Global Demography

Rural families view multiple children and large kinship networks as critical investments.
Children, for
example, can take over the agricultural work. Their houses can also become the "retirement
homes" of their parents, who will then proceed to take care of their children. Urban families may not
have the same set-up because couples live on their own. These differing versions of family life
determine the economic and social policies that countries craft regarding their respective populations.
Countries in the less developed regions in the world that rely on agriculture tend to maintain high
levels of population growth.
Because of MIGRATION, urban populations have grown. Industries and businesses in the cities are
attracting people from the rural areas. International migration plays a part. Countries welcome
immigrants as they offset the debilitating effects of an aging population, but they are also perceived
as threats to the job market. Voter's pressure has often constrained their governments to institute
stricter immigration policies.
The Perils of Overpopulation

Thomas Malthus, a British scholar, warned in his essay "The Principle of Population", 1798, that
population growth will inevitably exhaust world food supply. Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife Anne
wrote "The Population Bomb" which argued that overpopulation will bring about global
environmental disasters that would lead to food shortage and mass starvation. They proposed that
countries like the United States take the lead in the promotion of global population control in order to
reduce the growth rate to zero. Their recommendations ranged from bizarre (chemical castration)
to the policy-oriented (taxing and additional child and luxury taxes on child-related products) to
monetary incentives (paying off men who would agree to be sterilized after two children to institution-
building (a powerful Department of Population and Environment).
The rate of global population increase was at its highest between 1955 and 1975 when nations
were finally able to return to normalcy after the devastations wrought by World War II. The growth
rate rose from 1.8 percent per year from 1955 to 1975, peaking at 2.06 percent annual growth rate
between 1965 and 1970. By limiting the population, vital resources could be used for economic
progress and not be "diverted" and "wasted" to feeding more mouths.
In the mid-20th century, the Philippines, China and India sought to lower birth rates on the belief
that unless controlled, the free expansion of family members would lead to crisis in resources which
in turn, may result in widespread poverty, mass hunger and political instability. As early as 1958, the
American policy journal, Foreign Affairs, had already advocated "contraception and sterilization as
the practical solutions to global economic, social and political problems."
In May 2009, a group of American billionaires warned of hos a "nightmarish" explosion of people
was "a potentially disastrous environmental, social, and industrial threat" to the world.
This worry is likewise at the core of the economist argument for the promotion of reproductive
health. Advocate of population control contend for universal access to reproductive technologies
(such as condoms, the pill, abortion, and vasectomy) and giving women, the right to choose whether
to have children or not.
The use of population control to prevent economic crisis has its critics. For example, Betsy
Hartmann disagrees with the advocates of neo- Malthusian theory and accused governments of
using population control as a "substitute for social justice and much needed reforms - such land
distribution, employment creation, provision of mass education and health care, and emancipation.
Others pointed out that the population did grow fast in many countries in the 1960s, and this
growth aided economic development by spurring technological and institutional innovation
and increasing the supply of human ingenuity." They acknowledged the shift in population from
the rural to the urban areas. They likewise noted that while these "megacities" are now clusters in
which income disparities along with the transportation, housing, air pollution and waste management
are major problems, they also have become and continue to be, centers of economic growth and
activity.
Lately, a middle ground emerged between these two extremes. Scholars and policymakers agree
with the Neo-Malthusians but suggest that if governments pursue population control programs, they
must include "more inclusive growth" and "greener economic growth."
The character in the middle of these debates - women - is often the subject of these population
measures. Reproductive rights supporters argue that if population control and economic development
were to reach their goals, women must have control over whether they will have children or not and
whey they will have their progeny, if any. Most countries implement reproductive health laws
because they worry about the health of the mother.
Opponents regard reproductive rights as nothing but a false front for abortion. They contend that this
method of preventing conception endangers the life of the mother and must be banned.
A country being industrialized and developed, however, does not automatically assure pro-women
reproductive regulations.
Feminists approach the issue of reproductive rights from another angle. They are, foremost, against
any form of population control because they are compulsory by nature, resorting to a carrot-and-stick
approach (punitive mechanism co-exist alongside benefits) that actually does not empower women.
They believed that government assumptions that poverty and environmental degradation are
caused by overpopulation are wrong. These factors ignore other equally important causes like the
unequal distribution of wealth, the lack of public safety nets like universal health care, education and
gender equality programs. Feminists also point out that there is very little evidence that point to
overpopulation as the culprit behind poverty and ecological devastation.
Today's global population has reached 7.4 billion. it is estimated to increase to 9.5 billion in 2050,
then 11.2 billion by 2100.
• Demographers predict that the world population will stabilize by 2050 to 9 billion, although they
warn that feeding this population will be an immense challenge.
• The Food and Agriculture Organization recommends that countries increase their investments
in agriculture, craft long-term policies aimed at fighting poverty, and invest in research and
development. The UN body also suggests that countries develop a comprehensive social service
program that include food assistance, consistent delivery of health services and education
especially for the poor. If domestic production is not enough, it becomes essential for nations to
import. The FAO enjoins government to keep their markets open and to eventually move towards
a global trading system that is fair and competitive and that contributes to a dependable market
for food.
Cambridge English Dictionary defines global migration as " a situation in which people go to live
in foreign countries, especially in order to find work. Most global migration is from developing
countries to developed ones."
There are two types of migration: internal migration, which refers to people moving from one area to
another within one country; and international migration, in which people cross borders of one
country to another.
International migration can be broken down into five groups. First are those who move
permanently to another country (immigrants). The Second refers to workers who stay in another
country for a fixed period (at least 6 months in a year). Illegal migrants comprise the Third group,
while the Fourth are migrants whose families have "petitioned" them to move for the destination
country. The Fifth group are refugees (also known as asylum seekers), i.e., those "unable or
unwilling to return because of a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion,
nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion." The top 10 country
destinations of these migrants are mainly in the West and the Middle East with the United States
topping the list.
Fifty percent of global migrants have moved from developing countries to the developed zones of
the world and contribute anywhere from 40 to 80 percent of their labor force.
The Migrant influx has led to a debate in destination countries over the issue of whether migrants
are assets or liabilities to national development. Anti-immigrant groups and nationalists argue that
governments must control legal immigration and put a stop to illegal entry of foreigners. Many of
these anti-immigrant groups are gaining influence through political leaders who share their beliefs.
Even if 90 percent of the value generated by migrant workers remains in their host countries, they
have sent billions back to their home countries. These remittances make significant contributions to
the development of small- and medium-term industries that help generate jobs.
Remittances likewise change the economic and social standing of migrants, as shown by new or
renovated homes and their relatives' access to new consumer goods. The purchasing power of a
migrant's family doubles and makes it possible for children to start or continue their schooling.
Yet, there remain serious concerns about the economic sustainability of those reliant on migrant
monies. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) observes that in countries like the Philippines,
remittances "do not have a significant influence on other key items of consumption or investment
such as spending on education and health care. "Remittances, therefore, may help in lifting
households out of poverty... but not in rebalancing growth especially in the long run.
More importantly, Global migration is "siphoning qualified personnel' (and) removing dynamic young
workers. This process has often been referred to as "brain drain." Futhermore, the lost of
professionals in certain key roles, such as doctors, has been detrimental to the migrants'
home countries.
The Problem of Human Trafficking

On top of the issue of brain drain, sending states must likewise protect migrant workers. Human
trafficking has been very profitable, earning syndicates, smugglers, and corrupt state officials profits
as high as $150 million a year in 2014. Governments, the private sector, and civil society groups have
worked together to combat human trafficking, yet the results remain uneven.
In 2012, the International Labor Organization identified 21 million men, women and children as
victims of forced labor, an appalling three out of every 1000 persons worldwide. Ninety percent of
the victims are exploited by private enterprises and entrepreneurs; 22 percent are sexually abused
and 68 percent work under compulsion in agricultural, manufacturing, infrastructure, and domestic
activities. Human trafficking has been very profitable, earning syndicated, smugglers and
corrupt state officials profits of as high as $150 billion a year in 2014. Governments, the private
sector and civil society groups have worked together to combat human trafficking, yet there results
remain uneven.
Integration
There is considerable variation in the economic integration of migrants. In the United States and
Singapore, there are blue-collar as well as white-collar Filipino workers (doctors, engineers, even
corporate executives), and it is the professional, white-collar workers that have oftentimes been
easier to integrate.
Democratic states assimilate immigrants and their children by granting them citizenship and the
rights that go with it. However, without a solid support from their citizens, switching citizenship may
just be a formality. Linguistic difficulties, customs from the "old country" and of late, differing
religions may create cleavages between migrants and citizens of receiving countries, particularly in
the West. The latter accuse migrants of bringing in the culture from their home countries and
applying differences in linguistic and ethnic customs. Crucially, the lack of integration gives
xenophobic and anti-immigrant groups more ammunition to argue that these "new citizens are
often not nationals (in the sense of sharing the dominant culture)."
Migrants unwittingly reinforce the tension by "keeping among themselves." The first-time migrant's
anxiety at coming into a new and often "strange" place is mitigated by "local networks of fellow
citizens" that serve as the migrant's safety net from the dislocation of uprooting oneself.
Governments and private businesses have made policy changes to address integration problems,
like using multiple languages in state documents (in the case of the United States, Spanish and
English). Training programs complemented with counseling have also helped migrant integration in
Hamburg, Germany, while retail merchants in Barcelona have brought in migrant shopkeepers to
break down language barriers while introducing Chinese culture to citizens. Whether these initiatives
will succeed or not remains an open question.

Global Demography

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Global Demography

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Global Demography

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rural families view multiple children and large kinship networks as critical investments.

The Perils of Overpopulation

The Problem of Human Trafficking

You might also like