In the mid 20th century, scientific advances in agriculture dramatically increased food production. These advances also staved off widespread famine, and allowed the world’s population to grow. But a new study suggests that food production isn’t increasing as rapidly as it once was – a trend that could potentially exacerbate hunger around the world.
Philip Pardey: What we’re detecting here in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world is that the rate of growth in the last decade, decade and a half, is substantially lower than it has been in the previous three or four decades.
Philip Pardey is professor of applied economics at the University of Minnesota. He said the world is going to keep increasing its food production, but at a rate that might not be able to keep up with the world’s population growth. According to U.N. studies, global population might reach 9 billion by 2050.
Philip Pardey: The big picture is that we’re trying to match the growth in the supply of food with the growth in demand for that food.
Pardey added that, ultimately, if the supply of food can’t match demand, food prices will rise.
Philip Pardey: Many people in developing countries spend 80% of their income on food, so an increase in food prices puts a serious dent in the amount of food they can afford to purchase.
Today, one billion people are already undernourished. Pardey’s study showed that since the 1990′s, agricultural productivity has grown at 1% per year, whereas from 1950 – 1990, agricultural productivity grew at double that rate.
Philip Pardey: There are really clear signs emerging that we’ve got these structural shifts in productivity growth, and very clear evidence that we’ve had a structural shift in the amount and nature of agricultural research.
Pardey explained that one cause of the decrease in agricultural productivity is slowing agricultural research, on things like productive crop varieties and fertilizers. He said that funds previously channeled to agricultural science are now going to environmental research and health concerns, such as obesity. .
Philip Pardey: Why this is happening is a complicated question. Part of it may well be a sense of complacency that we had these very substantial increases in productivity back in the 50s and 60s. I think many people, and policy makers, thought we solved food supply problem, not recognizing that this is a long run game.
He said that still, he is optimistic that global agriculture will be able to provide food for 9 billion.
Philip Pardey: The history of agriculture over the past 50 or 100 years is that we’ve made massive improvements in the productivity and use of land in agriculture so we have been able to feed a lot more people. I’m quite optimistic that there is prospect, and the big question on the table is whether we use that prospect.
Dr. Pardey’s study was published in the journal Science in September 2009.
Enough grain is grown that no one need go hungry, but 80% goes to make meat, converting nutritious food into saturated fat and cholesterol.
The biotech industry cites this type of information often, using it to argue that only with genetically modified crops can we feed the growing global population. The more traditional vein of ag research Pardey is talking about deserves more attention, but so do more sustainable and/or organic farming methods, too. (Remember when nobody thought an organic apple looked appetizing? With better research and field tests, the organic industry has changed entirely in only about a decade, and in some cases, yields are competitive with conventional farming practices.)
Is the money that holds us back we have resources to increase agriculture industry, we have the people that want to work on the new products, we have the technology to make the hybrid growing systems, we have systems of natural renewable energy, we have plenty of sea water that could be used, the question is, are we going to be able to combine all these elements together to make a new type of agriculture.
I see the cost as the biggest problem, we have all the resources we need we have 6.8 billion people and a major economic crisis worldwide with job losses, so the thing is can we take the time and money to actually do something right that will last a long time instead of making one tiny advancement putting 10 million of these devices into use and the the next tiny advancement and 10 million more, etc… this is our current system and does not work, what we need is a hugely successful product and the entire world to go hungry until it is perfected, I volunteer myself (and current situation) to go on hunger strike.
Another problem is the future science leaders may not be up to the \”standards\” of current education. i predict the greatest scientist will all be put out of public education because they are not concurrent with the education systems of today. Causing a huge lack in creative and abstract thinking in our school system, mostly because of a educational standpoint that -some educaters are unable to deal with the current standings on testing and assignments. It has become more of can you pass the test rather than, can you invent the new system, with an additional sub-problem that the colleges are used to educate and then we all try and remember what we learned
Private corporations that are in need of funding and want to put products out immediately, rather than a masterpiece whenever it is built. however long that takes, and are mostly unwilling to work with other private corporations to stratify and complete successful products and blueprints. The educational system may in fact be the best time for the young scientists and engineers to come up with and produce Ideas and put them into order, which also adds to the fall of the 20th century businesses that all flunked out of business and are needing bailouts, the new entrepreneurs will fix that if they are given the right tools to build these masterpieces.
There are no technological nor agricultural problems feeding the earth’s population. There are, however, political and economic problems. And they are getting worse. They are: a move toward central planning, environmental regulation and the theft of private property. Russia tried this and starved. Now we seem to be bent on a worldwide trial of communism. And it will be a disaster as well.
If one wants to feed many people efficiently, one leaves the land in the hands of private owners and allows the owners decide what and how much to plant in response to percieved market forces. If one wishes to starve a lot of people, one puts the agricultural land in “public” ownership and then allow a bunch of bureaucrats to “plan” production. Nothing will be produced at an extreme cost.
Decide which you want. The laws of economics are as immutable as those of physics. Capitalism feeds people and provides wealth. Communism provides death, starvation, slavery and want.
Thanks for the Information, thanks for the useful Article. Also check these nice blog. estate agents belfast
Thank you for spreading that excellent written content on your website. I found it while I was researching on the Bing. I may check to come back after you publish another articles.