Global Hunger Can the planet feed itself in 2050? N ew agricultural technology has enabled global food supplies to outstrip population growth, driving down the number of hungry people around the world from just over 1 billion in 1992 to 842 mil- lion today — a 17 percent drop. But food shortages and under- nourishment remain huge problems in developing countries. Hunger stems from weather-related disasters such as droughts and floods, as well as from war, poverty, overpopulation, poor farming practices, government corruption, difficulties transporting food to markets, climate change and waste. Hunger is severest in sub- Saharan Africa, where 25 percent of the population is undernour- ished. Developed countries and humanitarian organizations have become proficient at providing emergency relief and promoting higher-yield, environmentally friendly agricultural practices, but the outlook on global hunger remains murky. Experts expect an ex- panding global population and growing economic affluence in developing countries to increase the demand for food, even as climate change hampers the planet’s ability to feed itself. American food aid is delivered to a refugee camp in Bossangoa, Central African Republic, on Dec. 19, 2013. Twelve percent of Earth’s population doesn’t get enough to eat. The problem is severest in sub- Saharan Africa, where one in four goes hungry. CQ Researcher • Aug. 8, 2014 • www.cqresearcher.com Volume 24, Number 29 • Pages 673-696 RECIPIENT Of SOCIETY Of PROfESSIONAL JOURNALISTS A WARD fOR EXCELLENCE ◆ AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SILVER GAVEL A WARD I N S I D E THE I SSUES ....................675 BACKGROUND ................681 CHRONOLOGY ................683 CURRENT SITUATION ........688 AT I SSUE ........................689 OUTLOOK ......................690 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................694 THE NEXT STEP ..............695 T HIS R EPORT Published by CQ Press, an Imprint of SAGE Publications, Inc. www.cqresearcher.com
Transcript
Global HungerCan the planet feed itself in 2050?
New agricultural technology has enabled global food
supplies to outstrip population growth, driving
down the number of hungry people around the
world from just over 1 billion in 1992 to 842 mil-
lion today — a 17 percent drop. But food shortages and under-
nourishment remain huge problems in developing countries.
Hunger stems from weather-related disasters such as droughts and
floods, as well as from war, poverty, overpopulation, poor farming
practices, government corruption, difficulties transporting food to
markets, climate change and waste. Hunger is severest in sub-
Saharan Africa, where 25 percent of the population is undernour-
ished. Developed countries and humanitarian organizations have
become proficient at providing emergency relief and promoting
higher-yield, environmentally friendly agricultural practices, but the
outlook on global hunger remains murky. Experts expect an ex-
panding global population and growing economic affluence in
developing countries to increase the demand for food, even as
climate change hampers the planet’s ability to feed itself.
American food aid is delivered to a refugee camp inBossangoa, Central African Republic, on Dec. 19,2013. Twelve percent of Earth’s population doesn’tget enough to eat. The problem is severest in sub-Saharan Africa, where one in four goes hungry.
CQ Researcher • Aug. 8, 2014 • www.cqresearcher.comVolume 24, Number 29 • Pages 673-696
RECIPIENT Of SOCIETY Of PROfESSIONAL JOURNALISTS AwARD fOR
EXCELLENCE � AmERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SILvER GAvEL AwARD
I
N
S
I
D
E
THE ISSUES ....................675
BACKGROUND ................681
CHRONOLOGY ................683
CURRENT SITUATION ........688
AT ISSUE........................689
OUTLOOK ......................690
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................694
THE NEXT STEP ..............695
THISREPORT
Published by CQ Press, an Imprint of SAGE Publications, Inc. www.cqresearcher.com
674 CQ Researcher
THE ISSUES
675 • Are developed countries’agriculture policies makinghunger worse?• Is climate change makinghunger worse?• Are genetically modifiedcrops needed to end hunger?
BACKGROUND
681 Early FaminesAncient Egyptian carvings telltales of mass hunger.
682 Manmade Faminefarm collectivization and warcaused millions to starve.
682 Relief EffortsInternational aid and newtechnology began targetinghunger.
685 Genetic EngineeringUse of corn-based ethanoland genetically modifiedcrops intensified.
686 Unintended ConsequencesThe Green Revolution causedenvironmental degradation.
CURRENT SITUATION
688 Sustainable FoodRecent food aid policies focuson small-scale farming.
688 Feed the FutureObama administration supportssmall-scale farmers.
4) and (Dec. wks. 3, 4). Published by SAGE Publica-
tions, Inc., 2455 Teller Rd., Thousand Oaks, CA 91320.
Annual full-service subscriptions start at $1,054. for
pricing, call 1-800-818-7243. To purchase a CQ Re-
searcher report in print or electronic format (PDf),
visit www.cqpress.com or call 866-427-7737. Single
reports start at $15. Bulk purchase discounts and
electronic-rights licensing are also available. Periodicals
postage paid at Thousand Oaks, California, and at
additional mailing offices. POST mAS TER: Send ad dress
chang es to CQ Re search er, 2300 N St., N.w., Suite 800,
wash ing ton, DC 20037.
Aug. 8, 2014Volume 24, Number 29
Aug. 8, 2014 675www.cqresearcher.com
Global Hunger
THE ISSUESA s radical Islamists
overran the Iraqi cityof mosul in mid-
June, taxi driver Abdel Hady,his wife and their six chil-dren began walking northtoward the relatively peace-ful autonomous region ofKurdistan, sleeping in thehomes of generous strangersalong the way.
when the Hadys arrived atthe Garmava refugee campthree days later, workers werepitching tents and digginglatrines to prepare for someof the 300,000 or more Iraqiswho had fled combat zonesthe previous week alone,joining 250,000 Syrians alreadyin Kurdish territory.
more than 2.5 million Syr-ians have fled that country’sbloody civil war to neighbor-ing Kurdistan, Turkey, Jordanand Lebanon, and the Iraqiconflict is expected to produce 1.5 mil-lion more refugees, straining local re-sources and draining the budgets ofUnited Nations (U.N.) relief agenciesand humanitarian organizations. 1 feed-ing the Syrian refugees alone costs$38 million to $40 million a week, dra-matically demonstrating how warfarecontributes to global hunger. 2
But such conflicts represent only afraction of the food shortages that todayleave 842 million people around theworld undernourished. That figure isdown from just over 1 billion in 1992,due to new agricultural technologythat has enabled global food suppliesto outstrip population growth. (Seegraph, p. 680.) The number of hungrypeople worldwide dropped by 26 mil-lion — 3 percent — in 2013 alone,according to the U.N. food and Agri-culture Organization (fAO). 3 The fAO
defines hunger, or undernourishment, as“not having enough food for an activeand healthy life” or not being able tomeet “dietary energy requirements.” 4
Still, 12 percent of the Earth’s popu-lation does not get enough to eat.most of the hungry are in the devel-oping world, and 70 percent are smallfarmers or agricultural laborers whocan’t grow sufficient food to feed theirfamilies or sell to others. 5 The prob-lem is severest in sub-Saharan Africa,where one in four goes hungry, butthat is down from one in three in theearly ’90s. 6
Experts worry that over the longterm, expanding middle classes in rapid-ly developing countries such as Chinaand India will raise demand for moreexpensive foods that overtax the en-vironment, further boosting food prices.And climate change and modern in-
dustrial agricultural practicesthreaten future agriculturalproduction and the environ-ment in a variety of ways,scientists say.
Currently, hunger kills near-ly 3.1 million children under5 each year — 45 percent ofall deaths in that age range.One-sixth of the children in de-veloping countries — 100 mil-lion — are underweight. 7
Hunger also helps to truncateadults’ lives. Life expectancy inAfrica is 58, for instance, com-pared with 67 in SoutheastAsia, 68 in the Eastern mediter-ranean and 79 in the UnitedStates. 8
Paradoxically, the Earthproduces more food than itsinhabitants need, but the foodis unevenly distributed. In theUnited States and other afflu-ent countries, more people areoverweight or obese than hun-gry — the result of eating toomuch high-calorie food andgetting insufficient exercise.
Obesity also is growing in rapidly de-veloping countries such as China, wherechildhood obesity rose from 1.5 per-cent of the child population in 1989to 6.9 percent of boys and 2.8 percentof girls last year. 9
“One billion people in the worlddon’t have enough food, while onebillion people eat too much,” said worldwildlife fund Senior vice PresidentJason Clay. 10
Experts say hunger has a numberof causes, including war, poverty, popu-lation growth, poor farming practices,government corruption, ineffective fooddistribution, inclement weather, cli-mate change and waste. “Short-termhunger usually is due to natural disas-ter or war,” says Christopher Barrett, di-rector of the School of Applied Eco-nomics and management at CornellUniversity, who researches hunger and
BY TOM PRICE
AFP
/Get
ty Im
ages
/Abd
ifita
h H
ashi
A severely malnourished girl convalesces at a hospital inMogadishu, Somalia, on July 15, 2014. Food is scarcein the country, where civil war has been raging for years.Affluent countries sent some 5 million metric tons of
food to the world’s hungry in 2012, mostly foremergency relief. The United States donated the most —
44 percent of the total.
676 CQ Researcher
poverty. “Chronic hunger is related tochronic poverty.”
Due to inadequate technology and re-sources, for instance, Africa’s agriculturalproductivity is less than half the worldaverage and is rising at half the rate ofthe continent’s population growth. 11
Some anti-hunger activists say afflu-ent nations also add to the world hungerproblem. Government subsidies to grow-ers in wealthy nations can depress worldcommodity prices, they say, reducingthe earnings of small-scale farmers indeveloping nations. Promoting plant-based biofuel also drives up world foodprices, making it more expensive for
the poor. Consuming meat- and dairy-rich diets increases the cost of food bydiverting food and land to feeding andraising animals. In addition, critics saycertain aspects of the donor countries’aid policies exacerbate hunger, such asa U.S. provision requiring food aid tobe shipped on U.S.-flagged vessels,which are often more expensive thanother ships.
About a third of the world’s food iswasted, the fAO estimates. 12 “In theundeveloped world, the waste happensbefore the food gets to people,” saidNorth Dakota farmer Roger Johnson,president of the National farmers Union.
“The food rots” because of lack of roadsand proper storage facilities. In the de-veloped world, he said, waste is due to“the staggering amount of food that’sthrown out after it gets to our plates.”
food production and distributionare hampered in many countries byprolonged conflict and political insta-bility, such as in Nepal, incompleteland reform, as in Tajikistan, and pop-ulation growth and extreme povertyin countries like Uganda, according tothe fAO. 13 Erratic rainfall and morefrequent droughts have exacerbatedhunger in the Sahel, the arid regionjust south of the Sahara Desert where
GLOBAL HUNGER
Hunger Concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast AsiaSeven African countries, Timor Leste in Southeast Asia and Haiti in the Caribbean have the world’s highest concentrations of hunger, or daily undernourishment.* Twenty-one other countries — including 14 African nations, Iraq, North Korea and Guatemala — have “high” rates of undernourishment, with 25 percent to 35 percent of their population classified as hungry.
* Undernourishment is defined as not having enough calories (energy) to meet minimum physiological needs for an active life. It is a less visible form of hunger than starvation, which the World Food Programme calls acute hunger.
Source: “Hunger Map 2013,” World Food Programme, United Nations, http://tinyurl.com/plddrmr
C A N A D A
MEXICO
CUBA
JAMAICABELIZE
DOMINICANREPUBLICHAITI
PUERTORICO
GUATEMALA
COSTA RICA
NICARAGUA
HONDURAS
EL SALVADOR
PANAMA
COLOMBIA
VENEZUELA
TRINIDAD &TOBAGO
GUYANA
SURINAM
FRENCH GUIANA
ECUADOR
B R A Z I L
P E R UB O L I V I A
PARAGUAY
A R G E N T I N A
URUGUAY
CHILE
FALKLAND/MALVINAS ISLANDS
G R E E N L A N D
ICELAND
N O R W AY
SWEDEN F I N L A N D
DENMARKUNITEDKINGDOMIRELAND
F R A N C E
BELGIUMNETHERLANDS
LUXEMBOURGGERMANY
ESTONIALATVIALITHUANIA
RUSSIA
POLANDBELARUS
UKRAINE
S P A I NPORTUGAL
CZECHREP.
AUSTRIASWITZERLAND
ITALYSLOVENIA
CROATIA
SLOVAKREP.
HUNGARY
BOSNIA AND
HERZEGOVINA BULGARIA
ROMANIAMOLDOVA
ALBANIA
GREECE T U R K E Y
CYPRUS
MOROCCO
WESTERNSAHARA
A L G E R I A L I B Y A
TUNISIA
MAURITANIA
SENEGALGAMBIA
GUINEA-BISSAUGUINEA
SIERRA LEONE
LIBERIA
M A L I
BURKINAFASO
IVORYCOAST
GHAN
ATO
GOBE
NIN
NIGERIA
N I G E RCHAD
E G Y P T
S U D A N
ERITREA
E T H I O P I ACENTRAL AFRICANREPUBLICCAMEROON
EQUATORIALGUINEA
GABONCONGO
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO
RWANDABURUNDI
UGANDA
K E N YA
SOMALIA
ANGOLA
NAMIBIA
ZAMBIA
TANZANIA
MALAWI
ZIMBABWE
BOTSWANA
MOZAMBIQUEMADAGASCAR
SWAZILANDLESOTHO
S O U T HAFRICA
MAURITIUS
RÉUNION
GEORGIAARMENIA AZERBAIJAN
SYRIA
JORDANIRAQ I R A N
S A U D IA R A B I A QATAR
UNITED ARAB
EMIRATES
OMAN
Y E M E N
I N D I A
AFGHANISTAN
PAKISTAN
TURKMENISTAN
UZBEKISTAN KYRGYZSTAN
TAJIKISTAN
K A Z A K H S T A N
SRILANKA
NEPAL BHUTAN
BANGLADESH
MYANMARLAOS
THAILAND
CAMBODIA
VIETNAM
M A L A Y S I A
PHILIPPINES
TAIWAN
I N D O N E S I A P A P U AN E W
G U I N E A SOLOMONISLANDS
FIJIVANUATU
NEW CALEDONIAA U S T R A L I A
N E WZ E A L A N D
R U S S I A
M O N G O L I A
NORTHKOREA
SOUTHKOREA
J A P A NC H I N A
ANDORRA
U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A
GALAPAGOSISLANDS
CANARYISLANDS
E
AS T I N D I E S
M E L AN
ES
IA
N o r w e g i a n S e a
North Sea
B l a ck S e a
Re
d
Se
a
G u l f o fG u i n e a
AralSea
H u d s o n B a y
G u l f o fM e x i c o
S e a o fO k h o t s k
B e r i n g S e a
S e a o fJ a p a n
EastChina Sea
YellowSea
B a y o fB e n g a l
S o u t hC h i n a
S e a
Ce lebesSea
C o r a l S e a
T a s m a n S e a
B a f f i n B a y B a r e n t s S e a C h u k c h i S e a
P A C I F I C
O C E A N
N O R T H
A T L A N T I C
O C E A N
S O U T H
A T L A N T I C
O C E A N
I N D I A N
O C E A N
P A C I F I C
O C E A N
A R C T I C O C E A N
C a r i b b e a n S e a M
ozam
b iqu
e Ch
anne
l
Gu l f of Aden
Casp i a n Se a
D e nm a r k S t r a i t
Ph
i l i pp
i ne
Se
a
Da
v i s St r a i t
B a l t i c
Se a
Kuwait
Singapore
Arctic Circle
Tropic of Cancer
Tropic of Capricorn
Arctic Circle
Tropic of Cancer
Tropic of Capricorn
Very low — less than 5%Moderately low — 5-14.9%Moderately high — 15-24.9%High — 25-34.9%Very high — 35% and moreInsufficient data
Rates of Undernourishment(% of population)
LEBANON
M e d i t e r r a n e a n S e a ISRAEL
THE BAHAMAS
TIMOR-LESTE
BRUNEI
SERBIA
Aug. 8, 2014 677www.cqresearcher.com
20 million people have inconsistentaccess to food and 5 million childrenface acute malnutrition, according tothe U.S. Agency for International De-velopment (USAID). 14
Countries that are winning the waragainst hunger have governments thatare consistently committed to “long-term rural development and povertyreducing plans,” says the fAO. for in-stance, in Bangladesh, Ghana andNicaragua, hunger has been cut inhalf in the last two decades througheconomic growth and freer trade, theagency said. Ghana and Nicaragua alsohave enjoyed political stability and highworld prices for their exports. 15
Speaking to a gathering of Africandiplomats in 2010, Johnnie Carson,then U.S. assistant secretary of Statefor African affairs, said that “our abil-ity to achieve our shared long-termgoals of democracy, stability and pros-perity on the continent depends en-tirely on the integrity and effective-ness of African leadership.” 16
most food aid responds to emer-gencies, rather than chronic hunger.Affluent countries sent just over 5 mil-lion metric tons of food to the hungryin 2012, 70 percent of which was foremergency relief. The biggest donor,the United States, contributed 2.2 mil-lion tons — 44 percent of the total,and more than four times as much asthe next-biggest donor, Japan, whichgave 407,000 tons. 17 (See graphic, above.)
The United States will spend about$3.5 billion on international food aidand agricultural development programsthis year. The food for Peace programreceives almost $1.5 billion of that, usedprimarily to buy U.S. farmers’ com-modities, which are shipped abroad asemergency relief. Another $600 millionprovides cash for such emergency re-lief activities as giving food vouchersto individuals and purchasing food nearwhere it is consumed.
The Obama administration’s feed thefuture initiative — which supports de-velopment programs led by farmers and
local, regional and national govern-ments in the developing world — getsabout $1.1 billion. The rest supportschild and school feeding activities, in-creased agricultural productivity and ex-panded trade in agricultural products.
Almost all of the U.S. emergency re-lief is distributed by the U.N.’s worldfood Programme; non-emergency reliefis supplied by nongovernmental orga-nizations. A small amount is distributeddirectly by the United States, such aswhen the military responds to naturaldisasters. 18
Back at the Garmava refugee camp,a mosul police officer named Tahaand his wife Shahla (who declined togive their last names to a reporter)faced a key danger posed by inade-quate nutrition: Shahla was about togive birth. 19 “The people who are es-pecially vulnerable to hunger arethose in the first 1,000 days — fromthe beginning of pregnancy to age 2,”says Richard Leach, president and
CEO of the world food Program USA,an independent nonprofit that sup-ports the U.N.’s world food Programmethrough fundraising and advocacy inthe United States. If mothers and chil-dren don’t receive adequate nutritionthen, he says, the children “won’t de-velop intellectually or physically to thedegree that they could have.”
maternal undernourishment fol-lowed by inadequate childhood nu-trition causes stunting — abnormallyshort growth. Stunting affected 160 mil-lion children in the developing world— 28 percent — in 2011, down from45 percent in 1990. 20
Children’s health is affected by thequality of the food they eat as well asthe quantity. Not consuming enoughvitamin A impairs growth, increasesvulnerability to infection and is theleading cause of childhood blindness.Iron deficiency impedes children’s in-tellectual development and women’schances of successful pregnancy. 21
United States and U.N. Are Largest Food Donors
The United States delivered nearly 2.2 million metric tons of food aid in 2012, more than twice the combined amount of the next three largest donors — Japan, Brazil and Canada. The United Nations and European Commission, the largest international government organi-zations, together provided more than 700,000 metric tons.
Source: “Table 6, Food Aid Deliveries in 2012 by Donor and Category (Mt — Cereals In Grain Equivalent),” Food Aid Flows 2012 Report Annex Tables, World Food Programme, United Nations, p. 16, http://tinyurl.com/llklkap
Largest Food Donors, Countries, 2012
Total Food Aid Country (in metric tons)
United States 2,195,285Japan 406,585Brazil 334,294Canada 293,293China 243,381Germany 168,486Australia 72,817Russia 61,606United Kingdom 59,876Sweden 47,343
Largest Food Donors, International Organizations, 2012
Type of Total Food Aid Organization (in metric tons)
United Nations 565,796European Commission 137,002Others 86,192International Government 60,075Nongovernmental 40,443Private 28,003
678 CQ Researcher
As government officials, relief work-ers, advocates and scholars debate thebest ways to attack hunger, here aresome of the questions they are addressing:
Are developed countries’ aidpolicies making hunger worse?
Anti-hunger activists cheered whenCongress in 2012 adopted a modest re-form to U.S. international food-aid pro-grams by lowering a requirement that75 percent of food be shipped on U.S.-flagged vessels. By this spring, the cheershad morphed into complaints, as theHouse moved to repeal the reform.
That legislation — which clearedthe House April 1 and awaits Senateconsideration — illustrates activists’ con-tention that developed countries’ aidpolicies and lifestyles make hungerworse or lessen the effectiveness offood-aid programs. 22
The critics especially cite U.S. aidpolicies that rely heavily on purchasingfood from American farmers rather thanusing cash to acquire food near whereit will be consumed. most of the pur-chased food is given to the hungry, usu-ally through the world food Programme.But in some cases, commodities maybe “monetized” — or sold on the mar-ket and the proceeds used for devel-opmental activities. Because of the costof purchasing commodities in the Unit-ed States and shipping them overseas,critics say it would be more efficient inboth cases to buy food near where it’sconsumed and to allocate cash to payfor development programs.
Even the 2012 shipping change hadfallen far short of activists’ desires. Itstill required that half of U.S. food aidbe transported on the more-expensiveU.S.-flagged ships, costing $75 millionmore per year than if the shipping wereopen to global competition, accordingto Cornell’s Barrett and Erin C. Lentz,assistant professor of international rela-tions at Bucknell University. 23
Authors of the House legislation re-pealing the change — Reps. DuncanHunter, R-Calif., and Elijah Cummings,
D-md. — said requiring the food to betransported on U.S. ships supports amerchant marine that is “essential to sus-taining our military.” 24 But the Defenseand Transportation departments told theHouse foreign Affairs Committee thatthe preference is unnecessary. 25
The requirement “forces a huge pre-mium price on ocean shipping andgenerates windfall profits for a handfulof shipping lines, most [of them] for-eign owned” despite being U.S.-flagged,says Barrett, who has studied the mat-ter in depth. Even without the shippingmarkup, locally bought food is oftenfaster and cheaper to deliver, he says.
“for the same [aid] budget,” says agri-cultural economics professor michael Carter,“we can save millions more people.”Carter, of the University of California-Davis, directs a research consortiumfunded by USAID.
But several nonprofits and compa-nies that grow, process and ship thefood defend existing commodities pro-grams. In a letter to Congress duringlast year’s debate on reauthorization ofa major farm bill, several of them wrote:“Growing, manufacturing, bagging, ship-ping and transporting nutritious U.S. foodcreates jobs and economic activity hereat home, provides support for our U.S.merchant marine, essential to our na-tional defense sealift capability, and sus-tains a robust domestic constituency forthese programs not easily replicated inalternative foreign aid programs.” 26
Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., asked:“How is wiring cash to someone in adeveloping country a good idea in-stead of giving them wholesome, nu-tritious commodities grown by hard-working Americans.” 27
As for the criticisms of monetizationprograms, a 2012 study commissionedby the Alliance for Global food Security— a coalition of 14 relief and develop-ment organizations, some of which en-gage in monetization — found that prop-erly managed monetization transactionscan avoid pitfalls while providing bene-fits that cash-only support cannot.
Informa Economics — a memphis-headquartered firm that conducts agricul-ture-related research — analyzed fivemonetization programs and found thatthey were designed not to compete withlocal production or disrupt commercialtrade. Although the sales were made atfair-market value, the study concluded, theprograms were able to offer the recipientcountries other benefits, such as flexiblepayment terms. As a result, some recipi-ents were able to make the purchases de-spite volatile exchange rates and avoidhigher shipping costs associated with low-volume sales, the researchers said. 28
The key is using “the right tool at theappropriate place,” says Leach, of theworld food Program USA. “There arecountries like Sudan that do not have ac-cess to food” and need to have it shippedin. “In Syria, it’s much better to buy foodregionally,” because it’s difficult to movecommodities through a combat zone.
Shipping U.S. commodities also canmake sense when responding to a near-by disaster in the Americas, Barrett says.And when the need is for foods forti-fied with vitamins and minerals, “youcan start to enjoy the efficiency of mod-ern American food processing.”
Aside from advanced nations’ aidpolicies, their agricultural subsidies, bio-fuel mandates and eating habits alsocan aggravate hunger, critics say.
farm subsidy programs “tend to re-duce worldwide commodity prices,hurting farmers in the developingworld,” said Daniel Sumner, an agri-cultural economics professor at theUniversity of California-Davis and di-rector of the University of CaliforniaAgricultural Issues Center. 29
Supporters of farm subsidies saythey help stabilize U.S. agriculture pro-duction. Critics should “feel lucky wedon’t have runs on grocery stores,”said Rep. Tim walz, D.-minn. 30
And donating U.S.-grown commodi-ties — or selling them at below-marketprices — can also depress local cropprices, says Robert Rector, a senior re-search fellow at the Heritage founda-
GLOBAL HUNGER
Aug. 8, 2014 679www.cqresearcher.com
tion, a conservative think tank in wash-ington. “You have to be careful not toundermine domestic production,” Rec-tor says. “Cheap and free food takesaway from the [local] market, particu-larly if you’re doing it consistently.”
Critics say subsidies and mandates pro-moting biofuels such as corn-based ethanol— designed to reduce greenhouse gasemissions and lower American and Eu-ropean dependence on foreign oil —raise food prices and divert food to fuelproduction. Action Against Hunger, an in-ternational relief and development orga-nization, said the amount of U.S. cornbeing converted into biofuels could feed570 million people a year. 31
Converting food to fuel “poses risksto ecosystems and biodiversity,” saidthe U.N. Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change, which previouslysupported biofuel production. 32
Oxfam, an international relief andadvocacy organization, has called forEurope and the United States to endtheir biofuel mandates and subsidies,which are projected to total between$9.2 billion and $11.5 billion in Europein 2015, says Damon vis-Dunbar, pro-ject and communications manager forthe International Institute for SustainableDevelopment, a Canadian-based researchorganization with offices in the UnitedStates, Europe and China. The UnitedStates, which offered $6.6 billion insubsidies in 2010, cut them to around$1 billion in 2012. 33
To meet Europe’s biofuel demand,companies are planting land in devel-oping countries that would be betterused feeding the poor who live nearby,Oxfam said. 34
Biofuels corporate executive PaulBeckwith argued that the ethanol man-date has stimulated important investmentthat has put the United States ahead ofthe world in getting “new advanced re-newable energy into commercialization.”Beckwith is CEO of Butamax AdvancedBiofuels, a joint venture of BP andDuPont that develops biofuel manu-facturing technology. 35
The affluent world’s appetite alsotaxes the environment and threatensthe developing world’s access to suffi-cient food, critics say. for instance, rais-ing animals for consumption is far lessefficient than using land to grow foodplants — and that much-coveted steakis the least efficient of all.
Every 100 calories of grain fed to ananimal produces only about 40 newcalories of milk, 22 calories of eggs, 12of chicken, 10 of pork or three of beef,according to Jonathan foley, who isleaving his position as director of theUniversity of minnesota’s Institute onthe Environment on Aug. 15 to becomeexecutive director of the California Acad-emy of Sciences. 36 By another reck-oning, it takes about a pound of feedto produce a pound of farmed fish, butseven to make a pound of beef. 37
Despite the relative efficiency of farmedfish, affluent diners’ desire for wild-caught seafood — along with pollutionand global warming — is depleting wildfish populations, which in turn threat-ens the livelihoods of poor fishermenwho compete with sophisticated fleetsfrom developed countries.
The International Programme on theState of the Ocean at Oxford Univer-sity has declared the planet “at highrisk of entering a phase of extinctionof marine species unprecedented inhuman history.” 38 for instance, over-fishing — both legal and illegal —threatens the scalloped hammerheadshark, used in shark fin soup, a del-icacy in many Asian countries. 39
Is climate change makinghunger worse?
Oxfam has called climate change“the single biggest threat to fightinghunger.” 40
Scientists have issued dire warningsabout the threat global warming posesto humanity’s ability to feed itself in thefuture, and they cite damage that’s al-ready occurring. The world food Pro-gramme says climate change could wipeout two-thirds of Africa’s arable land by
2025, boost food prices by 50 to 90 per-cent by 2030 and raise the risk of hungerby 10 to 20 percent by 2050. 41
But when it comes to climate change,agriculture is both a victim and a vil-lain. farming is a major source of green-house gases — including methane, car-bon dioxide and nitrous oxide — whichscientists say are warming the planet.Agriculture emits more greenhouse gasesthan all forms of transportation com-bined. fuel-burning farm machinery emitscarbon dioxide. Cattle release largeamounts of methane, fertilizer emits ni-trous oxide and soil releases carbondioxide (CO2) when cultivated. 42
Some say a warming planet andmore atmospheric CO2 will reducehunger by improving agricultural pro-ductivity. “Plants love warmth and sun-shine,” says Dennis Avery, a senior fel-low at the conservative Heartland andHudson institutes and director of Hud-son’s Center for Global food Issues.“Both animals and vegetation have amuch greater tolerance for temperaturechanges than the [widely used scien-tific] models would have us believe.”
Describing CO2 as “like fertilizer forplants,” which breathe it in like ani-mals breathe oxygen, Avery says dou-bling atmospheric CO2 concentrationswould increase crop yields by about35 percent.
Similarly, Andrei Illarionov, a seniorfellow at the libertarian Cato Institute,points out that in warmer places “thereis usually more precipitation than indrier areas, the cost of heating and vol-ume of food required to sustain humanlife [are] lower, while vegetation and[ice-free] navigation periods are longer,and crops’ yields are higher.” 43
Arguing that the Earth simply is inthe warm period of a routine climatecycle, Avery says the greater threat tofood production will occur during thenext Ice Age.
Other climate-change skeptics contendthat proposed responses to global warm-ing, such as switching to biofuels pro-duction, can threaten food supplies.
680 CQ Researcher
Scientists agree that CO2 by itselfcould increase plant yields, but most saythe damage to food done by greenhousegases will outweigh the benefits. for in-stance, two recent studies found thathigher CO2 levels diminish plants’ nutri-tional value and resistance to pests. 44
more broadly, scientists warn thatrising temperatures, more drought, andmore violent weather will lead to di-minished agricultural yields, particular-ly in warmer regions where many ofthe poor live.
This past may was the hottest onrecord, according to the National Ocean-ic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA). 45 The first decade of this cen-tury was the hottest in recorded histo-ry, and temperatures are even higherso far this decade, according to the Uni-versity Corporation for Atmospheric Re-search, a consortium based in Boulder,Colo., that manages the National Cen-ter for Atmospheric Research. 46
Already, according to the AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Sci-ence (AAAS), heat waves and extremestorms are becoming worse and morefrequent. The Greenland and Antarcticice sheets are melting more rapidly. Theoceans are absorbing growing amountsof carbon dioxide, which makes them
more acidic and degrades coral reefswhere millions of marine species live. 47
meanwhile deserts are expanding.The growing Sahara Desert has beendestroying crops and leaving farmers inwest Africa without food. 48 To escaperising temperatures, plants and animalsare migrating toward the poles, up moun-tainsides and deeper into the sea.Droughts this year devastated crops inBrazil’s southeast and in California, whichgrows nearly half of America’s fruits,vegetables and nuts. 49 Global wheatand corn productivity is declining. 50
“we’re facing the specter of reducedyields in some of the key crops that feedhumanity,” said Rajendra Pachauri, chair-man of the U.N.’s climate change panel.The panel’s report warned that alteredocean chemistry could cause fish extinc-tions, and changes in climate could threat-en apple orchards in washington, cher-ry orchards in California and coffee cropsin Central and South America, often tend-ed by subsistence farmers who dependon their coffee crops for survival. 51
Are genetically modified cropsneeded to end hunger?
A group of farmers and activists thisspring protested at the office of Philip-pine Agriculture Secretary Proceso Al-
cala, calling on him to block tests ofso-called “golden rice,” a geneticallymodified grain designed to combat vi-tamin A deficiency in the developingworld. Last year, about 400 protesterstore down fences surrounding a gold-en rice test field and ripped the plantsfrom the ground.
“There are not enough studies toensure the safety of golden rice to hu-mans,” Chito medina, national coordi-nator of the filipino activist groupknown by its acronym mASIPAG, saidin explaining the protests. “To plantthe genetically engineered rice, or thegolden rice, is a real threat to the en-vironment,” he said. 52
The Philippine protesters representjust one of numerous campaigns world-wide opposing genetically modified or-ganisms (GmOs). Scientists make genet-ically modified (Gm) plants and animalsby adding genes that introduce specifictraits — such as pest resistance — tothe organism. Opponents fear GmO plantscould harm humans, animals or the en-vironment. They paint GmOs as part ofa plot by western agribusiness to con-trol farming in the developing world.
So far, their actions have producedmixed results: GmOs are common inthe United States, rare in Europe andsubject to heated debate in the devel-oping world.
Golden rice was created in 1999 byIngo Potrykus of the Swiss federal In-stitute of Technology and Peter Beyerof the University of freiburg in Ger-many. They inserted genes from a daf-fodil and a bacterium into rice to en-able it to generate beta-carotene, whichthe human body converts into vitaminA. Later, beta-carotene production wasboosted by replacing the daffodil genewith one from corn.
The Philippines-based nonprofit In-ternational Rice Research Institute,which is developing the rice, said fieldtrials there met beta-carotene goals butproduced a lower yield than varietiescurrently in use. The institute is con-tinuing research focused on yield. 53
GLOBAL HUNGER
Global Hunger on the Decline
The number of undernourished people worldwide fell from more than 1 billion in 1992, one-fifth of the global population, to 842 million in 2013, or 12 percent.
Source: “Hunger Portal,” U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, undated, http://tinyurl.com/yz2bcrh
Global Population of Undernourished Persons(by number and percentages)(in millions)
1,015
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
2011-20132008-20102005-20072000-20021990-1992
957 907 878 842
19% 15% 14% 13% 12%
Aug. 8, 2014 681www.cqresearcher.com
Proponents say Gm foods are safeand essential to ease hunger and meetthe demands of a growing world pop-ulation, particularly as developing coun-tries’ become more affluent and demandmore and higher-quality food. Gmcrops, they say, increase yields, survivewith less fertilizer and pesticides andcan be more nutritious. Scientists areworking on drought-tolerant corn, sweetpotatoes with high beta-carotene con-tent, bacteria-resistant bananas, cassavavarieties that resist viruses and containadded beta-carotene and other nutrients,and corn that requires less fertilizer.
Gm plants grow on more than halfof U.S. farmland, represent nearly allof America’s soybeans and 70 percentof its corn and are common in Cana-da. 54 However, European countrieseffectively ban GmOs, with some ex-ceptions. Some GmO animal feed canbe imported, for example, and Spain,Portugal, the Czech Republic, Roma-nia and Slovakia grow some geneti-cally modified crops. 55
more than half the acreage plantedin Gm crops last year was in develop-ing countries, 87 percent of that in Brazil,Argentina, India, China and South Africa.Only three other African countries —Sudan, Egypt and Burkina faso — growGm crops, partly due to fear amongfarmers in other African countries thatGm crops can’t be sold in Europe. 56
Some countries refuse to accept GmOsas food aid, says Steve Taravella, the worldfood Programme’s senior spokesman inthe United States. And some donor na-tions prohibit their aid money from beingused to purchase Gm food, Taravellaadds.
Richard Roberts — a Nobel laure-ate for genetic research and chief sci-entific officer for a company that makesgenetic-research supplies — called op-position to Gm crops a “crime againsthumanity,” because the foods areneeded to feed the hungry. 57
michael Purugganan, a professor ofgenomics and biology and dean forscience at New York University, lament-
ed the “misinformation” circulated byGm opponents. “The genes they in-serted to make the vitamin [in goldenrice] are not some weird manufacturedmaterial but are also found in squash,carrots and melons,” he said. 58
The AAAS has noted that the worldHealth Organization, the American med-ical Association, the U.S. National Acad-emy of Sciences, the British Royal Soci-ety and “every other respected organizationthat has examined the evidence” has con-cluded that eating Gm plants is no riski-er than eating plants bred with traditionalfarming technology. 59
Opponents, however, contend thatthere are better ways to feed the hun-gry. “most GmOs are not used to solvehunger” but to increase the profitabil-ity of industrial farming, says Green-peace USA researcher mark floegel.“we have [other] technologies that sub-sistence farmers could use to maketheir lives better.”
Paul Johnston and Dave Santillo, sci-entists in Greenpeace International’s Sci-ence Unit, argued that history provesthe need for caution in using GmOs.Citing the ill effects of “one-time ‘won-der chemicals,’ such as PCBs and manypesticides,” they contended that “newproblems continue to emerge from chem-icals put into widespread use withoutthe drawbacks having been fully inves-tigated.” Thus, they said, “If you are indoubt about the consequences of whatyou intend to do, then don’t do it.” 60
Others take a more nuanced ap-proach. GmO technology can be used“for good or bad,” says walter willett,chair of Harvard University’s Depart-ment of Nutrition. GmOs used in theUnited States probably don’t pose healththreats, he says, but they also proba-bly don’t produce a significantly high-er yield. Noting the need to increaseglobal food production, he adds, “Iwouldn’t take them off the table.”
Oxfam is “agnostic about GmOs,”says Gawain Kripke, Oxfam America’spolicy director. most Gm productsbrought to market so far primarily ben-
efit industrial farming, he notes, buthe finds attempts to enrich plants’ nu-trients “pretty interesting.”
Similarly, world food Program USA’sLeach says, “we will accept food froma country if that country would usethat food to feed its own population,and we will take that food into anycountry that will accept it.”
farmers in Burkina faso in westAfrica have found that Gm cotton “cutspesticide and labor costs,” the Univer-sity of California’s Carter says. That showsthat “small-scale farmers can potential-ly make good use of at least some ofthese technologies,” he adds.
However, in the United States insectshave developed resistance to Gm cotton,which initially allowed farmers to useless pesticide. So pesticide use is rising,according to Charles Benbrook, researchprofessor at washington State Universi-ty’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture andNatural Resources. Similarly, corn engi-neered to tolerate monsanto’s Roundupherbicide requires increasing amounts ofthe product to kill weeds that have de-veloped resistance, he said. 61
BACKGROUNDEarly Famines
H istory records serious famine inevery part of the world. Egyptian
stone carvers chronicled lengthy droughtsand famines in the third millenniumB.C. They also portrayed the firstrecorded hunger-relief efforts — by theEgyptian upper class.
In Famine: A Short History, Irish econ-omist Cormac Ó Gráda identifies multi-ple causes of hunger, including too muchor too little rain, extreme temperatures,conflict, overpopulation, poverty, ideolo-gy and autocratic governments. Often thecauses converged, as when conflict co-incided with poor harvests, or drought
682 CQ Researcher
GLOBAL HUNGER
struck an impoverished community.famine most frequently hit the poor andseldom occurred in democracies.
The Old Testament book of Ne-hemiah, likely written in the fifth cen-tury B.C., describes overpopulation com-pelling the poor to sell their childrenbecause there was not enough food.The Punic wars triggered famine inRome in the first century B.C. Heavyrains and low temperatures broughtfamine to Europe in the early 14th cen-tury A.D. Authoritarian communist gov-ernment policies turned poor harvestsinto mass starvation in the Soviet Unionand China in the 20th century and con-tinue to do so in North Korea. 62
Ó Gráda, an economics professor atUniversity College Dublin, chroniclesfamines throughout history, including inTurkey (499-501), Bengal (1176), Japan(1229-32), mexico (1454), Africa (often)and, of course, in Ireland, during thepotato famine in the 1840s and ’50s,one of the best known. 63
Potato blight struck Ireland’s pota-toes — the primary sustenance of halfthe population — in 1845. The fungus-like micro-organism, carried to Irelandfrom mexico, devastated the crop andled to the deaths of more than 750,000Irish over the next decade. Two mil-lion people fled to England, Canada orthe United States. 64 During the latterpart of the century, 50 million peopledied in famines in India, China, Korea,Brazil, Russia, Ethiopia and Sudan. 65
Ireland’s Great Hunger marked thebeginning of the end of peacetimefamine in Europe, except for Russia.The last natural famine in western Eu-rope was in finland in 1867-68. 66
Previously, societies had respondedto hunger with personal and religiousphilanthropy. Some governments im-posed price controls, distributed foodand subsidized migration to places with-out food shortages. In the 19th and20th centuries nongovernment relief or-ganizations emerged, as did major ad-vances in agricultural technology. 67
In the United States, the 1862 mor-
rill Act funded state colleges and uni-versities focused on agriculture andmechanical arts. The U.S. governmentalso established the Cooperative StateResearch, Education and Extension Ser-vice to disseminate agricultural researchfindings. 68 In 1883, the Departmentof Agriculture began research on boost-ing agricultural production. 69 And, in1905, German chemist fritz Haber en-abled a gigantic leap in agriculturalyield by extracting nitrogen from air,which permitted the manufacture ofnitrogen-based synthetic fertilizer. 70
Advances in transportation, storage,medicine and the understanding of nu-trition as well as the spread of democ-racy also helped end peacetime faminein developed countries. In the devel-oping world, hunger was lessened anddealt with more quickly because of thegrowth of relief organizations, creationof inexpensive nutrient-dense foods thatcould be stored and transported easi-ly and the expansion of communica-tion technology that enabled news offood emergencies to spread rapidly.
Residents of affluent countries wereeating more, including more expensivefood. Per capita annual meat consumptionin Germany, for instance, rose from lessthan 44 pounds before 1820 to almost115 pounds by the early 20th century.In 1800 a typical European consumed2,000 calories a day, which rose to 3,000calories by the early 20th century.
In the mid-20th century, nearly60 percent of the world’s populationlived in countries with an average dailydiet of less than 2,200 calories. By themid-’80s, only 10 percent did. 71
Manmade Famine
S ome of the most notorious 20th-century famines were substantially
caused by humans.In 1932-33, for instance, an estimated
6 million to 8 million people died —many of starvation — during Russian dic-tator Josef Stalin’s violent push to col-
lectivize agriculture and turn the SovietUnion into an industrial power. Begin-ning in 1929, small peasant farms wereforced into collectives of up to 247,000acres. many peasants resisted, and thegovernment cracked down brutally. Asfarm production fell by 40 percent, thestate seized and exported grain to raisefunds for industrial equipment, leavingpeasants without enough to eat. 72
mao Tse-tung pressed the same dis-astrous policies on Communist China25 years later. Between 1958 and 1962,36 million starved to death. 73
In the late 1960s, between 500,000and 2 million people — many of themchildren — died of starvation duringcivil war in Nigeria. warfare disruptedfood supplies, and the Nigerian gov-ernment blocked relief shipments intothe breakaway region of Biafra. 74
In the early 1980s, several factorsconverged to create severe famine inEthiopia. The country was struggling torecover from drought-caused famine inthe 1970s when another drought hit.Poor farming techniques worsened theeffects, leading to deforestation, soil ero-sion and expanding deserts. Civil war— between Ethiopia’s marxist dictator-ship and rebels in the north — com-pounded the suffering.
The government tried to keep newsof the starvation from the world. Butafter the BBC televised images of thedevastation, relief supplies flowed intothe country. The government thenblocked shipments to rebel-controlledareas, and diverted food from starvingEthiopians to the army. An estimated1 million people died in 1984-85. 75
Relief Efforts
T he United States led relief effortsin Ethiopia, just as it had around
the world since early in the century, es-pecially after world war II. 76 The Unit-ed Nations, created after that war, alsofacilitated international relief programs.
Continued on p. 684
Aug. 8, 2014 683www.cqresearcher.com
Chronology1845-1984 Astechnology and anti-hunger or-ganizations fight famine, warsand other human actions be-come leading causes of hunger.
1845Potato blight causes Irish faminethat kills 750,000 and sends mil-lions of refugees to England,Canada and United States.
1862U.S. government begins to supportagricultural research and education.
1868End of finnish famine marks lastin heart of Europe.
1905German chemist fritz Haber “fixes”nitrogen from air, enabling manu-facture of modern fertilizer.
1929Soviet Union begins forcing farm-ers into collectives while pushingindustrial development, leading tocollapse of agricultural productionand 6 to 8 million deaths, manyfrom starvation.
1944American biologist Norman Borlaugbegins research that leads to “GreenRevolution” of high-yield farming.
1945U.N. establishes food and Agricul-ture Organization (fAO).
1953American biochemist James watsonand British biophysicist francis Crickdescribe the structure of DNA, en-abling eventual creation of genetical-ly modified organisms.
1954Congress authorizes purchase of sur-
plus commodities for resale at lowprices overseas to feed the hungry.
1958Communist China copies SovietUnion’s collectivism/industrializationefforts; 36 million starve.
1961U.N. creates world food Programmeto distribute food to the hungry.
1967Secessionist war in Nigeria’s Biafrastate leads to 500,000 to 2 millionstarvation deaths.
1973Scientists create first geneticallyengineered organism; world Bankbegins to address hunger.
1984Drought, poor farming practicesand civil war cause famine thatkills 1 million Ethiopians.
•
1994-2014 Newagricultural technologies incitecontroversy; anti-hunger organi-zations focus on sustainability.
1994food and Drug Administration ap-proves sale of genetically modified(Gm) food.
2000Genes from genetically engineeredStarLink corn, approved only foranimal feed, are found in tacoshells after farmers sell the cornfor human consumption.
2002Gm crops in United States pro-duce 4 billion pounds more foodand fiber with less pesticide peracre than conventional plants, raise
farm income by $1.5 billion.
2006To help protect wildlife habitat,world wildlife fund works withfood companies to promote effi-cient farming practices.
2007Overuse of Green Revolution tech-niques in India have made Punjabstate’s agriculture “unsustainableand nonprofitable,” according tolocal officials. world food Pro-gramme, with support from theBill & melinda Gates and HowardBuffett foundations, begins teach-ing better agricultural practices topoor farmers and buying theircrops for use in relief deliveries.
2009Obama administration launchesfeed the future program thatseeks leadership from developingcountries and taps private-sectorexpertise of nonprofit and profit-making organizations to promoteagricultural development.
2011Study finds high-tech sensors canincrease crop yields while reduc-ing fuel consumption and fertilizerand pesticide overuse.
2012farmers raise more fish than beeffor the first time.
2013fAO counts 842 million hungrypeople worldwide — 26 millionfewer than in 2012.
2014Climate-change threat to foodproduction underscored by Uni-versity Corporation for Atmos-pheric Research report that thisdecade is on track to beinghottest ever recorded.
684 CQ Researcher
The U.N. established the fAO in1945 and the International Children’sEmergency fund (UNICEf) in 1946. Itadded the world food Programme in1961, the U.N. Development Programmein 1966 and the U.N. Population fundin 1969. 77 The world Bank got intothe act in 1973, when bank PresidentRobert mcNamara set a goal of reduc-ing malnutrition and poverty in the de-veloping world by making loans foragricultural and rural development. 78
In 1954, the United States institu-tionalized its relief efforts by creatingthe food for Peace program, under whichCongress authorized the purchase ofsurplus commodities from American farm-
ers for resale at low prices overseas.The process was designed to help bothU.S. farmers and the hungry abroad. Italso provided the basis for a later de-bate about whether shipping com-modities across the ocean was the bestway to aid the hungry. Over the years,the program’s emphasis shifted fromsales, which essentially ceased duringthe 1990s, to donations.
The postwar era also fostered sci-entific and technological advances thatled to an unprecedented increase inagricultural productivity. In 1944, Amer-ican biologist Norman Borlaug went tomexico to work in a Rockefeller foun-dation-funded program that launchedwhat became the “Green Revolution”
of high-yield farming. 79 In 1953, Amer-ican biochemist James watson andBritish biophysicist francis Crick de-scribed the double-helix structure ofDNA, which paved the way for map-ping the genetic code and creatinggenetically modified organisms. 80 Bothadvances later faced criticisms that theymay do more harm than good.
Borlaug, who won the 1970 NobelPeace Prize, focused on using con-ventional breeding processes to de-velop disease-resistant and high-yieldwheat varieties. 81 The advances wereaccompanied by development of chem-ical fertilizers and pesticides, improvedirrigation techniques and increased useof mechanized equipment. Agricultural
GLOBAL HUNGER
Continued from p. 682
The scene — played out thousands of times across ruralIndia — led one journalist to liken poor farmers to thelate Indian filmmaker Satyajit Ray. 1
After a crash course in filmmaking, farmers set up tripodsand use small, battery-powered, digital cameras to record inter-views with fellow farmers about their best agricultural practices.They then edit their work to eight- to 10-minute presentations.
finally, with a tiny, battery-powered projector and perhaps asheet stretched between trees, they show the videos to otherindigenous farmers at bus stops, temples, schools, street cornersor local government offices — anywhere they find farmers withtime on their hands and an interest in learning how to growmore food at less cost in environmentally friendly ways. Some-times government workers attend the meetings and distributematerials needed to implement the suggested practices. 2
The program is organized and supported by Digital Green,the brainchild of Indian-American Rikin Gandhi, who got theidea about a decade ago while researching technology foremerging markets at microsoft Research India.
Traditional government agricultural extension programs, pro-vided via broadcast or print media, don’t reach many small-scale farmers, many of whom are illiterate. So Gandhi decid-ed to combine the high technology of making videos withlow-tech means of distributing them to far-flung rural commu-nities. The equipment is small enough to fit into a backpackfor transport by bicycle or on foot. 3
Gandhi figured farmers would be more likely to listen totheir peers. So, while the information comes from experts, farm-ers tell about their own experiences using the new technolo-gies. Having locals produce the videos adds to the films’ cred-
ibility, Gandhi said, and enables the films to be shot in thelocal languages.
“farmers listen to farmers,” says Jason Clay, senior vice pres-ident at the world wildlife fund, “They listen to their neigh-bors and to people who speak their language.” worldwide,farmers speak about 6,000 different languages, he says.
when the videos are shot by farmers, Gandhi said, otherfarmers “instantly connect with it.” 4 “The first questions farm-ers often ask when they see these videos are, ‘what is thename of the farmer in the video?’ and ‘which village is he orshe from?’ ” he said. 5
farmers adopt the new techniques about 45 percent of thetime, compared to a 33 percent rate for traditional agriculturalextension programs in India, according to Digital Green. microsoftResearch India also found that the program spent $3.70 to get asingle farmer to adopt a new practice, while traditional approachescost $38. 6
One farmer who adopted a new technique after attendinga Digital Green presentation was Chaitan Gadaba, from Put-pandi in eastern India, who learned how to grow okra withminimal irrigation. He had been cultivating rice on a portionof his land, and leaving the rest fallow for lack of water. Afterwatching the video, he began planting all of his property. 7
Similarly, farmers in Karnataka in western India learned to usethe azolla fern as cattle fodder to increase milk yields. Originallyshot in the Kannada language, the video was later produced inHindi for farmers in madhya Pradesh, some 600 miles away,where the practice became popular as well, Gandhi said. 8
Launched in 2006, Digital Green had reached 20 villages by2008. By 2009 it had spun off as an independent nonprofit. 9
videographer farmers Promote Best PracticesLocally produced videos have credibility.
Aug. 8, 2014 685www.cqresearcher.com
productivity soared.mexico became self-sufficient in wheat
during the 1950s, with yields increas-ing sixfold between 1950 and 1970. 82
In India, wheat yields tripled betweenthe mid-’60s and mid-’90s. 83
Overall, the Green Revolution hassaved up to 1 billion people from star-vation, according to former U.S. Agri-culture Secretary Dan Glickman andformer U.N. world food ProgrammeExecutive Director Catherine Bertini. 84
Genetic Engineering
I t took 41 years for watson andCrick’s DNA breakthrough to bring
genetically engineered food to market.Scientists created the first geneticallyengineered organism, a bacterium, in1973. Calgene — a California-based com-pany that is now a subsidiary of mon-santo — patented the genetically mod-ified flavrSavr tomato in 1989, but itdidn’t get food and Drug Administra-tion approval for sale until 1994. Twoyears later, monsanto introducedRoundup Ready soybeans, which couldsurvive when the fields were sprayedwith the company’s Roundup weed killer.
By 2002, U.S. farmers were producing4 billion pounds more food and fiberper acre with Gm crops than with con-ventional plants, reducing pesticide useby 46 million pounds and raising farm
income by $1.5 billion, according tothe National Center for food and Agri-cultural Policy, a washington-based re-search and education institution. 85
farmers also got an unintentionalboost from the 1973 Arab oil embar-go. As the embargo pushed up thecost of oil-based fertilizer, pesticides andfuel, governments turned to plant-based ethanol as an alternative fuel. In1975, Brazil required that ethanol fromsugarcane be blended with gasoline.The United States exempted ethanolfrom gasoline taxes in 1978. 86
In 2007, the United States requiredthat an increasing amount of ethanolbe blended with gasoline — from 9 bil-lion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion by
Since then, the organization has produced more than 2,800videos in over 20 languages and shown them to more than330,000 farmers in 3,000 villages. It operates in eight Indianstates and in Ethiopia, Ghana, mozambique and Tanzania. 10
Gandhi wants to reach 10,000 villages by next year. 11 Thevideos are available at www.digitalgreen.org.
A case study by the Oneworld foundation India called Dig-ital Green “a viable solution to the major problems afflictinggovernment agricultural extension programs,” which require a“huge number of staff” and “usually restrict their interactionsto the richer, more enterprising farmers within a village.” 12
Gawain Kripke, policy director at Oxfam America, the U.S.affiliate of the international relief and advocacy organization,says Digital Green adopts a key concept in agricultural devel-opment: Education should be embraced, directed and deliv-ered by farmers themselves.
“You don’t just arrive with new seeds and say try this,” Kripkeexplains. “You invite them to ask questions and request sup-port for what they’re trying to do. You can’t come to growmaize if they want to grow mangos.”
— Tom Price
1 Rajiv Rao, “Aspiring astronaut helps farmers,” Business Standard (India),Aug. 9, 2011, http://tinyurl.com/l5cqevt.2 Ibid.; “Case Study: Digital Green,” Governance Knowledge Centre, De-partment of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances, ministry of Per-sonnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India, June 2011,http://tinyurl.com/qayfl8p.3 David Bornstein, “where YouTube meets the farm,” The New York Times,April 3, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/ozbjohp.4 m. J. Prabu, “video clippings educate on methods practised elseware,” TheHindu, feb. 17, 2011, http://tinyurl.com/qchfubr.
5 “Tech-based farming Advice Should Stay People-Centred,” SciDev.Net (Lon-don), Nov. 20, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/obp2u4a.6 Bornstein, op. cit.7 “Latest technology helps ryots get good yield,” The Hindu, Aug. 4, 2011,http://is.gd/Tmi1Yq.8 Geeta Padmanabhan, “when farmers turn filmmakers,” The Hindu, Sept. 18,2013, http://tinyurl.com/o9uh6so.9 Rao, op. cit.; Priyanka Golikeri, “mIT alumnus chucks space dreams forterra firma,” DNA India, march 24, 2011, http://tinyurl.com/lmmp8hn; “AshokaInnovators for The Public: Rikin Gandhi,” Ashoka, http://tinyurl.com/kxhlwlr.10 “An Innovative Platform for Rural Development,” Digital Green, http://tinyurl.com/pzqv99k.11 Padmanabhan, op. cit.12 “Case Study: Digital Green,” op. cit.
Farmers in the central Indian state of Madhya Pradesh,one of the country’s most undeveloped regions, shoot avideo on chemical treatment of paddy seeds being grownin a nursery, to be shown to other farmers interested inenvironmentally friendly, lower-cost farming methods.
Cou
rtes
y D
igita
l Gre
en
686 CQ Researcher
2022. Last year, the EnvironmentalProtection Agency, which implementsthe law, required fuel producers touse 14 billion gallons of corn-basedethanol and 2.75 billion from non-food sources, such as wood or ined-ible parts of the corn plant.
The United States, Brazil and later Eu-ropean countries were aiming to reducedependence on foreign oil and cut car-bon pollution caused by burning fossilfuels. By 2011, ethanol production wasconsuming 40 percent of the U.S. corncrop, which rose to 44 percent last year,according to Sen. Dianne feinstein, D-Calif. Critics began bemoaning the un-intended consequences of ethanol use:higher food prices and disappointing en-vironmental benefits. 87
Unintended Consequences
G enetic engineering and theGreen Revolution produced other
unintended consequences.many people’s fears of Gm crops
were heightened in 2000 when genesfrom genetically modified StarLink corn— approved only for use in animalfeed — were found in taco shells.Some farmers admitted selling the cornfor human consumption. 88 The sameyear, Roundup-resistant weeds werefound in Delaware. Three years later,bollworms resistant to Gm cotton werediscovered in the South. 89
The modern agriculture spawnedby the Green Revolution — includ-
ing large, industrialized farms that re-plant the same crops in the sameplaces year after year — has overusedchemicals, drained aquifers, depletedsoil, threatened wildlife and biodiver-sity, spewed greenhouse gases andcreated its own pesticide-resistantcrops.
Even small-scale farmers in Indiahave discovered the Green Revolution’sdownside. Beginning in the 1960s,high-yield seeds, fertilizer, pesticides andirrigation multiplied productivity in Pun-jab and made the state the breadbas-ket of a nation that had transformeditself from a land of starvation to afood exporter. Over the decades, how-ever, Punjab’s farmers depleted the soil,created pesticide-resistant insects and
GLOBAL HUNGER
A few years ago, the world wildlife fund (wwf) took alook around the globe and determined that one of thebiggest threats to wildlife is habitat loss, and the biggest
threat to wildlife habitat is the human appetite.Tigers no longer live in areas of malaysia and Sumatra that
have been converted to oil palm plantations, for instance. Andoil palm cultivation has driven the Sumatran rhino from partsof malaysia, Sumatra and Borneo. 1
Overall, the fund says, habitat loss is a major hazard for 85 per-cent of species on the International Union for Conservation ofNature’s list of threatened and endangered species. During the1990s, more than 230 million acres of forests — 2.4 percentof the world’s total — were cut down, almost 70 percent forconversion to agriculture. 2 Between 1960 and 2000, the globe’scultivated land grew by 13 percent. 3 And conservationists worrythat demand for farmland will soar in the future.
Earth’s population — currently 7 billion — is expected togrow to 9 billion or more by the middle of this century, notesJason Clay, the organization’s senior vice president for markettransformation. And as economic growth creates larger middleclasses in places like China and India, those populations willconsume greater amounts of food, especially more animal pro-tein. Thus, by mid-century individuals may require twice asmuch food as they do now — counting what they consumeand the food consumed by the animals they eat, Clay says.
without greatly improved productivity and more environmen-tally friendly farming techniques, “the biggest threat to biodiversitybecomes agricultural sprawl,” Clay says. “wildlife need homes, too.”
So the wwf set out to “freeze the footprint of food,” as
Clay puts it, by promoting more efficient agricultural practices:producing more crops on existing cropland, thus halting theconversion of natural habitat to farmland.
The fund’s goal is to improve the efficiency of all food pro-ducers — from the largest conglomerate to the smallest sub-sistence farmer — so they use less land, water, fertilizer andpesticides. The organization decided to focus first on companiesthat produce or trade in 15 commodities whose cultivation posesthe biggest threat to wildlife habitat, including soy, sugar, palmoil, beef and farmed salmon.
“we needed to find the business case for change,” Clay says,a case he says can be found in the value of intangible assetssuch as a company’s reputation. “Killing that last population oforangutans can affect your corporate value,” he says. “So com-panies see this as a huge risk.”
wwf negotiators also argued that producing more food onthe same land — or in the same water — was good for thebottom line.
Currently, with support from the mars food corporation, thewwf also is working with the Beijing Genomic Institute tomap the genomes of Africa’s most important food crops, suchas yams, plantains and cassava. The findings will be releasedin the public domain, so plant breeders can use the informationto improve African crops.
“The goal is to produce better materials” so farmers can“double, triple or quadruple productivity” in areas where hungeris most common, Clay says.
The information can be used to improve plants either throughgenetic engineering or traditional breeding. Breeders can iden-
freezing food’s footprint to Save wildlife“The biggest threat to biodiversity is agricultural sprawl.”
Aug. 8, 2014 687www.cqresearcher.com
weeds and polluted the water sourceswith chemicals. In 2007, the PunjabState Council for Science and Technol-ogy reported that “the most stunningexample of the Green Revolution inIndia . . . has become unsustainableand non-profitable.” 90
Pat mooney, executive director ofthe ETC Group, an Ottawa-based or-ganization that studies how technolo-gies affect the poor, says the GreenRevolution “deserves credit for havingproduced a lot more wheat and riceand maize. Some people might other-wise not have been fed.” But, he adds,“it became a one-size-fits-all model. Inthe long term it caused a lot of dam-age and ended up focusing on yieldsbeyond nutrition.”
A review of academic literatureconducted by Barrett of Cornell andothers found that the Green Revolutionled to some poor people consuminga calorie-rich but nutrition-poor diet.“from the 1970s to the mid-1990s, theprice of staple foods [such as rice andwheat] decreased relative to the priceof micronutrient rich foods [such asvegetables] in much of Asia,” theywrote. As a result, the poor were eat-ing more grain and fewer vegetables,they said. 91
Barrett also notes other Green Revo-lution shortcomings. “In initially makingwater available essentially for free tofarmers, it pretty much guarantees theywill overuse water,” he says. He alsonotes the overuse of chemicals.
But, he adds, “The Green Revolu-tion had an amazing effect. It in-creased per capita calorie availability.It drove down food prices. There’s nobetter way to fight hunger than tobring down the price of the food, andthe Green Revolution achieved thatmore than anything before or since.”
The Green Revolution was muchless successful in Africa, where coun-tries lacked good roads or railways totransport food to market or to dis-tribute high-yield seeds, fertilizers andpesticides. African governments alsodid not offer farmers the support pro-vided by Asian governments, such ascredit, training and subsidies. 92 Andsince independence, many African coun-tries have suffered from government
tify plants with favorable genetic traits, then use traditional tech-niques to reproduce them.
The fund also has worked on food-related issues with suchindustry giants as wal-mart, Coca-Cola, General mills and Kel-logg. Now it is focusing on trade associations in order to havea broader, faster impact, Clay says. “working with companiesone by one is not fast enough,” he says.
Among other things, the wwf has encouraged industries tohave their practices evaluated by independent certification or-ganizations. for example, 15 salmon-farming companies, whichrepresent 70 percent of global production, have committed tohaving all of their practices meet third-party standards for min-imizing environmental damage by 2020, Clay says.
members of the Consumer Goods forum — a 400-memberinternational trade association of manufacturers, retailers andservice providers whose business lines range from food to beerto laundry supplies — have agreed to stop contributing to de-forestation in their production and acquisition of beef, soy,paper and palm-oil products, he says. The fund also is help-ing palm-oil processors enable their small-scale suppliers to im-plement environment-friendly practices, he says.
wwf’s market transformation program has become “a bit ofa model for others, including Oxfam,” says Oxfam America Pol-icy Director Gawain Kripke. “we launched a campaign a coupleyears ago — called Behind the Brands — that’s modeled onwhat wwf has done, but with a slightly different focus.”
Oxfam rates how companies treat land, water, climate, women,farmers and workers and then asks its supporters to contact thecompanies demanding improvement. “we’re actually having con-
structive engagement with these companies,” Kripke says. “They’vedone stuff we think is really positive in the last couple of years.”
Coca-Cola, for instance, raised its score for how fairly ittreats land issues from 1, the lowest, in 2013 to 7, the high-est, this year by requiring its sugar suppliers to respect theproperty rights of small-scale farmers, who often have theirland seized by larger organizations, Oxfam reported. 4
— Tom Price
1 “Palm oil & biodiversity loss,” world wildlife fund, http://tinyurl.com/oce8a9t.2 “Impact of habitat loss on species,” world wildlife fund, http://tinyurl.com/pgv3ota. for background, see Reed Karaim, “vanishing Biodiversity,” CQ Re-searcher, Nov. 6, 2012, pp. 497-520.3 Hugh Turral, “Climate change, water and food security,” U.N. food andAgriculture Organization, 2011, p. 31, http://tinyurl.com/nlh3q5b.4 “Race to the top: One year of looking Behind the Brands,” Oxfam Interna-tional, feb. 26, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/acxglfh. for background, see Jina moore,“Resolving Land Disputes,” CQ Researcher, Sept. 11, 2011, pp. 421-446.
Forest habitats for endangered Sumatran tigers have beenlost to conversion to massive oil palm plantations in Malaysiaand Indonesia, leading environmentalists to call “agricultural
sprawl” the biggest threat to the planet’s biodiversity.
AFP
/Get
ty Im
ages
/Rom
eo G
acad
688 CQ Researcher
GLOBAL HUNGER
corruption, authoritarianism, anti-freemarket ideologies and strife, U.S. Assis-tant Secretary of State for African AffairsCarson lamented in 2010.
“mismanagement, embezzlement ofstate revenues and centralized ap-proaches to economic managementprecipitated economic decline and thedeterioration of infrastructure and gov-ernment services,” Carson said. How-ever, since the 1990s, he said, a grow-ing number of African countries have“liberalized their economies, em-braced market reforms and adoptedpro-business policies.” 93
CURRENTSITUATIONSustainable Food
T he Senate Environment and Publicworks Committee is considering a
proposal to repeal the mandate that re-sults in nearly half of America’s corn cropbeing burned as motor fuel. Supportersof the legislation say the mandate divertsfood to fuel and drives up food prices.
Cosponsored by liberal CaliforniaDemocrat feinstein, and conservativeOklahoma Republican Sen. TomCoburn, the measure would eliminatethe requirement that an increasingamount of corn-based ethanol beblended into the nation’s gasoline.However, it would continue a man-date for burning so-called advancedbiofuels, which are made from ined-ible vegetation.
feinstein said she still supportsshifting to low-carbon fuels, but op-poses the corn mandate because itraises the cost of food and damagesthe environment. Coburn called for let-ting “market forces, rather than polit-ical and parochial forces, determinehow to diversify fuel supplies.” 94
The bill fits into a larger movementthat emphasizes sustainable food pro-duction that uses environmentally friend-ly agriculture and boosts the resiliencyof small-scale farmers in the develop-ing world when they face drought andother challenges, says Leach of worldfood Program USA. The efforts includeproviding drought- and pest-resistantseeds, teaching more effective farmingtechniques and combining relief withdevelopment projects.
The most effective attacks on hungerand its effects, Cornell’s Barrett says, areproviding health care for children andwomen of childbearing age, educatingchildren and investing in boosting poorfarmers’ agricultural productivity.
The Obama administration, U.N. agen-cies and private relief organizations areadopting policies based on the theorythat increasing small farmers’ productivi-ty while protecting the environment canlift them out of poverty while reducinghunger and boosting the local economy.
“Half of hungry people globally aresmall-scale farmers,” Leach says. “wecan take them out of hunger by cre-ating economic opportunity.”
for six years the U.N. world foodProgramme has been teaching devel-oping-world farmers better techniques,helping to organize them into associa-tions to store and distribute food moreefficiently and providing access to cred-it. The agency then purchases their cropsto provide food relief for the hungry.
The goal is to “get them produc-ing the quantity and quality they needto feed themselves, then to sell to theworld food Programme and then tograduate to selling to the marketplace,”Leach explains.
Feed the Future
T he Obama administration’s effortsto push a similar approach in U.S.
hunger programs have had a “trans-formative impact on the whole inter-national community,” Leach says.
Similarly, Oxfam’s Kripke describesObama as “a real leader across the worldin pushing agriculture development asa priority.” Unfortunately, he adds,“many other donors haven’t really beenfollowing very effectively.”
Called feed the future, the U.S. ap-proach assumes that anti-hunger andantipoverty programs are most effectivewhen embraced and led by develop-ing world farmers and their local, re-gional and national governments. It alsoseeks to tap expertise of both nonprofitand profit-making private organizations.
The administration, for instance, hasasked the Agriculture Department andcollege agriculture schools to researchtechnologies to enable small farmersto increase productivity. In addition,the New Alliance for food Securityand Nutrition, launched in 2012 by theGroup of Eight leading industrial na-tions,* now includes 10 African coun-tries and more than 160 companiesthat have pledged to invest more than$15 billion in African agriculture.
Carter, the UC-Davis researcher, cred-its the administration for targeting as-sistance to the specific needs of variousfarmer groups, such as by conductingresearch into the most effective and af-fordable farming techniques for a smallgeographic area. “It’s one thing to moveto the frontier of what’s technologicallypossible,” he says, “and it’s another toput resources into situations wherefarmers can exploit what’s available.”
Barrett cites increased funding foragriculture research as key to the pro-gram. Overall, according to Barrett, the$1.1-billion feed the future programis “a step in the right direction, but isseverely underfunded.”
“we should be spending more forpreventative action than for curativetreatment,” he says, suggesting that
Continued on p. 690
* The eight were France, Germany, Italy, Japan,the United Kingdom, Canada, Russia and theUnited States. Russia was expelled after its seizedCrimea this year.
no
Aug. 8, 2014 689www.cqresearcher.com
At Issue:Should hunger programs ban genetically modified food?yes
yesÉRIC DARIER, PH.D.FOOD FOR LIFE CAMPAIGNER, GREENPEACEINTERNATIONAL
WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER, AUGUST 2014
t he biotech industry has been exploiting food crises topromote genetically modified (Gm) crops, claiming theycan solve world hunger. People experiencing hunger
should have decent solutions, not be used to promote contro-versial technologies. Even in emergency situations, desperatepeople should have the right to choose what they eat.
Greenpeace opposes the deliberate release of Gm organismsinto the environment. They can multiply and cross-breed andpose a threat of irreversible damage to biodiversity and ecosys-tems. furthermore, we don’t know if Gm crops are safe to eat,especially over the long term. Therefore, with regard to Gmfoods, it is urgent that we apply the “precautionary principle,”which could be summarized as “in case of doubt, leave it out.”
Genetic modification makes crops prone to unexpected ef-fects. Evaluating food safety requires looking for such effects,which is extremely difficult, if not impossible, as reflected inthe ongoing controversy surrounding the assessment of thesafety of Gm crops.
U.S. food aid containing Gm grains has been used to pro-vide famine relief. Greenpeace is most concerned about the po-tential uncontrolled environmental spread of Gm organisms intothe affected countries. Notably, the United States has not joined167 other countries in ratifying the U.N. Cartagena Protocol onBiosafety, a treaty regulating the movement of Gm organismsamong nations.
millions of people around the world suffer from food short-ages, high food prices and hunger, due to several factors: in-dustrial farming, bad harvests, inadequate access to food dueto poverty and inequality, rising oil prices, changing consump-tion patterns, commodities speculation and the rush to pro-duce unsustainable biofuels.
Instead, ecological farming enables and encourages commu-nities to produce enough food to feed themselves while fos-tering sustainable farming and healthy food.
There are many ecological alternatives to Gm crops. TheU.N. agriculture assessment known as IAASTD recommendedpolicies that would lead to scaling up ecological agriculture.more recently, the report of the U.N. special rapporteur onthe right to food urged governments to “move away frombusiness as usual” and to tackle the systemic failure of thecurrent food system.
Let people choose which ecological agriculture solutionsbest allow them to feed themselves while protecting nature.Gm crops are part of the problem, not the solution.no
DENNIS T. AVERYENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIST AND SENIORFELLOW, HEARTLAND INSTITUTE; CO-AUTHOR,UNSTOPPABLE: GLOBAL WARMING EVERY1,500 YEARS
WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER, AUGUST 2014
g m crops produce more food during good years andhave the potential to resist drought and disease moreeffectively than traditional crops. They are ideal for famines and emergencies.
Pessimists say we can’t yet trust Gm foods, but they’veturned up no valid dangers. In fact, the European Commissionin 2010 said Gm is slightly safer than conventional crops be-cause of the targeted research conducted on them.
Aside from hunger emergencies, Gm is also critically impor-tant to meeting the enormous food challenge of the next 40years. The world must roughly double its food output, quickly,in order to feed a larger, more affluent population. (After2050, world population will begin a slow, steady decline asincreasingly literate women live in cities where it is expensiveto raise a child.)
Ideally, we will be able to double food output withoutplowing under wildlife habitat equal to the land area of SouthAmerica — just to produce low-yield crops. The world’s primefarmland is already under cultivation, so farmers must redoubleper-acre yields on existing fields. more nitrogen fertilizer andherbicides can be used in Africa, but most of the world’sfarmland is already using today’s high-tech inputs. That leavesa major food-supply gap that only higher-yield new technology— such as biotechnology — can fill.
The last time the world faced such a problem, during theLittle Ice Age (1300-1850 AD), it was also solved with technol-ogy. Governments ordered farmers to rotate crops and live-stock on the same land to maintain soil nitrogen. Better sail-ing ships brought Europe crops such as corn and potatoesfrom the New world and cold-tolerant turnips from China asa feed crop. Drought-tolerant New world corn was plantedacross China. food production surged, averting famine — ex-cept in france, where people claimed potatoes were poisonous.famine then brought on the french Revolution.
A California biotech researcher believes he has found aone-gene solution to a massive Third world food problem.The soil in about half of the world’s tropical cropland is natu-rally saturated with toxic aluminum. Traditional crop plantsstruggle to survive in the toxic soils, but the researcher hasdevised a way to genetically modify plants to thrive on thesame soils. However, the scientist is being discouraged due topublic Gm mistrust in wealthy, aid-donor countries.
690 CQ Researcher
“$10 billion is in the neighborhood ofwhat’s needed.”
Cornell’s Barrett is also optimisticabout a trend in which relief agenciesacquire food from local and regionalsources rather than shipping com-modities from donor countries. In theUnited States, the 2014 farm bill tookmodest steps in that direction by in-creasing the amount of aid that canbe provided in cash instead of com-modities or that can be used to pur-chase food near where it’s consumed.
Corporations also are pitching in.wal-mart, for instance, helps farmersin mexico and Central America followmore sustainable practices and improvetheir post-harvest food handling, wheremuch waste occurs. The Keurig Greenmountain coffee company helps cof-fee growers in mexico, Central Amer-ica and Africa diversify their crops tocombat seasonal hunger. 95
Corporate involvement is doubly im-portant, according to Clay of the worldwildlife fund, because “when com-panies like wal-mart or mcDonald’smake commitments to sustainability,their supply chains follow suit.”
Reversing Damage
P rivate organizations also are mov-ing to overcome environmental
damage caused by modern agriculture,which affects the Earth’s future abilityto feed itself.
Some advocates are looking to thesea as a source of food, because watercovers 70 percent of the globe but pro-vides less than 2 percent of the plan-et’s food. They face significant obsta-cles, however. many ocean areas havebeen overfished, and fish farms posesignificant pollution challenges. 96
farmers raised more fish than beeffor the first time in 2012, harvestingmore than 70 million tons of seafood— 14 times what they produced in1980. But, just as agriculture has de-
stroyed wildlife habitat, depleted soiland polluted fresh water supplies onland, aquaculture has destroyed man-groves to create shrimp farms and re-leased fertilizers, pesticides, antibioticsand fish waste into oceans. 97
To avoid aquaculture’s downsides,some farmers are raising fish in tankson land; others are adopting environ-mentally friendly practices at sea.
In landlocked western virginia, forinstance, Blue Ridge Aquaculture hasdevised a land-based fish farmingmethod that produces 12,000 poundsof antibiotic- and hormone-free tilapiaeach day. Company president Bill mar-tin describes his indoor fish farmingprocess as having “as close to zeroimpact on the oceans as we can get.”
Others are working to minimize theimpact of their ocean-based fish farms.Off the coast of Panama, for instance,Open Blue raises hundreds of thou-sands of cobia in cages 60 feet belowthe Caribbean. Ocean currents flush thepens to provide the fish with cleanwater and to dilute waste. The farmdoes not use antibiotics, and researchershave not found waste outside the farm.
To the north, off Canada’s British Co-lumbia coast, University of victoria re-searchers are raising sablefish (also calledblack cod) while keeping the PacificOcean clean. Down-current from thefish pens, baskets of shellfish eat thefish excretions. Sugar kelp grow next tothe baskets and consume almost all ofthe remaining nitrates and phosphorus.Eighty feet below, sea cucumbers ingestthe waste that falls to the sea floor. 98
farmers who grow crops and live-stock on land are deploying “preci-sion-agriculture” technology to increaseyields while decreasing environmentaldamage. Global Positioning System de-vices attached to farm equipment de-tect precise locations where water, fer-tilizer or pesticides are needed. Othermachines drag sensors over and throughsoil to measure treatment needs.
Precise measurements enabled NewZealand farmer Hugh wigley to cut his
lime use by 40 percent, for instance.wigley, who also supplies precisionequipment to other farmers, says oneclient discovered he didn’t need to spreadany lime on land where he had beenusing about two tons per acre. 99
A 2011 Agriculture Department studyfound that precision agriculture hasenabled farmers to reduce the dam-age caused by runoff of fertilizers andpesticides, reduced fuel consumptionand increased crop yields. 100
OUTLOOKSolvable Problem
w hile food production has beengrowing more quickly than
consumption, experts worry that ex-panding middle classes in countriessuch as China and India will boost de-mand for more expensive foods thatput a greater strain on the environ-ment than cheaper foods. That coulddrive already-rising food prices high-er, making it harder for the poorest ofthe poor to purchase enough to eat.
fulfilling demand for meat — es-pecially beef — will divert food toanimal feed and put added pressureon the environment. In addition, cli-mate change could disrupt the growthof crops and livestock. But techno-logical advances promise to enablefarmers to increase yields while pro-tecting the environment. And manyexperts are optimistic that hunger notcaused by conflict or natural disastercan be eliminated.
“Hunger is a solvable problem,” Leachof world food Program USA says. “weare smarter now in terms of under-standing the causes of hunger and inhaving creative strategies to addresshunger. And there’s greater understandingby the private sector about how to en-hance their businesses and at the sametime have positive social impact.”
GLOBAL HUNGER
Continued from p. 688
Aug. 8, 2014 691www.cqresearcher.com
Big remaining challenges includeaddressing climate change and creat-ing “better mechanisms to preventconflict,” Leach adds.
Cornell’s Barrett also expects theprivate sector to contribute to reduc-ing hunger. Rising food prices are draw-ing more private investment into pro-duction, he says. And reducingagriculture’s threat to the environmentgoes hand in hand with reducingfarmers’ costs, he says.
“As you develop products that aregreener and lower-cost, farmers adoptthem pretty quickly,” Barrett explains.“They’re doing a better job of dosinginorganic fertilizers precisely so we re-duce inorganic runoff to waterways.People are figuring out better ways tocontrol pests with natural predatorsand natural secretions from plants.And we’re doing a much better jobdeveloping efficient machinery.”
Unfortunately, these improvements arenot occurring fast enough to meet ex-pected future demand, he adds. Kripke,of Oxfam, agrees. As to whether poorfarmers will benefit from increasing fooddemand, Kripke says, “It’s possible. It’snot inevitable.”
Clay, of the world wildlife fund,worries that rising food prices —which may be good for farmers —will “leave people with less money ina real bad way.” But he’s hopeful today’syoung adults will tackle hunger be-cause “they care a lot about [how theirfood is] produced and knowing thatit’s produced sustainably.”
mooney, of the ETC Group, con-tends that affluent eaters must changetheir habits, and relief organizations mustteach the poor how to grow their ownfood and eat more healthily. “we’ve gotto adapt our consumer habits to ourplanet and to our health needs, whichmeans we need to reduce our meatand dairy consumption,” he says.
Developed nations waste food be-cause “you go to the grocery once aweek and buy all sorts of stuff, andit spoils in the back of the refrigera-
tor,” mooney says. Shoppers shouldvisit the store more frequently and buyless on each trip, he says.
Large-scale farms will continue toproduce a substantial amount of theworld’s food, mooney says. But “thatdoesn’t mean it has to be highly chem-ical farming.” Small-scale farmers prob-ably will adapt to climate change moreeasily than large agricultural corpora-tions, if researchers focus on small-scaleagriculture’s needs, he says.
Avery of the Heartland and Hudsoninstitutes predicts that large-scale, high-tech agriculture will not be replaced.“we need more food and more high-value food, and we have to think abouttripling the yield of crops and livestockon the good land that we currentlyfarm, because there’s no more goodland,” he says.
without continued technological ad-vances — including with GmOs andchemicals — “we will have more famine,and there will be loss of wildlife habi-tat on a massive scale” as more land isallocated to farming, Avery says.
Notes1 Abigail Hauslohner, “U.N. agency raises dis-aster designation in Iraq as refugees flood intoKurdistan,” The Washington Post, June 18, 2014,http://tinyurl.com/k7deo5v; mac mcClelland,“How to Build a Perfect Refugee Camp,” TheNew York Times, feb. 13, 2014, pp. mm-24,http://tinyurl.com/ljnvc3v.2 Olivia ward, “Canadian aid timely for starv-ing children,” The Toronto Star, may 30, 2014,p. A10, http://tinyurl.com/nrmc86w.3 “The State of food Insecurity in the world:The multiple dimensions of food security,”food and Agriculture Organization of the Unit-ed Nations, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/njzqzjp.4 Ibid.5 “The State of food Insecurity in the world2013,” food and Agriculture Organization ofthe United Nations (executive summary), 2013,http://tinyurl.com/nq8npru; “wake up before itis too late: make agriculture truly sustainablenow for food security in a changing climate,”U.N. Conference on Trade and Development,September 2013, http://tinyurl.com/kly4c3r.6 “The State of food Insecurity in the world
2013,” op. cit.7 “Hunger Statistics,” world food Programme,http://tinyurl.com/lhjx45.8 “world Health Statistics 2014 Part III: GlobalHealth Indicators,” world Health Organization,http://tinyurl.com/q5fgmmx.9 Chris Otter, “feast and famine: The Glob-al food Crisis,” Origins: Current Events inHistorical Perspective, Ohio State University,vol. 3, Issue 6, march 2010, http://tinyurl.com/l988h56. Also see “Table: Age-standardisedregional and national estimates of the preva-lence of overweight and obesity combinedand obesity alone for girls, boys, men, andwomen for 2013, for 188 countries and 21GBD regions” in “Global, regional, and na-tional prevalence of overweight and obesityin children and adults during 1980-2013,” TheLancet, may 29, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/k8slkbu.10 Jason Clay, “freezing the footprint offood,” world wildlife fund, Oct. 23, 2012,http://tinyurl.com/kohxm3k.11 Andrew C. Revkin, “It’s Time for Africa’sGreen Revolution, focused on Corn,” The NewYork Times (blog), April 10, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/kdn4kqx.12 Brian Jones, “wasting food can eat awaythe future,” Canberra Times, April 5, 2014,p. B9, http://tinyurl.com/oyezt6e.13 “The State of food Insecurity in the world2013,” op. cit.; mark Koba, “A hungry world: lotsof food, in too few places,” CNBC, July 22, 2013,http://tinyurl.com/n8trpyp.14 Chris Thomas, “Improving nutrition, build-ing resilience for families, societies,” USAID,may 22, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/kfqwn9d.15 “The State of food Insecurity in the world2013,” op. cit.16 Johnnie Carson, “Africa: Remarks at theAfrican Diplomatic Corp’s Celebration of AfricaDay,” U.S. State Department Documents andPublications, may 25, 2010, http://tinyurl.com/39o78ar.17 “food Aid flows 2012 Report,” world foodProgramme, United Nations, December 2013,http://tinyurl.com/jwcl2tn.18 Statistics from interview with Alan Jury, se-nior adviser to world food Program USA.19 Hauslohner, op. cit.20 miguel I. Gómez, et al., “Post-green revo-lution food systems and the triple burden ofmalnutrition,” food Policy, October 2013, vol.42, pp. 129-138, http://tinyurl.com/ozugl6n.21 Ibid.22 “H.R. 4005 — Coast Guard and maritimeTransportation Act of 2014,” Library of Con-gress, http://tinyurl.com/ozso9el.
692 CQ Researcher
GLOBAL HUNGER
23 Christopher B. Barrett and Erin C. Lentz,“Highway Robbery on the High Seas,” TheHill, may 29, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/l9t7gp7.24 Elijah E. Cummings and Duncan D. Hunter,“food aid supports sea-lift abilities,” The Wash-ington Post, may 17, 2013, p. A16, http://tinyurl.com/ls4c9jd.25 “Senator Coons introduces bill to reformand modernize America’s food aid program,”Office of Sen. Christopher Coons, June 3, 2014,http://tinyurl.com/lab8wf9.26 Letter to Sens. Debbie Stabenow and ThadCochran, wheatworld.org, march 21, 2013,http://tinyurl.com/nwav3dq.27 Steve Baragona, “Congress Debates Limit-ing US farmers’ Role in food Aid,” voice ofAmerica News, June 18, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/oswob8b.28 “The value of food Aid monetization: Ben-efits, Risks and Best Practices,” Informa Eco-nomics, November 2012.29 Daniel A. Sumner, “Picking on the Poor,How US Agricultural Policy Hurts the De-veloping world,” AmericanBoondoggle.com,http://tinyurl.com/ko62jfk.30 Tim Krohn, “farm bill up against misper-ceptions, lawmakers say,” The [mankato, min-nesota] Free Press, feb. 19, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/m5p9nyl.30 Ibid.31 James Phelan, “U.S. food Aid: To Ship foodor Send Cash — the Obama Administrationweighs In,” Action Against Hunger, April 9, 2013,http://tinyurl.com/mw3wpxo.32 Dennis T. Avery, “Column: Biofuels havefallen out of fashion,” Orange County Register,may 8, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/q5c2kgp.33 “Direct federal financial Interventions andSubsidies in Energy in fiscal Year 2010,” U.S.Energy Information Administration, Aug. 1, 2011,http://tinyurl.com/nvm97sz; Robert Pear, “After
Three Decades, Tax Credit for Ethanol Ex-pires,” The New York Times, Jan. 1, 2012, http://tinyurl.com/a3ve67x.34 Timothy Spence, “Europe worsening Hungerworldwide,” Inter Press Service, may 31, 2011,http://tinyurl.com/plzmtup. for background seeJina moore, “Resolving Land Disputes,” CQ Re-searcher, Sept. 6, 2011, pp. 421-446.35 “National Journal Holds a Policy Summiton Biofuels mandate,” Political TranscriptWire, Oct. 9 2013, http://tinyurl.com/nctkqo4.36 Jonathan foley, “A five-Step Plan to feedthe world,” National Geographic, undated.http://tinyurl.com/l3b2jaw.37 Joel K. Bourne, Jr., “How to farm a Betterfish,” National Geographic, June 2014, http://tinyurl.com/l5hbosw. for background, seeDaniel mcGlynn, “whale Hunting,” CQ Re-searcher, June 29, 2012, pp. 573-596.38 Richard Black, “world’s oceans in ‘shock-ing’ decline,” BBC News, June 20, 2011,http://tinyurl.com/oqtyo9p. Also see Reidwilson, “fisheries at Risk as Oceans Acidify,”The Washington Post, July 31, 2014, p. A3,http://tinyurl.com/pqwtvk7.39 “The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species:Sphyrna lewini,” International Union for Con-servation of Nature, http://tinyurl.com/qexdyos.40 “4 steps food companies can take to helpstop climate change,” Oxfam, may, 20, 2014,http://tinyurl.com/ow3ffrm.41 “7 facts About Climate Change And Hunger,”world food Programme, United Nations, Dec.4, 2011, http://tinyurl.com/7zw9c4u.42 foley, op. cit.43 Andrei Illarionov, “A few Notes on ClimateChange,” The Cato Institute, Dec. 11, 2009,http://tinyurl.com/ourmqpg.44 Eli Kintisch, “High CO2 makes CropsLess Nutritious,” National Geographic, may 7,2014, http://tinyurl.com/p3ud8fc.
45 Terrell Johnson and Jon Erdman, “world’sHottest may Is Now may 2014: NOAA,” Theweather Channel, June 23, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/kcnjgpn.46 “How much Has the Global TemperatureRisen in the Last 100 Years?” The UniversityCorporation for Atmospheric Research, http://tinyurl.com/a8gygt3.47 fiona Harvey, “Rate of ocean acidificationdue to carbon emissions is at highest for300m years,” The Guardian, Oct. 2, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/o55anz3.48 Coral Davenport, “Climate Change DeemedGrowing Security Threat by military Re-searchers,” The New York Times, may 13, 2014,http://tinyurl.com/q9jnvak.49 winnie Byanyima, “world ‘woefully un-prepared’ for climate impacts on food,”Oxfam International, march 25, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/oxwbatz.50 Justin Gillis, “Panel’s warning on ClimateRisk: worst Is Yet to Come,” The New York Times,march 31, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/mstxs6b.51 Alex Renton, “How climate change willwipe out coffee crops — and farmers,” The(London) Observer, march 29, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/pdgl6wb. Also see The Associated Press,“Cost of change,” The Denver Post, April 1,2014, p. A-14.52 Rio N. Araja, “Golden rice entry blocked,”Manila Standard Today, may 1, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/pvblyoh; Amy Harmon, “GoldenRice: Lifesaver?” The New York Times, Aug. 24,2013, p. SR1, http://tinyurl.com/nvannmk.53 “what is the status of the Golden Riceproject coordinated by IRRI?” InternationalRice Research Institute, march 2014, http://tinyurl.com/la6moer.54 Richard Roberts, “GmOs are a key tool toaddressing global hunger,” The Boston Globe,may 23, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/q5gespx. Seealso Reed Karaim, “farm Subsidies,” CQ Glob-al Researcher, may 1, 2012, pp. 205-228.55 marjorie Olster, “Key points in the genetical-ly modified food debate,” The Associated Press,Aug. 2, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/mkuwj2b; “Be-yond Promises: Top 10 facts about Biotech/GmCrops in 2013,” International Service for the Ac-quisition of Agri-biotech Applications, http://tinyurl.com/mjopzge. for background, see JasonmcLure, “Genetically modified food,” CQ Re-searcher, Aug. 31, 2012, pp. 717-740.56 Sharon Schmickle, “Hungry African nation atcenter of a food debate,” The Washington Post,Oct. 8, 2013, p. A10, http://tinyurl.com/k2wmkfl;“Beyond Promises: Top 10 facts aboutBiotech/Gm Crops in 2013,” op. cit.
About the AuthorTom Price is a Washington-based freelance journalist and acontributing writer for CQ Researcher. Previously, he was acorrespondent in the Cox Newspapers Washington Bureauand chief politics writer for the Dayton Daily News and The(Dayton) Journal Herald. He is author or coauthor of fivebooks including, with former U.S. Rep. Tony Hall (D-Ohio),Changing The Face of Hunger: One Man’s Story of HowLiberals, Conservatives, Democrats, Republicans and Peo-ple of Faith Are Joining Forces to Help the Hungry, the Poorand the Oppressed.
Aug. 8, 2014 693www.cqresearcher.com
57 Roberts, op. cit.58 Harmon, op. cit.59 Ginger Pinholster, “AAAS Board of Directors:Legally mandating Gm food Labels Could ‘mis-lead and falsely Alarm Consumers,’ ” AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science,Oct. 25, 2012, http://tinyurl.com/no6eyt9.60 Paul Johnston and David Santillo, “Precautionis simply common sense,” Greenpeace Interna-tional, may 24, 2012, http://tinyurl.com/pgj29pa.61 Carey Gillam, “Pesticide use ramping upas GmO crop technology backfires: study,”Reuters, Oct 1, 2012, http://tinyurl.com/9etfaj5.62 Cormac Ó Gráda, Famine: A Short History(2009), http://tinyurl.com/6slof8r. Also seeJoohee Cho, “North Korean Prison CampAtrocities Detailed in UN Report,” ABC News,feb. 17, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/o23wb4w.63 Ó Gráda, op. cit.64 “The Irish Potato famine,” Digital History,University of Houston, http://tinyurl.com/jwwnh96.65 Otter, op. cit.66 Ó Gráda, op. cit.67 Robert Denning, “Review: famine: A ShortHistory,” Origins: Current Events in HistoricalPerspective, Ohio State University, October 2009,http://tinyurl.com/pv26cvv.68 for background, see Tom Price, “Science inAmerica,” CQ Researcher, Jan. 11, 2008, pp. 25-48.69 See Jennifer weeks, “farm Policy,” CQ Re-searcher, Aug. 10, 2012, pp. 693-716.70 “fritz Haber,” Chemical Heritage foundation,undated, http://tinyurl.com/m6b7w4w.71 Otter, op. cit.72 “Ukraine: The famine of 1932-33,” Ency-clopaedia Britannica, http://tinyurl.com/k4eumoo; David P. Lilly, “The Russian famine of1932-1933,” The Center for volga GermanStudies, Concordia University, http://tinyurl.com/k6mafp8.73 Yang Jisheng, “China’s Great Shame,” TheNew York Times, Nov. 13, 2012, http://tinyurl.com/n7m3drb; Anne Applebaum, “whenChina Starved,” The Washington Post, Aug. 12,2008, http://tinyurl.com/l63626u.74 “The Biafran war,” Inventory of Conflict andEnvironment, American University, http://tinyurl.com/n5c235o.75 Tony Hall with Tom Price, Changing theFace of Hunger (2006); “Ethiopian famine25th Anniversary — Questions and Answers,”ONE, Oct. 23, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/m6akc5v.76 Denning, op. cit.77 See Tom Price, “Assessing the United Na-tions,” CQ Global Researcher, march 20, 2012,pp. 129-152.78 See mary H. Cooper, “world Hunger,” CQ
Researcher, Oct. 25, 1991, pp. 801-824. Alsosee marcia Clemmitt, “Global food Crisis,”CQ Researcher, June 27, 2008, pp. 553-576.79 Tina Rosenberg, “A Green Revolution, ThisTime for Africa,” The New York Times, April 9,2014, http://tinyurl.com/kc6v4zf.80 for background, see Jason mcLure, “Genet-ically modified food,” CQ Researcher, Aug. 31,2012, pp. 717-740.81 “Our History,” International maize and wheatImprovement Center, http://tinyurl.com/q79dynr.82 Ibid.83 Rosenberg, op. cit.84 Dan Glickman and Catherine Bertini, “SavingA Billion People from Starvation,” The Huffing-ton Post, Sept. 18, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/nkdjx8n.85 mcLure, op. cit.86 for background, see Sarah Glazer, “Risingfood Prices” CQ Global Researcher, Oct. 18,2011, pp. 499-524.87 Charles Kenny, “Congress wakes Up to theBad News About Biofuels,” BloombergBusinessweek, Jan. 6, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/pfmg6e8;“feinstein, Coburn Introduce Bipartisan Bill toEliminate Corn Ethanol,” Office of Sen. Diannefeinstein, Dec. 12, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/pal8nyz.88 Andrew Pollack, “Altered Corn SurfacedEarlier,” The New York Times, Sept. 4, 2001,
http://tinyurl.com/qg5nu24.89 mcLure, op. cit.90 Kenneth weiss, “In India, agriculture’s GreenRevolution dries up,” Los Angeles Times, July22, 2012, http://tinyurl.com/luofrj2.91 miguel I. Gómez, et al., op. cit.92 Revkin, op. cit.93 Carson, op. cit.94 Office of Sen. Dianne feinstein, op. cit.95 Andrew C. Revkin, “A Coffee Seller Seeks toCut Hunger Among Coffee Growers,” The NewYork Times, Oct. 9, 2012, http://tinyurl.com/m8o4enb; “food Security,” Keurig Green mountain,http://tinyurl.com/k5ln3r7.96 Alan ward, “weighing Earth’s water fromSpace,” National Aeronautics and Space Ad-ministration, Dec. 23, 2003, http://tinyurl.com/qxjjoqa.97 Bourne, op. cit.98 Ibid.99 Tim Cronshaw, “Soil mapping technologya big step forward,” The (Christchurch, NewZealand) Press, July 4, 2014, p. 15.100 David Schimmelpfennig and Robert Ebel,“On the Doorstep of the Information Age:Recent Adoption of Precision Agriculture,” U.S.Dept. of Agriculture Economic Research Ser-vice, August 2011, http://tinyurl.com/m8qan98.
FOR MORE INFORMATIONCenter for Global Food Issues, P.O. Box 202, Churchville, vA, 24421; 540-337-6354; www.cgfi.org. Project of the conservative Hudson Institute think tank thatpromotes free trade in agricultural products and contends that agricultural produc-tivity is key to environmental conservation.
ETC Group, 180 metcalfe St., Suite 206, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P5, Canada; 613-241-2267; www.etcgroup.org. Research and advocacy group that studies how newtechnologies, especially in agriculture, affect the poor.
Food and Agriculture Organization, viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome,Italy; 39-06-57051; www.fao.org/home/en. U.N.’s chief agency for food and agri-culture issues; compiles statistics and publishes reports on hunger.
Oxfam International, Second floor, 228-240 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 7BY,United Kingdom; 44-1865-339-100; www.oxfam.org. U.S. affiliate: Oxfam America,226 Causeway St., fifth floor, Boston, mA 02114-2206; 800-776-9326;www.oxfamamerica.org. Global relief, development and advocacy organization.
World Food Programme, via Cesare Giulio viola 68,?Parco dei medici, 00148Rome, Italy; 39-06-65131; www.wfp.org. U.N. agency that is the world’s largestanti-hunger organization, distributing 58 percent of the world’s food aid in 2012.
World Food Program USA, 1725 I St., N.w., Suite 510, washington, DC 20006;202-627-3737; www.wfpusa.org. An independent nonprofit organization that sup-ports the U.N.’s world food Programme.
World Wildlife Fund, 1250 24th St., N.w., washington, DC 20037; 202-293-4800;www.worldwildlife.org. wildlife conservation organization that sees agricultural ex-pansion as a threat to wildlife habitat.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
694 CQ Researcher
Selected Sources
BibliographyBooks
Buffett, Howard G., 40 Chances: Finding Hope in aHungry World, Simon & Schuster, 2013.A philanthropist and son of billionaire investor warren Buf-
fett analyzes how the well-fed world should fight hungerand poverty.
Falcon, Walter, and Rosamond Naylor, eds., Frontiers inFood Policy: Perspectives in Sub-Saharan Africa, StanfordCenter on Food Security and the Environment, 2014.Experts at an agricultural development symposium address
various aspects of hunger and rural poverty in the hungri-est region on Earth.
Gratton, Lynda, The Key: How Corporations Succeed bySolving the World’s Toughest Problems, McGraw-Hill,2014.A professor of management practice at London Business
School argues that global problems such as hunger cannotbe solved without help from major corporations and theirexecutives.
Ó Gráda, Cormac, Famine: A Short History, PrincetonUniversity Press, 2009.An economics professor at University College, Dublin, traces
the history of hunger from ancient Egypt onward.
Thurow, Roger, The Last Hunger Season: A Year in anAfrican Farm Community on the Brink of Change, Pub-lic Affairs, 2012.A senior fellow for global agriculture and food policy at
the Chicago Council on Global Affairs tells the stories offour small-scale farmers in western Kenya and concludes thatrelief and development organizations are headed in the rightdirection.
Articles
Barrett, Christopher B., and Erin C. Lentz, “Highway Rob-bery on the High Seas,” The Hill, May 29, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/l9t7gp7.The director of Cornell University’s School of Applied Eco-
nomics and management (Barrett) and an assistant professorof international relations at Bucknell University lament thathungry people go unfed because Congress requires at leasthalf of U.S. food aid to be shipped in U.S.-flagged vessels.The American vessels tend to be more expensive, so lessfood can be purchased when they are used.
Bourne, Joel K., Jr., “How to Farm a Better Fish,” Na-tional Geographic, undated, http://tinyurl.com/l5hbosw.A former senior editor for National Geographic explores
environmentally friendly approaches to fish farming.
Otter, Chris, “Feast and Famine: The Global Food Cri-sis,” Origins: Current Events in Historical Perspective,March 2010, http://tinyurl.com/l988h56.An assistant professor of history at Ohio State University
provides a historical perspective on the modern paradox ofglobal hunger and widespread obesity.
Rosenberg, Tina, “When Food Isn’t the Answer to Hunger,”The New York Times, April 24, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/n7b7ndm.monetary aid can better solve hunger than food aid under
certain circumstances.
Reports and Studies
“Case Study: Digital Green,” Governance Knowledge Cen-tre, Department of Administrative Reforms and PublicGrievances, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances andPensions, Government of India, June 2011, http://tinyurl.com/qayfl8p.A case study prepared for the Indian government evalu-
ates Digital Green, a nonprofit that uses information tech-nology to educate poor farmers about agricultural practices.
“The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2013,” U.N.Food and Agriculture Organization, Sept. 1, 2013,http://tinyurl.com/mbt7g5g.An annual U.N. report says the world is approaching the
U.N.’s 2015 hunger-reduction target, but achieving it wouldrequire “considerable and immediate additional efforts.”
“Wake up before it is too late: Make agriculture trulysustainable now for food security in a changing cli-mate,” U.N. Conference on Trade and Development, Sep-tember 2013, http://tinyurl.com/kly4c3r.A U.N. agency report says farmers should grow a larger
variety of crops and reduce fertilizer use, while food-aid or-ganizations should support small-scale farmers and con-sumption of locally grown food.
“What is the status of the Golden Rice project coordi-nated by IRRI?” International Rice Research Institute,March 2014, http://tinyurl.com/la6moer.A nonprofit explains the challenges of developing “golden
rice,” a genetically modified grain designed to combat blind-ness and other ailments due to vitamin-A deficiency.
Schimmelpfennig, David, and Robert Ebel, “On the Doorstepof the Information Age: Recent Adoption of PrecisionAgriculture,”Economic Research Service, U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, August 2011, http://tinyurl.com/m8qan98.Government economists evaluate farmers’ use of technolo-
gy such as optical sensors and GPS systems to more accu-rately fertilize, protect and water their crops.
Aug. 8, 2014 695www.cqresearcher.com
Cash vs. Commodities
Katz, Jonathan M., “Food fight: Coast Guard bill couldlimit aid to hungry,” Al Jazeera America, June 25, 2014,http://tinyurl.com/m7jrqa3.A freelance reporter contends that the U.S. food aid sys-
tem is wasteful and recommends that the United States sendcash or buy food locally during humanitarian crises.
Nixon, Ron, “Typhoon Revives Debate on U.S. Food AidMethods,” The New York Times, Nov. 21, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/nzuc7uz.Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines reignited a debate on U.S.
food-aid policy: Aid workers and antipoverty groups say cur-rent laws delay recovery efforts. The Obama administrationwants more flexibility to buy less expensive food closer to dis-aster areas and agriculture and shipping industries say chang-ing aid methods would hurt U.S. farmers and kill jobs.
Pecquet, Julian, “Obama administration hails Farm Bill’sfood aid reforms,” The Hill, Feb. 4, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/m7qmon6.The U.S. Agency for International Development hailed Sen-
ate passage of the farm bill for its “meaningful food aid re-forms,” which include $80 million a year for local food pur-chases during international emergencies, limits on sales ofU.S. commodities in countries receiving aid and increases incash-based assistance to countries in need.
Climate Change
“Global warming worsens food, hunger problems, UNpanel says,” The Associated Press, March 31, 2014,http://tinyurl.com/q7d3326.A warmer world will push food prices higher and reduce
food production, making it harder and more expensive tofeed the world, according to a United Nations scientific panel.
Gordon, Larry,“UC system aiming to reduce world hunger,improve food research,” Los Angeles Times, July 1, 2014,http://tinyurl.com/pg3no9e.The University of California system will expand research
to help reduce world hunger and help farmers cope withthe effects of climate change on food production.
Food Distribution
Gottfredson, Mark, and Gerry Mattios, “Removing TheTrade Obstacles That Promote Hunger,” Forbes, July 14,2014, http://tinyurl.com/l9hw7g4.food distribution problems along the agriculture supply
chain, such as spoilage and spillage, contribute to worldhunger, according to two partners at a global business con-sulting firm.
Moestafa, Berni, and Agus Suhana, “Indonesia TradeMinister Says Better Food Distribution a Focus,”Bloomberg, Feb. 12, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/nnseepb.Indonesia’s new trade minister said natural disasters, such
as floods and volcanic eruptions, challenge the steady sup-ply of staple goods and that his priority will be to improvefood distribution.
Genetically Modified Crops
Esipisu, Isaiah, “Malnutrition a threat with use of climate-resilient crops, scientists say,”Thomas Reuters Foundation,July 1, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/nhyg7g2.Genetically modified (Gm) crops designed to meet grow-
ing demand for food in developing nations and to be re-silient to climate change may inadvertently worsen malnu-trition, according to scientists.
Roberts, Richard, “GMOs are a key tool to addressingglobal hunger,” The Boston Globe, May 23, 2014,http://tinyurl.com/q5gespx.The chief scientific officer of New England Biolabs says
genetic modification of crops is key to addressing worldhunger because it improves agricultural yields and greatlyenhances the nutritional value of plants.
Shoo, Elizabeth, “Can genetically modified crops end hungerin Africa?”Deutsche Welle (Germany), Jan. 24, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/n9r8njf.The African Union seeks to eradicate hunger on the con-
tinent by 2025, but there is controversy over whether ge-netically modified crops can help countries reach that goal.
The Next Step:Additional Articles from Current Periodicals
CITING CQ RESEARCHER
Sample formats for citing these reports in a bibliography
include the ones listed below. Preferred styles and formats
vary, so please check with your instructor or professor.
ACCESSCQ Researcher is available in print and online. for access, visit yourlibrary or www.cqresearcher.com.
STAY CURRENTfor notice of upcoming CQ Researcher reports or to learn more aboutCQ Researcher products, subscribe to the free email newsletters, CQ Re-searcher Alert! and CQ Researcher News: http://cqpress.com/newsletters.
PURCHASETo purchase a CQ Researcher report in print or electronic format(PDf), visit www.cqpress.com or call 866-427-7737. Single reports startat $15. Bulk purchase discounts and electronic-rights licensing arealso available.
SUBSCRIBEAnnual full-service CQ Researcher subscriptions—including 44 reportsa year, monthly index updates, and a bound volume—start at $1,054.Add $25 for domestic postage.
CQ Researcher Online offers a backfile from 1991 and a number oftools to simplify research. for pricing information, call 800-818-7243 or805-499-9774 or email [email protected].
Upcoming Reports
In-depth Reports on Issues in the News
?Are you writing a paper?
Need backup for a debate?
Want to become an expert on an issue?
for 90 years, students have turned to CQ Researcher for in-depth reporting on issues inthe news. Reports on a full range of political and social issues are now available. followingis a selection of recent reports:
Transnational Crime, 8/29/14 Race and Education, 9/5/14 Youth Suicide, 9/12/14
Politics/EconomyAssessing the Threat from al Qaeda, 6/14Regulating Lobbying, 6/14U.S. Global Engagement, 5/14wealth and Inequality, 4/14China Today, 4/14Youth Unemployment, 3/14
