Skip to main content
Open Book Publishers

2. Evolution in the History of Population Thought

Chapter of: Human Evolutionary Demography(pp. 27–56)

Export Metadata

  • ONIX 3.1
  • ONIX 3.0
    • Thoth
    • Project MUSE
      Cannot generate record: No BIC or BISAC subject code
    • OAPEN
    • JSTOR
      Cannot generate record: No BISAC subject code
    • Google Books
      Cannot generate record: No BIC, BISAC or LCC subject code
    • OverDrive
      Cannot generate record: No priced EPUB or PDF URL
  • ONIX 2.1
  • CSV
  • JSON
  • OCLC KBART
  • BibTeX
  • CrossRef DOI deposit
    Cannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
  • MARC 21 Record
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 Markup
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 XML
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
Metadata
Title2. Evolution in the History of Population Thought
ContributorPhilip Kreager(author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0251.02
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0251/chapters/10.11647/obp.0251.02
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
CopyrightPhilip Kreager
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Published on2024-06-14
Long abstractThis chapter places evolutionary demography in the history of population thought, and more particularly in relations between demography and evolutionary population biology. Darwin conceived evolution as a dynamics of variation arising from the behaviour of populations at intra- and inter-species levels. While Malthus’s principle of population was an important early stimulus, Darwin resolved the core problem in evolution -- how mechanisms of variation combine to produce divergence of character -- by analogy to Smith’s account of the division of labour. With the benefit of hindsight, we can describe Darwinian population thinking as the first general methodology in which it became possible to combine bottom-up observation including enumeration of local population dynamics with top-down statistical methods. The two components entail different concepts of population, which may be characterised broadly as ‘open’ and ‘closed’. Their combination shows that evolutionary theory is rooted in the same sources of population thinking that gave rise to demography: the former lie in Classical population thinking and early modern population arithmetics, and the latter in 19th-century statistics and probability. Hereditary influences remained a ‘black box’ in Darwin’s theory, which only began to be unpacked with the rediscovery of Mendel’s research. The second half of the chapter traces the central role which demographic methods played in topical and analytical developments of the first half of the 20th century, including both the formulation and critique of eugenics, the emergence of population ecology, and the rise of the mathematical theory of population genetics. There is an irony here: even as demographic methods came to play an integral role, mainstream demographers became less and less involved. The ‘separatism’ of demography and evolutionary biology often remarked in the post-war era thus has deeper roots. These lie partly in topical issues, like reactions against eugenics, but more importantly in a conceptual shift in how we understand relationships between ultimate and proximate mechanisms of population change, and its implications for analysis and modelling. Evolutionary theory entails a balance of methods and insights drawing on both population concepts, which demography has not yet achieved. The concluding section provides examples of how current evolutionary demography is now integrating these developments into demographic explanation.
Page rangepp. 27–56
Print length30 pages
LanguageEnglish (Original)
Contributors

Philip Kreager

(author)
Senior Research Fellow in Human Sciences, Somerville College at University of Oxford
Director, Fertility and Reproduction Studies Group at University of Oxford
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9553-2936
https://www.some.ox.ac.uk/our-people/philip-kreager/

Philip Kreager is Senior Research Fellow in Human Sciences, Somerville College, and Director, Fertility and Reproduction Studies Group, Oxford University.

References
  1. Browne, J. 1980. ‘Darwin’s Botanical Arithmetic and the “Principle of Divergence”, 1854–1858’, Journal of the History of Biology 13.1: pp. 53–89, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00125354
  2. Cleland J. and C. Wilson. 1987. ‘Demand Theories of Fertility Transition: an Iconoclastic View’, Population Studies 41.1: pp. 5–30, https://doi.org/10.1080/0032472031000142516
  3. Darwin, C. 1851. A Monography on the Subclass Cirripedia (London: The Ray Society).
  4. —. (1868). The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication, I-II (London: Murray).
  5. — (1958), The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, N. Barlow (ed.). (London: Collins).
  6. —. 1996 [1859]. The Origin of Species (Harmondsworth: Penguin).
  7. Demeny, P. and G. McNicoll. 2006. ‘World Population 1950–2000: Perception and Response’, in The Political Economy of Global Population Change, 1950–2050, Population and Development Review Supplement, 32: pp. 1–51, New York: The Population Council, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2006.tb00002.x
  8. Dyson, T. and M. Murphy. 1985. ‘The Onset of Fertility Transition’, Population and Development Review, 11.3: pp. 399–440, https://doi.org/10.2307/1973246
  9. Fisher, R. A. 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
  10. Flew, A. 1982. ‘Introduction’, in T. R. Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population (Harmondsworth: Penguin).
  11. Galton, F. 1907. ‘Probability, the Foundation of Eugenics’, The Popular Science Monthly, 71: pp. 165–78, https://doi.org/10.2307/2331694
  12. Garrett, E., A. Reid, K. Schürer, and S. Szreter. 2001. Changing Family Size in England and Wales, 1891–1911 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
  13. Gould, S. J. 2002. The Structure of Evolutionary Theory (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press).
  14. Hamilton, W. E. 1966. ‘The Moulding of Senescence by Natural Selection’, Theoretical Population Biology, 12: pp. 12–45, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(66)90184-6
  15. Hauser, P. M. and O. D. Duncan. 1959. ‘Overview and Conclusions’, in The Study of Population: An Inventory and Appraisal, ed. by P. M. Hauser and O. D. Duncan (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 1–117.
  16. Huneman, P. and D. M. Walsh. 2017. Challenging the Modern Synthesis (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  17. Kaplan, H. and M. Gurven. 2008. ‘Top-Down and Bottom-Up Research in Biodemography’, Demographic Research, 19, 44: pp. 1587–1602, https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2008.19.44
  18. Kaplan, H., P. L. Hooper, J. Stieglitz, and M. Gurven. 2015. ‘The Causal Relationship between Fertility and Infant Mortality: Prospective Analyses of a Population in Transition’, in Population in the Human Sciences: Concepts, Models, Evidence, ed. by P. Kreager, B. Winney, S. Ulijaszek and C. Capelli (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 361–78, https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688203.003.0013
  19. Kohler, R. E. 1994. Lords of the Fly: Drosophila Genetics and the Experimental Life (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
  20. Kreager, P. 1988. ‘New Light on Graunt’ Population Studies, 42.1: pp. 129–40, https://doi.org/10.1080/0032472031000143156
  21. —. 2008. ‘Aristotle and Open Population Thinking’, Population and Development Review, 34.4: pp. 599–629, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2008.00243.x
  22. —. 2009. ‘Darwin and Lotka: Two Concepts of Population’, Demographic Research, 21.16: pp. 469–502, https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2009.21.16
  23. —. 2014. ‘On the History of Malthusian Population Thought’, Population and Development Review, 40.4: pp. 73–742, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2014.00009.x
  24. —. 2015. ‘Population and the Making of the Human Sciences: A Historical Outline’, in Population in the Human Sciences: Concepts, Models, Evidence, ed. by P. Kreager, B. Winney, S. Ulijaszek and C. Capelli (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 55–85.
  25. —. 2017. ‘Adam Smith, the Division of Labour, and the Renewal of Population Heterogeneity’, Population and Development Review, 43.3: pp. 513–39, https://doi.org/10.1111/padr.12085
  26. Kreager, P., B. Winney, S. Ulijaszek and C. Capelli, (eds.). 2015. Population in the Human Sciences: Concepts, Models, Evidence (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  27. Laland, K. N., J. Odling-Smee, S. Myles. 2010. ‘How Culture Shaped the Human Genome: Bringing Genetics and the Human Sciences Together’, Nature Reviews/Genetics, 11: pp. 137–49, https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2734
  28. Laland, K. N., K. Sterelny, J. Odling-Smee, W. Hoppitt, T. Uller. 2011. ‘Cause and Effect in Biology Revisited: Is Mayr’s Proximate-Ultimate Dichotomy Still Useful?’, Science, 334: pp. 1512–16, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1210879
  29. Lee, R. 2003. ‘Rethinking the Evolutionary Theory of Ageing: Transfers, Not Births, Shape Senescence in Social Species’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100.16: pp. 9637–42, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1530303100
  30. —. 2008. ‘Sociality, Selection and Survival: Simulated Evolution of Mortality with Intergenerational Transfers and Food Sharing’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105.20: pp. 7124–28, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0710234105
  31. Lewontin, R. 2001. The Triple Helix: Gene, Organism and Environment (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press).
  32. —. 2003. ‘Introduction: The Scientific work of Theodore Dobzhansky’, in Dobzhansky’s Genetics of Natural Populations I–XLIII. Ed. by R. C. Lewontin et al. (New York: Columbia University Press), pp. 93–115.
  33. —. 2004. ‘Building a Science of Population Biology’, in The Evolution of Population Biology, ed. by R. S. Singh and M. K. Uyenoyama (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 7–20.
  34. Limoges, C. 1968. ‘Darwin, Milne-Edwards, et le principe de divergence’, XII Congrès Interntional d’Historire des Sciences, pp. 111–15.
  35. —. 1970. La sélection naturelle: Étude sur la première constitution d’un concept, 1837–1859 (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France).
  36. Lotka, A. 1925. Elements of Physical Biology (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins).
  37. —. 1934, 1939. Théorie analytique des associations biologiques I, II (Paris: Herman et Cie).
  38. Malthus, T. R. 1982 [1798]. An Essay on the Principle of Population (Harmondsworth: Penguin).
  39. Mayr, E. 1961. ‘Cause and Effect in Biology’, Science 134:1501–06, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315133638-2
  40. —. 1982. The Growth of Biological Thought (Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press).
  41. —. 2004. What Makes Biology Unique? Considerations on the Autonomy of a Scientific Discipline (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
  42. Mayr, E. and Provine, W. B. (eds.). 1988. The Evolutionary Synthesis: Perspectives on the Unification of Biology (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press).
  43. Milne-Edwards, H. 1827. ‘Organisation’, in Dictionnaire classique d’historie naturalle, XII, pp. 332–44.
  44. —. 1851 [1834]. Introduction á la zoologie générale, ou, Considérations sur les tendances de la nature dans la constitution du règne animal (Paris: Masson), https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/148268#page/9/mode/1up
  45. Odling-Smee, J. 2015. ‘Niche Construction in Human Evolution and Demography’, in Population in the Human Sciences: Concepts, Models, Evidence, ed. by P. Kreager, B. Winney, S. Ulijaszek and C. Capelli (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 147–71.
  46. Pearl, R. 1925. The Biology of Population Growth (New York: Knopf).
  47. Pearson, K. 1896. ‘Contributions to the Mathematical Theory of Evolution: Note on Reproductive Selection’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 59, 2: 398–402, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspl.1895.0093
  48. —. 1912. The Problem of Practical Eugenics, London: Dulau and Co.
  49. Pollak, R. A., and S. C. Watkins. 1993. ‘Cultural and Economic Approaches to Fertility: Proper Marriage or Mésalliance?’, Population and Development Review, 19.3: pp. 467–96, https://doi.org/10.2307/2938463
  50. Pooley, S. 2013. ‘Parenthood, Child-Rearing and Fertility in England, 1850–1914’, History of the Family, 18.1: pp. 83–106, https://doi.org/10.1080/1081602x.2013.795491
  51. Porter, T. M. 1986. The Rise of Statistical Thinking, 1820–1900 (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
  52. Provine, W. B. 1971. The Origins of Theoretical Population Genetics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
  53. Quetelet, A. 1869. Physique Sociale, I-II (Brussels: C. Muquardt).
  54. Ryder, N. B. 1964. ‘Notes on the Concept of a Population’, American Journal of Sociology, 66.5: pp. 447–63, https://doi.org/10.1086/223649
  55. Schweber, S. S. 1977. ‘The Origin of the Origin Revisited’, Journal of the History of Biology, 10.2: pp. 229–316, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00572644
  56. —. 1980. ‘Darwin and the Political Economists: Divergence of Character’. Journal of the History of Biology, 13: pp. 195–289, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00125744
  57. Sear, R. 2015a. ‘Evolutionary Demography: A Darwinian Renaissance in Demography’, in International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, ed. by J. D. Wright, 2nd edition, VIII (Oxford: Elsevier), pp. 406–12.
  58. —. 2015b. ‘Evolutionary Contributions to the Study of Human Fertility’, Population Studies, 69.S1: pp. 39–55, https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2014.982905
  59. Smith, A. 1976 [1776]. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. by R. H. Campbell and A. S. Skinner, W. B. Todd (text ed.), I-II (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
  60. Soloway, R. A. 1982. Birth Control and the Population Question in England 1877–1930 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press).
  61. Spencer, C. 2015. ‘From Populations to Clines in Modern Statistical Genetics’, in Population in the Human Sciences: Concepts, Models, Evidence, ed. by P. Kreager, B. Winney, S. Ulijaszek and C. Capelli (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 501–16.
  62. Szreter, S. R. S. 1984. ‘The Genesis of the Registrar-General’s Social Classification of Occupations’, British Journal of Sociology, 35.4: pp. 522–46, https://doi.org/10.2307/590433
  63. —. 1996. Fertility, Class and Gender in Britain, 1860–1940 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
  64. Wachter, K. 2015. ‘Population Heterogeneity in the Spotlight of Biodemography’, in Population in the Human Sciences: Concepts, Models, Evidence, ed. by P. Kreager, B. Winney, S. Ulijaszek and C. Capelli (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 131–45.
  65. Wrigley, E. A. 1986. ‘Elegance and Experience: Malthus at the Bar of History’, in The State of Population Theory: Forward from Malthus, ed. by D. Coleman and R. Schofield (Oxford: Blackwell), pp. 46–64.
  66. Wright, S. 1930. ‘The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. A Review’, Journal of Heredity, 21: pp. 349–56, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a103361