Can technology feed the world’s population?

Syngenta’s Michael Mack says the need to grow more food on the same amount of land is pressing, and that organic farming is not the answer; technology is.

Based in Basel, Switzerland, Syngenta AG is a $12 billion agribusiness involved in the discovery, development and manufacture of products designed to improve crop yields and food quality.

Formed in November 2000 in an agreement between Swiss drug maker Novartis, which spun off its crop protection and seeds business, and AstraZeneca, which spun off its agrochemical business, Syngenta has become a competitor to the US giant Monsanto in the at times contentious world of agricultural technology.

It employs 24,000 people in more than 90 countries and earned $16.26 a share in 2008. The writer talked with Mack about the challenges facing ag-tech.

How will the race for better agricultural productivity versus the demand for more affordable food play out?

We are exclusively focused on improving crop yield. And the reason is that the world’s population is expected to go from 6.5 billion to perhaps 9.2 billion, a 50 per cent increase, over the next 30 to 40 years.

If we’re going to be able to grow food on the same amount of land, which is really primarily the objective, then we’re going to have to invest in more technology to help raise the yields of crop on existing land.

I must dispute the point about making food more affordable. That’s not a key objective today in many parts of the world. In North America and Western Europe, for example, food as a percentage of gross domestic product-or more specifically, food as a percentage of consumer disposable income-is actually quite low. In Europe, it’s about eight or nine per cent.

Having said that, there are many places in the world where food as a percentage of consumer disposable income is 60 to 75 percent.

There, of course, lowering the cost of food would enable communities to enjoy higher productivity and better education. But it’s not the volume of food. It’s about making sure that agriculture can be a more prosperous industry to be in.

Better agricultural productivity allows local growers to generate a surplus so they can feed themselves and generate income by feeding others. In some cases, low-priced food is what’s standing between a subsistence grower and a grower that would be a commercially viable.

What’s the best way to improve productivity yields, and in which parts of the world is this most needed?

Every crop is different. But by and large, growers need basic fundamentals in place to get beyond subsistence farming. For example, access to credit in order to buy ag inputs. Access to markets to be able to sell the produce that comes off their land.

In theory, one can have access to credit and inputs, but if the infrastructure’s not there roads and bridges, stores and facilities to take care of grain or produce when it gets off the farm the grower won’t be enabled.

So once this framework is in place for a grower to be productive, they need the best inputs. This means high quality commercial seed, fertilizer and water in some cases, irrigation. And they need some good products that we offer, such as crop protection chemicals, to be sure that productivity can be advanced up to four times.