Preventing Hunger: Who is Right?

Recent surveys have estimated that over 1 billion people in the world are malnourished and underfed. With such a staggering statistic already present, the danger of rising populations and possible future ecological disruptions threaten to increase this number even more. Experts agree that something must be done to stop such a widespread epidemic, but the most effective solution to this problem is still up for debate. In the academic journal Nature, Calestous Juma and Peter Rosset argue their opinions on how food agencies and government aids can prevent future famine and hunger in each one of their articles. Juma suggests that genetically modified crops are the answer while Rosset pushes for a change in economic policy. Although the two authors present differing solutions, they both give equally convincing support for why their arguments on how to solve world hunger will be the most affective.

In Juma’s “Preventing Hunger: Biotechnology Is Key”, he claims that in order to prevent hunger African countries must plant genetically modified crops to produce higher yields and higher nutritional values. He recognizes the fact that advances during the Green Revolution significantly improved crop yields and decreased malnourishment, but argues that they “aren’t sufficient to help agriculture survive the rising population and loss of productivity brought on by ecological disruptions.” Crops must be pest resistant, herbicide-tolerant, drought-tolerant and disease resistant to handle the increasingly difficult conditions in Africa. As evidence he gives the example of black-eyed peas which lose over $300 million a year as a result of insect attacks. He also makes the reader understand that this is not just Africa’s problem. By giving statistics such as that Africa produces 70% of the global output of beans he shows the importance of protecting Africa’s crops.

Peter Rosset on the other hand believes that it is not the crops themselves that are causing hunger, but the economic system and policies that are in place. In “Preventing Hunger: Change Economic Policy”, Rosset argues that structural changes in the food system must be made to prevent hunger. Although the United Nations Food Program has been in place for 50 years, he believes it has been “destroyed by decades of misguided policies that emphasized exports over feeding domestic populations and financial speculation.” He delves deeper by explaining that as of right now the private sector controls food reserves, forcing public sectors to downsize. This forces local food producers to downsize and causes speculation to drive prices past what poor people can afford. Because of this, governments and agencies must work to help local farmers and increase the productive capacity of exports. He believes this can happen if government mechanisms help to create co-ownership and co-management between the public sector, farmers and consumers. By doing this the local farmers would have more control of the market, letting speculation have much little effect on their business. He gives an interesting statistic to end his article saying that family farmers and peasants produce more than 70% of the world’s food. It is this reason why we need to support them.

Both articles do a great job presenting their arguments and successfully use evidence and facts to make their solutions seem like considerable options. However, Juma’s article produces a slightly more convincing argument by using a couple different devices. Although Rosset gives specific examples of what he believes are problems, Juma uses many more concrete numbers. This allowed me to better understand and visualize the immensity of the hunger problem and the impact implementing his solution could have. Secondly, he acknowledges the limits of his argument by giving qualifications and then using more facts to create a rebuttal. Rosset never seemed to recognize any problems his argument might have had, which gave me a sense of arrogance in his writing. Because of this I felt the urge to take Juma’s side whether his argument was better or not. Lastly, Juma states multiple added benefits of his solution to further convince the reader of its legitimacy. He shows that GM crops could curb the release of greenhouse-gas emissions, reduce the use of pesticides, save energy during the production of those pesticides, and even cut back on plowing and weeding. By using these multiple strategies that Rosset did not employ, his article gave a more convincing argument on how to solve world hunger.

Juma, Calestous. "Preventing Hunger: Biotechnology Is Key." Nature 479.7374 (2011): 471-72. Print.
Rosset, Peter. "Preventing Hunger: Change Economic Policy.” Nature 479.7374 (2011): 472-73. Print.