The world is on the threshold of technological breakthroughs and improvements in agriculture, and these could not come at a better time. Since the creation of jobs depends, to a large degree, on creating consumers with a higher standard of living, providing food in quantities and varieties suited to these emerging consumers will be vital.
This food revolution will, on its own, continue to provide new categories of jobs, but the traditional farm worker will not be a category that will grow. On the contrary, it will shrink due to automation and economies of scale. But job gains in related fields will more than make up for this loss. These include the preparation and transport of food, the production of agribusiness capital goods such as farm machinery, irrigation systems, and food processing plants, plus packaging and distribution systems. Already, over 70 percent of the cost of food is added after the food leaves the farm, and this proportion is sure to rise.
Although new agriculture-related jobs will contribute to global job growth, the greater impact will be on how the food revolution will literally and figuratively feed job growth in all sectors.
A phenomenon that is both caused by agricultural productivity and reinforces the need for that productivity is the migration of people from farms to the city. In 2007, we reached the crucial point at which more people lived in cities than in rural areas. The model we’ve seen in the United States, Japan, and Europe of incredibly greater amounts of food being produced by far fewer people will now become a global model.
Another recent milestone was reached when the global population topped 7 billion people.
§§§§§§§§§§
Between now and 2060, the world’s cumulative consumption of food will exceed twice the food that has been consumed since the beginning of agriculture 10,000 years ago. It is estimated that to feed the growing population by 2050, at least 70 percent more food will be needed each year than is produced today.1 In developing countries, many experts believe this goal will not be met since current investments in agriculture are woefully inadequate.
In 2008, during the financial crisis, the world got a glimpse of what will likely happen if food supplies don’t keep pace. When the price of food commodities soared, hundreds of millions of poor people, who already spend up to 80 percent of their incomes on food, were drastically affected. Thirty countries experienced food riots, and two governments fell.
However, there is actually reason for optimism today because breakthroughs in infotech, biotech, and nanotech are already converging on solutions that promise to revolutionize agriculture. Specifically, there are five levels of technology that are driving the food revolution and giving it the potential to take root and serve populations worldwide.
The first level is the foundation being put in place by biotech, or genetically modified crops, known as GM crops. These crops not only produce more food on the same land, but are also:
? Resistant to plant diseases and insects ? More nutritious ? More adaptable to environmental conditions such as drought, cold, and heat ? Able to thrive in soils containing minerals that would kill traditional crops
In the 17 years since biotech crops were first commercialized, their production has steadily increased. In 2011, the volume of biotech crops reached 160 million hectares, up 8 percent from 2010.2 Since 1996, GM crops have increased by 94-fold, which is the fastest any crop technology has ever been adopted in the history of modern agriculture.
§§§§§§§§§§
In fact, millions of farmers in 29 countries have now planted and replanted enough GM crops to cover an accumulated acreage of more than 25 percent the total land mass of the United States.
In 2011, the U.S. continued its lead in producing biotech crops with 69 million hectares, which
represents 43 percent of the global biotech crop.
Farmers are naturally risk-averse. So, they are embracing GM technology for one simple reason: Bio-tech crops deliver substantial and sustainable socio-economic and environmental benefits. Three of the biggest benefits include:3
1. Contributing to food, feed, and fiber security and self sufficiency. Between 1996 and 2010, even as food became more affordable and agriculture increased in productivity, $78 billion in profits was generated at the farm level due to biotech crops. 2. Biotech crops help save land. Because of their higher productivity, less land is needed for growing GM crops. Between 1996 and 2010, 91 million additional hectares were not needed because of this type of food production. 3. Biotech crops help reduce poverty and hunger. Foods are not the only GM crops. In developing countries such as China, India, and Pakistan, biotech cotton provided more than 15 million small resource-poor farmers cash income in 2011. This biotech cotton is genetically engineered to produce its own insecticide to protect it from destructive caterpillars.
§§§§§§§§§§
Blight-resistant potatoes and “Golden Rice” that is genetically-modified to provide high levels of beta carotene are just two examples of the way foods are being engineered to perform better and offer more nutrition.
§§§§§§§§§§
A study by Iowa State University on consumer acceptance of genetically modified foods revealed interesting results.4 Generally, people are willing to pay more for GM foods if the modifications enhance consumer traits, such as taste, coloration, and vitamins. However, if the GM food contains enhanced traits only of value to the farmer, such as pest and drought resistance, consumers expect to pay 15 percent less. So, it appears consumers are not uneasy buying modified foods as long as the foods provide health or aesthetic benefits.
Nevertheless, despite the total absence of reported links between GM food and adverse health or damage to the environment, there are still many who oppose biotech crops. Europeans have for years resisted this technology, although that bias appears to be waning. Recently, 41 Swedish scientists wrote an open letter to politicians and environmentalists emphasizing the need to rethink European legislation that restricts the use of GM crops.
§§§§§§§§§§
The second level of technology helping drive the food revolution is “smart irrigation.”
Currently, 70 percent of worldwide fresh water usage is allocated to farming. The vast majority of that water is wasted through run-off and evaporation.
By 2050, with a population of 9 billion people, this water usage pattern will not be sustainable.
We already have many tools that will let us fix this problem. One is computerized irrigation systems that use sensor networks to direct water where it is needed, when it is needed. Other systems have been developed that actually pull water out of the air in humid countries, lessening the demand on in-ground water supplies.
Another answer will be genetically modified crops that require dramatically less water or can even grow in salt water.5 By 2013, the first biotech maize hybrids that provide a degree of tolerance to drought will be commercially available in the U.S. Then, in 2017, a tropical drought-tolerant biotech maize is expected to be made available for sub-Saharan Africa. These advances will particularly help developing countries where drought occurs more often.
The third level of technology will eliminate waste and spoilage.
Historically, more food is wasted than is consumed. The culprits are pests and spoilage, resulting in far less than half of the food grown in the world being consumed by either people or domesticated animals, such as farm animals or pets. In some cases, the pesticides needed to protect these crops are causing harm as well as doing good. One example is the recent decline in useful bee populations, which may be due to pesticides.
A combination of solutions will be required. Plants are being modified to be resistant to pests, and better pesticides and herbicides are becoming available. Insect pests are also being controlled by genetically modifying insects to thwart reproduction as well as to attack microbes and parasites.
Meanwhile deploying new harvesting, storage, packing, and shipping methods will protect food from pests and spoilage once it’s ready to harvest.
The fourth level of technology is effective waste processing and recycling. Not only are we seeing a huge increase in agricultural demand for food crops, but there is an enormous shift from plant to animal protein as the world becomes more affluent. With this increase in animal production comes an increase in animal waste generated by feed lots, fish farms, and meat processing plants. An important issue is how to deal with this waste.
One long-term solution is “in vitro meat production,” which eliminates the need for animals.6 Instead, muscle stem cells are grown in an ultra-clean food processing plant to produce very healthy ground meat suitable for hamburgers, sausages, and tacos. This “cultured meat” is not destined to totally replace conventional meat. However, it will provide some relief from the growing waste issue, while helping feed the growing world population.
Another part of the equation is using biotech to clean up conventional meat production. Synthetic life research is on the verge of delivering microbes that turn animal waste and remnants into useful by-products that can be used to generate energy, produce crops, or act as industrial feed-stocks.
New uses for waste products are also being devised. A new method is being developed for converting billions of pounds of chicken feathers into plastic.7 Inexpensive and abundant, feathers are a source for keratin, a tough protein, which has been found to provide strength and durability for plastics. An added benefit is that this plastic features a high degree of bio-availability.
Finally, the fifth level involves optimization in the packaging, transport, and distribution chain for food. One important shift already taking place in the U.S. is the elimination of the transport bottlenecks created by trucks and trains. Because of poor coordination, perishable foods have, at high expense, been shipped on trucks from “farm centers” such as Florida, central California, and the Midwest to “consumption centers” on the West Coast and in the Northeast.
Today, information technology is permitting farmers, grocers, and intermediaries to tightly coordinate their activities to make low-cost shipping possible. Much of this is a return on investments in IT-intensive logistics, driven by retailers since the late 1970s.
At the same time, while we’re realizing the power of optimizing the long supply chains, it’s also becoming increasingly possible to shorten the supply chain everywhere. That’s why the biggest impact from streamlining won’t come in the developed world; it will come in the developing world. Specifically, in countries with poor logistics infrastructure such as India and China, it often makes more sense to move the food processing capital equipment to rural areas and encourage people to both produce and consume locally.
However, where this idea of shortening the supply chain intersects trends toward massive urbanization and new materials technology, it’s leading to a totally different paradigm: vertical urban farming.8 This is an avant-garde concept with many proponents. The question is not whether it could work, but whether it can become a cost-effective solution for the developing world within 30 years.
Closer to realization is the idea of better food packaging optimized to make food easier to transport and store. One innovative development, known as modified atmosphere packaging, is being used to reduce food spoilage by controlling the growth of organisms. The result is a longer shelf life and safer foods.
Another new type of packaging changes color to alert customers when food is starting to go bad as the result of broken packaging or poor refrigeration.9 Packaging is also being designed with an eye to low-impact disposal; cheap bio-engineered plastics that break down quickly in landfills are already in development.
These five technology levels will offer solutions that promise to meet the world’s sharply escalating food demands as we move into the 21st century. In the process, they will create hundreds of millions of low- and medium-skilled jobs where they are needed the most.
In light of this trend, we offer the following forecasts for your consideration:
First, to ensure the continued success of GM crops, governmental regulations will need to be relaxed.
For example, insect-resistant GM crops are currently regulated under the same laws for fungicides and rodenticides. This has been the case since 1986, despite reports such as the one published by the European Union in 2010 that found no difference between GM crops and crops modified by other techniques. Still, GM crops remain the only ones that are regulated. These types of regulations lead to delays and missed opportunities since many companies don’t take up the challenge of researching genetic modification because of the added cost of the regulations.
Second, ever-improving biotech crops will be needed to meet the evolving needs of both industrialized and developing countries.
The development of these crops will need to keep pace with population growth by offering solutions that stretch the traditional boundaries of agriculture, such as drought-resistant plants.
Third, a global food revolution in a 20-year time frame cannot rely solely on private-sector resources.
Most solutions will be developed by the private sector, driven by market forces. However, we can also expect to see solutions that spring from private-public collaboration, and some that are solely developed by public entities. Then these solutions will need to be implemented quickly as part of national biotech crop strategies that leverage the distinct advantages of each different development path.
References List :1. For information about using genetically modified plants to help feed a growing population amid world climate change, visit The Research Council of Norway website at: http://www.forskningsradet.no 2. The Guardian, February 8, 2012, "Campaigners Clash Over Industry Claims of Rise in GM Crops," by John Vidal. ⓒ Copyright 2012 by Guardian News and Media Limited. All rights reserved.http://www.guardian.co.uk 3. ISAAA, 2011, "Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2011," by Clive James. ⓒ Copyright 2011 by The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA). All rights reserved. http://www.isaaa.org 4. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, December 2011, Vol. 36, No. 3, "Household Production and the Demand for Food and Other Inputs: U.S. Evidence," by Wallace Huffman ⓒ Copyright 2011 by Western Agricultural Economics Association. All rights reserved.http://ageconsearch.umn.edu 5. The Canadian Jewish News, January 24, 2012, "Genetically Modified Plants to Resist Intense Drought," by David Allouche. ⓒ Copyright 2012 by The Canadian Jewish News. All rights reserved.http://www.cjnews.com 6. Environmental Science & Technology, July 15, 2011, Vol. 45, Iss. 14, "Environmental Impacts of Cultured Meat Production," by Hanna Tuomisto, et al. ⓒ Copyright 2011 by the American Chemical Society. All rights reserved. http://pubs.acs.org 7. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, March 9, 2011, Vol. 59, Iss. 5, "Graft Polymerization of Native Chicken Feathers for Thermoplastic Applications," by Enqi Jin, Narendra Reddy, Zifeng Zhu, and Yiqi Yang. ⓒ Copyright 2011 by the American Chemical Society. All rights reserved.http://pubs.acs.org 8. The New York Times, July 15, 2008, "Country, the City Version: Farms in the Sky Gain New Interest," by Bina Venkataraman. ⓒ Copyright 2008 by The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.http://www.nytimes.com 9. Daily Mail, January 7, 2011, "Wrapping That Will Tell You When Foods Going Off," by David Derbyshire. ⓒ Copyright 2011 by Associated Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.http://www.dailymail.co.uk
