Thomas Malthus

Historical Context Some historical context on Malthus: An Enlightenment philosopher, lived in England 1766-1834 Influenced by logical, scientific thinking of the Industrial Revolution Was concerned with the problem of over population in England

Graph arithmetic growth Graph geometric growth

Food production vs. People production Malthus observed that food production grows arithmetically, while population grows exponentially.

“Die Back Theory” Once a population has exceeded its carrying capacity a die back occurs. What are things that cause a die back? How can a die back be prevented, according to Malthus?

Dieback Theory Malthus theorized that the “dieback” would come in the form of war, disease, starvation, infanticide, etc. Do you think Malthus was proven right or wrong by history? Did birth rates stay high forever, and was population only checked by a die back?

Malthus was wrong For two reasons. The first reason: People eventually decrease their fertility in response to industrialization. Children are no longer assets after families leave the farm, so there is no incentive to have more children. Unless you count “love” as an incentive, which turns out to be much less motivating than money. Women also, for physical, financial, and personal reasons, tend to insist on having less children when they are educated and in a position to make demands in their spousal relationships.

Malthus was wrong The second reason: the Boserup Hypothesis It was observed by researchers that as population increased in the Amazon rainforest among rural inhabitants, there was not a die back in the population. Rather, communities practiced slash and burn agriculture over a wider swath of the amazon rainforest, generating more food. As human population has grown, humans have not died off but instead have become more resourceful. As our population grows, our food is worth more money because there is a bigger market of buyers, which incentivizes humans to come up with more efficient and technologically innovative farming techniques.

Cornucopians American economists are often “Cornucopians”, who believe that contrary to Malthus, people are resources As such, society should produce a slowly growing, highly educated population.

Homeostatic Plateau What things can increase the level of the homeostatic plateau?

Critical Thinking Will Malthus be proven correct in the future? Will we finally exceed carrying capacity and experience a die back?

Total Fertility Rate When It’s Too High, When It’s Too Low, and When It’s JUUUUUUUUUUUST Right

Too High TFR’s of 3 and over tend to be too high. Consequence: too many kids, not enough adults to make money to buy them food and stuff Consequence: Women don’t work, are miserable, etc. Consequence: Children grow up into an unstable economy with few opportunities

Too High: What to do? Anti-natal policies Natal = birth. Anti = against. Against birth policies. Governments encourage or force fewer children. Free birth control, free sterilization, forced sterilization, forced abortion, tax breaks, tax penalties. Countries: India and China

Neo Malthusianism So, even though Malthus was wrong, countries still adopted his policies They think overpopulation is a CAUSE of poverty instead of a result Most notable: China and India China’s One Child Policy Indira Gandhi’s Emergency 1975-1977

Case Study: China For decades, China had a one-child policy. That policy was enforced through Tax penalties for people with more than one child Forced abortions and sterilization The blood police Public shaming and group punishment

Unintended Consequences As we read the article, list some unintended consequences (Economic, Social, Political, Environmental) of the One Child Policy.

Rejection of Neo-Malthusianism Religious objections: Africa, the Middle East, many Muslims and Christians opposed to all birth restrictions, have culture that values large families Cornucopians: People are the resource, not food! (Boserup)

What is the best way? HIE: Healthcare, Infrastructure, Education, especially of women! The Cairo Plan Trust women to make their own family planning decisions Make all resources available, but do not include an element of force Educate women and improve healthcare to delay age of motherhood Increase access to satellite TV and internet where information is freely available and a culture of small families prevails

Too Low TFR’s of 2.0 or lower are too low Consequence: The population ages due to low birth rates (NOT low death rates, although that is a factor). Consequence: Old people are expensive. Consequence: Population will decrease, meaning there are less consumers to buy things. Consequence: Less taxpayers mean less revenue. Consequence: Less workers mean higher wages, which makes the country less competitive.

Too Low: What to do? Encourage immigration! Or… Pro-natal Natal = birth, pro = Promote, so Promote Birth Policies Governments give tax breaks to parents, pay people to take care of their children (one salary per child) free daycare, maternal and paternal leave, etc. Notable countries: U.K., France, United States! (but we aren’t very aggressive about it, our TFR is about 1.9).

USA CBR: 13 CDR: 8 TFR: 1.88 What will happen to the USA in the future economically? What policies should the USA adopt?