It's rare that I will give a book I fundamentally agree with such a low rating, but in this case it was necessary. It reads like a first "throw everything down on the page" draft; it could and should have been half the length, with some free and pointed use of the editor's pen. The structure of the book could have worked, with chapter for each additional billion people on earth, but it practice it is a pointless conceit. The chapters and subchapters themselves jump around from topic to topic, with very thin narrative or thematic threads to sustain coherence (and my attention...). This aspect of the book could have done with serious editing.
A related issue is when Dorling refers to areas outside his own area of expertise (which is frequently, given the broader implications that population growth has), he is too often content to resort to ad hominem dismissals on the one hand, and appeals to authority to justify his own - apparently unexamined - assumptions. This is a problem, as I enjoy reading a book where someone ventures outside their speciality, and learn things that surprise them. It's a sign of a curious mind. A topic such as this is profoundly political, which is to say it is contested. Right answers are rarely to be found in such contexts, and more often it's a matter of trade-offs and discussion. There should have been more of this.
As to the evidence referred to in the book, we could do without being subjected to comments from below the line on HuffPo or the Guardian, but it was not to be. Dorling, referencing Hans Rosling, calls himself a practical possibilist, and this is a stance I think a lot of people would be in much agreement with. We may have to wait until Hans Rosling himself writes a book from this perspective. ( )