Tit* Mom' 2116/0

MOM' 2116/0

_ RD 155 t09 SO 010,94i

AOTBOB . Knight, C. GregOry; Wilcox, B. 'Paul TIT* Triumph or Triage? The World Pocd Prbblea in Geographical Perspective. Resource Zaper.No. 75-3. Association. of American Geographers, Washington

D.C. , 4 SPORS AGENCY National Selene() Pondation, Washington, D.C. YOB DATE 76 'NOTE 78p. AVAILAPiE PIKE.Association of American Geographers, 1710 Sjocteenth Street, N.V., Washington, D.C.20089 (12.50, paper cover, quantity discounts available) . BM PRICE Bt-S0.83 Plus Postage. BC Not Available from EDES. DESCRIPTORS Depleted 146ources; Developed rations; Developing Nations; Eating Habits; Bcontimit Factors; Ehvironmentae*EducatiOn; EnvAronaental.Influences; *Food; *Pot yes (of Society); Geographic Concepts; 4 *GlobalApptoach;Bealth;_Bigher Education; *Rumen ,Geogriphy; Hunger; Living Standards: Nutrition; Po Arty ResearCh; * Prbblea Quality of Life; Resource Baterials;- Social Indicators; Socioeconomic Influences ; ,Trend Analysis; Wcrld affairs; World Problems'

gl ABSTRACT Emphasizinga problem-solving perspective, the

. docuaeat investigates the world food" scene. Simply defined, the world food 'problem is the apparent inability of the worldemLpeople to feed themselves adequately and consistently; Intended for use by college level geegraphyinstructors as-they develop coursel onhumap uses of the environment, the document presents data on the nature cf food supply systems, nitrition concepts, and sethodoLogical ideas. The .documen*is presented in four chapters. Chapter`I off a - 'geographical assessment of the world food problem. Major topicsare energy and. protein need, food excess and deficit, national diets, - diet .composition, and diet quantity. Chapter II compares food 'supply systems in developingand developed nations. Chapter III aiscpsses potedtial solutions to.the world food problem based upon human adaptation of the environment, technology, equitable distribution- within anA atong nations, and population control. The final chapter

, suggests creation of a world food policy based'epcn equitable aiitribution of food, changes in diet in industrializedareas;

allotation id. resources to developingareas, and creation of nailern ,. less energy intesivel farts in'iniestrialized agricultural systems...,

(yathor/D,) _ . .

, L / :

seitsesessiesseeelosseasippess#rnesessesgsseesitiosiossesspesimesmosp_ss Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the test that can be wade * from the original dodgiest: sigipposegtig..loweeeigessesipplossigigiossiolossioloesw**Ippippipposigiosiolosigiptiolossig*IpsigteA

4 oft ref.ALTIA I DIKATIOPIWILITAlte -111YrilAL terstrivn Off OCATION TN'S Docusag err' HAS ME* *EPRO- M/CEO ExACTiv AS RECIEivIED.FITOIIA THE PERSON OR OffOarrZA Trove corriGift. TIG IT ONTS off VIE* OR 0110rOMS STATED DOSPOTNECESSARILY EfforE SfforT OF F .CIAL NATIONAL ferfliTuTE OC EDUCATION POSITION OR Mt ,CY

--PERMISSION 70 REPRODUCE TRLS MATER I A LIN 11110f 1?4E ONLY .4AS,BEEA GRANTEDBY

70THE EDUCAT tOA RESOuRrAS i.GORMATIOK CE4TEll Atil) THE ER.0 SYS-1M TRIUMPH'OR TRIAGE? THt WORLDFOOD .PROBLEMIN GEOGRAPHICALPERSPECTIVE

C.-Gregory Knight- . R Paul Wilcox The Pennsylvania State University

RESOURCE PAPER NO.75-3 I

"V-

Si. 1 1

a 1

C t

...11111

CoPYri 19-70 bY Association of can Geographers - 1710 S Street, N.W. C Washings D.C. 20009 Library of Congress Number 76-029265 ISBN 049291-115-6 ti Supported brtbs MG and by agrant from the National Scienbe Foundation !

I ASSOCIAON OFAMERICAN.GEOGRAPHERS. Commission onCollege.Geography Publications

Resource Papers General Series' 1Theories of Urban Location. B J L Berry 1968 10 Geography in the Two-Year Colleges. Panel on I2. Alf Pollution' R A. Bryson.J E. 'Kutzbaeh. Geography in the Two-Year Colleges. 1970 1968 . . r 12 Plabfling College Geography Facilities.R. fif 3. Perspectives on Geomorphic Processes. G H. Stoddard. 1973 - "N ' . Dury. 1969 13 Perspectives on Ertvironment...15anel on Ens-4- _ 4. Spatial-Diffusion P R Gould: 1969 ronmental Education I: R.1.1anners`and M.' W. 5Perception of Environment, T F Saannen, Mikes'ell. editors 1974 1969 . 6 Social Processes in the City Race and Urban .Residential Choice. H. M. Rose. 1969 '7' The Spatial Expression of Urban Gros, th. Technical Papers' Mayer,, 1969 2, Conapiffer Assrsted Instruction in Geography, R. 8. The Political Organization of Space. E Sop. E Hvke, G JFielding. K. W, Rumage. editors. 1971 1969 . 9tAn Introduction to SpotiaiAlhacation Analysis. 8 LAND USE A Com peter Proz-am for 1.600ra- A I-Scott 1971 top. Use jn EconomiZreographi Courses D. F: 10. Nton and Natlire Yi-Fu Tuan. 1971 Niarble.11 M Ander 1972 11 Tropospheric Waves, Jet Streams, and Unift.d -1 Siu".es Weather Patterns. J. R Harman. 1971 Out-of-pr'ir.t General Series Publications and 12. The Spatial Structure of Administrative Sys- Technical Ppers are available in hard,coyer and is ,terns. B. H Massam. 1972 microfiche from ERICChESS, 855' Broadway. Boul- 13Residential 'Nlobility in the City, E G. Moore. der, CO 80302, . 19,72 1.13 The Periglaci).al Environment, Permafrostind 'Man! L V Price, 19F2 Resource Paper"-for Crtillege Geography 15 Conservation, Equilibrium. and Feedbaek.A.P- plied to Atmospheric and, Fluvial Processes. 'J N Raver. 1972 75 Series 16 Metropolitan Neighborhoods- Participation and RP75-1.Lend Control. Interface of Law and- Conflict Over Change. JWolpest. A Mum- Geog,rap 17-tH Platt . J,Seley, 1972 .RP75-2. e Outer City- Geographical Conse- 17 Computer Cartography, T K. Peuckej 1972 que s of the lirbanization the Sqburts. P 18 Society. The City. and The Space- Economy of - .0 Muller Urbanism. D. Harvey. 1972 lt1375-3 Triumph or Triage The World Food 19 Thematic Cartography. P Muehrcke. 1972 Problem in Geographical 'Perspective. C. C 20 *fan and Environment, K. 'Hewitt. F K. Hare. Knight. R. P. Wilcox 1N72 RP75-4.Maps, Distortion, and.Nleanin.g. 1 S. ..)21 The Use of Radar Imagery in Climthological Moninonier Research, A. Williams, Jr.1971 41' 22 Misrused and Misplaced Hospitals and Doctors. P. deVise. 1973 23. Visual Blight in America, P. Lewis. Yi-fu Tuan, . 1976 Series D Lowenthal, 1973 7- RP 76-1.The Geography of International Tourism, 24. Values in Geography, Sister Annette Buttimer, `I. M. Matley 1974 RP 76-2.:Social Aspects of Interaction and Trans- 25. Participation. Decentralization, and Advocacy s portation, F. P. Stutz . Planning, R. E. Kasperson. M. Breitbart, 1974 RP 76-3.Landscape and Literature. t. L. Salter, 26. Interurban Systerris and Regional,Economic De- WLloyd velopment. W. B. Stott', 1914 RP 76-4. Geography and Mental Health, C. j Smith 27. Major JobProviding Organizations and Sys- tems of Cities. A. R. Pred, 1974 28., The Underdevelopment. and Modernization of For information on these publications, write in: the Third Worla, A. R. de Souza. P. W. Porter. Association of American Geographers, 1710 Six-- 1974 teehth Street, N.W., Washington. D.C. 20009.

4. *!. e.

a FOREWORD In' 1968. the Commission on College Geography of the Associationof American Geographers published -itsfirst Resoitrce 'Paper. Theories .tUrbert.Location, by Brian J, L. of Berry. In 1974.ocoiriciding withthe ti termination of,,NSF funding for the'Commisside. Resource Papernumber 28 appeared: The Underdevelorimentdfid .Modernization of World, by Anthony k. deSourea the Third and 'Philip W. Porter. (*themany CCG actitities, the ,Resource PapersSeries became an effectivemeans for permitting Ooth teachers and studentsto keep abreast of developments the field. in Because of Ihepopulirity,: andusefulness of the MG applied for, and received Resource Papers; the a modes; grant from NSF to continueto produce Resource Papersand to put W.:serieson a self-supporting basis. The present Resource Papers Panel aubscribets to the originalpurposes of the Series, Whichare quoted' helm . The Resource Papers have been developedas expository docments for-the use of both the student and drie instructor.They ale experimental in that they are designed to supplement existingtexts aria to fill a gap between significant research in American geography . 'and readily EIccessibte materials.The papers are concerned with important conceptsor 'topics in modern geography and fOcuron'one of three general themes: geograplfic theory: policyimplications. or contemporary pocial relevance Theyare designed to implement a variety of uudergrecluatif college 'geographycourses at the introductory and_advanced level. In an effort to ihcrease the utilityof these papers.- tile Panel has `attempted to be particularly sensitive to the currency of materialsfor ,undergraduate geographycourses and to the writing style of these ,The Resource Papers papers. are developed, printed, and distributedunder, the auspices of the Association of AmericanGeographers; with partial funding from a National Science Foundationgrant The ideas presented ti these papers cki pot imply endorsemeit-by the AAG. Many aidivichials have assistedin producing these 4"ResourcePapers. and we wish to acknowledge thole who assisted the Panel in- reviewirig the , authors' prodpectuses, in reading'and commenting on the various.drafts, and in making helpfulsuggestions. The Panel acknowledges the perceptive suggestions and editorialassistance' of Je F. Castner of the AAG Central Office, '

e Safv8tOre j. Nabli Educational Affairs Director Association of American Geograiihers Project Director and Editor. ResourcePapers Series I

Resource Papers Panel: V liohnF. Louisbury, Aririona StateUniversity Mark 6. Monm6nier; SyracuseUniversity Harold A. Winters. MichiganState University PREFACE

In writing Triumph or Triagewe have come to conclusions thaChave left us personally uncomfortable, conclusions whep we began the that we only' vaguely suspected project. Thee reader may share,ourdiscomfort if our (mansions are seen to be valid*.We doubt that this papercan be read without reaction, however stronglyone may differ from our perspective. The world food situation provides an excellent opportunity to examinenot only the problem itself but also therole of science and'scientists very-minimum. we are all participants in society. At the in the world food scene. . We will be using this resofircepapa priniipally inour courses on human use of the environment. Here, thepaper will focus discussion of the nature of food supply Itystems towarda problem- solving perspective. For lower sionstudents, the paper offers considerable data and concepts forconsidera-. tion and elaboration.For advanCed students, it isa point of departure toward specific issues add methodological ideas. For all students. food andfamine pose persistent questions witha vast and accumulating literature awaiting scrutiny from a geographer's One fundamental problemindresiEng such a diffuse topicis finding Specific for further study and reflection breadth The paper sacrifices depth for order to provide a multiplicityof .starting points. Ikpreparingthe paper w found that our preconceivedperspectives (such asdaptive itens and the concept of vulnerability) sys- were insufficient to allow us to ad- dress,the range of questions impliedin the world food problem:we hope the student can benefit from theconsiderable investmentwe made before other foi:i began toemerge. An additional problem is -theidentification of datasources. We have tap- ped only the sinface of a vast amount of data and literature. andour citations will suggestsources from which one can develop There are innumerable data more detailed analyses. sets on food production andconsumption for manipulation. mapping, and analysis.The apparently prosaic ping, tabulation, nature of map- or statistical analysis is deceiving. In rorkingwith data. one invariably discovers questions thatmight otherwise have beenmissed and is forced to recognize boththe virtues and the limitations of used. data being . The reader will quicklydiscern major topics relevantto the world fad problem that-we have oversimplifiedor completely ignored. One of these is the disparate nattily of foodconsumption at a subnationalvel as differen- tiated by age-, sex, income, ethnicidentity, region, or other characteristics. Another is the food production andprovision system of centrally planned socialist economies. In addition, or we have bypassed the historicalprocesses by which industrial agricultureevolved, as will as the enticingand *nom- tant living historicalfarms such atiOldSturbridge Village in Massachusetts and Living History Farms in Iowa. There is no end to meaningfuldirections for individual and classroomexploration. ' 1 .. . We trust that this paper will prove useful in otherthan specialized courser Virtually any dimension of basichuman geographycan be illus- V trated by questions of food andfamine, and it is in introductorycourses that this p a p e r m a y have itsg r e a t e s t impact. A seminar on the world f l e m o o O r r o b - , though, sounds intriguing...

C. Gregory Knight R. Paul Wilcox. The Pennsylvania State-University

e! CONTENTS

PREFACE .. INTRODUCTION V 3 .. 1 I. THE WORLD FOOD PROBLEM . Is There is Probltm? 3 3 The World Food Situation . _ ...... 'r ...... , . 5 s; A Geographical Assessment ...... 9 Energy and Protein lieed , National Diets 9 f 'f . 12 . Diet Composition 4. 1 Diet Quantity . -4-, 12 Food Excess and Deficit . 13 If. FOODSUP.P4X SYSTEMS 13 1 . ;. --4 . 20 Fundamental Requisites N:- The Americaugood%Supply System 21 ...... 22 Food Production and lb-Stision ,., ... Land .... . 22 ,..28 Labor...... -.. .. '...... __...... Capital ..29 ! 30 Energy . .. e " Traditional Food Supply Systems 31 Food Production ...... 34 Food Provision' . 35, Assessment.... s ' 36 ...... 36 Agricultural DevelopmentThe _ Green Revolution.. . Common and Contrasting Elements ...... 38 III. SOLUTIONS 42 , 45 The Adaptive Man-EnvironmentSystem .4. Technology 46 Population - ,. 48 , . 49 Equity , ./ ,50 Decreasing Resource Demands by InaustesalAgriculture... Animal Versus Plant Protein 51 . ._.51 Agrichemicals . s . 'Enhancing Local Initiative in' De'veloping 53 Areas 4 55 The Risk of Dtiality . IV. PROSPECTS . 56 . 57 BIBLIOGRAPHY . ,...... 59

vii 7- . 4 . LIST OF FIGURES 7 .1World Grain Yield. 1960-1976 , ... 12 2. Dietary Composition andNational Income. 1962 . Caloric Intake.. 14 3. Dietary Cornposition.of National 15 . . ..). . .4. World Pattern of Diet Composition . 16 . , /5' World Pattern of Caloric.Sufficienii ... .. 18 . .. 6 World Pattern ofDietary Balance 23 7. The Structure of the U S.Food System .. 27 . 8. Hunger in the United States. 1973 ...... the U.S Food System 35 9 Energy Input and Farm-Output 33 10 Energy'Subsitly of AmericanArgfieulture... I...... ,. in Aroctp, Pakistan .' 40 ' 11. Addrition of improved Farming Practices 46 12. Problems, Solutions. and ImplicitFutures in Views of thq WorldFoo4Problern Continuity ina Man-Environment,Systern f. .f47 -13. Information. AdaptatiOn. and 47 14. Problem Solving in the AdaptiveHuman System.. . . . of the World3 Model 50 15-. The Structure of the Agricultural Sector 51 16 Population Growth and Resources' . . - . 51 17. Stability in the AgnculturalSecItor of IVorld3 :

4.0 "

. . 4- LIST OF TABLES , . . 1. ASpatial'Typology of"Causes" of the World Food Problern . .,.. b . 0 2. Estimated Magnitude of World Malnutrition,1970 ...... 3 World Wood Reseryes. 1961-1975 5 .* 6 4 4. Indices of Population ind Food Production - 5. Percentage of U.S. Assistance Received by Major 7 All) and PL 480 Recipients 8 * 6. 'Annt,uil Per Capita train Consumption. Middle1960's 7. FactOrs Affecting Nutritional Status '., .0:Caloric.Allowances in Feast and Famine., .' ,.. , .... 11099 9. Protein Content and Utilization . .. i 'll 10. Safe Levels of Protein Intake...... 11 '11. Dittary Composition and Balance . ....-..'.'...... 12. Structural Elements of a Food Supply SyStern 19 13. Indices of Farm Iftputs. 1950-1974 , 22 ..,4 25 14. Concentration in AgriculturalInput andProcessing Industries, 1967 15 Monokly Overcharges 26 26 16 American' Food Expendituresas a'Percentage'OfSpendableEarnings_ 1973 ' 17. 'Average Crop Yields for,Basib-Staple Foods 27 ...... 28, 18 World Consumption of Agricultural Inputs.1973...,.. 28 19. Potential'Net Photosynthesis of World ClimaticRegions. . 20. Energy Inputs Per Acre of Com-Production. . 29 1945 and 1970.,. 32 21. Energy Efficiencies in California Food Production...... 22. Energy Use in the U.S. Food System- 33. 34 -23. Energetic Efficiency of Traditional Food . Production- . . . ,. 37 . 24. Inputs and Useful Outputs from U.S. Cattle and Indian Cattle and Buffalo. 1972 . 25. The Network of International Agricultural Research 38 . : 39 26 Increases in Profits and 'Level of Livingin Selected Areas with Modern Rice Varieties in Asia. ;...... 40 27. Lentth of.Family Food Shortagesin an East Java ViHage Before and After'Acceptanceof Mbdernice Varieties. - . . 41

28. Let_hnological Solutions to the World Food Problem . . .;. '49 29. Assumptions of the Agricultural Sectot of World3.. .-52 30. Estimated Livestock Conversion Efficiencies' ...... 52 31,Comparative Resource Use for Human Protein Supply Alternatives...... 53

ix 44.111 .

The Blind Men and the Elephant It Was six men of Ihdostan To learning much inclined, Who went to see the Elephant (Though all of them were Mad). . . That each by observation . Might satisfy his mind.

i The ,First approached the ElePhant. And happening to fall Against his broad and sturdy side. At once began to bawl; "God bless me! but the Elephant Is very like a wall!" The Second, feeling of the tusk. Cried, "Flo' what have we So very round and smobth andand sharp? To rne"tis Imlay clear _ , This wonder of an Elephant is very like a spear" The Third approogbed the animel, And happening to take The squirming trunk within his hands, Thus boldly up and spoke: "I see." quoth he, "the Elephant Is very like a snake!" The:Fourth reached out his eager hand, I Arid felt about the knee. 4, :'What most this wondrous beast is like Is mighty plain," quoth he " Ms clear enough the Elephaht Is very like a tree!" The fifth who chanced to touch the ear. Sai,--'E'efi the blindeit man Cat tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can, This marvel of an Elephant Is very like a fan!" The Sixth no sooner had begun About the beast to grope. Than; seizing' on the swinging tail That fell within his scope, "I see." quoth he, "the Elephant Is very like a roper

And so these men of inclusion Disputed loud and long, Each In Nis own opinion Evceedingitiff and strong. Though each was partly in the right And all were in the wrong! - John Godfrey Saxe (18p2)

: ISITKCIDUCTIONl Problems of faodsupplyand famine are among the The costs of famine to humansociety are obvious in most bewildeting, diffuse; and.frustratini6f man- the catastrophic kind's contemporary dilemmas.:Withih Ease. But we must remember; the the lifetime high price paid in infant mortality, of each of its, OfficialvieitirS* of the world food- situa-. protein;a(nutrition have ranged from dire tion, impaired physical ancimenlal well-mg. and predictions of starving early dea0 from disease thatoccur in areas of peren- hordes to expectationt. ofa nirvana Of plentiful food .supply, only to, return againto iMpending doom: Even while onsview- -Becau. -food is necesSary to survival:it -is tittle was vogue, there remained . proponents of The opposite opinion. wonder that its produclon, availability;character, One expert and consumption pervade humansociety. For tradi-, _states that famine is imminent; affethet thatour ability to feed tltp world's people acialoately 'ticinal societies, provision gf foodis a significant ac- is finally tivity and a primary concern for all Members.:In in- within reach. As residents of an-industrialized nation, we are dustrialized societies, increases in inflationinevita- that'advanced agricultural teChno14-4bly brink the television commentatorto the grocery ogy not only provides us with foodfor a lOwer pro-., portion of income thartelsewhere, store. Food is sustenance. It is pleaSure Food iisthe butisalSo the hope product the backyard garden,it is a multimillion, for successful" agricultural.developmentin the poorer nations. On the otherhanct we are dollar business. Food is life, politics,matter, energy. accused of Think, for a moment, of thenature of food. Your profligate consumption ofresources and wasteful firit 'thoughtsmay focus on its nutOtional adherence to diits that are morallyunjustifiable in a - hungry. world. The fusdamentals of our componentscaloieS,_ protein, vitamins, and minerals--recalling yOur modicum ofknowledge of economic systems, al ngiwithour technologare et questioned in the fa these elements. In addition,you may reflect on the of persistent hunger within events that are the context of food the industrialized nations.Even among those wilo consumption: the agree that there is a world food problem: Wedding reception` the bowlingbanquet. Sunday there Is dinner the quick hinch along the-highway; -widespread disagreementon its causes and potential the rever- ent *eking of bread and wires. Theseevents consequences, lej alone its solutions.Commodity suggested a wider function of fried, that "fmaid, the diffusion of technology, is, food a and policies of 'its ingestion' associal act, laden with symboli triage are among theresponses that have been pre- posed.' It is understandable virue.-tying pedjple together.Food symbolizes time that we may see our--, of day (bacon and ege:tea and crumpets): season of selves as one of Saxe's blip 4men, when even experts,_ , year (eggnog and fruitcake: hamburgers antipotato cannot agree among then .v1Ives. salad), and ceremonial To most of us; famine connotesa lack of fOod, lead- events (Thanksgiving tun. , ing to starvation. Most fanilliar,erhaps, are famines key). Hot-dogs would-beas Out of plaie it a White. House state dinner as ham at a-Bar _the Sabelian region of WestAfrica or in Bangladesh. Mitzvah. What we However, there is a ;don't eat is, oftenas meaningful as what we do. more- insidiows kind of famine: In considering,the actual physical the virtually continuous lackof food elements that characteristics of food. another set of food relatedfunctions maybe ',sustain optimum growth and well-being,that 'protect obvious. Color, texturerarrahgernenfon against dietary deficiencies, andthat strengthen the serving dish.' body against infection' Thusit is useful to distin- es. sequence of courses, and other attributes guish two kinds. of food' shortage. suggest an aesthetic rote of foodbeyond its nutri- perennial hunger. tional role. What about food and catastrophic famine (Mayer,1g76}: that.,has been highly modified in Joni', suchas alcoholjd beverages? Is the 'fitinkerinsuffi.cientcaloric, protein,.qr piotec: function 9f imbibing Onlynutrition, or is it even inv .five elements on a, Fustained basis,indefinite in trition? Does the kind-of _bekerage have'symbolic time and often dispersed inspace; connotations.? Famine food 'deficiency, leadingto starvation, Sustaininrthe pervasive role of foodconsumption with a short-terra proximate-cause, definite,dura- in society are foorrsupplysystems,ultilnately.rooted /ion, and specific spatial locus. in tbe soil and sun, extendingfrom food producers to consumers. In the case of traditioharagricultureqn Triir refers to the separation of wounded or insured people developing areas,_even the vre'sence 'of cash, crops into three groups those who will survive withouttreatment* these does not alter an enduring who will sutrive if treated, awl those for whitintreatment cannot- pattern of the farm.farnily b and who thus are allowed to die, in the'context of _supplying most of itsown food, producing little"-, this paper: tilers to abandoning nations whosefuture surplus as a reliable food source hopeless to for othert. The pro- own Maltbusian fate diking unit is also-the'consumingynit,at least until% , . .

:11 . 1! ti famine strikes and food must be suppliedfrom alter- Second, we explore some dimensions ofthe.W'orld ,native local, national', or international sources.At an food situation, including a geographical_perspec- opposite extremd is the farm In theindustrialized tive op the factors thatiacuitribute to theproblem; vi,o4, no longer appropriate for "countrybumpkif Third, we analyze some import-ant aspects Of food- jokis, with each employee feeding 25 people Who supply systems, with particular'attention to a crit- live or work elsewhere Here, food consumptionis at ical questioning of industrialized agriculture as a the far end of a long and complex chainlinking solution to-the world food.problem; farther to consumer Amdng links in the chain are Fouh5, ,We discuss potential solutions to the flows of materials and ideas to the farm fromagri- . 'world 'food problem. suggesting th,e risk of in -, business and urtiversities: flows of money,induce- . credved duality' and triage; and meats. and subsidies to the farm frorgrain dealers, Finally..we conclude that although- no panacea food processors. and government,with a return flow , exists, there is hope that equitable. humane solu- of farm product4 and links'between -dealers, food tions will prevail. processors, wholesalers, andretailers'to the ultimate . heavily used transportation One of us, was once visitingEverg lades National consumer. depending on Park in Florida. There: a bright and seemingly en- "food 1 networks. Then, between...these extremes are thusiastic koung park ranger explained the ecology soply systems based on the sorcalled "greenrevolu-, farm. beneficiary of improved crbb -v4rieties of the area Subsecitientlpshe soberly explained that .- tion" due-life-sustaining water-supply to that vast area *as and agricultural techniques developed inlocal and international research institutes Here local con- threatened. and that here was an excellent opportun- sumption may also persist. but increasing inimpor- ity to monitor the impact of- human activity...com- tance are, sources from whichfarm inputs_are 'se- pounded by cature's variability With amazement we . noted the ranger's virtual lack of passion as she de- 4.1 cured (seed, fertilize'r,chemicals) and markets for disposing 'of' farm, producticin Cash andmaterial scribed past and present. ecological devastation scientific. flows become ifndortant. as does theinstitutional caused hca, man Later we realized that framework supporting them. At variouslaces on aloofness and at least superfil indifference make it emerging chains anchored in thegfe'en revplutioit possible to cope with truths that may be.ernotionally intolerable So too. scientific detachment makes dis- farm are multinatidnal corporations,philarthropic marketing- cussion of the. world' food problem possible. How- organizations. international agencies. ever. two, foides mitigate against, alack of involve- boards. and consumers the The intent of,alis paper is to enhanceOurunder- ment First; we ar,e participant dhservers in scene Whether We experience higher foodprices or standing of the world food problem.ore moment.. thapparent the sense-dulling spectre of deadand dying-children. ''let us simply define this problem as photographed in famine-stricken areas, we shall find, inability of the world's people to*feed t emsetves personal and adequately and consistently The problem is far more it increasingly difficult to hide our it's'causes (real or humanitarian concerns As students, ve examine the complex than that. of course, and problem, as Amencans,we are. from some) view- -- imagined) are incredibly in'tractable As geo-.g 'S points: the probleift We are reminded of the 1960's raphers, we' have the advantage of a holistic perspec- slogan, "If you're not part of the solution, you'reart. ? 011ie from which tp undertake our analysis----we can of the problem.."Seeorni-, 'as geographers we are see the proverbialforest asswell as the trees Because and in-" , among those whbse intellectual bent is toward human the world food problem has many forests organization of space and use of resources. The cur- numerable trees, we must focus ourdiscussion on help us td generate in- rent situation calls forthjttery iotaf our personal' some basic issues 'that may and professional competence to understand. if not sights as yell as place a multiplicity of datainto a compreheri ible framework Our specific purposes solve, the world food problem.

s are these: . and approa The spectreoTfamineis increasingly ourdarly.com- First, we ask whether there is a worldfood prob- panion in elle world Almost everyone hasdiffer- lem. suggesting an affirmative answer; ent answw (John Deere advertisement1976)

"se .

. o S 12 V 'C A

. . I. THE WORLD FWDPROBLENI

The woiiid food satiation is serious,even It is alio true that the yeorici.m.x. hay time in history, the ability, to .deal ate interacting problents of foodpr , rapid population growth and poverty. t Sterling Wortman 10 7 6: 3 1 )

Is There A, Problem? response to projected surpl 'Ominous predi&' Shortly after its creation, the Food and Agriculture--lions about chatiges in global cli to appeared.(Bry- 1 Organization of the-United Nations (FAO) issuedthe soh, 1976), suggesting thatcrop faires in northern, first of its World Food Surveys (FA0;1946).Based areas and famines in tropical, semiarid . on an assumed daily caloric requirement of 2600, areas could become the norm. Brown (1979) critiiplyassessed calories pet perion, it suggested that two-thirds the world food situation, and of the world's population Eckholm 1976) more was malnourished. ,I* recently documented #cological declinein major §ecoird World Food Surviy )FAO,1952) took into . food producing areas. A continuing debate over Spcinunt regional differences hi bodysize and age- population growth with respect to sex, distribution of the population, still suggesting resources_was en- capsulated inscomputer simulation modelsof world thato majority of the World's populationwent hun- futuies that suggested populationgrowth and gry, a view still held by the.FAO in 1961 {FAO, 1961)** and in its- economic collapse (Meadows et al., 1972,1974).Had 'rd World Food Survey (FAO, 1963). the FAO overstated, food problemsin the 194's and Pessimism the theme through the 1950's and 1950's? Do current FAO,food estimates understates'', 1960's fPSAC, 1 7). with famine predicted by 1975. / supplies by ten to 15 percent,as suggested by Pole- A series of potiular works echoed the tlieroe,includ- "man_fi975:511)? Was the optimism'of ing books by Vogt (1948),, de the late 1960 = Castro (1952), Russell unwarranted? Is the present problemoverstated (1954), Paddock and Paddock (1964,1967), Ehrlich ,(Polernan. 1975)? Is theapparent food problem sim- (1968), and Duniont(and Rosier(1969). By the late ply a result of transient factors(producton shortfalls 1960's, pessirnismikad become alarmismin some and lack ofirain reserves)or symptothatic of a-more, quarters. whereas official views turned in theoppo- enduring tilernma (Sanderson,1975; Walters, sija direction. Optimism expressedby Ben 1975)? Is the workd presentlyoverpopulated. (Whit- (1954). Clark (1967), and*COchrane(19694 wasp taker and Liken1,975); about to become 'overpopu- leled by official views (Boarrna, 1970). In'itsState of lated (Meadows et-alt, 1912): or capableof support- ,_ Food -and Agriculture for 1969, the FAO predicted - ing double, if not ten times itswesent numbers IIII surpluses rather than deficits, reflectinga com- (Clark, 1967: deWit, 1967)? bi tion_of peak world grain stocks accompaniedby That malnutrition exists is hot disputed,nor is the significant downward revision of human caloricand' occurrence of faatine. What is disputed is whether protein needs by World Health Organization(WHO) these events sinfOy-reflectan inability of local food and FAO expert groups. The promise ofthe :'green systems .to overcome social., economic and spatial revolution" contributed to a'general euphoria(Wal- barriers:to equitable production and' provisionof ters, 1975). In 1410; the U.S.,Department of Agricul- food, or whether these patternsare ;harbingers of ture's (USDA) Economic Research Serviceprojected futti're in which hunger , a supply of food and fiber in excess of demand and famine 41 be increasingly commonplace. One result of thisdisagreement through 1980 (IISDA, 1970). A major problemseen and uncertainty is a plethora of ideas about causes 41 in the early 1910's was how to dispose ofagricultural which contribute to the world food problemsIt is surpluses (Poleman. 1975). In 1971,an FAO nutri- possible td see a sample of thesecauses irua geo- tion group again cutcaloric needs andprotein needs '-graphical framework (Table 1). _.,by ono-third (FAO. 1971b). . At a ,world scale, a number of pervasive factors By the iiiiddle 1970's, pessimism againemerged. *creating food 'problems Grain stocks had dwindled are suggested. Two en- as a result of production vironmental perspectives cahbe discerned. The first shortfalls; coincidentally followinsa substantial de-" argues that food problems, even famine, emerge from creestrin Canadian, and American wheatacreage in occasional vagaries of environment, 4luding

3..

to 13 FABLE 1 A SPATIAL T,31PCILCiGY OF "CAUSES" OFTHircIRLD FOOD PROBLEM

Worldwide Problems: - Thepeveloping World: Occa.sionalnattiral catastrophes Excessive population growth Deteriorating world environment , - Imbalance among population. resources. technology Imbalances between commodity supply anddemand 'Lack of economic incentives Lack of commodity reserves . . Lack of development Warfare and civil disturbance Insufficient government attention to the rural sector Cultufally-based food prejudices Inability of traditional food supply systems tQ tope Declining ecological conditions in food-producing with change regions bidustrial-ISeveloping World Links The-Industrialized WOrld, Inequities in access to resources Excessive use of material and energy resources Insufficient research and technology transfer Pollution Lack of development planning Inefficient. animal protein-based diets Insufficient food aid 4 Insufficient application of science and technology Excessive food aid Excessive government control Politics of food aid Insufficient research funds 'Inappropriate technological research Conversion of farmland to competing uses Lack of institutional structure Inappropriate role of multinational corporations Insufficient development of agribusiness

Source Compiled born sources listed in the bibliography

drought. floods. earthquakes. aqdother natural dis- represents the overabundance, indeed thegluttony. asters. The second argument suggests thatthese fac- of the industrialized world. Sortie argue positively. tors may become increasingly probable,that world that the world fbod problem .could lie solved more rapidly if impediments to the already incredible - environmental conditions are deteriorating. particu- -larly in response fo huinan use of resources and an- productivity of industrialized -agriculture were re- thropogeoic pollution.2 Imbalances between supply moved. Among such impediments are insufficient and demand on the global scale. accompanied by research and development of tec4nology. conversion lack of reserves to meet the needs of catastrophic of farmland to nonagriculturalf:uses, and excessive famine. are also important. So too, patterns of war- government control. As bumper stickers inthe Mid- fare and civil disturbance are worldwide in-distribu- idle West suggest. "If you complain about farmers. 0/04,tion. Culturally based food prejudices limit useof don't talk with your mouth full." -tpoteritially valuable food resources, or create de- Other viewpoints lay .blame on 'thediveloping mands: for higher "qualify" foods,_ much less effi- world, with a primary focus on excessive populatio ciently prochiced. Finalliy. there is a widespread de- groivtlr, particularly in relation to local resou cline in the ecological conditioks in food producing and farm 'technology. Traditional farmer pervers regions. tinfortunately'corresponding -to ever- lack of-economic incentives. inattention to the .1 increasing demands for productivity. Sector, and lack of development in general are d to Some analysts find fault in the system of indus- contribute to an increasing inability to feed bu eon- trialized'agriculture that characterizes much of the ing populations. - tween Western world. Some argue negatively that theprob- A final perspettive addresses the links lem is industrialized agriculturethat it 'uses re- the industrial and the developing world. athe one sources profligately. imposesuncompensated pollu- hand:A is argued that Tpod problems are 9 .ptornat- tioncosts on,the environment, focuses on inefficient ic of Water inequities in access to reso s; that food conversion through animals, anddiagnosticilly there isvkisufficient research and technol gy transfer from thendustrial world, a lack of elopmerit planning, d insufficient food aid. contrast, it has -also argued that therehas, -n too much A large numble of observers ha suggested that climatic change may occur u a result of poll by particulates and food aid; that technological research as been largely carbon dioxide Wamung of the earthatmosphere since; the inappropriate to the developing w. Id; and that the. 1680's may be attributed to increased carbon,dioxide. which en- population problem is really a pre . lem of excessive cooling may be hances the greenhouse er Since two. global resource demands by the incius 4 :'zed few. related to partlates.fcu ;Sae reflection of solar radiation may Later we will be looking atvariety of possible hove offset the CO, effect Recent observations inthe Southern / Hemisphere give credence to these theories That area appearsto solutions to the world food an. famine problem. At be experiencing a contemporary warming trend.which could be.that time. we shall see that Eh,can be classified in related to rapid CO, chfhisiort to the atmosphere,but partiCulate three groups: advanceinent technoleiy; .popula- concentration in-the industrialized Northern Hemisphere.which theworld mistake° for tioncontrol:andrestr cturing hos lead to northern hemispheric cooling. could be socioeconomic order. With' . each _group there are a a worldwide trend (Damon andKonen. 1976) . 4' 14 4

.._ : / number of spe cific solutions. and both category and'others. they connote a decreased ability fsuccess- specific remedy are predicated byparticdfar notions ful national or international of the nature atherproblem response to threat of Thoseywhq see the.prob- cattstrophic famine. Thereare few who view the lem as one of excestive4overnmentcontrol are un- situation with optimism. likely to see government-orinternationally- Since many of the observations listed organized redistributing of world are dealt wealth as a.solu-. wilfi in materials easily.-Secured elsewherl(e.g.' tion. dny snore tkanAhose whodefine the problemas Brown. 1974; USDA. 1974a).we will summarize inappropriate technologicalresearch for developing each briefly before turning to countries are likely to call for a geographic perspec- a greater role for. the tive on the present world food situation. Aswe shall multinational agribusinesscorporatio. Although see, it, is extremely difficult to judge nutritional there are no clear dic.holornies roblem def- ,statur.from national level statistics initions and proposed solutio on population n.i. hery complex- and food production Data at that level obscureim- itv of the problem suggestsa krobable,conflict of ideas portant dietary*variatiops inadifferent locales,among among perspectives., different socioeconomicgroups. and among various . age-sex groups in the population. Nevertheless. na- The World Food Siltation lio level food consumption statistics developed The world food situationin the mid-1970's can be by FAO in the 1960's (FAO. 1971a) and for the characterized in afew poignant phrases industrialized nations by the Organization for; (1) Fifteen percent pf the word'speople mat- Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD. - nourished 1973) reflect a conclusion arrived at bymany (21 Declining verld toad stocks. both-in kind and localized ,dietary sUrves perhapsone out of six of iii potential production from idle croplandin the world's people is malnounshed (lackingsuffi- major exporting nations cient caloric or protein supplies). prin- (3) Increasing food and farrninput prices ,cipally in the developing regions (Table'cocentrated 2). The FAO (4) Increased fool delnand tomeet needs of suggests that'one-half of the children in developing population growth countries may be malnounshed (USDA. 1974,350)' (5) Further ,growth of demand dueto per capita However. if, (a very big IF,). onlya small proportion increases in consumptionas income rises of the Wbrld's grain production nov.47edto livestock (6).Crop produltionsincreasing slightlymore were available. when and where needed, aggregate 71than population asa result of modest in- dietary insufficiency could disappear The needed 'creases in yields and increases in cultivated 25 million metric tons-of cereals (USDA. 1974a:51) land . - represents less than one-quarter of the 'grains pres- (7) Declining world grain yields ently fed to livestock in the United Metes(OECD. (8) Increasing world food trade thous'on se .ed 1973), and an even smaller proportion of the total industrialized nations land used to produce feed grains and foragesfor (9) Continuing importance of food aidfrom the. livestock that,coula produce human food industrialized nations World food'stocks have declined drastically inre- 110) Significant deviation of avetagenational cent years. Expressed as the number of days' supply diets from normal reqUirementi`. including of world grain consumption. grain stocksdropped, both overfed and underfed populations. from over a 100-day supplyin 1960 to about a 31-day To some. these observations supply,.in 1976 (Table 3. Brown.1975.1054). suggest our -present Through the 1960's. actualgrain stocks could be in- proximity to the levels of population beyond-which creased by- one-third to one-half by bnnging idle the world's populationcan no longer be fed To a cropland in the United States into production. land ( TABLE 2 ESTIMATED MAGNITUDE OF WORLD mALNummoN,1970 Insufficient ProteinEnergy Supply Population Region 'Numbers (btons) Percent (millions) Developed Areas 1 07 3 28 Developing Areas i75' 25 Latin America 434 Q28 13 Far East 36 1 02 30 301 Near East 017 Africa 18 30 0 28 25 67 World Total 2 83. 16, 462 a Excluding Asian centrally planned ecotiOrmes Source USDA (1974a 5d) from FAO statistics.1974

5 -15 te.

____- inputs.recause of being belcVunder the Soil Bank. CroplandAdjust - four- to ten-fold multiplier of ment, and Wier programs(Rasmussen et al.. 1976). conversion losses in animals. Through the-middle twenti century. the world By 1974, no longer was aggventh-ofAmerica's crop- countries) has kept' land held back from grain production by such pro-" (with the exception of certai important "bank account" of po- food production slightly aheadf population growth grams. removing-an accomplished tential food production. (Tate 4). The developed cbu tries .and the develop- Atnericans,sperd. on the avefage. a lower propor- this primarily by yield expansi of otherindus- ing nations by a combination oyield and area in- tion of income on-food than residents base years. 1961 - trialized nations, but food price increases seem as creases (USDA. 1974a).From th 1965. the developed countries' in population important fo us as to others.There arediffering opin-, by expanded ions about how much these increasesreally reflect (10.2, percent) waomore than o rather than price in- production (33 percent). The dev ping areas htiol off -the-farm commodity prices ction durin); crements in processing arid' marketing.Nevertheless. almost as great an expansion of the same pf,riod (32 percent). but grear pulation recent production shortages.world demand, and a margin- high input prices (for fuel and fertilizer, forexample) growth kepit per capita food increases increase in food prices since al level (Table 4)' have meant a s., Grains supply over one-half of theta world food 1972. Froni 1 to 1970.food prices had beenfairly increase in grain stable, but be 'een'1972 and 1974 Wheatand rice entrgy needs. The fairly steady than dou- yields experienced through the1960's reversed in prices tripled. and soybean, prices more of factors may 01. Particularly important are the early 1970's (Figure 1) A number bled (Brown. '1974:62). weather .condi- farm input price rises both inindustrialized areas ha,ie contributed to this. including with al- tions. release of idle cropland ofless than average and. most cripcaily. in developing areas and shor- ready marginal food supplies. From 1971 to1974 fertility. higher energy prices. high prices be: tages of fertilizers. shortenedfallow cyclet, and use fertilizer prices increased seven or eight times than for fertilizer cause of higher energy pricesand shortages. By early of animal wastes for, fuel rather levels, (Brown. 1975:1058). The levelingof agricultural 1976. however. prices had dropped to 1973 productivity, particularly in industrialized areas. only two to four times the 1971 prices;asproduction yields can be in- capacity met demand. ifiigher input prices mayoffset raises questions as to whether, \ any incentive offered byhigher crop prices and add creased further exchange burdens to nations with World agricultural trade has increasinglyfocused - additional foreign on North Anienca andOceania as sources. with insufficient domestic supplies. America Food demand is projected to increase tonearly Western Europe a continuing ''sink:- Latin and Afries changing from net exporters to netimpor- twice the 1970 total by,,the year 2000. bothbecause iparginal net of population increases' andchanges in per capita ters of grain: and Asia changing front a be some six or exporter to a major importer (Brown.1975:1055). Re- food requirements. Not only will there in the major ex- seven billion.. people tofeed in 2000, but should -cent increases in wheat production living occur, porting areas have come.largelyfrOm expansion of modest increases sin per capita level of S. land decrease.,and land-in production. Potential increases in demand for lipsikstarchy staples will end of the century demand for litnstook pRiducts willincrease (Chan- in crop production through the production of meat. are considered minor.with gains in forest- and cellor and Gos1976:213). and potential* new. eggs. and milkito.mee g demands isbased on pasture -to- cropland conversion animals that could pro- irrigated land offset by nonagriculturalcompetition allocations of resou a/., 1976). The ,chic* food for man. these demands will represent a' for land (USDA. 1974b: Zeimetz et

TABLE 3WORLD FOOD RESERVES/1961-1975

Reserves(106metric tons)' Reserves as Days of World Grain . Grain Equivalent of Total Consumption Year Grain Idle U S Cropland 105 60 231 i-k 1961 163 91 147 71 _218 1965 259 89 1970 188 71 0 11.1 35 1975 - 111 Carry-over stocks at beginning of crop year Source: Brown (1975). in Science. Vol. 190.December 12. 1975 p 1054 Coifyriglit 1975 by the Ameilcan'Association forthe Advancement of Science Reprinted -by petmisaion of Lesterli. Brown andScience

6 16 TABLE 4.INDICES OF POPULATION AND FOODCtItooucno. Developed Countries Developing Countrters` World Food Production Calendar - Food Production , ood Production Peer PopuTalion Total Per Capita Population Total Per Capita Population Total Per Capita 1955 90.3 81 90 82.5 78 9r 85.7. 1980 963 96 100 93 1965 92 8 92 99. 94.2 94 102.3 104 102 105 0 100 1970 104 99 103 9 104 107 3 119 111 119.0 100 126 106 114 2 121 1973 1101 133 121 1284 106 132 103 . 120 9 133 110 1961-1965 levels rot at 100 Values for otheryeers may be read as percentages of these beee year values, Excluding Asian centrally plannedOCROOCIliell Souror. USDA(1574r21.

hold: the rich get richer, thepoor gel/ poorer. "i"-e seconc4nclusion that emerges fromgrain flow patterns e focal role of the developed nationa,_as food suppliers to the centrally plannecibanddeielop- ing areas. ConCentration of supplyis in reality greater, among the developed nations, onlya handful are z major gram exporters (UnitedStates. Canada. Au- 0 stralia. Argentina'. v 1.4 A variety of projections of'agricultural demand and production through themiddle 1980's (USDA. 1974a) suggests an increasingreliance by the developing countriesoil importing food from the in- 0 dustrialized areas to makeup local production def- KW 1975 -61 -66 -71 ,-7s icits. This food would either bepurchased in the world food market Figure 1.'World Grain Yield. 1966-1976 or be received as part of food aid After Brown Packages. The former' raises (1975). in Science. Vol 190. December,14. 1975. p. 1058 questions of whether the Copyright 1975 by the AmericanAssociatiOn for the Ad- pocrapsf countries have availablefunds, the latter a vancement of Science Used by permissionof Leiter R. wide range of social and politicalissues, including Btown and Science. dependency upon sources of food and the -ss consequentvulnerac=food supplies to disruption. Food aid to developingnations includes commodities and financial decades since the middle1950's haie broughtan. assistance for rural develop- increasing concentration ofgeneral world trade in ment, underboth bilateral and multilateralarrange- the industrialized nations.In 1955, trade among the ments. Among the most important ofthe bilateral aid developed countries accountedfor 45 percent of flows is the Agricultural Trade Development world trade and 35 percent ofworld agricultural and AssistanCe Act(PublicLaw480): passed in 1954. trade by valve. By 1972. therespective figures were This law, gave authority fsale or grant of surplus 57 and 49 percent (USDA. 1974a:18).This increasing agricultural commodities forforeign currency, concentration of trade within the developedworld is emergencyrellef, and in exchangefgr strategic mate- paralleled in thecase of grain 'trade. Trade between rial. Seen in the context ofa long series of agricul- developed nations accounted for 40.6percent of the tural legislatiOn since thedepression of the 1930's. world grain trade in the late1950's. and nearly 45 this law's primarypurpose war to adjust domestic percent by the early 1970:s. Todayover eighty per- agricultural Supply to meetdemand, and thus to. cent-of the world's grain tradeofiginatei in the in- stabilize prices. PL 480 providedfor overseas dis- dustrialized areris (USDA.1974a:20), posal of cossss. s 'ties. a role of increasingly major There are two inescapableconclusions that fol- importance.' baled the "Food for PeacePro- low from these data. First, foodtrade juts followed gram" in 1968-0, PL 480 from itsinception providetf general -world trade inan increased concentration some $23 billion in grants and loans (cashvalue of within developed nations.Developing nations have. agricultural commodities) through1974, of which experienced a declining trade rolewhich has re- five billion of the $14.5 billionworth of loans have - salted in ,a deireased role in international pike mechanisms 'and decreasedparticipation in the-- 'Studies by the USDA of the World FoodBudget (1961. 1964) flows of world wealth, oftenaccompanied by serious all can be seen in retrospect to haveexaggerated world food balance -of- payment 'problems.' needs; nevertheless hunger was-politicallydesirable in the face of The old cliche may. food surplus

, \ RECEIVED BY MAJOR AID AND PL 480 'RECIPIEN'TS'f' TABLE 5PERCENTAGE OF U.S. ASSISTANCE PL 480, -e AID (and Predecessor Agenties) 1974 1449-1974 . 1974 1954-1974 ;No 10 2S. Vietnam 20.7 S ,Vietnam 9 519 Vietnam 21 2India 51Pakistan 7 4Cambodiay. 188 India 6.gCambodia a 7.3 Indonesia 4 4S Korea 7 1India France 5 6 6.6, Bang 5.2 S. Korea 5 3Pakistan 3 2S. Vietnam hidonesia 3.8' rakista 4.4 Pakistan 4.3 a Turkey . 3 7 339Brazil 36 C. U A R. 3 0, *." 554, 35.0 51 7 ft specified Countries receiving0 percent ar moie of aid category for years es, Source _Calculated from data in`USAID (1975b) a`

AID budgets are for "stcurity assisrice"rather than been repaid. Funds earned by PL 480 sales havebeen Prior to 1969. MO used to pay local LIS. government expenses. to pro- for "developrhent assistance ". vide roans for development projects. to promote 0was not allowed to work onfood production: sales of U. S. farm products. and to advanceresearch There was a general belief both in and cfutof gov- and education (Cochrane, 1969:134). Becausethere ernment that other nations should potbe encouraged are variouscommodities involved (grand: legumes. to increase production (of basicfood crops) fork& oils. dairy products). tonnages are aninadequate of competition with U S efforts tosell its surplu% 1976 38) measure of the volume of PL**480loans and grants. stocks or even give them away "(Wort-man_ which reached one - quarter of total U. S. food exports In its presentation in supportof the fiscal year {by value) in the 1960's. By 1974. agricultural ex- 1976 budget. AID arguedthat bilateral assistance is ports provided for under governmentprograms important for focusingris&res- comprised less than five percent of total U.S.agricul- - on theke)problemareasaffecting the poor mayor- tural exports -5942 million compared to520.380 wad. million commercial agricultural exports(USDA' ity in developing countries in innovative on the" countries mostseriously affected by the 1974a:4b). agricultural food and energy crises: Title I of PL 480 authorizes sales of on problems and areasof critical U S foreign pol- commodities. primarily in local currencies, and rep- icy importance ( USAID. 1975a10) resents the largest proportion ofthe program (two- of com- Although the list of recipient nationsand organiza- thirds). Title II provides outright grants Sahelian modities. both directly to governments(one-half of tions in 1974. (including India, Bangladesh. West Africa, Pakistan. Sudan) suggest animportant all grants) and through voluntary serviceorganiza- related aid from tions (one-half). Although the act wasimportant for humanitarian role of food and food - been a small the U.S . the overall flows through AIDand PL 480, surplus disposal. it has nevertheles% life of postwar element in the tbtal U.S. foreign aid picture. never both in a recent year and during the military aid, indicate the political motivationof food and reaching 25 percent of total economic and has cor- assistance, and declining in current years (10.9 per- food- related aid (Table 5). Brown (1974:69) .cent in 1974). rectly observed-, . Funds provided by sales of PL 480 food in recip- Although Americans decry the use of petroleum as a ,lent countries and other kinds of U.S.foreign aid political weapon. calling it `politicalblackmail.' the are aimed atimprovirng local agricultnral productiv- United States has been using food aidfor political ity. Tile Development Assistance Programsof the purposes for twenty yearsand"descnbing this as U,S. Agency for InternationalDevelopment (AID) in- 'enlightened diplomacy - clude items directly and indirectly related tofood Food aid, including commoditiesand grants and and agriculture. including food productionand nu- loans for economic development. alsoflows through trition (54 percent of development assistance expen- international organizations as well asthrough bilat- ditures in 1974:75), population.planningand health eral arrangements. Of 'the total foodaid from de- (22 }percent) and education andhuman resources developed countries since 1960. the UnitedStates has vetopment (11 percent). Approximatelyone-half of provided eighty percent of the bilateral andmultilat- eral contributions. Canada seven percent.japan ' ' A list of organizations eligible for this role isprepared sotto- three percent. and France and Germanyapproxi- ally by the Of of Pnvate and Voluntary Cooperation Burea)s 1974a:54) Euro- (USAID 1974. lnately .two percent each (USDA. for Population and Humanitarian Assistance AID pean countries are nowshifting to multiFateral pro- War on f(triger. July. 1976)

8 18 TABLE 6 ANNUAL PER CAPITA GRAIN CONSUMPTION. MIDDLE1960's Consumpt tow

Multiple Nation j of Direct Indirectb Total Tanzania nada 202 /1791 1993 Un States 13.7' 200 1441 1641 11 2: U.S. 344 883 United 1227 84 ngdoin 169k, 956 1025 Argentina 7.0 2Z3 625 848 5.8 West Germar, 160 588 748' Mexico 51 305 242 547 38 tape 320 211 531 36 China . 312 118 430 3.O India 288 , Tanzania 348 24 4 133 11. 146 1.0 POunds per ;ear ...N By animal ccmascsicrit to eggs.. intli.-prOducts:-meat - ft. Sources FAO (1971a1. modtfied from By Brio? :None by LesterR Brown with Erik P Eckholm Copyright t1974 h The Overieas Development Council Published by Praeger Pubitslaess. New York

grams of the European Community. and considerable 1960: Americans and Canadi,ns annuallycon- moral pressure has been placedon the oil-exporting ed 11 to 14 times as much grain countrtes to fund development as Tanzanians. programs Major Altho.ugh world food supplies aremore than multilateral food programs also include theU.N. a adequate for the world's population. these FAO joint World Food Program and the supplies F are neither evenly nor equitably distributed. A.geo- Convention of the International GrainsA: nt of graphical assessment of world diets will illustrate 1967. the latter serving largely to ze world this observation, grain trade and provide moralpe ion for food aid to developing countries (USDA,1974a:54). A variety of other international organizationspro- vide food-related development aid. includingthe A Geographical Assessment World Bank Group, Asian. African. andInter. No single set of data exists that would allowaccu- American Development Banks, theEuropean rate assessment of the incidence and degree of mal- Economic Community; and programS of the UN.. in- nutrition in the world's population Nutritional cluding the-United Nations DevelopmentPrograms needs are understood only partiallt,'. and food supply (UNDPP.FAO. and WHO. Agriculture hasnot been a and ultimate consumptionare not well documented. primary focurriimongall thesegroups. For example. particularly for subnational populations A wideva- two of the World Bank Group members, the Interne- riety of factor's that affect individualafood needs and tioiial Bank for Reconstruction and Development consumption are only crudely approximated byna- and the International DevelopmentAssociation, tional averages and trends (Table 7). Sucha mul- jointly allocated only 8.5 percent of their fundsto titude of factors affects food **eds. demand.and agriculture between 1948 and 1963. 12.3percent supply that national figure's, derived from from 1964-1968. and 20.5 percent from1969 to 1974. aggregate production and end-of-yearcarry-over, are During 1975. however, these World Bank donors al- potentially misleading, with between-countryvaria- located 31 5 percent of their nearly $6 billionbudget tion in average diets undoubtedly. smaller than to agriculture, with additional funds for population. within-country extremes. In many,developingareas, water supply. and transportation, each of whichmay seasonality of food supply creftes markedvariation assist rural djvelopment (World Bank_1 p76). between "hungry seasons" and periods ofadequate Finally. there is wide divergence in, foodcon- food supply. Keeping in mind the variation thatany sumption and dietary sufficiency among the world's statisticmay hide. we -will assess the broad geo- peoples (Table 6).. The average Americanconsumes graphical variations in dietary sufficiency. 3320 calories per day. about one-quartermore than established needs. Canada's annualper capita grain consumption is nearly one ton, only ten percent of Eneigy and Protein Need which is consumed directly, the -remainder being In discussing human food needs,we will, focus on corwerted to eggs. milk products. andmeat. In. the energy and protein, two of the most well-known of

:\ 9 19 standard mad and FACTORS AFFECTING NUTRITIONAL STATUS energy needs of a reference or TAALE 7. woman with respect to activity on aunit time basis reqiiirements %. and to den* idealized daily energy Need: - based' on a minute-by-minute recosd of rtiyities . Age.. sex. body size., activity . Pregrumcy and lactation (WHO,,1973:109-111).Typicallyalaily,energy.needt Health and biological utifization of food are .46 clefined on thebasitof age, sex; and occupa -, criti- - Prophylactic or curative need; tional category. Allowances may be smaller in Environment cal food .situations (Table 8). Beyond thebody's Variatiop around average or typical need needs, excess caloric consumption is stored atfat, Demand: with about 3500 calories equivalent to onepound .Ina3rne level (0.45 kg) of excess body weight. Income distribution Determination of protein requirements is moredif- . Food price' ficilt. When energy intake.is insufficient to meet Government programs energy needs, the body- uses proteinsto provide Education energy rather than toierve its critical' metabolic Food habits and mores functions, including growth and tissue replacement Promotion of bottle or breast feeding 4..ike energy. protein must be replenishedvirtually Supply: daily. When energy intake Is 'severelyrestricted, Production of food/miffs utilization of protein- added to diets is impaired: Seasonality Food processing When intakes of both energy and protein are grossly C.onversionto animal products inadequate. the provision of protein concentrates or Marketing efficiency protein-rich food of animal origin may be a costly Internal and foreign food trade abd inefficient war of improving the diets.since Food and aid distribution programs energy can generally be provided morecheaply than Enrichment of nutrient content in foods protein of good quality This is an importantpoint in planning programmes for meeting the needsof vul- Saute: Modified from Dwyer and Mayer (1975). in Science. Vol. neralite till in developing countries.Clearly, 188. May 9.1976. p. 587 Copyright 1975 by the AmericanAssocia- energy and protein needsshould be considered to- tion for the Advancement of Science, Used by permissionof jean gether in planning for die nutritional improvement Meyer and Science. of populations whose diets are deficient intither (WHO.'1973:19). our requirements.' If sufficientfood is available, people will naturally consume as much food energy Thus energy and protein needs are not indepen- as required (or more).The FAO and WHO define dent, and shfe levels of proteinintake must be energy expenditures based uponthe needs of an av- specified in reference to energy intakA erage healthy person in a'particular age, sex, or oc- The World Health inization dries notspecify ctipationbl category. It is possible to tabulatethe singular, valid standards for minimum average protein intake. Some attempts have beenniade to calcu- how needs are essentially quantitative. liberties'proteins late desirable proteinienergy ratios.Typical hurrian are a nualitanre diaracaristic of diet, parallel tovitamins. miner- diets (in absence of hunger or famine) have a als. and fatty acids Minimum daily allowances havebeen ..ing stability of 11 to 13 percent ofcaloric i as sumested for many nutrients (Scinishaw and Young. 1976 62- proteins, independent of income air dietcomposi- 64). Energy needs are measured in calories. technicallytermed impossible kllogroacalories or Itiloaskelec tion. Whether this represents the ideal is

TABLE 8CALORIC ALLOWANCES IN FEAST Xs''D FAMINE 4 Rehabilitation Temporary Mainterumce Subsistence Ass. Sex..Occupation Allowances 1000 1000 0-2 years 1000 -1200 1300-1800 1500 1250 3-5 years i750 1500 64 yeses 1900-2300 2400-3000 2500 2000 10-.17 2000 Women 2200-3000 2500 Prog41111,Lectating 2200-, p 1900 Sedentary Maie 2400-2700 2000-2300 1800 1600 Sedentary Female a 7500 2000 Moderate labor poo -xfoo 3000-3500 Jo. 3000 25004 Heavy labor 3500 3000 Very Heavistabor for tbs Somme Modified bola Mayor119751:in Science, Vol. 188. May 9. 1975. p 576. Copyright 1975 by the American Asstcation Adwecannit of Scissor Used by persdinioa of pea Mayerand Science

10 20 to suggest The WHO prefers to specify a safe level of, from foods with 1gw relative,protein values,one protein intake that meet physiological needs of must ingest highei quantities of protein and should nearly all persons in a group. In other wordsa level eat foods with complementary amino aci of protein above average requirements. An addi- co.mposition (Table' 9) (Lappe. 1971;Timen1Iet al.. tional complication is that protein isnot a_single%,1975:754). This does not imply, however, thatpro- substance. but any of 'a varlet f' ofnecessary amino tein malnutrition follows from a largelyor totally acids The protein content of food canibe expressed, vegetarian diet Complementarily of amino acids . as "relitive protein value" in comparison to human from different foods (for example wheat and beans) milk or eggs, which have the most completeor high- can assure adequate nutrition (Lappe. 1971). Daily est quality protein based on both amino acidcom- safe protein requirements are basedon body position and digestibility Thus, if protein intake is, weight and other factors (Table 10)

fr TAB 4,9PROTIA CONTENTAND UTILIZATION

Percent Percent , Food Protein Content Net Protein Utilization Egg 13.`: 94 tililk 4 87 Frsh 18-25 813 Cheese. 22-36 70 Meat and Poultr: 25 68 Grain 8-14 50-70, Rice 70 Corn - 12 '50 Legumes 20-35 40-60 Soybea_ 35 4lt Kidne. an 25 38 Nuts and Seeds 20-30 Vegetables 43-58 2B 35)i-f2.0 Source Asse,mbled from data In Lappe :1971.

TABLE10 SAFE LEVELS OF PROTEININTAKE Adjusted Protein Level Based Typical Safe Protein on Protein Quality with`Re- Age Both Intake 'grams s'pect to human milk or eggs' Group Weight protein per f years) `kg) person per, daj.) Score = 80 Store,--60 Infants 90 14 17 23- 1-3 13 4 16 4-6 20 27 20 2 20 26 34 7-9 28 1 25 Male 10-12 31 41 36 9 30 37 50 Male 13-15 51 3 37 46 t 62 Male"16-19 62 9 38 47 63 Female 10-12 38 0 29 36 48 Female 13-15 4'9 9 31 39ti 52 Female 16-1Q 54 4 '0 37 Adult Male 50 65 0 3.7 46 62 Adult Female 55 0 29 36 48 Pregnant Woman (last 4i.,2 months), 9 -11 Lactating woman Cs (first 6 months) -17 -21 -28 Ratio of net utilizable protein to net utilizable proteinin human milk or eggs (see frable.9) ' Source WHO )1973 74) 4.

From the levels oLenergyneedC,described, it is possible to calculate national food requirements and convert this to average daily values (WHO, 1973). .These. values have been calculated by the FAO. and avenge national food,supplies can be compared with them. National Diets Unfortunately, there are difficult problems in de- termining national average diet. This is usually undertaken by-these calculations for a given year

Food prodUction - Foodiiiiports - Carry-over from I previous year = Food Supply Food exports Food fed to animals -,Carry-over from the current year = Disappearance (1)(2)-c(31-14)(5)(6)

Disapparance food values are corrected for assumed processing losses. and are then converted to nutritional components expressed as daily per capita values.-These calculations are clearly infenorto actual dietary intake studies, which have been undertaken among selected populations in some areas, but they musf suffice for a contemporary global assessment

The FAO made an unusually comprehensive study 90 200 400 100 1500 2 of annual food balances:for the late 1960's (1971a) This infonnatiatnias been partially updated by more GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT PER CAPITA S recent population and food production data by the Figure 2.Dietary Composition and National Income FAO and OECD. From these statistics a number of 1962 AfterPerisse et al 11974) studies can'be undertaken on diet composition and . adequacy, although analysis based on these data can be amplified usefully by reference to studies of ac- The Irish farmer at the time of the nineteenth- tual dietary intake. century potato famine consumed 4.5 kilograms (nearly ten pounds) per day; thus starchrks msade up 82 percent of a typical 3850 daily calonc intake Pro- Diet Composition tein came from potat6es (45 gm) and other sources There is considirable tegulvity in diet composi- (19 gm) (Pimentel et al., 1975:756, Connell, 1950) tion as a function of ecorincist development, at least Similar high starch, low protein diets can be found ,on a national basis (Figure 21, People in poor.de- today among the urban American poor (U.S. Senate. veloping areas have diets high in starchy staples and 1074)7 low in other components. with regalar increases in A useful means for comeoring national diet com- animal products. fats, and sugars asnational income position among countries-Ts a .graph showing total levels increase. In addition, protein,supplies change dietarycompositiondivMed among three from largely plant to animal sources. Obviously it is componentsstarchy staples, animal-based foods not oily the developing, largely tropical nations (milk. meat, eggs. animal fats), and other foods whose diet is composed primarily of starchy staples. measuring each in calories. For the United States, the average diet is composed of 1255 calories (38 percent) starches. 1326 calories (40 percent) animal ' Among the more comprehensivekoollectioneof these surVeys sources. and 738 calories (22 percent)from other are the studies by I M May (see May. 1974) The USDAhis also sources. You will notice that the triangularcoordi- ,undertaken dietary studies in the U S with regional and income nates add up to 100 percent. To check your under- level differentiation (USDA. 1956. 1969) , 'Earl* food budget calculations were made by the USDA standing. examine the percentages for Tanzania: 68 (1961. 1964) percent starches. 12 percent livestock sources. and

12 22 20 percent othersources (Figure 3).* vice of the' U S Department of Percentage v ues such Agriculture (FAO's as thoSe cited are derived Production Yearbook. USDA's from the food mposition tables prepared by the Agricultural Situa- FAO and OE tio i reports) The world map ofdietary sufficiency in . updated by population and food the early 1970's (Figure 5)was prepared .from these - production indices to derivevalues applicable tothe .sources,in order to reflect. ''early 1970's (FAO. 195b). as accurately as possitele The triangular graphs il- the currelit status of world foodconsumption err a lustrate the composition ofnational diets among the national,basis major world regions The triangle for Africa illus To give some indication of the traces the highly starch-dominataddiet of that re- meaning of value's gion. Afric,a'l pattern overlaps shown on themap. several camparisonSare useful that of Asia and Latin Tanzania's infant mortality rate (deaths America. The pattern of European,North American, before age one per.1000 live births) is, at139,about ten times and Oceanic nations illustratesthe importance of .animal, sources in the diets that of the United. States (Thomas.1972).In some of the industrialized areas of that country nearly one-quarter of babiei populations. On each triangle.hollow symbols indicate countries 'with inadequate diets born never reach their first birthdayThe country hat (those *.Ah less ,been plagued by foodshortages of numerous kinds than ninetypercent of energy needs provid ; the relationship of strongly (Brooke, 1967; Mascarehhas-et al.,1973), many re- starch-domirlated diets in 4uinrig international aid. A single the poorly fed areasis cleai As we noted smiler, this half-liter battle of means not only energy deficiency. beer costs a typical Tanzaniana half -day' wakes. if but probable,he is employed An equivalentamount of bottled protein-supply problemsas well. beer in the United States costs about The worldmap of diet compositioniFigure 4) is. five-minutes of - a wage-earner's salary Each year. Americanscon- in many ways. a map of world' wealthmild poverty. The map distinguishes sume an equivalent of- 160pelent of the annual four tategones of diet corn: Tanzanian grain supply in ranous position. from diets witha heavy animal-denved alcoholic beverages 1.iie.fed fivetimes Tanzania's total component to those with direr75 percEnt of eriergy intake from starchy staples9. protein neto cats and dogs"America's dogs, cats, and people are fat. witha price paid iltot only in Diet Quantity excessive food expenditures. but alsoin ill health Lack of uniform. reliabledata on cltets. acconi- Food Excess and Deficit ,,panied by short-term dietary imbalances makesany We have alluded to the inefficiency assessment 'of the status ofworld diets suspect in the con- Nevertheless. it is possible sumption of calories andprotein from animal rather to sketch a broad pitture than plant sources This Ob of quantitativesaspectsof annual diets at rva *on is based on the a world dynamics of biologicalfoodchains, scale. so long aswe remain aware of the degreeto ink of the flux wind% such an of foe energy as itmoves through c*ous species assessment hides variabilityin diets Thelar energy fixed as food within countries, ignoresproblems of the changes by the-corn plant is through the usedddd for the 'plant'sown metabolism\ and fos its year (such as the ;hungry season" in growth The cow that West Africa). and relieson the disappearance eats the plant use themajor method of diet estimation food cpntent for itsown metabolism.' and a small percentage for its own production ofmeat dr milk In Basic caloric needs for eachof the world's nations, consuming the meat expressed as dailyaverage intake. have been calcu- or milk. much of the Mod value lated by various world is again used for ourown metabolism. with adesuable organizations such as the pertentage for growth in youth)or an unfortunate FAO and WHO. rasingmethoilolosies describedear- lier. Average diets have beencalculated for the late 1960's (FA0,-1971a) and caloricintake for the early 1970's (FAQ. 1974)on a worldwide-basis: these Again. the map requires detailed stud% Questionslice these timates can 'be compared with es- may guide your ana4sis needed'caloric fa) Whit countries have the highest caloricinvoke valor supplies. These datamay be updated by means of compared with needs' population and agriculturalproduction indices cal- fb) What countries hose the lowestNaives' Middle values' culate4by the FAO and the (c) Are there ang modestlybiit adequately. fed indus- Foreign AgriculVeSer- trialized natxnse' Id; Are there aoy sufficienth fed,des eloping nations' le) What correlation is there if any betweenpopulation num- ' This coordinate system bers and density in developingcountries in companson is most commonly used for soil texture with,calont types based on sand silt and claycomposition but can be used edequacy7 " Gsltulatecl front Brown (1974:39) who with any classification scheme wherethree data values,add tip to cites L' S consump- 100 percent tion at 10) pounds ft& kg) of grain percapita per year for beer and liquor With a base population of approximate!) The map demands some studybefore proceeding You might 200 Million at the answer these questions for yourself time of the -VAC) food balance data thisrepresents 3 2 million la; What kinds of countries eat "highoff the hog?" metric tons per year For the equivalent base periodTanzania (b) What kinds of countries have produced about tsTo millionmetric tons of grain (FAO starch dominated diets? 1971a17) JO Are fhere poor countries withan animal-based caloric supply? Why? "Calculated from data; in Wittwer 1975 andPimentel et a! 1975

132 A VA Africa 'DIET Asia I WA, COMPOSITION T ANE A.P4 Ain 1 WA Affie UFA CALORIE SUPPLY LESS A TA I 1 FA rAt THAN 90% A I WA FA WA IFAIrMA OF NEED A P WA A /A WA PI TA LW A WA FA VA I =I FA

X STARCli /ANIMAL Latin OA . Developed AMAMAVA America AF1ICA Nations A I FA 000AYAYA r AALSC)UTM EAST EUROPE & USSR ti WAWA JAPAN NA FM s Arra X OTHER. NOSTNWEST EUROPE, PORTN MI I WA TA ArAl WA ITA MORK, & NEDITERRANEAN OCEANIA A FAWMA I FA EUROPE MI El A WA WA FA I A VI TA MY/ /A UNITED STATES 24 Figure 3. Composition of National Caloric Intake. Values COmputed from FAO and OECD data for the early 1970's . . 4

S.. ft

... ol

.., p

! COMPOSITION

. 1

Figure 4.World Pattern of Diet Composition. Coloring the map triay,enhance reodgnition of4geographic patterns. 4

',. -.

2 CALORIC SUFFICIENCY

14 p I

op 140 120 110 100 VO 10 70 loam* mrtasorrof214. OIL* ilmirliewlanirdr 0114,W,C4 Notional Caloric Supplyeas Percent of Neid a It a vs i-6. . Figure 5World Pattern of Caloric Sufficiency Values indicate percentage of national caloric intake comprised to needs- 28 4 29 t,

percentage for growth (in adults), At each sp alongjFor example. in the United States in1970.we di- the food chain. food energy is dissipated b normal rectly consumed3319calories per capita per day In metabolic'processes, as are much of theproin and addition. 136.650.000 metric tons ofgrains and other other qualitative food values Some plant tter. human foods were fed to animals Atan approximate such as grasses. cannot be used efficientlyv hu- 3 6 x 106calories per metric t6n. this is 6685 aalones mans directly as food. and we are forced toe-this Per capita per day. Assuming ten percentconver- kind of matenal indirectly. through animals mar- sion. 669 calcines were already accounted for in food, ginal. semi-arid areas this may bea ratio way consurnptibn.so that the total daily figure-is 9335 eventually to harvest solar energy using nfall calories. or about 354.percent ofaverage daily re- levels too sparse for crops. and itmay also be ra tonal quirements! You nidy already hive realized that the as p of crop and fallow-pasture rotations inore hum approximately twenty per6ent of total consumed areas However, when crops producefor calories (669 of 3319) does notagree with our earlier livestock could be used for human -food. thereis a figure of approximately forty percent, animal caloric significant loss of total food supply. sources for the American diet' However. half the ,This has. of course, been impliedin our miler total feed units consumed by American livestockare discussions. but here we must make this-grain or from pasture and forage (grass. legume hays. silage) tivestack" question explicit Table 6 shows, for the Thus the calculatiofirs reasonably.accurate13 middle 1q60's. the consumption ofgrain in Various Furthermore. there is good reason not to calculate parts of the world. both as direct-to-humancon sump- the food crop production potential of present forage top and alsb as indirect consumption througharil- producing landsIf it becomes important to de- man7%;,ith the attendant lossesup the food- chain) crease the direct (fuel) and indirect (fertilizer) uses of There is considerable controversyover this potential energy in industrialized farms. it may stilt be ecolog- waste of fifiod. which we will take up in otir discussion yesirable to continue the rotationalsroduction of golutions toward The end of thepaper In assessing of legume forage for animals the present status of the world food supply. however. For each country we completed calculationssimi- we cannot ignore the question At least -one -third of lar to-that illustrated for the Uniteki States Formany the world's grain productionis fed to livestock poorer countries, little or,no food crops were fed to (Brown.1974:44) animals For others. actualcrops fed varied. and The same food balances usedin the pieceding conversion factors for calonc values were altered ac- analyses have also been used to calculate the calciric cordingly For example. many European'netions feed eqbivalent of food crops fed to livestockin each high proportions of potatoes. and several Latin country This is a complex accounting task butit 'American countries `feed cassava'. plantains. and --works like this: sugar cane. all with different caloric values which were apportioned with grain values 'A world map of - Calories consumed by people (1) dietary balance (Figure 6) shows,annuAjocaloric - Caloric value of food crops (2) ex- fed to livestock cess or deficit" Dirceet and 'indirect caloric consumption extremes include annual deficits of nearly Caloric value of that food that (3) is passed up the food chain thirty percent and consuniption of nearly, four-and- and is already counted_in (1) one-half times annual calonc needs Because of space limitations, and lack of%uitable = Caloric supply consumed di- national standards. we have not undertaken similar rectly and indirectly analyses for protein supply We suspect that (1)-12)-(3) -, a pro- Here we are using the cipncept of indirect caloriesto mean'food energy content fed to animals but lost in the food chain conversion processes In the United A sirmia- calculation forthe LS as made wirel and Frirti97 5: inchcating an overall foodnd feed ca loirE co n.s u nap- States. over three-quarters of the coarse grains pro- tioff of 11117 Calories per d!ay This f differs from our own. duced (corn. oats. barley) are fed to livestock,as well since Heichei and =rink includAd the re andrage contribu- as wheat. soybean's. and other commodities that Lion to !Ise-stock as well as meat import.'and cblCFdiated back from' could be used directly for human food (setting aside. livestock-based calonc consurnbt ion eed energy as if feed were of Course. questions of dietary preference) Values all from food crops However their.gyre may be a useful ardica-- non of the les el'of potential bu food calones lost in prod:lc:rig thus calculated for_overall caloric consumptionper an Ammon did should present pasture and forage land be used capita may be an understatement. since the human to produce chipsitfi caloric yields comparable to forages food production potential of land presentlyproduct Cook i19-6 completed a Sitrular calculation His approach ing forage crops. has not been included. was similar to that of Heichel and Fnnk 'see Footnote 13ascludI The actual mg the total caloric value of lisesrock consersion effloencies values for these calculations are de- ssithout attempting to renaose nonhuman foods from the calcula- rived from a umbern of sources. including the food tion Here we base assessed only human loads fed to lisestock and balance sheets (FAO. 1971a). dataorcrop caloric certainly underestrnate the human food potentially lost bs fc;rage values (OECD. 1973:xviii-xx): and an7assumedten prOduction on arable land As with Heichel and Fnnk Cooks percent value for conversion efficiency (calories calculations may be a useful guide to the latter assuming that forage production provides a utilizable food supply for anirrAls available from livestock per calories fed to livestock). srrnilar to 14 hat could be produced on the same land for hurnans

417 Is 30 or

. , 1..1.WCli --....0 . " ..- NI.2', 4.` az° ".."1:-.Z - -..'7.-:, *-.),. . I 7-- -A.:4 --Pt 3r 3 3 174, -4774) - ';"e_',

r .... 4,J4 -4-- .-4 % 4 -t-s--1 41 .411) i---... ---4, e 041 . - - -4"3".r. . " -,_. 6 . , -, S,- ----e *r_. ... ._ ..-, -- -/- t s .. ,..-- ,.' AA 4 t ''" 6 4- < 4 ft . 4 , *:,114v- 5 4 ek," ..., . " I ifs/ S5-ta-.....) 4,,, t 44t=ZI I e .015 i r ./=...,./ 4 _ ",i 4

6 4, --- -- ; ; 4 .4 p. 3 DIETARY' F BALANCE

4 61ST413.12111. op 20% -10% Iscoli MO% atatIll , nro.teahors. 444011114.C4 Mika. MIA Direct & Indirect Caloric Consumption as Percent of Need

Figure 6.World Pattern of Dietary Balance. Values indicate calories of human food input to the food supply system in comparison 31 to annual caloric needs 32 ',TABLE 11.DIETARY CONfPOSYTION AND BALAN . . t, c. . Pk Dietary Composition 4 , V. T -

hinder 15% Under 15% _i ( Dietary Over Over Animal. Animal. 30% Balance 15% \ Under 75%, Over 75% (percent) Animal Animal Starch Starch (1) - (2) . t (3),/ (4) i ( . 1 t . V , 1-' 150 to 450 . . (1) . . ./ ..- 100 to 150 42) -.. , 50 to 100 (3) \ "%...... ,...

0 to 50 (4) ,

-10 to 0 15). . - 5 -30 to :-?10

.464 --... . . , .. To be compded tthe leader from Ftgums 4 and 6 teinsmap 'would exhibit similarextremes. with to find a significant relationship between dietary marked deficiency in thepoorer countries (in con- composition and dietary balance. The relationship iuno4ion with the low caloric intakes) andcoinpara- can be demonstrated (Table 11), a task we have left ble excesses in the industrialized world, particularly for the reader to complete. For eachcountry. enter if we were to incorporate theprotein value of fish- data corresponding to its specific dietary composi- meal fed to animals (and respective conversion loss- tion and caloric excess or deficit For example. ifa . es), American farmers feed about one:half of the an- country is in the second composition category and nual- U. S. fish and rshmaal supply to livpstock second dietary balance category (suchas Yugoslavia). (Brown. 1974:148). it is added to the appropriate section of the table. As a result of this and-preceding analysei of-the Completed.-the table will allow you to come tosome world pattern of food consumption.we might expect conclusion about world patterns of food availability.

4"11.11110

a 19 .33 . 4.

4. II. FOOD SUPPLY SYSTEMS-

Agricultural economists and other agricultural specialists . .have been p,robing the world of the developing countries 'over the past two 'decades to find the key to successful agricultural development. They need not have traveled so-far; the secretsof successful agricultural development are best found in the past history of the 12 'S. E 0 Heady(1976. .107) . 7 of which In the Mbeya Region of southwestern Tanzania. a itself on 17'0 hectares of farmland, one-sixth farm, family begins reparation for the coming crop is rented to a local sugar milleach year. The landscape is a finely grainedmosaic of agricultural per- A . season. Although tlle land is now a'parched brown. arrivarof the rains will return it to a lush green. From fection, indicating the intensive laborrequired to the family's ten hectares (25 acres). they must pre- maintain the nearly weed-free fields of riceand other half-hectare (one-acre) pare about three before the rainsarrive: cut and burn crops. The typical Sidamulyo farm must feed a six-member family aswell as pro- .-fallow bush: hoe or plow grassland; recultivate old fields: prune the coffee and spray the plants with (vide income. Formerly growing traditional and im- pest-inhibiting chemicals. Coffee sales from the last proved local rices, the family now cultivatesmodet11 harvest have provided sufficient funds ($225) to pay rice varieties (IR& IR5) from theInternatiodal Rice the children's school fees and to provide for farm Research Institute in Los Banos. Philippines,having followed the leadership of village officialswho first \and 'family necessities--dhemicals for the coffee. of mod- cooking oil. clothing. soap, salt, sugar. and perhaps planted IR8 in 1968. Since the introduction this year the long-sought radio. The market price'of ern rice varieties, fertilizer usefqr local and modern staple foods has nearly doubled since harvest, but varieties has doubled. The nationalextension and food must last until the next harvest so little will be credit organization known as Bimashas encouraged productivity by use of insecticides andpesticides, credit for which is sold. It was once possible to increase loam )are classing new land. but no new land remains. provided as vouchers. Hiller! former Bimas still outstanding, the N-mer must turn tooutside As fellows have become shorter% there has been a interest Petceptible decrease in yields. and the family must help, borrowing either in cash or kind at now prepare larger fields to assureyields with a rates of up to five percent permonth. Because of the higher cost of inputs to modern' varietyproduction, comfortable margin of safety against drought, peens, used on the field, as less or vermin. An do -drawnplow extends the ares that more family labor must be food crops and car- cash is 'available for hired labor to handlethe in- can be cultivated, and weeding creased labor requirements of the modernvarieties. ing for coffee require longer work 'days than ever and live- before. The family now plants coffee trees- on land Backyard production of knits, vegetables, oiice'available for food crops. but if yields from cof- stock provides dietary variety and, withoff -farm fee are sufficiedt, and high prices hold, the farmer 'work. an additional source of income. Forthe typical may be able to afford fertilizer to use onfood crop Sidamulyo farmer, the arrival of modern varieties fields. However. the price of fertilizer has also in- has brought marginally lower economic returns. creased. Perhaps the area Plabtedto coffee should be greater reliance on credit, and little change inthe shorter maturity of expanded. Traditional vironmental and agricul- occurrence of food shortages. The tural knowledge and the i iremain the majortools the improved rice varieties aids in the intensive by which the Tanzanian ic family manipulatesthe double cropping cycle. If the amount of available environment to produce its food. There is talk of new credit was not tied to use df modern varieties, would crop varieties. but theseed Must be pairchased and they continue to be cultivated? the few who have tried them have not done well. In rural Pennsylvania, a dairy farmer'smajor con- There is also talk of resettling people from farms into cern is the cost-price squeezeof recent years. Al- farm villages. as has taken place in other partsof though he has, improved crop and milkingyields Tanzania. No longer are people's fates in their>oirn slightly, sharp increases in input costscombined hands and those of family and neighbors. ButWeis with only modest farm-level commodity pricein- working for little return' good (Knight 1974). creases mean that he maybe Sidamulyo is an incredibily densely populated vil- on his own labor, when areasonable rate of return is lage in East Java (Prabowo and Sajogyo. 1975). assumed on his farm investment. As thePennsyl- There, a popuhrtioa of over 2000 people must sustain vania Farmer's Association suggests. asuccessful

20 34' farm enterprise must pay-all cashexpenses. pay in- (2) Provide space: solir energy is dispersed over terest on equity, provide a return fbr labor,cover cost of depreciation, compensate for space: thus food production. dependent n management efforts. photosynthesis, also requires and return a profit (PEMB. 1976).By vfftually any space: (3) Manage water: production dependson green perspective. the Pennsylvania farmis a big business. plants, in turn dependent with $200.000 worth of land (300acres dr 120 hec- on water: control tares) and capital (buildings, machinery), of where and when productibnoccurs is one a hired means of meeting this requisite, as is irriga- hand or two, ninety dairy cowl;,one million pounds tion: (4551000 kg) of annual milk production.an annual cash flow of $100.000, and (4) Provide nutrients: plant and animalgrowth a net income of $20.000, depend on nutrient -supply _provided including a $12,000 assumed letup'on investment (at by land management or nutrientsupplements: -4L- six percent interest) and $8,000 for family labor and (5) Channel solar energy: both wy management. The economics ofvirtually any part of inicro- and mac- field operations can be calculated down rospatial structure,as well as temporal to the last sequencing. guide food productionto meet penny, and agricultural extension personnel monitor. this requirement; farm productivity usingcomputer analyses which (6) 'Control succession: invasion andcompeti- guide feed composition and volume! heifer.breeding. tion. normal ecological herd culling. and field operations.Costs and returns processes. roust be controlled to enhance yields fromdesirable can be calculated for any portion of the farmopera- . tion. Long, hard hours are cultigens: a norm for the farmer, and (7) Provide protection: plants and keeping up with latest advisory bulletinsand other animals must literature is crucial. Farm radio networks be protected against predators.diseases. and carry daily pests: price developments. and interest is always sparked by_ (8) Harvest production: spatially dispersed food latest decisions in Harrisburg andWashington about milk prices and other farm policy. Thefuture of the production is carried the firststep toward family farm is a latent issue. withestate taxes. chil- consumption. concentration of the usable dren IfFho preferan urban life, and possibilities of -portion of plant and animal growthor incorporati n for tax purposes metabolism; as complicating fac- (9) Transportation: unless tors. Neve less, this farmer and his neighbors. for eaten in the field. all their co foods must be carried to thesite of consump- plaining, have a deeply rootedsense of tion, often via many transportation links:' personal value in farming and in feelinga sense of (10) Storage: the temporally accomplishment in successfully managingso com- concentrated pro- plicated an erifirtriTM. duction of food is made availableto meet the evenly distributed needs for foodover time, (11) Allocation:' Fundamental Requisites social and economic mechanisms suchas markets allocate food to These introductory vignettescover different cultural consuming units and individuals: and .technological levels,suggesting a diversity of (12) Conversion: foodmay be converted by ani- food production systems. Are thereany common fear mals, fermented,or otherwise altered into r....44tures of food supply systems thatspan the potential more utilizable or desirable forrns:- range of food supply configuraV:ons, from isolated (13) Preparation: foodis processed into dishes or hunting and gathering societiesto complex, beverages for consurnOtioo. usuallynear the regionally-specialized industrial agribusiness?One point of consumption in bothtime and way to answer this question is to suggesta list of space: basic reqUirements thatany human food supply sys-- (14) Ingestion. rules ofproper food ingestion. or tern must meet, a kind of universalmap or chart for etiquette, control how and when foodis con- structuring our discussion of foodsystems:that are sumed. apparently incomparable. Table12 suggests such a list of fundamental requisites for a food siottlily sys- Food supply systemscan be seen to consist of proc-a tem, along with .some broadly defifledstructural esses that gather solar energy and make it available elements by which agricultural-basedfood systems t9 humans. Geographically. food production these requirements. Here is dis- we will distinguish persed in space (an area phenomenon).whereas food een food production requisites and thosere- consumption is clustered at points. In addition.sea- to making food readable to consumers. Both sonality and variabilitymean that food production uction and provision of food have sesk,ralre- may 'be concentrated in fame. whereas food ments, each of which can be described briefly con- p sumption 'must be virtually continuous. Thusa f and later elaborated in thecontext of specific food supply system channels solar -systems: energy, f production and food consumptionacross tie and (1) Maintain continuity:a necessary element in space. the human fdbd supply system is thegeneti- Seasonality is a fundamental problemfor all as- cally- and culturally-encoded information pects of food supply since that guides the system: no world environment is without seasonal aspen Even in themost uniform

235 TABLE 12STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF A MOD SUPPLY SYSTEM

Basic uisites Structural Elements Produce ood: 1.. in continAity Genetic andcultur al information 410. 2. Prov s e space Spatial organization. land tenure system 3. water Spatial and temporal structire: irrigation 4,, Prov snutrients Land management or nutrient supplements 5 C solar energy Spatial and temporal structure 6. Con'I succession Abatement of invasion and competitiort, 7Provi s e protection s.Disease and pest control 8. Harv-production Acquire and concentrate usable productivity Provide F 9. Transrtation Spatial linkages between production and consumption 10. Storage Temporal linkages-between production and consumption Intermediate institutions between production and Oonsumptien:markets 11. Allocation form 12. Conversion Procedures fomaking food into assimilable or desirable 13. Preparation Processing food into anal consumption forms: dietary system 14. Ingestioq Etiquette '/

of environments there are distinct cycles of plant and turing of the food system andresultantticentration animal growth. in response to environmental sea- of economic power sonality that may be undetectable to the naiveob- server_ Variability is similar inimportance_ Variabil- Food Production and Provision ity may-be likened to noise or uncertaintyassociated The American food &1y stem is built upon acomplex with expected environmental and social processes. agricultural technology." Food productiondepends. VI/livability is the degree to which the requisites of first, on a system of highly specializedinstitutions food production and food consumption are subject to and roles which converge at the farm.including the disruption beyond the ability of the food supply sys- roles of government. universities, and largecorpora- tem to cope with variability. - tions. The farmer_ relies upon acombination of r ' In this section of our discussion. we haveseveral folklore. scientific knowledge, and contactWith primary purposes. The first is to suggesthow seem- Other factors in the system in making decisions. ingly different food supply systems meet the re- Among the "other factors" are universityextension quirements we have described. The second purpose perscinnel, sales staff hem seed and implementdeal- is to compare (and. on several dimensions, to mea- ers. and information on cropprice expectations and sure) the differences in how these requisites are met the worldwide agricultural situation."The farmer in food supply systems characteristic,of indus- also depends on a network of privateand public trialized. traditional. and developing, "green revolu- bodies which maintain genetic stocks.These genetic tion" societies. Finally,.we suggest some ofthe mate- stocks are often proprietary, with intensecompeti- rial, energetic. and informational link1gesthat con- tion among seed producers. Bothtechnological and stitute a world food system. genetic continuity are focused on institutions.which also are foci for new information. Newcrop,varieties The I'M' erican. Food Supply System may extend the areas suitablefor cultivation by hav- No food supply system exists in fiblationfrom a ing greater tolerance of expectedenvironmental variability. Farmers, as well as consumers, are partof an larger Social and physical environment, but its ties by govern- may be strongest to one oranother _segment of the industrial structure closely controlled these ment action_ A recent officialreview-of agriculltural larger. system. In industrialized agriCulture. the aims of ties are strongest to the economy:indeed. farming adjustment policies in theli. S. described and food provision in the United States arebest view- these programs: ed as an industry, requiringdiscussion from both an agricultural and anindustrial viewpoint (Figure " For contrasting views of American'farm technology, see 7). In the latter eense,,the foodindustry (from farm to USDA. 1958. USDA. 1975a, Higbee. 1963.DeMarco and Sechl. consumer) reflects characteiisticsof the -larger 1975; Hightovitt. 1972. Heady. 1976, 1 The U.S government. for example. issuesperiodic bulletins economy, with evolutionarystructural changes that status. including do- and reports on agricultural commodity and price reflect processes paralleled in other economic Foreign Agriculture Condors on venous commoditiesExamples mains. The key elenibnt in the Americanihcius- of the role of rapid communication includedaily crop livestock trialized food system is powerpower inthe literal price report j, disseminated byradio networks. such as the sense of a reliance onfossil fuels, and powpf in the Pennsylvania Agri-Broadcasting Network, and byuniversity ag- figurative sense in the vertical and horizontalstruc- ricultural Mention offices

_36 .

Primary Coal- Metols corporations have substantial farm holdings.Farm size has been an important element in the ability of the farm unit to tolerate economicand environmen- Form ...... tal variability. These unitsare made possible by use Machinery of energy-subsidized productionsystems, and big- netss can mean sufficient income from good Far tit i-zer years to "" ...... Pe.t7oloumpi provide for poorer years. The small size of farmunits fRm...... during the settling of the Great Plainsexacerbated problems of drought (Webb,1931; Borchert, 1971). /*.. Suitcase farming is an adaptationto provision of land under seasonal- and variableconditions. This ...... refers to farm ownership in distant locations,with the farm operator travelingamong farm units to meet hAeot Elect K ' Packing seasonal work demands. This practiceis welt-known at 'the Great Plains (Jenks and Kollmorgen,1958). Groin Mills".7 --/-** Suitcase farming extends the landarea managed through the year; may increase utjlization ofexpen- sive machinery by moving itamong farms; and provides a spatial solution to variabilitq,since entriron- I Transportation mental hazards do notoccur -uniformly, even in the Govammant wore- drought Agriculture, '1 e yearsof theGreatPlains Department Proc (Thornthwaite, 1941). For most industrialized farms,water is managed University .** Forestry largely by land use practicesto control runoff and Wholesale° erosion, still depending Distribution' on nature's delivery of pre- cipitation. In marginal areas, supplementalor full Restaurants cRetainai, r Stores irrigation may be economically beneficial, andfarm- S ers now. produce a substantial proportion of such American crops as cotton and vegetablesin irrigated CvmuMER. areas of the West, frequently with a government sub- sidyto provide inexpensive irrigationand an energy Energy subsidy for irrigation pumping andspraying. Farm- Figure 7The Structure of the U S Food System Sub- ers in subhumid areas practice dryland farming.in stantially modified from "The Agriculture bf theU.S "hy which they leave fields in bare soilfallow gum\ Eat! 0. fleadyCopyright c.e) 1976 by Scientific4i.-mencan. other year, in an attempt tostore moisture from two Inc All nghts reserved Used by permission ofW H- years for the benefit of each crop,a productive prac- Freeman and Company for Sbentific American tice where inigation is not available, butpotentially disastrous when continued droughtcreates. dust- bowl conditions fromthe bare, unprotected soil. For over 40 years. pricesupport and adjustment For the industrialized farmer, the soilmay be ,programs have had an important impact treated largely as a rooting mediumfor the crop. upon the with the expected 'nutrient withdrawals farm and national economy Consumers haveconsis- provided in tiTtly hadareliable supply of farm products fora the form of chemical fertilizers.Until recent in- smaller-proportion of theirincome than anywhere creases in fertilizer prices, it was typicallymore else In the world. Farmers have beenassured of at economical to buy fertilizer thanto spread manure. least specified minimusc pnces_for theirproducts but a combination of environmentalregulations on The legislation ana resulting pnigramshave been animal :wastes and higher fertilizercosts may in- modifiedto meet varying conditionsof depression. crease the importance (an benefits) ofmanure war. and prosperity. and have sought to give farmers. spreading. Chemical fertilizersare another energy in general, the opportunity to attain economic equal- subsidy of industrialized farming. ity with other segments of theeconomy (Rasmussen It has been esti- et al.. 1976:21) mated, for example, that in California22 percent pf the energy used in farming in1972 was for fertilizer Just as information is highly institutionalizedin and that for Canadian grain production,some 46 to the industrialized food7supplysystem, so too is the 57 percent of the energy inputsare for fertilizer provision of land for food production. Political allo- (Chancellor and Goss, 1976). Heichel hasestimated cation In the centrally planned economies and land that 23 percent of American agriculturaluse of markets are-parallel mechanisms by whichspace is energy is for fertilizer. (Heichel, 1974a).Energy-to- allocated for production. In the Western world,fam- fertilizer conversion factorsare available for re- ily farm ownership merges imperceptiblyth cor- searchers (Leach, 1975; Commoneret al., 1974; porate ownership, since many familie corporate Pimentel et al., 1973), and the for tax purposes. Many large, cost conscious farmer v y structured can check tables of fertilizer costs and expeCtedcrop

233I

a- pricesito'find optimum fertilizer investments (Som- funded irrigation projects. flood control, tax exemp- mers. 1976:18). tions, assessment variations, land drainage. finan- The spatial and temporal structure of, the farm cial assistance for preparing land for irrigation,the must reflect availability of solar energy andchannel- agricultural extension agent network, ruralelectrifi- ing of that energy through desirable' plants. 'Al- cation, state aid to schools, housing and welfare for though some recent attention has been given to migrant laborers, and government insuranceof mixed cropping (more than one crop interspersed in banks and savings-and loan associations. a field at one time). industrializedagriculture is Looking beyond the harxesi, we can see a flowof largely m000cultural, oftentimes not only in the information constituting a signal from the food pro- field but also for whole farms and farm regions_ Re- vision stem to the farmer That signal is manifest_ gional specialization and spatial interaction reflect in production contracts, commodity futures markets, the interaction of crop yields, crop values, and his- and government price predictions, while grain deal- torical tradition (Spencer and Horvath, 1963; ers. livestock feeders. milk supplycooperatives, and Loomis, 1976). The larger spatial system of food pro- speculators all encourage production by preharvest duction and provision. which pervades many ele- purchases These factors, all of which can be seen as ments of industrialized food supply systems. is a responses to the seasonality andvariability impera- major mechanism for overcoming seasonality and tives. play an important role in equilibrating prices variability problems of food supply. Regional' between harvests and in maintaining, largely in in- specialization. with transportation and other requis- tAaction with government. stockpiles over multiple ite food provfsion linkages, provides a supply of year periods. perishable commodities over longer time periods. The nature of farm inputs reflects recent develop- lessening the effects of seasonality Spatial interac- ments in American farming technology(Table 13). tion makes pOssible bringing food surpluses not only Farm labor has been replaced by machinery. and ag- to urban markets but also to area with food deficits ricultural chemicals are four times as important now as a result of environmental as they were in 1950. Between 1910and 1970, farm, Ciintrol of succession and protection of crops or population dropped from over 25 percent to less livestock -in the industrialized system require ag- than five percent: absolute farm production more ricultural chemicals in addition to traditional prac- than doubled: and output per farm worker multi- tices such as plowing or cultivation. Farmers can use plied nearly eight times (Heady. 1976:110).., chemicals as a variable input in the face of environ- That each American farmer produces food for '0 mental variability. A 1971 sample estimated that others means a complex systerb of linkages between, over fifty percent of American farms usepesticides. the farm and the American dinner table: Foodflows covering eighty perCent of corn acreage and 95 per- over the sametransportatiA network used by other cent of rice (Andrijenas. 1975). Machinery. iclearly commodities, and is part of the same industrial and important in meeting the exigent irm opert economic Aystem of suppliers. marketplace, and tions because of Seasonality (USDA, 1972a). Custom tonsumersttel characterizes the rest of our farm services provide a means forminimizing finan- economy Manytlements of spatialorganization and cial risk because of variability. since each farm oper- regional specialization characteristic of foodProduc- ation (planting. sprAying. harvesting ) is contPacted tion spill over into food provision as solutions to only if the crop appears to be successful. Custom seasonality and -variability. In addition; there is op- services are ago related to seasonality, since custom portunity for altering food processing and conver- machinery crews travel in south-to-north orbits "fol- sion through livestock as-a potential response to ex- lowing the sun." An inadvertent means of protecting tren' disaster. as well as processing to make food food supply against damage from hail is thedisper- available across the seasons. Hoarding. .migration. sal of production. The farmer may have dispersed and disaster relief are potential responses to variabil- production 'as a result of land boughthere, rented ity, along with the modest although important sea- there, and share-cropped elsewhere. The food sys- sonality of diet to cope with the seasonality of food tem. wide in spatial extent. similarly spreadsthe supply. risks. Foodallodtion-is largely a matter of market,, Harvesting and on-farm crop storage are heavily mechanisms, strongly affected by government poli- energy subsidized,eluding field machinery and cy. by various food 'programs for the poor.and by the natural or liquified petroleum gas Used-for drying oligopolistic.structure of the food industry. particu- grain. We can look backward and forward from larly ,as seen lb the ve?tical structure made,possible the harvest. Back%d, 'the harvest is assured, in by both technological interlinkages and transporta- aggregate, bye number of social subsidiesthat are an tion and communication innovations. Given our implicit response to variability. These include such perspectkve on tht food supply system as an indus- direct and obvious subsidies as crop insurance. try, it will be useful to examine oneof its 'major guaranteed prices, and commodity_clontii51 programs characteristics, that of concentration of ownership: (Rasmussen, et al., 1976). all of which assure that the Although transfers of food are accomplished participating farmer will not lose his shirt if he ven- through economic channels, the basic life support- tures to produce. Other subsidies includefederally ing role of the commodities involvedmake it impor-

24 35 TABLE 13.INDICES OF FARM INPUTS, 1950-1974s

Methanical . Real Power and ,r ,Year Total Agricultural Labor Estate Machinery Chemicals 1950 102 " 217 104 85 - -30 195 103 185 103 '98 40,: 1960 98 145 99 -98 1965 50 96 109 99 95 77 1970 101 90 98 100 110 1974 101 83' 94 105 138 s'1967- leo for each column;compare within columns only. SoUr0: USDA (1975b).

tent to view the fo6d industry through a widerlens. determined by the more. highly concentratedenergy Classical economic discussionsare often based on industry or by the government. Large concentrations twe assumptions: a competitive industrystructure rare generally associated withovercharging. For within which a large number of similar firms balance example, a study by the Federal Trade Commission. each other's influence on production, andprices reported that: controlled by consumer influence. Any movement . away from competitive structure leads to an erosion If highly conce ntrated industrieswere decentralized -of this "consumer dem..-.% ." The larger the devia- to the point where the largest four firms cbntrol 40 percent or less of an industry's sales, prices would A tion,ti the more cAmtrol AI from 'areas external to ' the industry into the boardroom. For example,when fall by 25 percent or more (Green et al.. 1972:14), the industry in question' consists- ofa number of The role of input induStry concentrationis of smal -....and a few much larger firms (oligopolis- primary' importance to the farmer whereas the-struc- tic , the latter groups are in a position to ture of processing industries is of interest to thecon- influence ,rices and also the modes of production sumer. Each consumer dollar spent art food benefits -characteristic of the industrial sectorintquestion, in the farmer but the majoritygoes to the processor. ways that are potentially morq advantageous to their Thus inflationary trends in food,prices do net follow own profits than to society as a whole; , identical trends in input industries. The situation' for farmers may be seen in the "cost-price squeeze" from, Because there are few firms, the actions ofone arc 1950 to the early 1970's. During that period, prices of noticed by the rest; each realties that,anymove on its inputs as well as market prices of food increased parta price increase for example wilT generatea reaction by other firms._ Since the best way to substantially, .whereas farm -prices forraw food maximize profits is to act as a monopolist would, the commodities fell. The cost of concentration in the oligopolistic firms begin to march tethesame corpo- agribusiness sector-has been calculated by the Fed- rate &ummer (Gteen et al.. 1972:7). eral Trade Commission (Table 15). In 13-food industries, these changes were estimated atover $2 billion This "conscious -Parallelism" doesnot require any in 1972. On the input side,, overcharges in farm formal agreement such asa written contraap. Rather, machinery have been estimated atan annual quarter the recognition of simi*-ity of interests hi industry billion dollars (U.S. Senate, 1974). - results in a- close conation of business policy Food price increases are sometimes consideredto through independent decisions. be of little importance beCause, it-is argued, . on the One can examine concentration 'rube input and average Americans spenda much smaller proportion processing sectors of the U. S..food systeit by using of their income on food than do people of otherna- U. S. Bureau of the Census (1967)-statiktics 'Quit show tions. For example,average figures show that the market shires accounted for by the four andeight Americans spend only 15percent of their income on largest firms in each industrial category (Table14). food, whereas English spend27 Percent, French 31 Opinions differ as to the level at whichconcentra- percent, and Russians 53 percent (URPE. 1973). But tion leads to price manipulation, with estimates average figures are Misleading. Since the top five ranging from forty to sixty percent (U. S. Senate. percent of the U. S. population receives twentyper- . 1974; Green WO.. 1972; URPE. 1973)., Figures deal- cent of all incoute, whereas the bottom eightyper- ing with concentration in input industriesmay not. cent receives 55 percent, in reality most families always show a direct relationship withprice, be-, must spend much more than 15 percent of their in- cause ap input industry may not control all of its come on food (Table 16). own factors of production. Such is the case for the Between-the large food provision' industries apd fertilizer industry, which has an apparently lowcon- the-consumer lies another groupnf economieinstitu- centration ratio', but depends on supplies ofraw fions, food "retailers. Nationally, the top,four andtop materials (particularly natural gas).whose pricesare eight -firm concentrations. of retailgrocers were 20.1 25 39 I

Is 1

TABLE 14. CONCENTRATION IN AGRICULT05ALINPUT441) PROCESSING INDUSTRIES. 167 Percent of Total Sales Industrial . Code (SIC) "fffauct-Class Top Four firms Top Eight Firms

37 - 21 Poultry feed. including supplements 28 gp 20422 Livestock feed. including supplempts 28 39 2871 Fertilizers 33 52 28790 Agricultural pesticides and other agricultural chemicals - 39 56 3522 Farm machinery a 45 56 _ 98 35221 Wheel tractors and attachments 75 35223 Harvesting machinery 67 82 Processing' 2011 Meat packing plants 27 38 20118 Canned meat (eltept pet food) 57 82 15 23 2015 , Poultry dressing plants 11 20221 Natural cheese 38 44 20222 Processed chew 72 47 2023 Condensed an evaporated milk 35 47 2026 ,- Fltfid milk and related products 21 29 20321 Canned baby foodi- _ 4 93 96 2033 Canned fruits and vegetables 23 35 20411 Wheat flour. except flour mixes 37 55 20430 Cereal breakfast foods 82 94 28 141 se 20511 Bread and bread type rolls 4 L 20620 Refined cane sugar 59 83 20630 Refined beet sugar 67 96 2072 Chocolate and cocoa products 74. 87 20962' Margarine 47 72 Sauce: U. S. Bureau of the Census (1967).

TABLE 15. MONOPOLY OVERCHARGES Market Concentration Monopoly Overcharge Industry 11966top Fotir Firms) $ Million (1972) Meat packing -40 5483.9 Fluid milk 60 256.7 Soft drinks 90 247.8 *Mat liquorl wei 65 108.0 Bread and related products' 50' 191.9 Canned fruits and vegetables 40 194.4143.6 Confectiolary products 40 50 Flour and-other.grain mill products 45 88.5 Distilled linter 55 88.3 Frozen fruits and vegetables 40 50 84.9 Cane sugar 40 71.5 Canned so 71.2 'Creckeri and cookie; 70 57.3% Source: Federal Toads Commission data. quoted by Hightower (1975:64-65). Takenby permission from Eat Your Heart OutFly Jim - tilsbrower. ¢9 1975 by Jim Hightower. (tied by permission of Crown Publishers. Inc.

, and 28.2 percent in 19704IJSDA. 19721r96). National alternativismore expensive smaller retailers value's again are misleading, because *cal concen- among them than the affluentsuburbanite, com- tration.may be much gteater. Typical values of met- pounding tlie pToblem of -low income and higher ropolitan area dominance by the top four retailers proportion 6f income needed for adequate nutrition. range from 51 percent in Bieghannon,New York to The inability of the American food supjsystem 88 moat" in Little Rock, Arkansas1Hightower, to assure 'adequate dietary qtiality for 13million 1976:21). Immobile, urban poor may be tied to fewer Americans (US: Senate, 1973) reflects boththe fail-

26 t 0 IeLE 16. AMERICAN EXPENDITURES AS A to income; for the poor it fails miserably.The Senate ENTAGE OF,SPENDABLE EARNLNGS, 1973 r Select Committeeon Nutrition and Human Needs KJ. S. Senate, 1913) has suggested thedistribution of Low Co St, Moderate Liberal hunger in America Annual Gross Plan Plan Plan one county scale of resolution. Income (percent) (percent) (percent) Counties with one-quarter ormore of the population below poverty income levels andone-third or less of 3,328 62 79 _ ,i. 97 the poor receiving foodassistance were classed as 5,000- 42 54 7. Eli "Hunger Counties, 1973." Even 7,280 counties falling out- 35 45 55 side these dualmeasures have 'sigiiificant numbers 10,000 26 4; pf poor lacking food astitsfance 15,000 18 28 (Figure 8)." Only 25,000 gilg ab-hajf of America'spoor would appear to be fed 12 14 18 adequately. .Source: Christian Science Monitor. quoted byHightower Having already alticizedsome aspects of the in- (1975;61) Taken by permission from Eat YourHeart 06t by Jim dustrialized food system, it isappropriate to suggest Hightower. Q 1975 by Jim Hightower Useclbypermission of , Crown Publisherk Inc some measures by whIch its performancemight .be- assessed, and by which other food supPly_systems might be evaluated. The following yardstickswill be useful for our discussion: land,labor, capital and Pre of commodity food programs, food stam energy. 'other welfare programs,as well as the food system itself. For the affluent, the food 'supply tern provides comilhodities virtuallyon demand, with seasonality and variability reflectedin minor " An earlier study. Hunger U SA. uses a similar approath to suggest patterns of hunger in 1968 (Citizen's Board of Inquiryinto price fluctuations that are insignificant withrespect Hunger and Malnutrition. 1968) -

O C 00 oo o 0o O 00 0 c 0.o o 000000ooo, s, 000o oo S. 0ooo ol 00 000. o :0°0°0 o Counties: 49,00. 0 00'06;0:. HUNGER 1973 O FAILURE- TO- FEED OVER 5,000 POQR -WITHOUT FOOD ASSISTANCE

) Figure & Hunger in the United States, 1973. FailtlreTto-feedcounties have less than one-third of the a assistance: hunger counties are failute-to-feed counties inwhich pow receiving food Senate. t973. more than one-quarter of the population is poor AfterS Land tionate use of agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and farm machinery. Using one-fifth of the world's Crop yields in the industrialized agricultural sys- annual fertilizer consumption and plowing its fields tem have benefited both from a highly developed with over one-quarter of-the world's tractors, it is .technology and from an environment of compara- little wonder -that America's agricultural technology tively high productivity as seen from, a world has been so successful in feeding a bit more than five t'perspective. AlthOugh the i)..S. agricultural system percent of the world's population (Table 18). appears to work miracles (Athericarr yields are type cally* double world standards Table 17), farmers The industrialized nations occupy some of the achieve these high yields by an extremely dispropor- world's most productive agricultural regions. par;

TABLE 17 AVAAGE CROP YIELDS' FOR BASIOSTAPLE FOODS a Area Vheat Race Maize (corn) Roots & Tubers' Potatoes 1961-5 1974 1961-5 1974 1961-5 1974 1961.5 1974 1961-5 1974 18 37 22 75 Developed Market Economies 1 74 2 14 4 91 5 58 3 51 401 18 24 22 27 26 56 North Arnenca 1 98 1 75 4.37 4 98 4 17 448 20 43 20.62 21 59 18 01 22 00 ,.....11g4tern Europe 2 17 3 37 503 5 53 249 4 18 1800 21 97 123 1 29 617 610 211 358 15 57 20 64 15 60 20 76 / Oceania 19 77 Other 1 24 1 28 5 01 584 1 26 1 79 17 46 17 20 16 18 Developing Market Economies 0 97 1 17 1 63 1 87 1 14 1 28 . 790 6 91 7 47 8 85 093 1 11 696 517 615 612 - Africa 070 073 1 28 1 31 i'-, Latin America 1 42 1 49 1 73 194 123 1 39 10 45 11 34 7 19 893 Near East 099 116 341 3 92 190 242 730 787 10 71 12 23 8.37 Far East 084 1 18 1 61 1 87 1 00 105 763 821 7 06 7 98 8 10 Other 1 67 0.83 1 82 1.96--"1"-3a 2 10 7 38 an 10 943 10 57 12 04 Centralk Planned Economies 1 01 152 2 74 .319 227 295 976 84'33 9 87 Asia '- 088 1 27 2 75 3 19 241 285 841 952 Eastern Europe and USSR 106 163 248 3 70 2 15 3 07 11 13 12 76 11 13 12 76 United States 1 70 1 84 4 37 4.98. 4 17 448 20 95 26 47 22 42 27 61 2 17 2 51 10 08 9904 193 13 39 World 1 21 1 60 2 05 236 1f

Thousands of kghectare Sweet potatoes sam cassa.a two starcht* -oots and tubers other than petaled Source FAO Production Yearbook 1974 FAD I975a;

TABLE 18WORLD CONSUMPTION OF AGRICULTURALN7UTS 1973

Fertilizers- Population 11974) Nitrog'en Phosphate. Potash Tractors Nurnber Number Percent Amount'Percent Amount'Percent Amount'Percent (million) Percent (mill ton j

Developed Market 71 7 750 192 17 82 46 1 13 96 87 6 11 48 55 5 11 78 &ore:Mies 235 60 8 77 22 7 508 _ 20 9 4 82 23 3 4 99 10 4 North America 365 94 7 75 20 0 6 12 25.2 556 26 9 588 35 8 ' Western Europe 27 4 16 04 Oceania 021 05 1 62 67 0.28 14 044 0 47 29 134 --3 4 Other 1 08 28 1 13, 47 0 82 40 Developing Mjrkrt 1927 49 3 Economies 7 05 182 3 45 14 2 1 90 92 1 40 85 0 15 09 304 78 Africa 0 43 11 0 31. 19 0 19' 09 44 0 72 44 317 81 Latin America 180 47 1 39 57 -0.90 49 31 054 22 0 04 ,02 0 25 15 193 Near East 1 21 28 4 360 80 1 21 5.0 0 77 37 0 27 16 1109 Far East 5 01 Other Centrally Planned 1228 31 4 13 79 357 685 28 2 7 32 35 4 3 25 19 8 Economies 866 222 Asia' 4 07 105 1 56' 64 0 58 28 020 1 2 Eastern Europe 9 2' 9 71 25 1 %5 29 21 8 6.74 32 6 .3 05 186 360 and USSR 5 4. 8 28 21 4 4.60 190 461 22 3 4 38 26 7 212 United States 3905 100 0 World 38 66 1000 24.25 100 0 20 70 T000 "113 42 1000' In anthem metric tons Peresetages calculated by the authors totals may not *gm with stare became at rounding error Soarer FAO Production Y vorboolt 1,74AO. 1975a) ti 28 42 titularly with resp tar climatic conditions. for growing staple earn corporate farming states. with half of their4800 tor- crops. CoMpared with the p6rate farms having annualsales exceeding humid tropics. middle latitudeareas may have as $100.000 (USDA. /974b:26). much,as thirty percentgreater photosynthetic potential for the summer four-month Concentration of production in largeunits paral- growing season (Ta- lels their develownent. Between1964 and 1970. ble191., This is because potentialphotosynthesis is a farms with over S;0,000 in sales . function of the positive effects increased in domi- of day length and nance from 64 10'76 percent of farm tales, although solar light intensity (duringwhich photosynthetic they numbered only 21.5 products accumulate). and the percent of all farms. Con. negative effects of centration is particularly notablein several farm temperature and night length (use ofphotosynthates products. Eb; the middle 1960's. for respiration dependsop temperature; long, warm over two-thirds of inigh& mean America's vegetable productionwas concentrated in greater respiration'th no photosyn- farms with over $100.0130 thesis):This reasoning. documen in sales. as was one-third Chang (1968; of li. S poultry production(USDA, 1974b26). Even 1970), partially explains the much'ghee racerin yields in the U. S. compared with tropical with farm products whereconcentration is not as Asia. Only if two great. such as cash grains, concentration or three crops can be grown may appear per year on a given' land elsewhere along the food supply'linkage: six com- area can tropical areas outprodUce middlelatitude areas '" panies control over ninetypercent of the wholesale grain market A 1967 'study reportedthat full If industrial technology permitsig1:.1iilcisfrom land. ownership of land resoukes economies of scale in many types ofAtnencen farmis an important ing could be achieved with farmunits of modest size element in understanding thestructure of the operated by one or two people. with American food system' Ooknership a high degree of of land is an mechanization and with custom farmservices aiding economic and politicalissue Industrialized farm smaller farms to achieve similar units,are becoming increasingly larger economies .Mad- In 1880 the den. 1967) Ilr1969. farms withsales greater than average farm size was 134 acres In 1940it was 1 'S100.000-0 9 percent of all acres Since then it has risen'tta much faster rate. so farmsabsorbed 29 that in 1969 it percent of all feed inputs. 11percent of all fuel in- was 389 acres In 196g. over 54per- puts. 39 percent of all livestock and cent or AsnenCa's faun acreagewas in farms of 1000 ultry boughti acres or more- (USDA. 1974b:23). Thus, the on the market. 24 percent of hired inert'. 17 recent percent of all seed. 16 percent of all fertitier. and 41 increase has partly resulted fromthe emergence ofa percent of all hired labor (Hightower. numt of large units (alifomiais perhaps the most 1973) extreme ease of concentration. partlyare result of its .- history of large land Vigils datingback to the Spanish Labor colonial system, but thephenomena is sufficiently. - widespread to. causeconcerti in other regions. In As technological inputs to farminghave increased. North Dakota. a 1932 law excludedlarge nonfarm hilman labor has drastically decreased(Table 13), corporat on investment in basic agriculturalproduc- The modern industrial farmerin theUnited King- tion.. donna, Fjoridei ind Texasare the major dom produces from 125to 800 times as many calories as he eats"busing mechanization and energy subsidies (Le.ac 11975) So long ** Potential pilltOsynthe-sis for,%atioustime periods are com- as energy is pared in Table-19 to'the MediterraneanIwinter rainfall) areas cheap, he can produce ood inexpensivelyand still which have the highest ainnual value Measurementsare earn a reasonable wage based on a staaard plaht andicamt6t becompared dimecth. to There is a large disparity betweenfarm and non- specific crop I.selds Per ;Aber than relativeQterpretation of ch. d mom zones see Chang. 1970- farm incomes in .the UnitedStates 1$6.400 versus $9.600' average faniily inccktne in1969) These fig-4

fA131.riis.1 9 POTENTIAL NET PHOTOSYNTHESIS OF WORLD'CIIMATICREGIONS Potential Photosridiests1/4 4 Month Region (Koppen atic Notation) 8 Month Annual Amount % Cs Amount % Cs Amount % Cs Humid tropical areas (Af. Am) 2.9, 75 Tropical savanna areas (Ave) 58 84 88 92 32 84 -6.2 Warip mpist subtropics (Cfa. Cwa) 86 92 97 34 89 67 92 91 95 Humid. midlatitude west coasts (Cfh,Cvib) 40 106 7 2' Mediterranean climates (Cs) 100 8.7 91 39 100 72 100 96 190 Cool cwitinental climates (Dfa. Dwa) 38 99 64 Cold continental clirdates (Dfb. Dwbj 89 6.8 71 41 107 5,4 as 62 65 Kg at' for suited period Values attributedto all periods assume adequate moisture Source Modified trorp, Chang (197096) Used by perrriission of the Afmais of the As,sociation of American Geographers

29 4J I ures are deceiVirtg beciiise muchof the disparity for land. buildings, And machinery. and ort term can be attributed to the veryley; income levels -of capital for operatirig costs between harves(Evans farm labor. Much of this labor is invisible tourban and Simunek. 1976) Since virtually all ents of ee mone- Americans. since it is expended far away. oncrops . the farming system (land. labor. energy) seldom conjuring images of American farming.Farm tart' value. detailed analyses of farm and cp budgets laborers pick fruit. clean and bag vegetables inthe have been prepared to guide farmers in their deci- field, spray pesticides. weed. and do other laborin- sions " Assuming that money could earn areturn by tensive operations. By 1972. only 2.8million work- being invested in alternative endeavors (such as at ers remained in the U S.food production system; bank account. factory, poker game). any investment approximately twenty percent of these wereblack. in agriculture represents an investmentthat must Puerto Rican. Mexican-American. or Mexican,Of yield a return at least as great as the opportunity cost this number. the minority who work all year (13 1 of the money. that is. what it would earn elsewhere. percent) made an annual average of S3.170.whereas This is why we separated the annual income of the the overall average wage was only 51.160 per an- Pennsylvania farmer cited earlier into Turn on in- num Government policy aidsthis process of human vestment and -payment for labor and rianagement abuse by differentiating between the rightsof ag- When capital must come from private sources. ricultural and nonagricultural workers Large num- reasonable return is expected It is interesting to note bers of the former are excluded from manyof the that in the early 1960's. even assumir*a very modest benefits cif labor legislation Often. farm workers are 14 1%) return.on capital investment. manyAmerican not unionized. and migrant workers are notallowed farmers were working for wages as low as 50e per to bktrgain collectively fortmproved benefits such as hour. and some. in areas of variable crop yields. were unemployment compensation In 1972.federal actually losing as much as one dollar for every hour minimum wage regulationscovered only 535.000 of worked (Higbee 1963' 167-169) these workers (URPE. 1973 70-71.981,Agricultural Many industrialized farms Ifelong to cooperative workers receive low rates of injury compensation.and organizations for supply of inputs or sale ofproduc- their in thirty states aregranted none at all. even though tion. and others assure markets by contracting ,agriculture is the third most hazardous industryafter harvest before production Some data are avaiLable mining and construction. Moreover.they receive for an analysis of contract farming. the system less comprehensive social security coveragethan whereby a corporation contracts for use of a farmer's workers in other industrial sectors Also. weak child land and production resources. gaining the cheap labor laws allow about 800,000 children to work dur- labor advantages of family farming. without assuming school hours (URPE. 1973-70-71) ing the risk of otvnership or capital investment.The A justification for this lack of power amongwork- farmer sells his prodflce to the purchaser or proces- between the two par- ers in the agriculturalproduction sector advanced in sor at a price fixed in advance Congress is that ties Contracts vary greatly in their details and whether the farmer gains or loses as a result depends farm commodity prices are det&rmined on a day.. onehviroumental conditions during the harvest. to day basis in a highly competitive worldmarket year Some of the west examples of oppressive con- and rigid bargaining legislation "light weaken the tract's are found in tlie broiler p ytry industry ability of L' S agnculture to compete in world trade IL'S Senate. 1972 50) The grower's contract Ls so unequal that he has been compared to the sharecropper in both his status and Other factors reinforce this mythology The trend his povert), The difference in this vision of that in- with some, crops towards "runaway fields" is one famous relationship is that the bossman is an absen- example. To avoid increased labor Costs. corporate tee landlord with a corporate not a personaliden- farmers may move their fruit and vegetable produc- tity whose big houseis in asianelled boardroom tion to southeast Asia or Latin America (De Marco in far away 91inneapolis'or New York_Otherwise the and Sechler. 1975:80-82) analogy needs no explanation The 'cropperis vis- Our image. then, of the highly productive Amen- ited b,. the 'field man" who supplies him with the . can -farming system is tainted by recognitionof the essentials to make a crop in this case baby chicks poverty levels of farm laborers. U S. policy encour feed and technical advice), the field man collects the agricultural tOchnolo harvest 18 week old chickens) measures the results ages further development of the weighs the chickens and sets the price) and de- some intended further to replace the farm worker. cades what the croppers share ought to be The crop- rather than to improve conditions for this group We per may even be lorced to buy hissupplies this subsidize the exploitation of farm labelers by public broiler equipment) from the company store The cor- provision of welfare. migrant housing, and other programs which make possible thecontinued payment of substandard wages. "The detailed of these budget calculations are in the Firm hterpnse Data S) stem of the Economic Research Serviceof the USDA' They have a high degree of spatial resolution and budget Capital detaiL Whole farm budgets arra* prepared b", the USDA as well The industrialized farm is a capital intensive en- as by various farm organizations andagncaltural extension ser- terprite. depending on long-term capital availability vices fUSDA_ 1971 1976 Krenz of of19761

4 4 porate idlord keeps all the records (1: S Sen-, ate Su values of farm land A 1975 studyin Illinois showed, inrnittee on Monopoly. 1972 3702) a. systematic bias in farmland assessment Owners of Government estimates of the share of .1.:S food pro- farmland priced at $200per acre paid taxes based on duction produced under contracts irklicatethat for assessments of 38 percent of sale price Thistax rate some commodities. such as milk and broilers.95 IS over three times that of farmland witha sale pric percent of production is controlled bycontracts, in excess of 51.000 per acre The latterwas assessed with considerable variation in other.commodities at only 12 percent of sale price (SuccessfulFarming. (U.S. Senate, 1972). Suchcontracts may exert a 1976) stabilizing effect on food supplies.but they also Large farms also connote greater potential foren- suggest a further dimension of concentration.con- vironmental pollution. partly becauseof cheaper as,- trol. and exploitation cessibility tQ operating capital andvolume discounts The political importance of food forcesthe gov- on input commodities Perelman and Shea(1972) ernment to support-agriculture by policy and bysub- cited data showing lowerinterest rates on loans for sidy programs. Schultze (1971)estimated that ag- larger farms. and sizeable volumediscounts on fer- ricultural subsidies cost the U S.taxpayer $9 to $10 tilizer (ten percent). insecticides(14 percent). and billion annually Since the 1950sthere has been an aerial crop dusting (25 percent) for farmsof 3200 overall increase in both the number ofsubsidy pro- acres or more grams and the level of direct payments under the Direct payments included commodity controlp Energy grams. land retirement payments. andconseryion and soil bank payments for land The fundamental task ofany agricultural improvements In systemto harnesssolarenergyforfood addition there are a number of othersubsidies from productionis accomplished by the government. including the Smith using human. ani- -Lever (1914) mal. and inanimate enerkyto channel the flux of and Hatch 11887) Act grantsto universities for ag- solar energy in desirable ricultural research and extension: ways In chemistry a, tax reductions for catalyst is a chemical that facilitatesa reaction research and developmentcosts. subsidized irriga- Human and other energy forms have tion water supplies; and asi miler catalyt- government research and .is role In agriculturq Because energycan be mea- agricultural extension roles Pricesupports and di- sured in universal units (calories. rect payMents have disproportionately benefited joules. BTU's. and the like), it has-become fashionableto measure the large farms. An estimated 53percent of price support productivity of an agricultural benefits were received by Class -I farms system in terms of in 1969. as energy output (of food) compared to totalenergy in- well as 29 percent of directpayments. although these farms. with $40.000 puts. an approach that is somewhat Ibisleading or more in annual sales. consti- Calones of crude oil energyare not caloWies of food tute only five percent of all farms Benefits forthese energy. since the former have only a potential catalyt- large farms has been estimatedat over fifty percent of ic role. whereas the latter Constitute energy their total income. but less than one-third consum- the income able by man Why. then. isenergy analysis impor- of the farm group with lowestincome can be attrib- \tent? uted to subsidies (Schultze, 1971) The spatial dis- First. energy is pervasivein the food supply sys- tribution of government agpiultural benefitsparal- tetn The system usesenergy to run farm machinery, lels the distribution of farm size, with themodifica- to manufacture fertilizer, to ship both agricultural tion that crops which dominatesome areas are not inputs and oiktPuts, to produce .agricultural chemi- subject to government supportIn 1970 the ten cals.toproduce machinery and building largest single payments, totallingS18 3 million. 'went,to California ($15 million). componentsthe list )5 endless. In the United Hawaii (52 3 mil- States. 12 percent of our overall 'energyuse is for lion), and Florida (S1 million) (Ramparts.1971) agnculture (Hirst. 1974) Here. then. the food prob- The' distribution of subsidiesmay be compared lem overlaps the "energy crisis,- and both comma- with government tax receipts fromthe agricultural ity and economic returns for energy_mputs sector. Tax revenues obviously need not necessarily are of increasing importance In the industrializednations. remain intrasectorial in distribution. butthe com- marginal-. returns for increased parison is of interest because it reflects another investment in way energy-dependent inputs are assessed withincreas- in which the government has supportedthe trend ing care Developing areas. where unit increases in toward increasing farm size Small farms with low energy-based inputs could havegreater marginal re- levels of income generally havea lower percentage turns in terms of food supplyrind human Of reported losses for tax nutrition. purposes than farms with must compete with the developed worldin the mar- high incomes. The extremecases in 1965 were those ketplace_ for energy inputs with incomes to the 515-20.000range. of which 63 9 A second factor is the interchangeability of percent reported a profit and were taxed according- land, labor. capital. and energy. Productionotherwise in- ly. and the group of 766 farms withincome greater creased by expanding land planted than $1.000.000 of which only to crops may also 14 percent reported a be achieved by adding more labor. capital(such as profit (13 S Senate. 1968) Similarinequities in taxa- imgation systems). or energy (particularly tion can occur with property taxes based as fer- on assessed tilizer) In the Unitjed States. capital andfossil fuels

31 .45 replace human labor and land. allowing the Ameri- ture are average values for corn (maize) production can farmer to produce fifty times more marethan in the United States (Table 20) Considerable techni- would be possible by hand labor. investing only 22 cal detective wolic must be done to complete these man-hours per hectare of production compared. for estimates. since values must be ascertained for tile example. to 1144 man-hours in parts of Mexico -energy costs of manufacturingmachiner,;.'produc- (Pimentel et al.. 1975:755). If energy inputs could be ing pesti4ides. and running tractors. among others used to provide dry-season irrigation and fertilizer to The use of energy,in corn production is worth pursu- produce an additional crop per year in rural Asia. ing because corn represents a middle level of pro- Chancellor and Goss (1976) suggest that input of duction'intensity. intermediate. for example. be- 0.453 x 10' calories of energy could produce the'tween vegetables and hay Since 1945 the amount of food needs of one persbn (0 952 x 10' calories per energy contributed bylabor has declined considera- year in Asia) without any expansion ofland Thus. bly, reflecting decline in farm labor populations over approximately threepeople could be fed with the the same period. As the corn yield has increased over catalytic energy role of one barrel of crude oil the same period so has the demand for all other in- A final factor is that fossil fuel energy. as a major puts which utilize energy Note the particularly large agricultural input. is a nonrenewable resource To Increases of fertilizer This is to counteract the the extent that food production depends on energy monocultural system s negative effect on soil qual- subsidy. its energy needs must compete in the ity economic 'marketplace with other energydemands. In 1939 corn was grown in three rear rotation cycles and as part of the larger energy economy. It ylust of c..orn-oats-clover :n order ;o regenerate the soil No eventually face the -prospect of resource depletion fertilizer was used and 10_000 corn seeds %ere We must question the eventual fate of food supply planted In an acre The :..tie corn belt states systems based on a fossil fuel suidy . 44as 38 bushels per acre 3r .19-0 howeler rotation Estimates of the energy su to the Indus- cad nein left by the via.. side instead the average trialized food SN stern have been de based on food farmer ernp:s. ed 150 :b --ogen fert:::zer Over production alone and on the whole food supply 25 000 seeds were planted per acre and yiefds were system, "..An example of the calculations possible for. 90-100 bushes per acre Lerz-- 1974 8 assessing the energy input and returnfrom agricul- It is also apparent from the table that the' energetic efficiency (the ratio berween the amount of energy expended in production and the amount received " Cerv.na..a :9-4'.RAKE :375 from the harvest) of corn production is very low and f-1 .:"9-319-4Ss.:-tar ie-.1.1!---ir19-4 rie)che. 1973 :9-4a :9-izanl, ST EA are.-^:-...rtz has declined in the period considered Thus. it was tnig sri dim 3.70 ul 1945 and only 2.82 in 1970

TABLE-20ENERG'i LNP1..-TS PER ACRE OF CORN PRODUCTION 1945 and 19-0 :945 1970

. Ratio Energy Energ :970 Equivalent Equivalent Input Units Amount .10' calories' Amount 10' calories: 1945

Labor holes 23 12 5 9 4.9 039 %Litt icier.- Kcal Y 10' 180 0 420 420 0 Gasoline gallons :5 543 4 22 -97 0 14. Nitrogen pounds 513 8 112 9-40 8 16 Phosp1xrrus pounds 106 31 471 44 Potassium pounds 5 52 60 680 13 08 Seeds bushels 0 17 34 0 0 33 63 0 1 85 Irrigation Kcal Y 10' 19 190 34 34 0 . 1 79 Insecticides pounds 0 1 11 0 x Herbic ides pounds 0 0 1 11 0 Drying Kcal Y 10' 10 10 0 120 120 0 12 00 Electricity Kcal ; 32 32 0 310 310 0 969 Transportation Kcal x 10' 20 20 0 70 700 350 Total Input 925 5 2 a96 8 '313 Corn Yield bushels 3.427 2 81 8 164 8 238 Output input ratio -7- 3 70 2 82 The Kcal alulacalonei is the same as the food calorie Source Punentel el al 119731 an Scienc. Vol 182tioveraber2 1973 pp 444-445 GDpyr:gh! 1973 b-) the Arne:it:4n fcrih!. Advancement of Science Repented permission of David Punentel and Science

32 46 The example of energy input to corn production is is available Overall energy input in relationto a - paralleled by studies of othercrops (Table -21) and by ricultural productivity is illustrated the total energy input for food in Figure . production in the showing an asymptotic pattern Note theincreas- United States (Table 22). More elaboratemachinery. ingly marginal returns to increased fertilizer, and directenergy use are all important in energy inputs the growth of energy subsidy as energy inputs are incread thereare no longer for food production in correspondingly grist increases in food the U.S. The food provisionsystem. on the other outputs. To hand, has used several times the extent that recent histopital trendsreflect pro- more energy than food ductivity as a function ofenergy, small energy cut- production. For example. in1940. over four times as backs would have little effect much energy was used in foodprovision as produc- on productivity, but tion'. falling to less than three tunes large cutbacks would apparently havea significant i as much in 1950 negative effect. Hirst (1974:138) has calculated the and 1960. but rising toover three times as much in approximate energy use for food productionamong 1970. The system beyond the farmuses far more food groups in the U.S.. energy. and adds nothing to the amount of food that suggesting that,43 percent of the energy is used for livestock products.13 percent for directly consumed starchy staples,and 44 percent for other foods (including tenpercent for al- TABLE 21 ENERGY EFFItiNCIESLNCALIFORNIA coholic beverages) Reflectingon our earlier discus- FOOD PROLTUCI sion of dietary composition this pointmust be Energy Output underscoredwe not only eat high off thehog. but -Crop Energ) Input Ratio in doing so we apparentlyuse a significant propor, tion of our energy subsidy for agriculture.Figure 10 Barle 6609 summarizes the _picture for the industrialized Wheat ag- 5363 ncultureof-the42nited States. showing theamount of Rice 2554 Sorghum energy subsidy required to produce a unit of food 2534 energy 21 For each food calorie a two-calorieenergy Corn 2.311 subsidy produced the foody and anther Potatoes z119 six, or Apples seven brought the food from the farm torus. Dry haris 1267 1150 Carrots 1059. Grapes 1054 This4discussion'for Tomatoes tne S has a;st, been paralleled h) 0761 udies the state ;eve: and for other nations Ie xair. pie Cer- Peaches 0'31 s-inkaai(1974, have caict..iated that five percent of the Califor- Lettuce 0337 nia enni) suppl) is used for agricultural productionLeach Beans Mier;! 0324 19753611attributes 45 percent of total Unitisd Kingdomienerp Cauliflower 0248 use to production and 15 7 per-..ent of that nation s toleenergy nudge/ to the f l o c raster.: Comparable figures for the 1.__S Pears i canned 0241 are an est:mated:12 percer.'of energy for the food srvem 'I-LrV. Tomat oeucanned 0167 1974, Broccoli Virozen and an implied four percent for food production aloneusing the 0133 .ambles Lo-fable22 Cauliflower (frozen; 01.23 iiebche1 andFrkak '1975 calculated an enm-g) sunsid:, of 4944 calories per das to a diet of 3391 calorie's a ratio of Farm production141*.rutprocessing except as specified 1 5 rather than the ti.o implied hi tne Ste.nnart andSteinhart data Source Cersinka et o; .1974 113) 19741

0 0120 19611 t963 V. 8 1%51970 1960 /961 2 if; 100 s maill 157 "959 II. .5 3954 ° a 1950 W Z 10 1947 3 t940 1920 8 5930 0 10 20 ENERGY ;N1110110" CALI/. Figure 9Energy trip5Ao4-Ferm-etitism-in the U SFood Figure 10 System After Steinh4rt and Steinhart Energy Subsidy of Arrierican Agriculture 11974 310) Used b After Steinhart and Steinhart t 1974311) Used by permis- permission of John S Steinhart sion of John S Steinhart I 334 "i TABLE 22.ENERGY USE IN THE U.S. FOOD SYSTEMS 1970 Component 1940 1950 1960

Production: 232.0 Fuel (direct use). 70.0 158.0 188.0 46.1 63.8 Electricity . 0.7 3!.9 -12.4 24.0 41.0 94.0 Fietllizer 2.0 Agricultural steel ,.-1 .6 2 7 1.7 9.0 30.0 52.0 80.0 Farm machinery 11.8 19.3 Tractors 12.8 30.8 18.0- 25.0 33.3 35.0 Irrigation 373.9 526.1 S 124.5 303.4 147 0 192.0 224.0 308.0 Food processing industry 6.0 Food processing machinery 0 7 5.0 5.0 28.0 38.0 to 8.5 17.0 Paper Packaging 31.0 47.0 Glass containers. 14.0 26.0 38.0 62.0 86.0 122.0 Steer Cans and aluminum 246.9 Trahsport (fuel) 49.6 102 0 153.3 28 0 49.5 44.2 74.0 Trucks asd trailers (manufacture) 571.5, 841.9 Subtotal 285 8 453.5 Preparation: Commercial refrigeration and cooking 121 0 150 0 186 2 263.0 Refrigeration machinery (borne and 10 0 25.0 32 0 61.0 commercial.) 480.0 Home refrigeration and cooking 144.2 202 3 276 6 275.2 377.3 494.8 804.0 Subtotal 2172 0 Grand total 6.85.5 1134.2 1440 2 - Values Arnim are 10° Worms_ Source- Steinhart and Steinhart-(1974.309) Used by permissionof loin S Steinhart

certificate, and there are no tiles of old farm Traditional Food Supply Systems magazines. We now have an image of the American hod sys- The farmhouse? Remove the electricity.plumbing, tem. productive and beneficent in some respects. floors. and all but two moms. Replacetwo-by-fours wasteful and gluttonous in others. Borrowing a very and brick with poles and mud, windowswit effective technique used by Heilbroner (1963)x. let us wooden shutters, the range with a small try to envisage the food system of atraditional soci- stove. There are no cupboards to bebare, and closets ety on the frioges of development. in contrastwith are pegs with a change of workclothes and one good the U.S. pattern. Our example is chosen from among garment for each family member.Hand woven bas- those hundreds of millions where traditional ag- kets hold produce in the rafters of thehouse. and riculture still persists. Let us begin, with thefirm clay pots, filled at the stream a' quarter-mile away. itself, taking away 380 of the 390 acres. since ,38 hold ariay's drinking water supply. The waterwill be other families occupy that land. The buildingi go es clear when the mud settles. Grass thatch or corru- well, the barn, the implement garages, the corn crib. gated metal provides a roof, and duringthe rainy the silos, the milk house, the tool shop. In their place season drinking water will becollected from it. We have the eaves of the house and'several mud- You can 'guess what has become ofthe power lined grain stores, a small corral fOr the oxen, and a mower, television, mixer, clotheswasher, and other perch for the chickens. Most livestock are gone. "necessities" of modern life. A betteredbicycle. a since there Is not sufficient mom for them on ten transistor radio-these are the real luxuries. No acres. Two oxen add a few chickens remain. driveways to shovel in winter, no air conditioning to Farm machinery? It too has vanished, replaced by break down in summer. But of course only apriniary few odd knives, a machete, school nearby, a dispensary five miles away, ahospi- a small ox-drawn plow, a without pub- and a fine pair of hoes, one with a hand-forged blade, tal 15 miles beyond. all over dirt roads the other with a blade purchased in a country store. lic transport. No grocery stores, shopping centers, or Obviously the gasoline and oil tanks are gine, with food stamps. file of old tax returns and Modest production of cash crops means anannual no machines to run. The the ferns records Is now a tattered notebook with several cash flow of one hundred dollars, in addition to important dates and tax receipts for a few years past. cash value of the food crops (as if that is anadequate The diploma on the wall is now a third grade sol measure of their value!). Of thehundred dollars: ten 34 48 may go to school fees. ten to taxes, twenty to fer- and makes greater use of solarenergy and soil nu- tilizer for the cash crop. twentyto laborers at critical Periods during the trients. In many tropical areas. the "field" isa micro- crop year. twenty to household cosm very similar in ecological structure to natural necessities like cooking oil, matches,needle and thread, ten to clothing. biological communities Succession is controlled by the field preparation process (by machete and hoe, Perhaps we belabor the image?Nevertheless, we perhaps by animal-drawn plow). by weeding and must ask ourselves how a traditionalsystem of agriculture fUnctions, using the cultivation as the crops mature. and by mixedcrop -' same frameworks we ping. Mixed crops, traps trid snares fordanimalpests. discussed previously. By lookingat some'of the impacts of the first salients of flooding. guarding., companion plarni-ng (plants "development," we will which resist pests are plantedamong the cropsas also understand the eaticing characterof a transi- tional. "green revolution" farm, are marigolds and onions in the U S.). and other basic to understand- techniques provide protection againstpests and dis- ing a third example of a food supplysystem which will follow -eases. Harvesting is by, hand laboror animal- po'wered machinery. There are a number of spatial and temporalmeans Food Productic. for coping with seasonality and variabilityin a traditional production system. For seasonality. thereare Traditional or preindustrial food supplysystems traditional calendars that control the scheduling of may be defined as systems which 'produce food activities The genetically-coptrolled phenblogy of without the benefit of fossil fuel subsidyiDuckham crops also helps to match food production to climat- and Masefield. 1970; Ruthenberg.1971, Grigg. ic seasonality. Spatial dispersion of activities may 1974). Our heuristic example is drawn froman area extend the seasonality ofcrop production by taking most familiar to the authorstropical Africabut advantage of different environments. If this region differs substantially from temperature Latin America. and rainfall patterns are favorable. multicropping(us- for example. in having fewer traditionalcases of ing the same field for several cropsin succession) landlord-tenant relations, and fromAsia i>z not hav- provides a temporal sequence of food supply from ing had wideseread irrigation andits socio-political the same field: grazing livestockon uncultivable. or concomitants Nevertheless, the conditionswe de- fallow land also extends the period of food produc- scribe are pan-tropicalin distribution tionFor pastoralists. seasonalitymay mean trans- Food production in the traditionalsystems is built humance. seasonal migration of livestock, that allows from a store of informationa geneticstock of crops harvesting of solar energy by grazing ina number of and livestock. and human informationthat may be places and environments referred to as folk science or ethnoscience. Although The major response to variabilityin the traditional individual differences in abilityto know and teach about the environmentsystem is use of what Allan (1965) has termed the occur in traditional society. "normal surplusFaced with environmental varia- there is little specialization with regardtd agricul- bility. traditional farmers, tural knowledge. Virtually in areas with adequate everyone has a .detailed land resources typically cultivatemore land * herd and intimate familiarity with environment.of an ex- more livestock than would be required to produce ceptionally high degree of ecologicalrationality as adequate food yields in an averageyear By cultivat- seen from our perspective (Conklin. 1967. Morgan ing more landor cultivating landmore intensively and Moss. 1970: Knight. 1974;Berlin et di, 1974) than usually neededthe farmerassures that al- Space is allocated by traditionaltenure systems. though yields may be ext mely low.enough food many of which are characterized by rights ofuse will be harvested eve e..rest years to supply rathErthan by true ownership. landis allocated by the family until thnext harvest Clearly, this does the'community for use. and is redistributedby the not always work.r a new and unex p community as its membership changes Land led threat to and production mi telude the nor Isurplus clop rotation, burning. and. insome areas. recycling mechanism. For -mpl,,, the normal surplus might of animal wastes provide nutrientsIn production be adequate for occasional drought. but systems with land rotation, known not..lcrcust as shifting culti- invasion. The normal surplus strategy isso named vation, planting is followed by long. wildfallow be- because during all butilhe poorestyears the farm fore clearing, burning. and recultivation.Natural family produces more food. often muchmore: than ecological succession restores environmentalpro- can be consumed. During the best years.some food is ductivity. More intensive landuse. dependent on left to rot in the fields, feasting iscommon, and suit- crop rotations and manuring, are characteristiof able foodstuffs are convened to alcoholic beverages areas with, higher densities of population (Boserup. View the latter two. if you like,as a positive reward 1965) for the farmer'working more than otherwise might Solar energy in the traditional system is chan- have been required Africa. the normal surplus neled. as in the industrial. throughcrops. but here may have been t fi st commitment to a cash the crops are often iriterplanted in thesame field ecbnomy. since exss crops could be marketed once Interplanting minimizes weed infestation. piovides the economic in tructure appeared. a less uniform environment for pests and dli.eases. In addition to he normal surplus mechanism.

35 49 r. -_-.. farmers can also cope with variability by spatial dis- (1965) has suggested that at lOwpopulation den- achieve persion of activities, including scatteredfields and sities. traditional agricultural systems can the high outputs in proportion to labor inputby using dispersed livestock. An example of the latter is As popu- tilia exchange of cattle among the Pakot of Kenya.-in land rotation as a major sftural element. which a person's cattle are dispersed- among the lation increases:land must used more intensively, `friend- and the required weeding and otherlabor to main- herds of friends ostensibly as a binding of shorter fallow ship. but also as a means to prevent disease,drought. tain productivity with increasingly means decreased productivi labor. but increased. rustling. °I-other hazards from decimating one's to traditidnal end of herd (Porter. 1965). Several of the seasonality-and -productivity to land. The ulti variability-adaptive aspects of traditional food pro- this evolution is the irrigated. wrice cultivation in duction also carry over into food provision. southeast Asia. where margihal labor inputs may produce just enough food_to sustain thelaborer (Geertz. 1963). As a result of this kindof difference Food Provision , in land use and labor intensity. nosingle characteri- Food provision in a traditional society is zation of returns to land and labor ispossible, simplifiedby the maintenance of singular perhaps with the exception that laborwill be production- consumption units. Each producing unit economized wherever possibleno one wantsto (the family) lives on or near the farm.producing work more or harder than necessary. most of its own food needs and consumingmuch of Traditional capital is obviously simpler thari in- what it produces What transportation is necessary is dustrialized agriculture. often including hand-made provided by human porterage or animal energy implements. Complex irrigation systems are also Traditional markets map take some food out of the capital. as are terraces and other land improvements: local community or circulate food within it.but However, the terms of reference we have used before many of thefood transfers would be by barter (for are useless in the traditional system.Capital invest- specialized services of a carver. physician. or di- ments must be efficient energetically.since they rep- viner). reciprocity (sharing of labor. food. andother resent human and anim41 energy investmentthat commodities on a reciprocal gift-giving and help- Must be produced by the system.Energy then is a lending basis). and redistribution through tradi- relevant measure _-, tional authorities (with taxation, personalwealth. or Studies o( traditional food supply systems have common fields providing food to needyfamilies, as been undertaken from an energetic viewpoint (Table well as for common ceremonial occasions)(Polanyi. 23) Values range from 5:1 (output: input) among 1957) Food conversion is simple. withsmall Ugandan pastoralists to 65:1 among shifting cul- 'amounts fed to livestock. some food converted to al- tivators in Africa. As would be expected energy re- coholic beverages. and sonthoving through the turns to energy invested must besignificantly greet mechanisms described to other consuming units to maintain the human community. It isequally im- Dietary custom and etiquette govern food prepara- portant to recognize/hat' these retains are action and ingestion. as in the industrializedworld complished wifbout fossil fuel subsidy (Rappaport. Food prejudices are common here as well as among 1971). ourselves, and some may have a rational basis (Si- Technology is indigenous in the traditional food moons. 1967). For example,adult lactase deficiency supply system. This need not mean that genetic and means many of the world'speople cannot digest cultural information were developed independently milk (hence the intriguing title, "One Man'sMilk is witiin the local society, but that whatever the origin Another Man's Whitewash"Harris. 1972). of these elements and whatever their technological in addition to the normal surplus. storage.migra- products. they have been tested against local social tion, toleration of hungry seasons.redistribution, and ecological environments. and modified and and ilietar change can all be seen to meet the'im- adapted through time (lanzen. 1973). That the sys- peratives of seasonality and variability.In the overall tem (and the 'society using it) persists is oneindica- food supply sy.stem. the traditional society's tion of its success: another is our increasing appreci- mechanisms for coping with the basic requisites-of ation of the complex cultural-ecologicaldynamici of food production. seasonality. and variability are such systems. and their resiliency to environmental sentially local in scale. Although the complex t- stress. work of flows and feedbacks thatcharacterize the We w)fo are accustomed to industrialized agricul- industrialize& system are not present, traditional ture often view traditional practices withwonder. if mechanisms meet many of the fundamentalneeds not disdain. Particularly vexing is the apparentin- for food supply efficiently and resiliently ability of India to feed itself, while its over 200 mil--- lion cattle are not consumed by the Hindu popula- A ssessment tion. India's sacred cattle are an excellent topic to The characteristics of traditionalsy;tems include help us see unfamiliar practices in a more favorable pefilcularly as a func- light. Harris 11966) provided Considerable insight varying intensities of land use. 4 tion of population density. and returns tolabor are into the taboo against beef codsumption whenhe inversely proportioGil to land-use intensity.Boserup- argued -that the-sacred cattle could be understood as TABLE 23. ENERGETIC EFFICIENCY OF TRADITIONAL FOODPRODUCTION

Society Energy Output/ Place Energy Input Ratio Kalahari, Bushmen Southern Africa 7.8 Dodo Pastore lists Uganda Shifting Cultivators 5.0 Congo Basin 65.0 Tsembega (shifting cultivators) _New Guinea India (traditional) 20.3 Rice cultivators South Aifia. 14.8 Southeast A:sta Chinese peasants 1935-37 14.2-16.5 Asia 41.1 -Corn cultivation (hoe) Mexico +OW Cora cultivation (hoe) 30.6 Guatemala 13.6 Cassava cultivation (hoe) Tanzania Cassava cultivation (hoe) 26.9 Congo Basin 37.5 Sources: beach (1975); Pimentei et g'61(1974)

( 41, '----ecologically rational. He suggested a symbiotic role of cattle 'With stress" to human experience.From the perspective man, in' which cattle provide milk, of our-recent history, traction, and dung, plus beef and hides we may see the ratioriality and for Hindu ecological sensibility of traditionalfood supply sys- untouchables. Moslems, and Christians.For Hindus, tems. One of the dilemmas of cattle are critical for supplyinglabor at seasonal development is the bottlenecks in the staple maintenance of the "positive" elementsOf tradition, grain economy. By using while bringing changeelsewhere: a process of "crea- crap wastes and uncultivated land, theydo not compete with man and indirectly Provide tive destruction" (Malassis,1976). Planners usually solar energy neglect the former and the latterdominates, not al- 1 tdungtwo-thirdi of whichis used as the ways creatively. of domestic fuel in India) andorganic fertilizer for fields. These Although our description oftraditional food sup- observations do notprove ply systems has been bothbrief and oversimplified, that cattle numbers and productscould not be used more efficiently, buLthey do our intention was to invoke a feeling ofappreciation suggest that behind for the positivaspects ofthese systems: seemingly irrational religiousbeliefs often liesan ecological rationality. . so called primitive societies developed Harris's argument has beendeveloped further technologies. techniques. anda jtore of practical from an energeticviewpoint by Leon (1975). In In- knowledge of a widerange of sophistication, by dia, 29 percent of the 'matterprovided to cattle is what must be admittedto be the scientific method. used, 22 percent of the and neither their accomplishrantsand skills nor energy, and three percent.of those of societies en vole de the protein, in contrastto nine. seven and five developpement should -per- be ignored or discounted(Brown and Pariser, cent in the United States,respectively (Table 24). 1975:592-593) Although the smallproportion of human food pgp- Wheii brought into vided to cattle in India could bedirectly consumed, contact with the industrialized Indian cattle prcnridgi foodin excess of the edible world, traditionalsystems ensure various kinds of food consumed, in dearestto the U.S. where six stress which should be mentioned(Szentes, 1971; times as much edible foodis fed to cattle as is ob- Porter and de Souza, 1974):- tained from them. , (1) Entry into the marketeconomy, occasioned Finally, the traditional system's ecologicalimpact , has been evolutionary, 'rather by taxation, conscription oflabor, or the lure than disruptive inna- of commodities; ture. The theory of biologicalevolution concerns - more than genetic material; it includes (2) Allocation of productiveresources to that thelyolution__ of interactive systems of livingmatter and environ- economy, -- conquest by the colonial ment. Thus the functioning and powers and European settlement,or alloca- persistence of tradition of indigenous agricultural tional systems maybeseen as an enduring evolution- resources ary product of human activity and (land and labor)to cash crops; environmental (3) Accelerated growth of population modification. We certainlycannot suggest that over as a result of diminished effectivenessof biological and a long period, without the IndustrialRevolution, even nonfossil fuel subsidized agriculture social controls, includingdeclining rates of may not infant mortality, changing 'have earned the accolade of"world food problem." incidence of disease, and decreased warfare and socialun- However, the industrialrevolution, growth of rest; technology, and, forpresent developing areas, the (4) Imposition of various colonial experience have broughta kind of "instant land management practices under colonial control,including 37 51'. ANb INDIAN CATTLE AND BUFFALO. 1972 TABLE 24.INPUTS -AND USEFUL OUTPUTS FROM U.S. CATTLE*a Utter (10.. kg) Energy (10u calories) Protein (100 kg) -inputs and India U.S. India __Outputs U.S. India U.S.

Inputs 2.1 11.9 0.68 38.8 1.7 16.0 . Edible by man 25.1 33.3 _22.2 40.00, 88.0 120.5 Inedible by man 41.1 ' 35.4 4. Total 34.1 40.68 126.8 121112 Outputs 6.50 Work . 5.04 2.04 2.06 0.88 Milk 1,12 , 0.51 4.40 2.23 '0.17 a. ft . Meat 8.90 0.50 Hides , 041 0.07 0.87 10.81 16.16 Manure 26.98 2.23 0.99 Total 3.00 11:89 9,44 22 3 Efficiency (%) 9 29 7 4 Copyright t 1975. Scientists' Source: Reprinted from "Agriculture. A Sacred Cow."by Bruce Leon. Environment, Vol. 17. Mt 9. p 38 Institute for Public Information

Foundation4 1943, cash cropping, prohibitions ontraditional Government and Rockefeller (such as and continuing today throughan` international net- practices believed to be wasteful (Table 25). By shifting cultivation), and establishmentof work of agricultural research centers the middle 1970's, a substantialproportion of wheat parks and reserves, and rice production in developing areas wasbased (5) Introduction of alien technologyand ideas. modern varieties (MV) of with both practical implications (new ag- upon high" yillding or these crops Wrymple, 1974, 1975;Atkinson and ricultural implements) and socialimplica- helped to overcome a knowledge and . Kunkel, 1976). The MV's tions (rejection of traditional number of obstacles to improved cropyields, includ' culture); and conditions due to ing environmental, cultural,and dietary problems (6) Decline of ecological with dissemination of cropvarieties developed technological evolution insufficientlyrapid traditional vat.- to meet pressure off resources;to closing of elsewhere; the limited response of land stress ieties to fertilization; thephotoperiodic sensitivity to. such traditional outlets,far man: day length and the longmaturing time which hin- as territorial expansion;and to "careless lodging (flatten- technology" which has ignored local en % dered multicropping; and potential ra-Milten, ring to the ground) of traditionaltall varieties because vironmental milieus (Fervor of increased head size whenfertilized (Brown, 1972). 1914:133-134j. In the period from 1950 to1970, grain In spite of this wide range ofassaults. manytiadi- increased by almost persist yields of developing countries tional aspecti of food supply systems one-third (USDA, 1974a:65). By 1973,approximately in the "developing" societies.Nit only do' these MV's of wheat and systems continue to provideneeded food Supplies, forty million acres were plaqted to veneering by a rice in &Else developing areas(Dalrymple, 197-5:19). but they have been able to withstand Research Institute observers Recently, the International Rice developing cash economy: Indeed, some .4?1975) coordinated a study of 36villages in rice feel that small farmers, responding examine the extent to which anct I I g areas of Asiii to to oppongnities t are socially, economically, had been adopted by farmers in ecologically rational from their perspective, are in.. ern rice varieties potentials in, areas whereinputs and markets were reasonably ac- positive element in rural development cessible, but where intensive campaigns tointroduce the nonindustrialeorld. Otheriwould subscribe to occurred. Also chapter. the modern varieties ,had not- the view quoted at the beginning examined were economic returns,to farmers, "changes in income andexpenditures, and use of other items of the MVpackage-fertilizer, planting Atricultural Development-The Green methods, and chemicals for pestand disease central. Revplution Although it is erroneous to generalize over awidely The "green revolution"begin in the indus- dispersed sample of farm villages, ituseful to list trialized countries in the 1920's and 1930'swith the some general observationsfrom this study: varieties. brooding of new, high productivity clop. (1) A majority of farmers hadtried MV's, and it Knowledge gained in the middle latitude areas was is reasonable to assume all farmers are aware the basis for research programs intropical areas, be- . of them; . &Ong with cooperativeyesearc,h bythe Mexican,..

38' 52 -TABLE 25. THE NETWORK OF INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURALRESEARCH

Inkitution = Reseirch Interests and Location °Founded Regional Coverage International Rice Research Institute Los Banos. 1959 Riceworldwide with emphasison (RI) Philippines Asia International Center for the Improve- El Batan, 1944 ment of Maize and Wheat (CIMMYT) Wheat. mane. barley, tritidale Mexico woild wide . , .International Center forTropical Palmira, , 1968 Agriculture (CIAT) Beans, cassava, maize -rice, beef - Colombia worldwide for lowland tropics, with Latin America emphasis International Institute for Tropical Ibadan. 1969 Agriculture (lITA) Root and tuber crops. grain legumes, Nigeria cereals worldwide for lowland tropics with African emphasis Vest Africa Rice Development Associ- Monrovia: . 1971 RiceWest Africa Sion (WARDA) Liberia krternational Potato Center (C7P) Liza Peru 1972 Potatdes--Wpriciwide International Crops Research Institute Hyderabad. 1972 for the Semi -Arid Tropics (ICRISAT)' Sorghum. millet, Legumes worldwide. India unirrigated semi-arid tropics International for Plant Genetic FAO-Rode3 1973 ResourcesI : j Conservation of plant genetic material Italy . worldwide Ifiternatio Laboratory for Research Nairobi. 1973 on II II Livestock diseases--Afria Dime* (MEAD), Kenya, International Livestock Centre for Addis Ababa. 1974 Livestock productionAfrica Africa ILLCA) Ethopia International Center, for Agricultural Lebanon (planned) Wheat, barley,legumes. oilseeds. cotton Research in Dry Areas (ICARDA) ' 4worldwide with,empiaiison semi -arid` zones with winter rainfall Sources: Wide (1975a.587); Jennings (1976188)

(2) The life of fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides,.4. standard of living as experienced by farmers and, tractors preceded the introductionof mys'ilp many who adopted MV's, although only about areas, and fertilizer use, in two-thirdi of MV farmers reported increased paati9der,,was practiced bya majority of profits and one-third increased level ofliv- r farmers bef&e MV technology.A Pakistani ing (Table 26); village is aneicample (Figure11); (3) Asian rice (8) Although increases level of living and in farmers are not resistantto profits- were ncnconfined to landownidg change; although adopters usuallydid better than their 'neighbors even-when farmers with= large holdings,increases were they grew concentrated among thisgroup, who also -local varietiel, suggesting thatthey were better farm managers; had more ready accessto farm inputs and , credit, and who had typically adoptedMV's (4) In many cases theMrs didnot provide great- earlier: er yields than local varieties, but a shorter (9) Typical kinds of expenditures byMV farmers growing season and nonphotoperiodism include food, clothing, education, houling-, .means two crops per,ear are produced, with medical care, bicycles, radios,other site areas growing- ve or six crops in two years: appliances and agriculturalinvestments .(5) Where MV's made such as tractors and wells; a second rice crop possi- (1.6) Many constraintsio increased ptoduction ble, it frequently displacedvegetable and of MV's 'are those iisoctetbdwith, Rise (legume) cru.Pi. witha potential for de- the creasing the quality of faraily'diet, depend- packagepest and disease problems;fer- ing on leVel of food expenditures; tilizer availability: adequate,irrigation and ' . drainage; availability of credit;availability of 4 (6) The MV's did not decreaselabortpul,'but ,seed; increased labor requirementsev in areas (11) Local varieties - with tsactiirs;- are still important, both for disease resistance and for_local foodstuffs; (7) Nevertheless, 'agricultural laborers seldom MV,'S are usually the marketed expeKienced-the same chahge in variety V both . ) economic are grown. but, in at leastone government,

4 price support qf traditional export varieties #b PUMP meant lower Miff acceigance., This summary, as well as the detailedStuck, suggests 8o very strongly an evolutionary ratherthan a rev- r olutionary change in association with modem va- o a FERTILIZER rieties. - / MODERN In Java, twd villages studied showed a marked a 40 i / contrast in acceptance of MV's, of rice. inthe East /VARIETIES Java village. MV acceptance was high (99 percent), .7) INSECTICIDE-7 as was population density-(2137 people i.e 453 ---- households ont170 hectares of f4rmland). The West I111 111 1_ Java village had ulatiwj of 3322 people (958 4 1163 rim households) on of farmland, but low 1500 :is acceptance of M areas had access to Figure 11.Adoption of Improve,d FarmingPractices in proved local varieties before MV availability. MV's ,AroOp. Pakistan After If 1975.234). were introduced to each village in 1968,and first planting was undertaken by village leaders. In'East 'Java, acceptance was apid and remains high, better off whereas in Weit t infestation,caused severe the MV of East Java, farmers are 00 The study con- crop oss. /varieties. In the latter after havin accepted MV's (Table 27). villag ocal varieties'outyielded MV's, cludes th t, "there is no sign yet of any 'green rev- whereas in East Javalhe MV lid marginally higher olution' in the sample areas" (IRRI. 1975:199: see yields, in spite of a T.:Irked-increase in fertilizer.use. also Frawke, 1974). Acceptance appears& be more re,lattd, toshorter Given the present importance of the greenrevolu- -0 maturity, critical in an area of intensivedouble tion technol4gical package forincreasing food cropping. In East Java, MV's requited Momlabor supplies, w shall look at dimensionsof this than local varieties,rimarily as a result of weeghig technology from the 'point of view ofvulnerability. eqiirired by the higfertilizer inputs which encour- "World food 'ty" commonly refers to problems age weed growth. West Java, harvesting the MV's of greater conce tion of surplus food production took less time, because the sickle rather than the in limited areas the absence of a cushion of food hand. knife was used. In both areas, the rice crop is stocks or land re to meet needs created by ex- very labor intensive (147-276 man-daystha)with traordinary events USDA, 1974a:40-47).However, double the labor input typical of Philippine farms the diffusion of tecology from industrial blase (70-130); for example. Both areas experienceannual poses problems that maybe more localizedat the rice shortages, and evidence suggests that even in scale of a nation, region. or even farmThe concept

AREAS WITH MODERN RICE -TABLE 26INCREASES IN PROFITS AND LEVEL QF LIVING IN SELECTED - VARIETIES IN ASIA Percentage of Farmers Reporting By Tenure By Farm Sizeb Less 4 ha than and All over farms Growers of Owners Tenants All Farms 4 ha Increase in Rice Profits 87 82 59 33 50 50 Modern iatieties only 75 59 Some mourn varieties 82 33 78 . 50 33 (65 . 50 84 combilis 73 6"-t. 6 1 , 12 6 LocAl vari only 20 44 44 10 22 26 66 all farms Increase in Standard of Living . 47 44 - Modern varieties only 27 42 32 25 .44 33 43 21 38 '27 Some modern varieties 38 40 38 22 45 combined', 38 6 6 6,a 6 2 17 Local varieties only , 36 it 8 all farms 21 14 % 18''r Value for ail farmers who grew any modern vanejles 'Owners only Source IRRI (1975 354)

40 4a. 54 s .

TABLE 27.1,LENG7it OF FAMILY FOOD SHORTAGES IN AN EAST JAVA VILLAGEBEFORE AND AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF MODERN RICE VARIETIES e- Duration of Food Shortage (months) No. of Percent Use (Percept of farmers reporting) Year farmers of MV 0 1 2 3 4 1968/1969 70 40 35 1971/1972 70 3 20 38 4 92194' 33 5 20 39 3 . .irDry seasoa(etet season. -Source: 1RM (1975:196) w

.of vulnerability was developed bySproutend Sprout 'either the individual farmer collects (1974). Following their typology. food supply and storei,this, vul- information or limited local tradeoccurs. This eys- nerability may arise from events in either thephysical tern thus assures that seeds adapted or social environment, illinerated by disruption to eachag- within the local area\oxby actions roecosystem will be available. When imported seeds originating from are distributed, other varieties formerly used abroad. We will exploresome aspects of new vul- are'fe- jected in favoi of the high yieldingvarieties. TheIctss nerabilities introduced by thegreen revolution in re- of genetic variability is felt by ference to some basic' requisites fora food supgly some ecologists system. increase the vulnerability of physicalsystems ( mann, 1973). Whether this is the The use imported green revolution techniqiies case, such a chailie creates does alter accessibility to geneticinformation from it ical changes in the distribbtiOn oftechni- 'ubiquitous to a commercial 00 cal genetic ormation. Technical information system. is s ialized kn wledge whose application Counteracting the loss ofgenetic information allows the development.pf regional,national. and private use o sophistica production procedure& ImpOrt- ing t olo stores of germ plasm. However, such peaksin a na- involves far-reaching changesin tion's information surface both theistri ution of knowledge and the process are very vulnerable to tin- by which ,predictable events, suchas environmental hazards, tion is disseminated throughouta and to social disruption, such society. Such changes are imposed upon as inadequate funding societies or even sabotage. Genetic erosion has been charac- with varied characteristics. Someimpacted areas. for example the original sites of teristic-of Europe and NorthAmerica for some time commercial toi:ta- (Miller. 1973: Harlan, 1975). Theurgency of the tion in Mexico, remainedtraditional witi eir take -over by the Mexican green revolution problem is that thenew varieties government (de Alcantara. are increasingly being exported toareas which were 1973-74). Elsewhere, the WI study(1975) noted the original genetic sites for that prior to thegreen rigroVition in Pakistan, im- the major, world food ported commercial infrastructure crops. and from which lossof genetic Information and many green would be particularly unfortunate(Frankel, 1973; revolution innovationswere alreadywell- Oldfield. 1976). established. information flowcan be seen in interna- The' introduction tional scholarships, the focal role of high response varieties of of thkagriculturar seeds has an impacton the proVisiOn of land with research network, and traininginstitutes tin by mul- none' agribusiness corporations. several different implications forfood system vul- 'A spirit of nerability.Theimportanceof. accessto Lin develops among the modern'agentsof change. with, risk of losing commercially-sold inputs for MVsuccess gives es- traditiOnal knowledge. tablished landowners with surplusincome an ad- Rao (1974) has noted tbatextension agents- fail to include arm input in information flow, vantage over smaller farmers,. This initialadvantage se that ex- is translated partially intonew land purchases and tension ga one-way flow, emphasizingfarmers who are identifiaOly progressive. In addition, other incased concentration of landownership. Since costs ownership is already highlyconcentrated (Griffin, are sustained in acquiring green revolutioninfOrma- lion, including foreign exchange losses 1972; Rao. 1974), this increased socialinequality can (patent and only increase the potenqal forvulnetability to /social licensing fell, payments forAmpatriateexpert'). the brain drain to developecticouvies, disruption. In addition, like large fermiin the U.S., a ftal large farms in developingcountries have financial Inapplicability of particulartecliNbloghis r, recip- incentives to use potentially harmful ient environments. We judge the levels of ag- toss of local en- riculturid chemic4sIlleaver, 1972). . vininmental linowledge, as well as ckf loco!genetic Water is a crititaMernent for material, a vul 'lig, since theseisourtes of fu- successbf MV's. The ture adaptations ma FAO pitijectaibilt by theyear 2000 controlled water 1 nger be available. use will increase by 240 percent in the agricultural The seeds produced eachyear by food crops con- sector tain genetic inforinatiam In rown, Institutional problems of traditional systems water ..agemen, declining ground grater tabl

41 55 r revolution approach is the removal ofthe multiplic- .silting of reservoirs and canals, and energy demands ity of traditional means for- copingwith variability. for irrigation are alt sources of food system vulnera- and bility. ', . without gaining the institutional, technological, The gretei revolution brings an.important change spatial processes that buffer theindustrialized ag- in the pattlIkn of nutrient control used foragricul- ricultural system against variability._ A new setof ture. Manufattured sources are supplyingincreasing dependencies is created for the farmer and consumer shares of nutrient supplements, a transition encour- and should those dependencies fail.traditional aged by the use of MV seeds. The new seedsiequire means may no longer be able to operate. assured 'quantities of nutrients in concentrated The gains of the green revolution are'nevertheless fertiliz- important. First. it has contributed atleast to main- amounts and this means use of commercial de- ers which until recently were cheap.Such a change taming' food supplies for growing-populations in has several implications fortfood systernvulnerabil, 'veloping areas. Secbnd. it has demonstratedthe re- ity. First, vulnerability may occur because of price or ceptivity of traditional farmers to innovation, pro---- nges for fertilizer. Yieldpotentials of vided the necessary institutional elements are pres- supp t Third,,,ithas given developing MV's, '.1is y dependent on fertilizer ilpios. maybe ent (Crosson, 1975). threatened. Secqp)a, inequities in fertir4r distribu- . countries a greater period in which toaddress popu- tion at an intra/is well as internationaVscale mean lation problems (Brown. 1974:145). However. that fertilizers are not allocated where'marginal pro- the model of industrialized agricultureimplicit in ductivity is greatest. The opposite appears true the green revolution is certainly aquestionable solu- the wealthy have access to fertilizers at levels giving tion to the world food problem little margipal returns. Third. fertilizer production is Common and Contrasting Elements- often located outside national boundaries. with re- All food supply systems must overcome spatial sultant vulnerability to political or economic disrup- photosynthetic , tion. and temporal tensions between the The green revolution technology replaces tract'. process. harvest. and consumption.In doing so. all follow a basic set of requisites. some addressed sim- tional methods of weed. pest. and disease oontrol. of com- For example, in some rice prodUCing areas. a combi- ply and others dealt with in a high degree nation of deep floodingand fish introduction were plex elaboration. Both traditional and industrialized used as insect controls. MV plants are usuA. short- food supply systems are the result ofevolutionary stemmed to prevent lodging. thus prti-cluding deep processes, and incorporate a varietyof mechanisms nt insecticides lam'!'tshsdan di- for coping with seasonality and variability to assure A floodidg; persis food availability Although the green revolution minish the avlability of this protein source of a (Palmer. 1972).onocultural practices. particularly farm can be seen as evolutionary in the context region-wide panting of identical crop varieties.im, longer period of intrusion of industrializedagricul- epidemicditeases. and the tural practices into nonindustrial ,areas.all these pose the th!eat of of developing emergence of Ifisecticide-tolerantpest; species. practices are alien in the context Agrichemical residues in the diet also affect the world-societies. Producing more food from the farm does not solve the plethora of otherproblems of health of the p6pulation. especially that of agricul- development including distribution of food equi- tura! workers. Lakshminarayana and Menon (1972) inci- 'noted that in India the agrichemical concen- tably according to needs. The commitment to trations are in starchy vegetables and cereals,thuS pient industrialized agriculture imposesvulnerabil- having a greater impact on the poor who consume ity to events beyond the control ofthe developing more of these foods, Rao (1974)noted the increased nation. dangers of pesticides for users with low skill levels. The green revolution canb-seen primarily as an such as those in developing areas. The dangerof effort to bring the genetic and fossil fuelsubsidized exposure to toxic chemicals isgreatly affected by the technology of the industrial world to devei.ping - accuracy with which instructions arefollowed. pro- areas in the hope' ofsubstantially increasing agricul- utput per unit of.land. Although it isdesirable vided cep can read. . . ture Returning to the Sprouts' typology. we can see that the yield gap between the developed and de- the green revolution brings with its benefits a variety veloping areas be narrowed to bring fOod more esvulnerabilities. Among physical vulnerabilities equitably to the-world's people (Table 17), it. is un- those associated with local environmentaldis- certain whether the financial resources willbe avail- ruptions of supply linkages for needed input/and able. and whether earth resources will permitthe increasing international dependence onfos0 fuel developing areas to "catch up." In our view. narrow- subsidies in the face of depletion of this resource. In ing the yield gapmay requirethe willingness of industrial areas to tolerate declining yields. addition to international social disruption affecting have-goe- input supply lines, internally the greenrevolution ' The green revolution does not appear to may exacerbate statusdistinctions based on educe- erated the numbers of displaced. landless people . risk of in- once expected. but. in spiteofa continuecigh labor, tion and wealth, with the concomitant of A creasing internal unrest.pAn requirement. similar to if not greater than that Perhaps the most implant aspect of the traditional agticulture. it has generated laborprob-

42 56 e t

I lems. One of these is seasonality of labor demand What is the world food system? It is thecombina- and a consequential lack of steady. reliableemploy- tion of material. eriergy. andiinformation flows that ment (Feder. 1.973-74). Potential labor exploitation disseminate the impacts of actions that .rimy result: as well as ap impetus toward mechaniza- occur in parts of the fooci.supply systems3.ve havediscussed Prices tion of labor bottlenecks. This then leadsto the ques: are perhaps a most obvious example. food prices in Lion of technologies appropriate in design anti scale developing countries are linked to worldenergy. fer- to developing areas. and-thus to the role of agnbusi- tilizer, and fond prices without regardto the produc- - ness in development. A multinational corporation's tive capacity of the country itself (Chancellorand primary concern is profit (Barnet and Muller.1975). Goss. 1976:215). Suppose and profit v011 be maximized by sale a alguntry imports half its of existing fertilizer sup*. farmers provide twenfypercent of _ technologies whose research and developmentcosts food needs by growinggreen revolution cropg. and have already been recovered in homemarkets. Offi- half the nation's families liveon farms. Consider a cials of developing nations. trainedas industrialized, doubling of imported fertilizer price's. Limited F agriculturalists, understandably follow FAO leader- foreign exchange means fertilizer importsmust be ship4ri viewing,inechan izatum and use of them ic.als. halved.. and as indispensable for agricultural development. The green revolution farmers bid up the FAO. in turn, draws upon its Intistry price °Noce] fertilizer. limiting. its availabilityto Cooperative others. Marketable crop surpluses drop.particularly Program for advice. The ICP has 100 multinational 'if farm familiesconsume their normal needs and agribusiness firms who have joined withFAO to ac- market only what is excess Market shortages celerate development cooperatively induce (DeMarco- and buying ()flood suppliesin anticipation of price in- Sechler. 1975:75-77) Thepressures toward an increases (hoarding). which further limits supplies and dustrialized- prototype for agricultural development drives prices upward 23 People with lowincome are are obvious. forted to starvation level diets.requiring the govern- For all food supply systems. spatial organization is ment to import and sell food at artificially lninter- a fundamental approach toward meeting the various !' nal prices. These purchases limitnew energy re- requisites we have listed_ Indeed, it is spatialorgani- source and fertilizer plant development. because zation that creates the fact 'of a world food system. they exhauit foreign exchange and therefore a world food problem' Let reserves. ThuN the us begin at opportunity to equilibrate the originalprice pertur- ong end of the scale. For the individual farfn.mi- bation internally is prohibited Suchan example e.crospatial organiiation of(he field isan important demonstrates that with agriculturaL development element in harvesting solarenergy resources. and m based on foreign technology.energy. and material traditional agriculture it has beena majbr element in inputs, world markets andpnces effectively pene- meriting succession and protectionimperatives trate a country, an obvious vulnerability. Also. the organization of the farming unit affectsits Since the industrialized nations effectivelytap productivity_ Traditional farmers 'manage theireas- most of the world's natural resource markets and ily accessible doors td gardens'more intensively control the provision of industrialized agricultural than distant fields.CFor industrialized farms. effi- inputs. the world food system isin fact created by ciency of operations and equipriient performance is that group of nations. Not onlyare the major affected by farm layout: as in traditional agriculture, surpluses of agricultural commodities controlled by spatial dispersion of activities' may function as a de- developed nations, but so too is the foodproduction vice for buffering the system against variability capacity of developing nations. The lattermust shop When we move up the scale from the farm. we in industrial marketplaceS for agriculturali is leave many traditional .systems behind, although and compete with the developednations for ener some. like Asian paddy cultivation, depended uplin resources The substance of the world food elaborate -social., political. and resource system. manage- like the industrialized food supplysystem, is becom- ment. It is-in the industrialized and green revolution ing increasingly concentrated. both politically and food systeMs. however. where spatial organization is in the emerging role of multinationalcorporations indispehsable at regional, national, and interne- operating in developing areas- tionalisEales. Flows of agricultural inputs to the farm. Ind flows of commodities from the farm and The role of the multinationalcorporation as world 'eventually to theconsumer constitute a mar ele- distribulbr is most dramatic in thearea of food Ag- ment in a society's basal metabolism. A multiplicity nbusiness is now buying or rentingmore and more arable land Decisions on what to plaint andwhere to of linkages for any one kind of flow, and the capabil- distribute the harvest ity of tapping a wide utial network ofresources, are made with the balance give industrialized agiit ulture protection .against sheet in mind Thus it is profitable in poorcountries variability that is absent from green revolution situations. We shrld not be deceived by the-stability that "This.Is a good example of a self-fulfilling propheCt People comes from this spatial redundancy% in industrial expect food price increases some buy large quantities basedon agricultureultimately we deRend upon fCissil fuel that assumption further shortages occur drivingprices upward thus the assumption of we increasesis proved bee. when such subsidies. and when the well runs df, the system increases mat have been created or accelerated) by earl) buying will no longer be energized and hoarding 1 to use land for exportable luxuries evenwhile'tbe will fear for its next day's bread, and that no hudian people are suffering severe malnutrition because it being's future and cal:tacit:lea vial be stunted by mal- does not grow enough grain (Bernet. 19Th) nutrition (Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to the The developed nations have assumed 'some World Food Conference. 1974) , humanistic responsibility for addressing the. world Such a commitment must be more than rhetoric A food problem:, pledge toward solutiorr of the world food problem by the industrial nations is proper and correct: increa.4 , ..we . proclaim a bold objectivethat within a ingly we are the world food problem. decade no child will go to bed hungryrthat no family ..

I, .

.,. r

s ft ...

4. 4

II -44 55 III. SOLUTIONS

Perhaps it walleiseelterto recognize and acknowledge forthrightly that therest of mankind will prob- %ably never consumeas mush food as the avenge American. L It Brown {1974:44) . What are the alternatives for solving the world wide range of problems and food problem? For theoptimist. science and potential solutions in technology, paralleled by each setting. Now.we will take the same kinds of application of demo- problems definitions and graphic brakes in developingareas. promise an end to cast them in a different hunger and famine. Technological way, treating them topically ratherthan spatially. optimism some- Figure 12 suggests problem denies even the necessity ofabating popula- clusters seen froma top- -growthi ical viewpoint, includingviews of the world food. problem as fundamentallyan economic. technologi- At .present 11967) thereare about 3 billion men living cal. environmental.demographic. or moral dilemma. on earth. The predictions are that therewill be 6-7 Among economic problemdefinitions are questions ion arqund the year 2000. At thisrate of increase. of supply and demandimbalance: technology jbill1- the number pf 100,billion will be reached in Kier dudes the need ?or researchand -development of year,. At that time starvation may bea bitter memory new genetic materials and production _ only. but today technologies: many many persons go hungrym a environment includes problems of ,world where the technicalways and means to pre- ecological degra- "' Neakebas are available (deWit. dation and environmentalchange: demography 1967:320) deals with the question of For the pessimist. the future holds human numbers: and the promise of an morality or equity includesthe problem of unequal increasing gap between hungrypopulations and the access to resources. dietary extremes. ability of the world to feed them. and the To some observers. damental structure of the worldeconomic system. .the world's ,population hasalready exceeded the Flip any analysis. the s carrying capacity (Whittaker and problem is typicallycon- Likens. ceived from oneor more viewpoints on itscauses. 1 . To others. we face the dilemma of providing followed by solutions food aid as a temporary to these causal factors. We palliative, only later to wit- view solutions in three broadgroupings: those focus: ness more massive starvationamong even larger -ing on technology. population. population numbers: and moral equity. 1p general. technological solutionsare those which There can be no moral obligationto do the impossi- to enhance industrializedagriculture at home and ble At some point, we in the LadedStales are propagate it in developingareas. along with the going to find that wecannot provide for the world socioeconomic concomitantsrequired to diffuse any more than we can police rt our position is technological innovations. The this: The sovereign right of each demographic cluster nation to control its focuses ultimatelyon population numbers, foreven own reproduction creates the reciprpcalresponsibil- the most optimistictaelmologists nevertheless ity to care for its own people we must.not permit con- cede that the earth isa spaceship. with someupper our aid to underwrite the failure ofsome nations to limit on human numbers. take care of their oitn (advertisementb The Em Clearly no analyst would virosmental Fund. 1976). be so naive as toassume that abated population The alternatives then growth alone v.-111 solve the worldfood problem. but are those of triageto help few solutions omitan implied, if not explicit. those nations wheretechnological development is popu- likely to be accompanied lation component The equitycluster is a bundle of bypopulation control, and solutions that are essentially In abandon the world's "basketcases." those who political, requiring "mold swamp the lifeboat. commitment to a fundamentalreordering of food To help us understand the supply systems at all scales,accompanied in large major directions that measure brie similarreordering of world economic `solutions to the world;foodproblem might follow, it will be useful to categorize processes. Implicit in these solution clusttrsare al- a number of contrastins ternative futures. ranging from viewpoints. Earlier we conceivedof various sliefini- an integrated world food system of hightechnological refinement toa nous of the. world food problemfrom a spitt61 reassertion of local adaption and =ve. This grouping was partietilerly initiative. accom- useful panied by equitableaccess to world resources. Be- ming food supply systems inindustrialized. tween these lie two forms of traditional. and transitionalsettings. We noted a inequality and differentiationduality and triage.Duality implies

45 59 Solution Implicit Problem Future Categories Clusters 1 HIGH I ECONOMICS },, TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY. TECHNOLOGY

ENVIRONMENT POPULATION

I POPULATION 4? EQUITY ...... ***SS471 EQUITY 'and ADAPTATION I MORALITY Futures in Views of theWorld Food Problem Arrows suggest Kane among Figure 12Problems. Solutions. and Implicit Many of the possible analytical pathsthat may be followed

them. In the process of culturaladaptation. while not marffd local differences in food production' "out-of-the-blue" act of technology. social status. and wealth: triageimplies denying the possibility of an creativity. the creative processis guided by informa- the same dimensions among rather thanwithin na- Knowledge and the en- "haves" and "have- tion flow from environment tions. the perpetuation of the culturation of children are meansby which cultural nots." of the superrich and thehopelessly poor. memory is preservedThus both genetic and cultural In this section. we first waritto suggestthat the with environ- considerable disagreement as to the natureof the adaptation are possible m interaction ment (Figure 13). andboth are relevant to this dis- problem and its solutions reflectspositively on op- important element Then. we will cussion. Genetic adaptation is an portunities for solving the pmblem! in providing new crop andlivestock varieties to discuss briefly the three solution-clusters.finally supply. whereas cultural concluding that whereas duality and triage areprob- meet imperatives of food adaptation may be seen from a widerperspective as a able future courses for mankind thisneed not occur made by process by whichmankind solVes its problems. if equitable and humane commitments are How does cultural adaptationoccur? One useful thecitizens of industrialized nations perspective on that process is tothink of certain filters through which newideas pass Cultural filters The Adaptive Man-EnvironmentSystem measure social accepts, . 'ty aswell as test new ideas adaptive system with respect to existing .-ledge. Economic filters In the context of this paper an test the viability of a neidea from an economic refers to the ability of human society tointeract with returns to food. An adaptive system viewpoint most obviously in monetary its environment to produce investment btit, in broad terms. as a measureof de- has several fundamentalcharacteristics. First, it in this case by sired returns in comparison tothose from alternative must be linked to its environment, investments of scarce inputs.Ecological or environ- flows of matter and energy. It mustbe able to extract real world, and in information from environment, and to create new mental filters take the test to the that context select fdr viability(FLrey..1960). These structures and behaviors in response toenvironmen- tell us where ideas from within perspectives, however. do not tal changes. These changes may come how they relate to the contemporary (innovation) or without (diffusion).Then. process- come from. nor situation. es of selection mustexist, either in society or in relationship to ongoing behaviors. Fi- Many ideas are derived in environment, to test potential new of the moment_ Figure successful problems or to salient issues nally, a memory must exist to preserve 14 schematically suggests a sequenceof events that adaptations for future use (Buckley. 1968). occurs in society'sproblem solving sequence (Orm- The biological mechanism ofevolution is one comes' from a framework, where rod, 1974). Awareness of the problem example of thb adaptive systems linkage between society andenvironment. Thecrea- new behaviors (mutations)apparently are randomly analysis and eventual environmental adeptly- tion of new behaviors includes generated without regard to definition of problems. and thesearch for solutions ity Genetic structure rememberschanges that have screened,Then, survived selection mechanisms,and reproduces that are put forward and culturally

46 GP CULTURAL IDEAS INFORMATION INFORMATION human brains, books... INPUT SELECTION Problem Analysis Invalid -CULTURAL Definition EVOLUTION INew Art r-LI Problem I Wrong SOCIETY- Sokotiotts Sought ENVII3ZNTAL Solution ENVIRONMENT ti INTERACTION

% If .... 41 ...... ,,....do.

GENETIC Sokeions Screened EVOU4TION

Solutions Attemp+ed MUTATIONS SELECTION . GENETK GENETK INPUT =INFORMATION imam crops, livestock 1 Preserved Suecess Figure 13.information. Adaptation. andContinuity in a t Man-Environment System. Modifiedfrom Baiema (1972:225) Used by permission of SocialBiology Figure it Problem Solving in the AdaptiveHuman Sys- tem. After Ormrod974 :231) Used by permission of Richard Ormrod attempts at solution may have several results,with successful solutions preserved (culturally encoded). ciency of solar energy conversion andfertilizer utili- Preserved knowledge in traditionalsocieties is refer- "ation. red to as ethnoecieriCe, whereas in modern societies Three important implicationsfollow from an knowledge is science andtechnology. adaptive systems perspectivb lq the adaptive systems on the world food framewor)rihe search for problem. First, it is importantto recognize the inher- solutions is seldom random. butis frequently chan- ently conservative nature of neled by our understanding of adaptation. Perhaps in cause and effect. We biology you heard the phrase."ontqgtby recapitu- accept that events havecauses and seek to under- lates phylogeny." This stand the identity of means that the embryonic causes. the mechanisms by development of advanced life formsfollows an vrhielethey operate. and theprocesses they repre- evolutionary-like process. sent. For example, searching for progressing from single a solution to the cell to increasingly complex formsas it grows in the problem of increasingcrop yield depends.on under- egg or Uterus. Genetic evolution builds standing what it is that makes upon itself._ plants grow. Plant rather' than totally restructuring life,and .accumu- growth may belimited by insufficientwater, infertile lates minor modifications which soil, competition' from other have permitted. plants, diseases, or survival in diffevest and changingenvironments. In pests. If you are a farmer in southernNigeria, you the case of society's adaptation, may understand the use of chemical fertilizers to environment, evert be- adaptation may suggest too extensivea change. A cause your traditions have madeyou aware that better term might be adjustment, 'plants grow by taking a series of minor up substances ("fat") from the changes that accumulateover time, but which when soil. Only if you atean agronomist are you likely to viewed from only two ends of the usidentand fully that time spectrum some crops are producing their might appear to be amore radical' adaptation. Adap- maximum yield as Constrained bytheir genetic en- tation. does occur. however. when dowment, The Nigerian's search dissonance be- may be for com- tween society's understanding of and behaviorin en- mercially Produced "fat" for thesoil; the ag- vironment utterly fails, and when survival ronomist's for genetic material With itself is a greeter effi- threatened. The temporary abandonmentof pastoral

47 61 11.

life for urban refugee camps in the West African including crop an d livestock genetics, farm opera- Sahel represents this kind of adaptation, at least in tions. and increasing reliance on institutionalized the short run. research. A majoremphasis is on direct and indirect The conservative nature-of adaptation can be seen energy subsidies to agricultureMechanization, ag- in the process by which the world food pioblem is ricultural chemicals, and irrigation represent the addressed. Most solutions represent a cumulative substitution of energy for land and labor-. mainte- tinkering with the status quo, rather than any fun- nance of food stockpiles andcommodity food aid to damental reordering of the system as it now sianiis.. abate famine are similarly energy dependent. It is Only massive dissonance could alter this pattern. but obvious that it-wjould be iingWasible to produceall for some observers such dissonance appears at hand. the world's food'byenergy intensive industrialized The second iihlication of. the adaptive systems agricultural systems. To increase energy intensity framework is the value of a multiplicity of problem substantially is equally problematical. For example. definitions, solutions. experiments, and eventual it has been estimated that todouble the world's pres- answers. Thergreater the universe ofperspectives, ently irrigated land would require an energyinput the greater the opportunity for productive solutions equal to five percent of the world's petroleum re- to be found. Rather than experience frustration atthe serves aAjtjear(Piritentel et al.. 19751. complexity of the world food problem. we can be Could di-dlustrialized agriculture, through food encouraged by the plethora of analyses and ap- stockpiles, meet needs created by production proaches being undertaken. This further implies that shortfalls, while intermediate or small -scale energy reactionsdependency subsidized technologies catch up with food re-I we must avoid two potential of on a monolithic respitnse rtothe problem (particu- quirements? Political and mathematical analyse larly. putting all the eggs in the industrialized ag- the necessary grain stocks have beenundertakin riculture basket). and feeling a hopelessnessthat (Eaton and Steele. 1970). but problemsinhernnt In uses us to continue as in the past.becoming insen- commodity food aid persist There seems to be a said-to sit to the problem itself The concentrationof strong view against regular food aid. which is tec iogy and econorpic power inthe industrial allow recipient governments to focus on. industrial WO d in a small number of powerful firms within development to the detriment of agncultut the risk of bath reactions it en. ice To continue to allocate free or low cost food to gov- Finally. the adaptive systeni&perspechwe helps us ernments that neglect their own rural areas is to link problem definitions. suggestedsolutions.and counterproductive It simply allows governments to solu- implicit futures. We can trace one or several put off the tedious andunglamorous task a f. helping tions proposed in relation to conceptualizationsof their own people help themselves Wtorprianti the nature of the 'problem. as well as the localand 1975 353 global implications of the solution (Figure 12) For example. if one views the problem narrowly asex- Commodity aid may not solye food supplyprolalems. cessive population growth innonindustrializerr since much food aid issold by the recipient govern- areas which is hopelesslydestroying the-ability of ment and may not reach all needy personsIn addl- resburces to provide sufficient foodstuffs. triage is an....Von, food aid may carry uneconomic -strings-such imphcit (if not an explicit) future should population a the U S. government's requirement thatfifty per- control fail to materialize. The greatestimpediments cent of such shipments must betransported by to solving the world food problem maywell Will- American carriers. paid by 'recipientcountries conceived definitions of its causes. leading to nits- (Miyamoto. 1973) Program -revenuesloaned to pri- directed solutions vate firms as part of policies todevelop commercial opportunities may have negative repercussionsFor Technology example. American firms have used lowinterest world government food aid funds toestablish poultry in- Much of the contemporary literature On the eventually food problem focuses on technologicalapproaches dustries in Colembia and South Korea. well as on the diverting crop production from traditionalfoods. to increasing food production. as such as inexpensive dry beans as a protein source,to planning necessary to disseminate technological and 'echler. breakthroughs and encourage technology dependent needs of the poultry industry (DeMarco 1975.46-50)4. Na simply. food aid hasoften been one agricultural development (Science. 1975, Scientific iniperialisrd by American. 1976), For this reason, we willconsider dimension of continued economic briefly the industrialized nations altegnative approaches in greater detail, indis- suggesting major directions of technological em- Technology and technological research are technology pensable for meeting the needs of theworld food %, phasis and focal questions ton technology based on agricultural experience irtlieindustrial problem iMartin. 1975) Unfortunately, is so closely entwined in larger economicand politi- areas. cal spheres that it is difficult to selecttechnologies' A wide range of research directions focuses upon improvement technology (Table 28) as a solution to-the worldfood appropriate for local 'agricultural which are free from the tentacles of theworld energy problem. Meny approaches represent a continuation political system of emphases already evident irrthe greenrevolution. economy and the world

48 62 b

TABLE 28. TECHNOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS TO THE WORLDFOOD PROBLEM Fboci Production: Clop genetics Improved photosynthetic efficiency Disease resistance Fertilizer response Improved structure for light reception lmprowed nitrogen fixation New hybrid varieties. New domestication Drought resistance Improved niftritional quality of crops Animal genetics Conversion efficiencies New domestication Farm operations Improved pest control New pesticides and agrichemicals Aerial apri.:cation of pesticides Improved claease control' Soil management unpovements Mechanization Irrigation Factory farms ft Research Technology transfer Enhanced' international research network Building agricultural research in developing areas Globs] morutonng systems matical modeling Altersve food 4,..urces synthesis' nil'ion of protein in oil crop residues Singlell protein Hydraics Muaculture Fishery management Fish meal Land resource development and preservation krid areas Humid tropics Potential land in industrial areas Preservation of existing production areas Food Provision' Food preparation technology Nutrient fortification Food synthesis New processes to utilize existing crops Food stockpiles Emergency supplies Price stabilization Commodity food aid *Food protection after harvest Agricultural specialization Source Compiled from references in thelnbliograph

Population industry. agriculture. resources. antipollution. Each The important role of population in the world food of the sections of the model is quasi-independent. problem is illustrated by the agriculturalportion of with external connections to othersectors of the the World3 computer simulation model (Meadowset model. The agricultural sector (Figure 15)consists of al.. 1974). World3 was created to explore thecom- several overlapping loops relating agriculturalin- plex web of interrelationshipsamong population. vestments. resources. and food productivity (Randers

49 63 and Zahn 1974). Loop 1 is a pegative feedback loop which adjusts food output from land in production Food Per to match food needs by the mechanism of investment Capita in land development (Loop 1 = 1-11-1,3-.45-11). , Food Loop 2 (1-2-1-09-5-1) is similar in struct . 4 adjusting food output by agricultural inv toariculturol loostowni ' Arable " 9 However, such investment implies an additio , loop (3 = 1-2-.7-49-08-4161 with positifeed- Land back indicating that increased productivity,will Yield mean increased erosion, reqiiiting further investment \1/42oci /" to increase productivity. Loop 4 is also a positive 6 Development Land Land Allocated Eros itin feedback loop (1-2-07-10-11-9-5-,1) repre- to Mousterian' ce senting fertility degradation as a result of pollutants and other soildestroyingprocesses.Fertility N...... Agric3turpl 5 regeneration is possible in loop .{.- Inputs (1--q-12--11-09-+5-01) by allocation of lancrto re- storative processes. Loop 6 (1-1-6--9---5-1), fi- Delay nally, suggests that food supplies can be augmented in the short run by bringing fallow land into produc- 12 10 tion. Land Land The actual operation of the agricultural segment of Fertility Fertility World3 depends on a number of assumptions, im- Regeneration Degradation pressed both verbally (Table 29) and mathematically. In addition, the mathematical equations describing the system must be calibrated for the "real world." The derived dynamics of the agricultural sector of 0 World3 provide an interesting perspective pn the Figure15..The Structure of the Agricultural Sector of the role of population. Among .a number of pbssible World3 Model. Adapted with permission from Meadows. modes of population-resource interaction are those Dbnnis L. William W Behrens III. Donella H.Meadows. Roger F. Naill. lorgen Randers. and Erich K.0 Zahn. illustrated in Figure 16, and the question raised is Dynurrucs of Growth- in a Finite World. copyright1974by which, if any, appears to operate in the agricultural Wright-Allen Ire Inc.. Cambridge,Mass 02142. p269. sector, Tests of World3 included an historical cali- bration of the model. and a series otktandard and op- tional runs to assess the model's sensitivity to esti- ittt iirThi parameters and technological innovations. Although there are many intriguing details at every the ;verld food problem must be contingent on even- step of the World3 model, we must limit mention tual balancing of population and resources.Whether here to two results of these tests. First, virtually any this will be accomplished on a regional scale,with combination of calibrations and technological policy vastly different levels of)naterial life, or on a -world resulted in an overshoot and decline pattern of popu- scale, with considerablelquity in quality of life, is a lation and resources. The model suggests that .the choice that lies ahead. critical element that is altered by various parameter 40" changes is the timing of the overshoot and decline, with each alternative simply, accelerating or putting lEguitY off the inevitable. Second, a series of equilibrium The third solution Illuster is one of equitable runs indicates that stability is possible, if Thebasic availability of resources to support food supply sys- corrective inure population stabilization is tems. Two elementi dominate this duster. Thefirst taken sufficiently early. Figure 17 is the result otthe is a decline in the energy intensiveness and resource run which assumes cessation of populationgrowth demands of industrialized agriculture; the second, in the year 2000. builds upon local initiative for agricultural de- One can debate whether 2000 is a firm date by velopment in nonindustrial areas. Realizingthese which population growth must end. Indeed whether goals may require more than humanitarian commit- a leveling of population is morelikely a cause or an ment: major segments of the world food system may effect of development is questionable (Frederiksen, have to be removed from the mechanisms of 1.869; Teitelbaum, 1975). Regardless, population economic markets and from the domination of numbers ate a critical element in food system ade- economics in the formulation of political policy. Re- quacy. Clearly population is crucial1108Vgiven the lated to this cluster are larger questions' of world unreciressed imbalances in access to resources and economic processes and access to resources and differentials in -food productivity. that characterize wealth; examination of food supply provides a brief the world food system. Even the most optithistic glimpse of even broader questions of economic jus- view of She success of various ether"solutionie to tice. As children, our mothers chided us for not eat-,

50 '" 64 STABLE

iti

' POPULATION b

UNSTABLE

1 \

Figure 16.Population Growth and Resources. Fourpo- tential relationships between population andresources are --illustrated: a) continuous growth; b) sigmoidor logistic approach to equilibrium; c) overshoot andoscillation: and d) overshoot and' decline. Adapted withpermission from Meadows. Dennis L. William W. BehrensM. Donella H. Meadows, Roger F. Neill. loosen Randers. and ErichK 0 Zahn:- Dyanmics of Growth ina Finite World, copyright. 1974 by Wright-Allen Press. Inc.. Cambridge. Mass.02142. P- 8-

ing' while children elsewherewere starving. A Figure 17Stability in the Agricultural Sector of World3. mother's admonition rings frighteninglytrue. This simulation assumes leveling of population.industrial output. and persistent pollution in theyear 2000 Note the Decreasing Resource Demands trajectory of each variable from 1900 to 2100. Adapted by Industrial Agriculture with permission from Meadows. DennisL., WilliamyW. Behrens III. Donella H. Meadows. RogerF. Nail'. Jurgen The principalreason to alter the nature of indus- Randers. and Erich K 0 Zahn. Dynamics ofGrowth in a trialized agriculture isnot, as skeptics have Finite World. copyright 1974 by Wright-AllenPress, Inc.. suggested, to redistribute foodto hungry masses. Cambridge. Mass. 02142. p 361. Rather, the purpose is to makeagricultural inputs accessible where their marginalreturns are greater (and at lower prices); to improve the healthof con- fertilizer. Two specific examplei willsuggest that sumers in industrialized nations (by adjustment Of substantial levels of resource savingsare possible diet quantity and quality to levels ,ofnecessity rather with negligible threats to theprovision of food than gluttony); and to enhance theevolution of pro- supplies, and with both humanitarianand economic duction technologies less vulnerableto the kinds of benefits. One example is the animalprotein depen- disruptions cited earlier in discussing' thegreen dent diet; the other, use of agrichemicals. revolution. A variety of methods have been suggestedfor de- Animal Versus Plant Protein- creasing resource consumption in industrialized One of the major means for reducingthe food supply systems (Brown. resource 1974:110-111; Wittwer. demands of industrialized agriCulturealteration of 1975:5133). Energy inputs, for example.can be re- the animal based diet toward duced by more efficienttransportation greater dependency on systems, proc- plant protein. This does notmean eliminating ani- essing, and container technology. Irrigation effi- mal products from diets. As ruminants.cattle, sheep. . ciency can save water and legume rotations can save and goats can use foods thatcannot be digested by

51 65 49 1t

TABLE 29.ASStMPTIONS OF THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR OF WORLD3

1. Food is ?roduced. from arable land andagricultural inputs (fertilizer. seed. pesticides). 2. Food output increases when thearable land area, the land fertility, or the amountof agricultural inputs are increased. 3. There are 'decreasing marginaLreturns to the useof agricultural inputs. 4. The aniount of potentially arable land isfinite, and deVelopment costs per hectare (for clearing,roads, irrigation dams) increase as the.stock bf potentiallyarable land decreases: in other words. the best and most accessible land is used first. 5, Newly developed land enters at the current averageland fertility. 6. Arable land erodes irreversibly on a timescale of centuries when subject to intensecultivation, unless countermeasures are taken. 7. The stock of arable land ie decreasedby urban-industrial building activity, the rateof decrease depending on both population andindustrial growth. . 8. Total investment in agriculture increases inthe long' run with increasing industrial outputper`Cepita and in the short run when" forced to do so by foodshortages. 9. Agricultural investment can be used to develop newland or to increase the amount of agricultural inputs productivities of the options on present land. Investment isallocated on the' basis of the relative marginal measured in.vegetable-equivalent kilograms per dollar-year- 10. The capital intensive use of land canlead to persistent pollution of the land (highpesticide concentrations. salinity. heavy-metal poisoning). level opersistent pollutants becomes high. 11.Land fertilitydecreases on-a time scale of decades when the be speeded up by proper land 12.Land fertilityregenerates itself over decades. and the process can maintenance. 13Farmers \endto maintain soil fertility by the properuse of capital except when pressured by extreme food shortages. 14. Land yield is reduced by airpollution.

Source: Assembled from Randers and Zahn (1974). in Meadows. atal.. Dynamics of GrOwth in a Finite World Cambridge, Mass,: Pram Inc-. pp. 268-269. Copyright 1974 by Wright-AllenPrem. Used by permission of D L Meadows sad Wright-Allen Press. $ man; including crop residues, forage cropsproduced What would be gained by a decrease in the animal on land not su,ited to other crops,and pasture that is portion of diets? First. land for human foodproduc- not cultivable (Hodgson. 1976; Janick et al., 1976). tion would be increased greatly. Forage crop and Forage crops as part of soil restoring rotations in- feed grain land would be available for producing clude nitrogen-fixing legumes. Thus. there are many huMan food. Also, the amount of land needed to cases where animals play an importantrole in food provide protein supplies would be vastly- decreased supply systems. where they are fully integrated into (Table 31).-Lockeretz (1975: 270) suggests that from an ecologically rati%ar rotation .system, orwhere three to six times as much land may be required for beef production compared to vegetable protein in they indirectly bmvWfood resourcesthat otherwise would be lost to man What can be reduced, however, is/the allocation of feed grains to livestock, replacing that portion of TABLE 30.ELS-75.TED LIVESTOCK CONVERSION animal protein intake with vegetable protein, or EFFICIENCIES slackening protein intake to sufficient rather than superabundant levels. When fed with foods other- Conversion Efficiency (%)* wise available to man, or food produced onland that Protein could produce human food, great inefficiencies Animal.' Product Energy occur that can be attributed primarily todietary pre- Cow 17-19 (44) 25-31 (47) dilections rather than to biological necessity. Vari, 3-8 4-15 ous estimates have been madeof the conversion ef- Pig Pork . 13-15 9-20 ficiencies of livestock, as represented in the products. Sheep Lamb 2-6 4-10 consumed. by humans (Table 30). The various ef- 'Chicken Broilers 10-12 18-25 Eggs 13-18 (20) 20-27 (38) ficiencies can be seen readily in market prices for (25) (44) food commodities, as well as in dietary advice forthe Goat Milk poormilk and eggs are much less expensive Range of salute includes typical values ()snick at aL, 1978:Van sources of animal proteinthan meats. Typically. Vleck, 1975: Pimento) at a/ : Heichel and Frink. 1975)and, in meat prices range from broilers (leekexpensive), parentheses. potentially feasible values for milk and eggs(Byerly. pork, and beef to lamb. 1967). 4 52 6 6 114 ti

TABLE 31. COMPARATIVE RESOURCE USE FOR HUMAN PROTEIN SUPPLYALTERNATIVES Region and Ratio of resource use, for beef pioduction to equivalentprotein value in wheat/soybeans') Production Irrigation System° Utopian& Energy° Water . _Fertilizer Texas 'High Plains Nonirrigated 3.0 10 , 8 Irrigated 2.1 5 4' 19 Western Nebraska ,. Nonirrigated 5.9 -. 17 Irrigated crops; 7 3.2 17 22 le. Irrigated apple ... and'pasture 3 2 24 45. 26 Northern Indiana 4.0 11 Georgia Coastal Plain 10 Graiti-fed_ 3.4 14 10 Pasture-fed 0.3 - 14. .. 12 Eecli beef production systees,includespasttue plus feed grain and protein supplement with feedlot finishing bd. which uses intensive pasture finishing). (except Georgia pasture- . I, to pound Jean beef versus 1.06 pounds whole are irrigated wheat plus 0.23 pounds soybean Vegetable minimsources irrigated where feed grains . 'ye Not including 'pasture, some of whichmay be cultivilble. e Includes slaughter or flour processing. Same Locknetz (1975270). Used by pernusionof the Journal of Soil and Water Conservation.

most parts of the U.S. 'Second, water resource use in agrichemical use, driving meat productprices to would also be decreased, withirrigation require- commensurately higher levels, with increasing abso- ments alone being four to 45 timesgreater for beef lute differences in price between vegetable than for other field and ani -,, crops. Bradley (1962) suggests mal sources of protein. Alternatively, thegovern- that the' water cost of beef is. 25 times that of a meni could impale,a ceiling on meat cons= diet, Considering -water needs of plants with coupon-rationing and price controls supporting each system. Fertilizerrequirements on animal produtts requiring- resources could be substantially decreased (one-seventh or produce nutritionally equivalentgrains and legumes less), as could be overallenergy requirements (one- (Backit4e.nct and Ingelstam, 1976). Finally, fifth or less] In summarY, at 1970 it is ar- U.S. crop yields, gued that scientific research isimproving the ef- -; one hectare of cropped land could provide thean- ficiencies of feed conversion, and this,in conjunc- - nual protein needs of eight (wheat)to 16 (soybeans) tion with increased use of nonhuman food. adults, taking into account net-Utilizable protein will make animal 'derived foods available withmore (Pimedrel et al., 4975:756). attractivacosts and efficiencies than-now exist.his Several counterargumentsare often raised con- argument, however, also suggests that the cerning' the utility of a phtentiat decrease sooner po- in animal .tential.human foods are denied foranima!_ suste- consumption. First, it is pointed out that aninialsuse nance, the more rapidly' theselnnovatirn will some foods not available to man. However,an ani- emerge, if for no ojber reason than priceincentives mal based diet in the industrialized worlddoes rep- to find innovative meat production technologies. resent a substantial allocation to livestock feed of We can conclude that what, political decisionscannot both. human foods- and the-- resources to produce now equitably and humanely determine about ani- these food!. Second, it is argued thatfood resources made available by Audi. mal food consumption, the marketplacewill eventu- a change could not effi- ally decide, too late perhaps tosave squandered re- ciently or continuously be allocatedto developing sources. areas. This argument ignores, however, the decrease resource demands such a change would- bang --a decrease In demand forenergy, fertilizers, and other Agrichemicals agricultural inputithus providing lesscompetition Pest eradication,was. a and perhaps lower prices for these tent theme accom- inputs to the de- panying use of chemical pesticides.In corn produc- veloping areas. Certainly only modestdietary tion, pesticide use increased thirty change could reestablish the food stockpiles times in the last eroded twenty years, but insect losses tripled.'Pest resis- during recent years. Furthermore, it fitsuggested that tance to,achernicali, accompanied by cultural, political, and economic obstacles high costs and make re- environmental contatainatiOn,may change the pat- ducing mood output in Amerita quitetuilikelyfflop- tern of pesticide use. Economic and environmental per, 1976:197). However, there we alternativeprocess- consequences of the eradication approach es to et complish this end. One is & marked decrease have lead to incriasing emphasison biological controls and

, 53 67 pest management. Biological controls includethose a seven percent increase in crop losses.This loss kinds of practices we mentioned in discussion of would be less than the 'annual ten percentproduc- traditional agricultureencrraging natural ecolog- doll surplus. Pesticide prohibition would raisefarm , ical balance by the nature of pNduction,-or use of product value by One-quarter btht retail food prices natural parasites of pestl. Fop..ixample. California by only nine percent (Pimentel, 1973), sinceouily viticulturafists plant- ckerg,rsep blackberrybucEes one-third to two-fifths of food prices are determined near the vineyards as hosts for a"wasp that preys oq by farm commodity prices (Chapman, 1973). the grape Teafhopper. Pest management includes the How could Pesticide use becurtailed? One . useof pesticides, but only on a !'when needed" mechanism is price. At present, the benefit-cost ratio rather than a routine basis. Based on knowledge of for pesticides is about three to one. This means that develoiiment of the pest's life cycle. field inspec- every dollar spent topurchase and apply pesticides ,,tions, and computer modeling, it is possible to' pre- yields three dollars increase in crop yield (Pimentel, dict when pest outbreaks are likely. and for farmers 1973% If pesticide costs were increased,this to receive advisory- messages at that time.Potato ratio would be less favprable. Amongmechanisms producers in Pennsylvania, apple orchard owners in for raising these pricer-huld be higher input costs MiChigan. and cotton producers in California can ticide manufacturing (particularly petroleum %se integrated pest management systems. Biological. s): higher costs involved in proving safetyof controls and integrated pest control might break the rides before use: and taxation. Increased prices vicious circle of incred pesticide use accom- tno be sufficient however.because decreased panied by_ rising crop losses as pests. develop resis- OS icicle use accompanied. by lower production would rise 'commodity -pnces. thus increasing the tance (Brody. 1976) . At is conceivable that American farmers could potential -benefit-costratio. The alternative elianinate the use of chemical fertilizers and pes- mechanisms are government control. such as exerted ticides. Chapman (1973). foi4example. suggested bypeU.S. Environmental Protection Agency on en- some consequences of regulationand prohibition of vironmental contamination aud by the Food and c.hemical'use. Among these would he an increase in Drug Administration on chemicalresidues on food. cultivated land with Imre d soil erosion as mare and consumer preferencea dentane,for organic nal land comes into prodtion: higher food p ces; food4 Outright legislatedp if ion would face in- smaller exportable surplus; changed food ap surmountable politicalanndustrial opposition. ance as a result of insect. r bacterialspoilage; and A negative change in etgy intensiveness in in- potential decline in f is dud other intensive dustrialized agriculture is a two-edged, sword. On production units d&wen ent on chemicals A-return he positive side are these potential results' to crop rotation rattier than monoculturewould oc- Impetus to maintain land in farms cur, as well as a decline in emigrationfrom farming Increased income to farmers areas. Farm incom&ould.increase. aProjection that Greater farm.empleyment is substantiated by studies of contemporary organic Decreased ecological and health risk from.chemi- -t, farms undertaken by the' Cente for the Biology of cal residues, -Natural Systems at Washington University (Lock- Use-of natural pest controls eretz et al'. 15). Sixteen organic farms in theli'Se of fertility enhancing crop rotations Midwest were tched with control farms on the On the other' hand, these would Also result basis of size. soitype, location. and.croplivestk More land in cultivation A Greater risk of erosion on marginal land producticin syste .Although both farm group s-- organic and inorg were highly "mechanizeilAs Smaller crop production the organic farms useonly one-third the-total ..#igher food prices energy input of the control farms per unitofproduc- Less exportable surpluses . r. tio.,..The market value per acre' was only slightly Alone. a simple decrease in energy use in indus- -lower (eight percent) for the organic farms on an ac- trialized agricultureprimarily through reduction reage basis, and the differerlebetween crop value' in agrichemicalswould reduce significantlyde- and operating costs was virtually identical for the mand for fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, with two groups. because of the lower input costsfor the the potential of making these commodities accessi- organic farms. This conclusion suggests that if or- ble at lower prices to .developing areas. where their . genic farming were widespread. and commodity use is appropriateIn other words. the, means for prices increased accordingly, farm incomescould production rather than the food itself would be real- indeed increase. located . It is difficult to measure the potentialItnpact of The joint effects of dietary change anda decrease pesticide prohillition. It is certainly erroneous t9 ex- in energy intensity would be less ecologically dis- to , trapolate from isolated organic farms.amidsf pes- ruptive, since the cropland saved front allocati ds - ticide using neighbors. The neighbors provide an feddgrain production would offset decreased y obvious spatial buffer decreasing the risk of pests. fromagrichernicalprohibition_Substantial diseases, and weeds. Pimentel (1973) argued that economic dislocations would occur. since many prohibition of pesticide use in the U.S. would cause American grain farjers also producvestock prod-

54 66 sUcts: agricultural input industries wouldbe 'st- economically,-and sociallyso given appropriate, veirely affected. Even if thesetwo policies were material and ,institution. : sities. Third, much adopteda substantial decrease in .animal-derived` of the gains in producti foods and a significant decline in . and food crops in agricheRical developing areas have = useplanning for cashioning the if achieved by small-scale economic impacts fanners. Finally, in . is 'a -major undertaking in addition t tional technologies, poten- to the need for tial new ideas of widapplicability may be found. planning effective transfers to developingareas ,of One example of -the, potential mobilized resources: use of traditional . practices fpr agricultural development is theTcent There are radial. ethical. environmental. andhealth spread of water fern cultivation inrice pas in arguments for the richtci alter theirconsumption to Vietnam and southern China (Galston. 1975).In Thai benefit the poor which do not need to be justified by Binh province of northern Vietnam. farmershave. the assumption that production possibilitiesare lim- cultured the water fern, eachyear transplanting the ited, o that food will be more costly andscarce, . fern to rice paddies. The fern vegetatively 'unless an effective institutional mechanismis estab- propa- gates. eventually covering the surfabe of thewater.' lished to transfer the sacrifices of the richinfood. Rite yields are increased by fifty'to resources. or incometo the poor an' mal- 100 percent due nourished, such sacnfices are not likelyto be effec- to nitrogen fixation by a blue-green algae that lives tive(USDA. 1974a52) in pockets on the water fern leaf. The symbiosisof Enhancing Local Initiative the algae and fern is turned by these farmersinto a in Developing Areas . symbiosis of rice and humansas well Preserving the Increasingly it has been recognized that foodsup- fern for the annual inoculationwas a well-guarded. ply syStemg of the developingareas are ultimately indeed valuable secret. kepteven from local women dependent on small-scale farmers andopportunities who might marryintooutside villages The peasants for increasing their -productivityAn ion to the were pursuaded to share this technology during the small farmer as opposed to lar e schemes can rice shortages of recent decades. andtechniques of be seen in statements of agricultural philosophy,pol- 'water fern culture are no longersec This trail< icy, and practice Ward(1974:25).for example, has tio technology is proving of grA:t valuein the suggest) that: ab of fertilizers it1.5,upon (the) strategy of backingthe small is danger that many traditional technologies menthehalfbillion small farmers in the develop- may lost as "modern" education and agricultural 'ing world--thatthe hopes of feedingmost of mari4 practices supplant traditional knowledgeand kind in the longer term depend. technology. If we view these traditionalpractices as Recent statements of intent by the WorldBank a source of innovation, it is clear that they greatly (1976:15-17)parallel very clpselynew directions in enhance potentials for local agriCulturalimprove- USAID assistance.'focusing on improving production ment. as well as multiply the numbers ofpotential in rural areas. with a strong "solutions" to the world food problem.For example component Of equity or the Chinese government eneour-g0s shared opporninity by significant numbersaf.rural traditional pest poor: control practices along. with modernprocedures. with emphasis on preventionas wellas on cure The bank 'believes that rural developmentprop- (Chiang. 1971/4) erly conceived and carried outneed not conflict Successful release of the latent potentials of with the objectives di-uglier food productionIn- farm- deed. studies irtiliCate that small farmers ers 'in the developing areas raises practical and are often ethical questions Practically, more efficient in the use of farm resources thenare science and technol- large farmers And though it-may take longerto in- ogy ttrost-uork cooperatively within local environ- crease food output on small farms than on larger ments+in seeking solutions. "Appropnate" or."alter- units it is more difficult. for instance. to devise and native" technologiesguy inake the technological implement development schemes involving large progress of the induerialized world availableatoa numbers of smallholders than those affecting onlya scale relevant to the small balderin developing areas few large-scale farmers-441e Bank has concluded (Schuinac§afr.1973:Dickson, 1974: Wade.1975b. that. in, the longer run, increases in foodproduction ChidEkele1975; Makhijani and Poole.1875) How - ofahe magnitude required to satisfy worldwide de- ever, i's mancrtan only be achieved by helping small fatmers it ethically acceptable for donor nationsto increase their prciductivity and output fOcus 9n development and diffusion oftechnologies eM tliat,afenow questioned in the industrialized areas' In practice. a number of-studies have suggestedthe Can we justifia,bly encourage dependencyot pe- positive, focal role of small-scale farmers in de- troleurn when we continue'to squander thisresource velopment. such that enhancing theimontributions4 for our own_ food prodUction and"necessities" of to development planning is increasingly imperative0 life? As Schumacher(1973:28)suggests: (Knight.1974:Morss et al.1975; Crosson. 1975). First; local farmers are often 'aware of proble and Itisqlear that the rich arein the process of stripping od productivity Second,am_ ple evence the world of its onothir-all enclov;mentof relativily accumulated to suggest that theyrespon .cheap and simple (to -use) fuels to opportunities that are environmentally. The vulabilifr of e green revolution technology v 55 lt9 suggests the desirability of either fundamentally dif- equities in the world economic system.It prevention ferent approaches to agricultural dev opm or a of hunger and famine are of highest priorityin what basic restructuring of the.world-eco Oc system to must be a lengthy and difficultprocess. this at least assure careful husbanding ofenergyresources. can be accomplished now,with food production technologies presently available and resources Given the improbability of.the latter, the former as- argued' sumes crucial importance. courageously redirected. Berg (1975:35) has persuasively: The-Risk of Duality After all the politilal and economic arguments.deal- The ultimate hope of technology is that somehoW ing with hunger and malnutrition is amoral issue the gap between rich and poor will be closed for that demands a aortal response. Why should itbe so most of the world's people. A partial commitment to difficult to justify? We often hear that national policies should flow only from self-interestWe solutions that are locally adaptive and equitable- - somehow have failed to recognize that doinggood such as developing local initiative or assuring a for the sake of doing good is self-interest. To most modicum of access to resourcesrimposes a common people, ethical. concerns are of value. et:impassion risk with technological solutions that only partially and human decency may not lend themselvesneatly succeed: increasing duality. and the potential of to cost-benefit analysis. but thedesire for sound :triage. Economic: social. and spatial dualities in de- moral values. and,the transfer of those values tofu- veloping areas are already 'familiar, as are similar generations. NarOgitimate rationale for Gov- distinctions between the industrialized and develop- ernment action Somehow. affluentsocieties must ing areas. From the acceptance of duality. learn to accept this kind of self-interest as abasis for the -public policy triage is only a short step down a road toward Given the facts. adherence to the lifeboat or triage end of our morality. If we have neither the hope nor theories is an intellectual and moral cop-out Tothe the moral commitment that all of humanity shall extt that there is to be hunger andmalnutrition. it have equitable access to would resources and oppor- wilMe a direct consequence ofmaldistnbution of tunity for friedom from hunger. we face an increas- resources among andwithin' nations. Enlightened ing Probability of triage being seen as inevitable and policies and actions could prevent it. and we have no therefore acceptable. For some.triage is a fashion- choice but to .try To do otherwise would reflecta able response to the threat imposed by equity and fundamental and grievous chile in the character of justice. man. (Copyright 1:6,11111:iii 14i the New York Times Company Reprinted ission 1 No short term palliative will redress presenj in-

I 54 70

_ _ _ 4

e IV,,PROSPECTS

. there is arm involved in *agricultural opertitidni than theproduction of incomes and the lowering of costs: whet is involved Ira society, the health. hap- piness, and harmony of man, as wellas the beauty of . his habitat E. F. Schumacher (1973:1 I1-112 ) In an article prepared prior to the U.N. Worl ood stockpiles and in-the longer view free Conference in 1974 Barbara Ward resources for c the alloc,atioto developing areas. Similarly, a decrease world food problem as "the challengeof justice" in energintensity in industrialized agriculture (197425). Our analysis has ledus to the same con- could clusion: the world food problem is the availability of agricultural inputs our own creation, for develioping areas. Nevertheless,uncertainties of and solutions are available, if the industrializedna- petroleum supply suggest caution in adoption of tions are willing to take sufficient moral responsibil- in- ity. Let, us summarize the argument dustrialized agriculture as a prototype for develop- we have- de- ing areas, even with "appropriate technologies."As veloped, share with you what worldappear to us to Franke (197448) has obegrved in Java: be initial steps toward meetingimnwdiate food needs, and finally suggest elements ofa longer-term The teciasology advocatesthe rate-of-profit world food policy. theorists. the military dictators, and the large land- Although there is considerableuncertainty regard- owners are attempting to produce enough food for ing the nature and extent of the world foodproblem, the people of Java. They are failing. Their optitnistic hunger, is a contemporary reality. plans and programs have created only increased even within the human suffering and promisemore of thg,pirrne, United States. By the middle 1970's, muchof the Perhaps solutions will come, not from the'devekip- ability of the world food systemto buffer Miami- rfitnit experts. bin from the small farme4 and land- tions in food production had been eroded,with no less laborers of lava immediate prospects for other than in productivity to match population, We find if particularly intriguing thaone pre- scription for survival of the American induftrialized substantial risk of famine in the abseneeof food,. stockpiles. North Amerip agricultural system. basedupon reduction of energy .... increasing im- use, calls for smaller, less energy intensive farms: portance as a food source for .i.. . depending for production on technologyw h substantial farm methods based on biological -diversity:legumes economic, energetic, and resource subsidization. to minimize fertilizer requirements: biologicalpest Viewed from the perspective of the basic'tructural controls: solar icrop drying: and windmills forirriga- requisites of any f supply system, purported ef- tion energy (Clark, 1975). A potential convergence of ficiencies-of ind industrialized agriculture and developing tradi- , food production and pro- tional cultivation syttems is apparent. vision .are questionab e, -particularlyas alternatives to traditional food supply systems in developing Thus, solutions to the world food problemdepend areas. Creed revolution technologies assume tiie upon the willingness of the industrialized worlri to vulnerabilities of industrialized Agriculture _ undergo modest "belt-tightening" in response lei its without own enlightened, moral self-ipterest. Given theneed its institutional features to protect againit variabili- for population growth to stabilize ty, having abandoned traditional meant forcoping with respect to with risk and uncertainty. The world resources and food production technologies. this food system is belt-tightening may be insufficientto solve popula- created by control over agriculturalinputs end food' tion problems, raising commodities exerted by the industrializednations. a larger chicken and egg" Commitment-to elements of industrialized agricul- proposition concerniorthe primacy ofpopulation ture for food production links adevoloping growth or development,a topic not considered here. nation to Among potential policies to solve immediate the world food system. and thus to the worldfood problem. hunger and famine problemtare.these: Althongh technological solutionsare attractive. (1) A voluntary decrease the world food problem is essentially moral in calorie. protein. and or ethi- particularly animal delved foodconsump- cal rather than economic or technical in character. tion in Food resources are inequitably distributed indiFiiIizedareas., within (2) n of substantial feed grain crop- and among nations. 'Changes tn diet in theindustrialized areas could immediately reestablish land to human -foods and -subsequentestab- food lishmentof fo'od stockpiles and distribution

w peograms financedbyindustrialized national product and tOinclices of consump- economies: and tion of world resources. (3) The explicit assumption by the political Perhaps most important is a policy that cannot be leaders and citizens of the industrial nations legislated. a. policy of moral commitment to equita- of moral responsibility for meeting short- ble. humane solutions to the world food problem. term world food needs. We must recognize that these solutions will have a profound impact on ourselves as well as on the In the long run, world foodprobleiscan only be world's poor. Adjusting to these impacts may be one addressed. in our view. as part offundamental of the greatest challenges those accustomed to the 'reordering of world wealth:Among mechanisms of material consumption standards of the indus- direct relevance to food supply are these: trialized wcirld will face. Nevertheless. a cbinmit- ment must be made. As persuasive and asseemingly' (1) Food rationing in industrialized nations. dispassionate as scientific analysis of the situation with particular emphasis on limiting animal might appear. arguments about solutions to the derived food intake' dependent on resources world food problem will remain inherently 'capable of producing human food. philosophical. moral. and political. To solve the (2) Severe limitation on use ofagricultural %void food problem. we will pay the necessary price. chemicals in industrial nations by rationin_g if only because triage is unconscionable. If or taxation; economics should have any bearing upon ourdeci- (3) Substantial energy taxation meinchis- sion. perhaps we could take comfortthat moral ac- trialized areas. witfi taxation inversely pro- tion will be "cheaper' while energy supplies are still portional to reserves of each fuel source and relatively. plentiful with small tax rebates to cover true energy I sit on a- man's back. choking him and makinghim consumption necessities by the poor. and carry me. and yet assure myselfand others that I am (4) A formal commitment todevelopment very son.) for him and wish to easehis lot be any finincing by the industrialized nations, each means possible except gettingoff his back (Leo of which is assessed proportionally to gross Tolstoy quoted by Clinton 19753

110

51. a. 72 a BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allan. W.. 1965. The AfnconHusbandman. Edinburgh: Ojiver and Boyd. of Food and:..'culture. in cooperation with Univer- sity of Calif.- . Andrilenas. P. A.. 1975. Farrhees* Useof Pesticides in 1971 Chancelfot. W an ... Extent of Crop Use. Washington: USDA Economic,. R. Goss. 1976, "Ilalancing Energy and Food Production. 19 75-2000'Science. Vol_ 192. Restrairch Service. AgriculturalEconomic Report 268. pp. 213-218. Atkinson. I. Land D. E. Kunkel.1976. High Yielding Var- Chang. J -H.. 1968. "The Agricultural - iedes of Rice in the Philippines. Washington- Potential of the USDA Humid Tropics." Geographical ,Review. Vol_58. pp Economic Service. Foreign Agricultural 333-361 Economic 113. "Backstrand. G. and. L Ingelstam. 1970. "Potential Photosynthesis 1976. "We Could Re- and Crop Productivity." Annals oTthe model Sweden." Current Sweden.VoL 7611. Association of Einem. C. J.. 1972. "Transmission of Amencart Geographers, Vol 60.pp 92-101 Information About Chapman D. 1973. "An End to Chemical the Environment in the HumanSpecies: A Cybernetic Farming ?" Envi- View of Genetic and Cultural Evolution." ronment. Vol. 15. No 2. pp 12-17 ogy. Vol. 19. No. 3. pp 224226 "Social Biol- Chiang, H C. 1976. "Pest Control in the People s Republic Barnet. R. J.. 1976. "Multinationals: _of China." Science. Vol 191pp 675-676 A Dissentirig View." Chidekel, D. 1975. Saturday Review. Vol. 3. No 'Small is Beautiful' as a Book anda_ 9. pp. 11. 58. Bum Stetter." Science for the People. Vol Barnet: R. J and R. E Muller.1975. Global Reach: The -7:pp 17-19 Power of Multinational Citizens Board of Inquiry into Hunger andMalnutrition in Corporations New York the U.S. 1968. Hunger USA A Report Boston: Beacon Simon aid Schuster Press Bennett. M K. 1954. The World'sFood Neiv York. / Harper. Clark. C.. 1967, Poputon Growth and Land Use. London. Macmillan. e Berg. A.. 1975. "The Trouble withTriage." New York Clark. W 1975. "US, Agriculture Times Magazine. June 15. is GroWing Troultio as 1975. pp. 26-35_ Well as Crops." Sigehsonion, Vol5. No. 19. pp Berlin. B. aid.. 1974. Principles of TzeltalPlant C..lassifico- 59-65. tion: An:introduction to the BotanicalEthnography of Cleaver. H. M.. Jr a Mayan-Speaking People of Highland Chiapas. 1972. "The Contradiction of the Green New Revolution." Mon ly Review. Vol 24.pp 80-111- York: Academic Press. Clinton. R. L_. 1976. '-TD Specter of Boerma. A. li.. 1970. "A World Agricultural Starvation." War on Plan,- Sum- Hunger, Vol 10.0-:o app10-14. tific American. Vol_ 223. No.2. pp_ 5469 Cochrane. W. W 1969. The World Borchert. J. R.. 1971. "The Dust Food Problem New Bowl in the 1970's." An- York: Crowell. nals of the Association of AmericanGeographers. Vol 61. pp. 1-22. Commoner. B. et al.1974. The Effect of Recent Energy Price-Increases on Field Crop Production Boaerup. E.. 1965, The Conditions ofAgricultural Growth 4P Costs St Lows- Washington University. Centerfor the Biology Chicaga. of Natural Systems Bradley. C C.< 19112. "_Human Water Needs-and Water Use Conklin. H. C. 1967, "Some Aspects of Ethnographic Re- in Americs.".Saerice. Vol. 138.pp 489-491 search in Ifugao." Transactions Brody. J. E.: 1976. "Farmers Turnto Pest Control in Place of the New York of Eradication." New York Times. Acaderol of Sciences. Series II. Vol30. pp 99-121 August 1. 1976 Connell, K. H.. 1950. The Populationof Ireland Oxford` Beiiolre. C.. 1967. **,Types ofFood Shortages in Tanzania." Clarendon Geographical Review. Vol. 57.pp. 333-357 Cook. E.. 19g. Man. Energy andSociety San Francisco Brown:le R. with...E. P. Eckholm.1974. By Bread Alone. W H Freeman New York: Praeger. Brown. L R. 1975 "The World IN Crosson. P R. 1975. "InstitutionalObstacles to Expansion Food Prospect." Science. of World Food 'Production." Vol. 190. pp 1053-1059. - Science, Vol. 186 pp- Brown. N. Land E. R. Pariser. 51,9-523. '1975. "Food Science in Dalrymple. D G. 19744Development and Spread of High . Developing Countries." Science. Vol. 188. pp 589- -- 593. .Yielding Varietiesvof Wheat andRice in the Lesis De- Bryson. R. A.. 1976. "The Lessons of veloped Nations. Washington_USDA Economic Re-' Climatic Histor." search Service. Foreign AgriculturalEconomic Report Ecologist. Vol 6. pp. 205-211. 95. Buckley. W.. 1966. "Societyas a Complex Adaptive Sys- Dalrymple. D. G.. 1975.'Measuring the *"-4sPi in W. Buckley (ed.). Modern Green Revolution Systems Research The Impact.of Researchon Wheat and 'Rice Produc- for the Bebariorallcientist.Chicago: Aldine. .13yerly. T. C. 1967. *Ilse Efficiency of tion. Washington USDA EconomicResearch Service. Feed Conversion,' Foreign Agricultural Economic Report106. Science, Vol. 157. pp. 8904195. /Damon. P. E and S. M. 'animal. Cervinka. V. et al.. 1974. Energy 1976. "Global Coo...?" Requirements for Agricul- Science.. Vol 193. pp. 447-453. tete in Calfratnea. Sacramento:-CalikeniaDepartment Dasmann. R et al, 1973. Ecological Principles for . r Economic Development London. Wiley. Frankel, 0 H . )973. Survey of Genetic Resources in Their de Alcantara. C H1973-74. "The Green Revolution as Centers of Diveriity Rome FAO and International History The ;Mexican Experience." Development and Biological Pr$ramme Frederiksen. H, 1969. "Feedbacks in Economic and De- Change. Vol. 5 pp 25L44 166. pp 837- de Castro. I. 1952.The Geography of Hunger Bosto4 Lit- mographic Transition." Science. Vol tle Brown Gar7. DeMarco. S. and S Sechler. 1975. The Fields Have Turned :m, A W W. 1975, "The Water Fern-RiceConnection." Brown Washington Agribusiness Accountability Pro- Natural History. Vol. 84. No 10. pp 10-11 1963. Agricultural Involution The-Processof tect Geertz. C deWit. C T1967. "Photosynthesis- Its Relationship to Ecological Change in Indonesia Berkeley University Overpopulationin San Pietro et alHarvesting the of California Press Sun. New York Academic Press Green. M Jet al1972, The Closed Enterppse System. Diclaion. D . 1974. Alternative Technology and the Politics NfW York Bantam of Technical Change. Glasgow: Fontana. Griffin. K .1972. The Green Revolution An Economic Duckham. A_ N and G B N,lasefield 1470. Farming Sys- Analysis Geneva United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Report 72 6 tems of the World Nev. York. Praeger World Dumont. P._ and B Rosier. 1969. The'Hun,gry Future New Grigg. D B 1974. The Agricultural Systems of the York. Praeger New York. Cambridge University Press Dwyer. J T and J Mater. 1975.Beyond Economics and Harlan J R. 1975 "Our Vanishing Genetic Resources." Nutrition The Complex Basis of -.Food Policy." Sci- Science. Vol 188. pp 618-621 ence. Vol: 188 pp 566-570 Hams, 1-. 1966 "The Cultural Ecology of India'sSacred Eaton D J and W S Steele 1976 Analysis ofGrain Re- CattleCurrent A nthropolov. Vol 7. pp 51-66 One NAn's Food is Another serves. A Proceedings. WashingtonUSDA Economic 1972 Research Service Report 634 Man s WhitewashNatural History Vok 81. No 91 Eckholm. E P1976 Losing Ground Environmental pp 12 14 Stress and World Food Prospects New `lock H W Heady E 0 1976 "The Agriculture of the U S Scien- Norton tific American, Vol 235. No 3 pp 106-127 Ehrlich PR.. 1968 The Plpulatioe Bomb New York Bal- Heichel G H 1973 Comparator: e Efficiency ofEnergy Ag- lantine Brooks Use in Crop Production New Haven Connecticut Evans C D and R V. Simunek 1975 Balance Sheet of ricultural Experiment Station_ Bulletin 739 1974a. "Energy Needs and Food . the Farming Sector1975Washington USDA _Economic Research Service Agriculture Information YieldsTechnology Review Vol 75. pp 18-25 Re- Bulletin 389 1974b. Auxiliary Energy FAO 1946 World Food Survey Washington. FAO quirements and Food Enerp Yields ofSelected Food 1952 Second World Food Survey Crops New Haven Connecticut Agricultural Experi- Rome FAO ment Station. Special Soils Bulletin 36 1961 Development Through Food Heichel G H and C R Fnnk. 1975. "Anticipatingthe of A Strategy for-Surplus Utilization- Rome- FAO Energy Needs of American Agriculture,"' Journal 1963 Third World Food Survey Soil and Water Conservation. Vol 30_ pp 48-53 Rome FAO Heilbroner R L1963, The Great Ascent New York- 1969 State of Food and Agricul- Harper and Row ture Rome FAO Higbee E1963. Farms-and Farmers in an Urban Age 1971a. Food Balance Sheets. 1964- Nev. York Twentieth Century Fund 1966 Average Rome FAO Hightower. 11972 Hard.Tomatoes. Hard` fames i__..1971b. Agricultural Commodity Washington Agribusiness Accountability Project Protections. 19,0.1980 Rome- FAO 1973. -Agribusiness and Ag- 1974. "Population. Food Supply ngovernrnent Power Profits, and Poverty G L and Agnceiltural Development.- MonthlyBulletin of Mason and F Veltei leds ). The'Politics of Exploita- Agricultural Economics and Statistics. Vol 23. No 9. tion New York_ Random House pp 1-13 1975. Eat Your Heart Out. Food 1975a. Production Yearbook, Vol Profiteering in A menca New York Crown Publishers 28. 1974 Rome- FAO. Hirst, E 1974 "Food-Related EnergyRequirements...Sci- 1975b. "World Food and Agricul- ence. Vol 184. pp 134-138 Anien- tural Situation-F6bruary 1975Monthly Bulletin of Hodgson. H J1976 "Forage Crops. Scientific Agricultural and Economic Statistics. Vol 24. No 4. can. Vol 234. No 2. pp 61-75 Agriculture in pp 1-19 Hopper. W. D . 1976. -The Development of Farvar. M. T and J P Milton. 1972. The CarelessTechnol- Developing CountriesScientific American. Vol 235. ogy: Ecology and InternationalDevelopment Garden No 3. pp 196-205 . International Rice Research Institute. 1975Changes in City. N Y Natural History Press Banos. Feder. E.. 1973-74. "Six Plausible 'Theses Aboutthe Peas- Rice Farming in Selected Areas of Asia. Los ant's Perspectives in the veloping World." De- Philippines. IRRI velopment and Change. V 5. pp 1-24. Janick. J, CH Noller. and C L RhyLerd 1976 "The Cy- FIrey. W.. 1960. Man. Mind onLand Glencoe. IIIThe cles of Plant and Animal Nutrition." Scientific Amen- ; can, Vol 235. No 3. pp 74-86 Free Piss Science Franke. R. W . 1974. "Miracle Seeds andShattered Dreams lanzen. D H . 1973 '`Troegcal Agroecosystems in Java. Natural History. Vol 83, yo 1. pp10-18 Vol 182. pp 1212-1219 Jenks G F and W M Kolttnorgen 1958 "Suitcase Farm- 84-8&

6. a 74 ing in Sully County. South Dakota, Annals of the Cultural Change. Vol 22.pp. 436-452 Association of American Geographers,' Vol.48. pp Morgan; W B and R. P Moss.,1970, "Soils, 27-40 Plants. and - Farmers in West Africa." in J P Garlick andR Vi Jennings. P L. 1974. "The Amplification ofAgricultural Keay leds ). Human Ecology in the Tropics Oxford Production." Scientific American, Vol. 235. No3. pp Pergamon 180-194. Morss, E R et al1975. Strategies for Small Farmer De- Knight. C G.. 1974. Ecology and Change: bra/ Modern,- velopment An Empirical Study of Rural Development zation in an African Contmunity NewYork Projects Washington Development Alternatives, Academic Press. Inc... for U S Agency for InternationalDevelopment Krenz. R. et al.. 1976. Costs of Producing FoodGroins. OECD. 1973. Food Consumption Statistics Feed Grains, Oilseeds.' and Cotton. 1955-1971 1974-76 Pans Organization for EconomicCooperation and --Washington: USDA Economic ResearchService. Ag- Development ricultural Economic Report 338: Oldfield M., 1976. The Utilization and Lakshminarayana. V and P K. Menon, 1972. Conservation of "Exposure of Genetic Resources, unpublished M A thesisThe the General Population in Hyderabadto DDT." Jour- Pennsylvania State University nal of Food Science and JechtioloVoL 9, p 82. Onnrod. R. K 1974. Adaptation ur'Culturol .Lappe. F, M, 1971. Diet for a Small Planet New York Ecosystems unpublished Ph D dissertation ThePennsylvania Friends of the Earth. Ballantine State University Leach. G.. 1975. Energy and Food Production London Paddock, W and P Paddock.1964. Hungry Nations Bos- International Institute for Environmentand Develop- ton Little and Brown_ ment. 1967. Famine-1975r America's De- Leon. B.. 1975. "Agriculture A Sacred Cow.-Environment, cision_ Who Will Sunve7 Boston Little and Brown Vol. 17, No 9. pp 38-40 PalmerI 1972. Science and Agricultural Production. Lerzu. C.. 1974. "The New Food Chain- Environmental Geneva Lruted Nations Research Institute forSocial Action. Vol 5. No 20. pp- 7-10 Development. Report 72 8 Lockeretz. W.. 1975. "Consumption of AgriculturalRe- Pennsylvania Farm Management andBusiness Analysis sources in the Production if Fat Cattle and Food._ Service 1976. 1975 FMBA Service Farm Business Grains 1 Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, y_61:_;;" Summary Camp Hill, Pa PennsylvaniaFarmer's As- 30. pp 268-271 sociation Lockeretz, V.V et al.. 1975. A Comparisonof the ?rock-lair' --Petetman. M and K P Shea. 1972. "TheBig FarmEncl. lion, Economic Returns. and Energy Intensivenessof torment 'Vol 14 No 10. pp 10-15 Corn Belt Farms That Do and Do Not Use Inorganic Perisse, J., F Sizaret. and P Francois,1969 cited in WHO. Fertilizers and Pesticides St Louis: WashingtonUni- 1973. Energy and Protein Requirements Geneva. versity. Center for the Biology of NaturalSystems WHO Technical Report Series 522 p 20 Loomis. R. S1976. "Agricultural Systems.- Scientific Panel:del, D 1973. "Realities ofa Pesticide Ban.' EniA American. Vol 235. pp. 98-105 - ronment. Vol 15 No 2. pp 18-31 Madden. JP 1967. Economies of Size in Farming Pimentel D et al, 1973 "Food Production and the Energy Washington_ USDA Economic ResearchService. Ag- Crisis." Science. Vol- 182 ricultural Economic Report 107 pp 443-449 1974 Maklinani. A' apd A Poole. 1975. Energy and Agriculture Workshop on Research in the Third World Boston Ballinger Methodologies for Studies of Energy,Food. Man and Malassis, L Environment, Phase 1Ithaca Cornell University 1976. The Rural World Education and De- Center for Environmental Quality .veiopment Pans. UNESCO Management 1975 Energy and Land Con- Martin. W P. 1975. All-Out Fo;:rd Production Strategy straints in Food Protein Production.' S'cienceVci and Resource Implications Madison.Wisc Amen- 190. pp 754-761 can Society of Agronomy. Special Publication 23 Poleman T ,T.. 1975 "World FoodA PerspectiveSci- Mascarenhas. A Cet al, 1973. "Studies in Famines and ` ence Vol 188 pp 510-518 Food Shortages." Special Number, Journalof the Polanyi. K et al. 1957 Trade and Market in the Earl) Geographical 'Association of Tanzania. Vol8 Empires New York. Free Press May. J. M M. 1974. -The Geography ofNutrition in j M Porter. P W 1965. "EnvironmentalPotentials and Hunter (ed.)._ The Geography of Health andDisease Economic Opportunities A Background Chapel Hill. University of North Carolina, forCultural Department Adaptation."American Anthropologist, 'Vol 67 pp of Geography. Studies in Geography No6 409-20 Mayer. I1975,Managementof Famine Relief Science Porter P W and A de Souza.1974. The Underdevelop- Vol 188. pp 571-577 ment and Modernization of the Third World 1976, "The Dimensions of Human Washington Association of American Hunger.""Scientific American. Vol235 No 3. pp Geographers. Commission on College Geography_Resource Paper 40-49 28 Meadows. D H et al. 1972. The Limits to Growth New Prabowo. D and Sapogyo. 1975'Sidoarjo. East Java and York: Universe Books Subang. West Java Meadows D L et al in IRRI. Changes in Rice Farming . 1974. Dynamics of Growth in a Fi- in Selected Areas of Asia Los Banos Philippines nite World Cambridge: Mass. Wright -Allen Press. IRRI. Inc. Miller. I President's Science Advisory Committee1967, The World . 1973. "Genetic Erosion. Crop, Plants Threatened Food Problem Washington U S by Government Neglect. Science. Vol Government Print- 182. p 1231 . mg Office - Mivamoto. I1973. "The Real Value of Tied Aid The Case Ramparts. 1971 "Mard Times The - Agn,-Welfare Roll, of Indonesia 1967-'69." EconomicDevelopment ind Vol TS, No 4.'pp 10-11

61 7 I" ( * Sector." WashingtonAID Bureau for Population and Randers. J and E K 0 Zahn, 19t4. "Agriculture Volun- in Meadows et al . Dynamics of Growth in aFinite Humanitarian Assistance OfficeOf Private and Wnght!Allen Press. Inc . tary' Cooperation World. Cambridge. Mass 1975a. AID in AnInterdependent pp. 257-368 Agricur World, ASummary' of the Presentation_to Congress, Rappaport. R. A . 1971. "The Flow of Energy in an for Fiscal 1976 tural Society." ScientificAmSrican. Vol 225. No 3. Foreign Assistance Programs 1ashington.Agency for International Development 116-132 1915b. L' S 'Overseas Loans_end Rao. V K R. V , 1974. Growth With Justice inAsian Ag- Institute Grunts and Assistancefront InternatiorforOrganiza- nculture Geneva United Nations Research International De- of Social Development. Report 74 2 tions Washington Agency for S Ward. 1976. A velopment Office of Finanical Management, Rasmussen. W 'D G L Baker. and J of Manufac- ShortHistoryofAgriculturalAdjustment S Bureau of the Census. 1967. 1967 Census Washington USDA Economic Research Service. Ag- tures, ConcentrationRatios in Manufactdring riculture Information Bulletin 391 Washington Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Food +Census_ Russell.J 1954. World Population and World Survey . 1955 Supplies LondonAllen and Unwtn USDA. 1956. Household Food Consumption 1971 Farming Syste.ms in the Tropics Washington USDA Agricultural Research Service Ruthenberg. H 1958 A Chronology of American Oxford Clarendon Sanderson F H .1975 The Great Food Fumble." Sci- Agriculture 1790-1956 Washington USDA Agncul- 'tural Marketing Service ence Vol 1.8.8 pp 503-509 The World Food Budget San Pietro A . F A Greer and T J Army 1967Harvesting 1961 1962 and 1966 Washington USDA Economic Re the SunNew York Academic Press Saxe J G . 1882 The Poetical IS orks of JohnGodfrey Saxe search Service Foreign Agricultural Economic Report Boston Houghton Mifflin 4 Farm Subsidies 1964 TheWorld Food Budget Schultze C L1971 The Distribution of Service Who Gets the Benefit? Washington BrookingsInsti- 1970 Washington USDA Economic Research Foreign Agricultural Economic Report 19. tute Small is BeautifulEconarmcs as 1969 Household Food Consump- Schumacher E F197-'3 USDA Agricultural if People Mattered New York Harper & Row tion Stirvey 1965-66 -Washington Food.Vol 188 pp 501- Research Service Science. 1975 Special Issue 1970World Demand Prospects 653 -Food and Ag- for Agricultural Exports of Less Develo Countries Scientific American 1976. Special Issue Research Ser- ricultureVol 235. No 3 in 1980 Washington USDA Economic Require- vice Foreign Agricultural EconomicReport 60. Sc-nmshaw N S and V R Young 1976 "The Selected L'S Crop ments of Human N tritionScientific Amerman. Vol 1971 235 No 3 pc; 50- Budgets Washington. USDA Economic Research Ser- vice Simoons F J1967. Ea"of This FleshMadison Univer- 1972a 'Usual Planting and Har- sity of 111 isconsin Press Report- 'Crop ManagementSuccessful ;esting Dates Washington USDA Statistical Sommers C E 1,976 ing Service Agriculture Handbook 283 Farming.Vol 74. No 2 p 18 1972b. The Market Structure of the Spencer J E and R I Horvath. 1963 "How DoesAn Ag- ncultural Region Originate'" Annals of the Associa- Food Industry Washington USDA Market Economics Vol 53 pp 74-92- Divisions. Market Research Report 971 tionof Amencon Geographers 1974a. The World Food Siniation H and M Sprout. 19744 MultipleVulnerabilities The Context of Environmental RepairPnhcetonN J trid Prospects to 1985 Washington USDA Economic Princeton University. Center of InternationalStuV. .es Research Service Foreign Agricultural Economic Re- port 98 Research Monograph 40 1974b. Our Land and Water Re- Steinhart I. S and C E Steinhart 1974. "Energy Use in Research Ser- *e U.S Food System." Science. Vol, 184 pp307- sources Washington USDA Economic 316 this article is modified-from,C ESteinhart and vice Miscellaneous Publication 1290 Uses. and Role in 1975a That WeMayEat, The Year- S Steinhart. 1974. Energy Sources. 1975 Washington S Govern- Human Afff, airs. North Scituate. Mass DuitburyPress 'book of Agriculture Farmland High ment Printing Office Successful Farming. 1976. "Assessing 1976 1975 Changes in Farm Pro- Priced Land Gets a Weak." Vol 74. No 9. p7 ' Economy of Underde- duc ion and Efficiency ASummary Report Szentes. T.. 1971TheAplitical on' iliSDA Economic ResearchService. velopment_Budapest Akadernial Kiado Teitelbaum. M` S,1975. "ILeFevanee of Demographic Statistical Bulletin 548 Countries."Sci- 1976. Firm Enterprise Data System Transition Theory for Developing Stillwater. Okla USDA Economic Research Service. ence,Vol 1.88, pp 420-425. Commodity Economics Division and Oklahoma State Thomas. I. D. 1972. "Infant Mortality inTanzania.- East University African Geographical Review. Val 10. pp. 5-26 the Food System Tbamtbwaite. C W . 1941, Atlas of ClimaticTypes in the USFEA1976. Energy Use in United/SW/Rs Washington. U S. GovernmentPrinting Washington, U S Federal Energy Administration U S Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human 'Office. 1973. Fact Sheets Needs. 1973. Hunger 1973 Washington U S Gov- Union for Radical Political Economics. ernment Printing Office NA.' York. URPE 1974. Nutrition and Food Availa- USAID. 1974. Voluntary ForeignA446 Programs

62 7 6 4it hairy Washington. U S Government ['Tinting Office Ward. B.1974. "The Fat Years and the Lean.- The U.S Senate Subcommitt on Monopoly. 1968. Corpora- tion Farming- G Economist, Vol 253. No 6845.pp 19-25 Plains and Upper Midwest Re- Webb. W P 1931. The Great Plains. NewYork Ginn And gion .WashingtoGovernment Printing Office. Company 1972 Role of Giant Corporations Whittaker. R H and G Likens. 1975 "The Biosphereand Corporate Secrecy :Agribusiness Washington S Man." in H Lieth and R H Whittaker (eds 1. Primary Government Printing Office Psgductivitv of the Biosphere New York.. Springer- Van Vleck G1975 "For Human Nutrition Grain vs Verlag Meat.- The Professional Nutritionist. Vol 7 No 2. Wiltwer S H 1975 'Food ProductionTechnology and pp 16-10 the Resource Base Vogt. W 1948. Road to Sun ival New York Sloane Science. Vol', 88 pp 597-584 Wade N World Bank 1976 Annual Report1976 Washington 1975"a "International Agnculturai Research Aiorld Bank Group Science Vol 188. pp 585-589 World Health Organization 1975b New Alchemy Institute 1973. Energy and Protein Re- Search for an Alternative Agriculture' Science. Vol quirements Geneva WHO Technical ,Report Series 187 pp 727-729 522 Wortman S1976'Food and Agriculture Scientific Walters H 1975 -Difficult Issues Underlying FoodProb- lems.' Science Vol 188 pp 524-530 American 'Vol 235 No 3 pp 30.39 Zeimetzis A et al1976 D)narnics of Land Use in Fast War on Hunger 1976. Spechaleissueon private and olun Grow th Areas Washington USDA-Economic Re- tary agencies Vol 10 No 7 Aft search Service Agricultural Economic Report325

: Ear

4..

77 63 r 7

Consulting Services Publications available from

Association of American-Geographers 1710 Sixteenth St.. N.W. Washington. D.C. 20009

*. Geography as a Discipline, R. Huke. V. Malrnstrom. 1973 Sources Funds for College Geography Departments, S J Natoli, 197 Plane ege Geography Facilities. Guidelipe_s for Space and Equip t (CCG General Series Publication No. 12). R. H. Stod- dard. 1 3 Community 'Internships for Undergraduate Geography Students, K E. Corey. A W Stuart. 1973 40 Undergraduate Program Development in Geography, T Burke. 1973 Geography in the, Two-Year Colleges (CCG General Series Publica- tion No 10). Panel on Geography in the To-Year.Colleges. 197P.

76 .1