The country I don't understand how they do it is Bangladesh. A country the size of New York State with 164 million people. (50% of the US population). As I understand it, they generate 90% of the food they require.
The answers below are misleading by omission. While being on a river delta makes for fertile land, Bangladesh was nowhere near food independent a few decades ago. It was made so due to modern crop varieties and modern farming methods:
> During the last two decades and a half, important changes occurred in the realm of rice production and profitability. First, the cost of producing rice is several times higher than potato but the rate of profit is more than double for potato. Second, the yield of wheat, jute and potato has increased over time but the yield of rice has almost doubled from 2.16 t/ha in 1988 to 3.7 t/ha in 2000 and about 4.6 t/ha in 2014.
More than a factor of almost four increase in the yield of a staple crop that has been grown in that region for a thousand years is a technological miracle.
>The country is notable for its soil fertility land, including the Ganges Delta, Sylhet Division and the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Agriculture is the largest sector of the economy, making up 18.6 percent of Bangladesh's GDP in November 2010 and employing about 45 percent of the workforce.[233] The agricultural sector impacts employment generation, poverty alleviation, human resources development and food security. More Bangladeshis earn their living from agriculture than from any other sector. The country is among the top producers of rice (fourth), potatoes (seventh), tropical fruits (sixth), jute (second), and farmed fish (fifth).
The reason so many people live there is precisely because they generate so much food. The ganges delta is perfect for farming rice (sans climate change)
Easy answer: Ganga-Bramhaputra delta (I do not know what they call it in Bangladesh).
To get a perspective: look at the map of egypt and map of their population density. Half the country is pretty much in Nile Delta and most of the rest is along Nile.
Chinese farm productivity is shite, and the government knows it.
It is true that the state throws absolutely colossal amount of resources on geoengineering and agriculture, yet to little effect.
China is nowhere near Holland or other advanced agriculture player in calories production per unit of labour.
Out of close to a 100 officials I went by through my career, I only managed to befriend two. From those two, I barely know in the most generalised terms of what is happening in top tiers.
Agriculture meetings are alleged to be the non-stop shit show, an every day crisis, and a way to demotion for the prime majority of cadres put on the agri committees, as most of them fail at the task.
Provincial level party executives all send their deputies instead of themselves to them as they fear demotion and penalties if they say something silly at those meetings.
Chinese bureaucracy does not deserve much credit there. Were that much of money be given to just anybody moderately competent, China would've long beaten even Holland on that.
I don't think that calories production per unit of labour is a big concern when you don't export produce and you've got access to so much labor and a socialist economy where food prices are fixed and jobs are all but guaranteed.
The Dutch have a stronger focus on produce export and a higher income per capita, so they have to be a lot more efficient in order to be competitive in the global economy.
One thing that's not mentioned is that the freshness and variety of produce available in China is fantastic. There's much less refrigeration and transportation, so there's a good chance the produce you buy at the local street market came from nearby fields very recently. Seeing this as a visitor from the US is quite a revelation.
Chinese love seafood and fish, they consume quite a bit of it as hinted by the article. But they usually also want to buy it alive.
Therefore in supermarkets and even restaurants you usually have tanks with live fish, crabs, etc. As fresh food as can be.
Regarding vegetables, the north is actually not that north by European standards and is sunny in winter (Beijing is at the same latitude as Ibiza...). This means that in places like Beijing they can have solar greenhouses that can produce fresh, local vegetables all year long even when it's freezing outside (winters are much colder than in Europe).
The author has made no efforts to hide the fact that he's a China apologetic and CCP propagation puppet. The fact is that the majority of the country's rice and corns are imported (from SE Asia or N/S America), which are Chinese main calory source. Another often overlooked fact is that China has built a vast crops storage network across the nation, for the fact that a small interruption in food supply chain could cause huge humanitarian disaster, and the new crops will rotate out old stale crops, which are barely eatable but sure, they're better than nothing. Most Chinese even have no idea of this, that their daily rice supplies are usually 5+ yrs old, unless you pay a premium to buy them from Whole Food equivalent super markets in China.
> Most Chinese even have no idea of this, that their daily rice supplies are usually 5+ yrs old
Even during the Maoist period 'new rice' was given out/sold once a year for celebration. Everyone was aware they were eating rotated granary rice.
Storing crops against famine (and eating the old, stored grain) is an ancient tradition [1] dating back to at least 6000 BC, and in China, guarding against famine was one of the earliest tasks of the Chinese proto-state.
What's also overlooked is that China went through one of the worst man made famines in history, and the government has internalized many of the lessons (paid in blood) from that affair.
The question should really be "How are many national economies keeping innumerable people hungry, even though there's plenty of food to go around several times over?"
In most places in the world it's easy and cheap enough to produce food and distribute it. Actually, it's so easy and cheap that many world states artificially subsidize agriculture/livestock farming/etc. to prevent them from collapsing due to low prices.
Because powers that be want control more than they want happy, well-fed, even productive population.
Ask any organizers of international food programs. In most cases local authorities will demand that they, not the international do-gooders, distributed the food. When they get hold of that food, they keep it under lock and key and distribute in a way that supports the existing power / social status structure, not in a way that helps most hungry people. Some food could even rot unused, but not given away to the hungry.
The problem is not a lack of food. The problem is that certain power structures emerged on top of traditional food-deficient economy, perpetuate it to stay in power, and can't be fixed by injection of food from the outside.
Doesn't the fact that they're subsidized to keep them from collapsing due to low prices mean the opposite of it being easy and cheap?
If the subsidies were removed, the farmers/etc would need to raise their prices to pay for whatever the subsidies paid. That new higher price would reflect the real cost of production. The subsidies are there to keep prices low and accessible despite a higher cost of production.
> "How are many national economies keeping innumerable people hungry, even though there's plenty of food to go around several times over?"
I never see this question on TV. What I mainly see on Tv is talk about political strategies, result surveys and the like. Climate change is one of the few things that I see being discussed. And even that has a lot of this let's talk about politicians positions and poll results.
I want to see more about how to improve the world. Does anyone know any good on-line resources about this? Because mass media is doing a poor job. And we need them to do a better job.
The main reason there is not enough food for everyone is that farmed land is hoarded by a few people, and agricultural production is targeted at crops with high market value. In other words, because agriculture is treated as an activity that must turn a profit, instead of a vital resource for the survival of the population in a country. Rich countries are able to subsidize their agriculture, but this is even more important in poor countries. In that case, starvation is the result of most internal agriculture being targeted at exports. Land owners can make a lot more money exporting their production to rich countries, where there is a large market for higher priced products, instead of the cheaper crops that could be sold internally.
ha ha. What a logic to tackle a question - let's change the question itself. I guess you have never witnessed or heard about green revolution. Welcome to the real world.
> In most places in the world it's easy and cheap enough to produce food and distribute it.
One thing that is not mentioned in the article is the massive amount of soy beans that China imports each year (approximately 90 mmt in 2019) to produce feedstock for their hog herds and acquacultures. Most of the soy beans are imported from the US (pre trade war), Brazil and Argentina.
I see 3 sushi restaurants on the same street, start to extrapolate in my head, and wonder how we hadn't extinguished most edible fish species decades ago.
From what I've read and heard on the subject, my understanding is: (1) some we have (touched upon at end of Jiro Dreams of Sushi, for example), (2) we are in the process of doing so to most the rest, (3) fish farms are increasingly making up the difference.
[+] [-] FigBug|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rayiner|6 years ago|reply
> During the last two decades and a half, important changes occurred in the realm of rice production and profitability. First, the cost of producing rice is several times higher than potato but the rate of profit is more than double for potato. Second, the yield of wheat, jute and potato has increased over time but the yield of rice has almost doubled from 2.16 t/ha in 1988 to 3.7 t/ha in 2000 and about 4.6 t/ha in 2014.
More than a factor of almost four increase in the yield of a staple crop that has been grown in that region for a thousand years is a technological miracle.
[+] [-] goda90|6 years ago|reply
>The country is notable for its soil fertility land, including the Ganges Delta, Sylhet Division and the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Agriculture is the largest sector of the economy, making up 18.6 percent of Bangladesh's GDP in November 2010 and employing about 45 percent of the workforce.[233] The agricultural sector impacts employment generation, poverty alleviation, human resources development and food security. More Bangladeshis earn their living from agriculture than from any other sector. The country is among the top producers of rice (fourth), potatoes (seventh), tropical fruits (sixth), jute (second), and farmed fish (fifth).
[0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh#Economy
[+] [-] opportune|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sremani|6 years ago|reply
To get a perspective: look at the map of egypt and map of their population density. Half the country is pretty much in Nile Delta and most of the rest is along Nile.
[+] [-] triceratops|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nradov|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wrong_variable|6 years ago|reply
Most people in those countries do not consume large amount of meat, massively reducing their need for large amount of agricultural land.
Soil fertility is just part of the equation, does not explain Egypt, Pakistan and a multitude of other countries.
[+] [-] baybal2|6 years ago|reply
It is true that the state throws absolutely colossal amount of resources on geoengineering and agriculture, yet to little effect.
China is nowhere near Holland or other advanced agriculture player in calories production per unit of labour.
Out of close to a 100 officials I went by through my career, I only managed to befriend two. From those two, I barely know in the most generalised terms of what is happening in top tiers.
Agriculture meetings are alleged to be the non-stop shit show, an every day crisis, and a way to demotion for the prime majority of cadres put on the agri committees, as most of them fail at the task.
Provincial level party executives all send their deputies instead of themselves to them as they fear demotion and penalties if they say something silly at those meetings.
Chinese bureaucracy does not deserve much credit there. Were that much of money be given to just anybody moderately competent, China would've long beaten even Holland on that.
[+] [-] winfred|6 years ago|reply
The Dutch have a stronger focus on produce export and a higher income per capita, so they have to be a lot more efficient in order to be competitive in the global economy.
[+] [-] lph|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mytailorisrich|6 years ago|reply
Chinese love seafood and fish, they consume quite a bit of it as hinted by the article. But they usually also want to buy it alive.
Therefore in supermarkets and even restaurants you usually have tanks with live fish, crabs, etc. As fresh food as can be.
Regarding vegetables, the north is actually not that north by European standards and is sunny in winter (Beijing is at the same latitude as Ibiza...). This means that in places like Beijing they can have solar greenhouses that can produce fresh, local vegetables all year long even when it's freezing outside (winters are much colder than in Europe).
See for example: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2015/12/reinventing-the-gree...
[+] [-] markbnj|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nine_k|6 years ago|reply
I bet it's characteristic for large cities where the amount of produce consumed is large, and prices are higher.
[+] [-] chopinsky|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] origin|6 years ago|reply
Even during the Maoist period 'new rice' was given out/sold once a year for celebration. Everyone was aware they were eating rotated granary rice.
Storing crops against famine (and eating the old, stored grain) is an ancient tradition [1] dating back to at least 6000 BC, and in China, guarding against famine was one of the earliest tasks of the Chinese proto-state.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granary
[+] [-] pradn|6 years ago|reply
At most a third of India is vegetarian.
http://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-a-vegetarian-india-10...
[+] [-] rueynshard|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] moondev|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SQueeeeeL|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rntksi|6 years ago|reply
https://www.quora.com/As-a-Chinese-person-what-do-you-think-...
[+] [-] galfarragem|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ETHisso2017|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Haga|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] abledon|6 years ago|reply
https://www.quora.com/profile/Janus-Dongye-Qimeng
[+] [-] dmix|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jws|6 years ago|reply
Where I sit, 1000km from an ocean, seafood is pretty remote. Sure, it gets flown in and flash frozen isn't horrible, but it isn't fresh.
[+] [-] entelarust|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] qarlow|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] einpoklum|6 years ago|reply
In most places in the world it's easy and cheap enough to produce food and distribute it. Actually, it's so easy and cheap that many world states artificially subsidize agriculture/livestock farming/etc. to prevent them from collapsing due to low prices.
[+] [-] nine_k|6 years ago|reply
Ask any organizers of international food programs. In most cases local authorities will demand that they, not the international do-gooders, distributed the food. When they get hold of that food, they keep it under lock and key and distribute in a way that supports the existing power / social status structure, not in a way that helps most hungry people. Some food could even rot unused, but not given away to the hungry.
The problem is not a lack of food. The problem is that certain power structures emerged on top of traditional food-deficient economy, perpetuate it to stay in power, and can't be fixed by injection of food from the outside.
[+] [-] jolmg|6 years ago|reply
If the subsidies were removed, the farmers/etc would need to raise their prices to pay for whatever the subsidies paid. That new higher price would reflect the real cost of production. The subsidies are there to keep prices low and accessible despite a higher cost of production.
[+] [-] chiefalchemist|6 years ago|reply
https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-11-28/more-people-die-eatin...
[+] [-] kartan|6 years ago|reply
I never see this question on TV. What I mainly see on Tv is talk about political strategies, result surveys and the like. Climate change is one of the few things that I see being discussed. And even that has a lot of this let's talk about politicians positions and poll results.
I want to see more about how to improve the world. Does anyone know any good on-line resources about this? Because mass media is doing a poor job. And we need them to do a better job.
[+] [-] coliveira|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] minikites|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mandeepj|6 years ago|reply
> In most places in the world it's easy and cheap enough to produce food and distribute it.
source?
[+] [-] gezh|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] klenwell|6 years ago|reply
From what I've read and heard on the subject, my understanding is: (1) some we have (touched upon at end of Jiro Dreams of Sushi, for example), (2) we are in the process of doing so to most the rest, (3) fish farms are increasingly making up the difference.
[+] [-] mstaoru|6 years ago|reply
- In Shanghai 96% white-collar workers have at least one disease of the "food triad" (diabetes, fatty liver, hypertension), up from ~80% in 00's.
- In Beijing 26% of the whole population is overweight or obese, up from 11% in 00's.
- China has the largest percentage of obese children in the World, only competing with Mexico.
So there is enough food, but this food is low quality empty calories to "feed" 1B people, not nourish them.
[+] [-] dgellow|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] known|6 years ago|reply
- Rice - Wheat - Lettuce - Cabbage - Cauliflowers - Eggplant - Potato - Spinach - Carrots - Cucumber - Pumpkin - Sweet potato - Grapes - Peach - Apple - Plum - Strawberry - Tomato - Tea - Beer - Pork meat - Sheep meat - Peanut - Egg - Honey
https://twitter.com/spectatorindex/status/106956943987883622...
[+] [-] coldtea|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hackbinary|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Marazan|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]