Section 1.4:
Population and Settlement:
People on the Land

Currently, Earth has more than 7.5 billion people, with demographers (those who study human populations and population change) forecasting an increase to 9.8 billion by 2050 (Figure 1.22). Most of this increase will take place in Sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa and Southwest Asia, and South Asia. In contrast, the regions of Europe, Eurasia, and East Asia will likely experience no demographic growth between now and 2050. Population concerns vary, with some countries, such as Bangladesh trying to slow population growth, while others, like Ukraine, worry about population decline.

Population is a complex topic, but several points may help to focus the issues:

• The current rate of population growth is now half the peak rate experienced in the early 1960s, when the world population was around 3 billion. At that time, talk of a “population bomb” and “population explosion” was common, as scholars and activists voiced concern about what might happen if such high growth rates continued. Still, even with today’s slower growth, demographers predict that over 2 billion more people will be added by 2050, with much of this growth taking place in the world’s poorest countries.

• Population planning takes many forms, from the fairly rigid two-child policy of China to slow population growth to the family-friendly policies of no-growth countries, like South Korea, that would like to increase their natural birth rates. Over half of the world’s married women use modern contraceptive methods, which has contributed to slower growth (Figure 1.23).

• Not all attention should be focused on natural growth because migration is increasingly a significant source of growth in some countries. International migration is often driven by a desire for a better life in a new country. Although much international migration is to developed countries in Europe, North America, and Oceania, there are comparable flows of migrants moving between developing countries, such as flows from South Asia to Southwest Asia or immigration within Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, the UN estimates that over 60 million people were displaced as a result of civil strife, political persecution, and environmental disasters in 2016, the largest number ever recorded. This includes both internally displaced people and refugees who have left their country of origin.

• The greatest migration in human history is going on now as millions of people move from rural to urban places. In 2009, a landmark was reached when demographers estimated that for the first time, more than half the world’s population lived in towns and cities.

Population Growth and Change

Geographers make use of a variety of ways to define the population characteristics of a region. The most common measures and models are described here. Because of the central importance of demography in shaping localities, each regional chapter has a table of population indicators for the countries of that region. Table 1.1 includes key population indicators for the world’s 10 largest countries by total population size in 2018. Keep in mind that one-third of the world’s 7.5 billion people live in two countries—China and India. The next largest countries are the United States, followed by Indonesia and Brazil. Combined, the 10 largest countries account for over 60 percent of the world’s population.

Population size alone tells only part of the story. Population density, for the purposes of this text, is the average number of people per square kilometer. Thus, China is the world’s largest country demographically, but the population density of India, the second largest country, is three times that of China. Bangladesh’s population density is far greater still at over 1200 people per square kilometer.

Population densities differ considerably across a large country and between rural and urban areas, making the gross national figure a bit misleading. Many of the world’s largest cities, for example, have densities of more than 30,000 people per square mile (10,300 per square kilometer), with the central areas of São Paulo, Brazil, and Shanghai, China, easily twice as dense because of the prevalence of high-rise apartment buildings. In contrast, most North American cities have densities of fewer than 10,000 people per square mile (3800 per square kilometer), due largely to a cultural preference for single-family dwellings on individual urban lots.

The statistics in Table 1.1 might seem daunting, but this information is crucial to understanding general population trends, overall growth rates, age structure, patterns of settlement, and rates of migration among the countries that make up various world regions.

Natural Population Increase 

A common starting point for measuring demographic change is the rate of natural increase (RNI), which provides the annual growth rate for a country or region as a percentage. This statistic is produced by subtracting the number of deaths from the number of births in a given year. Important to remember is that population gains or losses through migration are not considered in the RNI.

The RNI is a small number with major consequences. It can be positive as in the case of Nigeria, or stable as in the United States; some countries have negative rates, which means they are losing population. China’s RNI is 0.5, whereas India’s is 1.4. Yet if those rates are maintained, China’s population will double in 140 years, whereas India’s will double in 50 years. This is why demographers are confident that India will surpass China as the largest country in the next decade or so. The country with the highest RNI on Table 1.1 is Nigeria at 2.6. If Nigeria maintains that rate, it will double its size in 27 years. In fact, demographers forecast that in 2050 Nigeria will be the third largest country in the world, after India and China. Countries with a rate close to zero are demographically stable, but countries with persistent negative rates will experience slow declines in population unless immigration occurs. For many years Japan was one of the demographic top 10, but due to negative RNI, the country has lost population and in 2015 was replaced by Mexico (Figure 1.24).

Total Fertility Rate 

Population change is impacted by the total fertility rate (TFR), which is the average number of live births a woman has in her lifetime. The TFR is a good indicator of a country’s potential for growth. A TFR of 2.1 is considered the replacement rate and suggests that it takes two children per woman, with a fraction more to compensate for infant and child mortality, to maintain a stable population. Where infant mortality is high, a country’s actual replacement rate could be higher—say, 3.0. Clearly, women do not have 1.6 or 5.6 children; rather, women in some countries on average have 1 to 2 children versus 5 to 6 children, which means the potential for population growth is very different. In 1970, the global TFR was 4.7, but by 2017 that rate was nearly cut in half to 2.5. Around the world, fertility rates have been coming down for the last four decades as women move to cities, become better educated, work outside the home, control their fertility with modern contraception, and receive better medical care for themselves and their infants.

Four of the countries listed in Table 1.1 have a below-replacement TFR, meaning that over time their natural growth will slow as fewer children are born; and in some cases, population will decline if immigration does not occur. Even India’s current TFR is 2.3, a dramatic change from 5.5 in 1970. India will still grow for many decades to come, but the potential for growth has been reduced as Indian women have smaller families. The countries with the highest total fertility rates are in Sub-Saharan Africa, where the average is about 5. Nigeria’s TFR is slightly higher at 5.5.

Population Age Structure 

Another important indicator of a population’s relative youthfulness, and its potential for growth, is the percentage of the population under age 15. Currently, 26 percent of the world’s population is younger than age 15. However, in fast-growing Sub-Saharan Africa, that figure is 43 percent. This is another indicator of the population growth that will continue in this region for at least another generation. In contrast, only 16 percent of the populations of East Asia and Europe are under 15, suggesting slower growth and shrinking family sizes.

The other end of the age spectrum—the percentage of a population over age 65—is also important. Just 9 percent of the world’s population is over age 65, yet the percentage is twice that in many developed countries. Japan distinguishes itself in this regard with 28 percent of its population over 65; in contrast, only 12 percent of its population is under 15, indicating that the average age of the population is increasing as well. An aging population is significant when calculating a country’s need to provide social services for its senior citizens and pensioners. It also has implications for the size of the overall workforce that supports retired and elderly individuals.

Population Pyramids 

The best graphic indicator of a population’s age and gender structure is the population pyramid, which depicts the percentage of a population (or, in some cases, the raw number) that is male or female in different age classes, from young to old (Figure 1.25). If a country has many more young people than old, the graph has a broad base and a narrow tip, thus taking on a pyramidal shape that commonly forecasts rapid population growth. In contrast, slow-growth or no-growth populations are top-heavy, with a larger number of seniors than younger age classes.

Not only are population pyramids useful for comparing different population structures around the world at a given point in time; they also capture the structural changes of a population as it transitions from fast to slow growth. In addition, population pyramids display gender differences within a population, showing whether or not there is a disparity in the numbers of males and females. In the mid-20th century, for example, population pyramids for those countries that fought in World War II (such as the United States, Germany, the former Soviet Union, and Japan) showed a distinct deficit of males, indicating those lost to warfare. Similar patterns are found today in countries experiencing widespread conflict and civil unrest.

Cultural preferences for one sex or another, such as the preference for male infants in China and India, show up in population pyramids when there are more male children than female. Because of their utility in displaying population structures graphically, comparative population pyramids are found in many of the regional chapters of this book.

Life Expectancy 

A demographic indicator containing information about health and well-being in a society is life expectancy, which is the average number of years a typical male or female in a specific country can be expected to live. Life expectancy generally has been increasing around the world, indicating that conditions supporting life and longevity are improving. To illustrate, in 1970 the average life expectancy figure for the world was 58 years, whereas today it is 70 for men and 74 for women—female life expectancy is nearly always higher than male by a few years. Some countries, such as Bangladesh, Iran, and Nepal, have seen average life expectancies increase by 20 years or more since 1970. Table 1.1 shows that women in China, the United States, Brazil, and Mexico all have life expectancies of 78–81 years; men’s life expectancies are a few years less. Of the top 10 countries, Nigeria’s life expectancy is the lowest. Russia has the widest gap between male and female life expectancy—10 years. The life expectancy of men in Russia is similar to that of men in India and Pakistan, although Russia has higher levels of economic development.

Because a large number of social factors—such as health services, nutrition, and sanitation—influence life expectancy, many researchers use life expectancy as a surrogate measure for development. When this figure is improving, it indicates that other aspects of development are occurring. Each regional chapter reports on male and female life expectancy.

The Demographic Transition 

The historical record suggests that population growth rates have slowed over time. More specifically, in Europe and North America, population growth slowed as countries became increasingly industrialized and urbanized. From these historical data, demographers generated the demographic transition model, a conceptualization that tracks the changes in birth rates and death rates over time. Birth rates are the annual number of births per 1000 people in a country, and death rates are the annual number of deaths per 1000 people. When birth rates exceed death rates, natural increase occurs (Figure 1.26).

Stage 1 of the demographic transition model is characterized by both high birth rates and high death rates, resulting in a very low RNI. Historically, this stage is associated with Europe’s preindustrial period, a time that predated common public health measures such as water and sewage treatment, an understanding of disease transmission, and the most fundamental aspects of modern medicine. Not surprisingly, death rates were high and life expectancy was short. Currently there are no Stage 1 countries in the world.

In Stage 2, death rates fall dramatically while birth rates remain high, thus producing a rapid rise in the RNI. In both historical and contemporary times, this decrease in death rates is commonly associated with the development of public health measures and modern medicine. Additionally, one of the assumptions of the demographic transition model is that these health services become increasingly available only after some degree of economic development and urbanization takes place.

However, even as death rates fall and populations increase, it takes time for people to respond with lower birth rates. This happens in Stage 3, the transitional stage in which people become aware of the advantages of smaller families in an urban and industrial setting, contrasted with the earlier need for large families in rural, agricultural settings or where children worked at industrial jobs (both legally and illegally).

Then in Stage 4, a low RNI results from a combination of low birth rates and low death rates. Until recently, this stage was assumed to be the static end point of change for developing and urbanizing populations. However, this does not seem to be the case. In many highly urbanized developed countries, such as those in Europe as well as Japan, the death rate now exceeds the birth rate, and the RNI falls below the replacement level, expressed as a negative number. This negative growth state can be considered a fifth stage of the traditional demographic transition model.

Remember, though, that the RNI is just that—the rate of natural increase—and does not capture a country’s growth from immigration. For example, even if RNI is negative, a country may demographically grow or stabilize due to immigration from other countries.

Global Migration and Settlement

Never before have so many people been on the move, either from rural areas to cities or across international borders. Today more than 250 million people live outside the country of their birth and thus are officially designated as immigrants by the UN and other international agencies. Much of this international migration is directly linked to the new globalized economy because the majority of these migrants live either in the developed world or in developing countries with vibrant industrial, mining, or petroleum extraction economies. In the oil-rich countries of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, the labor force is composed primarily of foreign migrants, especially from South Asia (Figure 1.27), who are considered economic migrants (immigrants who arrive for employment opportunities). The top six destination countries, which account for 40 percent of the world’s immigrants, are major industrial or mining economies: United States, Russia, Germany, Saudi Arabia, United Kingdom, and United Arab Emirates. Within these countries, and for most other destinations, migrants are drawn to the opportunities found in major metropolitan areas. They are also responsible for billions of dollars in remittances, monies sent by individuals working abroad to families in the origin country. Many view remittances as a critical livelihood resource that is a catalyst for continued migration.

Not all migrants move for economic reasons. War, persecution, famine, and environmental destruction cause people to flee to safe havens elsewhere. Accurate data on refugees (migrants fleeing a well-founded fear of persecution) are often difficult to obtain for several reasons. Often these individuals are illegally crossing international boundaries, or countries deliberately obscure the number of people fleeing for political reasons. The UN estimates that there are currently 60 million refugees or internally displaced persons; more than half of these people are in Africa and Southwest Asia. The conflict in Syria has displaced over half of that country’s population. Over half of the 11.6 million displaced people are scattered within Syria, but nearly 5 million live outside the territory—mostly in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq (see Humanitarian Geography: Tools for Service).

Net Migration Rates 

The amount of immigration (people entering a country) and emigration (those leaving a country) is measured by the net migration rate. A positive figure means that a country’s population is growing because of migration, whereas a negative number means more people are leaving. As with other demographic indicators, the net migration rate is expressed as the numbers of migrants per 1000 of base population. Returning to Table 1.1, only the United States and Russia have positive net migration rates. Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Mexico have negative rates, while China, India, Brazil, and Nigeria have rates at zero, meaning the number of people entering and leaving in a particular year cancel each other out. This does not mean that these countries do not produce immigrants—both India and China have large populations overseas—but for that particular year, incoming and outgoing flows were equivalent.

Countries with some of the highest net migration rates—such as Qatar, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates—depend heavily on migrants for their labor force. Countries with the highest negative migration rates include those in conflict—such as Syria and Somalia, and Pacific island nations with relatively small populations and weak economies, such as Samoa and Micronesia.

Settlement in an Urbanizing World 

The focal points of today’s globalizing world are cities—the fast-paced centers of deep and widespread economic, political, and cultural change. This vitality, and the options cities offer to impoverished and uprooted rural peoples, make them magnets for migration. In 2018, some 4.2 billion people lived in urban areas. The scale and rate of growth of some world cities are absolutely staggering. Between natural growth and in-migration, New Delhi, India’s capital, grew from 14 million people in 2001 to 29 million people in 2018. Similarly, Shanghai expanded from 16 million people in 2000 to 26 million in 2018. Currently there are 33 megacities (a city with more than 10 million inhabitants), most of which are in the developing world, and geographers project that 10 more will be added by 2030.

Today 54 percent of the world’s population lives in cities. Urbanization varies by region. Latin America and North America are highly urbanized regions, with 80 percent of the population in cities. Sub-Saharan Africa may be rapidly urbanizing, but 60 percent of the people are still in rural areas. And in India, just one-third of the population is urbanized; that means nearly 900 million people still live in rural areas.

Generally speaking, most countries with high rates of urbanization are also more developed and industrialized, because manufacturing tends to cluster around urban centers. Many countries are characterized by urban primacy, in which a primate city (often the capital) is three or four times larger than the country’s next largest city. Seoul, Lagos, London, Manila, and Buenos Aires are all examples of primate cities.