Population Density - Dissertation Example

? Population density and its effects on the socioeconomic characteristics of a community Literature review 1 Co-relation between Human Populationand development The well-established link between population and community development (urban and rural) has long been subjected to different kinds of interpretations by different authors. As per the Malthusian theory, the population growth of any country or community can lead to scarcity of resources and a subsequent economic degradation and a decline in wealth causing widespread poverty (Malthus, 1807). However, the contenders to this theory opine that population growth is a condition that can be used favourably by educated classes to create new technologies and increase the production which eventually leads to economic freedom and subsequent development (Simon, 1998, Introduction). Though the two theories tend to be in discordance, in unison they reflect the importance of the links that exist between the different existing scope modifiers like various institutional variables and the prevalent economy type of that community, to the population growth rate. Thus, there are no doubts that population density and growth rate has signi?cant in?uence over the socio-economic and demographic characteristics of any community (rural and urban). • Higher population density and a high population growth rate subsequently results in increased demands for natural resources like water, food, fuel, agricultural land, an others from the natural resource pool. Rapidly expanding population thus results in over exploitation of natural resources, owing to the persistently rising demands. • High population densities or rising population growth rate leads to elevation in agricultural activities that in turn intensifies deforestation, promoting urbanisation and greater land use conflicts. • Population growth expansion leads to higher energy demands and use (especially fuel oil and its derivatives, since they form the common energy sources both for urban and rural communities). • population growth and density also ascertains the need for various essential public services like health, water, food, education, housing, transport, etc. thus, affecting the process of governmental budgetary allocation. The significant influence yielded by population on the natural resources, and socio-economic characteristics of a community, makes it necessary to study the orientation in population density and distribution, in order to plan and implement any program associated with growth and development of a State. To under the trends in population density and distribution it is necessary to study and analyse periodically the available standardised data (presently the data from census is used for analysis) on size and spatial distribution of population over a specific length of time. However, on studying the various available literatures on population density and its effects on the socioeconomic characteristics of a community, it is seen that very little research has been conducted in this regards. A closer look revealed that it was primarily owing to the complex nature of the term, ‘population density,’ not much work has been done on it (Fonseca and Wong, 2000). Thus, it makes it difficult for the researcher to differentiate between the cause and effect, while analyzing the multidimensional aspects of human density, and its relationship with socio-economic aspects. The intricate nature of the population density is also reflected in the association of various other factors, besides the socio-economic one, like historical or environmental factors, that assist in the formation a specific density range like clustered, linear, or randomly distributed, as regards any urban or rural population (Argent, Smailes, & Grif?n, 2006). 1.2 Density The term density forms to be one of the most important dimensions within the geographical aspects of development, and is seen as the economic output that is generated from a unit of land. The term, “refers to the economic mass per unit of land area, or the geographic compactness of economic activity. It is shorthand for the level of output produced—and thus the income generated—per unit of land area. It can, for example, be measured as the value added or gross domestic product (GDP) generated per square kilometer of land. Given that high density requires the geographic concentration of labor and capital, it is highly correlated with both employment and population density” (World Development Report, 2009, 49). Thus, it can be derived from the aforementioned definition, that the term density is one of the primary delineating features in any urban or rural community settlements. The strong equation that exists between economic mass and population density is rationalised with the urban/rural areas being a collective mass of producers and consumers, of sellers and buyers, and of employees and their respective employers. In typical urban settlement is the inclination of the “population density for distance from the city center is similar to the corresponding gradient for employment density” (ibid, 56). Here, it is implied that the size and density of an urban population determines the nature of unevenness of a country’s economic geography, since as a country develops the density also transforms from being evenly distributed to slowly becoming uneven in distributing (ibid). Therefore, greater urbanization is directly proportional to a greater conglomeration within a State. A country’s percentage of urbanization inherently reflects the “proportion of its population living in areas of high density and, therefore, for the “bumpiness” in its economic geography” (ibid). It is now evident that density serves as the primary link between the surrounding physical environments (like, urban or rural) and the human populations, and consistently forms a part in the discussions over the capability of the physical environment in providing for the consistently increasing world population. The various researches on this topic focus mainly on the high densities and increasing growth rates (as perceived in the developing or under developed nations) and their effects on the physical environment and the natural resources. However, very low densities can also have detrimental effects upon the preservation of human habitation (in the context of the modern developed capitalist nations), restricting the development of scale economies and proper labour division, creates huge transport costs for the residents of these sparsely populated nations, while creating a large void in the form of natural social interactions (Holmes, 1987). 1.3 Population density Human population density (urban and rural) is an essential instrument for analyzing the balance that exists between the capacity of the physical environment and the increasing world population. The term population density is a complex concept, associated with a host of agencies like human beings, physical environment, technological innovations, and economic structure, which are in turn interlinked with each other to create a web like structure (Fonseca & Wong, 2000). Population density, which is generally expressed in terms of the spatial dimension, shows the manner in which the human population has spread out worldwide, and form to be essential in factor within the population and social geography. A study of the available literature on this subject shows that very few researches are available in this line, with a major focus being only on the urban pockets. As for example, there are detailed reviews prepared by Saglie 1998 on the aspects of town-planning that are based on population density; with other general reviews on the population densities of the urban areas (Bahr, Jentsch, & Kuls, 1992). Population density in general to refers to the number of people residing in per square kilometer land area. In statistical terms, it is the ratio of the human population to the available land area, and gives an average figure of the number of people that are occupying a specific land area. Although a reasonably good indicator of an aerial population distribution, the population density factor tends to mask some of the important internal discrepancies that exist within a population congregation and the spatial distribution. Saglie (1987) in her papers on population densities distinguishes two different concepts within population density: measured density (quantifiable concept, comprising of families or individuals residing within a per unit area); and perceived density (qualitative concept comprising aspects of privacy, isolation, loneliness, crowding and contact opportunities). A majority of the density related papers have majorly focused upon measured density and have studied its different aspects in order to allow for a better scope for the government to work in the various public services departments, like providing its citizens with better facilities in the form of good quality potable water, health, food, education, or transport. In his research work Holmes (1981) established the idea of ‘critical density threshold’ for where the population density levels were linked to the wider aspects of ‘primary production,’ and furthermore, Holmes while working on the low population densities in the Australian inner lands , distinguished between two distinct terms, ‘settled areas’ and the ‘sparselands.’ The aspect of perceived density of a population remains a poorly explored area, with only a handful of researchers exploring this dimension. This aspect which is qualitative in nature is seen in the works of Tuan (1977, 56) where he suggested that the sense of loneliness or the feeling of being overcrowded, were created mainly from an individual’s perception of the available socio-economic opportunities within a community. He felt that the qualitative aspects of the human population density were fashioned by the factors of culture and an overwhelming desire for self-accomplishment. Tuan based his research work on the Russian farmers that lived in the vast expanse of the isolated Steppes. With very little human presence, except for the few distantly located farmhouses, there was a persistent feeling of despair and apprehension amongst the local farmers, thus, allowing the author to conclude that the qualitative factors of isolation or crowding though with no direct bearing on an individual’s physical environment, significantly affects the human mind (ibid). Saglie (1998) in her papers speaks of the perceived density factor in her interactions with the Norwegians living in cities. Her observations revealed that the Norwegians inherently seemed to prefer the sparser settlements, over the urban livelihood, which stemmed from their traditional living in low-density settlements. In this context, Saglie opined that “The ideal Norwegian way is to live scattered because Norwegians are ‘lone wolves’” (Saglie, 1998, 29). Here the measured and perceived aspects of density reflect two different spatial conceptions. The perceived density comes into being from the various social relationships that takes place within a community, is relative in nature, thus portraying a relational spatial notion. Om the other hand measured density reflects the absolute spatial proportion. This is taken into context in the research works of Tuan where he observed that ‘‘human beings require both space and place’’ (Tuan, 1977, 54), so one can assume that both loneliness and a sense of being overcrowded are necessary for proper functioning of any community. He further suggest that the shift in population density towards the urban settlements took place mainly during the industrial revolution, where the young people, in order to escape the close bindings of them rural communities, shifted to the more impersonal and less crowded urban areas (ibid, 60). Therefore, it is easily perceivable that both the measured and perceived aspects of population densities (in rural and urban) are important when taking into consideration the socio-economic characteristics and development of a community. 1.4 Rural population densities In the context of rural communities Smailes (1996) while working on the Australian rural communities distinguished three main habitable areas: ‘Marginal pastoral zone,’ which reflects persistent decreasing population demography, low incomes, with very poor chances for diversification in human livelihood. ‘Cereals/ sheep belt’ which reflects a persistently decreasing population density, with poor income and little scope for a range of services; and ‘Peri-urban zone’ which form the fringe areas around urban centres or cities, and are ‘core’ area, representing high population densities, high population growth and high incomes. Aangebrug and Caspall (1970) in their papers on the rural population density classified the rural communities in Kansas by the observable shifts within the patterns in population density for a specific time period. Robinson, Lindberg, & Brinkman (1961) made specific studies on rural communities where they explored the existing connection between the available percentage of agricultural land, rainfall percentage, percentage of the land yielding crops, and the average distance from the nearest urban pocket, with the rural farms. However, the most detailed work on rural communities was undertaken by Barry in 1967, where he made an organized distinction between the effects of density variation on the rural settlement system, as a whole. Using the unyielding concepts of the Central Place theory, Berry suggested that the aspects of rural service and trade areas can be easily linked with the regional population density. The rural areas irrespective of their population densities, the rural centers tend to create spatial pyramids (Berry, 1967). So a fall in the population density, the spatial dimensions at each step within the pyramid also falls down, while simultaneously there is a growth in the service/ trade areas that try to offset the falling population density. Owing to the modifications and transitions, the types of services that under high population densities were generally placed at the lowest rung of the pyramid moves up to a higher step with a fall in population density (ibid). here Berry further conceptualized the presence of a ‘phase shift’ within service/trade spatial dimensions reflecting sudden gaps within the population density. These gaps are noticed in the form of the rural and suburban areas that tend to develop around an urban base point; and also between the irrigation areas and the farming zones that are of the broad care type. The concept of rural population is also examined by Irving and Davidson (1973) through the precincts of the urban population with applicability also in the rural areas. Here the authors established the term social density, which refers to the time spent in the interpersonal interactions occurring within a specific per unit area, and within per unit of time. Rural population density with a strong influence over the socio-economic characteristics of any rural community is also taken into account by the government while planning for the overall rural development and framing social policies. Population density on the other hand is influenced by factors, like the natural resources, the time and nature of the human colonization. These factors are mainly transient in form and are likely to change or modify over the years. In this context Argent, Smailes, & Grif?n, (2002) outlined the chief factors that influenced population within a rural community setting: “rainfall; soil quality; remoteness (particularly from major cities); land values; farm type; population potential” (388). Rural population density exercises significant influences over the demographics and socio-economic characteristics of rural population, which is an ongoing process which is occurring at this very moment, yet is also persistent in nature that takes place over many years. The rural population density, unlike its urban counterpart takes into direct account the usable living areas and spaces, the environmental habitability, and the potential transport charges for delivery of services and other processes that allow the maintenance of social interaction between rural community members (Smailes, Argent, & Grif?n, 2002, 390). Homes, in paper further proved that rural population density can be interlinked ‘age and maturity’ of the tradition of the community, farm sizes, nature and type of the followed farming practices (Holmes, 1981). Smailes, Argent, & Grif?n (2002) in their papers designed a basic relationship between rural density (as an independent variable), and other rural community features that are the dependent variables. Here, the authors developed a positive relation between rural population density, and the rate of mobility of the community inhabitants, the total population; the industrial labor force, and percentage of the non-native members residing within that particular community. The negative interlinks developed with the rural population density were, that of the spatial area of the community, number of people working in the primary industry in that specific area, the proportion of masculinity, and the ratio of fertility within that particular community. Other factors that influenced the rural community populations were unemployment proportions, the youth dependency factor, and ratio of the community members that are below 15 years of age (Smailes, Argent, & Grif?n, 2002). Despite the significant lack of studies into the aspect of rural population density, the little exploration conducted into the theme reveals that there is indeed a very close connection between rural population density and the socio-economic characteristics and demographics of a rural community, with the factors being mutually dependent on each other. 1 Rural population density and in its role as a pointer of socio-economic structure and demographics of a rural community In the context of rural population density and in its role as a pointer of socio-economic structure and demographics of a rural community, Argent, Smailes, & Grif?n, (2002) made a detailed study that were based on the various experiments conducted on the rural communities in Australia. Here the researchers found that the rural population density serves as pointers for of the socio-economic characteristics and demographics of the rural communities. Based on this observation the researchers delineated the following notions: Low density of the rural population density can be linked with a rural community’s perceivable low worker participation rate. The authors contend that “this is expected mainly because in sparsely populated rural areas, numbers of females in the formal job market are likely to be low for a variety of reasons, including the relative shortage of both full time and part time non-farm jobs, particularly for women, and long commuting distances for the few jobs available” (Argent, Smailes, & Grif?n, 2002, 395). Low rural population density is related to with low numbers but high-density workforce present in the farms. The land productivity values also tend to affect the rural population density, and in rural areas with high populations, the farms tend to be smaller with a larger percentage of farm labourers. A high rural population density would also have the potential of providing better chances of various activities that are not farming based, to work profitably, thus allowing the rural population to look beyond agriculture (ibid). Low rural population density in related to wider spatial aspects, within the context of rural communities that lead to greater distances between any two neighbouring rural communities (Argent, Smailes, & Grif?n, 2002, 394). High rural densities are generally linked with “high levels of both occupational and industrial diversity of the population” (ibid). So, one can assume that the zones with higher populations will tend to attract more non- farming businesses, leading to influx of more people into the area, creating a wide variety of niches with the potential for higher levels of productivity for the community entrepreneurs (ibid). Rural communities with low population densities inherently show lower proportion of community members that are below 15 years of age (ibid). Low rural population density translates into lower rates of unemployment within that particular area. This is mainly because in the poorly populated zones, jobs tend to be few, and there is also an inherent lack in the provided public amenities and services, forcing job seekers to move away from that area. Rural areas with high population densities also inherently receive better public amenities and services thus attracting a large number of the migrant population, often creating a situation where the local people may start becoming jobless (Hugo and Bell, 1998). Low rural population density thus invariably show low influx of migrant population (non-natives), owing to a dearth of local jobs, and a lack of provided public amnesties and services (Argent, Smailes, & Grif?n, 2002, 395). “In areas of low rural density the masculinity ratio of the population (males per 100 females) will tend to be high” (ibid). Zones with poor rural population density will reflect lower number of people that may have shifted their residences in the last 5 years, since the sparsely populated communities will have greater number of people moving out (out-migration) instead of in- migration, as the lack of services and amenities would fail to attract any migrants (ibid). “Low rural density will tend to be associated with a high fertility ratio (children under 5 per 100 women aged 15–44)...Low density is likely to correlate with high ruralilty, isolation, a low proportion of exurban immigrants and the longer retention of established behaviours” (ibid). One positive aspect in the low rural population density is the fact that it tends to create higher spatial aspects in that particular rural social systems, which seems to offset partly, the negative aspects of low rural population density. Therefore low rural population density will naturally indicate an overall smaller community population size (Berry, 1967). 1.5 Conclusion From the above discourse, it is evident that the rural population density is an important variable in distinguishing, analysing, and delineating, the rural communities seen in any country, worldwide. In the 21st century, a rural community is an amalgamation between the rural and urban matrices, as regards the workforce available, amenities and service provided, market size, and the nature of the social interaction amongst various other factors. The notions of the rural population and the type of the rural settlement densities are critical variable factors in analyzing the population density, the socio-economic characteristics, and the settlement zones of the poorly populated rural areas, where the decreasing population creates problems for the authorities responsible for framing rural planning and policies. Rural population density tends to strongly influence the socio-economic and demographic characteristics of rural communities, especially in the context of the developed countries, and becomes a fundamental variable when the development plans and policy framing is considered. Thus, the rural population density is an essential study if one wishes to develop these poorly populated areas. A closer look at the theme of rural population reveals that very little work has been done in this regards as the population density has a very complex orientation. The complex nature of population density also must take into account the environmental and historical factors besides the socio-economic ones. Various researchers have shown that the rural population density has deep effects on attributes of the demography, culture, occupational diversity, local industry types, ethnic composition, and the community members’ mobility. The researchers have proved that the rural population densities tend to cast a significant influence economic opportunities that are made available to those that live in the rural areas, especially in the developed States. Even though there are available some researches that have been conducted on the topic of rural population densities in various developed countries like US, Australia, or some parts of Europe; while conducting literature review it was very clear that more primary researches are required on the arena of rural population density, in order to work for a better developmental plan and program for these remote ‘sparselands.’ \ References Argent, N., Smailes, P., & Grif?n, T. (2006). Tracing the density impulse in rural settlement systems: a quantitative analysis of the factors underlying the rural population density across south-eastern Australia, 1981–2001. Population and Environment 27, 151–190. Argent, N., Smailes, P., & Grif?n, T. (2002). Rural population density: its impact on social and demographic aspects of rural communities. Journal of Rural Studies 18, 385–404. Bahr, J., Jentsch, C., & Kuls, W. (1992). Bevolkerungsgeographie. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 80–11. Berry, B. (1967). Geography of Market Centres and Retail Distribution. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Fonseca, J., & Wong, D. (2000). Changing patterns of population density in the United States. Professional Geographer 52, 504–517. Holmes, J. (1987). “Population.” In, D. Jeans (ed.), Space and society. Sydney: Sydney University Press, 24–48. Holmes, J. (1981). “Sparsely populated regions of Australia.” In, Lonsdale, R., and Holmes, J. (Eds.), Settlement systems in sparsely populated regions. New York: Pergamon. Hugo, G., & Bell, M. (1998). “The hypothesis of welfare-led migration to rural areas: the Australian case.” In, Boyle, P., & Halfacree, K. (Eds.), Migration into Rural Areas—Theories and Issues. West Sussex: Wiley, West Sussex, 107–133. Malthus, R. (1807). An Essay on the Principle of Population. London: Printed for J. Johnson, by T. Bensley. Saglie, I. (1987). Density and town planning: Implementing a densification policy. (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis), Oslo: Oslo School of Architecture. Saglie, I., (1998). Density and Town Planning: Implementing a Densi?cation Policy. Oslo:NIBR (Norsk Institutt for By-og Regionplanlegging). Simon, J. (1998). The Ultimate Resource II: People, Materials, and Environment, Introduction. Retrieved from, http://www.juliansimon.com/writings/Ultimate_Resource/ Smailes, P. (1996). Demographic response to rural restructuring and counter urbanisation in South Australia, 1981-1991. International Journal of Population Geography 2, 26 1287. Tuan, Y. (1977). Space and Place: the Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. World development report (2009). Reshaping economic geography. 48-93, Retrieved from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2009/Resources/4231006-1225840759068/WDR09_bookweb_1.pdf Read More