Technological Progress vs Return to the Primitive
Do we embrace or reject technological progress? Our specific case will look at agriculture.
When our parents were growing up, they were told that by the time the 21st Century arrived there would be starvation. This Malthusian view of population and food resources has not born out to be true, thankfully. However, the avoidance of starvation is largely attributed to a set of innovations in agricultural now known as the Green Revolution. Farms have become larger, plant one or few crops exclusively, and use seeds and pesticides designed to work in tandem to resist pests and diseases.
However, we are now observing agri(cultural) decay. Topsoil is disappearing. Agriculture accounts for ten percent of global emissions. The nutritional needs of those in developed countries is not being met, despite the abundance of food available, not to mention the lack of basic nutritional needs being met in many developing countries. The technology is beginning to backfire. For example, glyphosate herbicide use, meant to solve the problem of weeds, has led to glyphosate resistant plants that have over-run millions of acres of farmland.
Where do we go from here? One side advocates for a Green Revolution 2.0. They believe we can further develop technology for agriculture to increase yields, modify crops to further resist disease, and control climate with massive vertical farming systems to farm non-arable land. The other side preaches a return to the primitive—a re-imagination of the communal. Instead of more technology and less hands, this group seeks the opposite. Small diverse labour-intensive landholdings are the answer to these folks. They integrate “natural” systems of soil regeneration, pest control, and fertilization. They localize distribution to feed the communities closest to them. The approaches are not compatible. They may exist in parallel, but essentially oppose one another.
Which approach is more difficult to achieve?
Which type of farm would you rather eat food from? Does everyone deserve to eat food from the farm you chose?
Who wants to be farmers? Would you? Is it unrealistic to assume that enough young people want to go into farming to sustain small landholdings?
Is there reason to be hopeful about the future of agriculture? Which approach can better cope with a changing climate? How can we know?
Can we use labour intensive agriculture to create jobs? Is this backwards thinking?