Professional speculators (punters)and hedge funds are driving up the price of basic commodities—in particular, foodstuffs. Back in April 22nd. a UN spokesperson referred to a “silent tsunami” that threatens to plunge more than 100 million people on every continent into hunger. Josette Sheeran, executive director of the UN World Food Programme (WFP), noted: “This is the new face of hunger—the millions of people who were not in the urgent hunger category six months ago but now are.” The article states that the food crisis has developed over “an incredibly short space of time—essentially over the past 18 months.” It continues: “The reason for food ‘shortages’ is speculation in commodity futures following the collapse of the financial derivatives markets. Desperate for quick returns, dealers are taking trillions of dollars out of equities and mortgage bonds and ploughing them into food and raw materials. It’s called the ‘commodities super-cycle’ on Wall Street, and it is likely to cause starvation on an epic scale.” Whilst half the world exist on $2 a day or less this is going to cause massive starvation. Water too, is now being bet on by the speculators after the politicians have handed over the water supplies through the "privatisation" process to their well heeled cronies. An article in the New Statesman says “Just like the boom in house prices, commodity price inflation feeds on itself. The more prices rise, and big profits are made, the more others invest, hoping for big returns." Look at the financial web sites: everyone and their mother is piling into commodities...." "The trouble is that if you are one of the 2.8 billion people, almost half the world’s population, who live on less than $2 a day, you may pay for these profits with your life.”
What must be taken into consideration is the politicians and trade union bureaucrats globally are driving wages downwards and backwards. Even a large section of the middle class are being driven backwards. (whilst the politicians are overflowing their own pockets) At a certain stage this process will have disasterous consequences.

'The recovery of Australia’s wheat crop, currently being harvested, has caused a significant decline in wheat prices since early April.'

I think it incorrect. Australia has still not planted much of it's wheat crop. We harvest November December.

It was the expectation of a better harvest this year that may have helped drive world prices down.

In any case it does show the importance of Australia's wheat exports to the global food supply.

It also demonstrates that if Australian crop prospects can impact world grain prices any decision to convert grain to ethanol in Australia will have the same effect, to increase prices with the flow on effects to the poor of this world

There is no food shortage.

Over 1 billion of Earth's human inhabitants suffer from obesity. And that's just the food that gets eaten. What about the food that doesn't?

Research has found that the global community dumps over 50 million tons of unused food each year to landfills.

It has been estimated that the world population throws away 700 million slices of bread and other huge quantities of bakery goods, meat and fish, ready-made mixed food and unopened dairy products each and every year.

This is equivalent to them throwing away one in three of every shopping bag of food they purchase.

The food debate (as with the energy debate) should focus squarely on the demand side of the equation before putting a priority on new production.

Talk about needs first. Only then we can talk sensibly about supply issues.

gecko says "that the global community dumps over 50 million tons of unused food each year to landfills."
But there is a necessary cause and that is, to keep food prices high to generate profits. Or the opposite, flood the world market to bankrupt some countries, particularly trade rivals. In the US with the science and technology available today, some states could easily produce enough to satisfy the worlds population, maybe even a few times over. But what happens? Farmers are subsidised not to grow wheat or rice in order to keep profits high. Irrespective of a billion people globally that verge on starvation yearly. During the 1930's depression in the US and here petrol and oil were regularly placed on the tips and ignited where food was dumped so that people would not get it for free. This is the anarchy of the market and profits.

Food prices are high (in relative terms) because oil prices are
high. Oil producers are cashing in an extra 1 trillion$ a year
or so from consumers. They can easily pay the 50 billion needed,
to lower food prices for the poor.

If oil prices stay high and food prices drop, due to the higher
cost of production, farmers will stop growing food in the first
place. That is exactly why we have a problem now. In many areas
of the world, it was simply not worth growing food anymore, as
dumped susbidised products put local growers out of business

Yet another article on food shortages that forgoes the opportunity to talk about population growth, with only a fleeting mention of “fears of Malthusian crises”.

Peter Timmer refers to rice shortages in The Philippines. A recent article in The Australian reported that The Philippines has the highest birth rate in Southeast Asia and annual population growth of more than 2 per cent, double the regional average. The nation's population swelled to 88.6 million last year, or an annual increase of almost two million. Despite a slowing of growth, 12 million people have been added to the population since 2000. The poorest families are having six or seven children. One third of the population lives on less than one US dollar a day.

A former health minister, Alberto Romualdez, has warned that the population could reach 100 million in five years if the President keeps requiring that the state follow Catholic Church teaching against artificial birth control. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23570024-2703,00.html

No wonder they’re having problems with food shortages.

Isn’t it time we started talking about the impact of population growth? It’s the poorest countries that are going to bear the brunt of this impact as this is where growth continues to occur. (The UN report World Population Prospects suggests that, if recent fertility rates remain constant, the population of the developing world could grow to 10.6 billion by 2050.)

This article in Time – What Condoms Have to do with Climate Change – is one of the relatively few articles I’ve come across which discusses this issue: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1739253,00.html

Developed countries have to acknowledge and address their over-consumption, but shouldn’t developing countries also consider the impact of their growing populations?

It’s time the issue of population growth was put high on the climate change agenda, along with a lot of other things previously overlooked by the flawed Kyoto Protocol (e.g. forest protection). It should be a major consideration in the post-2012 climate change agreement.

*It’s time the issue of population growth was put high on the climate change agenda, *

Elizabeth, you are absolutaly correct! I have argued for a long
time on OLO, that the pope should be charged with environmental
degradation :).

Fact is the Catholics still openly promote ever increasing
population numbers, under various names. They are great
lobbyists, I grant them that.

http://www.prolife.org.ph/page/population_control

Fact is also that our politicians and politicians the world
over are generally too gutless to touch the subject, as
Catholic politicians can be found in most Govts and they
are regularly lobbied by the tentacles of the Vatican.

I guess they won't get their ticket to heaven, if they don't
take notice of what the old farts in Rome are saying.

All very sad really.

I am not overly concerned about population growth, but nonetheless am sympathetic to the idea that governments should (at the very least) not encourage unnecessary population growth. To that end, it seems reasonable to (a) scrap the baby bonus (b) remove all child care subsidies and (c) don't introduce compulsory parental leave.

Savings can be returned to taxpayers who can then use the money to meet rising food and petrol prices.

Thanks for the link Yabby…

It is truly frightening that undemocratic and sexist religious institutions are still able to wield such power over women’s (and men’s) options to control their fertility.

I appreciate there is controversy about abortion, but even contraception is forbidden. Whilst individual Catholics in developed countries might have the confidence and ability to take their own licence on the issue of contraception, this is obviously more difficult in countries like The Philippines where the Church has more overt power.

As for the "climate change agreement", mainstream discussion is too narrowly focused on "global warming" and the impact of fossil fuel emissions. Whilst this is important, other serious environmental and sustainability issues seem to have received scant attention or action (e.g. deforestation and population growth).

This needs to change. We need a new global agreement that encompasses climate change and other environmental and sustainability issues.

“even contraception is forbidden. Whilst individual Catholics in developed countries might have the confidence and ability to take their own licence on the issue of contraception, this is obviously more difficult in countries like The Philippines where the Church has more overt power.”
Well said, Elizabeth. The lack of choice demanded by the Vatican’s present (and immediate past) head, and local disciples, is a terrible imposition upon the Philippines,Timor L’Este, etc.. The link provided by Yabby illustrates the extent of disinformation that the current Bishop of Rome is prepared to go to in prostitution of the truth: the rate of excessive births has been declining somewhat, but population increase continues at the expense of civilized society, and by mining environmental capital.

But the Catholic Church is not monolithic on this matter. A large percentage of that faith hold different, non-fundamentalist, views on the subject of individual choice regarding fertility. Paul Collins gives a coherent discourse on this issue in his current book “Believers”. Until such rational thought can be brought to prominence in the Catholic Church, and in other religious persuasions of current antediluvian tendency, food and nutrition availability in adequate quantity will always be ephemeral at best. There is no real hope for societies prevented from choice in matters of fertility.

*A large percentage of that faith hold different, non-fundamentalist, views on the subject of individual choice regarding fertility.*

Very true indeed, but they are mere followers and don't make
the decisions. Its the power of a few old men in Rome that is the
problem. If they were like Paul Collins, life would be a breeze!
But they are not and the suffering and misery they cause in the
third world, is a scandal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/3147672.stm

The BBC's Panorama did a programme on this, the transcript of
which is available from the above URL.

It tells a bit about what is going on in the third world.
Women who have already had 7-8 kids, denied the snip,
because of course the Catholics also control a huge number
of hospitals.

If women in the third world, had choices like women in our
world, we certainly would not be facing an extra 80 million
a year in population increase. The Vatican do everything in
their power to avoid this happening. It has little to do
with their flock of believers, just old men drunk with power
in Rome.

Maybe the 1/4 acre block was not an archaic concept after all. Who is surprised?

Those of us who do not live in units can at least grow some food most of the year in our backyards.

Isn't it disturbing Elizabeth, to note that Australia appears hell bent on importing their own over population problem, as if we do not have enough emerging problems already? Re Kevin07 and his increasing migration over Mr Howard, who increased migration after P Keating who (I don't know for sure) but probably -- increased migration.

More good news the NSW government has opened up scarce fertile ground for housing in North Western Sydney. The odour of stamp duty is too irresistible.

Is it possible to list good top soil as endangered?

I have faith that the free market will provide the goods but did you see the Cuban market gardeners who make more money than lawyers and doctors? Land made vacant by urban decay and socialism has been turned into farms. Manual labor appears to be the standard practise.

American farmers have been paid to not grow crops for many years -- called the land bank.