Depleted soil leads to reduced yields, forcing farmers to rely on fertilizers that raise food production costs, consumer prices.

Summary

Grocery prices are expected to rise globally as soil degradation, driven by overfarming, deforestation, and climate change, reduces farmland productivity.

The UN estimates 33% of the world’s soils are degraded, with 90% at risk by 2050. Poor soil forces farmers to use costly fertilizers or abandon fields, raising prices for staples like bread, vegetables, and meat.

Experts advocate for sustainable practices like regenerative agriculture, cover cropping, and reduced tillage to restore soil health.

Innovations and government subsidies could mitigate impacts, but immediate action is critical to ensure food security.

  • FinishingDutch@lemmy.worldEnglish
    204·
    9 hours ago

    There’s also simply way too many people on earth as it is. My country - one of the smallest on earth- had 15 million people back in 1995. Right now, 30 years later, we’re at 18 million. And in 2037, they’re expecting 19 million.

    Small numbers on a global scale, but definitely a lot of growth that’s causing issues. There’s a housing shortage, rising prices, healthcare and pensions are under threat, etc etc.

    And there’s places that are much, much worse. For example, even India is encouraging population growth. When the country is still very poor. That’s going to help their economy in the short run, but it’s going to be a much larger problem down the line.

    We need a controlled population decline, sooner rather than later.

    • scarabic@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      5 hours ago

      We’re going to top out around 12 billion according to demographers. And this is not some theory. Most developed countries are already seeing slowing birth rates and in cases like Japan it’s quite far along.

      Given how inefficient and self-destructive most of our farming is, I’m quite optimistic that it’s possible to support 12 billion sustainably. I don’t like this talk of “too many people” because it leads us to generally devalue people. If we’re not actively planning for who to remove first then we’re at least shrugging when thousands die in a disaster.

      We don’t have to cheapen ourselves this way. We just have to live and work smarter.

      • FinishingDutch@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        2 hours ago

        Well you can also turn that around and ask: why do we need more people? What does another individual add?

        One might argue that a baby born today might cure cancer or all known diseases. They might invent free, unlimited energy. They could be the greatest writer to ever live. Humanity’s best poet. He could bring about world peace.

        But he could also be our next Hitler, Saddam Hussein, etc.

        Earth is a finite planet. It’s not getting any bigger. So every human we add to it, takes up yet another square meter that consumes resources for an average of 80 years or so. I’ve seen my country get more crowded and the problems it causes.

        We don’t need more people. At all.

    • OutlierBlueEnglish
      123·
      8 hours ago

      Either we reduce our population in a controlled way, or nature is going to do it in a brutal one through famine, drought, and disease.

      • kautau@lemmy.worldEnglish
        72·
        9 hours ago

        Or buy all the useless crap being consistently pumped out in virtually every industry