Population, Urbanization & Environment – Comprehensive Study Notes

Global Population & Urban Projection (UN World Urbanization Prospects, 2011-Revision)

  • Regular updates every 2 yrs since 1988 by UN DESA Population Division.
  • 2011→2050: world population expected to rise by 2.3\text{ billion} (from 7.0\text{ billion} to 9.3\text{ billion}).
  • Urban population should absorb most growth:
    • 2011: 3.6\text{ billion} urban dwellers.
    • 2050 proj.: 6.3\text{ billion}.
  • Anticipated benefits of higher urbanization (esp. Global South):
    • Improved service delivery (health, education).
    • Expanded economic opportunities.
  • Anticipated costs:
    • Deteriorating infrastructure, pressure on energy/water, expanding urban poverty.

Framing the Canadian Case

  • Canada now majority-urban; only 13\% urbanized in 1851.
  • Urbanization reshapes Canadian lifestyle, economy, environment.
  • Chapter lenses: demography, urban history, classical & contemporary urban theories, environmental sociology, sprawl.

Key Demographic Indicators & Definitions

  • Demography = study of causes/consequences of population change (size, composition, spatial variation).
  • Indicators guide policy in health, immigration, labour, planning; census every 5 yrs is main data source.

Birth-Related Measures

  • Crude Birth Rate (CBR): live births per 1 000 population / year.
    • Canada 2011: 10.28.
  • Total Fertility Rate (TFR) 2007 Canada: 1.7 children/woman.
    • Below replacement rate \approx2.1.
  • Cross-national variance reveals women’s status (education, contraception, labour force, culture/religion).

Death-Related Measures

  • Crude Death Rate (CDR) 2008: 7 /1 000 (all ages, sexes).
    • Age structure affects CDR; Canada’s ageing → slow CDR rise.
  • Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) 2008: 5/1 000 live births.
  • Life Expectancy (LE) 2008: males 78.5 yrs, females 83.1 yrs.

Migration & Growth

  • Net Migration = Immigrants − Emigrants.
    • 1996–2006: accounted for 7\% of Canada’s 11.4\% population growth (US: 4.9\% of 11.5\% growth).
  • Natural Growth Rate = CBR − CDR (ignores migration).
    • 2006–2011 total pop. growth 5.9\% (up from 5.4\% previous census).
  • Regional highlights 2006–11:
    • Universal growth except Ontario, NWT, Nunavut.
    • Saskatchewan shift from -1.1\% (2001–06) → 7\%.
    • Yukon & Manitoba growth rate doubled.

Classical Theories of Population Change

Thomas Malthus (1798)

  • Premises: people eat & reproduce; food grows arithmetically, population exponentially.
  • Predicts resource crisis → catastrophe.
  • Proposed moral restraint (delayed marriage), rejected contraception.
  • Limitations now known: technological agri-gains, birth-control diffusion, longer LE.

Marxian Response

  • Karl Marx: population growth ↑ wealth; capitalism’s unequal distribution, not scarcity, causes suffering.
  • Modern split:
    • Neo-Malthusians: advocate population control, blame Global South; stress limits to oil/water.
    • Neo-Marxians: blame over-consuming Global North; emphasize inequality & resource hoarding.

Demographic Transition Theory (Warren Thompson, 1929; 4-stage model)

  1. Pre-industrial: high CBR/CDR → stable low growth.
  2. Early industrial/urbanizing: CDR falls, CBR high → pop. surge.
  3. Mature industrial: CBR falls → growth slows.
  4. Post-industrial: low CBR/CDR; ageing; possible zero/negative growth.
  • Critiques: oversimplified, ignores recessions, globalization, immigration, variable timing, tech determinism.

Canadian Urban Development – Five Epochs (Bunting, Filion & Walker)

  1. Mercantile (pre-1850)
    • Small staple-export outposts (Quebec City, Montréal, Halifax, St. John’s).
  2. Commercial (≈1800–1850)
    • Weaker colonial ties; immigration-fuelled rural growth; cities vital as markets; waterways key; Toronto rises (1793 founding).
    • 1867: pop. ≈3\text{ million}; 18\% urban.
  3. Industrial & Railway (1850–1945)
    • CPR 1885 drives westward settlement (Calgary, Vancouver).
    • American branch-plants cluster Québec-City–Windsor corridor.
  4. Post-WWII Welfare/Keynesian (1945–1975)
    • Family allowance, healthcare, housing support stimulate growth.
    • Mass suburbanization via auto + homeownership; metro regions take shape.
  5. De-industrial & Neoliberal (1975–present)
    • Oil shock, recessions → assembly-line collapse; good blue-collar jobs lost.
    • Neoliberal cutbacks, deregulation; growth concentrated in globalizing metros (Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto, Ottawa, Montréal).
    • Western boom: Calgary +12.6\%, Edmonton +12.1\% (2006–11). Smaller centres decline unless commuter-linked.

Sociological Perspectives on the City

Early European Functionalists

  • Tönnies: Gemeinschaft (rural, kin, natural will) vs. Gesellschaft (urban, contractual, rational); warns of cohesion loss.
  • Durkheim: Mechanical vs. Organic solidarity; cities free individuals via division of labour yet interdependence.
  • Simmel: Metropolis fosters blasé attitude; sensory overload → detachment.

Chicago School (1920s–30s)

  • City as “social laboratory”.
  • Wirth – Urbanism as a Way of Life: city = large, dense, permanent, heterogeneous; variables shape segregation, labour division, opportunity.
    • Critique: omits governance need.
  • Methods:
    • a) Ethnography (life histories, participant observation; e.g., The Gang, The Hobo).
    • b) Human Ecology (Park, Burgess, McKenzie): city as organism; competition allocates land.
    • Concentric Zone Model (1925):
      1. CBD (Zone I) – commerce, highest land value.
      2. Transition (Zone II) – industry & poorest rentals, crime.
      3. Working-class homes.
      4. Better resid. (single-detached).
      5. Commuter (suburban, upper-middle & upper).
    • Weaknesses: radial bias, ignores gentrification, multi-centres, choice, policy.
  • Later spatial refinements: Sector Theory (Hoyt); Multiple Nuclei (Harris & Ullman); GIS mapping today.

Conflict / New Urban Sociology (post-1960s)

  • Emphasize power, capitalism, state, racism, patriarchy.
  • Logan & Molotch – Growth Machine: elites (developers, banks, corporates) push pro-growth agenda; community interests sidelined.
  • Globalization lens:
    • Global Cities Theory (Sassen): cities (Toronto, Vancouver, NY, London, Tokyo) are command nodes for finance, telecom, culture.
    • Dual labour market: high-paid professionals vs. low-paid service migrants; spatial outcome = gentrified cores + marginalized peripheries.

Environmental Sociology & Urban Ecological Issues

Human–Environment Linkages (Dunlap & Rosa)

  1. Environment supplies resources.
  2. Humans produce waste that must be absorbed.
  3. Environment is habitat for all life.

Canadian Urban Environmental Problems

  • Air pollution (vehicle exhaust, smog) → morbidity/mortality.
  • Water quality: post-Walkerton focus; 18 % cities lacked adequate sewage (2005).
  • Solid waste: Canadians 2nd (after US) in per-capita generation; landfill scarcity in Toronto & Montréal.
  • Energy:
    • Rising climate-change concern; consumer vs. producer cities (Calgary/Edmonton less conservation urgency).

Ecological Footprint (Rees)

  • Measures land & water area needed for a population’s consumption + waste.
  • Average Canadian footprint ≈7 ha/capita; city range 6.87–9+ ha.
  • Canada 7th largest footprint of 130 nations; ~50 % due to carbon.

Sustainable Development & Urban Sustainability

  • Classic Brundtland definition (1987): meet present needs without compromising future generations; 3 E’s (Environment, Economy, Equity).
  • Municipal actions: solar/wind (Toronto), densification, green space, cycling infrastructure.

Theoretical Frames on Environment

  • Human Exemptionalist Paradigm (HEP) vs. New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) (Catton & Dunlap): NEP situates humans within ecosystem limits.
  • Functionalist-Technocratic view: rely on science & tech (hybrid cars, alt-fuels) to sustain growth.
  • Conflict / Political Economy / Urban Political Ecology:
    • Capitalism links labour & environmental oppression (O’Connor).
    • Urban political ecology examines privatization (water, utilities), deregulation, environmental justice.
    • Canadian examples: Africville (NS), polluted Indigenous reserves.

Urban Sprawl & Smart Growth

  • Sprawl = decentralization of people & jobs to low-density periphery; Calgary exemplifies.
  • Social costs: class segregation, weak neighbour ties, long commutes, job-access mismatch.
  • Environmental costs: farmland loss, highway build-out, ↑fuel use & emissions, transit inefficiency.
  • Mitigation:
    • Greenbelts (e.g., Portland 1979).
    • Smart Growth: infill, higher density, “urban villages” near transit; often targets young professionals & empty-nesters → affordability issues.
    • Gentrification (Vancouver, Calgary, Hamilton, Toronto): revitalizes cores but displaces lower-income/racialized groups.

Synthesis & Exam Cues

  • Canada’s demographic future = low fertility + ageing + immigration-driven growth; regional divergence.
  • Urban sociology evolved from functionalist order-keeping (Chicago) → conflictist power/inequality (growth machine, global cities).
  • Environmental sociology stresses ecosystem limits (NEP) vs. technofix optimism; equity lens key (environmental justice).
  • Sprawl, smart growth, gentrification are contemporary battlegrounds where demographic, urban, and environmental forces intersect.
  • Exam Tips:
    • Be able to reproduce CBR/TFR/CDR/IMR values and interpret their policy implications.
    • Contrast Malthus, Marx, Demographic Transition.
    • Draw & label Concentric Zone Model; critique via Canadian examples (gentrified cores, multi-CBDs).
    • Explain ecological footprint math & why Canadian cities exceed global biocapacity.
    • Discuss smart growth vs. sprawl in terms of 3 E’s of sustainability.