Geoforum 91 (2018) 73–77

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geoforum
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geoforum

Critical review

Food security: The challenge of the present T

a b,c,⁎
Alexander Y. Prosekov , Svetlana A. Ivanova
a
Laboratory of Biocatalysis, Kemerovo State University, Krasnaya Street, 6, Kemerovo 650043, Russia
b
Department of Higher Mathematics, Kemerovo State University, Krasnay Street, 6, Kemerovo 650043, Russia
c
Research Institute of Biotechnology, Kemerovo State University, Krasnay Street, 6, Kemerovo 650043, Russia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The group of basic problems that determine the existence of mankind involves the surplus of food for some and
Food security the malnutrition of others. There is an opinion that ensuring food security is an integrated task of agriculture and
Population growth political will, combined with the logistics of product delivery. Despite joint efforts and various UN programs to
Nutrition combat hunger, only short-term local results have been achieved. Food security, especially in the global sense,
BRICS countries
has not yet been implemented, and there are reasons for this. The analytical review presents evaluation of the
achieved result and points out the activities that require adjustments.

1. Introduction 2. Results and discussion

According to FAO, the prevalence of malnutrition in the world is
10.8% and 11.0%, that is, 794 and 815 million people according to the
results of 2015 and 2016, respectively. So, despite all the joint efforts,
the number of malnourished and hungry people in the world is growing
again. In 2017 the World Bank noted that 83 million people in 45
countries were starving. In the developed regions of the world, the
proportion of undernourished people does not exceed 5% of the po-
pulation, in developing regions it reaches 13%, in African countries
20%, and in Asian countries 13%. A noticeable deterioration in food
security in a number of countries in Africa, Southeast Asia, and West
Asia is obvious (Fig. 1).
With a stable population growth, the possibility of eradicating
hunger by 2050 becomes questionable (FAO, 2009). The main causes of
hunger and malnutrition are natural cataclysms, armed conflicts, po-
pulation growth, and poverty. The global financial crisis has made
adjustments to the dynamics of poverty and, consequently, the pro-
blems of hunger challenging (Lipton and Saghai, 2017; Moragues-Faus,
2017; Leventon and Laudan, 2017; Martin et al., 2016; Borch and
Kjærnes, 2016; Gohar and Cashman, 2016; Burchi and de Muro, 2016;
Myers and Caruso, 2016). However, are agriculture and the lack of
political will the only main problems of malnutrition and hunger? Is it
enough to understand the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of
the population and ecosystems and to ensure political conditions? The
proposed work is devoted to an analysis of these issues.
Many interstate official and public organizations and UN agencies,
including FAO, are engaged in the study and solution of the food pro-
blem. The most comprehensive set of indicators (Global Food Security
Index) of the state of food security in various countries of the world is
formed by the British research company The Economist Intelligence
Unit with the support of the American multinational company DuPont.
Regions, whose countries have favorable political and economic con-
ditions, are primarily represented by North America and Europe. In
Africa, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, and in some Asian countries,
the problem of hunger is the most acute (Fig. 2).
At the end of 2017, the five best/worst countries with an increase/
decrease in the index were selected: Sierra Leone +2.6, Paraguay
+2.0, Ecuador +1.4, Bangladesh +1.3, and Nicaragua +1.3/Yemen
−3.4, Congo (Dem. Rep.) −3.8, Madagascar −4.7, Qatar −6.0, and
Venezuela −7.1. The decline in food supply in countries with active
conflicts is obvious, but there are also some peaceful regions, where the
level of food security has decreased mainly because of the global fi-
nancial crisis. The problems of refugees and even by Brexit have also
influenced the results. Over the past year, the state in Syria −1.3, in
which the military actions are conducted, and in Ukraine −2.1 has
worsened, but the authorities do not want to notice this problem, while
in the United Kingdom +0.2, it seems only the results of the refer-
endum on the exit from the EU have already affected the economy and
food security of the population in a positive way.
UN organizations forecast continuing population growth, and by
2050, this figure is expected to be between 8.3 and 10.9 billion people,
meanwhile current trends point to the larger version. Such growth

⁎
Corresponding author at: Department of Higher Mathematics, Kemerovo State University, Krasnay Street, 6, Kemerovo 650043, Russia.
E-mail addresses: a.prosekov@inbox.ru (A.Y. Prosekov), pavvm2000@mail.ru (S.A. Ivanova).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.02.030
Received 14 August 2017; Received in revised form 5 February 2018; Accepted 25 February 2018
0016-7185/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.Y. Prosekov, S.A. Ivanova
Fig. 1. Malnutrition prevalence by regions.
Source: FAO.
Sub-Saharan Africa
North America
Middle East & North Africa
Europe
Central & South America
Asia & Pacific
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Fig. 2. Global Food Security Index scores (2015): 1 – Overall score; 2 – Affordability
score; 3 – Availability score; 4 – Quality and Safety score.
Source: http://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com.
rates, according to experts, will require an increase in food supply at
least by 50% and in some forecasts up to 75%. At the same time, the
needs of developing countries as a whole will double, including rice-
consuming countries where those needs will grow by 60% and Sub-
Saharan Africa – by 250%. The environment, limited reserves of global
food, and energy resources will not have a big effect on these dynamics.
The decline is expected only in developed European countries and de-
veloping Orthodox countries (Fig. 3).
As a rule, while ensuring food security, only the calorie content of
food per person is assessed, while rationality and variety of this food are
disregarded in most cases. Reducing the number of people suffering
from obesity is as much of a problem as reducing the number of un-
dernourished people (Black et al., 2013; Ng et al., 2014). Therefore, it
shall be necessary to provide the population with not just foodstuffs but
products within the framework of a healthy diet that guarantees the
health of the nation and the security of the state.
According to the fundamental principles of rational nutrition, the
optimal ratio of proteins, fats, and carbohydrates is 1:1:4 for the adult
Geoforum 91 (2018) 73–77
population with low labor intensity and 1:1:5 for those with high labor
intensity. The energy value of the diet of an adult living in a temperate
climate and not involved in hard labor should be distributed in a se-
quence of 13% protein food, 33% fat-containing foods, and 54% car-
4
bohydrates. In case of significant increase in the share of physical labor,
3
it is recommended to achieve proper energy consumption by increasing
2
the proportion of fats and carbohydrates and reducing proteins to 11%
1 of the total caloric value (WHO, FAO, http://health.gov/
dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines). The former Soviet Union adheres
to recommendations considering gender, age, and physical activity
coefficient (FCHER, 2009). According to expert.ru, British scientists
have determined the average weight of a person in the world – 62 kg. As
90
averaged index, 93.0–124.0 g of protein, 62.0–82.7 g of fats, and
372.0–496.0 g of carbohydrates per day were examined (Fig. 4).
Grain and cereals, vegetable and animal fats, and meat and dairy
products have the property of interchangeability, and can be attributed
to a group of basic foods. In 2017 (FAO), the cumulative increase in
world meat production will be about 0.3% to 418 million tons; milk –
1.4% to 831 million tons (an increase is expected in skim milk, cheese,
and butter and a decrease in whole milk); oil/fats – 7% (an increase in
palm, soybean, sunflower, palm kernel, and peanut oil and a decrease in
rapeseed and olive oil); and as a whole, for the grains – decline of 0.5%
to 2594 million tons (cereals for food needs – an increase by 1.0% to
1115 million tons and a decrease in wheat by 2.2%, and barley and
sorghum).
In 2017, the increase is planned for meat production in all countries,
especially in the US, Brazil, India, Argentina, and China; growth in milk
production in Asia and America, a decline in Europe, Africa, and
Oceania; and for wheat production – an increase in the countries of
Asia, Africa, North America, India, and Turkey, with decrease in –
Russia, Ukraine, North Africa, and Europe, without change – Argentina,
Australia, and Kazakhstan.
In the second quarter of 2017, world meat trade will increase by
2.5% to 32 million tons and for dairy products – by 1% to 71.8 million
tons in terms of milk. The main meat importers are China, Mexico,
74
A.Y. Prosekov, S.A. Ivanova Geoforum 91 (2018) 73–77

Fig. 3. Distribution of population growth rates by regions of the world.

Source: http://unesdoc.unesco.org.

12 It is planned to increase local inventories in producer countries,

1 2 3 4 such as Brazil, Indonesia, USA, Malaysia, India, the Russian Federation,
10
Australia, and Ukraine. World consumption of oils/fats has an increase
of only 2.5–3%. The consumption of soybean and palm oils increases
8
similar to that of the sunflower and peanut butter. The rapeseed oil
consumption is limited by supply shortage.
billion

6
4
2
0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2025 2050
years
Fig. 4. Dependence of world population and necessary protein consumption by years: 1 –
number of people, maximum UN forecast, billion people; 2 – necessary amount of protein
per day, million tons; 3 – required amount of fat per day, million tons; 4 – required
amount of carbohydrates per day, million tons.
Source: Prosekov and Ivanova (2016).
Chile, the Republic of Korea, Japan, the Philippines, the United Arab
Emirates, Vietnam, Iraq, and Singapore. The growth in domestic pro-
duction of the United States and the Russian Federation could reduce
external purchases of meat. The production of corn in the US (the lar-
gest producer) will increase.
The FAO’s latest forecast of the global supply and demand for cer-
eals in 2017/2018 remains profitable, as demand is expected to fall
slightly below the expected level of production, suggesting that world
reserves remain record high. A decrease in wheat consumption is
forecasted by 0.4% from 2016/2017, while the total use of fodder grain
and rice will grow by 0.8% and 1.2%, respectively.
The FAO forecasts an increase of 14 million tons (currently 703
million tons) and 4% of the world’s grain and oil/fat reserves by the end
of the 2018 season, respectively. World trade in cereals in 2017/2018 is
projected to decline by about 5 million tons (1.2%) to 391 million tons,
which will be the first reduction in four years.
Unconditional food security of the country is established with the
superiority of food reserves by 30% of the average population’s needs.
The FAO believes that food independence is achieved through the
production of vital products of at least 80% of the population’s needs.
The Russian legislation (Presidential Decree № 120, 2010) has identi-
fied eight types of food with threshold values: grain – not less than 95%;
sugar – not less than 80%; vegetable oil – not less than 80%; meat and
meat products (in terms of meat) – at least 85%; milk and dairy pro-
ducts (in terms of milk) – not less than 90%; fish products – not less
than 80%; potatoes – not less than 95%; and salt food – at least 85% of
the needs of the population.
The volume of production (FAO) of basic types of food in the world
in 2017, on average per capita per day, is 117 g of meat or meat pro-
ducts (in terms of meat), 303 g of milk or dairy products (in terms of
milk), 406 g of cereals, and 117 g of oil/fat. To maintain the existing
ratio of food products to the population, considering its growth, it is
necessary to increase food production by 2050 to 75% and world food
reserves by 14%, in particular, in developing countries by 18% as a
whole, in the African countries by 30%, in the Asian countries by 14%,
and in the countries of Latin America by 8%.
According to the UN data, it will be necessary to increase agri-
cultural production by 75% by 2050 to provide food for the population
(Godfray et al., 2010). Modern technologies allow increasing world
food production by increasing the fertility of lands, using biological
resources of sea and ocean waters, using solar energy, advances in ge-
netics, and breeding for improving crops and breeding more productive
breeds of animals. There is an opinion that the creation of genetically
modified organisms and products is not aimed at achieving the well-
being of a broad stratum of the people, including in terms of mal-
nutrition, but will only increase the incomes of a limited group of

75
A.Y. Prosekov, S.A. Ivanova
Fig. 5. Distribution of military expenditures and military exports.
Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (https://www.sipri.org).
people. At the same time, there is a real chance of bringing to the
ecological catastrophe the use of these technologies.
There remains no consensus on this issue. Some scientists propose to
breed insects that have more nutritional value than beef or pork. Most
tend to the possibility of better food provision by increasing the pro-
ductivity of agriculture and expanding the range of agricultural use
(Stocking, 2003; Smyth et al., 2015). According to FAO experts, 78% of
the world’s land has natural limitations for the development of agri-
culture, 13% of the areas are characterized as low productivity, 6% of
the areas as medium productivity, and only 3% of the areas as high
productivity. Arable land employs about 11% of the total land area, and
about 24% of the world’s land is used in livestock production. For ex-
ample, in the period 2000–2006, the EU lost 0.27% of its arable land
and 0.26% of its crop production potential. Significant losses were
observed in the Netherlands – 1.57% of its production capacity of the
harvest in six years, Cyprus – 0.84%, Ireland – 0.77%, and Spain –
0.49%. It is not surprising that many developed countries, whose eco-
nomic stability does not allow them to experience hunger or mal-
nutrition, demonstrate not always peaceful interest in these territories,
especially in combination with thoughts about the vastness of the un-
developed lands of the Russian Federation. This, in particular, explains
the imposed sanctions, and hostile rhetoric on a number of issues of the
world order, and the arms race.
3. Conclusion
FAO proclaimed the motto of 2018 “No food loss and food waste.”
Nowadays, sufficient amount of food is produced to ensure that each
person consumes about 2850 calories each day, but we still cannot get
rid of hunger. The global problem of hunger cannot be solved simply by
increasing productivity, although without the development of science-
intensive and breakthrough biotechnologies that allow the preservation
of manufactured products, the development of the theory of logistic
schemes, and the rational development of agricultural production, it is
impossible (Serageldin, 1999; Rosegrant and Cline, 2003). Hunger
usually does not occur because there were no grain stocks in the world,
but because of low income of the population in most developing
countries, food products were inaccessible for a large number of people.
The increase in productivity, for example, of agricultural products in
developed countries, such as the United States and the EU will not lead
76
Geoforum 91 (2018) 73–77
to the provision of food to the population, for example, in Africa, unless
we consider the UN humanitarian programs. Moreover, under certain
conditions, food can become not just an object of export but a subject of
political trade. Very often, economically developed giants allow
themselves to dictate political conditions under the guise of “estab-
lishing democracy” in different, and not only, developing countries.
Often, modern military conflicts, for example, in the Middle East, are
beneficial to Washington, which receives huge amounts of money from
the sale of weapons (Fig. 5).
Obviously, in a world in which political regimes change overnight,
there limited value in talking about food security. It is impossible for
one country alone to ensure its food security (if it is not the USA, of
course), no matter how rich this country is. In a unipolar world, an
equivalent counterweight, both to the US and the EU, is necessary for
ensuring global security. A group of developing countries can be this
counterweight in politics and economics. In the post-Soviet space, the
Customs Union, the Common Economic Space, and the Collective
Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) were organized for these pur-
poses. On a global scale, the group of countries Brazil, Russia, India,
China and South Africa (BRICS) can cope with this function (in ag-
gregate, they already occupy more than 25% of the world’s land, cor-
responding to 40% of the population, and have a combined gross do-
mestic product of 15.435 trillion dollars).
According to forecasts, the aggregate increase in the population of
the BRICS countries to 2050 will be 36–44% of the world growth, which
will, in fact, be half of the world population. This is not only a labor
force for agriculture but also an economic potential for the develop-
ment of other industries. Since the 2000s, in total, the BRICS countries
produced 25–39% of grain, 36–41% of fats and oils, and 23–25% of the
world’s meat production. The preservation of these indicators will also
allow these countries to gain not only a certain position in the world but
also within the framework of the collaboration to increase the pace of
development, production, and defense and to provide themselves with
political power and authority (http://www.pwc.com/it/it/
publications/assets/docs/world-2050.pdf).
Conflicts of interest
Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
A.Y. Prosekov, S.A. Ivanova
Acknowledgments
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
References
Black, R.E., Victora, C.G., Walker, S.P., Bhutta, Z.A., Christian, P., de Onis, M., Ezzati, M.,
Grantham-McGregor, S., Katz, J., Martorell, R., Uauy, R., 2013. Maternal and child
undernutrition and overweight in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet
382, 427–451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60937-X.
Borch, A., Kjærnes, U., 2016. Food security and food insecurity in Europe: an analysis of
the academic discourse (1975–2013). Appetite 103, 137–147. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.appet.2016.04.005.
Burchi, F., de Muro, P., 2016. From food availability to nutritional capabilities: advancing
food security analysis. Food Policy 60, 10–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.
2015.03.008.
FAO, 2009. How to Feed the World in 2050. < http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/
wsfs/docs/expert_paper/How_to_Feed_the_World_in_2050.pdf > .
FCHER, 2009. Norms of Physiological Needs of Energy and Nutrient Substances for
Various Populations of the Russian Federation, methodical recommendations,
Moscow.
Godfray, H.C.J., Beddington, J.R., Crute, I.R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J.F., Pretty,
J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S.M., Toulmin, C., 2010. Food security: the challenge of
feeding 9 billion people. Science 327, 812–818. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.
1185383.
Gohar, A.A., Cashman, A., 2016. A methodology to assess the impact of climate variability
and change on water resources, food security and economic welfare. Agric. Syst. 147,
51–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.05.008.
77
Geoforum 91 (2018) 73–77
Leventon, J., Laudan, J., 2017. Local food sovereignty for global food security?
Highlighting interplay challenges. Geoforum 85, 23–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
geoforum.2017.07.002.
Lipton, M., Saghai, Y., 2017. Food security, farmland access ethics, and land reform. Glob.
Food Sec. 12, 59–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2016.03.004.
Martin, K.S., Colantonio, A.G., Picho, K., Boyle, K.E., 2016. Self-efficacy is associated with
increased food security in novel food pantry program. SSM Popul. Health 2, 62–67.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2016.01.005.
Moragues-Faus, A., 2017. Problematising justice definitions in public food security de-
bates: towards global and participative foodjustices. Geoforum 84, 95–106. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.06.007.
Myers, J.S., Caruso, C.C., 2016. Towards a public food infrastructure: closing the food gap
through state-run grocery stores. Geoforum 72, 30–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
geoforum.2016.03.010.
Ng, M., Fleming, T., Robinson, M., Thomson, B., Graetz, N., Margono, C., Gupta, R., 2014.
Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and
adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease
Study 2013. Lancet 384 (9945), 766–781. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-
6736(14)60460-8.
Prosekov, A.Yu., Ivanova, S.A., 2016. Providing food security in the existing tendencies of
population growth and political and economic instability in the world. Food Raw
Mater. 4 (2), 201–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.21179/2308-4057-2016-2-201-211.
Rosegrant, M.W., Cline, S.A., 2003. Global food security: challenges and policies. Science
302 (5652), 1917–1919. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1092958.
Serageldin, I., 1999. Biotechnology and food security in the 21st century. Science 285
(5426), 387–389. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.285.5426.387.
Smyth, S.J., Phillips, P.W.B., Kerr, W.A., 2015. Food security and the evaluation of risk.
Glob. Food Sec. 4, 16–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2014.08.001.
Stocking, M.A., 2003. Tropical soils and food security: the next 50 years. Science 302
(5649), 1356–1359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1088579.