What Over Population?
There is Nothing New Under the Sun
Oded Kafka
Issue date: 9/1/06 Section: GV Feature
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Much has changed since Robert Malthus produced his seminal Essay on the Principle of Population in 1798, and yet much remains the same. Better census data is available now than when Malthus wrote his essay, and we have a better understanding of the factors that affect population: life expectancy,child mortality, birth rate, epidemiology, income and education, public policy and family planning. At its core, however, the debate still focuses on the
balance between a natural urge to reproduce and the economic, social, and political factors that affect the quality of life.
The United Nations Population Fund sees its mission as a responsibility to promote the right of every woman, man and child to enjoy a life of health and equal opportunity. This seems to me a narrow view
of the causes and spoilers of health and opportunity.
The basic argument centers around the fact that population growth is described by an exponential rate while agriculture follows a more limited arithmetic function. The difference between the rates is a shortfall in production and because food production is needed to maintain each generation, other factors must limit population. In today's world we can extend the squeezed supply argument to energy
resources and clean air in addition to arable
land and fresh water. The result is shortage, starvation, competition for resources, war and misery.
The rest is just commentary. Really!
Population growth, the argument goes, will only further limit arable land, fresh water supplies, and energy resources. Increased pollution will result in detrimental effects to habitat and human
health. Deforestation will lead to soil erosion and decreased greenhouse gas absorption. Greenhouse gas production from industrial production will exacerbate
global warming…DISASTER!
What Malthus could not foresee, and as a result,did not account for, was human innovation. He could not know about advances in crop fertilization, low moisture agriculture, increasingly mechanized
balance between a natural urge to reproduce and the economic, social, and political factors that affect the quality of life.
The United Nations Population Fund sees its mission as a responsibility to promote the right of every woman, man and child to enjoy a life of health and equal opportunity. This seems to me a narrow view
of the causes and spoilers of health and opportunity.
The basic argument centers around the fact that population growth is described by an exponential rate while agriculture follows a more limited arithmetic function. The difference between the rates is a shortfall in production and because food production is needed to maintain each generation, other factors must limit population. In today's world we can extend the squeezed supply argument to energy
resources and clean air in addition to arable
land and fresh water. The result is shortage, starvation, competition for resources, war and misery.
The rest is just commentary. Really!
Population growth, the argument goes, will only further limit arable land, fresh water supplies, and energy resources. Increased pollution will result in detrimental effects to habitat and human
health. Deforestation will lead to soil erosion and decreased greenhouse gas absorption. Greenhouse gas production from industrial production will exacerbate
global warming…DISASTER!
What Malthus could not foresee, and as a result,did not account for, was human innovation. He could not know about advances in crop fertilization, low moisture agriculture, increasingly mechanized
Be the first to comment on this story