Over 200 years ago in 1798, the British clergyman-economist T. R. Mathus published his classic book ‘Essay on the Principle of Population. According to Malthus, in an under-developed economy, development measures would lead to the improvement of basic amenities. Availability of food, nutrition, health care, hygiene, education, etc. would ultimately increase per capita G.N.P. Hence death rate will fall dramatically due to improved medical facilities, while the birth rate will increase significantly as people would be able to afford large families. Growth of food production is in A.P. – Arithmetical Progression (like 2, 4, 6, 8…etc).
On the other hand, population growth will be in G.P. – Geometrical Progression (like 2, 4, 8, 16…etc). So the gap between food production and demand will surely increase, as the growth of food production cannot keep pace with population growth.
The extra population will, eventually, face starvation epidemics- war famines, etc. Ultimately, the surplus population cannot survive and equilibrium between food supply and a number population could be achieved. This, he thought, was nature’s way of maintaining population control.
Malthus’ predictions were proved to be wrong in later periods in industrially developed countries. His short-sightedness was revealed in the following cases:
- Malthus failed miserably to consider the scope of birth control measures undertaken in many modernized countries in later years.
- Industrially advanced countries experienced such a dramatic improvement that the law of diminishing return was not applicable to them.
- Malthus was unaware of demographic changes, popularly known as the demographic transition.
In underdeveloped countries Malthusian principle yet holds true.