I'm disappointed that the UN maintains this viewpoint, especially since they have authority and vast media reach in what they say. Similar to others here, I sincerely doubt that 9 billion can live long on earth without making mass death inevitable (and not just our species). We have always had hunger helping to check unrestrained growth - have we now gained enough knowledge to eliminate hunger without the attendant population growth ? There is no solution to this predicament, only better or worse ways of coping. So far our species has responded exactly as you would expect from any critter, more food = more numbers (but still some hunger). We need to focus on socially just ways of stopping population growth in order to avoid a lot more hunger than we have now.

I don't think the world can support 9 billion people. Even if we change our ways, every living thing produces waste products, and humans the most since, being hairless and living in all climates, we rely on technology more than any other animal. Toxins are already building up dangerously in the ocean for instance.

So part of the solution is birth control using all methods that respect and empower women. Another part is better wealth distribution so that we do not have a situation where some people have billions of dollars and multiple mansions and some are eating mud.

Joe

The world population and resources are on a collison course. Technology has outrun Malthus' math for 200 years but the following does not look good:

*9 billion people by 2050.
*Peak oil will make agriculture much more expensive. Depletion of many ores and other non-renewables.
*Global warming is already causing desertification, changing weather patterns, more severe weather. Crop failures in record setting heat may well occur. Glacial melt that supplies billions of people is endangered.
*CO2 in the oceans threatens to to destroy the food chain that depends on organisms being able to produce calcium carbonate stuctures and shells.
*The oceans are already overfished, and some areas of Africa are already replacing fish with "bushmeat", endangering numerous species.
*Fresh water is already in short supply. More people means more water pollution. Aquifers that feed much of American agriculture are being drawn down much faster than can be replenished. Mountain glaciers are retreating.

The options seem to be cap and reduce population, much as China as doing already, continue the technology race with nuclear powered electricity everywhere, and desalination, fish farming, GMOs, cities of hunrdeds of millions, geoengineering..., or let the big die off hit.

"The food crisis pushed another 40 million people into hunger in 2008, Jacques Diouf said "

In other words, 40 million are hungry because they can't afford to pay for the food, not because of lack of food production. Increasing production (or lowering birthrates) won't help the situation. People need access to affordable and healthy food. Support small farmers who provide 80% of what we eat and abolish FAO, the hunger machine.

Here is a good question that I am not intending to acknowledge any bias, but would you be willing to give a part of your paycheck to fund birth control for the people who are too dumb to care?

Is the human mind so blocked that it cannot grasp the concept of ZPG ?
And cannot accept the idea that eliminating the "middleman" (in that case food animals) and revising the human diet , there will be much less pollution, more water available, more green forests, more land accessible for planting , etc..?
ZPG + education = hope for man of the future .

The simple truth is there's no way we'll ever be able to feed 9 billion people. If we don't take serious steps to educate people about the urgency of having smaller families and providing them with the comprehensive sex education and family planning services to do that...we're done for.

Craig Dunkerley

Protein production determines carrying capacity. End Cannabis hemp prohibition, expand the arable base and feed the world. The UNFAO doesn't even recognize hemp as food for humans, let alone teach people about hemp seed nutrition.

I can't help but think of what Daniel Quinn wrote: more food = more people. Unless we think we're different from all other species on this planet...which we're prone to do.

"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope

Samosamo, I totally agree. We've been totally ignoring the big elephant in the room..."Who not have more babies? Me, Nah, the mexicans, the indians, not me"...Yes, All of us.
They are cute, but do we really want those cute babies to be 50 year olds in America starving to death?

I think we all have the ability to grow our own food. Permaculture is an awesome way to intensely and naturally grow a lot of food in a small space, but we all have to realize that this planet cannot support an infinite growth of people- It's a FINITE planet!
The dirt under the feet of 18 billion people will not GROW that much food. There isn't enough carbon and nutrients left in the soil. We depleted it a long time ago with intense annual crops like corn and wheat.

There is no way around this except to either do something about population control or Mamma Gaia will find a way to shake off too many people. Floods, earthquakes, nasty viruses, it's a natural homeostasis for the Earth.

I mean, think about an apple. Left to sit on the counter, it will gather mold. The mold will multiply and literally eat the apple, creating more and more and more mold, happily consuming the apple until...whoops. No more apple. Then what happens to all those little bacteria and there children and grandchildren? They DIE.

Everybody is so insistent that there is no harm in the human poplulation to just keep on expanding and expanding as if, yeah, science will find a way to feed everybody and fix everything. Poppycock, in the last 50 or 60 years the earth's human population went from 2,000,000,000 at mid-20th century to 6,600,000,000 people that supposedly inhabit 'fair' earth which is an increase of 3. I would be modern miracle if I were still alive in 2050 and I would think with the 'modern' day thinking and emotional stupidity crap people feed on, I would not want to be here in 2050, when by a similar rise in humans would put the tally at 18,000,000,000 3xmore stupid people. So where and how will all those people be fed? All I have to say is have fun.
And peckinpah, it does have everything to do with overpopulation but hey, ship em off to mars.

Our planet can not sustain the current reproduction rates--and this is an essential factor in warming and related environmental issues as well as hunger. The Bush administration had waged war against family planning and the environment since his first day in office, when he essentially halted our international aid to these essential programs.

Bush’s contribution to over population, as well as his other enviromental crimes, have already caused immeasurable suffering & environmental damage to our planet. Until effective family planning programs can proceed without blockages from such irrational zealots guided by religious right radicals, starvation and environmental degradation from overpopulation can only worsen.

If our new president fails to reverse the dreadful Bush policies, he must assume blame for their catastraphic results.

Those people at the FAO don't seem to have a clue.

How about birth-control as a solution to this problem; those 3 billion don't need to be born, especially not if there's no food waiting for them.

A 1.5% annual increase will do the job indicated in the headline.

But we've had hunger for decades with no shortage of food, but rather a price depressing surplus, which has run LDCs, which are still 73% rural, into poverty. They need the contributiionof their farmers to stimulate their economies.

But the U.S. has had a strong commitment to losing money on farm exports for decades. In pouring out this wealth, we've dumped our farm commodities and contributed enormously to this problem.

This was, what, our "strategic national interest?" Hogwash. It was greedy self interest of grain and other commodity buyers. When farmers complained about this in the 1980s farm crisis, giving these warnings, they were blamed as "bad managers," and Reagan's budget director, David Stockman said low prices were a healthy "shakeout." So have they rationalized the business practice of losing money on exports.

Oh, and it's not subsidies that cause any of this, it's the lowering of price floors and supply management.

With the recent radical change, the price spike fall 2006-summer 2008, resources have poured in, and there are predictions of rampant oversupply again soon. So let's not get on this high horse of catering to the greedy few again, and focusing on oversupply.

The root cause of the food crisis is low farm prices. Let's not forget what we said only a few years ago. "Stop dumping our farm exports!" Go with nffc.net and get the rest of the progressive community to join them. We need to get the sustainable agriculture movement to take positons on world hunger and advocate for policies of price floors, supply management, price ceilings and reserves. So far they've stayed out of it. They must join with NFFC's world view, not keep their America-centric policy focus. We needchange in the movement. We also need the food reform movement to join and not stay out of these crucial issues.

The UN is nothing but a corrupt entity in bed with Big Agri and in support of overprocessed food designed to poison the public. The population will stabilize and people will turn towards conscientous eating as is the ongoing case. Besides, 2050 is way too off which in itself makes this UN claim suspect at best.

Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota

How about instead of the impossibilty of doubling our food production we instead focus on cutting the human population?

The Zero Population Growth argument is looking better and better.

Major corporations in Japan are forcing their workaholic sarimen (salary-men) out of their offices in an effort to spend more time with their spouses, in an effort to raise the declining birthrate in Japan. Why? Japan is already one of the most overcrowded techno-hive hell-holes in the world. Many of thier childern have NEVER seen a sunrise.

Besides, if the economic crash proceeds as it appears it is going to, the excesive human population will contract on it's own, due to simple starvation and conflict.