The Hot Zone

Do Falling Birth Rates Pose a Threat to Human Welfare?

The issue of whether falling birth rates pose threat to human welfare is an issue that British economist, Thomas Malthus dwelled upon many centuries ago. Malthus authored Essay on the Principle of Population in 1978. In his essay, Malthus posed his hypothesis that unchecked population growth always exceeds the growth of means of subsistence. Actual population growth is kept in line with food supply growth by "positive checks" such as starvation, disease and the like, elevating the death rate, and "preventive checks” like postponement of marriage that keep down the birthrates. Both of those checks where characterized by "misery and vice". Malthus's hypothesis implied that actual population always has a tendency to push above the food supply. Because of this tendency, any attempt to ameliorate the condition of the lower classes by increasing their incomes or improving agricultural productivity would be fruitless, as the extra means of subsistence would be completely absorbed by an induced boost in population. As long as this tendency remains, Malthus argued, the "perfectibility" of society would always be out of reach.

According to Michael Meyer, the author of the article, “Birth Dearth,” thinks a shrinking population will mean that the economic growth that has meant constantly increasing standards of living must come to an end. Across the world, people are having fewer children. Statistics show that fertility rates have dropped by half since 1972, from six children per woman to 2.9. Demographers speculate that the world’s population will continue to grow from today’s 6.4 billion to around 9 billion in 2050 (Meyer 126). After that, the population will drastically decrease. Meyer’s argues the decrease in population will change everything about our world including things like economic growth, size and power of nations, and the quality of our lives.

Meyer’s states that the more developed countries like Europe have experienced declining birth rates for many years. For a society to reproduce itself, woman must have 2.1 children. According to the United Nations report, France and Ireland are leading the charts with average 1.8 children. Germany’s fertility’s rates are in the median range with 1.4 children. Germany is projected to loose 5% of its 82.5 million people over the next 40 years which is the equivalent of all of East Germany (Meyer 126). Reiner Klingholz, a director of the Berlin Institute for Population and Development, predicts that Romania will decrease by 27%, Estonia by 25% and Bulgaria by 38%. “Parts of Eastern Europe, already sparsely populated, will just empty out,” says Klingholz.

In Asia, Japan is expected to loose much of its population as well. Their fertility rate is 1.3 children per woman. Since the average age of a Japanese person, it is estimated to loose 25 percent of their 127 million people in the next forty years. China’s fertility rate has also declined from 5.8 to 1.8 according to the United Nations report. The Center for Strategic and International Studies interprets this by suggesting that China’s population will age as quickly in one generation as Europe’s has over the past 100 years.

One of the major theories for why birth rates are decreasing is because there is an increase in females being educated. Since more women are enrolled in school, there has been a decrease in fertility, divorce, abortion, and marriage. Also the use of contraceptives has increased substantially. According to the United Nations report, 62% of married women are now using some form of non-natural birth control (Meyer 128). India is now the capital of global HIV. In Russia, alcoholism, poor public health, and industrial pollution have severely affected men’s sperm counts.

Meyer’s believes that the solution to the declining birth rate problem would be for the growing and shrinking countries to “create an opportunity”. As a result, the labor would flow from the overpopulated, the resource-poor south to the depopulating north. There fore, the jobs would be plentiful. The capital and remittance income from all of the rich nations would flow along the reverse path, benefiting everyone (Meyer 129). He also thinks that countries should adopt practices from governments like France and the Netherlands. They have “family-friendly” policies that help women combine work and motherhood. To promote having families the citizens gets to take advantage of tax credits for their children and subsidized child care. And as a result, the people will live longer, so that means that they are healthier which means that they can work more years before they retire.

David Nicholson-Lord is the author of the article, The Fewer the Better, and he argues that economic problems of population decline all have straightforward solutions. He thinks that a less crowded world will not suffer from environmental ills attendant on overcrowding and will, overall, be a roomier, gentler, less materialistic place to live with cleaner air and water (Nicholson-Lord 124). Environmentally, the decline of population will have less strain on the natural systems. The will also be more available land for the human species and the wilderness. He also says the overcrowding, congestion, and stress would result in less rage and casual public aggression. People will be less likely to commit crimes.

The main arguments have revolved around the decline of economic and social stagnation, the decrease