Talk Elections

World population will reach 9.2 billion in 2050, U.N. report says

UNITED NATIONS: The world's population will likely reach 9.2 billion in 2050, with nearly three times as many people over the age of 60 and virtually all growth in the developing world, the U.N. Population Division reported.

Hania Zlotnik, the division's director, said an important change in the new population estimate is a decrease in expected deaths from HIV/AIDS because of the increasing use of anti-retroviral drugs and the downward revision of the prevalence of the disease in some countries.

The new report issued Tuesday estimates 32 million fewer deaths from AIDS during the 2005-2020 period in the 62 most affected countries compared with the previous U.N. estimate in 2004.

This change contributed to the slightly higher world population estimate of 9.2 billion in 2050 in the 2006 estimate, compared with 9.1 billion in the 2004 estimate, the report said.

The new 2006 report also confirms "the very huge changes" that the population of the world is about to experience, mostly as a result of the reduction in fertility in developing countries, which means women are having fewer children, Zlotnik said.

Fertility has already reached below replacement levels in 28 developing countries which account for 25 percent of the world's population, including China, the report said. China's average birth rate during 2005-2010 is estimated at 1.73 children per woman.

According to the 2006 estimate, world population will likely increase by 2.5 billion people over the next 43 years from the current 6.7 billion — a rise equivalent to the world's population in 1950.

If fertility levels are slightly higher than projected, global population would reach 10.8 billion in 2050, and if they were slightly lower, it would hit 7.8 billion, the report said.

The growing population will be absorbed mainly in less developed countries whose population is projected to rise from 5.4 billion in 2007 to 7.9 billion in 2050. The populations of poor countries like Afghanistan, Burundi, Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Niger, East Timor and Uganda are projected to at least triple by mid-century.

By contrast, the population of richer developed countries is expected to remain largely unchanged at 1.2 billion. The report said the figure would be lower without expected migration from poorer to richer countries, averaging 2.3 million people annually.

But according to the report, 46 countries are expected to lose population by mid-century including Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, most of the countries in the former Soviet Union, and several small island nations.

Population growth will remain concentrated in populous countries with half the projected increase from 2005 to 2050 in eight countries listed according to the size of their expected growth — India, Nigeria, Pakistan, Congo, Ethiopia, the United States, Bangladesh and China, the report said.

Half the increase in world population between 2005 and 2050 will be the result of a rise in the over 60 population while the number of children under age 15 will decline slightly, it said.

Today, just 8 percent of the population in developing countries is over 60 years old, but the report said that by mid-century the figure will rise to 20 percent.

Globally, the number of people over the age of 60 is expected to almost triple, from 673 million in 2005 to 2 billion by 2050, it said.

"Population aging is, in fact, the result of a success — the success of humanity in controlling its number," Zlotnik said. "The only thing we can hope is that aging continues and that society can adapt itself to the important social changes ... and have better lives."

She said most countries in Asia and Latin America have reached the "relatively beneficial stage" of having more workers than children or elderly "and they will remain in that stage for at least two more decades."

But then their populations will start aging more, which is where Europe and North America are going, she said.

"Europe is the only region at this moment where the number of people aged 60 and over has already surpassed the number of children," Zlotnik said. "We expect that Asia and Latin America will have by 2050 an age distribution that is very similar to the one that Europe has today."

African countries will have a lot of workers by 2050 but to get there the population will nearly double from 2007 to 2050, Zlotnik said.

"So it is the continent that is going to have to absorb a very high increase, and it will have to absorb it at levels of development that are the very lowest that we have in this world," Zlotnik said.

2050: Most populated countries (millions)

India: 1.658
China: 1.409
USA: 402
Indonesia: 297
Pakistan: 292
Nigeria: 289
Brazil: 254
Bangladesh: 254
Congo: 187
Ethiopia: 183

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/14/news/UN-GEN-UN-World-Population.php

http://www.un.org/esa/population/unpop.htm

Time for a little population control.  :P

No. Birth rates are falling too fast. Many countries should increase their birth rate. Especially Europe, Japan, Russia and Canada. The population explosion is a thing of the past except for parts of Africa and the Middle East.

This is a rise from 8.9 Billion, which is the last projection I remember. Thats good news.

Population stabilization is a good thing. Russia and the former Soviet bloc have a problem, but that's more of a result of disastrous economic conditions than anything else. Few other places have falling populations to the point of concern. Europe as a continent can't really handle many more people than it has now, anyway; Europe is the least fertile inhabitable continent save desert-filled Australia.

India will have the upper hand in terms of manufacturing for a while, but their ballooning population will soon become so great that the government can no longer effectively provide services. Rapid population growth is no longer the benefit it was during the Industrial Revolution.

This estimate does not factor in when the sh!t hits the fan in Asia and you see a big drop due to something horrific.

I really don't see why we had to find a cure for AIDS-it could've helped kill off some of the excess population that are taking our resources.  :D

I really hope that you are joking. Otherwise are you a truely sick person.

Yes, we're joking.  However, by 2050, we need to have a settlement on the moon in order to being either off-planet housing and/or agriculture.  By 2100, I doubt that the world would be able to sustain such a large population of humans without having shortages of food/resources, unless we get some Star Trek tech going where we can resequence proteins into food and save the vast natural lands for something other than farming.

Earth in 2100 will have the same amount of people as it does now if not less. The reason: The demographic slowdown which is hitting the west(minus America) right now and starting to hit EVERYWHERE else now

I hope you're right

The west in general-fine
America-secure borders
Third world-pass out condoms and education

Use this formua and there's no reason why we would need to deplete resources.

By 2100 we'll likely have more than half of eartth's population being soley in 3 countries(United States with 600 million if it doesn't expand), China with 1.5 billion and India with another 1.5 billion. Imagine the power disparity between thsoe 3 and anyone else.

Fortunately, I'll be dead and not have to worry about it.  :P

The west will continue to shrink in population while some countries will start to shrink (China, Iran, much of south America), while many others will be reaching peak at 2050 (India).

I think there will be sustained famine and disease in Africa and violence will escalate in the Middle East and their populations will level off.

Well, I probably won't be contributing to the problem.

Who says its a problem? The US, China and India could take down any potenital competition and nip things like arab bitching at ISreal in the buds. That's the benefit of Global emprie.

Hopefully natural selection will eliminate some people in the most populated countries aside from the United States.  I mean seriously India and China must be becoming so overcrowded that disease will wipe them out

GASP!! BUT THAT'S PROVING EVOLUTION AND IS CONTRAY TO HOLY TEACHINGS!!!1111!111!1!1!1ONEONEONEONEELEVENTYONE11!!!!!!!! HOW CAN ANYONE PROVE THIS J000ISH C0NSP1RACY!!!1111

Aside from that, you're really sick. Wishing for the deaths of millions of people cannot be excused, however you put it.

Actually, China has rigorously tried to discourage population growth, and their population is expected to peak at around 1.4 billion in 2030 and then begin to decline.

It doesn't really prove evolution it proves that strong species survive.  Anyway, it wasn't wishing death it was predicting the ineviatble

Why don't you post directly into the comedy thread? Ah, well, I guess we have to do it for you.

I disagree with you, I believe that if a species or person is weak they will die off, but I believe that all creatures are placed on this earth by God

You... don't really understand what evolution means, do you?

What do you disagree with? The first sentence is a question and cannot be disagreed with. The second sentence cannot really be disagreed with either, given that I've already made it come true.

Why is everyone so worried? The world population growth rate has steadily decreased since the 60's, so we are growing, but the speed at which we are growing is slowing down.

Because per-capita resource consumption is accelerating?

Understatement of the day.

Your economies would be growing faster if you had a higher birth rate. And regarding your last sentence, um......the last 2 thousand years kind of disprove that. It may be less fertile than Africa, but you can't have lots of farms if elephants are going to trample through every few days and destroy your crops ;)


They've managed to go from 370 Million in 1950 to 1.1 Billion today while managing to decrease poverty and increase the food supply, contrary to what doomsayers have predicted. Adding another 500 million may not help the environment, which is sad, but I'm sure India can manage it.

don't be so hard on DWDL. Evolution never helped HIM or his ancestors out dso he doesn'tvare. ;)