Anne Johnstone rightly highlights the impact of the crushing poverty caused by small-scale subsistence farming in the developing world, noting that resources are required to help "small farmers to improve their productivity" ("Do we have the appetite to tackle world hunger?", The Herald, January 24).
However, in seeking to support small-scale farmers, we should remember the goal of economic development must be to make them, or at least their children, entirely redundant.
Escaping from the Malthusian poverty of an economy dependent on labour intensive agriculture will require the same transition which the developed nations enjoyed after the industrial revolution, when hydrocarbon-fuelled machines replaced carbohydrate-fuelled human labour. Through the historically unprecedented prosperity which we now enjoy in the developed nations, nurses are free to nurse and teachers teach only because their calorie needs are met through efficient, large-scale mechanised agriculture. Innovation and the efficient use of energy-dense fuels freed us from the land to engage in more progressive pursuits. Similarly, the end of labour intensive agriculture in the developed nations led to urbanisation, accelerated innovation and ultimately the delivery of valued public services. This is the same transition evident in China and other once impoverished economies which now enjoy growing GDP per capita and life expectancy.
Finally, we should note some proponents of small-scale farming advocate a prohibition of GM technologies in developing nations and actively promote labour-intensive organic farming, which is the very cause of poverty itself. This is the same misplaced thinking that promoted land-hungry biofuels, which are now seen as one of the contributors to poverty and hunger in developing world.
Colin R McInnes,
23 Williamwood Park West,
Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article