Home page Thomas Robert Malthus (1766–1834) Thomas Robert Malthus was born in 1766 near what is now Guildford and he died in Bath in 1834. He studied at Jesus College Cambridge taking classics but concentrating on maths. He was the first professor of political economy in England. His theories on population and food supplies have been criticised for many years as the world appears to support an increasing population. However, although "economic development" continues, in real terms the numbers of people who approach the margin where famine can occur within a short time frame, seem to be increasing. In the end population size, along with environmental degradation, needs to move from the realms of political party identities, international resolutions and talk to relevant practical actions. Malthus at the margin Thomas Robert Malthus the English demographer and political economist became well known for his analysis of the relative balance bewtween natural resources and population growth. In particular he pointed out the difference in an arithmetic growth of for food production and a potental for human population numbers to increase exponentially. In mathematical terms this indicates that population can outstrip food supplies. Malthus only explained this difference but did not make any particular predictions. In terms of modern decision analysis his writings were of importance simply because under given circumstances the Malthusian effect of population outstripping food supplies can and does occur. This is not a result of there being an aggregate world shortfall in food production but rather the food is not where it needs to be to avoid starvation or, when it is where starving people exist, they are unable to get hold of it for various reasons. The most prominent reasons involve political and/or economic motivations of those who have control over the food resources and in prices sometimes rising above levels poorer people can afford. It is therefore evident that Malthusian analysis is applicable today simply because the simplistic notion that distribution is competitive and fair does not hold true. The production and the availability of food is determined by a large range of locational-state issues 1. A review of such issues makes up part of the presentations at the ongoing "Feedstocks, Fibres & Food Workshop 2007-2008" organized by the George Boole Institute. A forthcoming brief to be presented at the Workshop is entitled,"Mathus at the margin" this will provide a more in-depth analysis of how Malthusian theory applies now. The toxic mix of politics and economics "Mathus at the margin" was written by Hector McNeill, Director of SEEL. In one section he recounts his own personal experience observing a starvation march which turned into a riot in Dacca, East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) in 1956. This march took place because poor people could not afford rice, their main dietary staple. It turned out that the reason that prices were so high was that some government ministers were involved in deals to hoard rice to profit from the price rises created by the imposed scarcity. During the riot the minister of agriculture ended up having his face smeared with cattle dung. McNeill, who was twelve years old at the time, describes how two or three days later his father had arranged for him to visit an Experimental Farm located near Dacca. There agricultural researchers showed him round laboratories and experimental field plots describing a range of the current solutions to improved crop production, including rice. McNeill recounts how this sequence of witnessing part of the starvation riot involving men, women and children and then seeing demonstrations of how food could be produced more productively and cheaply had a very intense emotional impact caused by the contrast between the potential hope and salvation represented by agricultural methods, and the ease with which such promise, resulting from dedicated human ingenuity, could be so cruely savaged at the hands of irresponsible politicians so as to cause such suffering and despair. Corruption is increasing not decreasing The main lesson, and one he has observed resurfacing over and over again during the last 50 years, has been just how the very people in whom people place their trust are often the very agents who abuse such trust by acting in a self-serving and predatory fashion. On occasions the failures are not due to corruption but rather incompetence and ignorance with people with inadequate experience taking decisions on very complex matters. Failure to apply a systems approach to biological systems On the other hand, according to Hector McNeill, the risk of people being driven to the margin is increasing with failures to protect the underlying ecologies which sustain the natural environment. At the margin (1956-2008) Many segments of national populations have been, and are, driven to the margin, not by crop failures but rather by political manipulation by unscrupulous predatory politicians. Such manipulative corruption, as a predominant aspect of risk decision analysis, has increased over the last 50 years rather than decreased. On the other hand the increasing complexity of the challenges facing biological systems are issues which seem to be beyond the comprehension of many well-meaning politicians. On occasions research design is also inappropriate. The risks are increasing with climatic change or instability, in many marginal zones micro-climatic stability can be exacerbated by the lack of ecological protection. Economics reigns In another paper submitted to the Workshop, McNeill shows that the nature of globalization is one which causes global market prices to intrude at the national level to such an extent that it is possible to end up with production occurring in zones which are not in fact as productive as areas more distant from market access. Quite often economics over-rides agro-ecological zoning or bioclimatic constraints a result of the location of consumption markets. In terms of feeding the population one is often faced with addressing population distributions and concentrations which have followed historic industrial and market growth patterns which today have resulted in inappropriate population concentration with respect to low cost food production areas. Too little is spent on appropriate agricultural research More to the point, and in spite of the rise in aid budgets, the amounts allocated to relevant agricultural research is insufficient. Agricultural research is a long term investment requiring, in particular, an emphasis on the training of appropriate people to undertake such work as well as to disseminate the findings through extension systems which reach the rural producers. This characteristic of agricultural development is not an attractive one for many politicians who want to see quick vote-earning results from government initiatives. Globally, there is a super-concentration of development funds going into so-called "budgetary support" initiatives where funds are simply handed over to governments by donors for these to be applied as the governments deem fit. Although this is more politically acceptable to the recipient political parties and demonstrates a political will on the part of donors not to impose "conditionality", the facts seem to be that this process, which concentrates very large amounts of money in the hands of so few, is associated with increasing inefficiencies as well as corruption. Even where limited funds do end up being allocated to research and extension they can end up simply paying salaries and sustaining the existence of institutions with inadequate attention being paid to the prioritization and relevance of activities. There is often a failure to subject such work to strict technical guidelines geared to the collection and analysis of sufficient relevant information to help make extension activities more productive. Updated: 18th April, 2008.