English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-04 06:32:28 · 1 answers · asked by rollyben 1 in Social Science Economics

1 answers

The basis of Malthus' theory is that the rate of population growth is exponential, while the rate of growth for neccessities (food resources etc.) is linear.

So on a very superficial level Malthus theory has no bearing because population is not necessarily exponential in growth and neccessities grow at a rate greater than linearity (in fact when technology kicks you get jumps in production).

However I believe Malthus' theory is still relevant in the anecdotal as it talks about how our use of resources can outstrip the amount of resources available. Malthus was more simplisitic in assuming that consumption would not change, while production was constant so the rate of population increase was the determining factor.

In reality consumption has changed, we consume more on a per capita basis in the developed world than ever before. However this has been offset by increases in productive efficiency.

So why is the theory still relevant? We have a better understanding of what our resource use has on the global enviornment. Effects such as global warming are I believe a direct result of increased consumption levels. An Inconvient Truth gets in to it quite well if you ignore the Al Gore stump speech in the middle.

2007-01-04 07:18:07 · answer #1 · answered by bfleung18 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers