Sustainable Food for the World
Rethinking Policy, Technology, and the Environment
by Gerald Nelson
September 11, 2006
Print     Email article 1 2 Next

Gerald Nelson is a professor in the Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He has published extensively on biotechnology, the environment, and agricultural policy issues, especially for the developing world. For the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, he was coordinating lead author for its reports on drivers of ecosystem change.

Today, farmers feed 6 billion people. However, some 800 million people go to bed hungry every night and 166 million children are malnourished. At the same time, current agricultural practices are responsible for dead zones at the mouths of the world’s rivers and rapid species extinctions. By 2050, the human population will grow by two to three billion. The challenge for agriculture is not only producing more food but producing it in a sustainable manner while raising living standards for the poor, many of whom live and work in rural

areas. All this must be done while dealing with the uncertain consequences of global warming and geopolitics. The solutions will include new policies, new technologies, and new production practices.

Although the world is an uncertain place, we can anticipate some elements of the future with confidence. In particular, population growth will continue at least until the middle of this century, the effects of climate change will be significant by then, and the products of the biotechnology and IT revolutions will widen the choices available to individuals and politicians dramatically. The consequences for food depend on the complex and unknowable interplay of human and natural systems. Key elements include the growth and distribution of global income, our ability to manage the global commons productively with the benefits shared equitably, and the possibility of irreversible natural events such as a human pandemic or melting of the Greenland ice cap.

Assessing the Future

One recent attempt to assess the bounds of the possible futures is the scenarios work of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Figure 1 portrays the range of possible outcomes as a set of four scenarios, arrayed along the axes of globalization versus regionalization and reactive versus proactive public policy. The scenario results are deep and extensive. All four scenarios show increased food production by 2050, both total and per capita availability, but the means to achieve these increases varies dramatically. In a scenario with more globalization, higher world incomes, and more even income distribution, technological change results in higher yields and lower food prices. The number of malnourished children drops from 166 million to 65 million. By contrast, in a scenario with more inward looking economic policies and reactive policies, increased food production is achieved by area expansion and environmental degradation. Increasing food prices and worsening income distribution leads to miserable conditions for the poor. The number of malnourished children increases by 18 million.

The bad news from the scenarios is how bad the future could plausibly become. The good news is that with a series of enlightened policy choices, agricultural technology investments, and changing production practices around the world, the future is hopeful.

Policy, Food, and Development

Developed countries spend a vast amount of public funds on their agricultural sector—about US$300 billion a year worldwide in the early 21st century—and place an inordinate political significance on policies that support domestic farm incomes. The consequences of national farm policies, however, are felt beyond the border. Developed country agricultural policies hurt the poor in developing countries in three ways. First, they encourage agricultural production in the developed countries, so that more output than a market economy would demand is produced in the wrong places. Developing countries are forced to accept lower prices and incomes, and incomes of poor farmers and agricultural workers suffer. Second, developed countries have a variety of regulations that unnecessarily restrict food imports from and reduce income-generating opportunities in developing countries. Finally, because agriculture contributes such a large share of the economic activity in developing countries, these effects have negative macroeconomic outcomes, in particular, slower overall growth. It should be pointed out that developing countries also often impose policies to the detriment of their own agricultural sectors. For a positive future of world food, agricultural policies and programs need to be realigned with global efficiency and sustainability as primary goals.

The Potential for Contributions from Science and Technology

Improvements in agricultural technology are a critical part of a positive future for world food. GM crops will be part of the technology improvements but other kinds of technological change are needed as well. Applications of information technology to agriculture have the promise of encouraging more complex and environmentally friendly production practices.

GM crops, particularly corn, soybeans, and cotton, continue to gain acceptance in the market because they increase farmer income. The way they are grown is usually more environmentally friendly than the practices they replace. Second and third generation GM crops will increase the set of improved characteristics, adding drought tolerance for example. There will always be those with moral or ethical objections to genetic modification, but over time, their numbers will likely decline as benefits from individual GM crops become more widespread and well-known. Experts have found no food-health problems with commercial GM crops currently in use and only minor environmental issues, although the potential for pest resistance is worrying. A significant benefit of the controversies over GM crops is that our regulatory systems have been challenged to improve and become more transparent. Both government and private sector oversight of the process of developing and commercializing GM crops has been enhanced dramatically in the past 10 years.

In the next 50 years, with a combination of global positioning systems, precision agriculture, automated farm implements, and vastly improved data collection and analysis, a farmer may very well be able to grow 20 or 30 different crops—instead of just two or three—that mature at different times and require different applications and seasons. Automation will allow a driverless tractor to perform farm operations much more precisely than a human operator. This sounds like science fiction, but the technology pieces are in place and it is only a matter of implementation, a process that could take anywhere from 10 to 30 years, depending on the incentives provided by the marketplace and the policy environment. An added benefit is that these changes will address the criticism that modern agriculture is too reliant on monoculture and industrial inputs.

Is there a Role for Organic Agriculture?

People buy organic for many reasons, including food and environmental safety and support for local agriculture. The demand for organic food today is at least partly a response to regulatory failures of 50 years ago. The early pesticides were nasty—with high generic toxicity and long lasting effects in the environment. They had the advantage for the farmer of simplifying agricultural production techniques, for example allowing much more monoculture. The need for location-specific knowledge content of farming became smaller.

1 2 Next