’WPCåK T 0(ØłŠ É 1mÕ 0cB #„ ƒ“ B*7 0 B ¼ UŁ %ń ų÷  ¬H 0Dļf3Ž5¾;Ńd  p>vė“ 0DŸyća\ˆp“ų^¬T ^3o ”¢"fC#qE#a(øH2ČH4ąH!`ōH!`TI!`“I!`J!`tJ!`ŌJ )4Kō'( £BK"]¶$p*}‹+U.-Ķ6-į.Įä.Ź„/7o1ś¦5  F($”” ļŠ h. ŠŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś24Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņBongaarts€(1992)€projects€that€35%€of€COņņ2óó€emissions€between€1985€and€2050Š ° Šwill€be€due€to€population€growth,€a€result€sensitive€to€the€rate€of€deforestationĻderiving€from€population€pressures.€€Much€higher€estimates€of€populationššs€roleĻare€provided€by€United€Nations€Population€Fund€(1991).€€For€qualifications€seeĻHarrison€(1990),€Shaw€(1989),€and€Horlacher€and€Heligman€(1991,€p.€361).óó Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś18Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņMyers€(1997)€highlights€the€propensity€of€the€affluent€to€š šuse€upšš€(notŠ ( Šsimply€use)€environmental€resources,€a€result€largely€of€market€failure.€€HeĻalleges€that€a€$7€per€gallon€tax€on€gasoline€would€be€required€to€internalize€theĻcosts€(even€exclusive€of€CO2€effects)€associated€with€the€š šcar€culture.šš€ĻKeyfitzšš€writings€(1996,€1976)€have€exposed€in€detail€the€issues€of€consumptionĻand€the€myopia€of€economic€analysis.óó#+e37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;3ŗ$““Ō2+eŌŚ  Ś0Ś  Ś.Ō3  Ōą0  ąIBM 4019 LaserPrinter PostScriptģ IBM40PS.PRS hhhhhhhhš’’TABLEA1.PSHEIĄ!fx- 0 yŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś5Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņ€The€figures€are€in€1985€purchasing€power€parity€dollars.€€Advantages€andŠ ž Šlimitations€of€this€measure€are€taken€up€by€Chen,€Datt€and€Ravallion€(1994).€ĻAlternative€measures€are€examined€in€United€Nations€(1997);€World€Bank€(1990,€ch.Ļ2);€Sen€(1985);€Ravallion€(1992);€and€Lipton€and€Ravallion€(1993).óó&’’0 d d(3ŗ $„„Ż ƒ!ŻŻ W ŻŚ  Ś0Ś  Ś. d< Œ 9p`( X īŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś15Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņUnited€Nations€Population€Fund€(1991)€defines€carrying€capacity€as€š š...theŠ 8 Šnumber€of€people€that€the€planet€can€support€without€irreversibly€reducing€itsĻcapacity€or€ability€to€support€people€in€the€future€(p.€71).šš€€It€offers€severalĻdetailed€case€studies€applying€this€concept,€each€of€which€appropriately€dependsĻon€upwards€a€dozen€fundamental€qualifications€conditioning€the€application€ofĻthis€definition.óó($Ó$‘‘ņņŚ  Ś0Ś  Śóó ŌŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś6Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņDeprivation€measures€are€discussed€in€United€Nations€Development€Program,Š  ŠņņHuman€Development€Report€1994óó;€and€in€Sen,€1985,€1987).óó “Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś7Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņBlank€and€Blinder€(1986);€Squire€(1993);€Chen,€Datt€and€Ravallion€(1994);Š > ŠLipton€and€Ravallion€(1993).óó€ 1Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś8Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņAhlburg€(1996)€concludes:€€š šLittle€direct€evidence€on€the€impact€ofŠ – Špopulation€growth€existsšš€(p.€219).€€McNicoll€(1997)€observes€š š...that€view€[of€aĻpoverty,€birth„rate€association]€finds€little€support€in€the€extensiveĻstatistical€research€literature€(p.€2).€€The€UNFPA€consultative€group€(UnitedĻNations€Population€Fund,€1993)€concluded€that€š šResearch€has€not€established€aĻstrong€causal€link€running€from€high€fertility€to€poverty€(pp.€50„51).€PritchettĻ(1997)€adjudges€that€solid€evidence€showing€population€growth€to€be€š ša€cause€orĻeven€an€exacerbating€condition€of€povertyšš€cannot€be€given€š šbecause€there€isĻnonešš€(p.€51).€For€a€recent€important€exception€to€these€assessments,€seeĻEastwood€and€Lipton€(1997).óó ZŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś2Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņThis€perspective€is€sometimes€called€š šrevisionism.šš€€It€is€ņņnotóó€primarilyŠ . Šdistinguished€by€whether€the€net€assessment€is€negative€or€positive,€but€ratherĻby€the€ņņmethodologyóó€that€emphasizes€a€more€complete€reckoning€of€the€impacts€ofĻdemographic€change.óó’’HD 4Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś9Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņAhlburg€(1996)€argues€that,€while€direct€policies€like€land€redistributionŠ Ę Šare€much€stronger€than€population€policies€in€poverty€reduction,€family€planningĻshould€play€a€role€since€such€programs€are€politically€easier€to€implement.óó įŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś10Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņThis€is€consistent€with€Kelleyššs€(1996)€review€of€36€econometric€studies.€€AŠ –" Šsomewhat€less€equivocal€interpretation€is€provided€by€Lloyd€(1994).óó(3/;$¦¦Ż ƒ!ŻŻ W Ż oŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś11Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņThe€classic€statement€is€by€Coale€and€Hoover€(1958).óó€Table_A ~Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś12Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€€ņņWhile€costs€per€student€have€declined€in€some€regions,€this€may€not€haveŠ V& Šsignificantly€impacted€education€quality€since€cost„trends€are€mainly€due€toĻslowly€growing€teacher€salaries,€explained€by€labor€market€conditions.€€(TheseĻtrends€may€also€result€from€the€hiring€of€a€large€cohort€of€relativelyĻinexpensive€younger€teachers.)€€See€Schultz€(1987,€1996);€Kelley€(1996).€ĻSchultzšš€results€for€the€1960s€and€1970s€cause€him€to€observe:€š šThis€findingĻchallenges€the€working€assumption€of€Coale€and€Hoover€(1958)€that€linkedĻpopulation€growth€to€the€share€of€income€allocated€by€poor€countries€to€š šlessĻproductivešš€expenditures€on€education€and€social€welfare€programsšš€(1987,€pp.Ļ458„459).€€Kelleyššs€updated€results€(1996,€pp.€79„80)€for€the€1980s€confirmŠ ,Č  ŠSchultzšš€findings.óó ŖŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś14Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņA€recent€study€summarizes€the€situation€in€the€intermediate„run:€€š šIfŠ (  ŠMalthus€is€ultimately€to€be€correct€in€warning€that€population€will€outstrip€foodĻproduction,€then€at€least€we€can€say:€€Malthus€Must€Wait.šš€(Mitchell€and€Ingco,Ļ1993).€€For€a€pessimistic€assessment€see€Brown€1994;€and€for€a€challenge€to€thatĻassessment,€see€Dyson€(1996).óó TŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś4Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€€ņņKelley€and€Schmidt€(1994).óó JŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś3Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€€ņņAn€early€discovery€of€this€finding€was€presented€in€United€Nations€(1988).€Š ž  ŠSee€also€Bloom€and€Freeman€(1988);€Barlow€(1992);€Blanchet€(1991);€Brander€andĻDowrick€(1994).€€A€statistical€assessment€of€these€studies€is€found€in€Kelley€andĻSchmidt€(1994).óó Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś16Ś  Ś.Ż  Żņņ€š šMost€published€estimates...are€probably€less€dispassionate€analyses€thanŠ č Šthey€are€political€instruments,€intended€to€influence€actions€one€way€orĻanother.šš€€Cohen€(1995,€p.€233).óó )Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś22Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņRapid€deforestation€is€a€recent€phenomenon.€€Globally€forested€areas€haveŠ Ø% Šdeclined€by€20%€over€a€period€of€many€centuries€(Miller,€Reid€and€Barber,€1991).€ĻThe€present€pace€is€exceptionally€rapid€by€historical€standards.€€Most€developingĻcountries€are€losing€forest€cover€(between€1978„1988€the€Amazon€lost€4%€of€itsĻclosed€canopy),€and€specie€loss€and€threats€are€proceeding€at€an€even€faster€rateĻ(Skole€and€Tucker,€1993).€€See€also€Robinson€and€Srinivasan€(1997,€p.€1191).óó<Ō6X9`+Courier’<ˆ 9+CourierBoldŸ<Ō6Xß9`+"CourierItalic ”,‰?xxx,,Xx$ėž’ž’ž’]ž’{ž’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’”-R&HHH,,hH$ėž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’”.r5ddd,,ōd$ėž’ž’ž’āž’ģģ’’g’’’’’’q’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’A‰?xxx°XXxtIž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’ž’ž’’’’’’’or5ddd°XōdtIž’ž’ž’gž’qq’’ģ’’’’’’ö’’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’ž’ž’’’’’’’Tjs4ddd°X/ōd·iž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’E<<<°X,<tIž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’ž’ž’’’’’’’Ōnr5ddd°Xfōd )ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’’’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’u[*PPP°XPtIž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’ž’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’ž’’’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ž’ž’ž’’’’’’’’’’’°(#(#\ \ rŲ'§§°\’’’’X°(#(#@³³rŲ'§§°Ŗ’’’’,°Table_A źńńŠ &. ŠŠ &. ŠńńŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś13Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņ€A€case€study€of€East€and€South€Asia€is€provided€in€Tan€and€Mingat,€1992.€Š  ŠIn€contrasting€Korea€and€India€in€the€mid€1980s,€pupils€per€teacher€in€primary,Ļsecondary,€and€tertiary€are€38€vs.€58,€34€vs.€20,€and€41€vs.€16,€respectively.€ĻIndiaššs€resource€allocations,€corroborated€by€other€statistics,€are€meagerĻ(generous)€for€lower€(higher)€education€levels.óó fŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś17Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņš šTechnologiesšš€vary€from€capital„intensive€methods€that€use€high„yield€seedsŠ ø Šwith€modern€fertilizers€and€pesticides,€to€labor„intensive€techniques€that€useĻš šgreenšš€methods€of€soil€preparation,€water€conservation€methods,€andĻharvesting/storing€formats€to€reduce€waste.óó sŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś19Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņFor€markets€to€function€well,€property€rights€must€be€clear€and€secure,Š Ų Šactions€should€have€no€significant€negative€side€effects,€competition€shouldĻprevail,€public€goods€should€be€minor€exceptions,€and€myopia,€uncertainty,€andĻirreversible€decisions€should€not€arise€(Panayotou,€1993,€ch.€2).óó<Ō6X9`+Courier ĆŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś21Ś  Ś.Ż  Żņņ€Given€a€proper€institutional€setting€and€incentive€structure,€poor€farmersŠ x# Šare€excellent€stewards€of€the€environment.óó ׯ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś1Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņSee,€for€example,€Meadows€and€others€(1972);€€Coale€and€Hoover€(1958);Š ž ŠNational€Academy€of€Sciences€(1971);€Ehrlich€(1968);€Barney€(1981).óó ·Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś20Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņLists€of€policy€failures,€with€scores€of€examples,€are€provided€in€WorldŠ H! ŠBank,€1992,€and€Panayotou,€1993.óó ĄńńŠ 1 ŠŠ 1 ŠńńŻ ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś25Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€€ņņOne€billion€people€lack€access€to€clean€water€and€1.7€billion€lack€accessŠ Ą Što€sanitation.€€At€least€two€million€child€deaths€are€directly€linked€to€theseĻconditions.€€300„700€million€women€and€children€suffer€from€severe€indoor€airĻpollution€from€cooking€fires.€€Robinson€and€Srinivasan,€1997,€pp.€1179,€1189.€óó -Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś26Ś  Ś.Ż  Ż€ņņIn€terms€of€policy€emphasis,€one€perspective€is€offered€by€Jha,€DeolalikarŠ 0  Šand€Pernia€(1993,€p.€25):€€slowing€š š...population€growth€by€itself€is€unlikely€toĻhalt€or€even€slow€the€rate€of€environmental€degradation€and€depletion€of€forest,Ļmarine,€and€water€resources.€€Other€policies€that€limit€access€to€common€propertyĻresources,€manage€rural„urban€migration,€regulate€greenhouse€gas€emissions,€andĻeradicate€poverty€will€be€needed...€€However,€rapid€population€growth€willĻcertainly€make€it€more€difficult€for€countries€to€improve€the€environment€with€aĻgiven€set€of€policies€and€interventions.šš€€€Contrasting€perspectives€andĻqualifications€are€offered€by€Shaw€(1989),€Birdsall€(1992),€and€Ahlburg€(1996)Ļwho€recognize€the€subsidiary€role€of€demography,€but€argue€that€populationĻpolicies€are€cost€effective€and,€given€the€political€difficulties€of€effectingĻneeded€institutional/political€changes€to€improve€economic€growth€andĻenvironmental€sustainabilty,€are€relatively€feasible.óó"’intrahouehold’"’headcount’’headcounts’’Ahlberg’’1980s’’1960s’’Ahlburg’,’disproportionately’,’Chen’’Lipton’’Ravallion’’1970s’’McNicoll’’Pritchett’’Eastwood’’intra’’Anand’’Morduch’’econometric’’Kelley’’US1’’Datt’’UNDP’’Evenson’’Behrman’’Birdsall’’1990s’’Coale’’ARavallion’’Donella’’Ansley’’Ehrlich’’T]hese’"’correlational’"’Barlow’’Dietre’’Didier’’Blancet’’1988a’’Schmidt’’Dowrick’$’distributional’$’DCs’’LDCs’ ’ch’ ’UNFPA’’GDP’’Mingat’’disadvanged’ ’entitlements’ ’Barney’$’counterfactual’$’Engle’’Boserup’’Ruttan’’Ingco’’Dyson’"’feasibilities’"’Higgins’ ’Alexandratos’ ’Agcaoili’’Rosegrant’’Worldwatch’’Bongaarts’’wetlands’’Smil’’costless’ ’biodiversity’ (’overexploitation’(’Hempel’(’anthropocentrism’((’contempocentrism’(’Myers’’CO2’’Keyfitz’’gail’’inlcude’"’bibiliography’"’biomass’’overfishing’’Panayotou’$’underinvesment’$’Srinivasan’*’complementarities’*&’Extensification’&’Skole’’Bilsborrow’’Palloni’’forresting’ ’salinization’ ’Waggoner’’Igr’’Pgr’’Ngr’’Tgr’’GNPgr’’Lutz’’C02’’Meyerson’’3rd’’4th’’gallies’’MacKellar’’Grossman’’OECD’’Preston’$’sustainability’$’Jah’"’sustainabilty’"’overarching’’Blanchet’’Reid’’foresting’ ’C0’ ’Horlacher’’Heligman’’Jha’’Deolalikar’’Pernia’’Agcoaoili’’Mercedita’’Nurul’’Oppenheim’’eds’’Springer’’Verlag’’Nikos’’FAO’’Wiley’’Sudhir’’IUSSP’’Vols’’ldc’’Institut’’d'etudes’$’demographiques’$’Taylor’’Rebecca’’Sheldon’’Danziger’’Dominick’’Salvatore’’l992’’Aldine’’Lester’’Norton’’Shaohua’’Guarav’’W.W.’’Barry’’Routledge’’Ballantine’’Ian’’Goldin’’Jeffrey’’Lamont’’typology’’FPA’’D.E.’’Satish’’Anil’’Ernesto’’WPS’’Cynthia’’Cassen’’Wolfgang’’Basia’’Zaba’’Ordina’’Landis’’Prinz’’Goujon’’Geoffrey’’Kenton’’Merlinda’’Volumes’’Hopkins’’Dordrecht’’Lant’’Kaplan’ ’Turkmenistan’ ’Gaurav’’Rosenzweig’’Oded’’Elsevier’’Vernon’’JAI’’Amartya’’Julian’’Vaclav’’Lyn’’Jee’’Peng’’Alain’’ESA’’SER.A’’Ames’ Ż ƒ ŗ %ŻŚ  Ś23Ś  Ś.Ż  Żņņ€COņņ2óó€trends€are€illustrative.€€Globally€per€capita€COņņ2óó€emissions€have€beenŠ X* Šflat€for€the€last€three€decades.€€Growth€of€C0ņņ2óó€might€thus€be€attributed€mainlyŠ  +Č Što€population€increase.€€However,€in€developing€countries€there€has€been€a€six„¼ńń¼ńńfold€increase€in€per€capita€emissions€in€the€last€45€years,€so€the€impact€ofĻpopulation€growth€there€is€relatively€small.€€Meyerson€(1998,€pp.€117„118).€óó–źÜK#|bó%ņLIBRARY.STYÉ ž’"’’BD’’O’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ń’ƒó?’’’’’ü’’’’’æ?Ėüó’’’Ļ’’Ļ’š=ĄąK—ūū鳥ƒ'Ą€ ž’"’’BD’’O’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ń’ƒó?’’’’’ü’’’’’æ?Ėüó’’’Ļ’’Ļ’š=ĄąK—ūū鳥ƒ'Ą€ ž’"’’BD’’O’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ń’ƒó?’’’’’ü’’’’’æ?Ėüó’’’Ļ’’Ļ’š=ĄąK—ūū鳥ƒ'Ą€ ž’"’’BD’’O’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ń’ƒó?’’’’’ü’’’’’æ?Ėüó’’’Ļ’’Ļ’š=ĄąK—ūū鳥ƒ'Ą€ ž’"’’BD’’O’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ń’ƒó?’’’’’ü’’’’’æ?Ėüó’’’Ļ’’Ļ’š=ĄąK—ūū鳥ƒ'Ą€ ž’"’’BD’’O’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ń’ƒó?’’’’’ü’’’’’æ?Ėüó’’’Ļ’’Ļ’š=ĄąK—ūū鳥ƒ'Ą€ ()*+,-<Ō6X9`+Courier’<ˆ 9+CourierBold<¬6Nß9`+$CourierOblique#Ż ƒ!ŻŻ W ŻŃH°ŃŌ€ ōtIōX XtIŌŌ€6ōtIō{ō ōtIŌŃ7€XXdČ7ŃŃ g р€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ņ ņTHE€IMPACTS€OF€RAPID€POPULATION€GROWTH€ON€POVERTY,ó óŠ ° Š€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ņ ņFOOD€PROVISION,€AND€THE€ENVIRONMENTó óŠ XØ Š€€Ģ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Allen€C.€KelleyĢ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Duke€University*ĢĢą  ąņņEconomic„Demographic€Linkages€I:€€An€Expanded€PerspectiveóóĢĢą  ąDebates€surrounding€the€consequences€of€rapid€population€growth€on€theĻpace€of€economic€development€have,€since€Malthus,€been€both€vigorous€andĻcontentious.€€Recent€decades€have€witnessed€a€major€swing€in€thinking€aboutĻpopulation€matters.€€On€the€one€hand,€the€1960s€and€1970s€were€dominated€byĻš štraditionalistšš€pessimistic,€and€sometimes€alarmist,€accounts€that€associatedĻrapid€population€growth€with€resource€exhaustion,€deficiencies€of€saving,Ļcrowding€out€of€productive€investments,€famines,€irreversible€environmentalĻdamage,€and€ecological€collapse.׃Jׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€€On€the€other€hand,€the€1980s€witnessed€aŠ {Ė  Šmajor€reassessment:€€alarmism€was€replaced€by€moderated€concerns€where€the€netĻnegative€impacts€of€rapid€population€growth€were€judged€to€vary€considerablyĻby€country€and€time,€and€where€populationššs€impacts€were€considered€to€beĻrelatively€small€by€comparison€with€other€determinants€of€economic€prosperity.€ĢĢą  ąIllustrating€this€interpretation,€a€seminal€study€by€the€NationalĻResearch€Council€(1986)€reached€the€š š...qualitative€conclusion€that€slowerĻpopulation€growth€would€be€beneficial€to€the€economic€development€ofĻdeveloping€countriesšš€(p.€90).€€It€was€non„alarmist€in€tone;€it€avoided€anyĻš šquantitativešš€judgments€of€the€size€of€population€impacts;€it€consideredĻpopulation€to€exert€both€positive€and€negative€impacts;€it€found€the€negativeĻpopulation€impacts€to€be€relatively€stronger€in€developing€countries;€and,Ļmost€importantly,€it€highlighted€the€need€to€account€for€ņņfeedbacksóó€and,€inĻparticular,€š š...the€€mediating€role€that€human€behavior€and€human€institutionsĻplay€in€the€relation€between€population€growth€and€economic€processesšš€(p.€4).€ĢĢą  ąExamples€of€mediating€impacts€are€numerous.€€Consider€natural€resources.€ĻWhile€an€increase€in€the€pace€of€population€growth€certainly€causes€naturalĻresources€to€be€used€at€a€more€rapid€rate„„a€traditionalist€concern„„thisĻincreased€use€will€ņņinitiallyóó€exert€upward€pressures€on€resource€prices.€ĻResponses€to€such€pressures€will€in€turn€š šmediatešš€and€dampen€the€pace€atĻwhich€resources€are€used.€€This€is€because€rising€resource€prices€will€Ļstimulate€exploration€and€resource€expansion,€cause€households€and€businessesĻto€conserve€on€resources,€and€result€in€substituting€more€abundant€for€scarceĻresources.€€In€the€longer„run€upward€price€pressures€are€attenuated€and/orĻreversed.€€The€net€impact€of€rapid€population€growth€on€resource€use€willĻtherefore€be€dampened€due€to€responses€to€price€changes€and€market€forces.€ĻSuch€feedbacks,€highlighted€by€an€expanded€perspective€on€population€matters,Ļtake€some€time€to€be€fully€revealed€but€are€critical€to€assessing€the€fullĻimpacts€of€population€growth.€ĢĢą  ąThe€major€causes€of€the€shift€in€thinking€about€population€matters€areĻtwofold.€€First,€an€accumulating€empirical€literature€discounted€the€strengthĻof€several€of€the€traditionalist€renderings.€€This€was€particularly€true€withĻrespect€to€concerns€about€natural€resource€exhaustion€(Simon,€1981),€savingĻconstraints€and€investment€crowding€out€(Hammer,€1985;€Kelley,€1988),€and€theĻcapacity€of€governments€to€provide€population„sensitive€public€servicesĻ(Schultz,€1987).€€Second,€and€most€important,€the€ņņmethodologyóó€used€to€evaluateĻthe€consequences€of€population€growth€was€changed€1)€to€consider€the€impactsĻover€a€ņņlonger€period€of€timeóó,€and€2)€to€take€into€account€ņņindirect€feedbacksóóĻwithin€economic,€social,€and€political€systems.€€This€revised€perspectiveĻresulted€in€reducing€the€assessed€size€of€the€economic„growth€impacts€ofĻpopulation€growth€since€the€(often€negative)€short„run€direct€impacts€wereĻoffset€by€the€(often€positive)€longer„run€and€sometimes€delayed€indirectĻimpacts.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś2Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€€Š Ö+&'< ŠĢ*€DRAFT€(revised)€8/20/98.€€Not€to€be€quoted,€all€or€in€part.ĢŠ  Ė-)? Šą  ąA€good€example€of€going€beyond€initial€short„run€š šdirectšš€impacts€ofĻdemographic€change€relates€to€assessing€the€š šindirectšš€impacts€of€increasedĻfertility€on€saving.€€While€adding€a€child€to€a€household€will€in€the€shortĻrun€exert€direct€pressures€on€household€saving€in€an€attempt€to€financeĻadditional€consumption,€over€the€longer€run€there€will€be€indirect€impactsĻthat€need€to€be€taken€into€account.€€In€response€to€pressures€caused€byĻadditional€children,€parents€may€well€work€harder€or€longer;€and€eventuallyĻchildren€may€contribute€to€household€and€market€work€and€income.€€The€š šnetššĻimpact€of€larger€families€on€saving€in€the€longer€run,€when€these€feedbacks€orĻresponses€are€fully€reckoned,€is€unclear.ĢĢą  ąPopulation€debates€are€now€less€contentious€because€the€magnitude€of€theĻimpacts€are€considered€to€be€smaller,€more€qualified,€and€guarded.€€StudiesĻincreasingly€focus€on€areas€where€feedbacks,€and€especially€governmentĻpolicies,€are€important.€€Examples€include€evaluations€of€population€linkagesĻwith€1)€poverty€where€the€distribution€of€public€entitlements€can€be€decisive,Ļ2)€food€production€where€government€interventions€have€been€critical,€and€3)Ļthe€environment€where€market€failure€is€prevalent.ĢĢą  ąThe€present€paper€will€update€much€of€what€we€know€from€research€thatĻhas€emerged€over€the€last€decade€on€the€relationships€between€demographicĻchange€and€the€specific€themes€of€poverty,€food,€and€the€environment.€€TheĻassessment€of€these€themes€will€embrace€four€overarching€perspectives.€€First,Ļboth€the€short„€and€the€long„run€impacts€of€demographic€change€will€be€Ļreckoned€in€an€attempt€to€effect€a€balanced€and€complete€account.€€Second,€theĻtwo„way€relationships€between€population€and€political€change€will€be€exploredĻsince€the€size€and€nature€of€populationššs€impacts€are€critically€related€toĻpublic€policy€in€several€areas.€€Third,€the€institutional€settings€(e.g.,€theĻefficiency€of€markets,€the€ownership€patterns€of€natural€resources,€theĻrelative€priorities€accorded€urban€versus€rural€activity)€that€have€a€notableĻimpact€on€the€size€of€population€impacts€will€be€exposed.€€And€finally,€theĻpervasive€and€important€interrelatedness€between€areas€of€populationššsĻimpacts„„in€this€case€between€poverty,€food€provision,€and€the€environment„„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńwill€be€addressed.€€Understanding€these€synergies€is€critical€to€formulatingĻand€appraising€the€likely€success€of€policy€interventions.ĢĢą  ąņņInterpreting€the€More€Inclusive€Bottom„Lineóó.€€Recent€statisticalĻfindings€on€the€bottom„line€impacts€of€rapid€population€growth€on€economicĻgrowth€have€changed.€€These€changes€support€and€elaborate€the€new€š šrevisedššĻmethodology€just€noted,€and€they€condition€the€current€debates.ĢĢą  ąMore€than€a€dozen€studies€using€cross„country€data€for€the€1960s€andĻ1970s€have€failed€to€unearth€a€statistically€significant€association€betweenĻthe€growth€rates€of€population€and€per€capita€output€(Kelley€and€Schmidt,€Ļ1994).€€An€early€judgment€is€instructive:€š š[T]hese€cross„national€studies€haveĻnot€provided€what€we€might€hope€for:€€a€rough€and€stylized€depiction€of€theĻconsequences€of€rapid€population€growth,€unless,€indeed,€the€absence€ofĻsignificant€results€is€itself€the€resultšš€(Lee,€1983,€p.€54).€€On€the€oneĻhand,€these€results€have€had€an€inordinate€impact€on€population€debates,Ļbuttressing€the€moderated€evaluations€of€population€impacts.€€On€the€otherĻhand,€such€an€interpretation€should€be€itself€qualified€since€simpleĻcorrelations€of€such€a€complex€process€are€difficult€to€interpret;€indeed,€inĻthis€case€they€are€often€misinterpreted.€€Still,€given€the€ņņstrengthóó€of€theĻtraditionalistššs€negative€€assessments€in€the€past,€a€lack€of€any€correlationĻis€a€notable€empirical€finding.€€ĢĢą  ąBut€even€this€statement€requires€qualification.€€A€lack€of€an€empiricalĻassociation€of€population€and€economic€growth€does€ņņnotóó€imply€that€demographyĻis€unimportant.€€It€could€(and€likely€does€in€this€case)€mean€that€ņņimportantóóĻ(negative€ņņandóó€positive)€population€impacts€on€the€economy€do€in€fact€exist,Ļbut€that€they€are€largely€offsetting.€€In€the€past€the€traditionalists€haveĻtended€to€emphasize€only€the€relatively€strong€negative,€short„run€impacts.€ĻWhile€these€evaluations€may€well€be€right€in€direction€and€even€in€magnitude,Ļthey€are€nonetheless€incomplete€and€likely€misleading€since€they€largelyŠ É-)? Šignore€feedbacks€and€longer„run€offsetting€forces.€€Small€and€muted€ņņnetóóĻimpacts€may€be€the€rule€and€not€the€exception.ĢĢą  ąTo€draw€upon€the€saving€example€discussed€above,€the€ņņnetóó€impact€of€sayĻan€additional€child€on€the€size€and€use€of€household€resources€will€vary€ņņoveróóĻthe€childššs€lifetime.€€In€early€years€the€child€is€a€net€cost;€in€later€agesĻhis/her€consumption€costs€may€be€broadly€offset€by€positive€contributions€toĻhousehold€activities€(e.g.,€gathering€wood€and€water,€tending€youngerĻchildren);€and€still€later,€the€then€young€adultššs€contributions€in€the€fieldsĻand€in€formal€market€work€may€be€positive,€and€large.€€The€š šnetšš€impact€ofĻchildren€of€varying€ages€in€a€family€may€be€measured€as€small,€but€theirĻindividual€impacts€are€both€positive€and€negative,€and€can€be€large.€€ĢĢą  ąSignificantly,€recent€assessments€have€unearthed€fairly€large€ņņnegativeóóĻcorrelations€between€population€and€per€capita€output€growth€based€on€data€forĻthe€1980s.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś3Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€ņ ņ€ó óSeveral€questions€immediately€arise.€€Has€the€impact€ofŠ yÉ  Špopulation€growth€changed?€€Could€it€be€that€the€negative€consequences€ofĻrapid€population€growth€associated€with€diminishing€returns€to€capital€and€theĻenvironment€are€emerging€as€relatively€more€important€than,€say,€the€positiveĻimpacts€of€scale,€induced€innovation/technical€change,€and/or€attenuatingĻfeedbacks?€€Or,€is€it€possible€that€the€1980s„„a€period€encompassingĻsignificant€structural€adjustments,€world€recession,€wars,€and€droughts„„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńconstitutes€an€š šexceptionalšš€decade?€€More€generally,€is€it€possible€that€theĻnet€impacts€of€population€growth€vary€systematically€with€the€overall€pace€ofĻeconomic€growth?ĢĢą  ąDefinitive€answers€to€these€questions€are€not€yet€forthcoming.€€However,Ļrecent€inquires€into€the€š šnewšš€€correlations€have€extended€both€the€resultsĻand€the€interpretation€of€the€literature.€€First,€the€new€cross„countryĻresults€show€that€the€impact€of€population€is€not€only€in€terms€of€its€ņņrateóó€ofĻchange,€but€possibly€also€its€ņņsizeóó€and€ņņdensityóó.€€Each€of€the€latter€twoĻfactors€reveals€a€statistically€ņņpositiveóó€impact€on€€economic€growth€in€theĻ1980s,€although€not€by€enough€to€offset€the€negative€growth„rate€effect.€€SuchĻa€finding,€while€still€preliminary,€illustrates€the€need€to€ņņdecomposeóó€theĻvarious€offsetting€impacts€of€demographic€change.ĢĢą  ąSecond,€decomposition€is€also€fruitful€in€at€least€two€other€directions:€Ļ1)€age„distributional€changes€as€emphasized€in€life„cycle€modeling€byĻeconomists,€and€2)€demographic€components€modeling€(births,€deaths,€migrants)Ļas€emphasized€by€demographers€and€policy€analysts€(Coale€and€Hoover,€1958;ĻKelley€and€Schmidt,€1995;€Bloom€and€Williamson,€1998).€€Recent€studies€ofĻthese€decompositions€reveal€reasonably€strong€impacts€of€demographic€change,Ļeven€in€cases€where€the€corresponding€net„population€growth€aggregates€suggestĻnil€(offsetting)€impacts.ĢĢą  ąFinally,€there€are€recent€results€that€suggest€the€impact€of€demographyĻcan€vary€by€the€ņņlevelóó€of€economic€development.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś4Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€If€true,€such€findings€couldŠ ³". Šbe€central€to€the€perspectives€governing€all€population€assessments.€€First,Ļthere€are€likely€to€be€systematic€factors€such€as€the€level€of€per€capitaĻincome€(or€correlates€thereof)€that€condition€the€impacts€of€population€growthĻon€the€economy.€€Second,€the€lack€of€correlations€in€the€earlier€decades€mayĻsimply€reveal€that€populationššs€impact€varies€by€country€and€setting,€and€overĻtime:€€the€positive€or€negative€impacts€largely€cancelled.€€Finally,€there€isĻa€priority€need€to€identify€and€account€for€factors€conditioning€populationššsĻimpacts€on€the€economy.€€Government€policies€represent€a€likely€candidate€andĻare€emphasized€in€the€present€review.ĢĢą  ąņņEconomic„Demographic€Linkages€II:€€The€Political€Economy€of€ChangeóóĢĢą  ąGovernment€policies€condition€the€form€and€the€size€of€populationĻimpacts€on€the€economy,€and€these€policies€likely€respond,€in€turn,€toĻdemographic€change.€€Unfortunately,€very€little€can€be€said€about€howĻgovernments€react€to€rapid€population€growth.€€In€many€developing€countries,Ļgovernment€policies€have€been€incompatible€with€promotion€of€economic€growthŠ Ź-)? Šin€a€situation€of€rapid€population€change.€€Ill„advised€farm€policies€areĻillustrative.€€Farmers€have€frequently€faced€constraints€in€the€form€ofĻovervalued€exchange€rates€that€disadvantage€their€products€in€export€markets,Ļmarketing€boards€that€suppress€farm€prices€and€reduce€the€incentive€toĻproduce,€taxes€on€farm€inputs€(e.g.€fertilizers€and€pesticides)€that€raise€theĻcosts€of€innovation,€and€urban€bias€in€the€provision€of€social€services€(e.g.,Ļeducation)€that€encourage€rural€to€urban€migration.€€Altering€any€one€of€theseĻgovernment€policies€can€significantly€modify€the€impact€of€demographic€changeĻon€food€provision.€€ĢĢą  ąGiven€this€perspective,€evaluations€must€be€broadened€to€ask:€€what€isĻthe€impact€of€rapid€population€growth€ņņonóó€government€policies?€€Specifically,Ļwill€growth„inhibiting,€demographically„incompatible€policies€be€more€or€lessĻlikely€to€change€in€a€setting€of€rapid€population€growth?€€The€answer€is€notĻobvious.€€On€the€one€hand,€slower€population€growth€buys€time€for€governmentsĻto€respond.€€On€the€other€hand,€such€time€can€be€and€often€is€squandered€sinceĻneeded€policy€changes€are€politically€difficult€to€make.€€Indeed,Ļprocrastination€can€even€heighten€problems€in€the€future.€€In€contrast,€aĻscenario€of€stringent€population€pressures€may€š šforcešš€needed€policy€change,Ļand€sooner.€€Of€course,€whether€such€change€made€under€pressure€is€anĻimprovement€is€itself€uncertain.€€In€short,€there€is€no€strong€ņņa€priorióó€basisŠ ¼  Šfor€believing€that€government€policy€making€will€be€better€or€worse€in€aĻsetting€of€rapid€versus€slow€rates€of€population€growth.€€The€issue€is€anĻempirical€one.ĢĢą  ąThe€literature€on€government€policy€responses€to€demographic€pressuresĻis€still€emerging.€€This€theme€will€be€highlighted€in€the€present€assessmentĻin€part€to€expose€and€stimulate€needed€research,€and€in€part€to€emphasize€theĻimportance€of€government€policies€to€poverty,€food€provision,€and€theĻenvironment.ĢĢ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ņ ņPOVERTYó óŠ é9 ŠĢņņDefined€and€Measuredóó€€ĢĢą  ąPoverty€is€identified€primarily€as€the€inability€to€meet€minimum€needsĻof€consumption,€most€notably€of€food,€housing,€medical€care€and€education.€ĻPoverty€is€frequently€measured€in€absolute€terms€as€the€amount€of€incomeĻrequired€to€purchase€a€subsistence€bundle€of€necessities.€€For€makingĻinternational€comparisons€most€observers€utilize€the€World€Bankššs€poverty€lineĻof€$US1€per€day.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś5Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€€This€permits€the€calculation€of€a€š šheadcountšš€as€theŠ É( Šnumbers€falling€below€the€poverty€line,€and€a€headcount€index€as€theĻpercentage€of€the€population€in€poverty.€€Measures€of€intensity€or€severity€Ļinclude€the€š špoverty€gap,šš€the€percentage€deviation€of€the€average€income€ofĻthose€in€poverty€from€the€poverty€line.€€While€poverty€can€be€viewed€in€otherĻways€(e.g.,€the€extent€or€degree€of€the€individualššs€absolute€or€relativeĻdeprivation,€measured€either€in€terms€of€income/consumption€or€by€attributesĻsuch€as€life€expectancy€or€education),€attention€here€will€be€on€the€WorldĻBank€measure.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś6Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀Š $Q0 ŠĢą  ąQualifications€to€the€various€measures€of€poverty€as€indicators€ofĻš šwelfarešš€are€numerous:€€1)€none€of€the€measures€considers€the€satisfactionĻderived€from€children;€€2)€the€differential€age„specific€needs€of€children,Ļworkers,€and€the€elderly€are€seldom€reckoned;€3)€š šhome€productionšš€facilitatedĻby€children,€as€well€as€scale€economies€in€production€and€consumption,€bothĻcorrelated€with€household€size,€are€also€unreckoned.€€Failure€to€adjust€forĻthese€dimensions€overstates€the€impact€of€large€families€on€welfare€and€theĻincidence€and€severity€of€poverty.ĢĢņņLinkages€of€Demography€and€Povertyóó€€ĢĢą  ąStandard€economic€theory€most€relevant€to€accounting€for€the€incidenceĻof€poverty€focuses€on€the€individualššs€ownership€of,€or€claim€on,€income„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńearning€physical€assets€(e.g.,€land,€capital,€water),€human€capital€assetsŠ Ź-)? Š(e.g.,€education€and€health),€and€entitlements€to€public€services€that€enhanceĻincome€and€consumption.€€Simply€stated,€individuals€with€modest€physicalĻassets,€poor€health€and/or€limited€education,€and€weak€claims€on€public€goods,Ļare€most€likely€to€be€poor.€€It€is€not€surprising€that€poverty€isĻdisproportionately€located€in€rural€areas,€although€women€and€children,€andĻthe€weak€and€disabled,€are€also€disproportionately€poor.ĢĢą  ąWith€these€dimensions€of€poverty€in€mind,€what€are€the€predicted€impactsĻof€population€growth€at€the€aggregate€level,€and€of€large€families€at€theĻhousehold€level,€on€poverty?€ĢĢą  ąņņThe€Aggregate€Levelóó.€€An€expansion€of€population€growth€will€(usuallyĻwith€a€lag)€increase€the€labor€force.€€On€the€one€hand,€this€will€reduce€theĻņņrelativeóó€return€to€labor€(wages)€and€increase€the€ņņrelativeóó€return€to€theĻowners€of€capital,€land,€and€natural€resources.€€The€short„run€impact€isĻadverse€to€the€poor€since€they€derive€most€of€their€income€from€wages.€€On€theĻother€hand,€these€negative€impacts€will€be€moderated€in€time€by€increasedĻinvestments€(ņņcaused€byóó€population€growth)€in€capital€and€land€given€their€nowĻhigher€rates€of€return.€€Under€plausible€assumptions,€such€population„inducedĻinvestments€will€expand€employment€and€be€skewed€toward€using€low„cost€labor,Ļboth€outcomes€(especially€employment)€that€are€favorable€to€the€poor.€€As€aĻresult,€standard€macroeconomic€theory€is€not€sufficient€to€predict€whether€anĻincrease€in€population€growth€will€increase€or€decrease€the€incidence€ofĻpoverty.€ĢĢą  ąņņThe€Household€Levelóó.€€The€impact€of€population€growth€on€poverty€at€theĻhousehold€level€is€complex€and€not€well€understood.€€At€the€simplest€level,Ļthe€birth€of€a€child€will€increase€the€likelihood€of€household€impoverishmentĻsince€limited€resources€must€be€distributed€amongst€more€household€members.€ĻHowever,€such€an€outcome€will€plausibly€induce€additional€work€by€otherĻhousehold€members€and,€over€time,€the€now€older€child€will€likely€contributeĻto€the€householdššs€economic€activity€(including€š šhome€productionšš€such€asĻtending€siblings,€transporting€water,€and€gathering€firewood).€€Even€later€theĻchild€in€adulthood€may€contribute€to€the€support€of€parents€in€old€age.€€ThisĻscenario€emphasizes€the€importance€of€assessing€the€impact€of€large€familiesĻover€the€ņņcomplete€life€cycle.óó€€In€so€doing,€the€impact€of€family€size€onĻpoverty€is€largely€an€empirical€issue€(Panayotou,€1994,€pp.€261„262).ĢĢņņPoverty€Incidence€and€Trendsó󀀀ĢĢą  ąTable€1€provides€estimates€of€the€numbers€classified€as€poor€by€regionĻin€developing€and€transition€countries,€a€headcount€index,€and€a€measure€ofĻthe€š špoverty€gapšš€(United€Nations,€1997,€p.€69).ĢĢ€€€€In€1993€around€1.3€billion€people,€or€one„quarter€the€Developing€World,Ļare€classified€as€poor.€€Poverty€is€greatest€in€South€Asia€and€sub„SaharanĻAfrica€where€headcount€rates€are€around€40%;€the€severity€of€poverty€isĻrelatively€high€there€as€well.€€Headcount€rates€are€considerably€lower€inĻLatin€America€and€East€Asia€(averaging€around€25%),€and€especially€low€(4%)€inĻthe€Middle€East€and€North€Africa.€€ĢĢą  ąWhile€recent€trends€are€tenuous€to€interpret€over€the€short€six„yearĻperiod€from€1987„1993,€the€headcount€index€declined€from€33.3€to€31.8.€€ThisĻimprovement€was€not€shared€by€all€regions:€€headcount€rates€rose€in€LatinĻAmerica€and€sub„Saharan€Africa€and€declined€in€South€and€East€Asia€and€theĻMiddle€East.€ĢĢą  ąTrends€over€a€longer€period€(see€Table€2)€are€available€for€elevenĻcountries€for€which€there€were€poverty€surveys€over€a€period€of€at€least€tenĻyears€at€the€time€of€the€World€Bank€assessment€(World€Bank,€1990,€p.€41).€€TheĻsample€represents€50%€of€the€worldššs€poor.€€The€general€picture€is€one€ofĻimpressive€reductions€in€poverty€between€1960€and€the€mid€1980s.€€For€example,Ļthe€headcount€index€declined€in€Indonesia€from€58€to€17€over€17€years;€inĻPakistan€from€54€to€23€over€22€years;€and€in€Thailand€from€59€to€26€over€24Š É-)? Šyears.€€Sub„Saharan€Africa€did€not€share€in€these€trends;€poverty€there€wasĻhigh€and€persistent.ĢĢņņDemography€and€the€Determinants€of€PovertyóóĢĢą  ąņņSome€Macroeconomic€Interactionsóó.€€ĢĢą  ąAt€the€macroeconomic€level,€the€most€important€single€determinant€ofĻpoverty€is€the€pace€of€overall€economic€activity€(United€Nations,€1997,€p.Ļ63),€and€especially€employment.€€Since€the€poor€are€disproportionatelyĻrepresented€in€the€ranks€of€the€under„€and€unemployed,€economic€expansionsĻthat€give€rise€to€robust€labor€market€demand€typically€reduce€the€incidence€ofĻpoverty;׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś7Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀and€conversely,€notable€contractions€in€overall€economic€activity,Š „ Ō  Šlike€that€recently€experienced€in€Asia,€can€have€profound€impacts€on€theĻnumbers€in€€poverty.€ĢĢą  ąThis€connection€between€poverty€and€the€pace€of€economic€expansion€canĻgive€rise€to€an€indirect€link€between€the€rate€of€population€growth€andĻpoverty.€€ņņIfóó€high€rates€of€population€growth€adversely€affect€the€pace€ofĻeconomic€growth€and€employment,€then€the€incidence€of€poverty€can€beĻassociated€with€the€pace€of€population€growth€as€well.€€This€is€a€qualifiedĻš šifšš€since€convincing€evidence€of€a€reasonably€strong€and€consistent€negativeĻpopulation€and€economic€growth€relationship€across€a€wide€range€of€settingsĻand€over€time€is€far€from€established.€€Nonetheless,€most€analysts€would€agreeĻon€the€circumstances€when€such€a€relationship€is€most€likely€to€occur€and€beĻnegative:€€where€land€and€natural€resources€are€relatively€scarce,€whereĻmarkets€and€governmental€institutions€are€weak€and€unresponsive,€and€whereĻeducation€and€health€resources€are€lacking.€€These€are€the€very€circumstancesĻthat€are€commonly€associated€with€poverty,€so€a€link€between€poverty€incidenceĻand€population€growth€for€a€subset€of€exceptionally€poor€and€dysfunctionalĻcountries€represents€a€defendable€hypothesis.€€ĢĢą  ąSuch€a€negative€statistical€relationship€between€population€and€perĻcapita€output€growth€was€found€in€the€1980s€in€cross„country€data€for€a€largeĻnumber€of€developing€economies,€although€this€relationship€was€largely€absentĻin€the€1960s€and€1970s€(Kelley€and€Schmidt,€1994).€€It€was€also€found€that€theĻsize€of€the€negative€impact€of€population€growth,€especially€in€the€1980s,€wasĻgreatest€at€low€income€levels.€€The€1980s„„and€likely€not€by€coincidence„„wasĻa€period€of€stalled€poverty€reduction€in€many€areas,€especially€in€those€withĻlanguishing€economic€growth.€€Adverse€impacts€of€population€growth€onĻaggregate€economic€performance€may€have€played€a€part,€although€theĻquantitative€importance€of€such€a€role€is€uncertain.€ĢĢą  ąIndeed,€a€review€of€the€empirical€literature€reveals€that€there€isĻlittle€direct€evidence€based€on€economy„wide€data€that€population€growth€orĻhigh€fertility€exert€a€statistically€identifiable€ņņnetóó€impact€on€the€incidenceĻof€poverty.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś8Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€However,€such€a€finding€is€not€surprising€since€the€effects€ofŠ ²". Šdemography€are€pervasive,€triggering€both€positive€and€negative€impacts€on€theĻunderlying€determinants€of€poverty.€€Thus,€influences€of€demography,€whichĻindividually€may€be€quantitatively€important,€can€also€be€offsettingĻ(McNicoll,€1997).׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś9Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀Š N%ž 2 ŠĢą  ąņņReverse€Causationóó.€€Macroeconomic€links€are€also€elusive€to€identifyĻbecause€poverty€reduction,€especially€in€agriculture,€is€itself€growthĻenhancing€economy„wide.€€Improvements€in€farm€productivity€not€only€reduceĻpoverty€in€agriculture,€but€create€jobs€in€industries€that€supply€farmers€withĻneeded€inputs,€consumer€goods,€processing,€and€storage.€€A€recent€study€ofĻpoverty€in€India€concluded€that€š šit€is€the€dog€(the€rural€economy)€that€wagsĻthe€tail€(the€urban€sector).šš€€The€bulk€of€Indiaššs€expanded€employment€hasĻcome€from€improved€agriculture,€and€this€will€likely€occur€for€a€period€toĻcome€(Ravallion€and€Datt,€1996,€p.€19).Ģā āŠ {,Ė'= ŠŌ  Ōā āą  ąņņSome€Micro€Economic€Interactionsóó.€€ĢĢą  ąIdentifying€the€impacts€of€demography€on€poverty€using€data€at€theĻhousehold€level€is€difficult€given€the€lack€of€information€on€intra„householdĻresource€allocations.€€While€income€and€expenditure€survey€data€do€show€aĻpositive€correlation€between€poverty€and€household€size,€such€simpleĻcorrelations€are€hard€to€assess€because€they€typically€fail€to€account€forĻscale€economies€in€consumption€and€the€age€distributions€of€households€(AnandĻand€Morduch,€1995).€€ĢĢą  ąFortunately,€there€is€considerable€household„level€data€on€educationalĻenrollments€and€attainments€of€children„„information€relevant€to€assessingĻboth€current€poverty€and€its€persistence€over€time.€€An€analysis€of€dozens€ofĻstudies€relating€educational€outcomes€to€household€size€yields€mixed€results.€€ĻThere€are€sizeable€numbers€of€countries€displaying€positive,€negative,€andĻstatistically€insignificant€correlations.€€Where€the€results€are€statisticallyĻsignificant,€however,€a€negative€impact€is€most€likely;€on€the€other€hand,€theĻsize€of€this€impact€is€typically€small.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś10Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€Of€course,€the€quality€of€educationŠ Ē  Šreceived€by€poor€families€may€well€be€relatively€low€given€their€location€inĻrural€areas€where€education€provision€is€typically€poor,€so€the€somewhatĻequivocal€impacts€on€enrollment€and€attainment€rates€must€be€qualified.ĢĢą  ąSuch€household„level€studies€of€the€poor€reinforce€some€of€the€sameĻrealities€found€in€the€economy„wide€data:€€there€appear€to€be€offsetting€andĻinduced€responses€to€demographic€pressures€(expanded€family€sizes€in€thisĻcase).€€While€in€large€families€greater€demands€are€placed€on€children€toĻassist€with€family€needs,€larger€families€can€be€more€š šefficientšš€inĻproduction€and€consumption€since€there€is€greater€latitude€for€scale€economiesĻand€specialization€in€both€household€production€and€consumption.€ĢĢą  ąSchooling€is€no€exception€since€older€children€can€assist€youngerĻsiblings,€and€share€books€and€education€resources.€€About€the€most€one€canĻconclude€about€the€impacts€of€family€size€on€poverty€is€that€intra„familyĻtradeoffs€are€more€limited€and€difficult€to€make€in€impoverished€families;€ifĻadverse€net€impacts€of€family€size€are€to€be€found,€they€are€most€likely€to€beĻgreatest€for€the€impoverished.ĢĢą  ąņņSome€Political„Economy,€Demography€InteractionsĢĢóóą  ąIn€addition€to€the€governmentššs€role€in€maintaining€a€robustĻmacroeconomic€environment,€it€is€generally€agreed€that€ņņdirect€and€targetedóóĻgovernment€policies€that€expand€or€redirect€resources€toward€the€poorĻconstitutes€the€most€powerful€approach€to€poverty€reduction,€especially€ifĻsuch€policies€address€the€underlying€causes€of€poverty€(World€Bank,€1990;ĻUnited€Nations,€1997).€€The€most€promising€policies€relate€to€empowering€theĻpoor€with€a€stronger€ņņmeansóó€to€earn€income€such€as€providing€greater€access€toĻland,€credit,€knowledge€of€farming€techniques,€health,€education,€and€basicĻnutrition.€€Implementing€these€policies€has€economic€costs€requiring€either€anĻincrease€in€overall€production€or,€more€than€likely,€a€redistribution€ofĻresources€away€from€politically€powerful€elites€in€order€to€empower€theĻpolitically€weak€poor.€€Such€redistributions€confront€sizeable€politicalĻobstacles€and€are€difficult€to€effect.€€ĢĢą  ąņņEducation:€€A€Case€Studyóó.€€To€illustrate€the€political€dimensions€of€theĻpoverty€and€demography€link,€one€might€ask:€€how€is€the€likelihood€ofĻgovernments€undertaking€policies€that€expand€or€reallocate€resources€towardĻthe€poor€(and€presumably€away€from€the€middle€class€and€rich)€affected€by€theĻrate€of€population€growth?€€While€speculation€on€this€issue€is€abundant,Ļneither€political€theory€nor€empirical€assessment€provides€a€convincingĻanswer.€€A€case€study€of€education€provision€and€its€relation€to€demography€isĻinstructive€since€most€agree€that€improving€educational€capacity€represents€aĻpromising€poverty„reduction€strategy.€ĢĢą  ąIt€is€often€hypothesized€that€rapid€population€growth€not€only€detersŠ É-)? Šthe€expansion€of€education€provision€(enrollment€rates)€and€reduces€schoolingĻquality€(e.g.,€crowding),€but€also€diminishes€economic€growth€since€governmentĻspending€will€be€shifted€away€from€more€productive€investments.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś11Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€The€poorŠ žN Šare€likely€to€be€disadvanged€on€all€accounts.ĢĢą  ąTo€the€surprise€of€many€analysts,€several€empirical€assessments€haveĻfailed€to€support€these€seemingly€plausible€hypotheses.€€In€spite€ofĻexceptional€demographic€pressures€across€most€developing€countries€over€theĻ1960s,€1970s€and€1980s:€1)€educational€enrollments€have€advanced€dramatically,Ļindeed€at€a€pace€unprecedented€by€historical€standards;€2)€class€sizes€haveĻmost€often€declined;€and€3)€the€ņņshareóó€of€education€expenditures€in€GDP€(aĻstatistic€relating€to€š šcrowding€outšš)€has€been€largely€ņņunrelatedóó€toĻdemographic€pressures.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś12Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊ „ Ō  ŠĢą  ąThe€poor€have€been€beneficiaries€of€these€trends.€€While€these€resultsĻdo€not€provide€the€ideal€š šcounterfactualšš„„what€government€allocations€wouldĻhave€been€in€the€absence€of€population€pressures„„still,€the€progress€that€hasĻbeen€made€has€been€both€unexpected€and€impressive.€€ĢĢą  ąSome€additional€insight€into€the€political€dimensions€of€the€Ļrelationships€between€demography€and€government€policies€can€be€obtained€byĻconsidering€education€allocations€amongst€the€primary,€secondary,€and€tertiaryĻlevels.€€This€issue€is€critical€to€the€poor€who€benefit€most€from€schoolingĻinvestments€at€lower€education€levels.€€Here€the€record€is€mixed.€€While€someĻcountries€have€emphasized€primary€education€at€the€expense€ofĻsecondary/tertiary€education,€in€some€the€opposite€is€the€norm.€€TheseĻpriorities€are€important€since€differences€in€costs€per€student€at€the€variousĻeducation€levels€can€be€enormous.€€For€example,€some€countries€with€highĻpoverty€rates€(e.g.,€India)€support€exceptionally€high„cost€secondary€andĻtertiary€systems€resulting€in€substantial€subsidies€to€the€relativelyĻaffluent.€€These€policies€are€arguably€at€the€expense€of€the€poor.׃/ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś13Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€PovertyŠ B’ Šreduction€in€these€countries€will€require€major€changes€in€government€(e.g.Ļeducation)€priorities€and€policies.€€ĢĢą  ąA€relevant€issue,€then,€is€the€impact€of€rapid€population€growth€ņņper€seóóŠ Ž." Šon€priorities€and€political€decisions.€Unfortunately€there€is€no€widely„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńaccepted€theory€or€convincing€evidence€that€demographic€pressures€are€eitherĻcausing€such€education€priorities€and€allocations,€or€are€likely€to€modifyĻthem€(and€how),€yet€government€policies€can€have€an€inordinate€impact€on€theĻincidence€of€poverty.€€This€example€illustrates€both€the€importance€ofĻelevating€research€into€these€political„economy,€demography€linkages,€andĻexercising€caution€in€assessing€the€important€political€linkages€betweenĻdemography€and€poverty.ĢĢŌ  Ō€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ņ ņFOODó óŠ d!“, ŠĢą  ąņņSome€IssuesóóĢĢą  ąIssues€relating€to€food€and€population€linkages€are€relatively€wellĻunderstood.€€The€literature€on€agricultural€economics€on€food€production€andĻdemand,€popularized€by€Malthus€(on€the€production€side)€and€Engle€(on€theĻdemand€side),€represents€some€of€the€oldest€research€in€economics.€€ĢĢą  ąThe€general€consensus€(with€few€exceptions)€from€the€recent€researchĻliterature€is€that,€with€a€steady€increase€in€the€prudent€management€of€food„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńproducing€resources€and€with€an€improved€and€reasonably€well„functioningĻinstitutional€environment,€it€should€be€possible€to€meet€food€needs€even€underĻa€somewhat€conservative€scenario€of€moderate€technical€change€and€risingĻincomes.€€With€the€likelihood€(assuming€active€encouragement€and€support)€ofĻfairly€rapid€technical€change,€and€the€possibility€of€a€shift€toward€aĻsomewhat€more€caloric„efficient€(e.g.,€a€reduced„beef)€diet,€there€is€room€forĻguarded€optimism.€€The€š šifsšš€of€improved€management,€diets,€technical€change,Ļand€institutions€are€all€feasible€but€not€automatic.€€As€a€result,€a€stance€ofĻcautious€optimism€that€avoids€complacency,€and€active€promotion€of€theŠ Ź-)? Šconditions€necessary€for€success€in€agricultural€production,€represent€theĻmost€appropriate€posture€with€respect€to€issues€surrounding€the€balanceĻbetween€food€consumption€and€production.€€Population€policies€that€enableĻfamilies€to€attain€their€family€size€preferences€will€be€facilitating€as€well.€ĢĢą  ąThe€more€important€issues€appear€to€relate€to€problems€associated€with:Ļ1)€ņņdistributingóó€food€within€and€between€countries„„largely€an€issue€ofĻaugmenting€š šentitlementsšš€(income€and€government€relief)€to€the€very€(mainlyĻrural)€poor;€2)€creating€public„policy€environments€and€rural€infrastructureĻ(including€R€&€D,€education€and€health)€that€facilitate€agriculturalĻproduction;€and€3)€encouraging€strategies€of€environmentally„friendlyĻproduction,€or€š šsustainable€development,šš€to€use€the€popular€lexicon.ĢĢą  ąņņFood€Linkages:€€Population€and€ProductionóóĢĢą  ąPopulationššs€overall€impact€on€agricultural€production€is€both€positiveĻand€negative.€€Which€force€dominates€is€an€empirical€issue€that€varies€fromĻcountry€to€country€and€over€time.ĢĢą  ąOn€the€one€hand,€the€traditional€framework€of€Malthus€emphasizes€theĻnegative€force€of€diminishing€returns€which€holds€that,€other€things€equal,Ļpopulation€pressing€against€limited€land€will€eventually€result€in€decliningĻlabor€productivity€and€real€wages.€€On€the€other€hand,€this€negative€force€canĻcompletely€or€in€part€be€offset,€or€even€dominated€by,€improvements€inĻtechnology,€expansion€of€the€quantity€or€quality€of€land€or€other€factors,€andĻrealization€of€internal€and€external€(e.g.,€transport)€economies€of€scale.€ĻImportantly,€these€positive€forces€can€be€and€often€are€directly€ņņcaused€byóó€theĻpressures€of€population€growth€(Boserup,€1965,€1981;€Ruttan€1996).€€WhichĻdemographically„induced€forces€dominate,€and€under€what€conditions,€have€beenĻthe€thrust€of€the€empirical€literature€on€the€analysis€of€food€and€populationĻlinkages.€€ĢĢą  ąTo€date€the€outcome€has€been€encouraging.€€For€most€of€the€worldššsĻpopulation,€diets€have€improved€markedly,€consumers€have€faced€declining€realĻfood€prices€over€long€periods€of€time,€and€the€incidence€of€malnutrition€hasĻbeen€significantly€reduced.€€€Prospects€for€the€intermediate€future€appear€toĻmirror€these€trends,€although€this€forecast€is€not€without€challenge.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś14Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊ ,|$ ŠĢ€€€€ą  ąņņProduction€and€Consumption€Trends:€€Past€and€PresentóóŠ zŹ& Šą  ąĢą  ąWorld€food€production€per€capita€has€increased€by€more€than€20€percentĻover€the€period€1961€„€1994.€€The€most€rapid€increase€has€been€in€theĻdeveloping€countries€where€population€more€than€doubled€and€daily€foodĻcalories€per€person€rose€from€roughly€1900€to€2600€(a€comparable€figure€forĻdeveloped€countries€was€3,000€to€3,200)€(Bender€and€Smith,€1997,€p.€18).€€TheĻgrowth€of€effective€consumption€was€even€greater€given€the€reduction€in€foodĻwaste€at€all€levels.€€While€this€picture€is€remarkable,€it€should€be€qualifiedĻby€the€sobering€reality€that€the€ņņdistributionóó€of€food€was€uneven,€resulting€inĻmalnutrition€and€starvation€in€some€areas.€€There€was€considerable€regionalĻvariation€around€these€averages:€€growth€in€production€and€daily€caloricĻintake€was€fastest€in€East€Asia€and€Latin€America,€and€it€languished€in€sub„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńSaharan€Africa.ĢĢą  ąLand€expansion€has€constituted€a€relatively€small€source€of€agriculturalĻproduction€in€recent€decades;€intensification€(e.g.,€multiple€cropping,€landĻaugmentation)€and€improved€technologies€and€resource€use€have€been€the€primaryĻsources€of€food€production€growth.€€While€there€is€still€abundant€cultivableĻland€worldwide,€new€land€is€increasingly€costly€to€bring€into€production,Ļoften€suffers€from€poor€social€overhead€capital€(e.g.,€transport),€can€resultĻin€notable€environmental€costs,€and€is€not€located€in€Asia,€the€region€ofĻgreatest€population€density.€€ĢĢą  ąAssessing€production€possibilities€in€the€future€therefore€focuses€onĻimproving€the€efficiency€of€existing€resource€use,€and€on€adapting,€adopting,Š É-)? Šand€discovering€improved€technologies.€€Judging€whether€this€will€be€feasibleĻgiven€population€pressures€has€resulted€in€a€large€literature€that€focuses€onĻcarrying„capacities,€and€on€the€feasibilities€of€alternative€production€andĻdemand€scenarios.ĢĢņņą  ąProduction€and€Consumption€Trends:€€FutureĢóóĢą  ąņņCarrying€Capacity„„A€First€Passóó.€€How€many€people€can€the€earth€support?€ĻSerious€examination€of€this€question€reveals€that€answers€depend€on€so€manyĻapparently€reasonable€assumptions€(e.g.,€support€at€what€level€of€well„being?Ļenvironmental€costs€to€future€generations?€€technology?)€that€any€singleĻevaluation€is€problematic.׃ ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś15Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€This€justifies€examining€a€large€number€ofŠ Ż -  Šassessments.€ĢĢą  ąThe€majority€of€the€more€than€50€studies€on€carrying€capacity€reveal€anĻability€to€feed€around€10€billion€people,€a€figure€exceeding€the€(medium„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńvariant)€projected€population€for€2050€(Cohen,€1995,€p.€216).€€Most€studiesĻprovide€worldwide€estimates€only,€and€each€has€its€own€set€of€(usuallyĻphysical)€constraints€(e.g.,€land,€water,€photosynthesis,€technology).€€ManyĻare€based€on€what€is€physically€š špossiblešš;€some€attempt€to€capture€an€assumedĻdecision„making€reality€(what€farmers€and€governments€š šwillšš€versus€what€theyĻš šcan€possiblyšš€do);€none€provides€serious€behavioral€modeling€of€decisions;Ļand€many€partake€of€some€political€posturing.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś16Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊  Z Š€€Ģą  ąFrom€a€food€security€or€a€food€self„sufficiency€perspective,€country„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńspecific€estimates€are€required,€and€these€are€few€in€number€and€problematicĻin€interpretation.€€The€most€well„known€study€(Higgins€and€others,€1982)Ļfocuses€on€evaluating€production€capabilities€of€alternative€land€types€andĻtechnology€cum€input€bundles.€€The€study€demonstrates€that:€€land€ņņper€seóó€is€aŠ ōD Šrelatively€unimportant€constraint,€there€are€significant€variations€by€countryĻin€the€relative€economic€advantages€of€producing€food,€and€there€are€greatĻeconomic€benefits€of€engaging€in€food€trade.€€Substantive€insight€by€thisĻstudy€into€the€issue€of€š šfood€securityšš€is€quite€limited€since€the€analysisĻconsiders€only€the€limiting€case€where€each€country€supplies€all€of€its€ownĻfood.€€This€begs€the€key€issue.€€In€reality,€self„sufficiency€in€theĻņņproductionóó€of€food€is€in€many€cases€an€economically€costly€policy.€€TheĻrelevant€issue€relates€to€untangling€alternative€options€for€obtainingĻacceptable€food€security€within€the€context€of€a€regime€of€international€tradeĻin€food.€€Clearly€the€urgency€of€self„sufficiency€in€food€production€is€muchĻless€important€to€countries€with€a€strong€export€base€(e.g.,€the€major€oilĻproducers).ĢĢņņą  ąóóņņRecent€Shorter„Run€Projectionsóó.€€For€the€next€one€or€two€decades,€worldŠ  f* Šfood€production€is€predicted€to€be€broadly€consistent€with€consumption€demandsĻaccording€to€researchers€at€several€international€agencies€(World€Bank,€UnitedĻNations€Food€and€Agriculture€Organization,€International€Food€Policy€ResearchĻInstitute)€(Mitchell€and€Ingco,€1995;€Alexandratos,€1995;€Agcaoili€andĻRosegrant,€1995).ņ ņ€ó ó€An€exception€to€this€assessment€is€provided€by€theŠ Y#©/ ŠWorldwatch€Institute,€which€predicts€severe€difficulties€and€massive€faminesĻbased€largely€(but€not€exclusively)€on€observed€declines€in€worldwide€cerealĻproduction€per€person€commencing€around€1984,€termed€a€š šwatershed€yearššĻ(Brown,€1994).ĢĢą  ąQualifications€to€the€Worldwatch€assessment€illustrate€the€complexity€ofĻanalyzing€such€trends€and€the€benefits€of€desegregating€data€at€the€regionalĻlevel.€€One€such€challenge€(Dyson,€1996)€observes€that€European€agriculturalĻpolicies€resulted€in€dumping€excess€production€in€the€mid€1980s,€triggeringĻprice€reductions€and€production€cutbacks€in€North€and€parts€of€Latin€AmericaĻ(e.g.,€Argentina).€€Combined,€these€factors€substantially€accounted€for€theĻš šwatershedšš€observed€in€the€aggregate€data,€and€they€masked€important€eventsĻoccurring€elsewhere.€€Indeed,€in€the€largest€region€(Asia),€cereal€productionĻper€capita€actually€ņņincreasedóó€over€the€period.€€And€in€Africa€there€was€ņņnoóóĻproduction€watershed€observed€in€the€1980s.€€Sadly,€Africa€continued€its€long„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńrun€trend€of€poor€performance,€a€legacy€largely€of€rural„sector€neglect€andŠ Ź-)? Šadverse€agricultural€policies.€€In€short,€the€watershed€observed€in€theĻaggregate€data€was€less€the€initiation€of€a€long„run€trend€of€productionĻdeficiencies€worldwide,€and€more€a€problem€of€developed€countries€coping€withĻproduction€excesses.€€ĢĢą  ąņņLonger„Run€Projectionsóó.€€For€the€period€up€to€2050,€several€recentĻstudies€forecast€food€production/consumption€balance,€but€with€qualifiedĻconfidence€and€notable€conditions.ĢĢą  ąOne€such€study€concludes€that€š š...serious€and€persistent€global€foodĻshortages€can€be€avoided,€provided€governments€vigorously€pursue€efforts€toĻimprove€economic€policies€and€facilitate€the€dissemination€of€new€technologyĻand€investment€in€research€and€human€resourcesšš€(Bongaarts,€1996,€p.€499).€ĻThis€studyššs€six€key€(and€seemingly€defendable)€assumptions€are€exemplary€ofĻthe€choices€and€conditions€that€must€be€met.€€Specifically,€the€study€posits:€Ļ1)€an€increase€in€caloric€intake€per€capita€of€30%€over€the€next€fifty€years;Ļ2)€a€10%€shift€of€grains€to€animals;€3)€an€annual€yield€increase€šš€that€of€theĻprevious€30€years€(1.1%€versus€2.1%€per€year);€4)€an€increase€in€arable€landĻuse€of€.17€billion€hectares€(there€are€now€2.2€billion€in€forests€andĻwetlands);€5)€cropping€frequency€comparable€to€currently€dense€countries;€andĻ6)€a€small€percentage€increase€(5%)€in€trade€(this€is€fairly€large€absolutelyĻgiven€the€growing€agricultural€base).€€Of€course,€there€are€other€combinationsĻof€the€above€assumptions€that€would€achieve€the€same€overall€result.€€ManyĻtradeoffs€are€possible.ĢĢą  ąAnother€recent€study€(Smil,€1994)€arrives€at€the€same€overall€foodĻbalance€conclusion,€but€highlights€an€initial€strategy€of€relying€on€well„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńdocumented€possibilities€for€increased€production€ņņefficienciesóó€in€theĻutilization€of€ņņexistingóó€(not€expanded€or€new)€resources€and€technologies.׃3ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś17Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀Š ōD ŠThis€involves€adopting€better€agronomic€practices;€reducing€irrigation€waste,Ļpost€harvest€losses,€and€end„use€consumption/production€waste;€and€improvingĻdiets€(a€modest€reduction€in€fat€intakes).€€Such€strategies€would€expand€foodĻavailable€sufficient€to€feed€8.4€billion€people€at€1990€diets,€or€7.7€billionĻat€improved€diets.€€A€secondary€strategy€of€expanding€land€use,€fertilizerĻuse,€and€other€resource„augmenting€techniques€would€be€sufficient€to€meetĻpopulation€food€needs€to€2050€and€beyond.€€Of€course,€the€first€strategy€doesĻindeed€involve€significant€costs€and€a€compatible€institutional€setting.€€ĢĢą  ąThe€greatest€uncertainty€in€appraising€future€food€production€capacitiesĻrelates€to€the€pace€of€adopting€and€adapting€existing€technologies,€and€ofĻdiscovering€new€technologies.€This€relates€in€part€to€the€availability€ofĻcomplementary€resources,€the€capacities€to€finance€them€(including€credit€toĻsmall€farmers),€and€an€institutional€setting€(land€security,€and€favorableĻgovernment€pricing,€taxing,€R&D,€and€agriculture€extension€policies).€ĻAnalysts€of€these€processes€(e.g.,€Ruttan,€1996)€observe€that€improvements€inĻyields€observed€in€the€past€were€extraordinary€and€are€unlikely€to€beĻsustained€in€the€future.€€Indeed,€there€are€signs€of€diminishing€impacts€andĻrising€costs€of€inputs€(fertilizers,€water).€€Moreover,€the€costs€of€advancingĻtechnologies€will€require€substantial€financial€and€government€support,€andĻmust€include€a€broad€strategy€of€investing€in€human€capital€(education€andĻhealth).€€ĢĢą  ąEven€given€these€qualifications,€most€analysts€are€š šcautiouslyĻoptimisticšš€about€agriculture€futures€(Ruttan,€1996,€p.€168).€€Some€regionsĻ(sub„Saharan€Africa€in€particular),€and€some€groups€of€people€(theĻimpoverished)€will€continue€to€struggle.€€On€the€latter,€the€problem€relatesĻmore€to€food€ņņdistributionóó€and€entitlements€and€less€to€food€production€ņņper€seóó.€Š 8)ˆ$8 ŠCritical€to€agricultureššs€success,€however,€will€be€prudent€management,Ļconsiderable€innovation€and€spread€of€modern€technologies€and,€likely€mostĻimportant,€facilitating€government€policies.€€These€conditions€are€neitherĻautomatic€nor€costless.€€ĢĢą  ąMoreover,€even€if€in€place,€these€conditions€may€not€be€sufficient€toĻcope€adequately€with€some€of€the€environmental€costs€of€extensive€expansion€ofŠ É-)? Šagricultural€systems.€€These€costs€include€deforestation€and€biodiversityĻloss,€soil€loss,€overexploitation€of€water€resources,€and€pollution€fromĻfertilizers€and€pesticides.€€Impacts€on€greenhouse€gas€emissions€must€also€beĻrecognized:€€increased€carbon€dioxide€from€deforestation,€fuel€use€for€farmĻmachines€and€transport,€nitrous€oxide€from€fertilizer,€and€methane€from€riceĻpaddies.€€While€the€capacity€to€provide€sufficient€food,€albeit€with€notableĻmodifications€in€government€policies€and€with€substantial€investments,€is€aĻfeasible€and€even€a€likely€outcome,€the€toll€on€the€environment€must€beĻreckoned.€€ĢĢ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ņ ņTHE€ENVIRONMENTó óŠ 6 †  ŠĢą  ąInteractions€between€demographic€change€and€the€environment€are€complexĻand€pervasive€in€scope.€€They€vary€by€the€resource€considered,€theĻinstitutional€setting,€and€the€stage€of€economic/political/social€development.€ĻThere€is€no€area€in€economic€demography€that€is€less€settled€in€terms€ofĻassessment.ĢĢą  ąEnvironmental€overuse€and€degradation€takes€many€forms€including€theĻpolluting€of€air€and€water;€the€destruction€(or€imprudent€use)€of€land,Ļforests,€and€other€renewable€natural€resources;€the€reduction€of€biodiversity;Ļand€the€buildup€of€wastes,€including€greenhouse€gasses.€€In€assessing€theĻrelationships€between€demography€and€the€environment,€it€is€critical€toĻisolate€the€fundamental€ņņcausesóó€of€environmental€problems.€€This€is€difficultĻgiven€the€large€number€of€factors€that€condition€such€relationships.€€ĢĢą  ąņņAnalyses€of€the€Environmentóó€€ĢĢą  ąņņComplex€Interactionsóó.€€One€recent€study€(Hempel,€1997),€illustrative€ofĻthis€complexity,€highlights€eight€factors€as€central€to€modeling€environmentalĻproblems.€€It€begins€by€citing€two€core€values€that€expose€profound€ethicalĻissues:€€1)€anthropocentrism€(the€self„centered€behavior€of€man€thatĻsacrifices€species€to€satisfy€wants)€and€2)€contempocentrism€(a€lack€ofĻsufficient€regard€for€future€generations).€€Two€consumption€patterns€areĻstressed:€€the€existence€of€significant€3)€affluence,€and€4)€poverty.€ĻAffluence€is€associated€with€extensive€consumption€of€nonrenewable€energy,Ļbeef,€automobiles,€land,€and€building€materials.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś18Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€Poverty€is€associated€withŠ -}$ Šextensive€water€contamination,€overexploitation€of€fisheries€and€forests,€landĻdegradation,€and€air€pollution€(the€burning€of€biomass€in€particular).€€ĢĢą  ąTwo€factors€are€isolated€as€substantially€governing€the€extent€ofĻresource€overuse:€€5)€the€degree€of€market€failure€where€prices€do€notĻproperly€assess€the€appropriate€costs€of€environmental€use,€and€6)€theĻoutright€failure€for€markets€to€exist€(e.g.,€overfishing€as€a€š štragedy€of€theĻcommonsšš).€€And€two€factors,€7)€technology€and€8)€population€growth,€areĻsingled€out€as€š šamplifyingšš€the€extent€of€environmental€spoilage.€€Of€these,€Ļtechnology€is€most€important.€€Population€growth€can€have€small€or€largeĻimpacts€depending€on€the€nature€of€the€more€fundamental€factors€noted€above.€ĻPeople€ņņper€seóó€are€considered€less€important€as€causal€determinants€than€theirŠ $Q0 Šbehaviors€that€derive€from€the€ņņsettingóó€in€which€they€live€(Shaw,€1989;ĻBilsborrow,€1992).ĢĢą  ąSuch€a€taxonomy€is€just€one€of€many€possible.€€It€reveals€the€complexityĻof€the€underlying€relationships€and€places€one€interpretation€of€populationššsĻrole€in€perspective.€€To€more€fully€expose€the€underlying€relationships,€threeĻfeatures€of€environmental€problems€merit€elaboration:€€market€failures,€policyĻfailures,€and€poverty.Ģ€Ģą  ąņņMarket€Failuresóó.€€€Markets€ration€most€š šindividually€ownedšš€resourcesĻreasonably€well€by€determining€an€exchange€š špricešš€that€incorporates€both€theĻdemand€for€a€resource,€and€its€š šcosts.šš€€In€contrast,€many€renewableĻenvironmental€resources€possess€the€property€of€being€owned€š šin€commonšš€suchĻthat€there€is€little€incentive€by€individuals€either€to€reveal€theirĻpreferences,€or€to€conserve.€€Markets€can€therefore€fail€where€propertyŠ Ź-)? Šownership€rights€(and€other€conditions)€are€weak€or€absent.׃4ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś19Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€EnvironmentalŠ ° Šresources€will€be€š šoverusedšš€since€their€intrinsic€values€are€understated€andĻtheir€effective€price€is€too€low.ĢĢą  ąThis€market€failure€necessitates€correction€by€modifying€the€ņņcausesóó€ofĻits€existence€(e.g.,€by€assigning€secure€property€rights),€and/or€by€devisingĻalternative€methods€of€resource€allocation.€€Such€methods€require€groupsĻ(social,€and€usually€governmental)€to€establish€rules€designed€to€modifyĻindividual€behaviors,€and€often€to€impose€taxes€and€subsidies€to€reconcileĻindividual€and€group€values€for€an€environmental€resource.€€Short€of€suchĻcorrections,€environmental€spoilage€and€overuse€will€occur.€€Moreover,€theĻfaster€the€pace€of€population€growth€(an€amplifying€factor),€the€more€rapidĻthe€pace€of€overuse.€€Populationššs€role€will€be€much€smaller€if€mechanisms€forĻproperly€valuing€environmental€resources€are€in€place.€€This€is€rarely€theĻcase€in€low„income€countries€where€the€rate€of€population€growth,€marketĻdistortions,€and€environmental€degradation€are€all€high€(Panayotou,€1994).ĢĢą  ąņņPolicy€Failuresóó.€€Public€(or€collective)€policies€represent€the€key€toĻmoderating€environmental€problems.€€Unfortunately,€policy€failures€areĻpervasive€and€largely€account€for€environmental€problems€worldwide.€€TheseĻfailures€are€of€two€types:€€direct€failures€through€neglect€of€environmentalĻrequirements,€and€indirect€failures€through€the€unintended€side€effects€ofĻseemingly€unrelated€policies€on€the€environment.ĢĢą  ąWhile€attention€is€typically€focused€on€š šdirectšš€failures€(e.g.,Ļunderpricing€logging€rights),€š šindirectšš€failures€are€often€more€important.€ĻThese€include€a€long€list€of€policies€that€disadvantage€the€rural€sector:€Ļovervalued€exchange€rates,€urban€bias€in€service€provision,€underinvesment€inĻrural€infrastructure€and€R€&€D,€taxation€of€farm€inputs,€and€constrained€farmĻprices.€€These€policies€result€in€rural€poverty€and€actively€encourage€farmĻpractices€that€overuse€a€relatively€cheap€resource„„the€environment.׃Kׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś20Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€It€isŠ B’ Šnot€a€coincidence€that€poverty€is€especially€prevalent€in€the€rural€sector€andĻthat€environmental€spoilage€is€directly€linked€to€poverty.€€Both€areĻsubstantially€caused€by€the€same€force:€€policy€failures.ĢĢą  ąņņPovertyóó.€€š šThe€poor€are€both€the€victims€and€agents€of€environmentalĻdamagešš€(World€Bank,€1992,€p.€30).€€In€rural€areas€the€poor€rely€on€naturalĻresources€over€which€they€have€little€legal€control.€€They€have€weakĻincentives€to€preserve€or€conserve.€€Their€time€perspectives€are€of€necessityĻlimited€since€day„to„day€survival€dominates€their€behaviors.€€Extensive€use€ofĻenvironmental€resources,€considered€imprudent€or€excessive€from€societyššsĻperspective,€is€fully€rational€for€poor€farmers€given€their€urgentĻrequirements€and€the€institutional€setting€in€which€they€find€themselves.׃=ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś21Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀Š  f* ŠChildren€are€especially€valued€in€such€a€setting€to€fetch€water€and€firewood,Ļnecessities€for€existence.€€The€poor€can€be€trapped€in€an€unstable€š šviciousĻŌ  Ōcirclešš€of€worsening€interactions€between€their€needs€and€the€environment,Ļwhich€they€are€systematically€degrading€and€upon€which€their€survival€depends.€ĻĢĢą  ąņņSome€Interactionsóó.€€Happily€this€š šviciousšš€circle€can€become€š švirtuousššĻņņifóó€š šdevelopmentšš€includes€not€only€economic€growth,€but€also€and€critically,Ļinnovation€and€advancement€in€political€institutions€and€policies.€€In€manyĻinstances€this€political€change€is€virtually€a€ņņprerequisiteóó€to€resolvingĻenvironmental€problems,€long€term.€€Robinson€and€Srinivasan€(1997)Ļconvincingly€argue€that€š š...there€are€strong€complementarities€betweenĻpolicies€to€improve€the€environment,€influence€population€growth,€and€promoteĻdevelopment€in€general€(p.€1179),šš€and€that€š š...inappropriate€governmentĻpolicies€and€institutions€are€frequently€to€blame€for€environmental€stress€(p.Ļ1180).šš€€In€contrast,€appropriate€policies€cause€(even€poor)€farmers€to€useĻenvironmentally„friendly€farming€techniques€that€raise€productivity€andĻincome;€to€invest€in€human€capital€and€environmental€resources;€and€to€reduceĻfamily€size.€€It€appears€that€the€nexus€between€poverty,€environmentalĻstewardship,€and€population€growth€can€result€in€a€reinforcing€web€of€eitherĻpositive€or€negative€outcomes,€depending€critically€on€the€institutionalŠ É-)? Šsetting€and€the€nature€of€governmental€interventions€(Panayotou,€1994).ĢĢą  ąGiven€these€broader€perspectives€on€the€interactions€between€populationĻand€the€environment,€consider€some€of€the€evidence€relating€to€the€nature€ofĻseveral€specific€linkages.ĢĢą  ąņņAgriculture€and€DeforestationóóĢą  ąĢą  ąFarming€is€the€principal€route€by€which€humans€interact€with€theĻenvironment.€€This€primarily€involves€transforming€land€between€uses€(e.g.,Ļforests€to€crops)€and€modifying€the€intensity€of€land€use.€€ĢĢą  ąņņExtensificationóó.€€Deforestation€constitutes€the€most€conspicuous€exampleĻof€environmental€change€in€farming.€€While€the€rate€of€deforestation€isĻuncertain,׃ ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś22Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀studies€across€many€countries€and€ecological€settings€reveal€aŠ Ņ "  Špositive€correlation€between€deforestation€and€population€growth€(Bilsborrow,Ļ1994;€Birdsall,€1994;€Palloni,€1992).€€The€strength€of€these€correlationsĻvaries€substantially€between€settings€and€depends€on€factors€such€as€access€toĻand€ownership€of€land,€restrictions€on€foresting,€the€relative€economicĻattractiveness€of€using€intensive€versus€extensive€cultivation€techniquesĻ(strongly€influenced€by€land€tenure€and€government€policies),€and€the€like.Ģ€Ģą  ąņņIntensificationóó.€€The€expansion€of€irrigation,€associated€in€part€withĻthe€advent€of€new€technology€packages€of€seeds,€fertilizers,€and€pesticides,Ļis€currently€under€ecological€stress.€€Upwards€of€twenty„five€percent€of€theĻarable€land€under€irrigation€is€threatened€by€problems€of€water€deficiencies,Ļsalinization,€and€pollution€(Waggoner,€1994).€€Soil€degradation€isĻincreasingly€commonplace.€€While€water€is€often€over€and€ineffectively€usedĻ(largely€because€it€is€š šunderpricedšš),€and€while€there€are€many€opportunitiesĻand€environmentally„friendly€methods€of€conservation€possible,€theĻinstitutional€mechanisms€for€implementing€effective€water€management€can€beĻcostly€and,€in€some€settings,€infeasible.€€Population€pressures€ņņper€seóó€areŠ é9 Šthus€not€the€only,€or€necessarily€even€the€primary,€cause€of€ineffective€waterĻuse€and€related€pollution,€but€they€exacerbate€the€pace€of€ecological€damage.€€ĢĢą  ąņņIndustryóóĢĢą  ąPollution€of€air€and€water,€largely€by€industrial€processes,€constitutesĻthe€primary€mechanism€of€environmental€damage€in€developed€countries,€andĻincreasingly€in€developing€countries€as€their€economies€are€transformed€fromĻagricultural€to€secondary€and€tertiary€production.€€Isolating€and€accountingĻfor€the€specific€impacts€of€population€growth€on€industrial€pollution€hasĻoften€been€carried€out€using€Paul€Ehrlichššs€I€=€PAT€formula,€which€attributesĻthe€growth€of€pollution€(Iņņgróó)€to€the€growth€of€1)€population€(Pņņgróó);Š ½ + Š2)affluence€(usually€measured€as€the€growth€of€gross€national€product€perĻcapita,€GNP/Nņņgróó);€and€3)€technology€(the€growth€of€pollution€per€unit€of€GNP,Š  "[- Ši.e.,€Tņņgróó€=€I/GNPņņgróó).€€Š ²". ŠĢą  ąThis€formulation€must€be€used€with€care.€€It€explains€relatively€littleĻbut€accounts€for€everything.€€It€is€an€accounting€identity€not€well€designedĻto€expose€the€underlying€ņņcausesóó€of€pollution.€€The€limitations€of€theĻframework€are€several.€€First,€it€ņņmustóó€be€reckoned€on€a€regional€or€preferablyĻnational€basis€since€the€key€š šdeterminingšš€relationships€vary€enormously€fromĻplace€to€place:€€e.g.,€pollution€technologies€are€less€effective€in€low€incomeĻcountries;€per€capita€fossil€fuel€use€is€higher€in€high€income€countries.€€TheĻcompilation€of€š šworldšš€estimates€based€on€global€averages€that€fail€to€accountĻfor€regional€differences€has€resulted€in€notable€errors€in€the€analysis€of€theĻimpacts€of€demography€(Myers,€1994).€€Indeed,€one€study€reveals€a€400+%Ļoverstatement€of€the€impact€of€population€growth€by€failure€to€account€forĻregion„specific€differences€in€emission€patterns€(Lutz,€1992).׃Sׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś23Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊ -+}&; Š€€Ģą  ąSecond,€the€choice€of€demographic€unit€of€analysis€as€between,€say,Ļš špopulationšš€versus€š šhouseholds,šš€can€have€a€notable€impact€on€the€assessmentĻof€demography€(MacKellar€and€others,€1995).€€For€example,€if€large€householdsŠ É-)? Šare€smaller€users€of€energy€on€a€per€person€basis€than€small€households,€then€Ļslowing€population€growth€which€results€in€smaller€household€sizes€can€resultĻin€increases€in€some€forms€of€pollution.ĢĢą  ąThird,€the€PAT€model€assumes€that€the€growth€of€the€right€hand€sideĻvariables€is€independent€of€each€other.€€In€fact€they€are€systematicallyĻcorrelated€and€causally€related.€€Thus:€€1)€population€growth€arguably€has€anĻimpact€on€per€capita€output€growth;€2)€population€growth€declines€with€risingĻlevels€of€affluence€(the€Demographic€Transition);€and€3)€rich€countries€tendĻto€employ€less€polluting€technologies,€although€this€depends€on€the€measure€ofĻenvironmental€quality€(Grossman,€1995).ĢĢą  ąOne€recent€study€that€uses€statistical€methods€to€account€for€theseĻthree€interactions€on€several€forms€of€pollution€(carbon€dioxide,€carbonĻmonoxide,€nitrogen€oxide,€pesticide€use€and€nitrogen€fertilizer€use€inĻagriculture)€finds€a€relatively€small€impact€of€demography€(in€OECDĻcountries):€€š š...in€accounting€for€variation€in€changing€levels€ofĻenvironmental€hazards€produced€by€industrial€processes,€population€growth€isĻdestined€to€play€a€minor€rolešš€(Preston,€1996,€p.€105).€€More€studies€of€thisĻframework€using€data€from€developing€countries€are€needed€beforeĻgeneralizations€can€be€formed.׃ׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś24Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊ ¼  ŠĢą  ąHowever,€across€most€studies,€it€appears€that€choice€of€š štechnologyšš€isĻthe€key€determinant€(Commoner,€1994)€of€industrial€pollution€and€thatĻdemography€plays€a€relatively€modest€role.€€The€technology€choice€isĻinfluenced€not€only€by€level€of€prosperity€(poorer€countries€employ€lessĻcostly€but€more€polluting€processes),€but€also€reflects€political€choices€thatĻstress€š šgoodsšš€over€the€š šenvironmentšš„„a€choice,€incidentally,€that€currentlyĻdeveloped€countries€also€made€at€earlier€stages€of€economic€development.€ĢĢą  ąņņAn€Emerging€Synthesis€and€ConsensusóóĢĢą  ąThese€results€highlight€the€relevance€of€two€perspectives:€€first,Ļenvironmental€problems€are€qualitatively€different€between€developed€andĻdeveloping€countries;€and€second,€the€roles€of€government€in€promotingĻenvironmental€sustainability€are€somewhat€different€between€these€settings,Ļbut€central€in€both€cases.ĢĢą  ąIn€contrast€to€developed€countries€where€environmental€concerns€focus€onĻwaste€disposal,€pollution€and,€to€a€certain€extent,€concern€about€the€globalĻcommons€(e.g.,€COņņ2óó),€in€developing€countries€environmental€problems€relate€toŠ Č( Šair€pollution€from€biomass€burning,€inadequate€sanitation,€waterĻcontamination,€and€land€and€forest€spoilage.€€In€terms€of€human€welfare,€theseĻenvironmental€deficiencies€in€developing€countries€are€arguably€the€mostĻserious€facing€the€world€today.׃Nׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś25Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊ d!“, ŠĢą  ąUnfortunately,€as€stressed€in€other€parts€of€this€review,€the€capacityĻof€governments€to€effect€appropriate€policies€in€the€developing€world€inĻparticular€can€be€limited.€€š šDevelopmentšš€applies€not€only€to€the€economy,€butĻto€the€efficacy€of€institutions€like€government,€as€well.€€ĢĢą  ąThe€linkages€between€government€policies€and€population€pressures€isĻproblematic€and€uncertain.€€Fortunately€the€centrality€of€public€policies€toĻenvironmental€matters,€and€the€forms€of€their€implementation,€are€beingĻrecognized€and€increasingly€addressed€by€international€institutions.€€EmphasisĻis€shifting€from€š šscarcityšš€of€environmental€resources€to€a€recognition€thatĻtheir€rational€use€involves€effective€public€policies.€€The€role€of€demographyĻis€also€being€put€into€perspective.€€Population€pressures€are€but€one€factorĻin€the€complex€of€determinants€of€actual€and€optimal€environmental€resourceĻuse.€€Slowing€population€growth€ņņwillóó€diminish€the€pace€of€environmentalĻdegradation.€€However,€whether€such€an€outcome€will€in€fact€facilitateĻurgently€needed€policy€action€is,€as€emphasized€in€other€contexts€above,€quiteĻuncertain.׃Oׯ ƒ$ÓŻņņŚ  Ś26Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€Š "-r(> ŠŠ É-)? Šą  ąThe€ņņWorld€Development€Report€1992óó€on€the€environment€highlights€thisĻreorientation:€š š...the€environmental€debate€has€rightly€shifted€away€fromĻconcern€with€the€ņņphysical€limitsóó€of€growth,€toward€concern€about€incentivesĻfor€ņņhuman€behavioróó€and€policies€that€can€overcome€ņņmarket€and€policy€failuresóóššĻ(p.€10).€€In€the€area€of€environmental€management,€as€in€the€areas€ofĻproviding€sufficient€food€and€eliminating€poverty,€the€impacts€of€demographicĻchange€are€more€š šamplifyingšš€than€š šcausal.šš€€As€a€result,€population€policiesĻare€best€viewed€as€supportive€to€the€more€centrally€important€policy„makingĻcomponents€needed€to€advance€economic€development,€poverty€elimination,€andĻlong„run€environmental€stewardship.ĢĢą  ąņņConcluding€Observations:€€Population€Policies€in€PerspectiveóóĢĢ€€€€€ņņPovertyóó.€€Even€though€poverty€headcount€rates€have€declined€dramaticallyĻin€many€countries€in€recent€years,€over€1.3€billion€people€are€stillĻclassified€as€poor.€€Statistical€studies€of€economy„wide€data€have€notĻrevealed€convincing€and€notable€linkages€between€demographic€change€andĻpoverty€rates.€€However,€this€finding€must€be€viewed€with€caution€since€theĻunderlying€relationships€are€complex€and€difficult€to€reveal.€€ĢĢą  ąIt€is€widely€believed€that€the€most€important€factor€accounting€forĻpoverty€is€the€macro„economic€environment,€and€especially€factors€that€governĻthe€growth€of€employment.€€To€the€extent€that€macro„economic€growth€isĻadversely€influenced€by€the€pace€of€demographic€change,€then€poverty€will€beĻadversely€impacted€by€rapid€population€growth€as€well.€€ĢĢą  ąPublic€sector€programs€targeted€toward€the€poor€have€also€accounted€forĻreductions€in€poverty€in€many€countries.€€The€most€important€example€has€beenĻeducation€provision€that€emphasizes€the€lower€grades.€€Growth€here€has€beenĻexceptional€by€historical€standards.€€Important€to€further€progress€in€povertyĻreduction€will€be€continuing€improvement€in€the€quality€and€scope€of€educationĻprovision,€as€well€as€efficient€delivery€of€primary€medical€services,€possiblyĻin€some€cases€at€the€expense€of€high„cost€tertiary€education€and€capital„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńintensive€medical€facilities.€€Such€a€strategy€involves€difficult€politicalĻtradeoffs€which€can€themselves€be€influenced€by€demographic€realities.€€WhileĻreduced€population€growth€will€buy€time€to€augment€the€health€and€education€ofĻthe€poor,€such€time€can€and€often€is€squandered,€and€procrastination€canĻheighten€problems€in€the€future.€€The€linkages€between€population€growth€andĻthe€formulation€of€such€poverty„reducing€policies€are€thus€both€critical€andĻuncertain.ĢĢ€€€€€ņņFoodóó.€€Even€though€the€expansion€of€food€available€per€person€inĻdeveloping€countries€has€grown€at€an€impressive€pace€in€recent€decades€(fromĻ1900€to€2600€calories),€and€total€food€production€has€more€than€doubled,€theĻņņdistributionóó€of€food€has€been€uneven€and€starvation€and€malnutrition€is€stillĻpervasive,€especially€in€Africa.€€ĢĢą  ąIn€the€face€of€notable€demographic€pressures€in€the€future,€a€comparisonĻof€population€with€carrying€capacity€estimates€indicates€that€persistent€foodĻshortages€can€be€avoided,€albeit€with€improvements€in€and€prudent€managementĻof€rural„sector€production.€€There€are€notable€possibilities€for€low„costĻimprovements€in€storage,€transport,€and€utilization€of€existing€technologies;Ļand€advances€in€technologies€and€movements€toward€more€calorie„efficient€dietsĻare€expected.€€However,€advances€in€science€ņņper€seóó€will€not€solve€incipientŠ C'“"5 Šdifficulties.€€Critical€to€meeting€food€needs€will€be€the€provision€ofĻstronger€rural€infrastructure€and€institutional€settings€(roads€andĻcommunications,€credit,€research€stations,€pricing€and€taxing€policies)€andĻhuman€investments€in€education€and€health,€including€reproductive€health.€ĻThese€facilitating€conditions€are€neither€automatic€nor€costless.ĢĢą  ąAn€important€element€in€food€provision€is€the€need€to€reckon€growingĻenvironmental€costs.€€While€these€can€be€large,€they€can€also€be€attenuated€byĻappropriate€government€policies.€Unfortunately€the€latter€is€problematic€inĻmany€settings€and,€as€a€result,€while€adequate€food€provision€may€be€possibleŠ É-)? Šin€the€future,€an€appropriate€level€of€environmental€stewardship€is€uncertain.ĢĢą  ąņņEnvironmentóó.€€Even€though€recent€decades€have€witnessed€significantĻdegradation€of€environmental€resources€(e.g.,€rain€forests,€soil,€water),Ļfortunately€individual€countries€and€international€institutions€areĻincreasingly€recognizing€the€nature€and€causes€of€environmental€problems,€andĻthe€need€for€appropriate€policies€for€environmental€management.€€EnvironmentalĻdebates€have€moved€well€beyond€the€š šsave„the„environment„at„all„costsšš€stage„„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńthe€biologist/ecologist€perspective€that€has€raised€the€red€flag€to€alarmistĻproportions„„to€more€reasoned€perspectives€that€assess€the€underlying€causesĻand€consequences€of€environmental€š šusešš€in€a€way€that€provides€a€neededĻreckoning€of€benefits€and€costs.€ĢĢą  ąThe€growth€and€distribution€of€the€population€has€direct€impacts€onĻenvironmental€use,€but€the€nature€of€these€impacts€is€largely€governed€byĻinstitutional€realities„„property€rights,€land€distribution,€taxes€andĻsubsidies€on€various€types€of€production€and€consumption,€and€the€like.€€GivenĻthe€nature€of€environmental€resources,€enlightened€government€policies€areĻcritical€to€population„environmental€interactions.€€Because€markets€and€policyĻfailures€are€extensive,€seeming€adverse€impacts€of€population€growth€can€beĻhigh,€although€slowing€population€growth€may€not€halt€environmental€decay,€andĻthe€impacts€in€many€settings€may€even€be€relatively€small.€€That€is€because,Ļabsent€government€policies€that€correct€market€failures€and€provideĻappropriate€incentives€for€individual/firm€behaviors,€environmentalĻdegradation€will€continue,€albeit€at€a€reduced€pace.€€And€the€possibility€ofĻincreased€economic€prosperity€associated€with€reduced€population€growth€canĻitself€carry€with€it€pressures€on€the€environment.€€Thus,€the€impacts€ofĻdemographic€change€can€best€be€viewed€as€š šamplifyingšš€the€impacts€derivingĻfrom€the€more€fundamental€causes€of€environmental€degradation.€€EnvironmentalĻpolicies€should€focus€on€these€causes,€although€population€policies€thatĻreduce€fertility€will€certainly€buy€some€time,€which€is€particularly€needed€inĻthis€area€since€the€institutional€and€policy€changes€required€are€bothĻextensive€and€exceptionally€difficult€to€effect€politically.ĢĢą  ąņņSynergy€and€Interaction:€Population€and€Economic€Policies€inĻPerspectiveóó.€€Poverty€reduction,€food€provision,€and€environmental€use€areĻintegrally€linked€with€economic,€demographic,€ņņandóó€political€change.€€š šViciousĻcirclesšš€of€cumulatively€worsening€peŌ% € Ōrformance€in€each€of€these€threeĻdimensions€may€be€exacerbated€by€and,€in€some€cases,€caused€by€large€familiesĻand€rapid€population€growth.€€Breaking€this€interacting€web€can€be€facilitatedĻby€š šenlightenedšš€government€policies€that€promote€income€growth,€empower€theĻpoor€with€education€and€health,€and€provide€farmers€incentives€to€behaveĻprudently€in€the€allocation€of€their€time€and€environmental€resources.€ĻHappily€such€policies€can€lead€to€š švirtuous€circlesšš€of€cumulatively€improvingĻperformance€in€all€three€dimensions.€€In€such€a€situation€children€become€lessĻvalued€as€producing€agents,€womenššs€roles€change,€and€the€demand€forĻreproductive€health€services€increases.€€Economic€and€demographic€change€areĻbest€viewed€as€mutually€interacting€forces€influenced€by€institutionalĻsettings€and€government€policy.€€€As€a€result,€population€policies€are€bestĻviewed€as€supportive€to€the€more€centrally€important€policy„making€componentsĻneeded€to€advance€economic€development,€poverty€elimination,€and€long„runĻenvironmental€stewardship.ĢĢĢĢĢą@ų/ģąReferencesˆĢĢą0  ąą ° ąAgcoaoili,€Mercedita€and€Mark€W.€Rosegrant€(1995).€€Global€and€regional€foodĻsupply,€demand,€and€trade€prospects€to€2010.€€In€ņņPopulation€and€Food€inŠ -+}&; Šthe€Early€Twenty„First€Century:€€Meeting€Future€Food€Demand€of€anĻIncreasing€Populationóó,€Nurul€Islam,€ed.€€Washington,€D.C.:€Š {,Ė'= ŠInternational€Food€Policy€Research€Institute.Š (#(# ŠŠ É-)? Šą0  ąą ° ąAhlburg,€Dennis€A.€(1996).€€Population€growth€and€poverty.€€In€ņņThe€Impact€ofŠ ° ŠPopulation€Growth€on€Well„being€in€Developing€Countriesóó,€D.€A.€Ahlburg,Š W§ ŠA.€C.€Kelley€and€K.€Oppenheim€Mason,€eds.€€Berlin:€Springer„Verlag,€pp.Ļ219„258.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąAlexandratos,€Nikos,€ed.€(1995).€€ņņWorld€Agriculture:€€Towards€2010:€€An€FAOŠ óC ŠStudyóó.€€New€York:€€John€Wiley€and€Sons.Ššź(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąAnand,€Sudhir€and€Jonathan€Morduch€(1995).€€Population€and€poverty.€€PaperĻpresented€at€UNICEF„IUSSP€University€of€Florence€Conference€onĻDemography€and€Poverty.€€Florence,€March€2„4.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBarlow,€Robin€(1992).€€Demographic€influences€on€economic€growth.€€Ann€Arbor,ĻMichigan:€€University€of€Michigan.€€Mimeographed.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBarney,€Gerald€O.,€Study€Director€(1981).€€ņņThe€Global€2000€Report€to€theŠ yÉ  ŠPresident:€Entering€the€Twenty-First€Centuryóó,€Vols.€1€&€2.€Š  p  ŠCharlottesville:€€Blue€Angel,€Inc.Š (#(# Š€Ģą0  ąą ° ąBender,€William€and€Margaret€Smith€(1997).€€Population,€food,€and€nutrition.€ĻņņPopulation€Bulletinóó€(Washington,€DC),€vol.€51,€No.€4€(February),€pp.€1„Š ¼  Šńń%ńŠ ¼  Šńń%ń48.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBilsborrow,€Richard€(1992).€€Population€growth,€internal€migration€andĻenvironmental€degradation€in€rural€areas€of€developing€countries.€ĻņņEuropean€Journal€of€Populationóó€(Amsterdam),€vol.€8,€pp.€125„148.Š’O(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBilsborrow,€Richard€E.€(1994).€€Population,€development,€and€deforestation.€ĻIn€ņņPopulation,€Environment,€and€Developmentóó.€€Proceedings€of€the€UnitedŠ ōD ŠNations€Expert€Group€Meeting€on€Population,€Environment,€andĻDevelopment,€January€1992.€€New€York:€€United€Nations,€pp.€117„134.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBirdsall,€Nancy€(1992).€€Another€look€at€population€and€global€warming.€ĻPolicy€Research€Working€Paper€No.€1020,€Washington,€DC:€€The€World€Bank.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąBirdsall,€Nancy€(1994).€€Another€look€at€population€and€global€warming.€€InĻņņPopulation,€Environment,€and€Developmentóó.€€Proceedings€of€the€UnitedŠ ,|$ ŠNations€Expert€Group€Meeting€on€Population,€Environment,€andĻDevelopment,€January€1992.€€New€York:€€United€Nations,€pp.€39„54.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBlanchet,€Didier€(1991).€€Estimating€the€relationship€between€populationĻgrowth€and€aggregate€economic€growth€in€ldc's:€€methodological€problems.€ĻIn€ņņConsequences€of€Rapid€Population€Growth€in€Developing€Countriesóó.€Š  f* ŠProceedings€of€the€United€Nations€Institut€national€d'etudesĻdemographiques€Expert€Group€Meeting,€New€York,€23„26€August€1988.€€NewĻYork:€Taylor€and€Francis,€pp.€67„99.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąBlank,€Rebecca€and€Alan€S.€Blinder€(1986).€€Macroeconomics,€incomeĻdistribution,€and€poverty.€€In€ņņFighting€Povertyóó,€Sheldon€H.€Danziger€andŠ $P0 ŠDaniel€H.€Weinberg,€eds.€€Cambridge,€Massachusetts:€€Harvard€UniversityĻPress,€pp.€180„208.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąBloom,€David€E.€and€Richard€B.€Freeman€(1988).€Economic€development€and€theĻtiming€and€components€of€population€growth.€€ņņJournal€of€Policy€ModelingóóŠ C'“"5 Š(New€York),€vol.€10,€No.€1€(Special€Issue:€€Modeling€Demographic€andĻEconomic€Dynamics,€Dominick€Salvatore,€guest€ed.),€pp.€57„81.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBloom€and€Williamson€(1998).€€Demographic€transitions€and€economic€miracles€inĻemerging€Asia.€€ņņWorld€Bank€Economic€Reviewóó€(forthcoming).І*Ö%:(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBongaarts,€John€(l992).€€Population€growth€and€global€warming.€€€ņņPopulationŠ Ō+$'< Šand€Development€Reviewóó€(New€York),€vol.€18,€No.€2€(June),€pp.€299„319.Š{,Ė'=(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBongaarts,€John€(1996).€€Population€pressure€and€the€food€supply€system€in€theŠ É-)? Šdeveloping€world.€€ņņPopulation€and€Development€Reviewóó€(New€York),€vol.Š ° Š22,€No.€3€(September),€pp.€483„503.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBoserup,€Ester€(1965).€€ņņThe€Conditions€of€Agricultural€Growth:€€The€EconomicsŠ „õ Šof€Agrarian€Change€under€Population€Pressureóó.€€Chicago:€Aldine.ŠLœ(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBoserup,€Ester€(1981).€€ņņPopulation€and€Technological€Changeóó.€€Chicago:€Š šź ŠUniversity€of€Chicago€Press.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBrander,€James€A.€and€Steve€Dowrick€(1994).€The€role€of€fertility€andĻpopulation€in€economic€growth:€€Empirical€results€from€aggregate€cross„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ńnational€data.€€ņņJournal€of€Population€Economicsóó€(Berlin),€vol.€7,€pp.€1„Š Ż -  Šńń%ńŠ Ż -  Šńń%ń25.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąBrown,€Lester€R.€(1994).€€Facing€food€insecurity.€€In€ņņState€of€the€World€1994óó.€Š Ņ "  ŠWorldwatch€Institute€Report€on€Progress€Toward€a€Sustainable€Society.€ĻNew€York:€€W.€W.€Norton€and€Company,€pp.€177„197.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąChen,€Shaohua,€Guarav€Datt,€and€Martin€Ravallion€(1994).€€Is€povertyĻincreasing€in€the€developed€world?€€ņņReview€of€Income€and€Wealthóó€(NewŠ e  ŠHaven,€Conn.),€vol.€40,€No.€4,€pp.€359„376.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąCoale,€Ansley€J.€and€E.€M.€Hoover€(1958).€€ņņPopulation€Growth€and€EconomicŠ  Z ŠDevelopment€in€Low€Income€Countries:€€A€Case€Study€of€India's€Prospectsóó.€Š ± ŠPrinceton:€€Princeton€University€Press.€€Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąCohen,€Joel€(1995).€€ņņHow€Many€People€Can€the€Earth€Support?óó€€New€York:€€W.W.Š ¦ö ŠNorton.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąCommoner,€Barry€(1994).€€Population,€development,€and€the€environment:€€TrendsĻand€key€issues€in€the€developed€countries.€€In€ņņPopulation,€Environment,Š B’ Šand€Developmentóó.€€Proceedings€of€the€United€Nations€Expert€Group€MeetingŠ é9 Šon€Population,€Environment,€and€Development,€January€1992.€€New€York:€ĻUnited€Nations,€pp.€64„80.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąDyson,€Tim€(1996).€€ņņPopulation€and€Food€Production:€€Global€Trends€and€FutureŠ …Õ# ŠProspectsóó.€€New€York:€€Routledge.Š,|$(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąEastwood,€Robert€and€Michael€Lipton€(1997).€€The€impact€of€changes€in€humanĻfertility€on€poverty.€€University€of€Sussex.€€Mimeographed.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąEhrlich,€Paul€R.€(1968).€€ņņThe€Population€Bombóó.€€New€York:€€Ballantine.Šoæ)(#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąGrossman,€Gene€M.€(1995).€€Pollution€and€growth:€€What€do€we€know?€€In€ņņTheŠ ½ + ŠEconomics€of€Sustainable€Developmentóó,€Ian€Goldin€and€L.€Alan€Winters,Š d!“, Šeds.€€Cambridge:€€Cambridge€University€Press,€pp.€19„46.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąHammer,€Jeffrey€S.€(1985).€€€Population€growth€and€savings€in€developingĻcountries:€€A€survey.€€World€Bank€Staff€Working€Paper,€No.€687.€ĻWashington,€DC.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąHarrison,€P.€(1990).€€Too€much€life€on€earth.€€ņņNew€Scientistóó€(London),€vol.Š õ%E!3 Š126,€pp.€28„29.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąHempel,€Lamont€C.€(1997).€€Population€in€context:€€A€typology€of€environmentalĻdriving€forces.€€ņņPopulation€and€the€Environmentóó€(New€York),€vol.€18,€No.Š ‘(į#7 Š5€(May),€pp.€439„461.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąHiggins,€Gerald€M.€and€others€(1982).€€ņņPotential€Population€SupportingŠ †*Ö%: ŠCapacities€of€Lands€in€the€Developing€Worldóó.€€Technical€ReportŠ -+}&; ŠFPA/INT/513€of€Project€Land€Resources€for€Population€of€the€Future.€ĻRome:€€Food€and€Agriculture€Organization€of€the€United€Nations.Š (#(# Šā āŠ "-r(> ŠŌ  Ōā āą0  ąą ° ąHorlacher€D.E.€and€L.€Heligman€(1991).€€Recent€findings€on€the€consequences€ofĻrapid€population€growth€in€developing€countries.€€In€ņņConsequences€ofŠ W§ ŠRapid€Population€Growth€in€Developing€Countriesóó.€€New€York:€€Taylor€andŠ žN ŠFrancis,€pp.€345„377.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąJha,€Satish€C.,€Anil€B.€Deolalikar€and€Ernesto€M.€Pernia€(1993).€€€PopulationĻgrowth€and€economic€development€revisited€with€reference€to€Asia.€€ņņAsianŠ šź ŠDevelopment€Reviewóó€(Manila),€vol.€11,€No.€2,€pp.€1„46.ŠA ‘(#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąKelley,€Allen€C.€(1988).€Economic€consequences€of€population€change€in€theĻthird€world.€€ņņJournal€of€Economic€Literatureóó€(Nashville),€vol.€27,€pp.Š 6 †  Š1685„1728.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąKelley,€Allen€C.€(1996).€€The€consequences€of€population€growth€on€humanĻresource€development:€€The€case€of€education.€€In€€ņņThe€Impact€ofŠ Ņ "  ŠPopulation€Growth€on€Well„being€in€Developing€Countriesóó,€D.€A.€Ahlburg,Š yÉ  ŠA.€C.€Kelley€and€K.€Oppenheim€Mason,€eds.€€Berlin:€€Springer„Verlag,€pp.Ļ67„137.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąKelley,€Allen€C.€and€Schmidt,€Robert€M.€(1994).€€Population€and€Income€Change:€ĻRecent€Evidence.€€World€Bank€Discussion€Papers€249.€€Washington,€DC:€ĻThe€World€Bank.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąKelley,€Allen€C.€and€Robert€M.€Schmidt€(1995).€€Aggregate€population€andĻeconomic€growth€correlations:€€The€role€of€the€Components€of€demographicĻchange.€€ņņDemographyóó€(Chicago),€vol.€32,€No.€4€(November),€pp.€543„555.Š’O(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąKeyfitz,€Nathan€(1976).€€World€resources€and€the€world€middle€class.€ĻņņScientific€Americanóó€(New€York),€vol.€235,€pp.€28-35.€ŠōD(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąKeyfitz,€Nathan€Keyfitz€(1996).€€Population€growth,€development€and€theĻenvironment.€€ņņPopulation€Studiesóó€(London),€vol.€50,€No.€3€(November),Š é9 Špp.€335„359.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąLee,€Ronald€D.€(1983).€Economic€consequences€of€population€size,€structure€andĻgrowth.€€ņņIUSSPóó€(International€Union€for€the€Scientific€Study€ofĻPopulation)€ņņNewsletteróó€(Liege,€Belgium),€No.€17€(January„April),€pp.€43„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ń59.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąLipton,€Michael€and€Martin€Ravallion€(1993).€€Poverty€and€policy.€€World€BankĻPolicy€Research€Department€Working€Paper€WPS€1130.€€Washington,€DC:€€TheĻWorld€Bank.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąLloyd,€Cynthia€B.€(1994).€€Investing€in€the€next€generation:€€The€implicationsĻof€high€fertility€at€the€level€of€the€family.€€In€ņņPopulation€andŠ d!“, ŠDevelopment:€€Old€Debates,€New€Conclusionsóó,€U.S.„Third€World€PolicyŠ  "[- ŠPerspectives€series.€€Robert€Cassen,€ed.€€New€Brunswick,€NJ:€ĻTransaction€Publishers,€pp.€181„202.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąLutz,€Wolfgang€(1992).€€Population€and€environment:€€what€do€we€need€moreĻurgently,€better€data,€better€models,€or€better€questions.€€InĻņņEnvironment€and€Changeóó,€John€Clark€and€Basia€Zaba,€eds.€€Liege,€Belgium:€Š õ%E!3 ŠOrdina€Editions.€€Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąMacKellar,€F.€Landis,€Wolfgang€Lutz,€Christopher€Prinz,€and€Anne€GoujonĻ(1995).€€Population,€households,€and€COņņ2óó€emissions.€€€ņņPopulation€andŠ ‘(į#7 ŠDevelopment€Reviewóó€(New€York),€vol.€21,€No.€4€(December),€pp.€849„865.Š8)ˆ$8(#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąMcNicoll,€Geoffrey€(1997).€€Population€and€poverty:€€A€review€and€restatement.€ĻPopulation€Council€Working€Papers€in€Policy€Research€No.€105.€€New€York:€ĻPopulation€Council.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąMeadows,€Donella€H.€and€others€(1972).€€ņņThe€Limits€to€Growthóó.€€New€York:€Š "-r(> ŠPotomac€Association.Š#É-)?(#(# #Їą0  ąą ° ąMeyerson,€Frederick€A.€B.€Meyerson€(1998).€€Population,€carbon€emissions,€andĻglobal€warming:€€The€forgotten€relationship€at€Kyoto.€€ņņPopulation€andŠ W§ ŠDevelopment€Reviewóó€(New€York),€vol.€24,€No.1€(March),€pp.€115„130.ŠžN(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąMiller,€Kenton€R.,€Walter€V.€Reid,€and€Charles€V.€Barber€(1991).€ĻDeforestation€and€species€loss:€€Responding€to€the€crisis.€€InĻņņPreserving€the€Global€Environmentóó.€€New€York:€€W.W.€Norton€and€Company,Š šź Špp.€78„111.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąMitchell,€Donald€O.€and€Merlinda€D.€Ingco€(1993).€€The€world€food€outlook:€ĻMalthus€must€wait.€€World€Bank,€International€Economics€Department,ĻJuly.€€Washington,€DC:€€The€World€Bank.€€Mimeographed.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąMitchell,€Donald€O.€and€Merlinda€D.€Ingco€(1995).€€Global€and€regional€foodĻdemand€and€supply€prospects.€€In€ņņPopulation€and€Food€in€the€EarlyŠ Ņ "  ŠTwenty„First€Century:€€Meeting€Future€Food€Demand€of€an€IncreasingĻPopulationóó,€Nurul€Islam,€ed.€€Washington,€D.C.:€€International€FoodŠ  p  ŠPolicy€Research€Institute,€pp.€49„60.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąMyers,€Norman€(1994).€€Population€and€the€environment:€€The€vital€linkages.€ĻIn€ņņPopulation,€Environment,€and€Developmentóó.€€Proceedings€of€the€UnitedŠ ¼  ŠNations€Expert€Group€Meeting€on€Population,€Environment,€andĻDevelopment,€January€1992.€€New€York:€€United€Nations,€pp.€55„63.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąMyers,€Norman€(1997).€€Consumption:€Challenge€to€sustainable€development...€ĻņņScienceóó€(Washington,€DC),€vol.€276,€No.€5309€(April€4),€pp.€53„55.Š’O(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąNational€Academy€of€Sciences€(1971).€€ņņRapid€Population€Growth:€€ConsequencesŠ M Šand€Policy€Implicationsóó.€€2€Volumes.€€Baltimore:€€Johns€HopkinsŠ ōD ŠUniversity€Press€for€the€National€Academy€of€Sciences.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąNational€Research€Council€(1986).€€ņņPopulation€Growth€and€Economic€Development:Š é9 ŠPolicy€Questionsóó.€€National€Research€Council,€Working€Group€onŠ ą  ŠPopulation€Growth€and€Economic€Development,€Committee€on€Population,ĻCommission€on€Behavioral€and€Social€Sciences€and€Education.€€Washington,ĻDC:€€National€Academy€Press.€Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąPalloni,€A.€(1992).€€The€relation€between€population€and€deforestation:€ĻMethods€for€drawing€causal€inferences€from€macro€and€micro€studies.€ĻUniversity€of€Wisconsin€(Madison)€Center€for€Demography€and€EcologyĻWorking€Paper€92„14.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąPanayotou,€Theodore€Panayotou€(1993).€€ņņGreen€Markets:€the€Economics€ofŠ  f* ŠSustainable€Developmentóó.€€San€Francisco:€€Institute€for€ContemporaryŠ ½ + ŠStudies€Press.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąPanayotou,€Theodore€(1994).€€An€inquiry€into€population,€resources€andĻenvironment.€€In€ņņPopulation€and€Development:€€Old€Debates,€NewŠ Y#©/ ŠConclusionsóó,€U.S.„Third€World€Policy€Perspectives€series.€€RobertŠ $P0 ŠCassen,€ed.€€New€Brunswick,€NJ:€€Transaction€Publishers,€pp.€259„298.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąPreston,€Samuel€H.€€(1996).€€The€effect€of€population€growth€on€environmentalĻquality.€€ņņPopulation€Research€and€Policy€Reviewóó€(Dordrecht,Š œ&ģ!4 ŠNetherlands),€vol.€15,€No.€2€(April),€pp.€95„108.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąPritchett,€Lant€(1997).€€Review€of€Robert€D.€Kaplan's€ņņThe€Ends€of€the€Earth:€Š ‘(į#7 ŠFrom€Togo€to€Turkmenistan,€From€Iran€to€Cambodia„„A€Journey€to€theĻFrontiers€of€Anarchyóó.€€ņņFinance€and€Developmentóó,€March,€p.€51.Šß)/%9(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąRavallion,€Martin€(1992).€€Poverty€comparisons„„A€guide€to€concepts€andĻmethods.€€World€Bank€Working€Paper€No.€88.€€€Washington,€D.C.:€€WorldĻBank.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąRavallion,€Martin€and€Gaurav€Datt€(1996).€€How€important€to€India's€poor€isŠ É-)? Šthe€sectoral€composition€of€economic€growth?€€ņņWorld€Bank€Economic€ReviewóóŠ ° Š(Washington,€DC),€vol.€10,€No.€1€(January),€pp.€1„25.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąRobinson,€James€A.€and€T.€N.€Srinivasan€(1997).€€Long„term€consequences€ofĻpopulation€growth:€€Technological€change,€natural€resources€and€theĻenvironment.€€In€ņņHandbook€of€Population€and€Family€Economicsóó,€Mark€R.Š óC ŠRosenzweig€and€Oded€Stark,€eds.€€Amsterdam:€€Elsevier€Science€B.€V.,€pp.Ļ1175„1298.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąRuttan,€Vernon€(1996).€€Population€growth,€environmental€change€and€technicalĻinnovation:€€Implications€for€sustainable€growth€in€agriculturalĻproduction.€€In€ņņThe€Impact€of€€Population€Growth€on€Well„being€inĻDeveloping€Countriesóó,€D.€A.€Ahlburg,€A.€C.€Kelley,€and€K.€OppenheimĻMason,€eds.€€Berlin:€€Springer„Verlag.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąSchultz,€T.€Paul€(1987).€€School€expenditures€and€enrollments,€1960„1980:€€TheĻeffects€of€income,€prices€and€population€growth.€€In€ņņPopulation€GrowthŠ  p  Šand€Economic€Development:€€Issues€and€Evidenceóó,€D.€Gale€Johnson€andŠ Ē  ŠRonald€D.€Lee,€eds.€€Madison:€€University€of€Wisconsin€Press,€pp.€413„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ń476.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąSchultz,€T.€Paul€(1996).€€Accounting€for€public€expenditures€on€education:€€AnĻinternational€panel€study.€€In€ņņResearch€in€Population€Economics,€Vol.€8óó,Š  Z ŠT.€Paul€Schultz,€ed.€€Greenwich,€Connecticut:€€JAI€Press,€Inc.,€pp.€233„¼ńń%ń¼ńń%ń264.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąSen,€Amartya€(1985).€€ņņCommodities€and€Capabilitiesóó.€€Amsterdam:€€North„Š ¦ö Šńń%ńŠ ¦ö Šńń%ńHolland.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąSen,€Amartya€(1987).€€ņņThe€Standard€of€Livingóó,€The€Tanner€Lectures.€€Cambridge:€Š ›ė ŠCambridge€University€Press.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąShaw,€R.€Paul€(1989).€€Rapid€population€growth€and€environmental€degradation:€ĻUltimate€versus€proximate€factors.€€ņņEnvironmental€Conservationóó€(Geneva),Š 7‡! Švol.€16,€No.€3,€pp.€199„208.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąSimon,€Julian€(1981).€€ņņThe€Ultimate€Resourceóó.€€Princeton:€€PrincetonŠ ,|$ ŠUniversity€Press.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąSkole,€D.€and€C.€Tucker€(1993).€€Tropical€deforestation€and€habitatĻfragmentation€in€the€Amazon:€€Satellite€data€from€1978€to€1988.€ĻņņScienceóó,€vol.€260,€pp.€1905„1910.Šoæ)(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąSmil,€Vaclav€(1994).€€How€many€people€can€the€earth€feed?€ņņPopulation€andŠ ½ + ŠDevelopment€Reviewóó€(New€York),€vol.€20,€No.€2€(June),€pp.€255„292.Šd!“,(#(# Š€Ģą0  ąą ° ąSquire,€Lyn€(1993).€€Fighting€poverty.€€ņņAmerican€Economic€Reviewóó€(Nashville,Š ²". ŠTennessee),€vol.€83,€No.€2€(May),€pp.€377„382.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąTan,€Jee„Peng€and€Alain€Mingat€(1992).€€ņņEducation€in€Asia:€€A€ComparativeŠ §$÷1 ŠStudy€of€Cost€and€Financingóó.€€Washington,€DC:€€The€World€Bank.€€ŠN%ž 2(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąUnited€Nations€(1988).€€ņņWorld€Population€Trends€and€Policies:€€1987€MonitoringĻReportóó.€€Department€of€International€Economic€and€Social€Affairs,ĻPopulation€Studies€No.€103.€€ST/ESA/SER.A/103.€€New€York:€UnitedĻNations.Š (#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąUnited€Nations,€Department€for€Economic€and€Social€Information€and€PolicyĻAnalysis€(1997).€ņņReport€on€the€World€Social€Situation€1997óó€(New€York:€Š †*Ö%: ŠUnited€Nations).Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąUnited€Nations€Development€Program€(various€years).€€ņņHuman€Development€Reportóó.€Š {,Ė'= ŠNew€York:€€Oxford€University€Press.Š (#(# ŠŠ É-)? Šą0  ąą ° ąUnited€Nations€Population€Fund€(1991).€€ņņPopulation,€Resources€and€theŠ ° ŠEnvironment:€€The€Critical€Challengesóó.€€New€York:€€United€Nations.ŠW§(#(# ŠĢŌ  Ōą0  ąą ° ąUnited€Nations€Population€Fund€(1993).€€ņņPopulation€Growth€and€EconomicŠ „õ ŠDevelopment:€€Report€on€the€Consequences€of€the€Consultative€Meeting€ofĻEconomists€Convened€by€the€United€Nations€Population€Fund,€28„29ĻSeptember€1992óó.€€New€York:€€United€Nations.Ššź(#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąWaggoner,€Paul€E.€(1994).€€How€much€land€can€ten€billion€people€spare€forĻnature?€€Task€Force€Report€No.€121,€Council€for€Agricultural€Science€andĻTechnology,€Ames,€Iowa.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąWorld€Bank€(1990).€€ņņWorld€Development€Report€1990:€€Povertyóó.€€New€York:€Š „ Ō  ŠOxford€University€Press.Š (#(# ŠĢą0  ąą ° ąWorld€Bank€(1992).€€ņņWorld€Development€Report€1992:€€Development€and€theŠ yÉ  ŠEnvironmentóó.€€New€York:€€Oxford€University€Press.Š  p (#(# ŠĢą@Ž %ģąTABLE€1.€€RECENT€POVERTY€TRENDSˆĢŌ*hƒ dhŌŌ, dd ŌŌ,•dd"ŌŌ,•dd"ŌŌ,•dd%ŌŌ,’dd%ŌŌ,Œdd%ŌŌ,‘dd%ŌŌ+  ŌŠ €  žN ‹‹ ŠĢĢĢĢņņRegionóóŠ -€ žN  ……-ŠĢĢ€€€ņņNumber€poor€€Š ° Š€€€(millions)€Ģ€€1987€€€€€€1993€Š 0€ žN  ……0Š€Headcount€index€ˆĻ(%€of€populationˆĢbelow€povertyˆĢlevel€€€€ˆĢ€€1987€€€€€€1993€ˆŠ 3€ "žN  ……‹‹3ŠˆĢˆĢˆĢ€Poverty€gap€(%ˆ)Ģ€€1987€€€€€1993óóˆŠ (žN  ‹‹(ŠDeveloping€andĻtransition€countriesĢŠ "‡ ×  "ŠĢ1227Š  ą 0  ŠĢ1314Š  ą 0  ЈĢ30ˆ.1Š  ą 0  ЈĢ29ˆ.4Š  ą 0  ЈĢ9ˆ.5Š  ą 0  ‹‹ЈĢ9ˆ.2Š %ą 0  ‹‹%Š€Eastern€Europe€andĢ€Central€AsiaĢŠ "`  "ŠĢ2Š  i ¹ ŠĢ15Š  i ¹ ЈĢ0ˆ.6Š  i ¹ ЈĢ3ˆ.5Š  i ¹ ЈĢ0ˆ.2Š  i ¹ ‹‹ЈĢ1ˆ.1Š %i ¹ ‹‹%Š€Developing€countriesĢŠ "ņB  "Š1225Š  K›  Š1299Š  K›  Š33ˆ.3Š  K›  Š31ˆ.8Š  K›  Š10ˆ.8Š  K›  ‹‹Š10ˆ.5Š %K›  ‹‹%Š€€Latin€America€andĢ€€€€CaribbeanŠ "Ō$  "Š91Š  -}  Š110Š  -}  Š22ˆ.0Š  -}  Š23ˆ.5Š  -}  Š8ˆ.2Š  -}  ‹‹Š9ˆ.1Š %-}  ‹‹%Š€€Middle€East€andĢ€€€€North€AfricaŠ "¶ "Š10Š  _ Š11Š  _ Š4ˆ.7Š  _ Š4ˆ.1Š  _ Š0ˆ.9Š  _ ‹‹Š0ˆ.6Š %_ ‹‹%Š€€Sub„Saharan€AfricaŠ "ńA "Š180Š  ńA Š219Š  ńA Š38ˆ.5Š  ńA Š39ˆ.1Š  ńA Š14ˆ.4Š  ńA ‹‹Š15ˆ.3Š %ńA ‹‹%Š€€South€AsiaŠ ",| "Š480Š  ,| Š515Š  ,| Š45ˆ.4Š  ,| Š43ˆ.1Š  ,| Š14ˆ.1Š  ,| ‹‹Š12ˆ.6Š ,€,| ‹‹,Š€€China€East€Asia€andĢ€€€€PacificŠ )€^ )Š464Š )€g· )Š446Š )€g· )Š28ˆ.2Š )€g· )Š26ˆ.0Š )€g· )Š8ˆ.3Š ,€g· ‹‹,Š7ˆ.8Š&g·   &ŠĢ€€€€€€Source:€€United€Nations,€Department€for€Economic€and€Social€InformationĢ€€and€Policy€Analysis,€ņņReport€on€the€World€Social€Situation€1997óó€(New€York,Š 3ƒ# Š€€ńó%ńUnited€Nationsńó%ń,€1997,€p.€69.Ģ€€€€€€Poverty€line€=€$1€per€day€in€1986€purchasing€power€parity€prices.ĢĢŠ  Ļ' ŠĢą@€ !ģąTABLE€2.€€CHANGES€IN€POVERTY€1960„1986ˆĢŌ*¬ƒ"$ d d dd •dd"•dd"•dd%’dd%Œdd%‘dd%¬ŌŌ,‹dd ŌŌ,ydd ŌŌ,œdd ŌŌ,hdd ŌŌ,hdd ŌŌ,hdd ŌŌ,dd ŌŌ,œdd ŌŌ+  ŌŠ € žN ŠŠ .€!b² „„.ŠĢņņLengthŠ  Y ŠofĻperiodóóŠ 9€,W§" „„……9ŠĢĢņņHeadcountŠ ° Šņņ€€€index€€€óóŠ <€/ W§" „„……<ŠĢNumberĢof€poorĢņņ€€(millions)€€óóŠ <€/ W§" „„……<ŠAverageĢincomeĢshortfallĢņņ€€€(percent)€€óóŠ 3€ " W§" 3ŠCountry€andĢ€€€PeriodŠ 2€ !9 ‰   „„2Š(yrs.)Š 9€ (’ ā"  „„9ŠFirstĢyearŠ 9€ (9 ‰ "  „„9ŠLastĢyearŠ 9€ (9 ‰ "  „„9ŠFirstĢyearŠ 9€ (9 ‰ "  „„9ŠLastĢyearŠ 9€ (9 ‰ "  „„9ŠFirstĢyearŠ 9€ (9 ‰ "  „„9ŠLastĢyearóóŠ )9 ‰ "  )ŠĢBrazilĢ€€€(1960„80)ņņa,bóóŠ  Ā   „„ŠĢ20Š % k " „„%ŠĢ50Š % k " „„%ŠĢ21Š % k " „„%ЈĢ36ˆ.1Š % k U „„%ЈĢ25ˆ.4Š % k U „„%ŠĢ46Š % k " „„%ŠĢ41Š  k " ŠColumbiaĢ€€€(1971„88)ņņaóóŠ  ¤ō  „„Š17Š %ż M " „„%Š41Š %ż M " „„%Š25Š %ż M " „„%Š8ˆ.9Š %ż M U „„%Š7ˆ.5Š %ż M U „„%Š41Š %ż M " „„%Š38Š ż M " ŠCosta€RicaĢ€€€(1971„86)ņņaóóŠ  †Ö  „„Š15Š %ß/ " „„%Š45Š %ß/ " „„%Š24Š %ß/ " „„%Š0ˆ.8Š %ß/ U „„%Š0ˆ.6Š %ß/ U „„%Š40Š %ß/ " „„%Š44Š ß/ " ŠIndiaĢ€€€(1972„83)Š  hø  „„Š11Š %Į " „„%Š54Š %Į " „„%Š43Š %Į " „„%Š311ˆ.4Š %Į U „„%Š315ˆ.0Š %Į U „„%Š31Š %Į " „„%Š28Š Į " ŠIndonesiaĢ€€€(1970„87)Š  Jš „„Š17Š %£ó" „„%Š58Š %£ó" „„%Š17Š %£ó" „„%Š67ˆ.9Š %£óU „„%Š30ˆ.0Š %£óU „„%Š37Š %£ó" „„%Š17Š £ó" ŠMalaysiaĢ€€€(1973„87)ņņaóóŠ  ,| „„Š14Š %…Õ" „„%Š37Š %…Õ" „„%Š15Š %…Õ" „„%Š4ˆ.1Š %…ÕU „„%Š2ˆ.2Š %…ÕU „„%Š40Š %…Õ" „„%Š24Š …Õ" ŠMoroccoĢ€€€(1970„84)Š  ^ „„Š14Š %g·" „„%Š43Š %g·" „„%Š34Š %g·" „„%Š6ˆ.6Š %g·U „„%Š7ˆ.4Š %g·U „„%Š46Š %g·" „„%Š36Š g·" ŠPakistanĢ€€€(1962„84)ņņa,bóóŠ  š@" „„Š22Š %I™!" „„%Š54Š %I™!" „„%Š23Š %I™!" „„%Š26ˆ.5Š %I™!U „„%Š21ˆ.3Š %I™!U „„%Š39Š %I™!" „„%Š26Š I™!" ŠSingaporeĢ€€€(1972„82)Š  Ņ"% „„Š10Š %+{$" „„%Š31Š %+{$" „„%Š10Š %+{$" „„%Š0ˆ.7Š %+{$U „„%Š0ˆ.2Š %+{$U „„%Š37Š %+{$" „„%Š33Š +{$" ŠSri€LankaĢ€€€(1963„82)ņņaóóŠ  “( „„Š19Š % ]'" „„%Š37Š % ]'" „„%Š27Š % ]'" „„%Š3ˆ.9Š % ]'U „„%Š4ˆ.1Š % ]'U „„%Š35Š % ]'" „„%Š29Š #€ ]'" #ŠThailandĢ€€€(1962„86)ņņa,bóóŠ 2€!–ę+ „„2Š24Š 9€(ļ?*" „„9Š59Š 9€(ļ?*" „„9Š26Š 9€(ļ?*" „„9Š16ˆ.7Š 9€(ļ?*U „„9Š13ˆ.6Š 9€(ļ?*U „„9Š..Š 9€(ļ?*" „„9Š35Š-#!ļ?*"  -ŠĢ€€€€Source:€€Ahlburg,€Dennis€A.€(1996).€€Population€growth€and€poverty.€€InĻņņThe€Impact€of€Population€Growth€on€Well„being€in€Developing€Countriesóó,€D.€A.Š »! / ŠAhlburg,€A.€C.€Kelley€and€K.€Oppenheim€Mason,€eds.€€Berlin,€Springer„Verlag,ĻTable€3,€p.€226.Ģ€€€€This€table€uses€country„specific€poverty€lines.Ģ€€€€ņņaóóMeasures€for€this€entry€use€income€rather€than€expenditure.Š W$§3 Š€€€€ņņbóóMeasures€for€this€entry€are€by€household€rather€than€by€household€number.Š  ž$N 4 ŠŃ°Hр€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€NOTESĢĢ