Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Contemporary approaches to addressing food insecurity - Coggle Diagram
Contemporary approaches to addressing food insecurity
Genetically modified organisms (GMO's) :leaves:
Organism whose genetic material has been modified in a laboratory using genetic engineering or transgenic technology
93% corn, soy and cotton in the US is now GM
95% sugar beet in US is engineered to be herbicide and insect tolerant
Increase chemical use
Who develops GM crops?
Research funded by agribusinesses like Monsata
Profit driven
Not
Funded by national research agencies and charities
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Patents held for public good
Farmers who buy seed protected by some types of patent must sign an agreement not to sell or save seed from these crops
Have to buy new seeds every year
At the mercy of providers and the prices they set
Patent holders release varieties without charge for public benefit
Golden Rice
Source of vitamin A
Advantages
Increase yields :
protected from pests and weeds
fewer chemical inputs requires
reduced economic cost and negative environmental impacts
farmers' incomes increase
improve QoL
increase food security
Safe for human consumption
No evidence they pose a risk to wildlife
Who is doing the research :
Potential health benefits
2015 trial in the UK showed that Camelina, an oilseed plant, could be genetically modified to reproduce the nutrients in oily fish that are thought to protect against heart disease and help infant brain development.
Shorter growing time
Increase number of harvests
Longer shelf life
Decreased food waste
Disadvantages
Lack of long-term testing data
Bans or restrictions on GM crops
More expensive than normal seeds
And need to be repurchased every year
Not available to poorer/ subsistance farmers
Require additional inputs
risk of cross contamination with conventional crops and wild species
negative impacts on ecosystems
Can threaten genetic diversity
lack of biodiversity
inability to adapt to changing environments
Evaluation
Positive social impacts as can potentially reduce food insecurity as allow higher yields. Also could have health benefits as nutrients can be added/increases however there is a lack of long-term testing data on health concerns. Positive environmental impact as pest resistant varieties reduce the need for chemical additives but also can threaten genetic biodiversity or cross-contaminate natural varieties resulting in impacts on the food chain. Positive economic impacts as increase yields and therefore farmers incomes increase however some producers of the seeds don't allow farmers to harvest their own seeds and so they are forced to rebuy them every season. Overall mostly positive impacts and they outweigh the negatives. In the past limited to developed countries but becoming more widely available
Vertical Farming :male-farmer:
Aim to grow crops year-round in high-rise urban buildings
Japan has started using vertical farms after the nuclear accident in 2011 in Fukushima, as many of the farmlands cannot be used.
In Antarctica the South Pole Food Growth Chamber provides members of staff with at least one fresh salad a day (if there are limited supply flights to the station) due to optimal temperatures
Disadvantages
Lots of energy needed to power lights and control systems
3-5x more expensive than traditional farming
focussed on developed countries
Automation replaces human labour
job losses
Advantages
vertical farms use 98% less water per crops
Can use waste water
Bad weather doesn't affect their growth
Food supplies= more secure
Building protect crops from pests so no herbicide/pesticides needed
Control airflow, humidity, lighting, temperature and nutrient conditions
increased productivity all year round
Food doesn't have to be transported as far
reduce emissions
M&S grow some of their greens in London shops
Evaluation
Positive social impacts as food supplies are more secure as not as depended on climate. However it is quite expensive so not really available in less developed countries where the need for food security may be greater. Positive economic impact as productivity is increased as it is year-round however automation may result in job losses. It is also more expensive than traditional methods. It uses much less water than traditional methods and so is better for the environment but lots of energy is needed to power the lights and control systems which results in increase emissions. However as these farms take up less space they can be closer to where the demand is highest and so transport emissions are cut. Overall much more positive impacts but only really available in developed countries so limited scope.
In Vitro Meat:cow2:
Manufacturing meat through "tissue-engineering" technology
in 2009 scientists from the Netherlands grew meat using cells from a live pig
2013- first lab-grown burger cooked and eaten
cost 250000 euros to make
Advantages
It has been claimed the in vitro meat could deliver up to 50,000 tonnes of meat in 2 months from only 10 pork muscle cells and be sufficient for global demand
Reduce food insecurity as quicker and higher yields
Omega 3 fatty acids could be added for health benefits
Significantly less environmental impacts than slaughtered meat
2% of land that global meat/livestock industry uses
4% gas emissions
Ethical issues overcome
Animals unharmed
No genetic modification
Sustainable method of meeting increasing demand for meat due to increasing population and changing diets
Disadvantages
Very expensive
not widely available
Advanced technology required
Less suitable for developing countries
Difficulties of scale and production
Vegetarians/vegans still hesitant as meat cells used initially
Lack of meat diversity
Cultured meat is much harder than producing processed meat
Livestock sector employs 1.7 billion people
lack of employment
Evaluation
Positive social impacts as ethical issues are overcome. Also nutrients can be added which can help decrease malnutrition. However he technique is expensive and so not really available in less developed countries where malnutrition rates are higher. There are positive environmental impacts as fewer livestock have to be kept to meet global demand so fewer emissions and less land, food and water required. However as it is expensive and technologically complicated there are difficulties with using it on a large enough scale to make a considerable different. Positive environmental impacts as significantly fewer emissions. Overall positive but again limited to developed countries with technology available
Overall
Generally positive but limited to developed countries that have access to the technology to make them happen. These tend to be the countries that are least food insecure and so these solutions don't really aid those most in need