"Overall, they find that agricultural intensification—broadly defined as activities intended to increase either the productivity or profitability of a given tract of agricultural land—rarely leads to simultaneous positive results for ecosystem services and human wellbeing."

-Because? Class? Anyone?

"...population growth is potentially exponential while the growth of the food supply is linear. It derives from the political and economic thought of the Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus..."

-Thats riiight, malthusianism. Otto gets the gold star.

Oh nonono says little eikka economics keeps growth in check. This has been proven, he says.

But the books eikka reads never include the ONE BILLION ABORTIONS which have taken place since 1973.

Eikka must stay after class and read every post from otto for the last 10 years.

"Another important finding is that the distribution of wellbeing impacts is uneven, generally favouring better off individuals at the expense of poorer ones. For example, a study in Bangladesh showed how rapid uptake of saltwater shrimp production is enabling investors and large landowners to get higher profits while poorer people are left with the environmental consequences that affect their lives and livelihoods long term."

-Of course this is the smelly lie that eikkas friends tend to fall for. Blame the rich people, end of discussion. But overpopulation creates a buyers market for labor. More people pursuing fewer jobs. Competition among employers necessarily drives wages down. More people out of work, more poverty, more suffering. Wealth inevitably becomes concentrated in the few employers who win this enhanced competition.

Sure, you can take those profits away from the winners to support the idle and the restless, but this only makes it worse down the road.

Malthus is inexorable. The only solution is to destroy the cultures that promote large stable families. Religionists know full well who Im talking about and they do not like the prospect one bit.

But all the oppressed women who are forced to make babies until it kills them understand better than perhaps anyone.

Here is an excellent example....

"Kiryas Joel has by far the youngest median age population of any municipality in the United States,[2] and the youngest, at 13.2 years old, of any population center of over 5,000 residents in the United States.[3] Residents of Kiryas Joel, like those of other Haredi Jewish communities, typically have large families, and this has driven rapid population growth.[4]

"According to 2008 census figures, the village has the highest poverty rate in the nation. More than two-thirds of residents live below the federal poverty line and 40% receive food stamps."

... outgrowing... overwhelming... by Design.

"There are three religious tenets that drive our growth: our women don't use birth control, they get married young and after they get married, they stay in Kiryas Joel and start a family. Our growth comes simply from the fact that our families have a lot of babies, and we need to build homes to respond to the needs of our community." — Gedalye Szegedin, village administrator

"Due to the rapid population growth occurring in Kiryas Joel, resulting almost entirely from the high birth rates of its Hasidic population, the village government has undertaken various annexation efforts to expand its area, to the dismay of the majority of the residents of the surrounding communities."

-Understandable, no? And not uncommon wherever religion is at the center of culture and society.

This is how the religions we are left with have survived to the present. The ones they extincted simply could not keep up.

And it also happens to be why the torah is part of the xian canon.

I believe this is a prehistoric initiative, lessons learned and passed down from the original exodus out of africa, when the tropical cromags arrived in europe and quickly overwhelmed and obliterated the temperate and subarctic neanderthal. Their cultures had adapted to the necessities of seasonal reproduction while the cromags had weathered the intense intertribal competition in the tropics for 1000s of gens.

They flooded the holy land and exterminated the subhumans in short order.

The greatest story ever told, finally recorded in writing after an eon or 2.

The greatest threats to Earth's food supply are:
-Organic farming.
-Opposition to GM enhanced crops.
-not cross-breeding of like plants.
-ceasing of anti-biotic use in livestock
If these things hadn't been extensively used, 1/2 the planet would now be starving to death.

TB, you forgot to add: - Morons who deny science.

New research suggests that the combined social and ecological results of increased agricultural intensification in low and middle-income countries are not as positive as expected.

Yep. These countries, that consume a small fraction of resources compared to high income countries, must be starved out of existence. That's science for you.

Can anyone help me with dangers of reverting the Sahara to savanna or wetter conditions, and how to retain biodiversity there? I'm offering theory on how atmospheric water is commercially available through out the Sahara. If my 15 years of study is right, 100 km belt along Southern Sahara can be converted into US Midwest, or wetter, type agriculture. How can it be done with environmental balance to protect biodiversity as currently balanced. Remember, it is close to tropics, and that as desertification is reversed, it will extend the savanna further north, lets say by as much as is converted to high moisture agriculture. If you can help collaborate on this issue, I would really appreciate it. Atanacio, pluvinergy@gmail.com
I have not studied the subject, but it is a critical consideration, as you know.