Increasing Yields Through New TechnologyChapter 14Dr. WJ Mueller

New Technology It allows us to gain more output from the same inputs, orSame output with fewer inputsBottom line is increased productivityHas two effectsMore profit &/orLess expensive goodsGreen RevolutionStarted in the 1940s by Dr. Norman BorlaugWheat breeder working in MexicoProblem: Wheat rust limited yield

Green RevolutionScreened many varieties of wheat for resistance and found two that were resistantHe crossed them with productive varietiesResult: productive, rust-resistant varietiesYields increased from 11 bu/A to 20 bu/AWas awarded the Nobel Prize in 1970 for this work

Borlaug (cont.)Wheat had lodging problemsHeavy heads (because of increased yield) would cause stems to break and fall overMade harvest difficult or nearly impossible

Borloug (cont.)Bred for shorter varieties with stronger stemsGreatly reduced the problemHe also developed higher-yielding varietiesBorloug (cont.)Encouraged by the results, the Ford Foundation & Rockefeller Foundation joined to establish two international ag research stationsInternational Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) in MexicoBorloug (cont.)These centers were very successful in increasing yield and technologyThe new higher-yielding seeds were used all over the world to increase yieldIt came to be called the Green RevolutionIn a head-to-head comparison with old varieties, they did no better with old production practicesBut the new varieties did much better with fertilizer & irrigationBorlaug (cont.)He is credited with saving 100s of millions of lives with his workGreen RevolutionThey bred for other characteristics that made these crops higher yieldingDisease resistanceChanged plant architecture High flag leaf (the top leaf above the seed head), resulted in higher yieldsMore vertical leaf arrangement (supported higher populations of plants)CriticsBecause of his work we use more:FertilizerPesticidesWater for irrigationBecause of this we have lost species diversityBiggest criticism: the poor are worse off because:they are usually late adoptersThey do not have the money to adopt new technologiesCritics (cont.)Some of this is true!Overall, the benefits outweigh the negativesIs it any different than any other business?Less productive businesses go underStudies in the 1980s showed that the benefits were shared nearly evenly among big and small producersThere was a difference in ageYounger, better educated farmers benefited mostHow could this be?1.Seeds developed breed trueMeaning that seeds could be saved and planted the next year and the plants would be the sameContrary to Hybrid seedIt must be purchased every yearIf you plant seed from a hybrid crop, the offspring will not be the sameIt will be less productiveYields with hybrid seed are generally significantly higher than from traditional bred seed How could this be? (cont.)2. Fertilizer is almost infinitely divisible meaning: A farmer only has to buy as much fertilizer as is neededThis is contrary to such technologies asTractors Cannot divide a tractor easilyCan purchase smaller tractors!Irrigation systemsHow could this be? (cont.)The technology associated with the Green Revolution was not labor savingIn fact more labor is needed to hand harvest more grainHow could this be? (cont.)4.Because of the increased production, food became cheaper, benefiting the poor more than the richPoor spend a greater portion of their income on foodCereals have a very low elasticity of demandResultsLower food pricesFarmers produced more but income decreasedSupply exceeded demandProbably contributed more to the demise of the small family farm than anything elseEfficiencies of scale drove the small farmer out of businessIs that any different than any other business?Results (cont.)Have prices really dropped?In 1948 my dad got $2.48/bushel for wheatAccounting for inflation, today that is the equivalent of:$23.61/bushel!-Last year we did well by getting $8.50/buProspects for Future Yield GrowthDo you think that the following will increase or decrease?Irrigation?Fertilizer use?Labor?Prospects (cont.)Do you think that technological advancements will increase yields in the future?Do you think we will continue to see the rates of increase we have seen in the past?Is it possible that rates might reverse?Climate change?More virulent strains of disease-causing organisms?Pests resistant to chemical controls?PessimistsFood growth is following an S-shaped curve?Are we getting to the shoulder of the curve?

?A 2002 IRRI project report warns: Yield at the farm level is approaching a plateau?Pessimists (cont.)Are we reaching physiological limits (how much a plant can produce)Remember Wheat:Average 39 bu/ARecord 212 bu/AIn growth chamber 969 bu/AThe potential is there to increase yields, but is it practical? Is it economical?Pessimists (cont.)Harvest indexes have risenWeight of the harvestable part/total plant weight0.25 in 1950 for corn0.5 in 2010 for corn (this means that today, half of the above-ground parts harvested is corn kernels)How much higher can you go?One has to have the plant structure to produce and support the grain

Prospects (cont.)Is it possible that rates might reverse?Is the level of todays farm production environmentally sustainable?Climate change?More virulent strains of disease-causing organisms?Prospects (cont.)Pests resistant to chemical controls?Is it possible that famines of biblical proportions might return?Some argue that they already have in some parts of the worldCould it happen in the USA?OptimistsSome talk of the Second Green RevolutionFocus not on yield but environmentally friendly production practicesGreen energyLess environmental impactHow can this be done?No-till, or minimum-till agricultureMore efficient water systemsBetter geneticsThese are pretty much agreed on, howeverOptimists (cont)Some do not agree on the following:GMOsOrganic productionUtilization of waste products as fertilizerHuman wasteYard waste and food waste used for fertilizerMost agree that we need to:Reduce water pollutionUse less fuelHave less dust (PM10 - particulate matter 10 or less)Use fewer pesticidesHave less erosion