Maggie S,
I agree grain fed beef will be limited in the future, however since most of the land on earth is unsuitable for cultivation, there will always be a place for grazing animals. They will continue to be an important source of food, if not an essential source.

Imperial, I think you really mean the National Farmers Federation, what difference their views on climate change(or society) make I don't know, but you're telling the story. The NFF president may however disagree with your "sceptic" synopsis.
http://www.nff.org.au/read/2433921808.html

I'm guessing you don't know many farmers if you believe they aren't custodians of the land. I'm not so sure city planners have been anywhere near as concerned about land and water resource constraints.

An interesting URL from the BBC, discussing rice production in
Ghana.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7350856.stm

The story kind of highlights some of the problems in the third
world. Whilst it has been cheaper to import cheap overseas food,
why bother to grow it at home? As they say themselves, its
about attitude, as much as anything.

The thing is, with our food production methods, in the past they
have relied on cheap oil, gas, phosphates, potash etc. They are
no longer cheap. Mining the soil for nutrients, is not a long
term option and not sustainable. Farmers won't grow increasing
amounts of food, unless it is profitable.

Many markets can in fact afford higher grain prices and the raw
materials are only a small % of the final cost of food. Why
should say the ME, which is rolling in billions of $ from high
oil prices, not pay more for grain etc?

It should not be the role of farmers either, to subsidise food
for the poor. Wealthy Govts seem to have plenty of money for
EU/US farm subsidies, buying military hardware etc. They are free
to subsidise cheap food for poor countries, so that all taxpayers
contribute, not just farmers

Rojo, I think the NFF president is one of a small minority. In his article, Julian was proposing to give farmers the role of custodians of the land, my point is they have had 200 years of stuffing it up. Julian’s proposal is like giving the job of rebuilding Rome to the Vandals.

Rojo,

you are correct in stating that most of the world's land is suitable only for grazing. This fact does not negate my statement. Cattle are increasingly fed with grains that should be directly consumed by humans. Even in Australia, cattle are 'finished' in feed lots for up to three months, many of them owned by Japanese companies, who require the (fat) marbled meat desired by Japanese meat eaters.

Another issue is the huge amount of water used to sustain cattle. From memory, I think the ratio of water necessary to produce a kilo of grain is about one-tenth the amount needed to produce a kilo of
beef.

Technological fixes are not enough to solve Africa's crop problems
Solutions should come primarily from within the continent, not from outsiders, says Chris Wardle

A relevant article from today's UK Guardian newspaper

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/may/06/food.internationalaidanddevelopment

(abridged version pasted below)

[The] suggestion that Africa needs a green revolution along the lines of Asia, with the implied emphasis on technological solutions, is too simplistic. We need a change in the approach to rural development.
Certainly, a lot of aid was spent on agriculture in the 70s and early 80s. This failed, not so much because of "the self-interest on the part of western donors and advisers", but because the large-scale rural development projects, funded by the EU and others, did not consult local peasant farmers. They were imposed from the top down. Often the technologies promoted were inappropriate - such as reliance on fertiliser which was frequently unavailable - and not suited to local conditions.

But the current failure in food production goes much deeper than this. All over Africa, peasant farmers are mono-cropping their staple food simply to have enough food to feed their families. This practice is unsustainable as it impoverishes the soil, leading to declining yield and lower production.

Over the past 15 years, sizeable areas in Ethiopia, Uganda and Malawi transformed from being dependent on food aid to producing more than enough food. The key is a concerted investment of three to five years that directly involves the peasant farmers. They identify their food production problems and suggest possible solutions. As a result they have a sense of ownership in initiatives to improve production.

Emphasis is placed on promoting sustainable practices such as crop diversification and rotation, using nitrogen-fixing crops (such as beans, which are high in protein) to improve the soil. The farmers are also encouraged to create simple organisations, such as farmers' groups, that allow them to continue activities by themselves.

…technological fixes are not enough: solutions should come primarily from within Africa itself

To all those posters barking about the population problem, be of good cheer, a solution has been found.
It’s called ‘wealth’.
For several decades now, it has become evident that population density and starvation do not necessarily go hand in hand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density
As one enlightened soul on Al Gore,s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ put it: “the best birth control is simply knowing your children are going to survive”. Or another, one of the first (Saudi, I think from memory) OPEC oil ministers on asked about the difference oil made to his country: “we were very poor. The common practice was to have 6 or 7 children, in the hope that 1 or 2 might survive”.
In every country where infant mortality has been reduced to less than 4%, populations have achieved close to zero, or even negative growth, putting aside immigration.
No one would deny the common sense of regulating population to available resources, yet countries like Japan and Monaco seem to manage very well, thanks very much. Nevertheless, the facts are clear. It is poverty, not population, that is the greatest killer in the world today.
In fact, -and rather horrifyingly- the greatest killer in the world today is not aids, or cancer, or even war.
It is gastro-enteritis.
If we do not address this shocking state of affairs, I fear a war that will make the so called ‘Great’ wars look like pub brawls, is inevitable.