Technology has given us cures to diseases that used to wipe out thousands at time. It’s given us the printing press and the telegraph, which helped spread news and information, furthering people’s knowledge and freedom. Technology gave us the wheel, which completely transformed agriculture and transportation. There’s no doubt the ingenuity of humans has helped improve the lives of our species, and many of these inventions have assisted in making growing food, cooking food, buying food, selling food, and consuming food easier, and in turn, helped many not go hungry. However, technology has also given us televisions we can spend all day in front of, causing obesity and laziness. It’s given us nuclear bombs, or weapons in general. Technology created the Industrial Revolution, which spurred not only overuse of our natural resources, but extreme pollution, and a dependence on mass-produced everything. Technology can and should be used for solving world hunger, but it is not the end-all-be-all, and its use should be monitored for unfortunate side effects and the most sustainable methods should be employed.
Industrial agriculture picked up in the 1900s and has increased drastically in the past couple decades. Industrial agriculture is the use of technology and an industrialized system and factory-like process in the production of food. It has helped lift many out of poverty, and provided more food security for entire populations (5). It has led to pollution of our waterways through the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and has also caused soil erosion and depletion from the use of chemicals, heavy machinery, and row crops or mono-crops. Named the “Green Revolution”, the increase in pollution from mechanized farming practices was anything but “green” (2). As discussed in World Hunger: 10 Myths by Frances Moore Lappe and Joseph Collins, industrial agriculture has been seen as some as a solution to solving world hunger. The reasoning behind this is that it is believed to be more efficient. Farmers can mow down their land, plant as much corn and soybeans on it as they can fit using technologically-made GMO crops, fly a plane above their thousand-acre field spraying chemical fertilizers and pesticides on it – many of the chemicals not even hitting the plants, use an irrigation system that will waste thousands of gallons of water that will run off into the streams taking animal waste and chemicals with it, then sit in giant heated combines and tractors that will further deplete the land and resources. The farmer barely has to step foot in their own field. To some, this may seem amazing, and revolutionary, but it’s hardly efficient. As Wendell Berry wrote in The Unsettling of America, this type of farming takes the culture out of agriculture and the farmer out of the farm. Lappe and Collins also talk of this in ‘Myth 3: Only Industrial Agriculture and GMOS Can Feed a Hungry World.’ They say industrial farming “disconnects farming from its rich context,” and is only concerned about producing agricultural products; not with who is actually consuming these products. Farmers relationship with the plants they grow and the people they feed are both important, but are barely recognized with an industrialized food system.
Berry argues that instead of using these methods that take everything natural away from farming, we should not try to be ‘gods’ with technology and should live within our limits. The earth will provide what we need if we work with it and not against it. He advises we should keep it local, using as much as we can of what grows well in areas where it naturally grows, and also planting native species and cover crops after using the land for strictly agriculture purposes. Farmers shouldn’t forget about the ‘margins’, which serve an important purpose in filtering water, and keeping native pollinators and other important ecological species nearby. There are many resources on the farm itself, if used correctly, that can easily provide all the fertilizer, irrigation, or other necessities in the production of food without causing so much waste (1). Waste is a really big problem of our agricultural system today. As Berry talks about, we take in much more from the Earth than we give and we don’t worry about returning what we take. Production of anything has been over-complicated by technology, and quantity has become more important than quality (1). But, Berry does say technology doesn’t have to be bad, which despite all of his critiques of modern agriculture is important to remember. He says it can be used to assist farmers, but under conditions; “The mechanical aspect of the technology would serve to harness or enhance the energy available on the farm. It would not be permitted to replace such energies with imported fuels, to replace people, or to replace or reduce human skills” (1-pg 90). It is also important to think about the future effects from industrial agriculture. If the soil is completely drained, and nothing can grow on it anymore, then what is the purpose of a $100,000 combine that can harvest 100 acres a day?
127 our experts are availableright now
“The germs that used to be in our food have been replaced by poisons,” wrote Berry (1-pg 41). Thanks to technology, we now have ways to eliminate disease and pests in our food, and we can preserve it for astronomical amounts of time. Preservatives for food is an important technology. We can now store food for months, even years at a time. We can ship it all over the world, using chemicals to make sure it’s perfectly ripe when it arrives in the Ames Walmart from Brazil. The ability to preserve food can help in food assistance programs; it can be shipped to impoverished areas, and kept in places where there may not be refrigeration. But, this technology has also led to an increase in chemical and artificial ingredients in our foods, which can lead to an array of health problems from obesity, headaches and allergies, to cancer.
There is also debate among whether GMO foods are the answer to world hunger. Genetically modified organisms (GMO) means the genetic makeup of the organism has been altered to produce a desired effect. Examples of this are GMO crops to produce higher yields, resist a certain pest or weed, and grow with less water (6). In some ways, I do see this as a technological marvel that could help solve hunger. Some places of the world are just very, very difficult to grow food in, and are prone to drought or other issues. Instead of bringing them foreign aid, or shipping them food with unhealthy preservatives and chemicals from America, wouldn’t it be great if we could supply them with GMO seeds that will grow where they live, and they could sustain themselves fully from that? However, there are concerns with GMO crops. There is worry that weeds or pests or disease will just grow stronger, and more resistant to these crops as well. There is still much to learn about GMOs and their effects. Another worry is that food will be bred to all be exactly the same, and there will be no diversity of crops. Through GMO breeding, a banana grown in Guatemala could look the same as a banana grown in Canada, for example, if it was bred to grow in such conditions. As mentioned earlier, Berry questions the morality of changing nature to make it grow how and where we want, and I do the same. The earth is so full of resources, and if we learn to use what is around us and really pay attention to our local environments, we would be surprised with all that we can find.
Much of the focus on agriculture-related technology is on creating higher yields. However, as Collins and Lappe explain, the earth has enough food to feed everyone just fine. The problem is not the amount of food we produce, but how we produce it and how much waste we create. Technology related to food security should be focused on waste, and mitigating it and repurposing it. Sustainable farming methods should also be used, with assistance from technology – not an entire farm run by it. As Berry talks about, farmers should nurture the land that they farm, not exploit it. One extremely easy ‘technology’ anyone could employ to help either their crops, their garden, or a community garden is composting. It takes waste and turns it back into nutritious, natural fertilizer rather than just going down the garbage disposal or in the dump. According to World Resources institute, other ways of reducing global food waste is making sure food is stored properly right away, redistributing it, and rethinking our portion sizes. Technology was used by researchers at Perdue University in developing a bag to help store grain for months and keep out pests that was used in several countries that struggle with food security. Building silos has also helped them immensely (3). Storing food is much harder for the developing world, who are also the ones (mainly) struggling with food insecurity.
The overarching ethical argument I see in this question, is that there are many quick and dirty methods of creating more food with technology that do assist in reducing hunger, however, the problems they create may retroactively cause more hunger, or other environmental or health issues down the line. That is to say though, not all technology is bad. Its use should be monitored, and it should be used to work with our earth, not against it or in exploitation of it. Using the example of industrial agriculture to solve world hunger through the utilitarian approach, there are a few main issues. Doing the most good while reducing harm is the key of the utilitarian approach, and over time industrial agriculture does a lot of harm. As I talked about earlier, it greatly contributes to pollution, and really is not as efficient as it may seem. Industrial agriculture helps some farmers produce much more than they would ever be able to without this technology, meaning they can make more money, and more food, fuel, or animal feed can be made from their gigantic mono-crops. I would argue, though, that the depletion of nutrients in soil, the waste, the pollution, and the fact that a lot of these types of crops aren’t even used to feed humans make this type of technology use in agriculture unethical. It also makes things much harder for small scale or local farmers who want to use sustainable methods and can’t compete with corporate ‘agri-businesses’. To put it in the words of a utilitarian argument, the benefits of industrial agriculture in solving world hunger do not equate to or exceed the disadvantages caused by this type of farming and use of technology – especially when other, better methods can be used. In the long run, more people will suffer from effects of industrial farming than those who will benefit from it.
One aspect of technology to assist in solving world hunger that falls outside the realm of food production is the internet and globalization of information. As a student of journalism and international studies, I am familiar with the way information spreads and mass media. In recent years, our access to information has skyrocketed. We can look up anything we want through this vessel we carry in our pockets. Because of the tool of the internet and technology, we can educate ourselves and others about ways to solve hunger globally. Through social media, people can share ideas about things like shopping local, growing your own garden, fundraisers for food insecurity, or just spreading awareness about food security-related issues. Because of our ability to quickly communicate with anyone anywhere, once we find methods that work we can instantly share them and educate others. However, many in impoverished areas don’t have access to this type of technology, nor would they know how to use it. In this case, we can educate aid workers or governments on sustainable tactics to help reduce hunger, and continue to research methods that will work for them locally forever.
With a growing population, our planet is going to have to find a way to feed approximately 9.7 billion people by 2050 (4). Our dependence on technology is also growing. While technology can be a vital tool in solving any issue humanity is faced with, we should not become too dependent on it, and also be aware of the effects of the technology we use. We can use technology to teach others sustainable methods that will help in keeping hunger to a minimum, but it can also be used to overproduce food that will only go to waste. Technology should be used in sustainable ways to help reduce waste and be used alongside nature to help end hunger, and not as means of exploiting our planet in the name of capital and mass-production.
Works Cited
- Berry, Wendell. The Unsettling of America Culture and Agriculture. Sierra Club Books, 1986.
- Lappé Frances Moore., and Joseph Collins. World Hunger: 10 Myths. Inst. for Food and Development Policy, 1982.
- Lipinski, Brian. “10 Ways to Cut Global Food Loss and Waste.” 2018 Will See High Meat Consumption in the U.S., but the American Diet Is Shifting | World Resources Institute, 6 June 2013, www.wri.org/blog/2013/06/10-ways-cut-global-food-loss-and-waste.
- “World Population Projected to Reach 9.7 Billion by 2050 | UN DESA Department of Economic and Social Affairs.” United Nations, United Nations, 29 July 2015, www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/population/2015-report.html.
- Green Revolution: Curse or Blessing? International Food Policy Research Institute , 2002, ebrary.ifpri.org/utils/getfile/collection/p15738coll2/id/64639/filename/64640.pdf.
- Folger, Tim, and Craig Cutler. “The Next Green Revolution.” National Geographic, National Geographic, www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/green-revolution/.
- Introduction to the US Food System : Public Health, Environment, and Equity, edited by Roni Neff, John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, 2014. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.proxy.lib.iastate.edu/lib/iastate/detail.action?docID=1813350.
