 |
|
The Greatest Living American? |
The greatest living American is Norman Borlaug, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970, and joins Jimmy Carter as the two living American-born laureates around whose necks this distinction as been placed.
How did Borlaug win his Nobel back in 1970?
Through the 1940s and 1950s, Borlaug developed high-yield wheat strains, then patiently taught the new science of Green Revolution agriculture to poor farmers of Mexico and nations to its south. When famine struck India and Pakistan in the mid-1960s, Borlaug and a team of Mexican assistants raced to the Subcontinent and, often working within sight of artillery flashes from the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, sowed the first high-yield cereal crop in that region; in a decade, India’s food production increased sevenfold, saving the Subcontinent from predicted Malthusian catastrophes.
As a temporary American expat to India, Borlaug’s impact on India’s development was possibly greater than Deming’s on Japan…
First, some background from Wikipedia on just how bad the food situation was in India back in the heady mid 1960s –
…the Indian subcontinent was at war, and experiencing widespread famine and starvation, even though the US was making emergency shipments of millions of tons of grain, including over one fifth of its total wheat, to the region.[12] The Indian and Pakistani bureaucracies and the region’s cultural opposition to new agricultural techniques initially prevented Borlaug from fulfilling his desire to immediately plant the new wheat strains there. By the summer of 1965, the famine became so acute that the governments stepped in and allowed his projects to go forward.
Borlaug created several new wheat species through careful cross breeding of strains from all over the planet coupled with trial and error in relatively large scale production
 |
|
The Face of Progress |
In Pakistan, wheat yields nearly doubled, from 4.6 million tons in 1965 to 7.3 million tons in 1970; Pakistan was self-sufficient in wheat production by 1968. Yields were over 21 million tons by 2000. In India, yields increased from 12.3 million tons in 1965 to 20.1 million tons in 1970. By 1974, India was self-sufficient in the production of all cereals. By 2000, India was harvesting a record 76.4 million tons of wheat. Since the 1960s, food production in both nations has increased faster than the rate of population growth.
So why, Easterbrook asks, is Borlaug relatively unknown today? Well, there are many reasons and for starters, there hasn’t been a famine in the US for a hundred years 
. But I think Instapundit reader Richard Fagin nails one of the modern reasons well –
It’s not because he spent his life serving the poor, per se. Press accounts are filled with stories about those who serve the poor. It’s that Mr. Borlaug didn’t serve the poor by giving away other people’s money, or by demanding that other people give away their money. He served the poor by DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGY, which in the view of the press is just as evil as making money, if for no other reason than someone makes money from the developed technology.You won’t see any accolades afforded all the brilliant researchers at GE Medical Systems, Pfizer, Merck, Glaxo, Medtronic, or you name it, for precisely the same reason.
I’m not sure if I’d go all the way and say that the press broadly views new tech to be as evil as money (current infatuation with GreenTech, Google, 787s, etc. being great counter examples) but, there’s a nugget of truth to Fagin’s retort.
It’s been said that publicity, medals and memorials have as much to do with the group that awards / builds them as with the folks that actually did the deed worth rewarding. In that way, arguably, they don’t document the past as much as provide a means by which the awards committees of the present try to incent their vision of the future.
The problem is that today’s Borlaug would be regarded as a “frankenfood” researcher working in common cause with global agribusiness behemoths supporting Golden Rice and/or insecticides. What Borlaug et. al. do is, in many respects, the textbook definition of “un-natural“. And, well, nowadays press accolades aren’t quite lining up for that lot. While western contemporaries might not recognize Borlaug, Desi techno-optimists however, seem to.
Past successes, which responded to temporal constraints, opportunities and knowledge, entitles carte blanche acceptance of biotech endeavors in agriculture? I don’t think so.
I hear ya. But then we don’t know about so many other great people in the world, living or dead, but we do know about Paris Hilton and Aishwarya Rai. I think Borlaug, like many thinkers and scientists, is just competing with Hiltons and Rais for our time and lazy attention. I personally don’t think it is a big media conspiracy. How many other noble laureates can we name?
Mmmmaybe, possibly because the rights/patents are held by the companies and the credit goes to them?
A few years back a 14 year old desi kid wrote a hip hop tribute to Borlaug (“Thank You Norman”) — it’s actually quite catchy: http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/topics/borlaug/borlaug-rap.html
Thanks for the info. He, along with M.S. Swaminathan, probably made one of the greatest contributions to India with the Green revolution.
well it’s an odd choice of words to call him “the greatest living American” when his most consequential work was in mexico and asia. Furthermore, Prince is still alive and American.
Cross-breeding is as old as agriculture. Today’s “frankenfood researchers” directly manipulate genes, which is very, very new. Borlaug was not the “textbook definition of un-natural”; Monsanto is. Big difference.
The last para makes me sad: why is it that so many well-meaning people insist on vilification of human ingenuity and enterprise? I can understand that the vanguard of human ingenuity has left the average populace so far behind that the populists fear it, and seek to tear it down. But why do well-meaning people support such an endeavor?
Because he was in a non-glamorous field. Agricultural scientist. How romantic does that sound? That and lack of marketing.
The economist has a great article on the Story of Wheat. It used to be available for free online, but not anymore. In that, Borlaug is cited as a man who helped India go from a net importer to one of the largest producers of wheat in the world.
That was an impact of monumental proportions. But as others have noted, it doesn’t carry the marketing appeal that some of the well known, yet not as effective, aid promoters have. Famine and food shortages in the modern era have more to do with war and conflict (Zimbabwe used to be an agricultural haven, but man made policy has destroyed that), rather than an overall ability to produce food.
He’s actually competing with the Bonos of the world for attention. Now, if those with the ability to harness attention can only funnel their efforts to more science (following the pareto principle) since it seems only science has held the ability to make dramatic changes in human condition (along with political stability), we’d be more effective.
article on msnbc today -> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19886675/site/newsweek/ “It’s a trifecta much bigger and rarer than an Oscar, an Emmy and a Tony. Only five people in history have ever won the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal: Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela, Elie Wiesel … and Norman Borlaug.”
I think people like Borlaug are on such a different level intellectually that they view normal people in the same way normal people look at mentally handicapped people and as we know “normal” people do not look for recognition from mentally handicapped people and the same goes for these incredible minds and their desire to be known by “normal” minds. I know it is not a politically correct analogy, but I cant think of another one.
I am sure the respect these people get from other great minds is enough of a ego boast for them.
You fans of biotech know nothing…a daily diet of 900 calories of organic arugula sustains human life better than 1800 calories of frankendaal. Po’ people should shop at Whole Foods and stop bitching
Best. Rap song. EVER. I’m gonna be bumpin’ it in my tricked out Corolla on my way to Whole Foods tonight.
NVM: Amen, though I must admit Monsanto has created some pretty cool innovations.
Conservative attitudes towards food production are not necessarily any more natural than progressive ones.
Crossbreeding may be old but it is not natural. The whole concept of agriculture itself is unnatural and has a huge impact on the environment. That is not to say that it is a bad idea.
Very true. By Vinod’s definition, my grandfather’s obsession with creating new rose varieties would be classified as ‘frankenflowers.”
Given the current round of lawsuits and fines being imposed over runaway GM rice varities (I’m thinking of Liberty Link among others), the fact that scientists are still discovering things about rice, like the range of rice pollen, and the reluctance of rice-dependent communities and states to host new GM rice R&D fields, I would think that Mr. Borlaug wouldn’t dream of comparing his cross-breeding efforts with the veritable witchcraft of today.
He was not taking bits of genetic information from bacteria, or other mammals, to create his high-yield wheat–he was combining the most favorable traits within wheat varities only.
and yes, I know bacteria are not mammals. Poor editing on my part.
This is totally OT in terms of this being a desi forum, but….As a proud Gopher alum, I just have to add that Borlaug graduated from the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. He was actually admitted to the now-defunct (regrettably) General College, which gave students who were not able to meet the regular requirements an opportunity to attend the college (such as low-income, immigrant, first-generation college students, students with disabilities, etc.) , then transferred to one of the university’s regular colleges and…eventually won the Nobel!
The college merged GC into another college so it could focus on research and pretend its a private college and not a state land-grant university. But I’m biased! It still exists but I wonder how effective it is.
Says Norman Borlaug in the article linked : Genetic modification of crops is not some kind of witchcraft; rather, it is the progressive harnessing of the forces of nature to the benefit of feeding the human race. The genetic engineering of plants at the molecular level is just another step in humankind’s deepening scientific journey into living genomes. Genetic engineering is not a replacement of conventional breeding but rather a complementary research tool to identify desirable genes from remotely related taxonomic groups and transfer these genes more quickly and precisely into high-yield, high-quality crop varieties. To date, there has been no credible scientific evidence to suggest that the ingestion of transgenic products is injurious to human health or the environment.
What are the alternatives to transgenic products? It is clear that we need massive increases in yield levels to feed the increasing demand for food worldwide.
Did anyone not see the great episode on Norman Borlaug from Penn and Teller’s Bullshit, one of the few television shows geared towards skeptics? Some quotes from the show:
Couldn’t find a link to the episode online, but here’s a quote from the end about the debate over frankenfood and attempts to block GMO food from reaching impoverished nations:
Thanks for writing about Borlaug, who was a genuine here. I disagree with you here though:
I’ve never met anybody who thinks of conventional breeding as frankenfood, that’s restricted to direct genetic manipulation, for example, splicing genes from different species. I can’t imagine even a complete agricultural luddite objecting to breeding programs, they date back further than written language. [In fact, it’s mainly bleeding heart liberals who lionize him, I see little on the right, precisely because Borlaug isn’t a captain of industry, instead he gave away what he learned.]
Nor do I think it is about the press objecting to money – that seems hugely at variance with what I’ve seen. Rich people are famous period. If they’re dumb, they’re vilified, but they’re famous nonetheless.
You’re missing the simplest explanation – Borlaug did most of his work outside the US, and it didn’t touch American lives. Furthermore, it happened at a time when we began to take agriculture for granted.
A great man though.
The Nobel prize for science is always well deserved but especially so in this case.
The Nobel “Peace” award however, is usually dubious and political as it is in Carter’s case.
does no one over here think that india needs another “green revolution”…look at the number of farmers committing suicide. instead of giving them financial help and free/subsidised electricity why isn’t the government doing research…giving them marketable, better quality cotton, finding more uses for jawar/bajra or other crops that grow on their soil like Jackson did for peanuts and finding other crops that can grow there.
Vandana Shiva offers a different perspective on the Green Revolution and high yield varieties of wheat, as does the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
I’d say the jury is still out on the long-term ramifications–depletion of the water table, depletion of the soil, reliance on pesticides and fertilizers that throw multiple ecosystems out of whack…can we blame Borlaug for farmer suicides from Punjab to Korea?
18. Shankar said:
Well, one alternative to transgenic products is to scale back on cash crop production and grow more food, preferably locally. Corn starch and soybeans go into so much that you don’t even eat, not to mention all the corn syrup in processed foods. And think of all the grain that goes into meat production. We should at least take away the subsidies, so that these luxury items reflect their true cost.
Democrats just blew a golden opportunity to change food policy this week when they caved to big industry and endorsed a “more of the same” Farm Bill.
If you are really interested in learning about alternatives and time-tested solutions to problems of food distribution (because there’s no shortage so much as imbalance), start with the website for The Oakland Institute, which was even founded by a bad ass desi woman, Anuradha Mittal.
I just remembered a line from the great Steven Wright.
“I’d kill for a Nobel Peace Prize”
Shankar, you might also check out this article that appeared in Harper’s Magazine a couple years ago.
Swaminathan along with Borlaug reduced widespread famine in India. Certain opinions propounded by Vandana Shiva make enormous sense but on the whole the “truth” from the green left is the stuff that comes out of the mouths of people who have never known the pangs of hunger. As somone said “even the poor in USA are fat”.
That is at least partially due to the fact that unhealthy food is bolstered by subsidies in the US, whereas “healthy” food comes at a premium price. Many people in the US were hoping that the Farm Bill being voted on tomorrow (its provisions are debated every five years) would address this public health concern. [Link]
Maybe “deep ecologists” are still debating this, but they have a different moral framework…
back in high school one of my science teachers taught Malthus as scientific fact. that population growth would outstrip food supply and other resources was a certainty to him. “it’s scientific fact, he’d scream.” “famines are going to happen. no doubt.” And i think there was quite a consensus at the time. when my brilliantly rebellious buddy (who now runs a brilliantly contrarian hedge fund that was short the market during the clinton crash) pointed out that it is just a theory, he responded so is evolution and looked at him as if he denied the holocaust.
years later, julian simon would win his famous wager with paul ehrlich. the price of metals went down, proving that better technology led to a more efficient use of natural resources. i was gobsmacked.
Every farmer who has committed suicide disagrees with you.
Each of the 2,000 farmers who commit suicide every year disagrees with you.
Just curious, where does vinod stand on stem cell research, cloning and current govt restrictions on it.
More productive farming leads to more food, which leads to cheaper food prices, which leads to lower income for farmers, which leads to farmers committing suicide.
However, this does not diminish Borlaug’s work. Food will continue to get cheaper and cheaper with technological advance. The thing is that farming is no longer an occupation that can employ many people. Farmers have to move from farming to do something else. How many farmers are there in any developed country? Yet we subsidize them rather than retrain them. The problem is we think of India as a land of farming villages when we should really be planning for a country of 1000 cities of a million people each.
You’re not factoring in the effects of the first world’s dumping subsidized grain in overseas markets. That also sends prices on a race for the bottom. Also, farmers owe money to creditors for the cost of the pesticides and fertilizers required by high-yield varieties.
How will food continue to get cheaper and cheaper as water becomes scarcer and scarcer? You do realize that food production requires water, right? And where will these cities you propose get their water as we continue logging catchments and depleting aquifers and polluting rivers?
I am afraid that once this experiment goes full circle, we are all going to be farmers, my friend. If we’re lucky.
I nominate Vinoba Bhave for the title of Greatest Dead Indian. Well, after my grandfather.
The many millions of people who don’t die every year because they have food disagree with you. Sorry, most people will not accept the “Earth can’t sustain these people, let them perish” argument of the deep ecologists. Funny thing is that the same deep ecologists who say it’s not about production but rather distribution are the same people who fight against the development of roads into underserved areas based on bogus cultural preservation/environmental concerns
Now you are putting words in my mouth. Thanks. I never once identified with your statement in quotes nor with what you call “deep ecologists.”
I am saying that the jury is still out. If you read this article (which I linked to, above), you will see that UNESCO is pointing to some serious long-term ill effects of the Green Revolution, and if you read this excerpt from Vandana Shiva you will see that India was working on home-grown solutions to hunger which would not have had the same ill effects.
“Buy now, pay later” could be the credo of the Green Revolution. 2,000 Punjabi farmers are paying with their lives every year. I hope you’re right and I’m wrong, but I doubt it. The worst is yet to come, my friend. Ask the well-diggers. The land is turning into an alkaline desert.
When I said we need another green revolution what i meant was that by advanced technologies we can find varieties of food grains that can give us better yeild without the use of or atleast using a considerably less amount of fertilizers and pesticides and also water. Why go back to everything natural when we can research and find better ways of doing things and with the least amount of enviromental damage
What Norman Borlaug did was, to his knowledge, the best option. We came to know about the ‘bads’ of pestsicides and fertilizers only after about a decade or so and then too because so many of these chemiclas were over-exploited.
Give a hungry person the choice between being fat with unhealthy food and being hungry with healthy food and 10/10 times the person will choose being fat.
Farming in India is subsistence – in most cases not economical. Many subsistence farmers find it better to sell the land and migrate to the cities so that their belly is full.
The arguments about ecology is possible when one’s belly is full. Otherwise it is just ‘gas’.
Really?? Have you talked to them? I have. And most people consider it very insulting to do a job, to work under someone else. They’ll keep trying, take loans after loans, but won’t ever even consider selling their land. Thats their life, the only way of life they know.
You juxtapose the two as if the environment has nothing to do with filling bellies… as if the choice is between ‘save the earth’ and ‘feed the poor’. It’s a false dichotomy that tends to get promoted by corporate ideologues who have everything to gain by pretending that what they are doing feeds the poor (not that that’s what you are, just that this is where such talking points come from).
Part of the problem with the Green Revolution (thanks for the Vandana Shiva link, btw, Harbeer!) is that it focused production on cash crops for export– thus forcing farmers to fill foreign bellies rather than their own.
It also allowed US chemical companies like Dow to use India as a testing ground for unproven chemical products, without nearly as many environmental and safety regulations. Ask the people of Bhopal how grateful they are for that.
Yes. I have talked to them. My grandparents were subsistence farmers who sold and migrated to the city. So I am quite aware of the travails of subsistence farming. Several of my distant uncles continue to farm and wont sell the farm till they die. However, the children wont have any qualms. Incidentally, the land has become quite valuable real estate now!
My grouse with the environmental do-gooders is that the preachers far outnumber the doers. It is not about feeding the poor, it is about feeding oneself. A conversation about the poor is easy, a conversation about feeding ones family is a whole differnt story. Most ‘do-gooders’ have no clue about large scale agriculture or the fickle nature of growing food.
Wonder how many green activists have lived through a famine and suffered the pangs of hunger?
Having said all of the above I believe that the world has enough for everyones need but not enough for even one persons greed. What is need and what is greed is debatabale.
Melbourne Desi @ 38 said:
Give a hungry person justice and they can make their own choices. Why are the only options in your scenario limited to hunger or corn syrup? Enough with the dualism and false dichotomies, sheesh! Try imagining possibilities beyond A and B. What if the hungry person is given a vacant plot of land where s/he can raise food to be both healthy AND well fed?
I’m glad you liked the Vandana Shiva excerpt, Sarah. I think it was written in 1989 and conditions have only gotten worse since then. Check out the Harper’s article if you get a chance, too. It’s all about what farming might look like in the future when we run out of petroleum, etc.
Ria @ 37:
You are probably right about Borlaug’s good intentions, but “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Also, if you read the Vandana Shiva article I linked to above, you’ll see that the intentions of the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations (who funded much of his work) were not among the noblest. Here is another great article on the topic of hunger and technology:
Thanks, Harbeer! Printing the article to take on my weekend trip…
I’m totally with you on this… BUT, if we’re talking about the US working class (as in #26 and #27) hunger vs. corn syrup is pretty much the reality on the ground. When I was 18 and working three jobs, the only thing I could afford was the ‘2 burgers for $2’ special at Burger King, which I’m sure wasn’t so good for my health! But I get the feeling you have probably already read ‘The Omnivore’s Dilemma’. (Melbourne Desi, if you haven’t checked it out, I highly recommend it– it’s US-centered but gives an idea of just why the poor in the US are fat.)
That said, there are a few alternatives starting to pop up in urban spaces– my neighborhood in Philadelphia has the Food Trust, which is beginning to open up farmer’s markets in poor urban areas where people don’t have access to fresh produce. But such programs are few and far between.
I don’t think many of the policy wonks at the World Bank and IMF or the massive international agribusiness companies have lived through famines either. Does that fact alone automatically discredit either side? Seems a bit ad hominem to me.
Harbeer – Justice ? Get a hungry person to choose between food / justice. Millions of people have land in India – how many have full stomachs? Mate, you are pretty clueless. Further, do you know what it means to be hungry and not have the option of even eating a $1 McD meal? A life where you get to eat one meal every two days. I suspect from your comments that your experience of agriculture especially in India is rather limited. Do you know how hard it is to produce food for one family ? Do you understand that the vagaries of nature make the concept of “feast/famine” more than just a concept. Have you ever looked up at the sky and prayed for rain (for months). If you have undergone these travails pray share your thoughts on how to alleviate the misery. Millions of Indians would gladly have corn syrup if it meant that they could fight hunger.
Borlaug along with Swaminathan enabled millions of Indians to eat, so is it any wonder that they are treated like demi-gods.
Vandana Shiva articulates many concerns very well but again she is someone who has never gone hungry in her life. So kinda hard to be advocating a position that creates hunger. I agree with her on disallowing patents for plant varieties – that is bound to destroy indian agriculture.
since i’ve added a lot of commentary to this thread i thought i might add some data. i checked who the patels have been marrying on the new york times wedding pages. here is what i found
Sonali Dalsukh Madia and Nimesh Naresh Patel Shilpa Patel and Christopher Larson (brown + white married by an episcopal priest in a hindu & christian themed ceremony) Mira Patel and Fayez Muhtadie (hindu + muslim married in interfaith & hindu ceremony) Nell Maloney, Manish Patel (hindu + white, catholic & hindu ceremony) Payal Patel and Ravi Chatani Sandhya Jain and Samir Patel Sheevani Patel, Ruchir Raikundalia Sonal Patel, Sachin Chaudhry Bena Shah, Abhay Patel Vinisha Patel, Saurabh Shah Shefali Patel, David Shusterman (hindu + white, hindu & jewish ceremony) Lisa George, Sarit Patel (hindu + white, catholic & hindu ceremonies) Vihas Patel, Tejas Patel Hemalee Patel, Unmesh Kher Anil Patel and Clare Stephens (hindu + white, catholic & hindu ceremony) Sheila Patel, Steven Benfield (half-brown + white, catholic ceremony) Vidisha Dehejia And Ashvin Patel Sanjay Patel Wed To Leslie Dickey (hindu + white, civil wedding) Susan Patel to Marry R.M. Furlaud Jr. (half-brown + white, wedding announcement) Eric Patel Weds Catherine Miller (brown/half-brown (?) + white, episcopal wedding)
i saw no patterns of fuglytude. the photographed pairs seemed to be “matched” no matter the race combination.
melbourne desi @ 44 said:
What part of even the World Bank and UNICEF are critical of the Green Revolution do you not understand? Are you saying that the experts and scientists at the World Bank and UNICEF are clueless?
Buy now, pay later.
You make it sound as if corn syrup is the only alternative to hunger. It’s not. Check out the Cuban example (assuming you are actually interested in this topic and not just in “being right.”)
Sarah–I have not read The Omnivore’s Dilemma, but it sounds interesting. I’ve read some of Michael Pollan’s articles in the NYT Magazine and tried to interview him for a radio show I work on. He was, according to his publicist, “too busy.”
The world bank is populated by overpaid bureaucrats whose only interests are to propagate their hegemony . Corrupt jerks of the worst kind. (eeks I sound like a Republican!!). The policies that the World Bank and the IMF foster upon the developing world cause more famines than the ideas of the loony left. Please read my post properly – I used corn syrup as a substitute for any food – not literally corn syrup.
I am well aware of Cuba and its organic farming experience. Have you been to Cuba recently ? Will you migrate there? I dont think the world is tearing down the walls of cuba. Last time I heard the cubans were fighting to get out.If you think that the Cuban experience can be replicated in India, you are sadly mistaken.
I dont mean to be rude but given that you have very limited understanding of agriculture nor any first hand knowledge, this discussion is going nowhere. Feed a million people in the developing world with your farming philosophy and then we can talk 🙂
Cheers and am out of here.
Norman Borlaug is still known in farm-country Iowa and in the Midwest. He had done wonders for India. Many you deshis are young and come from middle class or upper middle class families. I have seen and gone through some thing called “hunger”. In Orissa, my worst day was seeing a tribal laborer eating soaked rice (leftover rice plus water)in a field in Angul district without salt. He had some raw paddy seeds next to the bowl and was trying to take the rice close to his mouth and then putting back on the ground. I asked him why is he doing that? His answer – he did not have salt at home and did not have money to buy. In his mind, he was thinking the raw rice was salt and then he was trying to swallow the soaked rice. In the Orissa famine of 1866 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orissa_famine_of_1866), close to 5 million people died.
The most vulnerable months are July-September in rural Orissa where marginal farmers, who do not normally work as field hands due to their caste system, get close to starvation. The previous years rice paddy is nearly depleted in stock and the new crop is ready. Still the starvation persists (although in a limited scale — http://www.indiatogether.org/2008/jul/pov-starve.htm). Introduction of hybrids in the coastal belt of Orissa and in the canal command areas of Hirakud Dam in western Orissa helped a lot in food production.
R.N. Tagore was also a great lover of agriculture (much before Dr. Borlaug). He came twice to the University of Illinois where his son was studying. Amardeep had an article on this blog earlier about Tagore:
http://www.lehigh.edu/~amsp/2005/07/tagore-in-america-sepia-mutiny-guest.html