Evolution not revolution of farming systemswill best feed and green the world

The challenge to properly feed a world population of 9.2 billion by 2050, that must be achieved on essentially currently cropped area, requires that food production be increased by 70%. This large increase can only be achieved by combinations of greater crop yields and more intensive cropping adapted to local conditions and availability of inputs. Farming systems are dynamic and continuously adapt to changing ecological, environmental and social conditions, while achieving greater production and resource-use efficiency by application of science and technology. This article argues that the solution to feed and green the world in 2050 is to support this evolution more strongly by providing farmers with necessary information, inputs, and recognition. There is no revolutionary alternative. Proposals to transform agriculture to low-input and organic systems would, because of low productiv- ity, exacerbate the challenge if applied in small part, and ensure failure if applied more widely. The challenge is, however, great. Irrigation, necessary to increase cropping intensity in many areas cannot be extended much more widely than at present, and it is uncertain if the current rate of crop yield increase can be maintained. Society needs greater recognition of the food-supply problem and must increase funding and support for agricultural research while it attends to issues of food waste and over consumption that can make valuable reductions to food demand from agriculture

Vivienda y Revolución. El Concurso entre Camaradas de la OSA, la Sección de Tipificación del Stroykom y la Casa Experimental de Transición Narkomfin (1926-1930) = Housing and Revolution. OSA’s Comradely Competition, Typification Section of the Stroykom and Narkomfin Experimental Transitional House (1926-1930)

La cuestión del asentamiento socialista en la URSS durante la década de 1920 estuvo caracterizada por el objetivo de definir y establecer un estado socialista en términos políticos, sociales y económicos. En este contexto de inestabilidad y cambio, un grupo de arquitectos pertenecientes a la Asociación de Arquitectos Contemporáneos, OSA, y liderado por Moisey Ginzburg, abordó el tema de la vivienda obrera asumiendo la responsabilidad y el compromiso por alcanzar un nuevo orden social. Su misión no consistió únicamente en solucionar el problema del alojamiento para los trabajadores en las grandes ciudades soviéticas, sino en redefinirlo como el marco adecuado para una sociedad sometida a un cambio sin precedentes que, al mismo tiempo y en un proceso dialéctico, debía contribuir a la construcción de esa nueva sociedad. La respuesta dada por la OSA trascendió el diseño inmediato bajo los estándares modernos establecidos en Occidente y tomó forma en un proceso de investigación que habría de prolongarse durante cinco años. Este trabajo, que culminó con la construcción y puesta en crisis de la Casa Narkomfin, se desarrolló en tres aproximaciones sucesivas. La primera, de carácter conceptual, consideró la participación ciudadana, así como de especialistas independientes, formalizándose en el Concurso entre Camaradas convocado por la OSA en 1926. La segunda aproximación al problema de la vivienda obrera se articuló a través de la investigación llevada a cabo por la Sección de Tipificación del Stroykom, esta vez desde premisas científicas y metodológicas. Finalmente, las conclusiones alcanzadas fueron transferidas a la práctica arquitectónica por medio de la construcción de seis Casas Experimentales de Transición, entre las que destacó la Casa Narkomfin. Este último acercamiento, de carácter empírico, ha sido tradicionalmente examinado por los expertos como un hecho aislado. Sin embargo, su estudio debe trascender necesariamente el genio del autor-creador en favor del proceso de investigación al que pertenece. En esta tesis, la Casa Narkomfin no se presenta sólo como el paradigma de vivienda soviética de vanguardia al que estamos acostumbrados, sino como un prototipo que recoge los principios y conclusiones alcanzados en las aproximaciones conceptuales y científicas precedentes. Únicamente desde este punto de vista cobra sentido la consideración de Ginzburg sobre su propio edificio como un medio propositivo y no impositivo: un proyecto concebido como una herramienta de transición hacia una sociedad más avanzada. ABSTRACT The question of mass housing in the USSR during the Twenties was marked by the drive to define and establish a socialist state in political, social and economic terms. In this context of instability and change, a group of architects gathered together under the Association of Contemporary Architects, OSA, led by Moisey Ginzburg, to address the issue of mass housing, thus taking on the responsibility and being committed to creating a new social order. Their quest not only involved solving the problem of housing for workers in large Soviet cities, but also redefining this solution as an appropriate framework for a society undergoing dramatic changes which, at the same time and in a dialectical process, would contribute to the creation of this new society. The solution provided by OSA transcended Modern standards of immediate design set by the West and was the result of a research process that would last five years. This work culminated in the construction of Narkomfin House and its self-criticism, developed in three successive approaches. The first was conceptual, being formalized in the Comradely Competition held by the OSA in 1926 and taking into account the participation of citizens and independent experts. The second approach to the problem of mass housing involved research developed by the Typification Section of the Stroykom, this time under scientific and methodological premises. Finally, the conclusions reached were put in practice with the construction of six Experimental Transitional Houses of which the most notable is Narkomfin House. This third empirical approach has traditionally been examined by scholars in isolation. However, its study must necessarily transcend the genius of the author-creator and involve the research process of which it is part. In this thesis, Narkomfin House is presented not only as the paradigm in Soviet housing avant-garde we are used to, but also as a prototype reflecting the principles and conclusions reached in the preceding conceptual and scientific approaches. Only from this point of view does Ginzburg’s understanding of his own building as a proactive and non-imposed environment make sense: a project conceived as a transition tool towards a more advanced society.