Actually, probably not. Removing Western subsidies would improve things, but production wouldn’t boom by a long shot. Much of sub-Saharan Africa lacks the infrastructure to get the products to markets, has low soil fertility and little infrastructure and funds to get fertiliser, and relies on rain rather than irrigation. A labour force weakened by malaria and AIDS, and ag activities hampered by poor regional govt policies (e.g., Zimbabwe), add to this burden.

The above being a perscription for less food being produced, how this will help end world hunger is somewhat unclear.

Free market idealists need to start getting real about the way power in the world actually works. Start taking on the farming lobby groups of the West…not people like Sue Kedgely who are simply standing alongside the poor.

It basically makes them beneficiaries of the state, doesn’t it???

Subsidised food sent overseas ends up destroying self sufficency !!

You support this
Obviously not , but your green bashing intent gets the better of you since its ‘trade’ and must be good.

Protectionism is restricting imports NOT paying subsidies to export it and destroy the agriculture elsewhere

[DPF: Don't lie about me or you will be gone also. I have explicitly opposed said subsidies and protectionism is both tariffs and subsidies. Both should go]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10463579

There is virtually no real free trade in food, despite what Kedgley thinks. In a recent post I reference an Economist article which discusses some World Bank research that suggests that tariffs are one of the major impediments to food supply.

http://adamsmith.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/965/

In addition it is thought that higher returns to farmers in poorer countries offset cost increases plus enable re-investment.

Further factors are incompetent and corrupt governments in Africa, and elsewhere turning food exporters eg Zimbabwe into importers, EU and American protectionism, inefficient farming practices and the need for much more investment in agricultural science and development to overcome the problems of water resource depletion, cost of oil and fertiliser. This is why the head of the oECD in releasing a major report prepared jointly with the FAO on the eve of the conference declared that it was time the world realised that GE/GM was a necessity and that the fearmongering by the likes of Kedgley and others had to stop.

With regard to rice part of the problem is that only 6-7% of the global crop is traded, and the Japanese are sitting on some 1.5 million tonnes which could be released to the global market as it is primarily Thai and US rice bought to meet WTO commitments and then warehoused so as to protect Japanese rice farmers, so the domestic Japanese rice price is thus far higher than the world price. Really clever. heh?

But umaha-closp is right the moment the EU/US protectionists want to cloak themselves in ‘green’ rhetoric they will pander to La Kedgley and her ilk.

For anyone interested most of my posts on food issues can be accessed through this static page

http://adamsmith.wordpress.com/food-issues-page/

“As for globalisation, it’s dying already, though it will be a long time before it finally carks it”

Intellectual bankruptcy.

Gosh I wonder how those Pacific Islanders could afford the gas and communications to arrive here in 1250. The good old days when things were cheap.

The urge to trade, to move about the globe to both “know” and “fear” the other is as old as man. I wouldn’t put much store in your prediction of “de globalisation”

It proved that these fruit loops are just Commies who want to control my life

they are all living in 1930s Russia.

That Norman prick would institute the gulags quick as a flash if he got his crazed hands on the levers of power

Earth to Sue – come in Sue.

David,

Don’t be too hard on Sue. She is just harking back to the one NGO, anti-globalisation, people power victory of recent times. Sue and her friends are proud of how they stopped the “evil” Doha reform of the WTO. Remember all that protesting – Sue & friends, American agri-business, EU welfare farmers & Japanese hobby rice farmers all got together and “saved” the world from free trade. They fought and stopped the intentions of the worlds poorest countries to end subsidies in the 1st world.

Sue (you must be aware) truly believes she is channelling “millions of independent farmers” in the 3rd world and as such is their “legitmate” representative. Sue believes she is a much better representative than any silly government of these people. Sue knows she has their real interests at heart (not that she has asked or even speak their languages and certainly not been elected), however Sue “cares a lot” and that is enough for Sue.

Sue and friends have been removed from the main hall of the conference. But, let me assure you, they shall be let back in the moment 1st world protectionists need “legitimate” representatives of the worlds poor to stage a street protest, sit in or small scale riot to protect “millions of independent farmers” from free trade.

Ships are cheap.

>>cheap communications

Sorted.

>>open societies/borders

Getting there.

>>As for globalisation, it’s dying already”

Funny.

Kyoto penalises local production, favours offshore and has ruled carbon emissions on transport to be illegal.

As for globalisation, it’s dying already…

I’m glad you’re not my financial adviser! Run chicken little run!

“As for globalisation, it’s dying already”

To be replaced with what?, if you really think that the country is going to turn to that arrogant wanker Comrade Norman for leadership then you are sadly mistaken.

Maybe you don’t quite understand Sue. She’s pointing out the hypocrisy forced onto Third World countries by the US and Europe to open their internal markets by removing subsidies and tariffs, and then dumping subsidised food on them, undercutting local production. You know, “Free markets are best when they’re one way and in our favour”. I know you don’t agree with this either, but you’ve mis-read what Sue is saying, it’s entirely consistent. The protectionism at play here is only there for the US and EU, not the third world.

As for globalisation, it’s dying already, though it will be a long time before it finally carks it. $139 oil and higher will torpedo it. Globalisation requires cheap transport, cheap communications and open societies/borders. Remove one of those and you get de-globalisation. We need to stop living in the 90s, realise that we can’t ship everything in from overseas, and look to rebuilding our manufacturing base. We’re going to need it.

One would expect a veteran Green such as sue to be number 3 on the list by now.

Sometimes that old hard-right. Neo Reagen stuff just slips out eh David?