NAME........

MAKHOSONKE

SURNAME........NDLOVU

STUDENT.............L012 0328F

PROGRAMME........GEOGRAPHY AND POPULATION STUDIES

MODULE..POPULATION AND ENVIRONMENT

LECTURER..MRS. S. SIBANDA

DUE DATE...18 MARCH 2016

ASSIGNMENT QUESTION
1a) Explain the concept of Environment (10)
b) Critically discuss how environmental change may influence population dynamics (15)

Different approaches have been adopted when it comes to explaining the concept of
environment. Some scholars like Carr, (2002) have seen it wiser to explain the environment as a
surrounding and everything that affect an organism during its lifetime meaning that the
environment is sum total of water, air and land interrelationships among themselves and also
with the human being, other living organisms and property. Thus according to Carr, (2002)s
definition the environment includes all the physical and biological surrounding and their
interactions. Environmental studies provide an approach towards understanding the environment
of our planet and the impact of human life upon the environment. Homer, (2003) goes on to
expand that the environment is actually global in nature as it is a multidisciplinary concept
uniting all living and non-living features.
Tracing the concept of environment from the origin of the term environment is Jacques (2002)
who alludes that the term environment was derived from a French word Environ meaning to
encompass or encircle. It refers to both abiotic (physical or non-living) and biotic (living)
environment. Thus the scholar goes on to add that the word environment means surroundings, in
which organisms live. Environment and the organisms are two dynamic and complex component
of nature since the environment regulates the life of the organisms including human beings.
Homer (2003) and Jacques (2002) agree in opinion that human beings interact with the
environment more vigorously than other living beings and with this on hand human beings are
party and parcel of the environment which they have modified it according to their need.
In analysis, from the definitions above the environment is simple made up of two components
that is living and non-living features. Of which the biotic component of the ecosystem consists of
3 distinct groups of organism, the producers, consumers and decomposers. The producers are
those organisms capable of photosynthesis, production of organic material from solar lift and
carbon dioxide as stipulated by Amelung, (2000). Consumers on the other hand are organisms
whose survival depends on the organic material manufactured by the producers and these include
animals of all sizes ranging from large predators to small parasites such as mosquitoes and flies.
The last group of living organisms is the decomposers. These include micro-organisms such as
fungi, bacteria, and yeast among others. Whereas abiotic (non-living) components perform
important function in the ecosystem. These are providing water and oxygen for organisms; act

as a reservoir of the most important elements for life that is carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen,
sulphur and phosphorus and these elements constitute 95% of all living organisms (Carr, 2002).
It should be noted that the concept of environment does not end there as some authorities like
Carr, (2002), Morrow (2009) and Homer (2003) have adopted a holistic approach in the
classification of the environment. This is so because Jacques (2002) went on to divided the
environment into 5 pillars that is social, political, economic, technological and biophysical, of
which he claim that these pillars interact with each other and being inter-dependent for the
sustainability of the environment.
Under Social and Cultural environment Morrow, (2009) added that this type of environment
involves the culture and life style of the human beings. The social or cultural environment means
the environment which is created by the man through his different social & cultural activities and
thinking. The historical, cultural, moral, economic aspects of human life constitute to the social
or cultural environment. Culture involves the religion of the human, relations with each other
among others. A society involves different types of people, who have different religion, different
thinking, and have a culture of their own (Homer, 2003). Thus the social and culture
environment affects the social culture of human beings and hence it has the great importance.
Adding on the Social environment is Earken, (2010) who highlights that Cultural environment
involves the stage of development that human being have attained in the path towards progress to
determine their way of life. Human interaction with environment has influenced the ecosystem
since according to Amelung, (2000), people of different cultures view their place in society from
different angles.
According to Earken, (2010) economic environment involves different types of economic
activities developed by man. The scholar goes on to add that each type of economic activity has
its own requirement of resources as well as technology. It exists outside of the scope of or control
of a particular environment. Thus hence we cannot effect what happens to it but by studying it
we can have potential to adapt to it. By definition, economic environment is the health of the
economy where the environment is found or actually operates, condition and how it can impact
its components, this encompasses the GDP, consumer availability and consumer confidence as
stipulated by (Carr, 2002).

Political environment is a type of environment with its ideological principles, varying due to
important factors such as production, consumption, use of resources and these are determined by
the strategies and policies advocated by the -government. This in turn determines the level of
development and progress of the society (Earken, 2010).
The biophysical environment is the biotic and abiotic surrounding of an organism or population,
and consequently includes the factors that have an influence in their survival, development and
evolution (Morrow, 1999). However, Amelung, (2000) indicates that the biophysical
environment can vary in scale from microscopic to global in extent. It can also be subdivided
according to its attributes for example the marine environment, the atmospheric environment and
the terrestrial environment. Thus the biophysical environment provide basic needs and
opportunities for social and economic development.
Technological environment as alluded by Carr, (2002) comprises of the crafting materials and
transforming them into implements that allow man to control or manipulate natural resources in
order to meet his needs. Homer (2003) on the other hand claims that technology dates as far back
as the Stone Age era, when man discovered how to make fire, 1.4 million years ago. In fact, no
one could have thought back then that fire, including its wood burning technology could create
an impact on todays natural environment through its greenhouse gas emissions. The scholar goes
on to add that nowadays green technology has come up with better solutions of generating heat and

energy. The suns powerful UV rays are being harnessed through solar panels instead of the
wood burning process. The kinetic powers of wind and water currents are being utilized to
produce electricity that can lessen the demands for coal and fossil fuels. Thus with the
technological environment interacting with other components environmental sustainability is
achieved.
In a nutshell, environment is a broader concept which has called for a holistic approach when
dealing with it. Nonetheless, being crucial to note when dealing with environment is that it
constitutes of pillars which are interrelated such that a change in one of the pillars will have a
direct effect on other pillars.

b) As alluded in the above work that the concept of environment is broad, thus environmental

change means a change in all pillars of the environment that is the political, social-cultural,
economic, biophysical and technological environments. Being crucial to note is that the change
in these environments influences population dynamics. In definition population dynamics as
alluded by Jahn et al, (2005) is the branch of life sciences that studies the size and age
composition of populations as dynamic systems, and the biological and environmental processes
driving them (such as birth and death rates, and by immigration and emigration). Thus this essay
seeks to critically discuss how environmental change may influence population dynamics.
To start with are the changes in the bio-physical and their influence on population dynamics.
Bio-physical environment encompasses climate, topography; geology; soils; vegetation (flora)
fauna (animals); groundwater (hydrogeology) and surface water. According to Molden et al
(2010) a change in climate conditions for example may lead to population change through
migration. Bringing a clear picture on this is Eakin et al (2010) who indicates that about 30
million people are climate migrants at global level, while the recently information reveals that by
2050 there would be 200 million people who would be affected by adverse climate events that
could induce more migration (Stern, 2007). This is so because climate changes are associated
with emergence and re-emergence of diseases hence people migrate in aim to adapt while some
die during these climatic shocks. Thus migration leads to decreased population on the abandoned
country or region while creating an increase in population on the receiving country while on the
point high mortality reduces population growth and with this on hand it goes with little challenge
that a change on biophysical environment poses a significant influence on population dynamics.
Different from this idea is Jahn et al, (2005) who argues and say it is the other way round
meaning that population changes are the one which influence environmental dynamics. The
scholar goes on to add that as people migrate they increase population on the receiving county
hence posing more pressure to the environment thus leading to the alterations to environment as
population increase means increased fossil-fuel combustion, deforestation and carbon dioxide
(CO2). Ambardekar et al (2011) gives South Africa as an example to support his idea, claiming

that South Africa has been the destination for many migrants in Sub-Saharan Africa and that has
directly impacted the environment in many ways. Therefore in analysis a critical approach is
needed when assessing environmental change and their influence on population dynamics
especial with respect to bio-physical environment.
Still under bio-physical environment for example lack of accessible water supply and poor water
quality is another major environmental problem affecting a large proportion of the Tanzania's
rural and urban population. In many areas of Tanzania, fresh water resources are being used up at
such rapid rates than ground water supplies. Thus the lack and poor quality of water has been
associated with incidences of many water-borne diseases and deaths in many parts of Tanzania
and with this happen one may rise and claim that a change in the availability of safe water has a
significant impact on population dynamics as water scarcity related deaths mean a decline in
population. Jahn, (2005) on the other hand alludes that in response to water scarcity the
population have been seen migrating to water endowed areas. Christian Aid also predicts that up
to one billion people would be displaced by environmental causes by 2050 leading to decrease in
population numbers (Christian Aid 2007). However, some scholars like Molden et al (2010)
argue and say the population changes is the one which is responsible in causing safe water
scarcity. This is so because Industrial fixation of nitrogen for fertilizer and other human activities
has more than doubled the rates of terrestrial fixation of gaseous nitrogen into biologically and
water bodies available. Adding on that is Ambardekar, (2011) who articulates that water is fouled
with pollutants from industries, municipalities and agriculture in many countries. Nonetheless,
water scarcity does influence population dynamics.
Moreover, Natural disasters can also induce migration for example the major floods that struck
Bangladesh in 1998 (Molden et al (2010). Several studies have attributed increased flooding in
Bangladesh to deforestation in the Himalayan highlands of Nepal and northern India (Irvin,
1988) thus flooding leads to loss of land resulting to the growth and concentration of population
in large squatter settlements on river banks or shifts into agricultural wage labour. Besides
floods, is are droughts disasters, for example in Zimbabwe drought has

triggered serious

outward-migration since it is increasingly seen as one potential adaptation strategy (IPCC,

2004).This has been so because according to Unganai and Murwira (2010), Zimbabwe
agriculture accounts for 15-19% of the GDP, 45% of export earnings and supports the livelihood

of at least 70% of the population hence a drop in agriculture output has left Zimbabwe exposed
to food insecurity which is directly linked to high infant mortality resulting in a drop in the
population. Thus disasters general do not disrupt human activities only but also claim human life
hence directly affecting the population dynamics as shown in the diagram below.

(Flooding in Pakistan in 2010: Source- www/Asif Hassan/AFP/Getty Images)

Looking at political environment, it should be realised that its change has a significant influence
to the population dynamic. Take for example Madagascar grew at an average 5 percent a year but
overall economic growth has been flat over the period 2009-11 (Brotz et al, 2013). Against a
benchmark of 5 percent annual growth, GDP in 2011 would have been 20 percent above its
current level. This has been facilitated by the political environment such as the weakening rule of
law, increasing insecurity, poor governance in natural resource exploitation (rosewood, gold, and
precious stones), limited progress on the anti-corruption front, and the lack of transparency in the
management of public resources within the political environment. Thus the government has
failed to finance the growing population or provide work for them. Coming from the other side is
Ambardekar et al , (2011) who highlight that Sierra Leones political environment is said to have
changed as Sierra Leone's own army and leaders have become

corrupt; its soldiers are

nicknamed "Sobels," rebels by day, soldiers by night (Brotz et al 2013). Thus corruption in Sierra
Leone has led to civil unrest with the mob clamouring for their rights. As a result of civil wars
Sierra Leone has suffered terrible social and economic costs and under the cover of warfare the
rebels are said to be committing heinous crimes against humanity in the form of murder, rape,

and mutilation (Molden et al 2010). Take for example the 1991 and 1999 which claimed over
75,000 lives, caused 500,000 Sierra Leoneans to become refugees, and displaced half of the
countrys 4.5 million people. With this on hand, a change in political environment leads to
population deaths, displacement hence causing the population to decline. Adding on is Eakin et
al (2010) who says girls and young women who managed to escape from the rebels or who were
released, suffer a variety of consequences such as sexually transmitted infections. These include
HIV/AIDS, trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder, extreme anxiety and alienation by their
communities and families. In overall these after effects are said to reduce the life expectance of
the population. It is hence not vindictive to say a change in the political environment influences
population dynamic.
Looking at economic environment it should be noted that it has effects on population dynamics
while the rest of the world's economy grew at an annual rate of close to 2 percent from 1960 to
2002, growth performance in Africa has been dismal. From 1974 through the mid-1990s, growth
was negative, reaching negative 1.5 percent in 1990-4 Brotz et al (2013) while Ambardekar et al,
(2011) highlights that since 1975 the investment rate has declined to 8.5 percent for the whole
African continent. In Zimbabwe economic inflation has added to price increases throughout the
period of structural adjustment since food prices rose by 516%, medical care, transport and
education by 300%, between 1990 and 1995 at which time 62% of households could no longer
afford all the basic necessities of food, clothing, shelter and transport (Jahn, 2005). With regards
to the health sector, although Zimbabwes health system used to be relatively sound in the 1980s
and 1990s, however since 2000 the change of economic environment has caused a scale down on
the health delivery institutions operations, with some facilities closing down all together. Thus
economic decline key challenges to the countrys health system (since 2000) included lack of
equipment, shortage of essential medical consumables, shortage of drugs as well acute shortage
and loss of skilled medical personnel (Makochekanwa, 2010). Therefore this as a result this has
led to increase in both infant and child mortality rates, and also a rise on both male and female
mortality rates. High mortality rates have directly hindered the population from growing in the
country as we are still below 15 million.
Apart from that a change in the economic environment in Zimbabwe has created push factors for
migration to the neighbouring countries like south Africa for example recent figures released by

the South African authorities show that of the 2,000 illegal migrants repatriated each week, up to
20% are unaccompanied children and about 350-400 Zimbabwean children cross the border each
day without passing official checkpoints as claimed by (Jahn, 2005). It is imperative to note that
when the environment is health it tend to attract more pull through its pull factors and promote
more births hence causing an increase in the population a good example is South Africa which is
said to be hosting are 4 to 8 million undocumented migrants (Ambardekar et al, 2011). However,
an unconducive economic environment tends to repel population growth. It hence become wise
to conclude that a change in economic environment influences population dynamics.
Technologically environment and socio-cultural environment has as well somehow influenced
the population dynamics. In Germany for example after the Fukushima nuclear disaster of 2011
which claimed thousands of life, followed by human health problems. This caused population to
decrease through displacement, death and migration. However Molden et al (2010) argue and say
technological advancement foster development while on the other hand bringing an easy
management of the environment for example the use of GIS and Remote Sensing can be used to
trace and monitor the environment. On the other hand unhealthy socio-cultural environment for
example differences in religion lines, ethnical lines among others may lead to civil unrest. For
example the Orma and Pokoma in Kenya who fought for land ownership. More so being the
Rwanda genocide which was perpetuated by religious and tribal issues. Thus, socio-cultural is
closely associated with welfare geography (who gets what, when and how) meaning that a social
class the royal class tend to benefit more at the expense of the suffering masses. This on its own
is associated with civil wars, food insecure, malnutrition, disease outbreaks followed by deaths
causing a change on the population demography.
In a nutshell, environmental change with no doubt has significant influence on the population
dynamics despite the fact that the nexus the two (environmental change and population
dynamics) may occur the other way round.

REFERENCES
Ambardekar, A.A., T.J. Siebenmorgen, P.A. Counce, S.B. Lanning, and A. Mauromoustakos:
(June 2011)"Impact of field-scale nighttime air temperatures," Nigeria.
Amelung G and Diehl X, Rudel K and Roper L (2002). Environmental Impact of Migration in
Rural Tanzania, In UN (eds.), Tanzania
Brotz, Lucas; Cheung, William W. L.; Kleisner Kristin; Pakhomov, Evgeny; Pauly, Daniel
(2012). "Increasing jellyfish populations: trends in Large Marine Ecosystems" Field
Research
Carr M, (2002), African People and Their Country, International African Institute, Oxford
University Press, London
Eakin R and Lemos Y, (2010). A Potential Partnership for Sustainable Development, in
UAPS and NPU (eds.), African. Population Conference.
Homer D (2003) Population, Environment and Natural Resource Management. University
Press London
Jacques M. May, (2002). Influence of environmental transformation in changing the map of
disease. Ecology and International Development department, Ghana.
Jahn, GC; Almazan, LP; Pacia, J (2005). "Effect of nitrogen fertilizer, Newyork Publishers,
USA
Molden, D., T. Oweis, P. Steduto, P. Bindraban, M.A. Hanjra, and J. Kijne: (2010) "Improving
agricultural water productivity," Agricultural Water Management, Oxford University, UK
Morrow, B. H. (2009). Identifying and Mapping Community Vulnerability. New York
publications, USA