Children fill school libraries with their own stories. Photo: United Nations Photo (Flickr)

Developing countries face overcrowded classrooms and empty libraries. Students have started addressing this issue by filling shelves with their own stories.

Many children in developing countries do not have books to take home or read in class. If they do, they’re usually not translated into local dialects. This means limited use by parents at home, many of whom are also illiterate. UNESCO reported in 2010 that one in five adults is illiterate. Not only learning to read but having easy access to books and other printed material is imperative to improve this staggering statistic.

While some rural communities have access to e-readers, they're few and far between. This is where innovation and imagination come in. A primary school in Chingoe, Mozambique, is filling its library with homemade books, shaping young readers by allowing them to share their own stories. The Literacy Boost program by Save the Children applies this hands-on method and has seen results. Teachers write their own short stories, children draw illustrations that serve as writing exercises, or parents tell stories to their children for transcription. Add a little string for binding and you’re set. It's an innovative way to promote and combine oral traditions with basic education.

Writing can also help children cope after disasters or hardships. Drawing or writing out their experiences is a constructive way to process emotions. Sharing these stories with their peers helps in the recovery effort while simultaneously improving important written and verbal communication skills.

While some may not ascribe a homemade library the same prestige of traditional textbooks or literature, it provides an important foundation where needed most. Children are able to read at home, engage their family and community, and boost their learning skills. No matter who wrote it, taking a book home to read is the first step in realizing the magic of education.

On Monday, the world welcomed its 7 billionth person. The implications of population growth are similarly staggering in number, but here are five of the more important things to know about the growing world community.

There might not be 7 billion of us. Yet.

The October 31st date was chosen by the United Nations Population Fund, and it’s somewhat symbolic. "There is a window of uncertainty of at least six months before and six months after the 31 October date for the world population to reach seven billion," UN population estimates chief Gerhard Heilig told the BBC. However, the crux of the matter—the ever-increasing world population and the problems that come with it—stands.

Human being No. 7,000,000,000 is probably poor—and it's likely the parents didn't plan the pregnancy.

The developing world acted as the engine for most of the last decade's population growth. It’s home to the world’s seven fastest-growing cities, according to Foreign Policy. As such, it’s attracting the attention of policymakers and crystal-ball-gazers alike. Many, like the Worldwatch Institute’s Robert Engelman, propose extending access to contraceptives and encouraging smaller family size to curb population-related problems, though a recent Economist article says that this would only have a modest effect in the face of scarce world resources.

Sure, resource scarcity is a problem, but maybe it doesn’t have to be.

Not all commentators are equally pessimistic about continuing population growth. Some of the most basic problems, like access to food and water, might really be problems of efficiency rather than scarcity. Global Envision contributor Ben Osborn recently wrote about a study by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research that showed that given proper integration and storage of water resources, no one would have to go thirsty. On the food front, a scientific study published in Nature showed that proper agricultural reforms “could increase global food availability by 100–180%,” more than enough to meet the needs of our growing population.

The antidote to population could be migration.

Ensuring good quality of life for the earth’s inhabitants goes beyond just food and water. The UN’s State of the World Population 2011 report identifies migration as a trend that can be used to help aid in economic development. Wealthy countries with declining fertility rates could provide job opportunities for workers disenfranchised in their overpopulated home countries. At the same time, migration is a hot-button issue for developed nations that may not be so keen to open their borders. The report also cites increased access to education as a key factor in reducing population growth and providing better opportunities for youth in developing nations.

Maybe we should all just learn to stop worrying and love the population bomb.

Many fear rapid population growth in a world with limited resources, but given the proper policies it might not have to be so scary. Since there’s no “undo” button for world population, perhaps the best question to ask in light of the 7 billion marker is “How can we make the best of it?”

Want to know where you fit into the 7 billion? Check out The BBC’s “What’s Your Number” tool.

Margo Conner is a senior at Lewis & Clark College in Portland, Oregon, majoring in international affairs. Read her other contributions to Global Envision.

Developing countries are determined to foster stronger domestic science communities. Photo:NASA (flickr)

Developing countries are shooting for the moon.

No longer willing to follow in the technological footsteps of developed nations, Fast Company reports, developing countries are launching significant space programs to subsidize and promote in-country technological innovation.

From Tanzania to Brazil, governments of developing countries are investing billions into building domestic science institutions, as well as funding science and technology scholarships. The aim is to form cohesive space programs of their own without relying on the previous accomplishments of Western nations. On they way, they'll foster a stronger homegrown science community while strengthening education and promoting industry.

But most importantly, says José Goldemberg, a professor at the University of Saõ Paulo, this fledgling investment is an effort to “adapt and develop technologies appropriate to our local circumstances." Some developing countries are pioneering their own paths, exploring technologies relevant to their countries' unique needs.

The programs focus on everything from energy and bio-engineering to environmental science and water resource management. Some, such as the Nelson Mandela African Institute of Science and Technology (which has institutions located in various locations across Sub-Saharan Africa), will begin to offer master's and Ph.D. degrees.

In April 2010, one of the more ambitious developing-world projects was established. Mexico’s Agencia Espacial Mexicana, working with 45 partner countries from around the world, launched the development of a space program with an agreement by all parties to share financial, scientific, and technological resources in their space exploration efforts.

Though the goal of space exploration may seem far-fetched for countries that often struggle with domestic and economic stability, the growth of national ideas and talent are essential to any nation's progress. Even if space exploration is not in the cards for these countries for many years to come, technology developed in the process could prove to be vital. NASA’s space research led not only to man's first steps on the moon, but provided the technology behind everyday-use inventions like ear thermometers and smoke detectors, long distance telecommunications and cordless devices.

Small steps in the development of domestic science and technology programs could lead to a giant leap for the future of a country. From advanced education and job creation to new technologies that simplify complex problems, these programs promise much for millions across the globe.

In post-earthquake Haiti, members of the Bohoc community rehabilitate and widen a road. Photo: Lisa Hoashi/Mercy Corps.

In minutes, everything was gone.

The funnel clouds from one of the United States’ worst tornado seasons in years destroyed homes, bridges, schools, and anything else in their path. While the loss is catastrophic, the reconstruction period that follows a natural disaster can create interesting economic niches and opportunities for those seeking to put the pieces back together.

This kind of destruction is not unique to the U.S. Catastrophes around the globe cause economic shifts. Sometimes this means a transformation in a country’s economic structure, but on occasion, disaster can spark positive changes.

In an example of structural transformation, massive winter flooding in Colombia recently put millions of acres of land underwater — having disastrous effects on the country’s dairy, agricultural, and cut flower industries. Colombia had planned to transform its eastern plains into the country’s primary agricultural sector, doubling the amount of land under cultivation, but the flooding presented a major roadblock. “...[I]n just a few hours we are losing what has been 35 years in the making,” one dairy farmer told Reuters.

Last year’s floods in Pakistan, the earthquake in Haiti, and Hurricane Katrina (to name a few) disrupted millions of lives and wiped out or severely destroyed local and national economies. Recovery may take decades.

But disasters have also spurred interesting new economic developments. The floods in Pakistan washed away thousands of miles of roads and railway lines, many bridges, almost 10,000 schools, and 1.7 million houses. Rebuilding them represents an enormous business opportunity. It is also a chance to introduce more resource-efficient practices in industries like agriculture, livestock, and dairy farming that were wiped out by the floods, Pakistan’s High Commissioner to the UK, Wajid Shamsul Haman, told Reuters.

Indeed, the destruction of infrastructure and existing institutions sometimes represents an opportunity to rebuild in new and improved ways. In March 2010, the Haitian government unveiled a plan to rebuild the nation that seeks to redistribute a large portion of the population to smaller, less disaster-prone cities, according to the New York Times. Building up the infrastructure in these smaller communities should create an economic incentive for people to stay. Planners hope that a decrease in Port-au-Prince’s population will help to alleviate many of the social problems related to overcrowding that it faced before the earthquake.

New Orleans experienced massive job loss following Hurricane Katrina, but by 2008 it had regained 99 percent of its pre-storm total thanks to thousands of new jobs in construction and government, says the New York Times. Some companies and nonprofits incorporated green building practices as part of the rebuilding process, according to the Christian Science Monitor. In fact, the New Orleans school system, which was in many ways failing before the hurricane, is ranked as the most reform friendly city for education by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, says the Christian Science Monitor. Test scores and graduation rates are both up. In some ways, the city is experiencing a rebirth.

A natural disaster is, of course, still a disaster. Even the best-laid reconstruction plans may never materialize. This is especially true in the developing world, where the wounds left by a disaster are more severe and take longer to heal. Scientists predict the world will experience more severe natural disasters in greater numbers in the coming century, says The Guardian. That means more floods, more hurricanes, and more tornadoes like the one that recently ripped through Joplin, Missouri. It also means that now, more than ever, we need to understand how to create positive economic change in a disaster's aftermath.

The Developing Worlds Educated face Tough Choices after Graduation. Photo: Farhad Zalmai for Mercy Corps

“Brain drain” has long bothered policymakers in poor countries says The Economist. But recent migration studies and a touch of classical economics suggest the better phrase is “brain gain."

A country that sends its most skilled workers abroad has three key advantages:

Remittances (money sent home from abroad) go up. In 2010, workers remitted $325 billion, equaling the GDP of Switzerland, largely from developed to developing countries. According to The Economist, skilled workers often find better job opportunities abroad in richer countries, multiplying their income several fold and creating the potential for additional remittances.

Émigrés return with more marketable skills. Increasing numbers of skilled migrants eventually return home with new skills, new contacts, and a pot of savings to invest after several years abroad. In one Romanian study, returning migrants earned 12 to 14 percent more than similar people who stayed home.

There is a higher incentive for education and skill development. Research from Fiji and the Cape Verde Islands show that the general level of education in a population often rises when workers see potential for immigration to “greener pastures”. People have an increased incentive to pick up skills which remain useful if they decide not to migrate after all.

Of course, emigrating tends to benefit the migrants themselves. Otherwise, they would be less likely to leave home.

"Brain gain" parallels English political economist David Ricardo’s law of “comparative advantage” -- stating that two countries with advantages in different areas are better off trading. Richer countries offer more quality employment opportunities for skilled labor while, according to two North African studies, skilled laborers remaining in developing countries often face underemployment or unemployment. Migration across borders -- swapping workers for revenue -- balances these two forces. Some studies claim the world would add $39 trillion to global growth over 25 years if labor became truly mobile.

A skilled immigrant moving from the developing to developed world could actually benefit both nations:

• The destination-country adds a skilled worker, boosting output.
• The worker's annual income rises -- say, from $10,000 (at home) to $50,000 (abroad).
• If the worker remits only 25 percent of his or her income, then losing that worker abroad actually raised the individuals contribution to GDP from $10,000 to $12,500.

Migration does create winners and losers says The Economist. The emotional toll on families continually forced to relocate can be high, though lessening with new technology. And some skilled workers (educated and trained at the expense of cash-strapped governments) do not return much to their poorer homelands.

However, the benefits of brain gain are increasingly thought of as outweighing the costs of brain drain. The Economist aptly sums it up: "Letting educated people go where they want, looks like the brainy option."

Early childhood education could be the best way to raise a nation's collective I.Q. Photo: horizontal.integration (flickr)

Are we simply born with a predetermined IQ, or can it go up or down depending on what happens to us in life? This question of nature versus nurture is explored in a recent study that shows kids raised in poverty have statistically lower IQ's than middle- or upper-middle-class children.

A high IQ doesn't just translate to intellect, writes New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. It also means a better chance of succeeding in life. Several studies show that intensive early childhood education programs can raise children's IQ's over time.

So to close the intelligence gap, Kristof says U.S. parents and policymakers should fund school-based intervention programs in low-income communities.

The implication of this new research on intelligence is that the economic-stimulus package should also be an intellectual-stimulus program. By my calculation, if we were to push early childhood education and bolster schools in poor neighborhoods, we just might be able to raise the United States collective IQ by as much as one billion points.

A Brazilian anti-poverty program known as Bolsa Familia ("Family Fund") is getting attention from governments around the world, writes the Economist. Modeled on a similar program in Mexico, this conditional cash transfer program has been tested successfully in several other Latin American countries, and the World Bank is now looking to start similar programs in Eastern Europe.

In the Brazilian version of the program, poor families with children receive direct transfers of around 70 reals (about $35) a month, on the condition that their children stay in school and have regular health checkups. According to the World Bank, this relatively simple and modest program is unique in that it can help reduce both current and future poverty and inequality in Brazil.

Children learn based on their teachers-- and often national policy regarding education. This month's issue of Foreign Policy explores how the way Germany and France teach economics may spell a dismal economic future.

Millions of children are being raised on prejudice and disinformation. Educated in schools that teach a skewed ideology, they are exposed to a dogma that runs counter to core beliefs shared by many other Western countries. They study from textbooks filled with a doctrine of dissent, which they learn to recite as they prepare to attend many of the better universities in the world. Extracting these children from the jaws of bias could mean the difference between world prosperity and menacing global rifts. And doing so will not be easy. But not because these children are found in the madrasas of Pakistan or the state-controlled schools of Saudi Arabia. They are not. Rather, they live in two of the world’s great democracies—France and Germany.