The International Food Policy Research Institute is well-served by Joachim Von Braun – for his being a yes-man and keeping it within the limits of its blinkered vision. But, what a pity that is for world society. For the desperately deprived in the immediate term; for everyone in the longer term.

He catalogues a long list of efficiencies and other worth-while steps needing to be taken, but ignores the underlying problem of demographics - why? How can his organization continue to side-step the impossibility of adequately catering for increasing numbers of humans in situations that are already desperate? Could not that matter be given at least a mention as being a necessity for attention?

The situation in Ethiopia would be a fair example. In 1984 there was a massive problem, due to drought and agricultural insufficiency – exacerbated by civil unrest. Now in 2008 that nation is facing another crisis in agriculture. Nigeria’s population is surely worth some consideration in these critical matters. In dates and population: 1984/43 million; 2003/71 million; 2007/77 million; 2035/154 million?? (28 years doubling time at present rate of population increase).

As Tom Lehrer sang in his ditty about namesake Werner Von Braun – “Whatever goes up, must eventually come down” - applies to human numbers, too. It will be done grossly unfairly and disastrously – if totally and continuously ignored as it is currently

Correction to my previous post. Ethiopia (not Nigeria) on the population statistics. Nigeria is another example - one of many that are suitable for this purpose.

Colinsett, you make a valid point about overpopulation tending to be ignored by most policy groups, but I think it's beyond the mandate of the International Food Policy Research Institute to consider this. Given the flow on effects to the rest of society, and how many issues overpopulation is related to, it's something which is beyond this organisation's ability to consider.

If they did, I suspect they would be attacked viciously from many quarters, and have their important work sidetracked.

Relax, folks. Peak Oil is shortly to be followed by Peak Food. The reason, as pointed out in the article, is that food will not be grown below the cost of production, which includes a large energy component. The result will be that when the requirements of the first world are taken from annual food production (including a significant amount for the production of essential biofuels), there will be insufficient food available to feed the rest of the world, even at the most basic level. Millions will starve. Thank heavens we can feed ourselves, and that we have a sea boundary. It's going to be an interesting century.

TRTL and plerdsus, you both make good points.
The issue of overpopulation is incorporated into almost all aspects of society. So much so that it is viewed as being beyond the scope of any organization focused on just one of those aspects.
Again, the same issue is the crux of the problem facing society in the shape of peak oil, which in itself will wash over peak food.
Yes, let all good organizations keep their heads down concentrating on their own element of expertise in rescuing the drowning multitude from out of the river of life: it is not their business to ask the question - who the hell is upstream tossing that multitude into the river.
So be careful, don’t knock that tossing into the river – without it there would be a shortage of brownie points for the rescuing industries