For related articles and more information, please visit OCA’s Politics and Democracy page and our Organic Transitions page.

Every expert on the global food supply that I’ve talked to has told me that if you want to end hunger, you have to do something about poverty. And yet most news coverage – and certainly nearly all public statements from agribusiness – focuses on technologies to produce more food, rather than on ending destitution.

When I spoke with Raj Patel, he made this point eloquently:

“If one looks at the reasons people go hungry in the world today, poverty is the primary reason. But when one thinks about this goal of feeding the world, invariably the issue of poverty gets dropped out of that equation – because it’s such a hard problem. Whereas increasing yields is something your favorite tea company will be able to do for you, right here, right now.

“It’s interesting to think about: Why is it so hard to imagine ending poverty? It’s an idea that at various points, even in U.S. political history, was a very real goal.”

I’ve been wondering this myself. Perhaps it’s a downer to talk about poverty, while it’s exciting to talk about new agricultural technologies. Or perhaps, as Patel suggested, it just seems too hard: We are at a historical moment when changing things with politics feels impossible, but changing things with technology seems eminently achievable.

I was surprised and heartened, therefore, when I read the new report from the International Food Policy Research Institute on global hunger. The report is mostly what you’d expect: It says we’re making progress – there are fewer hungry people in the world – but some countries are backsliding. And, it says, we need to be paying more attention to micronutrient deficiencies.