Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the US Food System

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the US Food System CLIMATE CHANGE GLOBAL FOOD SECURITY AND THE U.S. FOOD SYSTEM U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System December 2015 Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System This document and all individual sections herein may be cited as follows: Brown, M.E., J.M. Antle, P. Backlund, E.R. Carr, W.E. Easterling, M.K. Walsh, C. Ammann, W. Attavanich, C.B. Barrett, M.F. Bellemare, V. Dancheck, C. Funk, K. Grace, J.S.I. Ingram, H. Jiang, H. Maletta, T. Mata, A. Murray, M. Ngugi, D. Ojima, B. O’Neill, and C. Tebaldi. 2015. Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System. 146 pages. Available online at http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/FoodSecurity2015Assessment/FullAssessment.pdf. Additional Technical Contributors: Mamta Chaudhari (GWU), Shannon Mesenhowski (USAID), Micah Rosenblum (USDA FAS), Isabel Walls (USDA NIFA), and Keith Wiebe (IFPRI) DOI: 10.7930/J0862DC7 This document was produced as part of a collaboration between the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, and the National Center for Atmospheric Research. NCAR’s primary sponsor is the National Science Foundation. Image credits: Images are I-Stock/I-Stock. com, Shutterstock/Shutterstock.com unless otherwise noted. I-Stock/I-Stock.com: Cover, pgs. x, 13, 16, 17, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 50, 53, 60, 66, 71, 74, 85, 87, 92, 93, 110, 111. Shutterstock/Shutterstock.com: Title page, pgs. 1, 12, 17, 22, 24, 25, 36, 52, 56, 58, 65, 68, 75, 80, 81, 84, 104, 106, 108, 111, 112, 114, 115. This report is in the public domain. Some materials in the report are copyrighted and permission was granted for their publication in this report. For subsequent uses that include such copyrighted materials, permission for reproduction must be sought from the copyright holder. In all cases, credit must be given for copyrighted materials. December 2015 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all of its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, political beliefs, genetic information, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll-free at (866) 632-9992 (English) or (800) 877- 8339 (TDD) or (866) 377-8642 (English Federal-relay) or (800) 845-6136 (Spanish Federal-relay). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. ii December 2015 Dear Colleagues: On behalf of the National Science and Technology Council and the U.S. Global Change Research Program, we are pleased to transmit to you the Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System assessment report. This state-of-the-science assessment establishes the technical foundation for managing food security outcomes around the world and for preparing consumers, agricultural producers, and others in the United States for changing conditions. This report, in response to the President’s Climate Action Plan, integrates research from the biophysical and the social sciences, across multiple sectors, to evaluate climate-driven changes in global food security and analyze the U.S. role in food security in a changing world. The result of a three-year effort led by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, this study brought together over thirty experts at nineteen institutions in four countries. The authors drew on information gathered in stakeholder workshops and public commentary, as well as on analysis by technical experts within the Federal government. We would like to thank the authors, reviewers, and staff who prepared this report, and the stakeholders and members of the public whose comments ensured its usefulness and applicability. Food security represents one of humanity’s most urgent and important challenges. The science in this report provides a particularly useful tool in meeting that challenge. Sincerely, John P. Holdren Thomas J. Vilsack Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Secretary Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy U.S. Department of Agriculture Executive Office of the President iii Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System Table of Contents Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................................................................viii Report in Brief ....................................................................................................................................................................................................ix Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Introduction and Report Background ..........................................................................................................13 1.1 Report Background ......................................................................................................................................................................13 1.2 Report Scope ....................................................................................................................................................................................14 1.3 Report Organization ....................................................................................................................................................................14 1.4 Report-Development Process ..................................................................................................................................................15 Chapter 2: Key Concepts and Definitions ..............................................................................................................................17 2.1 Food Security ...................................................................................................................................................................................17 2.2 Food Insecurity ...............................................................................................................................................................................19 2.3 Food Systems ...................................................................................................................................................................................19 2.4 Climate Change ..............................................................................................................................................................................20 2.5 Non-climate Drivers of Food Systems and Food Security ..........................................................................................21 2.6 Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................................................................23 Chapter 3: Models, Scenarios, and Projections of Climate Change and Socioeconomic Change .......................................................................................................................................................25 3.1 Climate Modeling ..........................................................................................................................................................................25 3.2 Greenhouse-Gas (GHG) Emissions and Concentration Scenarios ..........................................................................27 3.3 Climate Projections .......................................................................................................................................................................28 3.4 Socioeconomic Change ..............................................................................................................................................................35 3.5 Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................................................................38 Chapter 4: Integrated Assessment Modeling of Agricultural and Food Systems .............................41 4.1 Impact-Assessment Framework for Agricultural and Food Systems ....................................................................41 4.2 Biophysical Models .......................................................................................................................................................................42 4.3 Global Economic Models ............................................................................................................................................................44 4.4 Regional Economic Impact-Assessment Models ............................................................................................................44
Recommended publications
  • Food Security and Food Sovereignty: Getting Past the Binary”, Dialogues in Human Geography 4 (2): 206-211
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2043820614537159, The final, definitive version of this paper has been published in Dialogues in Human Geography, 4(2), June 2014 published by SAGE Publishing, All rights reserved. Accepted version of article published in Dialogues in Human Geography: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2043820614537159 Full reference: Clapp, Jennifer. 2015. “Food Security and Food Sovereignty: Getting Past the Binary”, Dialogues in Human Geography 4 (2): 206-211. Food Security and Food Sovereignty: Getting Past the Binary Jennifer Clapp1 It has become fashionable among some critical food studies scholars to counterpose food sovereignty to food security. Those taking this approach have associated all that they find unpalatable about the current mainstream, dominant industrial food system with the concept of food security, while presenting food sovereignty as a friendlier alternative. Lucy Jarosz’s article highlights this binary and while she suggests that the two concepts are not in fact solely oppositional, she suggests that tensions between them concepts are not likely to dissipate anytime soon. This short commentary seeks to delve deeper into the points of tension between food security and food sovereignty that Jarosz raises. I argue that the oppositional frame within the literature is problematic in several ways. First, in assessing food security, critics have inserted a rival normative agenda into a concept that is in fact much more open-ended. Second, proponents of food sovereignty make questionable claims in articulating the normative agenda that they attach to food security. Given these problems, the juxtaposition of food security and food sovereignty as competing concepts is more confusing than helpful.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Pesticides in Developing Countries and Their Impact on Health and the Right to Food
    STUDY Requested by the DEVE committee The use of pesticides in developing countries and their impact on health and the right to food Policy Department for External Relations Directorate General for External Policies of the Union EN PE 653.622 - January 2021 DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT STUDY The use of pesticides in developing countries and their impact on health and the right to food ABSTRACT This study provides a broad perspective on the main trends regarding the use of pesticides in developing countries and their impacts on human health and food security. Information is provided on the challenges of controlling these hazardous substances, along with the extent to which pesticides banned within the European Union (EU) are exported to third countries. The analysis assesses the factors behind the continuation of these exports, along with the rising demand for better controls. Recommendations are intended to improve the ability for all people, including future generations, to have access to healthy food in line with United Nations declarations. These recommendations include collaborating with the Rotterdam Convention to strengthen capacity building programmes and the use of the knowledge base maintained by the Convention; supporting collaboration among developing countries to strengthen pesticide risk regulation; explore options to make regulatory risk data more transparent and accessible; strengthen research and education in alternatives to pesticides; stop all exports of crop protection products banned in the EU; only allow the export of severely restricted pesticides if these are regulated accordingly and used properly in the importing country; and support the re-evaluation of pesticide registrations in developing countries to be in line with FAO/WHO Code of Conduct.
    [Show full text]
  • Saving the Planet with Pesticides and Plastic
    11 Saving the Planet with Pesticides and Plastic: The Environmental Triumph MYTHMAKERS SAY: ofHigh-Yield Fanning "Pesticides often leave the most resistant pests behind .... Then ... the resistant pests multiply ... soon, enormous quantities of pesticides are sprayed on the crops to kill just as many pests as were there when the process began. Only now the pests are stronger. And all the while, the quantity of pesticides to which we ourselves are exposed continues to Dennis T. Avery increase." Vice President Al Gore, Earth in the Balance, p. 5 2 Director of Global Food Issues "The second cause of slower food production growth is environmental degradation, which is damaging agriculture more than ever before." Lester Brown, State of the World 1993, Worldwatch Institute REALITY SAYS: "The Food and Agricultural Organization reported Sunday that the percentage of people in the developing nations who are hungry fell to 20 percent from 36 percent between 1961-63 and 1988-90." Paul Overberg, Gannett News Service, quoted from the Binghampton, N.Y., Press and Sun-Bulletin, September 21, 1992 "... [Plublic and private research institutions, commercial R&D enter- prises and especially the various international agricultural (research) cen- ters ... are moving forward in concerted efforts to extend, redirect @nd Hudson fine-tune the original Green Revolution thrust. With the added impetus of biotechnology and other new scientific tools, we see clear indications that Institute ,many of the problems and constraints of the 1960s and 1970s have been Indianapolis, Indiana surmounted." 214 Saving the Planet with Pesticides and Plastic Is High-Yield Farming Sustainable? 215 Dr. John R.
    [Show full text]
  • Disaster Management of India
    DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN INDIA DISASTER MANAGEMENT 2011 This book has been prepared under the GoI-UNDP Disaster Risk Reduction Programme (2009-2012) DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN INDIA Ministry of Home Affairs Government of India c Disaster Management in India e ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The perception about disaster and its management has undergone a change following the enactment of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The definition of disaster is now all encompassing, which includes not only the events emanating from natural and man-made causes, but even those events which are caused by accident or negligence. There was a long felt need to capture information about all such events occurring across the sectors and efforts made to mitigate them in the country and to collate them at one place in a global perspective. This book has been an effort towards realising this thought. This book in the present format is the outcome of the in-house compilation and analysis of information relating to disasters and their management gathered from different sources (domestic as well as the UN and other such agencies). All the three Directors in the Disaster Management Division, namely Shri J.P. Misra, Shri Dev Kumar and Shri Sanjay Agarwal have contributed inputs to this Book relating to their sectors. Support extended by Prof. Santosh Kumar, Shri R.K. Mall, former faculty and Shri Arun Sahdeo from NIDM have been very valuable in preparing an overview of the book. This book would have been impossible without the active support, suggestions and inputs of Dr. J. Radhakrishnan, Assistant Country Director (DM Unit), UNDP, New Delhi and the members of the UNDP Disaster Management Team including Shri Arvind Sinha, Consultant, UNDP.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change and Food Sovereignty in Nunavut
    land Article Being on Land and Sea in Troubled Times: Climate Change and Food Sovereignty in Nunavut Bindu Panikkar 1,* and Benjamin Lemmond 2 1 Environmental Studies Program and the Rubenstein School of the Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, 81 Carrigan Dr., Burlington, VT 05405, USA 2 Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA; blemmond@ufl.edu * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 7 November 2020; Accepted: 7 December 2020; Published: 10 December 2020 Abstract: Climate change driven food insecurity has emerged as a topic of special concern in the Canadian Arctic. Inuit communities in this region rely heavily on subsistence; however, access to traditional food sources may have been compromised due to climate change. Drawing from a total of 25 interviews among Inuit elders and experienced hunters from Cambridge Bay and Kugluktuk in Nunavut, Canada, this research examines how climate change is impacting food sovereignty and health. Our results show that reports of food insecurity were more pronounced in Kugluktuk than Cambridge Bay. Participants in Kugluktuk consistently noted declining availability of preferred fish and game species (e.g., caribou, Arctic char), a decline in participation of sharing networks, and overall increased difficulty accessing traditional foods. Respondents in both communities presented a consistent picture of climate change compounding existing socio-economic (e.g., poverty, disconnect between elders and youth) and health stressors affecting multiple aspects of food sovereignty. This article presents a situated understanding of how climate change as well as other sociocultural factors are eroding food sovereignty at the community-scale in the Arctic.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change and Cultural Response in the Prehistoric American Southwest
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey Fall 2009 Climate Change and Cultural Response In The Prehistoric American Southwest Larry Benson U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Michael S. Berry Bureau of Reclamation Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Benson, Larry and Berry, Michael S., "Climate Change and Cultural Response In The Prehistoric American Southwest" (2009). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 725. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/725 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. CLIMATE CHANGE AND CULTURAL RESPONSE IN THE PREHISTORIC AMERICAN SOUTHWEST Larry V. Benson and Michael S. Berry ABSTRACT Comparison of regional tree-ring cutting-date distributions from the southern Col- orado Plateau and the Rio Grande region with tree-ring-based reconstructions of the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) and with the timing of archaeological stage transitions indicates that Southwestern Native American cultures were peri- odically impacted by major climatic oscillations between A.D. 860 and 1600. Site- specifi c information indicates that aggregation, abandonment, and out-migration from many archaeological regions occurred during several widespread mega- droughts, including the well-documented middle-twelfth- and late-thirteenth- century droughts. We suggest that the demographic response of southwestern Native Americans to climate variability primarily refl ects their dependence on an inordinately maize-based subsistence regimen within a region in which agricul- ture was highly sensitive to climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Railroad Operational Safety
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Number E-C085 January 2006 Railroad Operational Safety Status and Research Needs TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2005 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS Chair: John R. Njord, Executive Director, Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City Vice Chair: Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Division Chair for NRC Oversight: C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2005 TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES COUNCIL Chair: Neil J. Pedersen, State Highway Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Technical Activities Director: Mark R. Norman, Transportation Research Board Christopher P. L. Barkan, Associate Professor and Director, Railroad Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Rail Group Chair Christina S. Casgar, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, Office of Intermodalism, Washington, D.C., Freight Systems Group Chair Larry L. Daggett, Vice President/Engineer, Waterway Simulation Technology, Inc., Vicksburg, Mississippi, Marine Group Chair Brelend C. Gowan, Deputy Chief Counsel, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, Legal Resources Group Chair Robert C. Johns, Director, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Policy and Organization Group Chair Patricia V. McLaughlin, Principal, Moore Iacofano Golstman, Inc., Pasadena, California, Public Transportation Group Chair Marcy S. Schwartz, Senior Vice President, CH2M HILL, Portland, Oregon, Planning and Environment Group Chair Agam N. Sinha, Vice President, MITRE Corporation, McLean, Virginia, Aviation Group Chair Leland D. Smithson, AASHTO SICOP Coordinator, Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames, Operations and Maintenance Group Chair L. David Suits, Albany, New York, Design and Construction Group Chair Barry M.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustenance & Ecology on the Edge
    Care of Earth Care of People Two Permaculture tenets Sustenance & Ecology on the Edge A Permaculture View of One Plant Community Michael Pilarski This book had it's beginning on the edge of the Pacific Ocean at the southwest corner of the Olympia Peninsula, just below the Quinault Indian Reservation. The ocean's thunder never ceases as the heavy surf releases tremendous amounts of energy - shifting sand, nutrients, logs and rocks. Here at the edge of the ocean, the wind is strong - and salty. The vegetation crowding down to the ocean's edge is shaped by the wind. To a permaculturist, each new plant community is a delight to explore and is filled with lessons. Here are a few observations and ideas garnered from exploring the plant communities in this windswept forest. Sitka spruce (Picea englemanii) is the main conifer along with shore pine (Pinus contorta) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) in sheltered areas. Alder (Alnus) and willow (Salix) are the tallest deciduous trees. Smaller deciduous trees and shrubs include Twinberry honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata), native crabapple (Malus fusca), elderberry (Sambucus) and salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) thickets. The lower shrub understory is largely evergreen. Evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), and salal (Gaultheria shallon) are predominant. These are both very useful from a human viewpoint and large amounts are harvested for the ornamental foliage industry. Sword fern (Polysticum munitum) and/or deer fern (Blechnum spicata) are common in some, but not all, of the local ecosystems. Both of these ferns are harvested for the ornamental foliage trade. A common groundcover in open areas is the native beach strawberry.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Security and Identity: Iceland
    FOOD SECURITY AND IDENTITY: ICELAND A thesis submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts by Gina Marie Butrico August, 2013 Thesis written by Gina Butrico A.A.S., Middlesex County College, 2009 B.A., Kent State University, 2011 M.A., Kent State University, 2013 Approved by ___________________________________, Advisor Dr. David H. Kaplan, Ph.D. ___________________________________, Chair, Department of Geography Dr. Mandy Munro-Stasiuk, Ph.D. ___________________________________, Associate Dean for Graduate Affairs, Raymond A. Craig, Ph.D. College of Arts and Sciences ii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ..........................................................................................................v List of Tables ....................................................................................................... viii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................ ix Chapter I. Introduction .................................................................................................1 Food Security in Iceland ..............................................................................3 Food Identity in Iceland ...............................................................................5 Site Selection ...............................................................................................6 Food Geography...........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Resilient Watershed & Fire Management
    PANDEMIC RECOVERY AND BEYOND Resilient Watersheds and Fire Management California is in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic during the second-worst megadrought in the past 1,200 years.1 Simultaneously,2020 was named the largest wildfire season recorded in California’s modern history,and included the first “gigafire”– the August Complex fire,which burned more than 1 million acres.2 The drought-fire-flood cycle. Drought and fire intensification are intrinsically linked [see graphic on page 2]: Drought increases fire risk while wildfires limit and impair our water supplies. Drying of vegetation from drought creates more fuel for fires. Fire reduces forest carbon sequestration,therefore releasing more greenhouse gases,causing air temperatures to increase. With increased temperatures,more moisture evaporates from land and lakes,rivers and other bodies of water. These waterbodies are additionally impaired because fire erodes the landscape, allowing more runoff and debris into our water supplies. In a post-fire landscape,vegetation crucial for groundwater recharge can take years to regrow. With the pandemic complicating and stressing resource management and emergency response, capacity and priorities,a pause in forest-management approaches, particularly controlled burns,increases our current vulnerability and leaves In 2020, five of California’s six largest fires Californians in a heightened state of risk. Agencies at all levels of governance must in modern history burned simultaneously. develop strategies to contend with the multi-threat challenges that Californians Source:California’s Wildfire Management and Resilience are experiencing now and will continue to experience in the years to come. Plan.10/10/20 draft (numbers not finalized).
    [Show full text]
  • Food Insecurity in Advanced Capitalist Nations: a Review
    sustainability Review Food Insecurity in Advanced Capitalist Nations: A Review Michael A. Long 1,*, Lara Gonçalves 1, Paul B. Stretesky 2 and Margaret Anne Defeyter 3 1 Department of Sociology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA; [email protected] 2 Department of Social Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE18ST, UK; [email protected] 3 Department of Social Work, Education and Community Wellbeing, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE7 7XA, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 27 March 2020; Accepted: 28 April 2020; Published: 1 May 2020 Abstract: Food insecurity is a substantial problem in nearly every advanced capitalist nation, with sizable portions of residents in many affluent countries struggling to eat healthily every day. Over time, a very large literature has developed that documents food insecurity, evaluates programs meant to reduce that insecurity, and proposes solutions to attenuate the problem. The purpose of the current review is to provide a very broad overview of the food insecurity literature, including definitions, measurement, areas of study, and impacts on health. Importantly, this review suggests there are two major causes of food insecurity in the advanced nations: economic inequality and neoliberalism. The food insecurity literature suggests that diminished government responsibility in advanced capitalist nations corresponds to an increase in feeding programs run by non-profit and charitable organizations. This review concludes by suggesting that, while a massive amount of research on food insecurity currently exists, more research is still needed to address gaps in the literature when it comes to significant events, coping strategies and disadvantaged populations.
    [Show full text]
  • From Food Rebellions to Food Sovereignty: Urgent Call to Fix a Broken Food System
    INSTITUTE FOR FOOD AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY SPRING 2008 VOLUME 14 • NUMBER 1 From Food Rebellions to Food Sovereignty: Urgent call to fix a broken food system By Eric Holt-Giménez and Loren Peabody Hunger in a World of Plenty he skyrocketing cost of food has resurrected the specter of the “food riot.” The World Bank reports that Tglobal food prices rose 83% over the last three years and the FAO cites a 45% increase in their world food price index during just the past nine months.1 The Economist’s comparable index stands at its highest point since it was originally formulated in 1845.2 As of March 2008, average world wheat prices were 130% above their level a year earlier, soy prices were 87% higher, rice had climbed 74%, and maize was up 31%.3 Not surprisingly, people have taken to the streets in Mexico, Italy, Morocco, Mauritania, Senegal, Indonesia, 1 Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Yemen, Egypt, and Haiti. Over 100 people have been killed and many more injured. In Haiti, the poorest country in the western hemisphere, with food prices increases of 50-100%, driving the poor to eat biscuits made of mud and vegetable oil, angry protestors forced the Prime Minister out of office. The food crisis will get worse before it gets better. Without massive, immediate injections of food aid, 100 million people in the Global South will join the swelling ranks of the word’s hungry.4 But the protests are not simply crazed “riots” by hungry masses. Photo by Kimberly D. Mok Rather they are angry demonstrations against high food prices in countries that formerly had food sur- pluses, and where government and industry are unre- sponsive.
    [Show full text]