Humanity’s environmental footprint has increased, but at a much slower rate compared to population and economic growth because of more efficient use of natural resources. There is a long-standing dispute on the extent to which population growth causes environmental degradation. Most studies on this link have so far analyzed cross-country data, finding contradictory results. However, these country-level analyses suffer from the high level of dissimilarity between world regions and strong collinearity of population growth, income, and other factors. We argue that regional-level analyses can provide more robust evidence, isolating the population effect from national particularities such as policies or culture. We compile a dataset of 1062 regions within 22 European countries and analyze the effect from population growth on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and urban land use change between 1990 and 2006. Data are analyzed using panel regressions, spatial econometric models, and propensity score matching where regions with high population growth are matched to otherwise highly similar regions exhibiting significantly less growth. We find a considerable effect from regional population growth on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and urban land use increase in Western Europe. By contrast, in the new member states in the East, other factors appear more important.
The answer is gold and salt. Mali and Songhai were among the 3 powerful empires who did flourish in West Africa. They did control the trade at their time. Hope this is the answer and would be of big help.
The correct answer is to grow faster than and increasing rapidly. The economist Thomas Malthus wrote that the human population would grow faster than its food supply and it will increase rapidly. This will lead to overpopulation and war and famine.
The United States opposed Italy's dictatorship and Germany's dictatorship
