Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

From the inception of the social sciences, population variables have been recognized as crucial determinants of economic development and organization. From the start, two competing schools of thought vied for predominance, one a pessimistic view of population's role in economic change derived from Thomas Malthus, the other a far more optimistic view of population as the wellspring of prosperity. Neo-Malthusianism came to dominate the social sciences after World War II. Derived from Malthus's dictum that increases in agricultural surplus are outstripped by geometric population growth, many social scientists became convinced that demographic growth and economic growth are antithetical processes. Coale and Hoover (1958) , for instance, theorized that rapid population increase forces the consumption of savings, adversely affecting both capital formation and investment rates. High youth dependency ratios force nations to divert scarce capital to activities with few immediate economic multipliers (e.g., education), thereby underinvesting in the existing labor force. Such theorizing led quite naturally to the view that rapid population growth and dense habitation cause habitual poverty. Ironically, this pessimism stood in sharp contrast to the pronatalism of western philosophy (e.g., Cicero, Machiavelli), an optimism reflected in the theories of several founders of the social sciences ... log in or subscribe to read full text