The findings of a 2013 report from the United Nations titled, “Wake Up Before It’s Too Late,” say small-scale, organic farming is the only way to sustainably fe

The findings of a 2013 report from the United Nations titled, “Wake Up Before It’s Too Late,” say small-scale, organic farming is the only way to sustainably feed the world. The report they're referring to can be accessed here: http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditcted2012d3_en.pdf http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditcted2012d3_en.pd... That report is not an official statement by the United Nations nor any of its working groups. It's published by a UN committee, but it's merely a collection of papers by individual authors. They say right in the introduction (page 3) that the opinions expressed in it are not those of the United Nations or any of its member States. So it's misleading to call it a "report from the United Nations". It's not even clear to me which article they're specifically referring to. I only skimmed it (it's 321 pages long) and did some keyword searches, but I don't see a direct "we must do only 'organic' farming or we all die" statement. Addressing concerns like crop monocultures can be done incrementally, without abandoning the benefits of pesticides and genetic modification. But even then, when you're talking about 'feeding the world', crop yields are the name of the game. And my understanding is exactly the opposite of this article: crop yields under organic farming techniques is lower than conventional modern farming (by ~20% according to http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X1100182X http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X11...). Further, I recall that this gap is below the level to sustain the world's current population. In other words, by advocating for 100% organic farming, you're intentionally advocating for a practice that will lead to starvation of part of the world's population. I can't see how that's conscionable.