The Pros And Cons Of The Population Bomb

The Population Bomb a theory developed by Paul Ehrlich in the 1960’s predicted that in less than two decades the overpopulation of the world would not be able to sustain itself leading to mass starvation and deaths. To achieve a more balanced carrying capacity he argued that population control at the family level would be necessary for society to continue to function. This type of thinking led to the implementation of population control programs, such as female sterilization that was forced upon women in undeveloped countries. Its 2016 and Ehrlich’s prediction did not come true still, continued global population growth along with increasing global climate change has once again ignited the debate on advocacy for population control.

Hartmann and Barajas argue that family planning thinking like Ehrlich’s is fundamentally flawed because it focuses and disproportionately blames minority groups of people primarily poor women. Instead they argue that overconsumption by developed countries such as
Furthermore undeveloped countries with high population growth rates have the lowest carbon emissions per-capita than the rest of the world contradicting overpopulation claims. Many of these countries ironically are resource rich however; due to corruption and mismanagement they tend to suffer from environmental injustice while powerful corporate and political actors profit. Many of the communities around resources suffer severe health effects from chemicals used during the extraction process. Women in particular are physiologically more prone to store pollutants in their bodies that they later transfer to their infants when breastfeeding them. Additionally climate change affects food security, women and girls can suffer malnutrition due to a hierarchy of cultures were men and boys eat