Introduction

With a history marred by British colonialism, India is no stranger to food shortages. Famines were often used as political tactics by the British government to force Indians into submission, to the point where Indian bodies today are “starvation-adapted”--a result of the 31 famines our ancestors had to endure (Bakar). The country experienced mass food shortages in 1867, 1897, 1900, and 1943–to the point where in the city of Kolkata, 200 people were dying of hunger every day. In another food shortage in 1965, the government of India was forced to ask its constituents to take “dinnerless days” (Westhead). Unfortunately, gaining independence in 1947 wasn’t enough to undo the consequences of British colonialism and its impact on Indian food security: even today, those issues remain ever present.

According to the Global Hunger Index 2022, South Asia has the highest number of undernourished people in the world, totaling 331.6 million people in 2021. On top of that, South Asia recorded the world’s highest regional hunger level in 2022 at 27.4. Within this region, India is the largest country with the biggest population. The role of food security in ensuring quality of life cannot be understated: when communities cannot easily access nutritious food, their health, education, and economic opportunities can be severely impacted. 

1. Thesis Statement

Based on empirical evidence from models around the world, I want to evaluate how technology can be used to successfully battle food insecurity in India. 

A lack of agricultural technology has been a constant limitation in India’s progression away from food insecurity. For example, in the first half of the 1960s, there was only one tractor for every 20 villages, and most farmers relied on primitive tools to till their fields. This lack of modern farming equipment hindered agricultural production and contributed to the food shortage in 1965, which led to widespread protests and disruptions across the country. I believe that increasing access to innovative agricultural technology can help mitigate the impacts of British colonialism and push India in the right direction.

 In order to maintain a diverse approach and understand how technology can help address these challenges, I plan to analyze research from three different continents–Africa, South America, and Asia–using case studies from the countries Rwanda, Uruguay, and Bangladesh. By evaluating the success of different approaches in these countries, I hope to identify effective strategies that can be adapted to the Indian context. 

2. Significance

To first establish the inherency of this problem, it is imperative to make sure that readers understand the significance of this paper, and of food insecurity in general as a global issue. Chronic hunger is one of the biggest social justice issues plaguing our world right now – to the point where zero hunger is #2 on the list of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. 

About 40% of the world’s population is currently malnourished–of which a big portion face chronic hunger (or are undernourished). The impact of undernourishment is catastrophic: it leads to damages in physical development such as cognitive and developmental delays that can give ways to non-communicable diseases in adulthood–diseases including heart attacks, strokes, certain cancers, and diabetes. In fact, in 2004, these non-communicable diseases accounted for 40% of all hospital stays in India (Upadhyay). 

Additionally, children who are hungry or malnourished are more likely to have cognitive and developmental delays, which can affect their ability to learn and perform well in school. This can have long-term consequences for their future educational and economic opportunities.Not only does this reduce their potential to earn as they become adults, but it also contributes to illiteracy in India which directly correlates to high rates of child labor. In fact, in a study of 17 Indian states, 46.1% of children aged 5-14 years were deemed illiterate (Raju). 

On top of that, widespread food insecurity can often serve as a catalyst for violent conflict as people are forced to go to great lengths to find food for their families. Authors Sachs and Ban specifically cite instances of drought and famine in Africa that led to migration movements which resulted in resurgent violence and even a civil war in Mali. 

As the global demand for food grows and resources grow more limited, the environment’s capability to produce continues to lower, meaning that a solution to this problem is necessary now more than ever (Sachs and Ban). Food security is an essential component of human well-being and sustainable development. Ensuring that all people have access to nutritious food is not only a moral imperative but also a key factor in promoting economic growth, social stability, and overall human development.

3. Your viewpoint

I believe that technology is the best response to food insecurity because it can be implemented independent of government intervention or policy development. Therefore, this paper will focus on the different types of technology used in regions around the world and how they can be used to successfully battle food insecurity in India.

An important note: throughout this paper, I define technology using the Oxford Dictionary definition of  “the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry.” This broad definition includes any form of innovation that hasn’t previously been used in the practices I’ll be discussing. This definition is also much more inclusive; rather than just defining technology to involve the use of computers or the internet, I want to allow for innovation in all facets of farming. The specific technologies I will be discussing in this paper are small-scale irrigation technology, agroecology, and aquaculture.

Background / Brief Summary

India ranked 102 out of 117 countries in the 2019 Global Hunger Index because 14.5% (i.e., about 190 million) Indians are undernourished. According to the Global Food Security Index, that number has only increased– exacerbated with the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2022 16.3% of the population was undernourished. Furthermore, 51% of women of reproductive age (15–49 years) are anemic, about 38% of the children (aged under five) in India suffer from stunting (height is too short for their age) and 20.8% from wasting (weight is too low for their height). Overall, about 33.4% of children in India are underweight (“Global Food Security Index 2022.”) This leads to a significantly higher risk of death from common illnesses such as diarrhea, pneumonia, and malaria (Mishra, Rampal). 

1. Authoritative Viewpoints

Any solution for food insecurity must consider the nexus approach to water, energy, and food. The nexus approach emphasizes understanding the interdependence of subsystems and to focus on system efficiency rather than individual productivity. This interdisciplinary and holistic approach is necessary to properly derive solutions for unique regions and nations (Rasul, Sharma). Diving deeper, a successful solution would need to take into account the different regions within a country as well as the natural resources found in them. Once those nuances have been addressed, the residents of the nation must be trained in innovative growing techniques that utilize biodiversity. I identified this framework specifically because it focuses less on the actions of policymakers and more on technological tools and training that could be applied. This means that actors such as nonprofits or private corporations could bring about this benefit themselves (EAT-Lancet Commission). 

Main Points

1. Irrigation Technology in Rwanda

Definition: Subsistence or smallholder farming is when the agricultural produce is completely utilized to sustain the farmer and their family.

Before I discuss the specifics of small-scale irrigation technology, let’s quickly go over some of the food security issues that Rwanda faces to really emphasize the value of the technology that’s described below. Based on data from the World Food Programme, nearly one fifth of Rwanda’s population is food insecure (2.64 million people). Chronic malnutrition among children under 5 is incredibly high, at 32.4%. The country’s economy primarily depends on agriculture, with 69% of rural households involved in small-scale farming.

Central Point: How is irrigation technology helping with food security in Rwanda? 

From 2016 to 2017, a study of smallholder farmers examined the impact of small-scale irrigation technologies (SSIT) on farm profitability in Rwanda. The study found that farmers who used this irrigation technology experienced an average increase in yield of 59.4% (836 kg per hectare for non-adopting farmers vs 1,330 kg per hectare for those who did). Additionally, farmers who adopted SSITs had better access to markets, with 68.8% of them selling their produce at a market, compared to 51.3% of non-adopters–a difference of 17.5%. 

The study went one step further in evaluating profitability by calculating the net present value, internal rate of return, and benefit-cost ratio of profit after adopting this technology. Analysis of these results proved that the value of farms with SSITs increased: investment in farms with SSIT could have yielded profitability of anywhere between 25.6% and 59.9%; and that for every Rwandan franc (RWF) invested in SSIT, farmers received between 1.6 and 2.9 RWF in return. Another finding from this study was that SSITs increased the resilience of Rwandan farms, making them especially valuable in areas with limited rainfall. By providing small-scale farms access to clean water at all times of the year, SSITs allowed farmers the ability to produce crops even during dry seasons and could do the same during weather disasters such as droughts (Habineza et. al).

Another analysis on the land productivity provided by SSITs was conducted two years laters (in 2019) with similar results.The study used a cross-sectional survey design to collect data from 328 farmers who adopted small-scale irrigation technologies in four districts of Rwanda. The data was collected using a structured questionnaire and analyzed using descriptive statistics, a propensity score matching technique, and a regression analysis.

Authors Hong and Ngango found that (per the Rwandan government’s increased investment), the use of small-scale irrigation technology led to higher outputs in land productivity, crop yields, and household income. Specifically, there was a clear difference in crop yields between farmers who adopted drip and sprinkler irrigation and those who didn’t by an average of 64.6% per hectare; and those who did utilize the technology experienced an increase in household income by an average of 40% (Hong, Ngango).

Figure 1:

Figure 1: This table, particularly the Yield row, shows the difference in crop yield between adopters of small-scale irrigation technologies and non-adopters over a period of 2 months. Risk perception is higher for adopters but that is perceived risk perception which is high in the beginning since farmers are using a previously unknown technology.

Overall, both studies proved that SSITs had a significant positive impact on land productivity in Rwanda–making it a long-term solution for sustainable agricultural growth in the region. This research can be used as a case study for improving food security in both Rwanda and other similar contexts (such as India).

 In conclusion, SSIT can revolutionize farming in Rwanda in four main ways: (1) increasing crop yields by allowing farmers to grow crops even during dry seasons, (2) diversifying crops, including those not suitable for rain-fed farming, (3) reducing vulnerability to climate change and subsequent unpredictable weather patterns, and (4) increasing farmers’ livelihoods by providing them with an increase in income–something that could pave the way for improved access to education, healthcare, and more.

2. Agroecology in Uruguay

As I did before, let’s first go over some of the food security issues that the people of Uruguay currently face. Inhabited by just over 3 million people, Uruguay provides food for almost 30 million people around the world (“Uruguay, a World Reference in Food Security”). However, despite Uruguay’s importance in global agriculture, from 2019-2021, 7.3% of Uruguay’s population was food insecure – about 250,098 people (Romero). 

Central Point: How is agroecology helping with food security in Uruguay?

Definition: Agroecology is a branch of agriculture that focuses on the ecological and social factors that impact farming in order to create the most long-lasting, sustainable farming processes.

Uruguay’s “National Agroecology Plan” (NAP) is a law that was passed in December 2018 to promote agroecological food production – a response to the severe exhaustion on natural resources and weakened biodiversity the country was experiencing. In order to find a solution ideal for the community, researchers engaged in community dialogue and farmers’ workshops over a period of three years, and ultimately, were able to identify agroecology as one potential solution. They determined that agroecology was the ideal innovative approach to agriculture since it takes into account biodiversity and ecological sustainability and, in doing so, promotes social equity. This form of farming emphasizes diverse cropping systems, a lack of agrochemicals, and a focus on bettering soil health. This can include practices such as airing and sun-drying seeds to prevent against disease and pests and keep the seeds preserved, fertilizing crops with organic matter such as animal manure or poultry litter, engaging in extensive composting, and using bio-inputs and plant preparations (such as native efficient microorganisms or macerated nettle) for naturally controlling pests and diseases (“Food Sovereignty in Practice in Uruguay”). In addition, for small-scale farmers, agroecology increases their financial independence and gives them protection against economic and environmental events by increasing the resiliency of their land (Baraibar, et. al). 

It’s important to note that a lot of agroecological practices are rooted in traditional indigenous farming but have been historically overlooked as the free market system prioritized short-term yield and overproduction. However, this emphasis on profit depleted the natural resources of Uruguay (and many other agricultural centers around the world); therefore, agroecological practices are key to reviving the biodiversity of the region and ensuring that the land can continue to produce.

As proof of agroecology’s value, the following study specifically focused on 2 categories of agrochemical inputs: nutrients (synthetic fertilizers) and pesticides. The study analyzed 82 farmers and 428 fields in Uruguay, testing them both separately and in relation to each other, while using key agroecological practices such as crop diversification. The authors then compared the productivity and profitability of conventional (with the agrochemicals) and reduced-input (without the chemicals) vegetable production systems. The results showed that the reduced-input system had comparable yields and profitability to the conventional system, meaning that the agrochemical inputs are not necessary to guarantee productivity when agroecological practices are being used. In essence, adopting reduced-input systems could have significant benefits for the environment and human health, and reducing agrochemical inputs would be an ideal action for long-term sustainability and productivity in the region (Scarlatto, M., et al). 

Figure 2;

Figure 2: This graph is a conceptual representation of pathways towards more sustainable commercial vegetable production systems in Uruguay. The four quadrants reflect combinations of yield and levels of pesticide and nutrient inputs. The two quadrants with high inputs represent an inefficient and polluting production situation. In contrast, the quadrant of low yields and low input levels constitute a situation where efficiency gains are possible. Different pathways of change are outlined: “Ecologisation” entails maintaining crop productivity while reducing inputs, and “Intensification” focuses on increasing productivity at sustainable input levels.

As the aforementioned research shows, agroecology’s holistic approach optimizes the interactions between plants and humans, ultimately creating a sustainable and self-sufficient food system. Not only does it promote biodiversity, improve soil health, and just overall reduce the environmental impacts of agriculture, but it also supports local farmers by requiring more hands-on interaction; and promotes food sovereignty by prioritizing food for local consumption (since crop diversification limits overproduction of any one crop). Food sovereignty is the cornerstone of ending food insecurity by enabling farmers to sustain themselves and their families with their crop yield as well as selling their produce for income. Uruguay’s adoption of agroecology can and should be used as an example for future agroecological engagement around the world–including India.

3. Aquaculture in Bangladesh

Like the two countries mentioned earlier, Bangladesh faces alarming rates of food insecurity. About 20% of the population face severe food insecurity every year and as many as 49% of the people are below the poverty line and face varying levels of food insecurity. Furthermore, the development of 31% of children under the age of five is stunted and for 9%, their growth is severely stunted (Fahim, et al). Finally, the agricultural sector is one of the biggest contributors to the economy with around 80% of the population associated with it. 

Central Point: How is aquaculture helping with food security in Bangladesh?

Definition: Aquaculture or aquafarming is the controlled farming of aquatic animals and plants such as fish, crustaceans, mollusks, and algae.

Many researchers have identified land meat production as uniquely detrimental to our planet’s production capacity, meaning that other alternatives need to be identified. One key option is aquaculture, which can help improve food security by increasing the availability and accessibility of fish as a source of protein. In Bangladesh, more than 50% of the animal protein consumed comes from fish. Because aquaculture can produce fish in large quantities in a controlled environment, it can help supplement wild fish stocks and increase the overall supply of fish. In doing so, aquaculture makes fish available to local communities at affordable prices and ultimately helps improve the diets of the people (Gurung, et. al). 

One specific study analyzed aquaculture farming’s introduction and its impact on 225 farmers in Bangladesh. After more than a year of farming, researchers found that the gross income of households with aquaculture farming increased at an average growth rate of 8.1%. Furthermore, in participating households, aquaculture became up to 10% of the total household income. The researchers also looked at aquaculture’s impact on employment and found that farms with aquaculture had significantly more opportunities for employment than those which didn’t. Finally, the article also tested new aquaculture-focused technologies and found that when implemented correctly, these technologies could further increase overall yield and income (E-Jahan, et al). In essence, aquaculture was able to successfully help with food security for farmers in Bangladesh and its impact can be increased with the help of newer technologies. 

Finally, it’s worth noting that in resource-poor areas within Bangladesh, the introduction of aquaculture led to more significant changes in income. Specifically, in some of the more flood-prone regions, income derived from fish culture rose from 4.6% to 21.6% of the total farm income and from 2.8% to 13.5% of the total household income. Especially as land livestock cultivation has become difficult as access to land decreases, small-scale aquaculture is key to meeting the nutritional needs of poor rural households (Ahmed, Lorica). 

Aquaculture–along with just providing food sovereignty and access to protein–is also one of the most sustainable solutions for meat production. Integrating sustainable practices into this method of farming is significantly easier than any other method of land farming. Examples of such methods include recirculating aquaculture systems, integrated multi-trophic aquaculture, and organic and certification schemes. Furthermore, as biotechnology continues to innovate, aquaculture is poised to become one of the most resilient, long-term solutions to food insecurity (Little, et al). 

Figure 3:

Figure 3: This figure identifies aquaculture’s linkages to food security–specifically, its impact on income, employment and consumption. 

Aquaculture is key to reducing the resource exhaustion that comes with livestock production as it can be produced with much less land, water, and feed. Additionally, small-scale aquaculture farms not only provide local farmers with food sovereignty but also reduce pressure on wild fisheries and help create opportunities for employment. Aquaculture’s explosion in Bangladesh is only proof of its value; other countries who replicate Bangladesh’s example (such as India) will likely see similar success.

Social Impact

It’s important to mention that measures are being taken in India to boost agriculture and limit food insecurity in the nation. However, these measures are often misguided since they come in the form of government policies which attempt action without truly understanding what type of support farmers in India need. One key example of this–and a crucial piece of context necessary to properly implement any agricultural reform in India–is the Farm Bill protests of 2020. The proposed Farm Bills were meant to support the growth of the agriculture sector in India. However, their neoliberal perspective resulted in the removal of institutional safeguards, the reduction of state authority, and proposed a wholly free-market reliant system. Farmers, outraged, protested at the policy they saw as setting them up to be exploited by large businesses. These three bills essentially removed protections for local farmers and aimed to usher the sector into a globalized, capitalistic era.

Researcher Lys Kulamadayil explains that the protests were not simply a result of the recent agricultural reforms but are rooted in deeper structural issues that have been ignored by India’s central government. Historically, India’s agricultural sector has been plagued by problems such as low productivity, lack of investment, and inadequate infrastructure, especially as much of the nation seeks to modernize. The Farm Bills’ goal to liberalize the sector meant that farmers would lose their bargaining power in the market and be subject to the whims of large corporations (Kulamadayil). 

The unfortunate reality is that government action tends to proceed from the top-down, passing bills that are not rooted in the wants and needs of the people being impacted. This further reinforces my message at the beginning of this essay that technology is the most ideal solution, since it doesn’t require government policies for successful implementation. 

However, despite technology’s independence from governing bodies, actors must still remember to proceed with a bottom-up approach. Understanding the intricacies of Indian politics as well as the values that matter the most to Indian farmers is still key to making any meaningful difference. Working with farmers in the way that they need (and not just what we think is best) is indispensable to making any lasting change in the country and changing the tide of food insecurity.

Conclusion

As I’ve shown throughout this paper, different forms of agricultural technology can be used to mitigate the impacts of food insecurity in India. I know this to be true due to the fact that these technologies have succeeded in countries in Africa, South America, and Asia. Similar to India, the nations of Rwanda, Uruguay, and Bangladesh have high rates of poverty despite their abundance of natural resources. Specifically, irrigation technology, agroecology, and aquaculture can be used to bolster agricultural success in India and protect Indians against the chronic hunger that plagues the nation. 

However, it’s important to note that these technologies can only be properly and successfully implemented in India as long as the nexus framework with a transdisciplinary approach (as I explained at the beginning of this paper) is used. This essentially means that actors need to take into account the diversity of regions present in India as well as the societies and cultures at play within the people of the nation. With a proper understanding of the specific issues that plague Indian farmers as well as learning how best to work with the people, the technologies I’ve discussed above can be used to help with food security issues in the nation. 

1. Personal Relevance

Being of Indian descent myself, this topic is especially relevant in my life. Both my parents were born in India and a large majority of my extended family still lives there. I’ve visited the country enough times to witness firsthand the ongoing consequences of food shortages plaguing the population; I want to use my education in this class to find a solution to a problem that could directly impact my family. Combining my fascination with technology and passion for food with the learnings in the class has allowed me to devise the solution I’ve covered in this paper. 

2. Call to Action

My call to action is to encourage private corporations and non-profit organizations to not only work on establishing some of these technologies in India but to more importantly, invest in and support Indian entrepreneurs who can help build and implement these technologies with their insider knowledge. As the Social Impact section regarding the Farm Bill protests proved, communicating with the people you’re trying to help is a necessary part of creating something meaningful. When working with Indian farmers to ensure self-sufficiency, the implementation of technologies such as small-scale irrigation, agroecological processes, and aquaculture can be revolutionary. By supporting Indian innovators and approaching this issue with determination, cultural competence, and empirical knowledge, ending chronic hunger in India is absolutely possible. 

Works Cited

Bakar, Faima. “How History Still Weighs Heavy on South Asian Bodies Today.” HuffPost UK, HuffPost UK, 14 Mar. 2022, https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/south-asian-health-colonial-history_uk_620e74fee4b055057aac0e9f.

E-Jahan, Khondker Murshed, et al. “The Impacts of Aquaculture Development on Food Security: Lessons from Bangladesh.” Aquaculture Research, vol. 41, no. 4, 2010, pp. 481–495., https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2109.2009.02337.x.

Ekekwe , Ndubuisi. “How Digital Technology Is Changing Farming in Africa.” Harvard Business Review, Harvard Business Publishing, 18 May 2017, https://hbr.org/2017/05/how-digital-technology-is-changing-farming-in-africa.

Fahim, Shah Mohammad, et al. “Nutrition and Food Security in Bangladesh: Achievements, Challenges, and Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic.” The Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 224, no. Supplement_7, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiab473.

“Food Sovereignty in Practice in Uruguay.” Friends of the Earth International, 10 May 2021, https://www.foei.org/food-sovereignty-in-practice-in-uruguay/.

“Global Food Security Index 2022.” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, https://impact.economist.com/sustainability/project/food-security-index/explore-countries/india.

Golam Rasul & Bikash Sharma (2016) The nexus approach to water–energy–food security: an option for adaptation to climate change, Climate Policy, 16:6, 682-702, DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2015.1029865

Habineza, E., Nsengiyumva, J.N. Ruzigamanzi, E. and Nsanzumukiza, M.V. (2020) Profitability Analysis of Small Scale Irrigation Technology Adoption to Farmers in Nasho Sector, Rwanda. Journal of Agricultural Chemistry and Environment, 9, 73-84. https://doi.org/10.4236/jacen.2020.92007

Juri S, Baraibar M, Clark LB, Cheguhem M, Jobbagy E, Marcone J, Mazzeo N, Meerho M, Trimble M, Zurbriggen C and Deutsch L (2022) Food systems transformations in South America: Insights from a transdisciplinary process rooted in Uruguay. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 6:887034. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2022.887034

Kamala Gurung, Humnath Bhandari & Thelma Paris (2016) Transformation from Rice Farming to Commercial Aquaculture in Bangladesh: Implications for Gender, Food Security, and Livelihood, Gender, Technology and Development, 20:1, 49-80, DOI: 10.1177/0971852415618747

Khushbu Mishra, Jeevant Rampal, The COVID-19 pandemic and food insecurity: A viewpoint on India, World Development, Volume 135, 2020, 105068, ISSN 0305-750X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105068.

Kulamadayil, Lys. “Informed Dissent or Misinformed Rebellion? Making Sense of India's Farmer Protests.” Völkerrechtsblog, 4 Feb. 2021, https://voelkerrechtsblog.org/informed-dissent-or-misinformed-rebellion-making-sense-of-indias-farmer-protests/.

Little, D. C., et al. “Aquaculture: A Rapidly Growing and Significant Source of Sustainable Food? Status, Transitions and Potential.” Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, vol. 75, no. 3, 2016, pp. 274–286., https://doi.org/10.1017/s0029665116000665.

Mahfuzuddin Ahmed, Mylene H. Lorica, “Improving developing country food security through aquaculture development—lessons from Asia”, Food Policy, Volume 27, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 125-141, ISSN 0306-9192, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-9192(02)00007-6.

Mozumder, M. A. K., Islam, M. M., Alam, M. S., & Rahman, M. M. (2009a). Transparency and accountability for ensuring food security in Bangladesh: A study on field institutions. Department of Public Administration.

Ngango, Jules, and Seungjee Hong. “Adoption of Small-Scale Irrigation Technologies and Its Impact on Land Productivity: Evidence from Rwanda.” Journal of Integrative Agriculture, vol. 20, no. 8, 2021, pp. 2302–2312., https://doi.org/10.1016/s2095-3119(20)63417-7.

Olwer, Hannah. “The Eat-Lancet Commission Brief for African Cities.” EAT, 11 Apr. 2022, https://eatforum.org/learn-and-discover/brief-for-african-cities/.

Raihan, Mohammad J., et al. “Effect of Seasons on Household Food Insecurity in Bangladesh.” Food and Energy Security, vol. 7, no. 3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.136.

Raju TN. Child labour, adult literacy and employment rates in India. Indian J Pediatr. 1989 Mar-Apr;56(2):193-200. doi: 10.1007/BF02726606. PMID: 2807445.

Romero, “Food Insecurity Prevalence by Severity in Uruguay 2021.” Statista, 23 Aug. 2022, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1034338/food-insecurity-prevalence-severity-uruguay/#:~:text=The%20share%20of%20population%20who,23.5%20percent%20to%2023%20percent.

“Rwanda: World Food Programme.” UN World Food Programme, https://www.wfp.org/countries/rwanda#:~:text=Over%2038%20percent%20of%20Rwanda's,food%20security%20in%20the%20country.

Sachs, Jeffrey D. “Chapter 10: Food Security.” The Age of Sustainable Development: Foreword by Ban Ki-Moon, Columbia University Press, New York, 2015.

Scarlatto, M., et al. “Ample Room for Reducing Agrochemical Inputs without Productivity Loss: The Case of Vegetable Production in Uruguay.” Science of The Total Environment, Elsevier, 10 Dec. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969721073241.

Upadhyay, R Prakash. “The Burden of Communicable and Non-Communicable Diseases in Developing Countries.” Iranian Journal of Public Health, vol. 41, no. 3, 31 Mar. 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/springerreference_73361.

“Uruguay, a World Reference in Food Security - News.” XXI, https://www.uruguayxxi.gub.uy/en/news/article/uruguay-un-referente-mundial-en-seguridad-alimentaria/.

Westhead, Rick. “India Has History of Food Shortages, Often Leading to Violence.” Thestar.com, Toronto Star, 17 July 2011, https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2011/07/17/india_has_history_of_food_shortages_often_leading_to_violence.html.