Ignoring the Debate to Generate Real Solutions!

For the context of this post see: Metamorphosis!

In doing an evaluation of the literature on food security and food systems I’m wondering if the actual focus of the questions being asked should be local vs. global, or alternative vs. mainstream. It would appear to me that such reification could seriously constrain the research. And while I’m not going to fault those who have taken this stance in the past, but there is so much overlap that by creating such a dichotomy between these paradigms one runs the risk of presenting an oversimplification. Now, I do agree that there are clear differences, but is this research really about the debate between the mainstream industrial system versus local eco based food system(s) or is it about optimal solutions to support food access, sustainability and stability? I mean, what are we after here?

The real goal is to address food insecurity, and simultaneously identify patterns of sustainable and resilient food systems in the wake of climate change. This means our food systems need to be environmentally sustainable in the sense that they lessen the negative environmental impacts of agricultural production, processing, distribution and consumption. This includes reducing the carbon waste that is generated and pumped into the atmosphere, this means addressing the usage of and over-dependence upon inorganic fertilizers and pesticides that contaminate water ways and strip soils of essential nutrients. This also means addressing the global reach of food distribution and fossil fuels used to ship these products world-wide as well as the energy consumption and creation of waste products associated with the processing and subsequent consumption of these food goods. With these issues in mind it is hoped that we as a society can drastically cut these impacts and thereby minimize the potential for catastrophic climate change.

However, most scientists are in agreement that climate change is upon us and that the damage has been done. Right now, our job is to avert an all out biotic collapse. So if we are constructing food systems to minimize the effects of food production (etc) on our climate, then we will also need to understand how these methods fair when confronted with the types of climatic shifts that most are warning us of. With the types of shifts expected our way in the next 50 to 100 years, it is necessary for us to assess whether the types of solutions we decide to implement within the food systems of the world will be able to withstand the shock of regional adverse weather, soil degradation, rising sea levels and subsequent massive population migrations away from coastal cities. According to most scientists the effects of climate change will be more severe depending upon the region, which would suggest that regional variations in the configuration of food systems would be most appropriate. This means certain regions will be more dependent upon global imports of food and it might be necessary for these regions to begin identifying alternative means for generating the type of capital needed to feed themselves in a volatile world.

Yet, coupled with these issues is the persistent need to maintain our work to eradicate food insecurity and chronic hunger. Forget climate change for a second, we still have nearly 2 billion people who are food insecure at any given time throughout the year and according to the Food and Agricultural Organization we have roughly 10 million people dying annually from hunger. That kind of death toll is more than AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined! So we have a tripartite problem to address. One, we need to minimize the carbon leak (and other greenhouse gases) into the atmosphere, our practice of food production need to become more ecologically aware, meaning we need a global adoption of agro-ecological principles for food production. Second, we need to construct systems that include practices, trade and networks that support adaptive and flexible systems that can withstand shocks and disturbances brought on by climate shifts (which are already happening). And third, we need a system that is configured in such a way that it provides a level of food equity that ensures that ALL people have their nutritional needs met, in a healthy and just way. This doesn’t mean tons of canned vegetable that processed with massive amounts of sodium and calcium chloride for preservatives, or access to a McDonalds on every street corner, but rather healthy, affordable and culturally appropriate foods.

Now the hypothesis is that a mixture of global and local food system configurations is going to be needed to address these issues in the future, but with an emphasis upon the local eco based system. But what is that ratio for say the Sahel or the Negev, meaning what percentage of food consumption could take place within the region of origin compared to the percentage of food imported from around the world and still minimize the greenhouse gases, ensure food access for all and provide a stable and resilient food system?

To accomplish this task and fully engage this question I still think it will be appropriate to include the discussion on mainstream versus alternative, but this discussion is more of a means to provide a basis for understanding the impacts of climate change on food security, or the environmental impacts of food production (eg the climate) and each opposing side could be assessed in relation to either one’s ability to provide healthy access to food. This would suggest the need to generate two generic models indicative of each of these two paradigms followed by place-based models that allow for mix-up of these different paradigms in order to identify the optimal configuration for each region in the study.

GPSI Update

I had someone comment on another blog entry (Global Plant Sciences Initiative - Paying the Bills) and ask whether the GPSI site is up. The answer to that is yes and no. The site is near completion, but it will not go public for sometime, at least that is the impression I get. Nevertheless the site design is near complete and since it is still locked down from public view I decided to present a screen shot to show what has been accomplished so far.







The next few steps for the project are to get additional feedback from the stakeholders involved, make any needed changes, conduct a workshop on using the site, begin uploading content and and then permission the site for public view and participation.

From what I gather this seems to be scheduled for Spring of 09, but it could be sooner. Yet, that is not up to me. Anyway, it has been a fun project and continues to be!

Defining Food Security

I have been tasked to formulate a working definition of food security in order to orient a study on the role that climate change and political conflict could have on peoples ability to meet nutritional requirements. The focus is aimed at achieving long-term food security among developing nations, but it could be extended to address potential threats posed to the so-called developed countries as well.

The definition that seems most useful for this analysis is the one developed at the World Food Summit of 1996 and accessed in a policy brief by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the UN. In this definition four central dimensions have been identified as being critical to understanding food security.

These dimensions follow from here:

Food availability: The availability of sufficient quantities of food of appropriate quality, supplied through domestic production or imports (including food aid).

Food access: Access by individuals to adequate resources (entitlements) for acquiring appropriate foods for a nutritious diet. Entitlements are defined as the set of all commodity bundles over which a person can establish command given the legal, political, economic and social arrangements of the community in which they live (including traditional rights such as access to common resources).

Utilization: Utilization of food through adequate diet, clean water, sanitation and health care to reach a state of nutritional well-being where all physiological needs are met. This brings out the importance of non-food inputs in food security.

Stability: To be food secure, a population, household or individual must have access to adequate food at all times. They should not risk losing access to food as a consequence of sudden shocks (e.g. an economic or climatic crisis) or cyclical events (e.g. seasonal food insecurity). The concept of stability can therefore refer to both the availability and access dimensions of food security.

(Source: FAO, 2006 Policy Brief - Food Security)

Beyond the set list offered by the FAO on the topic of food security, there are number of elements that must be considered within each of these dimensions.

Elements to emphasize:

Labor - this is critical since labor is the means by which agricultural production takes place and in turn the fruits of one's labor feedback to enable future labor for continued agricultural production. This would suggest that health also plays a central factor as a person's health influences the productive capacity of one's labor.

Health - this enables efficient and optimal levels of labor output. Problems with health due to diseases and malnutrition severely constrain productive capacity. In turn, food insecurity negatively effects health.

Environment - Climate change, poor soil fertility, water scarcity, landscape, pests and temperature all mitigate (or potentially mitigate) food production.

Political Economy - this includes elements of trade, power relationships related to food production, distribution, processing and access. Problems of conflict might also fall under this heading as conflict poses serious threats to food supply stability.

Culture - Determines appropriate food types to be produced and how that food is handled and in some cases where that food originates.

Education - It is important that food producers have access to information related to alternative processes of cultivation, marketing skills as well as food preservation skills. Consumers also must have a level of education that can support healthy eating lifestyles, as well as environmentally friendly ways of interacting with food.

Technology - the use of pesticides, fertilizers, GMOs, transport systems, computer forecasting systems, GIS, etc. can have both positive and negative consequences, which must be weighed regarding not just food availability, but also food quality and long-term sustainability.

Now, this is not complete and each element will be further refined but it presents a good start for developing a holistic view of food security and will support further development of appropriate models in order to map the potential impacts of climate change and political conflict on food security in specific communities.

Sources:
Overseas Development Institute, 2006. Policy Brief - Future of Food Production and Climate Change.
Food and Agricultural Organization, 2006. Policy Brief - Food Security
Mtika, Mike. 1998. Social and Cultural Relations in Economic Action: Peasant Food Secuirty in the Context of AIDS. Washington State University.

Food crisis looms in East Africa (Article from the BBC)

More than 14 million people in the Horn of Africa need food aid because of drought and rocketing food and fuel prices, the United Nations has warned.

The UN World Food Programme says it urgently needs $400m (£200m) to prevent starvation in the east African region.

Continue on to source...

Metamorphosis!

The past month has been a flurry of activity, revaluation of my research interests in light of stumbling across some new insights, and well honestly I have been undergoing a dramatic cognitive shift for the past year.

While most of my preliminary ideas have focused on issues such as biofuels adoption or water resource allocation linked with participatory practices using patterns and pattern langauges, things have shifted. In some ways DIAC-08 was the final straw pushing me over the edge. This shift in thinking resulted in a rapid redrafting of my PhD topic, a meeting with my committee chair, further refinement and now a newly approved research program.

The new (current) title of the research is:
Reconfiguring the World’s Agri-Food Systems – Food Security and Poverty Reduction in an Era of Climate Change?

The overarching research question(s) driving this work is:
Can a reconfiguration away from the mainstream agri-food system, towards alternative localized food-system(s) increase food security while also promoting poverty reduction and environmental restoration in the face of global climate change? Similarly, by promoting such a shift can an alternative food-system provide insulation from price volatility associated with shifts in production due to climate and conversion of food crops to biofuels?

To answer this question I'm tentatively planning on three case-studies that include a system dynamics approach to material flows modeling and policy analysis. Linked with the analysis phase is the construction of systems based policies to increase the resilience of local alternative food-systems. These policies will be fashioned in structure after patterns (see previous post: Patterns as Policies, and Pattern Languages as Policy Frameworks? ).

Together with quantitative dimensions provided by the system dynamics models and the elements within specific "patterns as policies" it is suggested that a deeper understanding and thereby opportunity for successful interventions for reconfiguring our food systems will be more likely to achieve the benefits cited with local small-scale agriculture with regards to community economic development, reduction of environmental impact from agricultural production, poverty reduction and thereby support food security.

For those interested here is a link to the evolving research overview. However as you might notice this title is different than the one provided in this blog entry. This just means that I'm revising and clarifying the specifics of the research. Once this is complete I will restart the process of identifying case study locations.

Vertical Farming?

What is Vertical Farming (check it out)?

A recent article that was sent by a friend: "Country, the City Version: Farms in the Sky Gain New Interest"

Ok, so I have been reading about Dr. Despommier for a while. I guess my primary concern with this type of project is that only those with the greatest resources will control the means of production since they are going to be the ones principally equipped to fund and market such large scale projects. Currently, the industrial ag system has had an adverse effect here in the US and such a system could potentially serve as the final blow for massive consolidation and the dissolution of small-scale family owned farms.

However, it is a pretty cool idea and if there was a way to create some equity within this type of production model then it could be a very viable alternative on a number of fronts. It just seems so often that lofty idealistic professors and inventors come up with simple solutions only for those solutions to be appropriated and corrupted by not so idealistically oriented peoples.

Thoughts on DIAC-08

Well, it has been a week since DIAC convened in Berkeley, CA and I have had some time to process a bit of the incredible things I saw. The presentations I attended and almost every paper within the proceedings contained some gem of knowledge and inspiration for me.

Yet, what was perhaps the biggest inspiration was the opportunity to talk with a few of the presenters outside of the conference. Of note Peter Day and Andy Dearden were extremely supportive, gave great feedback, showcased the cool things they are up to, and well, just plain fun to hang out with.

It was also a great opportunity for me to showcase some of my completed research and present what I'm working on presently. While I got a pretty warm reception for my research paper presentation, I think it was my exploratory paper and new research interests related to food systems, system dynamics and patterns (as policies) that got the most questions and excited responses.

Though I have been working heavily with patterns and pattern languages for the past few years now, it was interesting to hear people suggest that I leave patterns to pursue this system dynamics/food-system analysis stuff. Granted I have been thinking about this for a while, but to have several different people mention essentially the same thing causes one to pause and think for a minute.

Now, I'm not going to abandon what I have been working on or the projects I already have in the works, but the feedback I got basically reaffirmed the new direction I have been taking.

The issue I have is the committee that I have put together are perhaps better geared towards enabling me to pursue a research program focused on patterns, and now to change in mid-stream when I have already submitted a proposal of study could rock a boat I don't want to rock.

And yet, I have broached the topic with my chair and he seems pretty interested. So we'll see.

The point is I feel like shifting gears.