Yes the current economic system is problematic and it was great to see the Occupy movement. Things are probably start changing…

Sustainable agriculture has been shown to increase yield, though increased yield is not what we need right now. What we need is an overhaul of our current economic system that requires growth in GDP and exports-based agriculture in the first place. China would be able to feed its population quite easily if it stopped devoting its land to feeding other countries.

This can all be changed with a complete global change in mindset. That may sound unrealistic, but it will either happen, or it won’t and we’ll all die out. Our planet cannot sustain our current global lifestyle.

Crop destruction caused by climate variability cannot be avoided with GM crops. A substantial amount of damage can be avoided with a diverse agricultural system that involves intercropping, integrated pest management, etc. But there’s no way of being entirely certain about the future, even when we inject viruses containing the genomes of other unrelated organisms into plants. A lot of the time, such tampering makes crops more susceptible to damage, not less.

The wealthiest individuals who are actually directly robbing other countries are perfectly aware of the effect they’re having on people. They just don’t care. As for those who work under them, and the general population, most of us are either unaware, or apathetic. Many feel that it is unrealistic for any change to happen, so they do not try to change anything. I feel like the Occupy movement that’s happening around the world is a first step at alleviating a lot of this apathy. How long it will last is anyone’s guess, however.

If you look at traditional subsistence agricultural methods (not to be confused with subsistence lifestyles – subsistence ag just means you provide food for yourself/community and don’t grow cash crops), they are superior to our current food production in many ways. They don’t involve the use of petroleum or toxic pesticides or fertilisers, they provide for everybody, they require significantly less water, and they create an economic structure that isn’t based in disproportionate distribution and destruction of the environment. We don’t need millions of electronics to be happy, or lots of flashy brand-name clothes that were created by child slaves.

Look at my post about GM crops again. India doesn’t have trouble feeding its population because of overpopulation. It has trouble because it’s busy feeding the rest of the world. This is the underlying problem with exports-based agriculture. The same is of course true for China.

Cities do not “have” to develop. That is the dominant belief system, but it is far from true. If we changed our economic structure, we wouldn’t need growth or development.

Oxford economist (and former employee of the World Bank) Raj Patel’s “The Value of Nothing” is a good place to start. It explains the deadly flaws in current economic theory, including how price theory is a farce.

We don’t have the right to have so much excess when the rest of the world has nothing. They are following in our footsteps because we have indoctrinated them with the idea that having lots of cheap stuff is the equivalent to good living conditions. It is not. Even within the wealthy countries, there are miserable, poor, hungry people. And none of us need the mountains of food, plastic, and other stuff that we throw away every day.

I haven’t read Ted Trainer or heard of him, but I’ll check him out. Unfortunately, the solutions to our problems may be considered idealistic to some. But the fact is, if we don’t try those idealistic solutions, we are all screwed. So while it may be unrealistic to expect our global economic system to change, the alternative is that we let it destroy us all.

Back to the GM issue, food production is an important topic in national security in many countries. Take China as an example, GM crops are popular since they show promising sign of increasing the productivity. When land and water are scarce, and you got 1.3 billion mouths to feed, it’s understandable that many people would go for the GM crops, despite its unforeseen effects to human and the ecosystem. Relying on other countries for valuable resources such as food will only make you in a poor position to get a fair deal. It’s pretty hard to convince people that there are really enough food out there for everyone… and freakly speaking, food production depends on climate as well, so it also means that there is never too much food, you never know what’s going to happen next year.

Just visit China and India… People are everywhere, it’s a huge task to feed everyone in these two countries, let alone providing everyone with the basic living condition. A lot of environmental destructions in my home were, unfortunately, unavoidable, because cities have to develop and the economic growth needs to be increased in order to provide jobs and raise the living standard. This is in big contrast to Australia and New Zealand where the population densities are so low that everyone can get a fair share of resources easily. Of course, it’s impossible for everyone on earth to live like the first world people, but then it’s a moral dilemma. How do you have the rights to enjoy those good living condition for so long and now ask those less fortunate ones not to strive for those good living condtion?

Have you read any books from Ted Trainer? I first came across with the over-consumption and uneven distribution of resources from his class. Unfortunately his solution was a bit too idealistic….