Society, Science & Food Security :
Sustainable Agriculture Options?
• Outline of Coursework Essay - Choice
• Global Problems – Hunger, Climate Change &
Degradation
• GM Options – UK and African Perspectives
• Past Experiences of Agricultural Technology
• Low External Input Agricultural Options
• Local Food Debates & Possible Futures
Example of Sustainability Science
Debates – Niger Farming Systems
Example of Sustainability Science Debates
• See Sahelian Soils debates of Warren et al., 2001 – The
Geographical Journal, 167(4), 324-341.
• Examines whether ‘capitals’ framework helps assessments
of sustainability ‘strength’
– “Strong sustainability” - no loss of natural capital (e.g. soil)
– “Sensible sustainability” - conversion of some natural into other
forms of capital
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
– “Weak sustainability” - just increase total capital
Sahelian Soil Erosion - E. Niger
• “Despite high rates of erosion, we find it difficult to decide
whether the system is sustainable (using the capitals or any
other framework). It is even dubious whether sustainability
is an urgent concern”
– Warren et al., 2001; p.324
• Other (more important?) concerns –
–
–
–
Rainfall (climate change)
pests
lack of labour / illness
prices
• Livestock / urbanisation futures => why conserve soils ??
• Shows need to extend science into worlds of sociology,
politics and commerce
Problems of Environmental Sustainability
• Drive for soil conservation from agronomists and soil
scientists, rather than from local communities
• Can the sustainability of natural capital conflict with the
sustainability of livelihoods (social sustainability)
– “to be ‘socially sustainable’, some farmers must engage in
practices that lead to erosion” (Warren et al., 2001; p.333)
• How can you monitor / assess the ‘critical natural capacity’
needed for ‘sensible sustainability’ ?
– Often relates to maintaining environmental diversity that enables
risk management by societies
– Concept has serious operational and methodological difficulties
Links to Context of Food System
Sustainability
• Modern agricultural methods have been able to
increase food production, yet over 800 million
people remain food insecure (affected by hunger &
malnutrition)
• Poor & hungry people need low-cost readily
available technologies & practices to increase food
production without envt damage = low external
input agriculture (typically local & organic)
Agricultural Sustainability
• Sustainable Agricultural Systems typically –
– Integrate natural processes (e.g. nutrient cycling, natural
pest enemies) into food production system;
– Minimise the use of non-renewable inputs that damage
local environment or human health
– Make productive use of local knowledge & skills (human
capital)
– Maximise people’s capabilities to work together & share
best practice (social capital)
• (Pretty et al. 2003)
Coursework Essay (25% of module mark)
• EITHER • Outline current understandings of the threats to global food
security caused by land degradation & climate change &
analyse the potential for GM agricultural technology to
reduce hunger and malnutrition.
• OR –
• Outline the socio-economic and environmental issues
surrounding food globalization and analyse the usefulness
of ‘food miles’ as an indicator of food system sustainability.
• Submit to UG Earth & Environment office (via pigeon holes
in Level 9 Reception of Earth Sciences) by Tuesday
November 7th
Good Practice in Essay Writing
• Introduction – including your specific aim of the essay and brief
overview of structure followed (ie. in your words from the start!)
• Main body –
– Contrasting views and your analysis to show your understanding
– Use diagrams where possible to cut the waffle
– Always reference secondary data / views in text of essay (author, year) eg.
(FAO, 2000; UNEP, 1997; DEFRA, 2003; Dougill, 2006)
– Logical flow to arguments
• Conclusion – synthesis of main views and your views on key
messages for future
• Reference list – write out in full sources used – essential for all
coursework, though not expected in exam!
Q1 Context - Global Hunger Map - FAO
2000
Social / Political Context
• MDG 1, Target 2 – “Halve between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of
people who suffer from hunger”
• In South Asia the challenge is improving the distribution of plentifully
available food
• In Sub-Saharan Africa the challenge also involves agricultural
productivity
• UNDP HDR2003 states that – “Increased investments are needed to
research & develop better technologies &
disseminate them through extension services.
Yet public investments & donor support for
agriculture have fallen in recent decades”
• FAO 2004 – “genetic engineering is a
‘global war of rhetoric’ …biotechnology can
overcome production constraints that are more
difficult or intractable with conventional breeding
.. But it’s not a panacea”
Global Trends in Food Production
Global Environmental
Degradation & Poverty Links
• Global and National Degradation Estimates
• Degradation - Poverty - Famine links
• Failings of soil science & problems caused
Poverty - Environment Linkages Conventional Views
“Predominantly the poor of the world depend directly on natural
resources, through cultivation, herding, collecting or hunting for their
livelihoods. Therefore, for the livelihoods to be sustainable, the
natural resources must be sustained”
– Rennie and Singh, 1996; p.9
• “There is no doubt that human societal development depends on the
physical resource base of the globe”
– Potter et al., 1999; p.132
• “land degradation is the single most pressing global environmental
problem (especially for the world’s poor)”
– Stocking, 2000; p.287
Poverty - Environment Linkages Conventional Views
“Land degradation is the ‘quiet crisis’ (making) land users more
vulnerable to adverse conditions such as drought”
– Blaikie and Brookfield (1987)
“Ultimately land degradation is a social problem with economic costs
attached to it”
– Enters, 1997
“2.6 billion people affected by land degradation, influencing over 33 %
of the Earth’s land surface”
– Snel and Bot, 2002 - http://www.fao.org/landandwater/agll/lada/emailconf.stm
Nitrogen Application by Region – Green
Revolution Technology
•
Source: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO),
FAOSTAT Statistical Database (FAO, Rome, 1997).
Tractor Use
http://www.ourplanet.com/aaas/pages/population02.html#
Desertification (Land Degradation in
Drylands): The first big environmental issue
Desertification : context
“land degradation in dryland areas resulting from various
factors, including climatic variations and human activities”
– UNCCD, 1995
• Degradation is “a reduction of the resource potential by one
or a number of processes operating on the land” (UNEP,
1997)
• i.e. has impact on land’s economic value
“dryland degradation is occurring (&) is a v. serious threat to
to the well being of the billion or so people in drylands”
– Stiles, 1995; p.3
• Controversial issue as “at the interface between science,
politics and decision makers”
– Thomas, 1997; p.583
Conventional views on aid - ‘top down’
• Global extent of problems such as famine, poverty & land
degradation requires regional or global scale solutions
• Imposed measures aimed at resource conservation the key
to environmental sustainability
Conventional approaches to
Development Intervention
• Standard solutions to standard problems - often focused on
mechanical conservation of soil, reducing overgrazing based
on ecological indicator species presence only
• Often strictly enforced against desires of local people and
undermining traditional practices
• Lack of local involvement meant poorly maintained after
initial expenditure
Recent change of emphasis (UNCED
and UNCCD)
Aid and development initiatives now recognise need for:
• Locally appropriate solutions based on integrated
resource management
• Local community involvement at all stages, esp. project
formulation
• Interdisciplinary research
IPCC (2001) Impacts, Adaptation &
Vulnerability - Key Findings
• Key emerging findings
1. High confidence of regional climate changes
2. Increase in extreme events (see Table SPM-1), difficult to quantify
relative impact of climate and other s-e factors
3. Well established science on vulnerability of key ecosystems
4. Sensitivity of human systems recognised, varies with location,
time, and social, economic and env conditions - both adverse and
beneficial impacts outlined
5. Impacts of increased frequency of extreme events expected to fall
disproportionately on the poor (See Table SPM-1)
IPCC (2001) Impacts, Adaptation &
Vulnerability - Key Findings
• Cont...
6. Potential of CC leading to irreversible changes in Earth systems
not yet evaluated (a further cause of uncertainty / scaremongering)
7. Adaptation necessary, but will incur costs and will not prevent all
damages. Can draw on existing eg’s of adaptation strategies
8. Ability to adapt depends on wealth, technology, education,
information, skills, infrastructure & resource access …
=> poorer societies have less adaptive capacity and are more
vulnerable to CC changes
9. Policies for improved env management and poverty reduction
offer potential ‘win-win’ options
Emergence of GM in world agriculture:
risks and benefits - Pretty, 2001
• Biotechnology includes conventional breeding that has
resulted in many yield increases & nutritional improvements
to major crop types (see cassava e.g. in FAO World Hunger
Report, 2000)
• GM is the transfer of DNA from one organism to another, so
allowing the recipient to express traits of the donor
• Research focused in developed nations (now 3 generations
of products) & calls for moratorium on research in
developing world (e.g. Oxfam)
• Environmental and health impacts remain unknown - need
for precautionary stance?
Cassava research: West African success story
• Cassava root - excellent energy source; leaves rich in vit A,
C, Fe and Ca
• New varieties produced using biotechnology (crossbreeding) in 1980s; reduced undernourishment markedly Ghana from 62 to 10%; Nigeria 44 to 8% (1981-1998)
• Improved drought resistance crucial
Genetic Modification of Food – Gene
Revolution?
• Genetic Modification (GM) – “involves moving genetic material from
the cells of one organism to those of another, be they related or
unrelated” (DEFRA, 2003)
• The first GM plants were bred in the 1980s, and the first commercial
crops were grown on a large scale in 1996.
• Globally, the four main GM crops being grown commercially are
soybean (62 % of global soybean), maize (19 %), cotton (13 %) and
oilseed rape (5 %).
• In 2002, GM crops grown worldwide covered twice the land area of
Britain (58.7 million hectares)
• Globally, approximately 6 million farmers in 16 countries (7
developed; 9 developing) grow GM crops, with 75 per cent of these
farmers coming from the developing world
– All from DEFRA, 2003 - http://www.gmnation.org.uk/
Global Distribution of GM Crop Growth
GM – Scientific Context
•
•
•
•
See scientific debates at –
http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/gm/
http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/gm/
An acceptance that major communication / public
awareness required, but an assumption that GM crops are
here to stay & need to ensure benefits reach developing
nations
• Stress need to move away from opinionated views on ‘good’
or ‘bad’ to recognise that must assess safety of each new
product on its own individual merit
• UK field trials showed that GM maize had no detrimental
impact on soil biodiversity of fields; beet and rape
significantly reduced biodiversity
GM Nation? The Main Findings
• People are generally uneasy about GM
• The more people engage in GM issues, the harder their
attitudes – narrow-but-deep group surveyed across 2 weeks
of information provision
• There is little support for early commercialisation
• There is widespread mistrust of Government and MNC’s
• There is a broad desire to know more and for more research
to be done – “no one knows enough at the moment”
• Developing countries have special interests
• The debate was welcomed and valued
UK Media Portrayal of GM debate Frankenstein Foods
• Much media attention and concern in tabloid press decrying
“unnatural” process
• Much confusion with mad cow disease and distrust of food safety
issues of great public concern since the early 1990s
• Campaigns driven by prominent Environmental groups (FoE,
Greenpeace) & media figures (Prince of Wales, celebrity chefs) taken on-board by producers / supermarkets due to consumer pressure
Some GM headlines in last 10 years –
“A Hot Potato”
•
•
•
•
“Frankenstein Food Fiasco” - Daily Express, 99
“Mutant tomatoes not to our taste” - Daily Mail, 99
“GM foods to avoid like the plague” - Guardian, 00
“Frankenstein foods - are we being hysterical?” London Evening Standard, 00
• => Catchy headlines helped turn Europeans so
strongly against GM foods, while Americans have
barely noticed their spread
UK - Lessons to be Learned
• The Precautionary Principle drives the need for more
scientific investigation, but uncertainty in scientific
messages prone to mis-representation
• Public concerns (over role of science & MNC’s) and
consumer patterns are more important drivers of change
than scientific arguments or Government support
• Health and environment remain high on the agenda and
unlikely that UK public views will change even with further
scientific studies
Hunger & GM
• GM Nation recognised that developing countries have
special interests and class this as “debate within the debate”
• Active participants reject view that GM could benefit
developing countries, by a majority
• Opposition based less on negative feelings to GM, but more
on the view that there are better ways to promote
development (fair trade, better food distribution, better
governance etc.)
• People sceptical as to whether MNC’s will
deliver benefits to people of developing world
GM - An African perspective
• Clear message delivered to OECD Conference on Food Safety, July
2000 (quoted from Krebs, 2000)
• “We would like to be like you, with plenty of food for our people. We
need every tool at our disposal to achieve this, including
biotechnology, which will allow us to grow things without costly
chemicals and irrigation systems we cannot afford”
• “GM may be better for Africa than older technologies, like those of
the Green Revolution .. Which failed Africa because it came from the
West”
– Wambungu, 2000
• Many African opponents –
• “Africa’s genetic resources are being exploited by
global transnational corporations”
– Wangari Maathai, 2004
Additional Reading for Q 1
DEFRA (2003) GM Nation? The findings of the public debate. Available
@ http://www.gmnation.org.uk/docs/GMNation_FinalReport.pdf
FAO (2004) The State of Food and Agriculture 2003 – 2004: Agricultural
Biotechnology: meeting the needs of the poor? Available @
http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/docrep/006/Y5160E/Y5160E00.HTM
Krebs, J. (2000) Seeds of hope. New Scientist, 5/8/00, 48-49. See also http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/gm/
Rowell, A. (2003) Don’t Worry It’s Safe to Eat: The True story of GM
food, BSE and Foot and Mouth. Earthscan, London. Chapter 1.
UNDP (2003) Human Development Report 2003. See overview from http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/
Q2 Specific Context – Food System
Sustainability & Local Food
• Local v. Global Conflict in Hunger & Environment Debate
• Local food – an argument for using ‘Food Miles’ as an
indicator of the sustainability of our food buying choices
• Global trade – strong focus on fair/ethical trade as a better
route to poverty alleviation than simply aid-based approach
• => Is ‘Food Miles’ concept being used as an ethical trade
barrier by vested interests in western food industry?
Problems of Global Food Flows
• Agri-businesses developing taking fertile
agricultural land out of hands of local communities
across developing world => Local food often best
solution for the South too !?
• CO2 emissions associated with food transport
• Dependence on surplus food aid makes poor
consumers vulnerable to climate change elsewhere
(e.g. drought in US => hunger in West Africa)
Additional Reading for Q2
• Sustain. (2001) Eating Oil: food supply in a changing climate. [Internet]
Available form http://www.sustainweb.org/pdf/eatoil_sumary.PDF
• DEFRA . (2005) The Validity of Food Miles as an Indicator of Sustainable
• Development. [Internet] Available from
• http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/reports/foodmiles/execsumm.pdf
• Pretty, J. et al. (2005) Farm costs and food miles: An assessment of the full
cost of the UK weekly food basket. Food Policy. 30. pp 1-19.
• Blanke, M. & Burdick, B. (2005) Food (miles) for Thought - Energy Balance
for Locally-grown versus Imported Apple Fruit. Environmental Science and
Pollution Research. 12 (3). Pp 125-127.
• Halweil, B (2004) Eat Here: reclaiming homegrown pleasures in a global
supermarket. New York, W.W. Norton and Company
• Lang, T. & Heasman, M (2004) Food Wars: the global battle for mouths,
minds and markets. London, Earthscan.
• Norberg-Hodge, H. et al. (2002) Bringing the food economy home : local
alternatives to global agribusiness. London, Zed Books.