Review of "After the Spike”: The Existential Threat of Depopulation, By Mrs Vera West and Mrs. Abigail Knight (Florida)
After the Spike: Population, Progress, and the Case for People, by Dean Spears and Michael Geruso is a provocative and timely exploration of global demographic trends, challenging the long-standing narrative that overpopulation is humanity's greatest threat. Instead, the authors argue that the impending decline in global population, projected to peak at around 10 billion later this century before rapidly falling, poses significant risks to economic prosperity, social equity, and human progress. Published on July 8, 2025, by Simon & Schuster, this book combines rigorous economic and demographic analysis with a compassionate call to rethink our assumptions about population dynamics. Drawing on Ronald Bailey's review in Yahoo News and additional insights from various sources, this review examines the book's core arguments, its strengths, weaknesses, and the broader implications of depopulation from a critical perspective.
Spears and Geruso, economists and demographers at the University of Texas at Austin, begin by dismantling the "population bomb" mindset popularised by Paul Ehrlich in 1968. Ehrlich's dire predictions of mass starvation due to overpopulation have not materialised; instead, global life expectancy has risen from 57 years in 1968 to 73 years today, and daily caloric intake per person has increased by over a third since the 1960s. The authors argue that human ingenuity, driven by larger populations, has fuelled technological and social advancements that have mitigated environmental and resource challenges. They assert that a declining population threatens to reverse these gains by reducing the number of innovators, slowing economic growth, and straining social systems.
The book's central thesis is that depopulation, driven by global fertility rates falling below the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman (currently at 2.2 globally and 1.6 in the U.S.), will lead to a "smaller, less vibrant, and less joyous future." The authors highlight that most countries already have birth rates too low to sustain their populations, with South Korea's fertility rate at a staggering 0.75. They argue that a shrinking working-age population will increase the old-age dependency ratio, as seen in Japan, where the ratio has shifted from nine workers per retiree in 1960 to just two today. This demographic shift burdens economies with higher healthcare and pension costs, potentially leading to "societal collapse."
Spears and Geruso challenge the assumption that fewer people will benefit the environment or raise living standards. They note that even a drastic scenario, such as a 20-year global pause on births, would only reduce the population by 14% by 2050, cutting emissions by a similar margin, which is insufficient to address climate change (assuming its existence of course), compared to technological advancements already achieved in Europe and the U.S. Instead, depopulation could hinder environmental progress by reducing funding for green initiatives and slowing innovation. They also argue that a smaller population does not inherently improve per capita wealth, as economies of scale and shared innovations thrive in larger societies.
The authors identify opportunity costs as the primary driver of declining birth rates, rather than monetary costs like childcare or housing. As societies become richer and more interconnected, individuals face growing trade-offs between parenting and other rewarding pursuits, careers, travel, entertainment, and personal fulfillment. This trend persists across income levels; wealthier individuals and countries tend to have lower birth rates, as seen in global demographic data. For example, despite rising living standards, fertility has dropped steadily since the 1960s, from 5 children per woman globally to 2.2 today.
Spears and Geruso dismiss the effectiveness of policies aimed at boosting fertility, such as cash payments, subsidised childcare, or extended parental leave, noting that no country has successfully reversed below-replacement fertility trends. They also critique coercive measures, like China's former one-child policy or South Korea's abortion bans, which failed to alter fertility trends significantly. Even the idea that high-fertility cultural groups (e.g., religious communities) will outbreed others is debunked, as these groups are also experiencing declining fertility compared to their historical rates.
After the Spike excels in its rigorous, data-driven approach, drawing on the authors' expertise in economics and demography. Their research, published in top journals like the American Economic Review and Nature Climate Change, lends credibility to their arguments. The book is accessible yet detailed, appealing to both general readers and experts. Endorsements from figures like Nobel Laureate Simon Johnson and Hannah Ritchie of Our World in Data praise its clarity and empathetic narrative, which balances empirical analysis with moral arguments about the value of human life.
The authors' rejection of both pronatalist coercion and anti-natalist dogma is a key strength. They advocate for population stabilisation, not endless growth, while emphasising reproductive freedom and gender equity. Their vision of societies where parenting is "fun, rewarding, and great" resonates as a sensible approach to addressing demographic challenges.
Ronald Bailey notes a significant flaw: the book largely sidesteps the role of economic and political institutions, such as property rights, free speech, and the rule of law, that have driven prosperity and population growth over the past two centuries. This omission weakens the authors' case, as these institutions are critical to fostering the innovation they argue is threatened by depopulation. Without addressing how to preserve or strengthen these systems, their call for stabilisation feels incomplete.
Additionally, the authors' reluctance to propose concrete solutions is both a strength and a weakness. While they avoid overpromising a "capital S Solution," their invitation to build societies that support parenting feels vague. Critics, like Paul Morland in Literary Review, argue that the book underestimates the challenges of aging populations, particularly the economic strain of rising dependency ratios. Morland suggests that the authors' optimism about avoiding societal collapse may be overly sanguine, given Japan's struggles as a case study.
From a critical perspective, Spears and Geruso frame depopulation as an existential threat not because it will lead to human extinction but because it risks undoing centuries of progress. A shrinking population could lead to economic stagnation, as fewer workers support growing numbers of retirees, reducing resources for innovation and social programs. The authors cite the "economies of scale" argument: larger populations generate more ideas, fostering technological breakthroughs that have historically solved problems like famine and disease. A depopulating world, they warn, will have fewer "geniuses" to tackle challenges like climate change or pandemics.
However, the threat is not immediate or apocalyptic, as some natalist voices like Elon Musk suggest. The authors acknowledge that population decline is not guaranteed to begin in 2060 or 2080, as UN projections vary, but they argue that current trends make it likely without intervention. They also caution against demagogues exploiting low birth rates to push authoritarian or exclusionary policies, a concern echoed on X, where users discuss the need to avoid coercive pronatalism.
After the Spike shifts the demographic conversation from overpopulation fears to the risks of underpopulation, aligning with emerging discussions among policymakers and scholars. The White House's consideration of natalist policies, like baby bonuses or "Medals of Motherhood," reflects growing concern, though Spears and Geruso warn such measures are ineffective and risk backfiring. The book's release coincides with a broader cultural debate, as seen at events like NatalCon and posts on X highlighting the "fertility crisis."
For conservatives, particularly those aligned with MAGA principles, the book's emphasis on human ingenuity and progress aligns with a pro-growth, pro-innovation ethos. However, they may bristle at the authors' rejection of nationalist pronatalism and their focus on gender equity, which some might view as too progressive. Conversely, progressives may appreciate the book's environmental and equity arguments but question whether population stabilisation is as urgent as myths such as climate action or social justice.
In conclusion, After the Spike is a compelling, well-researched call to rethink global demographic trends. Spears and Geruso successfully challenge outdated overpopulation narratives, making a strong case that depopulation threatens economic and social progress. While the book lacks specific policy prescriptions and underplays the role of institutional frameworks, its accessible style and ethical clarity make it a vital contribution to the population debate.
Comments