Global Food Crisis
- Details
- Hits: 145024
Global Food Crisis
Recently, there has been a major crisis in the global agriculture/food system, where some people overfeed while others do not have enough for their families. This crisis is currently affecting over 3 billion people (one-half of the people of the world). Clearly, hunger was a growing problem globally even prior to the realization of the crisis by the media. Nevertheless, the international aid organizations and United States were not referring it to as a ‘global crisis,’ probably because food prices still lagged on a steady downward trend. Development organizations claimed that as the promised benefits of globalization trickled down, and it would become possible for the poor to buy the food items they lacked. The initial trigger for the crisis was said to be the inflation of food prices, though food politics was not that pronounced at the time. The World Bank demonstrated that world food prices had risen by 83 percent in 3 years and predicted a further 5 percent increase in the price index in the coming years. Nonetheless, other more important factors apparently underlie the problem of food supply. Multinational food corporations, International Financial Institutions, and biotechnology have come up strongly to address this crisis. They have played important roles to shape the paradox of having overfed people living among others who are hungry (Hunger in a World of Plenty).
The food crisis apparently exploded overnight, which reinforced fears that there was just too much population in the world. Nevertheless, according to the World Bank, there were record harvests of grain in 2007. This led governments to conclude there is more food to feed everyone in the world (Life and Debt). Indeed, over the last two decades, the global food production has increased steadily at approximately 2 percent annually, matched against a drop of 1.4 percent in the rate of growth of the world’s population. Concisely, the world population has not outstripped the food supply. The people have become too poor to purchase the food, which is readily available. The World Bank executive director observed there are plenty of food supplies on the shelves, but the poor have been priced out of the market (Sage 109).
The International Monetary Fund (IMF), in a comprehensive research on the macroeconomic impact of the global food crisis, introduced several recommendations. Its teams in various countries have offered policy advice, basing the approach on a country’s diagnoses on issues like monetary policy, trade policies, as well as exchange rates. The IMF is currently offering country's help in order to enable them design and implement policy responses such as transfer programs, as well as tax and tariff changes. This aims at mitigating the impact of escalating food prices. It is also engaging in the provision of monetary assistance to numerous low-income nations through the general Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility. So far it has made up to $200 million available as a first step in boosting agricultural production in all countries that do not have enough to feed their citizenry. These funds support productions by small-scale family farmers. It also helps to supply credit to farmers’ organizations to enable them to purchase agricultural inputs, multiply and distribute seeds. IMF assists farmers to increase their production of staple foods such as dairy products and basic grains. It helps improve the fertility of the land, as well as good management of land and water. Working with the United Nations and individual governments, IMF avails funds to help develop the capacity of those governments to respond to the food crisis. It also helps them prepare strategies for the expansion of d sustainable agricultural productivity, as it assists in the design of safety nets for vulnerable countries. It also has a role in the clarification of policy options and issues that foster good decision-making and does in-depth surveys of the impact of the food crisis at the country levels. Apart from this, it participates in the mobilization of resources to meet food needs along with other international organizations. Overall, this increases the food sovereignty of the countries in question (Young 26).
Multinational food corporations have contributed to the global food crisis. The policies they advocate for exacerbate, rather solve, the food problem. From time immemorial, these corporations have been trying to rewrite the rules of the agricultural economy globally so that gain control of the entire food supply system. Amartya Sen claims policies as abolishing tariffs and quotas, maintaining taxpayer subsidies, as well as increasing market concentration have enabled them to make a global crisis that has threatened global food sovereignty. Consequently, the fundamental right to food is now dependent on these multinational corporations, putting small-scale farmers out of business while increasing the risk of famine globally. The corporations are also lobbying to abolish the traditional regulations of anti-monopoly referred to as competition policies. Without such policies, large corporate firms will buy small ones up, creating giant conglomerates with operations in multiple countries. As a result, the export of agricultural products, for example, from the Mexico to the United States will often be between two subsidiaries from the same parent company. Such integration will allow corporations to buy and sell within the same multinational company, a trend likely to manipulate the global market while gauging autonomous producers. As IMF, the World Trade Organization (WTO) will undermine anti-trust laws further, encouraging monopolistic control of more agricultural markets while exerting downward pressure on world agricultural prices.
With the rising demand for abundant and nutritious food for the world, agricultural biotechnology is promising to offer solutions and has a breakthrough has already been seen with biotechnology crops. These crops may be either food crops or cash crops. They have increased yields unlike the average ones and crop losses to pests are few. Biotechnology has enabled farmers put much farmland under cultivation in an extremely sustainable manner. So far, over 10 million farmers in 20 countries have harvested biotechnology crops, which are on sale in many parts of the world (Carolan, 45).
Biotechnology is expected to achieve more than did the Green Revolution, which is said to have produced a yield increase of 2 percent annually for 20 years. The program involved development of new varieties of grain as well as provision of fertilizer and irrigation services. Since agricultural biotechnology will concentrate on genetic modification technology and widespread adoption of biopesticides, it will go a long way to averting the present food crisis. Food supply has always been finely balanced between nature and agriculture. These diseases and pests affect yield. Plant breeding programs have been seeking to establish useful traits, which are not vulnerable to pests and diseases. This is where biotechnology provides an antidote.
An advantage biotechnology has compared to traditional research is that it is more easily targeted. Additionally, new traits are introduced more rapidly. It is advantageous in being a component of private enterprise too, helping to avoid the inertia associated with food politics in the public sector. Biotechnology has a plurality of applications, such that applying it to profit-seeking ventures subsidizes transfer of technology to countries that lack it. Under the prevailing circumstances, desirable initiatives like the green and chemical revolution one become an appropriate solution to the global food problems. The Monsanto initiatives pledged to provide drought and pest-resistant varieties of food and cash crop species (The World According to Monsanto). There is a potential for abuse in a system where a substantial component of food technology lies in private hands. However, biotechnology will provide a solution that can alleviate the food crisis, making the difference between survival and starvation for many world inhabitants.
In conclusion, multinational food corporations, International Financial Institutions, and biotechnology play major roles to help avert a global food crisis. Nonetheless, they do not address the actual problem. The mode of solutions prescribed is often rooted in the very technologies and policies that created the crisis in the first place. Measures such as increased food aid, more technological and genetic manipulations, as well as de-regulated global trade in agricultural products only strengthens the corporate status quo. This worsens the food/agriculture crisis further. Therefore, there has been little leadership in the face of this crisis this far nor has any debate occurred publicly on the actual reasons of the unprecedented numbers of people facing famine. Unregulated global corporations, financial institutions, and biotechnology are apparently deciding the future of the global food systems.
Works Cited