 Food Crisis The world is facing a growing food crisis. Researchers estimate that the world population will increase 39% by the year 2050, exponentially increasing the demand for food (Cleveland). Nature’s inability to support the expanding population’s necessity for food is concerning, since lives are at stake. On account that this is a global life-threatening problem, many controversial conversations regarding potential solutions have risen. Some experts argue that the food crisis can be solved through economical means, while others contend it can be solved socially, and others believe it can be resolved through environmental methods. 

 Economic ways of fixing the food crisis is a large part of the current conversation. The Prince of Wales spoke in a conference detailing his thoughts on the subject. The prince proposed to reevaluate the fundamentals of the entire economic model (Philip 395). He claims that the GDP approach is not maintainable long term when Earth is consumed so aggressively (Philip 395). The Prince volunteers that sustainability needs to be accounted for; so, when thinking about the cost of food one not only needs to take into account the financial costs but also the costs to earth (Philip 396). In order to achieve this, HRH wants to “encourage businesses to expand their accounting process so that it incorporates the interconnected impact of financial, environmental, and social elements on their long-term performance” (Philip 396). In turn, if the government implemented this model and applied it into our economy, HRH says it would help solve the future of food because it creates tangible responsibility. By the same token, David Cleveland tackles the issue on hand in his book “Balancing on a Planet”. One of his proposed economical solutions includes shifting the agrifood system from a global level to a local level. Cleveland thinks that “an important aspect of creating alternatives for the future will be to combine small-scale, traditional agriculture with select aspects of modern, scientific agriculture in ways that provide solutions to the current food crisis”. Cleveland notes that even though this is not a short-term relief, it may be the best fix to solve the immediate food crisis as well as avoid them from the future. Economics could be the ticket from the burgeoning food catastrophe. In addition, “Searching for a New Model on Farming” by Robert Biel indicated that the food crisis could helped be solved economically by cutting the amount of food that is wasted (Biel). Out of the food being produced, 30% to 50% ends up being wasted (Biel). Biel claims that “plenty of food is being produced, but fails to reach those in need”, in turn, the problem he identified was not insufficient production but the distribution of food. He believes that people need to be more conscious about how much food they waste when hunger is such a struggle world-wide. Cleveland adds to Biel’s argument, mentioning that “every portion of food available to be eaten that is instead wasted is also a waste of all the energy and resources used to produce, process, transport, store, and prepare that food”. Therefore, less waste results in the conservation of the resources associated with production and a total decrease in environmental waste all together (Cleveland). Correspondingly, Godfray points out that the food industry encourages waste by using super-sized portions as well as buy one get one free deals. Godfray also brings up that “unwanted food goes to a landfill instead of being used as animal feed or compost because of legislation to control prion diseases”. Regulations on food inadvertently elevates food waste (Godfray). Godfray believes that “food waste should be reexamined within a more inclusive competing-risks framework”. On the contrary, Stuart points out that one votes everyday with the way they spend their money, creating more change than legislation can. Stuart outlines that consumers need to stop wasting food, parents need to educate their children on how to treat food, governments need to establish awareness campaigns to change behavior, supermarkets need to stop throwing away food, restaurants need to adjust serving sizes, fishing policies need more sustainability, and farmers need to sell directly to customers. In turn, these solutions would alleviate the density of the current food crisis. Food waste is a large contributor to the surmounting global food crisis and dealing with this issue starts with conversations like the ones between The Prince of Wales, David Cleveland, Robert Biel, Chris Godfray, and Tristan Stuart.  Other solutions that are put forward are to resolve the food crisis by social means. Erica, Dhawan and Saj-Nicole Joni think that the emergency can be solved with connectional intelligence, defined as “the ability to combine the world’s diversity of people, networks, disciplines, and resources, forgoing connections that create value, meaning and breakthrough results” (6). Dhawan and Joni claim that connectional intelligence “gets big things done”. The hardest problems, like the global food crisis, can be solved by joining together, combusting ideas, and taking action (Dhawan 167). Additionally, Godfray brings up another social solution to the food crisis. Godfray’s research shows that “the conversion efficiency of plant into animal matter is ~10%; thus, there is a prima facie case that more people could be supported from the same amount of land if they were vegetarians”. In other words, changing one’s diet would help curve food scarcity. 

 Some experts fight for an environmental solution. In Sara Menker’s TED Talk, “A Global Food Crisis May Be Less Than a Decade Away”, she explains that the countries that have a surplus of calories, North America, South America, and Europe, export food to countries that have calorie deficits. As population and demand for food increases so does the demand for food production from these surplus regions (Menker). Menker suggests that in order to solve the global food crisis potential yields in India and Africa need reforming. To put Africa’s “vast amounts of arable land remaining” in perspective, sub-Saharan Africa’s current corn yields are where North American corn yields were in 1940 (Menker). Furthermore, vertical farming is another proposed environmental solution to the current food catastrophe (Cockrall-King 336). The idea behind vertical farming converts the landscape from two dimensional to three dimensional, creating a farm sky scraper (Cockrall-King 336). Stories upon stories of crops and livestock would dramatically decrease farming’s footprint, as a result creating more square feet for farming and in turn more food for the growing population (Cockrall-King 336). Changing the way the environment is viewed could solve food scarcity problems.

All of these solutions are viable; however, an issue that is largely missing in these worldwide conversations is widespread education on the food crisis. Widespread education would allow people to become more knowledgeable on the current matter, thereupon enabling them to play an active role in the conversations. More conversations promotes more awareness, which in turn means more people might participate in solutions. This is where the change and action happen, especially on a topic regarding the future of human existence. People start to fight for what they believe in and strives are made to fix the situation. Moreover, another missing point is rather than attempting to fix the consequences of the problem, people should focus more on the root of the problem. In other words, instead of consistently trying to figure out how to feed a fast-growing population, some of the effort should go towards concerning ourselves with the fast-growing population itself. Food scarcity and a scarcity of all resources for that matter arise with more people.  The conversations around solutions to the global food crisis are so controversial because every solution has its faults. Menker debates that “changing consumption patterns and reducing food waste” are “conversations [that] have been going on for some time now, [and] nothing has happened. Nothing has happened because those arguments ask the surplus regions to change their behavior on behalf of deficit regions. Waiting for others to change their behavior on your behalf for your survival is a terrible idea. It’s unproductive.” However, when Menker suggests converting some of the third world’s land area she does not account for the vital role of vegetation in capturing and storing CO2 (Goodall). To enumerate, Goodall emphasizes that “if we expand the extent of farmland by cutting down trees, we are reducing the Earth’s ability to recycle the CO2 we have generated by burning fossil fuels”. Experts poke holes in each other’s arguments, making it inconceivable to find a solution all can agree on and implement. Ergo why this controversial topic encompasses so many conversations. 

 Overall it is of upmost importance that solutions to the food crisis are conversed upon; the world depends on it. The current food patterns cannot continue in order to sustain the growing population. Even though not just one answer exists, these conversations transpire the start of change. Some experts argue that revamping the economic model will solve the crisis, while others argue that the solution lies in reducing the amount of food waste or changing our diet. Other proposed solutions include improving sustainability, the agrifood system, connectional intelligence, or potential food yields in India and Africa. Whether the solution prevails through economic means, social means, environmental means or through a combination of all of them, change needs to happen sooner rather than later.
