User:Brimba/notes

Historical timeline
New World crops

Potato

Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) argued in An Essay on the Principle of Population, first published in 1798, that if left unrestricted, human populations would continue to grow until they would become too large to be supported by the food grown on available agricultural land.

Irish potato famine Agricultural extension services

Invention of synthesized nitrogen

Green revolution

IRRI rice

India self-sufficient

Paul R. Ehrlich's book "The Population Bomb" is published 1968

Deng Xiaoping enacts economic reforms in China, including de-collectivize of agriculture.

ADIS/HIV impacts the African continent

Limiting factors

 * Land
 * Water
 * Sunlight
 * Grain is already at or near maximum productivity per ha

Offsets

 * Develop marginal land
 * Improve non-grain productivity
 * Capture run-off rainwater
 * Use no-till to control erosion
 * Develop salt-resistant crops
 * Land ownership
 * Aquaculture
 * Democracies

The sheer poverty and underdevelopment found in developing countries afford enormous opportunities for rapid grow in their agricultural sectors.

''At one time, famine was a geographic phenominon. When a country or region had a poor harvest, its people often faced famine. Given the growning integration of the worlds grain economy and today’s capasity to move grain around the world, famine is concentrated much less in specific geographic regions and much more among income groups.'' Lester R. Brown (Outgrowning the Earth, 2004, )

Consumption levels, not food avalability, define a state of famine. Fred Cuny (Famine, Conflict, and Response: a basic guide 1999)

From the 1970’s forward famine has been viewed as more of a

In an increasingly integrated world, food security is now seen as having global dimensions as opposed to being a regional phenomenon.

Most of the worlds water trading is done in the form of grain trading.

Chronic hunger leads to stunted growth and physical deficencies in individuals. It also leads to high levels of infant and child mortality.

Most aid has remained focused on responding to catastraphies instead of trying to make societies more resiliant. Malthus predicted that population would outstrip resources and cause widespread famine and ecological disaster. His predictions were wrong, but his ideas remain extraordinarily influential today with population control and environmental groups.

In nations with large surpluses of food available for export (such as the US, France, and Canada) food production at all levels is geared primarily towards producing the largest possible profit. Most of the food the average farmer produces is being grown with the expectation of taking it to the marketplace, only a small percentage is normally held back for family consumption. The higher the expected profit, the more food the farmer is willing to grow until he reaches the maximum carrying capacity of his land. When profits fall farmers will reduce production of marginal land, and marginal crops, and concentrate on only those crops that will bring the highest price. If profits fall far enough a farmer may only grow enough food to meet the needs of his immediate family.

Most food consumed in industrialized nations is consumed indirectly in the form of meat from livestock, poultry, eggs, and milk. When food justice is spoken about on an international level, it is normally to advocate redistributing this grain to the less developed countries to ensure food security on a global level. If this grain was diverted from livestock production et al, there would be sufficient grain freed up to feed the entire human population world-wide. However, the loss of livestock would require a radical adjustment to most westernized diets. To date there is little indication that voters in the United States and other grain producing nations would be willing to restructure their diets to achieve food security in developing nations.

If such a change was made, beyond relieving hunger, the consequences in developing nations remain unclear. In most nations with significant numbers of people suffering from chronic or intermediate hunger, the agricultural sector dominates the economy and is the main source of employment. As large amounts of free or low-cost food are shipped into a country on a regular basis it would likely undermine existing food production. How to keep agricultural production from collapsing in these countries becomes a relevant question.

Other questions asked revolve around what would industrialized nations expect in return for funding such a program? Would they look upon those being feed as owing something in return? Or would they be wholly altruistic in how the program was administered?

While representative of the three main approaches advocated, these are far from exclusive, as most organizations will advocate an approach in line with their particular views or outlooks.

Each of the three has its own strengths, and its own weaknesses.


 * 9.1 billon population
 * Green Revolution
 * Seasonal Hunger
 * Millennium Development Goals
 * governments give preference to cities
 * Non-geographic famine
 * Protien malnutrition
 * Land rights
 * Ethanal production
 * Poverty as cause of food insecurity

Shifting food crops to fuel production could further tighten food supplies and raise prices, pitting affluent automobile owners against low-income food consumers. Earth Policy Institute http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/2005/Update49.htm


 * Population
 * Food production
 * Poverty
 * Technological change
 * Sustainability
 * Political Structure

The dispute began in 1993, when the European Union -- then the European Commission (E.C.) -- implemented its European Banana Regime, which placed limits on imports of bananas from non-ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific) countries

The annual quota for dollar bananas was initially set at 2 million tonnes with a tariff of 100 euros per tonne.

Several states, mainly France and Spain, are keen to protect incomes for their banana farmers in Guadeloupe, Martinique and the Canary Islands. Others, mainly in northern Europe, are large-scale fruit importers and want the lowest prices possible.

What is Food Security and Famine and Hunger?

-

Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbour in City of New York, 28 U.S. (3 Pet.) 99 (1830)

In 1801 Robert Randall, a seaman, left his estate for the formation of a new charity to be called the “Sailor’s Snug Harbor” for the purpose of maintaining and supporting aged, decrepit, and worn-out sailors. The estate included valuable property within New York City. Randall’s will was contested by John Inglis, who claimed to be the rightful heir to the land. The case wound its way through the court system, arriving at the US Supreme Court during the 1829/1830 term.

Under US law at that time, only US citizens could legally own land, thus Inglis citizenship was an important issue in the case. If he was deemed a British citizen, and not a US citizen, then he was “disabled from taking the land in question by inherence” and the trusties for the Snug Harbor would retain title to the land.

It was established that John Inglis was born in New York City in approximately 1776; however, no exact record existed of the date. This led to a dispute as to whether Inglis was a US citizen, or a British citizen. Under US law, if he was born prior to the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th 1776, he was a British citizen. If he was born on or after July 4th, but prior to September 15, 1776 when the British troops took control of the city, then he was a US citizen. If he was born between September 15, 1776 and November 25, 1783 when British troops evacuated the city, then he was a British Citizen, as the City of New York was under British control during that time period. John’s father was known to be a staunch Royalist, and supporter of the British during the war. His father left New York City with the British troops, taking John with him. John Inglis never returned to the United States after that time, eventually residing in Nova Scotia.

Under British common law involving civil wars, even if Inglis was born a British citizen, he could have chosen to be an American citizen at the conclusion of the War, however, he was too young, and the decision therefore fell to his father, who sided with the British, and both father and son left the country.

Likewise, the Court concluded that even if Inglis was born a US citizen, a “right of election” existed allowing individuals to choose which side they would live under. “…a minor owes allegiance to the country chosen by his father subject to his dissent at majority” Due to his age, his father had chosen for him to be a British citizen, and by his failing to act contrary to that choice upon reaching adulthood, he had adopted and ratified the choice made by his father.

The party must be born within a place where the sovereign

Two things usually concur to create citizenship: First, birth locally within the dominions of the sovereign; and, second, birth within the protection and obedience, or, in other words, within the ligeance of the sovereign. That is, the party must be born within a place where the sovereign is at the time in full possession and exercise of his power, and the party must also at his birth derive protection from, and consequently owe obedience or allegiance to, the sovereign, as such, de facto. -- The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. Henry A. Wallace