Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Economics is a social science essay
Economics is a social science essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Oded Galor and David N. Weil’s work, From Malthusian Stagnation to Modern Growth describes three different regimes on society including population, GDP per capita, family, and lifespan. They are the Malthusian model, the Post Malthusian model, and the Modern Growth Era model. The first of these three was the Malthusian model, developed by Malthus in the late 18th century, the Modern Growth is what we have today, and the post Malthusian model is the transition between the two ends of the spectrum.
The Malthusian model defined human society for much of its history, and only started to break from that model around the time Malthus wrote his works on it. The Malthusian model sees that for thousands of year, the standard of living remained more
…show more content…
Around this time, living standard began to rise more dramatically. This meant that fertility increased while mortality decreased, leading to an overall larger families and higher population. Technology also was increasing much faster than before due to the return for human capital increased. Real wages for a longer living population increased, and along with increased technological advancement, meant that families could invest more into their children. More could afford to send their children to school, and thus feeding into the quickened pace of technological advancement. Another aspect is the falling fertility after the initial surge as families see that their children are surviving more, so they do not need to have nine kids and expect only three to survive. Now they can have two kids and both are likely to grow up. This regime was the transition between the Malthusian model where everything is constant, and the Modern regime that we have …show more content…
Society barely changed, and when it did, slow technological change meant that society would return to what it had been before the shift. The Modern regime sees a society where families are small, people live longer, women work, and wealth is usually increasing. Finally, the Post-Malthusian regime sees society slowly escape the trap that had held it for thousands of years, but is still not modern. Society sees people live into their forties, technology allows for increased real wages without half the population dying, and families at first explode due to lower mortality rates, but then decrease to the modern standard where small families are the norm. Modern economists are still finding new factors for the transition from the Malthusian society to Modern society, are unlikely to find them
Thomas Malthus believed that the food supply only increased arithmetically, whereas the population increased geometrically. He felt that due to this, the population would have to be kept in check by things called negative checks, decreasing the birth rate, and positive checks, increasing the death rate. He also believed that the only way out of this vicious cycle was for people, purposefully decrease their crude birth rate. On the other hand, Boserup believed the food supply increased with demand, a process she called agricultural intensification. She believed that if more food was needed, more food would be farmed by intensifying the use of arable land, such as by putting more land into cultivation and using better cultivation methods. An example of this is a farmer not using part of his land because it does not have a supply of water, but the farmer then putting in an irrigation canal when he goes hungry because he does not have enough food for his kids. In conclusion, the fundamental difference between Malthus and Boserup in their approach to population issues is that Malthus believed that food supply could not adapt to a rapid increase in a population, whereas Boserup thought it
There have been several major revolutions throughout human history. V. Gordon Childe explains them as; The Neolithic Revolution, The Urban Revolution and The Industrial Revolution. (Harris 1994) These revolutions mark monumental periods in human history. Each thought to be a tremendous benefit to the survival of humankind. However, when all of the evidence is taken into account, especially regarding the Neolithic revolution, it would appear that there is significant detriment to the survival of the human race. The Neolithic, the first of the revolutions, which is marked by the advent of agriculture, may in fact be the pivotal point of the human health decline.
First, according to Boserup’s research on agricultural development, Malthus’s hypothesis that population growth results from the intensification of agriculture is unjustified, and it is more likely that increasing agricultural productivity is the cause of population growth rather than the effect. The problem in establishing this conclusively, of course, is that growth rate and food production increases occur over long periods of time, and it is thus difficult to determine definitively which factor preceded which in a historical context.... ... middle of paper ... ...
“An Essay on the Principle of Population” is written by Thomas Malthus where he outlines his theory on population growth. He thought that if population continued to grow, food production wouldn’t be able to keep up with demand and he believed that many people would die due to famine. Either people would have to use more contraception to drop the birth rate, or the death rate would increase due to wars, disease or
All though things were looking as if there is more of everything and living standers are higher like no other period in Europe, the working class was crushed with work and no benefits. They worked daily and could
Human beings appeared on this earth hundreds of thousands of years ago and eventually formed into tribes. They lived the life of hunter-gatherers and flourished at it, although not to our standards of population explosion, but they prospered nonetheless. The population of humans steadily grew at a very calm rate, “On the average, our population was doubling every nineteen thousand years. That's slow---glacially slow” (The Story of B 288). Then something happened. In the region of land between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in what is now ancient Mesopotamia, and agricultural revolution was started bringing the practice of Totalitarian Ag...
Jared Diamond makes the argument that when humans decided 10,000 years ago to no longer be hunter-gatherers and made the decision to become sedentary and start domesticating their animals and crops, the result is that the human race has experienced a steady downfall. Diamond makes the point that “with agriculture came the gross social and sexual inequality, the disease and despotism that curse our existence,” (Diamond). While the present system certainly is far from being perfected, Diamond’s various complaints and solutions certainly would not be of much use in the present time either.
At some point in time, human populations decided to settle down and harvest their own food instead of searching for it in the woods. In modern times, people tend to view this as a great advancement or revolution. Why would people want to search for food daily and forage for tubers or berries when they could just head to the supermarket or their own backyard? Scientist have determined, however, that this development brought many negative effects to the human population. The societies who adopted agriculture were malnourished and unhealthy, but they gained enough of an advantage over hunter/gatherer populations that the benefits outweighed the cost – at least in their eyes. Our society today has been shaped by this “revolution” and its effects,
Growth is important in a society. If all the people meeting specific needs get too old to work or dies, there would be no one to take over that particular function. However, extreme growth could be a major problem and would be considered a latent dysfunction. The same could be said for environmental effects – some are to be expected and cannot be avoided, but too much would cause problems in the functioning of the population. Social conflict theory would view the problem with population growth as lying in the distribution of goods and unequal consumption. If everyone were using energy, water, food, and the like with the same careful consumption, there would be no problem with a larger population. However, some people, particularly those living in poverty, consume less and will still face the environmental issues that can arise, while the rich and powerful use too much and cause more problems. If the people that use more would act more socially responsible, there would be enough to sustain a population growth. Symbolic interaction theory would focus on the perception of the people in society and their views on things that affect the population growth and environmental changes. One example would be the contribution of having a large family to population growth, which could be prevented by birth control. However,
Economics can be a tricky subject to explain to the general public. People often view Economics as a broad scope of finance. While Economics does look at the financial industry quite a bit, it is not solely about stocks and bonds. As Merriam-Webster describes, Economics is “a social science concerned chiefly with description and analysis of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services.” The important aspect to gain from this definition is that Economics is a social science, which means the discipline studies human behavior. Economists study human behavior regarding the
On the heels of the Scientific Agricultural Revolution, families were displaced from their tenant farms. The advances in fertilizer, irrigation and crop rotations, created efficiencies in farming that meant less farmers were needed to tend the crops and land owners no longer needed tenants to work them. Tenant farmers, after generations of farming land for the land owners, flocked to the cities to look for work. Some were exported to the North American colonies to farm land, but that would not solve the unemployment problem for all. Luckily, the Industrial Revolution arrived and these farmers found work in the emerging factories (Pavlic, P. 238). England’s financial innovations, the development of energy, transportation improvements, and the invention of machinery all helped to spark the Industrial Revolution (Pavlic, p. 239). As families began to urbanize, society was forced to make many changes to respond to the conditions. All of these changes because of the Industrial Revolution, created the modern society we live in today.
Twenty years later, Malthus would write a discouraging, but very influential book, An Essay on the Principle of Population. Malthus believed that the human race would eventually be doomed by overpopulation. His theory was that food would increase in arithmetic ratio but population would double every generation. This theory is faulty because it does not account for disease, famine, war, etc. Malthus’ view of supply and demand left a permanent impression on generations to come. It would hence be know as “the dismal science.”
The first stage of the demographic transition model is the pre industrial stage. In this stage birth and death rates are both usually high, which normally leads to almost no population growth within a country. The second stage of the demographic transition model is the Agricultural revolution stage, where one finds a reduction in death rates (DR), but birth rates (BR) remain high. In this stage there is also a population explosion, which is found mainly in underdeveloped and developing countries. Moving on to the third stage known as the industrial revolution stage one sees a drastic change in population. Some of the change is due to advances in medicine and improvements in diet. These changes caused a drop in death rates and birth rates drop. “Human life expectancy in the industrialized countries soared from an average of 35 years in the eighteenth century to 75 years or more at present.” In this stage we find that the birth rates are about the same and death rates are lower. The last stage known as the post industrial period produces zero population growth. The zero population growth is achieved when there is both a halt or decline in both birth rates and death rates. Many countries however do not pass all the way through the demographic transition, but rather have a prolonged period during stage two, where the population explosion is in full effect, this causes for some problems in the countries and populations on a global scale.
This change is even seen in completely isolated civilizations because sustainable human habitation alters the environment, once the environment around the civilization has changed, it forces the society to find new ways of doing certain things. There can also be change when there is a shift in the population, if there is a rise or drop in the birth or death rates of a society, there may have to be changes made in the distribution of food and resources as well as the size and availability of the job market. One of the largest general ideas of social change is the evolutionary theory. When the evolutionary theory was first proposed, it stated, "the social system (society) is made up of parts that must fit together in order to work effectively. Change in one component necessitates change in the others"(Massey, 86). Throughout time the theory itself has changed and become more advanced, but these early understandings can still be used to understand contemporary social change as well as past social change. In the same aspect of society, humans are constantly learning and creating, every year there is a new advance in technology and medication and because of this society is constantly adapting and evolving to work with these new innovations to further society. All these changes can be grouped into generations and help to
However, the relationship between population growth and economic development of a country could be considered as negative if the increase of population is become an obstacle to the country’s economic development. This is because the faster the population growth, the greater the dependency burden. In other words, the segment of population which is considered economically unproductive included children and the elderly, expands along with the population growth. According to Kelly and Schmidt (1996), this negative view could be proved by Thomas Malthus as he raised warning about the danger of over-population in his “Pessimism about the economic impacts of population” over two centuries ago and thus conquered the thinking of population analysts.