[syrrim]

We could attempt to define the "fair" population of a country based on its land area and some other factors. Splitting up a country into parts then wouldn't grant it a larger fair population, since you would split up the area as well. The necessity of doing this is that otherwise, when one country decides to expand its population, every other country has to accept a lower allocation of the world's resources. The difficulty of doing this is that you are inflicting on the residents of a country a lower allocation of those resources on the basis of something they had no control over, namely the country of their birth.

[Thorrez]

You could see a country with a high population and small amount of land as having an "unfairly high population level".

You could see a country with a low population and a large amount of land as "greedily taking more land than necessary". Kind of akin to NIMBYism.

I'm not sure either is correct. I've heard statistics that living more densely is better for the environment.

[noduerme]

well then, I guess the only fair thing would be to distribute people randomly in equal proportion to every square meter of dry land /s

Please wiki: (1) Mercantilism, (2) Colonialism, (3) Nazism to understand why your plan for equality leads to massive, inhuman levels of suffering. (Let's throw in Malthusianism just as a pivot to draw a circle around).