When famine loomed in Mexico and southern Asia in the mid-20th century, agricultural crop researchers saved the day. Scientists at Mexico's International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and the Philippines's International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) came up with new, high-yielding varieties of wheat and rice that raised harvests and kept starvation at bay.

That major advancement in crop production—financed with money from governments and the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations—increased yields of cereal grains by using improved crop seeds, irrigation systems, synthetic fertilizer, and pesticides. Led by American agronomist Norman Borlaug, this movement became known as the Green Revolution.

Most increases in agricultural production during the past half century have come from that type of innovation: boosting crop and livestock yields on land that already was being used for agriculture. Studies indicate that this growth in productivity has stemmed largely from investments in agricultural research.

View Images Skilled fingers separate good seed from bad at IRRI. Green Revolution "miracle rice" varieties developed here in the 1960s doubled yields in Asia. Further growth has stalled since the mid-1990s, as investment in agricultural research has declined. "Governments thought we'd won the war on food security," says IRRI Director General Robert Zeigler. "So they put money elsewhere." Photograph by John Stanmeyer, VII

Calls for Revitalizing Agriculture Research

Worried about this decline in basic research and the flattening of yield growth, scientists and research groups are calling for renewed emphasis on—and financing of—publicly funded agricultural research. Donald Kennedy, editor emeritus of Science, wrote in the magazine's October 3 issue that "for decades the agricultural sector has suffered from neglect. If we want to combat new strains of pests that destroy crops, find new crop varieties enriched in nutritional value, improve yields, develop resistance to disease and drought, and provide environmentally sensitive cultivation practices, then agricultural research must be a priority. Why isn't it?

"Over the past 35 years," he continued, "new ventures in U.S. public investment in agriculture research and development confronted a steady decline. At the same time, great advances in biochemistry, cell and molecular biology, and genetics were being made through increased funding to other agencies (besides USDA) for competitive-merit based research grants."

View Images With population expected to rise by about a third by 2050, crop production worldwide will need to double to keep up with rising demand for grains—which are also fed to animals—as the developing world becomes prosperous enough to eat more meat. NG Staff. Source: David Tilman, University of Minnesota

Kennedy also said that because of the regional or commodity-based "formula" method in which agricultural grants are allocated to the USDA, "agricultural research is now in a deficit position with respect to the infrastructure, human capital, and policies needed to address the challenges of food security."

Former USDA Secretary Dan Glickman, an advocate of increased public funding for agricultural research, recently was named chairman of the new Foundation for Food and Agricultural Research, which Congress has funded with $200 million for making research grants. Those grants must be matched with non-government money as the foundation's projects are identified. Congress's move represents a healthy contribution, but it also shows that the U.S. government's investment in the future of our food supply remains a tiny fraction of the public financial support for health and medical research. The National Institutes of Health receives almost $30 billion annually for its research grant-making, 150 times more than the funding for the Foundation on Food and Agricultural Research.

The vital role of agricultural research in improving harvests and farmer prosperity dominated discussions last month at the first-ever gathering of CGIAR, a consortium of the world's top agricultural researchers. During a panel discussion that focused on the role of staple crops in meeting future food needs, Tim Searchinger of the World Resources Institute starkly framed the looming challenge.

Targeting Africa, Asia, and "Leverage Points"

Getting higher yields of corn and soybean from U.S. farms to feed more meat animals is not the problem. The main challenge for agricultural research is to get usable knowledge to farmers in places such as sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia, so they can raise enough food for themselves and others, make money, and protect the land and water on their farms.

National Geographic Emerging Explorer Jerry Glover is working to achieve that in Africa by exploring integration of perennial legumes such as pigeon peas and groundnuts—plants that generate their own nitrogen fertilizer—into farmers' fields as a way to improve soil health and increase yields of food crops planted alongside the legumes. Glover's work at the U.S. Agency for International Development is part of Feed the Future, a U.S. government program designed to improve the harvests, and lives, of smallholder farmers.

Meeting the challenge of growing more food will also require targeting areas where additional research investment can be particularly effective in increasing productivity and protecting the environment.

Getting Knowledge "That Works"

Tim Folger writes in "The Next Green Revolution" in the October 2014 issue of National Geographic that the main challenge agricultural researchers face in helping farmers is not in creating low-tech or high-tech solutions to problems, but in providing appropriate knowledge "that works" and is useful to farmers on the land they farm.

Before we can better educate farmers about improved agricultural methods, we must identify what those methods should be. This is where low-profile, long-term agricultural research activities come in, projects and studies that create knowledge that help lead to successful harvests and prosperous farms.

Examples include more research into fruit, vegetable, crop, and livestock production; designing mobile phone networks to share market and production information; creative initiatives to capture and store water and irrigate fields; crop storage methods that trim the waste from harvests and protect grain from insects and rodents; solar-powered lighting; new and improved roads; and the creation of local purchasing cooperatives, financing strategies, and group markets to boost farmers' capital and revenue.

A new Green Revolution likely will hinge less on the kind of big research breakthroughs that defined the original Green Revolution and more on incremental examples like these that can work together and add up to better harvests and better lives for farmers.

Bruce Campbell, a CGIAR researcher, tells of Mary Ogello, a Kenyan farmer who was able to triple and quadruple her corn and sorghum harvests after researchers helped her access information about the start of rainy season and the likelihood of flood and drought on her land. Such thinking is part of a new approach called climate-smart agriculture that seeks to help farmers respond to climate change while reducing greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture that drive climate change.

View Images Rice bowls used for three meals a day by Chinese factory workers speak to our ever-rising need for food: By 2050 we'll have to grow enough food for more than 9.6 billion people, and by 2100 enough for a projected 11 billion. Photograph by John Stanmeyer, VII

A Rising Sense of Urgency

The era of cheap food seems to be past, and as has been the case for a half century, food supplies and prices will be influenced by the effectiveness of agricultural research. When Norman Borlaug worked to develop high-yield "Green Revolution" wheat varieties more than 50 years ago, he was driven by a sense of urgency. We could all benefit by adopting his sense of urgency in making agricultural research a priority once again.

Dennis Dimick has degrees in agriculture and agriculture journalism from Oregon State University and the University of Wisconsin, and is National Geographic's executive editor for environment. You can follow him on Twitter, Instagram, and flickr.