By: Al K. Rashid
Two hundred years ago, Thomas Robert Malthus was the most famous political economist of the nineteenth century. Prior to his writings, economists had viewed high rates of population growth positively. Malthus’ work demonstrated the reverse, by positing an inverse correlation between population growth and economic expansion. While Malthus’ theory subsequently has been proven mostly unfounded, it is interesting to reflect on the impact it had on another famous thinker. Charles Darwin incorporated Malthus’ concepts on population into his own famous theories of “natural selection” and “survival of the fittest”.
Malthus and his Magnus Opus “An Essay on the Principle of Population …”
Malthus was born in 1766 in the town of Dorking in Surrey, England. At the age of eighteen he enrolled in Jesus College, Cambridge, where he studied mathematics and natural philosophy. In 1788, Malthus decided to enter the church and was ordained an Anglican parson. Malthus developed his theory on population in response to a debate with his father, who had witnessed the transformative powers of the early industrial revolution to improve the economic conditions of the poor. England and Western Europe were experiencing great economic expansion during the late eighteenth century. However, Malthus did not share his father’s positive outlook. His perspective was fashioned by the outcome of several recent famines. In 1798, Malthus published his ideas in a book entitled, An Essay on the Principle of Population, as it Affects the Future Improvements of Society, with Remarks on the Speculations of Mr. Goodwin, M. Condorcet and Other Writers. This population essay provided quantified analysis which correlated population growth with what Malthus termed “subsistence.” Malthus stated that, while population increases geometrically, subsistence (food supplies) only increases arithmetically. So while the population may increase on the order of 1,2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc., subsistence only increases at the rate of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. Malthus believed that the ability of the economy to increase the food supply is limited because of ultimate land scarcity as well as the limited capacity of cultivated land to produce (due to the law of diminishing return). Thus, Malthus predicted a bleak future for humanity, predicting that ever increasing population growth will doom mankind to an endless struggle to survive. There was a solution, however. Malthus theorized a “population optimum” where population growth might be held in balance with the supply of resources. This optimum could be achieved by ‘preventive checks’, which would have to be actively adopted by the populace. These checks to population growth include “moral restraint”, late marriage, education, and migration. Malthus warned that if these checks were not implemented, then nature would supply its own, including epidemics, earthquakes, droughts, war, and other natural calamities. These external factors limit excessive population growth and, consequently, restore the required balance.
Enlightenment Thinkers vs. the Malthusian Modus Operandi
Malthus lived toward the end of the Age of Enlightenment and during the era of the French revolution. The socioeconomic conditions of society were a prime topic among learned thinkers. Authors such as the Marquis de Condorcet and William Godwin argued that society’s problems could be primarily attributed to defective social institutions. The English Poor Law of 1834 was held up as a promising social reform to improve the well being of the poor in society. Malthus disagreed and argued that encouraging such welfare programs would aggravate societal problems by allowing the poor to breed more. Malthus was extremely concerned about what he considered to be the decline of living conditions among the working classes in nineteenth-century England. He attributed this to the overproduction of the young and to the irresponsibility of the poor. In response, Malthus suggested that the family size of the poor be regulated to prevent them from producing more children than they could support.
The Modern Population Optimum Theory
The major assumptions of the Malthusian theory are accepted by contemporary neo-Malthusians. For example, they believe that, for every country there is a certain optimum level of population which, at a given time and condition, is required to maximize the utilization of its resources. If the population rises above the optimum level, a certain percentage of the country’s human resource is likely to remain unemployed. In the event population falls below the optimum level, the resources of the country will remain fairly under-utilized. Neo-Malthusian ideas were revived during the 1970’s with the outbreak of severe famines in India and certain parts of Africa. Paul Ehrlich wrote the famous book, The Population Bomb, emphasizing that a population explosion would cause mass starvation throughout the world (Ehrlich, 1971). Unlike Malthus, these neo-Malthusians encouraged policies that regulate population growth through birth control. In addition, they targeted population growth in the Third World and not the poor in western societies. Robert Hielbroner, the famous economic historian, made the following general statement about population growth and poverty, “We can state with some clarity that wealthier people have fewer kids and poor people have more. The increase in children creates the increase in poverty. At the same time, the increase in poverty seems to lead to more children being born. This vicious circle must be broken to eliminate poverty.” (Schmitt, 2004).
The Flaws in Malthus’ Prophesies
One major flaw in the Malthusian model is that there is no strong evidence that human population follows exponential growth. Historically, the productivity gain from the industrial revolution far outstripped population growth. Moreover, technological and agricultural development and the evolution of contraceptives contributed to a dramatic increase in the standard of living in many societies which, in turn, increased production and reduced population growth. Ironically, in certain countries such as Japan, France, and Sweden, population growth is so sluggish that it may endanger the future economic growth of these countries.
The Malthus – Darwin Link
Darwin initially believed that creatures reproduce only sufficiently to maintain a stable population. Once back from his famous voyage on the Beagle, Darwin first encountered Malthus’ work. In 1838 Darwin wrote in his autobiography, “I happened to read for amusement Malthus on population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on, from long continued observations of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favorable variations would tend to be preserved and unfavorable ones to be destroyed. Here, then, I had at last a theory by which to work.” (Hall, 1984). Darwin pondered the theory that populations increase at a rate greater than subsistence. He reflected that such an occurrence would provoke a struggle for existence. Ultimately, he hypothesized that “natural selection”, based on the concept of the “survival of the fittest” could account for evolutionary change. Darwin wrote, “I saw on reading Malthus on population, that “natural selection” was the inevitable result of the rapid increase of all organic beings.”
He further gave Malthus his due by noting, “In the next chapter the struggle for existence amongst all organic beings throughout the world, which inevitably follows from their high geometrical powers of increase, will be treated of. This is the doctrine of Malthus, applied to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms. As many more individuals of each species are born than can possibly survive, and as, consequently, there is a frequently recurring struggle for existence, it follows that any being, if it vary however slightly in any manner profitable to itself, under the complex and sometimes varying conditions of life, will have a better chance of surviving, and thus be naturally selected. From the strong principal of inheritance, any selected variety will tend to propagate its new and modified form.”
Malthus further influenced another giant in the field of biology at that time. Alfred Wallece had published findings similar to Darwin’s shortly after the latter’s famous publication on the origin of the species. The following is a quote by Wallace, “…the most important book I read was Malthus’ An Essay on the Principle of Population. It was the first work I had yet read treating any of the problems of philosophical biology, and its main principles remained with me as a permanent possession, and twenty years later gave me the sought-after clue to the effective agent in the evolution of organic species.” (Frey, 1970).
Notes
Clark, Ronald. The Survival of Charles Darwin: A biography of a man and an Idea. Random House, Random House, New York, 1984.
Couts, David A., Alfred Russul Wallace - An Exponentialist View, 2005,
http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/exponentialist/Wallace.htm
Ehrlich, Paul. The Population Bomb. New York: Ballantine Books, 1971.
Hall, T.D. (1995) “Influence of Malthus and Darwin on the European Elite http://www.Trufax.org/.
Malthus, T.R., An Essay on the Principle of Population, as it Affects the Future Improvements of Society, with Remarks on the Speculations of Mr. Goodwin, M. Condorcet and Other Writers. First Edition. London: J. Johnson, 1798.
Schmitt, Gavine( 2004) “ Is the world Population a Concern?
http:// www.framingbusiness.net
