Download Can food production be sustainably increased?

Can food production be
sustainably increased?
Janet Cadogan
Contents
a Does food production need to be
increased?
b What is meant by sustainable food
production?
c The use of hydroponics and
aeroponics
Case study of Thanet Earth, Kent
Case study of Aero-Green, Singapore
d The Blue Revolution
Case study of shrimp farming:
Supanburi, Thailand
a Does food production need to be
increased?
World food production continues to grow, e.g. in the
past 40 years, world food production has grown by
approximately 25%, and food prices in real terms have
fallen by 40%. Despite this the world still faces a food
security challenge.
■ 963 million people across the world are hungry.
■ Every day, almost 16,000 children die from
hunger-related causes – one child every five
seconds.1
The world population is expected to grow to 8.9 billion
by 2050 and by this time, 84% of the population will be
in those countries currently making up the ‘developing’
world. So there is a clear need to increase food production,
but how?
Some people believe the best way is to support existing
farmers across the world.
For example:
Progressio2 is an international development charity
working to eradicate poverty. This organisation believes
e Genetic modification
Monsanto’s view
Other views
f The Second Green Revolution
Case study – Singh’s Plan for India
g Tasks
h References
that small-scale sustainable farming can help increase
food production. It points out that there are 1.4
billion smallholder farmers who have sustained poor
communities for centuries and provided food for their
domestic markets. Together, small-scale farmers can
produce the majority of the staple crops needed to feed
their own nation’s population. The charity believes that
the way of life of small-scale farmers and the crucial role
they can play is under threat because food has become a
profit-driven industry which is concerned with growing
the biggest quantities at the least cost.3
An alternative view is to use technology to increase food
production but does it use sustainable methods?
b What is meant by sustainable food
production?
A more sustainable agriculture seeks to make the best use
of nature’s goods and services as functional inputs. It does
this by paying attention to regenerative processes, such as
nutrient cycling, nitrogen fixation and soil regeneration. It
may also use the natural enemies of pests rather than using
chemical controls in the food production processes so it
minimises the use of non-renewable inputs (pesticides
and fertilizers) that damage the environment or harm
the health of farmers and consumers. Also, sustainability
involves making better use of the knowledge and skills
of farmers, so improving their self-reliance. Because of
The Geography Magazine
1
this, people are more willing to work together to solve
common management problems, such as pest, watershed,
irrigation, forest and credit management.4
In essence, this is producing food in a way which is in
harmony with nature. It involves sensitive management
so that the soil, water and environmental resources will be
available for future generations to use.
So can new technologies increase food production? And
are these methods sustainable?
c The use of hydroponics and aeroponics
Both techniques require plants to be grown without soil.
In fact, scientists have known since the 19th century that
soil is not needed for plant growth. When the mineral
nutrients in the soil dissolve in water, plant roots are able
to absorb them. So, if mineral nutrients are introduced
into a plant’s water supply artificially, soil is no longer
required for the plant to thrive. Almost any plant will
grow with hydroponics and the main advantage is that
pests and diseases are less likely to become a problem and
therefore fewer pesticides are used. Also, greenhouses can
be set up almost anywhere, as they are not so dependent
on the usual physical factors associated with agriculture.
Hydroponic systems are now widely used in commercial
greenhouses. The world’s largest facility is Eurofresh
Farms in Arizona, which sells about 125 million pounds of
tomatoes a year. The usual material the plants are grown
in is rockwool but other substrates include perlite, gravel
and clay balls.
Aeroponics is seen as cutting edge technology in the
world of hydroponics. The systems require the greatest
amount of technology and service compared with other
hydroponic techniques.
The crops are generally planted on the outside top of an
enclosed chamber where they receive maximum sunlight.
The plant roots are suspended in air and misted water,
which has nutrients added. The fine mist sprays up onto
the roots of the plants and then drips off down into the
bottom where it is used again. Research suggests that
aeroponic systems maximize oxygen availability at the
root zone, thus helping to maximize plant growth.
Aeroponic systems can be an excellent choice for medicinal
herbs where clean, soil free root material is often needed.
High quality medicinal roots can fetch a premium price
in certain markets. This technological breakthrough in
the world of herbal root production is especially useful
because medicinal herb plants are typically destroyed
when roots are harvested using conventional growing
techniques.
Research by NASA suggests that plants grown
aeroponically have an 80% increase in biomass (dry
weight), use 65% less water and need 25% of the nutrient
input of hydroponically grown plants. However, one
limitation is that only certain species of plants can survive
for only so long in water before they become waterlogged
and die.
Supporters of hydroponics say:
■ Plants grow up to four times faster.
■ Seasonal crops can be harvested all year
round.
■ Surplus water is recycled, cutting use by 20
per cent.
■ Fewer chemical pesticides are used.
Critics say:
■ Without soil, the produce is bland.
■ Heated greenhouses and light are wasteful.
■ You cannot produce true organic produce.
■ Greenhouses are an eyesore.
Figure 1: Hydroponics: How it works
2
The Geography Magazine
Figure 2: Plants grown using aeroponics
Case study of Thanet Earth, Kent (Hydroponics)5
Thanet Earth, in Kent, is the UK’s largest greenhouse
development. It is partly owned by the Fresca
Group, which is a huge company which supplies
fresh foods to supermarkets. It is expected to open
in 2010 and will be growing over 1 million plants at
any time. Whilst this scale of production is seen in
the Netherlands, it is unprecedented in the UK. Each
of the 7 greenhouses will be 140m in length, and the
size of 10 football pitches. Together, they will cover
220 acres. This development is expected to provide a
15% increase in the UK’s salad production. 2 million
tomatoes will be picked each week throughout the
year and peppers and cucumbers will be picked from
February to October. Figures suggest that currently
we only produce 3 or 4% of what we consume; for
example, just 1 in every 10 peppers and 1 in every 3
cucumbers.
Figure 3a: Site of Thanet Earth, Kent
Figure 3b:
Scale of
Thanet Earth
The Geography Magazine
3
Figure 3c: Greenhouse
h
growing peppers at Thanet Earth
h
Thanet Earth has many features which suggest it is a sustainable way of producing food:
■ Each greenhouse will have its own reservoir, so water used for the plants will be recycled and re-used, so
there will be no drain on local supplies.
■ Curtains and shades on the roofs and windows keep 95% of the light inside the greenhouses. This
reduces light pollution and is less disturbing for migrating birds.
■ Kent has 17% more light than the rest of the UK and so during the summer months, less ‘extra’ lighting
will be required. It is expected to be so bright that workers will need to wear sunglasses.
■ It will use an efficient ‘combined heat and power’ system (CHP). The site is near the Kentish Flats wind
farm. Located in the Thames Estuary, this is one of the UK’s largest off shore wind farms. Also, there are
plans for 300+ wind turbines on the site itself, so that it can be self-sufficient in renewable energy and
feed any excess energy back into the national grid.
■ The growing environment will be computer controlled, e.g. drip feeding and watering, so the plants will
get just what they need so there will be less waste.
■ Hot water and carbon dioxide by-products will be collected and redirected back into the greenhouses to
help plants grow.
■ 500+ jobs will be created, keeping the local communities viable.
In contrast to these ‘green credentials’ some people argue that whilst Thanet Earth can help produce more of
the UK’s food, it is located in the wrong place – as it is on good agricultural land.
4
The Geography Magazine
Case Study of Aero-Green, Singapore (Aeroponics)6
Aero-Green is a 5.3 hectare farm and it is the first commercial aeroponics farm in Asia to adapt aeroponics
technology to grow vegetables in Singapore. Aeroponics is a method of growing plants whereby the roots
of the plants are suspended in the air. The plants are anchored in holes, on the top of a panel of polystyrene
foam.
Figure 4a
Figure 4b Growing plants at Aero Green, Singapore
From a sealed trough below, a fine mist of soluble nutrients is sprayed and they adhere to the roots. In
supporting good and healthy growth of the plants, the availability of air in the root zone is critical. In
aeroponics, air is present, unlike hydroponic systems where water is circulated to encourage aeration of
the solution.
Besides substantial savings in water and land, two of Singapore’s most prized assets, the system also
produces cleaner vegetables as they are cultivated in a protected environment.
The principle of aeroponics lies in the periodic spraying of plant roots with a nutrient mist, which
encourages the growth of an extensive network of fine lateral roots. Because the collective surface area
represented by these tiny roots is very large, the uptake of oxygen and nutrients is much greater than
usual, which ultimately allows the plant to grow faster.
The cutting edge technology in cultivating vegetables is ideal for countries where water and land are
scarce.
The Geography Magazine
5
d The Blue Revolution
Just like the Green Revolution of the 1960s, the Blue
Revolution of the 1970s and 1980s was supposed to
increase food production and reduce hunger in many
parts of the world.
According to an article in New Internationalist (1992)7,
the World Bank, along with many aid agencies were
pumping $200 million a year into aquaculture projects.
In the Philippines, Thailand and Ecuador, huge areas
of mangrove forests were chopped down to make way
for shrimp ponds. Also, the floodplains of the Ganges,
Irrawaddy and Mekong rivers were used for fish farms,
farming carp and tilapia. So great was the growth,
that between 1975 and 1985, the output from world
aquaculture doubled.
Currently, fish farming is the fastest growing form of
agriculture. Aquaculture offers developing countries
a means to earn foreign exchange through high-value
species, such as prawns and salmon, and a way for poor
communities to maintain a healthy diet and earn an
income. Also, it is a relatively efficient way to produce
animal protein: beef cattle require seven pounds of grain
to produce a pound of meat but catfish require only 1.7
pounds of grain to produce a pound of fish.
But if aquaculture projects are not carried out in an
environmentally responsible way, they can cause water
pollution, wetland loss, and mangrove swamp destruction.
There are serious concerns, for example:
■ Man made shrimp ponds are dotted along the coasts of
many countries from Taiwan to Ecuador. They are seen to
be capital intensive, with TNC investors including CocaCola and General Foods. This has led to the destruction
of mangrove forests. On top of this, their polluted waste
water is damaging the local wild shrimp fisheries and
sugar plantations.
■ Japan has many fish farms along its coast, producing
salmon, prawn, flounder, yellowtail, red sea bream and
other high value species. However, some critics believe
that major disease and pollution problems are beginning
to show up as fish waste and uneaten food builds up on
the sea floor – in some cases it is said to be 30 centimetres
thick. This sludge prevents the growth of aquatic animals,
reduces water quality and may be linked to ‘red tides’ of
toxic algal blooms. As well as killing fish, it can poison
people who eat contaminated seafood. By adding
antibiotics to the ponds, many believe that drug resistance
has built up in the pests and this is not desirable in a food
crop.
■ Along Canada’s Pacific ‘Sunshine Coast’, there are over
100 salmon farms. Whilst they do provide a ‘cheaper
salmon’ for the consumer, they have many critics. Some
say they are responsible for ‘red-tide’ outbreaks; they
pollute the shores with waste and biocides (and other
medication used to treat the fish). One estimate was that
an average salmon farm produces the same volume of
effluent as a town of 40,000 people. Also, the farmed fish
often ‘escape’ from broken pens and they move into local
rivers, breeding with or forcing out the wild salmon. They
can spread diseases including sea lice and bacterial kidney
infections.
■ Another issue is the sustainability of feeding carnivorous
fin fish, such as salmon. They are fed fish-meal made from
wild caught fish such as herrings. It is estimated that
it takes about 3 pounds of feed fish to raise 1 pound of
salmon.
Thus, many argue that the success of marine aquaculture
is at the expense of existing fisheries. The fish farms are
not providing food for the local population; neither are
they providing them with jobs. All too often, local people
have lost the work they used to have on farms and sugar
plantations; and their homes are now more vulnerable
to storms as the mangroves, which once protected their
shorelines, are gone.
Case study of shrimp farming: Supanburi, Thailand
In the 1990s the Thai government recognised that uncontrolled shrimp farming was damaging the country
and allocated money for more sustainable development and management techniques. Initiatives supported
by the World Bank and FAO (UN) aided training, the development of a shrimp farming code of conduct and
aquaculture zoning, as well as research into water recycling and zero-discharge farming methods. Mangroves
were re-established in old, abandoned shrimp farms and shrimp diseases were investigated.
As a result, low-salinity shrimp farming for black tiger shrimp was introduced in areas much further inland
from the coast, such as at Supanburi.
6
The Geography Magazine
This was a big change as intensive shrimp
culture had previously been concentrated
along narrow belts of land in coastal areas.
The rapid development of low-salinity
culture in freshwater areas was only
possible by moving large volumes of sea
or salt pan water inland. The profit being
made from paddy rice cultivation was
less favourable than shrimp farming and
so it has created a major land and water
management challenge.
The
debate
over
the
potential
environmental impacts of inland shrimp
farming was based on 3 issues:
1. Whether the ‘closed’ production
systems minimize environmental
impacts.
2. The ability of the Thai government
to enforce environmental protection
regulations.
3. The emergence of cumulative
environmental impacts.
In 1998 the Thai government banned
low-salinity shrimp farming in the central
area but protests by farmers meant that
it was difficult to enforce. There is much
debate over whether this type of farming
is sustainable, but certainly salinization
and water pollution are big environmental
concerns.8
Figure 5:
Fi
5 SSupanburi
b i province,
i
Thailand
il d
e Genetic modification
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are a contentious
issue. Many people point to the benefits GMOs could offer
medicine, agriculture and pest control. Others see GMOs
as threats to the environment and to human health.
■ plants that can produce novel products such as
plastics
■ new treatments for genetic disorders
■ bacteria that can clean up soil contamination9
GM technology offers:
■ pest and disease resistant crops which should
lead to reductions in insecticide use
■ weedkiller resistant crops that make weed
control easier
■ rice with added vitamin A
■ potatoes with more protein
■ drought resistant crops
Set against these benefits are potential risks. Will genes
from modified crops escape into wild plants, protecting
them from their natural pests, or from weedkillers? Will
GM crops disturb natural ecosystems, harm wildlife, or
pollinate organic crops, invalidating their organic status?
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/publications/other/gm.asp
(see this site for a booklet which gives a very
balanced view and which you can download)
The Geography Magazine
7
Monsanto’s view
Monsanto is an agricultural company which has developed GMOs. On its website it states “We apply innovation
and technology to help farmers around the world produce more while conserving more. We help farmers to
grow yields sustainably so they can be successful, produce healthier foods, better animal feeds and more fibre,
while also reducing agriculture’s impact on our environment”.10 The company states some of its successes:
■
■
■
■
■
Mexico – yield increases with herbicide tolerant soya beans of 9 per cent.
Romania – yield increases with herbicide tolerant soya beans have averaged 31 per cent.
Philippines – average yield increase of 15 per cent with herbicide tolerant corn.
Philippines – average yield increase of 24 per cent with insect resistant corn.
Hawaii – virus resistant papaya has increased yields by an average of 40 per cent.
As well as increased yields, so increasing food production, other benefits are said to come from using GMOs.
For example:
■
■
Reduced rates of pesticides and herbicides used.
Reduced fuel use and less carbon dioxide emissions.
The reduction in greenhouse gas emissions associated with GM crops for 2006 is estimated to be equal to
removing more than half a million cars from the road.
On average, the volume of herbicide used on corn has dropped 20 per cent since herbicide tolerant corn was
introduced in 1996.
Approximately 95 per cent of the soya beans and 75 per cent of the corn in the United States are GM. More
than 95 per cent of the soya beans in Argentina and half the soya beans grown in Brazil are GM. Where given
the choice, farmers have consistently adopted GM crops quickly and widely because they see the improvement
these products deliver. Whether it is increases in yield, or other benefits, some farmers see value in growing
GM crops. However there are other views on the use of GMOs.
Other views
Biggest Brazilian soya state loses taste for GM seed11
Farmers in Brazil’s Mato Grosso, the country’s top soya state, are shunning genetically modified soya
varieties in favour of conventional seeds after the hi-tech type showed poor yields. Another reason for Mato
Grosso’s ongoing shift away from GM-soya is that trading houses and meat processors strive to avoid GM
foods in favour of conventional soya as they are conscious of consumer demand. As a result they will pay a
premium for it.
Other potential effects have been given:12
On the environment
Biodiversity could be affected as GMOs breed with ‘wild species’ and we would lose the varieties we
currently have, i.e. there would be a reduced ‘gene pool’.
■ There is no sound evidence on whether genes might mutate over generations.
■ Insect pollinators, e.g. bees, might be adversely affected by GM pollen.
On human health
■ Some people have allergic reactions to certain foods, e.g. nuts. When scientists transferred a nut gene
into a soya bean, the potential to cause the same dangerous reaction was also passed on.
Socio-economic effects
■ Farmers may have to pay large sums of money to the big agricultural companies. It has even been
suggested that ‘terminator technologies’ will mean that a crop may not be able to be grown the following
year from its own seed. So the debate is still very much alive. The world leading producers of GM crops
are the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, India and China, however many countries will not allow
GM technology to be utilised on a large scale, though ‘field trials’ may take place.
8
The Geography Magazine
f The Second Green Revolution
In the 1960s the green revolution was seen by many as
the answer to hunger and starvation. It was believed that
through using mechanisation, chemicals, new strains
of plants and more efficient use of transport and land
organisation, agricultural production would increase
greatly. And so it did; however there were associated
environmental, social and economic costs. Today, India is
again struggling to meet the needs of its growing affluent
population, who demand not only more food but a greater
variety too. As a result, there have been calls for a second
green revolution “so that the spectre of food shortages is
banished from the horizon once again”. (Singh 2006)13
Case study – Singh’s Plan for India
In January 2006, Manmohan Singh, India’s Prime Minister, set out a 7 point plan to increase agricultural
productivity and rural development. His concern is that whilst India has one of the fastest growing
economies in the world, its agriculture is not benefiting. It is suggested that India could help feed the world,
yet it can barely feed itself.
Singh’s plan is based on a need for large scale investment in rural areas, which will allow a greater use of
affordable technologies. It includes:
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
soil health enhancement
water harvesting and conservation
access to affordable credit
reform of crop and life insurance
improvement of rural infrastructure
regulation of the farm market
application of science and technology to improve seed quality and productivity of livestock and
poultry.
To enable this to happen, the Indian government has plans to bring more than 10 million hectares of land
under cultivation with proper irrigation facilities. They argue that it will be done sustainably but many are
concerned about the increased supply of water this will demand.
g Tasks
1.
2.
3.
4.
Watch the videos on the Thanet Earth website.
Debate the GMO issue – For or Against the use of
GMOs to increase food production.
Draw tables based on the methods listed above, to
evaluate their sustainability.
Use two columns for each one, headed sustainable
and unsustainable.
Answer the question:
‘Critically assess attitudes towards the sustainability
of food supply.’
h
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
References:
www.bread.org/learn/hunger-basics/hunger-factsinternational.html
www.ciir.org/Progressio/Internal/9736/smallscalefarming
www.fairtrade.org.uk/includes/documents/cm_
docs/2009/f/ft_conference_reportfinal.pdf
www.essex.ac.uk/ces/esu/occasionalpapers/
SAFE%20FINAL
www.thanetearth.com
www.aerogreentech.com.sg/aero/about_aerogree.
htm
New Internationalist www.newint.org/issue234/
blue.htm
www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1579/0044-744729.3.174
www.nerc.ac.uk/publications/other/gm.as
www.monsanto.com/monsanto_today/for_the_
record/gm_crops_increase_yields.asp
Reuters (13 March 2009)
www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo8.
htm
www.redherring.com/Home/15128
The Geography Magazine
9