Biotechnology companies and even some scientists argue that we need genetically modified seeds to feed the world and to protect the Earth from chemicals. Their arguments feel eerily familiar.
Thirty years ago, I wrote "Diet for a Small Planet" for one reason. As a researcher buried in the UC Berkeley agricultural library, I was stunned to learn that the experts--equivalent to the biotech proponents of today--were wrong. They were telling us we'd reached the Earth's limits to feed ourselves, but in fact there was more than enough food for us all.
Hunger, I learned, is the result of economic "givens" we ourselves have created, assumptions and structures that actively generate scarcity from plenty. Today this is more, not less, true.
Throughout history, ruminants had served humans by turning grasses and other "inedibles" into high-grade protein. They were our four-legged protein factories. But once we began feeding livestock from cropland that could grow edible food, we began to convert ruminants into our protein disposals. Only a small fraction of the nutrients fed to animals return to us in meat; the rest animals use largely for energy or they excrete. Thirty years ago, one-third of the world's grain was going to livestock; today it is closer to one-half. And now we're mastering the same disappearing trick with the world's fish supply. By feeding fish to fish, again, we're reducing the potential supply.
We're shrinking the world's food supply for one reason: The hundreds of millions of people who go hungry cannot create a sufficient "market demand" for the fruits of the Earth. So more and more of it flows into the mouths of livestock, which convert it into what the better-off can afford. Corn becomes filet mignon. Sardines become salmon.
Enter biotechnology. While its supporters claim that seed biotechnology methods are "safe" and "precise," other scientists strongly refute that, as they do claims that biotech crops have actually reduced pesticide use.
But this very debate is in some ways part of the problem. It is a tragic distraction our planet cannot afford.
We're still asking the wrong question. Not only is there already enough food in the world, but as long as we are only talking about food--how best to produce it--we'll never end hunger or create the communities and food safety we want.
