Africa: population growth, governance, democracy

Over most of Africa, in contrast, the judiciary is a tool of the executive controlled through partisan appointment; there is no free press (another area where Africa performs dismally in international rankings); and, in many countries, the military influences or actually forms the government, de facto if increasingly rarely de jure. The point is that there are few if any working democracies in Africa regardless of the presence of the paraphernalia of democracy; South Africa, for example, has a very good democratic constitution but that has not prevented the ruling ANC party from robbing the country over the past twenty years or so.

Botswana is one African country that is well governed: it has regular elections and not only is there a limit on how many terms one individual can serve as president (as there are in many African countries) but this limit has generally been observed (a departure from the all-too-common African experience). These measures notwithstanding, however, Botswana has been governed by the same party since independence in 1966, mainly because that party is controlled by the country's major tribe (Bamangwato). Is this true democracy? Maybe not. The keys to the county's success are the 'No Corruption' regime (established by the country's first president, Sir Seretse Khama) and its diamond wealth. Combined, these factors mean that the considerable mining revenue accruing to the government actually does end up in the government's coffers and not in individual's pockets, which seems to be the fate of revenue from mining and oil wealth in countries such as Nigeria, for example.

One question we should ask ourselves is whether Africa can in fact afford the checks and balances upon which our own democracy depends – bearing in mind that creating and enforcing these measures would reduce funding available for schools, hospitals, roads etc. (and, of course, the large sums of money diverted into the Swiss bank accounts of the elite). The answer is probably not.

Consequences of population growth in Africa and the third world generally

In view of the facts discussed above, there are really two consequences that should concern us (in that they impact on our own national security and social cohesion):

First, many people in the third world quite correctly see little hope for themselves and their families in their own countries and so will seek a billet somewhere in the first world, including Australia. There is, therefore, likely to be a massive, increasing and ongoing effort by migrants to cross the Mediterranean and also renewed efforts to find ways into Australia. Australia thinks it has solved the problem of unauthorised arrivals, but the facts and figures provided above strongly suggest that pressure will increase substantially over coming years.

Second, wages in the third world are far lower than in developed economies. We need to recognise that, as overall population in Africa grows, so does the educated cohort with professional and technical proficiencies that are in demand in Western countries (even if they represent a decreasing percentage of the African population as a whole). Some may leverage this demand and migrate to developed countries. Globalisation, however, means that more and more productive capacity will be transferred from the first to the third world, particularly in sectors where wages are a significant part of production cost. Thus, population growth in the developing world is likely to have a continuing negative effect on wages in the first world. Local discussions in Europe, America, Australia and Japan blaming their current governments for wage stagnation seem to me to be missing the point altogether.

Is there anything we should or can do about the tsunami that is going to overtake us.

Is there anything we should or can do to mitigate the impacts described above? Yes. China's one child policy – introduced as a temporary measure in 1978 and relaxed in 2016 – was a major factor (along with reform policies that loosened state control over the economy) in enabling that country to drag some 800 million people out of poverty over the past forty years or so while maintaining social cohesion. The rest of the world also benefitted hugely from this policy – a stable and growing China has driven down costs and the spectre of inflation and has helped drive economic growth in the rest of the world. Australia has been one of the prime beneficiaries.

The third world, and Africa in particular, needs to be persuaded that it is it in its absolute best interests to put in place measures that will help to reduce – or at least plan and control – population growth. The drastic policies that China introduced will not be possible anywhere else, but other measures – better education of women, greater access to family planning, and possibly financial incentives – will not only have a major effect on population growth and social cohesion but also further other important development goals such as women's reproductive rights, improved national health and direct investment in community capacity.

Are we focusing on the right issues?

One important issue not discussed above is the growing global threat from climate change. The factors driving Climate Change are greatly accentuated by population growth but, while there is endless discussion of global warming, little of that discussion seems to focus on the explosion in the worldwide population. This lack of attention notwithstanding, climate change is just as clearly a consequence of the massive increase in global population as the economic and social consequences outlined above.

The world population was 2.5 billion in 1950, with Africa accounting for just under nine per cent. A century later, in 2050, it is forecast that there will be 9.3 billion people on Earth, and that Africa's share will have risen to a quarter of the global population. Surely population growth is what we should be focusing on more than anything?