Anne+T.+-+POSITION+PAPER

REVOLUTION, REACTION, REFORM--

 Annie Trexler National History Day Position Paper Mrs. Sidor 5/17/12

“There is no more essential commodity than food. Without food, people perish, social and political organizations disintegrate, and civilizations collapse.” – Norman Borlaug


 * The Problem**

The Green Revolution, started as an answer to the developing world's accelerating population growth and mounting hunger problem, realized the importance of food and our world. (Green Revolution, Gale). Multiple theories have been floating around as to why we have this problem considering the advances of technology and science. In an ideal world, every person would have physical and economic access at all times to healthy and nutritious food in significant quantity to cover the needs of their daily ration and food preferences. By having access to this, they would be able to live a healthy and active life; all would have food security (Food Security, GREENR). Achieving food security such as food availability, access to food, and food utilization, are the three fundamental pillars. When you look at it in black and white, achieving it sounds simple. Unfortunately, it's much harder. Currently, "many people in the world do not have sufficient land to grow, or income to purchase, enough food. The causes of poverty include poor people's lack of resources, an extremely unequal income distribution in the world and within specific countries, conflict, and hunger itself" (2012 World Hunger and Poverty Facts and Statistics, WorldHunger).


 * Innovation and Benefits **

To combat the issue of world hunger, a great man arose. He combined science, common sense and plain old hard work. Norman Borlaug is considered the “father of the Green Revolution.” He was a plant breeder fromIowawho won the Nobel Peace Prize for a series of agricultural innovations that averted malnutrition, famine and the death of millions (He saved a billion lives, The Washington Times). Borlaug used genetic engineering to achieve his goal. “Genetic engineering refers to the process by which the DNA in an organism’s body is altered in order to bring about some new or improved life function” (Genetic Engineering: Overview, ABC-CLIO). This scientific process goes back to 1968, when Swiss microbiologist Werner Arber discovered reaction enzymes. These enzymes are essential to genetic engineering for their ability to cleave a specific site within DNA (organics of agriculture, Britannica). Building on this new DNA technology, scientists developed "gene--cloning," where a DNA's molecules from two or more sources are combined either within cells or in vitro then these organisms are then inserted into host organisms in which they are able to propagate (genetic engineering, Britannica). Organic Farming emerged as both a method and a movement, mainly as a reaction to the increasing industrialization of agriculture in the early 20th century.

Norman Borlaug’s work was achieved through three successful steps. First, he and his colleagues laboriously crossbred thousands of wheat varieties from around the world. The goal was to produce new plants with resistance to rust, a destructive plant pest which improved yields 20 percent to 40 percent. Second, he crafted so-called dwarf wheat varieties that would not fall over in the field when aggressively fertilized to achieve maximum yields. Finally, he devised an ingenious technique called “shuttle breading” –growing two successive plantings each year, instead of the usual one, in different regions ofMexico. With this new availability of two test generations of wheat each year, breeding was cut by half the requirement for breeding new varieties. Moreover, because the two regions possessed distinctly different climatic conditions, the resulting new early maturing, rust-resistant varieties were broadly adapted to many latitudes, altitudes, and soil types (A man for all seasons, The Washington Times).

As a result of Borlaug’s dedication to his work, many countries’ food supplies flourished. Wheat production inMexicomultiplied threefold in the time that Borlaug worked with the Mexican government. In addition, dwarf wheat imported in the mid-1960s was responsible for a 60 percent increase in harvests inPakistanandIndia. An additional result of Borlaug’s research was the creation of a wheat-rye hybrid known as triticale. The increased yields resulting from his new strains enabled many developing countries to become agriculturally self-sufficient (Norman Ernest Borlaug, Britannica). It has been said that Norman Borlaug could be the greatest man who ever lived because he is credited for saving over a billion lives. His inventions have enabled scientists to advance agricultural development by creating food grains that are resistant to diseases, pests, and have a rapid growth rate. His work created a base for others to use when combating the issue of alleviating world hunger.

The current controversy is //how// to achieve food security throughout the world. Today, many countries contribute the funding to provide food amounts to underdeveloped nations. However, at what point does helping a country turn into a priority? The U.S House of Representatives has decided to start withdrawing from the worldwide problem of famine by voting to "cut these lifesaving programs by almost 20% this year" (David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World). The United States has always somewhat contributed to fighting world hunger, but speakers from the World Food Prize Symposium in Des Moines, Iowa believe that other countries will follow their pattern of slowly decreasing their charity to underdeveloped countries in order to save money (Forest Laws, Farm Press). The money going to these countries buys food, it doesn't produce it. New ideas are floating around that instead of money going to buy food; it should be invested in agricultural equipment to produce crops that are products of genetic engineering. By putting this idea into action, the funding towards fighting famine in underdeveloped countries would be put to better use. Instead of purchasing specific amounts of food, genetically engineered seeds would be the better buy because they would produce more food than what the money is currently buying. The grains produced, would grow in abundance and people would be able to depend on them because they can withstand most growing conditions and rarely contract diseases. After a few years, the underdeveloped countries wouldn’t require as much in nutritional aid. They would be producing their own food and could start building up their agricultural industry to the point where they could rely solely on that, and not funding from neighboring nations.


 * Arguments**

Agricultural genetic engineering has always been a controversial topic. The general public has never responded well to unnatural “Frankenfoods.” It doesn’t seem healthy or ethical, and in reality, crops grown using GMO seeds have never fared well when it comes to taste. Many argue that GMO farms are growing too fast for federal laws to keep up regulations. So far, there are no requirements to label foods that have been genetically altered. According to OM Organics, “recent lab tests and industry reports have shown that 60-75% test positive for these untested genetically modified foods. With no labeling regulations, there’s no way to tell what has been genetically engineered or not” (GMO’s, Om Organics).

Even though genetic engineered foods have prevalence in our food supply, there have been zero reports on them causing health problems. “So far, in America, trillions of servings of foods containing genetically engineered ingredients have been consumed without a single instance of harm to people or habitats – Whereas organic spinach sickened and killed a number of people in 2007” (Henry Miller, Former FDA biotech director). Biotechnology companies and “agri-business giants” claim that using technology and synthetics is the only way we can supply our world population.

Due to rising economic deficits, the U.S government has proposed a list of spending cuts to save money. A few of them involve feeding the hungry people of theUnited States, and under developed countries of the world. According to president of Bread for the World, Rev. David Beckmann, “Less than 1 percent of U.S government spending goes to help reduce hunger and poverty around the world, but the House of Representatives has voted to cut these lifesaving programs by almost 20 percent this year” (Congressional spending cuts could void progress on food security, Delta Farm press). These cuts are due to the turbulence in the global economy and especially the high grain prices. The U.S believes that their government can simply not afford to fund agricultural feeding problems any longer. In addition, the payments our government makes to farmers are considered pointless and wasteful. “Federal farm subsidies are outdated, expensive, and inequitable” (Jake Caldwell, Bad Seeds). Our nation’s farmers and rural communities are made up of poorly designed and ineffective agricultural subsidy programs that weaken their competitiveness. These programs drain taxpayer resources, and should be reformed. However, the government’s final decision of reform is cutting the programs funding completely.

These proposed tax cuts would not only reduce agricultural development assistance, but overcoming the cycle of famine as well. The hardest job scientists have is convincing people to break out of their old beliefs to try something new and groundbreaking. Despite all of Norman Borlaug’s success in other countries, General Kofi Annan [former United Nations secretary] ofAfricarevoked Borlaug’s new agricultural propositions. Mr. Annan says, “Biotech crops are unsafe, untested, and likely to enslave poor farmers to mega-corporations and expensive seeds. He plans to “battleAfrica’s chronic poverty and malnutrition with “traditional seeds” and methods” (Still feeding the World, The Washington Times). To counter Mr. Annan’s thoughts of refusing change, Borlaug rattled off statistics proving his traditional ways, a thing of the past. “Our planet has [around] 6.5 billion people,” he notes. “If we use only fertilizers and methods on existing farmland, we can only feed 4 billion. I don’t see [around] 2.5 billion people volunteering to disappear. To feed everyone [in the world] with organic and traditional farming, we would have to plow millions of acres of forests and other wildlife habitat," he calculates. If, instead, we continue to use commercial fertilizer and hybrids, and have strong public support for (GE) research, the Earth can provide sufficient food for 10 billion people" (Still feeding the world, The Washington Times).

One of the most common concerns about genetic engineering in agriculture is how scientists know too little about the possible environmental effects. Extremists in the environmental movement are doing everything they can to stop GE progress, and have recruited their allies; The United Nations (A man for all seasons, The Washington Times). Their concern has to do with the potential outcome of using genetically engineered seeds on a regular basis. “A single species of GMO seeds are sold to specific farms (depending on bacteria), which then produce a single, uniform variety year after year. Assuming they are not victim to common GMO crop pitfalls, such as overall crop failure, insecticide resistance, and the creation of new "superweeds" and pathogen strains, the farm soil is destroyed (Food Security: Our daily bread, The Guardian). However, many argue that the pros outweigh the cons in this situation. There are so many positive effects that GE seeds produce, that it’s worth almost anything. According to the FAO Organization, over 925 million people on earth are considered undernourished. Nearly all of them reported to be in developing countries. Worse of all, most are children. With the use of genetically engineered seeds in crops, this number would slowly begin to disappear because food would become more widely available (2012 World Hunger and Poverty Facts and Statistics, WorldHunger).


 * Call to Action**

Achieving food security is one of the biggest problems we currently face, “we must find ways in which to produce more food while continuing to reduce the impact our agricultural practices have on the environment” (Felicity Lawrence, Royal Society Newspaper). Another problem is how to fund these programs without draining governmental funds. Many recommendations have been tossed around in regards to agricultural subsidy programs. For example, the $650 million saved from direct-payment reduction should be reinvested into existing rural-based programs to provide incentives for renewable clean energy, energy efficiency, and advanced dedicated biomass energy crops on the farm. A portion of these savings should also be dedicated to enhancingU.S.agricultural exports in a manner that promotes small businesses and is consistent with international trade obligations (Jake Caldwell, Center for American Progress).

Overall, agricultural genetic engineering is a necessity when combating world hunger. A great man once said, “You can’t eat potential. In other words, you haven’t succeeded until you get new developments into the field and actually into people’s bellies” (Norman Borlaug, ABC-CLIO). This is coming from a man who saw life steady, and saw it whole. He trusted in science and used it to shine a light on a problem with a dim solution.


 * Annotated Bibliography **

Chen, Shaohua. “2012 World Hunger and Poverty Facts and Statistics.” WorldHunger. June 2004. World Bank. 7. April. 2012 []

This fact sheet is a secondary article written by Shaohua Chen, author of “How have the worlds poorest fared since the early 1980’s?” In this source, Shaohua defines controversial sub-topics of hunger and provides graphs to prove how big of a problem world hunger actually is. This source is useful for my position paper because of the multiple statistics. Out of the 7 pages of facts and number crunching, I was able to pull an abundance of quotable research from this source.

M. Whelan, Elizabeth. “He saved a billion lives.” 18. July. 2007. The WashingtonTimes. 8. April. 2012. []

This news article is a secondary source written by Elizabeth M. Whelan, who is president of the American Council on Science and Health. In this article, Whelan raves about all of Norman Borlaug’s accomplishments. She provides specific examples of his success and quotes from people who knew him well. This source ties into my position paper because Mr. Borlaug is a reoccurring theme in it and my goal was to extenuate how great of a person he was and how he should be recognized by a larger pool of people.

Miller, Henry. “A man for all seasons.” 16. September. 2009. The WashingtonTimes. 9. April. 2012. []

This news article is a secondary source written by Henry Miller who is a physician at the Hoover Institution and author of “The Frankenfood Myth: How Protest and Politics Threaten the Biotech Revolution.” In this article, Miller breaks down Borlaug’s work into three steps and provides detailed information about each. I chose this source for my position paper because of the many ideas it provided on the Green Revolution. Miller quotes Borlaug’s thinking multiple times and this tied into my paper very well. It helped me make it flow better.

Various Authors. “Origins of agriculture.” Unknown. Encyclopedia Britannica Online School Edition. 12. April. 2012. 

This article is a secondary source compiled of various authors’ work from Encyclopedia Britannica Online. In this article, the authors provide a basic explanation of what genetic engineering is and what it involves. It was a good resource for my position paper because it also provided the history of GE. I used it mainly in my memo 3 for the back round/where my topic originated.

Various Authors. “genetic engineering.” Unknown. Encyclopedia Britannica Online School Edition. 12. April. 2012. 

This article is a secondary source compiled of various authors’ work from Encyclopedia Britannica Online. In this article, the authors provide a basic explanation of what genetic engineering is and what it involves. It was a good resource for my position paper because it provided scientific facts and information. I used it to explain the science/technology area of my topic.

Various Authors. “Norman Ernest, Borlaug.” Unknown. Encyclopedia Britannica Online School Edition. 12. April. 2012. 

This article is a secondary source compiled of various authors’ work from Encyclopedia Britannica Online. In this article, the authors provide back round information as to where Borlaug grew up and where his interest in science grew. It was a good resource for my position paper because it provided detailed information about the effects his work had on specific countries such as Mexico, India, and America.

Little, Julian. “Our future food security depends on using GM crops.” 28. October. 2009. The Guardian. 15. April. 2012. [|http://www.guardian.co.uk]

This news article is a secondary source written by Julian Little, a writer for a newspaper in the UK called “The Guardian.” In this article, Little shows both sides of the debate of agricultural genetic engineering. She quotes people from both positions such as Felicity Lawrence who works for the Royal Society. This news source ties into my position paper well because it is full of controversial positions on my topic. It provides evidence to each rebuttal as well.

Vaughn, Jacqueline. "Norman Borlaug." Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society. ABC-CLIO. 19. April. 2012. <[|http://www.issues.abc-clio.com]>

This biography is a secondary source written by Jacqueline Vaughn. This article highlights all of Borlaug's achievements and summarizes his work. I chose this article because Norman Borlaug is a main contributor to genetic engineering and there was some good information that seemed useful for my paper. I particularly loved how she provided quotes directly from Borlaug himself on his opinions and though process.

E. Newton, David. “Genetic Engineering: Overview.” Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society. ABC-CLIO. 19. April. 2012. [|http://www.issues.abc-clio.com]

This overview is a secondary source written by David E. Newton, a researcher atCambridgeUniversity. In this article,Newtonprovides basic divisions of genetic engineering and then details pertaining to each one. I chose this source for my position paper because some of the detailed divisions of GE really helped me portray my opinion of how genetic engineering should be used in agriculture to my audience.

Caldwell, Jake. “Bad Seeds.” 4 May.2011. Center for American Progress. 19. April. 2012. []

This report is a secondary source written by Jake Caldwell, Director of Policy for Agriculture, Trade, and Energy at American Progress. In this report, Caldwell addresses how much money if funded towards American farms whether they are being farmed or not. He adds in statistics and his own recommendations as to what the next steps should be. This source is important because it provides a good opposing opinion against my position.

Driessen, Paul. "Still feeding the world." 20 April. 2008. The Washington Times. 19. April. 2012. <[]>

This news article is a secondary source written by Paul Driessen who is senior policy adviser for the Congress of Racial Equality and Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, and author of "Eco-Imperialism - Green Power/ Black Death." In this article, he shows Norman Borlaug's negotiating skills with Africa to try and get them to change their traditional ways of farming to his new genetic engineering ones. The article also shows how much Borlaug supports his research and is dedicated to spreading it world-wide to save as many lives as possible. This source was relevant to my topic because it provided Borlaug's opinions on traditional farming techniques and how he dealt with problems surrounding them.

Brandon, Hembree. “Congressional spending cuts could void progress on food security.” Delta Agriculture. 13 October. 2011. Farm Press. 19. April 2012. []

This news article is a secondary source written by Hembree Brandon who is on the Farm Press editorial staff. In this news article, Brandon highlights the recent cuts in government spending and how it will affect hungry people in America and the rest of the world. This article is useful because it provides opposing statistics on how the United States spending cuts are affecting countries such as Africa

Various authors. "Genetic Engineering/GMOs - Controversy." unknown. Om Organics. 20. April. 2012. < [|http://www.omorganics.org] >

This article is a secondary source written by various authors from Om Organics. In this article, the main controversies of genetic engineering in agriculture are addressed. I chose it because it gave me outline ideas that produced more ideas of how I can branch out the controversy of my topic.

.M. Laney, Rheyna. “Green Revolution.” Gale. 2007. SAGE Publications, Inc. 21. April. 2012 [] ?

This informational article is a secondary source written by Rheyna M. Laney, Professor at the Soma State University. In this article, Laney highlights high-yielding variety seeds (HYV’s) and how they have impacted our society. This source is being used for my position paper because it offers good pros and cons to different types of agricultural genetic engineering. Also it elaborates on how the yields function.

Scribner, Charles. “Food Security.” Gale. 2003. Cenage Learning. 23. April. 2012 []?

This encyclopedia article is a secondary source written by Charles Scribner, writer for Cenage Learning Company. In this article, Scribner lists the pillars of how to achieve food security. He provides statistics and good definitions/explanations. This source is being used for my position paper because it offers a better way to explain food security to the people who read my paper. By using this article, I am able to convey my point without getting mixed up in definitions and redundant information.