13

The scientific challenge

A worker at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center takes a sample of a wheat plant on the research center campus outside Mexico City. The center, known as CIMMYT, for its name in Spanish, is part of a network of 15 research institutes that aim to “reduce poverty and hunger, improve human health and nutrition, and enhance ecosystem resilience” in developing countries.

- Jon Miller

Geneticist Fernando Castillo González shows some of the corn varieties he has collected from farmers’ fields. Castillo says farmers look for taste, texture and suitability of the stalks and leaves for animal feed in addition to high yields.

- Jon Miller

Geneticist Fernando Castillo González (left) helps 84-year-old farmer Pedro Hernández González select corn seeds to use for the following season. As in the USA, Mexican farmers are aging, with many young people moving to cities or migrating overseas.

- Jon Miller

Farmers Porfirio Ernesto Bastida Olivares and Josefina Ruiz Cano farm just over an acre of land near the Mexico City airport. They are using a technique called “conservation agriculture” to make up for the loss of water to urban development.

- Jon Miller

Marianne Bänziger, CIMMYT's research director, with tall traditional Mexican corn plants on the research center campus. Bänziger works on breeding African corn plants that can tolerate drought.

- Jon Miller

A worker at the maize and wheat center uses a slingshot to scare birds away from research plots.

- Jon Miller

A worker at the maize and wheat center sorts and cleans experimental wheat seeds. The center sends dozens of new varieties each year to plant breeders around the world.

- Jon Miller

Corn seeds await processing by CIMMYT technicians. The center offers its seeds at no cost to plant breeders throughout the developing world.

- Jon Miller

The seed-sorting room at CIMMYT.

- Jon Miller

The CIMMYT gene bank stores 140,000 varieties of wheat and 28,000 of corn. The center recently launched a project called “Seeds of Discovery” to catalogue the characteristics of all the samples in the collection.

- Jon Miller

A lab technician runs a DNA test on a sample of wheat.

- Jon Miller

A guide leads a tour at the maize and wheat center. Posters and displays celebrate founder Norman Borlaug, known as the father of the Green Revolution, who bred high-yielding wheat varieties that responded well to fertilizer and water. Critics say the Green Revolution relied too heavily on chemical inputs and favored better-off farmers.

- Jon Miller

Scientists from 13 different countries attend a workshop at CIMMYT's Mexico headquarters. The idea of the program is to equip local scientists to confront problems in their home countries.

- Jon Miller

CIMMYT's Matthew Reynolds and Gemma Molero are part of an international effort to increase the “yield ceiling” of wheat. By changing wheat’s basic chemistry, they hope to increase the size of each plant without requiring more water or nutrients.

- Jon Miller

Geneticist Ravi Singh, originally from India, checks an experimental wheat plot on the CIMMYT campus. Singh is working to breed wheat varieties that resist wheat rust, a disease that is devastating crops in Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

- Jon Miller

To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.

Get Adobe Flash player

Kai Ryssdal: There are now, the United Nations tells us, 7 billion people on the planet. Sooner rather than later -- another 30, 35 years or so -- there's going to be more than nine billion. That's a whole lot of mouths to feed.

So today we're starting a year-long series about the global food system, and how we're going to feed those 9 billion people -- if we're going to be able to feed 'em at all.

We start at dinner.

Doorbell

You can think of the world's food system as a giant potluck dinner.

Woman: Hello, come in!

The first thing that strikes you is the abundance. There's a huge table, it's piled with food. And the smells --

Man: Magnifico!

Ryssdal: Wow, what is that?

Woman: It's goat stew. Try some!

Fifty years ago, people were eating a lot less on average, especially meat.

Man: Have a hamburger. It's delicious.

Back in the '60s and '70s, about a billion people -- one in every three human beings -- were hungry. Millions of people were dying in famines in China, Africa, Bangladesh. People worried there was no way to keep up with an exploding population.

But then came the Green Revolution. And over the course of just a couple of decades, global food production skyrocketed. Famines are now actually pretty rare. We're producing more food, and we're better at dealing with emergencies.

But even with that, things aren't exactly working. Down at this end of the room, there's a family sitting on the floor with a few grains of something, looks like millet. The number of chronically hungry people in the world is still around a billion. Granted that's one in seven of us -- not one in three -- but still, it's a lot.

And clearly something's out of whack, because there are also about a billion obese people worldwide. Actually, a lot of things are out of whack.

Back here in the kitchen, the water system's all messed up -- there's too much in some places, not enough in others. There's a big pile of rotting -- something -- over there, and man, it's getting hot. And crowded, too. There's hardly any room to move.

Here comes another busload of people -- and they look hungry, too.


Ryssdal: A question you might draw from such a scene setter is: Now what the heck do we do? More than nine billion people. So over the course of the next year, in collaboration with Homelands Productions and PBS NewsHour, we'll be looking at what we have do now to be able feed ourselves in the future.

Maybe one place to start is science. Can't we just research and develop our way out of this? It's worked before. Here's Jon Miller.


Jon Miller: I figured Mexico was a good place to go to take a look into the scientific pipeline. This is where farmers thousands of years ago transformed a grass called teosinte into what we now know as corn. It's also where scientists in the 1950s and'60s developed the semi-dwarf wheat varieties that launched the Green Revolution.

My first stop is where a lot of that work was done, at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center outside Mexico City. I'm here watching technicians clean and sort experimental corn seeds to go out around the world. I ask research director Marianne Bänziger if there's some big game-changer on the horizon. She says, basically, forget about it.

Marianne Bänziger: It is not just one solution. I mean, our action plans are 10 approaches. And the 10 approaches are not just breeding, they're about really looking at the whole livelihood of a farm family.

So the idea isn't just to increase the total amount of food the world produces. It's also to make life better for the two billion or so people who depend on farming for their food and livelihood. Because ironically, most of the world's poorest and hungriest people are in the food production business. If they can produce more, the thinking goes, everybody benefits.

Bänziger says for most crops, a good place to start is by closing what's known as the "yield gap." That's the difference between what farmers could be producing, using existing technology, and what they actually do produce.

Bänziger: In Africa, under the best conditions, you can get 10 times more yield than what farmers get today. On average, I would say in Africa we can increase production four or five times.

In Asia and Latin America, she figures output could double. Actually realizing those gains -- well, that's the challenge.

People speaking Spanish: Buenos días, hola, hola. Porfirio Bastida para servirles.

I go on a little field trip to see Porfirio Bastida, who farms just over an acre of corn near the Mexico City airport. The city's been creeping closer and closer, sucking up water and land.

People speaking Spanish: Esta bien. Buenos días. Pasenle!

For the last three years, Bastida has been practicing what's known as "conservation agriculture" -- he doesn't plow and he doesn't hoe and he lets the stalks and leaves of the corn plants stay in the field after harvest. American farmers have been doing this for decades to control erosion, but here it's a pretty radical departure from the way people normally farm.

Porfirio Bastida: Mire, en primer lugar, hemos visto que, pues, ya no tenemos suficiente agua.

Interpreter: Yeah, so basically Porfirio is saying that they decided to use conservation agriculture because they don't have much water available for their crops. When they keep all the organic material on the soil, that helps the field to retain humidity.

Bastida says he's using much less water now, and he's harvesting twice as much corn. Plus it's less work. Still, of all the farmers in this area, so far only he and his wife have adopted the method. Take-home message: It takes time for new things to catch on.

I spend the next day tromping around cornfields with Fernando Castillo, a Mexican geneticist who teaches at a nearby university.

Fernando Castillo: Que es lo que más le interesería?

Farmer: Primero las plagas.

Working with a tiny budget, he helps local farmers improve the way they select the corn they'll save for planting the next season. These are traditional varieties, not hybrids or GMOs, and since Mexico is where corn comes from, there's lots of genetic diversity in any given field. Castillo says with a little tutoring, Mexico's 2.8 million corn farmers can accomplish much more than a few plant breeders with Ph.Ds.

Castillo: Farmers have worked for years, and they have learned from their parents and grandparents the local conditions and the management. So most of it is based on local knowledge and local resources.

Castillo says the process could raise Mexican corn yields by 2 percent per year, which is just about what's needed to keep up with the demand. But he's been at this for 15 years, and he's still just working with a handful of farmers.

Around the world, thousands of scientists are hacking away at thousands of problems. Some are experimenting with "agro-ecological" methods -- mixing different crops and trees and animals to diversify diets and reduce the need for chemical fertilizers. Others are trying to breed crops that resist insects or diseases, or that tolerate flooding or drought. Some of this stuff is pretty ambitious.

Matthew Reynolds: This field contains the first experiment of the wheat yield consortium in Mexico.

Matthew Reynolds is a wheat specialist at the maize and wheat center. He's heading a global push to make wheat plants much more efficient at converting sunlight into grain. There's a parallel effort going on in rice.

Reynolds: This is actually a very interesting area, the spike photosynthesis, because no one has ever systematically tried to improve this photosynthesis of the spikes.

It's not just about the spikes -- those are the parts of the plants with the seeds on them -- it's about fundamentally changing the way the plant works. Reynolds says the research will take 20 or 30 years to bear fruit -- if it bears fruit at all. But it could increase wheat yields by 50 percent.

Reynolds: So what are the odds? The answer to that question is more: What are the consequences if we fail?

But no one is really counting on the project succeeding -- there are just too many scientific uncertainties. So the strategy for now is to keep working on as many fronts as possible.

With climate change, and another two or three billion people coming, I ask Marianne Bänziger if it'll be enough.

Bänziger: We can feed the world in 2050. Maize is the livelihood for 900 million poor people. Wheat feeds more than 1.2 billion poor people. So it is a little bit absurd to think that the resources are not there. They are there.

Still, everyone I talk to here says no matter how generous the funding, no matter how good the science, it won't make a difference if government policies aren't right. That means fair prices for farmers and help when crops fail. It means access to land and roads and warehouses and markets. It means education and nutrition programs and family planning.

But you can't just wait for all those things and then call in the scientists. Because if there's one resource scientists need more than anything, it's time.

In Texcoco, Mexico, I'm Jon Miller for Marketplace.


Ryssdal: Food for 9 Billion is a collaboration between Marketplace, Homelands Productions, PBS NewsHour and the Center for Investigative Reporting.

About the author

Jonathan Miller has been executive director of Homelands Productions since 2005.

Pages

Dan_Marshall's picture
Dan_Marshall - Nov 20, 2011

This is yet another vote for including population control as one factor in our strategy for feeding 9 billion. Some considerations which have not yet been included in this string:

1) Currently the discussion is about feeding 9 billion. Can we feed 7 billion in a sustainable manner? By "sustainable" I mean that all future generations of all species will have the same or better access to resources as the current generation.

2) There are many excellent economic, social, political, and even racial arguments against shrinking population, but each of these issues seem surmountable whereas the depletion of resources our lives depend on does not appear to be surmountable.

3) In my conversations with others, there seems to be support for the idea of making birth control available to those who want it. The Center for Biological Diversity says 200 million women world wide
want access to birth control don’t have it. This is probably a good concept to start with. Personally I would like to see us implement one child per family world wide. The Chinese did it, why can't the world?

4) I suggest this because when I look at the World it seems clear that humanity is consuming resources at a much faster pace than they can be renewed so it’s just a matter of time before our species crashes, likely taking down many other species at the same time. The current crisis called global warming is just the tip of the iceberg when we consider rapidly depleting rare minerals, fresh water, habitable land, fertile soil, species diversity, and fuel. Given this perspective, it seems that the only viable long term solution is to radically reduce our species’ population, and the best way to do this would be to implement one child per family world-wide. We carefully recycle our garbage to help save the planet, and then celebrate the birth of a child, which is a disaster for the planet. I love kids, but from where I sit, it looks like our species is driving at high speed toward a cliff. Deep down we know we’re headed for disaster but each of us shies from looking directly at the situation because it’s just so big. So instead we all join hands and enjoy the rush forward. From a distance we probably look like lemmings.

Jon Miller's picture
Jon Miller - Nov 17, 2011

As the guy who reported this story I really appreciate these comments. We'll be dealing directly with population in an upcoming piece. We'll also look at agroecology, soil fertility, trade, food sovereignty, conflicting visions for agriculture, and a slew of other issues over the course of the next year. Look for radio pieces roughly once a month, and occasional TV pieces on NewsHour. In the meantime, you can read some of my thoughts about population and productivity (spurred by the comments here) on the Homelands Productions blog, http://wp.me/plaTE-gr.

kallenbachcm's picture
kallenbachcm - Nov 16, 2011

I was tremendously excited about the launch of this series and I'm looking forward to hearing the reporting coming out of this new program. I strongly believe this series should include a segment on the importance of soil in addressing this problem of feeding the world. I am a doctoral student at the University of New Hampshire in the field of soil science and I work on ways to manage soils to improve crop yields while minimizing negative environmental impacts associated with agricultural production. Soils are becoming increasingly recognized across a variety of disciplines in the scientific community as a critical component in understanding, managing and solving agronomic and environmental issues. For example, Science recently described soils as "the final frontier" in their 2004 Special Issue. Soils help regulate plant nutrient and water availability, above ground primary productivity, greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity, and water quality. Unfortunately- in part due to intensive farming practices-, a large portion of our arable soils are degraded and are no longer able to support many of their agronomic and ecosystems services. However, with interest in soils booming, combined with novel molecular methods, many advances have been made in how to improve our soil health and subsequently soil’s services to the global food market. Including a segment on the fundamental values and issues of soil in relationship to food production will help make this series more comprehensive and will increase the public awareness of caring for our soils. I urge you to consider including the role of soils as a critical component in addressing this “scientific challenge" in your wonderful and timely new series.

wvhaugen's picture
wvhaugen - Nov 16, 2011

If you are serious about feeding more people, you will have to do it with mostly human labor and only minimal fossil fuel inputs. I am a farmer and I have been working on this problem for several years. I can produce 3.5 kilocalories of food for each kilocalorie of labor and gas input. Compare this to industrial agriculture where it takes 7 kilocalories of fossil fuels to produce 1 kilocalorie of food. In other words, I am more than 20 times more efficient than industrial agriculture. My system is viable on small plots, using established conservation measures such as diversification, green manuring, etc. This is the real agroecological solution and is demonstrably sustainable. In other words, anyone can do the numbers. However, it does mean we in the US have to drastically reorganize society so 1) farmers are paid a fair price and 2) 20% of the adult population have to become full time farmers. If you are serious about feeding the world, you are going to have to get behind real measurable sustainability. You can follow this on my website www.fafarm.org.

Forested's picture
Forested - Nov 16, 2011

While population growth is a continuing strain on the world's supply systems and ecosystems, it is worth noting that demographers project a stabilization of world population somewhere around 9 or 10 billion. This video from the Economist represents the current thinking http://youtu.be/UAIv15fWfHg. Supplying the world's people is still a monumental problem. The critical thing is that we not consider the problem of feeding the world in isolation from the problem of restoring its ecosystems. www. Forested.us

Clara's picture
Clara - Nov 15, 2011

Feeding the 9 billion is only one problem. As stated elsewhere much of the food from the Green Revolution is based around petrochemicals and fertilizers. Both get scarer by the day. Now the world gets to deal with the likes of Monsanto and their Franken Foods and GMO's and the misery they have reaped on the planet. The emphasis should be on population control which our leaders refuse to talk about. I guess its all about political correctness rather than "in your face" reality.

I suggest that anyone interested in this subject to go to Frosty Wooldridge's website(http://www.frostywooldridge.com/) and read his experiences in the overcrowded conditions around the world.
I have travelled about the world for over 40 years and visited over 93 countries during that time.
Once you see the slums of Calcutta, Bombay, Jakarta and other cities, you wonderhow people exist in these conditions day after day. The shortages of food, lack of drinking water, the diseases and piles of garbage everywhere. Many have no job and little hope for improvements. Many people in my travels have approached me about the need for population control or a "culling of the masses".

Besides the food issues for 9 billion, where are they all going to live, obtain adequate, clean drinking water, housing or shelter, clothing and of course a means of a livable living. After the 9 billion is reached, then what, the experts plan for a few billion more. There are limits to everything. Thomas Malthus was right.

Most of our great leaders do not talk about the obvious of population control, but in private the topics are the norm.

A few quotes from some notables.

“There is a single theme behind all our work–we must reduce population levels. Either governments do it our way, through nice clean methods, or they will get the kinds of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it….”
“Our program in El Salvador didn’t work. The infrastructure was not there to support it. There were just too goddamned many people…. To really reduce population, quickly, you have to pull all the males into the fighting and you have to kill significant numbers of fertile age females….” “The quickest way to reduce population is through famine, like in Africa, or through disease like the Black Death….”
Thomas Ferguson, State Department Office of Population Affairs

“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
Prince Phillip, Queen Elizabeth’s husband, Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund/WWF

“Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature”
Anonymously commissioned Georgia Guidestones

fobarski's picture
fobarski - Nov 15, 2011

Dear Kai and the wonderful folks at Marketplace:
You do a great job. Have enjoyed the show for years.
I have a quibble about the "Food for Nine Billion" series. While much of the green revolution depends on petrochemicals, phosphates and potash, all of which are going to become more expensive and harder to get (Morocco will be the Saudi Arabia of fertilizer in few years), there is a bigger problem than this. Even if we ARE able to FEED nine or ten or twelve billion folks, what will they do for construction wood, fuel to cook with and heat with, transportation infrastructure and energy (assuming we cannot provide cars and gasoline for that many), heavy metals for batteries and cell phones and computers and on and on. Human macroeconomics seems to violate everything I know about ecology. I suspect there will come a limit, and we are likely to find it VERY unpleasant.
-- Frank

vicki's picture
vicki - Nov 15, 2011

Thank you for covering this very important issue. Agree with the reader above to talk about big Ag and the role of companies like Monsanto. Oxfam's GROW campaign and the UN Rappateaour Olivier de Schutter should also be highlighted along with the role Agroecology can play. The issue tends to be more the access to food rather than the quanitity of food. Please also cover the link between climate change and food security. Thanks again.

tdaly001's picture
tdaly001 - Nov 15, 2011

Like the other commenters here, I agree that population control is the correct strategy. While the idea of "feed the hungry" is considered to be universally good and above question, I believe that supporting a population greater than can be sustained by the local geography is harmful. It is clear to me that terrorism really became a global issue as a result of falling infant mortality in the middle east during the late seventies and early eighties. The world communities good intentions created a generation that can not support itself without outside help and therefore the generation has limited dignity and opportunity. this is a case were recognizing the short term solution is horrible in the long term and the issue just needs to be left alone.

aodonnell's picture
aodonnell - Nov 14, 2011

I would like to hear more about the responsibilities of the countries world wide to educate people about the necessity of population control. It is unwise to continue playing catch up with the food supply wagering great risks for the natural environment and food safety.

Pages