The "Green Revolution" and its Consequences

The problem of providing underdeveloped countries with food, unsolved to this day, did not arise yesterday. Attempts to solve it were constantly undertaken at different levels. In the 40s of the 20th century, the transformation began in the countries of Latin America, which were supposed to lead to higher yields, and thus allow these countries to produce enough agricultural products to meet the needs of their populations. These transformations are called "green revolution". Indeed, the changes have been significant. Have they become a boon or have further aggravated the situation of countries in need? We will discuss further.

The term "green revolution" was first used in 1968 by V. Gaud, the director of the US Agency for International Development. With this phrase he described already visible significant changes in the agriculture of Mexico and the countries of Asia. And they began with a program adopted in the early 1940s by the Mexican government and the Rockefeller Foundation.

Main goals

Programs for the development of agriculture in countries in need of food set the following tasks:

• Breeding of new varieties with higher yields that would be resistant to pests and weather events;
• Development and improvement of irrigation systems;
• Expansion of the use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers, as well as modern agricultural machinery.

"Green Revolution" is associated with the name of an American scientist who received the Nobel Prize in 1970 for his contribution to the solution of the food problem. This is Norman Ernest Borloug. He was engaged in breeding new varieties of wheat from the very beginning of the implementation of a new agricultural program in Mexico. As a result of his work, a variety with a short stalk resistant to lodging was obtained, and the yield in this country increased threefold in the first 15 years.

Later, the experience of cultivating new varieties was adopted by other countries of Latin America, India, Asia, Pakistan. Borloug, who was said to have "fed the world", headed the International Wheat Improvement Program, later acted as a consultant and led teaching activities.

Speaking about the changes brought by the "green revolution", the very scientist who stood at its sources said that this is only a temporary victory, and recognized both the existence of problems in implementing programs to increase food production in the world, and obvious environmental damage to the planet.

The Green Revolution and its Consequences

What were the results of the transformations that lasted for several decades in different parts of the world? Some statistics. There is evidence that the number of calories in the daily diet of people in developing countries increased by 25%, and many associate it with the achievements that the "green revolution" brought. This was the result of the development of new lands and increased yields of rice and wheat in already developed fields in 15 countries. 41 new wheat varieties were obtained. With an increase in the area of cultivated land by 10-15%, the yield increase was 50-74%. However, the transformation was practically not affected by the needy countries of Africa, including because of the underdevelopment of the local infrastructure.

The reverse side of the medal is, first of all, the impact on the biosphere. Traces of a long-banned DDT drug are still found in Antarctica. Nitrogen fertilizers have caused significant damage to soils, and such intensive use of fields has led to their almost complete depletion. Illiterate installation and maintenance of irrigation systems have caused pollution of surface water bodies. Today, the resource for further development in this direction is almost exhausted, which means that the severity of the food problem will only grow.

Much is also said about the fact that, as a result of the "green revolution", the developing countries have become some kind of food colonies. The level of development of farming in private farms is still low, and many private farmers have lost fertile land. The question of the effect of genetically modified products on human health remains open.