September 1, 2007
1 min read
Add Us On GoogleAdd SciAmA Question of Sustenance
Globalization ushered in a world in which more than a billion are overfed. Yet hundreds of millions still suffer from hunger's persistent scourge
By Gary Stix
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
In 1963 some 200,000 Indians in West Bengal and Assam faced imminent starvation. A few years later drought caused severe food shortages in the nearby state of Bihar. Against a backdrop of such reports, biologist Paul Ehrlich speculated in his 1968 book The Population Bomb that, within just a few years, hundreds of millions would starve to death, as inexorable population growth outstripped limited resources.
This neo-Malthusian scenario never came to pass. For India, the green revolution in agriculture averted a “ship to mouth” existence in which foreign food aid would be needed indefinitely to stave off Ehrlich’s worst-case prognostications. In the ensuing 40 years, India has undergone a radical makeover and now graces magazine covers as an emerging economic giant. The turn-of-the-century developing world now often confronts more of a problem with fat than it does with famine—a sociological spin-off of globalization known as the nutrition transition. The millennium marked the first time that the overweight equaled the number of the undernourished worldwide, and, as a demographic, the overnourished 1.3 billion now surpass the hungry by several hundred million.
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber