Science Magazine has removed the pay wall from “Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People.” The paper concludes, as many have before, that keeping up with humanity’s needs as numbers and appetites crest toward mid-century poses big challenges. But it expresses optimism that a sustained focus on efficiency, technology and policy innovations can do the trick. (The images above, from the paper, show how investments in water storage and other measures helped restore vegetation in a dry region in Niger.) Here’s the summary:

Continuing population and consumption growth will mean that the global demand for food will increase for at least another 40 years. Growing competition for land, water, and energy, in addition to the overexploitation of fisheries, will affect our ability to produce food, as will the urgent requirement to reduce the impact of the food system on the environment. The effects of climate change are a further threat. But the world can produce more food and can ensure that it is used more efficiently and equitably. A multifaceted and linked global strategy is needed to ensure sustainable and equitable food security, different components of which are explored here.

The authors include a menu of possible uses for genetically modified crops, but stress that technology alone is far from sufficient if policies are not shifted to advance the appropriate use of the right agricultural strategy or tool in the right place. Over all, a focus on “sustainable intensification” of production of crops and livestock will be vital to limiting impacts on remaining undeveloped ecosystems.

Aquaculture holds great promise, if practiced appropriately and efficiently, as does livestock production, the authors say, noting the reality that meat will long remain a part of most diets, particularly in populations moving out of poverty.

In the end, they say, one reality has to be a shift from simply boosting production to a new, interdisciplinary focus on getting the most food value with the least loss of land and other resources. The kicker?

[W]e must avoid the temptation to further sacrifice Earth’s already hugely depleted biodiversity for easy gains in food production, not only because biodiversity provides many of the public goods on which mankind relies but also because we do not have the right to deprive future generations of its economic and cultural benefits. Together, these challenges amount to a perfect storm. Navigating the storm will require a revolution in the social and natural sciences concerned with food production, as well as a breaking down of barriers between fields. The goal is no longer simply to maximize productivity, but to optimize across a far more complex landscape of production, environmental, and social justice outcomes.

[UPDATE, 2/12] This edition of Science also contains an analysis by the State Department’s Nina Fedoroff and 14 other authors, titled “Radically Rethinking Agriculture for the 21st Century.” It centers on technological innovation, as well, including advancing agriculture in saline conditions and environmentally-sound aquaculture. But its central take-home point is that society needs to reexamine its approach to genetically modified crops. Here’s the nut:

The world has consumed GM crops for 13 years without incident. The first few GM crops that have been grown very widely, including insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant corn, cotton, canola, and soybeans, have increased agricultural productivity and farmers’ incomes. They have also had environmental and health benefits, such as decreased use of pesticides and herbicides and increased use of no-till farming. Despite the excellent safety and efficacy record of GM crops, regulatory policies remain almost as restrictive as they were when GM crops were first introduced. In the United States, case-by-case review by at least two and sometimes three regulatory agencies (USDA, EPA, and FDA) is still commonly the rule rather than the exception. Perhaps the most detrimental effect of this complex, costly, and time-intensive regulatory apparatus is the virtual exclusion of public-sector researchers from the use of molecular methods to improve crops for farmers. As a result, there are still only a few GM crops, primarily those for which there is a large seed market, and the benefits of biotechnology have not been realized for the vast majority of food crops.

There’ll be more here in coming months on other models for advancing agriculture without threatening the environment.

UPDATE 2 p.m.: In a fresh strip, the cartoonist Marc Roberts tweaks both sides in the debate over genetics and crops, which has a habit of not staying centered on data.