Louisa Pearson: We’re more likely to have issues with ageing than over-consuming toddlers

ARE you celebrating Universal Children’s Day? What do you mean you had no idea it was happening?

If you’re a parent, every day is probably children’s day. Noisy children’s day, cute children’s day, messy children’s day and so on. If you’re a 30-something woman who remains childless, like me, Children's Day has probably set you wondering if there’s enough time to create a Walton’s-style brood of loveable offspring.

Ever since the UN announcement a few weeks back that the world’s population has swollen beyond seven billion, talking heads galore have been wading in with their tuppence-worth about the connection between population and the environment. My interpretation of their combined natterings is that it’s not the big families of developing countries that pose the real threat to the planet, it’s the resource-guzzling little misses and misters of the West. This notion is fuelled by studies that show having a child is the naughtiest thing you can do in terms of a carbon footprint.

Two years ago, research by the Oregon State University concluded that in the USA, the greenhouse gas impact of a child is 20 times more influential than any other factors, such as driving a gas-guzzling vehicle. These sorts of stats have led some environmentalists to proclaim that they will remain child-free so as not to further burden the planet. It has nothing to do with the fact that they can't stand the thought of sleepless nights or changing nappies, honest. We’re lucky enough to have the freedom to choose to have as few or as many children as we like in this country, but should people seriously be curtailing procreation for environmental reasons?

Scotland’s population has remained more or less steady at just over five million for the last 50 years. The nation’s fertility rate in 2009 was 1.77 – less than the 2.1 required for population-replacement. In other words, we’re more likely to experience issues concerning an ageing population than a plague of over-consuming toddlers. Further, I would like to raise a small point about environmental awareness in the under-16s: they are significantly more clued up than their parents.

Exhibit A is the Eco Schools movement, which now involves more than 3,600 schools in Scotland, and teaches pupils about issues such as food and the environment, biodiversity, transport and the value of a low-carbon future. A recent survey by Tetra Pak found that more than a third of children nag their parents about increasing recycling at home, while two thirds of parents believe their children first became aware of recycling between four and six. What were you doing at that age? I was busy baking fairy cakes without a care whether the paper cases would be recyclable.

What’s to say this new legion of eco warriors won’t create a cleaner, greener tomorrow, either through necessity or choice? Maybe this is just ‘last chance to breed’ hormones asserting themselves by deluding me that children will save rather than destroy the planet?

Back to reality. A Co-operative study has found that six in ten parents experience green pester power, but my favourite finding is that more than half of all parents incorrectly blame climate change on carbon monoxide. Good grief. The kids are all right but I fear their parents are a lost cause.