Malthusian catastrophe 20942 222188028 2008-06-28T00:07:01Z LGagnon 31951 /* Criticism */ A '''Malthusian catastrophe''' (sometimes called a Malthusian check, Malthusian crisis, Malthusian dilemma, Malthusian disaster, Malthusian trap, Malthusian controls or Malthusian limit) is a return to [[subsistence]]-level conditions as a result of [[demography|population]] growth outpacing [[agriculture|agricultural]] [[production, costs, and pricing|production]]. Later formulations consider [[economics|economic]] growth limits as well. Based on the work of mathematician [[Thomas Malthus]] (1766-1834), theories of Malthusian catastrophe are very similar to the [[subsistence theory of wages]]. The main difference is that the Malthusian theories predict over several generations or centuries whereas the subsistence theory of wages predicts over years and decades. An August 2007 science review in ''[[The New York Times]]'' raised the claim that the [[Industrial Revolution]] had enabled the modern world to break out of the Malthusian Trap,<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/07/science/07indu.html?bl&ex=1186804800&en=fbe25403514c47d5&ei=5087%0A Review - A Farewell to Alms - Industrial Revolution - Human Population - New York Times]</ref> while a front page ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' article in March 2008 pointed out various limited resources which may soon limit human population growth because of a widespread belief in the importance of prosperity for every individual and the rising consumption trends of large developing nations such as [[China]] and [[India]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120613138379155707.html |title=New Limits to Growth Revive Malthusian Fears |publisher=[[Wall Street Journal]] |author=JUSTIN LAHART, PATRICK BARTA and ANDREW BATSON |date=March 24, 2008 |accessdate=26 03 2008 }}</ref> ==Traditional views== In 1798, [[Thomas Malthus]] published ''[[An Essay on the Principle of Population]]'', describing his theory of quantitative development of human populations: {{quotation|I think I may fairly make two postulata. First, That food is necessary to the existence of man. Secondly, That the passion between the sexes is necessary and will remain nearly in its present state. These two laws, ever since we have had any knowledge of mankind, appear to have been fixed laws of our nature, and, as we have not hitherto seen any alteration in them, we have no right to conclude that they will ever cease to be what they now are, without an immediate act of power in that Being who first arranged the system of the universe, and for the advantage of his creatures, still executes, according to fixed laws, all its various operations.<br />...<br />Assuming then my postulata as granted, I say, that the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man. Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio.|Malthus 1798, Chapter 1, online<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/prppl10.txt|title=An Essay on the Principle of Population by T. R. Malthus|year=1798}}</ref>}} A series that is increasing in [[geometric progression]] is defined by the fact that the ratio of any two successive members of the sequence is a constant. For example, a population with an average annual growth rate of, say, 2% will grow by a ratio of 1.02 per year. In other words, the ratio of each year's population to the previous year's population will be 1.02. In modern terminology, a population that is increasing in geometric progression is said to be experiencing [[exponential growth]]. Alternately, in an [[arithmetic progression]], any two successive members of the sequence have a constant difference. In modern terminology, this is called linear growth. If unchecked over a sufficient period of time, and if the ratio between successive sequence members is larger than 1.0, then exponential growth will always outrun linear growth. Malthus saw the difference between population growth and resource growth as being analogous to this difference between exponential and linear growth. Even when a population inhabits a new habitat &ndash; such as the American continent at Malthus' time, or when recovering from wars and epidemic plagues &ndash; the growth of population will eventually reach the limit of the resource base. (Malthus 1798, chapter 7: [http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/prppl10.txt A Probable Cause of Epidemics]). ==Neo-Malthusian theory==<!-- This section is linked from [[Demographic transition]] --> [[Neo-malthusianism|Neo-Malthusian]] theory argues that unless at or below subsistence level, a population's [[fertility]] will tend to move upwards. Assume for example that a country has 10 breeding groups. Over time this country's fertility will approach that of its fastest growing group in the same way that :<math>f(t) = a\times1.01^t + b\times1.02^t, \mbox{where}~a > 0 \mbox{ and } b > 0,</math> will eventually come to resemble :<math>g(t) = b\times1.02^t</math> regardless of how large the constant ''a'' is or how small the constant ''b'' is. Under subsistence conditions the fastest growing group is likely to be that group progressing most rapidly in agricultural [[technology]]. However, in above-subsistence conditions the fastest growing group is likely to be the one with the highest fertility. Therefore the fertility of the country will approach that of its most fertile group. This, however, is only part of the problem. In any group some individuals will be more pro-fertility in their beliefs and practices than others. According to neo-Malthusian theory, these pro-fertility individuals will not only have more children, but also pass their pro-fertility on to their children, meaning a constant selection for pro-fertility similar to the constant [[natural selection]] for fertility [[gene]]s (except much faster because of greater diversity). According to neo-Malthusians, this increase in fertility will lead to hyperexponential population growth that will eventually outstrip growth in economic production. This appears to make any sort of voluntary fertility control futile, in the long run. Neo-Malthusians argue that although adult immigrants (who, at the very least, arrive with [[human capital]]) contribute to economic production, there is little or no increase in economic production from increased natural growth and fertility. Neo-Malthusians argue that hyperexponential population growth has begun or will begin soon in developed countries. To this can be added that, unknown to Malthus, farmland deteriorates with use. Some areas where there was intensive agriculture in classic times (i.e., the feudal era) had already declined in population because their farmland was worn out, long before he wrote. At the time Malthus wrote, and for 150 years thereafter, most societies had populations at or beyond their agricultural limits.{{Fact|date=September 2007}} After [[World War I]], the growth rate of the world's population accelerated rapidly, resulting in predictions by [[Paul R. Ehrlich]] and many others of an imminent Malthusian catastrophe. However, the so-called [[Green Revolution]] produced a contemporaneous exponential increase in the world's food supply, and the date of the predicted Malthusian collapse had been temporarily forestalled, until the peaking of agricultural production began to occur in the 1990s in several world regions. [[David Pimentel]] and [[Ron Nielsen]], working independently, found that the human population has passed the numerical point where all can live in comfort, and that we have entered a stage where many of the world's citizens and future generations are trapped in misery.<ref>[http://www.utne.com/web_special/web_specials_archives/articles/799-1.html Ecologist Says Unchecked Population Growth Could Bring Misery]</ref> There is evidence that a catastrophe is underway as of at least the 1990s; for example, by the year 2000, children in developing countries were dying at the rate of approximately 11,000,000 per annum from strictly preventable diseases.<ref>U.S. National Research Council, Commission on the Science of Climate Change, Washington D.C. (2001)</ref><ref name="Ron">Ron Nielsen, ''The Little Green Handbook'', Picador, New York (2006) ISBN 0-312-42581-3</ref> This data suggests that by the standard of misery, the catastrophe is underway. The term 'misery' can generally be construed as: high [[infant mortality]], low standards of sanitation, [[malnutrition]], [[water crisis|inadequate drinking water]], widespread diseases, war, and political unrest. Regarding famines, data demonstrates the world's food production has peaked in some of the very regions where food is needed the most. For example in [[South Asia]], approximately half of the land has been degraded such that it no longer has the capacity for food production.<ref name="Ron"/> In China there has been a 27% irreversible loss of land for agriculture, and continues to lose arable land at the rate of 2,500 square kilometres per year.<ref>UNEP, ''Global Environmental Outlook 2000'', Earthscan Publications, London, UK (1999) which may also be viewed at http://www.unep.org/geo2000/ov-e/index.htm, including an optional PDF download</ref> In [[Madagascar]], at least 30% of the land previously regarded as arable is irreversibly barren. On the other hand, recent data shows the number of overweight people in the world now outnumbers that of malnourished, and the rising tide of [[obesity]] continues to expand in both rich and poor countries.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4793455.stm?ls Overweight 'top world's hungry'], August 15, 2006. [[BBC]]</ref> Many technologically developed countries have by 2006 passed through the [[demographic transition]], a complex social development in which [[total fertility rate]]s drop in response to lower [[infant mortality]], more education of women, increased [[urbanization]], and a wider availability of effective [[birth control]] causing the [[demographic-economic paradox]]. By the end of the 21st century, these countries could avoid population declines by permitting large-scale [[immigration]]. On the assumption that the demographic transition is now spreading to [[less developed countries]], the [[United Nations Population Fund]] estimates that human population may peak in the late 21st century rather than continue to grow until it exhausted available resources.<ref name="UN">{{cite web|url=http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/longrange2/WorldPop2300final.pdf|title=2004 UN Population Projections, 2004.|format=PDF}}</ref> Some have expressed doubt about the validity of the UN projections, claiming that they are below the projections by others.<ref name="Ron"/> The most important point is that none of the projections show the population growth beginning to decline before 2050. Indeed, the UN "high" estimate does not decline at all, even out to 2300, indicating the potential for a Malthusian catastrophe.<ref name="UN"/> The actual growth curve of the human population is another issue. In the latter part of the 20th century many argued that it followed [[exponential growth]]; however, a more recent view is that the growth in the last millennium has been faster, at a superexponential (possibly [[hyperbolic growth|hyperbolic]], [[double exponential function|double-exponential]], or [[Tetration|hyper-exponential]]) rate.<ref>Varfolomeyev, SD & Gurevich, KG, "The hyperexponential growth of the human population on a macrohistorical scale." ''Journal of Theoretical Biology'', 212(3), pp. 367-72 (2001).</ref> Alternatively, the apparently exponential portion of the human population growth curve may actually fit the lower limb of a [[logistic curve]], or a section of a [[Lotka–Volterra equation|Lotka–Volterra cycle]]. [[Image:World-Population-500CE-2150.png|thumb|400px|World population from 500 AD to 2150, based on [http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/longrange2/WorldPop2300final.pdf UN 2004 projections] (red, orange, green) and [http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html US Census Bureau historical estimates] (black).]] Historians have estimated the total human population on earth back to 10,000 BC.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html|title=Historical Estimates of World Population, U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2006.}}</ref> The figure on the right shows the trend of total population from the year 500 AD to 2005, and from there in three projections out to 2150 (low, medium, and high).<ref name="UN"/> If population growth were exactly exponential, then the trend would be a straight line on this [[semilog]] graph. The fact that it has been curving upwards indicates faster-than-exponential growth over the last 1500 years of history. However, the United Nations population projections out to 2150 (the red, orange, and green lines) show a possible end to this phenomenon occurring as early as 2050 in the most optimistic scenario, and by 2075 in the "medium" scenario. [[Image:World population growth rates 1800-2005.png|thumb|400px|A chart of estimated annual growth rates in world population, 1800-2005. Rates before 1950 are annualized historical estimates from the [http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html US Bureau of the Census].]] The graph of annual growth rates (below) also does not appear exactly as one would expect for long-term exponential growth. For exponential growth it should be a straight line at constant height, whereas in fact the graph from 1800 to 2005 is dominated by an enormous hump that began about 1920, peaked in the mid-1960s, and has been steadily eroding away for the last 40 years. The sharp fluctuation between 1959 and 1960 was due to the combined effects of the [[Great Leap Forward]] and a natural disaster in China.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/|title=International Data Base}}</ref> Also visible on this graph are the effects of the [[Great Depression]], the two world wars, and possibly also the [[Spanish flu|1918 influenza pandemic]]. Though short-term trends, even on the scale of decades or centuries, cannot prove or disprove the existence of mechanisms promoting a Malthusian catastrophe over longer periods, the prosperity of a small fraction of the human population at the beginning of the 21st century, and the debatability of [[ecological collapse]] made by [[Paul R. Ehrlich]] in the 1960s and 1970s, has led some people, such as economist [[Julian Lincoln Simon|Julian L. Simon]], to question its inevitability.<ref>Simon, Julian L, "[http://www.juliansimon.org/writings/Articles/REVOLUTI.txt More People, Greater Wealth, More Resources, Healthier Environment]", ''Economic Affairs: J. Inst. Econ. Affairs'', April 1994.</ref> A 2004 study by a group of prominent economists and ecologists, including [[Kenneth Arrow]] and Paul Ehrlich<ref>Arrow, K., P. Dasgupta, L. Goulder, G. Daily, P. Ehrlich, G. Heal, S. Levin, K. Mäler, S. Schneider, D. Starrett and B. Walker, "Are We Consuming Too Much" ''Journal of Economic Perspectives'', 18(3), 147-172, 2004.</ref> suggests that the central concerns regarding sustainability have shifted from population growth to the consumption/savings ratio, due to shifts in population growth rates since the 1970s. Empirical estimates show that public policy (taxes or the establishment of more complete property rights) can promote more efficient consumption and investment that are sustainable in an ecological sense; that is, given the current (relatively low) population growth rate, the Malthusian catastrophe can be avoided by either a shift in consumer preferences or public policy that induces a similar shift. However, some contend that the Malthusian catastrophe is not imminent. A 2002 study<ref>[http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/news/2002/7828-en.html World agriculture 2030: Global food production will exceed population growth] August 20, 2002.</ref> by the [[United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization|UN Food and Agriculture Organization]] predicts that world food production will be in excess of the needs of the human population by the year 2030; however, that source also states that hundreds of millions will remain hungry (presumably due to economic realities and distribution issues). ==Application to energy/resource consumption== Another way of applying the Malthusian theory is to substitute other resources, such as sources of [[Future energy development|energy]] for food, and energy consumption for population. (Since modern food production is energy and resource intensive, this is not a big jump. Most of the criteria for applying the theory are still satisfied.) Since energy consumption is increasing much faster than population and most energy comes from non-renewable sources, the catastrophe appears more imminent, though perhaps not as certain, than when considering food and population continue to behave in a manner contradicting Malthus's assumptions. Retired physics professor [[Albert Bartlett]], a modern-day [[Malthusian]], has lectured on "Arithmetic, Population and Energy" over 1,500 times. He published an article entitled [http://fire.pppl.gov/energy_population_pt_0704.pdf ''Thoughts on Long-Term Energy Supplies: Scientists and the Silent Lie''] in Physics Today (July 2004). For a response to Bartlett's argument, see two articles on energy and population in Physics Today, November 2004,<ref>[http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-11/p12.html Long−Term Energy Solutions: The Truth Behind the Silent Lie] November 2004</ref> and following letters to the editor. A further way of analyzing resource limitation is the dwindling area for storage of [[soil contaminant]]s and [[water pollution]]. The high rate of increase in toxic chemicals in the environment (especially persistent organic chemicals and endocrine altering chemicals) is creating a circumstance of resource limitation (e.g. safe potable water and safe arable land). ==Criticism== [[Ester Böserup]] wrote in her book ''The Conditions of Agricultural Growth: The Economics of Agrarian Change under Population Pressure'' that population levels determine agricultural methods, rather than agricultural methods determining population (via food supply). A major point of her book is that "necessity is the mother of invention". ==See also== {{MultiCol}} * [[Albert Bartlett]] * ''[[Beyond the Limits]]'' by [[Donella Meadows]] * ''[[Cannibals and Kings]]'' by Marvin Harris * [[Carrying capacity]] * [[Charles Galton Darwin]] * [[Club of Rome]] * [[Demographic transition]] * [[Dismal Science]] * [[Famine]] * [[Future energy development]] * [[Malthusian growth model]] * [[Malthusianism]] {{ColBreak}} * [[Medieval demography]] * ''[[Neanderthals, Bandits and Farmers]]'' by [[Colin Tudge]] * [[Olduvai theory]] * [[Over-consumption]] * [[Overpopulation]] * [[Peak oil]] * [[Population growth]] * [[Survivalism]] * [[Sustainability]] * [[Tragedy of the Commons]] * ''[[The Ultimate Resource (book)|The Ultimate Resource]]'', a book by [[Julian Simon]] challenging the perceived dangers of overpopulation * [[World population]] {{EndMultiCol}} ==Notes== {{reflist}} == References== {{refbegin}} * Korotayev A., Malkov A., Khaltourina D. ''[http://urss.ru/cgi-bin/db.pl?cp=&lang=en&blang=en&list=14&page=Book&id=34250 Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Compact Macromodels of the World System Growth.]'' Moscow: URSS, 2006. ISBN 5-484-00414-4 * Korotayev A., Malkov A., Khaltourina D. ''[http://urss.ru/cgi-bin/db.pl?lang=en&blang=en&page=Book&list=14&id=37484 Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends.]'' Moscow: URSS, 2006. ISBN 5-484-00559-0 * Korotayev A. & Khaltourina D. ''[http://urss.ru/cgi-bin/db.pl?cp=&lang=en&blang=en&list=14&page=Book&id=37485 Introduction to Social Macrodynamics: Secular Cycles and Millennial Trends in Africa.]'' Moscow: URSS, 2006. ISBN 5-484-00560-4 * [[Peter Turchin|Turchin, P.]], et al., eds. (2007). [http://edurss.ru/cgi-bin/db.pl?cp=&page=Book&id=53185&lang=en&blang=en&list=Found History & Mathematics: Historical Dynamics and Development of Complex Societies.] Moscow: KomKniga. ISBN 5484010020 {{refend}} ==External links== * [http://www.blupete.com/Literature/Biographies/Philosophy/Malthus.htm Essay on life of Thomas Malthus] * [http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/malthus/malthus.0.html Malthus' Essay on the Principle of Population] * [http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Laissez-Faire_In_Popn/L_F_in_Population.html David Friedman's essay arguing against Malthus' conclusions] * [http://www.ishmael.com/Education/Writings/The_New_Renaissance.shtml Daniel Quinn's New Renaissance speech] * [http://www.un.org/popin/wdtrends.htm United Nations Population Division World Population Trends homepage] [[Category:Exponentials]] [[Category:Futurology]] [[Category:Population]] [[Category:Demography]] [[Category:Human geography]] [[Category:Demographic economics]] [[Category:Economic problems]] [[Category:Peak oil]] [[Category:Disaster preparedness]] [[de:Bevölkerungsfalle]] [[es:Catástrofe maltusiana]] [[fr:Catastrophe malthusienne]] [[nl:Malthusiaanse catastrofe]] [[sk:Maltuzianizmus]]