AP® Environmental Science review sheet from Aim for Five (aimforfive.com/enviro/units/5/5-3)
Unit 5 · Topic 5.3
5.3 The Green Revolution
The Green Revolution, beginning in the mid-1900s, greatly increased food production using high-yield crop varieties, synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation and machinery. It helped feed billions of people, but it also increased fossil fuel use, water use and pollution and reduced the genetic diversity of crops.
Key terms
- Green Revolution
- high-yield varieties
- mechanization
- synthetic fertilizer
- monoculture
What changed
Starting in the 1940s in Mexico and spreading to India, Pakistan and much of Asia and Latin America in the 1960s, the Green Revolution transformed farming. Plant scientist Norman Borlaug developed short-stemmed, disease-resistant wheat that produced much more grain. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970 for his role in reducing hunger. Similar high-yield rice varieties followed.
- High-yield varieties: crops bred to produce more grain per plant, often with short, sturdy stems that don't fall over under heavy grain heads.
- Synthetic fertilizers: nitrogen made by the Haber-Bosch process, plus phosphorus and potassium, to feed those high-yield crops.
- Pesticides and herbicides: to protect large fields of a single crop.
- Irrigation: high-yield varieties need reliable water.
- Mechanization: tractors, harvesters and other machines replaced much human and animal labor.
Benefits
Food production rose dramatically, and grain yields in many countries roughly doubled or more within a few decades. Countries that had faced famines, like India, became able to feed their growing populations. Food became cheaper. Machinery let fewer workers farm more land, which raised efficiency and profits for many farms. Because each hectare produced more, less new land had to be cleared for farms than would otherwise have been needed.
Costs
A monoculture is a large area planted with one crop variety. It's efficient to plant, spray and harvest. But because all the plants are genetically similar, a single pest or disease can spread through the whole crop. In 1970, a fungal disease called southern corn leaf blight destroyed about 15% of the U.S. corn crop, largely because most of the corn shared the same vulnerable genetic trait.
- Fossil fuel use: machinery runs on fuel, and making synthetic nitrogen fertilizer takes large amounts of natural gas.
- Water use: more irrigation led to depleted aquifers, waterlogging and salinization.
- Pollution: fertilizer runoff causes eutrophication; pesticides harm wildlife and can contaminate water.
- Soil degradation: heavy machinery compacts soil, and intensive tilling increases erosion.
- Monoculture and lost genetic diversity: farmers planted huge areas of a single high-yield variety, replacing many local varieties.
- Social effects: the expensive inputs favored larger farms that could afford them.
Beyond the Green Revolution
Today, genetically modified (GM) crops, whose genes have been changed, often by adding a gene from another organism, to resist pests or herbicides, continue the push for higher yields. They raise many of the same tradeoffs: higher production versus concerns about reduced genetic diversity and pest resistance. Sustainable agriculture (topic 5.15) tries to keep high yields while lowering these costs.
Worked examples
Try each one yourself first, then open the solution.
- Example 1
Percent increase versus ‘times as much’ (trap)
Before the Green Revolution, a region's wheat yield was 1.0 metric ton per hectare. Twenty years later, it was 2.5 metric tons per hectare. A student says this is a 250% increase. Is the student right?
Show the solutionHide the solution
- Step 1: Percent change = (new − old) ÷ old × 100.
- Step 2: (2.5 − 1.0) ÷ 1.0 × 100 = 1.5 × 100 = 150%.
- Step 3: The student confused ‘2.5 times as much’ with ‘a 250% increase’. The new yield is 250% of the old yield, which is an increase of 150%.
Answer: No. The yield is 2.5 times the original, which is a 150% increase, not 250%.
- Example 2
Weighing a tradeoff
Describe one environmental benefit and one environmental cost of high-yield crop varieties planted as monocultures.
Show the solutionHide the solution
- Step 1: Benefit: more food per hectare means less forest or grassland has to be cleared for farming to feed the same number of people, which protects habitat.
- Step 2: Cost: monocultures have low genetic diversity, so a pest or disease that attacks the variety can spread through whole regions, which also encourages heavy pesticide use.
- Step 3: A strong answer links each one to a specific result.
Answer: Benefit: higher yields reduce the land that must be cleared. Cost: low genetic diversity makes crops vulnerable to pests and diseases and encourages heavy pesticide use.
Common mistakes
- Saying the Green Revolution was purely good or purely bad. Exam answers should show the tradeoff.
- Forgetting the fossil fuel link. Both machinery and synthetic nitrogen fertilizer depend heavily on fossil fuels.
- Confusing ‘times as much’ with percent increase in yield calculations.
On the exam
- Expect questions asking for a benefit and a drawback of Green Revolution practices. Be specific, like naming monoculture and loss of genetic diversity.
- Connect Green Revolution irrigation to salinization (5.5) and fertilizers to eutrophication (8.5).
Connected topics
Videos
Check yourself
4 questions on 5.3 The Green Revolution. Pick an answer to see if you got it, and why.
Which statement best describes an environmental trade-off of the Green Revolution?
| Year | Average grain yield (metric tons per hectare) | Synthetic fertilizer applied (kg per hectare) |
|---|---|---|
| 1960 | 1.0 | 5 |
| 1980 | 2.0 | 60 |
| 2000 | 3.0 | 140 |
Hypothetical data for a country that adopted Green Revolution methods in the 1960s
By what percentage did the average grain yield increase from 1960 to 2000?
Which statement is best supported by the data?
A region plants a single high-yield wheat variety on nearly every farm. Which risk is most likely to increase?
0 of 4 answered