Preventative checks, the ways of doing this were; Moral Restraint, the aim of this one was that if you had a smaller family then when wealth was distributed it would be in larger amounts for each family member (this was aimed more towards the wealthier half of the population). The other idea was to increase birth control. This meant that there would be a limit on the amount of humans being born (this was aimed towards the poor, however it wasn’t really suitable due to the vast amount of poor people).
Positive checks were famine, misery, plague and war. These would be used because preventative checks had not limited to the poor and in theory it would be the poor who would suffer from famine for example.
Malthus wrote:
‘All the children born, beyond what would be required to keep up the population to this level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the death of grown persons…’
He also wrote:
‘Instead if recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses and court the return of the plague’
When Malthus wrote his theories he didn’t really seem to consider how technology would improve. He did however realise that an increase in the demand for food would lead to more land of poor quality to grow on, and with a limit in technology that leads to a limit on the amount of land you can grow on, and once that limit is passed then it will turn into a lower quality of food and long term that could lead to an increase in deaths etc.
Malthus theory in my opinion seems to simple, and not very thought out. I think that it is incredibly one sided and he hasn’t viewed every possible option.
Boserup
Ester Boserup was born in Copenhagen in 1910. In 1966 she published a paper on how she thought population would increase. Boserup has produced a positive theory, contradicting some of Malthus’ previous arguments. Although in some cases she agreed with Malthus she did not think one day that the world would run out of food.
Ester Boserup had a positive theory on population growth.
In Boserup eyes, the higher the population the more people that they are to work and therefore the more people they are to produce goods that are needed. She disputed that population increase was the independent variable, not the amount of food grow (like Malthus). In other words the more people they are the more pressure placed upon their current technology which would mean that there is more demand for new technology. Boserups argument was mainly that we would never run out of our food supply, as technology will always continue to get better and therefore keep up with demand. She also stated that
‘There will always be enough food to feed everyone; it’s just a question of if the food produced is distributed evenly’, this theory was based on various farming systems like shifting cultivation (the movement of different crops into different areas, so they all get a range of nutrients from the soil). If population increased agriculture will move into higher stages of intensity through the introduction of new farming methods. Boserups ideas were based upon close communities and everyone working together. This in reality does not happen due to in and out migration. Migration usually occurs when there is a place, which is over populated. Using Boserups theory this would never happen because more food would just be sent out to them.
Boserups theory seemed a little more open minded that Malthus’. She seemed to be thinking more large scale and for everyone in the world.
In my opinion I think that both theories have positive and negative points. Malthus’ theory was not as open minded as Boserups. However Malthus had some very valid points (many not humanitarian), however seen as his theory was written almost 200 years before Boserups that may have seen suitable for his times. The fact that if you have fewer children your wealth will be distributed in larger amounts is valid and may have been taken into consideration by many families in 1800’s. However I do not agree with the thought of not recommending cleanliness to the poor and encouraging bad habits. From a social side this is incredibly wrong in today’s society however this may not have been the case in 1800’s. However from another side, the Malthusian theory may be a little strong and slightly heartless, but I am able to see where he is coming from, and he has valid points which some have been used. E.g. Birth Rate: with the use of contraception.
In a nutshell Malthus’ theory is that the only way to solve the problem of the worlds population is to exonerate some of the population, while Boserups was that technology would improve so we would be able to cope with it!
