Got Food? - the Scientia Review

term costs of these modern techniques resulted in mainly rich farmers benefiting. The costs of patented
plant varieties and dependence of fertilizer would hurt the poor and put many into debt (Miller, 2012).
Pesticides and fertilizers were expensive investments for farmers. Also, farmers who followed fertilizeroriented
techniques drained the soil of natural fertility, resulting in the increasing amounts of fertilizer
used over time. A similar trend was seen with pesticides, which resulted in resistant pests which required
other pesticides in order to be eradicated. Over time, the costs would build up for these products. Further,
rich farmers could afford tractors and other technologies which allowed them to greatly increase
productivity on their larger plots of land, resulting in a more industrialized system of farming. (“The
Quiet Revolution of the Sixties”, 2006)
Also, despite the efforts to bring crops to famine-stricken areas of poverty, many people still
suffered from hunger. As a movement, the Green Revolution was not a charitable solution as much as a
profitable investment. The fact remained that those who could not afford the new crops, even despite
some cost reductions, starved. Also, the costs commonly increased over time due to the expensive nature
of maintaining pesticide and fertilizer techniques. Also, poor peasants who depended on special weeds as
a primary source of vitamin A suffered when these weeds were extinguished (Reiff, 2011). As a result,
even though the grain production yields surpassed population counts, the actual food consumption among
lower class families was relatively low. For example, analysis of hunger shows that from 1970 to 1990,
excluding China from the calculations, there was a 11 percent increase in poverty. (“The Quiet
Revolution of the Sixties”, 2006)
The Green Revolution also led to the degradation of society and living conditions. The
introduction of new technologies and chemicals ultimately led to heavy pollution, such as pesticides
found in the water supply or the fumes of tractors and other machinery. The development of irrigation
systems contributed to the spread of malaria due to an increasing number of stagnant water sources as
mosquito breeding grounds. Also, the modernized techniques depleted groundwater sources and degraded
the land, resulting in looming problerms for many villages (“The Quiet Revolution of the Sixties”, 2006).
In meeting the demand of crops, new irrigation systems were continuously being built. Approximately 70
percent of fresh water was used for irrigation purposes. However, growing fears arise due to the kinds of
water sources which were tapped. In south Asia, for example, many of the ground water sources used
have tested positive for arsenic concentrations (University of Michigan, n.d.). These water sources are
still used as irrigation sources as well as drinking water wells.
Pesticides and Health
Pesticides provided a powerful solution to pests which devastated crops in Asia. Pesticides,
alongside fertilizers, have far reaching implications on ecological destruction. However, as a potent
chemical, usage of pesticides has had a negative effect on humans as well. Due to their streamlined,
common usage, diseases due to pesticides have been a major health hazard of the Green Revolution, and
their effects have been documented over the years.
A large portion of exposure comes from the application of the chemicals onto the land. Farmers
who must apply the chemical and further cultivate the chemical-ridden fields receive long term exposure.
Also, many farming areas are subject to poor regulation and safety. Protective equipment is rarely
available, let alone used, by farmers. In India, for example, people have used the containers which would
hold pesticides as kitchen storage tools. Overuse due to misunderstanding of guidelines also has caused
considerable poisoning of water supplies (Pepper, 2008).
102