Taken from shiftfrequency.com
For the richest nations access to food is almost as obvious as the air we breathe. We wake up day in and day out without having to worry as to whether we will be able to have a meal. As long we have access to employment in an economically strong society, we have access to food. As we are not worried about our access to food, for the most of the time we seem not to be much bothered about the ways our food is produced. However, as the current debate on sustainability shows, we cannot afford to be unaffected anymore. We should be very concerned, and even disgruntled maybe, as to the conditions our food is currently produced, as this has eventually the impact on the question whether we will be fed at all. And this does not only concern the quantity of what we eat, but also the quality of what we are eating, i.e. how nutritious is our food.
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), is an UN body who is very much concerned with the question of the way the world is going to feed itself beyond tomorrow. According to a research conducted by them, the world population will reach 9.1 billion people worldwide by 2050. This means that the world is facing a huge challenge when it concerns access to the most basic need of our existence. Without a solution and change the way we deal with our access to resources, a simple steak for dinner is a luxury we just cannot afford.
Technology has often been seen as the solution to most of our daily problems. As with any solutions, no solution alone is perfect for an indefinite time. Yet, many of us continue to turn our hope to technology to come and save the day. In the case of food production, this has turned out to be quite an illusion. Worse yet, some stories show that technology has endangered, rather than improved the sustainability of farming activities.
The most fervent opponent of GM (genetically modified) food production so far has been Green Peace. In several and ongoing campaigns they have tried to create awareness as to the dangers of GM Food production. According to the website of Green Peace, GM crops are created in the lab by inserting genes into the plants and into the foods that we eat. They distinguish between 2 types of GM crops, one is the engineering of crops in absorbing herbicides without dying and the other is the engineering to produce pesticides within the plant itself. Both aims at the production of a more resistant and stable crops. Several problems have been identified with GM crops[1]; among others this concerns health impact on animals fed by GM crops, environmental impact due to the increased use of pesticide and also unexpected toxins or allergens in food that can affect the nutritional value. In addition, farmers have due to the use of GM crops increasingly become dependent on the use of GM for the continuance of their businesses. Despite these critics, most big corporations producing the GM technology still holds that GM is the solution for the future! One glance at the website of the world leading GM seed provider Monsanto, we are hailed in with the many benefits of GM. The benefits of GM is according to them numerous. Not only will it allow farmers to produce more, to conserve more, it eventually will improve the lives of all of us, it is the answer to our future needs!
The debate as to what should secure our future access to food is thus made difficult, due to the different perceptions on GM that can be discerned. Perhaps, the most important view is the view of the consumer, who actually is going to consume the food. How does the consumer perceive the use of GM as solution to our daily diet? Unfortunately, the consumer of which much of their knowledge is dependent on correct information given by the government as to the dangers of their purchase is itself also much at a loss. In a report conducted by the Food Standard Agency (FSA)[2], consumers are very afraid of health risks, but at the same time they also realize that many billions mouth needs to be fed. The research of FSA has shown that consumer’s sentiment towards GM is much dependent on their trust in the Authority and technology in general. People who are in general more averse towards Authority and the ‘miracle’ of technology tend to have a more skeptical view on what GM eventually can do for mankind.
When it concern the production of meat, increasingly we see more and more farmers concentrating their activities in what has been termed as Mega-farms’. The phenomenon of Mega-farms is characterized by a decrease number of farms, while increasing the numbers of animals on the farms and the area of the farm. This trend has been debatable, although the solution may be economically sound, from an environmental, health and ethical perspective this has been quite problematic. From an economic perspective, various studies have shown that producers of Mega-farms have been more successfully able to capture technology advances. This has resulted in lower production costs and has also improved the quality of the final product for the consumer[3]. The negative impacts of Mega-farms cannot be underestimated however. Mention can be made on the spread of animal diseases, health risks for citizens, nasty odour pressure on urban areas and environmental pressure on nature areas, consequently lowering the quality of life in rural areas[4].
What this two cases show is that the future of food security is getting more and more complex in a world where the population is ever more increasing. Technological solutions and economic efficiency that has been offered so far as a solution to the increasing food demand, has proven not to be unproblematic. The way forward is not clear-cut as the different debate has shown. One thing is however clear, solutions for future problems should entail a more systematic approach, as Senge would argue. Offering a solution from one angle is not sufficient, as it only gives us the solution for that particular hitch. We need a broader systemic view. This means that different stakeholders need to come together to collaborate on a solution, only then will a solution be approached incorporating different angles. Understanding each other needs is indispensable for reaching a sustainable solution. Because, the future of food security is not only to strike a balance for the sake of animal welfare and the environment, although undoubtedly important, it also concerns the economic survival of producers and answering the ongoing need of unconcerned access to a nutritious plate of food!
Shuyi Wu
[1] Why genetically engineered food is dangerous: New report by genetic engineers.
[2] R. Sheldon, N. Cleghorn e.a., ‘Exploring attitudes to GM food’, Report of National Centre for Social research in preparation for Food Standard Agency 2009.
[3] G.L. Benjamin. ‘Industrialization in hog production: implications for Midwest agriculture’, Economic perspectives, 1997-21.
[4] For more on this topic, see http://edepot.wur.nl/239734
No comments:
Post a Comment