Malthusian Theory of Population

The most well-known theory of population is the Malthusian theory. Thomas Robert
Malthus wrote his essay on “Principle of Population” in 1798 and modified some of his conclusions in
the next edition in 1803.
The rapidly increasing population of England encouraged by a misguided Poor Law
distressed him very deeply. He feared that England was heading for a disaster, and he considered it
his solemn duty to warn his country-men of impending disaster. He deplored “the strange contrast
between over-care in breeding animals and carelessness in breeding men.”
His theory is very simple. To use his own words: “By nature human food increases in a slow
arithmetical ratio; man himself increases in a quick geometrical ratio unless want and vice stop him.
The increase in numbers is necessarily limited by the means of subsistence Population invariably
increases when the means of subsistence increase, unless prevented by powerful and obvious
checks.”
Malthus based his reasoning on the biological fact that every living organism tends to
multiply to an unimaginable extent. A single pair of thrushes would multiply into 19,500,000 after
the life of the first pair and 20 years later to 1,200,000,000,000,000,000,000 and if they stood
shoulder to shoulder about one m every 150,000 would be able to find a perching space on the
whole surface of the globe. According to Huxley’s estimate, the descendants of a single greenfly, if
all survived and multiplied, would, at the end of one summer, weigh down the population of China!
Human beings are supposed to double every 25 years and a coup/e can increase to the size of the
present population in 1,750 years.
Such is the prolific nature of every specie. The power of procreation is inherent and
insistent, and must find expression. Cantillon says, “Men multiply like mice in a barn.” Production of
food, on the other hand, is subject to the law of diminishing returns. On the basis of these two
premises, Malthus concluded that population tended to outstrip the food supply. If preventive
checks, like avoidance of marriage, later marriage or less children per marriage, are not exercised,
then positive checks, like war, famine and disease, will operate.

The theory propounded by Malthus can be summed up in the following propositions:

(1) Food is necessary to the life of man and, therefore, exercises a strong check on population. In
other words, population is necessarily limited by the means of subsistence (i.e., food).
(2) Population increases faster than food production. Whereas population increases in geometric
progression, food production increases in arithmetic progression.
(3) Population always increases when the means of subsistence increase, unless prevented by some
powerful checks.
(4) There are two types of checks which can keep population on a level with the means of
subsistence. They are the preventive and a positive check.

The first proposition is that the population of a country is limited by the means of subsistence. In
other words, the size of population is determined by the availability of food. The greater the food
production, the greater the size of the population which can be sustained. The check of deaths
caused by want of food and poverty would limit the maximum possible population.

The second proposition states that the growth of population will out-run the increase in food
production. Malthus thought that man’s sexual urge to bear offspring knows no bounds. He seemed
to think that there was no limit to the fertility of man. But the power of land to produce food is
limited. Malthus thought that the law of diminishing returns operated in the field of agriculture and
that the operation of this law prevented food production from increasing in proportion to labour
and capital invested in land.

In fact, Malthus observed that population would tend to increase at a geometric rate (2, 4, 8, 16, 32,
64, etc.), but food supply would tend to increase at an arithmetic rate (2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12). Thus, at the
end of two hundred years “population would be to the means of subsistence as 259 to 9; in three
centuries as 4,096 to 13, and in two thousand years the difference would be incalculable.”
Therefore, Malthus asserted that population would ultimately outstrip food supply.

According to the third proposition, as the food supply in a country increases, the people will produce
more children and would have larger families. This would increase the demand for food and food per
person will again diminish. Therefore, according to Malthus, the standard of living of the people
cannot rise permanently. As regards the fourth proposition, Malthus pointed out that there were
two possible checks which could limit’ the growth of population: (a) Preventive checks, and (b)
Positive checks.

Preventive Checks:
Preventive checks exercise their influence on the growth of population by bringing down the birth
rate. Preventive checks are those checks which are applied by man. Preventive checks arise from
man’s fore-sight which enables him to see distant consequences He sees the distress which
frequently visits those who have large families.

He thinks that with a large number of children, the standard of living of the family is bound to be
lowered. He may think that if he has to support a large family, he will have to subject himself to
greater hardships and more strenuous labour than that in his present state. He may not be able to
give proper education to his children if they are more in number.

Further, he may not like exposing his children to poverty or charity by his inability to provide for
them. These considerations may force man to limit his family. Late marriage and self-restraint during
married life are the examples of preventive checks applied by man to limit the family.

Positive Checks:
Positive checks exercise their influence on the growth of population by increasing the death rate.
They are applied by nature. The positive checks to population are various and include every cause,
whether arising from vice or misery, which in any degree contributes to shorten the natural duration
of human life.

The unwholesome occupations, hard labour, exposure to the seasons, extreme poverty, bad nursing
of children, common diseases, wars, plagues and famines ire some of the examples of positive
checks. They all shorten human life and increase the death rate.
Malthus recommended the use of preventive checks if mankind was to escape from the impending
misery. If preventive checks were not effectively used, positive checks like diseases, wars and
famines would come into operation. As a result, the population would be reduced to the level which
can be sustained by the available quantity of food supply.

Seth, T. (2015, August 14). Malthusian Theory of Population: Explained with its Criticism. Retrieved
May 12, 2019, from http://www.economicsdiscussion.net/articles/malthusian-theory-of-population-
explained-with-its-criticism/1521

Bulgaria Will Have World's Most Rapidly Shrinking Population in Next 35 Years - UN

Bulgaria is expected to have the world's highest population decline rate between 2015 and 2050,
a UN report shows.

The Southeastern European country is among the 48 whose population is expected to shrink
over the next 35 years. It is part of the group where a decrease of more than 15% is expected
between 2015-2050, alongside Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Hungary, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania,
Moldova, Romania, Serbia and Ukraine.

Bulgaria has a population of roughly 7.15 million as of 2015, a number that is projected to go down
to 5.154 m in 35 years, the UN says. This suggest a decrease of 27.9%, the biggest in the world
according to a table that is part of the UN report's key findings. Romania comes second with 22.1%,
and the first ten positions are entirely dominated by Eastern European countries. By 2100,
the Bulgaria's population is expected to have decreased to 3.4 million.

In a table representing a list of ten countries with the oldest and the youngest populations
for 1950, 1980, 2015, 2030, and 2050, Bulgaria ranks 7th as of the current year, but is not present
elsewhere in the "top 10" list. Fertility in European countries in general "is now below the level
required for full replacement of the population in the long run (around 2.1 children per woman, on
average), and in the majority of cases, fertility has been below the replacement level for several
decades."
"Fertility for Europe as a whole is projected to increase from 1.6 children per women in
2010-2015 to 1.8 in 2045-2050, but such an increase will not prevent a likely contraction of the total
population size," the report has added.

The 2015 Revision of World Population Prospects also shows that India will become the
world's most populous country in just seven years, when it will be home to more people than China.
India and China's population are currently 1.31 b and 1.38 b, respectively, but both will have about
1.4 people by 2022, and after 2030 China's population will see a slight decrease, the international
body estimates. The world's overall population is projected to grow to 9.7 billion by 2050 and to 11.2
billion by 2100, with more than 9 billion people living in Africa and Asia at the end of the century.

Bulgaria Will Have World's Most Rapidly Shrinking Population in Next 35 Years - UN. (2015, July 30).
Retrieved May 12, 2019, from https://www.novinite.com/articles/170130/Bulgaria Will Have
World's Most Rapidly Shrinking Population in Next 35 Years - UN

Boserup Theory of Agricultural Development

Boserup occupies the place of pride in the task of discussing the problems and processes of
agricultural development. It is so not because she attributed agricultural development to the factor
which so far has been described as irrelevant but as she has demolished a theory propounded by
classical economist. i.e. Malthus.

Boserup in her attempt tried to probe into the causes of agricultural development. She maintained
the view that agricultural development is due to some kind of compulsion. This compulsion relates
to rising trend of population.

It means the basic force behind agricultural development is the pressure of population. The
development of patterns and techniques of cultivation is governed by the population growth. She
supported this contention through an examination of agricultural development of some African and
Latin American countries.

According to Malthusian theory of population if at any time food supply increases population will
increase and new equilibrium will be established between population and food supply.

In a sense, if population is less than the existing food supply, population will increase and wipe out
the excess food supply. But, if population is already beyond the means of subsistence, it itself will
come down to reach an equilibrium through the positive checks.

Boserup has tried to refute both these aspects of Malthusian theory. She criticised first part of the
theory on the ground that few observers would like to suggest that the tremendous increase in the
rates of population growth witnessed throughout the under developed world in the two postwar
decades could be explained as a result of changes in the conditions for food production.

It is reasonably clear that the population explosion is a change in basic conditions which must be
regarded as autonomous in the sense that the explanation is to be sought not in the improved
conditions of food production but in medical inventions and some other factors which the student of
agricultural development would regard as independent variables.

As regards the second part of Malthusian theory, the refutation is more direct and emphatic. Thus
her theory of agricultural development cannot be sustained so long as Malthusian contention holds.
According to Prof. Boserup, “whenever, there is a population pressure, population does not go
down. It rather leads to various technical and other changes which result in agricultural growth
and increase in food supply.”
Stages of Agricultural Development:
1. Forest Fallow:
According Prof. Boserup, agriculture in the initial stages is called forest fallow which is based on very
simple operations. It needed small capital in the form of a seed or axes for felling of trees. It also
requires least amount of labour to produce agricultural product.

n this stage, matured forests are burnt. The soil itself becomes loose due to burning of the forests.
This type of land can be dug up with a simple stick. No hoes or ploughs are needed for sowing. In
short, this stage needs the least amount of capital and labour per unit of food production.

2. Bush Fallow:
Now let us examine, according to Prof. Boserup what happens when population grows and its,
requirements for food are not met by burning of matured forests. Allowing a forest to mature fully,
requires a long gestation period.
Obviously, for having more crops, the community will resort to the burning of forests with less
mature growth. When repeated burning of less matured forests takes place, we find ourselves in the
bush fallow stage. In this stage bushes rather than forests are burnt.

The soil in this stage is compact instead of becoming loose. Now, for producing a crop on such a soil,
an implement stronger than a mere stick accompanied by more labour is required.

It is so because burning of grass and weeds is very difficult as the hoe cannot remove all the weeds,
more labour will be required even for weeding purposes. The period for a land to be follow declines
from 25 to 6 years. In short, we can say that growing population need more food and necessitate
bush burning.

3. Short Fallow:
The short fallow stage is accompanied by growth of population and accordingly increased need of
food grains in the society. The society cannot afford to grow bushes. Thus, the land under grass and
weeds has to be used in its existing form.

A hoe having been an important implement during the bush fallow stage, cannot kill grass roots and
weeds. Therefore, there arises the need for plough. It is so because burning of grass and weeds is
not an easy task and the hoe cannot remove all the weeds.

Moreover, there is only a little of fertilizing ashes because the burning of bushes, too, has become
less frequent. During this period, pond mud, refuse, litter from surrounding land etc. is now needed
as manure. This needs more labour and capital.

4. Annual Cropping:
In annual cropping, there is no fallow: No doubt, sometime lapses between the harvesting of one
crop in one year and the sowing of other in the following year. In fact, it is called an annual rotation
system in which the time intervening two crops is utilized for sowing grass or fodder.

5. Multiple Cropping:
According to Prof. E. Boserup, multiple cropping is the most crucial and intensive system of land use
pattern. Under this system, two and more successive crops can be sown in a year. It means, there is
sufficient scope to grow a variety of crops during rabi and kharif seasons.

The fallow period is almost negligible. As a result of growing population both the fourth and fifth
stages of agricultural development will again come into existence. These require not only more
capital but as well as more of labour.

In fact, in support of her view, Boserup quotes Parain to suggest that there is another stage of
agricultural development after the short fallow stage. It was the introduction of three cause of
rotation in Northern Europe in 800 AD. Again, it is brought about by the growing density of
population.

These stages require more labour per unit of food produced. As more food is needed and agriculture
enters the short fallow stage, draught animals have to be kept one could afford to pay less attention
to their upkeep when population density was low and population requires less intensive agricultural
operation. But the increase in the density of population, agricultural operations will assume wider
dimensions and draught cattle will have to be kept more busy.
This, in turn, requires greater stress on the production of food grains and fodder. All these stages
require more labour per unit of cultivation of food. In order to prove her arguments that per unit of
food output requires more labour input as we move from the forest culture to short fallow. The
nature of food crops produced changes when the community heads towards the short fallow stage.

Therefore, this stage encourages production of cereals rather than root crops. The production of
cereals requires protection from weeds, undoubtedly production of cereals needs less labour, but in
terms of calories, their per acre output is very low as compared with the root crops. Thus, wider area
will have to be brought under cultivation resulting overall utilization of labour will tend to increase.

In a net shell, it is concluded that Prof Boserup’s analysis focuses that the development of
agriculture in the early stages was greatly influenced by growing population.

Hence, supporting from European, African and North and South American history where agriculture
was developed either by additional population of enslaving weaker section or through natural
processes. In such countries, production was almost in a deteriorated state of affairs. Consequently,
in many countries, efforts were made to encourage the people to shift from the towns to villages.

Growing Population and Other Changes:

Prof. Boserup has referred to another change in which agriculture develops as a consequence of
growing population. It is with regard to change in the make of tools. In agricultural development
along with different tools employed in different stages, there also exist the change in their source.

The agricultural communities prefer to use tools by artisans or factories in towns. Apart from all this,
it has also been noticed that some rural communities like that of Indonesia have changed to better
tools without changing the kind of tools.

Apart from all this, development of towns cannot take place smoothly, if population density was not
reached a critical minimum. The towns are to be connected with the villages for the supply of food.
Many economic historians have pointed out chat famines in medieval times occurred due to sparse
population rather than due to over-population in the rural areas.

The premature growth of towns accompanied by all inefficient transport system resulted in poor
availability of food grains to urban areas. According to Prof. Gadgil. “The local scarcities were turned
into general famines due to poor transport system”.
Boserup tries to establish that trend in agricultural development in the pre-industrial stage is greatly
influenced by the trend in population growth.

At the same time she pointed out that even that social structure in pre- industrial economies is
moulded by population growth. In a sense, growth of population affects the system of cultivation
which in turn affects the social life of the people.

For instance, forest fallow explains the tribal way of life prevalent in this period. The cultivators
moved from one forest to another for burning it. In the bush fallow period, life is more settled.
Pedod of cultivating a piece of land is longer.

Further, Boserup has attempted to show that the system of ownership of land is connected with the
system of cultivation. In this context, she asserted that the attachment of individual farm ties to
particular plots becomes more and more important with the gradual shortening of the period of
fallow and the reduction of the part of the territory which is not used in rotation.
Finally, Boserup tried to emphasise the point that in the pre-industrial stage, growing population
does not create any obstacle in the way of investment needed for agricultural development The
investment like raising of new fields, minor irrigation work, digging of canals, drainage etc. need the
conversion of human labour into capital assets. Therefore, a growing population is welcomed in
these stages of agricultural development.

Boserup’s Theory and Modern Times under Developed Economies:

Prof. Boserup maintained that her theory of agricultural development is valid even in the modern
times for under-developed countries with undeveloped industrial sector.

For instance, she remarked that the modest increases in output per man hour which can be obtained
by the use of industrial products or scientific methods in such communities may not be sufficient to
pay for every scarce resource of skilled labour and foreign exchange which they absorb.

Therefore, it seems somewhat unrealistic to assume that a revolution of agricultural techniques by

means of modern industrial and scientific methods will take place in near future in countries which
have not yet reached the stage of urban industrialization.

Criticisms of Boserup’s Theory of Agricultural Development:

Unlike other agricultural development models, Boserup theory of agricultural development is also
not free from criticism. According to T.W. Schultz, “Boserup thesis is in general wrong, This may be
true only if we attempt to test its validity with regard to the modern underdeveloped countries.
The main points of criticism an understated:
1. The major criticism levelled against Boserup theory is that it is not applicable to those economies
where the urban industrial sector is less developed, The U.S. A. or Canadian economies even, if it is
sparsely populated as compared to many other economies is, thus, no longer a test case for this
theory.

2. Boserup has expressed the hope that in the present day underdeveloped economies, growing
population can be absorbed in the agricultural sector. But, this idea is true in countries like U.S.A.
where the density of population is quite low. The farm problem in such economies has necessitated
transfer of labour from agriculture sector to the non-agriculture sector.

The reason is that it is difficult to understand Boserup’s opinion how urbanisation and subsequent
industrialization took place in such countries when pressure of population on agricultural
development was quite low in pre- urbanisation periods. In fact, there are certain other significant
factors which are quite important to bring urbanisation and industrialization in those countries.

3. Though, Boserup has attempted to show that cultivation becomes more intensive when
population increases and becomes extensive in character when population falls. But, this assertion
of Boserup is not fully convincing. It is due to the reason that the sequence of intensification of
cultivation and accompanying technical, institutional and social set up enumerated by her is not fully
reversible.

In Indian context, the growing unemployment in the agricultural sector in the post-independence
period is so conspicuous that it can be ignored. In other words, disguised unemployment in
traditional agricultural economies of South East Asia fails to recognise the fact that agricultural
development has totally failed to absorb growing population.

4. Boserup has absolutely ignored the unfavourable effects of growing population on agriculture. In
backward economies where land frontiers have already been reached, the sub-division and
fragmentation of holdings must follow. Thus, small farmers in turn will obstruct the use of improved
technology and the growing population may adversely affect the process of capital formation.

5. The last but not least is that Boserup model has only an academic value. Its, application to modern
day world is completely uncertain. The various stages of intensification of cultivation are only a
matter of history and it is a history which is not likely to repeat itself.

Aditya, H. (2016, August 18). Boserup Theory of Agricultural Development (With Criticisms).
Retrieved July 12, 2019, from http://www.economicsdiscussion.net/agricultural-
economics/boserup-theory-of-agricultural-development-with-criticisms/21591