Economics Wisconsin

Picture (2x30, 48 bytes)

World Population Change: Boom or Bust?

This is an e-Lecture (text and Web links) version of a presentation on the economics of population change that we have done at several conferences in Wisconsin and Georgia.  This e-Lecture could be used  by teachers for classes in economics, geography, world affairs, social problems, and other social studies courses.  It may be used either independently or in conjunction with the Web based audio file interview with the authors .

 

Y6B 
The year 1999 was designated as Y6B by organizations concerned with world overpopulation issues.  Y6B stands for the year of 6 billion people.  The world population was estimated to reach that number on October 12, 1999.

As of July 1, 2001, the U.S. Census estimates world population at 6,157,744,000 people.  A good explanation and analysis of the data for world population is at the U.S. Census Bureau Web site.  Although the world has added one billion people in the last 12 years, the very important population growth rate has begun to slow down.  From a record high annual growth rate of 2% in 1968, it has declined to 1.4% in 2000.  That is a 30% decrease in the rate of growth, and it will have significant effects on future demographic developments.  An excellent source of recent world demographic data is the Web site of the Population Reference Bureau.

 

Population: The First Essay, 1798
One of the first economists to study population change was Thomas Robert Malthus in his extended essay published in 1798.  He forecasted a dismal future for the human race based on mathematical analysis.  He postulated that the human population would grow exponentially while food production would increase linearly and therefore "the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence."  Eventually population would be checked by "misery and vice" in the form of famine, disease, and war.

This tragic scenario led to economics being known as the "dismal science."  See the Web site by that name The Dismal Scientist.   

Contemporary advocates of Malthus' ideas are referred to as "neo-Malthusians."  They expand his concepts beyond food production to all goods, services, and environmental quality.  (See ZPG  and Worldwatch ). 

 

"From Malthusian Stagnation to Modern Growth"
In the American Economic Review, May 1999, Oded Galor and David Weil categorize past and current population growth into three distinct regimes: Malthusian, Post-Malthusian, and Modern Growth.

  • The Malthusian regime consists of very slow population growth due to high birth rates and high death rates.  This regime dominated human history until approximately 1700-1800.  This regime was characterized by a very low rate of technological change, a stagnant level of per capita income, and a positive correlation between income and population growth.  Economists would further add a concept called the "law of diminishing returns."  This "law" makes it difficult for food production to keep up with population growth.

  • The post-Malthusian regime is characterized by high birth rate and low death rates.  This is a dramatic stage of the demographic transition.  The population grows very rapidly, the rate of technological change increases, and there is a positive relationship between income and population growth.  However, income per capita is generally increasing as technological change overwhelms diminishing returns.  In the 1800s and early 1900s, this regime characterized European nations and other industrialized regions.  Many less developed countries continue to exhibit these characteristics.  Our concern and preoccupation with the "population explosion" dates from this period.
     

  • The modern growth regime is characterized by low birth rates and low death rates.  Furthermore, fertility rates (number of births per woman in her lifetime) decline significantly.  Technological change accelerates, and a negative correlation develops between income per capita and population growth.  As the incomes of families rise, the numbers of children they have declines.

The Population Reference Bureau put together a history  of  the world population and trends which are occurring in the population.   The following graphs are from their web site.   The graphs range in size from 28 KB to 35 KB,  so expect a few seconds delay while the images load.   

 

Decline in World Fertility Rates
As stated above, world fertility rates have been declining dramatically for the last fifty years.  From a high of 5.0 children per woman in 1950, the fertility rate has decreased by 44% to 2.8 children per woman in 1999.  

Even more impressive is the decrease in the fertility rate for women in the high income countries of the world (More Developed Regions: MDRs) to 1.6 which is well below the replacement level of 2.1.  As the chart  indicates, fertility rates in all regions have fallen significantly, with Africa being the only remaining area with a very high childbearing rate.  Some current fertility rates from a sample of countries are:

United States: 2.06
Italy: 1.18
Spain: 1.15
Ukraine: 1.26
Zambia: 5.62
China: 1.82
India: 3.11


Why did fertility decline? 

There are many reasons why fertility rates have declined.  Reasons that are primarily non-economic include:

  • improved contraceptives,

  • increased knowledge and acceptance of contraceptives, and

  • reduced child mortality. 

Lower child mortality is especially important because if the goal of parents is to have a certain number of surviving  children, then they can achieve their goal with less births.   Decline in Infant Mortality 

Economic reasons for the decline in fertility rates include:

  • high rates of urbanization increase the cost-benefit ratio of children,

  • increased education of women has raised their earning power and increased the "opportunity cost" of child bearing and child rearing,

  • rapid technological change has raised the rate of return to human capital and education.  High rates of return to human capital and education has raised the incentives of parents to invest in their children's education and to substitute quality for quantity in family size decisions.

Urbanization of the population 

 

Future of population change?
Predicting future demographic trends is highly uncertain.  However, the crucial determinate of long-run trends in the size of the world's human population is the fertility rate or average number of children per woman.  The trend in that fertility rate is down in virtually every country in the world.  Causing and reinforcing that decline are several important economic and non-economic variables discussed above.  Although there is powerful momentum in the near future for large increases in the population because of the large numbers of women of childbearing age, in the longer run of 100-150 years, there is strong evidence that world population will stabilize and probably decline from current levels.  This optimistic development is one of three scenarios depicted in the United Nations population projections .  Their projections are highly dependent on future trends in fertility rates.

Finally, there are important political, social, and economic consequences of the changes in population discussed above.  The much lower fertility rates in the high income MDRs will vastly increase the proportion of the world's population that will live in the poor developing nations.  The decline in world fertility rates will create an age distribution much older than at present with fewer workers available to support the rising numbers of elderly people.  These changes will challenge our domestic social system and our international political system.


Additional Resources

This e-Lecture may be used  by teachers for classes in economics, geography, world affairs, social problems, and other social studies courses.  It may be used either independently or in conjunction with the Web based learning resources and audio file interview with the authors .

This presentation was developed by Larry Weiser, Director of the Center for Economic Education at University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, in collaboration with Bob Enright, Professor of Sociology at UW-Stevens Point, and with additional contributions from George Langelett, Assistant Professor, South Dakota State University.

Hit Counter

 

EconomicsWisconsin
Wisconsin Council on Economic Education
161 W. Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 3143
Milwaukee, WI 53203
(414) 221-9400
Fax (414) 221-9790
wicnclee@ameritech.net