Soil science, population growth and food production: some historical developments

Author

• Alfred E. Hartemink

Conference paper

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5760-1_6

Cite this paper as: 

Hartemink A.E. (2007) Soil science, population growth and food production: some historical developments. In: Bationo A., Waswa B., Kihara J., Kimetu J. (eds) Advances in Integrated Soil Fertility Management in sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities. Springer, Dordrecht

Abstract

The world’s population has doubled since 1960. Currently, the developing world accounts for about 95% of the population growth with Africa as the world’s fastest growing continent. The growing population has many implications but most of all it requires an increase in agricultural production to meet food demand. Soil science has a long tradition of considering the growth in food production in relation to the increasing human population. This paper reviews some of the major developments in these subjects from a soil scientist’s perspective. It starts with the work of Thomas Malthus and various subsequent studies relating population growth and food production. Population growth and projections up to the year 2050 are discussed. The main soil studies since the 1920s are reviewed with a focus on those conducted in the Dutch East Indies and the UK. The productivity of soil science measured by the number of publications and soil scientists has kept pace with the increasing population. Although the number of undernourished people in the world is on the decline, it is concluded that continued efforts from soil scientists remains needed particularly now the focus of attention in the USA and Western Europe moves from population growth per se to population ageing and obesity.

Reference

1. The Economist December 20: 19–21.Google Scholar
2. Anon. 1999. Unshapely world, too old or too young. The Economist September 25: 60.
3. Bennett H.H. 1939. Soil Conservation. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc: New York & London.Google Scholar
4. Bettany G.T. 1890. Introduction. In: Malthus T.R. by An essay on the principle of population or a view of its past and present effects on human happiness with an inquiry into our prospects respecting the future removal of mitigation of the evils which its occasions (6th and last edition). Ward, Lock and Co.: London, New York, and Melbourne.
5. Boserup E. 1965. The conditions of agricultural growth. The economics of agrarian change under population pressure. Aldine Publishing Company: New York.Google Scholar
6. Bouma J. 2001. The new role of soil science in a network society. Soil Science 166: 874–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Bouma J., Batjes N.H. and Groot J.J.R. 1998. Exploring land quality effects on world food supply. Geoderma 86: 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Bouma J. and Hartemink A.E. 2002. Soil science and society in the Dutch context. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 50: 133–140.Google Scholar
9. Bradfield R. 1960. Opportunities for soil scientists in freeing the world from hunger. In 7th International Congress of Soil Science, Madison, Wisconsin, 1960. pp. 1–10.
10. Buringh P. 1982. Potentials of world soils for agricultural production. In 12th International Congress of Soil Science, New Delhi, 1982. pp. 33–41.
11. Buringh P., van Heemst H.D.J. and Staring G.J. 1975. Computation of the absolute maximum food production of the world. Agricultural University, Department of Tropical Soil Science: Wageningen.Google Scholar
12. Dudal R. 1982. Land degradation in a world perspective. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 37: 245–249.Google Scholar
13. Edelman C.H. 1951. De onuitputtelijke natuur. Economische-Statistische Berichten, 12 Sept., 1–4.Google Scholar
14. Ehrlich P. 1968. The population bomb. Ballantine Book Inc.: New York.Google Scholar
15. Eswaran H., Beinroth F.H. and Reich P. 1999. Global land resources and population-supporting capacity. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 14: 129–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. FAO 2000. Agriculture: Towards 2015/30, Rome.
17. Fischer G. and Heilig G.K. 1997. Population momentum and the demand on land and water resources. In: Greenland D.J., Gregory P.J. and Nye P.H. (Eds) Land resources: on the edge of the Malthusian precipice? pp. 869–889. The Royal Society: London.Google Scholar
18. Gallopin G.C. and Raskin P. 1998. Windows on the future – Global Scenarios and sustainability. Environment 40: 7–11.Google Scholar
19. Greenland D.J. 1991. The contributions of soil science to society – past, present, and future. Soil Science 151: 19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Greenland D.J. 1994. Soil science and sustainable land management. In: Syers J.K. and Rimmer D.L. (Eds) Soil science and sustainable land management in the tropics. pp. 1–5. CAB International: Wallingford.Google Scholar
21. Greenland D.J., Gregory P.J. and Nye P.H. 1997. Introduction and conclusions. In:Greenland D.J., Gregory P.J. and Nye P.H. (Eds). Land resources: on the edge of the Malthusian precipice? pp. 861–867. The Royal Society: London.Google Scholar
22. Greenwood D.J. 1993. The changing scene of British soil science. Journal of Soil Science 44: 191–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Hall A.D. 1936. The improvement of native agriculture in relation to population and public health. Oxford University Press: London.Google Scholar
24. Harris J.M. and Kennedy S. 1999. Carrying capacity in agriculture: global and regional issues. Ecological Economics 29: 443–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Hartemink A.E. 1999. Publish or perish (2) How much we write. Bulletin of the International Union of Soil Sciences 96: 16–23.Google Scholar
26. Hartemink A.E. 2003. Soil fertility decline in the tropics – with case studies on plantations. ISRIC-CABI Publishing: Wallingford.Google Scholar
27. Hartemink A.E. 2002a. Publishing in soil science – Historical developments and current trends. International Union of Soil Sciences, Vienna. p. 196.Google Scholar
28. Hartemink A.E. 2002b. Soil science in tropical and temperate regions – Some differences and similarities. Advances in Agronomy 77: 269–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29. Heuvelink G.B.M. and Webster R. 2001. Modelling soil variation: past, present, and future. Geoderma 100: 269–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Howard A. 1940. An agricultural testament. Oxford University Press: New York and London.Google Scholar
31. Huber P. 1999. Hard green. Saving the environment from the environmentalist. A conservative manifesto. Basic Books: New York.Google Scholar
32. Insam H. 2001. Developments in soil microbiology since the mid 1960s. Geoderma 100: 389–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Jacks G.V. and Whyte R.O. 1939. The rape of the earth – A world survey of soil erosion. Faber and Faber Ltd: London.Google Scholar
34. Jensen N.F. 1978. Limits to growth in world food production. Science 201: 317–320.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
35. Kellogg C.E. 1974. Soil genesis, classification, and cartography: 1924–1974. Geoderma 12: 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36. Kendall H.W. and Pimentel D. 1994. Constraints on the expansion of the global food supply. Ambio 23: 198–205.Google Scholar
37. Lal R. 2001. Managing world soils for food security and environmental quality. Advances in Agronomy 74: 155–192.Google Scholar
38. Latham J.R. 2000. There’s enough food for everyone, but the poor can’t afford to buy it. Nature 404: 222.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
39. Lomborg B. 2001. The skeptical environmentalist: Measuring the real state of the world. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
40. Lutz W., Sanderson W. and Scherbov S. 1997. Doubling of world population unlikely. Nature 387: 803–805.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
41. Malthus T.R 1826. An essay on the principle of population or a view of its past and present effects on human happiness with an inquiry into our prospects respecting the future removal of mitigation of the evils which its occasions. Ward, Lock and Co.: London, New York, and Melbourne.Google Scholar
42. McCalla A.F. 1999. The challenge of food security in the 21st century. TAA Newsletter 19: 12–19.Google Scholar
43. Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J. and Behrens W.W. 1972. Limits to growth. A report for the club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. Universe Books: New York.Google Scholar
44. Mermut A.R. and Eswaran H. 1997. Opportunities for soil science in a milieu of reduced funds. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 77: 1–7.Google Scholar
45. Mermut A.R. and Eswaran H. 2001. Some major developments in soil science since the mid-1960s. Geoderma 100: 403–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
46. Mohr E.C.J. 1947. De wereldvoedselproductie en de bodem. Landbouwkundig Tijdschrift 59: 1–8.Google Scholar
47. Nye P.H. and Greenland D.J. 1960. The soil under shifting cultivation. Commonwealth Bureau of Soils: Harpenden.Google Scholar
48. Osborn F. 1948. Our plundered planet. Little, Brown and Company: Boston.Google Scholar
49. Penck A. 1928. Das Hauptproblem der physischen Anthropogeographie. In First International Congress of Soil Science, Washington DC, 1928. pp 98–116.
50. Pendleton R.L. 1954. The place of tropical soils in feeding the world. Ceiba 15: 201–222.Google Scholar
51. Penning de Vries F.W.T., Rabbinge R. and Groot J.J.R. 1997. Potential and attainable food production and food security in different regions. In: Greenland D.J., Gregory P.J. and Nye P.H. (Eds). Land resources: on the edge of the Malthusian precipice? pp 917–928. The Royal Society: London.Google Scholar
52. Pinstrup-Andersen P. 1998. Food security and sustainable use of natural resources. Ecological Economics 26: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
53. Raats P.A.C. 2001. Developments in soil-water physics since the mid 1960s. Geoderma 100: 355–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54. Ross C. 1999. Can we feed the world in 2020? New Zealand Soil News 47: 137–141.Google Scholar
55. Russell D.A. and Williams G.G. 1977. History of chemical fertilizer development. Soil Science Society of America Journal 41: 260–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
56. Russell E.J. 1954. World population and world food supplies. George Allen & Unwin Ltd: London.Google Scholar
57. Seidl I. and Tisdell C.A. 1999. Carrying capacity reconsidered: from Malthus’ population theory to cultural carrying capacity. Ecological Economics 31: 395–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58. Short R. 1998. An essay on the principle of population, by T.R. Malthus. Nature 395: 456–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
59. Sinclair T.R. and Cassman K.G. 1999. Green revolution still too green. Nature 398, 556.Google Scholar
60. Smil V 1999 How many billions to go? Nature 401: 429.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
61. Sparks D.L. 2001. Elucidating the fundamental chemistry of soils: past and recent achievements and future frontiers. Geoderma 100: 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
62. Stamp L.D. 1960. Our developing world. Faber and Faber: London.Google Scholar
63. Tiffen M., Mortimore M. and Gichuki F. 1994. More people, less erosion. Environmental recovery in Kenya. John Wiley & Sons Ltd: Chichester.Google Scholar
64. Tinker P.B. 1985. Soil science in a changing world. Journal of Soil Science 36: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
65. Tuljapurkar S. 1997. Demography – Taking the measure of uncertainty. Nature 387: 760–761.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
66. van Baren F.A. 1960. Soils in relation to population in tropical regions. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 51: 230–234.Google Scholar
67. van Baren J.H.V., Hartemink A.E. and Tinker P.B. 2000. 75 Years The International Society of Soil Science. Geoderma 96: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
68. White J.T. 1941. Bodemvruchtbaarheid en landsbelang. Archipel Drukkerij, Buitenzorg.
69. Yaalon D.H and Berkowicz S. 1997. History of soil science – International perspectives. Catena Verlag, Reiskirchen. 438 p.Google Scholar
70. Young A. 1999. Is there really spare land? A critique of estimates of available cultivable land in developing countries. Environment, Development and Sustainability 1: 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

For further details log on website :
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-5760-1_6

From Thousands to Millions: Accelerating Agricultural Intensification and Economic Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa

Author

• A. Maatman
• M.C.S. Wopereis
• K.S. Debrah
• J.J.R. Groot

Conference paper

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5760-1_5

Cite this paper as: 

Maatman A., Wopereis M., Debrah K., Groot J. (2007) From Thousands to Millions: Accelerating Agricultural Intensification and Economic Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa. In: Bationo A., Waswa B., Kihara J., Kimetu J. (eds) Advances in Integrated Soil Fertility Management in sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities. Springer, Dordrecht

Abstract

Agricultural growth rates of about 6% are required in sub-Saharan Africa to fuel economic growth. It is generally acknowledged that this will require sustainable agricultural intensification through the increased use of external inputs, in combination with locally available soil amendments, i.e., integrated soil fertility management (ISFM).

Over the last five years and in 16 pilot areas in West Africa, IFDC and its partner organizations in the Agricultural Intensification in Sub-Saharan Africa (AISSA) network have developed the Competitive Agricultural Systems and Enterprises (CASE) approach. The approach is holistic in the sense that it involves all stakeholders of the agribusiness system at the grassroots level, including smallholder farmers, local entrepreneurs, traders, bankers, and facilitating agents. It is dynamic as it fosters both technological and institutional change through experiential and social learning processes. ISFM and Commodity Chain Development are basic concepts and all project activities purposely foster empowerment and strengthen the innovative capacities of local stakeholders, without substituting for the market.

We estimate that about 60,000 farmers and 200 local entrepreneurs have benefited from AISSA-related activities on agricultural intensification in West Africa. To accelerate and extend processes of agricultural intensification, bottom-up grassroots approaches have an important role to play. However upscaling can only be sustainable when, at both local and regional scales, enabling institutional and policy environments for market development exist. IFDC is involved in a number of projects that aim to improve the conditions for ISFM-based agricultural intensification at the regional level, by means of partnerships with farmer-based organizations, traders’ associations and government structures (the fertile triangle). Collaboration with the West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA) and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) is also instrumental in reinforcing efforts to establish common agricultural policies for West Africa, to improve the transparency and competitiveness of agricultural inputs markets, and to nurture the expansion and professionalism of the private sector. The interests of small-scale farmers are safeguarded and the environment is protected.

The approach – combining bottom-up and regional-level projects to promote and scale-up agricultural intensification processes – is not a blueprint package. It offers opportunities for effective participation of all stakeholders involved, partnerships with facilitating institutions, and perspectives to move from thousands to millions of farmers.

Reference

1. Developing Countries: Emerging Strategies for Rural Development and Poverty Alleviation. International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), The Hague, CABI Publishing.Google Scholar
2. Bigman 2002b. Diversifying Agricultural Production and Exports in Africa. In: Bigman (Ed.). Globalization and the Developing Countries: Emerging Strategies for Rural Development and Poverty Alleviation. International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), The Hague, CABI Publishing.Google Scholar
3. Bigman 2002c. Introduction and Overview. In: Bigman (Ed.). Globalization and the Developing Countries: Emerging Strategies for Rural Development and Poverty Alleviation. International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), The Hague, CABI Publishing.Google Scholar
4. Cohen M. 2001. 2020 Vision: The Prospects for Universal Food Security in the Next Two Decades. Paper presented at the 42nd Annual International Studies Association Convention, February 2001, Chicago. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington.Google Scholar
5. De Ridder N. and Van Keulen H. 1990. Some Aspects of the Role of Organic Matter in Sustainable Intensified Arable Farming Systems in the West-African Semi-Arid Tropics (SAT), Fertilizer Research 26: 299–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Eicher C. 2004. Flashback: Fifty Years of Donor Aid to African Agriculture. Revised version of paper presented at the International Policy Conference, “Successes in African Agriculture: Building for the Future.” Michigan State University, U.S.A.
7. IFDC 1999. A Strategic Framework for African Agricultural Input Supply System Development. IFDC, Muscle Shoals, Alabama, U.S.A.Google Scholar
8. IFDC 2002. Global and Regional Data on Fertilizer Production and Consumption, 1961/2–2000/1. Muscle Shoals, Alabama, U.S.A.Google Scholar
9. IFPRI 2002. Reaching Sustainable Food Security for All by 2020. PDF-file and PowerPoint presentation available at www.ifpri.org/2020 vision.
10. Jayne T.S., Kelly V., and Crawford E. 2003. Fertilizer Consumption in Sub-Saharan Africa. Policy Synthesis for Cooperating USAID Offices and Country Missions. USAID.
11. Maatman A. and Van Reuler H. 1999. Farming Systems Research and the Development of Integrated Nutrient Management Systems: Linking Input/Output Market and Technology Development, In: Renard G., Krieg S., Lawrence P., and Von Oppen M. (Eds). Farmers and Scientists in a Changing Environment: Assessing Research in West Africa. Margraf Verlag, Weikersheim, Germany.
12. NEPAD 2003. Comprehensive Africa Development Programme. African Union, NEPAD.
13. C. Peacock, A., Jowett, A. Dorward, C. Poulton and I. Urey, 2004, Reaching the poor: a call for action. Investment in smallholder agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa. FARM - Africa, HARVESTHelp, and Imperial College London.
14. Pieri C. 1989. Fertilité des terres de savannes: bilan de trente ans de recherche et de développement agricole au sud du Sahara. Ministère de la Coopération et de Développement Français, Paris, CIRAD, Montpellier, France.Google Scholar
15. Renard G., Krieg S., Lawrence P., and Von Oppen M. (Eds) 1999. Farmers and Scientists in a Changing Environment: Assessing Research in West Africa. Margraf Verlag, Weikersheim, Germany.Google Scholar
16. Roe E. 1991. Development Narratives. Or, Making the Best of Blueprint Development. World Development 19 (4): 287–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Sanders J.H., Shapiro B.I. and Ramaswamy S. 1996. The Economics of Agricultural Technology in Semiarid Sub-Saharan Africa. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.Google Scholar
18. Schreurs M., Maatman A. and Dangbégnon C. 2002. In for a Penny, in for a Pound: Strategic Site Selection and On-Farm Client-Oriented Research to Trigger Sustainable Agricultural Intensification in West Africa. In: Vanlauwe B., Diels J., Sanginga N. and Merkx R. (Eds). Integrated Plant Nutrient Management in Sub-Saharan Africa: from Concept to Practice. CABI publishing in collaboration with the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Nigeria (pp. 65–74).Google Scholar
19. Schweigman C. 2004. Food Security: Opportunities and Responsibilities. Or: The Illusion of the Exclusive Actor. Valedictory Lecture, November 2003, CDS Research Report No. 19. University of Groningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
20. Sijm J. 1997. Food Security and Policy Interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa. Lessons from the Past Two Decades. Erasmus University Rotterdam, Tinbergen Institute Research Series, No. 166, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
21. Snrech 1994. Pour préparer l’avenir de l’Afrique de l’Ouest: une vision à l’horizon 2020:synthèse de l’étude des perspectives à long terme en Afrique de l’Ouest. OCDE/ OECD, Club du Sahel, BAD/ ADB et CILSS.
22. Wiggins 1995. Change in African Farming Systems between the Mid-1970s and the Mid-1980s. Journal of International Development, Vol. 7, No. 6, 807–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Yanggen D., Kelly V., Reardon T. and Naseem A. 1998. Incentives for Fertilizer Use in Sub-Saharan Africa: a Review of Empirical Evidence on Fertilizer Response and Profitability.MSU International Development Working Paper No. 70, Michigan State University, U.S.A.Google Scholar

For further details log on website :
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-5760-1_5