Last week I looked at the impending train wreck that will almost certainly occur if the human population continues to outstrip the ability of the planet to feed its members. Most population growth is happening in places like India, the Middle East, Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa – places where arable land and water resources are not overly-abundant.

To make matters worse, the governments of these largely developing nations, in well-meaning but misguided attempts to "catch up" with the industrialized world, are paving over what farmland there is in the name of "development."

What, realistically, can be done?

It's Not Necessarily Shortages

Much of the problem has less to do with supply than it does with distribution. Used effectively, the existing cropland we have is more than enough to feed everyone on Earth. But while we may very well be able to increase production with fewer inputs than ever, most of this progress is not happening in those regions of the world most in need – and such progress may not be possible in those areas for reasons of climate or geography, or both.

Part of the problem lies with protectionist trade barriers as well as regulations that put some real constraints on farmers, particularly in Western Europe. It goes without saying that the EU, which is experiencing a population decline and can easily produce surpluses, is a lot closer to Africa than North America. Of course, the other problem is that many of these African countries (run by corrupt, self-serving dictatorships) would have difficulty paying for this surplus food.

Doing More With Less

Despite increased yields with fewer inputs over the past few decades, there are many places in the world where agriculture is still practiced in highly inefficient ways. A couple of weeks ago, I talked about Haiti and the devastating effect that centuries of "slash-and-burn" agriculture has had on that country.

Like it or not, most increased agricultural yields have occurred in industrialized countries using industrial methods. Perhaps, instead of sending armed troops to Haiti, we should be sending agronomists armed with plows, new kinds of fertilizers and more efficient scientific farming methods.

Water Equals What?

Finally, there is the ugly specter of water issues. Regions of the world that are the poorest are also those in which clean water is at a premium – or has been given over to industrial needs rather than agrarian ones. Farmers must consider what crops provide the greatest amount of caloric content for the least amount of water. For example, at current water costs (in US dollars), a pound of wheat can be grown for under ten cents, while protein-rich lentils and fava beans can be raised for a bit more, around 12.5 cents a pound. However, olives can run as much as .35 cents a pound, and when we start getting into beef, the cost goes up to a whopping $1.15 per pound or so.

Technology has been providing solutions to agricultural problems for many years, and there is no reason to think that kind of progress will stop. Yet, we must understand that a finite planet cannot support an infinite number of people. In the worst-case scenario, nature may take care of the problem with a cataclysm that we cannot imagine.

In the meantime, there will be difficult choices to be made.