Farmer suicides in several places in the world suggest that it is not as simple. Weather, which is largely not controllable, plays a big role in traditional food production. And then there is human nature, talking about which would bring out things like lack of sustainability education, greed, etc., playing a big part in the final outcome. Besides, the ecological web (interactions among different kinds of organisms in the environment) is gradually being appreciated for its role in food production. It is not obvious that a healthy ecological web can be maintained while simply assigning a piece of land to every human being on the planet. There are too many human beings to allow for simplistic solutions, even if the political landscape allowed their implementation.

I suppose, food security can be a long-term goal, but efforts to achieve it will probably start small. One could conceive that it starts by educating those who already have access to arable land so that they enhance the land's natural productivity over time. Several efforts to this effect are already underway around the world, but it is a long road ahead.

Absolutely not. I this era of specialization, we need to land resources to the one who can effectively and productively utilize the resources, not equally to all.

Hello,

Such venture would not be realistic in the first place due to the availability of limited land vis-a-vis the ever increasing human population.

In addition, food security is not just about feeding a mouth today without plans for tomorrow. Therefore, even if were possible for every man to hold his own piece of land, the quality of such piece of land held by an individual would become degraded with time as a result of continuous cropping; such a land would not able to serve the holder on the long run. This is so because the soil is a dynamic system, in which the chemical, biological and physical components interact in a coordinated manner to bring about the needed quality required of it. The soil therefore needs a time of rest to recover after it had been drained by cultivation. Agricultural input can never provide a replacement to the effect that nature has on the soil.

Agree Utibe. Nutrition security is another and one very big issue related to it yet is not often talked about or discussed when food security is. Thanks there are various other bunch of issues too to address.

No because every person does not know how to get out of that to feed him or her self. All members of the human society are interdependent, there needs sense of feeling for others to get every body fed.

Obviously, if each man on the word has one portion of agriculture land can produce many foods but is the ordenation of this process the secret of sucess on food production and it is link to the agricultural and livedtock police of each regions and countries, and be careful about the problems of environmental damages to the nature and peoples because disorders in the process to obatin foods and others commodities and facilities for living , and the problemds is very complicate beacuse each peoples not work exactly on agricultures activities and dont have any experience on this problems and the sucess is not secure and finaly in our concern the main problems about foods for all is not the cuantity for year but is the inequity of the access to foods for all peoples in the word....

Not at all: Food chain is sustained through trade. The Environmental conditions are dynamic; Economic conditions are volatile; food tastes and preferance change; Agribusiness requires passion, zeal and, property rights policy/laws and technology! Plus family succcession systems! for food security of all.Let people do what they are best at and find food in the market when they need it. Not everyone have equal advantage in crop farming or livestock farming or Non farm activities. The bottom line should be Employment!!

Who will give, what, and from where? Not everybody can be involved in food production as the means of production require the basic inputs which must be produced by some other specialized group elsewhere, and who must also be fed. Specialists in food production must therefore produce enough to feed everybody including those in other sectors of economic activities. To continue to produce enough to feed everybody and provide sustainable food security, the producers must be able to adapt themselves to changing conditions and adopt production systems to overcome ever increasing production challenges like climate change, increasing populations, and declining horizontal land space, and so that human nature can avoid the Malthusian predicament.

Give every living man a small piece of land, allow him to grow what he can eat and address food security. Is that sustainable?

ANSWER

1. Its very hard to provide land to every man or family.

2. Urban peoples can not give time to grow themselves due to they have business life.

3. Rural peoples can do it, so it can be beneficial to develop rural community.

4. It should be rural sustainability.

5. Sustainable term divides when your practice changes

6. It said to be ''feed security'' via food security at rural level those are very poor and have problem of food round year.

Kind regards, SJ

Definitely not i think. It's just like you give a hungry man a fish instead of giving them a stick and training them to do fishing.

and the thing you have just mentioned can cause a serious problem to agricultural production. That is land fragmentation which causes inefficiency in agricultural production. As you might know that fragmented land holding with small farm size prevents you from applying machineries, mordernizing your production as well as economic of scale.

We can access food security problems from other disciplines which requires more research and effort from communities

An interesting thought experiment. The following issues need to be considered for the scenario:

• Who is the ‘we’ and from what has the ‘we’ obtained the legitimacy and power to expropriate and redistribute current land (use) rights? This is a hot land reform issue in southern Africa.
• Who decides about whether the property/use rights are allocated to ‘man’, woman or ‘family’. Historically, equitable subsistence farmland holding ‘rights’ were allocated locally to households in many places (see my Tyrol and Namibia papers); household corresponds at least in this case to the core family.
• How is the subdivision of the initially allocated smallholdings prevented? Historical and current strategies are impartial inheritance (combined with migration/off-farm employment and/or voluntary birth control by late marriage and celibacy) and an imposed one-child policy.
• Where is the mineral, synthetic and/or organic fertiliser coming from/paid for to allow permanent, sustainable universal smallholder/subsistence farming?
• How is the food provision organised and paid for in the case of regional floods, droughts, unseasonable frosts, heat waves and other disasters.
• What about productivity in food production? In about one generation western Europe became secure in food production after WW II, while the farming population decreased from about a third to less than 2% of the total. The process was not spontaneous, but a deliberate policy.