By the year 2050, 80% of the Earth's population will live in urban centres. Applying the most conservative estimates to current demographic trends, the human population will increase by about three billion people by then. An estimated 10 hectares of new land (about 20% larger than Brazil) will be needed to grow enough food to feed them, if traditional farming methods continue as they are practised today. At present, throughout the world, over 80% of the land that is suitable for raising crops is in use. Historically, some 15% of that has been laid waste by poor management practices. What can be done to ensure enough food for the world's population to live on ?
The concept of indoor farming is not new, since hothouse production of tomatoes and other produce has been in vogue for some time. What is new is the urgent need to scale up this technology to accommodate another three billion people. Many believe an entirely new approach to indoor farming is required, employing cutting-edge technologies. One such proposal is for the 'Vertical Farm'. The concept is of multi-storey buildings in which food crops are grown in environmentally controlled conditions. Situated in the heart of urban centres, they would drastically reduce the amount of transportation required to bring food to consumers. Vertical farms would need to be efficient, cheap to construct and safe to operate. If successfully implemented, proponents claim, vertical farms offer the promise of urban renewal, sustainable production of a safe and varied food supply (through year-round production of all crops), and the eventual repair of ecosystems that have been sacrificed for horizontal farming.
It took humans 10,000 years to learn how to grow most of the crops we now take for granted. Along the way, we despoiled most of the land we worked, often turning verdant, natural ecozones into semi-arid deserts. Within that same time frame, we evolved into an urban species, in which 60% of the human population now lives vertically in cities. This means that, for the majority, we humans have shelter from the elements, yet we subject our food-bearing plants to the rigours of the great outdoors and can do no more than hope for a good weather year. However, more often than not now, due to a rapidly changing climate, that is not what happens. Massive floods, long droughts, hurricanes and severe monsoons take their toll each year, destroying millions of tons of valuable crops.
Passage Analysis: Future Food Security
The provided passage highlights a critical challenge facing the world: feeding a rapidly growing human population, projected to reach 80% urban by the year 2050. It points out that traditional farming methods require vast amounts of land, much of which is already in use or has been degraded by poor management. Climate change further exacerbates these issues by causing extreme weather events like floods and droughts that destroy crops annually. To address this pressing need for food, the passage introduces the concept of 'Vertical Farm' as a potential innovative solution for growing food within urban centers.
Evaluating Option Conclusions
The question asks us to identify which statement may not be concluded from the information presented in the passage. Let's examine each option based on the text:
-
Statement 1: Climate change has made the future of agriculture uncertain.
The passage explicitly states, "Massive floods, long droughts, hurricanes and severe monsoons take their toll each year, destroying millions of tons of valuable crops." This evidence directly supports the conclusion that climate change introduces significant unpredictability and risk to agriculture, making its future uncertain. Therefore, this statement can be concluded from the passage.
-
Statement 2: Vertical farming is a sustainable option for the future of agriculture.
The passage mentions that proponents claim vertical farms "offer the promise of ... sustainable production of a safe and varied food supply (through year-round production of all crops)". While presented as a claim by proponents, the context positions vertical farming as a key solution addressing future food needs. This aligns with the idea that it is considered a sustainable option. Therefore, this statement can be concluded from the passage.
-
Statement 3: Vertical farming has no negative implications on agriculture.
The passage focuses heavily on the potential benefits and the urgent need for solutions like vertical farming. It outlines requirements for vertical farms, such as needing to be "efficient, cheap to construct and safe to operate," which suggests areas that require careful consideration and management. However, the text does not provide any explicit information or guarantees stating that vertical farming carries absolutely zero negative implications for agriculture. It highlights the advantages but does not conduct a comprehensive analysis of all potential downsides. Concluding that there are no negative implications is an absolute statement not directly supported by the provided text. Therefore, this statement may not be concluded from the passage.
-
Statement 4: Reduction of transportation costs is one of the main reasons why we should adopt vertical farming.
The passage clearly states that vertical farms, being "Situated in the heart of urban centres, they would drastically reduce the amount of transportation required to bring food to consumers." This significant benefit is presented as a key advantage, implying it is a major rationale for adopting this technology. Therefore, this statement can be concluded from the passage.
Based on the analysis of each statement against the provided text, the statement that cannot be definitively concluded is that vertical farming has no negative implications on agriculture.
Important Questions from Political Parties
Which of the following statements is correct with respect to the political parties in India?
- As of May 2025, former cricketer Harbhajan Singh represents which political party in the Rajya Sabha?
- Out of the three given numbers, the first number is twice the second and thrice the third. If the average of the three numbers is $121$, what is the difference between the first and the third number?
- What number should be added to each of the numbers $94, 24, 100$ and $26$ so that resulting numbers are in proportion?
- Which of the following statements may be concluded from the passage?
