Feed 9 Billion People: Article Analysis

Without some system of worldwide food sharing, the proportion of people in the rich and poor nations might eventually stabilize. The overpopulated poor countries would decrease in numbers, while the rich countries that had room for more people would increase. Hardin continues on to show that the modern approach to foreign aid stresses the export of technology and advice, rather than money and food! An ancient Chinese proverb once said: “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach him how to fish and he will eat for the rest of his days” (Hardin, Pg. 84). A number of programs for improving agriculture in the hungry nations known as the “Green Revolution” have taken a big stand in offering harvest and greater resistance to crop damage due to action taken on this advice. It is said that foundations such as “miracle rice” and “miracle wheat” are one of the most prominent advocates of a world food bank.

Before revealing plan 4.0, Mr. Brown explains the constraints, setbacks, and conflicts of the current world: skyrocketing food costs, steady increase of hunger (projected 1.2 billion by 2015), limited irrigation

Being a part of FFA has completely changed the course of my life. It is because of this amazing organization that I have learned to be service minded. Helping others has become the biggest goal I want to achieve in my lifetime. I want to leave a mark on the world and change it for the better. With the experience I have gained so far, an imminent change I want to make is to feed the world population by the year 2050. In 2050 the USDA reports that the agricultural industry will not be able to provide enough food to sustain the predicted world population of 9.7 billion people. This would mean potentially millions of people would become food insecure and not have adequate availability to a food supply to maintain a healthy diet. This is a very

Instead, through the examination of logic and evidence used within the texts by Smail, Tiffen & Mortimore, and Hamilton can one develop a more extensive and polished perspective on increasing population and its potential interrelatedness with food scarcity. The reader can identify with components of the arguments presented in all three of the texts. The increase of population absolutely has a negative effect on our supply of food. The reader recognises and accepts this aspect of Smail’s case. Although, to what extent? One cannot agree that an increase of population will have a catastrophic effect on the planet to the effect described by Smail. The argument he displays is heavily peppered with contradictions, one does indeed recognise action must be taken to address the issue of population growth and food supply, however, the measures idealised by Smail are flawed and extreme. Furthermore, the subject of population growth and food supply cannot be addressed by looking at population alone, other important and influential factors must be considered as well. One can agree with Hamilton, that consumption and other factors need to be considered when developing a policy or solution. Moreover, a solution to the matter of increased population and its detrimental effects on food supply, must be adaptable. Not all situations are the same as the one presented by

As the human population continues to grow exponentially, researchers like David Jenkins, are looking into other possible food production. Jenkins proposes that eating plants would not only be beneficial for the body, since it lowers cholesterol and blood pressure, but it would also be more sustainable than raising meat. Jenkins’ research highlights three dietary methods and he explains how these dietary methods (especially Simian) can help us feed 9 billion in 2050. With the exponential growth in human population, there must be an increase in livestock (meat) to support the rapid growth. Jenkins’ data show that already livestock feed processing and production heavily contributes in the emission of greenhouse gases. Jenkins’ proposal is that

It is estimated that 740 million people are starving in the world today. (Prakash and Conko 357) There are about 7.2 billion people in the world, so the hungry population accounts for 12.7% of the population. The time has come to change these statistics. It is the 21st century and we, as humans, now have the technology and resources to reverse these terrible numbers. There are two arguments on what we should do with this new technology, however. One side, researched by a science policy analyst, stated that biotechnology still has kinks to be worked out and is not the best way to combat world hunger. Another side by a AgBioWorld Foundation vice president and a world-renowned scientific researcher, professor, scholar, and director of the

The global population is expected to reach 9 billion people by the year 2050 and scientific projections indicate that world is on a trajectory towards an environmental and global food crisis. World Leaders, environmental enthusiasts and aid agencies have cause for alarm as they support urgent policies for change, for without them mankind will face unprecedented food insecurity. In 2015 estimates were that there were “some 795 million people” [World Food Programme, 2015], experiencing food insecurity and 3.1 million children under 5 died through malnutrition, while Australians continue to waste an estimated 361 Kg’s of food per person per yr [PMSEIC, 2010, p.44] All the while the earth groans under the weight of Greenhouse Gas Emissions [GHG], deforestation, soil degradation and

However, some believe, that a shift in the way we produce food may have some unintended consequences. They contend that poverty in nations such as Africa and Asia, is caused by the low productivity of the unindustrialized farm labor. The U.S. Agriculture Department projects, without reform, there will be over a thirty percent increase in the numbers of the ‘food insecure’ people in those nations over the next decade (Paarlberg 179).

Many things are being done to help resolve this issue. More land is being made available for farm use (Clemmitt 555). On top of increasing farmland, farmers have also been learning how to use more effective techniques to ensure a successful harvest (Clemmitt 559). In order to fix the issue of starvation and malnutrition, from the lack of food, "we must first fix the political and economic issues", say many scholars (Clemmitt 565). Money is a major issue for the citizens in the United States. The amount of food isn't the first problem; it's not having enough money to buy the food that is available (Clemmitt 567). There are many issues with not being able to obtain food. The only issues that cannot be fixed are natural disasters, like hurricanes and tornadoes (Clemmitt 566). Although with all the technology in the world we cannot control Mother Nature. Technique is an important key to a successful harvest. Some farmers believe monoculture would be the best technique because it produces a large amount of one crop. The technique is effective and efficient but it’s harmful to earth's biodiversity. Thankfully there is a large amount of people in the next generation who are taking an interest in farming. This may help with the growth of farming, and fixing the issue of starvation. Genetically modified food is created in a way to grow quicker and easier than regular crops (McLure 719 720). Genetically modified foods have many helpful traits like being resistant to weeds. Another helpful trait of genetically modified food is it can grow in large amounts (McLure 721). The way the modified food is designed to help with growing large amounts with less acreage. The modified food, and organics, is believed to be cheaper because they do not require fertilizer (Kiener 820). Farmers are now trying to convince others to decrease or even stop the use of biofuel. It's becoming known that biofuel is taking away the amount of

As the Earth’s population grows at breakneck pace over the next several decades, who will feed the world’s people? Agriculture has undergone an extensive expansion and transformation throughout the last few centuries, beginning with the Industrial Revolution of the late 1700s. New technology allowed for better and greater methods of production. With the development of modern technology, people try to think some way can plant less, get more. Many farmers plant only one crop in the same place year after year. However, those against monocropping claim that it is very hard on the environment and actually less profitable than organic means of farming (“Monoculture Crops – Learn About The Effects Of Monocropping”). In addition, the destructive nature of agriculture has recently shown its hand. While our supermarkets, convenience stores, and restaurants are filled with abundant food options, people forget to ask themselves where all this food comes from. Globalization has opened up economies of scale and has allowed people to tap into different types of products, whether that is food or clothing. But the availability of an increased mass market comes at a cost. However, today, the modern farming techniques have grown into a headache for farmers and governments alike, because they are the consequences of overproduction, industrial waste and other problems arising from the modern methods of agriculture. Thus, modern techniques are harmful to environments, animals, and humans.

The article future of food: Jon Foley's 5-step plan to feed the world by: Ben Jordan published in the National Geographic’s focuses on strategies to provide better nutrition worldwide. The author, Ben Jordan, raised points that can make readers ask questions. Is there going to be food available to people? Is it going to be harder or easier to find food? Is the food going to look different to people or the same? The future of our food is going to be more organic because people want to learn where food comes from. Food can evolve because people are going toward organic foods. There is going to be a lot more people becoming vegetarians because it is healthier. Many people have realized that by reducing their intake of meat and processed fast

Even though America may prosper, the future it’s still dark for many other countries and there seems to be no viable solutions. With the scarce amount of food that we have, it seems like an impossible task, with only three times what we require to feed the world´s population it is impossible to choose an alternative, such as distributing this food among everyone,

However, the issue will require attention soon enough when addressing the 70% food production increase mandatory in feeding the estimated world population of 9.3 billion by 2050 (United Nations, 2011).

In the past ten years the world population exceeded six billion people with most of the growth occurring in the poorest, least developed countries in the world. The rapidly increasing population and the quickly declining amount of land are relative and the rate at which hunger is increasing rises with each passing year. We cannot afford to continue to expand our world population at such an alarming rate, for already we are suffering the consequences. Hunger has been a problem for our world for thousands of years. But now that we have the technology and knowledge to stamp it out, time is running short.

Here is the deal, this world certainly isn’t getting any smaller. The population of the world as of right now is 7.5 BILLION people, That's a lot! By the year 2050, the government is predicting the population will be around 15 BILLION people. With this growing problem, farmers are feeling the pressure. But farmers have found a way to help this