Dank niedrigerer Geburtenraten rückt der globale Bevölkerungshöchststand näher: Grafiken erklären es
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/07/21/world-fertility-rate-decline/74447945007/
Dank niedrigerer Geburtenraten rückt der globale Bevölkerungshöchststand näher: Grafiken erklären es
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/07/21/world-fertility-rate-decline/74447945007/
8 Kommentare
From the article
>[A new report from United Nations](https://population.un.org/wpp/) shows the estimated global population will peak at 10.3 billion people in the mid-2080s – a significantly earlier timeline than what was predicted a few years prior.
>Although the population is continuing to grow, the [report](https://population.un.org/wpp/) found that such growth is slowing down. One indicator of this slow down is the drop in global fertility rates.
>Fertility rate is the number of live births per woman at reproductive age. Globally, the rate is 2.25 births per woman – that is one child per woman less than three decades prior in 1990.
Come on humans! You can do better! Peak faster, harder, better stronger.
Surprise Surprise the harder it is economically it is to have kids the fertility rate drops.
Peak global population has always „been approaching.“ Wouldn’t word it that way for the 2080s estimate, though.
And now governments are trying to fix fertility rates.
Are there any documented cases of an industrialized society successfully reversing low fertility rate trends?
We don’t have a lot of history evaluating urbanized societies so I imagine it’s hard to really find examples. But the idea of reversing a fertility trend once it falls below replacement level seems remarkably difficult.
We’re seeing in societies like Japan and South Korea, that aging societies just creates more pressure on the younger generation to keep the economy going, that falls in fertility get compounded quickly.
Just stabilizing a trend is hard, and reversing would be even harder.
It either requires extreme incentivization towards the child bearing generation, or it goes the other way, with regressive and punitive approaches. And the way the world is trending, it doesn’t feel like an aging generation is keen to incentivize younger people at the cost of their own financial security.
We need it to peak for human quality of life, plain and simple. At this point more total humans means less access to and progressively inflated prices of nearly everything that makes life worthwhile, by the very nature of too many people vying for the same things that can’t be scaled up forever.
Now there are many essays crying how the flattening or non-pyramid demographics are bad.