the association for unmanned vehicle systems international breaks down precision agriculture into two components: remote sensing and precision application. remote sensors are set up throughout a given area to track the health of plants and water, record growth rate and resource usage, and scan for potential health concerns. this substantial accumulation of data allows farmers to selectively use (i.e., precisely apply) the exact amount of nutrients, resources, or pesticides necessary for their fields. 

family farms, such as the mcpheeters in nebraska, are able to survive with a fraction of their historical labor force due to the application of sensor technology and surveillance drones. with 3,000 acres of row crops (mostly corn for ethanol or fritos) that normally took 40 people and a handful of families, this small-scale operation employs just 5 workers through the usage of this new technology. 

to that end, the world food programme — the food assistance branch of the united nations — underscores the significance of improved access to and quality of data as the foundation for any impactful initiative on malnutrition, food security, or food access. 

the food and agriculture organization focuses on solutions to transform our food supply chains, resource economies and systems of production and distribution to a more food secure reality for its 194 member countries. “transforming our food systems requires innovative solutions to ensure food security and nutrition for all,” said fao director-general qu dongyu. “at fao, together with the development of ai tools, we work towards establishing the international platform for digital food and agriculture — an inclusive multi-stakeholder forum for identifying and discussing the potential benefits and risks of digitalization of the food and agricultural sectors,” he added. these efforts not only challenge the mainstream, international food apparatus, but also provide the chance to bridge technological inequities between the global north and global south. that being said, 6 billion people are without wide bandwidth data transmission today, 4 billion without internet, 2 billion without mobile phones, and 400 million people are without a digital signal.

in the spirit of revitalizing international cooperation for lofty goals, the rome call for artificial intelligence (ai) ethics is a multi-industry, private-public pledge to utilize artificial intelligence to harness the power of big data in solving food insecurity, poverty and starvation. the fao director-general and italy’s minister for technological innovation and digitalization, paola pisano, coordinated between global leaders in technology and food production (microsoft and ibm) in signing the “rome call for ai ethics” in a ceremony presided by archbishop vincenzo paglia, president of the pontifical academy for life and endorsed by pope francis himself.

there is some skepticism, however, in the efficacy of technology to be the end-all, be-all solution to growing food demand and consumption. jonah kolb, vice president at farmland management group moore & warner, and arne duss, the founder and ceo of highpath consulting, highlighted several areas of concern for the application of agtech into common practice: 

• application of yield-enhancing technology is impractical considering that most u.s. farms are owned by their operators (family farms).
• there is scarce interest in changing farm practice amongst u.s. farmers, 62% of which are near their retirement age.
• opportunities for technological applications are limited in the u.s., which only has one growing season.

regardless, precision agriculture provides a unique opportunity to correct unsustainable agricultural practices and norms. this form of agriculture may exacerbate the loss in farm jobs and pose issues for laborers without the means to adapt to this technology. more than just providing technical solutions, ethically-applied artificial intelligence can allow for a localized food system that enables small-scale production in the spirit of holism rather than the status quo by prioritizing big agriculture and the industrial agricultural complex. 

for a graduate level course on urban sustainability at the george washington university, our group studied ways in which cincinnati, denver, salt lake city, and minneapolis are working towards sustainable transit initiatives. we presented our research at the american institute of architects in washington dc.

“what we’re pushing for and suggesting is kind of a leave-it-as-it-policy,” said paul joyce of the alpine triangle coalition. “we don’t want to change a lot about the alpine triangle. we just don’t want a lot to change about it in the future.”

but some local residents are apprehensive about closing public land to future mining. while others worry that a conservation land designation might negatively impact tourism.

japan is where pearls were first cultured in the early 20th century by placing a small bead within the akoya oyster, then submerging the oyster for more than a year in the cool waters of ago bay, about a two-hour drive from kobe. these days there are only a dozen or so small pearl farms at once what was the world epicenter of pearl cultivation.

the process of culturing pearls is a practice more complicated than that of napa valley winemaking. it’s a nuanced science, influenced by intuitive sense and experience. the lower the oyster is placed in the water, the colder the water. this is good, since colder temperatures can trigger a richer lustre in pearls. too low, though, and the amount of oxygen the oyster gets is reduced and that increases mortality. if the oyster grows too fast, the pearl’s shape will be irregular.

in addition to the notorious red tide, an aggressive infestation of plankton, and pollution, the reason for the precipitous drop in japanese pearl production is because of global warming, which has raised the temperature of the waters in ago bay by as much as three degrees over the last decade.

ed note: stephen g. bloom is the author of tears of mermaids: the secret story of pearls (st. martin’s press)

realistically – individuals can do a lot of little things to help reduce their carbon footprint – like voting with their pocketbooks and all. this, however, pales in comparison to what things like big industries and power plants are pumping out. now i realize that things like passenger car exhaust contributes to a significant portion of carbon emissions, but even here there’s only so much people can do with the current state of transportation, job options, and cultural entrenchment. if you’ve got to commute, then you gotta do it. and if it’s cheaper (time-wise mostly) to drive there alone then that’s what people will be (and are) doing. time is the most valuable commodity these days, and if it’s faster to go alone by car – they’ll do it. until the systems themselves change to accommodate new methods that allow people to change effectively with them, nothing on our individual homefronts are going to change.

the truth is – national and state policy directives guide (1) government, (2) corporate, and (3) personal behavior the most. just look at the recent “hands-free” laws that took effect in oregon in jan 2010. would people really honor this directive if it weren’t enforced? no. and it is being enforced, so they ultimately will. simple as that. you see enough people getting pulled over and you’ll find religion here.

the bottom line is that until we have a strong cohesive net of state and national policies that drive this revolution, nothing significant is going to happen. people are going to continue to do whatever’s convenient during the coarse of their busy lives and that’s about it. same goes for businesses. when it comes to competition in the existing arena – you can only go green so much before it becomes burdensome and affects the bottom line.