While I understand your logic, I don't think you can make this claim universally. Our food distribution systems are set up to be efficient, but they are also set up to be beneficial for a very small number of players.

For example there are very few distributors for grain: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-big-five...

The systems we have in place are meant to protect that near monopoly as much as they are to distribute food. On top of that, countries give loans to poor countries in exchange for 2 promises: 1) that they use the money to buy grain from the country lending the money 2) they don't grow grain themselves. In that way, we actively undermine world agriculture.

If your massive improvement disrupts these players, I think you're going to be in for a very rough time of it. Things like GMO further solidify the near monopolies, by restricting where you can buy seed, etc. This is one of the reasons you see a big political push for them.