Skip to main content
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • Archive
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • Highlights from Latest Articles
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Purpose and Scope
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • For Reviewers
    • Author FAQ
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • Archive
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • Highlights from Latest Articles
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Purpose and Scope
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • For Reviewers
    • Author FAQ

New Research In

Physical Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Applied Physical Sciences
  • Astronomy
  • Computer Sciences
  • Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences
  • Engineering
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Mathematics
  • Statistics

Social Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Economic Sciences
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Political Sciences
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Social Sciences

Biological Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Anthropology
  • Applied Biological Sciences
  • Biochemistry
  • Biophysics and Computational Biology
  • Cell Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Evolution
  • Genetics
  • Immunology and Inflammation
  • Medical Sciences
  • Microbiology
  • Neuroscience
  • Pharmacology
  • Physiology
  • Plant Biology
  • Population Biology
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Sustainability Science
  • Systems Biology

Population stabilization potential and its benefits underestimated

Jane N. O’Sullivan
PNAS February 10, 2015 112 (6) E507; published ahead of print January 23, 2015 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1422507112
Jane N. O’Sullivan
School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: j.osullivan@uq.edu.au

See related content:

  • Plausible reductions in future population growth and implications for the environment
    - Feb 10, 2015

This article has letters. Please see:

  • Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems
  • Reply to O’Neill et al. and O’Sullivan: Fertility reduction will help, but only in the long term
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Bradshaw and Brook’s report “Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems” (1) argues that plausible efforts to reduce birth rates will make little difference to the course of human population this century. Although they emphasize that population reduction is highly desirable from an environmental perspective, and that greater support for voluntary fertility reduction is much needed, the authors argue that the benefits will be generations away.

However, apart from unfairly combining declines in fertility and mortality as if they are codependent, Bradshaw and Brook’s (1) global scenarios ignore the important impact of country-to-country variability. Holding current age-specific fertility and mortality rates constant would lead to a rapid increase in high-fertility countries’ share of the total population. Fertility reduction focused in these countries has a far greater impact on future population than the globally averaged course the authors project. This effect is evident in their own subregional projections. At the global level, Bradshaw and Brook’s (1) “business-as-usual” scenario (Scenario 1) is almost the same as the “realistic” scenario (Scenario 2a), in which global fertility falls slowly to 2.0 by 2100 but mortality also halves. In 2100, the scenarios reach 10.42 and 10.35 billion, respectively. However, when the same scenarios are applied to subregions, Bradshaw and Brook find “the final mean population densities [in 2100] were between 16% and 37% lower [for subregions in the 2a projection] … than those predicted assuming constant vital rates” (1). Given constant land area, this finding clearly contradicts the global result and the paper’s title. The sum of subregional populations, which can be calculated from tables S2 and S3 in ref. 1, are 14.5 billion for Scenario 1, and 9.8 billion for Scenario 2a, a difference of almost one-third. The difference would be even greater if the projections were done on national data rather than subregions: the United Nation’s “constant fertility” projection reaches 28 billion by 2100 (2).

Bradshaw and Brook (1) claim that fertility reduction is a solution from which only “our great-great-great-great-grandchildren might ultimately benefit.” This statement is belied by the enormous social and economic benefits that family-planning–adopting nations have experienced in one generation, compared with their nonadopting neighbors (3). Bradshaw and Brook (1) attribute the general lowering of fertility over past decades to rising affluence, education, and the empowerment of women. More accurately, “general” lowering is the result of rapid lowering in individual countries at different times as they adopted voluntary family-planning programs, averaged together with those who saw little decline because they did little. There can be little doubt that a renewed commitment to such voluntary programs could achieve below-replacement fertility globally, much sooner than Bradshaw and Brook consider realistic, with enormous benefits this century.

Thus, Bradshaw and Brook’s (1) paper seriously understates the hazard of our current population course, and underestimates the impact of fertility-reduction efforts. The authors clearly intend to reinforce the importance of population on total environmental impact, but the effect of this paper can only be perversely to diminish political will for family-planning efforts.

Footnotes

  • ↵1Email: j.osullivan{at}uq.edu.au.
  • Author contributions: J.N.O. wrote the paper.

  • The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Bradshaw CJA,
    2. Brook BW
    (2014) Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111(46):16610–16615
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division
    (2013) World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision. (United Nations, New York). Available at esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm. Accessed January 12, 2015
    .
  3. ↵
    1. O’Sullivan JN
    (2013) Revisiting demographic transition: Correlation and causation in the rate of development and fertility decline. 27th International Population Conference, IUSSP, Busan, South Korea, August 26–31, 2013. Available at www.iussp.org/en/event/17/programme/paper/4775. Accessed January 12, 2015
    .
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Population stabilization potential and its benefits underestimated
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
Citation Tools
Population stabilization potential underestimated
Jane N. O’Sullivan
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Feb 2015, 112 (6) E507; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1422507112

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Population stabilization potential underestimated
Jane N. O’Sullivan
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Feb 2015, 112 (6) E507; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1422507112
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 116 (7)
Current Issue

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Several aspects of the proposal, which aims to expand open access, require serious discussion and, in some cases, a rethink.
Opinion: “Plan S” falls short for society publishers—and for the researchers they serve
Several aspects of the proposal, which aims to expand open access, require serious discussion and, in some cases, a rethink.
Image credit: Dave Cutler (artist).
Several large or long-lived animals seem strangely resistant to developing cancer. Elucidating the reasons why could lead to promising cancer-fighting strategies in humans.
Core Concept: Solving Peto’s Paradox to better understand cancer
Several large or long-lived animals seem strangely resistant to developing cancer. Elucidating the reasons why could lead to promising cancer-fighting strategies in humans.
Image credit: Shutterstock.com/ronnybas frimages.
Featured Profile
PNAS Profile of NAS member and biochemist Hao Wu
 Nonmonogamous strawberry poison frog (Oophaga pumilio).  Image courtesy of Yusan Yang (University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh).
Putative signature of monogamy
A study suggests a putative gene-expression hallmark common to monogamous male vertebrates of some species, namely cichlid fishes, dendrobatid frogs, passeroid songbirds, common voles, and deer mice, and identifies 24 candidate genes potentially associated with monogamy.
Image courtesy of Yusan Yang (University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh).
Active lifestyles. Image courtesy of Pixabay/MabelAmber.
Meaningful life tied to healthy aging
Physical and social well-being in old age are linked to self-assessments of life worth, and a spectrum of behavioral, economic, health, and social variables may influence whether aging individuals believe they are leading meaningful lives.
Image courtesy of Pixabay/MabelAmber.

More Articles of This Classification

  • SNPs deciding the rapid growth of cyanobacteria are alterable
  • Reply to Zhou and Li: Plasticity of the genomic haplotype of Synechococcus elongatus leads to rapid strain adaptation under laboratory conditions
  • Genetic variant rs17185536 regulates SIM1 gene expression in human brain hypothalamus
Show more

Related Content

  • Plausible reductions in future population growth
  • No quick fix to reduce human population size
  • Humans are too many to reduce quickly
  • Scopus
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited by...

  • Voluntary family planning to minimise and mitigate climate change
  • Reply to O'Neill et al. and O'Sullivan: Fertility reduction will help, but only in the long term
  • Scopus (2)
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Archive

PNAS Portals

  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Teaching Resources
  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Press
  • Site Map

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2019 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490