Expand

Hey, not to freak anyone out or anything, but the world might become a post-apocalyptic wasteland where people fight to the death over taquitos within the next 40 years.

OK, obviously, that’s a little bit of an exaggeration; we’re not going to go full-on Road Warriors until 2075 at the earliest. We think we can laugh, but USAID officials are actually predicting global-scale conflicts over food by 2050. Given that Malthusian theory states that war, famine, and disease are the three factors keeping human population in check (and don’t discount disease’s prevalence given the efforts of some unbelievably dumb Americans), it’s particularly encouraging to see two of them ganging up on us at once.

The core issue at hand is that the world population is likely to increase to 9 billion by 2050. This, coupled with a lack of adequate resources, is going to lead to huge problems:

“For the first time in human history, food production will be limited on a global scale by the availability of land, water and energy,” said Dr. Fred Davies, senior science advisor for the agency’s bureau of food security. “Food issues could become as politically destabilizing by 2050 as energy issues are today.”

You might think that the solution would be improved biotechnology or farming techniques. NOPE. While those will certainly help, they won’t be enough to alleviate the problem entirely, according to Dr. Davies — or at least, current research funding projections won’t be enough to help:

“The U.S. agricultural productivity has averaged less than 1.2 percent per year between 1990 and 2007,” he said. “More efficient technologies and crops will need to be developed—and equally important, better ways for applying these technologies locally for farmers—to address this challenge.” Davies said when new technologies are developed, they often do not reach the small-scale farmer worldwide.

There’s also the matter of which particular crops we’re farming. According to Davies, the fact that we focus on crops like corn is actually a huge issue, because of the economic implications and the benefits that high-value horticultural crops could lend to small farmers:

“A greater emphasis is needed in high-value horticultural crops,” he said. “Those create jobs and economic opportunities for rural communities and enable more profitable, intense farming.” Horticultural crops, Davies noted, are 50 percent of the farm-gate value of all crops produced in the U.S.

The funny thing is that another ultimate solution might not actually come from where you expect: scientists have noted a phenomenon called the demographic-economic paradox whereby increasing wealth leads to decreasing birth rates. This is the reason that a relatively wealthy country like Japan, which could support more children, actually has a stagnant birth rate. So the answer it would seem, would be to decrease economic inequality so that we can all prosper.

Ha. Hahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA GOOD LUCK WITH THAT. *sounds of profuse, pain-wracked sobbing*

Hey, but enjoy your Easter dinner, everyone! While you still can.

17 Comments on "Food Shortages Might Doom Humanity by 2050"

Kenz300 on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 11:54 am 



The core issue at hand is that the world population is likely to increase to 9 billion by 2050. This, coupled with a lack of adequate resources, is going to lead to huge problems:

“For the first time in human history, food production will be limited on a global scale by the availability of land, water and energy,” said Dr. Fred Davies, senior science advisor for the agency’s bureau of food security. “Food issues could become as politically destabilizing by 2050 as energy issues are today.” — ”

———————————

So why is there so little talk about slowing or ending population growth?

If you can not provide for yourself you can not provide for a child.

Access to family planning services needs to be available to all that want it.

Davy, Hermann, MO on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 12:24 pm 



Well, PO might not get people’s attention but “Peak Food” sure is. Pity people do not realize how interconnected the two are. We don’t need to look out to 2050. I hate articles picking 2050 as a benchmark. Spare me your lack of critical thinking. You see this with supposedly PHD’s and the like. Just look at the door step please NGO’s, UN think tanks, and university departments. The danger is real and it is now. We have energy stress, food stress, and water stress. We have a population that is quickly expanding every month. We have a complex interconnected global system at limits of growth facing diminishing returns on problem solving. A financial system happily dancing at the edge of a cliff. It is over kids. We are in a few short years facing collapse primarily from the nexus of food, energy, and water stress. If that were not enough a compounding of these stresses by pollution and AGW. Let us hope the food card is the card that wakes the average GP up to the reality of a world on the cusp of a paradigm shift. The average GP will not understand this but he may be moved toward bottom up changes to lifestyles and basic choices. Basic choices when magnified by millions matter. Less towards energy intensive mindless activities and more towards gardening, local food, and less energy intensive and environmentally damaging activities. Lots of low hanging fruit to grab in the rich world. The tird world is doomed because of overpopulation and carrying capacity overshoot. We are all doomed in the end. Happy Easter.

Beery on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 1:16 pm 



Where is the “doom”? Surely a reduction in population is just what we need. Certainly, getting there won’t be pretty, but the end result is hardly “doom”.

Davy, Hermann, MO on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 1:52 pm 



Yea, Beery, best to have balance when discussing decent becuase “who knows?”. We are dealing with something that is global with population overshoot and economic/social decent. Yet, I would say if you are one of the unlucky ones to experience population reduction, unemployment, and homelessness then I gather doom would be a feeling.

eugene on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 1:57 pm 



The resource wars are already on. And Beery, have another beer.

Makati1 on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 2:42 pm 



So many other black swans up there that food is only one of the many ways humanity is going to suffer in the next 40 years … or the next 10. But then, what do I know?

bobinget on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 3:57 pm 



In an attempt to solidify it’s fundamentalist base of support, Republican Party policy to restrict access to abortion and birth control for poor American families will continue to overload welfare and prison populations.

GregT on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 5:57 pm 



Welfare, and incarceration, are both large contributors to US GDP. As is security, policing, and the criminal justice system. Ponzi based economic, and monetary systems, also require exponential growth in population. The capitalist system is not sustainable. The costs of living will continue to grow exponentially for the average person, as the uber rich consume the middle classes. Food is already unaffordable for one out of every six Americans, this trend will also continue to grow.

Beery on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 9:02 pm 



“We are dealing with something that is global with population overshoot and economic/social decent. Yet, I would say if you are one of the unlucky ones to experience population reduction, unemployment, and homelessness then I gather doom would be a feeling.”

Sure, but what’s the alternative to a gradual reduction in population due to food shortages? EVERYONE choking to death because we’ve destroyed the atmosphere? There are really only those two options and I’d prefer the one where we stay alive as a species.

J-Gav on Sun, 20th Apr 2014 10:40 pm 



I don’t doubt that by 2050 a growing proportion of the world’s population will see the brick wall (or precipice if you prefer that metaphor) that we’re all confronted with. Meantime, horticulture/sylviculture/permaculture sounds like a better way to go than most of the BAU crap presently on offer …

Mark on Mon, 21st Apr 2014 12:24 am 



These food shortages they discuss don’t mention that some regions and nations will be affected more than others.
The ones that are mostly desert but have a booming population due to misogynistic cultural and religious values, and have to import a significant portion of their food will be the first to experience famine.

Other countries that are located at temperate latitudes, have lots of arable land, and have managed to stabilize their populations will be the best off.

That is if none of the recent advances in water filtration technology pan out. If they do, then cheap desalinization will allow the countries that are mostly desert to farm more of their land.

jeyeykei on Mon, 21st Apr 2014 1:20 am 



These are the factors to be considered:

Climate
Population
Topography

If in case all of these are problems, not a single region or nation is exempted, no matter how economically rich it is.

GregT on Mon, 21st Apr 2014 1:55 am 



Jeyeykei,

You are correct, of course, and all of the finger pointing is nothing more than denial. The drought in California is already a big problem for food prices here in North America, and it certainly appears that it will get a whole lot worse. No country is going to be exempt, and one country in particular, already has one out of every six people unable to afford food.

Mark on Mon, 21st Apr 2014 3:38 am 



“The drought in California is already a big problem for food prices here in North America, and it certainly appears that it will get a whole lot worse.
There will probably be an El Nino event here in California next year, this drought is a temporary phenomenon that will probably end with heavy rains.

“No country is going to be exempt, and one country in particular, already has one out of every six people unable to afford food.”
America is a major exporter of food. Countries like Egypt, Yemen and Afghanistan however have overshot their carrying capacity and have to import most of their food. These and others like them are the countries that will be screwed in a worldwide food shortage.

GregT on Mon, 21st Apr 2014 6:34 am 



Mark,

America is a major importer of energy, and has been for over 40 years. Food production is directly tied to energy. Not enough energy= not enough food.

The US overshot their carrying capacity back in the 70s. The rest of the world is getting really tired of Americans killing their families. When the US can no longer control energy through killing people, the US will not have enough food. The rest of the world won’t be there to help the US. The rest of the world has had enough.

Mark on Mon, 21st Apr 2014 4:59 pm 



If you include Canada, North America is for the time being not a major net importer of energy. It imports some oil, but in addition to natuaral gas don’t forget America has significant coal reserves too. I believe when solar becomes even more economical and advanced nuclear becomes commerical it will be a moot point. With cheap electricity biofuels or batteries can be made to run the farm equipment. And even without modern fossil fuel based agriculture Norht America has quite a bit of land to feed its population.

Saudi Arabia on the other hand is a major exporter of oil, but cannot grow enough food to sustain its population because it is mostly desert and its population has exploded in recent decades. It needs to import food from countries it exports oil to in order to survive. Once it cannot or won’t export oil to those countries it will have nothing of value to exchange with food exporting countries and it will have a huge problem. Unless it too uses cheap solar energy to build desalinization plants to turn its desert into farmland.
As far as the US killing families in the rest of the world, currently we are only killing some Islamic Jihadists in a few places where people hate Americans anyway. It is quite a strech to say this is the rest of the world. Historically maybe, but that can be said of just about any major power in world history. British, Germans, Russians, Chinese, Japanese, Romans, French and just about any other major country are guilty of killing people outside their borders.

Alan on Mon, 21st Apr 2014 5:41 pm 



No one will be exempt, not just countries or regions. We will see and likely participate in the great die-off of the 2020’s, following the tumultuous close of the first decade of the 21st century. The loss of energy supply share will not be pretty, or subtle or fun, and we are on the crux of it. We are so compelled/controlled/committed to our current systems and they take so much to maintain, that small failures and postponement of maintenance will cascade when available energy no longer meets growth plus maintenance.

Plant a garden with nut trees and fruit trees, and raise some chickens; practice for the coming interesting decades.