In the entire history, claims have circulated that the world was developing too fast. In late 18th century, a scholar and a Reverend called Thomas Malthus stated in his book Essay on the Principle of Population that the developing European population would outshine the available resources. Later on, history stated that Rev. Malthus was not right. On the same course, rose Paul Ehrlich who presented the book called The Population Bomb, in 1969. The book forecasted that millions of individuals would be malnourished to death in the 1970s after the inevitable crash in the food supply of the world. It also predicted that the removal of all natural possessions, and stated that the world was in hazard of recurring to a pre-industrial Dark Age. Unfortunately, not all these prophecy happened (Kenner 32).
In present times, overpopulation has become a topic of concern in the world. In fact, some people argue that by 2150, the population of the world will be approximately 694 trillion, which is about 125 times the current world population. It is clear that the community is still worried about the rising population (Tierney 64). This begun sometimes back in 1999, when the associated press outlined that the world population counter at the United Nations surpassed 6 billion. Nevertheless, the ultimate aim of this context is to prove that there is enough for everyone through examining cornucopian perspective and green revolution. The quote used is, “Does the World have enough for everyone?” by Randy Ewoldt.
Nature has enough for everyone
To begin with, the allegations and predictions above by Rev. Thomas Malthus and Paul Ehrlich never happened, because the nature has enough to offer in terms of food and resources. Even in present times, some people still argue that the world does not have adequate resources to sustain the increase population and, therefore, there must be a way to control population (Tierney 64). However, some people also argue that nature has adequate resources to offer to the increasing population. The later claims are right because indeed, the world has enough matter and energy to sustain the increasing population. This is supported by the cornucopian viewpoint, which refers to a futurist thought that sustained development, and stipulation of material things for human can be accomplished by the same developments in technology (Ewoldt 67).
Essentially, they suppose that there is sufficient matter and energy on earth to supply for the ever-increasing population of the world. They also suppose that there should be no worries for the future, because the profusion of matter and energy in space would seem to issue human beings with abundance room for growth.
A scholar called Vandana Shiva supports this perspective. She is the initiator of Navdanya, which is a movement of more than 500, 000 keepers and natural farmers in India. She is famous for writing books and some of her main ones include: “The violence of the Green” and “Soil, Not Oil.” In her article, “The Failure of Gene-Altered Crops,” she argues that Food Security for the next two decades will need to be generated from environmental security and climate pliability. There is a need for genuine green revolt, not second “Green Revolution” centered on hereditary engineering. She insists that there is the need for biodiversity and strengthening that functions with nutrients and water cycles of nature, not against them.
Nonspecific engineering has never rose yields. This means that the energy and matter provided by the earth is sufficient for every person on earth (Ewoldt 67). This energy is sufficient for this decade and for the next decade no matter that the population increases. She emphasized her point of view by stating that the non natural measures that people undertake to control population in worry of the insufficiency of resources. She gives an example of the present study conducted by Doug Gurian-Sherman of the Union of Concerned Scientists printed a study referred to as, “Future to Yield” has proven that in an almost 20 year record, hereditarily engineered crops have never increased yields (Tierney 64). The study never acquired notably augmented yields from crops engineered for herbicide broadmindedness or crop engineered to be insect- confrontation. She added that the International Evaluation of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development conducted by 400 scientists more than four years has also proven that genetic engineering does not contain much assurance. As an alternative, small farms centered on policies of agri-ecology and sustainability fabricate more food.
The Essence of Green Revolution
Green revolution is the only evidence of vast global augmentation in food generation created by the enlargement of industrial agribusiness. There is no doubt that the green revolution has led to massive augmentation in both production and the total quantities of food being cultivated globally. The green revolution is not something new or miraculous in the sense that it was developed to encourage and motivate people to continue cultivating and keeping the environment green. It also associates with oil production in the world. In fact, three key pillars sustaining industrial agriculture as exercised in the 20th and 21 century are genetic engineering, mechanization and pesticides and/or fertilizers (Kenner 87). Mechanization, pesticides, and fertilizers directly depend on petroleum to operate the machines and natural gas to function as chemical feedstock.
In conclusion, the cornucopian perspective is correct in the sense that energy and matter in the world is enough to sustain the increasing population especially if technological advances are employed to foster production. The green revolution should also be supported extensively to ensure that there is no shortage of food in the world.