Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
TR 11:15am
38 comments:
Wilmer Almendares
said...
Population explosion, food production and sustainabiblity
There are multiple issues that arise that lead to increase in human population and the ability of the natural environment to sustain life. There are many intertwined issues at the root of this problem. So the question becomes how to address all these issues to resolve or find a method to alleviate them? In sub-Sahran Africa this issue has been present for many of years. The World has sent BILLIONS in financial and food aid yearly to help in overcoming the problem, yet there appears to be no progress made. The population continues to grow. There appears to be more time spent having sex without a care rather than looking for methods to boost agriculture. If families in the sub-Saharan are unable to provide the adequate means to support themselves they should be limited on the offspring they can have. Not stating that this will resolve all the issues but will alleviate some problems. We can look at the China and adapt the same principle. Having offspring’s and not providing the proper nutrients will lead to their death. This is an act of genocide when you think of all the children that will die within a population. Let’s not forget the lack of medical practice that may put the women’s life in jeopardy as well amongst other things. Obviously certain freedoms that have been provided continue to be violated. Not all areas of the world respond well when given the ability to act freely, so why not limit some of these freedoms. My argument will not resolve the issue overnight and will take some time to see progress.
There are many possible solutions to this problem, however, they’re not easy to accomplish. One of the first problems to address is the education level of the people of Saharan Africa. The government needs to bring education to all the remote locations and give them the tool of knowledge to bring themselves out of the situation they are in. If they are taught how to cultivate crops they will have more food to sustain themselves, of course if climate conditions permit. They must know how to read and write as well. They should learn skilled trades as well this could help them make money and raise resources to the community. Volunteers or non-profit institution could market there products and sell them to the world through auctions, charity events, online sales, the possibilities are endless. This would also give a sense of value and pride to the community. Next would be sexual education; they must be aware of all the consequences sex brings to make educated choices. This would greatly reduce AIDS and HIV which is another major concern. The government must also mandate birth control to reduce overpopulation. To not violate human rights they should be allowed 1 child per house hold and if more children are desired the family must put in a petition to see if they qualify or not. The people must come together as a community and exchange different skills to start having a more productive society. About the sustainability there has to be a way to grow crops without so many chemicals and pesticides. Again is about learning how to do so, and caring more carefully about the crops. This is all I could think of so far, but unfortunately what first needs to happen is for the African government to stop the corruption and start doing their job. This I see very grim so until that happens all we can do is start growing everything organic and continue all the campaigns that help other countries just reorganize what are the first aids needed like education/job trades, medical, food, etc. A single gift is only good for a limited amount of time; instead the best gift anyone could ever receive is the one that keeps on giving like.
There are around 7 billion people in the world that is alot of mouths to feed. The world is only so big and can only hold a certain amount of people before it would run out of space. In Africa theres the aids epademic,everyone there is corrupt, places like Ethiopia are in the dessert so its hard to grow food. The U.S. government and the United Nations send money and food to these places in need, but the corrupt people don't allow the people who need it to have it. If I was in a place like that I would move.
Food production and population explosion is obviously uneven. When in America people are overweight and overnurished, in Africa people are underweight and malnourished. But still the population seems to grow on and on. With this growth going on America will keep getting fatter and bigger and continents like Africa would keep getting Bonnier and smaller. Besides this problem we keep hurting the planet. You see we are overproducing food and that's not the natural cycle of nature. It's like as long as we are fat and full, it doesn't matter what else is going around us. The problem with the sub-Sahran Africa isn't it's population,it's their goverment itself. How is a country supposed to prosper, when the goverment it's eaten all the little crumbs people have? The only solution to me, it's a drastic change of goverment. A goverment uncorrupted that would be fair to it's people. I don't mean like a Utopia, but something better than they have. Because in the end is better a little good and a lot of bad.
Food production and sustainability has increased in sub-Saharan Africa because of its high population and necessities. I believe the government is not doing much to improve. Thousand of kids are being born under extreme necessity and lack of nutrition some even dying because they don’t have the adequate aid. I believe one thing that can be done in order to improve the necessity would be if the government would provide theses countries with health aid, medicine and food. Also if the low income families were provide with an opportunities to grow their own goods. In addition, providing educational talks with those that have more than three children to limit or use protection. -Cristine Lopez-
I wish we could map out the directional movement (cause and effect) from the problem. Starting by finding out why is it that this area for example has the inability to get food? And I sometimes wonder why is it that these people are living in such desolate places where its hard to grow food and why don’t they move? Nomads survived this way. Why isn’t their government ( And I mean every government involved or suffering from underdevelopment which includes us) spending towards education in survival in modern times. Don’t we have schools to teach people how learn to make cash crops? Don’t give them a fish but teach them how to fish and they can fish forever. Give them something they can do to grow demand? Demand for what? A demand like food! But you cant grow food here. Where do you get the man power and equipment to produce the amount needed to feed a country? The government. They spend ludicrous amounts of money on weapons, why not on helping to feed they’re own people. I’m sure if outside contractors are mining in their country.Charge them for the use. Tax them. Everybody wants a piece of the pie in the sky. An injection of money is in need to jump start such a program. What if their government doesn’t want to spend the money on that but rather on protection in arms? Where is all this money coming from anyways? These dictators nowadays looks real sharp in their military suits driving in Mercedes-Benz. Why are we still using jacked up nitrates in our fertilizer that end up screwing our own oceans up? Why is our government allowing such an yearly event? How much money does the fertilizer business actually make out of this? Where does that money go to? Who invests in these companies? Who’s to gain or lose in these investments? Are we to make more money if we used different fertilizer? Will our economy suffer from such a decision? Can it ever be possible that people can actually think if it’s even manageable to have a child and consider the pro and cons if they were to conceive of a child? One has to be economically sound to have a child and be able to live a “less stress” life. Education is at a loss in these peoples mind. Population control is inevitable. Unless nature somehow balances this were going to come to a point of over population. Will we have to colonize into space? It is so clear as a winter day in south Florida that if you knew the sacrifices involved in raising a child one would consider even having one if one is even financially able to sustain a normal life raising a kid. I feel the government has to set regulations on this. I also feel all of these governments have to find a way to work with one another to somehow find resolution. Funding money towards efficient programs that give successful results is the key. Funding research in finding these methods is also as important. In turn the research will take in all variables in order to figure out the solution. I also feel citizens who are able to contribute in proving they’re own idea of how to make this work is crucial. I don’t feel that the government can do this alone. The government can give super incentives towards individuals who can produce viable results in solving this problem. Does the prize outweigh the benefit from solving the problem of world population vs sustainability?
Food production is lacking in the world today. Their are many people suffering from this situation. Millions at that, especially in Africa. I think the government is not doin a good job in handling this situation.. But, the people in Africa don't seem to be aware of there situation. Because they are still having sex and reproducing instead of trying to produce more agriculture to feed themselfs. But i guess they are reprodu ing because most of the population is dying from aids or some other sort of disease. I think the solution to this problem has to be in the hands of the government. To take charge and help the people of Africa gain more food sources.
Everyday a human being is born and the amount of food decreases. It is difficult to find a solution to this problem, but I believe that we can do something about it over a period of time. I think we can find faster way to produce and distribute food around the world. Food is a necessity for humans, there is no excuse for a person not to have food. Africa is in very bad shape and needs help in many categories, food been one of them. Is unfortunate that with the technology that we have we can't find a way to send more resources to Africa in a effective way to help the people that need help and are dyin just because the lack of eating. It is bery sad we have to find a way to get to them and fast.
While it is impossible to solve this multi-issue problem unilaterally with just one solsution it is evident that the key missing factor in all issues is education. Knowledge or rather the lack of understanding is often humanities greatest down fall. We find ourselve in a predicament were are population out numbers our demand for food, but studies have shown that that when women for example are educated that they are less likely to have larger families, in addition to holding off on having children till later on in there their thirties. This by no means is a simple end to be all answer. I could sit and discuss the many steps that not only we as individuals, but as a society must take in order to resolve these issues. I would however rather focus on the core structural problem; which is this "without being educated everything else becomes erelevent, because we are not able to think beyond not only the moment but rather of the future, planning, and objectives that await not only ourselves but society."
I believe the cause of over population in these certain areas is due to lack of education. If these people were taught the extreme need for protection and birth control they could hopefully stop or lessen the population count. I’m not saying its wrong to have as many children as you can or want but its wrong to want to raise a child in a world that you may not have the proper food, shelter, and healthcare that is needed to raise the child. Or what about the countless children that are born into this world already diagnosed with aids. The government needs to step in and help educate people on the importance of self-control or protection. As of food they also need to help provide resources were they can plant, grow and harvest crops. And as Americans we can step in and help lessen the ridiculous amount of food we waste everyday.
Population of the world has always and will always depend on food. America is a huge consumer of the worlds food, it is sad that we sit back and eat McDonalds and pizza hut on “family night” while. In other countries, they eat nine times less than us. So why do we do this? Why are we so insensitive towards other people? I believe it’s because of the way we are raised, which is the obvious answer and stems to more negatives of society. From a young age we are taught to eat everything on are oversized plates. Because “kids in Africa are starving” this makes no sense, we are supposed to indulge while others cant. Kind of insensitive, and ignorant.. Thanks ma. Not only this case of misjudgment but the readily available fast food on every corner doesn’t help, and everyone had a nice Sunday drive to the golden arches once in their lives. The point is from an early age we are programmed to eat and to eat with furious disregard for everyone. Because what ma didn’t tell you is that while that kid in Africa was starving. 1000 others were as well, along with their mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers. If they were not starving they were dead. Americans have forgotten America the country. To Americans it’s the united states of the world. Not America the selfish indulging brats. -Cinderella Santos
Population and Food production a negative correlation one seems to keep raising as the other seems to be diminishing. It is a growing concern for the population and the environment, as population increases the demand for food will be higher and there may come to a put were we may have a food shortage in the world. Some things that could be done to avoid this problem is for one maybe Americans should learn to eat less, we are famous for our obesity and greediness maybe we should stop stuffing our faces at Golden Corral and only eat what we need. For countries in Africa where malnutrition is a problem and the population keeps increasing maybe they should force laws to stop people from having an abundance of kids maybe that can help slow the population problem and it will be also less people to feed. But I also do believe that technologically we are at point were we can make alternatives for food science has done a lot for humanity and maybe it can be a way to feed the masses. Since the agriculture industry seems to be damaging the ozone another form of producing food may be the solution.
Population growth should slow down and then may be people will be better fed. The increase in demand for food will be lower. There are just too many people in this world today and the demands for food are rising and this is causing our natural resources to decrease, for instance the oceans were swarming with fish, but today people rely on farmers to produce their food than ever. I think they should cut down on the reproducing because the way their living doesn’t support the supplies they have, food wise. Although we have the extra food to feed the entire world's people. What we do not have are stable governments and economic opportunities that allow people to earn a fair wage for their labor, and am speaking for Americans but for people in sub-Saharan Africa, they don’t have the type of wages to support a family when they are struggling to survive on their own. I don’t think it’s a problem due to education but the life style one lives. Not to mention that as men we tend to have desires that we want and may need. One may say the solution to this may be only by the government stepping in and the stop of reproduction. Why have a kid when you won’t be able to feed them?
I believe that there would be a ways to deal with these issues… In order to increase the rate of food production and still achieve sustainability should start with something like… educating people all around the world how to practice protected sex, especially in second and third world countries, so the human reproduction would slow down. Hunger is a very serious issue too. I feel bad every day seeing it how much food goes into waste. Maybe if we would know how’s to be really, really hungry then we would not throw so much food away so easily in restaurants or everywhere else. There should be programs in the future about selected food waste too…
World hunger is becoming more of an issue than ever before. With population increasing as years go by, hunger and the demand for food follows along with it. Food is what fuels people to keep people going day after day. In places with extreme poverty, food is not taken for granted and valued as much as one’s own life. In America, people do not appreciate the value of food. It is continuously being thrown away and let go to waste. I’m certain if all the food that is let go to waste would have been given to those in need of food, it would most likely feed everyone across the globe for at least a day. People never appreciate things until they do not have it anymore.
The root to this problem is so much more than just within the country of Africa. It branches out to the world and this planet. This is an issue where everyone needs to help in order for it to be solved, but I feel it is like that whole "world peace" thing. Where everyone wants it but there are so many questions as of where to begin. The root larger perspective of the root I think lies in the education of the nation. If perhaps family were more educated to understand forms of birth control and what creating life does. Many may have the attitude like oh it is just one more person here on Earth but its like the voting mottos many candidates used in the past election "every vote counts". So in this case every life counts. Some may say its common sense regarding reproduction, if you don't have the money or resources to support the family, simply don't act on the matter. Some countries have even established laws on reproduction but for other reasons and then that leads to questions about religion and ethnics. This article leaves me dumb founded because there is so much that we can do about this problem but I start to feel like we have come to a point of no return and if there is a return, where do we start.
Personally I believe the main reason is lack of education about what are we, big countries, are doing to the planet. Wealth grow in undeveloped countries is a controversy that many people know but do not want to talk about it, at least for now. People in countries like China are acquiring more buying power as the country’s economy grows. Many people see this as something good; however, the more buying power they get the more they are going to consume, which is taking us to the place where earth cannot keep up with us. To add to this issue, is the lack of education about having children. There was to be a point where people need to understand that having a big family is not a good idea. Maybe someday government would have to control child birth. Other countries cannot help other people because they can barely keep up with their own society’s demands. We need to invest a lot more in R&D (research and development) to improve our agriculture, which is the main source of our food. Eventually we are going to end with every specie on the sea, and is going to be agriculture, mixed with a lot of technology, that is going to helps survive. We are not going to live our lives in the future at this rate, we are going to SURVIVE DAY BY DAY
It is true that at the rate human population is growing is uneven than the rate of food production on earth, however if one stays and thinks about it there is nothing much that can be done for a country or a society of low economic resources or agriculture to do for its own sake. Is either find a solution on how to boost their incomes so therefore food could be purchased or somehow increase their agriculture so they can farm their own food. However in a country like africa where they lack of education and other major factors, is hard to find these kind of impulses or progress as one can say. In order for a country so self stain the leaders such as politics should e fair and aim for the best of their responsability, and not corrupt or selfish. Along with a bright education and a future to look for, the children of that country could be their future if they really focus on that outcome. They could be the WILL OF FIRE for everybody else. In other remote posibility. I believe that one day all the countries will come together as a single nation and help each other in the time of need. But for that day to come we still have to make sure to understand each other and learn how to accept our beliefs.
The problem of this lack of food production is not to be blamed entirely on the system because a system is specifically mend to give balance and a so called justice, that is the purpose of its creation on first place one should think that the problem is rather on the persons in power such as the political leaders and the rebel leaders they are the creators and the cause of this African massacre they are so blinded and obsessed with power and money or maybe the never to a justice and human ethics class or maybe the forgot that they are humans and that they are destroying their own specie or maybe they think that since we are so many perhaps it is ok with proceeding their massacre and their genocidal purposed starvation. Enjoying the suffering of many so the few can enjoy the American and European government can send a trillion dollars and I believe that the problem will be still there because this food problem doesn’t lay in the agriculture nor soil nor in the land nor desert it lays in the hearts of those presidents, politicians and rebels in power and their hearts are more hopeless and revolting than Aids Malaria or starvation it self.
Population explosion, food production and sustainability
The most frequent solution I see that many people agree on is education. Education is important but it is not the only solution. Most children and adults have never attended school in these regions because there is not money to fund a school with. Their education is extremely limited due to their life styles. The major issue we need to resolve is their population. As one of the comments suggested, we should educate them on how to use condoms to prevent pregnancy. Not to mention sparing the lives of innocent children who will be born into unnecessary circumstances. If we do not try to limit the population growth there will be no growth in food aid that will feed the families in the sub-Saharan Africa. This is not to say that this will eliminate the problem all together but it is a reformative action.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems.1 Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?
As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems.1 Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems. Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems. Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems. Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems.1 Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?
As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems.1 Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?
As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Over the years the United Nations has been bringing food to the poor countries included in Sub-Sahara Africa. There is a lack of education of the countries where the people are so poor they are starving. The governments of those countries are the ones responsible for their own people. They need to bring education, infrastructure, and agriculture. By being educated it is the only way that they will come out of their poverty. At this point we can see Charles Darwin’s phase come into play of “the survival of the fittest”. The strongest and the smartest will survive in the end. If the western world was able to sustained themselves thousands of years and bring a civilized economy and government the west is the “strongest” out of the world. It could have been the resources that the west had or it could have been the people. In the end the United Nations can send food try to provide education or speak to the leaders of the countries but it is the government’s power to change what is happening to their people.
Daniel Restrepo... the problem in the world is defenitelly a problem that time is no going to solve, unless the solution means that we humans wipe ourselves out and leave the rest of the species in earth along. if we really want to persist living in this wonderfull planet its going to take action from every single one of us. every nation needs to get together and atack the problem from the rooths. maybe i dont know exacly what it takes to end poverty, or to figure out a method of sustainability that doesnt take such a high price in our planets health. but if the world is determined enough to figure all these problems out instead of building booms and military power we could get closer to those answers.
The problem of poverty is very acute in the world. Mostly, the third world countries are the ones that pay the negative consequences of it. Basically, it leads to many problems like food's shortage, and health decease (HIV/AIDS). In sub-Sahran Africa the problem is worst where the poorest households are often female headed. I think, there are two mains reasons for the problem: the increase in humain population and the use of basic food, such as corns, rice, beans to produce ethanol. Also, there is a huge relationship between poverty and HIV/AIDS. People in sub-Saharan countries can't get rid of their chronic state of poverty without the help and assistance of the international community. For many decades some of the international community's country have been playing game with the Sub-Saharan governments. Most often, their pledges never go through while the problem of poverty is becoming greater. I think that as the leader of the world the United States need to take the lead and help those human beings who are in needs.
Ironically, Sub-Saharan Africa has more variety of grains than anywhere in the world. However, because this culture continues to produce offspring, but neglects scientific advancements and consideration for the land that they cultivate, depletion of the soil is a major concern. The relationship between population pressure, reduced fallow periods (which are periods that leave the soil uncultivated, to regenerate nutrients). and soil nutrient depletion (including erosion), yields a generally unsustainable system between population, agriculture and environment. Yes, the depletion of soil and unsustainability is a result of lack of education, but are we really helping by sending food there, without teaching the advancements we are learning?
In response to what other peers have said about the "world sending billions in financial and food aid yearly with no progress made." Can we really expect progress to be made? Sure, we, as Americans pat ourselves on the back, feeling that we fulfill our philanthropic duty by giving to charities that collect for developing countries and places such as these. It helps for a little while. It could take some of the pain away, especially since every child has at one point heard "there are kids in Africa who would love to eat that". Sure, they'd love to eat what we have on our plate. But instead of merely sending food or finances expecting amazing progress in places like this, why don't we help in bigger ways? Why don't we love more? We're very good at saying we care-- saying that we love these strangers. When it comes time to act, we stand far-off expecting that they, like us, will drool at the site of some extra cash. Wouldn't it help more for them to be educated?
Every day, we eat way more than we need to. We walk away from restaurants where our portion sizes are 3Xs the healthy serving size, loosening our pants and ready for a nap. The sad thing is that most of the hungry and hurting, don't even know people like us, who care more about them, then just feeling good about themselves. I look at Jesus as THE example, not just an example, of giving much, pouring oneself out for the good of others. Jesus said: "But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Matthew 20:26-28 Jesus didn't see need and merely drop a few coins in the collection. No, He loved enough to GO and SERVE, something that's seeming harder and harder for us to do. We need to love the hurting, enough to act, on their behalf, not out of duty or self-righteousness. Are we TOO comfortable? Even in this "bad economy"?
Food production versus population growth is probably one of the largest problems that we face today that is also the least mentioned, in my opinion. It ties in with global warming, in that it is realized as a problem but it seems as if it's being set on the back burner. We are very privileged to live in the United States, where being the most poverty stricken person you can still be much much better off than say a person in Sub-Saharan Africa. I assume the answer leads to finding a fine balance in between the amount of food we produce and consume. In politics though it can be a very slow process for any actual change to take place. We cannot really do anything about population growth, its going to run its course, but through laws and legislations maybe something can come about to slow the course of growth. I come across these pictures a couple months ago and I wanted to share, it is called What the World Eats: http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1626519,00.html -Grant Kunkel
The issue of sustainability and population explosion is one that is facing the global community. In Sub-Sahara Africa,especially, this issue is most prevalent. I believe that the solution is to educate the inhabitants of this area and to set some sort of child to parent ratio. It might sound absord, but nonetheless I believe this will be one solution to the issue of over population. The reason why this problem is prevalent in Sub-Sahara Africa is because of the lack of sexual education, which also contributes to the high numbers of adult and children being infected with AIDS. Many children are left to fend for themselves when their parents pass away. All these social issues that the inhabitants of this country are faced with contribute to the lack of agriculture and the lack of education (which is most important). The US continues to supply this area with vast amount of money, yet nothing seems to be changing! The government and politics of this area are crippled and unwilling to help its citizens. What their government does is steal from its pepole, and do nothing to protect them. I feel like the solution lies in the hands of the pepole!
Juan Munoz said... Population explosion, food production and sustainabiblity
In this era of sinking economies, limits for growing is back and this time is squeezing us painfully. Today’s generation keeps on growing at a huge rate and if we look back in time our ancestors faced similar problems, but with the difference that growing population for them meant more ingenuity, more talent and most important of all more innovation; in the other hand for our generation this problem seems to carry less and less those important survival skills. With the population at its peak and keeping on growing, it is shown by studies made by The United Nations that in 2050 there will be more than four billion people living in nations defined as water-scarce. This meaning less land for farming, less capacity in the atmosphere to accept the heat this causes trapped gases that could fry the planet for centuries to come, Scarcer and higher-priced energy and food; And if the world’s economy does not bounce back to its glory days, there will be less credit and fewer jobs. We already had a taste of what the environment could do to us if we don’t do something to reduce the problem of over population think of the catastrophes that have occur over the past few years in the world, things that have never been experience in human history had happen and unfortunately there is nothing we could do to avoid them; Except making changes in our life style which we as humans are not willing to make. These changes could include more education in the world to make it a safer place for our offspring and even for us, also come up with technology to some how solve or alleviate the problem of food water shortage. This is a simple dent that we could do to alleviate a problem that is slowly asphyxiating us and our planet.
Sustainability a problem that seems to be finally getting the attention that it deserves. But narrowing the conflict and taking a closer look at Africa, the problem seems to be with the government(how food aid is handled) and their inability to create enough food due to being unnourished. The government's taking the resources that were given to those in need seems to be the Africa's largest problem. Since they keep the food and money, the farmers that could have use that to have the energy to work or buy new equipment. And because they don't have the equipment or energy to provide for themselves, they have more children for two reasons. To keep the mortality and death rates about even, and the hope that the children will be able to help with the work, so they will be able to make ends meat. The government will first have to create enough possibilities for the people of Africa to compete with the rest of the world for the earth's last resources.
The human species has survived throughout evolution because of their ability to adjust to any kind of changes in the environment. Our species is the smartest living organism that inhibits this planet and yet we could say we are also the dummest. Our selfish drive for power and the restless thirst for curiosity has impacted the environment that surrounds us, often for the bad.These are some of the vices characterize mankind and these exact same malicious traits have destroyed much of our planet and killed thousands of species. The corruption that sadly occurs in most third world country plays a crucial role in why the helpless and innocent people in sub-Saharan Africa cannot sustain their own family neither with safety nor food. The billions of dollars in food products that great powers, such as the United States and Great Britain send in do not end up in the homes of the needed, but in the hands of the cruel and corrupted people that are infiltrated within their government. On the other hand, education illustrates the other vital source for success in these underdeveloped countries. These people should receive free education in sexual awareness, and they should additionally receive a certain amount of money or food as reward for only having a limited amount of children.
It seems ridiculous to think that the shortage of food is due to agriculture. So in other words the production of food is what's causing the shortage of food? That doesn't sound right at all. I think that the problem isn't agriculture at all. A more likely answer is that rich countries consume so much more than they need, and waste so much that others don't have. Overpopulation sounds like another possible reason, the fact that in these poor countries where they have such few resources and people make barely any money they are not educated enough to prevent pregnancies. These people who don't know any better keep bringing more children into the world and they can not evenafford to feed them. It all comes down to he greed of the wealthy and the miseducation of the poor.
One of the main crises that plague third world countries is the increase of overpopulation while educational institutions are absent. In the other hand, the few schools that are available are not efficient in instructing many African societies; young men are forced to drop out and earn money while young girls drop out due to early pregnancies. Another interesting issue regarding food production in Africa is the fact that there are no storage facilities or effective roads. If food was successfully produced, there would be no way to proficiently preserve the products or transport them to different places without it rotting.
38 comments:
Population explosion, food production and sustainabiblity
There are multiple issues that arise that lead to increase in human population and the ability of the natural environment to sustain life. There are many intertwined issues at the root of this problem. So the question becomes how to address all these issues to resolve or find a method to alleviate them?
In sub-Sahran Africa this issue has been present for many of years. The World has sent BILLIONS in financial and food aid yearly to help in overcoming the problem, yet there appears to be no progress made. The population continues to grow. There appears to be more time spent having sex without a care rather than looking for methods to boost agriculture.
If families in the sub-Saharan are unable to provide the adequate means to support themselves they should be limited on the offspring they can have. Not stating that this will resolve all the issues but will alleviate some problems. We can look at the China and adapt the same principle. Having offspring’s and not providing the proper nutrients will lead to their death. This is an act of genocide when you think of all the children that will die within a population. Let’s not forget the lack of medical practice that may put the women’s life in jeopardy as well amongst other things.
Obviously certain freedoms that have been provided continue to be violated. Not all areas of the world respond well when given the ability to act freely, so why not limit some of these freedoms. My argument will not resolve the issue overnight and will take some time to see progress.
There are many possible solutions to this problem, however, they’re not easy to accomplish. One of the first problems to address is the education level of the people of Saharan Africa. The government needs to bring education to all the remote locations and give them the tool of knowledge to bring themselves out of the situation they are in. If they are taught how to cultivate crops they will have more food to sustain themselves, of course if climate conditions permit. They must know how to read and write as well. They should learn skilled trades as well this could help them make money and raise resources to the community. Volunteers or non-profit institution could market there products and sell them to the world through auctions, charity events, online sales, the possibilities are endless. This would also give a sense of value and pride to the community. Next would be sexual education; they must be aware of all the consequences sex brings to make educated choices. This would greatly reduce AIDS and HIV which is another major concern. The government must also mandate birth control to reduce overpopulation. To not violate human rights they should be allowed 1 child per house hold and if more children are desired the family must put in a petition to see if they qualify or not. The people must come together as a community and exchange different skills to start having a more productive society. About the sustainability there has to be a way to grow crops without so many chemicals and pesticides. Again is about learning how to do so, and caring more carefully about the crops. This is all I could think of so far, but unfortunately what first needs to happen is for the African government to stop the corruption and start doing their job. This I see very grim so until that happens all we can do is start growing everything organic and continue all the campaigns that help other countries just reorganize what are the first aids needed like education/job trades, medical, food, etc. A single gift is only good for a limited amount of time; instead the best gift anyone could ever receive is the one that keeps on giving like.
There are around 7 billion people in the world that is alot of mouths to feed. The world is only so big and can only hold a certain amount of people before it would run out of space. In Africa theres the aids epademic,everyone there is corrupt, places like Ethiopia are in the dessert so its hard to grow food. The U.S. government and the United Nations send money and food to these places in need, but the corrupt people don't allow the people who need it to have it. If I was in a place like that I would move.
Food production and population explosion is obviously uneven. When in America people are overweight and overnurished, in Africa people are underweight and malnourished. But still the population seems to grow on and on. With this growth going on America will keep getting fatter and bigger and continents like Africa would keep getting Bonnier and smaller. Besides this problem we keep hurting the planet. You see we are overproducing food and that's not the natural cycle of nature. It's like as long as we are fat and full, it doesn't matter what else is going around us. The problem with the sub-Sahran Africa isn't it's population,it's their goverment itself. How is a country supposed to prosper, when the goverment it's eaten all the little crumbs people have? The only solution to me, it's a drastic change of goverment. A goverment uncorrupted that would be fair to it's people. I don't mean like a Utopia, but something better than they have. Because in the end is better a little good and a lot of bad.
Food production and sustainability has increased in sub-Saharan Africa because of its high population and necessities. I believe the government is not doing much to improve. Thousand of kids are being born under extreme necessity and lack of nutrition some even dying because they don’t have the adequate aid. I believe one thing that can be done in order to improve the necessity would be if the government would provide theses countries with health aid, medicine and food. Also if the low income families were provide with an opportunities to grow their own goods. In addition, providing educational talks with those that have more than three children to limit or use protection.
-Cristine Lopez-
I wish we could map out the directional movement (cause and effect) from the problem. Starting by finding out why is it that this area for example has the inability to get food? And I sometimes wonder why is it that these people are living in such desolate places where its hard to grow food and why don’t they move? Nomads survived this way. Why isn’t their government ( And I mean every government involved or suffering from underdevelopment which includes us) spending towards education in survival in modern times. Don’t we have schools to teach people how learn to make cash crops? Don’t give them a fish but teach them how to fish and they can fish forever. Give them something they can do to grow demand? Demand for what? A demand like food! But you cant grow food here. Where do you get the man power and equipment to produce the amount needed to feed a country? The government. They spend ludicrous amounts of money on weapons, why not on helping to feed they’re own people. I’m sure if outside contractors are mining in their country.Charge them for the use. Tax them. Everybody wants a piece of the pie in the sky. An injection of money is in need to jump start such a program. What if their government doesn’t want to spend the money on that but rather on protection in arms? Where is all this money coming from anyways? These dictators nowadays looks real sharp in their military suits driving in Mercedes-Benz.
Why are we still using jacked up nitrates in our fertilizer that end up screwing our own oceans up? Why is our government allowing such an yearly event? How much money does the fertilizer business actually make out of this? Where does that money go to? Who invests in these companies? Who’s to gain or lose in these investments? Are we to make more money if we used different fertilizer? Will our economy suffer from such a decision?
Can it ever be possible that people can actually think if it’s even manageable to have a child and consider the pro and cons if they were to conceive of a child? One has to be economically sound to have a child and be able to live a “less stress” life. Education is at a loss in these peoples mind. Population control is inevitable. Unless nature somehow balances this were going to come to a point of over population. Will we have to colonize into space? It is so clear as a winter day in south Florida that if you knew the sacrifices involved in raising a child one would consider even having one if one is even financially able to sustain a normal life raising a kid. I feel the government has to set regulations on this. I also feel all of these governments have to find a way to work with one another to somehow find resolution. Funding money towards efficient programs that give successful results is the key. Funding research in finding these methods is also as important. In turn the research will take in all variables in order to figure out the solution. I also feel citizens who are able to contribute in proving they’re own idea of how to make this work is crucial. I don’t feel that the government can do this alone. The government can give super incentives towards individuals who can produce viable results in solving this problem. Does the prize outweigh the benefit from solving the problem of world population vs sustainability?
-Jose luis Guerra
Food production is lacking in the world today. Their are many people suffering from this situation. Millions at that, especially in Africa. I think the government is not doin a good job in handling this situation.. But, the people in Africa don't seem to be aware of there situation. Because they are still having sex and reproducing instead of trying to produce more agriculture to feed themselfs. But i guess they are reprodu ing because most of the population is dying from aids or some other sort of disease. I think the solution to this problem has to be in the hands of the government. To take charge and help the people of Africa gain more food sources.
Everyday a human being is born and the amount of food decreases. It is difficult to find a solution to this problem, but I believe that we can do something about it over a period of time. I think we can find faster way to produce and distribute food around the world. Food is a necessity for humans, there is no excuse for a person not to have food. Africa is in very bad shape and needs help in many categories, food been one of them. Is unfortunate that with the technology that we have we can't find a way to send more resources to Africa in a effective way to help the people that need help and are dyin just because the lack of eating. It is bery sad we have to find a way to get to them and fast.
While it is impossible to solve this multi-issue problem unilaterally with just one solsution it is evident that the key missing factor in all issues is education. Knowledge or rather the lack of understanding is often humanities greatest down fall. We find ourselve in a predicament were are population out numbers our demand for food, but studies have shown that that when women for example are educated that they are less likely to have larger families, in addition to holding off on having children till later on in there their thirties. This by no means is a simple end to be all answer. I could sit and discuss the many steps that not only we as individuals, but as a society must take in order to resolve these issues. I would however rather focus on the core structural problem; which is this "without being educated everything else becomes erelevent, because we are not able to think beyond not only the moment but rather of the future, planning, and objectives that await not only ourselves but society."
I believe the cause of over population in these certain areas is due to lack of education. If these people were taught the extreme need for protection and birth control they could hopefully stop or lessen the population count. I’m not saying its wrong to have as many children as you can or want but its wrong to want to raise a child in a world that you may not have the proper food, shelter, and healthcare that is needed to raise the child. Or what about the countless children that are born into this world already diagnosed with aids. The government needs to step in and help educate people on the importance of self-control or protection. As of food they also need to help provide resources were they can plant, grow and harvest crops. And as Americans we can step in and help lessen the ridiculous amount of food we waste everyday.
Population of the world has always and will always depend on food. America is a huge consumer of the worlds food, it is sad that we sit back and eat McDonalds and pizza hut on “family night” while. In other countries, they eat nine times less than us. So why do we do this? Why are we so insensitive towards other people? I believe it’s because of the way we are raised, which is the obvious answer and stems to more negatives of society. From a young age we are taught to eat everything on are oversized plates. Because “kids in Africa are starving” this makes no sense, we are supposed to indulge while others cant. Kind of insensitive, and ignorant.. Thanks ma. Not only this case of misjudgment but the readily available fast food on every corner doesn’t help, and everyone had a nice Sunday drive to the golden arches once in their lives. The point is from an early age we are programmed to eat and to eat with furious disregard for everyone. Because what ma didn’t tell you is that while that kid in Africa was starving. 1000 others were as well, along with their mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers. If they were not starving they were dead. Americans have forgotten America the country. To Americans it’s the united states of the world. Not America the selfish indulging brats.
-Cinderella Santos
Population and Food production a negative correlation one seems to keep raising as the other seems to be diminishing. It is a growing concern for the population and the environment, as population increases the demand for food will be higher and there may come to a put were we may have a food shortage in the world. Some things that could be done to avoid this problem is for one maybe Americans should learn to eat less, we are famous for our obesity and greediness maybe we should stop stuffing our faces at Golden Corral and only eat what we need. For countries in Africa where malnutrition is a problem and the population keeps increasing maybe they should force laws to stop people from having an abundance of kids maybe that can help slow the population problem and it will be also less people to feed. But I also do believe that technologically we are at point were we can make alternatives for food science has done a lot for humanity and maybe it can be a way to feed the masses. Since the agriculture industry seems to be damaging the ozone another form of producing food may be the solution.
Bryant Gavilan
Population growth should slow down and then may be people will be better fed. The increase in demand for food will be lower. There are just too many people in this world today and the demands for food are rising and this is causing our natural resources to decrease, for instance the oceans were swarming with fish, but today people rely on farmers to produce their food than ever. I think they should cut down on the reproducing because the way their living doesn’t support the supplies they have, food wise. Although we have the extra food to feed the entire world's people. What we do not have are stable governments and economic opportunities that allow people to earn a fair wage for their labor, and am speaking for Americans but for people in sub-Saharan Africa, they don’t have the type of wages to support a family when they are struggling to survive on their own. I don’t think it’s a problem due to education but the life style one lives. Not to mention that as men we tend to have desires that we want and may need. One may say the solution to this may be only by the government stepping in and the stop of reproduction. Why have a kid when you won’t be able to feed them?
-Bryant Gavilan-
I believe that there would be a ways to deal with these issues… In order to increase the rate of food production and still achieve sustainability should start with something like… educating people all around the world how to practice protected sex, especially in second and third world countries, so the human reproduction would slow down. Hunger is a very serious issue too. I feel bad every day seeing it how much food goes into waste. Maybe if we would know how’s to be really, really hungry then we would not throw so much food away so easily in restaurants or everywhere else. There should be programs in the future about selected food waste too…
World hunger is becoming more of an issue than ever before. With population increasing as years go by, hunger and the demand for food follows along with it. Food is what fuels people to keep people going day after day. In places with extreme poverty, food is not taken for granted and valued as much as one’s own life. In America, people do not appreciate the value of food. It is continuously being thrown away and let go to waste. I’m certain if all the food that is let go to waste would have been given to those in need of food, it would most likely feed everyone across the globe for at least a day. People never appreciate things until they do not have it anymore.
The root to this problem is so much more than just within the country of Africa. It branches out to the world and this planet. This is an issue where everyone needs to help in order for it to be solved, but I feel it is like that whole "world peace" thing. Where everyone wants it but there are so many questions as of where to begin. The root larger perspective of the root I think lies in the education of the nation. If perhaps family were more educated to understand forms of birth control and what creating life does. Many may have the attitude like oh it is just one more person here on Earth but its like the voting mottos many candidates used in the past election "every vote counts". So in this case every life counts. Some may say its common sense regarding reproduction, if you don't have the money or resources to support the family, simply don't act on the matter. Some countries have even established laws on reproduction but for other reasons and then that leads to questions about religion and ethnics. This article leaves me dumb founded because there is so much that we can do about this problem but I start to feel like we have come to a point of no return and if there is a return, where do we start.
Personally I believe the main reason is lack of education about what are we, big countries, are doing to the planet. Wealth grow in undeveloped countries is a controversy that many people know but do not want to talk about it, at least for now. People in countries like China are acquiring more buying power as the country’s economy grows. Many people see this as something good; however, the more buying power they get the more they are going to consume, which is taking us to the place where earth cannot keep up with us. To add to this issue, is the lack of education about having children. There was to be a point where people need to understand that having a big family is not a good idea. Maybe someday government would have to control child birth. Other countries cannot help other people because they can barely keep up with their own society’s demands. We need to invest a lot more in R&D (research and development) to improve our agriculture, which is the main source of our food. Eventually we are going to end with every specie on the sea, and is going to be agriculture, mixed with a lot of technology, that is going to helps survive. We are not going to live our lives in the future at this rate, we are going to SURVIVE DAY BY DAY
It is true that at the rate human population is growing is uneven than the rate of food production on earth, however if one stays and thinks about it there is nothing much that can be done for a country or a society of low economic resources or agriculture to do for its own sake. Is either find a solution on how to boost their incomes so therefore food could be purchased or somehow increase their agriculture so they can farm their own food. However in a country like africa where they lack of education and other major factors, is hard to find these kind of impulses or progress as one can say. In order for a country so self stain the leaders such as politics should e fair and aim for the best of their responsability, and not corrupt or selfish. Along with a bright education and a future to look for, the children of that country could be their future if they really focus on that outcome. They could be the WILL OF FIRE for everybody else. In other remote posibility. I believe that one day all the countries will come together as a single nation and help each other in the time of need. But for that day to come we still have to make sure to understand each other and learn how to accept our beliefs.
The problem of this lack of food production is not to be blamed entirely on the system because a system is specifically mend to give balance and a so called justice, that is the purpose of its creation on first place one should think that the problem is rather on the persons in power such as the political leaders and the rebel leaders they are the creators and the cause of this African massacre they are so blinded and obsessed with power and money or maybe the never to a justice and human ethics class or maybe the forgot that they are humans and that they are destroying their own specie or maybe they think that since we are so many perhaps it is ok with proceeding their massacre and their genocidal purposed starvation. Enjoying the suffering of many so the few can enjoy the American and European government can send a trillion dollars and I believe that the problem will be still there because this food problem doesn’t lay in the agriculture nor soil nor in the land nor desert it lays in the hearts of those presidents, politicians and rebels in power and their hearts are more hopeless and revolting than Aids Malaria or starvation it self.
Population explosion, food production and sustainability
The most frequent solution I see that many people agree on is education. Education is important but it is not the only solution. Most children and adults have never attended school in these regions because there is not money to fund a school with. Their education is extremely limited due to their life styles.
The major issue we need to resolve is their population. As one of the comments suggested, we should educate them on how to use condoms to prevent pregnancy. Not to mention sparing the lives of innocent children who will be born into unnecessary circumstances. If we do not try to limit the population growth there will be no growth in food aid that will feed the families in the sub-Saharan Africa. This is not to say that this will eliminate the problem all together but it is a reformative action.
Carolina Salinas
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems.1 Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?
As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems.1 Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems. Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems. Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems. Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems.1 Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?
As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Something is wrong with our agricultural and food systems.1 Despite great progress in increasing productivity in the last century, hundreds of millions of people remain hungry and malnourished. Further hundreds of millions eat too much, or consume the wrong sorts of food, and it is making them ill. The health of the environment suffers too, as degradation of soil and water seems to accompany many of the agricultural systems we have developed in recent years. Can nothing be done, or is it time for the expansion of an agriculture founded more on ecological principles and in harmony with people, their societies, and cultures?
As we advance into the second decade of the twenty-first century, we have some critical choices. Humans have been farming for some 600 generations, and for most of that time the production and consumption of food has been intimately connected to cultural and social systems. Yet, over the last two or three generations, we have developed hugely successful agricultural systems based largely on industrial principles. These systems produce more food per hectare and per worker than ever before, but only look efficient if the harmful side-effects — the use of fossil fuels, the loss of soil health, the damage to biodiversity, the pollution of water and air, the harm to human health caused by agricultural pesticides on food and in the environment, and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in large-scale animal production facilities — are ignored.
Recent advances in aggregate productivity have only brought limited reductions in the incidence of hunger. There are more than 1 billion people hungry and lacking adequate access to food. However, there has been progress, since less than one sixth of the world’s population is considered under-nourished today, as opposed to one quarter in 1970. Since then, average per capita consumption of food has increased by 17 percent to 2,760 kilocalories per day — good as an average, but still hiding the fact that many people are surviving on less: thirty-three countries, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa still have per capita food consumption under 2,200 kcal per day. The challenge remains huge. A further sign that something is wrong is that one in seven people in industrialized countries are now clinically obese, and that five of the ten leading causes of death are diet-related. Alarmingly, the obese are outnumbering the thin in a number of developing countries.
As total population continues to increase, so the absolute demand for food will also increase. Increasing incomes will mean people will have more purchasing power, and this will increase demand for food. But as diets change, so demand for certain types of food will also shift radically. Increasing urbanization means people are more likely to adopt new diets, particularly consuming more meat and fewer traditional cereals and other foods. In theory, there is enough staple food produced worldwide to feed everyone adequately, but much is fed to animals (37 percent of cereals in developing countries, 73 percent in industrialized countries), and much is wasted in the upper levels of the social pyramid by the food rich.
Over the years the United Nations has been bringing food to the poor countries included in Sub-Sahara Africa. There is a lack of education of the countries where the people are so poor they are starving. The governments of those countries are the ones responsible for their own people. They need to bring education, infrastructure, and agriculture. By being educated it is the only way that they will come out of their poverty. At this point we can see Charles Darwin’s phase come into play of “the survival of the fittest”. The strongest and the smartest will survive in the end. If the western world was able to sustained themselves thousands of years and bring a civilized economy and government the west is the “strongest” out of the world. It could have been the resources that the west had or it could have been the people. In the end the United Nations can send food try to provide education or speak to the leaders of the countries but it is the government’s power to change what is happening to their people.
-Nicole Gelman
Daniel Restrepo...
the problem in the world is defenitelly a problem that time is no going to solve, unless the solution means that we humans wipe ourselves out and leave the rest of the species in earth along. if we really want to persist living in this wonderfull planet its going to take action from every single one of us. every nation needs to get together and atack the problem from the rooths. maybe i dont know exacly what it takes to end poverty, or to figure out a method of sustainability that doesnt take such a high price in our planets health. but if the world is determined enough to figure all these problems out instead of building booms and military power we could get closer to those answers.
The problem of poverty is very acute in the world. Mostly, the third world countries are the ones that pay the negative consequences of it. Basically, it leads to many problems like food's shortage, and health decease (HIV/AIDS). In sub-Sahran Africa the problem is worst where the poorest households are often female headed. I think, there are two mains reasons for the problem: the increase in humain population and the use of basic food, such as corns, rice, beans to produce ethanol. Also, there is a huge relationship between poverty and HIV/AIDS. People in sub-Saharan countries can't get rid of their chronic state of poverty without the help and assistance of the international community. For many decades some of the international community's country have been playing game with the Sub-Saharan governments. Most often, their pledges never go through while the problem of poverty is becoming greater. I think that as the leader of the world the United States need to take the lead and help those human beings who are in needs.
NEGOT JEAN LOUIS
Ironically, Sub-Saharan Africa has more variety of grains than anywhere in the world. However, because this culture continues to produce offspring, but neglects scientific advancements and consideration for the land that they cultivate, depletion of the soil is a major concern. The relationship between population pressure, reduced fallow periods (which are periods that leave the soil uncultivated, to regenerate nutrients). and soil nutrient depletion (including erosion), yields a generally unsustainable system between population, agriculture and environment. Yes, the depletion of soil and unsustainability is a result of lack of education, but are we really helping by sending food there, without teaching the advancements we are learning?
In response to what other peers have said about the "world sending billions in financial and food aid yearly with no progress made." Can we really expect progress to be made? Sure, we, as Americans pat ourselves on the back, feeling that we fulfill our philanthropic duty by giving to charities that collect for developing countries and places such as these. It helps for a little while. It could take some of the pain away, especially since every child has at one point heard "there are kids in Africa who would love to eat that". Sure, they'd love to eat what we have on our plate. But instead of merely sending food or finances expecting amazing progress in places like this, why don't we help in bigger ways? Why don't we love more? We're very good at saying we care-- saying that we love these strangers. When it comes time to act, we stand far-off expecting that they, like us, will drool at the site of some extra cash. Wouldn't it help more for them to be educated?
Every day, we eat way more than we need to. We walk away from restaurants where our portion sizes are 3Xs the healthy serving size, loosening our pants and ready for a nap. The sad thing is that most of the hungry and hurting, don't even know people like us, who care more about them, then just feeling good about themselves. I look at Jesus as THE example, not just an example, of giving much, pouring oneself out for the good of others. Jesus said: "But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Matthew 20:26-28 Jesus didn't see need and merely drop a few coins in the collection. No, He loved enough to GO and SERVE, something that's seeming harder and harder for us to do. We need to love the hurting, enough to act, on their behalf, not out of duty or self-righteousness. Are we TOO comfortable? Even in this "bad economy"?
Food production versus population growth is probably one of the largest problems that we face today that is also the least mentioned, in my opinion. It ties in with global warming, in that it is realized as a problem but it seems as if it's being set on the back burner. We are very privileged to live in the United States, where being the most poverty stricken person you can still be much much better off than say a person in Sub-Saharan Africa. I assume the answer leads to finding a fine balance in between the amount of food we produce and consume. In politics though it can be a very slow process for any actual change to take place. We cannot really do anything about population growth, its going to run its course, but through laws and legislations maybe something can come about to slow the course of growth. I come across these pictures a couple months ago and I wanted to share, it is called What the World Eats: http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1626519,00.html
-Grant Kunkel
The issue of sustainability and population explosion is one that is facing the global community. In Sub-Sahara Africa,especially, this issue is most prevalent. I believe that the solution is to educate the inhabitants of this area and to set some sort of child to parent ratio. It might sound absord, but nonetheless I believe this will be one solution to the issue of over population. The reason why this problem is prevalent in Sub-Sahara Africa is because of the lack of sexual education, which also contributes to the high numbers of adult and children being infected with AIDS. Many children are left to fend for themselves when their parents pass away. All these social issues that the inhabitants of this country are faced with contribute to the lack of agriculture and the lack of education (which is most important). The US continues to supply this area with vast amount of money, yet nothing seems to be changing! The government and politics of this area are crippled and unwilling to help its citizens. What their government does is steal from its pepole, and do nothing to protect them. I feel like the solution lies in the hands of the pepole!
--Melida Ortega---
Juan Munoz said...
Population explosion, food production and sustainabiblity
In this era of sinking economies, limits for growing is back and this time is squeezing us painfully. Today’s generation keeps on growing at a huge rate and if we look back in time our ancestors faced similar problems, but with the difference that growing population for them meant more ingenuity, more talent and most important of all more innovation; in the other hand for our generation this problem seems to carry less and less those important survival skills. With the population at its peak and keeping on growing, it is shown by studies made by The United Nations that in 2050 there will be more than four billion people living in nations defined as water-scarce. This meaning less land for farming, less capacity in the atmosphere to accept the heat this causes trapped gases that could fry the planet for centuries to come, Scarcer and higher-priced energy and food; And if the world’s economy does not bounce back to its glory days, there will be less credit and fewer jobs. We already had a taste of what the environment could do to us if we don’t do something to reduce the problem of over population think of the catastrophes that have occur over the past few years in the world, things that have never been experience in human history had happen and unfortunately there is nothing we could do to avoid them; Except making changes in our life style which we as humans are not willing to make. These changes could include more education in the world to make it a safer place for our offspring and even for us, also come up with technology to some how solve or alleviate the problem of food water shortage. This is a simple dent that we could do to alleviate a problem that is slowly asphyxiating us and our planet.
Sustainability a problem that seems to be finally getting the attention that it deserves. But narrowing the conflict and taking a closer look at Africa, the problem seems to be with the government(how food aid is handled) and their inability to create enough food due to being unnourished. The government's taking the resources that were given to those in need seems to be the Africa's largest problem. Since they keep the food and money, the farmers that could have use that to have the energy to work or buy new equipment. And because they don't have the equipment or energy to provide for themselves, they have more children for two reasons. To keep the mortality and death rates about even, and the hope that the children will be able to help with the work, so they will be able to make ends meat. The government will first have to create enough possibilities for the people of Africa to compete with the rest of the world for the earth's last resources.
Education and the Fight against Corruption
The human species has survived throughout evolution because of their ability to adjust to any kind of changes in the environment. Our species is the smartest living organism that inhibits this planet and yet we could say we are also the dummest. Our selfish drive for power and the restless thirst for curiosity has impacted the environment that surrounds us, often for the bad.These are some of the vices characterize mankind and these exact same malicious traits have destroyed much of our planet and killed thousands of species. The corruption that sadly occurs in most third world country plays a crucial role in why the helpless and innocent people in sub-Saharan Africa cannot sustain their own family neither with safety nor food. The billions of dollars in food products that great powers, such as the United States and Great Britain send in do not end up in the homes of the needed, but in the hands of the cruel and corrupted people that are infiltrated within their government.
On the other hand, education illustrates the other vital source for success in these underdeveloped countries. These people should receive free education in sexual awareness, and they should additionally receive a certain amount of money or food as reward for only having a limited amount of children.
- Lester Alvarez
It seems ridiculous to think that the shortage of food is due to agriculture. So in other words the production of food is what's causing the shortage of food? That doesn't sound right at all. I think that the problem isn't agriculture at all. A more likely answer is that rich countries consume so much more than they need, and waste so much that others don't have. Overpopulation sounds like another possible reason, the fact that in these poor countries where they have such few resources and people make barely any money they are not educated enough to prevent pregnancies. These people who don't know any better keep bringing more children into the world and they can not evenafford to feed them. It all comes down to he greed of the wealthy and the miseducation of the poor.
One of the main crises that plague third world countries is the increase of overpopulation while educational institutions are absent. In the other hand, the few schools that are available are not efficient in instructing many African societies; young men are forced to drop out and earn money while young girls drop out due to early pregnancies. Another interesting issue regarding food production in Africa is the fact that there are no storage facilities or effective roads. If food was successfully produced, there would be no way to proficiently preserve the products or transport them to different places without it rotting.
Post a Comment