writing post

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system Author(s): E. M. Young Source: Geography, Vol. 95, No. 2 (Summer 2010), pp. 60-69 Published by: Geographical Association Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20789350 Accessed: 07-05-2020 19:54 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide

range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and

facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geographical Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Geography

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geography Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010 @ Geography 2010

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system E.M. Young

ABSTRACT: This article considers the contemporary

food system and suggests that it is deadly in several

respects. The most blatant failure of the current

system is that it fails to feed approximately one

billion people adequately each year yet manages to overfeed approximately 800 million people

worldwide. This binare contradiction, or 'Our Big Fat

Contradiction' (Patel, 2007, p. 1), is detailed at the

outset The system also fails to protect the

environment upon which we all depend for

sustainable food production; the second deadly drawback the article considers. The final deadly

trend lies at the production and distribution end of

the food chain. Here power is being concentrated,

poor people are being marginalised and choice is

being eroded.

A?er detailing the most glaring problems the article examines how the food system is organised, and

what ideologies and structures help sustain and promote its diffusion across the globe. The core

question is, given its multiple failings, why is the

contemporary system of food production not

challenged more successfully and changed? The answer points to the powerful vested interests that

profit from its operations, a few of which are also

considered. The article concludes that the system is

ethically suspect and unsustainable, and closes with an evaluation of the efforts made by various

individuals and communities to implement a more

enlightened food system.

Introduction and perhaps worst of all, our food is increasingly

bad for us, even dangerous' (Walsh, 2009, p. 1).

In August 2009, Time magazine, not noted for its radical politics or environmentalism, ran a

cover story about the problems associated with

the global food system. In recent years, popular and academic books and articles about these

problems have multiplied and have raised awareness about some of these problems (Holt Gimenez and Patel, 2009; Pollan, 2006, 2008; Lang and Heasman, 2004; Lawrence, 2008; Patel, 2007; Roberts, 2008; Schlosser, 2001; Weiss, 2007; Madeley, 2000; Shiva, 2000). For geographers, the excellent Atlas of Food by

Millstone and Lang (2003) is indispensible and Atkins and Bowler (2001), Robinson (2003) and

Dicken (2007) provide in-depth analyses. Books multiply but the problems intensify. Celebrity chefs

in the UK and USA encourage consumers to consider the health implications and ethics of food

production and consumption, with mixed results.

This article details some of the food system's most serious flaws, attempts to explain their

causes and suggests why change seems so elusive.

First, however, it is worth considering the case for

the current system. Affluent consumers

everywhere enjoy a diverse and rich diet

unprecedented in human history. We pay very low

prices for all our food staples and even foods

previously considered 'luxury' items (e.g. shrimps,

oysters, scallops and chicken) are now within most

household budgets. Today's affluent consumers contrast markedly with all human communities in

the past by being assured of the availability of all

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

? Geography 2010 Geography voi 95 Part 2

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

Figure 1: The geography of world hunger. Source: FAO, 2009.

I_;_

foods, all year and every year. What this article

considers in the real price of this system: who or

what might be bearing the burden of the system that serves some of us so well. What social and

environmental externalities are concealed behind

the supermarket shelves?

Global malnutrition: under nutrition Malnutrition means 'bad nourishment' and it

includes not getting enough food (under nutrition

associated with hunger) as well as having too much (over nutrition associated with obesity). The

most urgent problem with the contemporary food

system is that it fails to deliver a sufficient diet to

approximately 1.02 billion people (Food and

Agricultural Organisation, 2009). Most of these people suffer from chronic daily hunger (as

opposed to acute hunger - see below) and associated health problems. Contrary to some

optimistic predictions in the 1990s, the numbers of undernourished people soared between 2006 and 2009, precipitating a 'food crisis': '2009 has been a devastating year for the world's hungry, marking a significant worsening

of an already disappointing trend in global food

security since 1996 ... There have been marked increases in hunger in all of the world's

major regions, and more than one billion

people are now estimated to be undernourished' (FAO, 2009).

Measuring hunger is fraught with problems and

estimates of the number of hungry people may

vary significantly if just a few basic parameters are

adjusted. However, for the purpose of this article,

the general pattern shown in Figure 1 is adequate.

The geography of global hunger is complex and at all places is mediated by sub-national variables

such as region, class, ethnicity, gender and age.

Essentially, patterns of hunger correlate with

patterns of power: those without power tend to

suffer first while those who enjoy access to power

seldom experience hunger (Young, 1997). Patterns are also dynamic and show substantial seasonal

and annual shifts. High global food prices in 2007-08, for example, were estimated to increase

the number of hungry people by 75 million over the

2006 estimate (FAO, 2008). However, allowing for these complexities, it is important to appreciate

that the majority of hungry people live in Asia,

where China, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh

together account for most of the world total. The

prevalence of Asia in these statistics contradicts

popular perceptions that hunger is most serious in

Africa. Hunger is very serious in parts of sub sanaran Africa, but because the total population of

the region is smaller, absolute numbers are less than those for Asia. Figure 2 illustrates broad

regional totals.

Near East and North Africa 42 million

Latin America and \ ?!ve!?Ped countries the Caribbean \_^JHz'on 53 million t^^>>^

Sub-Saharan Africa 265 million

Asia and the Pacific

Figure 2; Geographical incidence of hunger by world region. Source: FAO, 2009.

61

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geography Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010 @ GeograPhV 2010

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

Figure 3: The global incidence of obesity. Source: WHO, 2006.

62

Fifteen out of the 16 countries where the incidence

of hunger exceeds 35% lie in sub-Saharan Africa and at present severe hunger threatens to overwhelm populations in the Horn of Africa. Here

we may introduce the concept of acute hunger

which, in contrast to chronic hunger, implies a real

threat of death if emergency relief is not available.

In October 2009, 25 years after the Food Aid

concerts launched by Sir Bob Geldof during the

crisis of 1984-85, Ethiopia was in the headlines

again with the World Food Programme warning that

famine was again imminent. Although drought may be the proximate (immediate) cause of the current

crisis in Ethiopia, as it was in 1984, the causes are complex. All food emergencies are, in essence, the end result of a toxic mix of economic, political

and environmental factors, hence the term

'complex emergencies' and the specific contribution of each factor will vary in nature and

significance.

Global malnutrition: over nutrition The second deadly symptom of the contemporary

food system is the emergence of a global obesity pandemic, a different manifestation of

malnutrition. Major global structural changes

explain its emergence (Rayner et a/., 2007) and the major proximate (immediate) factors are detailed below.

'Changes in the world food economy have

contributed to shi?ing dietary patterns, for

example increased consumption of an energy

dense diet high in fat, particularly saturated fat,

and low in carbohydrates. This combines with a

decline in energy expenditure that is associated

with a sedentary lifestyle, with motorized

transport, and labour-saving devices at home

and at work largely replacing physically

demanding manual tasks, and leisure time often

being dominated by physically undemanding pastimes' (WHO, 2002, p. 1).

Both developed and developing nations are paying a high price for malnutrition (Halweil and Gardner,

2000). Simple distinctions between the incidence, costs and nature of malnutrition in the affluent

global North and less affluent South are no longer

satisfactory. Hunger persists in some communities

in wealthy countries such that the World Health

Organisation (2002) now identifies health problems linked to over nutrition as one of the

most serious public health issues facing countries in both the North and South.

Beware; Figure 3 provides an excellent example of

the dangers of casual map interpretation. It

employs aggregate data for very large countries,

and suggests, for example, that the problem of

obesity is non-existent in China and India when in

fact, it is alarming public health officials across

Asia. Sadly, and paradoxically, as with traditional

patterns of malnutrition (hunger), Asia is emerging

as the world centre of obesity and its associated

health problems. Indeed, across the developing world obesity is already a significant problem and estimates indicate that it will worsen. The health

problems associated with obesity (it is correlated

with a number of chronic diseases, including diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancer) are

U

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

? Geography 2010 Geography Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010

expensive to treat and generate dilemmas for

public health officials trying to balance budgets

between treating traditional killers, like infectious diseases and the more recent conditions

associated with non-communicative diseases.

Countries across the developing world are facing this 'double burden' of disease and its multiple social and economic impacts (WHO, 2009).

Industrial agriculture: some social impacts Having considered the Janus-faced nature of the

global food system with reference to nutrition, let

us now examine some of its social impacts.

Capitalist agriculture evolved in Europe and is

associated with enclosures and dispossession from the fourteenth century which initiated mass

rural poverty and out migration. In the mid

twentieth century prevailing models of capitalist

farming were transformed and industrial food

production emerged in the United States. This

model diffused to Europe after the Second World

War, and has been vigorously marketed across the globe ever since (Atkins and Bowler, 2001). Its emergence and dominance can be explained with

reference to powerful agro-business interests

largely based in the USA and the EU. We return to

this below. At this juncture, it is more important to

summarise its most devastating social and environmental impacts.

The diffusion of industrial farming systems in the

twentieth century has helped generate some of the

largest mass migrations in human history. Just as

capitalist farming and its associated privatisations displaced millions of peasant farmers in Europe,

and colonially imposed agricultural production systems displaced millions between the sixteenth

and twentieth centuries, so today, industrial

farming, driven by corporate monopolies, is

responsible for displacing small landowners and

peasant farmers. Across the developing world rural

poverty and landlessness explains the pattern of

rural-urban migration and the inexorable rise in

urban populations (see the interactive map of urbanisation trends since 1950 on the BBC

website).

The geography and mechanics of the process are too complex and contested to examine in detail here, but since the 1950s, millions of small

peasant farmers in the developing world have

suffered a catastrophic decline in their livelihoods

(Magdoff, 2008). Sadly, this also applies to small farmers in the developed world and transitional economies too, where subsidies and 'efficiencies'

have meant that farm units must be very large to

survive the vicissitudes of market volatility. The

experience of small farmers in Poland is representative of this trend. Mr Lopata, an activist, describes how the small farm sector in Poland has

suffered since joining the EU:

'[M]ost of our farms are tiny by EU standards,

about seven hectares - and they play a huge role in protecting our biodiversity, as well as

providing us with fantastic food ... [now in the

EU] Polish farmers are finding that the practices

they adopted hundreds of years ago are now

illegal. It's become a nightmare' (quoted in

Seedling, 2008, p. 26).

Access to land is obviously an essential

component of small-scale farming and, as industrial farming expands, small farms are

incorporated in larger units, rendering their

previous occupants landless. This process is well

documented in the Punjab in India after industrial

farming was introduced in the 1970s (Shiva,

1991). During the 1980s and 1990s vast areas of fertile land in Latin America, previously used to

grow human food crops, switched to the intensive

cultivation of soya, which has been described by

some as '[0]ne of the most destructive

developments in agriculture over the past two

decades' (Seedling, April 2009, p. 3). Soya has become an indispensible component of intensive

livestock farming (or confined animal feeding

operations (CAFOs)) that are now entrenched in the

developed world and expanding rapidly elsewhere (MacDonald and Iyer, 2009).

In recent years, another process has been

identified - the 'land grab' by corporations and

governments of extensive acres in the developing

world. This land may be leased or purchased, but either way it becomes unavailable for food

production for local populations. The land may be

used to cultivate food to supplement domestic

food production (as in China, Japan, Libya and the

United Arab Emirates). Indeed, '[T]he Beijing

government is about to make the buying of land overseas to produce food for export to China a

central and official government policy' (Seedling,

2008, p. 4). Many of these land purchases are driven by speculative activity whereby corporations

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geography Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010 ? Geography 2010

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

are hoping to cultivate increasingly profitable

crops, specifically biofuels and sugar. So, the diffusion of industrial farming comes at a very high

price to many small producers and their plight, in

turn, creates multifaceted social problems for their

governments when, dispossessed, they migrate to the urban areas. Having considered examples of the social implications of the contemporary global

food system, we now review some of its most

glaring environmental impacts.

Industrial agriculture: some environmental impacts

Since the 1960s concern has been raised about

the negative environmental impacts of industrial

food production (Carson, 1962). Increasingly,

however, the catastrophic costs of its externalities

have been more accurately mapped and measured

(Altieri, 2001; Kimbrel, 2002; Pretty, 2005; Halweil

and Nierenberg, 2008). The problems are numerous and here we summarise just a few of

the most urgent.

A core problem is that industrial agriculture is

completely dependent upon petroleum. Petrol fuels

the system from start to finish:

in the fields petrochemical derivatives,

fertilisers, pesticides and herbicides, are employed to secure high yields

huge amounts of petrol are used to drive the

heavy machinery that has replaced labour in

this production system the raw materials are transported to factories,

6 1

sometimes thousands of miles away for

processing the processed food products are then

distributed by fleets of refrigerated ships and

lorries to the retail outlets where they are

refrigerated again before being bought by

consumers who arrive and depart from the

supermarkets in cars.

Thus, the high profile 'food miles' issue is only one

small element of a much larger problem.

A Greenpeace (2008) report attempts to quantify the direct and indirect contributions of industrial

agriculture to greenhouse gas emissions. They conclude that agriculture contributes between 17

and 32% of all global induced greenhouse gas emissions. The livestock industry, especially the massive increases in cattle production to satisfy

the world's insatiable 'carnivorous cravings' (Holmes, 2001), helps explain some of the

methane contributions. Carbon dioxide is released

at every point in the system where petroleum is

employed at the same time as carbon-absorbing forests are cleared for farming (FAO, 2006).

Rainforests are particularly at risk, and campaigns to prevent the further destruction of these precious

carbon sinks and biodiversity-rich habitats are

underway (Rainforest Action Network, 2009).

Water is essential to all agricultural production

systems, but the demand in traditional systems

was modest compared to the phenomenal use in the industrial food system. At every link in the

industrial food chain, water is required in very high

volumes. Most crops are irrigated with water drawn

from ground water aquifers or reservoirs, both of

which can be environmentally damaging, and the construction of the latter often incurs awful social

costs (Scudder, 2006; Roy, 1999; Magalh?es and Hernandez, 2009). However, applying water to crops in fields and livestock (while alive) is only a

fraction of the water usage. Beef production

requires huge volumes of fresh, clean water: from the rather anachronistically called 'dairy parlour'

through to the abattoir and post-kill processing. Concerned environmentalists insist that the

demand for water associated with intensive meat

production is completely unsustainable and are

calling for the auditing of food chains for their

'embedded water' use (GRAIN, 2008, p. 14).

However, it is not simply the demand for water that

is problematic; the industrial food system is also a

major source of water pollution. Oceans, seas,

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

? Geography 2010 GeoqraDhv Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010

rivers, ground water and wetlands across the globe

have all suffered to a greater or lesser degree from

pollution from agriculture. The storage and

disposal of animal waste has long been a serious problem and the diffusion of CAFOs, from Vermont

to Vietnam, is exacerbating the problem. Gurian

Sherman's (2008) expos? of such facilities describes how they have been subsidised in the USA, and such food producing units (with all their

attendant costs) are appearing across the developing world too.

Some of the most serious water pollution results

from run off from farms and factory units:

excess nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorous, cause eutrophication and algal blooms ammonia and nitrates can accumulate to toxic

levels in ground and river water

heavy metals and salts can leak from manure

and contaminate surface and ground water

pathogens from intensive farming are

increasingly implicated in disease outbreaks. The combined environmental impact of these

pollutants range from being minor nuisances to

severe ecological impacts involving damaging the health and well-being offish, birds and mammals,

and even humans. Having suggested some of the most serious environmental burdens placed on our

ecosystem by the diffusion of industrial farming

practices, how may we understand the advance of

the industrial model of agriculture?

Industrial agriculture: vested interests The industrial model of food production has been

accompanied by an unprecedented concentration of power at both ends of the food chain and at all

the links in between (Barker, 2007). A few very

powerful corporations control every aspect of the

production, processing and retailing of our staple foods which allows them to manipulate prices to

maximise their profits. Patel describes the

asymmetries in the system: 'Somehow we've ended up at a world with a few

corporate buyers and sellers ... And when the

number of companies controlling the gateways

from farmers to consumers is small, this gives

them great power both over the people who

grow the food and the people who eat it' (Patel, 2007, p. 12).

This power, allied to their financial clout (which

dwarfs that of most other sectors), means that

such corporations remain largely unaccountable to producers, consumers or governments who attempt to manage their less seemly practices (for

example, marketing junk food to children). Some

argue that they 'call the shots' at every level: at

the international level they have impressive powers

of persuasion within the World Trade Organisation

(WTO) and at the national level, where their deep

pockets help 'sway' national power brokers (Patel,

2007, p. 107). Yet few readers will recognise the names mentioned below. How have such

phenomenally influential players, who literally

control vital sections of such an important global

economic activity, escaped popular attention?

Vorley (2003) maps a convincing picture of corporate power with reference to every aspect of

the food chain. The trading and processing of

cereals and oilseed are highly concentrated, with

Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) alone reputed to control about three-quarters of global

cereals, while Bunge, ADM, Cargill and Dreyfus

dominate oilseed trading and crushing. Vorley

(2003) exposes a similar concentration in the soy and sugar sectors, and examines the markets for

commodities produced by millions of poor farmers in some of the poorest countries in the world. Of

coffee and cocoa production, he states '[T]he balance of power in the coffee chain has shifted

dramatically in favour of commercial interests in

the industrialised world, with only around 10% of

I Deadly diets: I geographical I reflections on I the global food I system

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geography Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010 @ Geography 2010

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

retail value retained in producing countries' (Vorley,

2003, p. 11). Small producers (whether in the EU or Ethiopia) have little or no leverage against such structural realities. At the retail end of the chain,

the pattern is depressingly familiar: in the

developed world (and increasingly in the emerging

markets and developing world), a few powerful

conglomerates have emerged and enjoy enormous power at the check outs. A factor they use to great

effect to modify our diets and constrain our choices.

Having reviewed some of the most obvious failings of our food system we pose another question:

given these multiple failings, why is the

contemporary system of food production not

challenged more successfully and changed?

Corporate power has driven the agendas in food

and agricultural policy for their own ends, profit

maximisation. Since the 1980s, as globalisation has intensified, corporate power has enjoyed ever

greater access to previously protected markets,

both to produce the raw materials and to market

their processed goods through internationally

owned retail outlets. Part of the globalisation

process was explicitly designed to 'open up' markets in the developing world for foreign

investment (Rayner et a/., 2007). Robinson argues:

'[l]n the last three decades both food production

and distribution have been radically restructured

in favour of a more global scope and character,

with TNCs (Transnational Corporations) playing

an increasingly important role, especially in

activities "upstream" and "downstream" from

farms' (Robinson, 2004, p. 53).

Corporate power is of course facilitated by many

other actors and agents. Many governments,

especially those with major agricultural interests

(e.g. in the EU and USA) have assisted their accumulation of power. Often, governments used

their weight at international trade forums to

promote corporate interests, by insisting on trade

liberalisation by others while retaining their own

protectionist policies (Barker, 2007; Young, 1999, 2004).

Multiple business opportunities come in the wake of the corporate penetration of emerging markets

(in Russia, Brazil, Philippines, India, China, etc.)

and there are, undoubtedly, many who are

financially and personally equipped to exploit these

spaces. A great many businesses benefit from the current state of affairs; employees and share holders are unlikely to complain as the food sector

retains its profit margins while most other

economic sectors are failing. Millions of wealthy consumers in India and China, as well as the USA

and UK, generally see little wrong with the status

quo. They enjoy a diet divorced from seasons or

fluctuations in price and spend a smaller

percentage of their income on food than ever

before, but many are now beginning to appreciate

that things are not quite right.

Conclusion: alternative futures? All manner of groups, at the local, national and

international level, are emerging to challenge the

nature and impacts of the current food system

from a variety of perspectives. Concerns range

from human rights to animal rights and from human health to environmental health and

sustainability. However, at the core of their

concerns is the threat posed to all of these from

the globally integrated food system governed by

corporate agendas. Change may be most effective,

however, if fought for by those most seriously

burdened by the system at present: small

producers in the developing world and vulnerable

consumers who are coping with increases in staple food prices. These consumers are more likely to challenge their politicians and the status quo than

those of us who are sheltered from major food

shocks. It is from within these populations that

some of the most serious challenges are obvious; it is from these communities too that some of the

most inspirational figures emerge.

A global alliance of non-governmental

organisations (NGOs) and civil society organisations (CSOs) is the International NGO/CSO Planning Committee (IPC). The IPC

promotes the concept of food sovereignty, that is,

the rights of producers and consumers to control

the food system and to challenge the power of the corporate food producers. The IPC includes social

organisations representing small farmers, fishing

communities, indigenous peoples, agricultural workers' trade unions and human and

environmental activists from the world regions. It

launched its initial agenda in a Forum for Food

Security in 1996 where it introduced the concept

of food sovereignty. The IPC has since broadened its objectives and presents a more radical agenda

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

? Geography 2010 Geography Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010

than that suggested by mainstream policy makers (see IPC website).

La Via Campesina (LVC) provides another example of a global grassroots movement that is

challenging some of the most serious injustices in the food system. As with the IPC, it promotes the

concept of food sovereignty. LVC too, has members

from across the globe fighting to change economic

development policy, so that small sustainable producers are protected and corporate power is restricted. Their core sentiments were articulated

recently by a Canadian farmer who argued that the

'time for talking is over' and that:

/Jf the world is serious about eradicating

hunger, there are not many options. We have to

support and encourage small farmers to

produce food for their communities in

sustainable ways. A genuine solution to the food

crisis means that small scale farmers, not

transnational corporations, must regain control

over food producing resources such as land,

seeds, water and local markets/ (Via Campesinas, 2009)

Their campaigns are designed to retain control of

the food chain at the local level and they lobby

against things like the introduction of genetically

modified seeds, and for things like a fairer

international trading regime.

Numerous organisations coalesce around humanitarian concerns, thus religiously based

chanties and human rights activists appreciate the centrality of the food system to livelihoods and

poverty reduction. Oxfam continue to fight for

human rights and sustainable livelihoods for the

poor and the organisation recognises the central

role of agricultural policy to this objective. Oxfam

has published excellent review articles that expose

the way the international trading system is biased against small farmers. More recently they revisited

the role of agriculture in development and published recommendations which are available

online (see Fraser, 2009; Alpert et al., 2009). The organisation's in-depth investigation into cocoa

production is an exemplary study that illustrates

the bitter price of chocolate (Cappelle, 2009).

The problem of obesity and its potential costs are beginning to frighten policy makers, therefore

public policy interventions are being considered in

a variety of areas. The International Obesity Task Force (IOTF website) examines the causes and

consequences of obesity world wide and supports

research and analysis. The findings inform national

governments' health policies. IOTF has recently advocated the adoption of The Sydney Principles',

a set of guidelines to govern the marketing of food

and non alcoholic drinks to children. In the UK high profile advocates advise the government on the links between the food system and the nation's

health and suggest new policy directions (Lang and Rayner, 2002; Ambler-Edwards et a/., 2009) Animal welfare groups, from the mild to the radical,

challenge the worst examples of animal cruelty in

farming systems. They can now add the dangers of animal diseases and their potential to infect humans in their war on animal exploitation

(Nierenberg, 2005). Also, political leaders appear to be more prepared to accept that environmental

issues really do demand attention and cannot be

debated without reference to agricultural and food

policy. The concept of sustainable development may yet help deliver a more equitable system and serve as a rallying call for people in diverse areas of the food system. In the UK, diverse NGOs

promote sustainable food and farming (see websites for National Trust, RSPB, Soil Association,

Sustain).

The negative links between globalisation, changing diets and the food production system are now established, but, on a more positive note, there is evidence that grassroots resistance to the worst of

its implications is gaining momentum too. As this

article details, food, more perhaps than any other

commodity, illustrates how people and

environments across the globe are connected; changing the nature of these connections is vital to

ensuring more people enjoy access to a healthy diet from a provisioning system that is more

socially and environmentally sustainable. Some argue that agriculture is now at a crossroads (Greenpeace, 2009). As consumers we can influence future directions by educating ourselves

about such everyday geographies and perhaps

change our patterns of consumption accordingly.

As citizens we can lobby governments and join

campaign groups dedicated to addressing the problems detailed in this article.

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

References Alpert, E., Smale, M. and Hauser, . (2009) 'Investing in

poor farmers pays', Oxfam Briefing Paper 129. Available online at www. oxfam. org/sites/www. oxfam. org/files/bp-129 investing-in-poor-farmers-summary.pdf (last accessed

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geography Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010 ? Ge?graPhV 2010

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

68

13 November 2009). Altieri, G. (2001) 'Modern agriculture: ecological impacts

and the possibility of truly sustainable farming', Agroecology in Action. Available online at www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~agroeco3/modemjagricultureM ml (last accessed 29 January 2010).

Ambler-Edwards, S., Bailey, K., Kiff, A., Lang, T., Lee, R., Marsden, T., Simons, D. and Tibbs, H. (2009) Food Futures: Rethinking UK strategy. London: Chatham House, Institute of Foreign Affairs. Also available online at www.chathamhouse.org.uk/files/13248_r0109food futures.pdf (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Atkins, and Bowler, I. (2001) Food in Society. London: Arnold.

Barker, D. (2007) The Rise and Predictable Fall of Industrial Agriculture. San Francisco, CA: International Forum on Globalization. Also available online at

www.ifg.org/pdf/ag%20report.pdf (last accessed 29 January 2010).

BBC website, Interactive map on urban growth: http://news.bbc.co.Uk/l/shared/spl/hi/world/06/urban isation/html/urbanisation.stm

Cappelle, J. (2009) 'Towards a sustainable cocoa chain', Oxfam Research Report. Available online at www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/towards-a? sustainablecocoa-chain-0901.pdf (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Carson, R. (1962) S/7ent Spring. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Dicken, (2007) Global Shift: Mapping the contours of the world economy. London: Sage.

Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) (2006) The State of Food Insecurity in the World. Available online at www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0750e/a0750e00.htm (last accessed 5 May 2010).

FAO (2008) The State of Food Insecurity in the World. Available online at www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0291e/ i0291e00.htm (last accessed 5 May 2010).

FAO (2009) The State of Food Insecurity. Available online at www.fao.org/oOcrep /012/i0876e/i0876e00.htm (last accessed 30 March 2010)

Fraser, A. (2009) 'Harnessing agriculture for development', Oxfam Research Report. Available online at www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/bp harnessing-agriculture-250909.pdf (last accessed 13 November 2009).

GRAIN (2008) 'Interview with Professor Tim Lang about the world food crisis'. Available online at

www.grain.org/seedling/7id-553. Greenpeace (2008) Cool Farming: Climate impacts of

agriculture and mitigation potential. Greenpeace Canada. Also available online at www.greenpeace.org/ canada/en/recent/agriculture-and-climate-change (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Greenpeace (2009) Agriculture at a Crossroads: Food for survival. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International. Also available online at www.greenpeace.org/internatlonal/ press/reports/agriculture-at-a-crossroads-report (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Gurian-Sherman, D. (2008) CAFOs Uncovered: The untold costs of confined animal feeding operations. Cambridge, MA: Union of Concerned Scientists. Also available online at www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/food_and_agricultu re/cafos-uncovered.pdf (last accessed 13 November 2009).

HaIweil, . and Gardiner, G. (2000) Underfed and Overfed: The global epidemic of malnutrition. Washington, DC:

WorldWatch Institute.

Haiweil, . and Nierenberg, D. (2008) 'Meat and seafood: the global diet's most costly ingredients' in State of the World 2008: Innovations for a sustainable economy. Washington, DC: WorldWatch Institute, pp. 61-74.

Holmes, K. (2001) 'Carnivorous cravings: charting the world's protein shift', EarthTrends. Available online at http://earthtrends.wri.org/features/view_feature.php7th eme=8&fid=24 (last accessed 28 November 2009).

Holt-Gimenez, E. and Patel, R. (2009) Food Rebellions: Crisis and the hunger for justice. Oxford: Fatamu Books.

International NGO/CSO Planning Committee (IPC) website: www.foodsovereignty.org/new/index.php (last accessed 13 November 2009).

International Obesity Task Force website: www.iotf.org (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Kimbrell, A. (2002) Fatal Harvest: The tragedy of industrial farming. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Lang, T. and Heasman, M. (2004) Food Wars. The global battle for mouths, minds and markets. London: Earth scan.

Lang, T. and Rayner, G. (eds) (2002) Why Health is the Key to the Future of Farming: A report on the future of farming and food. London: UK Public Health Association, Charter Institute of Environmental Health, Faculty of Public Health Medicine, National Heart Forum and Health Development Agency. Available online at www.agobservatory.org/library.cfm7reflD~30300 (last accessed on 13 November 2009).

Lawrence, F. (2008) Eat Your Heart Out: Why the food business is bad for the planet and your health. London: Penguin.

MacDonald, M. and Iyer, S. (2009) Skillful Means: The challenge of China's encounter with factory farming. Brighter Green Policy Paper. Available online at http://brightergreen.org/a.php?id=ll (last accessed 12 November 2009).

Madeley, J. (2000) Hungry for Trade: How the poor pay for free trade. London: Zed Books.

Magalhaes, S.B. and Hernandez, F. (2009) Experts Panel Assesses Belo Monte Dam Viability. Available online at www.internationalrlvers.org/files/EXEC%20SUMMARY% 20ENGLISH_0.pdf (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Magdoff, F. (2004) precarious existence: the fate of billions?', Monthly Review. Available online at www.monthlyreview.org/0204magdoff.htm (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Magdoff, F. (2008) The world food crisis: sources and solutions', Monthly Review. Available online at www.monthlyrevlew.org/080501magdoff.php (last accessed 12 November 2009).

Magdoff, F., Bellamy Foster, J. and Buttel, F. (eds) (2000) Hungry for Profit: The agribusiness threat to farmers, food and the environment. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Millstone, E. and Lang, T. (2003) The Atlas of Food: Who eats what, where and why. London: Earthscan.

National Trust website, Food and Farming section: www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-chl/w countryside_environment/w-foodJarming.htm (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Nierenberg, D. (2005) 'Happier meals: rethinking the global meat business', WorldWatch Paper 171, available online at www.worldwatch.org/node/819 (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Oxfam website: www.oxfam.org Patel, R. (2007) Stuffed and Starved: Markets, power and

the hidden battle for the world food system. London: Portobella Books.

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

? Geography 2010 Geoaraohv Vol 95 Part 2 Summer 2010

Pollan, M. (2006) The Omnivore's Dilemma. London: Penguin.

Pollan, M. (2008) In Defence of Food. London: Penguin. Pretty, J. (2005) The Earthscan Reader in Sustainable

Agriculture. London: Earthscan. Rainforest Action Network website, Rainforest

agribusiness pages http://ran.org/campaigns/rainforest_agribusiness/ (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Rayner, G., Hawkes, C, Lang, T. and Bello, W. (2007) 'Trade liberalisation and the diet transition: a public health response', Health Promotion International, 21, supplement 1. Also available online at http://heapro.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/21/su ppLl/67 (last accessed 29 January 2010).

Roberts, (2008) The End of Food: The coming crisis in the world food industry. London: Houghton Mifflin.

Robinson,. G. (2003) Geographies of Agriculture: Globalisation, restructuring and sustainability. London: Pearson.

Roy, A. (1999) 'The greater common good', Friends of River Narmada website:

www.narmada.org/gcg/gcg.html (last accessed 29 November 2009).

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) website, Advice for farmers section:

www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/farming/advice/ (last accessed 13 November 2009)

Schlosser, E. (2001) Fast Food Nation: What the all American diet is doing to the world. London: Penguin.

Scudder, T. (2006) The Future of Large Dams: Dealing with the social, environmental, institutional and political costs. London: Earthscan.

Seedling Magazine (all years), available online at www.grain.org/seedling/ (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Shiva, V. (1991) The green revolution in the Punjab', The Ecologist, 21, 2, pp. 57-60. Also available online at www.theecologist.org/back_archive/19701999/ (last accessed 30 October 2009).

Shiva, V. (2000) Stolen Harvest: The hijacking of the global food supply. London: Zed Books.

Soil Association (2009) Food Futures: Strategies for resilient food and farming. Bristol: Soil Association. Also available online at www.soilassociation.org/Why organic/Climatefriendlyfoodandfarming/Foodfutures/ tabid/565/Default.aspx (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Stacey, C. (2009) 'Ethics of eating meat', BBC website: www.bbc.co.uk/food/food_matters/meatethics.shtml

Sustain website: www.sustainweb.org (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Via Campesina website: http://viacampesina.org/main_en (last accessed 13 November 2009).

Vorley, B. (2003) Food Inc.: Corporate concentration from farm to consumer. London: UK Food Group. Also available online at www.ukfg.org.uk/docs/UKFG Foodinc-Nov03.pdf (last accessed 30 October 2009).

Walsh, B. (2009) 'Getting real about the high price of cheap food', Time, 21 August. Available online at www. time, com/time/health/article/O,8599,1917458,0 O.html (last accessed 27 August 2009).

Weis, A. (2007) The Global Food Economy: The battle for the future of farming. London: Zed Books.

World Health Organisation (WHO) (2002) A Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation on Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. Available online at www. who. int/nutrition/topics/ljntroduction/en/index. h

tm/ (last accessed 5 May 2010). WHO (2006) Global Database on Body Mass Index: An

interactive surveillance tool for monitoring nutrition transition. Available online at

http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp (last accessed 5 May 2010).

WHO website (2009), Obesity section: www.who.int/topics/obesity/en (last accessed 13 November 2009).

www.monthlyreview.org/0204magdoff.htm (last accessed 12 November 2009)

Young, E.M. (1997) World Hunger. London: Routledge. Young, E.M. (1999) 'Far-fetched meals and indigestible

discourses: reflections on globalisation, hunger and sustainable development', Ethics, Place and Environment, 2,1, pp. 19-40.

Young, E.M. (2004) 'Globalization and food security: novel questions in a novel context?', Progress in Development Studies, 4,1, pp. 1-21.

Useful websites Basic statistics:

FAO Hunger Home: www.fao.org/hunger/hunger home/en/ World Food Programme: www.wfp.org/hunger/stats World Health Organization: www. who. int/topics/nutrition_disorders/en/

Other campaign websites: Action Against Hunger: www.actionagainsthunger.org/ Food First: www.foodfirst.org/ Food Sovereignty: www.foodsovereignty.org/new/ Grassroots online: www.grassrootsoniine.org/pubHcations/educational resources/food-thought-action-a-food-sovereignty curriculum International Alliance Against Hunger: www.iaahp.net/

One World: http://uk.oneworld.net/guides/food7gclid~CLGipPbtyZ8 CFSUulAodlgurOw World Development Movement: www.wdm.org.uk/

E.M. Young is Senior Lecturer in the Applied Sciences Division, Faculty of Sciences, University of Staffordshire (e-mail:

l.young@staffs.ac. uk).

Deadly diets: geographical reflections on the global food system

^9

This content downloaded from 132.174.254.116 on Thu, 07 May 2020 19:54:45 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms