Theory of optimun population

 

This theory of population is also known as optimum, ideal and best population theory. In this theory an attempt has been made to determine whether the increasing population of a nation is beneficial or harmful, keeping in view the economic conditions of all the economic outputs including food grains of the nation. Best population means that population of a nation which is neither more nor less than that quantity of population which maximizes per capita income or national income or total production or utilization of economic resources available in the nation.

Optimum Population Theory: Evolution and Evolution

In this regard, the demographers started thinking and churning from the very day that Mathas had warned the whole world that increasing population is harmful. Although no definite date can be set for the formulation of this theory, but on the basis of the history of economic thought, it can be said that the first Edward West in 1815 AD in his “Essay on the application of the In the article titled “capital to land”, the idea was propounded that with the increase of population, specialization comes in labor, so that in production –
Robbins optimum population is the one in which maximum production is acceptable. Optimun population is the Population which just makes the maximum returns possible )

 

Proponents of this theory include Car Sounders Edward Prof. Sijwick, Prof. Edward Cannon, Dalton, Prof. Vince, etc. are prominent.
The principle implies that the fertility rate in this population should be such that the population remains at the optimum (ideal) level. This theory assumes that the optimum population of a country is the ideal population that results in the maximum per capita population in the country. If the population continues to decline from this point onwards, then the per capita income decreases. The optimum population of Ravines is the one which allows maximum production potential. Car Saunders idealizes the population that produces maximum economic well-being. In determining the optimum population of any country, per capita income, wealth, growth, personal welfare, employment power, longevity, knowledge of culture, welfare growth and total number, etc., can be considered as the basis. It is worth mentioning in this context that the optimum population deficit of any country does not remain constant, the object keeps on changing.

Along with the shortage and excess in the means of production of the country, it also keeps on increasing. With the changes in the methods of production, changes in political conditions, manpower, availability of natural resources, etc., the optimum or ideal population of a country keeps on changing.

The first twenty-five years of celibacy, the second twenty-five householders, the third twenty-five years of vanaprastha, and the final stage is divided into sanyas. Social scientists have drawn a clear line between education and initiation and marriage and household. The third step binds the man even more. Similar thoughts are seen in Ramayana and Mahabharata period, where moral values, celibacy and self-restraint have been linked to religion and policy through various narratives, anecdotes.
Apart from India, if we study the ideas related to population relative to other countries, then it is clear that some links of modern ideas are definitely visible in that period also. Even in ancient times, people were aware that due to increase in population per capita output could decrease and the standard of living of the people could fall.

Information about this fact is obtained from the literature of the famous thinker Confucius and ancient Chinese thinkers, these scholars had imagined an ideal population for agriculture. He was of the view that the deterioration of this ideal ratio could worsen the condition of the economy. Therefore, whenever the pressure of population on agriculture increases in any place, the government should shift the population from the area of ​​high pressure to the area of ​​lesser pressure. Apart from this, there is also a mention of banning population growth in Chinese literature.

According to these thinkers, the death rate increases due to inadequacy of food grains, due to child marriages the infant mortality rate increases. Population decreases due to war, but these thinkers could not explain how fertility, mortality and migration affect the balance between population and resources.

Ancient Greek thinkers Plato and Aristotle have also expressed their views about the ideal condition of population. For the self-reliance and security of any society, the population should increase as much as it needs. Otherwise, there will be poverty and economic problems will arise. Both the thinkers emphasized self-restraint to reduce the population and suggested the establishment of colonies. Aristotle considered abortion and infanticide to be justified to stop population growth. According to him , in all those countries where the population is limited . There should be a rule that to limit the population only the number of children for each family should be determined and if married couple

Thus, if there are more children than the prescribed number, then abortion should be done before the communication of consciousness and life in the pregnant child. Plato considered a city state with 5,040 citizens as ideal, whereas according to Aristotle, the population of the ideal state should not exceed one lakh.

Like the thinkers of China, the thinkers of Rome also studied population from the perspective of the great empire, they gave more importance to population growth for the establishment of a vast kingdom. It seems that the thinkers of Rome were not as conscious of population growth as the Roman thinker Cicero, towards the people of imperialism, mentioned the elements that restrain population growth but focused on the principles of determining growth or decrease. did not put

Feudalism and ecclesiastical influence clearly visible on Christian thinkers in the medieval period. The thinkers of that time studied the population problem on the basis of morality and ethics and did not give any importance to materiality. Condemned murder, abortion, infanticide, divorce, polygamy and emphasized abstinence from celibacy, the fourteenth century Muslim thinker Ibn Khaldun’s idea about population is remarkable. Attempts were made to establish relations with political and social moods. Khaldun was of the view that having more population than less population leads to more effective use of resources. The Italian thinker Betero believed that a state of equilibrium has been reached between resources and population and now the increasing population will not be able to increase the means of subsistence further and will create an imbalance.

Merchantist economists of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries considered population to be helpful in economic development, capable of protecting and necessary to maintain the sovereignty of a country, so they did not consider the increase of population as unreasonable. More population, more labor, more production will increase economic prosperity. On the other hand wages will decrease, as a result of cost reduction, exports will increase and gold and silver will get more quantity which was their target. Naturalist economists believed that the number of human beings is determined by nature, so there should not be interference in the matter of nature.

Obstructing the population flow was considered a protest against nature. Related to wages Prof 0 Wage and population After each other naturalists come eminent economists in which Adam Smith’s relation of population to J. B. Market law was based on the fact that it is inversely related. Adam Smith created the iron theory of wages, the first and greatest thinker in the history of population theories is Malthus, who is also called a pessimistic economist and who is also known as the father of demography. Malthus’s population theory shook the world’s world of thought and created a stir in the ideological world and called the attention of the world to the growing population. Malthus became the first economist to draw the whole. after that

After Malthus came a flood of theories, the optimal population theory, the biological theory of population, the demographic transition theory, developed. Apart from this, many thinkers like Sadler, Doubleday Raymond Pearl, Spencer Guinea, Marx, Henry George etc. presented their thinking in this area.

After this, at the end of the 19th century (Henry sidgwick) Henry Sijwick laid the foundation for the idea of ​​optimum population. Sijwick, in his book Principles of political economey, expressed this view, “Just as there is a point in an individual firm that yields the maximum return, it occurs when all the resources within the firm are in an appropriate proportion.” This applies to the whole economy, in the same way as to the firm or individual economy.” it happens . Although he did not use the word optimum, but his indication was on the same side. Taking the support of this statement, Edwin Canon published in his book “Wealth” in 1924. A systematic and scientific study of optimal population theory by using the first optimum term. Propounded the theory while explaining. Later on, the role of Prof. Dalton, Prof. Robbins and Prof. Car Saunders was remarkable. Optimum Population Theory Assumptions Demographers have presented this theory with the following main assumptions

Despite the increase in the population of a country, the reciprocal ratio of the working population to the total population remains the same.

Hourly production and working hours by each person of the working population of the country remain constant.

Despite the increase in the population of the country, there is no change in the natural resources, amount of capital and technical condition of that country at a particular time.

Optimum Population Theory Meaning and Definitions

Optimum population means the population that

It is necessary for maximum utilization and production of given resources in a country at a given point of time. When the size of the country’s population is ideal, the per capita income is maximum. Thus, at a particular time and circumstances, that population is the best in which per capita income is maximum. It is necessary to have a clear concept of the theory. to understand the definitions given by scholars

Dalton ” Optimum population is that which provides maximum per capita income. ( Optimum population is that which gives the maximum • income per head )”

Boulding – “The population at which the standard of life is • maximum is called the optimuun population Economic Analysk P – 658 )

Wolff “The population which makes maximum production possible is the optimum population or the best population.”

Robbins – “The optimum population is that in which the maximum production is possible.” ( Optimum population is the Population which Just makes the maximum returns possible )

Car Saunders ” Optimum population is that which produces maximum economic welfare . ” ( Optimum population is that which produces maximum economic welfare . )

J.R. Hicks ( J.R. Hicks ) ” Optimum population is the level of population at which per capita production is maximum ” ( Optimum population is that level of population which would make out put per head a maximum social framework , p – 271) .

 

Eric Roll – “The optimum population is the population of a country that can produce the maximum output with the help of a given quantity of other means.” Edwin Canon “A measure of production in a country at a given time” There is a maximum point at which there is complete coordination of population and natural resources, in which case the amount of labor is such that both increase and decrease in it cause a decrease in production.” Prof. Cannon further clarified his statement. While saying that, “There is a point of maximum production in every industry, similarly there is a point of maximum production in all the industries together.”

If the population is low enough to bring the output of the entire economy to this point, then this situation is of public scarcity. So the population has to increase. On the contrary, if the population is so high that it has gone beyond that point, then it means that there is a situation of overpopulation in the country and it can be overcome by reduction in population. If you reflect on the views of various scholars expressed in relation to optimum population, then in conclusion you must have understood that Dalton’s definition is more simple, scientific and realistic.

Robins’ approach is more comprehensive. According to him the optimum population would be the one where total output would be maximum. In this way they carry the entire productive service of the economy. Although Ravines did not lay emphasis on the distribution of wealth or total output like Dalton, he broadened it by including consumption in the idea of ​​optimum population. Thus, while Robbins’ idea is more elaborate, Dalton’s idea is practical. Dalton’s definition is scientific from the point of view that it is not enough to maximize production for the optimum level of population, but it is also necessary that it should also have a equitable distribution. The definition of Car Saunders is also not universally accepted because welfare results in value judgments regarding the structure of other distributions and outputs. Thus Dalton’s definition is universal.

Optimum Population Theory Explanation

Let us try to know the basis of the simple and first principle of knowing the principle. The idea of ​​optimum or optimum is accepted everywhere. How many students should be there in a class, how many clothes should be there to wear or how much light should there be in the room to study, etc. The question is related to the idea of ​​the optimum. The optimum is the best but not the maximum.

For example, a worker may try to earn maximum wage, but for maximum wage, other factors have to be taken into account like security of employment, working conditions, legality of source of money etc. Therefore, even after getting high wages, he will not accept employment in such a place where there is insecurity. Thus he is looking for an optimum or optimum wage and not the maximum wage. Thus, the optimum or optimal situation is the one where a particular goal is being best met. In this context, the matter of optimum or optimal population can also be talked about. This is why Alfred Sauve wrote – “An optimum population is the one that achieves a given alm in the most satisfactory way.” Personal welfare, increase in wealth, employment, power, public health and life expectancy, standard of living, national production, national income, per capita income, consumption per capita, etc. Of these various factors, the economic base may be the most acceptable basis. Therefore, whenever optimum is mentioned, we refer to economic optimum.

Sauve wrote, “The • optimum population is only a convenient phrase. When we say that, a country is economically over populated, we mean that its populations is higher than its economic optimum at the present moment.” It seems expedient to mention the criteria as well. as

1. Composition of population.
2. Natural Resources
Technology |
4. Production method.
5. Human happiness.
6. Personal Opportunity & Security
7. Harmony with nature.
8. Protection of Ecology
9. Spiritual achievement not in ideal proportion to means

Now the question arises that what should be the basis of economic optimum or optimum? You must have understood from the laws of origin that there is such a combination of resources that the cost is minimum. If each of the sources of production is mixed, then the full use of each means will not be possible in the field of production. As soon as all the factors are in ideal proportion, the limit of maximum output will come.

The optimum population theory is based on the Law of Returns. There is a functional relationship between population growth and working population. In order to properly exploit the natural resources of a country, it is necessary that a certain proportion of manpower should be maintained with other means of production. If the population of a country is less then the working population will also be less. Therefore, due to not being able to use the means of production properly, the average production and per capita income will be low. When the population increases and the working population increases, then as a result of the benefit of division of labor, the per capita income starts increasing along with the good use of the resources of the country.

In this way, you must have understood that initially with the increase in population, the marginal productivity of labor and the average productivity generation growth law (Laws of Increasing Returns) will be applicable. Its point will be achieved at which optimum relationship of population with other means of production will be established. Here the average output will be maximum and optimum. This will be the point of optimum population. This is the condition of the Law of Constants Returns.

If the increase in population continues even after this, then this optimal coincidence will be broken. As a result, the Law of Decreasing Returns will become active due to decrease in marginal and average production, per capita income will start decreasing. Now you must have understood that the optimum population level or point is where the average per capita income will be maximum. If the size of the population is less than this level, then it will be called under-population and if the size of the population is more than this point, it will be considered as over-population in the country. You can also understand the optimum population theory from the following picture per law of constant return. Deposit Law of decreasing return
AP is the curve of average income or average production per capita in the population diagram. In the beginning, with the increase in population up to OM, the real income and productivity per capita increases – that is, the law of increasing return applies. The per capita income on OM population is ME which is maximum. After this the per capita income starts decreasing, here this law of origin (Law of Decreasing Return) is applicable. Hence, OM is the optimum population. It is clear from the picture that the population up to OM is desirable but after the M point it is undesirable and if it is not stopped, the problem of population will arise. Prof. Malthus believed that if natural restrictions are implemented in the country, then this situation is an indicator of the situation of overpopulation or overpopulation, but this idea is not real.

According to the optimum population theory, if a country has less than optimal population, then the population is otherwise more than optimal, then the situation of population will be considered as overpopulation. Dalton’s formula – Optimum size The famous economist Dalton established a formula to measure the scarcity or excess of population which is as follows

A – OM M = 0 Where, M Degree of Maladjustment A = Actual Population 0 = Optimum Population If M is positive then it indicates population, if M is negative then it indicates less population or population. If M is zero, then the actual and optimal population will be equal.

Ideas of Dalton and Ravines in relation to optimum population The views of Dalton and Ravines in relation to optimum population are particularly noteworthy.

Dalton gives maximum income per capita to the theory of optimum population (Optimum population is that which gives maximum income per head). Both have been given importance. According to Dalton, the population will be considered to have reached the optimum point when it attains the maximum per capita income from the natural resources, production technology and capital support available in the country.

Can win If the population of the country will be less than this optimum level, then it means that the resources have not been used properly.

Conversely, if the population exceeds the optimum point, then each unit of the other factor will reduce the average income due to less work in the field of production. Thus you must have understood that maximum average income will be achieved only when the combination of the factors of production is in optimum ratio. Deviation in any direction from this point will sometimes bring in the average income. ,

Prof. Ravines has a different view than Dalton’s. According to him, optimum population is the one in which maximum production is possible (The population which just makes the maximum returns possible is the optimum or best population). . Ravines’s approach assumes little importance because, in comparison to Dalton, he has given importance to social production rather than to average per capita income. According to Robbins, the increase in population is justified to the extent to which the increase in total output is found. This can happen only if the per capita income is not maximum. Only then will there be optimum population. When every person gets enough income for subsistence.

 

Differences in the approaches of Dalton and Rawins On making a comparative study between the approaches of Prof. Dalton and Prof. Rovins, the difference found in their approach is given below. 1. Prof. Dalton considers per capita income as the basis for determining ideal population. . According to you, the ideal population is that population in which the natural resources, capital, day-art of the country can be properly and fully exploited and the maximum per capita income can be achieved.
Whereas, Robbins considers maximum total output as the basis of ideal population. According to you, “Optimum population is the population which maximizes production”.

According to Prof. Dalton, the growth of population is good to that extent till the per capita income reaches its maximum point. Whereas according to Robbins this growth is good till the point of maximum origin is reached. From this point of view, according to Robbins the optimum point of population will be slightly ahead of Dalton’s optimum population point because according to Robbins that level of population is optimum where both production and consumption are equal. Dalton is of the opinion that if the population has reached the optimum point, then the quantity of birth rate will be suitable enough to replace the death rate i.e. decline in population. But Robbins says it could be more.

If we look at the views of both the scholars, then it is clear that Prof. Dalton has not only kept in mind the origin of the country in this theory, but has also given sufficient emphasis on the proper distribution of wealth (production) in the country. Whereas Robbins has focused more on production and consumption only, not on the relationship between generation and distribution.

Robbins’ analysis is theoretical and Dalton’s idea is practical. According to Robbins, if the per capita in the country is engaged in gainful employment, then there is no fear of overpopulation. ” ” ( It every person in the country is gainfully employed , there is no fear of over population )

In one sense, Robbins’ approach appears to be more liberal and broad. But when we think on the basis of equitable distribution, Dalton’s idea is more liberal and his definition looks more best and practical. Whereas the definition of Robbins seems to be narrow. If considered deeply, it can be said that there is no real difference between the views of these two scholars. The only difference is in the perspectives.

 

Car Sounders and Optimal Population Theory

Car Saunders believes that the population which increases per capita income is called ideal population. According to Saunders, when the population of a country increases, it strengthens the division of labor and specialization, which leads to an increase in per capita income. This increase in population gives rise to a situation where per capita income becomes higher , and the same amount of population which increases per capita income . called optimum. This point which maximizes the income of the individual is known as ideal or optimum population.

Thus, with the help of optimum population theory, we know that size of population of a country, which is economically suitable for the country. In short, that size of population will be optimal, which increases the per capita income, when the per capita income of any country decreases as it increases above this ideal point, then the population increases, the per capita income increases with its At the same time, when the population of a country increases, it also reduces the natural resources and available capital per capita, increases unemployment and decreases per capita income. Saunders has called this situation the condition of over-population.

Optimum Population Theory Important Features

Following are the important features of optimum population theory

This theory based on the Decreasing Law of Origin is based on the Variable Ratio or Decreasing Law.

, The point of optimum population is dynamic

The point of  population is dynamic. When there is a change in any of the means which are taken as given, this optimum point or level changes. For example, scientific progress in the country, technological development, discovery of natural resources, research of new methods of production will increase per capita production and the optimum point will shift upwards. The dynamic nature of the point of optimum population can be illustrated by the diagram, the shape of O. In a given situation of production technology and scientific development, AP is the average product curve or the per capita income curve at which the optimum population level is OM. Improvement in the methods of production and research results in increase in production and per capita income increases from EM to E.M because now the new average line of production rises up to AP. As a result, the optimum population point increases from M to M. The OM population which was optimal earlier is now under-populated.

Optimum population is not only a quantitative but also a qualitative consideration.

Some modern economists, including Prof. Boulding Prof. T. R. by Prof. Penrose, hold the view that optimal population is not only a quantitative idea but also a qualitative consideration. This is the reason why Boulding uses the term standard of living in place of per capita income. Prof. Bai considers that size of population as optimal which (in addition to maximum per capita income) can also maximize social and economic life. Naturally, when production or income increases, people’s economic welfare also increases.
Due to which their standard of living starts rising, but by including qualitative factors like character, health, etc., it becomes very difficult to find the optimum population accurately for a country at a given point of time.

 

Criticism of optimum population theory

The principle of optimum population is very useful for the society but it does not mean that it is completely free from defects. Many scholars have criticized it on the following grounds

1. Assumptions of this theory are not correct- (a) The belief that the ratio of working population to population remains unchanged in spite of population growth is not correct. (b) It is also wrong to assume that the natural resources, the amount of capital and production methods of the country remain unchanged even after the increase in population. In today’s dynamic society, the imagination of them to remain unchanged is beyond reality. (c) It also does not seem practical to say that the working hours of the working population and the hourly work performed by them remain constant.

2. This theory is not practical, it is very difficult in the real world to measure the optimum or ideal population that has been talked about. As Chatterjee wrote, “In this sudden and ever-changing world, the search for the truly optimal population is like a mirage.”

(3) Accepting the theory of population is the opinion of unreasonable critics that it is inappropriate to consider the theory of population as optimal population theory because, this theory does not throw proper light on the relation of cause and effect, it is silent in this context that how and how population Why does it increase or what is the law of its increase? For the formulation of this theory it is necessary that there should be a relationship between cause and effect. This principle is actually just the use of the concept of optimum in population analysis. This is the reason why Jahan (Benay K. Sarkar) has called it unscientific in nature. “Elderly, sociologists like Sorokin have been forced to say that this is a vicious circle of dogs.”

4. This theory is very static for the modern changing world – Many scholars have called it unsuitable and static for the modern progressive world due to the static nature of the theory – According to Alva Myrdal this theory is an old static analysis. “In today’s world, technical, social institutions and economic organizations do not live in the same position. Not only this, due to changes in the production function, the laws of production keep on changing. Therefore, it would be unscientific to assume these facts to be constant. This is the reason why Paul Mombert has said that this theory is of only theoretical importance to the modern world. Due to its static nature, this theory loses its usefulness. According to Hauser and Duncan, It is static and also volatile.

5. This theory is based only on the materialistic point of view – In this theory, only the physical bases have been taken to measure the ideal population. The qualitative and other aspects of the population have not been taken into account. Thus, this theory only pays attention to per capita income and production, which in itself is indicative of a narrow view. In fact, the population is not only affected by economic grounds, but also by the social, cultural, political and military forces of the country. Therefore, these facts should have been taken into account in the determination of population.

This theory does not pay attention to the distribution side of income – This theory is also criticized for neglecting the distribution side of national income. Focuses only on the production side. The maximum average income per capita is of no importance unless there is an equitable distribution of national income. If the total national income is few

If money is concentrated in the hands of individuals, then the economic welfare of the society cannot increase. Thus, this theory ignores the important aspect like equitable distribution of national income.

Difficult to find optimum population An important criticism of optimum population theory is that it is difficult to find optimal population over a given period of time. There is no evidence about optimum population level in any country. It is not possible to measure it because optimum population means quantitative and qualitative ideal population for the country. ) is also included. These variables keep on changing and are related to the environment. Thus the concept of optimum level of population remains unclear.

This principle is not helpful in making economic policy, this theory proves to be useless from the point of view of guiding economic policy. When the objective of fiscal policy is to increase or stabilize the level of employment generation and income in the country, then there is no talk of optimum level of population. Therefore, this principle has no practical use and is considered useless.

The approach of the theory is narrow- This theory considers the question of population in a narrower perspective. Per capita income alone is not an indicator of progress. It is also necessary for the citizens to be advanced in health, education, civilization, building skills and moral point of view. Thus, while considering the ideal population size, it is not enough to focus only on economic progress but also on social, political, moral and military conditions. It is not possible to measure the social, political, moral of

There is difficulty in measuring per capita income accurately. The data in this regard are often inaccurate, unproductive and unreliable which raises doubts about the notion of optimum population. Perhaps that is why Brinley Thomas has also said, “It is a blurred idea.” Despite the above criticisms, optimal population theory has an important place in the field of demographics. With the promulgation of this theory, the fear of the common Malthusian Devil was reduced in the people. This theory made it clear that not every increase in population is harmful. If the per capita income increases with the increase of population, then its increase is not beneficial. Therefore, keeping this principle in mind, population growth can be encouraged or discouraged.

 

Optimum Population Theory Importance

This theory has been criticized on many grounds but it is never meant to be.
That this principle has no utility or importance at all. In short, the importance of the theory can be clarified from the following points:

The theory of ideal population is important because it has not established any relation between the food content of the population. On the contrary, in this theory an attempt has been made to relate the population to capital, production process and natural resources.

The theory of ideal population appears to be more scientific, real and justified as compared to other theories of population. Thus, from the point of view of the nation also the theory of ideal population seems closer to the truth.

The theory of ideal population encourages division of labor and specialization in the society. Increases production growth. Recognizes inventions and scientific discoveries and thus paves the way for industrialization. The theory of ideal population is not a mere document of the despairs of human society. In this theory the growth of population is linked with future happiness and prosperity.

Proponents of ideal population theory hold that it is easier to prevent a society from reaching a state of overpopulation than to reduce population. 6 This principle emphasizes on reducing the population by controlling it. In this way, this principle is also useful for the success of family planning.

This theory also lays emphasis on the growth of per capita income because the prosperity and happiness of the citizens of a country is possible only with the increase of per capita income. This principle also emphasizes on the change in its environment. By changing our environment according to the time and situation, the balance of society and nation remains.

 

The theory of optimum population relates population growth with economic growth.

In this theory, population is seen as a producer and it has been clarified that neither the decrease of population nor its growth would be good for a country. Proponents of this theory have considered per capita income as the basis of population determination, which is more appropriate.

This theory refutes that man is not a slave of circumstances, but he can make circumstances his slave. Comparison and Superiority with Malthus’ Theory

Despite many criticisms, the optimal population theory is considered superior to Malthus’s population theory. The reason for this is that the optimum population theory has some of its own characteristics, which are as follows:

The population theory of  leads the human society towards a hopeless life and hopeless thinking. It also warns of a sad future.
On the contrary, the theory of ideal population indicates a happy future and gives importance to optimistic thinking in human society.

Malthus’s theory has inertia and permanence. This theory of Malthus is beyond dynamic thinking. On the contrary, importance has been given to mobility in ideal population theory.

Malthus’s theory of population does not outline the future progress of the country, whereas the theory of ideal population is based on the future progress of the country. In Malthus’s population theory, human possibilities have been wrongly estimated, whereas the ideal population theory is based on human possibilities.

In his theory, Malthus relates population only with the supply of food, whereas in the theory of optimum population, population has been related to all the resources, total production and national income of the country, which is more appropriate.

Malthus always considers every increase in population to be a loss. Not every increase was considered harmful in the optimal population theory. The growth and condition of only that population is harmful which is more than the ideal population point. Malthus does not say in his theory that how much population should actually be in a country at a particular time, whereas optimum population theory decides the quantity of ideal population, which is more appropriate. Malthus’s theory is in itself pessimism, whereas the optimal theory is optimistic, not considering every increase in population as worrying.

Malthus considered the activity of any country to be a symbol of abundance of natural disasters such as famine, drought, extreme rain, earthquake, epidemic etc. While the optimum theory does not consider them as a symbol of population, it considers per capita income as the real criterion.

Malthus’ principle is applicable only in backward and overpopulated countries. Whereas the optimum principle applies to countries with every situation and population.

Malthus’s theory does only numerical analysis of population, not qualitative. Whereas the optimum theory does not completely ignore the qualitative aspect of population like Malthus.

Malthus sees population primarily as a consumer, whereas the optimum theory sees it as a producer as well.

Where Malthus’s theory is completely static, the optimal theory is not only static but also dynamic.

Malthus’s theory is not scientific because it does not even determine the amount of population, as well as mentions many moral and religious things in it, but the optimal theory is free from these defects.

Malthus’s theory is more theoretical and less practical. He considered every increase in population to be bad as it would bring severe calamities on the people. Malthus writes that the table of nature is laid out for some in-numbered guests and those who come uninvited will have to starve (The table of nature is laid for a limited number of guests and those who come uninvited).
must starve ). On the other hand, optimum theory assumes that increase in population is not only desired but also necessary for optimum exploitation of natural resources of the country.

Malthus’s theory is based on the unrealistic concept that nature is miserly because in agriculture the law of diminishing returns remains in force. But from this point of view the concept of optimum theory is real. Because, this theory assumes that the law of increasing returns works first up to the optimum point and then the law of decreasing returns. From the discussion of the above facts, it can be concluded that optimal population theory is better than Malthus’ theory.