Fortunately, Malthus’s prediction was flawed. First, by 1850, the European birth rate began to drop, partly because children were becoming an econom- ic liability rather than an asset and partly because people began using artificial birth control. Second, Malthus underestimated human ingenuity: Modern drip-irrigation techniques, advanced fertilizers, and effective pesticides increased farm production and saved vital resources far more than he could have imagined (Yemma, 2011). Some people criticized Malthus for ignoring the role of social ine- quality in world abundance and famine. For example, Karl Marx (1967, orig. 1867) objected to viewing suffering as a “law of nature” rather than the curse of capitalism. More recently, “critical demographers” have claimed that saying poverty is caused by high birth rates in low-in- come countries amounts to blaming the victims. On the contrary, they see global inequality as the real issue (Horton, 1999; Kuumba, 1999). Still, Malthus offers an important lesson. Habitable land, clean water, and fresh air are limited resources, and greater economic productivity has taken a heavy toll on the natural environment. In addition, medical advances have lowered death rates, pushing up world population. Common sense tells us that no level of population growth can go on forever. People everywhere must become aware of the dangers of population increase. Check Your Learning What did Malthus predict about human population increase? About food production? What was his overall conclusion?
Fortunately, Malthus’s prediction was flawed. First, by 1850, the European birth rate began to drop, partly because children were becoming an econom- ic liability rather than an asset and partly because people began using artificial birth control. Second, Malthus underestimated human ingenuity: Modern drip-irrigation techniques, advanced fertilizers, and effective pesticides increased farm production and saved vital resources far more than he could have imagined (Yemma, 2011). Some people criticized Malthus for ignoring the role of social ine- quality in world abundance and famine. For example, Karl Marx (1967, orig. 1867) objected to viewing suffering as a “law of nature” rather than the curse of capitalism. More recently, “critical demographers” have claimed that saying poverty is caused by high birth rates in low-in- come countries amounts to blaming the victims. On the contrary, they see global inequality as the real issue (Horton, 1999; Kuumba, 1999). Still, Malthus offers an important lesson. Habitable land, clean water, and fresh air are limited resources, and greater economic productivity has taken a heavy toll on the natural environment. In addition, medical advances have lowered death rates, pushing up world population. Common sense tells us that no level of population growth can go on forever. People everywhere must become aware of the dangers of population increase. Check Your Learning What did Malthus predict about human population increase? About food production? What was his overall conclusion?
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 3 steps
