Overpopulation is a word we listen very often and are well aware of. Let's start at the very beginning, when more people meant security in an insecure world. On the Indian subcontinent during the Mughal rule, the increasing population was celebrated, as it meant more people could work on a farm and produce more food. The Roman emperors were no different. In some cases passing laws to promote early marriage and frequent childbirth so their armies could stay up to strength. Life was mostly about popping babies and setting up new colonies until the number of people started becoming a visible problem.

In modern times, the fear exploded. Overpopulation was soon blamed for everything from poverty and poor resource management to destroying the environment. Some countries begin experimenting with methods of population control. China became the ‘poster child’ and its one-child policy resulted in a disastrous gender imbalance. And like other control measures in Asia, it was eventually repealed.

And the enemy had been identified as overpopulation. So what exactly is overpopulation? It is defined by carrying capacity, a slightly complicated concept which basically means the number of individuals and ecosystems resources can sustain indefinitely. But demographers have consistently got it wrong. Actually, we are not quite sure what the earth's carrying capacity is, because the variables are constantly changing. 

Already, in the developed World, the population has largely stabilized or begin to decline. And the developing world is on track to follow. Education and access to contraception are driving the numbers down even if cities don't look like it yet. People get this perception that these cities are overcrowded, and really busy. But actually the bigger point is : impact on the environment are linked to consumption.

As seen around the world : consumption, unlike population, is on an exponential rise. If we look at the levels of consumption across different contexts - globally, across cities, within cities - they're highly highly unequal. So shouldn't we then be looking at who is consuming and how much, instead of simply counting the number of people?

No one can really deny that the human population has an impact on the environment. But right now wealthier countries emit more carbon which significantly impact the rate of climate change. Also lowering consumption sounds way easy than deciding whether that many people should or shouldn't exist. 

So it's time to change the narrative away from the easy-to-blame visual problem of population to the more hidden and dangerous concerns of waste and overconsumption.