The Science Exchange, 55 Exchange Place, Adelaide SA 5000 [View map]

Science behind the headlines: Beyond seven billion

Science behind the headlines: Beyond seven billion
When: Tuesday 6 December 2011
Time: 6:00pm to 7:30pm
Bookings have closed for this event.

As the human population swells to over seven billion, are we in danger of permanently depleting the Earth’s resources? What does the future hold for humans as a species?

At our first Science behind the headlines event, Paul Willis hosted a discussion on the science of population growth. He talked with some of Australia’s leading experts in the field and to the media to discuss ways this information can be relayed to the public. Tom BourneBarney ForanGraeme Hugo, Clare PeddieUdoy Saikia and Tory Shepherd  answered your questions.



Related Content

Listen to audio of Dr Paul Willis speaking with Terry Begley on the Mornings program, 612 ABC Brisbane

Read the article, How many people can the world support? by Dr Paul Willis for The Punch

View the video, We are 7 billion, The Economist online

Read the article, population to hit 7 billion today – maybe, ABC Science online

Read the article, the world at seven billion – what’s your number? BBC World
View the complete recordings from the event


2 Responses to “Science behind the headlines: Beyond seven billion”

  1. Gary Goland says:

    Hi. I hot topic given the priority corporations are putting on the need for cheap labour here and wherever they operate. Intersted that none of the speakers could respond directly to John Coulter’s challenge asking when do we know, and how do we know, enough people is enough people? A subsiduary to this is that there seems only to be a priority on commercial potential of bigger markets, and not on quality of life. The corporates are the one donating to our political participants…so that is what matters?
    I will follow up with John and ask him for references he has to defining capacity at less than the current population.
    I had intended to ask the question, “With increasing migration between countries with different cultural reference to family size, is this going to assist confusing the issue of limited capacity, and is it going to fire social disconnection between nationalities? A response would be appreciated. Cheers, Gary

  2. Udoy Saikia says:

    If this question refers to migration to Australia, we need to look at this issue in some detail with respect to the type of migration. If it is organised migration to Australia such as the points-based migration, then the migrants will have a different socio-economic status and a modern outlook about family size compared to the rest of the population in their country of origin. In other words, they will be predisposed towards a more rational family size (in most cases, this would be small family size). Refugees or asylum seekers may be culturally be predisposed to large family sizes, but they comprise probably no more than 2 to 3 per cent of all migrants, and their influence on the total scheme of things would not be much. The present trend in international migration is from developing countries to developed countries, but there is also a great deal of migration between developing countries.

    If we look at fertility in Australia by country of birth (COB) of mother, then we will find that most COB groups have below replacement fertility (for example see fertility rate of India COB which is much lower than the current fertility rate back in India). Those groups that have high fertility (TFR greater than or equal to 3) comprise very small proportions of the Australian population and contribute negligible percentages to the total births in Australia. Therefore, in my opinion, migration between countries with different cultural reference to family size, “is not going to assist confusing the issue of limited capacity, and is not going to fire social disconnection between nationalities”, unless such migration happens at very high rates.

    I would also like to draw your attention to a theory called Minority Group Hypothesis (Goldscheider and Uhlenbarg 1969) which states that minorities tend to have lower fertility as compared with the majority group unless there is a normative system in the society that supports a strong pro-natalist ideology.

    Goldscheider, C. & Uhlenberg, P. 1969, Minority Group Status and Fertility, American Journal of Sociology, Vol.74, No.4, pp.361-372.

    Thanking you
    Regards

    Udoy

    Udoy Saikia, PhD
    Senior Lecturer and Associate Director, Applied Population Studies
    School of the Environment
    Flinders University

Leave a Reply


− 9 = 0