[concordDance]

> Hence the degrowth movement, etc.

The oddest thing about this to me is that they don't seem to think through what exactly this implies.

If one truly believes in the need to reduce human population then by far the highest margin things are not things like preserving a few hundred year old forest in England, but mass introduction of contraceptives to the DRC. It'll be places like Nigeria and Congo that dominate in terms of number of humans next century, not dying Europe (whose resource usage will decline even faster as fertility free falls), and those countries are not going to remain low resource consumption for too long.

[Ma8ee]

Population growth decreases with education and higher standard of living, not only in Europe.

[concordDance]

Yup, but those two countries alone are still going to hit 1.5 billion combined at current rates (DRC has 6.05 TFR declining at 0.05 per decade), momentum is key. And if they attain European rates of resource consumption then by that point they'll be by far the biggest "problem" as far as "degrowthers" are concerned.

And unlike, say, India, getting that number down is much easier (people resist being killed, but freely distributed contraceptives would likely by welcomed by women).

[BigGreenJorts]

The introduction of mass contraceptives in DRC and its neighbors is happening. There's a lot of social and economic drivers that make it hard however.