Difference between the Malthusian Theory and the Optimum Theory of the Population

Malthusian Theory of Population in following terms.

(i) Malthus is pessimistic and afraid of an increase of population. But the optimum theory is optimistic because it holds that an increase of population may increase the productivity of the country. An increase of population is welcomed so long the actual number is less than optimum.

(ii) Malthus considers the problem of population in relation to the food stuffs of the country only. But optimum theory considers it in relation to the total wealth of the country. A country may be short in her food stuffs, but she may be rich in other resources. Great Britain produces only a part of her necessary food-stuffs. But she can meet her shortage by selling her industrial products and various other services such as banking, shipping etc and by importing food from abroad.

(iii) But the defect of the optimum theory lies in the fact that there is no means to determine the optimum number of a country. Moreover optimum for a country is not fixed. With the change of data i.e. resources the optimum also changes. For example if Pakistan possesses optimum number today, and if tomorrow she discovers some new mines or oil fields, the optimum number of today may be under- population tomorrow. Conversely with the loss of a good market for cotton etc the optimum population may be turned into over population.

Thus theory is not very useful in practice because by a plan or policy we can not achieve the optimum. The actual population may coincide with the optimum only as accident.