Unit 2 Population Settlement Strategies to influence population change : China Migration – Mexicans to USA Settlement LEDC Rio De Janeiro Problems With Large LEDC Cities Improving shanty towns Return to Slide 1

International Migration: Mexico to USA Consequences on Mexico Population Index International Migration: Mexico to USA Home Factor Push Factors (Mexico) Pull Factors (USA) Social 2000 patients per doctor High infant mortality rate 500 patients per doctor Low mortality rate Economic Low wages 25% of USA pay rates 40% unemployment 20% are underemployed Better job opportunities Better pay Environmental Mexico City- overcrowded &polluted (just breathing in the air is like smoking 20 cigarettes a day) Large, open spaces to deal with the large population Cultural Standard of living: incomparable to the USA Way of life and standard of living is much better in the USA Impacts Consequences on Mexico Consequences on USA Social Negative: a female heavy population structure Negative: ↓BR = lower population Negative: Racial TENSION & DIVISION Economic Negative: Economy ↓ as those migrating out were the key contributors Positive: Men can send back money earned in the USA to their family and friends back in Mexico Positive: migrants fill up all the jobs that the Americans don’t want, helping the economy- they are essential to the growth of the country. Environmental Positive:↑ environment& ↓ air pollution as the population decreases Negative: Increased population: overcrowding and increased pollution Cultural Negative: Culture of Mexico could potentially diminish Positive: migrants return with new skills Positive: America can gain new cultures

Unit 2: Strategies to influence population change : China Background to the “One Child Policy” In the early 1900s = China was in stage 1-2 of the DTM, large families were encouraged by Govt. to↑ the workforce needed for industrialization. BR & DR high China industrialised & agriculture produced higher yields and public health improved → DR quickly ↓ hence, THE POPULATION SKYROCKETED. People made no effort to lower the birth rates due to the benefit (and longstanding culture) of having children for labour, particularly in rural areas where un- mechanised subsistence farming took place. In the 1950s the pop. growing at a very high 1.9% a year Events: 1975 The Chinese government started “Wan xi Shao” – “Later, Longer, Fewer” publicity campaign – not very effective 1979 The “One-child policy”. Inducements: free education/priority housing/pension & family benefits Fines on families that had further children “granny spies” & “female infanticide” Effects: Pop growth rate ↓ to 0.7%, China = stage 3 of the DTM. There were, however, Negative effects : 90% of foetuses aborted were female → man > women by 60 million. Tradition of large families is steadily disappearing Return to Slide 1

Unit 2– LEDC Rio De Janeiro Problems With Large LEDC Cities Population – 11,500,000 Crime Associated with organised crime, violence and drugs. Favelas are areas of high crime rates, but are becoming safer places as community spirit increases. Wealthy residents are moving out of Rio to safer areas. Tourists told not to take valuables e.g. jewellery to beaches. Housing 500,000 homeless in Rio. >1,000,000 people live in favelas. 1,000,000 in low quality authority housing Favela= residential area which lacks basic services e.g. water & electricity + no legal right to the land Often built on steep slopes from any available materials. Flash floods and mudslides can carry houses away after heavy rainfall. 200 people were killed after storms in 1988. Attempts have been made to clear the favelas in the past, but the evicted returned and rebuild. Local authorities now accept the presence of the favelas and work with the residents to improve them. Traffic Surrounding mountains don’t allow the city to expand. Little space for improving the traffic network. = traffic congestion, pollution and large amounts of noise during much of the day/night. Pollution SMOG = Industrial pollution + traffic fumes Beaches + sea are also polluted. There is no refuse collection in some parts of the city, such as the favelas Open sewers in Favela = serious health hazards, e.g. cholera in 1992. Return to Slide 1

Unit 2– Improving Rio’s shanty towns – LEDC cities Rochina - favela Self-help Schemes People work together to build their homes Authorities provide breeze-blocks for walls and roof tiles. The money saved by not having to pay for labour is used to provide amenities such as electricity, a clean water supply, tarred roads and community centre. Low-cost Community Housing Projects Low cost homes can be built with cheap breeze-blocks. Water tank on the roof collects water for use in an indoor sink and bathroom/toilet. Electricity and mains sewerage are added. The inhabitants mostly have jobs, making them able to pay a low rent. The 'Favela-Bairio' programme Favelas need support from outside. Since 1995, the Rio city authorities invested to improve favelas. Financial backing from the Inter-American Development Bank →Rio city authorities have spent $500,000 on the 'Favela-Bairio' programme Aim to improve the services and infrastructure in 300 of Rio's favelas. The programme promotes self-help amongst favela residents, building on the strong community spirit that exists there. City authorities discuss and negotiate with the local community committees to find the best ways in which local people can help themselves. Return to Slide 1

Unit 3 Agriculture Tourism Comparison of two farms in EU The CAP Rice farming in India Green Revolution: Traditional v. “Higher Yield” Tourism Tourism: In the Gambia Tourism: EU - Majorca Return to Slide 1