Science does food security

You’ll remember Jeremy waxing lyrical a few days back about a Science paper on “the challenge of feeding 9 billion people.” That paper now finds itself part of a special issue on food security. 1

In the 12 February 2010 issue, Science examines the obstacles to achieving global food security and some promising solutions. News articles introduce farmers and researchers who are finding ways to boost harvests, especially in the developing world. Reviews, Perspectives, and an audio interview provide a broader context for the causes and effects of food insecurity and point to paths to ending hunger. A special podcast includes interviews about measuring food insecurity, rethinking agriculture, and reducing meat consumption.

A lot of it is behind a paywall, but something that isn’t is Radically Rethinking Agriculture for the 21st Century. That radical rethink, in case you’re wondering, consists of using more biotechnology and saline water. Right.

Witnesses to agricultural adaptation


I think we may have already blogged about WWF’s Climate Witness programme, and if not we should have. It’s a very “effective way to illustrate the impacts of climate change on real people in many different locations around the world, and the action they are taking to address the issues.” Several of the stories involve agriculture, of course. For example, Joseph Kones from Bomet in Kenya says that drought has been increasing in his area over the past 20 years, and that his farm is part of a pilot adaptation project involving tree planting and the building of terraces. It would be nice to extract all the agrobiodiversity-relevant examples of changes and adaptation to them. Perhaps a job for the Platform on Agrobiodiversity Research? Which incidentally we have just added to our blogroll. See what I did there?

Fertilizers: downside seen in China

It really does seem tragic that people need to make their own mistakes, rather than learn from others’. Latest case in point: soils in China are being destroyed by excessive use of fertilizers, which is making the soils too acid to support plant growth. Yields have already dropped 30-50% in some places. The conclusion that profligate and ignorant use of fertilizers comes from a paper published in Science by F.S. Zhang at China Agricultural University in Beijing and colleagues. That is behind a paywall, but there is a report in Nature News.

“They see the green leaves but they don’t see the impact on the soil. If they have a poor crop they think more fertilizer is needed, making matters worse,” Zhang says. Farmers routinely apply double and sometimes triple the necessary amount, he says. Better education could provide a simple solution to the fertilization problem.

People who promote “more fertilizers” as a panacea should consider that they need to deliver more than merely fertilizers.

Nibbles: Farmers’ Rights, Seed Breeder, Genebanks, Pigeon Pea, Cheese

Person shows unsolicited interest in agrobiodiversity shock

So there I was, riding the morning train to work, lost in a Ted Talk, as usual. Interesting enough, about diarrhea in India, and how even though rehydration therapy is saving hundreds of thousands of lives, babies are still dying. Then he overlays his slide of a bridge to nowhere with a bunch of words, to make the point that he isn’t talking only about diarrhea, that the problem lies in “the last mile,” getting women actually to use the cheap, available rehydration salts. That sort of problem is common to many areas, and it is nothing to do with poverty, or lack of education. On any given day, 25% of the diabetics in North America are not using their insulin properly. And blow me if, at around 4’40” in, he doesn’t say this:

It’s not just medicine. Here’s another example from technology: agriculture. We think there’s a food problem, so we create new seeds. We think there’s an income problem, so we create new ways of farming that increase income. Well, look at some old ways, some ways that we’d already cracked: intercropping. Intercropping really increases income. Sometimes in rice we found incredible increases in yield when you mix different varieties of rice side by side. Some people are doing that. Many people are not. What’s going on?

Wow! Here’s a guy who gets it. What I found so interesting is that for the rest of his talk Sendhil Mullainathan focused on ways to help individuals to overcome their cognitive and psychological biases and do the right thing, even though at some level they don’t believe it is the right thing. It’s the whole idea of nudging people to change their behaviour. What I found particularly intriguing about the agricultural example is that it isn’t the farmers who need nudging. It’s the people who allocate research funds, and who run (or more likely shut down) extension services, and who deliver what they think poor farmers need or want.

These are the people who need to be nudged. I just wish I knew how. If you’re rich and educated, you can eat the diverse diets that offer better health. But you can also deny that option to poor people. You can invest in a hedge fund, but you can also promote an agricultural system that permits no hedging. What’s going on?

I know there are times when we sound like a cracked record 2 when we bang on about the disconnect between agriculture and conservation, or the more general lack of awareness of the importance of agrobiodiversity. But this made such a nice change. So, not that you need it, thank you Sendhil Mullainathan.