We will characterize as non-Malthusian those channels that work through the growth rate or demographic structure of the population. Regarding the second part of the model-whether higher population lowers the standard of living-some further clarification is required before we can even pursue this issue.įirst, it important to differentiate among the different channels through which population affects economic outcomes.
For reasons that have not fully been determined, countries that get richer now see falling rather than rising rates of population growth. In this paper we ask whether the model has any relevance to the world today.įor the first part of the model-the positive causality running from income to population growth-the answer is clearly no. Second, without changes in the function generating population growth, technological improvements or increases in the stock of resources will eventually result in more people but not a higher standard of living.Īs a description of population-income interactions, the Malthusian model had a long period of success, covering most of human history in most of the world until the beginning of the industrial revolution. Specifically, in the absence of technological change or expansion in the stock of the fixed resource, population will be stable around a constant level. These two components generate a number of predictions. Second, because of the existence of some fixed resource such as land, there is a negative feedback from the size of population to the standard of living. First, there is a positive effect of the standard of living on the growth rate of population, resulting either from a purely biological effect of consumption on birth and death rates, or a behavioral response on the part of potential parents to their economic circumstances. The Malthusian model of population and economic growth has two key components.
0 kommentar(er)
