Follow this blog:
RSS

Did Borlaug prevent or just delay mass famine?

By | September 14, 2009, 8:18 AM PDT

Dr. Norman Borlaug, whose “scientific farming” led to the “green revolution” of the 1970s, died over the weekend in Texas. (Drawing from Gho-Englisch.de.)

The “green revolution,” a term first used in 1968, describes Borlaug’s work starting in the 1940s, using new seeds and techniques to increase food crop yields in the developing world.

Mourning was especially heartfelt in India and Pakistan, where the green revolution prevented mass starvation. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called Borlaug’s death “the end of an era.”

Truer words were seldom spoken.

Borlaug’s work cemented a relationship between the poor of the world and science that still exists. He also demanded that governments pay world prices for grain, making him a hero of capitalism as well.

That may be why his death is being politicized by conservatives, who claim “the left” would have prevented the green revolution, and that Borlaug defused the “population bomb” predicted by liberal thinkers like Paul Ehrlich.

It’s deadly nonsense.

Fact is agriculture is a key driver of global warming, as described in this 2008 article from Iowa State University.

The big problems are nitrous oxide, produced by nitrogen fertilizers, and methane produced by farm animals. New techniques for using fertilizer and managing animal feed are recommended, but how far, and fast, can those ideas filter into the developing world? We need more Borlaugs.

Increased populations and the profitability of agriculture also lead to deforestation, another big driver of global warming. Almost one-fourth of all land on Earth is now devoted to agriculture. Techniques like no-till organic agriculture can mitigate some impacts but it’s not a cure-all.

This may be why some conservatives are drawing strict lines in the sand, calling anyone who supports population controls “evil” and suggesting that, if there are too many people, activists die first.

Closing our eyes and shouting won’t shut down science, however. They won’t stop global warming, and won’t mitigate its impact.

Unless scientists, businesspeople and politicians cooperate in the fight against global warming Dr. Borlaug’s legacy will have been to kill the grandchildren of the millions he saved.

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Dana Blankenhorn

About Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn was a contributing editor for SmartPlanet from 2009 to 2010.

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn

Contributing Editor

Dana Blankenhorn has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement and founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media. He holds degrees from Rice and Northwestern universities. He is based in Atlanta.

Follow him on Twitter.

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a technology reporter since 1982, a business reporter since 1978, and a writer for as long as he can remember. His Schwab IRA has a few tech stocks in it, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials bought over 10 years ago. But the vast majority of his tiny fortune (emphasis on the word tiny) is invested in mutual funds. He presently writes for no one else but ZDNet, SmartPlanet and himself. But if you've got an opportunity let him know. If he takes the gig he"ll first add it to this disclosure page.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
12
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: Did Borlaug prevent or just delay mass famine?
I am neither Republican nor Democrat so I am not going to take sides here. The grim reality is that we are rapidly approaching the carrying capacity of the planet when it comes to being able to support the human population. All one has to do is to study the 1000 year history of Easter Island and what happened there will surely happen globally if serious intervention does not occur. Whether this intervention is a result of political leadership or, push come to shove, natural law, there will be a hell of a price to pay for a lot of people and it is not going to be pretty. Anyone who thinks that somehow we can continue on this joyride the way we have been is completely delusional or has their head buried in the sand.
Posted by cppsolutions
14th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: Did Borlaug prevent or just delay mass famine?
... and what will you next preach about (after Global Warming), as the unusual solar minimum continues, and global temperatures drop further ?
Posted by AlterGeek
14th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: Did Borlaug prevent or just delay mass famine?
Norman Borlaug was debatably the greatest person in the 'green' revolution, but where Norman would have been the first to have said that this is only just one of the pieces in the jigsaw of human survival. For the realisation of a world without starvation, great wars et al, we have to look elsewhere and fast, as time is simply running out.

In this respect the pace of economic recovery throughout the world should not be the prime consideration of industrialists (World Economic Forum, Dalian, China ? 12th September 2009) or governments, but what the future holds for all who live and breathe on this planet. In this respect the way that our politicians are working and addressing mounting global problems is like Nero fiddling whilst Rome burns. They are oblivious to the strains on humankind?s constant growth and are impotent in preventing global Agamemnon coming in this present century with their present thinking and mindsets. Whilst they try and fix the financial system through the people?s wealth, they impoverish tens of millions yearly. The system is a destructive force and where they are the conductors, forever adding fuel to the burning mass that goes on underneath. Over the next 20 years the world will increasingly witness a far more destabilised world, where emerging wars become a common event. By then there will be over 8 billion humans living on planet Earth (and that will be 2 billion less than peak population by 2075 at 10 billion humans according to the latest UN predictions), a significant number unable to sustain themselves. Indeed, the vast dwindling resources problem will create the base and start-line for global conflict, the size and ferocity never seen before. Therefore as Rome did indeed burn, so will humankind eventually with the present political mindsets. This is not pie-in-the-sky scare mongering, but sheer fact and is conditioned by common sense and what will eventually come to pass. That is why armaments throughout the world are increasing every year and where by 2030 through this vast expenditure by governments worldwide, could very well become the largest industry in the world turning over in excess of $5 trillion annually. Indeed in the case of the USA alone, the Friends Committee on National Legislation calculates for Fiscal Year 2009 that the majority of US tax payer?s money goes towards war ? some 44.4% of all taxes. Therefore whilst our politicians continue to place their faith in that the strongest will prevail, they lose sight of any possibility of a peaceful future world. Indeed again, they fuel the whole process of human destruction and where their combined interests of relying upon weapons of mass destruction to protect themselves and the preservation of the capitalist system that supports such an unholy mechanism, is absolutely flawed. In time and when things are too late, politicians (and industrialists) will realise the folly of their mismanagement of the world order, for by then all that they once held so dear will have disappeared completely ? and the rest of humankind with it.

For having the insight gained from the thinking of many of the world?s foremost scientists and engineers, technology will not come to the rescue this time, as there are not any significant breakthroughs on the horizon in science today. Indeed, if a scientific miracle were discovered tomorrow to solve just one of humankind's huge problems, it would take around 4 decades for this to have any significant global effect, as all other revolutionary technologies have shown us in the past ? R&D development, technological prototypes, final technology product, mass manufacture, global distribution logistics etc, etc. Therefore any solution would come too late according to the dictates of common sense and where the resources necessary to support 8-10 billion humans, would not be there.

And where all the above future problems are determined by a vastly overpopulated world, unimaginable depletion of natural resources over the next 25-years that will not be able to support all human life (it only takes 15% of the global population to be affected to cause an irreversible situation), lack of energy and food, the destruction of arable land by continual erosion (both the hot climate effect and rise in sea levels) and the decimation of the oceans through industrial pollution and energy resources extraction on a momentous scale.

Dr. David Hill, DSc(Hon)
World Innovation Foundation Charity
Bern, Switzerland
Posted by bettysenior
14th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
Good debate
Although I was hoping for more from the right than global warming denial. If Borlaug's science was good science, then why isn't global warming good science? Only because it dares disagree with your ideology? That's Lobachevski-ism.
Posted by DanaBlankenhorn
14th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
It's An Overpopulation Problem
Like the Chinese have discovered, there is a peanlty for overtaxing your natural resources. Borlaug gave us a little more time, but also allowed the problem to compound to an even worse level of disruption. One should note how tied to energy modern American corporate farming is attached.

It is not agriculture per se that contributes to that nebulous concept "golbal warming" (climate temperature is always changing when observed over millenia - stable climate assumptions of Global Warming are just not warranted), but human activity and geophysical processes in general.
Posted by brianpeterson@...
14th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: Did Borlaug prevent or just delay mass famine?
Unlike Dana, who resorts to ad-hominem atttack (assumes that anyone questioning global warming must be right-wing), many good points made in most of the posts.
Posted by AlterGeek
14th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
Just delayed - and worsened
The green revolution put off the day of reckoning, but now there are far more mouths to feed (or starve). The use of chemical fertilizers without replenishing soil organic matter leaves soils more erodible, less able to retain moisture and nutrients, and less able to produce a crop without heavy inputs of fertilizer.

Vast areas of the world's farmland are in this depleted condition, and the most populous countries have little uncultivated land left that's suitable for conversion to farmland. Droughts are becoming more common, chemical fertilizers more expensive, insects more resistant to the chemical pesticides required by the "green revolution" farming systems.

So now we're looking at a likelihood of famines much more massive than would have occurred without the "green revolution". Borlaug and his compatriots should have been more concerned about the long-term sustainability of farming systems, rather than just maximum yields; and population control should have been a top priority everywhere.
Posted by Greenknight_z
15th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
AlterGreek
Yes, I was referencing your first note when I wrote. It was an ad hominem
attack. So you responded with an ad hominem attack accusing me of the
same.

It's this kind of nonsense and projection that give conservatives a bad
name. You're acting like a 7 year old ADHDer
Posted by DanaBlankenhorn
15th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: Did Borlaug prevent or just delay mass famine?
It seems fairly likely that something like the Singularity is headed our way in the very near future. Whether we like it or not, and whether we are ready or not, technology and knowledge are continuing to advance exponentially, and it is likely that we will soon have, if not a cure for stupidity, at least the equivalent of eye glasses for our short-sighted brains. Once that happens, the changes are going to come so fast that we cannot even begin to imagine the effects it will have. Global warming and the potential for a catastrophic famine or global pandemic are probably not going to be the big headlines in twenty years.
Posted by just another guy
15th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
Leftist drivel
I should expect no less from the worshipers of Reverend Al Gore: this piece is just more leftist drivel from people who have no clue about the true cause of the problems on our planet: Satan. And so long as idiots post stuff like this, pretending that there is no cosmic battle being waged for our very souls, all and sundry will continue to have their minds captured by nonsense and lies, thinking that by implementing one lunatic leftist scheme after another somehow, magically, utopia will be achieved. That is not to say the capitalism and conservatism have it all correct - far from it. But I'd rather live in a conservative, capitalist society any day, instead of a leftist, socialist gulag like we have today. Long may socialism and environmentalism die!
Posted by EndGame666
18th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: Did Borlaug prevent or just delay mass famine?
Soylant Green anyone?
Posted by DSilda
19th Sep 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: Did Borlaug prevent or just delay mass famine?
Sorry, it should be 'Soylent' not Soylant.
Posted by DSilda
19th Sep 2009
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!