The Green Revolution began during the 1970s and 1980s, in an attempt to increase the nutrition in food crops and to make species of food crops more uniform and robust. Scientists developed strains of hybrid plants, such as wheat, rice, and maize that quantitatively produced more food that was of better quality. This research was led by Dr. Norman Borlaug in Mexico and others under the sponsorship of the Rockefeller Foundation during the 1960s.
There were several techniques that the scientists used to help increase yield and appearance of crops. First, genetic engineering was used, such as cross breeding plants for desirable qualities. Other methods were also used, such as expensive fertilizers, irrigation, heavy machinery, and pesticides and herbicides. These techniques were all used together to dramatically increase the yield of crops in many different third world countries, whose population was increasing at the fastest rate.
The Green Revolution was an influence and a disappointment to some people that it affect the most. It affected society, agriculture, and new technology. The wheat yield increased over time. As that was happening population grew and failure occurred. From land being dead tired to new technology, where it was easy to get fast money. Although the Green Revolution was started to end world hunger and the disparity in developing countries, it caused other consequences which included population growth and changes in genetic diversity of certain plants and cultural lifestyles. This revolution introduced the use of new technology and many scientifically altered crops to the world. With the rise in food supply, the population increased and some countries weren’t as starving as before. But with the advancement in t...
... middle of paper ...
...tive mode of agricultural production. Other global environmental impacts from industrial agriculture include soil erosion, salinization and water logging from irrigation, surface and groundwater contamination from pesticides and fertilizers, and the loss of cultural and biological diversity. The second phase is accelerating these unsustainable trends and is creating a global industrial food system that is highly fossil fuel intensive not only in the production sector, but in processing and distribution – where the average food item is more highly processed, more heavily packaged, and transported increasing distances. By contributing to increasing economic and social inequities at both national and international levels, this system also increases the risks of social instability. The need for more sustainable and socially just food and agricultural systems is clear.
Humans are damaging the planet to live comfortably, we must change the way food is distributed worldwide, support local farmers and switch to a healthier diet in order to stop global warming. The current global has been getting better for us humans over the years, from eating bread and eggs 3 times a day in the XV century, now we can eat better than the kings of those times, however the much of the food in not healthy and the global food system still fails in getting food to every individual in the planet and in addition it contributes to the destruction of our world. Ms. Anna Lappe explains how the food system contributes to around 1/3 of the global warming issue in her essay “The Climate Crisis at the End of Our Fork”, while a group of Plos one explains the issues about the export and import of food growth over the last 50 years in the
On the topic of environmental impacts due to “industrial farming”, Bill McKibben and Blake Hurst share completely different perspectives. McKibben believes that industrial farming has simply left an unexcusable bad impact on the environment, saying that it is unethical and that the meat we eat is potentially killing our environment and us as well. McKibben states that “we should simply stop eating factory-farmed meat, and the effects on climate change would be one of the many benefits.” (page 201). McKibben addresses that the techno fixes brought in industrial farming are simply not enough to help our environment.
Tilman, David, Kenneth G. Cassman, Pamela A. Matson, Rosamond Naylor, and Stephen Polasky. "Agricultural Sustainability and Intensive Production Practices : Article : Nature." Nature 418 (2002). Nature Publishing Group : Science Journals, Jobs, and Information. Web. 31 Nov. 2011.
Shifting back to a more locally sourced food economy is often touted as a fairly straightforward way to cut externalities, restore some measure of equity between producers and consumers, and put the food economy on a more sustainable footing.” (source E). The long-distance transportation of food uses a profligate amount of fuel and exploits cheap labor in the process. It can greatly assist the environment to buy from local sources by making the carbon footprint of food production lesser and saving natural resources such as oil.
Mass Production was a system used in various time periods as a benefitting factor toward a certain situation. Mass production was stemmed out during the times of World War I and was later on used as a system for other wars. Mass production was not only limited to wars, but instead it was also used in the Green Revolution. The Green Revolution began around the 1930s and made its change on the food system. It changed how agriculture worked and altered how food was produced. Mass production and the Green Revolution can be directly related to each other because mass production benefitted the Green Revolution. Through the film, Food Inc., the Green Revolution served as a change and an initiation to the development of social and
In order for us to maintain our lives, we need to consume food to supply nutrient-needs for our bodies. As the global population increased, the demand for food also increased. Increased population led to mass production of foods. However, even with this mass production, in under-developed countries, people are still undernourished. On other hand, in developed and developing countries, people are overfed and suffering from obesity. In addition, the current methods of industrial farming destroy the environment. These problems raised a question to our global food system. Will it be able to sustain our increasing global population and the earth? With this question in my mind, I decided to investigate the sustainability of our current global food system.
Centuries ago, the farming technique was only one: the rotational crops. For each season, people planted new seeds that would grow in the conditions given by the whether. After some time, the soil would rest and prepare for future cropping seasons. However, this is no longer the case, or at least it is no longer the only farming technique. Technology has made possible agriculture to grow, and to develop new techniques and types of crops. The most important new agricultural technique is monoculture, which is the single-species crop.
As the global population continues to rise, the amount of food needed to feed the people will increase as well. Two types of agriculture systems have been the backbone for crop production for decades if not centuries: conventional and organic agriculture— both methods could not be any more different. Conventional agriculture, a method that uses synthetic chemical pesticides, technologies or additives, and practices that are unsustainable is the leading producer for our food. On the other side of spectrum, organic agriculture generally, performed in a much smaller scale, does not use synthetic chemicals and utilize methods that are environmentally sound. Most conventional
The developed world’s love affair with local/organic farming (peasant farming as Collier describes it) has decreased food production worldwide because it does not use the land efficiently enough as with commercial agriculture companies. It also requires government subsidies that large commercial farming companies do not necessarily need. By increasing commercial farming, the world food supply will inevitably increase over a short period.
Some of the serious environmental tribulations related to food production and consumption consist of “climate change, water pollution, water scarcity, soil degradation, eutrophic...
Agriculture has changed dramatically, especially since the end of World War II. Food and fibre productivity rose due to new technologies, mechanization, increased chemical use, specialization and government policies that favoured maximizing production. These changes allowed fewer farmers with reduced labour demands to produce the majority of the food and fibre.
More farmers are now planting crops for biofuel, resulting to an intense drop in food production. According to experts this promising alternative energy source is seemingly causing a global decrease of food supply. As the demand for biofuels increases, more industrialized countries are offering encouragements and subsidizing farmers to grow crops for fuel rather than for food. The biofuel production method was also anticipated to be carbon neutral, as the crops would absorb the carbon dioxide released when the biofuel was burned. However crops for fuel are now grown at such a rate that they need more energy to cultivate, grow and harvest. By the time it reaches households, it would have consumed more energy and released more greenhouse causing substances than the feared fossil fuels would have. The fact that emissions are released during production, processing, fertilizer application and as a result of land use change is highly ignored. Somehow biofuels can sidetrack less harmful and clean resources like renewable energies such as solar and wind energy. Large scale cultivation of biofuel crops, unlike small scale, locally produced and biofuel owned farms are commonly challenged by problems such as severe use of water, chemicals, fertilizers and pesticides. These also often lead to pollution, depleting and degrading available water resources which can cause famines. According to contrary believe of analysts, it has also shown that there is not enough farming land on earth to produce biofuel crops to meet the huge energy needs encouraged by our current and unmaintainable ways of living. http://www.greenerideal.com/science/0516-biofuels/ &
But with the increase in pollution, overpopulation etc. plant lives are in danger and in result, in fact, humans are in danger. So, for the survival of both, scientists worked very hard and discover various techniques to transform the genetic material of plants so that they can protect themselves, increase their yield.
Today agriculture is the livelihood of most poor underdeveloped nations. This communal life blood provides a majority of the population with a source of employment, nourishment and income. It is considered to be an invaluable skill, that is taught down from generation to generation along with a sense of respect for the environment. However as a nation begins to undergo development, so do their food production systems. The country's newfound development causes significant restructuring of their agricultural production practices. This restructuring leads to poor environmental practices, and adverse agriculture methods. Increased economic development/production negatively affects a country's environmental and agricultural health.
There are those that believe our planet has reached its maximum capacity to sustain humanity and we need to reduce our population to rectify it. It is also said that our planet is well capable of providing both the nutrition and caloric needs for humanity, both now and into the future as well. Regardless of where one’s opinion of the facts fall between these two arguments, global food security is not where it should be. Uneven development could be argued to be a cause of this. But it is not the only issue affecting the planet.