As the world cries out for more food, sectors of the rural community are calling for a debate on land use priorities and a closer look at the impact of legislation such as the emissions trading scheme and the role of genetic engineering.
AgResearch chief executive Andy West said last week that if the world was to maintain in 2050 the same effective level of food supplied in 2000, a 50% improvement in agricultural productivity was needed.
In the past 100 years, food produced per hectare had increased 400%, and while further gains were needed, Dr West said that process would be hampered by population growth and the needs and concerns for the environment.
Societies around the world faced a dilemma of balancing environmental concerns, preserving soil and water values but also producing more food.
If there were protests and concerns about the supply and price of food now, it would only worsen, with the world's population picked to increase by three billion in the next 60 years but food producers expected to meet that extra demand with a reduced impact on the environment.
Land was being lost to property developers and urban sprawl, reducing the available area for food production and putting pressure on lifting yields from the remaining land.
Drought in large grain-producing countries such as Australia had accentuated the problem, but there was a growing international view that hunger posed a more immediate risk to civilisation than climate change.
The publicly-sensitive option of genetic engineering (GE) has also been aired as a possible solution to increase yields and meet food needs.
The deputy director-general of New Zealand's Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Barry O'Neill, raised the idea in a speech last week, saying access to genetically-engineered crops was needed to help farmers meet the needs of a burgeoning population.
Speaking in London in his role as president of the World Organisation for Animal Health, Dr O'Neill said in an NZPA report that unless crop productivity improved, food production would not keep pace with population growth.
"I think we are entering a new phase dominated by environmental issues, climate change and rising demand, and unless new varieties are introduced, we are not going to be able to feed the world."
Food shortages would help advance the GE debate, technology he described as holding "the most promise" of addressing those public food concerns.
"By 2050 we will need twice as much food produced from less land and with less water and more pressures around environmental sustainability.
These are real challenges we need to get our heads around."
Questions have also been asked among those in the rural sector about the merits of imposing an emissions trading scheme (ETS) on New Zealand agriculture at a time when million's of people were starving.
New Zealand was the only country in the world to impose an ETS or carbon tax on its farm sector, but New Zealand was unusual in that agriculture was its greatest greenhouse gas contributor.
It was revealed at the recent conference of the New Zealand Institute of Primary Industry Management (NZIPIM) that the cost of ETS could cripple the sector by 2025, at a time when even more food was needed to feed a burgeoning population.
Meat and Wool New Zealand has calculated that a carbon charge of $25 a tonne would cost a sheep and beef farm $38,000 a year to fund their emissions.
At $125 a tonne the emission's charge would rise to $190,000, by which stage the sector would not be viable.
The recent Federated Farmers High Country committee conference also questioned the merits of retiring large areas of the South Island high country for conservation when the world needed to be fed and clothed.
While the high country was not as productive as downland areas, it was a key part of the food system, producing store sheep and cattle which were finished on more intensively farmed areas.
It was also the source of high-value merino wool for clothing.
But large areas were being retired for conservation values, forcing a drop in merino sheep numbers from 2.7 million in 2003 to 2.2 million in 2006.
New Zealanders have been telling the agriculture sector to reduce its impact on the environment, but hunger and demand for food may result in some compromises.
