Showing posts with label food. Show all posts
Showing posts with label food. Show all posts

2009/02/24

Return to traditional values or an even slipperier slope?

Economic crisis has major implications for diet, health and other food issues.

Martin Shuker, KFC’s chief executive, says that the chain’s cheap prices are helping win custom. “We do offer good value, so you can buy a bargain bucket and feed a family of four for a tenner, [which is] definitely appealing in these difficult economic times,” he said. Does anybody else find this SCARY?

I seem to remember having myself predicted some sort of return to austerity, or more "traditional values" this year in response to economic decline and falling consumer confidence, it seems however, that in the UK for example while people are turning their backs on the fashionable restaurants, gourmet, ethical and health foods that boomed as incomes peaked, far from cooking up cheap healthy veg at home they are filling up on buckets of fried chicken, takeaway pizza, supermarket value brands and stuffing themselves with comfort foods as the recession deepens.

The high street landscape is already begging to change as the likes of Domino's, Subway, Aldi and Lidle implement expansion plans in response to the strong growth they are enjoying in the current climate. This is not the change we needed!

It strikes me that there are various fundamental issues/questions here, two major points for analysis and action standing out:

1. The premiumisation of "health" and "ethical" - the use of health and ethical categories to boost profits worked while incomes were rising but this is now unravelling in response to weakening consumer making the question of whether it is appropriate to be paying a premium on health more prescient than ever.

2. Poor consumer choices - why do consumers choose unhealthy foods over cheaper healthier ones? Why do consumers choose expensive health foods when they are buying more branding than health benefits.

2008/06/08

Event: The Price of Food: Hunger or Hope for Africa?


16 July, 2008 - 18.00 - Portcullis House, Westminster - London

Speakers
Dr Monty Jones
Executive Director, Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa

Dr Camilla Toulmin
Director, International Institute for Environment and Development

Professor Lawrence Haddad
Director, Institute of Development Studies

Chair
Hugh Bayley MP
Chair, Africa All Party Parliamentary Group

This forthcoming Royal African Society event will address some really key and really topical issues and is very much in line with the themes I have been pursuing and writing about here at InformationOthewise. I encourage anyone interested to come along and anyone who is unable to attend but has questions they would like to put to the panel, to get in touch as FreeHouse representatives will be attending.

The world food crisis threatens to destroy years, if not decades, of economic progress, and may push millions back into abject poverty, stated Kofi Annan recently. But others see the crisis as an opportunity to reform global agriculture and increase longer-term productivity in Africa.

The discussion will look at the implications of the food crisis for Africa – both the opportunities and the threats – as well as possible interventions. It will discuss the possibility of a Green Revolution for Africa. It will also critically assess the role of bioenergy in the current crisis and in the future of sustainable agricultural production in Africa.

Space is limited. RSVP essential: ras_research@soas.ac.uk

Please arrive 15 minutes prior the meeting to clear security. http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/faxmap.pdf

2008/05/18

Emerging land grab: investment for the future or the birth of a new food Imperialism?


A new rush to invest in agricultural production and the new land grab for Africa: Driver for agricultural development or the birth of a new food imperialism? Maneuvering to assure security of supply in the new global trade economy of "starve thy neighbour"

By the end of the 20th century commodity prices were depressed, mainly because of sluggish demand growth in relation to supply. Their value had been on a downward trend in real terms since the 1980's. Since 2002 however, commodity prices have rebounded, driven largely by growing demand in newly industrialising developing countries. If the cycle of growth and industrialization in these emergent economies continues, the current commodity boom may mark the beginning of a changed commodity economy in the twenty-first century characterized by a long-term demand growth for, and consequent resurgent value of, primary commodities in world trade. (See recent post: "Changing Commodity Economy").

The emergent economies driving this demand growth (China, India etc.) and increasingly competing with the developed world for global resources are inevitably maneuvering to secure their current and expanding long term commodity needs. This has led to a general resource "grab", or rush to secure access/rights to commodity resources principally concentrated in the developing world. Commodity rich Africa has inevitably become a major focus of this scramble for resources, and rising commodity demand has driven economic growth in the continent which has outpaced the developed world (though not developing Asia). This indecorous and at times unscrupulous rush to secure a share of Africa's resources however, has inevitably invited comparison to the "scramble for Africa" by western colonial powers at the end of the 19th century.

While the scramble for mineral and oil resources is a widely acknowledged geo-political phenomenon, with recent hikes in agro-commodity prices, there has emerged a new trend: a scramble for food supplies by direct purchase of agricultural land and investment in agricultural production, mostly in the developing world. Recent record food staple prices left big net food importers and big emergent markets like China and Saudi struggling to secure supply as well as provoking the slashing of import tariffs across the developing world - succeeding almost overnight where WTO talks had failed - but also provoking countries across Asia to impose export restrictions or bans on certain food products.

Apparently as a reaction to this environment, a number of countries are clearly maneuvering to secure food supply and price: Under a recently announced policy proposal being considered by Beijing, Chinese companies will be encouraged to buy farmland abroad, particularly in Africa and South America, to help guarantee food security. Saudi Arabia meanwhile, is looking at plans to establish joint ventures in Thailand, the world's largest exporter of rice, which guarantee the product to to Saudi and any surplus to other GCC countries in a bid to improve long-term food security. The UAE have been investing in agricultural land and production in Pakistan over the last year. Etc.

China already runs an agricultural trade deficit, and, while they are investing increasingly in rural development domestically, demand growth outstrips supply growth. Saudi meanwhile, while rich in oil, is unable to produce domestically the food crops it requires and in fact is scaling back what agricultural production it has in order to conserve on diminishing water resources. Faced with the prospect of higher global food commodity prices and increased price volatility, countries then, like China whose growing consumption outstrips growth in supply and oil rich but otherwise resource impoverished middle eastern countries like Saudi are clearly looking to bypass global commodity markets in order to secure directly affordable long term food supplies.

Saudi officials, apparently without appreciating the irony of this, have declared the necessity of purchasing, for example, rice supply, since they cannot be expected to remain at the mercy of price setting major exporters like India. These comments are thrown in an even more interesting light when considered against current proposals by Vietnam for the development of an OPEC style cartel of rice producers. Jiang Wenlai of the China Agricultural Science institute meanwhile was quoted as saying “China must ‘go out’ because our land resources are limited".

What though will these sort of policies mean for developing countries? Jiang Wenlai is quoted as saying "It will be a win-win solution that will benefit both parties by making the maximum use of the advantages of both sides.” It is not especially clear from this in what sense the developing countries China invests in will benefit, and Jiang Wenlai could not be reached for further comment. It is I suppose suggested however, that foreign investment in agricultural development and improved productivity etc. will benefit the target countries. The situation however, is undoubtedly not this simple, what are we witnessing: new investment in agricultural production? Or the emergence of a new food imperialism and "starve thy neighbour" trade economy?