There was a New York Times article yesterday which states that the world population will stabilize at around 10 billion in 2100 and not at 9 billion as previously projected. That means the error for the projected addition to the current population is around 50%. A 3 billion increase instead of a 2 billion increase as previously thought. In any scenario, this is a significant adjustment and should raise serious questions about the way the old and the new research were conducted. But in a world where billions live in or on the edge of poverty, the implications are huge.
Already, in countries like India, an apathetic elite has jettisoned the aims of rural development amidst advertisements about economic growth. Greater than 10% annual growth in the service sector combined with 2% annual growth in the agricultural sector in India means that the stage is set for possibly the biggest divergence in living standards between two groups inside the same country in modern history. After accounting for population growth, the 60% of the Indian population that depends on agriculture sees little or no per capita growth. The article does not state how much of the population growth is going to be in India, but given India’s previous lackadaisical attitude towards the population issue and its inability to come up with or implement holistic rural development plans, this recalibration needs to be studied in detail by the country’s experts to understand how it impacts India.
As for Africa, the implications cannot be overstated. The article states that Africa’s population will go from 1 billion to 3.6 billion by 2100. In a continent that has seen recurring famines and ethnic conflicts, this recalibration has serious implications for development aims and national economic policies. It will be interesting to observe to what extent the new projections are consistent with national census and projection statistics. Country by country breakup of the population growth numbers will become necessary to enable right prioritization and resource allocation, both as regards internal resource allocation and as regards how external aid is spent.
As for the United Nation’s efforts to tackle poverty around the world, the picture is likely to become grimmer. The World Food Programme is already struggling to provide even basic sustenance to people in several areas of the world. Food production projections that this writer has come across on the internet do not paint a very optimistic picture even at the 9 billion stabilization level. The new population projection means that availability of agricultural land, long-term sustainability of food-crop production ( soil fertility after prolonged fertilizer use, soil fertility after prolonged growing of genetically modified crops, availability of irrigation resources for crop varieties that require a lot of water ) and poor people’s entitlement to food in a world where the rush towards ultra-capitalistic paradigms is becoming rampant will pose overwhelming challenges.
Capitalistic modes of production do not encourage the creation of food production buffers. Land use is likely to be appropriated quickly for other uses even though billions are starving because the rich are able to pay for houses and industrial activity while the poor cannot pay for food. Countries like India use minimum support prices for food grains. That should achieve the goal of allocating more land to food production than an ultra-capitalistic mode would. However, at the same time, the results as regards food security for the broad masses are not impressive. People still starve while food rots in granaries due to the lack of proper systems to ensure that food gets to the hungry masses. Food riots have taken place in recent times in India due to the unresponsive nature of the government’s welfare systems in the food area. People with Below Poverty Line ( BPL ) cards should get food from the government. However, the occurrence of food riots indicates that not enough effort has been made to make this system work in the proper way. In a country where water resources ( and as a result, irrigation resources ) are becoming scarcer, a significant increase in future population beyond the previously expected numbers can spell disaster for a food security system that is already failing badly. And with the advent of neo-liberal policies, it will not be surprising if greed for real estate development and other elitist uses of land result in a disastrous misallocation of resources as regards land use. Given India’s track record in the population area and the food security area, it is time for the nation’s policy framers to take a serious look at current and future land use, and to determine if serious changes to capitalistic resource allocation are needed to ensure that the country is not faced with severe food scarcity in the future. Land that is used for real estate or industrial development or for dams will be impossible to reclaim for agricultural use. This needs to be taken into account in any serious examination of land-use and land rights policy by the government. Correct assessment of this issue is paramount if India and other countries in similar situations are to have the agricultural resources and output necessary in the future to sustain manufacturing sector output or service sector output.
by C. Jayant Praharaj
Already, in countries like India, an apathetic elite has jettisoned the aims of rural development amidst advertisements about economic growth. Greater than 10% annual growth in the service sector combined with 2% annual growth in the agricultural sector in India means that the stage is set for possibly the biggest divergence in living standards between two groups inside the same country in modern history. After accounting for population growth, the 60% of the Indian population that depends on agriculture sees little or no per capita growth. The article does not state how much of the population growth is going to be in India, but given India’s previous lackadaisical attitude towards the population issue and its inability to come up with or implement holistic rural development plans, this recalibration needs to be studied in detail by the country’s experts to understand how it impacts India.
As for Africa, the implications cannot be overstated. The article states that Africa’s population will go from 1 billion to 3.6 billion by 2100. In a continent that has seen recurring famines and ethnic conflicts, this recalibration has serious implications for development aims and national economic policies. It will be interesting to observe to what extent the new projections are consistent with national census and projection statistics. Country by country breakup of the population growth numbers will become necessary to enable right prioritization and resource allocation, both as regards internal resource allocation and as regards how external aid is spent.
As for the United Nation’s efforts to tackle poverty around the world, the picture is likely to become grimmer. The World Food Programme is already struggling to provide even basic sustenance to people in several areas of the world. Food production projections that this writer has come across on the internet do not paint a very optimistic picture even at the 9 billion stabilization level. The new population projection means that availability of agricultural land, long-term sustainability of food-crop production ( soil fertility after prolonged fertilizer use, soil fertility after prolonged growing of genetically modified crops, availability of irrigation resources for crop varieties that require a lot of water ) and poor people’s entitlement to food in a world where the rush towards ultra-capitalistic paradigms is becoming rampant will pose overwhelming challenges.
Capitalistic modes of production do not encourage the creation of food production buffers. Land use is likely to be appropriated quickly for other uses even though billions are starving because the rich are able to pay for houses and industrial activity while the poor cannot pay for food. Countries like India use minimum support prices for food grains. That should achieve the goal of allocating more land to food production than an ultra-capitalistic mode would. However, at the same time, the results as regards food security for the broad masses are not impressive. People still starve while food rots in granaries due to the lack of proper systems to ensure that food gets to the hungry masses. Food riots have taken place in recent times in India due to the unresponsive nature of the government’s welfare systems in the food area. People with Below Poverty Line ( BPL ) cards should get food from the government. However, the occurrence of food riots indicates that not enough effort has been made to make this system work in the proper way. In a country where water resources ( and as a result, irrigation resources ) are becoming scarcer, a significant increase in future population beyond the previously expected numbers can spell disaster for a food security system that is already failing badly. And with the advent of neo-liberal policies, it will not be surprising if greed for real estate development and other elitist uses of land result in a disastrous misallocation of resources as regards land use. Given India’s track record in the population area and the food security area, it is time for the nation’s policy framers to take a serious look at current and future land use, and to determine if serious changes to capitalistic resource allocation are needed to ensure that the country is not faced with severe food scarcity in the future. Land that is used for real estate or industrial development or for dams will be impossible to reclaim for agricultural use. This needs to be taken into account in any serious examination of land-use and land rights policy by the government. Correct assessment of this issue is paramount if India and other countries in similar situations are to have the agricultural resources and output necessary in the future to sustain manufacturing sector output or service sector output.
by C. Jayant Praharaj