The world at seven billion

Lots of people

The United Nations estimates that on Monday 31 October the world's population will reach seven billion. But how accurate is this figure?

Not only is the world's population supposedly reaching seven billion today, the charity Plan International has anointed a girl born in India as the seven billionth.

In reality, things are much less clear.

The UN's population estimates chief, Gerhard Heilig, describes it as "nonsense" to suggest anyone could pinpoint where the seven billionth child will be born.

And he says the UN recognises that its own figures come with a 1-2% margin of error. Today's population could actually be 56 million higher or lower than seven billion, Mr Heilig says.

"There is a window of uncertainty of at least six months before and six months after the 31 October for the world population to reach seven billion," he told the BBC.

Start Quote

You are always going to be essentially guessing… We will never have a true, definitive figure”

End Quote Professor Mike Murphy London School of Economics

The UN Population Division website adds that no-one can determine the date with an error margin smaller than about 12 months, as even the best censuses have "inevitable inaccuracies".

"In fact, due to very poor demographic statistics in a significant number of developing countries the uncertainty may be even larger."

The UK census of 2001 illustrates the problem. The population had been thought to be about 60 million, while the census showed it was closer to 59 million.

"The British figures were revised by more than 1% in 2001 and that's in a highly developed country," says London School of Economics professor, Mike Murphy.

There are plenty of other countries, he says - Nigeria for example - where recording systems are far less accurate, and some countries that have not held censuses for decades.

One child

According to some experts, the UN has jumped the gun.

The US Census Bureau says the most likely date the world population will reach seven billion is between March and April next year.

Births in China

The UN estimates fertility (the average number of children born to a woman) using census data, surveys, vital registers compiled by national statistical offices - and, in countries where fertility statistics are controversial, other sources such as immunisation data.

A large number of data sources are used to estimate fertility in China, including vaccination studies and school enrolment ratios. The UN says fertility estimates for China are "very controversial", in China itself as well as in the rest of the world.

Sergei Scherbov of the Vienna Institute of Demography, meanwhile, says there is a 95% probability that the figure will be reached between January and July 2012.

Earlier this year, he and two colleagues published a paper arguing that the seven billion figure was most likely to arrive in 2012 or 2013 - and was almost as likely to occur in 2014 as in 2011. But since then, he says, new figures have come in that make 2012 more probable.

"People have no idea how many of us are here," he says, modestly.

Mike Murphy agrees. "As you can never get a true figure to compare, you are always going to be essentially guessing… We will never have a true, definitive figure," he says.

Out for the count

No census for more than 25 years:

  • Afghanistan
  • Angola
  • Burma
  • DR Congo
  • Eritrea
  • Faeroe Islands
  • Iceland
  • Lebanon

Census data not received by the UN

  • Dutch Caribbean
  • Lebanon (last census 1932)
  • Somalia
  • Uzbekistan
  • Western Sahara

Source: UN

China illustrates one kind of problem. While it conducts well-organised censuses, the one-child rule means that births could be under-recorded.

Mr Scherbov believes the average number of children born to a woman is about 1.4, but the UN used a figure of 1.7 between 2000 and 2005 and 1.64 between 2005 and 2010. That means the UN could have overestimated the population of China by several million, he says. By the same token, Mr Scherbov might have underestimated it by this amount.

The UN's reason for naming a symbolic date as seven-billion day is to draw attention to the speed of population growth, with less than 13 years having passed between the six-billion and seven-billion milestones.

"It can focus attention of people all around the world on global population challenges," says Mr Heilig.

Plan International's goal in picking a girl born in Uttar Pradesh as the seven billionth member of the world population is to draw attention to sex-selective abortion - the practice of aborting female foetuses in countries where male children are prized.

India is also the country with the highest predicted population growth for 2010-2015 - 135 million compared to 80 million in China.

The charity knows of course, just like the UN, that the number seven billion is approximate.

One of its campaigns is designed to ensure that more children are properly registered - as otherwise they have no proof of identity and "no legal existence" - and it cites estimates that 51 million newborns go unregistered every year.

Ultimately, does it matter if the seven billion figure is 1-2% out, or more?

Not really, says Mike Murphy.

"It's not in the end a figure that people use to make specific decisions. It may inform the context in which these decisions are made, but it's not a figure used in decision-making," he says.

The figure plays a part in the debate about the world's ability to grow enough food to feed its growing population. But if population figures are uncertain, Professor Murphy says, this is even more true of food production figures.


More on This Story

In today's Magazine

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 45.

    I'm shocked by the number of people suggesting letting the poor die or a"controlled war" WE are responsible for many of Africa's problems both historically and today. The wealth of our nation is partly due to exploitation of poorer countries. We should remove barriers (trade/war), redistribute wealth and stop making things worse(Global Wmg/debt) With economic development comes reduced birth rate.

  • rate this

    Comment number 44.

    43.HaveIGotThatWrong - money to be made from GW? Possibly & if it came in the form of a Green New Deal could give the UK a massive industrial boost too. And nothing like as much money as is made daily by the fossil fuel lobby continuing to spin the line that GW is not man made......

  • rate this

    Comment number 43.

    40. Little_Old_Me
    6.HaveIGotThatWrong - population growth and global warming are inextricably linked. Either we must cut over comsumption & needless waste or reduce the population. I know which would be easier & more palatable.......
    There's money to be made out of Climate change, but not in population reduction. That's the real reason one is favoured over the other.

  • rate this

    Comment number 42.

    Nothing to worry about, the explosion in population is in the third world, and famine and disease will no doubt redress the balance if the west keeps it's nose out and lets nature take it's course.

  • rate this

    Comment number 41.

    Education, security and improved standards of living is the most successful method to bring down the birth rate

    All suggestions of culling, sterilisation, withdrawing food aid and witholding innoculations are basically amount to advocating genocide

    I'm appalled how quickly these ideas are thrown out as suggestions, especially given the fact that the world is not actually overpopulated at all

  • rate this

    Comment number 40.

    6.HaveIGotThatWrong - population growth and global warming are inextricably linked. Either we must cut over comsumption & needless waste or reduce the population. I know which would be easier & more palatable.......

  • rate this

    Comment number 39.

    Easy to say this is just a 3rd world problem-it's not.
    Until there are severe consequences to having >one or two children, the situation will get worse. Having 5 kids is selfish and damaging to the global environment whether you life in Europe or Africa.

    We have cheated the natural limits on our population with medicine and intensive farming. The plague that finally culls us will be devastating.

  • rate this

    Comment number 38.

    As humans, we have compassion for life and therefore attempt to control populations in a positive manner. It isn't really effective though.

    The ruthless, unsympathetic juggernaut that does control the numbers is mother nature herself. We endlessly battle her to protect ourselves from disease, disasters etc, but she will always win.

  • rate this

    Comment number 37.

    "Religious leaders need to step up and "get real" about birth control."
    Very true, but this is only a minor issue compared to the effect poverty has on having large families.

    "... tackled by transferring more wealth, healthcare and education to the 3rd world.. "
    Again somewhat true, but how to transfer us getting more in debt??? Better policies in home nations is far more important.

  • rate this

    Comment number 36.

    Whatever the figure it is self evident the world population is growing at a rate greater than available resources. This is where attention should be focused.

  • rate this

    Comment number 35.

    If you have more than two children, you are part of the problem. Large families were justifiable when population numbers were lower - they're unacceptable now. Childhood deaths have fallen without birthrate falling.

    The most environmentally damaging thing you can do is have a child. If you think you have a right to more than two, you are wrong.

    It's a scary time to be a human.

  • rate this

    Comment number 34.

    'Never trust statistics unless you fiddled the figures yourself' said Churchill...I think there is probably more than 7 billion!

  • rate this

    Comment number 33.

    7. Eviltuba
    Africa is not overpopulated - it is less densely populated than Europe. Produce is flown out to fill our supermarkets. They struggle because of the conflicts we fund (to profit from arms sales, diamonds)+ global warming we're causing. As for pollution, a baby born in Africa today will produce 75 times less Co2 in their life than 1 born in the US. Birth control- China is tough on this.

  • rate this

    Comment number 32.

    #9 What Darwin would think of food aid is irrelevant, his scientific works were a biological theory for nature, not a social manifesto for us! On topic, the planet can support this many people thankfully but we'll run into issues if we don't clean up our polluting act soon. I really hope the population does level out around 9 or 10 billion as many predict or else we really may be stuffed!

  • rate this

    Comment number 31.

    In the developing world, the stranglehold that monothiestic religions have over peoples minds (and bodies) prevent any realistic reductions in brith rates. Religious leaders need to step up and "get real" about birth control.

    Education and raising living standards are the only means we have to fight ingnorance and supersition so young people can make informed decisions about birth control.

  • rate this

    Comment number 30.

    We should not get hung up about one particular number. The issue is that population is still growing uncontrollably, and this will inevitably put pressure on resources. This can only be tackled by transferring more wealth, healthcare and education to the 3rd world, since this is the only proven method of encouraging people to have the confidence to have smaller families.

  • rate this

    Comment number 29.

    Really, i'm still waiting to know how you arrive at this hokum...considering the facts that hundreds out of warfare, famine and hunger die both in africa and middle east, not to mention a worldwide industrial deaths. are you saying the average deaths equates the average births? please this is another waste of resources just like nasa.

  • Comment number 28.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • rate this

    Comment number 27.

    It's quite irrelevalent as to whether there are 6.5 billion, 7 billion or 7.5 billion of us ... the issue is that there are far too many, and the numbers are still increasing rapidly.

  • rate this

    Comment number 26.

    The Daily News nails it again. Many lolz:
    As world population hits 7 billion, Sussex Police tells motorists to expect longer journey times on A27.


Page 8 of 10



BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.