Photo by RedGlow82
Here’s a thought-provoking item from CBC News.
The story outlines a debate that’s raging between economists, farmers and environmentalists over the looming food crisis.
On one side are those who acknowledge that industrial-scale farming practices (including heavy duty fertilizers) are unsustainable and harmful to the environment – but who argue that in the short term we need them to produce the largest possible crop yields to feed the world’s poor and weather the proverbial storm.
On the other are those who think that postponing the implementation of sustainable agricultural practices can only be counter-productive in the long term, and therefore ineffective overall.
What do you think? Short-term pain for long-term gain? Or short-term gain with some resulting long-term pain?
I don’t know what the answer is. I do know, though, that most of us westerners are likely to be cushioned from the consequences, whether they come sooner or later.
I hope that at some point, this dialogue will include the people who’ll be feeling that pain.
About the Author
More By This Author
- Sunshine Guaranteed - Or Your Money Back (8 comments)
- New Paid Travel Writing Opportunities from BootsnAll (2 comments)
- You Don't Need a Mumbai Slum Tour to See Wealth Disparity at Work (2 comments)
Related Posts
8 Comments... join the discussion!
-
-
I think we should always err on the side of people not starving now. A mother that can't feed her child could give a crap about the environment.
↵ -
That's exactly right, Kelsey – but it's all interconnected. industrial agriculture drives small farmers out of business, which leads to unsustainable dependencies – the best way to prevent hunger is to make it easier for that mother and her community to produce a reliable supply of their own food.
What's that piece of advice from Jesus? Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, teach him to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime.
It's less a matter of teaching the proverbial fisherman to fish, or farmers to farm – it's about slowing down a system that takes the fish and the crops right out from under them.
↵ -
How about give an African man fertilizer and pesticides and he'll be able to feed his family and earn a little extra money?
I've heard a lot of arguments lately for advancing agriculture in developing countries to end the hunger crisis. I agree, the global food economy is bonkers. Cash crops are produced in developing countries and exported to developed countries while the subsistence farmers go hungry.
↵ -
This is a huge issue, and thanks so much for drawing attention to it, Eva!
I firmly believe that scaling back industrial agriculture in favor of small-scale, locally produced alternatives needs to happen now. Industrial agriculture depends on cheap fuel and government subsidies, and drives small farmers out of business.
On a per-acre basis, small farming is more efficient than the most pesticide-laden, oil-soaked ADM cropland in Kansas.
We need more small farmers in every corner of the world. Someday soon, the days of flying lettuce across continents will be over, and without a local infrastructure of food producers, we’re screwed.
Proponents of industrial agriculture argue that the world is too over-populated, and the global poor depend on big agriculture for grain production. Yes, there are a lot of hungry people in the world, but again, small-scale agriculture is simply more efficient. Driving African farmers out of business by flooding them with cheap grain imports may make economic “sense” from Wall Street’s perspective, but it’s a travesty from the point of view of the hungry abandoning their farms and forced into urban slums.
Read Wendell Berry, Michael Pollan and Bill McKibben for more.
↵ -
I think we should always err on the side of people not starving now. A mother that can’t feed her child could give a crap about the environment.
↵ -
That’s exactly right, Kelsey – but it’s all interconnected. industrial agriculture drives small farmers out of business, which leads to unsustainable dependencies – the best way to prevent hunger is to make it easier for that mother and her community to produce a reliable supply of their own food.
What’s that piece of advice from Jesus? Give a man a fish, he’ll eat for a day, teach him to fish, he’ll eat for a lifetime.
It’s less a matter of teaching the proverbial fisherman to fish, or farmers to farm – it’s about slowing down a system that takes the fish and the crops right out from under them.
↵ -
How about give an African man fertilizer and pesticides and he’ll be able to feed his family and earn a little extra money?
I’ve heard a lot of arguments lately for advancing agriculture in developing countries to end the hunger crisis. I agree, the global food economy is bonkers. Cash crops are produced in developing countries and exported to developed countries while the subsistence farmers go hungry.
↵
