‘We have to equitably reduce our impact on the environment’
“Allowing the human population to gradually decrease in size, by strengthening education and advancing reproductive rights, reproductive agency,” would be a “tangible” contribution to saving the environment, according to a University of Ottawa professor.
Celine Delacroix recently participated on a Population Institute panel ahead of the United Nation’s anti-children “World Population Day” today. The College Fix attended the webinar on Wednesday.
Delacroix (pictured) joined several other panelists in saying that while population is currently growing, it would be beneficial if there were fewer people on earth.
“Research shows that when we have access to modern methods of contraception and learn about reproduction, we have less children,” she previously wrote. “In turn, slowing population growth significantly reduces human environmental impact.”
She continued this line of argument during her remarks on Wednesday. Asked by her Population Institute colleague about why society should not embrace “pronatalism,” Delacroix lamented human consumption and how people were causing climate change.
There needs to be more discussion about the benefits of population decline and the environment, Delacroix said.
“It’s clear that global population size and the growth of our population was and continues to be a major driver of environmental degradation and climate change,” she said. “It’s a key variable in driving environmental degradation because every human being has an impact on nature.”
“The aggregate impacts are overwhelming…ecosystems as a whole,” she said, noting there is “rapid” “environmental degradation.”
“We have to equitably reduce our impact on the environment,” she said.
“We clearly need to reduce and eliminate unsustainable consumption and sustainable production patterns,” she said, before going on to push for abortion and birth control to reduce population.
“Population growth and decline pose different challenges,” Delacroix said, although they are “not on the same scale.”
It will be easier to adapt to “population decline,” since population growth will “destroy the environment.”
“So instead of responding to lower fertility rates by proposing pro-natalist policies, we can really center reproductive rights, embrace lower fertility rates, and transform all these challenges that are associated with population aging by using them as opportunities for [a] more just society,” she said.
These comments drew praise from Kathleen Mogelgaard with the Population Institute and the moderator for the discussion.
She thanked her for explaining that “we might welcome a slower population growth path,” because it will help the environment.
The comments fit with the general theme of the United Nations World Population Day which is that we should kill off little babies in the womb and encourage women to use birth control.
“Global fertility rates are falling, prompting warnings about ‘population collapse,’” the website for today’s event reads. “But the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)’s State of World Population report shows the real issue is a lack of reproductive agency—many people, especially youth, are unable to have the children they want.”
MORE: 80 colleges could close in next five years, Federal Reserve economists say
IMAGE CAPTION AND CREDIT: University of Ottawa Professor Celine Delacroix; Population Institute