With rising food prices starting to kick in globally the specter of food fights is becoming a reality (hat tip to Nevil).

Riots have been seen in many countries now and food, like climate change, is starting to be seen as a national security issue.  The Philipines is facing major rice shortages which is almost unthinkable for a country where rice is a staple. It is also causing serious unrest.

Even here in New Zealand consumers are unhappy about paying 60% more for a block of cheese which has been produced down the road.

Its a difficult situation that will take some sorting out. Producers want the best prices they can get and so will sell into the international market. Subsidies continue to distort the market.

World Bank President, Robert Zoellick has suggested a move away from direct aid and an attempt to remove barriers, create local markets and improve local production.

About time! That’s what i like about Kiva which promotes empowerment and local solutions. That is the way forward. Forget about the huge projects of the 1970s and 80s which dropped so many developing nations into the debt trap. Create a level playing field and encourage local solutions.

From the Rt Hon Balneus comes an interesting proposition to reduce teenage pregnancies: simply offer a cash incentive for not getting pregnant.

This came about from a post about population reduction being the answer to reducing carbon emissions. As i noted in my previous post population growth, especially in developing countries, is putting severe pressure on all resources.

China has been on to this well in advance with its one child per couple policy.  For developed countries teenage pregnancies have been a bit of a problem and something that has not been adequately addressed. This idea fits in neatly with the premise of the “Logic of Life” by Tim Harford.

Tim notes that people make complicated  calculations about potential trade offs every day whether its to have unprotected sex or park illegally. He argues cogently that we do respond to incentives and change behaviour when the pay offs look in our favour.

For example he notes research which showed juvenile crime lower or falling in US states where the age for adult criminality was lower than in states where it was higher. The reason was simple: the payoffs were worse for juvenile criminals in states where they would be tried in the adult system. Juveniles were simply responding to the market.

So for teenage pregnancies it is a similar story. Where welfare benefits are good for both mother and baby, there is no disincentive to get pregnant. So the payoffs for riskier behaviour are ok. That’s because as a society we value the rights of the baby and choose to provide for it regardless of how it arrived.

Now imagine we said to all teenage girls that for every year until a certain age (whether 18 or 21) they would receive $200 in a savings account for not getting pregnant. That would be an interesting idea to model.

Now I am sure there are many pros and cons to this but I like the idea of policymaking taking into account how people behave rather than what officials deem to be a good or right thing to do.