Population Theory by Malthus

The Prelude to Malthus

The eighteenth century was the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, a time when the goodness of the common person was championed. This perspective, that the rights of individuals superseded the demands of a monarchy characterized by a great deal of enthusiasm for life and a belief in the perfectibility of humans. In France, these ideas were well-expressed by Marie Jean Antoine, Nicolas de Caritat, marquis de Condorcet. Condorcet thus saw prosperity and population growth increasing hand in hand, and if the limits to growth were ever reached, the final solution would be birth control.

Godwin’s Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and Its Influences on Morals and Happiness appeared in its first edition in 1793, revealing his ideas that scientific progress would enable the food supply to grow far beyond the levels of his day and that such prosperity would not lead to overpopulation because people would deliberately limit their sexual expression and procreation (Godwin, 1793).

The Malthusian Perspective

The Malthusian perspective derives from the writings of Thomas Robert Malthus, an English clergyman and college professor. His first Essay on the Principle of Population as it affects the future improvement of society; with remarks on the speculations of Mr. Godwin, M. Condorcet, and other writers was published anonymously in 1798. Malthus’s original intention was not to carve out a career in demography, but only to show that the unbounded optimism of the physiocrats and philosophers was misplaced. These “difficulties” are the problems posed by his now famous principle of population. He derived his theory as follows:

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. . . . 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. Subsistence increases only in an arithmetical ratio. . . . By the law of our nature which makes food necessary to the life of man, the effects of these two unequal powers must be kept equal. This implies a strong and constantly operating check on population from the difficulty of subsistence. (Malthus 1798)

Malthus believed that he had demolished the utopian optimism by suggesting that the laws of nature essentially prescribed poverty for a certain segment of humanity. Nonetheless he proceeded to document his population principles and to respond to critics by publishing a substantially revised version in 1803, slightly but importantly retitled to read An Essay on the Principle of Population; or a view of its past and present effects on human happiness; with an inquiry into our prospects respecting the future removal or mitigation of the evils which It occasions. In all, seven editions of Malthus’s essay on population were published, and as a whole they have undoubtedly been the single most influential work relating population growth to its social consequences.

Causes of Population Growth

Malthus believed that human beings, like plants and non-rational animals, are “impelled” to increase the population of the species by what he called a powerful “instinct,” the urge to reproduce. Further, if there were no checks on population growth, human beings would multiply to an “incalculable” number, filling “millions of worlds in a few thousand years” (Malthus, 1872). 

According to Malthus, the ultimate check to growth is lack of food. In turn, the means of subsistence are limited by the amount of land available, the arts or technology that could be applied to the land and social organization or land ownership patterns. A cornerstone of his argument is that populations tend to grow more rapidly than the food supply does, since population has the potential for growing geometrically (two parents could have four children, sixteen grandchildren, and so on) while he believed that food production could be increased only arithmetically, by adding one acre at a time. He argued then, that in the natural order population growth will outstrip the food supply, and the lack of food will ultimately put a stop to the increase of people. 

Malthus was aware that starvation rarely operates directly to kill people, since something else usually intervenes to kill them before they actually die of starvation. This “something else” represents what Malthus calls positive checks. There are also preventive checks e.g. limits to birth. In theory, the preventive checks would include all possible means of birth control, including abstinence, contraception, and abortion. However, to Malthus the only acceptable means of preventing a birth was to exercise moral restraint; that is, to postpone marriage, remaining chaste. Any other means of birth control, including contraception (either before or after marriage), abortion, infanticide, or any “improper means,” was viewed as a vice that would “lower, in a marked manner, the dignity of human nature.” Moral restraint was a very important point with Malthus, because he believed that if people were allowed to prevent births by improper means (prostitution, contraception, abortion, or sterilization) then they would expend their energies in ways that are not economically productive.

Consequences of Population Growth

Malthus believed that a natural consequence of population growth was poverty. This is the logical result of his arguments that 

1. People have a natural urge to reproduce, and 
2. The increase in the food supply cannot keep up with population growth. 

Malthus believed that the urge to reproduce always forces population pressure to precede the demand for labor. Thus overpopulation would force wages down to the point where people could not afford to marry and raise a family. At such low wages, with a surplus of labor and the need for each person to work harder just to earn a subsistence wage, cultivators could employ more labor, put more acres into production, and thus increase the means of subsistence. Malthus believed that this cycle of increased food resources leading to population growth leading to too many people for available resources leading then back to poverty was part of a natural law of population. Each increase in the food supply only meant that eventually more people could live in poverty.

Avoiding the Consequences

Borrowing from John Locke, Malthus argued that “the endeavor to avoid pain rather than the pursuit of pleasure is the great stimulus to action in life”. Pleasure will not stimulate activity until its absence is defined as being painful. Malthus suggested that the well-educated, rational person would perceive in advance the pain of having hungry children or being in debt and would postpone marriage and sexual intercourse until he was sure that he could avoid that pain. If that motivation existed and the preventive check was operating, then the miserable consequences of population growth could be avoided.

You will recall that Condorcet had suggested the possibility of birth control as a preventive check, but Malthus objected to this solution. Malthus believed that the only way to break the cycle is to change human nature. Malthus felt that if everyone shared middle-class values, the problem would solve itself. He saw that as impossible, though, since not everyone has the talent to be a virtuous, industrious, middle class success story, but if most people at least tried, poverty would be reduced considerably.

To summarize, the major consequence of population growth, according to Malthus, is poverty. Within that poverty, though, is the stimulus for action that can lift people out of misery. So, if people remain poor, it is their own fault for not trying to do something about it. For that reason, Malthus was opposed to the English Poor Laws, because he felt they would actually serve to perpetuate misery. They permitted poor people to be supported by others and thus not feel that great pain, the avoidance of which might lead to birth prevention.

Critique of Malthus

The single most obvious measure of Malthus’s importance is the number of books and articles that have attacked him, beginning virtually the moment his first essay appeared in 1798. The three most strongly criticized aspects of his theory have been 

1. The assertion that food production could not keep up with population growth.
2. The conclusion that poverty was an inevitable result of population growth, and 
3. The belief that moral restraint was the only acceptable preventive check.