iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
James C. Borel

GET UPDATES FROM James C. Borel
 

To Feed the World, Think Locally -- and Act Locally

Posted: 10/14/10 06:04 PM ET

In a rare instance of good news from the front lines of world hunger, the United Nations announced last month that the number of hungry people across the globe is expected to shrink by 9.6% this year, the biggest drop in 15 years. While the trend line is heartening, most of the decline comes from the rising fortunes of millions in China. Much work remains to lift others around the world out of poverty and want.

As the global community observes World Food Day on Oct. 16, commemorating the founding of the U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organization in 1945, the poor still face a sobering outlook. Demographers say that the planet's population will swell from six billion today to nine billion by 2050. Food production must nearly double over that time to feed the growing human family.

Advances in agricultural science can play a critical role as part of the solution. The best minds and money are funding everything from next-generation seeds to better fertilizer and weed control to close the food gap. But that's not enough. We won't solve the problem until we pay sufficient attention to a quieter, often overlooked dilemma: the potential mismatch between the location of production and the location of consumers.

It may come as a surprise, but the solution to the sweeping global problem of the food gap is not necessarily global in scope, but local. After all, record-breaking bumper crops in Iowa won't necessarily help Africans and Asians, who will account for almost all of the world's population growth in the years ahead. But boosting local food productivity will help close the gap between the haves and have-nots -- and keep food more affordable for those who need it most.

Therefore, we must find the most effective ways of moving food from farms to forks -- in other words, help people grow the food they need close to home. Right now, 85 percent of all food never leaves the country where it's produced. Countries that can't produce enough at home are at risk. Mozambique, for example, faces challenges controlling food prices because it relies heavily on food imports -- growing only 30% of the wheat it needs. Yet, elsewhere there is evidence that investment in local agriculture can pay big dividends. In Malawi, using modern breeding, molecular markers, and biotechnology, a public-private consortium helped develop high-producing maize hybrids with improved nitrogen use for degraded local soils. In 2007, Malawi increased maize production by 65 percent to a record 2.44 million metric tons.

Indeed, countries that enjoy food security share several important traits, such as high levels of investment in all aspects of agriculture -- everything from the science of research and development to the infrastructure of roads, railways, and ports. They also provide private companies with incentives to invent and to share their inventions with others through open markets. Intellectual property rights are critical, too: Innovators need the assurance that they can share the benefits of their ideas without simultaneously losing their economic rights to them.

By increasing supply, local productivity helps keep food affordable for consumers. Higher local yields also fatten the pocketbooks of local farmers and the per-capita income of the entire local economy, which can then afford to buy imports to cover any remaining food gap. After all, with growing populations, it becomes more difficult for any locale in the world to rely entirely upon local production for all its food needs.

The good news is that we're already taking great strides. Every year, science helps farmers do more with less. Cutting-edge seed companies continue to make advances in genetics and biotechnology, allowing us to increase the robustness of staple crops. Researchers are also finding ways to make crops more nutritious and environmentally sustainable. For example, Pioneer is partnering with Africa Harvest Biotech Foundation International to develop new varieties of African staple crop sorghum, enriched with essential nutrients, such as lysine, vitamins A and E, iron and zinc - using technology to fight hunger, malnutrition, and poverty in Africa.

By investing in local agriculture, we can help close the twin gaps in food productivity and between the geographies of production and consumption. By doing so, there will be economic opportunities. As the demand for food grows, we'll be there to meet it.

James C. Borel is executive vice president of DuPont.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 14
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
luvsox
Progressive by Choice, Democrat by Default
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
luvsox
Progressive by Choice, Democrat by Default
08:10 PM on 10/17/2010
check out the amazing Munster Indiana guy who farms tilapia in his basement!
01:55 PM on 10/15/2010
The world has more food than it can eat. About a third of all food in the West is wasted - and that's more than enough to feed those who do not have enough. Thus said, those we are told who do not have enough are in that situation because of their political environment not their agriculture environment. Keep you GMO seeds where you know where.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
08:33 AM on 10/16/2010
Nonsense.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:32 PM on 10/16/2010
Txtface is right and it is you are poorly informed....as usual.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:13 PM on 10/15/2010
scary. we don't want a bunch of chemicals and "biotechnology" poisoning us or poisoning our brothers and sisters in developing nations. the inevitable downstream consequences are enormous and avoidable by simply following good local stewardship without playing god.

fertilizers, pesticides and GMO foods are taking us in entirely the wrong direction, although I agree about the local nature of agriculture. there is nothing "local" about africans being forced to buy American BigAgra frankenfoods.

sorry.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
08:31 AM on 10/16/2010
You 'should' be sorry. You are against even fertilizers? Good grief......you have no clue what you are talking about. ALL farmers use fertilizers, even organic. By the way, organic farms commonly use pesticides as well. That's a little secret the people at Big Agra-supplied Whole Foods and the BigAgra-supplied Trader Joes won't tell you.

The nonGMO, old fashioned, pre-1950's, nostalgic farm world you dream about is labor intensive, fuel intensive, carbon producing and more prone to soil erosion. If you want to do the extra labor required for nonGM, then go farm yourself. Go ahead and farm. What are you waiting for?

As a farmer myself, you are actually the one who has the ideas which are "scary"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jumbotron16
a slight improvement over jumbotron15
01:20 PM on 10/19/2010
Wow, you're really clueless aren't you? :/
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
KurtMichaelFriese
Money is not speech - merely a megaphone
10:32 AM on 10/15/2010
The biggest weakness of GMO crops isn't environmental or biological, it's legal. Making Africans be able to grow enough food to feed themselves matters little if they do not own it. Large global corporations (like DuPont) own the patents to all those GMO seeds, thus making the people who use them beholden to those companies.

You are what you eat, therefore who owns your food owns you. The penalty for poaching the King's deer is kinda on the stiff side.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
08:51 AM on 10/16/2010
Oh gee....another nonfarmer telling us what the farm world is like. Did you know farmers have been buying seed from seed salesman for decades and decades long before GMO? Yes..soybeans used to be one of the seeds that could be kept and planted the next year. Now we buy GM soybeans. They are more expensive but allow for no-till. The fuel, labor costs have dropped a lot and soil erosion has dropped as well with non-till. There is absolutely no doubt about that. There is much data. Here's one source:
http://www.soyconnection.com/pdf/9001_USB_CAST_V1r1May11.pdf

The legal stuff you talk about is mostly an urban myth. And I mean URBAN, since most rural farmers just deal with seed companies as any other supplier. Farmer don't lay awake in bed every night worried about Monsanto lawyers. That's truely urban folk's myth. (and yes...I've have heard about Monsanto vs Percy Schmeiser....so you don't need to link it)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:27 PM on 10/16/2010
Hazel, you're not a real farmer, that is quite clear.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
KurtMichaelFriese
Money is not speech - merely a megaphone
07:26 PM on 10/16/2010
Those farmers of the past could save the progeny of the seed they bought and plant it again. Not so with GMOs.

Schmeiser was just the tip of the iceberg. Look up Pioneer v. JEM Ag, the US Supreme Court decision of Dec., 2000, which gave corporations the right to take utility patents (not just plant patents) on their seed. And then look at the laws that permit patenting of DNA and whole life forms. While your looking that up, take a look at the average farmers annual profit compared to that of Monsanto

Or Tyson, for that matter. Contracts with them require farmers to incur an average $250K debt when they make an average $18K per year.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ozark Homesteader
http://ozarkhomesteader.wordpress.com
09:56 AM on 10/15/2010
Rather than advocating GMO crops, which have an ongoing cost to people who can't afford it, why not return to crops that developed millennia ago in response to similar conditions. For example, native wild winter squash, high in nutrients, still grows wild across the American desert southwest in places I would have assumed nothing could grow. The same is true of corn varieties. Ditto on the sorghum you mention--minus the GMO component GMO crops that must be purchased annually are not a long-term solution. They are no better and in many cases may actually be worse than a food drop.
http://ozarkhomesteader.wordpress.com/
05:43 PM on 10/14/2010
We don't need GMO seeds to teach people permaculture to improve crop yields