| Abstract: | This paper evaluates the 2 most important antinatalist arguments the have dominated the population debate over the last 25 years, drawing heavily on 3 1984 studies -- land and resource scarcity and saving and investment. The extent to which these arguments have successfully included the indirect effects of population growth on an economy in order to determine the net impact of population is assessed an emerging revisionist interpretation of the role of population in development is discussed. It is believed that on scientific grounds, and focusing primarily on economic impact, neither the arguments nor the various models used to support the antinatalist position sufficiently support the strength of the general conclusion that population growth exerts a strong adverse impact on the economy. Population growth reveals sooner the symptoms of underlying problems, but many of the solutions are to be found in areas other than altering the rate of population growth. Population growth is viewed less as a cause of development problems and more as an agent that pushes more fundamental problems to the forefront. Empirical evidence concerning nonrenewable resource constraints is not sufficient to make any strong conclusion about the impact of rapid population growth. With regard to food, the problem is more one of unrealized potential for increasing agricultural output and of the distribution of income than of diminishing returns to land. The results of economic research have failed to provide substantial and convincing empirical evidence to support the strong antinatalist concern about the adverse effect rapid population growth has on savings and investment. Authors of recent literature reviews deemphasized this impact. A revisionist interpretation deemphasizes some of the traditional" hypothesized direct influence of population and assigns population the role of an accomplice in contrast to the leading role of villain in the development story. To this list is added the importance of the pace of population growth and the political response to it. 2 problems commonly attributed to population are noted to illustrate some of the relevant considerations: food imbalance and high unemployment rates. For many countries, a main cause of food shortage is government policy that penalizes agriculture through the imposition of taxes and subsidies that twist the terms of trade against farmers, thereby reducing incentives to produce and innovate. 1 impact of rapid population growth is to bring this problem to a head sooner. It also forces a more rapid response. The critical question is whether such "time pressure" is more or less likely to bring about changes that will address the causes of the problem or the manifestations of problems. For high rates of unemployment or underemployed labor in 3rd world cities, the question is whether the pressure of time results in a resolution of the fundamental causes or just a treatment of the symptoms. |
