The world population is expected to climb to 9.7 billion in 2050 from 7.7 billion today, with the population of sub-Saharan Africa doubling, a United Nations report released Monday said.
The population could then grow to 11 billion by 2100, according to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs’s “World Population Prospects” report.
The study paints a picture of a future in which a handful of countries see their populaces surge as life expectancy lengthens while the global growth rate slows amid declining fertility rates.
By 2050, more than half of the world’s population growth will be concentrated in just nine countries: India, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Indonesia, Egypt and the United States.
Meanwhile the world’s most-populous country China will see its population drop by 2.2 percent, or around 31.4 million, between 2019 and 2050.
All told, 27 countries or territories have experienced a reduction of at least one percent in the size of their populations since 2010 due to low levels of fertility.
The report also says deaths are outpacing new births in Belarus, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Russia, Serbia and Ukraine, but that population loss will be offset by an inflow of migrants.
The overall global fertility rate, which declined from 3.2 births per-woman in 1990 to 2.5 in 2019, is expected to fall further to 2.2 in 2050.
That’s close to the minimum of 2.1 births needed to ensure the replacement of generations and avoid long-term population decline in the absence of migration, according to the United Nations.
The report also projects growing life expectancy generally, including in poor countries where it is now seven years less than the global average.
Global average life expectancy should reach 77.1 years in 2050 against 72.6 years currently, the report says. In 1990, the average life expectancy was 64.2 years.
‘I don’t care’: Watch Kamala Harris shut down Chris Hayes for asking a dumb question about Trump
Sen. Kamala Harris shut down MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes during a post-debate interview on Tuesday evening.
Hayes questioned Harris about her call for Twitter to follow their terms of service and kick President Donald Trump off of the platform.
"Do you think he puts people’s lives in danger when he targets them in tweets?" Hayes asked.
"Absolutely," Harris replied.
"Do you think he knows that?" Hayes asked.
"Does it matter?" Harris replied.
"The fact is he did it. The fact is that he is irresponsible, he is erratic," she explained. "He is like a 2-year-old with a machine gun."
Democrats blast Trump and demand his impeachment at CNN debate
Democratic White House hopefuls united in searing condemnation of Donald Trump during their fourth debate Tuesday, saying the president has broken the law, abused his power, and deserves to be impeached.
From the opening moments, most of the dozen candidates on stage launched fierce broadsides against Trump over the Ukrainian scandal at the heart of the impeachment inquiry.
"The impeachment must go forward," said Senator Elizabeth Warren, who is neck and neck with former vice president Joe Biden at the head of the 2020 nominations race.
"Impeachment is the way that we establish that this man will not be permitted to break the law over and over without consequences," she thundered.
Here are 3 winners and 4 losers from the CNN/NYT Democratic presidential primary debate
Twelve Democrats took to the stage Tuesday night for yet another debate in the party's 2020 president primary hosted by CNN and the New York Times.
After only ten candidates qualified for the previous debate, an additional two — Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and wealthy donor and former hedge fund manager Tom Steyer — made it to the stage this round for an even more crowded event.
The candidates discussed a range of important policy issues, but since the format was a debate, and they're all competing for the same nomination, it is ultimately most critical who won and who lost the night. Here are three winners and four losers — necessarily a subjective assessment, of course — from the debate: