Is The Era Of Cheap Food Ending?

Many would be glad to see the Golden Arches topple for nutritional reasons, but some scientists think that with the human population growing and oil production past its peak, the era of cheap, abundant food is reaching its inevitable end.

Reviewing The Coming Famine, a new book by Australian scientist Julian Cribb, in the New York Times, Mark Bittman summarises:

Like many other experts, [Cribb]argues that we have passed the peak of oil production, and it’s all downhill from now on. He then presents evidence that we have passed the peaks for water, fertilizer and land, and that we will all soon be made painfully aware that we have passed it for food, as wealthy nations experience shortages and rising prices, and poorer ones starve.

The problem isn’t just overpopulation, Cribb contends, it’s overpopulation that’s soon to be matched by overconsumption – the “two elephants in the kitchen”, he deems them. In his book, Bittman explains, Cribb spells out

the fate of a planet whose resources have, in the last 200 years, been carelessly, even ruthlessly exploited for the benefit of the minority. Now that the majority is beginning to demand – or at least crave – the same kind of existence, it’s clear that, population boom or not, there simply isn’t enough of the Euro-American way of life to go around.

And this is precisely the reason that genetically modified foods look like an increasingly attractive option. The way things are trending – both with food markets and global diets – the demand for food is quickly outpacing what agriculture and husbandry can supply.

In response to Bittman’s review, Heather Horn at the Atlantic Wire rounded up some other takes on the issue of energy, overpopulation and the food market.

Jeremy Harding, writing about the future of food for the London Review of Books, noted overpopulation, the rise in the price of energy and a shift in global nutrition that will be impossible to sustain:

Generations that once lived on grains, pulses and legumes have been replaced by more prosperous people with a taste for meat and dairy. Crops like maize which once fed many of us directly now feed fewer of us indirectly, via a costly diversion from which they emerge in the value-added form of meat. Global production of food – all food – will have to increase by 50 per cent over the next 20 years to cater for two billion extra people and cope with the rising demand for meat.

Horn also links to economist Tyler Cowen, who says that many of the people who are most concerned about the impending food shortage are “often the ones with the least economically informed answers”. He does not dismiss the concerns about the food market proposed by others, like Harding, but says instead that they might be countered by new market models, like agricultural free trade.

What’s clear in the debate is that our population is growing, and it’s a population that’s eating more than ever. And if our traditional methods of producing food can’t sustain the new global diet, maybe more efficient, genetically modified foods will. [TheAtlanticWire]

Image credit: Straightedge217

Discuss

(7 Comments)
  • [–]

    Frank

    Thursday, September 23, 2010 at 12:04 PM

    As the article pointed out, we’re eating more meat than ever and this is using up our crops in a very inefficient manner.

    Instead of taking meat/dairy consumption for granted, why don’t we price them realistically, cut down our meat consumption and eat more grains/veges. Remember the food pyramid?

    http://web.mit.edu/athletics/sportsmedicine/wcrfoodpyr.html

    Our food problem is mainly caused by poverty, inequality and overconsumption:

    http://www.globalissues.org/article/200/population-and-feeding-the-world

    • [–]

      Craig

      Thursday, September 23, 2010 at 2:41 PM

      We can eat less meat and consume genetically enhanced crops (greater yields/nutrition) but without addressing population growth, we will still hit a brick wall. Until we address that, we are delaying the inevitable. We will see the rise of conflict between resource poor states (and those that have failed) – we will see nation states that are able to remain cohesive, become extraordinarily protective of its resources. Illegal immigration (as numbers swell beyond economically and socially unsustainable) won’t be a sideshow political topic – it will become seen as fundamental to reducing impact to status quo.

      We are living in a twilight and are on the cusp of great human social and economic shifts – make way for pandemics, war and breakdown of social stability. Our way of life is an illusion. Take note of Rule #32 people. ‘enjoy the little things in life’ while you can.

    • [–]

      LucasF

      Thursday, September 23, 2010 at 5:38 PM

      I’m not sure I am informed enough on this issue to comment, but what you allude to seems to me to be happening naturally, for example, the price of lamb in Australia is becoming insane…or at least insane compared to recent prices. It’s almost like the good old days now where a roast was something a family saved for a whole month to pay for.

  • [–]

    Tim

    Thursday, September 23, 2010 at 12:56 PM

    Also see this excellent book:

    Tomorrow’s Table
    Organic Farming, Genetics, and the Future of Food
    Pamela C. Ronald and R. W. Adamchak

    http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Agriculture/BiotechnologyPlantBreeding/?view=usa&ci=9780195301755

  • [–]

    Enne K

    Friday, September 24, 2010 at 8:33 AM

    There are population deniers who way the West is consuming too much and the world’s population is not too high. We could reduce consumption, but who wants to? Eating less meat and buying less private cars is a good start, but it doesn’t stop people multiplying their numbers. It buys time. The human race has simply been far to successful on the planet. It is not just about us – our planet is shared (supposedly) with millions of other species, and their survival is at stake too.

  • [–]

    Jet

    Saturday, September 25, 2010 at 12:45 AM

    Can we stop this neo-Malthusian crap already?! I hate to think that giz readers are a bunch of fear-mongering malthusians who’ve forgotten the ingenuity of mankind. As long as the people who want to be vegetarian or anti-gm respect our choice to enhance yields with genetic breakthroughs and fertilizers and not impose their moralistic eating habits on the rest of us by banning progress in this field…the developing world will be able to industrialize, bring millions out of poverty, and thus in turn lower their birth rates.

  • [–]

    Milly O

    Tuesday, September 28, 2010 at 1:55 PM

    Jet, it is a cruel hoax to say that developing countries can climb out of poverty and debt through economic development. The reality is that our planet’s resources are limited and Earth cannot sustain our rising population if we all want to live in first world standards. We have already passed peak oil, peak soil, peak phosphorous, and the demands for food are rising but our soils are being depleted. Hardly “neo-Malthusian crap” – the human species has, despite famine and massive disasters, been too successful! Any attempt of development are just swallowed up by population growth.

Join The Discussion