This week world leaders gathered at a "food summit" in Rome, Italy to discuss how to solve the ever-growing problem of feeding the world's poorest populations. Far from easy, the discussions proved that while everyone wants the same thing -- to provide nutritious sustenance to people everywhere -- the methods of going about doing so are many, complicated, and sometimes in opposition.

Most notable was the issue of cost. Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary General, scoffed at the $3 billion the UN announced was needed to solve the food crisis, saying that $20 billion would be a more appropriate figure.

Biofuels, too, proved to be a controversial topic, favored strongly representatives from the United States and Europe but strongly questioned by environmentalists, who argue that biofuels could accelerate global warming by encouraging deforestation and contribute to soaring commodities prices by diverting crops from food to biofuel production.

Another problem is the violence spawned by the fantastic inflation in food costs in Brazil, Haiti, India, Vietnam, and many African countries. Robert Zoellick, the president of the World Bank, called for the lifting of trade barriers in those countries that may be contributing to the near-double increase in food prices in those countries.

Oxfam spokesman Alexander Woollcombe, meanwhile, argued that wealthy nations should be examining their own trade policies instead of criticizing those of poorer ones.

One thing they did agree on, however, was to cut world hunger in half by 2015. "We are convinced that the international community needs to take urgent and coordinated action to combat the negative impacts of soaring prices on the world's most vulnerable countries and populations," they said.