The GLP is committed to full transparency. Download and review our 2019 Annual Report

Malthusian inversion: Slowing population growth could mean cheaper food and a cleaner environment

| | January 29, 2020
harvesting x
This article or excerpt is included in the GLP’s daily curated selection of ideologically diverse news, opinion and analysis of biotechnology innovation.

I’ve noticed several articles in the past few weeks talking about slowing or even falling population growth …. The richer we get, it seems the fewer babies we want or need.

[Editor’s note: Jayson Lusk is an agricultural economist at Purdue University.]

We’ve all probably been adequately exposed to the concerns and problems associated with over-population from the writings of Malthus to Ehrlich’s Population Bomb. Less well appreciated are the benefits and costs associated with a falling population.

A smaller population would no doubt produce some benefits. Probably the most obvious benefit is that a smaller population would lessen human’s demands on our environment and natural resources.

Related article:  A Rwandan farmer’s son: Why I advocate for GMO crops in Africa

Among the adverse consequences, however, of falling population is likely to be downward pressure on farm incomes. The Malthusian concern implied a large population that was incapable of sufficiently feeding itself. For humanity writ large, this outcome would have been a tragedy …. Innovation and productivity growth, fortunately, prevented the hunger problems that would have accompanied a rising population.

[F]lat or declining population, along with innovation, have the potential to have positive environmental outcomes, and it will important to think about appropriate farm policy in light of these trends.

Read the original post

News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend