Food is not oil – but it is at least as important
In the current financial turmoil we forget that just recently food was our great concern: mass famines were said to threaten world peace. The price rise of past years is due to the high demand for food and feed in Asia. Combined with a weak dollar, high energy costs and unfavourable weather food stocks have declined. Due to US and the EU “setting aside” policies, some of the best farmland has been left unproductive.
Although prices are now decreasing somewhat, the question still stands. Can we feed the world? The answer is emphatically: Yes, we can.
Food is not like oil because stocks cannot be exhausted. They fluctuate, but food is a renewable resource. Food is not like oil, because it is produced by about a billion independent farmers. Although large multinational businesses are involved, there is no “Organisation of Food Exporting Countries” like OPEC. There is no technical reason why we could not feed a world of nine billion people. Hunger is a matter of buying power, not of shortages.
However, in some ways, food has become like oil. The global financial crisis has encouraged speculation in soft commodities similar to oil. And in the same way a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico affects the oil price, a dry summer affects agricultural production and prices. Volatility confirms a lack of trust. That has led to export-restrictive measures, driving up prices even further.
Biofuels are seen by some as the biggest culprit. Demand for biofuels is growing extremely fast, thanks to subsidies, in response to geopolitics and climate change. The nightmare scenario is for food to be converted into fuel. But this will not happen if farmers are given a fair chance to respond to higher prices for food.
Still, we should worry about the short-term effects. The high prices and volatility on the markets will continue. The victims are poor urban consumers in developing countries whose purchasing power is affected. Also, high prices for agricultural raw materials may lead to an uncontrolled expansion of deforestation, while also offering opportunities.
So let us not forget in the current financial crisis that in the real economy food is what ultimately drives people. Hence we must agree on new international arrangements fast, in particular in the WTO, to promote the production of safe food for all.
–
Louise O. Fresco (1952) is a cross-disciplinary professor, focussed on international sustainable development, at the University of Amsterdam. She was the Assistant Director-General in the Agriculture Department of FAO, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, in Rome. Fresco is a columnist for NRC Handelsblad (in Dutch) and has established herself as a novelist.
–
What do you think? Is the financial crisis distracting us from the real problems in the real world? Should we focus on safe food for all?
Friday 24 October 2008, 13:10
“However, in some ways, food has become like oil.”
This is a striking comparison. It helps us investigate our future by way of experiment.
Monday 27 October 2008, 9:22
Fresco is likely correct that, if very efficiently operated, agriculture would be able to produce and distribute sufficient food for 9 billion humans, or even more. Yet it is negligent to assert this possibility without mentioning the need to also address the quality of life likely to be thus provided. True, the first fight is to feed everyone adequately, but focusing on the skirmish and neglecting the battle is a good way to lose the war.
Fresco also seems to assume continuing conditions not too different from those of today. This is despite the addition of 2.5 billion people in only 40 years and climate change that, at least for now, is exceeding many worst case scenarios. This, too, seems an attempt to avoid the really difficult issues surrounding agriculture.
In fact, Fresco seems to treat agriculture only as a solution. The fact that agriculture is also a – in one sense, the – fundamental problem is either outside her reference framework or too sensitive for her to touch in her columns.
Tuesday 28 October 2008, 14:51
Coming from the FAO I felt pleased to know there seem to be about a billion farmers out there. Big business in agriculture gave us a lot of goodies like chocolate, bananas, coffee and chips, but this vast amount of people working on Mother Earth is rather comforting.
I think it impossible for this amount to dwindle to, let’s say, half a billion soon. Power to the people, food for the people and independence for the people. Farming people are the backbone of this beautiful planet of ours. I feel like praying…
Companies like Monsanto, Caterpillar, Unilever & AH seem much less powerfull now
Wednesday 29 October 2008, 13:24
We promote Free trade and expect a grow in the economy, production of goods en services, but still large part of the world have a shortage of food. We still maintain export subsidies on our food and that is why the developing countries can not compete and stop producing food against acceptable cost.
The counter part of free trade is a free movement of the production factors, one of them the free movement of labor. Without the free movement of the production factor labor, we create a big problem, becouse the labor can not move to the place where it is needed.
The EU is currently promoting the defending of the so called borders of the EU, the EU is thinking about a army to defend this boarden agents illegal immigrants
Free trade, export subsidies and free movement of labor are one integral part of a balanced economical system, in case we block on part than we have to accept the that the problem of shortage of food and hunger never will be solved
The EU has to actively seek new members in Africa, that is the only way, a army to block the free movement of labor is the complete wrong way to solve the problem
Saturday 1 November 2008, 18:57
Interesting to see that somebody apparently agrees that food and eating might be most important in life.
The main message of the article seems to be: “Let the farmers farm and it won’t be that bad.” Political will seriously interferes here though, or worse, the lack of it.
Living in Brazil for about fifteen years it amazes me to see the quantity of unproductive farmland in this country. There seem to be three important factors. One is that much of Brazil’s farmland is in the hand of wealthy people mostly interested in financial speculation and in maintaining wealth and power. Long lasting fights and discussions about redistribution of farmland aren’t changing much. Other is that the government doesn’t provide subsidies nor otherwise seriously stimulates or facilitates farming. And also, as Brazilian common knowledge says, getting loans is dangerous. Prices fluctuate strongly and are unpredictable. Interest rates are sky-high, especially for loans and debts. And the worst part is that banks prefer to confiscate properties, like farmland, rather than trying to renegotiate debts or to find other solutions to give farmers a chance to survive when they get into financial problems.