There is a shortage of food because there are too many people. Until population growth is halted, and total world population reduced, there will always be a shortage of food.

Waffling on about food shortages, and telling Australia what it should be doing about countries who over-burden resources through their own population growth stupidity is a waste of time.

Starvation is a natural way of re-balancing population for any animals. Humans are no different, and it seems that there needs to be an even greater shortage of food for the ignorant to achieve a sensible balance.

Unfortunately, I can only agree with Mr Right. In addition, there is the unfortunate fact that peak oil will shortly be followed by peak food. Those who rail against the use of food crops to produce fuel fail to realise that the major cities of the world will starve unless fuel is available to transport essential supplies.

The other problem is that the usual result of any resource shortage is a war to decide who gets the limited supplies.

Not a good outlook for this century.

I'm hoping the crisis in capitalism will also allow us to stop shying away from discussing population. Although major religions (Catholics and Muslims) advocate unlimited family size to boost the number of adherents, and global capital wants its consumer base to keep expanding, developed countries have naturally declining populations. We should learn how to exploit this trend and foster it in other countries. A sustainable economy based on a fixed or declining population is surely not beyond our ingenuity, and is surely preferable to any 'growth' alternative I can think of.

If the farmers in Afghanistan, planted food, rather than poppies, their food supply would be much better, I see no reason for us to support their drug crops. When their fields produce only food, there may be some reason to help, if it was still required.

The Solomon Islands have much more than adequate very fertile land to support their population. If some of them chose to live in the larger towns, without access to that land, that's their choice, & I can see no reason for us to subsidise that choice. We would be simply encouraging the developement of an urban trash class, similar to here, in a country which can afford such indulgences even less than Australia.

With these island people, one generation removed from the village, & its land, is removal for ever. There is no way back for them, & they are landless.

We would be doing the poor of the world a favour if we confined all these NGO people, to barracks for the next decade.

That goes double for the UN. They have been "doing good" for 45 years, & things in these countries just get worse. Has anyone else but me, come to the conclusion that UN help is something we could all do with out. As they have not got it right now, I see no likelihood of them doing so, any time soon, or ever.

Like the big bank bosses, the overpaid UN & agency staff should get a real job, & stop wasting our money.

If you see how many fat people their are in Australia, America and England you will realize their is no food shortage. The problem is that most of it goes on our bodies or into the bin. If India killed a few more of their cows we would also reduce a fair degree of poverty. This article is more political than it is serious about addressing food distribution. The Mr Right's mantra that we are over populated is unproven dogma. It is more likely that the billions of dollars in aid never get to the mouths of people due to corrupt Governments. Zimbawe has the capacity to feed Africa and yet because Mugabe is black the UN does what it normally does (very little).

*If the farmers in Afghanistan, planted food, rather than poppies, their food supply would be much better, I see no reason for us to support their drug crops*

Farmers in Afghanistan of course used to grow food crops like wheat,
but subsidies from the EU/US, to protect their own farmers, drove
down the price of international wheat, below the cost of production.

So now, how can I blame Afghan farmers for growing what feeds their
families? I can't of course, with any kind of credibility.

Farmers will grow all the food that people want, but it has to
cover the cost of production. If the market is distorted by
the EU/US, as it is, well what you have is what we have now.

Its a failure in Western politics, not a failure in food production.

“Ethiopia faces a desperate food crisis that has been compared to the country's 1984-85 famine that claimed an estimated one million lives.” The author says.

Is it any wonder? If they had problems with a population of 42.6 million in 1984, it is reasonable to expect difficulties with the current 79 million (and increasing at 2.5%, with women having a total fertility rate of 5.3).

He also states “At least seven out of 10 of the world’s hungry are women and girls. Responses by the Federal Government need to focus on meeting the needs of poor women in affected countries and incorporate an understanding of women’s role in agriculture, waged work and the household.”

How strange it is that the author carefully excises from discussion any mention of a requirement to understand poor women's need, and almost-universal wish, to be able to control their own fertility: an ability currently being discouraged by political pressure from religious-fundamental lobbyists both in the USA and in Australia.

Does the author not want to overcome the problem? Perhaps wishes to forever continue his accumulation of "do-good" brownie-points at the expense of others' human misery

Colinsett, great points! It even hit Bob Geldorf, when he went
back 20 years later.

I watched a documentary the other day, I think it was from Niger, IIRC.
The guy was complaining that he did not have enough food
to feed his family. Next thing he was proudly saying that he
has 11 children! No wonder there is a problem.

The reality in part of Africa is that these girls are married off
at a very young age, thats why the huge fistula problems. They
are then expected to pop out baby after baby, with little say in
the matter.

Giving these women family planning would empower them to make
decisions about their lives. Alot was being done, but of course
the religious fundamentalists backed by George Bush changed alot
of that. Abstinence was to be preached. Ha! It did not even work
for Sarah Palin's daughter and has been a huge failure. Even
for Catholic priests who can't keep their pants up.

I read a little while ago - sorry, I do not have the reference - that South Australia produces enough food to feed 90 million people. SA is not regarded as particularly productive, but if this figure is anything like accurate, then there is only one problem: stop feeding all that food to the animals!
A more vegetarian diet would make a very large difference to food scarcity. The Green Man says, "Eat less meat!"