Re: Depopulation Is Coming. Don’t Expect It to Solve Our Problems.

There was an op-ed in The New York Times arguing that a smaller human population is not beneficial. We sent in a letter to the editor, which wasn’t published, so we are featuring it here.

We encourage all our members and supporters to make their voices heard! See our media guide for advice on how to do that.

Re: Depopulation Is Coming. Don’t Expect It to Solve Our Problems.

Professors Geruso and Spears present flawed arguments suggesting reduced population pressure isn’t advantageous. Just because we curtailed smog, ozone depletion, and acid rain while population grew rapidly doesn’t mean our numbers don’t matter. Each were addressed by regulation, which replaced terrible pollutants with better alternatives.

Today’s environmental quandary is much more complex. Pollution and climate change are accompanied by natural resource depletion and catastrophic biodiversity loss. The growing human enterprise has already breached six of nine critical planetary boundaries. Technology alone cannot fix the polycrisis — we must confront the root drivers: overpopulation and overconsumption.

Rapid population growth exacerbates poverty and hampers sustainable development. Progress happens when we invest in ensuring every child is wanted, healthy, and well-educated.

The authors claim that “no one yet knows how to avoid depopulation.” Not so. Surveys show that most prefer to have two children. People feel limited in childbearing decisions by finances and concern over the state of the world. The authors are correct that making parenting “easier, fairer, [and] simpler to combine with other aspirations for a good life” is the way forward.

Bryce Hach
Board Chair
Population Connection