Jamie Oliver, heating up the debate at BSUFN16

By Abigail Wincott, University of Brighton

The BSUFN annual symposium yesterday was a lively one and there was a particularly heated discussion during our parallel session on ‘Consumers, Identity and Culture’.

My media colleague Gilly Smith and Jo Ralling from the Jamie Oliver Foundation talked about TV chefs, the changes they might effect in wider food culture and the materials and structures which accompany those changes. For example, Gilly mentioned new restaurants and a foodie tourist trade in Hungary, in part the product of a Hungarian version of Jamie Oliver. Jo talked up the successes of Jamie’s food campaigns in the UK, including the sugar tax and changes to school dinners.
A couple of people in the room took issue with their account, accusing Jamie-style cheftivism of unforgivable smugness and asking why Oliver doesn’t raise the issue of food poverty more often.

Others worried that these chefs’ campaigns tend to shame people, that lifestyle TV formats of problem-expert advice-redemption are inherently judgemental, assume lack of information is the reason for poor eating and don’t recognise the varied and individual circumstances people eat and cook in. The same might be said however for public health campaigning the world over…

To her credit Jo acknowledged she and the team at the JO Foundation were aware of these issues, discussed them and tried to produce programmes which took account of them. At all costs they wanted to avoid shaming she said.

Gilly argued people who make sweeping statements about foodie campaign TV tend not to have watched the half hour programmes, but only read the soundbites in news reports. These leave less room for nuance she argued.

This discussion about lifestyle TV activism is a really important one and we didn’t even scrape the surface on the day. It seems to me the question of form or format is key – Jo and Jamie and  other media producers are bound by generic conventions like the quest or the transformation. Commissioners need to show they are moving with ‘the next big thing’ and won’t always stick around to follow things up (a point Gilly made). Sound bites may get read more, but long form journalism and longer programmes do have the potential to be both entertaining and a bit judgemental but also so much more.

I think we should all be mindful that food debates of all kinds are mediated, and all are affected by the medium. Academic journal articles, conferences presentations and Q&As are no exception. Our discussion was at least as inadequate on the day as any news report – but it was, I hope, an important opener to a much longer conversation.

Governing Food Policy Workshop Highlights Complexity and Diversity in Food Policy

The Brighton and Sussex Universities Food Network (BSUFN) hosted a workshop on Governing Food Policy at the University of Sussex on Friday the 25^th of September 2015. The workshop highlighted the complexity of food policy and the interactions between policy and governance of food within different sectors and at different scales. During the workshop it was acknowledged that there isn’t a single ‘food policy’ and this term in fact relates to numerous policies in sectors related to food.

Over 30 participants joined discussion during the workshop and heard about research being undertaken at the University of Sussex on areas related to food policy. This included ‘quick fire’ presentations on sustainability standards, international agricultural research, seed sovereignty, the role of food industry, economics and innovation, health, local food poverty, and the work of the Brighton & Hove Food Partnership.

During the workshop, kindly supported by SPRU (Science Policy Research Unit), eight people presented their work related to food policy. Researchers from SPRU, the Institute of Development Studies, and the Department of Social Work presented research which indicated the diversity of topics and sectors that constitute part of a web of different food policies. Two non-academics also presented their work on local community-based practice in the area of food policy.

The workshop saw the launch of BSUFN’s special interest group (SIG) on Food Policy and Governance. Members of the SIG and the wider Network will take the discussion during the workshop forward through additional activities, collaborations, and investigation into societal engagement with food policy.

A report on the Governing Food Policy Workshop will be made available here soon.

Food Policy Needs to Feed Society

In the run up to our Governing Food Policy Workshop on the 25th of September 2015, we are sharing a series of articles to provoke discussion. This post was written by Rachael Taylor and is the third post in this series. Rachael is a Doctoral student at SPRU (Science Policy Research Unit), University of Sussex and is researching small-holder farmers and agricultural development interventions in Northern Ghana.

Food Policy Needs to Feed Society

We cannot ignore the importance of food, we all need it to survive. Food is not only essential for life but also has cultural dynamics and provides a social function. The global food system cannot ignore that the primary objective of the food system is to feed society. This post questions whether existing food policies really reflect the needs and priorities of society.

A Complex Global Food Machine

The global food system is highly complex, with numerous sectors interacting at multiple scales and with different objectives and outcomes. It is complex because the huge number of people, processes, interactions, and influences can result in non-linear outcomes which means they are not possible to predict. It is easy for one cog in an Earth-sized machine to focus so intently on its own particular function that it forgets what the machine as a whole is trying to do. Food policy is the element of the food sector which is meant to manage this so that the food system as a whole obtain the necessary outcome of feed society.

Food policy sees the intersection of other major areas of the global food system. Food policy and governance refers to diverse sectors within the global food system and associated policies act at a range of scales in time and space. If there is any activity which is associated to food then somewhere there is a policy which relates to that.

But perhaps food policy has lost sight of the fact that, ultimately, its objective is to ensure the survival of society through sufficient and nutritious diets. Are food policies and the processes that lead to their development being controlled by the few in order to control the many?

A Food System Dominated by Few

In her recent book, Nora McKeon (2015) argues that even agricultural production is no longer primarily concerned with feeding society, instead being driven towards food as a commodity, food to produce biofuels, and food to feed livestock. Large agribusinesses, governmental policies and subsidies, international trade agreements, and intergovernmental priorities are diverting food production away from focusing on feeding society and towards achieving profit or political objectives. Mass-scale food production within the global system is no longer primarily concerned with ensuring that every individual always has sufficient culturally appropriate food to live a healthy and active life.

Agribusinesses prioritise food production, processing, and marketing in order to make financial profit. International trade agreements secure low prices for buyers and consumers, meaning producers at the other end of the food chain get paid little. Governmental targets to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases have driven demand for biofuels to replace fossil fuels, meaning crops are being used for fuel instead of food.

Changing diet patterns in response to increasing affluence globally has led to an increased demand for meat produce, meaning crops are being used to feed livestock instead of people. It is a widely-cited statistic that it takes ten kilograms of feed to produce one kilogram of beef, meaning an overall loss of nine kilograms of food produce. Peasant farmer organisation La Via Campesina state that less than half of all grain produced worldwide are now eaten by humans, the rest being used for biofuels and as livestock feed.

Over recent decades there have been many voices rising concerns that the food system is not functioning sufficiently to feed society. The volume and number of these voices has rapidly increased in recent years, particularly since the food price crisis in 2007-8. Many organisations, civil society groups, and farmer representative have described the food system as ‘broken’.

Putting Society Back at the Centre of Food

This is where we see the rise in mobilisation and action taken by the food sovereignty movement. Food sovereignty prioritises providing food for people, seeing food as a right and campaigns for food justice and equality. Food sovereignty argues for locally appropriate production methods and focuses on producers and local systems. The food sovereignty movement has its own policies and has produced statements and guidance for policy-makers globally.

Some may see ‘food sovereignty’ as another term and additional elements of a complex global food system. But at the moment the food sovereignty movement is arguably the most dominant voice rallying against big agribusiness and international politics and economics. This movement which considers food as a human right still has negligible influence on high-level food policy and governance but it is the first step towards putting society back at the centre of food systems. Food production is for consumption and the primary concern should be ensuring that every individual can eat enough to live a healthy and active life.

 

Reference:

McKeon, N. (2015) Food Security Governance: Empowering communities, regulating corporations, Routledge, Abingdon, pp246

New Speakers Announced for our Governing Food Policy Workshop

Governing Food Policy Workshop

Friday 25^th of September 2015

14:00 – 17:30

Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Room 2.10 – University of Sussex campus, Falmer

This workshop sees the launch of a new Food Policy and Governance special interest group (SIG) hosted by BSUFN. The purpose of this workshop is to discuss the broad topic of governing food policy in the context of work being undertaken by BSUFN members. Food policy is considered broadly as any policy of an organisation or governing institution which is related to food. Discussion among workshop participants aims to inform any areas of interest and priorities for activities and collaboration within the Food Policy and Governance SIG and BSUFN more broadly.

The workshop will centre on a series of questions to provoke discussion but these questions should not be considered to be exhaustive and other related topics for discussion are welcomed.

• In what ways are local, national, and global food policies and priorities interlinked?
• Does existing local, national, and international food policy reflect the needs and priorities of society?
• Which stakeholders currently influence the production of food policy?
• Through what means can society engage with and influence the production of food policy? Is society currently successful in this?
• In what ways could BSUFN interact with food policy research, governance, and societal engagement?

Sessions will be structured as ‘quick fire’ introductions followed by a period of open discussion among workshop participants. Speakers will each be given ten minutes to introduce a topic concerning food policy within their area of interest. A provisional programme is now available below.

The workshop will be followed by a BSUFN social in Brighton to start the new academic year. Booking for the meal is essential. Details are available here.

Time	Session
14:00	Welcome and Introduction Rachael Taylor (SPRU, University of Sussex)
14:10	Food Policy and Sustainability at an International Scale
	Saurabh Arora (SPRU, University of Sussex)	Sustainability Standards
	Ruth Segal (SPRU, University of Sussex)	International Agricultural Research Agendas
	Elise Wach (Institute of Development Studies)	Seed Sovereignty
14:40	Open discussion
14:55	Food Industry and Food Policy in Governing Bodies
	Erik Millstone (SPRU, University of Sussex)	Food Industry and the EU
	Peter Senker (University of East London)	Economics and Innovation
	Durwin Banks (The Linseed Farm and Brighton & Hove Food Partnership)	Health and Diet
15:25	Open discussion
15:40	Tea / coffee break
16:00	Local Food Policy in Brighton & Hove and East Sussex
	Emily O’Brien (Brighton & Hove Food Partnership)	Local Food Systems
	Bella Wheeler (Social Work, University of Sussex)	Food Poverty in Brighton
16:20	Open discussion
16:35	Break out group discussions Rachael Taylor (SPRU, University of Sussex)
16:55	Feedback and open discussion
17:30	Close

Contrasting Food Corporations and Economics with Peasant Farmers and Sustainability

This is the second in a series of posts to provoke discussion about the global food system and influences on food policy prior to our Governing Food Policy Workshop to be held on the 25th of September 2015. In this post, Peter Senker contrasts the current role of multinational food corporations with peasant farmers and contemporary efforts to consider human health and environmental sustainability in the food system. Peter presents a discord between economically-driven food production and marketing industries and small-scale farmers and independent retailers.

Peter Senker worked as a Senior Fellow in SPRU, University of Sussex, from 1972 until 1995 when he retired. Despite retiring 20 years ago Peter is still very active in academic research and continues to publish his work. Peter has recently taken a position on the BSUFN steering group representing the Food Cultures and Technologies special interest group.

Contrasting Food Corporations and Economics with Peasant Farmers and Sustainability

We all know in general  about  the literature that Adam Smith wrote  more than a couple of hundred years ago about the benefits of markets in which suppliers compete with each other to meet the needs of consumers; and about how an ‘invisible hand’ ensures that each supplier striving for his own advantage benefits Society.

This sort of thinking still dominates the minds of most policy makers worldwide. But enormous quantities of research has clearly shown that this stuff does not apply to the modern multinational agricultural, food production, marketing and distribution industries.

Massive quantities of research have shown clearly that these industries are dominated by small numbers of huge multinational corporations whose central objective is to increase their profits.  They do this mainly by means of strenuous efforts to reduce the costs of the inputs they buy – from agricultural products to labour to transport – and by increasing the price they get from the sale of the products they produce, market and distribute. In reducing the costs of their inputs, the nutritional qualities of the foods they produce and market are of little interest to these corporations. In fact, from a nutritional point of view, a huge quantity of foods sold –particularly packaged foods sold at high prices in supermarkets – is not particularly nutritious, and indeed, is often harmful to their consumers’ health (obesity, diabetes etc.).

Large-scale food processing factory

The corporations are happy so long as billions of customers can be persuaded to buy their products in vast quantities. The corporations spend many millions of pounds – including expenditure on research & development and innovation – on reducing the costs of inputs –taking some ingredients out, substituting cheaper ones etc. They spend billions on advertising etc., in persuading customers that the products they produce are tasty and nutritious.

In contrast, billions of peasants and small farmers around the world produce nutritious traditional tasty foods mainly for themselves and their families, largely by traditional means, and sell any surplus on markets.  Over the centuries, and all over the world, traditional farming has often produced and deployed substantial positive innovations to cultivation. But the huge resources derived by multinational corporations which they secure from their profitable operations are used continually to increase the proportion of land used, and agricultural and food production and distribution undertaken by those corporations.

Peasant farmers in Amhara Region, Ethiopia

In addition, there is a small but growing number of independent farmers, food producers, restauranteurs, etc., who treat the production and sale of nutritious food at the same time as minimising its harmful environmental impact – as their “profession”. This is analogous to the way in which doctors treat their patients with the main aim of helping them to recover from illness and stay healthy.

In summary, the present world agricultural and food production and distribution system is rubbish (“Dysfunctional” is the more respectable word used in my academic publications).

 

BSUFN would like your thoughts on this topic. Do think the current global food system is dysfunctional? What works well in the current food system? What do you think needs to be changed? What role can BSUFN play in this dialogue? Is there a need for BSUFN to support or undertake cross-disciplinary research? Could BSUFN take a role in publicising information to a wider audience? Could BSUFN get involved in advising policy-makers in the food sector?

You can get in touch with us by posting in the comments section below, via the Creating a Network for You page, or by e-mailing us at food.network@sussex.ac.uk.

 

Peter’s comments are drawn from two of his recent publications:

• Senker, P. (2013)  ‘Arable agriculture, food, technology choice and inequality’, In: Cudworth, E., Senker, P. and Walker, K. (Eds) Technology, Society and Inequality: New Horizons and Contested Futures, Peter Lang, New York, NY, pp.105–19
• Senker, P. (2015) The triumph of neoliberalism and the world dominance of capitalism, Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, available here

Provoking Discussion on Health and Governing Food Policy

In the lead-up to our workshop on Governing Food Policy on the 25th of September 2015, we will be sharing a number of posts from BSUFN members to get people thinking and provoke discussion around a range of areas related to food policy.

This post addresses the issues surrounding human health in response to the five questions we are presenting for the workshop. This post was written by Durwin Banks and presents some of his thoughts on the topic. Durwin will be speaking during the Governing Food Policy Workshop in September.

Durwin Banks is a local linseed farmer (The Linseed Farm) and sits on the Board of the Brighton & Hove Food Partnership. Durwin is a representative for BSUFN’s Food Health and Education SIG and has recently taken up a place on our sterring group. You can find more of Durwin’s articles on the links between food and health here and you can follow him on Twitter @flaxfarmer.

Provoking Discussion on Health and Governing Food Policy

•   In what ways are local, national, and global food policies and priorities interlinked?

World trade debates at high levels between powerful nations are the link to many policies and often priorities are about big money and not at all about providing good and healthy food for the world population. Commodity trading of food can distort markets but it is not wholly bad and does provide a kind of warehousing effect.

• Does existing local, national, and international food policy reflect the needs and priorities of society?

These policies often do not reflect the need of society for good and healthy food but unfortunately does pander to the fast food which society at the moment sees as a priority.

• Which stakeholders currently influence the production of food policy?

The largest stakeholders influencing food policy at the moment are big Pharma. They use The Food Standards Agency and the trading standards departments to ensure the lid is kept on food information that could lead to healthier populations. Laws are formulated and passed to ensure the dominance of cure rather than prevention. Examples are the Cancer Act 1939 and EU directives bringing herbal healing under the control of the MHRA. The Cancer Act largely prevents an integrated approach to cure and the EU herbal directives make it more difficult to use herbs traditionally used for thousands of years. These herbs have not damaged health and caused death but pharmaceuticals have and there is plenty of evidence of this.

• Through what means can society engage with and influence the production of food policy? Is society currently successful in this?

For the reasons above it is very difficult to influence policy and society has been unsuccessful in ensuring health through food. The only means society can engage and have influence is through buying power and this requires food information and educating individuals in groups or one at a time. Finally the sugar debate is bearing some fruit and that shows there can be influence brought to bear but creating laws to regulate its use will be a long time coming.

When governments do act pressure can result in bad law and this happened in Denmark when a fat tax was brought in. Instead of taxing for instance manmade fats margarine, saturated fats were taxed making a mockery of any drive for a balance of healthy fats. (We are animals and have saturated fat in our bodies and have the mechanism to both assimilate and expel excess. We do not have this ability with abused fats.)

• In what ways could BSUFN interact with food policy research, governance, and societal engagement?

The BSUFN could interact by using evidence of the impact of food on health and it would be good to formulate research in this area. Southampton University have done work on the blood of pregnant women testing for the balance of omega three and omega six. My suggestion would be a project of testing the sperm for the same things and looking at the food regimes of the suppliers of the sperm. I have not heard of any research in this area so as sperm is the beginning of new life this would be a good place to start.

Upcoming event – Governing Food Policy Workshop

Governing Food Policy Workshop

Friday 25^th of September 2015

14:00 – 17:30

Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Room 2.10 – University of Sussex campus, Falmer

This workshop sees the launch of a new Food Policy and Governance special interest group (SIG) hosted by BSUFN. The purpose of this workshop is to discuss the broad topic of governing food policy in the context of work being undertaken by BSUFN members. Food policy is considered broadly as any policy of an organisation or governing institution which is related to food. Discussion among workshop participants aims to inform any areas of interest and priorities for activities and collaboration within the Food Policy and Governance SIG and BSUFN more broadly.

The workshop will centre on a series of questions to provoke discussion but these questions should not be considered to be exhaustive and other related topics for discussion are welcomed.

• In what ways are local, national, and global food policies and priorities interlinked?
• Does existing local, national, and international food policy reflect the needs and priorities of society?
• Which stakeholders currently influence the production of food policy?
• Through what means can society engage with and influence the production of food policy? Is society currently successful in this?
• In what ways could BSUFN interact with food policy research, governance, and societal engagement?

Sessions will be structured as ‘quick fire’ introductions followed by a period of open discussion among workshop participants. Speakers will each be given ten minutes to introduce a topic concerning food policy within their area of interest. A provisional programme is now available below.

The workshop will be followed by a BSUFN social in Brighton to start the new academic year. Booking for the meal is essential. Details are available here.

Time	Session	Chair / Discussants
14:00	Welcome and Introduction	Rachael Taylor (SPRU, Sussex)
14:10	Food Policy and Sustainability at an International Scale	Saurabh Arora (SPRU, Sussex) Ruth Segal (SPRU, Sussex) Elise Wach (IDS)
14:40	Open discussion
14:55	Food Industry and Food Policy in Governing Bodies	Erik Millstone (SPRU, Sussex) Durwin Banks (The Linseed Farm and Brighton & Hove Food Partnership)
15:15	Open discussion
15:30	Break
15:50	Local Food Policy	TBC (Brighton & Hove Food Partnership)
16:10	Open discussion
16:30	Introduction to break out	Rachael Taylor
16:35	Break out group discussions
16:50	Feedback and open discussion
17:30	Close

Establishing a Food Policy and Governance Special Interest Group

The Brighton and Sussex Universities Food Network is excited to announce that we are establishing an additional special interest group (SIG) on the theme of Food Policy and Governance.

There have been a number of requests from members for a SIG on this theme and the topic of policy and governance has continually come up in discussions about other areas of food systems. Just as there are elements of each of the other five SIGs which are cross-cutting in scope, food policy and governance is a very broad-ranging issue with influence in every area of food-related work, research, and activity.

BSUFN are planning a short workshop to officially launch the Food Policy and Governance SIG. This workshop will consider the role of the food industry and those with a vested interest in influencing food policy and governance decisions. Watch this space for announcements about this workshop.

If you are a member of BSUFN and would like to be part of the Food Policy and Governance SIG, or any of the six SIGs, then please let us know via e-mail. Additionally, if you are interested in giving subject-specific recommendations by being a rep for this SIG then please also contact us by e-mail.