If food will no longer be cheap, must that be so unpalatable?

           A lengthy couple of stories describing the trade-off between biofuels and higher food prices will make for a particularly ominous cover for The Economist next week. High food prices, as many have observed, hurt anyone who loses more from food than he gains from a higher income. So if governments do nothing to amend the disparity, the world faces more misery, especially among the urban poor.
        However, the Economist coverage takes a balanced view and even surprises us for being possibly the first time we've ever seen the food versus fuel argument framed optimistically.
        The advent of biofuels and subsequently higher priced food, one article in the issue posits, chance to break the "dizzying" cycle of government subsidies and the counter-measure of protective tariffs, because higher food prices will mean subsidies can stop messing with a fair market. The European Union is already preparing to do a top-down review of its hugely distorting Common Agricultural Policy.
        "The reforms of the past few decades have, in fact, grappled with the rich world's farm programmes—but only timidly. Now comes the chance for politicians to show that they are serious when they say they want to put agriculture right."