1869 



mobility, and of dealing with problems of nutrition in the face of global 

 maldistribution of food, the problems growing out of increased con- 

 centrations of populations in urban centers, and other critical popula- 

 tion problems, all demand a renewed zeal in the global health field. 

 The place of such efforts in national planning for future initiatives has 

 not been high. 



In view of the practical need for action, the moral imperative that 

 calls for action, the opportunities for improved diplomatic relations 

 that would result from such action, and the large benefits at relatively 

 small cost that could also accrue, it is suggested that global health 

 might justifiably command a large place in the long-range planning of 

 diplomatic initiatives. However, for such plans to be converted into 

 action would require a consensus that does not yet^appear to exist. 

 Accordingly, as Dr. Quimby suggests : 



Perhaps there is need to mount an educational program so that a larger segment 

 of the public is included in the discourse surrounding the issues of national and 

 global public health. The status of the world's health might become a public issue; 

 and that issue could stimulate scientific, medical, and economic debate. For in the 

 United States, at least, debate is absolutely essential to both clarification and polit- 

 ical action.558 



The question that emerges out of this study is: by what route does 

 the problem of U.S. action toward global health achieve consensus, how 

 does it reach decisionmaking levels in the U.S. Government, and what 

 kind of long-range planning effort might be mounted — and where — to 

 chart the future course of constructive action that might yield the 

 gains described above? 



ISSUE three: beyond malthus 



Along with the problem of bringing the atom under safe international 

 control, the problem of resolving the "food/people equation" ranks at 

 the top of the hierarchy of long-range global problems of diplomacy. 

 The technology is perhaps less abstruse, but the organizational and 

 administrative complexities are probably considerably greater in 

 bringing food and population into a humane and decent balance. 

 As the author of this study, Dr. Allan S. Nanes, observes: 



Clearly, the two global tasks of producing enough but not too much food to 

 feed the world's population, and providing incentives and means for the world's 

 population to hold itself within reasonable bounds, are a tremendous challenge 

 for modern diplomacy. The rewards of success are less impressive than the terrible 

 consequences of failure. There is a regrettable tendency on the part of mankind 

 to respond eagerly to rewarding opportunities, but to ignore the prospect of 

 misfortune and delay action to avert it until convinced of its reaUty by its actual 

 onset. ^^^ 



It is possible to perceive, rationally, the adverse human conse- 

 quences of overpopulation. Analysis reveals that the human conse- 

 quences of a stable and balanced or declining population in a free 

 economy can also be adverse. Population growth in some instances, 

 the study points out, is a "powerful engine of economic growth and 

 expansion." If the poor, underdeveloped and developing nations 

 have encountered social and cultural obstacles to population control, 

 the developed countries have "... not yet accepted the consequences 



«s Ibid., p. 703. 

 . m Nanes, Beyond Maltkus: The Food/People Equation. Vol. II, p. 801. 



