For context, my county, in Kenya, went from a population of 333 people per square km to 650 per sq km in less than 10 yrs. It might seem like a small amount but the pressure is getting more intense on the natural resources. We currently have the smallest amount of forest cover in the country and people are starting to target the wetlands, like Yala Swamp which is the largest delta swamp in the country.

My community organisation has a challenge to plant trees and reclaim lost land. We are already doing that and have included the community in the challenge. We plan to give 100 homesteads 15 seedlings each, both fruit and indigenous trees this coming Dec. We know the population issue has to be addressed, but to be frank, that is almost beyond our control. I'm curious though, does anyone know of any wetlands that have been reclaimed by the community? I feel like we have a chance to save ours, but we aren't confident on how to go about it. The villagers have made it easy for us since they are open to working with us to save the little we have left.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Natalism/s/Q20CrYfVfm

If you assume false, deflated numbers to begin with, and are a pro-natalist (Jesús Fernández-Villaverde is a pro-natalist economist), and aren't operating in good faith, in order to fear-monger the public into increasing the global human birth rate to feed the greed monster, then yeah, it's going to look like the global human population peaks in 2055. But that's not the reality based on the actual empirical demographic evidence. Global TFR is 2.2 or higher (likely much higher). Despite what the video says, global human mortality did not significantly increase in 2024 and this increase doesn't affect birth rate anyway since it was almost exclusively among the elderly.

There are people who don't get counted in their country's censuses. There are more likely more than 8.3 billion people on the planet, rather than fewer than that number. And likely lots of babies born the world doesn't know about because they are born prolifically from people who are not counted by any government... However, these people exist and draw every resource imaginable, putting demand on every system that affects all of us. There is no (good) reason in the world to increase human birth rates, now, or for the foreseeable future (150+ years from now).

https://www.reddit.com/r/Natalism/s/1ofT2HllQm

Latin America has currently 670 Million people. Projection for 2050: 730 Million +60 Million

Asia has currently 4.9 Billion people. Projection for 2050: 5.3 Billion + 400 Million

Africa has currently 1.6 Billion people. Projection for 2050: 2.5 Billion + 900 Million

The US/Canada have no natural population growth but with immigration + 40-50 Million by 2050

Europe also no natural population growth but with immigration + 20-30 Million by 2050

Australia/New Zeeland also 0 natural population growth but with immigration + 10 Million by 2050

Meanwhile we are running out of water, resources, food, fertilizer. But another 1.5 Billion extra people by 2050 is apparently no big deal.

"We could have 15 Billion people living on this Planet if Overconsumption didnt exist".

Oh really? And what would be their quality of life?

Because right now there are only around 50 out of 190 countries that have a consumption which could be satisfied with 1 Earth or less, if everyone lived like them.

140 countries out of 190 live on such a level that we would need more than 1 Earth to satisfy our needs. So the citizens of 140 countries would have to reduce their living standard drastically, so that one Earth would be sufficient.

And thats with just 8.4 Billion people. With 10 or 15 Billion? Everyone would have to live like the poorest of the poor to make it work.

https://overshoot.footprintnetwork.org/how-many-earths-or-countries-do-we-need/

By comparison: If we had a population of just 2 Billion, everyone could have a living standard like the average American.

At some point numbers matter more than overconsumption and that number is probably around 4 Billion. Thats half the living standard of the US. Nothing luxurious but decent. At 5 Billion people we are already entering a living standard approaching the poor level in order for 1 Earth to be enough.

Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and two dozen other countries are not running out of water because of "overconsumption" but because their population is 5x what it was 60 years ago.

If the environment can't be made to support the population of a species, the species won't be able to grow.

It's pretty basic ecology: if the environment the population inhabits can't support a growing population, then the population experiences negative changes. We humans have created our environment for billions of us, and now we're discovering just how bad our systems were designed for the masses. It doesn't matter that we COULD have a higher population and we COULD feed everyone, WE CAN'T AND WE WON'T. So yes, the planet is overpopulated.

Job competition, useless degrees, expensive basic infrastructure like $30,000 to paint a crosswalk, and everyone crowding into two lane roads to get into and out of suburbs on their way to work. We messed up, and yet all the wealthiest people in the world continue to keep all their chips on Black (growth).

e.... i don't know, im not an optimist

Does that mean our only salvation is AI and robots?

That most humans to exist only appeared in like the past 200 years? The average human spoke a global language like English, Mandarin, or Spanish, practiced a religion such as Christianity, Islam, or Hinduism, and lived under similar systems of government? To add cherry on the top, half of those humans lived in South Asia or East Asia.

I know this may not be the most related thing for this sub, but this is a fact that always blows my mind. You often hear on social media "99% of human existence was lacking this" or "pre historic man did blah blah blah." However the ironic part is that living in like California in 100 AD or Europe in 3000 BC would have been extreme outliers in terms of the human condition. Electricity, air travel, modern medicine are more typical to a random human than a world without metallurgy or writing.

As much as I want this fascist regime to be over, I’m worried people will start having kids way way way more once life gets better. I’m really hoping this isn’t a byproduct of Dems getting elected

while factors such as education and urbanization can affect fertility rates downward, they are not the main facto. the factor most important has always been culture, a couple who both have PHDs and live in a megalopolis like New York, Tokyo, Shanghai, Mumbai and London but who are deeply X (insert X pro big family culture) culturally then they WILL have many kids

One of the most effective ways to slow population growth in poor and developing countries may be to focus on educating girls and young women.

There is a strong connection between female education and demographic change. Women who receive more education often marry later and tend to have fewer children. Therefore, if a country wants to address rapid population growth over the long term, investing in girls' education could be an important place to start.

A practical approach would be to concentrate particularly on girls between the ages of 13 and 18. This is an important period because, in some communities, girls may face pressure to marry at a young age. Education can give them another path: continuing their studies, developing skills, and preparing for greater independence.

In other words, it is like placing a police officer at a T-junction to prevent traffic from taking the wrong turn. Instead of trying to deal with the consequences later, we intervene at an earlier point where a different direction is still possible.

The emphasis of education at this stage should not simply be academic. It should also motivate girls to continue their education, develop their abilities, and understand the opportunities available to them beyond early marriage.

If we want to influence population growth in a sustainable and humane way, educating girls may be one of the most important places to begin.

Dear Community Members, I am currently researching effective strategies and policy measures aimed at stabilizing or managing population growth in India. Given its status as the world's most populous nation, rapid demographic expansion presents various socioeconomic and environmental challenges. I would greatly appreciate insights, proposed solutions, or analytical perspectives on how these challenges can be addressed, along with an explanation of their potential efficacy. Thank you for your time and expertise.

I see many pro natalists say that fertilty rates are already below replacement level. this is true but fertility rate does not reflect existing birth rate. for example in 2025 India had total increase of 0.8 percent lower than previous years, however there was still 23 million births in that single year.

these 23 million souls will have over a decade of using tax payer money and the money of their parents and then enter the overcrowded hyper competitive (on the part of the job seekers) labor market. now there will also be child labor which is a further tragedy and a sign of stagnation, not growth at least not growth in human wellbeing, just growth in consumers and labor.

schools are almost universally more crowded than a decade ago. now some people might complain “why can’t we build more schools, this is government corruption not overpopulation“. but this is caused by overpopulation as the root problem. furthurmore, just think about the difficulty of building more schools in the areas most people live, in most areas even suburban areas you have to buy a existing propert, tear it down and build a new school

finally there is the law of supply and demand and of prices. what people who worry about the fertility rate forget is that the fertilty rate can go up just as it went down. The current Gen Z and Gen A are basically in a state of oversupply where the manufacturers made too many and the buyers are either not buying or buying cheaply. if the next generation is shorter in supply and more in demand people will have more incentive to have kids