AHC: Have Ireland regain its 1840 share of the world population by the present day

[Zachariah]

In 1841, Ireland had a population of 8.175M- 0.74% of the world's total population at that time. Your challenge is to have the island of Ireland regain at least this share of the world's total population by the present day, without resorting to a Vlad Tepes scenario- i.e, without reducing the world's total present-day population in this ATL by any more than 20% compared to OTL. In other words, the world's total population has to be at least 6 billion, and the island of Ireland's population in this TL by the present day has to be at least 44.4M. What do you think- can it be done? And how much would have had to change to have a chance of bringing about this outcome?

 

[Monter]

44 million? NO! Even if the famine is either adverted or solved quickly and the Irish starts breeding like rabbits (read, everything goes nicely for the Irish), I did put 15-20 million as the top largest.

 

[Zachariah]

Why not? After all, it's not like Ireland would have to be self-sufficient. It'd still be markedly less densely populated than Taiwan is today (with roughly 125 people/km2 less)- and Taiwan's population was only estimated to be around 1M in 1840. And this is supposed to be a challenge- it isn't supposed to be likely or easy. Aren't you even going to give it a try?

 

[ShortsBelfast]

44 million -I would be eating my daily allocation of krill paste and bioengineered yeasts in the United Communalist Collective Republic of Ireland on the 84th floor of my city block. Think "Make Room, Make Room".

20 million- The current population level on the entire island couldn't be more than 8.3 million (1.8m in NI and 7.5 in ROI, give or take a few illegal immigrants) and that is after two and a half centuries of emigration because of an indigenous lack of jobs and opportunities. Since around 70% of Irish agricultural produce is exported we could (at a lower but adequate level) feed up to 20 million people ( and assuming the agricultural land needed to feed an additional 5.7 odd million is sacrificed to urban sprawl). But what would they do for employment? And how would the state fund itself if it ceased to be a food exporter and (presumably) a lot less attractive as a tourist destination? Living standards would be lower than OTL but not so much lower that we could outcompete the developing world on labour costs.

I suppose if all the Irishmen/Ulstermen of genius like Holland and Ferguson had stayed home and we had become a highly industrial nation, an Ireland of that population might more or less pay its way but you would need an Ireland wank of truly "Stars and Stripes Forever" proportions to make an Ireland with that kind of population viable.

And consider the knock on effects for the US, Canada, NZ and Australia where at least 10-15% of the overall population are of Irish or Scots Irish ethnicity. US population alone would be either 30 million lower or else 10% different in ethnicity.

 

[Zachariah]

Alright then, let's have it. I'd like to see a good Ireland wank scenario which didn't involve ASBs. Alternately, do you feel that a more realistic challenge of maintaining Ireland's population relative to that of Great Britain (almost 44% that of Great Britain's population, over 30% of the total population of the British Isles), with the same stipulation (without reducing Great Britain's total present-day population in this ATL by any more than 20% compared to OTL), might be more achievable? FYI, that'd mean that Great Britain's population would have to be at least 49.4M in this TL, and that Ireland's population would have to be at least 21.75M. Doable?

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

I can't see why Ireland couldn't reach that level of population personally. Iraq has a population of around 40 million with serious desertification.

 

[Achaemenid Rome]

I can't see why Ireland couldn't reach that level of population personally. Iraq has a population of around 40 million with serious desertification.

Ireland has fewer summer months, though, leading to lesser annual crop yields than the Tigris and Euphrates.

 

[Zachariah]

But it'd still have a similar population density to that of England IOTL, and it's right next door. If England can support that population, why shouldn't Ireland be able to? The British Isles are fertile and productive enough.

 

[Taloc13]

I just did a bit of digging around. My home states of Punjab and Haryana* have a population of 28 million each (56 million total) . Also did an area comparison they are 19k sq. miles for Punjab and 17k sq. miles for Haryana which is 36k sq. miles compared to Ireland's 32.5k sq. miles. Get them Punjabi levels of population density, mostly by making Ireland as urbanized as Punjab and Haryana are. That should more then achieve AHC.
PS Not sure how fertile Ireland is.
* In India

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

Ireland has fewer summer months, though, leading to lesser annual crop yields than the Tigris and Euphrates.

Well it may not be likely, but it is possible nevertheless. Advantages can be given to Ireland as well that Iraq lacks so it isn't as easy as just say that Iraq has better summer months, whenever it also has vast deserts and a polarized populace.

 

[Achaemenid Rome]

But it'd still have a similar population density to that of England IOTL, and it's right next door. If England can support that population, why shouldn't Ireland be able to? The British Isles are fertile and productive enough.

Actually you have a point. The population density of England is 413 people per sq km. Ireland is 70,273 sq km. If Ireland had the same population density as England, it would have 29,022,749 people, which is less than 44.4 million but comparable. The total Irish diaspora is 80 million. So it's possible.

If somewhere other than Europe industrializes first, leading Ireland to be a developing economy instead of a developed one, and an exploited periphery country in the core-periphery model, then it would face exponential population growth for much longer than it did IOTL and go through the demographic transition more slowly leading to a higher population.

The entirety of Europe however would likely be a humanitarian crisis, since it is already the second highest population density continent.

 

[Zachariah]

And that's just the ROI, not the island of Ireland- Ireland's size is 84,421 sq km. So if Ireland had the same population density as England, it would actually have 35,501,610 people, which is even more comparable, and helps to put things into context.

 

[Gloss]

And that's just the ROI, not the island of Ireland- Ireland's size is 84,421 sq km. So if Ireland had the same population density as England, it would actually have 35,501,610 people, which is even more comparable, and helps to put things into context.

The climate is about the same but not exactly the same, also you talked about "regaining", it´s asb to have post 1848 Ireland recover its population and reach a England level density.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Europe in general, be it the wealthy parts or the poor parts, all have long since lost their 1840 share of the world population. So the easiest way to is to both improve Ireland and find a way to stem population growth in Africa and Asia.

 

[rfmcdonald]

At most, it might be possible to keep Ireland's population on a level close to its peak OTL with an early successful industrialization. More than that would require very substantial changes, IMHO.

 

[ShortsBelfast]

In terms of soil quality and fertile land, Ireland is considerably better than most of Scotland but inferior to most of England. Which is basically why there was only a limited influx of English settlers to Ireland, mainly at elite levels but a mass influx of Scots to the Ulster Plantation. Remember that Iraq has oil and that England had lots of iron and steel and a bit of copper, lead and zinc. Remember too that Ireland is a peripheral economy, not at the core of the continent. And our climate is best suited to livestock farming overall as opposed to intensive arable/horticulture.

 

[Gloss]

In terms of soil quality and fertile land, Ireland is considerably better than most of Scotland but inferior to most of England. Which is basically why there was only a limited influx of English settlers to Ireland, mainly at elite levels but a mass influx of Scots to the Ulster Plantation. Remember that Iraq has oil and that England had lots of iron and steel and a bit of copper, lead and zinc. Remember too that Ireland is a peripheral economy, not at the core of the continent. And our climate is best suited to livestock farming overall as opposed to intensive arable/horticulture.

I wouldnt say that Iraq is populated because oil, I would argue that while half of the country is a desert the rest is pretty much the opposite, super fertile and hydrated land.

 

[ShortsBelfast]

I fully agree that Iraq is not heavily populated because of oil. What I am saying is that the jobs and revenues generated by that oil helps pay for their sizeable urban population. A majority of the population of Iraq lives in cities and towns and not as farmers of that fertile hydrated land. Or as desert nomads for that matter.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

I fully agree that Iraq is not heavily populated because of oil. What I am saying is that the jobs and revenues generated by that oil helps pay for their sizeable urban population. A majority of the population of Iraq lives in cities and towns and not as farmers of that fertile hydrated land. Or as desert nomads for that matter.

I understand your argument in the modern age, but Iraq in the 800s was very populated and much more so than it would be in the 1300s-1600s. In a similar manner, so was Ireland. The main difference is that Iraq recovered a large amounts of its population by immigration from Iran or simply due to inward growth. Ireland lost its population by migration to America, thus I do see it as impossible for Ireland to mimic similar methods, perhaps.

Do note that Irish history is for the most part a mystery to me.

 

[ShortsBelfast]

Ireland was mainly populated by tribes/clans who raised cattle and sheep until the early medieval period. There was then a move to a greater amount of arable farming largely introduced by firstly the monasteries and later the Norman and Old English ( i.e. still Catholic) invaders. Population then started a slow climb but didn't really take off until the introduction of the potato as a food crop from the New World and the rise of linen as a cash/industrial crop (even pre-industrialisation there were handloom linen weavers). The 1840s probably represented Ireland's geostrategic "sweet spot" as, with the shipping technology of the time, it had the most favourable fuelling and watering stops before crossing the Atlantic and had just enjoyed 150 years of relative peace and calm since 1690, two or three nationalist risings notwithstanding.