In 1980, two American professors made a $1,000 bet on a crucial question: would Earth run out of resources to support a growing human population? Paul Ehrlich, a biologist from Stanford, was one of the professors. He had written a popular book in 1968 called “The Population Bomb,” where he predicted that the rapid increase in global population since World War II would lead to widespread starvation. Ehrlich’s ideas were influenced by Thomas Malthus, an 18th-century economist who believed that population growth would always outstrip food supply if left unchecked.
During the 1970s, it seemed like Ehrlich’s predictions were coming true. Famines, pollution, and political unrest made many people think that humanity was heading towards a crisis. Some governments even started considering policies to control population growth. On the other side of the debate was Julian Simon, a professor of business and economics. Simon looked at historical data and found no evidence that a growing population led to lower living standards. In fact, he found the opposite. Simon argued that human creativity would always find ways to overcome resource shortages.
In June 1980, Simon wrote an article for Science Magazine that criticized Ehrlich’s views, sparking a heated debate. Simon regretted not betting against Ehrlich earlier, especially after Ehrlich’s prediction that “England would not exist in the year 2000.” Later that year, Simon challenged Ehrlich to a bet. Their argument also touched on whether environmental protection or economic growth should be prioritized, a key issue in the presidential race between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan.
After some negotiation, they agreed on the terms: they would bet $200 on the price of each of five metals. If the prices decreased or stayed the same over the next decade, Simon would win. If the prices increased, Ehrlich would win. The metals were chosen because they are finite resources used in manufacturing. Ehrlich believed that a growing population would consume these resources, causing prices to rise. Simon, however, thought that human innovation would find alternatives, keeping prices stable or even lowering them.
Over the next ten years, the global population continued to grow, but the prices of all five metals decreased. This made Simon the winner of the bet, although the bet itself might not have been the best way to settle their original debate.
Today, the focus on overpopulation is seen as a historical snapshot. Our understanding of starvation and famine has evolved. We have enough resources to support a growing population, but the challenge is distributing them fairly. Population size is no longer seen as the main cause of environmental issues and climate change. Instead, experts agree that we should focus on replacing unsustainable technologies with sustainable ones. Economic growth and environmental protection can coexist.
In October 1990, Julian Simon received a check from Paul Ehrlich, with no note attached. This marked the end of their famous bet, but the conversation about how to best manage our planet’s resources continues.
Engage in a classroom debate where you take on the roles of Paul Ehrlich and Julian Simon. Research their arguments and present your case on whether population growth is a threat to resources. This will help you understand the complexities of the overpopulation debate and the perspectives of both sides.
Choose one of the five metals involved in the bet and research its historical price trends, availability, and technological alternatives. Present your findings to the class, discussing how human innovation has impacted the resource’s demand and supply over time.
Work in groups to brainstorm innovative solutions to current resource shortages or environmental challenges. Present your ideas, focusing on how human creativity can address these issues, similar to Simon’s argument in the bet.
Watch a documentary on global population growth and resource management. After viewing, discuss in groups how the documentary’s insights relate to the Simon vs. Ehrlich bet and what lessons can be applied to today’s environmental challenges.
Write a research paper exploring sustainable technologies that have emerged since the 1980s. Analyze how these technologies contribute to both economic growth and environmental protection, reflecting the lessons learned from the bet’s outcome.
In 1980, two American professors placed a $1,000 bet on a critical question: would the Earth run out of resources to sustain a growing human population? One of them was Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich, author of the bestselling 1968 book, “The Population Bomb.” The global population had rapidly increased since World War II, and Ehrlich predicted that millions would starve as the population grew faster than the food supply. He drew from the ideas of 18th-century economist Thomas Malthus, who suggested that population growth, if unchecked, would always outpace food supply.
Throughout the 1970s, it seemed Ehrlich was correct; famines, pollution, and political unrest led many to believe humanity was on the brink of crisis, prompting some governments to consider and implement policies to limit population growth. Betting against Ehrlich was Julian Simon, a professor of business and economics. He analyzed historical data and found no correlation between a growing population and a decrease in living standards—in fact, he found the opposite. Simon argued that Ehrlich’s work, like Malthus’s, was based on theoretical calculations, while real-world data told a different story. He claimed that human ingenuity would always find alternatives to compensate for diminishing resources.
In June 1980, Simon wrote a critical article for *Science Magazine*, sparking a heated debate between the two men. He expressed regret for not placing a wager against Ehrlich earlier, referencing Ehrlich’s prediction that “England would not exist in the year 2000.” Later that year, Simon called Ehrlich a false prophet and challenged him to a bet. Their feud also touched on the debate over whether to prioritize environmental protections or economic growth, a key issue in the American presidential race between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan.
After some discussion, they agreed on the terms: $200 on the price of each of five metals. If the price of the metals decreased or remained stable over the next decade, Simon would win. If the price increased, Ehrlich would win. Although it may seem unrelated, the price of metals was chosen because they are finite natural resources used in manufacturing. Ehrlich believed that a growing population would consume these resources, driving prices up, while Simon thought humanity would find substitutes, keeping prices stable or decreasing them.
So, what happened? The world population continued to rise over the next ten years, but the price of all five metals decreased, making Simon the clear winner of a bet that may not have been the best proxy for their original debate.
Today, their focus on overpopulation represents a snapshot of history. Our understanding of the causes of starvation and famine has evolved: we have the resources to support a growing population, but we are currently failing to distribute those resources equitably, and addressing this should be our priority. We no longer view population size as a primary cause of environmental degradation and climate change, nor do we see limiting population growth as a viable solution. Instead, experts largely agree that we should focus on replacing unsustainable technologies and practices with sustainable ones, and that economic growth and environmental protections can coexist.
In October 1990, Julian Simon received a check from Paul Ehrlich, with no accompanying note.
Overpopulation – A situation where the number of people exceeds the capacity of the environment to support life at a decent standard of living. – The city faced significant challenges due to overpopulation, leading to inadequate housing and strained public services.
Resources – Natural materials or assets that are available for use and can be utilized to produce goods and services. – The sustainable management of resources is crucial for ensuring long-term economic growth and environmental health.
Population – The total number of people inhabiting a particular area or country. – The population of the metropolitan area has grown rapidly, prompting the government to invest in infrastructure development.
Starvation – A severe deficiency in caloric energy intake, leading to extreme hunger and malnutrition. – The international community must address the root causes of starvation to prevent humanitarian crises in vulnerable regions.
Environment – The natural world, including the land, water, air, plants, and animals, especially as it is affected by human activity. – Protecting the environment is essential for maintaining biodiversity and ensuring the health of future generations.
Sustainability – The ability to maintain ecological and social systems over the long term without depleting resources or causing harm to the environment. – Implementing sustainability practices in agriculture can help preserve soil health and increase food security.
Innovation – The introduction of new ideas, methods, or products that bring about significant improvements or changes. – Technological innovation in renewable energy has the potential to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and mitigate climate change.
Economics – The study of how societies use scarce resources to produce valuable commodities and distribute them among different people. – Understanding economics is essential for analyzing how policy decisions impact national and global markets.
Famine – An extreme scarcity of food affecting a large number of people, often caused by factors such as drought, war, or economic instability. – The region was struck by a severe famine, prompting international aid organizations to provide emergency relief.
Pollution – The introduction of harmful substances or products into the environment, causing adverse effects on ecosystems and human health. – Reducing air pollution is a critical step in improving public health and combating climate change.
