The reason that the increase in population growth in the 19th and 20th centuries did not lead to famine as Thomas Malthus predicted was because

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Let’s break down what the question is asking: why the classic Malthusian prediction of inevitable famine due to population growth did not come to pass in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Option 1: 'there was diminishing marginal product of labor' This statement describes a situation where adding more labor yields progressively smaller increases in output, which by itself would not explain why famines were avoided. In fact, diminishing marginal product of labor is more of a general characteristic of some production functions, not a direct mechanism that prevented famine through higher productivity or resource availability. So this option does not capture the key reason.
Option 2: 'increases in technology, physical capital, and human capital raised labor productivity' This option points to a trio of structural advances: better technology (e.g., agricultural innovations), more physical capital (machinery, infrastructure), and better human capital (education, health). Together, these raised output per worker and the efficiency of resource use, offsetting population pressures predicted by Malthus. This aligns with the standard explanation that productivity growth outpaced population growth.
Option 3: 'people learned to eat less' This is not an accurate or widely accepted mechanism for averting famine at the societal level in the historical context. Food intake per person did not systematically decline as a primary mechanism; rather, agricultural and economic improvements increased supply and resilience. Therefore, this is incorrect.
Option 4: 'wars kept the population in check' While conflicts have affected populations, they are not the central cause for the long-run growth of output and food availability that offset Malthus’s prediction. Wars typically destroy capital and disrupt production, making this explanation inadequate as the primary reason for the absence of famine due to population growth.
Option 5: 'worldwide population didn't actually grow' This is factually false for the period in question; world population did grow substantially, which is precisely why Malthus’s concerns were raised. The statement contradicts historical data, so it cannot be the correct reasoning.
In summary, the most plausible explanation among the choices is the acceleration of output per worker driven by technological progress, accumulation of capital, and improvements in education and health, all contributing to higher labor productivity and preventing famine in the face of rising populations. The remaining options either misstate economic relationships, rely on historically unsupported claims, or mischaracterize the drivers of growth.

ECO102H1 S LEC0101 Week 4 Quiz - Economic Growth

The reason that the increase in population growth in the 19th and 20th centuries did not lead to famine as Thomas Malthus predicted was because

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

Question46 According to Malthus (1798), limited resources will limit population growth and the world will eventually reach some constant population level True False ResetMaximum marks: 1 Flag question undefined

Jerry says disease, natural disasters, and even war serve a greater purpose. His friends say his views are offensive, and Jerry replies, “But I’m a Malthusian!” Along with Thomas Malthus, Jerry believes that the benefit of problems that wipe out large numbers of humans is that

Suppose a nation starts at point A on the following graph. According to Thomas Malthus, a rise in population would move the nation from point A to a point such as:

Thomas Malthus, an 18th-century British economist, introduced the concept of the Malthusian Trap. According to this theory, which of the following statements best describes the dynamics of technological improvement, population, and living standards in pre-industrial societies?

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler