The Population Bomb Thesis GEOG1131: Popula3on, Migra3on and Human Se<lement Tuesday, September 15, 2015 Amal Sealy Department of Geography & Geology University of the West Indies -­‐ Mona Lecture Outline •  The global popula>on •  Popula>on growth: an op>mis>c perspec>ve •  Popula>on growth: a pessimis>c perspec>ve •  Why was Malthus wrong? A liberal cri>que •  The Popula>on Bomb Revisited •  Why was Malthus wrong? A Marxist cri>que •  Conclusions The Global Population Years •  0001: 200 million •  1650: 500 million •  1804: 1 billion •  1927: 2 billion •  1960: 3 billion •  1975: 4 billion •  1990: 5.3 billion •  1999: 6 billion •  2011: 7 billion?? •  2025: 8 billion??? •  2050: 9 billion????? •  The world popula>on has grown tremendously over the last two thousand years •  Current world popula>on es>mated at 6.96 billion by the United States Census Bureau as of July 1, 2011 •  Approximately 140 million births annually •  World Growth Rate at 1.2% •  hUp://www.google.com.jm/publicdata/explore?
ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=sp_pop_grow&tdim=true&dl=en
&hl=en&q=global+popula>on+growth
+chart#ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=sp_pop_grow&
scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&ifdim=country&tdim
=true&hl=en&dl=en Population Growth: an optimistic perspective •  Neo-­‐Boserupian perspec>ve “Of all things in the world, people are the most precious… it is the people that propel social progress, create social wealth, develop science and technology and, through their hard work, con>nuously transform the human environment.” (Declara>on of the UN Conference on the Human Environment 1973) Boserup’s main arguments: •  Connec>on between popula>on and technology •  The increase in popula>on pressure s>mulates changes in the agricultural system •  Popula>on growth naturally leads to development rather than being a hindrance to it Population Growth: a pessimistic perspective •  Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-­‐1834) An essay on the principle of popula2on (1978): “That popula>on cannot increase without the means of subsistence is a proposi>on so evident that it needs no illustra>on” Unchecked popula>on growth always exceeds the growth of means of subsistence Malthusian Theory Neo-­‐Malthusian Perspective •  Popula>on growth considered the main cause of poverty •  Rapid rates of popula>on growth in the Third World resul>ng in widespread poverty, economic stagna>on, environmental destruc>on, rapid urbaniza>on etc. •  Unlike Malthus, they see birth control as a means of checking this growth. •  See the problem as res>ng with the poor who produce more children, because of their ignorance and lack of foresight. •  The solu>on, therefore, lies in persuading (or forcing if needs be) the poor to have fewer children. Paul Ehrlich •  The Popula>on Bomb (1968) “People are realizing that we cannot forever con>nue to mul>ply and subdue the earth without losing our standard of life and the natural beauty that must be part of it. These are the years of decision – the decision of men to stay the flood of man.” Why was Malthus wrong? a liberal critique •  Popula>on predic>ons are unreliable •  Popula>on alone cannot determine whether a crisis exists •  But predic>ons about future food supply are also problema>c •  If popula>on growth was the root cause of poverty, most Western European na>ons would have been poorer at the end of the 19th century than at its start The Population Bomb Revisited •  Is the Bomb defused? “Remember the popula>on bomb, the fer>lity explosion set to devour the world’s food and suck up or pollute all its air and water? Its fuse has by no means been plucked. But over the last three decades, much of its Malthusian detona>on power has leaked out.” The Popula3on Bomb is a Dud (New York Times: August 29, 2004) Why was Malthus wrong? A Marxist critique •  David Harvey (1974): “If an exis>ng social order, an elite group of some sort, is under threat and is figh>ng to preserve its dominant posi>on in society, then the overpopula>on and shortage of resources arguments can be used as powerful ideological levers to persuade people into acceptance of the status quo and of authoritarian measures to maintain it.” Why was Malthus wrong? A Marxist critique cont’d •  Posi>ve checks on popula>on will necessarily be the lot of the lower classes •  Marxist analysis uses rela>onal defini>ons of needs, resources, and scarcity •  Poverty is not natural, but rather is a consequence of the workings of capitalism •  Not a popula>on problem but a poverty and human exploita>on problem e.g. 2008 World Food Crisis Conclusions •  Crisis neither natural, global, nor primarily caused by popula>on increase •  Reducing popula>on growth may well be in the long-­‐term interest of poorer na>ons •  But this will not solve global problems of poverty which have much more diverse roots •  Two major food problems persist in the world today -­‐  massive surpluses in the developed world and famine, starva3on and shortage in the developing world