Overheard some idiots at my work talking about “overpopulation”, and got me thinking about the subject. My default response to that dumb talking point is “we have enough food to feed everyone in the world and then some, it’s just the fucked up system of distribution (i.e. capitalism) that is to blame”, but I realised I’ve never actually seen any detailed information to back that up. I know that the USA throws away FIFTY PERCENT of its food, Australia throws away a third. But is that amount of food waste enough to feed the world?
It would be good to have some sources to refer people to when they make those shitty arguments.
Overpopulation is also used as a dogwhistle by fascists to justify eco fascism. Western countries consume much more energy than less developed countries.
And it's important to note current western levels of consumption reflect significant planned obsolescence and lack of repairable consumer goods, absolutely disasterous urban planning, a high level of intensively farmed goods, etc.
And the reason China pollutes so much is because all of the consumerist crap is made there and shipped to the West.
And they are a rapidly developing state as well - many western cities were blanketed in smog as late as the 70s, and recent policy changes (e.g. in recycling) demonstrate an aspiration for cleaner production.
In the book Mass Starvation: The History and Future of Famine by Alex de Waal, he lays out how we actually make more than enough food to feed everyone without exception. The issue isn't with food, its with distribution.
He shows how the switch in Western countries to "just in time" shipping models enabling them to have more fresh food and less preserved and canned food, actually adversely affected poorer countries who were no longer supplied with left over food from those wealthy nations as a result of the switch to "just in time" and instead had to try and make do with their own produce which wasn't enough to feed everyone before and unsurprisingly wasn't enough to feed everyone after, especially with farming in a lull because they were relying on foreign imports far more than local produce. The result of this change, coupled with the beginning of various neoliberal world trade policies that allowed corrupt governments to trade food resources away in exchange for economic growth for the wealthy or military supplies or even promises of allyship with the other trading partners, was the "return of famine" in the 1980.
You see previously many argued that famine was now a thing of the past as a direct result of longer lasting foods because of preservatives, the widespread adoption of canned goods (as described above) and the "Green Revolution" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution ) that enabled previously poverty stricken countries with very little farmable land available to grow enough grain (and later rice, wheat and even potatoes in some areas) to feed their entire populace within just a few yearly crop cycles (ie India had enough grain to feed the entire population within just five years of starting the program).
Sidebar (click to read)
Incidentally this turned Norman Borlaug into something of a hero for Libertarians who claim that Borlaug has saved more lives than any other person in history with his genetically modified "hardy" and "very high yield" seeds enabling more people to eat and avoid death by starvation. The book spends a whole chapter debunking "the cult of Borlaug" basically stating that Borlaug was one of a large team and his insistence that the seeds be sold with no restrictions (rather than follow the initial idea of giving the seeds away in return for various agreements about their use and continued study of the population) lead to many tons of product being sold to buy weapons while the populace starved. Borlaug continued to complain from then on that seeds being sold cheaply or sometimes at a loss, following worldwide pressure from various global poverty charities and even the UN Council, had stolen money "straight from my pocket". Borlaug believed he was robbed of a fortune until his dying day in 2009, telling friends that his 1970 Nobel peace prize win "hardly kept his bank account solvent".
I won't spoil the whole book which I think I'm in danger of doing being I'm currently somewhat manic - but it's well worth the read because it lays out using the best data available how much food we make vs how much we waste vs how the distribution networks work and how even with many improvements made in farming and drought reduction, the main obstacles to ending global poverty, to 'make poverty history' as Chris Martin wrote on his hand back in the early 00s, are distribution and greed. Basically our modern distribution models are pretty unsustainable with some products arriving 80% spoiled and that being considered a successful yield. The book basically makes a strong argument for new distribution system (basically a move away from "just in time" shipping), a wide adoption of a seasonal diet rather than expecting everything from summer crops to winter fish stocks all year around, better, more efficient use of local resources rather than wasting energy with large farms that supply milk, eggs, butter and meat to entire counties in some cases, better education about food sources and preparation, having your own vegetable or herb garden and finally ending the obsession with buying year round "fresh produce" (which is tied into the previous points about education and planting your own garden) and learning how to make better use of what is available.
The book ends with three chapters that systematically debunk and deconstruct the EcoFash favourite myth that lower birth rates across poorer countries and a smaller population would solve world hunger and eliminate poverty by allowing what little food these places have to go further because it's spread around fewer people. DeWaal demonstrates that not only would this fail as the kind of change needed would take generations to have a sizable, notable effect on population but that again the issue is not with a lack of food but with distribution. He shows that most of these countries have enough food going in now but it's not distributed equally meaning only the rich and greedy were fed and a third ofit was thrown out as kitchen waste, he fully debunks the idea and uses it to explain what's really happening further.
Basically the issue is massive inefficiency and capitalist excess and if either was dealt with, even in part, it would go much further towards solving the issue than any amount of population control. I highly recommend the book for anyone looking for a good counter point to the standard ecofash arguments.
(sorry this is so fucking long, I'm absolutely exhausted and in dire need of sleep and yet wide awake because of mania)
Famine is an interesting topic. Basically, there's no reason famines have to happen, and it's been like that since the 19th century. Politics and (occasionally) infrastructure are the only real reasons why they happen. Could the Allies have shipped food to offset the Bengal famine? Of course. The Potato Famine? Easily avoided. The "starving Ethiopians" of the 80s? If the political will had been there, grain could have been delivered.
As an aside, for all comrades, if you can, compost. Composting is easy (the EPA has a good guide) and can be done almost anywhere. You can donate or use it in urban gardening if you're an apartment dweller, use it for window boxes, etc., to grow your own food. Does it solve food waste? Obviously not. But it helps give you a bit of food independence, and can lead to a healthier diet. Pro tip: don't bother trying to compost any meat unless you've got LARGE compost piles. Around where I am, I know people who compost small animal roadkill, but they have multiple 3-4 feet high piles.
I’ve been saving this comment in my inbox for a few days until I had a chance to read it, holy shit thanks! This is such a great response, and that book seems exactly like what I’m looking for in answer to this post. I’ll definitely be putting it on my ereader
People seem to be misunderstanding the question, I already know that an immense percentage of food is wasted worldwide, but how do those amounts compare to the deficit of food in poor countries, literally “is the amount of food wasted enough to feed people who don’t get enough”, or would there still be a deficit?
Not sure if this helps. It's an editorial, but there's links to the other studies. Around 30-40% of food is wasted worldwide.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241746569_We_Already_Grow_Enough_Food_for_10_Billion_People_and_Still_Can't_End_Hunger
If you want the pdf version, head to https://sci-hub.se/
Nah, some items - the example used by Zizek is a specific type of Scottish made caviar that is highly sought after for its supposedly unique taste "evocative of clear fresh water" (I have no idea what that taste could even be) - anyway the caviar is transported across the world via trucks, ships and cargo planes and during transport 80% of it gets spoiled. They literally factor in throwing away the majority of the product into their pricing and shipping model.
Right. And the pandemic as far as waste is concerned is making the problem so much worse. Many restaurants, the one I work at included, are turning to single use utensils and cups instead of reusables to be more sanitary. Which is a good idea but on top of food waste that's already inherent in our system the plastic and paper waste must be exploding.
That's why compost piles are awesome.
What to do with the banana peels? It'll become dirt.
I forgot about some produce? It'll become dirt.
I trimmed off more of the onion than I needed to? It'll become dirt.
Artichokes? It'll become dirt.
Yeah, it's harder if you have an apartment, with no access to a shared gardening space.
Some people do worm bins, and use the castings for potted plants, but I wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting to deal with that. I wouldn't want to.
