This article, following closely on the Schaper "Holy Chow" screed, suggests a difference of opinion among the NCR editors, to me.  What better way to politicize food (per Schaper) than to deny it to those who cannot "do for themselves" or blame climate change.  If we eradicate hunger, we release one of the political levers that governments use to control the populace.  
The problem of hunger is not one of overpopulation, food scarcity, or climate change; it is one of logistics.  The article does get it right that conflict is one component, but others certainly include policies/systems that drive economies into ruin and kleptocracies.  
We can't have large-scale farms, however; "agribusiness" is bad, as everyone reading Schaper knows!
Maybe I'm wrong; maybe the editors agree - "good food" is meant for first-world nations and those whose sensitivities are politically free of fault - the merely sustainable should be parceled out to the rest of the globe.  Fixing AGW opens Paradise.

Labels: moderation: safe