Famine won't be a problem if a country won't rely on one staple food

[Billy]

I think a country should not rely on one food staple to survive. If the Irish have other staple aside from potatoes, less people would have died from the potato famine. In Southeast Asia, People rely too much on rice. Whenever there is a rice shortage, the high demand of rice causes a price increase and many people are starving because of it. People there should learn how to eat other staple food aside from rice so there won’t be a shortage of food. Look at Brazil, They have more staples for their dishes, they eat rice, plantains, cassava, flour and manioc.
There won’t be food shortages in the Philippines if people there will be re-cultured to eat other staples aside from rice. Sweet potato, burro banana, maize and cassava were very cheap on that country. Those foods I mentioned are more nutritious than rice. Less people will be starving if rice is not their only staple.

In Many European countries; wheat is the main staple, I have seen people protesting for the rising price of bread because of the high demand of wheat. Right now there are flours that are not made of wheat, If European bakeries will consider flours like Chick pea flour, pumpkin flour, coconut flour and other alternatives maybe bread will be more affordable.

There is Hunger in the US but it is not as worst as Africa and Asia because multiculturalism made Americans a multi-staple society. If there is shortage of potatoes, Americans can go for pasta or lentil. If there is shortage of rice, Americans can go for beans.
If people will learn to use other food staples aside from what they were use to, a famine can be eased much easier. The only hard thing about this is the fact it is not easy to re-culture people. It took 30 years to make Americans eat lobster.

I remember there is an NGO that tried to teach Africans to farm rabbits and learn to eat Rabbit meat because raising rabbits is cheaper and they can multiply faster than chickens and cows. I don’t know if it’s successful but if they succeed to re-culture them to learn using a food source they were not used to, it could stop hunger.

[kd3pc]

One also has to raise food crops that will actually grow in the conditions that country may, or may not have. Countries like the USA, that have tremendous natural resources, a weather pattern that allows copious food crops to be grown, and a technology driven economy that can make the most of those assets has a definite advantage over countries like Ireland, where potatoes were the only option they had for quite some time.

It is not a simple matter to "re-culture" a nation for any purpose, let alone that of diet, possible food sources and protection from famine.

[Billy]

I think if Ireland discovered beets, spring barley and oats much more earlier, Maybe the potato famine would have not happened. Those are their other crops aside from potatoes. During the potato famine though, it happened on a time they were so reliant on potatoes. Yeah re-culturing a country will take decades. I heard the early days of sushi and taco in the US is a struggle before it became a part of the American diet. As an Asian person I do feel some sort of withdrawal when I don't eat rice. So making an Asian learn other staples would be hard.

[mairj23]

Famine shouldn't be an issue anywhere in todays society. Africa actually has the most natural resources, that's why there is so much fighting there. Yes, they should grow more and different crops but a lot of that information is lost in this modern day in age. The elders are gone and the youngsters don't have the know how to do it. They need programs on agriculture and funding to beat this.

[DancingLady]

You have a good point when it comes to crop failure due to blight, but many, many famines are caused not by plant disease, but by drought. In the case of drought, there is no way to grow enough of anything in the affected area and people have no choice but to obtain food from elsewhere or starve. The poor often starve in these circumstances because they do not have the means to obtain food from elsewhere.

[Billy]

There are actually plants that thrives during droughts, so farmers can compensate their income by going for alternate crops they can cultivate. Rice shortage is always a problem in my country but it won't be if people will learn to eat other staples that also thrives in the region. Farmers will escape famine if they will go for alternate crops instead.

[bala]

Exactly for instance let us take people in my state as an example.
In our state rice is the staple food,but the trend has followed a reverse order and people have started having burgers,sandwiches instead of rice,meaning farmers are losing out on their money which int urn affects the economy invariably.

[Billy]

Exactly for instance let us take people in my state as an example.
In our state rice is the staple food,but the trend has followed a reverse order and people have started having burgers,sandwiches instead of rice,meaning farmers are losing out on their money which int urn affects the economy invariably.

Well those farmers can export their rice abroad because other Asian countries experiences a rice shortage. As far as I know India have other staples aside from rice. Wheat is very important in India because flat bread is a major part of Indian diet. I also heard some Indians uses pigeon peas as their main staple food.

[Preacherbob50]

It is not a matter of changing staples or additional staples in a famine. Because of the lack of WATER among other things the land cannot be planted by anything other than desert born plants which generally have little or no real nutrients in order for animals and humans to live.

If there is no water, there are no plants or fresh water seafood. No plants mean no feed for animals, birds, or man.
For those of you who believe that the U.S. is above all of the rules of famine, you need to check out our problem in California. Because of newer EPA regulations and lack of rain, a large portion of California has no water in which to irrigate the land ergo no agriculture. No agriculture from that area means an over all shortage in the U.S. A shortage here means that "supply and demand" take over. Because of a lack of feed, the farmers and ranchers of pork, beef, chickens (and all of the bi- products produced from those items) must downsize their total stock in order to feed and produce healthy birds and animals for human consumption.
A lack of stock means higher prices in order to curb (and take advantage of) the demands. Higher prices mean less consumption and variety and less consumption and variety means your kids best not be picky about what they eat!
Nothing grows without WATER folks and that is the chief reason for the disaster called FAMINE! Without water, you cannot even boil rocks and enjoy rock soup!

[Billy]

There are actually crops that were drought resistant and needs less water than most crops. About dessert plants not having nutrition, Many species of edible cacti are considered super foods. From Nopales cactus to Prickly pear. There are also species of beans that thrives in drought infested environments.

If Californians will be more open minded about other types of livestock animals.

Rabbits can replace the chickens
Ostrich can replace beef and chicken eggs
Camels can replace dairy cows
Quails can also replace chickens and chicken eggs

Those animals don't need as much water as other livestock.

In case of pigs, Banana trees are good feeds for them. I believe bananas are one of those plants that don't need much water. In many countries, pig farmer shreds banana trees and feed them to pigs. A pig farm and banana farm can work well together.

Not all Famine is caused by lack of water, there famines that happened because of too much water.

[Vash]

The problem is, when there is some kind of national scale natural disaster (being it flood or drown or pests), most if not all crops would be affected... not just one type or two.

The key is to store lots of grain during the good years. So it can offset the "bad" years.

On the topic of "staple", I eat a variety of "staple" myself. Out of health reasons more than anything else.
For breakfast, I usually have oatmeal.
For lunch, I often have wholewheat bread and sweet potatoes for grain. Sometimes I eat a variety of beans.
For dinner I have a mixture of millet, oatmeal, buckwheat, quinoa, red rice, brown rice, etc.

Anyway, it is all out of health concern. Eating a varity of whole grain and beans is very healthy. It also proves I am open to more than just a few "staple".

[Briannagodess]

I do agree that a country should not have one staple food as this can greatly help in diminishing hunger and also in agricultural aspects. However, the problem in famine is that there is no supply of food or if there is, it requires money. Food should be available for all, there should be more farms and forests than restaurants and fast food chains. That way, food is accessible for everyone.

Next, there is this problem of climate change which also affects crop production. If people do change and have a variety of staple food, but still there is no supply because of climate change, then there is still a problem.

[Billy]

Its a matter of adapting and compensating, if an area is not suitable for growing rice anymore because of drought, they can go for those drought resistance beans. People needs to learn how to adapt and sometimes go outside the box to thrive even in the hardest situations. I know there is also a disturbing trend of farming fields being turned into Residential suburbs and commercial areas but that can be compensated with Urban farming. People should stop saying excuses and they should try to figure out how to adapt to the situation. Introducing foods to people is hard though. It took 30 years for Americans to accept lobster as food, teaching people to eat and accept a new food staple will not be easy. People needed an open mind when it comes to food,

This is something that is hard to solve on a large scale but people who will try to accept other options on their own will suffer less.