A revisionist look at population and growth.

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The recently issued National Research Councils report entitled Growth and Economic Development: Policy Questions adopts a moderate position on population issues. It neither treats population growth as an ominous world threat nor accepts the extreme views of Julian Simon that rapid population growth promotes economic development and technological advancement. The report maintains that population growth is not the major cause of the problems in the Third World; but accepts the position that rapid population growth does impede development. The report tends to support the position of the current US administration that market forces can offset some of the negative effects of rapid population growth. The report was discussed by the participants at a National Academy of Science symposium. Most of the participants viewed the report favorably including those who represented both the Population Crisis Committee and the American Enterprise Institute. Only Ansley Coale a prominant demographer and Jiang Chengzong of the Chinese embassy voiced dissatisfaction with the report. There was some disagreement as to whether the report represented a revisionist view when compared to previous National Research Council reports. Some of the reports main conclusions were 1) rapid population growth does not necessarily lead to resource exhaustion 2) rapid population growth is contributing to the depletion of renewable resources 3) pollution problems cannot be overcome by market forces alone 4) economies of scale and technological innovation can compensate for rapid population growth only to a limited degree 5) rapid population growth negatively affects the quality of education and will ultimately increase the number of illiterates in the worlds population 6) slowing the population growth rate would reduce income inequality and 7) rapid urbanization is more the result of government policies than of population growth. Officials of the US Agency for International Development were pleased with the reports conclusions as they provided no support for the administrations efforts to cut funds for family planning.