Sunday, January 31, 2016
Alternative Food Movements - Food Justice and Sovereignty
The 2008 Global Food Crisis in which food prices rose exorbitantly, resulting in record levels of global hunger combined with record profits for major agrifood corporations may have stemmed from various proximate causes such as droughts, high oil prices, and the huge amount of grain used to feed livestock, but it is clearly the underlying structure of the global food industry, the corporate food regime, at the root of the problem (Holt-Ginenez, 2011). “Like capitalism, the corporate food regime goes through periods of liberalization characterized by unregulated markets and breathtaking capital expansion, followed by devastating busts.” - like the 2008 food crisis- “These are followed by reformist periods...in an effort to restabilize the regime” (Holt-Ginenez, 2011). Thus, in order to avoid such “busts” in the future, which could include increasingly severe food crises, the entire structure of the global food regime must be transformed. The reformist trend which focuses on food security, through such institutions as the UN Commission on Sustainable Development, is not a part of the alternative food movement as it only serves to prop up the current, inequitable system.
Progressive trends in the food movement, focusing on citizen empowerment and food justice, seek a more equitable and environmentally sustainable food system in which issues of access to healthy food in underserved communities, wages of agricultural workers, and local food production are addressed. These initiatives are much needed and many have been very successful, For instance, the food justice organization, Nuestras Raices, based in Holyoke, Massachusetts has “...demonstrated that it is possible to rebuild and empower communities by creating alternative approaches to growing and producing food” (Gottleib & Joshi, 2010), and the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) has organized multiple successful campaigns aimed at improving the wages and working conditions of agricultural workers.
The only problem here is the need to also restructure the global food system, which the progressive trend does not tend to address as its focus is typically based on a more local scale. The radical trend, however, is concerned with the global food system. This trend focuses on the human right to food sovereignty and the democratization of the food system, and seeks to break the corporate monopoly and redistribute land and rights to water and seed. While the progressive trend is often active in practice, the radical trend is active more so through advocacy to raise awareness of the inequalities and injustices present in the current system. It is noted, however, that these trends are not necessarily fixed and have diverse interests and positions on many issues, and that alliances can be made across these somewhat fluid categories. Holt-Ginenez suggests that for true success of the alternative food movement, a transformation of the corporate food regime, the progressive and radical trends need to align.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm really glad that you also focused on scale of the food movement and recognize that there is not one right place to incorporate change. Although it is 'easier' to create local change in a community, as you can imagine theoretically there are stronger bonds such as cultural practices and community pride that create more meaningful engagement, it could be more meaningful overall to adjust the policies that subsidize corporate entities. At the same time, if all of our focus is solely on the corporate monopolies and restructuring the industrialization of food, then what will become of the peoples choices who are so embedded in their processed food way of life. Each scale is so important to address and within that to focus on the human right as you've described. Do you think there's any equitable way to begin the breaking down of corporate monopolies so that there isn't a spike in prices for the poor before they're able to understand and partake in accessing healthy foods?
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point, clearly it would be disastrous if the current global food system was dismantled overnight as there are so many people who would not/do not have an alternative food system to turn to, and I'm only thinking in terms of the United States. I think that as you said, it is easier or at least more obvious how to put into practice initiatives that work on a local scale (within the U.S.), and I think that for a smoother transition away from the corporate food regime we would first need to build capacity of local food production to meet the local needs, from inner-city community gardens to larger scale farming projects, focusing especially on access for members of under-served communities who would be affected most severely by increased food prices.
DeleteI also think that movements working to improve the rights of workers in the agricultural and food industries are a good step away from the corporate food regime, as this system runs on cheap labor (unless it can be replaced by a machine) as well as fossil fuels. I agree that it would also be necessary to adjust the policies/subsidies supporting corporate entities, and I'm sure that there is something that can be done about our domestic agriculture policies to decrease the negative impacts on the Global South, but I'm not very well read on that subject.
So, maybe the progressive trend we are seeing take place in the Global North is a good step away from the corporate monopolies and eventually towards a transformation of the system through scaling-up and embracing a more global concern. If the means of food production were placed back into the hands of the people and communities most affected by hunger and poverty, and if the rights of workers within the food system were improved and protected on a global level we might see the power of the corporate food regime begin to wane.
I didn't mean for that response to be so long, but I guess that's my opinion on the first steps to breaking down the corporate monopolies.