PRESIDENT'S LETTER

ASPB and Global Food, Water, and Energy Security

ASPB President Nick Carpita

Gebisa Ejeta. PHOTO BY Tom Campbell, Purdue Universit

Debby Delmer in Africa

Leon Kochian in India.

At a U.S. State Department ceremony announcing the award of the 2009 World Food Prize to Gebisa Ejeta, Secretary Hillary Clinton began with a reminder: “This morning, 1 billion people around the world woke up hungry, and tonight, they will go to sleep hungry” (1). After decades of complacency about agricultural productivity in the wake of the Green Revolution, the political events of the past year have reawakened our senses to how precipitously close we are coming to potentially catastrophic food and water shortages in the developing world, with ripple effects that will affect even well-fed, rich nations. According to Ejeta, whose decades of research have led to new drought-tolerant and Striga-resistant sorghum varieties for sub-Saharan agriculture, world leaders and development agencies have finally come to a sobering realization: we need to provide sustained support for agricultural science and technologies if we are to transform agricultural productivity in developing countries to anything close to the levels enjoyed by rich nations (2). As the planet’s population rapidly approaches the 7 billion mark this year, our worldwide ASPB membership becomes an ever more crucial link to supply the fundamental underpinning research that will keep the steady trajectory we need to get ahead of the curve on food, water, and carbon-neutral energy security.

The complacency of global governments toward agriculture is not that surprising when considering the decades of advances. The proportion of domestic disposable personal income U.S. citizens pay for food has dropped from 25% when hybrid corn was first introduced in the 1920–1930s to less than 10% today (3). No developed nation pays more than 15% for its food, although in a rapid-growth economy like China’s, the proportion nears 30%, and for India, close to 40%, even after the Green Revolution made India a grain-exporting country (4). World Bank President Robert Zoellick warns that the political upheavals in North Africa and the Middle East, a region that imports almost half its food, have each been kindled by food shortages, and the rising cost of food is the biggest challenge facing developing nations (5). This is an unsustainable course that demands far greater input from rich countries. For the United States, the drop in disposable income needed to buy food because of the successes, or excesses, in agricultural productivity has translated into marked decreases in funding for the science and technology needed to sustain the trajectory for continued advances now lagging on a global scale.

The Green Revolution meant major advances in agriculture for Mexico, India, and Indonesia, but how did it miss Africa? According to Ejeta, when the Green Revolution was launched in Asia, the institutional capacity essential for an agricultural revolution in Africa was virtually nonexistent: “Africa was simply not ready for a science-based development campaign at the time. The colonial agricultural research farms were no more than test stations for commodities of European interests such as cotton, coffee, tea, and cacao” (2). The genetic advances in wheat and rice were of little help to a continent with very different staple crops, and precious few resources were devoted to developing what Africans relied on for a sustainable subsistence.

Although rich nations are awash in food, their aid to developing nations continues on a downward spiral—a decrease that was accelerated by the downturn in the global economy, just when the funding is needed most. Fortunately, several private foundations and nongovernmental agencies have stepped up in a significant way to augment much-needed support. The Lugar-Casey Global Food Security Act promises to further stem the decline, but it is not without its detractors because of its willingness to include genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as part of the solution. As coauthor Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) explains, “Food insecurity is a global tragedy, but it is also an opportunity for the United States. We are the indisputable leader in agricultural technology. A more focused effort on our part to join with other nations to increase yields, create economic opportunities for the rural poor, and broaden agricultural knowledge could strengthen relationships around the world and open up a new era in U.S. diplomacy” (6).

There are indeed lots of challenges, and plant biologists have steadfastly conducted basic research to address them. Former ASPB President Debby Delmer, retired director of food security at the Rockefeller Foundation and currently a consultant in international agriculture, says that “As plant biologists, we most identify with the need to create higher-yielding, more nutritious crop varieties resistant to pests and diseases and more resilient to the stresses imposed by low soil fertility, drought, salinity, and all the other consequences of erratic weather that will only increase with climate change.” The chair of ASPB’s International Committee (IC), Leon Kochian, adds that “There are also other, more subtle issues associated with food insecurity. More than 2 billion people in developing countries suffer from micronutrient malnutrition, such as iron, zinc, and vitamin A deficiencies. For these people, plant-based foods are the primary components of their diets, and these food crops are traditionally poor sources of bioavailable micronutrients.”

What is needed most? Debby’s personal wish is that we “find better ways to identify and nurture those unique young individuals who have the potential for real leadership. These are the people who really make things happen locally and are critical for success.” Debby has already walked that walk through her involvement in foundation work. The Plant Biology in Africa symposium she organized at ASPB’s 2007 annual meeting in Chicago was a stunning example of how quickly the high-quality science carried out by young scientists she helped identify and support is already being implemented into agronomic practice.

A more substantial investment is still essential, but our ASPB membership is positioned to facilitate much-needed scientific strategic partnerships that can accelerate the outcomes of these investments. Debby suggests that in the big picture, “There are three things we may be best positioned to do: (1) continue to make new fundamental discoveries that will open the way for new advances in all types of agriculture; (2) step up funding and the interest of our membership in human capacity building—identify those leaders of tomorrow and make sure they have the opportunity to engage in state-of-the-art research and bring their energy and education back to their own countries; and (3) find ways for our key scientists to spend some time in a developing country or an international research center, such as the Biosciences Eastern and Central Africa (BecA) in Nairobi, Kenya (http://hub.africabiosciences.org), or one of 15 centers of the CGIAR.” Increased investment in science and technology education in developing countries is core to building infrastructure in these countries. The Generation Challenge program is an effort by the CGIAR centers to take advantage of advances in genomics, genetics, and plant breeding to enhance the lives of resource-poor farmers in developing countries.

ASPB is poised to get involved in meaningful ways. Since its inception in 1999, ASPB’s IC mission has evolved to serve our international membership. We have sponsored workshops to promote international cooperation. ASPB participates in AGORA, an online resource that makes agricultural journals (including both ASPB-published journals) free online to institutions in countries in which the per capita income is less than $1,000 per year. Through the efforts of Mel Oliver, ASPB has also taken the lead in initiating and promoting the Global Plant Council, a global consortium of plant societies committed to addressing global concerns of hunger, energy, climate change, health and well-being, sustainability, and environmental protection. Leon wants the mission of the “new” IC to focus more intensively on high-impact outreach activities connecting plant biologists and agricultural researchers in developing countries and those working with them. “Our initial activities will focus on ASPB-supported development and sponsorship of workshops in sub-Saharan Africa,” says Leon. Already on the books is a capacity-building workshop on molecular breeding in maize and sorghum at the BecA training facility in Nairobi that Debby also mentioned. This workshop will provide training to a dozen sorghum and maize breeders from research facilities in East and West Africa on the use of molecular markers and genome data to facilitate plant breeding. Leon adds, “The follow-up on the workshop would bring participants to the next ASPB annual meeting to build linkages between ASPB members and scientists from sub-Saharan Africa. Another key activity for the IC will be to begin to develop a network connecting scientists from Africa with ASPB scientists from the United States and other countries.” Leon urges better linkage between ASPB and the CGIAR system to meet the common goal of improving world food security. Debby suggests that we also consider making membership and registration to all our sponsored meetings free to scientists from AGORA-eligible countries who partner in our cooperation. She adds, “But equally challenging is getting advanced seeds into the hands of farmers through creation of stronger seed systems, both public and private, and creating new markets that provide incentives to farmers to generate more economic security. Another key challenge is the lack of infrastructure, particularly roads and power, that leaves farmers isolated and unable to access inputs and store and deliver outputs. Particularly in Africa, a striking—some might say alarming—new development is the massive investment, particularly by foreign entities, in long-term leasing or purchasing of undeveloped lands and the creation of massive new farms. While there is no question that consolidation of small farms into larger, more efficient ones has almost always gone hand in hand with agricultural development, the big challenge will be to protect the rights of the poor as this new development unfolds.”

Even for developed nations, food security is not guaranteed. The earthquakes on February 21 in New Zealand and on March 11 in Japan are testament to how quickly that security can be threatened. The earthquake centered near Sendai, Japan, and the tsunami it triggered wreaked sudden, widespread death and destruction, with continuing impacts at the stricken nuclear power facilities. The latter has had significant consequences for the safety of the local food supply and dire economic consequences as a result of its shortfall. ASPB continues to reach out to the leadership of the Japanese Society of Plant Physiologists (JSPP) and to ASPB members in Japan so that we may learn about the deeper national impacts of these disasters on the plant science infrastructure and the larger plant biology community in Japan, and we stand ready to offer more tangible assistance and support, particularly in the hard-hit Tohoku and Kanto districts. Responses from Japan tell of frightening experiences and the widespread continuing problems with energy stability in the affected northeastern regions, but they also speak of the resilience of the Japanese people in dealing with such crises. We have not heard any reports of members injured or lost, but we also have had limited connections with the hardest hit universities. Kazuo Shinozaki, president of the JSPP, thanks ASPB for its concern and ideas for how we can help. The disaster forced cancellation of the 52nd JSPP meeting, which had been scheduled for the week following the earthquake in Sendai. The JSPP leadership is planning a minisymposium in Nagoya in July. As Kazuo relates, the western and central districts of the country have not been damaged by the disaster, and plant scientists in Nagoya, Kyoto, Nara, Okayama, and Fukuoka are giving strong support to plant scientists in the affected districts so that they can quickly recover. ASPB stands ready to offer assistance and support through visits to the labs of collaborators during the time of lab reconstruction to keep the science moving forward. Along these lines, Subra Suresh, director of the National Science Foundation, recently issued a “Dear Colleague” letter reminding us that the NSF Rapid Response Research (RAPID) mechanism represents one NSF-funded approach toward addressing immediate research and education needs in the wake of disasters such as these. He also pointed out the possibility of requesting supplemental funds to add an international dimension to an existing NSF grant, such as conducting research remotely through the use of information and communication technologies, temporarily hosting databases on behalf of affected institutions, and providing temporary laboratory space for researchers and students from affected institutions (7).

Nick Carpita

References

1. Secretary Clinton spoke at the 2009 World Food Prize announcement ceremony and posted a blog entry about chronic hunger and food.
2. Ejeta, G. (2009). Revitalizing agricultural research for global food security. Food security: The science, sociology and economics of food production and access to food 4:391–401.
3. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. Consumer Price Index data.
4. Conway, G. (1998). The doubly green revolution: Food for all in the twenty-first century. Ithaca, NY: Comstock Pub. Associates.
5. Schneiderman, R.M. (January 23, 2011). No return to the gold standard. Newsweek.
6. The Lugar-Casey Global Food Security Act. (2009).
7. National Science Foundation.
   General guidelines for RAPID and supplement requests are described in the Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (NSF 11-001).