developing countries experiencing rapid population growth while developed countries are either growing more slowly or not at all?
While both developed and developing countries have experienced significant declines in their death rates, developing nations continue to have higher birthrates. Between 2008 and 2050, 96% of total population growth will occur in developing countries. Source: www.prb.org

The differences in populations can be explained by countries developments and social customs. A country's birth rate is strongly linked to the degree of industrialization, economic development, and availability of quality medical care. Also, social customs pertaining to educational attainment, womens status, and family planning services affect population levels.

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

With the beginning of the 20th century, developed nations improved living conditions through advances in medicine, sanitation, and nutrition through industrialization. These advancements led to declines in death rates, increases in life expectancies, and increases in infant and child survival rates. More people were living, and were living longer. Birth rates remained high and the population swelled. However, with increased urbanization, large families became less practical and more expensive. Machinery was used more frequently to plant and harvest food, reducing the need for rural families to have as many children to work on the farm. Over the course of the 19th and early 20th centuries, birth rates dropped dramatically as people realized the advantages of having smaller families. Developing regions, such as sub-Saharan Africa, and parts of Asia and Latin America, still house large agrarian populations; therefore, incentives for having larger families still exist. And without a social security system in most of the developing world, people also have more children to take care of them in their older age. While death rates have fallen in many developing regions due to advances in health (sub-Saharan Africa being an exception due to the high level of HIV/AIDS), fertility rates are still high. As a result, these populations are growing rapidly as they complete what is known as the demographic transition. The availability and accessibility of quality family planning services, education level of the population, and the status of women also affect population size. Social customs and financial abilities limit the affect these influences can have on population. For example, education of women and girls, and access to modern family planning are the most important factors in determining the rate at which a countrys population grows. Developed nations more frequently can provide such resources for their people. And social customs can make educating women or using family planning services more or less acceptable. 8. Is the U.S. imposing its own values about reproductive health and family planning on other countries? No. The U.S. generally provides assistance to other countries through two avenues: the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the United States Agency for International Development. UNFPA assists governments and NGOs at the receiving countrys request. USAID grants assistance to foreign NGOs that apply for funding. UNFPA maintains a democratically organized and implemented agenda, agreed upon by the 179 countries that took part in the (Cairo) International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in 1994. UNFPA extends assistance to countries at their request and works in partnership with governments, all parts of the United Nations system, development banks, bilateral aid agencies, non-governmental organizations, and civil society. Under internationally agreed upon population and development goals, each country decides for itself what approach to take in order to meet the specific needs of its residents.13 At the Cairo conference developing countries agreed to provide 75% of the funding needed for family planning and the industrialized countries agreed to provide the remaining 25% of the funding.

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

With the amount of unmet need for family planning services, it is important for the U.S. to help fund international family planning. An estimated 200 million women in the developing world wish either to have no more children or to delay their next birth but are not using any method of family planning. Providing access to family planning is simply meeting this unmet need for contraception. 9. 1Is religion an obstacle to population stabilization? Not always. Many religious leaders understand the consequences of rapid population growth and the need to stabilize it. In fact, countries like Iran and Thailand have both implemented successful family planning programs that take into consideration religious values, while organizations such as the Christian Health Association of Ghana have been working towards goals similar to those stated in Cairo consensus on global population policy (see question #19 for more information on the Cairo convention).14 In determining religions influences on population, a key point to understand is that a difference often exists between the official position of a religions organized leadership and the actual practices of its followers. For example, although the Catholic Church's position on reproductive choice is a critical barrier to solving population problems, many Catholics around the world do not heed the Vaticans official ban on modern methods of birth control. In fact, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention 2002 National Survey of Family Growth reported that 97% of American Catholic women over the age of 18 have use a banned form of contraception, a percentage that is close to that of the general population. Furthermore, in the predominantly Catholic countries of Spain, France, Mexico, and Brazil, over 60% of women report having used a banned method of contraception, while predominantly Catholic Italy continues to have one of the lowest fertility rates in the world.15 However, this is not to say that organized religions leaders do not influence population matters. The Vatican has been successful in its lobbying efforts to curb contraceptive use in the U.S., from getting the government to fault on previous commitments to population stabilization, to succeeding in diverting funds from family planning programs. The Vatican has affected population matters abroad as well, such as in Africa where Catholic bishops have actively opposed condom use, an act with serious implications in the face of the AIDS pandemic. You cant resolve [the HIV/AIDS epidemic] with the distribution of condoms, said Pope Benedict XVI to reporters while on a recent trip to Africa. On the contrary, it increases the problem.16 Additionally, in Muslim societies, there are diverse views on family planning. In the book World War III, Michael Tobias writes that many Muslims "insist that family planning is inherent to the Qur'an itself" and that birth control is approved of in Islamic religious texts. However, many people see Islam, like Christianity, as preventing population stabilization due to views on family planning. Yet, religious influences are only one of many other cultural pressures (i.e. views of family planning and womens status) affecting reproductive choices. For example, studies have shown that fertility rates are higher among Islamic countries, such as Yemen and Pakistan, where education and jobs are less accessible to women than in other Muslim nations, such as Tunisia and Turkey.17 Although religion can play an important role in family planning choices and availability, urbanization, higher levels of education, expanding economic opportunities for women and

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

availability of contraception can have more bearing on a person's family planning decisions than religious doctrine. And the degree to which followers adhere to religious doctrine must also be taken into account when weighing effects of religion on population. 10. How does improving the status of women affect population growth? As girls and women gain access to education and employment, their health improves, their options expand and they have smaller families than women who are denied access to education and employment. 1The number of children a woman has is not determined by biology alone. Less tangible factors health, religion, culture, and economic and social standingare more influential. In many societies women are valued primarily for their role in reproduction, hold little or no political or economic power, and are provided with inadequate health care and education. Women in these societies tend to have higher fertility rates. But in areas where women have more autonomy, they generally have more power and resources to control their own fertility and birth rates go down. Elevating the status of women worldwide is vital to lowering fertility rates and ultimately, stabilizing global population. The key to such empowerment is education, one of the strongest forces of lasting change. Educated women have increased opportunities and are more likely to enter the labor force before marriage, thus marrying later, delaying childbearing, and having fewer children overall. Additionally, educated women are usually more aware of and have access to medical services, including family planning, and have greater confidence and ability to use them. Kerala, India exemplifies the change education can proffer. Here, women have a near 100 percent literacy rate, affordable and accessible health care (including family planning), and most of the same educational and economic opportunities men enjoy. Because of this, this economically poor and developing area has a fertility rate as low as most industrialized nations, including the U.S.18 Access to family planning and reproductive health services is also vital to empowering women and lowering fertility rates. Without access to such information and resources, even educated women have a difficult time having only the number of children that they desire. Population Connection believes that quality family planning services should be made available to all people who want them, and calls on Congress to promote universal accessibility to family planning services in the United States and around the world. Equal partnerships between women and men in the private sphere are also crucial for achieving smaller, healthier families. If women have power to make decisions about sexual activity and reproductive health, they can avoid many of the approximately 80 million unintended pregnancies19 and 340 million sexually transmitted infections contracted each year.20

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

11. How does the HIV/AIDS epidemic affect global population? In addition to the horrible impact on individual lives, HIV/AIDS is drastically altering demographic distributions, such as age and sex ratios within countries population profiles, changing population growth patterns. But more importantly, HIV/AIDS is ravaging important social structures. The death toll for AIDS is over 25 million worldwide, and, according to UNAIDS/WHO estimates, about 2.7 million more will become newly infected with HIV every year unless larger scale prevention and treatment initiatives are implemented.21 The most direct demographic impact of AIDS can be seen in the dramatic lowering of life expectancies in the affected countries (see chart). Average life expectancy has dropped below 40 in seven African nations.22 The radical decline of the population aged 20-40, coupled with fewer children due to the increased death rates of women of reproductive age and transmission of HIV from mother to infant, is significantly altering population structures. AIDS Is Slashing Years off Life Expectancy

U.N., Population and HIV/AIDS, 2007.

But the HIV/AIDS problem, like all population matters, is not just about numbers and demographic trends. There is a distinct, humane element to the HIV/AIDS pandemic, one that is radically altering individuals lives around the globe. And its for this reason that arguments about population decline benefits from the AIDS crisis should be met with staunch reproach. AIDS is not solving our population troubles; it is only exacerbating problems. Quality of life issues, already sensitive in many of the areas hardest hit by HIV and AIDS, are experiencing dramatic setbacks. AIDS is affecting every aspect of life: Economy Unlike many other diseases, HIV/AIDS affects people in their prime working ages, disrupting businesses and the economy; markets are declining, productivity is down, and operating costs are rising.23 Health Systems

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

Patients are crowded out as more beds, resources, and staff is required by AIDS patients. Health care staff is not immune to infection themselves, and their deaths to AIDS noticeably affect the health systems in those countries.24 Education Education holds the key to ending the AIDS epidemic, but with funds shifting from education to health care and with AIDS infections among teachers, the benefits of the skills and knowledge education brings may never manifest. The affect of HIV/AIDS on children also affects the education system, as children must leave school to care for infected family members, are orphaned and left without means to attend school, or die themselves from the disease.25 Families Victims of AIDS often leave behind spouses and children who depended upon their support. Thus, children are sent to work earlier as families lose the financial ability to pay for treatments or living expenses. Government Budgets often must be redrawn, with community resources redirected to social services for those affected by HIV/AIDS, including orphans. Agriculture With labor shortages due to infected workers, crop yields are less, farmers switch from cash to subsistence crops, and costs of food increase.26

Although treatment is far more costly than prevention, many areas still fail to dedicate time and resources to prevention. Early and intelligent prevention and intervention is vital to stopping the spread of AIDS, and the ensuing social problems. 12. How does a growing population affect biodiversity? As the human population grows, we displace more and more species, putting them at risk for extinction. Biodiversity refers to the wide variety of living organisms and their complex interdependency for survival. It is an important measure of the health of an environment because if one species whether plant or animalshows signs of stress, then entire life systems may be threatened. These systems ensure the continuation of the planets most critical functions, including conversion of carbon dioxide to oxygen. Recent global research has concluded that humans are destroying natural habitats at least 1,000 times faster than natural rates of extinction. Species are decreasing exponentially as human population rises. Seventy-five percent of the historical growth of population and 75 percent of the loss in global forest cover took place in the twentieth century.27 In the United States, land conversion (such as deforestation and logging) and wetlands and coastline development contribute most to species loss.

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

10

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

Pollution, over-harvesting, and animal grazing also exacerbate the demise of certain species. Because of the demands of both large-scale mechanized agriculture and the great needs of subsistence farmers, increased food production depletes our already waning supply of topsoil.28 Higher population densities in traditionally agricultural areas further frustrate this trend by reducing the amount of food producing land on Earth. The adverse effects of population growth and unsustainable exploitation of natural resources are especially significant in some of the most biologically rich countries of the developing world. As it stands, an estimated 240 acres of natural habitat is destroyed every hour as a direct result of the growth in human populations.29 Around the world, disruptions in ecosystems could give rise to global warming, acid rain, an increase in the sea level, and destruction of the ozone layer. In addition, unfettered population growth can upset biological ecosystems that provide humans with much needed medicines, cosmetics, nutrition and fuel, as well as other recreational and commercial services. 13. Wont slowing population growth negatively affect our countrys economic, political, and social well-being? A large population size does not necessarily produce a world power or a healthy economy. As Dr. Nafis Sadik, former Executive Director of the UNFPA, asks, "What society has bred itself into prosperity?" Even with the current replacement level fertility rate, the U.S. is still one of the fastest-growing industrialized countries in the world, adding nearly 3 million people to its population annually. Meanwhile, we are faced with air and water pollution, traffic-choked highways, crowded classrooms, and a shortage of affordable homes. Population stabilization is the first step toward achieving better lives for present and future generations. Adding sheer numbers to our population will not strengthen our nation. Instead, we need to focus on implementing policies that improve the quality of life for all people and promote sustainable growth. These include providing quality education, caring for the sick and the elderly, working to eradicate poverty, cleaning up the environment, and seeking alternative sources of energy. 14. In this country is it a matter of the wrong people bearing children? Theories maintaining that there are right or wrong people bearing children, are misguided and will only serve to deter progress and cooperation in population awareness and education. In fact, in terms of environmental impacts, affluent, conspicuous consumers could be considered the wrong people. Such people require far greater resources to maintain their lifestyles than those living on restricted incomes. This is not to suggest that maintaining poverty is the solution. The challenge remains in identifying and eliminating those patterns of wasteful overconsumption that compromise the needs of future generations. However, some people continue to think that recent immigrants and racial minorities are largely to blame for the population and environmental pressures in the United States. Demographically speaking, lower-income African Americans and Hispanics do have, on average, a larger family

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

11

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

size than middle-and upper-class whites. This trend may reflect a cultural preference for larger families, but it may also be highly correlated with a lack of access to education, economic opportunities, and reproductive health care. However, labeling people as right or wrong along demographic lines only misdirects attention from the real problem: affordable and accessible family planning information and resources for everyone. Even where women do not intend to have children, women may be limited by the lack of services, counseling, and information available to them. Such scarcities will disproportionately affect low-income people for whom effective and affordable contraceptives are still not widely available. In recent years, cutbacks in funding for family planning clinics have further diminished such needed services for young men and women. And for many, comprehensive sex education is non-existent. In short, there are too many solutions that need our attention to focus our energy on whether the right or wrong people are having children. 15. If Americans choose to have fewer children, wont this cause the demise of our Social Security system? Problems with the Social Security system cannot be solved by constantly producing more children. Children come with costs to our social programs as well expenditures on schools, day cares, TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), health care, and other social services. The debate needs to focus on the fundamental demographic changes that are transforming our country. Our current system relies on outdated definitions of dependency, productivity, and aging. When Social Security was established, the average American male lived to age 68 and received social security at age 65. Then, young workers could expect to live only a few years beyond age 65, and to be economically dependent on Social Security for those few years. Today people live longer and play productive roles in our society well past 65. The system is outdated. Thus, Social Security and other retirement systems are being scrutinized to determine how to keep them financially viable. Additional efforts, including targeted policies and programs, will help ensure that we can best meet the needs of the elderly. These must be adaptable to the changing needs of this population, and the availability of resources. 16. What is the most effective family planning policy? Population Connection firmly believes that only voluntary family planning programs are effective and sustainable. Coercive measures, which include forced abortions, sterilizations, and sex selection, are unethical, immoral, and unacceptable. The most effective family planning programs give men and women the freedom to choose the size and spacing of their family. In his studies of India, Nobel prize-winning economist Amartya Sen explains how the disparities in reproductive patterns among particular regions result from differing approaches to family planning. Southern areas, such as Kerala and Tamil Nadu, have drastically reduced fertility rates through voluntary and collaborative approaches. In contrast, some of their northern counterparts,

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

12

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

including Punjab and Haryana, have high fertility rates and much lower levels of female education and general health care, despite a tendency to use heavy handed family planning methods, including coercion.30 Extensive statistical evidence also links womens empowerment (including education and literacy) to fertility reduction in countries around the world. Programs should be devised with this in mind. The efficacy of voluntary measures is bolstered by the receptiveness of populations in the developing world. In Uganda, for example, the percentage of females enrolled in primary education increased to 49.3 percent in 2003. Among women with more than primary education, the total fertility rate dropped from 5.0 in 1988 to 3.9 in 2000.31 Growing successes with voluntary family planning, in programs across the world, demonstrate that there is no need for coercive practices. Family planning programs should be developed UNFPA 2003 with respect to the fact that, quite often, people prefer to have fewer children, but simply lack the means to do so. A comparison of female literacy and fertility in developing countries. 17. Does supporting family planning mean you are anti-child? No. Just the opposite. Population Connection is concerned with improving peoples quality of life, including children. We recognize that everyone feels the benefits from family planning services, not just women. For example, a child born to a mother who has given birth within the past two years is twice as likely to die before the age of one than a child whose mother spaced her pregnancies.32 Family planning allows women to space pregnancies, thereby increasing child survival and health. It is also estimated that at least 75% of all infant deaths in developing countries are the result of poor care during pregnancy and childbirth.33 These deaths could be avoided with improved maternal health, adequate nutrition and health care during pregnancy, and appropriate care during

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

13

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

childbirth. The direct impacts of a maternal death on childrens well-being have also been strongly documented. When a mother dies in childbirth, her newborns chance of survival is greatly reduced, while surviving children are less likely to receive adequate nourishment or education.34 These are just a few facts in the overwhelming evidence that improving family planning services greatly improves many lives. 18. 1Is Population Connection a pro-choice organization? Yes. We believe the decision to carry a pregnancy to term is best left to the individual woman. No one is proabortion. But because there will always be unintended pregnancies and contraceptive failure, and because some women will decide they cannot continue a pregnancy, abortion should be safe, legal and available to all women. Of the estimated 42 million abortions that occur each year,35 roughly 20 million are performed in countries where abortion is either restricted or illegal.36 A 2004 World Health Organization study found that in 2000, one in 10 pregnancies resulted in an unsafe abortion, one that was unsanitary, crudely self-induced, or performed by poorly trained providers. As a result, an estimated 68,000 women die each year due to complications from an unsafe abortion,37 and those women who survive often experience long-term health problems, ranging from chronic pelvic pain to infertility. At the 1994 (Cairo) International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), world leaders agreed that unsafe abortion is a major public health concern, and that governments should work to eliminate unsafe abortion practices. If reducing maternal deaths is to be an international priority, it is imperative that reproductive health services include access to voluntary and medically safe abortion services. The U.S. need not look far to see how such education and availability could affect womens lives. U.S. teenagers have the highest rates of pregnancy, childbearing and abortion among developed countries. Teen birth rates are twice as high as in England, and three times as high as in Canada.38 Easy access to contraceptives and other reproductive health services in these countries contributes to better contraceptive use and, in turn, lower teenage pregnancy rates. Therefore, Population Connection believes that better contraception education and distribution, among teenagers and adults, is key to reducing the overall numbers of unintended pregnancies and abortions, in the United States and worldwide. Population Connections goal is to reduce the number of abortions and unintended pregnancies by battling for safer, more effective and more accessible contraceptives, increased access to family planning information and resources, and greater education of young people about responsible family planning. 19. What was the Cairo conference, and why is it important? The U.N.-organized 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), called the Cairo conference or Cairo, brought together 179 countries to reaffirm the importance of slowing population growth for social and economic development. The Cairo Conference was the 3rd U.N. Conference on Population {The United Nations previously held international conferences on population in Bucharest (1974) and Mexico City (1984)} and was the first to focus on meeting the needs of individuals, rather than simply achieving demographic targets. The result of ICPD was the creation of the Programme of Action, a 20-year plan promoting, among other things,

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

14

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

universal access to quality and affordable reproductive health services; reductions in maternal, infant, and child mortality; and closing the gender gap in education. Cairo put an end to the concept of population control. It recognized that smaller families and slower population growth depend on free choice and the empowerment of women, not control. In acknowledging the importance of advancing womens status worldwide, the Programme of Action, underscores the empowerment and autonomy of women and the improvement of their political, social, economic and health status, not only as an end in itself, but also as a vital part of achieving a sustainable population balance. Population Connection supports the Cairo consensus and urges the United States government and other world leaders to fully implement its agenda. 20. 1Where does Population Connection stand on U.S. immigration policy? Population Connection believes that the United States should view immigration in a global context, and focus its attention on the factors that compel people to leave their native homes and families. Foremost among the root causes of international migration are population growth, economic stagnation, environmental degradation, resource scarcity, poverty, and political repression. Unless the United States successfully addresses these international issues, no domestic policy will effectively prevent people from seeking entry to the United States. Population Connection, therefore, calls on the United Stated to focus its foreign aid on these core issues and work cooperatively with other nations to address international migration. Because of its increasing importance and impact on annual population growth, immigration plays a significant role in Population Connection's goal of stabilizing U.S. population. However, immigration goals must be placed within a larger framework, one that aims to slow population growth and promote a balance between U.S. population and the environment through increased energy efficiency, conservation of natural resources, and sustainable environmental practices. Population Connection recognizes that the United States should preserve its ability to absorb reasonable numbers of refugees and legal immigrants. In order to accomplish this, the United States needs to maintain control, in a way consistent with basic human and civil rights, over illegal immigration. 21. What can one person do to reduce the pressures of population? Plenty! First, find ways to reduce your personal impact on the environment. Nearly every action we make affects our environment in some way, from the length of shower we take in the morning to the kind of car we drive to work each day. Even small changes in personal choices and habit can make an impact, like using public transportation instead of driving, buying only recycled paper goods, using fewer pesticides and herbicides on your lawn, choosing organic fruits and vegetables over chemically-treated, and throwing paper, aluminum, plastic and glass in the nearest recycling bin, instead of the nearest trash can.

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

15

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

Second, educate yourself on current population issues, such as international family planning funds and reproductive rights. Check out our website often at www.populationconnection.org. Population Action International (www.populationaction.org ), the Population Reference Bureau (www.prb.org) and the United Nations Population Fund (www.unfpa.org) are also excellent resources for current information. Support family planning efforts in your community. Support comprehensive sex-education that gives our children accurate information. You can also visit your local library to check out the latest titles on population, such as the Worldwatch Institutes State of the World (published annually) and More: Population, Nature, and What Women Want. Once you understand the scope of the population challenge, use your knowledge to raise awareness of population issues in your community -- write a letter to your local paper, contact local radio and television stations, or volunteer to give a lecture or head a discussion group on population issues at a local high school or community center. Simply initiating a dialogue with your friends, coworkers and neighbors in invaluable to instigating change. There are many things you can do on a national level as well. Keep tabs on current populationrelated legislation and make your vote and your voice count. Write, email or call your lawmakers, urging them to support environmental conservation, international and domestic family planning programs, school-based comprehensive sexuality education, and expanded educational and employment opportunities for women. To learn about current legislative action, key votes, and Capital Hill basics, visit our legislative action center at http://www.populationconnection.org/site/PageServer?pagename=getinvolved_actioncenter.

7/17/2009

Population Connection- Public FAQ Master Folder -FAQ/FAQ_MASTER.doc

16

www.populationconnection.org 2120 L St NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037

1 2

http://www.unicef.org/health/index_bigpicture.html http://www.unicef.org/media/media_45481.html 3 http://www.unicef.org/media/media_45481.html 4 http://go.worldbank.org/XQSUWNSEN0 5 www.prb.org 6 http://www.one.org 7 Activity-Friendly Cities Aid Obesity Control, Environmental Damage. Medical News Today. 27 March 2008. 8 Sheehan, Molly. City Limits: Putting the Brakes on Sprawl. Worldwatch Institute. June 2001. 9 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/xx.html 10 Research conducted by Peter D. Hart Research Associates on behalf of the National Womens Law Center and Planned Parenthood Federation of America, 2007. 11 The total budget for population assistance is $545 million for bilateral and multilateral FPRH. The total U.S. budget is $3.55 trillion. 1212 http://www.populationaction.org/resources/factsheets/FactSheet_1.htm 1313 www.UNFPA.org 14 Population Action International, 2007. 1515 United Nations World Population Prospects: 2006 revision 16 Simpson, Victor. Pope: Condoms Not The Answer To AIDS. The Huffington Post. 17 March 2009. 1717 www.popinfo.org 1818 The Status of Women. Population Reference Bureau. 2002.

J. Joseph Speidel, Cynthia C. Harper, and Wayne C. Shields. "The Potential of Longacting Reversible Contraception to Decrease Unintended Pregnancy". Contraception. September 2008.
1919 20

World Health Organization, 1999. UNAIDS, 2008. 2222 US Census Bureau study cited by United Press International, 2002. 2323 Facing the HIV/AIDS Pandemic. Population Bulletin, a publication of PRB. September 2002. 2424 Facing the HIV/AIDS Pandemic. Population Bulletin, a publication of PRB. September 2002. 2525 www.prb.org 2626 Facing the HIV/AIDS Pandemic. Population Bulletin, a publication of PRB. September 2002. 2727 http://www.nwf.org/internationalwildlife/1998/6billionso.html. 2828 http://www.nwg.org/internationalwildlife/1998/6billionso.html. 2929 http://www.animalalliance.ca/kids/endan.htm. 3030 http://www.unfpa.org/modules/populi/issues99/dec99/news2.htm. 31 Ellis, Amanda, Manuel, Claire, and Blackden, C. Mark. Gender and Economic Growth in Uganda. The World Bank, 2006. 3232 Population Reports. Center for Communication Programs, The Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. 3333 Facts and figures from the World Health Report, 2005. Geneva: WHO. 3434 WHO, 2005. 3535 Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2008. 3636 "Facts in Brief: Induced Abortion Worldwide, 2003," Alan Guttmacher Institute. 3737 Nour NM (2008). "An Introduction to Maternal Mortality". Reviews in Ob Gyn 1: 7781. 3838 UNFPA, State of World Population, 2007.
2121