Food as a Human Right: Combatting Global Hunger and Forging a Path to Food Sovereignty [Hardcover ed.] 1440861773, 9781440861772

Citation preview

Food as a Human Right

Food as a Human Right Combatting Global Hunger and Forging a Path to Food Sovereignty WILLIAM D. SCHANBACHER

Praeger Security International

Copyright © 2019 by William D. Schanbacher All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, except for the inclusion of brief quotations in a review, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Schanbacher, William D., author. Title: Food as a human right : combatting global hunger and forging a path to food sovereignty / William D. Schanbacher. Description: Santa Barbara, California : Praeger, [2019] | Series: Praeger security international | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018051769 (print) | LCCN 2018055047 (ebook) | ISBN 9781440861789 (ebook) | ISBN 9781440861772 (hard copy : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Food sovereignty. | Right to food. | Food security. | Human rights. Classification: LCC HD9000.5 (ebook) | LCC HD9000.5 .S364 2019 (print) | DDC 363.8—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018051769 ISBN: 978–1–4408–6177–2 (print) 978–1–4408–6178–9 (ebook) 23 22 21 20 19

1 2 3 4 5

This book is also available as an eBook. Praeger An Imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC ABC-CLIO, LLC 147 Castilian Drive Santa Barbara, California 93117 www.abc-clio.com This book is printed on acid-free paper Manufactured in the United States of America The publisher has done its best to make sure the instructions and/or recipes in this book are correct. However, users should apply judgment and experience when preparing recipes, especially parents and teachers working with young people. The publisher accepts no responsibility for the outcome of any recipe included in this volume and assumes no liability for, and is released by readers from, any injury or damage resulting from the strict adherence to, or deviation from, the directions and/or recipes herein. The publisher is not responsible for any reader’s specific health or allergy needs that may require medical supervision, nor for any adverse reactions to the recipes contained in this book. All yields are approximations.

Contents

Acknowledgments Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights 1. Globalization, Development, Food Security, and the Emergence of a Global Food Regime

vii ix 1

2. The Underside of Development

23

3. Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

45

4. Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

67

5. The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

91

6. Water

113

7. Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

135

8. Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

157

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

185

Notes

195

Index

209

Acknowledgments

I would like to give my greatest thanks to my colleagues at the University of South Florida (USF) and my longtime friends and academics. Throughout my career there have been many influences and supporters who have pushed me along. These friends include Brett Bebber, Lenny Lowe, Hollis Phelps, the Houtsma brothers, PJ, the entire LP, and many more. We do not always agree, but we maintain our bond of friendship. Finally, and perhaps, most importantly, I would like to acknowledge those who cannot be acknowledged. They are the true heroes of this book. They are those who are voiceless, whom I will probably never meet, but they tire relentlessly, day to day, to provide most of the food we eat and are privileged to eat. I thank you.

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

Food. You can tell stories about food. You can write and teach about food. You can learn about food. But what is food? It is a source of life, a source of sustainability, and a source of understanding history. It is also a source of understanding different cultures and religions and the source of their existence. In many instances food is about cooking as well. Although we have a long history of food eaten raw, in our current culture, food is most often cooked, and unfortunately, frequently microwaved. This has resulted in many ways in the rise of fast food, and large food corporations have emerged. While difficult to measure, in the United States, estimates say that between 20 and 40 percent of food that we put on our plates each year is thrown away.1 Personally, I go to the grocery store almost every day. Invariably, I end up buying more food than I need, and I end up not being able to eat it all before some of it goes bad. Hence, I am guilty of what 20–40 percent of the population is guilty of as well. This is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it is good that we shop, we converse with people at the store, and we take time to learn about the food we are buying. It builds relationships. On the other hand, we consume too much. If we learned about where our food came from, we might begin to think about how much we overconsume, and we begin to learn about the communities that produce our food and how much they struggle to produce the food that

x

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

we here in the United States eat too much of. When we take that step, we begin the process of understanding modern food and food corporations. With upward of 850 million people suffering from hunger and malnutrition each year, the global food system remains a broken system in need of change. Multilateral organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank and the trade agreements orchestrated by the World Trade Organization (WTO) remain powerful in influencing the global food system yet have failed to achieve their ostensible goals. This book compares the concept of food security with the concept of food sovereignty. While both concepts seek to end global hunger, the emerging movement of food sovereignty offers innovative ideas and strategies that must be considered as a viable alternative to failed efforts in the mission to end hunger. ORGANIZATION OF THIS BOOK This book offers the provocative ethical argument that the world’s affluent citizens are complicit in, if not directly contributing to, a violation of human rights. We, affluent citizens of developed countries, benefit, whether we realize it or not, from an unjust global food system that has been created by the IMF, World Bank, and trade agreements enshrined in the WTO. We are complicit in this violation of human rights because affluent countries and the citizens who elect our political leaders who have clout to influence economic and trade policies have the ability to change the system. From an ethical standpoint, this book argues that the best way forward is to allow developing countries to determine the food and agricultural policies they see best for their local communities and farmers. As it stands today, global institutions negatively influence developing countries and trade agreements, and these countries have little say in shaping the policies. Rather than resorting to strategies such as charity or the work of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), this book argues that we must implement policies that allow developing countries to have a larger say in what needs to be done to improve the plight of their own country and their own local communities. Throughout the chapters of this book, readers will also be introduced to different philosophical, moral, and literary texts that might apply to the topic of food and the global food system and thus, albeit, indirectly related to the core theme of food sovereignty. While it might not seem apparent at first, references to these various schools of thought and disciplines are increasingly important not only for understanding the complexity of the global food system but also for the emerging interest by scholars in these different fields. As the subtitle of the book indicates,

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

xi

part of the goal, understanding and discussing food sovereignty and food as a human right, is “forging a path” toward a more humane and a just global food system. At the center of the food sovereignty movement is the notion that we must reinforce the cultural importance of food rather than think of it as a simple commodity like all other commodities. Instead, food is a building block of life and takes on a more profound significance for the lives of those who produce what feeds us. Things have changed. Things will hopefully change again. This is a key hope of all farmers, both local and global, whether it is global politics, global food movements, or small daily changes in the lives of everyday farmers. Michel de Certeau, the French philosopher who analyzed the practices of what he called “everyday life,” observed and theorized on the nature of human behavior and interaction—behaviors and interactions that often go by unnoticed by those in power. His focus was mostly on the lives of his local community laborers, but his concept lives on today and can be utilized for the plight of global food producers and consumers.2 His interests in the lives of everyday workers relate to many of the issues that will be investigated in this book. It is often the case both historically and currently that the lives of the people who produce our food go overlooked in our daily food consumption practices, thus tying together the circle of food growing, food production, distribution, and ultimately, food consumption. The concept and movement of food sovereignty along with its many offshoots focus on bringing a global awareness to the emergence of unheard voices who have been saying “No!” or “Enough” or “¡Ya basta!” to the policies of organizations such as the World Bank and the IMF and the trade agreements orchestrated by the WTO. As mentioned earlier, de Certeau spoke about the lives of everyday workers in a rapidly industrializing Europe at the time of his writings, but his theorizing may also be applicable to current agricultural practices and the lives of ordinary farmers today. Many of the global communities that the food sovereignty movement works to support are people who go unnoticed by the consumers of the products they produce. What is more important is the fact that the products that global farmers produce are consumed by families on an everyday basis. They are the very products and ingredients of the foods that we buy, eat, and use in our daily lives. CHAPTER 1 The first chapter briefly introduces the current status of the global food system in the context of terms such as “globalization,” “development,” “food security,” and what many have come to call the “global food regime.”3 To understand the emergence of our current global food system,

xii

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

we must tackle the difficult, if not impossible, challenge of defining the term “globalization.” This is a highly contested term, and many scholars have pointed out that using the term is unhelpful due to its ambiguity. Globalization is not a new thing; it has been present and evolving since the earliest years of human civilization. Cultures, people, and ultimately, nations come into contact with one another and share their systems of beliefs, food traditions, and so forth. At times this has been beneficial to everyone, and at times it has come with violence and the extermination of cultural systems. Nonetheless, it is productive to try to understand the process of globalization through the lens of global food pathways. Choosing a specific locus of study allows people to at least understand how globalization has been influenced and continues to influence the way we think about food production, distribution, and consumption. Today, scholars, activists, and interested consumers debate the meaning of food security. As William D. Schanbacher argues in The Politics of Food: The Global Conflict between Food Security and Food Sovereignty, the definitions of food security and food sovereignty are not binarily opposed—rather the methods with the common goal of feeding the world often diverge from one another. A close reading of Schanbacher’s book illustrates the complexity of these issues.4 Securing food for the most impoverished people around the world is not simply a process of providing the necessary caloric intake to survive but rather should also include reflection on the cultural significance of food for different people, different regions, and different beliefs, traditions, and practices related to food production and consumption. CHAPTER 2 To begin to understand this, Chapter 2 introduces readers to important organizations and trade strategies and agreements, which have come to create the global food system we have today. In particular, organizations such as the IMF and the World Bank and the trade agreements such as those put into policy through the WTO are criticized for their failures. Although the IMF and World Bank may have ostensibly constructed global financial policies with good motives on paper, whether they actually achieved these goals is debatable. Instead, critics of these institutions have questioned whether it is time to radically reconceptualize how we think about organizing a global financial system in a way that will curb global poverty and hunger. Thinking through different opinions on these subjects invariably ends with more philosophical reflection upon whether the economic system of capitalism itself must be put on trial. Although some scholars have argued that the time for questioning capitalism is long gone, this is not a

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

xiii

justified ethical response. In fact, it is a categorical error inherent to the argument itself. Simply by the premise that other forms of economic systems have failed in the past, it does not logically lead to the conclusion that capitalism is the only other option. For instance, myopic critics are quick to cite the failures of communism in Russia, China, Cuba, and so forth. However, in referencing these failures, what is often overlooked is the difference between the theory of communism and its various manifestations. More accurately put, there should be a nuanced distinction between the writings of Karl Marx and fellow communist theorists and regimes such as those of Mao Zedong in China, Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin in Russia, and Fidel Castro in Cuba. Arguably the failures of these regimes had nothing to do with the idea of communism itself but rather the failure of these political leaders to successfully put into practice the ideals of Marx’s original thoughts. CHAPTER 3 Chapter 3 introduces readers to the food sovereignty movement. It is related to the themes in Chapter 2 insofar as food sovereignty takes many different forms, which, in turn, utilize different philosophical and economic theories. Some base their strategies on different forms of communism, and some work within the capitalism system itself. While these theoretical discussions are important, the central concern for food sovereignty is to, first, protect the human right to food and then begin discussion over concrete ways for achieving them. Once this can be accomplished, we can begin to implement specific policies that will include ideas about protecting the cultural significance of food. In direct relationship to the cultural meaning of food are the conditions under which it is produced and consumed. If global food producers— peasants, small-scale farmers, indigenous peoples, and so on—are denied the opportunity to produce their own food for their own families and communities, much is lost. Instead, these farmers are often forced to produce food simply for the demands of the global market, thus truncating their ability to enjoy their own traditional cuisines. This is not to suggest that global farmers must produce their own indigenous foods, but rather they should have an opportunity to choose to do so if they wish. The fetters of the global economy that limit these opportunities are challenged by the food sovereignty movement. CHAPTER 4 Chapter 4 investigates the phenomenon of “land grabbing.” This is the process in which governments normally, but not limited to, sell land to

xiv

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

larger farm operations or to foreign investors as a means to improve their economic (conditions). This is a somewhat difficult area of study because the people who are pushed off their lands often do not have a platform to voice their grievances about this usurpation of their lands and lifestyles. Invisible people working on family farms or through simple subsistence living do not have any clout or any bargaining power when governments decide their lands could improve their markets. Instead of negotiating with local farmers, the easy solution is to simply move in and start pushing people out of the way. Nonetheless, the issue of land grabs is particularly important for understanding the concept of food sovereignty. Land is essential for survival, and it is imperative for small-scale and peasant farmers to have control over this vital resource. Without this security, these global farmers are undercut by the very thing that can bring about the insurance of survival. Unfortunately, as the world becomes more market driven under a faux capitalism, these global farmers are subjected to the whims of industrialized consumption practices, which, in turn, have a direct impact on whether they will be able to produce food for the survival of their families and communities. Developing countries are put between a rock and a hard place and have to decide whether to bolster their economies versus protecting the livelihoods of all of their citizens, and sometimes these two ends are at odd with each other. CHAPTER 5 Chapter 5 provides an examination of one of the major controversial issues global citizens face today—namely, the ever-grown influence and expansion of agribusiness and the corporatization of the global food system. As mass-produced agriculture continues to grow, both national governments and global farmers are becoming subject to the demands of the market. In the food industries, this falls largely in the hands of large corporations, which have so much market strength that they are almost immune to international regulatory laws. These corporations can virtually operate without oversight. In developing countries, governments are often desperate for foreign investment, and inviting corporations into their countries allows them to provide more jobs, which, in turn, help to bolster their economies, even if just by a meager amount. However, when corporations are allowed to operate without much regulation, they have had a history of exploiting labor and land. They have the upper hand in most negotiations. Areas such as export processing zones (EPZs) serve as sovereign pieces of property, which national governments have little oversight and control over. These areas are where massive cargo ships will dock to pick up

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

xv

payloads of fruits, vegetables, and other foods that will be transported to industrialized countries. The conditions of the laborers who have provided these foods go unnoticed. It is simply a matter of taking one commodity and transporting it to become another commodity, albeit often on the shelves of grocery stores in affluent countries. This is the beginning of the disconnect between global farmers and the food that ends up nourishing our families and friends at the dinner table. For food sovereignty, researchers and activists are increasingly focusing attention on the corporate misuse and waste of natural resources at the hands of transnational corporations (TNCs). CHAPTER 6 Chapter 6 focuses on one of the most currently important issues with respect to human rights and food sovereignty. Water is a source of life that we cannot do without. Not only do we simply need it for bodily hydration but it is also necessary for the growth of food, which in turn impacts both our natural and animal ecosystems. In its three forms of vapor, liquid, and solid, water becomes significant for the clouds and moisture it creates in our skies, the eventual rain that results once this water becomes too dense, and finally the ice that is formed either over mountainous regions or in both the southern and northern poles. Occupying over 70 percent of Earth’s surface, in its different forms, it provides nourishment for animals in the oceans as well as rivers and lakes on the land. Aside from its biological importance, water can also be a source for exploration as well as human enjoyment. Humans play in the world’s ponds, fish and raft in its rivers, and occasionally, climb on top of the world’s highest mountain peaks. Unfortunately, despite its abundance, it is one of the most threatened natural resources. Whether through pollution through the dumping of human waste into the oceans or contamination by modern industries producing harmful chemical runoff, water is increasingly under siege. As water becomes scarcer in different regions of the world, it serves as the source of political and cultural conflict. Competition over water has brought people to arms and forced many global communities to compete with powerful corporations over the use of water. Yet, all might not be lost, and many current conservationist groups are working arduously to recover what we are on the verge of losing. Chapter 6 provides a foray into many of the most pressing concerns with respect to food sovereignty and water and provides examples of what countries and communities are doing to promote conservation and protection of water. Food sovereignty researchers and activists base many of their studies and activism on the need for water sovereignty.

xvi

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

CHAPTER 7 Chapter 7 builds upon the themes and issues developed throughout the book and introduces the important role that human rights can play in how we conceptualize global food justice and food sovereignty. The issue of human rights itself is a contested term that has evolved since its modern political inception after World War II. Critics of human rights argue that they are a human-made system and therefore cannot be the foundation for understanding how we should treat both the environment and other human beings. However, this criticism is countered by many religious groups who argue that, while not explicitly phrased in terms of a “human right,” the notion of human rights is central to many religious traditions and thus has much older origins. Chapter 7 will introduce readers to the ways in which different major world religions have understood their respective texts and practices through the lens of human rights. Chapter 7 will introduce the theories of Martha Nussbaum, Amartya Sen, and Thomas Pogge as a way that might help tackle the major problems of global hunger and poverty. While all three of these thinkers take different approaches to current problems in the global food system, they have the common ground of wanting to create a fairer and more compassionate global society that can center on food as a means to begin a dialogue about creative ways to accomplish this goal. For Nussbaum and Sen, their innovative “capabilities approach” model is a practical way to set the foundation for what it means to live a dignified and flourishing life. In this sense, it is universal in nature because the model can be applied across cultures. Pogge provides an additional voice to this conversation by asserting a provocative argument that contends that the current global food system is built upon a widespread violation of human rights by affluent countries of the world. Pogge’s argument does not sit well with global citizens who sit comfortably in their isolated sanctuaries, which are built on the backs of the world’s impoverished communities. CHAPTER 8 Chapter 8 concludes with an ethical analysis of the themes covered throughout the book. Many of the issues discussed are controversial and deserve continued and informed debate on the complexities of the global food system. The concepts and various social movements associated with food sovereignty provide resources for continued reflection on how to address injustices and inequalities in the global food system. As an ethical analysis of the themes addressed throughout the book, Chapter 8 provides readers with a choice that is grounded in a careful distinction between two ways of framing questions about the global food system, food justice, and human rights.

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

xvii

Food sovereignty addresses many of these issues by first looking at how the global food system is currently structured and, second, whether we have the moral fortitude to challenge the status quo. It presents readers with somewhat of a moral dilemma. People in affluent countries can continue to live comfortably within the confines of their communities of convenience, or they can step out of their comfort zones and begin to better educate themselves about the realities and hardships that many of the world’s farmers and food producers face on a day-to-day basis. This is not necessarily a comfortable decision. To draw from the life of the famous Buddhist legend Siddhartha Gautama, later to be known as the Buddha, it is a process of stepping outside of the confines of the castle walls and witnessing firsthand the realities of life. Just as the noble father of Siddhartha feared what would become of his son if he were to actually witness the suffering of the world, so do the mothers and fathers in our contemporary world hope to shelter their children from the harsh realities of the real world. But the story of the Buddha is poignantly appropriate. Upon trying various strategies of answering life’s most profound questions of meaning and purpose, he meditated, unsuccessfully at first, about how to go about finding answers to his questions. Through self-imposed depravation, the Buddha finally woke up after a long night of hunger, meditation, and temptation to return to the luxuries of his previous existence. Despite these tribulations, he journeyed to the outside world, to the world of suffering, and to the world of reality for much of the communities in the world much like what we live in today, and consequently, he was changed. He could not return. Instead, his physical awakening was also what was to become known as his Enlightenment. In a certain way, this is the entire goal of the food sovereignty movement. It urges people to reflect and learn more about the realities of the world, and as uncomfortable as the growing pains may be, they may result in the creation of a more compassionate and just world. Lastly, at the end of each chapter, recipes are suggested for those interested in making new meals for friends and family but perhaps, more importantly, for introducing them to different cuisines from around the world. This is paramount not only to understand the concept of food sovereignty but also to illustrate the centrality of food in our everyday lives. When we gather together to cook and eat with one another, we experience the joys of spending time with family and friends. (Warning: There can be too many cooks in the kitchen, but just laugh it off.) While these recipes provide examples of different food cultures from around the world, they also serve to initiate a discussion on where our food comes from and the people who produce it. They also illustrate the diversity of global cultures and cuisines. However, perhaps more importantly, they might also make us all think a little more about those who cannot have the luxury of eating nutritious and abundant amounts of food.

xviii

Introduction to Globalization, Food Sovereignty, and Human Rights

Many people suffer from extreme levels of hunger and malnutrition and would be elated just to have one meal or cook one recipe once in their lives. Unfortunately, this is not the case for millions of starving children and families around the world. This book not only provides an academic and, at times, incisive criticism of the current global food system but it also provides suggestions for potential solutions to many of the global poverty and hunger issues we face currently. Brief vignettes in each chapter will provide additional resources for those interested in looking deeper into certain subjects and regions of the world. Along with these vignettes, the recipes will also provide a foray into ways different cultures eat and think about food. Finally, and most importantly, this book is about food, human rights, and the ways in which the food sovereignty concept and movement might provide a paradigm shift in the ways we think about food. In many ways, learning more about the food sovereignty movement educates us all about many dimensions of community relationships, global agriculture, global and local foodways, and finally, human life.

CHAPTER 1

Globalization, Development, Food Security, and the Emergence of a Global Food Regime

“Globalization” is a contested term. For many scholars, activists, and local and international farmers, this term is synonymous with words such as “opportunity,” the chance to move out of poverty and to bring their children a better life. For others, this term symbolizes oppression, the way of international superpowers to continue to exploit people living in poverty and people of color. In general, scholars correctly will argue that “globalization” is not a new term. We have been globalizing since the dawn of time, but it has just transformed into different iterations. This is true, but in terms of the global food system, this is too ambiguous. We are at a point today where globalization has almost reached its pinnacle of exploitation. As Marx and Engels infamously quoted in the final, prescient words of the Communist Manifesto, “The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!”1 While the Communist Manifesto was meant as a pamphlet to invigorate fellow workers and warn of a future revolution, its words still ring true today for many global populations. In many ways the fruition of this revolution has not come to light, but this does not dilute the potency of Marx’s and Engels’s words. Even if not directly the most important document for many global farmers, it remains a driving force in their demands and hopes. Whether implicitly or explicitly, global farmers are those who often live in poverty, living difficult lives that remain unseen and unrecognized by much of the industrialized, affluent world.

2

Food as a Human Right

Today, although we see some signs of progress in terms of economic equality, often those markers are skewed by documents produced by agencies such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the United Nations. These organizations are often in collusion with international trade organizations, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), and regional trade agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), as well as European and Asian trade agreements. Historically these trade agreements have been asymmetrical in nature and have disproportionately benefited more affluent countries. In the creation of the WTO, for instance, Walden Bello notes, “The eight years of negotiations that produced the WTO were dominated by the United States and the European Economic Community; Canada and Japan also played significant roles.”2 According to Bello, the WTO’s ostensible goal of a more robust global free-trade system was to improve the conditions of all nations; it ultimately served corporate interests to the detriment of the world’s poor. Historically, this ongoing debate on how we could all go about continuing to curb global poverty and hunger emerged as part of an early historical debate on the difference between two movements called food security and food sovereignty. Schanbacher has been critiqued for making too strict a binary between these terms, but this is an overstatement of his argument.3 However, these critiques have been somewhat overstated. What has been important for people concerned with the difference between food security and food sovereignty is not a binary distinction between food security and food sovereignty, but rather the nuances between the historical developments of these two concepts and terms. For example, we can observe the original iterations of the term “food security.” In one of its early versions, “food security” is defined as follows: Food security, as defined by the United Nations’ Committee on World Food Security, is the condition in which all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.4

This definition has evolved over time. Scholars and activists who have examined this evolution remind others that the original definition was worded much differently. In its original iterations, we see that much of the wording, while well intended, deserves more substantiation. Nonetheless, scholars and activists such as Schanbacher, Clapp, and Fuchs have the same goal in mind, and this goal coincides with much of what the food sovereignty movement is fighting to achieve—namely, working hand in hand with global organizations and political policies that ensure we can compassionately feed the world. This goal is

Globalization, Development, Food Security

3

represented through voices who take issue with problems connected to various obstacles that stand in the way of achieving these efforts. Scholars and activists such as Clapp and Fuchs have devoted much of their careers to investigating the multivariate causes of the growth of agrifood corporations and the ways in which global governance has evolved over time. The emergence of what might be called cutthroat capitalism that privileges the wealthy to the detriment of the poor has in many ways intensified problems for impoverished nations as well as specific sectors of society such as those working in agriculture. For scholars such as Clapp and Fuchs, we address the issue of the corporate food system and its influence on both the public and private sector. Clapp’s work incisively examines the intricacy of how corporate food businesses have immense influence on the process. She writes, Fundamental changes have taken place in food systems around the world over the past century. We now have a globally integrated food system that affects all regions of the world.

Clapp continues to write, The international governance of the food system is geared toward providing some degree of regulation to put in place safeguards from potential negative socioeconomic and ecological consequences of a globalized food system.5

Most importantly, the authors state that “at the same time, these corporations play a key role in the establishment of the very rules that seek to govern their activities.”6 To return to another iteration of “food security,” we read, The World Food Summit of 1996 set as a target the halving of the number of undernourished people in the world by 2015. This goal was also adopted by the Millennium Summit in 2000. The progress made so far towards meeting this target was reviewed at the “World Food Summit; Five Years Later” conference in Rome in June 2002. The latest analysis by FAO indicated that if current trends at the national and international levels continue, it is unlikely that this target will be met.7

As noted in one of the first iterations of the concept of food security, we see that the original World Food Summit as well as the Millennium Summit had ambitious goals. While the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) originally admitted that the target goals would not be met, this does not mean that the summit’s goals were misguided, rather that they were just too difficult to achieve. As we proceed with this book, we will see that many of the themes of food sovereignty, while not necessarily

4

Food as a Human Right

directly challenging organizations such as the FAO, do challenge the way in which the FAO’s conceptualization of food security has been approached in the past. Returning to the concept of globalization, it is important to introduce the most current development of economic and political theory, namely what many have called “neoliberalism.”8 Neoliberalism is also a developing concept, but in its formative years, it was defined by a philosophy of deregulation, free trade, and the free-market enterprise. This neoliberal economic, philosophical, and ethical worldview defines deregulation as the reduction of government intervention into business, the opening of borders, and in general, the opening of the free market through the elimination of tariffs and trade restrictions. What is ironic about this philosophy—especially in the United States, many European countries, and certain countries in Asia—is, while politicians espouse these philosophies, they continue to protect their economies from the harms of free trade. Country leaders have argued, and continue to argue, that they are all for these general philosophies until these begin to harm their own national interests. Once this occurs, we see a complete 180 in terms of their political positions. This is not to sound polemical. In fact, we have historic examples of such instances of change of heart. For instance, in the United States we witnessed this in the infamous example with the country of Haiti. During the Clinton administration (1993–2001), he arguably devastated the economy of Haiti through his political and economic policies. As the governor of Arkansas at the time, Clinton pushed through policies, while perhaps well intended, and ended up harming many Haitian farmers. In Clinton’s efforts to feed the impoverished country, he began shipping food to the country. This, in turn, ended up undermining farming communities in Haiti and forced many to leave their farms or resort to other means to provide a meager income for their families. In a sense, this is precisely what founds the concept of food security and precisely how it differs from the concept of food sovereignty. Had the Clinton administration recognized the shock waves of their policy solutions, they would have realized that they were doing more harm than good. This is not to suggest that the United States should have remained uninvolved, but rather more educated about the potential harms their policies might have caused. This is a common theme in food sovereignty to the extent that many countries and communities argue that what they need and want is not help but rather the infrastructure to provide for themselves, a knowledge and ability that they are more capable of doing than foreign powers. The following brief interview provides a firsthand account of a scholar who has lived among the people of Haiti. It provides a glimpse into the failure of global governance institutions to improve the lives of those

Globalization, Development, Food Security

5

communities most in need. Scholar Lenny Lowe responds to the following questions regarding the devastative earthquake in Haiti in 2010: Q1: What was your experience with the United Nations and their role in the aftermath of the earthquake? (I remember you telling me about how they occasionally committed some pretty bad abuses, just hung out at bars, etc.) A1: There is a difference between my actual experience with the United Nations and the local, on-the-ground perception of the United Nations (in Haiti, MINUSTAH). Generally, I encountered UN soldiers arriving from time to time passing down the street with semi-automatic weapons across their chests, at the ready. They neither spoke nor interacted with those around them. These were the vast majority of UN soldiers. However, I did once encounter a high-ranking American UN soldier driving down the street. A taxi (moped) passed him on the small street, because SUVs (like the one he was driving) are necessarily slowed by the rough terrain and pedestrian and animal traffic. After the taxi passed him, he accelerated and ran the taxi into a cinder-block retaining wall, yelling at him in broken French for having tried to pass him (a laughable complaint for anyone who has driven in Haiti). The driver was shaken up but uninjured. I followed them man, intending to scold him, and found him going to the hotel at the end of the street where he disappeared for about 30 minutes in the early evening with a prostitute. When he came back out, I tried to stop him and ask him why he had run the driver off the road. He was sweating and drunk, and he simply told me to get out of his way. He told me that I had no idea who he was or what he was capable of doing to me. He forced his way past me to his car and sped away down our dusty road. This encounter is far more consistent with the general perception of MINUSTAH in Haiti. There are countless stories of rape in the countryside and even around Port-au-Prince. There was even an enduring grudge between a couple of men and a MINUSTAH soldier that ended in murder. During the fall of 2010, as the cholera epidemic was sweeping across our town finally, we awoke one morning to murmuring in the streets about a murder just a short walk from our house. It turns out that it had nothing to do with unrest regarding the cholera epidemic (which, even at that time was RIGHTLY being blamed on MINUSTAH). Instead, the soldier had slept with another man’s wife several weeks earlier, and the Haitian man had ended their dispute by burying a machete into his head while he slept. Q2: What does the dynamic of religion look like in Haiti today, and how has that played a role in the formation of the country as well as where it stands today? A2: This is unanswerable even in a thousand sentence. The most orienting comments I can make is there is a growing culture war—the flourishing and increasing population of evangelicals and charismatic Haitian Christians who largely agree with the diagnosis of born-again pundits like Pat Robertson that Haiti’s “problem” is the devil (i.e., the Kongo-Yoruban-Catholic ancestor-oriented dance and drumming practices known collectively as “Vodou”) and his “stronghold” in Haiti. These folks are seen as anti-nationalist by opponents, though they are definitely crafting their own kind of Christian nationalism. On the other side, you have Vodou-nationalists who see Vodou as an important marker of Haitian cultural

6

Food as a Human Right

identity that is constantly threatened by Christianity, academics, and the global economy (they’re not wrong, really). These two sides mark the edges of the culture war, or better yet—the war for Haiti’s soul. In the middle, though, there are plenty of folks—like the Pentecostals I study. Floating transcendently aloof above it all is the Haitian elite, many of whom are cosmopolitan atheists, politicians, academics who dismiss all of it as “superstition” and are quick to disparage religious folks, but even quicker to profit from it. Finally, the role of what we call “religion” in contemporary Haitian life is hard to ignore. It is also hard to ignore how thoroughly missionized the country has become, with folks headed to church all hours of the day every day of the week. Historically, Vodou has served as a genuine source of grassroots organization, local justice, community health and healing, etc. These days, that role is increasingly being overtaken by evangelical and charismatic Christian communities. Q3: If you had an opinion about the best way to move forward with improving the lives of Haitians, what would that be or look like? A3: If I had any strong sense that something, anything could work, I’d be trying to do it rather than writing to you about it. But, my sense is that Haitians are most broadly the victims of a global capitalist market-based economy that continues to extract from Haiti and places like it and only “helps” here and there to assuage the guilt. It is hard for me to imagine a solution that would work through and with that system, but neither do I see that system collapsing any time soon. Thus, in the absence of a strong centralized government, and given the state of Haiti’s infrastructure, I believe a path forward must involve self-determination on the part of various groups of Haitians. Insofar as the global economic powers have systematically raped Haiti and Haitians, I would love to see some kind of withdrawal from the system on the part of Haiti. But, we all known that isolationism provokes the anger of Uncle Sam even further. Tourism as an industry could certainly generate some money and infrastructure, but it is an insulting prospect for the world’s first independent black republic. Large scale agriculture will require government protection and oversight that is impossible within Haiti’s present systems. So, small scale, local reconfigurations of power and economy seem like the best path forward.9

HAITI: FAILED DEVELOPMENT POLICY, FAILED JUSTICE, MORE OF THE SAME TO COME, MAYBE? 10 It would be unproductive to waste energy discrediting the religious rhetoric of certain televangelists or the analogous political rhetoric of certain ranting cable celebrities, so for those serious about constructively examining ethical responsibilities, both religious and secular, to Haiti— theologians, development economists, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and the global citizenry—must focus attention on multilateral organizations such as the IMF and the World Bank along with U.S. legislation such as the HOPE II Act. As ethicists and theologians, we should be more concerned with how current policy solutions for rebuilding Haiti

Globalization, Development, Food Security

7

fall short of the radical reconstruction efforts needed to rewrite an entire history of a country whose people have been reduced to chattel. Actually, in uttering these previous remarks, I have gone too far. To say this country has had a history of “a people” conceals the fact that the 8 million indigenous Indians living there upon Columbus’s arrival in 1492 were utterly decimated by the late seventeenth century. Nevertheless, French and Spanish settlers were able to transplant a new population of African slaves to the island of Hispaniola, which became home to almost half of all slaves held in the Caribbean colonies. According to researchers and doctors such as Paul Farmer, Hispaniola was one of the world’s richest colonies, yet it was the most brutal, with approximately one of every three slaves dying within the first three years of exploitation. For instance, in rare firsthand documentation of slave treatment, Haitian slave Baron de Vastey recollected the treatment of slaves by their captors: “Have they not thrown them into boiling cauldrons of cane syrup . . . Have they not cast them alive to be devoured by worms, or onto anthills . . . Have they not buried them alive, crushed them in mortars . . . Have they not forced them to eat shit . . . Have they not hung up men with heads downward, drowned them in sacks, crucified them on planks?”11 Maybe Pat Robertson was onto something when he said the Haitians “got together and swore a pact with the devil,” pleading, “We will serve you if you will get us free from the” French. Perhaps this was the lesser of two evils.12 Slaves were crucified on planks. Vastey’s remarks expose another side of the story that carries us to more recent years and into a theological focus. While time does not permit us to go into the contentious events of the decades-long drama of liberation theologian and previous president Jean-Bertrand Aristide, it is worth noting the ever-present meddling of the United States in Latin America and the Caribbean from the 1960s to the present, specifically the threat liberation theology presented for corporate and elite interests. As one U.S. Army intelligence officer recalled, “US army intelligence officers also understood exactly what was at stake, and all through the 1980s and early 1990s recognized that ‘the most serious threat to US interests was not secular Marxist-Leninism or organized labor but liberation theology.’ ”13 And with respect to Aristide, one U.S. official noted, “Aristide—slum priest, grassroots activist, exponent of liberation theology—represents everything the CIA, DOD, and FBI think they have been trying to protect this country against for 50 years.” 14 “What is so dangerous about liberation theology?” one might ask. Concepts such as the preferential option for the poor and the potential for mass mobilization behind individuals or governments, such as Aristide’s in the 1990s, directly threaten the status quo.15 But, rather than focusing on the political turmoil in Haiti, or liberation theology for that matter, it is my present concern to identify how current policy proposals reinforce the status quo and risk reinstituting the same old failed policies

8

Food as a Human Right

of the past. Perhaps more importantly, analyzing how these policies conceive of reconstruction and future development reveals a particular understanding of human relations and human well-being, which should concern us from an ethical perspective. The extreme poverty in Haiti provides a glimpse of the material well-being of its people: 76 percent of the population lives on less than $2/day, and 56 percent lives on less than $1/day, the benchmark for extreme poverty. Globally, that gap between the rich and the poor is most extreme in Latin America, and Haiti is the most unequal within this region. It is also important to note, for our present purposes, that poverty is more widespread in rural areas, with roughly two-thirds of Haiti’s extremely poor population living in rural areas. It is under these conditions that multilaterals, NGOs, and the United States have tabled options for economic and infrastructural recovery. Currently, the three central options in discussion include bolstering tourism, increasing export processing zones (EPZs) in which textile and apparel firms can set up shops, and ostensibly rebuilding the agricultural sector. Let us focus on the first two options. United Nations’ special envoy to Haiti, Bill Clinton, and the World Bank Group’s International Finance Corporation suggest that rebuilding the tourism industry holds one potential option. From a pragmatic perspective, this option seems daunting. On the one hand, it should be noted that Haiti’s tourism industry has been virtually nonexistent since the mid-1980s due to political unrest, poverty, and violence.16 Accordingly, any such policy proposals would have to address more basic economic recovery and stability options before revitalizing tourism. On the other hand, while proponents of tourism argue that it creates jobs and helps build infrastructure such as roads and airports, the industry does not substantially improve the conditions of locals—for instance, they do not own the hotels, cruise ships, adventure businesses, and so forth. At best, locals gain employment opportunities, yet the material conditions of life do not radically improve. Moreover, if we properly conceive of tourism as a commodity, we recognize how its consumption conceals the true power dynamics between the tourist/consumer and the local/consumed. Or to put it in classical Marxist terms, tourism is a form of commodity fetishism that conceals the true social relations at play.17 What is perhaps more interesting from an ethical standpoint is this question: How does tourism construct local subjectivity generally, specifically that of the Haitian people? Perhaps Jamaica Kincaid’s description of the nativetourist dynamic contains insight: Every native of every place is a potential tourist, and every tourist is a native of somewhere. Every native everywhere lives a life of overwhelming and crushing banality and boredom . . . Every native would like to find a way out . . . But some natives—most natives in the world—cannot go anywhere. They are too poor. They are too poor to go anywhere . . . so when the natives see you, the tourist, they envy

Globalization, Development, Food Security

9

you, they envy your ability to leave your own banality and boredom, they envy your ability to turn their own banality and boredom into a source of pleasure for yourself.18

Kincaid’s words are particularly timely when we recall that Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines docked in Labadee Beach within days of the quake. Viewed in this light, we see that the Haitians are valuable only to the extent that they can allow tourists to leave “their own banality and boredom” and turn Haitian “banality and boredom into a source of pleasure.” While tourism may provide meager opportunities to sell local wares to foreigners, the industry reinforces subjectivities of servitude and dependency. Locals serve tourists in restaurants, hotels, guiding tours, and so forth. Locals are dependent on tourist interests, demands, and money, and this relationship is asymmetrical with the tourists holding virtually all power. As a form of commodity fetishism, the industry conceals the fact that “a significant number of employees are not proud of what they do, and harbor resentments rooted in the inability to distinguish between service and servitude.”19 The tourism industry in Haiti continues to be a contested issue. On the one hand, it provides a meager opportunity for local Haitians to earn a little more income. On the other hand, it perpetuates a certain sort of ambivalence because tourism serves as a symbolic manifestation of Haiti’s subjugation to racism, colonialism, and slavery under the rule of global powers. A critical ethical examination of the possibility of tourism generating sustainable socioeconomic recovery illustrates the underside of this policy option and thus the need for policy solutions that do not perpetuate relations of domination, servitude, and dependency. Alongside tourism, a second major policy solution supported by U.S. legislation such as the HOPE II Act and multilateral organizations such as the World Bank is the expansion of EPZs, which will provide employment opportunities primarily in textile and apparel production. Consider how HOPE II advocates and Oxford economist Paul Collier envisions the potential of Haitian labor: Due to its poverty and relatively unregulated labour market, Haiti has labour costs that are fully competitive with China, which is the global benchmark. Haitian labour is not only cheap it is of good quality. Indeed, because the garments industry used to be much larger than it is currently, there is a substantial pool of experienced labour.20

Or take the initial February response to the quake by World Bank president Robert B. Zoellick: Repeatedly hit by natural disasters, Haiti has been cursed by its geography. But geography could be Haiti’s strategic opportunity. Six hundred miles from the

10

Food as a Human Right

United States, Haiti has enormous potential. With access to the U.S. market through the HOPE II Act, Haiti can create jobs in its apparel and agriculture sectors.21

Here we go again with Haiti’s “curse.” As we know, a curse is some sort of evil or misfortune inflicted upon an individual or group by a supernatural force. A curse also implies the accursed somehow deserve or are complicit in their punishment. Zoellick’s language, while perhaps unintentional, conceals the fact that current policy proposals are simply a continuation of the destructive structural adjustment programs initiated, with the support of the United States, by the World Bank and IMF in the 1970s and 1980s, programs that were by no means supernatural in nature. Market liberalization, deregulation, and privatization—core elements of the Washington Consensus guidelines for economic development—created a perfect environment in which EPZ labor serves as the best current opportunity for generating jobs. Let us take a brief look at the history of structural adjustment policies in Haiti. Beginning in the 1970s and intensifying in the mid-1980s, Haiti has been constrained by neoliberal economic policies imposed by the IMF and other international financial institutions. These programs have focused largely on the elimination of import tariffs and “the reorientation of domestic production in favor of cash crops popular in North American supermarkets.” The results of these programs included dramatic cuts in wages and the decline of public sector work. Take, for instance, the case of rice production. Prior to structural adjustment programs, Haiti was self-sufficient in rice, which is a staple food for much of the population. However, by 1995 subsidized rice from the United States began flooding Haiti as it was forced to cut its tariff on foreign rice to 3 percent. As a result, U.S. rice now trades at around 70 percent of the price of Haiti’s indigenous competition.22 The case of rice is just one example of a general trend in global agricultural communities. Prior to the earthquake in Haiti, they were largely self-sustainable in terms of agricultural goods such as rice, but now the country remains beholden to the aid of more affluent countries and NGOs. Aside from the destructive policies in the agricultural sector, the current proposal for increasing EPZs and textile and garment labor exposes another distressing policy option and its consequent ethical implications. Ultimately the expansion of EPZs results in sweatshop-like labor conditions. This is no secret, as is evident in the quote by Paul Collier. Similar to our analysis of tourism, this issue can be broken down on both a pragmatic and an ethical level. On a pragmatic level, proponents of increasing textile and garment labor argue that this provides jobs and can potentially augment Haiti’s economy. Although EPZs do hold an enormous labor potential—for instance, there are currently 27 million workers who are

Globalization, Development, Food Security

11

employed in EPZs globally—“too many of them continue to be hampered by a reputation for low wages, poor working conditions and underdeveloped labour-relations systems.” Moreover, the International Labor Organization has suggested, since the 1980s–1990s, that it is difficult to determine whether these zones are beneficial for global trade as well as the countries’ economies that are home to these zones. This trend is particularly distressing for those concerned with the long-term economic recovery of Haiti. Even though EPZs create jobs, if meaningful economic linkages are not made, long-term socioeconomic development will remain elusive. Setting aside the practical problems of EPZs, what is perhaps more alarming is the social and cultural impacts of such labor. As Ellen Israel Rosen laments, sweatshop labor creates “patterns of apparel employment that may ultimately threaten the continuity of family life in developing countries by impoverishing women and their families.”23 Rosen’s mention of women is particularly important given that upward of 90 percent of the 27 million EPZ workers worldwide are women. As such, we might take a closer look at how EPZ and sweatshop labor targets gender-specific social and global relations. Melissa Wright conceptualizes what she calls the myth of the “disposable Third World women,” a myth that nonetheless is grounded in concrete, day-to-day struggles of life and death. The women, or protagonists, of this myth of disposability turn into a “living form of human waste,” wherein they are required to be dexterous, patient, and attentive workers because these qualities allow them to create valuable products—products that “generate value as [these women] depreciate in value.” This is a global story in which female sweatshop workers are women who are “essentially, wasting away,” while these very women create all kinds of wonderful and popular things that can be bought and sold on the international market.24 We do not need to look far to see historical examples of this type of exploitation. The Walt Disney Corporation—not coincidentally also a major global icon of tourism—has had a particularly notorious yet lucrative history in Haiti. Through the mid-1990s, Disney paid Haitian workers as little as a dollar a day or 12 cents an hour to produce Mickey Mouse and Pocahontas pajamas, which was a blatant violation of Haitian minimum-wage laws. These workers, mostly Haitian women, sew these pajamas, which are exported to the United States and sold at places like Walmart for $11.97 each. This massive profit differential demonstrates not only how these women produce goods that generate value while they themselves waste away but also the ruthless exploitation characteristic of foreign firms operating in EPZs. An honest ethical assessment must conclude that policy solutions such as tourism and the expansion of EPZs do not genuinely consider the longterm well-being or flourishing of Haitians but rather implicitly show that

12

Food as a Human Right

our ethical commitment to the Haitians is quite minimal. As human beings they are valuable only to the extent that they can offer cheap, monotonous, and transitory labor that allows tourists to leave “their own banality and boredom” and turn that of the Haitian’s into a source of pleasure. Although it would be ethically irresponsible to deny suffering Haitians the opportunity for employment, whether in the form of sweatshop labor or through tourism, this does not recuse us from naming the ethical implications of how these solutions truly subjugated the Haitian people. Although the daunting task of devising reconstruction and sustainable development plans in the future will require a coordinated effort by Haitians, development workers, NGOs, economists, and so on, I would like to conclude with one potentially fruitful avenue of exploration. If the recovery of the agricultural sector is seriously considered, this effort should involve the participation of food sovereignty activists and fieldworkers. Briefly stated, the mission of food sovereignty demands that food be considered. The participation of this movement might hold both the theoretical framework and practical tools to help in this process. Food sovereignty activists and members recognize the harmful effects of the World Bank and IMF policies that impose punitive financial constraints that push countries away from self-sufficiency and toward dependency. Food sovereignty also recognizes the importance of food and agriculture as an integral aspect of curbing poverty and generating long-term sustainability. Alongside the potential for agriculture to improve the conditions in Haiti, I would like to draw attention to how a food sovereignty approach to human rights challenges policies that inhibit self-determination. Multilateral policies, U.S. legislation, or NGO programs that hinder the Haitian’s opportunities for freedom from dependency are precisely the types of policies that perpetuate historical inequities. Understanding policies in this light brings this ethical discussion to bear on larger global issues. Rather than demonstrating that state governments, NGOs, or international financial institutions actively attempt to alleviate poverty, I suggest we should view their failures as actively violating human rights. Commenting on the recent outbreak of cholera in Haiti, the chief medical officer for Partners in Health applies this concept to clean water. She notes, In 2000, a set of loans from the Inter American Development Bank to the government of Haiti for water, sanitation and health were blocked for political reasons. The city of St. Marc and region of the lower Artibonite were among the areas slated for upgrading of the public water supply. This project was delayed more than a decade and has not yet been completed. We believe secure and free access to clean water is a basic human right that should be delivered through the public

Globalization, Development, Food Security

13

sector and that the international community’s failure to assist the government of Haiti in developing a safe water supply has been violation of this basic right.25

By understanding current policy solutions in relation to human rights in this light, we have a firmer ground from which to begin reversing the historical conditions that reinforce social relations and subjectivities of servitude, domination, and exploitation. Ultimately, any failure to act is as much a violation of human rights as acting in malice. THE WORLD BANK: PARTNERS IN CRIME WITH GLOBAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS—THE CASE OF COFFEE PRODUCTION IN ETHIOPIA In many ways the World Bank is in partnership with major financial institutions that determine the conditions of the global poor and, in turn, global farmers. Along with the IMF, these two organizations often work in unison to influence and dictate both the global economic system and the way in which national governments are required to shape their political policies. This, in turn, has an impact on regions, individual countries, and lastly, local communities within their sphere of influence. Often, the communities that are impacted the worst are those of global farmers. The infamous example of coffee production in Ethiopia is an example of a historical result of policies that have been imposed by organizations such as the IMF and World Bank. As Nobel Prize–winning author Joseph Stiglitz recalls from his research on the Ethiopian coffee, The IMF has a distinct role in international assistance. It is supposed to review each recipient’s macroeconomic situation and make sure the country is living within its means. If it is not, there is inevitably trouble down the road.26

As Stiglitz notes, while assistance from multilateral organizations such as the IMF has sought to help improve the conditions of some of the world’s poorest countries, the history of success of these multilateral organizations is contested. Ethiopia produces two varieties of some of the most popular coffee beans in the world. Among others, two of the most high-demand coffee bean varieties include Arabica and Sidamo. These coffee beans are largely exported to European nations but have become popular around the world. The wording of this quote by Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America, the then president of Oxfam, is important to parse. When discussing the issue of food sovereignty and human rights, it is important to recognize the implicit conceptualization of how global communities should integrate into the modern world.

14

Food as a Human Right

“Harnessing market forces and allowing poor countries to benefit from intellectual property rights are keys to creating fairer and more equitable trade,” continued Offenheiser. “In a modern economy, companies must bring their business models in line with the demands of good corporate citizenship, which goes beyond traditional philanthropic approaches to dealing with poverty.”27

Again, the wording in this statement is important, noting the emphasis upon the words “good corporate citizenship.” Implicit in this statement is the notion that underdeveloped countries producing commodities for affluent countries need to harness market forces and go beyond conventional philanthropic approaches to addressing issues of poverty. What is important is the idea that global corporations such as Starbucks will not only agree to these types of agreements but also have the capacity to ensure that the conditions of the laborers producing their goods are indeed being respected. These questions can be illustrated on a very specific, local example that comes from the city of Tampa, Florida, in the United States. While thousands of miles away from the fields of Ethiopian coffee producers, this example is apropos to the issue of many concerns of the food sovereignty movement. In an investigative report by Laura Reiley, “Farm to Fable: A Times Investigation into Tampa Bay’s Local Food Scene,” she writes, If you eat food, you are being lied to every day. The food supply chain is vast and so complicated, from farm-to-table restaurants to farmers markets. Everywhere you look, you see the claims: “sustainable,” “naturally raised,” “organic,” “nonGMO,” “fair trade,” “responsibly grown.” Restaurants have reached new levels of hyperbole.28

Laura Reiley brings to light a phenomenon in one community that should be explored on a more in-depth level. Related to the case of Ethiopia, consumers might begin to ask this question: Where does our food come from? In this very local example, we begin to see that a capitalist system can subsume the most popular progressive movements such as “going green,” sustainable, and ecologically safe. This is what the system of capitalism does. It takes the most popular social movements in trend and incorporates them into the very economic system that serves to keep the global social order in place. What is often unseen is that this is the system that benefits the rich and not the poor, the system that keeps poor global farmers in chains. Food sovereignty recognizes how much of the food produced by global farmers is sold for exploitive profits and consumed by people who do not know where or by whom it has come from. It advocates and brings to light some of the examples of how the concept of food sovereignty might

Globalization, Development, Food Security

15

begin to address these issues. In highlighting the inconsistencies of many capitalistic theories and practices, it shows the greater global citizenship how this system is broken. THE WTO COMPLETES THE TRIFECTA OF GLOBAL GOVERNANCE The WTO, in cooperation with the IMF and World Bank, shore up almost complete control over the national and international monetary systems and, in turn, the conditions in which some of the poorest countries are forced to succumb to their policies. The underside of the history of trade agreements can be seen in the story of Lee Kyung-hae. Lee Kyung-hae has become an iconic yet tragic example of the plight of global farmers negatively affected by the policies of the WTO. Prior to Lee Kyung-hae taking his own life in the ultimate gesture of sacrifice in support of impoverished global farmers and in protest against the power of agribusinesses and governments that support the power of these business interests, speaking on behalf of Korean farmers, he wrote, Soon after the Uruguay Round Agreement was sealed [and led to the WTO], we Korean farmers realized that our destinies are no longer in our own hands. We cannot seem to do anything to stop the waves that have destroyed our communities, where we have been settled for hundreds of years. To make myself brave, I have tried to find the real reason and the real force behind those waves. And I reached the conclusion, here in front of the WTO. I am crying out my own words to you, that have for so long boiled in my body: I ask: for whom do you negotiate now? For the people, or for yourselves? Stop basing your WTO negotiations on flawed logic and mere diplomatic gestures. Take agriculture out of the WTO system.29

While Lee Kyung-hae’s self-sacrifice has become a rallying, iconic, and tragic event that has inspired many global farmers to continue protesting the WTO’s unfair asymmetrical trade negotiations and methods, it should not have been necessary. His self-immolation harkens back to many similar acts done in protest against the harmful political policies of national governments and their ties to big businesses. Perhaps one of the most infamous examples of self-immolation was witnessed in the case of the Buddhist monk Thı´ch Quảng Ðức (1897–1963), setting himself on fire in a busy intersection in Saigon. While his self-immolation was largely a political act at the time, part of it was motivated by the lack of land reform by the Vietnamese government. In the case of Lee Kyung-hae’s death, this was focused directly at the harmful policies of the WTO. Although the WTO has since changed some of its trade policies, at the time of Lee Kyung-hae’s death, the issue at

16

Food as a Human Right

hand was whether governments should consider the agricultural industry, and in particular, small-scale agriculture, as part of global free-trade arrangements. In effect, by subjecting small-scale farmers to these global arrangements, many farmers were driven off their farms and out of their homes because they had no means to compete with larger, more powerful farms. This trend continues to this day. While many may argue that this trend is inevitable, this by no means allows us to question the ethical implications of allowing it to continue. In many ways, the food sovereignty movement addresses the global food system and all its complicit consumers by indicting us of taking part in this process of the exploitation of small-scale and peasant farmers. When we blissfully purchase exorbitant amounts of food and eat happily without recognizing the consequences of our consumption practices, are we not all to blame in some part? Consumers in affluent countries can go on with their everyday lives and meals without truly acknowledging who produces the cheap foods that we eat, the environmental consequences of our eating choices, and the labor conditions of the people who produce our foods. While we, affluent consumers, might not be intentionally wanting to exploit our farmers, we do have the opportunity to better educate ourselves about these issues. By remaining ignorant of the true structure of the global food system, we fail to think about creative ways in which we might make it a more just and equitable system. Although this very well may involve uncomfortable changes in our daily lives, such as reducing our consumption levels, taking time to learn about the conditions of global farmers, and perhaps changing our worldviews with respect to what we eat, these reasons are not logical justifications for failing to do so. Traveling to your local grocery store, you can stroll through and look at some of the “fresh” produce. What comes to notice is a microcosmic example of the reach of globalization in the United States in terms of the global food system. You will likely find avocadoes and tomatoes from Mexico and fruits from Central and South America. You will also notice that, oftentimes here in the United States, these fruits and vegetables come from states that are hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away. This raises some important questions for investigating the nature of the global food system. First, does the number of miles that food has to travel have a harmful environmental impact, such as on high levels of carbon emissions? This is a highly contested debate between both food activists and environmental scientists. For instance, many consumers who are attempting to eat local foods because they believe that they not only are healthier but also reduce the carbon footprint argue that the distance that food travels to reach our nightly dinner plates—typical estimates of 1,500 miles—is egregious. Instead consumers should focus on eating locally grown and

Globalization, Development, Food Security

17

bought foods and ingredients. However, as one investigative report published by the Guardian remarks, In addition, the government has revealed that it is changing its stance on food miles, as was recently stressed by Gareth Thomas. “Food miles alone are not the best way to judge whether the food we eat is sustainable. We need a betterinformed food miles debate. Long term, the only fair option is to ensure the prices of the goods we consume, including organic produce, cover the environmental costs wherever the goods are from. We also need a labelling system that tells consumers about how the product is reducing poverty.”30

This article highlights the argument that there are other factors involved with buying local foods that are not flown thousands of miles. Researchers and consumers should also consider the environmental impact of what we eat—namely, it does not boil down to the distance alone that food travels to reach our stores and dinner plates. Instead, it would be better to take all these factors into our thinking about our consumption choices, whether they involve eating only locally produced foods or foods that are produced from around the world. Remarking on the WTO Peter Rosset notes: “The United States government, which is supposed to be a ‘government of the people, for the people, and by the people,’ needs to stop its hypocritical pushing of trade liberalization, and rather join millions of family farmers and peasants in the rebirth of democracy through the principle of People’s Food Sovereignty.”31

Rosset points out the hypocrisy of many U.S. policies with respect to our trade agreements. In many recent U.S. governmental foreign trade agreements, they exercise pressure on poorer foreign countries to adhere to certain trade rules that the United States and other affluent countries that shape these trade policies do not themselves abide by. There is also a cultural dynamic to this debate. While the distances that foods travel from around the world should be considered, what is not often discussed is how trying different types of foreign cuisines also introduces us to different cultures. Herein lies the beauty of cooking and eating. Not only do we get to cook or taste dishes that we may not have access to make for ourselves but, as these dishes are researched and experimented with, they also provide a small glimpse into the lifestyles and food traditions of different global communities. Roland Barthes observes more modern food practices when he writes about nutrition and consumption behavior: By being faithful to a certain brand and by justifying this loyalty with a sect of “natural” reasons, the consumer gives diversity to products that are technically so identical that frequently even the manufacturer cannot find any differences.

18

Food as a Human Right

He goes on to write, When he buys an item of food, consumes it, or serves it, modern man does not manipulate a simple object in a purely transitive fashion; this item of food sums up and transmits a situation; it constitutes an information; it signifies . . . all food serves as a sign among the member of a given society.32

While the previous quotes are somewhat technical in their language, they provide several insightful points about the complexities of the food consumption habits in many societies. Setting aside the problematic gender-assumptive language (i.e., “modern man”), Barthes offers an interesting analysis of our consumption patterns. In the first quote, he underscores the idea that, in many instances, it is simply advertising that dictates our purchasing decisions. We have seen this in countless examples, such as buying Coca-Cola versus Pepsi, Domino’s versus Pizza Hut, or Kraft versus Velveeta macaroni and cheese (interestingly, Kraft owns Velveeta, which raises additional questions about what really the difference is other than a simple sleight of hand in terms of advertising and creating a market demand based on demand rather than taste), to name a few. Another issue that is more complex is whether a global trade liberalization is ideal. Researchers continue to debate whether free trade and the opening of borders, along with deregulation and privatization, are goals to be pursued for the greater good of all humanity. For food sovereignty activists, this does not appear to be the case. Thus far, history has not necessarily proven that free trade has benefited everyone. Again, this is a complex matter and, in many ways, will continue to be a discussion between economists, politicians, and global citizens who are searching for ways in which to mitigate the environmental and societal consequences of our food consumption practices. FARMING UNTIL YOU CANNOT BEAR IT ANYMORE: THE CASE OF FARMER SUICIDES IN INDIA One of the darker sides to the global food and agriculture system and climate volatility is the common, yet underreported, phenomenon of farmer suicides. Faced with enormous pressures to make a living and feed their families, as well as the perennial unease of whether mother nature will provide good weather, many farmers from around the world have succumbed to these pressures and decided to take their own lives. India is one such country that has been plagued by this phenomenon in recent decades (which has been recorded). In a recent study, statistics show that since 1980 suicide rates in rural and agricultural areas in India have doubled. Rising temperatures and

Globalization, Development, Food Security

19

their harmful effects on agricultural communities have led researchers to speculate that this is one of the root causes behind these suicides. 33 For example, in a research done by Tamma A. Carleton, she concludes, I find that temperature during India’s main agricultural growing season has a strong positive effect on annual suicide rates. . . . Crop-damaging temperatures increase suicide rates in India. . . . For days above 20°C, a 1°C increase in a single day’s temperature during the growing season increases annual suicides by 0.008 per 100,000 people, causing an additional 67 deaths, on average across India; this amounts to a 3.5% increase in the suicide rate.34

While these rates may not seem significant, they do illustrate how scientific studies have observed a correlation between climate change, suicide, and global agricultural communities. What is interesting about these studies is that they draw further attention to the difficult lives of farmers worldwide. Not only do they depend on the land for their own survival but part of this survival also depends on whether they can rely on farming to make a sustainable living for their families and communities. This is the bare threshold that must be met in order to survive, but as the food sovereignty movement as well as our current understanding of human rights might add, this is not enough. To live a truly dignified life, should we not be able to toil on the land in a way that also allows us to actually enjoy life, provide a good standard of living for our children, and perhaps even enjoy the beauty of nature? These are not the concerns that we usually come across in the corporate food model of production. In the vein of the famous Karl Marx, he wanted all people to share in the joys and diversity of life whether through reading, philosophizing, fishing, or farming. The food sovereignty concept and movement embody many of Marx’s sentiments. It does not deny the difficulty of an agricultural livelihood but rather suggests that we might work toward a global food system that might improve the chances of global agricultural producers living dignified and sustainable lives. In this sense, the food sovereignty movement fights to improve the livelihoods of global farmers who often go unnoticed. In the case of farmer suicides in India, we see some of the worst-case situations in which farmers become so desperate that they choose suicide rather than being unable to provide for their families. Of course, many would argue that this is a cowardly way out of a difficult situation, but what many do not realize is the despair that many global farmers face each year when they come to the realization that they will not be able to feed their families. In many ways the food sovereignty movement serves as a potential resource for alleviating these problems. Food sovereignty puts more control into the hands of farmers while also providing resources for educating farmers about ways to mitigate the

20

Food as a Human Right

unease and unpredictability of a farmer ’s livelihood. It provides resources for empowering national governments to better support their farmers as well as local communities that hope to create a more just food system. In the case of farmer suicides in India, the concept of food sovereignty may also have the potential to curb suicide rates by better educating farmers about how many farm communities around the world experience the same hardships they do. In this effort, food sovereignty holds the potential to create networks of solidarity in which people do not feel like they are alone or who are facing hardships similar to families around the world. When farmers are able to share their common causes and realize that they are not the only people who are experiencing the anxieties of a farming lifestyle, they begin to live more dignified lives. In the spirit of global farmers and farming communities, the following section provides several recipes that highlight some of the themes presented in this chapter. APPETIZER RECIPES Recipe 1: Mud Pies/Cakes This recipe is relatively simple and can be made by people all around the world, especially those in extreme poverty. If you live in an arid environment, simply walk as far as needed to obtain a bucket of water. Usually this is done by women. Upon returning home with your water, use whatever tool needed to dig up some soil, avoiding animal and human waste if possible. Mix in dirt and water to create a cake-like consistency, flatten out into circular discs for presentation, and set them out in the sun for 24 hours so they can dry out. When ready for eating, heat up over a fire briefly and season with whatever local herbs you might have. Enjoy. Ingredients: 1. Dirt 2. Water 3. Seasoning

Hopefully the irony is not lost here on this first recipe. Unfortunately, this is the reality for many impoverished global communities. Mud cake/pies are often made and consumed simply to provide a momentary reprieve from the painful stomachaches that come with hunger and malnutrition. Of course, there is essentially no nutritional value to these cakes, but they can at least provide a starving child who does not

Globalization, Development, Food Security

21

understand why her or his stomach is constantly hurting with a moment of relief. People in affluent countries have noticed many of the late-night commercials that show pictures of emaciated children and ask for donations to help out. Showing starving children is a good strategy for eliciting donations from those who have never experienced hunger. However, at best, it is a better strategy for ignoring the entire problem altogether, and at worst it perpetuates the problem. Those in affluent countries can make a small donation or even an annual contribution, but in reality, this perpetuates a global system of dependency. Instead, we might envision creative and possibly revolutionary ways in which we reform the global system and make it one in which mud cake recipes can be thrown in the dustbin. Recipe 2: Homemade Potato Chips with Paprika This recipe is a fun way to premake potato chips, which are healthier than the processed potato chips we find at the grocery store. A look at most brand-name potato chips will quickly illustrate how much unhealthy fat, sodium, and processed ingredients are in your typical bag of potato chips. The following recipe provides a healthier alternative. For people interested in the origins of our food, it introduces us to the origins of the potato. Often little known is the birthplace of the potato. While potatoes are grown all around the world, legend has it that the potato’s birth country is what is now modern-day Peru. If you ever get a chance to visit this beautiful country, you can walk to any grocery store and see a plethora of different colors, sizes, and varieties of potatoes. In Peru, this is a staple part of most recipes. In this recipe you use a simple Idaho potato, but you can also substitute any variety you favor. Ingredients: 1. Potatoes 2. Canola oil 3. Paprika

Instructions: Thinly slice your potatoes and place them on a cooking sheet or over tinfoil sprayed with cooking oil. Preheat your oven to 375°, and place your chips in. The cooking time varies but is relatively quick, so you will want to keep an eye on them so as they do not burn. Once crisp, remove them from the oven and lightly dust with paprika. Serve with any sort of dipping sauce you want or simply eat them plain. (Note: You can also

22

Food as a Human Right

use these for nachos, but you need to make them crispier because the second cooking of the chips for nachos may make them a little soggy. If you put them on broil, you will have no problem and will deliver batches of homemade nachos for a great gathering of friends and family.) Recipe 3: Nachos with Corn, Bean, and Cilantro Salsa Following the previous recipe for homemade potato chips, one great option for a salsa for nachos, or simply as a hearty dip, is a delicious corn, bean, and cilantro salsa. Ingredients: 1. Fresh sweet corn 2. Canned black beans 3. Cilantro 4. Cumin 5. Salt and pepper

Instructions: For preparation, shuck however many corncobs you need. This will vary depending on how much salsa you want to make for the number of guests. Again, depending on the number of guests you are preparing this meal for, you will want to add an equal ration of canned black beans. Drain excess black bean juices from the can and mix them in with your corn. The easiest way to prepare the corn is (after cleaning it) to cut the end off the tip of the shucked corn and take a large sharp knife and carefully cut down the sides of each cob, thus creating your own pieces of corn. Mix with beans, cilantro, and a dust of cumin for additional flavor. This is a great topping for the nacho recipe provided in this chapter.

CHAPTER 2

The Underside of Development

This chapter begins by analyzing the failures of historical policies propagated by multilateral organizations, powerful nation-states, and harmful global and regional trade agreements. In many examples, in fact, the original goals of these organizations have been neither accomplished nor benefited the countries they targeted to help. In many cases these organizations and trade agreements have exacerbated many problems associated with the failure to change the conditions of the global poor as well as the structure of the global food system. Historically, opinions have been contentious about the role of multilateral organizations and their successes and failures with respect to their efforts to curb global hunger and poverty. In the past the most prominent role players were the organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank and trade organizations, as mentioned in the Introduction to this book, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO). However, these organizations and trade agreements have not proven to be successful for the most impoverished and those who do not have a voice. In particular, the voiceless we are referring to are the small-scale global farmers and fisher communities who do not have a voice in their governments’ decisions about what crops to grow, whom to sell them to, and most importantly, what these crops mean to them. The crops and meats are often culturally very significant to the families who eat and grow them. Today, many families are forced into the globalized market system in which they can no longer produce for themselves what they want and what is culturally important to their communities. Instead they are economically forced to produce crops that are in market demand by their own governments or the international market. Farmers who once produced a variety of crops such as milk, yams, vegetables, and fresh greens now have the recourse to produce items such as flowers, cheap clothing, and even their own bodies. It is true that there are some families who desire to make this transition in order to provide a slim

24

Food as a Human Right

chance at a better future for their children. This is their right, a human right. However, there are also families who desire to remain in farming and live the life that they are living, without having to bow down to the powers that be. They wish to live in a world of fairness and justice in which they are compensated by their hard work and respected for their geographical place and space. They hope to have recognition for the foods they are producing for the world. These communities hope that movements, such as food sovereignty, will advocate, mediate, and allow them to have their voices heard. Activist and scholar David Harvey sums up the plight of the global poor in general, but his thoughts can also be applied to the situation of global farming communities. Discussing the theoretical ideology of capitalism, he writes, The final potential barrier to perpetual accumulation exists at the point where the new commodity enters the market either as a thing or a service of some kind to be exchanged for the original money plus a profit.1

For Harvey as well as previous Marxist thinkers before him, it is the never-ending pursuit for profits that ultimately creates conditions of human poverty and suffering for the masses. The pursuit for profit is the core of the capitalist model of organizing economies and, as such, how society is organized. Although Harvey’s quote contains complex terminology, it can be put into layman’s terms. In using the idea of the accumulation of capital, he is referring to the phenomenon of how the elite and wealthy people in society have the means to gather greater wealth through their ownership of the means of productions. In the case of global farmers, this would equate to owning things such as the land, the tractors, the tools used to harvest crops, and the workers themselves. What is also complex is the historical process in which this has come about. For authors like Harvey, and Karl Marx before him, he argues that when people do not actually have the ability or opportunity to own the tractors, tools, and land that they toil on, they will never have the option of securing a meaningful and secure life. Herein lies one of the conceptual problems of food security. If we simply read the idea of food security at its face value, on the level of trying to provide basic caloric needs for impoverished populations, we see that this can be interpreted as just making sure that people have enough to eat each day to stay alive. Opponents of this conceptualization will argue that what is most important is lost, namely the loss of the cultural significance of food for global communities. This happens for both impoverished and affluent nations. The agricultural commodities that provide us with our everyday meals bring us back to a famous yet often unread piece of literature by Marx. In his Manuscripts of 1844, he discusses the concept of alienation. He outlines

The Underside of Development

25

four different forms of alienation, which deserves acute attention. First, he describes a very basic alienation between humans and the natural world. This is an old-time phenomenon that initiates the further forms of separation between people and cultures. First, Marx argues that in the earliest of human societies, we did not have a concept of private property. At the core of our humanity, we must recognize how fundamental the economic act of labor is to our everyday lives. Labor is the basic activity that underpins our social lives. For Marx, labor ought to be creative, diverse, and satisfying, namely an expression of our total personality. However, it has instead become “alien” and unsatisfying, largely due to the development of the notion of private property. In his Manuscripts of 1844, he describes four different forms of alienation that can be useful to understand the modern world, including the production of food cultures around the world. These forms include (1) alienation from nature; (2) alienation from “himself, his own active functions, his life-activities.” In Marx’s words, “estranged labour estranges the species of man,” the objects of my labor; (3) alienation from the complete self— that is, “Man’s species being, both nature and his spiritual property, into a being alien to him, into a means to his individual existence. I simply produce commodities”; (4) finally, Marx concludes, “An immediate consequence of the fact that man is estranged from the product of his labour, from his life-activity, from his species being, is the estrangement of man from man.” 2 While the only way to truly understand Marx’s corpus of work on issues of alienation is daunting, several key points can outline his method of thinking. For Marx the concept of alienation is central to his entire corpus of writings even though he goes into to great detail in the Manuscripts of 1844. In essence, to be alienated from something or someone is to experience feelings of separation, disconnection, or disharmony. In terms of human relationships, to feel alienated from another person might, for example, be experienced when we reconnect with an old friend only to discover that they have become a completely different person than the person we once knew. Generally, this new person has changed in negative ways and so we feel alienated in our encounter with them. Marx applies this experience of disconnect or separation on multiple levels and relates it also to the products we produce. For example, when an artist finishes a piece of art and decides to sell it to an unknown consumer, he or she experiences a feeling of separation or alienation from his or her original creation. As such, it is important to examine Marx’s analysis of different forms of alienation. First, Marx believed that the exploitation of global laborers was not simply a problem of greed among the owners of the means of production, namely what we think of today as the managers, bosses, and CEOs of the world. Instead, it is more an inherent aspect of capitalism itself. Under such a system, people are incessantly striving to make greater profits, and

26

Food as a Human Right

for the bosses of corporations and businesses, this effort will end with extracting as much as they possibly can, for as little a cost as possible from their labor force. In turn, as workers are forced to work longer hours for less wages, their lives become abysmal. During the Industrial Revolution, we witnessed this phenomenon. As Marx would put it, the workers became “surpluses,” namely if they did not agree to work for lower and lower wages, they could be easily replaced. In their efforts to secure their jobs through long hours, workers end up creating more than what can be actually sold in the marketplace. During times when there are surpluses of products, the owners of companies resort to cut down production, which in turn results in having to lay off some workers. This results in wider economic downturns. These downturns coupled with the discontent of laid-off workers create social strife and conflict. For Marx, this is the beginning of the final revolution in which workers start to organize and fight against the very system that has created their miserable conditions. It is the broad understanding of history that provided Marx with his more philosophical differentiation between what he defines as the “base” and the “superstructure.” The “base” represents the world’s working class or the proletariat in Marx’s terminology, while the “superstructure” is the factory owners, whom Marx calls the “owners of the means of production.” For Marx, the “base” is the realm of class struggle, labor, and human feelings of alienation. Alternatively, the “superstructure” is what we can see in everyday life; it is the visible manifestation of all the powers, which serves to suppress the masses of laborers. Marx applies this method of thinking not only to economic conditions but also to all aspects of life, including the family, the arts, philosophy, and religion. Essentially, class struggles have historically permeated every dimension of human existence. It is the job of the superstructure or, in more modern terminology, those in power to keep the masses pacified so they will not turn to violence and not attempt to change the system. Those in power want to desperately maintain their power and will do so by whatever means necessary. Ultimately, this evolves into what we know today as the concept of private property. For Marx, if we look back over many millennia, we see that the earliest human societies were not capitalistic societies. Rather they were the opposite; they operated in a communal way in which everyone contributed in order to ensure the community would survive and flourish. It is only the later development of the notion of private property that allowed for the emergence of capitalism and greed. People began wanting more and more for themselves and developed the attitude of “what’s mine is mine.” In order that this attitude is protected, modern society’s rulers needed a system of law that could punish anyone who threatened the status quo. In turn, there needed to be a strong and powerful state or

The Underside of Development

27

government that ensured that the law was enforced. Finally, Marx observes this entire process is replicated in our systems of ethics and morals. We create systematic and elaborate theories of what is considered ethically good behavior, and this in turn determines our moral decisionmaking choices. The works of Marx might not be initially applicable to the food sovereignty movement, but on closer examination, they help us understand the power relations in the current global food system as well as provide a helpful theoretical lens in which we might analyze the evolution of the conditions of global farmers and food producers. Just as Marx believed that, ultimately, the working classes would rise up in revolution against the factory owners, we see a similar trend in the food justice movements around the world. Farmers and food producers around the world are making their voices heard through protest, writing, and teaching one another.3 Although Marx’s economic theories have been largely disputed or, in some cases, debunked, the core of their message remains pertinent to this day. When we read beyond the fact that many of Marx’s predictions have not come to fruition, we are still left with the significance of the cultural importance of his writings. Before examining the remaining cultural significance, it should be noted that Marx never put a specific date on the eventual fall of capitalism and revolution of the masses. Nonetheless, Marx’s remarks on the evolution of human relationships still ring true today. He presciently recognized that the rise of cutthroat capitalism would divide humanity in a contentious way. It would pit workers against the owners of the means of production but ultimately also pit us all against one another. Although Marx makes many critical comments on modern capitalist agriculture, his theories have an important relationship to many of the themes found in the concept of food sovereignty and the development of modern economies, including the current global food system. When the foods we eat on a daily basis are disconnected from a genuine knowledge of where the ingredients come from, and who cultivates them, we alienate ourselves from foreign cultures and the people who are a part of these processes. As Chapter 3 details, the food sovereignty concept and movement fight against the current global food system, which creates the conditions in which consumers in affluent countries can happily eat their daily meals with little knowledge of where they came from. When communities and families in affluent countries completely divorce themselves from where and how their foods are produced, they further propagate problems in the global food system. As the quip goes, “ignorance is bliss.” This is not to suggest that all people in affluent countries are completely oblivious but rather there is an urgent need for us to reconnect and gain more knowledge about where our food comes from.

28

Food as a Human Right

ORTHODOX VERSUS HETERODOX ECONOMIC THEORY: A POSSIBLE PERSPECTIVE FOR FOOD SOVEREIGNTY While highly contested debates about the nature of economic systems have occurred and will undoubtedly continue to occur, it is helpful for researchers interested in the food sovereignty concept to explore these debates. Briefly stated, the researcher and professor of economics, David Dequech, helpfully overviews four prominent economic theories or perspectives, which might help to organize our thoughts on how social movements operate. He summarizes the economic schools of neoclassical, mainstream, orthodox, and heterodox economics.4 While analyzing all of these economic schools of thought is outside the scope of this book, what is helpful is his analysis of heterodox economic theory. For Dequech, economic heterodoxy might be the most difficult to pin down due to its multiple variations. What is most important, however, is the paradigm shift that must take place in order to begin to understand nontraditional economic thought when the reference points are all considered in some ways “orthodox.” For instance, when economists discuss neoclassical economics, they emphasize the importance of human characteristics such as rationality, maximizing output, and the general desire to minimize risk when making economic decisions. When looking at heterodox economic ideas, many of the assumptions about human nature and, thus, our economic decision-making processes are challenged. Most heterodox economists would get chased out the door by more traditional orthodox, mainstream, and neoclassical economists. However, as Dequech notes, If one defines orthodox on the basis of intellectual criteria (referring to theoretical, methodological, or political ideas that are common to the most recent dominant school of thought), then defining heterodox economics in opposition to the orthodoxy logically implies adopting intellectual criteria as well. Heterodox economics would thus be defined by its divergence from at least some of the main orthodox ideas. Unlike orthodox economics, heterodox economics as an intellectual category does not necessarily have shared methodological, theoretical, or political features that are accepted by every dissenter from the orthodoxy at any particular point in time.5

Ultimately, the implicit narrative that underlies this quote is the field of economics, while continually evolving is essentially a “hard science.” It is measurable, quantifiable, and mathematical and operates by a certain, detached logic of rationality. In many ways, heterodox economics disavows these premises and instead argues that these blanket assumptions can and should be challenged. In other words, the field of economics is not a hard science like chemistry, mathematics, physics, and so forth. Hence, why I along with,

The Underside of Development

29

I imagine, many sympathizers with heterodox economic ideas would be chased out of a room filled with like-minded neoclassical, mainstream, and orthodox economists. However, this is in itself not a logical response to the possibility that we might begin to think about economics in a different way. Rather than assuming that the field of economics is a steadfast, hard science, we think about it in a more sociological sense. If people are not always rational, if they do not always take their self-interests as the deciding factor in economic decisions, and if they do not always intentionally minimize risk, then the story changes. Heterodox economics is a complicated category for economists due in part because of the difficulty of deciding whether it should be considered a complete theoretical, methodological, sociological, and political opposite of orthodox economics. Thus, trying to pin down the exact definition of heterodox economics involves analyzing different perspective from which to try to understand it. At the very least, there is a variety of different forms of heterodox economics and within heterodox economic circles, there are disagreements and nuances. Ultimately, heterodox economics faces the problem of how to understand the field of economics in terms of defining or understanding human nature. Questions of what drives humans to act and make decisions the way they do drive how we think about economic interactions. For food sovereignty activists and researchers, heterodox economic theory might be a resource for both defining what food sovereignty means and directing the future in terms of how people choose to make their economic decisions. By refusing to live by the standards of orthodox economic theory, food sovereignty activists and followers can change the way global farmers produce and consume food. Making intentional decisions to avoid consuming corporate-funded industrialized food, citizens in affluent countries can support the effort to strengthen the bonds between small-scale and peasant farmers and those who buy the food they produce. Citizens in affluent countries who think about economic systems such as heterodox economics begin to realize that they might not need to make every consumer or consumption decision on the basis of what orthodox economic theory suggests is the human motivation behind our purchasing choices. In a similar vein of thought, Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri comment on more modern social movements. The concepts of empire and the multitude developed by theorists Hardt and Negri in their books Empire and Multitude, respectively, discuss the diverse, multifaceted, and enigmatic nature of social uprisings in the face of growing imperialistic forces. In Empire, they suggest, [W]ithin its domain the nation-state and its attendant ideological structures work tirelessly to create and reproduce the purity of the people, on the outside the

30

Food as a Human Right

nation-state is a machine that produces Others, creates racial difference, and raises boundaries that delimit and support the modern subject of sovereignty.6

For Hardt and Negri, the modern nation-state is a complex system that often becomes an uncontrollable animal of its own. It is a dialectic of the constant flux between the sovereignty of the individual and the state. The issues raised by the authors provide insight into some of the future problems that the food sovereignty movement might face. Hardt and Negri continue to interrogate the nature of “new social movements”—much like those of the food sovereignty and human rights movements—by suggesting that [t]he various analyses of “new social movements” have done a great service in insisting on the political importance of cultural movements against narrowly economic perspectives that minimize their significance. These analyses, however, are extremely limited themselves because, just like the perspectives they oppose, they perpetuate narrow understandings of the economic and the cultural. Most important, they fail to recognize the profound economic power of the cultural movements, or really the indistinguishability of economic and cultural phenomena.7

The conundrum for Hardt and Negri is the difficulty of keeping both the economic and the cultural aspects of global communities in constant relationship when attempting to understand the nature of new social movements. A common criticism of various historical changes in food justice social movements is the charge that they represent a nostalgic or antiquated hope to return to a time that is long gone. Perhaps one of the most famous articles that demonstrates this sense of nostalgia is Lynn White Jr.’s brief analysis of the intersection between religion and science in the Western world. White was writing prior to the works of Hardt and Negri, but his thoughts resonate with similar themes with respect to the tension between religion and science. This tension is also one that is illustrated, albeit sometimes subtly or beneath the surface of current debates about the role of science and development, by the author White. In his famous article “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” he writes, There are many calls to action, but specific proposals, however worthy as individual items seem too partial, palliative, negative: ban the bomb, tear down the billboards, give the Hindus contraceptives and tell them to eat their sacred cows. The simplest solution to any suspect change is, of course, to stop it, or, better yet, to revert to a romanticized past: make those ugly gasoline stations look like Anne Hathaway’s cottage or (in the Far West) like ghost-town saloons. The “wilderness area” mentality invariably advocates deep-freezing an ecology. . . . But neither atavism nor prettification will cope with the ecologic crisis of our time.8

The Underside of Development

31

For White, there is a long and often untold history of the relationship between ecology, science, and religion. While not specifically speaking about the evolution of the modern food system, White’s remarks resonate with many of the themes and issues that will be discussed with respect to the food sovereignty concept and movement. Regarding food justice social movements, White’s quote resonates with current communities and global regions that fight for the rights of farmers. The idea that we return to the land, produce our own food, and conserve our natural world seems to be a desire that is bygone. Skeptics argue that modern science has advanced technology, so traditional small-scale farming as a profession will soon die out. In many ways this is not altogether untrue. Small-scale farms are being rapidly replaced by large-scale operations that produce what is considered a more effective system of food production that can feed the world. Large agribusinesses tout that they have the technology and resources that now represent the vanguard for the future of feeding those in need. By upscaling farming operations, thereby dismantling small-scale farmer producers, large companies can utilize modern technologies in such a way that solves many of the global hunger and malnutrition problems we face. The recent merger of Monsanto and Bayer is an example of this sentiment and ostensible goal of large-scale agribusiness. For example, Bayer’s company website boasts, There has never been a more important time for innovation in agriculture. Our world faces enormous challenges including a changing climate, limited natural resources, and a growing population. And we believe agriculture is part of the solution. At Bayer, we’re a responsible global team working to shape agriculture through breakthrough innovation for the benefit of farmers, consumers and our planet. From the Earth’s deepest roots to its highest satellites, we combine modern science with farmers’ ingenuity to put innovation at their fingertips to help nourish our growing world and preserve natural resources.9

As Bayer’s quote highlights, the company hopes to become the leader in agricultural innovation, which will ultimately help the plight of farmers and foster the sustainability of our natural world. While on the surface this seems to be a noble cause, concerned citizens question whether this “innovation” in the agricultural sector of the global economy is truly going to benefit those most in need. Instead, the question becomes: To what extent is this branding strategy of feeding the world and protecting the environment simply an advertising strategy to convince unwitting consumers that they are helping impoverished communities by purchasing products produced by these large farms and agricultural conglomerates? This has the effect of blinding consumers from the downsides of development in food and agriculture. By insisting that companies such

32

Food as a Human Right

as Bayer are an integral player in the fight to reduce global hunger, consumers are assuaged of their concerns about where to purchase their foods and who produce the goods that these companies sell. The story is different for small-scale, poor, and peasant communities because they do not have the luxury of making purchasing and consumption choices in the same way as citizens in affluent countries. Nonetheless, there is a potential for global farmers to connect with consumers in industrialized countries by building bonds and bridges. Bridges can be built via seeking out ways to purchase and consume food that is produced in healthy, egalitarian, and environmentally safe ways. Finally, through building bridges, citizens who consume food that is grown and transported from across the world can, in a small way, serve as a bonding experience with the people who produce it. Through this small bond, citizens in affluent countries can begin to learn about the hardships that most global farmers face. Perhaps, most importantly, thinking about the possible alternatives to cutthroat capitalism, new forms of economic thought such as heterodox economics enable and embolden supporters of food sovereignty, food justice, and human rights. Food sovereignty activists are proactive in calling attention to the injustices that global farmers face as well as the increasingly unhealthy and unsustainable food system in place today. But there is hope, although it requires the concerted effort of all people to stand up and individually make decisions that will help bring about a new sort of political economy. STUFFED, STARVED, AND SEEKING FOOD JUSTICE Raj Patel is well known for his incisive critique of the global food system and the political and economic structures that have reinforced and sometimes magnified the problems we face with respect to the global food system. In his influential book, Stuffed and Starved, Patel investigates the complex dimensions of the global food system. At the time of the writing of this book, Patel notes, Today, when we produce more food than ever before, more than one in ten people on Earth are hungry. The hunger of 800 million happens at the same time as another historical first: that they are outnumbered by the one billion people on this planet who are overweight.10

Although conditions have changed since the writing of Patel’s book, the core importance remains. Patel brings attention to issues we still face with respect to hunger and poverty. The gap between the rich and the poor and the consequences of persistent hunger and human and animal suffering remain the status quo.

The Underside of Development

33

Amid great plenty, billions of people still face pervasive hunger, poverty, joblessness, environmental degradation, disease and deprivation. One of the greatest challenges facing humanity is to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of ending hunger and poverty while making agriculture and food systems sustainable. The challenge is made more daunting by huge, but uneven, demographic pressures, profound changes in food demand, and the threat of mass migration of youth in search of a better life. Achieving the SDGs will require food system transformations and strategies that leverage the food system to boost economic growth in countries where industrialization is lagging. This entails resetting priorities on a broader front.11

As the quote from the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) illustrates, the world is challenged with this astonishing situation that requires that we continue to explore and build upon our understanding of the global food system. Patel reflects, “Thinking about food brings together the common valuation of land and water, the need for responsive institutions, the rights of individuals and the politics of genuine democracy.”12 Patel argues that many of the problems underpinning global hunger and malnutrition are inextricably tied to the global economic system. Capitalism in its current form is largely responsible for creating and perpetuating a food system in which we have such high numbers of people who are obese and, paradoxically, high numbers of people who suffer from poverty and hunger. In relation to the writings of Marx, Patel’s reflections provide a more contemporary interpretation of how people might think about economic relations and divisions in society with respect to global agricultural production and consumption. Many of these people are the people that the food sovereignty movement strives to give a voice to; moreover, in giving these people a voice, they show the underside of modern economic and cultural “development.” According to Paulo Freire’s line of thought, the underside of modern development can also be analyzed in terms of how we educate our communities. Education is that terrain where power and politics are given a fundamental expression, since it is where meaning, desire, language and values engage and respond to the deeper beliefs about the very nature of what it means to be human, to dream, and to name and struggle for a particular future and way of life. As a referent for change, education represents a form of action that emerges from a joining of the languages of critique and possibility.13

Freire recognizes the importance of education for bringing about positive change. However, his methods are somewhat unorthodox. Education is a process of consciousness building, and it must be done by the people themselves.

34

Food as a Human Right

As a process, education can be aided by teachers and professionals but takes its most meaningful form when it is done by autodidactic methods of specific individuals and communities. Part of building the collective consciousness of a community necessarily involves direct action. As Freire argues, As we attempt to analyze dialogue as a human phenomenon, we discover something which is the essence of dialogue itself: the word. But the word is more than just an instrument which makes dialogue possible; accordingly, we must seek its constitutive elements. Within the word we find two dimensions, reflection and action, in such radical interaction that if one is sacrificed—even in part—the other immediately suffers. There is no true word that is not at the same time a praxis. Thus, to speak a true word is to transform the world.14

Freire vehemently argues that we cannot have true positive revolutionary change if we offer only polemical words, but rather our thoughts must be put into action. For Freire, the process of dialogue is a process of learning in which people become cognizant of their own condition and that of their community. It is a process of becoming aware of the political, economic, and cultural situation that has served to oppress them. As readers will find in the following chapters, themes in religion subtly infiltrate narratives on the struggle of oppressed people worldwide, as well as provide an educational opportunity for speaking in a language that is familiar to the masses. In the introduction to Freire’s The Politics of Education: Culture, Power, and Liberation, Henry A. Giroux writes, Within the discourse of theologies of liberation, Freire fashions a powerful theoretical antidote to the cynicism and despair of many left radical critics. The utopian character of his analysis is concrete in its nature and appeal, and takes as its starting point collective actors in their various historical settings and the particularity of their problems and forms of oppression. It is utopian only in the sense that it refuses to surrender to the risks and dangers that face all challenges to dominate power structures. It is prophetic in that it views the kingdom of God as something to be created on earth but only through a faith in both other human beings and the necessity of permanent struggle.15

Giroux uses the term “prophetic” in an intentional way. In the works of the prophets of major world religions, the theme of struggle is common. Particularly in religions such as Judaism and Christianity, it is the words of the prophets that deliver a message not only of hope but also of warning. When people go astray, bad things may happen; when they are diligent in their faith and cause, God will provide and sustain them. Although many activists and revolutionaries have disavowed religion due to its historical record of oppression, this need not be the ultimate fate of religion with respect to revolutionary struggles. Freire’s words

The Underside of Development

35

hauntingly echo the thoughts of Marx, yet for Freire, religion can serve as a positive phenomenon. It can serve a source for motivating revolutionary change. The examples of this are demonstrable. Revolutionaries such as Freire also recognize the role that power, or lack thereof, plays in the possibility producing true change. As theorist Iris Marion Young reflects, The powerless are those who lack authority or power even in this mediated sense, those over whom power is exercised without their exercising it; the powerless are situated so that they must take orders and rarely have the right to give them. Powerlessness also designates a position in the division of labor and the concomitant social position that allows persons little opportunity to develop and exercise skills. The powerless have little or no work autonomy, exercise little creativity or judgment in their work, have no technical expertise or authority, express themselves awkwardly, especially in public or bureaucratic settings, and do not command respect.16

Young’s words reflect the plight of many global farmers. Alternatively, the core of the food sovereignty movement, as well as the work of activists such as Freire, is centered upon changing the current global food system. While political elites and governments seeking to maintain the status quo find this sentiment a threat that needs to be quashed, part of Freire’s political and educational project is to help people become conscious of the architects of political power that operate to keep them oppressed. Once people, even if not as educated as their governmental politicians and industry leaders, start to recognize what is really going on, they are equipped with the elementary tools to begin building a revolution. To quote the classic song “For What It’s Worth” by Buffalo Springfield: “There’s something happening here/What it is ain’t exactly clear.” 17 Although Springfield’s song is unrelated to food sovereignty, it speaks truth to power. Food sovereignty activists recognize that there is an emergent movement that is becoming more vocal. This movement is a group of people—people who go unnoticed and often suffer from the physical and economic abuses committed by those who are in power. Springfield’s song was written in part due to certain curfew laws imposed on what the U.S. government considered a tumultuous time. In the 1960s there were race riots and emerging antigovernment protests that threatened the power of the affluent leaders in both politics and culture. Food sovereignty demonstrations represent this same sentiment insofar as they question the status quo and the power of governments that seek to keep the peace in countries that oppress farmers and food producers through unjust political policies. Moreover, the food sovereignty movement is aligned with other food justice movements to the extent that it challenges multiple levels of

36

Food as a Human Right

cultural inequality. It calls into questions of race, class, and environmental protection. Alison Hope Alkon and Julian Agyeman’s research has illustrated with respect to the genocide not only of the Karuk people in California but also in many other Native American tribes: Native people actively managed salmon, acorns, and hundreds of other food and cultural use of species. The abundance of these species was a product of this management in which high-quality seeds were selected, the production of bulbs enhanced through harvest, oak populations reinforced through fire, and fish populations carefully managed. . . . What seems beyond comprehension, especially for non-Indians, is the ecological damage occurring from the disruption of Native cultural management.18

For Alkon and Agyeman’s research, this has ultimate significance in the global genocides and relocations of indigenous peoples. What we fail to realize is that access to food has been historically a strategy for decimating certain cultures and political threats to power. The authors of the book’s chapter on the Karuk people continue to argue that food provides us insight into the importance of cultural heritage, which is a common theme within the concept of food sovereignty: Karuk people speak of the foods they eat as relations. They speak of long-standing and sacred responsibility to tend to their relations in the forest and in the rivers through ceremonies, prayers, songs, formulas, and specific practices they call “management.” Rather than doing something to the land, ecologically systems prosper because humans and nature work together. Working together is a part of a pact across species, a pact in which both sides have a sacred responsibility to fulfill.19

This observation brings several questions into mind with respect to the mission and values of the food sovereignty movement and food justice in general. The first few words of the quotation speak directly to the core of food sovereignty. Food is not simply an object of consumption but rather a form of relationship. Conceptually, food has a much deeper meaning insofar as it represents both a source of life and a way to gather together in communion and in common local histories and stories that are the basis of global communities. Second, food for not only many indigenous populations but also present-day communities serves as a way to build “sacred relationships.” Although food sovereignty and food justice movements are not always religiously motivated, they do provide a way for communities of different religious traditions to gather together in common bonds. Food justice is an idea that seeks to reinforce these bonds, which are currently being undermined by corporate interests as well as an economic capitalist system that inherently dismantles impoverished communities. Chapter 8

The Underside of Development

37

provides a few brief examples of the importance of food in major global religions. While this research is ongoing and outside the scope of this book, it will provide areas for people who are interested in food justice with ideas for further inquiry. Many scholars have engaged these issues, but for many readers, this may not be common knowledge. Third, the quote brings attention to the concept that the management of our food systems is essential for the survival of cultures across the world. The current global food system is actively destroying the ability for relationships that are built around the simple activity of eating food together that can reinforce a more humane and just world. To say that the “food system” is actively destroying this ability to build relationships, however, is too abstract. On a more concrete level, it is the multilateral organizations, the national governments, and the corporations that exploit the environment and their laborers who deserve scrutinization. Returning to the religious dimension of food justice, many religious traditions do have a long history of the importance of feeding those in need. In the following section, the work of one theologian who has recognized the importance of feeding the poor provides a small, yet important, account of how religious leaders might come to build relationships with more secular food justice and food sovereignty communities. LIBERATION THEOLOGY, LIBERATING THE OPPRESSED, AND CREATING A JUST GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEM Working and writing from a theological perspective, the famous liberation theologian, Gustavo Gutie´rrez, reflected on his experiences in Latin America. First published in 1971, the words in his book, A Theology of Liberation, not only are prescient but also remain meaningful almost half a century later. On the subject of impoverished peoples, he wrote, To characterize Latin America as a dominated and oppressed continent naturally leads one to speak of liberation and above all to participate in the process. Indeed, liberation is a term which expresses a new posture of Latin Americans.20

For Gutie´rrez, since its first colonization by Europeans, Latin Americans have lived lives of oppression and marginalization. As such, the desire for liberation—in its many different forms, whether it is spiritual, cultural, economic, or political—has been embedded in their moral fabric. Gutie´rrez continues, remarking on more recent attempts to throw off the shackles of colonial domination and occupation: The failure of reformist efforts has strengthened this attitude. Among more alert groups today, what we have called a new awareness of Latin American reality is

38

Food as a Human Right

making headway. They believe that there can be authentic development for Latin America only if there is liberation from the domination exercised by the great capitalist countries, and especially by the most powerful, the United States of America. This liberation also implies a confrontation with these groups’ natural allies, their compatriots who control the national power structure. It is becoming more evident that the Latin American peoples will not emerge from their present status except by means of a profound transformation, a social revolution, which will radically and qualitatively change the conditions in which they now live.21

At the time of writing this quote, Latin Americans were suffering the consequences of so-called development and developmental economic theory. While some progress was made, it came at certain costs as well— the underside of development. DEVELOPMENT IN ARGENTINA AND BRAZIL: TWO CASE STUDIES Agricultural sectors have also been affected by drastic changes in development. Aided by the World Bank and IMF, countries such as Brazil and Argentina have, for decades, seen a concentration of land used for the production of soy and other biofuels to the detriment of other native crops and animals. Argentinian farmers have witnessed a decline of land used for cultivating traditional crops in favor of genetically modified (GM) soybeans. This transition is due in large part to the increasing global demand for soy. As Kaag and Zoomers comment, There is no doubt that one of the most striking transformations that has taken place in Argentina over the last two decades is the enormous expansion in soybean cultivation and the spread with which rural life and landscape have changes. Some have already witnessed this process closely and since its inception, although few in the 1970s and 1980s imagined how extensively these beans could be planted.22

In large part this is due to a sort of laissez-faire political position toward the expansion of soybean production. Allowing large-scale local agricultural operations as well as transnational corporations to purchase large swaths of land led ultimately to the destruction of local, small-scale farming communities. In Brazil, today the country is dominated by a few major corporations. Agribusiness not only has exploded here in terms of exportation of certain goods, such as red meat, sugar, and coffee, but has also exploded here in local communities. As Magdoff and Tokar note, Key multinationals have had an important presence in the Brazilian agrifood industry since its birth—Nestle, Unilever, Anderson Clayton, Corn Products

The Underside of Development

39

Company, Dreyfus, and the Argentine transnational Bunge y Borne. They were later followed, as different markets matured, by Kraft, Nabisco, General Foods, and Cargill from the United States.23

The global expansion of these agribusinesses has, on the downside, impacted local communities and farmers who have been exploited by large-scale landowners. The ability to use local communities for cheaper labor has come at the expense of impoverished communities. Today in Brazil, this has also had harmful environmental consequences. The Amazon basin, an area of great environmental and cultural diversity, is currently under siege due to the interests of large corporations and global demand for certain crops and demand for exported goods to other affluent countries. As Magdoff and Tokar continue to note, for example, The U.S. Sara Lee Corporation and a range of European firms have moved into coffee, particularly the coffee-roasting sector, and have now established a dominant position in the important domestic market. Foreign investment is now becoming particularly notable in the sugar/alcohol complex, involving traditional and non-traditional actors, especially global investment funds.24

While the case of Brazil is still evolving, it is yet to be determined whether the local interests of small communities will benefit from these changing conditions. The food sovereignty movement brings attention to these types of concerns because, historically, it is the more marginalized communities that produce products such as coffee and sugar, and they are the ones who do not benefit from this “economic development”; rather they become the voiceless communities that are exploited the most. FAIR TRADE AND FOOD SOVEREIGNTY As a relatively new food justice–related movement, fair trade has become a banner flown by activists, university students, corporations, and conscientious consumers who are concerned with creating a fairer global trade system. However, since alternative trade organizations emerged in the 1940s and evolved over time, culminating in the creation of the 1997 Fairtrade Labelling Organization, many scholars and activists have begun to question whether fair trade is indeed fair for those producers it intends to reach. As it stands now, fair trade has been beneficial for some but must be scaled up before it can be truly labeled “fair.” Neoliberal “free trade” still predominates and, as often dealing in niche markets providing luxury products, fair-trade goods continue to be subsumed by the more powerful neoliberal “free-trade” system. “Solidarity-based” rather than “corporate-led” fair-trade models hold the greatest potential for a fair(er) fair-trade system. Food sovereignty’s

40

Food as a Human Right

emphasis on sustainable economic and ecological development, its focus on small-scale producers, and its vision for creating a more just global food system give greater substance to the ideals and potential of fair trade. As a briefing by the Food First organization highlights, some of the most pressing questions are as follows: The evolution of different (and diverging) trends within fair trade raises a critical question: Is fair trade creating a new, more sustainable and socially just economy by changing the rules of trade? Or are the changing rules within fair trade undermining its social, economic and environmental objectives?25

Fair trade remains a complex issue with a relatively recent and conflictual history in which debates have emerged about what exactly constitutes the term itself. As the Institute for Food and Development Policy notes, the question becomes whether “fair trade” is really accomplishing the core goals it seeks to implement into local and global political policies. Fair trade emerged in the early 1940s and 1950s but changed radically in the 1980s as traders attempted to gain access to global markets. As Gavin Fridell notes, in its initial phases, fair trade was characterized by a certain degree of domestic and international regulation of commodities, with the aims of “laying the groundwork for an alternative trading system . . . that would form part of a new international economic order based on strong state intervention at the national and international level.”26 However, in the 1980s, goals changed and a series of fair-trade labeling initiatives sprouted. These initiatives emerged as a result and response to changing political, economic, and ideological circumstances spawned by neoliberal economic policies of privatization, deregulation, and trade liberalization. In addition, the structural adjustment programs (SAPs) of the 1980s began taking their toll on food producers in developing countries in the South.27 Trade agreements promoted by the WTO undermined developing nations’ governments’ ability to control and direct their domestic macroeconomic policies. In order to enter these trade agreements, Southern governments were forced to “slash or eliminate subsidies of all kinds, including social services and price supports for small farmers.”28 With respect to issues associated with food sovereignty and food justice movements, debates continue on the subject of what the reality of solutions such as fair-trade proposal entails. Do they actually further progress in the global food system, or do they simply provide a sheen under which corporate interests can continue to manipulate consumers into thinking that they are doing a good service to global and impoverished farming communities? If corporate interests motivated simply by profits are the main motivation for promoting fair trade, consumers are faced with the ethical responsibility to investigate precisely where their foods come from. Moreover, they are called to task to question under what conditions their foods and food

The Underside of Development

41

ingredients are produced. The food sovereignty movement, in many ways, seeks to bring attention and light to these issues. TYPES OF FAIR TRADE: SOLIDARITY VERSUS CORPORATE The first, and arguably, most predominate model is what Fridell refers to as the shaped advantage model.29 This model recognizes the inevitability of globalization and, in particular, the pervasiveness of a neoliberal/neoclassical trade system. According to this perspective, fair-trade initiatives need to augment institutional capacities and marketing skills to help fair-trade farmers enter the global market. The shaped advantage model will succeed to the extent that it can foster “development networks based on trust and cooperation.”30 Consumers who are cognizant of poor working conditions, unfair wages, and general poverty decide to purchase fair-trade goods out of the desire to use their economic power to influence the system. The second model of fair trade is one that sees itself as an alternative to globalization. Similar to the shaped advantage model, the alternative model recognizes the need for peasants and small-scale producers to enter the global economy. However, this perspective envisions a more radical political project that “seeks not only to address poverty and marginalization at the local level but to confront the structural causes of these effects.”31 However, this model suffers from many of the same problems of the shaped advantage model. The alternative model points to ways in which international trade rules are “rigged” against poor states and poor producers. According to this logic, advocates suggest that a truly freetrade system would be to the benefit of all those involved. What is needed is to show the hypocrisy of Northern government policies and restructure policies that are more in line with larger fair-trade goals. The final type of fair trade is what Fridell calls the decommodification model. This vision of fair trade draws off a Marxian analysis of commodity fetishism. To quote Marx’s famous lines, “The mysterious character of the commodity-form consists therefore simply in the fact that the commodity reflects the social characteristics of men’s own labour as objective characteristics of the products of labour themselves, as the socio-natural properties of these things.”32 For Marx, commodity fetishism describes the situation in which laborers begin to see the products of their labor in terms of a relationship between “things” rather than between the types of labor or between actual human beings.33 Advocates of the decommodification model see fair trade as a direct challenge to the “core values of global capitalism and its imperatives of competition, accumulation, and profit maximization.”34 They see fair trade as a system that illuminates the “social and environmental conditions under which goods are produced” as well as the ways in which it may serve to replace capitalist

42

Food as a Human Right

values of competition, accumulation, and profit maximization and, instead, reaffirm values based in solidarity and cooperation.35 Broadly speaking, we can juxtapose the decommodification model with the corporate-led model of fair trade. The corporate model of fair trade is based on the idea of corporate social responsibility (CSR) or what some call the “shareholder-driven” approach.36 Based on a vague notion of ethical business practices, a shareholder-driven approach is one in which businesses purchase fair-trade goods in an effort to connect producers and conscientious consumers. CSR initiatives attempt to tap into ethical consumer markets to improve brand image and to capture the growing market of ethically minded consumption.37 As highlighted in the example of Bayer, the corporate-led food and agricultural industry is increasingly taking a strong hold over both the environment and the minds and choices of consumers. RECIPES The following recipes come from the early twentieth century. They were recipes that were often made prior to and during the wartime periods due in part because they were convenient and allowed soldiers to have the maximum amount of sustenance in an efficient, travel-ready way. While they might not look to be the most appetizing recipes, they introduce us to an important side of cooking and eating. For much of the world, people need to make the most of what they have, and this, unfortunately, often comes at the cost of taste, conviviality, and the joys of cooking. However, the following recipes also provide a glimpse into the lives of people at war, whether it is physical battle or the less visible war against hunger that people fight every day across the world. In a somewhat paradoxical example related to fair-trade issues discussed in this chapter, the following recipes provide a few illustrations of ways in which human ingenuity has led to creative ways to provide food during times of need and desperation. In particular, in times of war or economic hardship, both citizens and soldiers were forced to live off meager food rations, much like what we see many global communities are doing today (even if not at war). These recipes offered here are a few illustrations of using durable ingredients that can be transported longer distances, are less inclined to spoil, and provide high energy sustenance for beleaguered communities and soldiers. Recipe 1: Hoover Stew Hoovervilles or shantytowns became commonplace during the Great Depression, and as James Gregory notes, “There were dozens in the State of Washington, hundreds throughout the country, each testifying to the

The Underside of Development

43

housing crisis that accompanied the unemployment crisis of the early 1930s.” 38 These small, dirty, and often unsafe shantytowns emerged during the Depression and were named after President Hoover. A common version might include a small can of chicken or beef broth mixed with cooked noodles. If available, inhabitants might slice small chunks of hot dogs or vegetables such as corn or peas. Ingredients: 1. One 16-oz box of noodles (macaroni or spaghetti) 2. One package of hot dogs, cut into round discs 3. Two cans of stewed tomatoes 4. One can of corn or peas (canned corn or other vegetables can be substituted)

Recipe 2: Chili con Carne Often during times of war, food can serve as a weapon (by blocking the food route supplies to enemies or by burning agricultural areas to ensure that food cannot be harvested for opposing forces). During World War II, Canada, for example, had recorded some common recipes that would help soldiers to ration food in times of need. While the following recipe does not directly relate to the current food sovereignty movement, it does share striking similarities with how global communities think about food. To a certain extent, many impoverished communities find themselves at war with the global food system itself. As such, communities and families are often forced to ration their food supplies due to the volatility of the food system as well as whether or not they will be able to feed their communities and families from one day to another. The following recipe is a much more lavish version of a wartime meal but provides readers with a glimpse as to what might go into a more simplified chili. Ingredients: 1. 1 tbsp oil 2. 1 large onion 3. 1 red pepper 4. 2 garlic cloves, peeled 5. 1 large tsp hot chili powder 6. 1 tsp paprika 7. 1 tsp ground cumin 8. 500 g lean minced beef 9. 1 beef stock cube

44

Food as a Human Right

10. 400 g can chopped tomatoes 11. ½ tsp dried marjoram 12. 1 tsp sugar 13. 2 tbsp tomato puree 14. 410 g can kidney beans 15. Plain boiled long-grain rice, to serve 16. Sour cream, to serve39

Recipe 3: Carrot and Honey Cookies This is another example of a wartime meal, which provides copious amounts of sugar. It not only demonstrates the need for quick energy but also provides a glimpse into what people had to resort to in times of need and desperation. Ingredients: 1. 2 cups sifted flour 2. 2 tsp baking powder 3. ¼ tsp salt 4. ¼ tsp soda 5. ½ tsp cinnamon 6. ½ tsp nutmeg 7. 2 cups quick-cooking rolled oats 8. 1 cup raisins 9. 2/3 cup shortening 10. 1 cup grated carrot 11. 1 cup honey 12. 2 eggs, well beaten

Instructions: Take the dry ingredients and stir thoroughly until all are incorporated evenly. Once they have been mixed, set aside and then mix the carrots, honey, eggs, with the creamed shortening. After the wet ingredients have been mixed, slowly incorporate the dry ingredients. Once all ingredients have been incorporated, grease a baking pan and use a spoon to dollop half-dollar-sized cookies and bake at 350° for 25–30 minutes. This will yield approximately 4–5 dozen cookies.40

CHAPTER 3

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

This chapter suggests that the concept of food security (as envisioned by the multilateral organizations) has failed, and instead, we should consider the idea, concept, or movement of food sovereignty as a possible alternative framework. The concept of food sovereignty argues that food is a basic human right and that food production and agricultural policies should be in the hands of the people who actually produce our food (rather than governments or multilateral organizations). The food sovereignty movement is a global social, cultural, and political movement as well as an organization of farmers and activists in countries all over the world. It also has a complicated history, which continues to be contested and debated about among scholars and activists.1 In many ways its model and movement are nuanced and different than the food security model. However, in other ways it has the same goals. Both paradigms seek to curb global hunger and work with and against the organizations that potentially harm the global effort to reduce hunger and poverty. The food sovereignty movement is historically attached to La Via Campesina, a movement that is one of the largest social justice movements in the world today. La Via Campesina is now recognized as being the most politically significant transnational agrarian movement existing today. Numerous social movements consider it as a key point of reference in the struggles against the instruments of capitalism and it is also recognized by United Nations institutions as the international voice of peasant communities. Over the past twenty years La Via Campesina has gained strength and legitimacy as it has succeeded in carving out a space in the international arena and filling that space with the voices of peasants, small-scale farmers, women, farm workers and indigenous peoples articulating peasant demands and peasant alternatives. The movement has also grown

46

Food as a Human Right

rapidly; initially bringing together 46 organizations, it now embraces 148 organizations from sixty-nine countries representing millions of rural peoples in Asia, Europe, the Americas, and Africa.2

The idea and movement of food sovereignty originated with the Via Campesina movement, which was introduced to the world during the World Food Summit in 1996. At its core it challenges the neoliberal global order that emphasizes deregulation, privatization, asymmetrical trade agreements, and the dismantling of national governments that uphold this global order. HOW NEOLIBERAL POLICIES AFFECT THE WORLD AND HARM FOOD SOVEREIGNTY “Neoliberalism” is a contested term but has been generally associated with modern capitalistic economic practices such as the reduction of government regulation, the privatization of all industries, and free trade. Historical alternatives have included forms of communism or highly centralized political regimes. While historians have documented the many failed attempts at communism and state-controlled economies, one of the major questions that is often overlooked is: Have the historical attempts at creating communist or socialist systems of rule actually adhered to the fundamentals of these philosophies? Instead, we should also consider the possibility that historical attempts of implementing these rulership systems have failed due to the corruption of rulers who ultimately failed to actualize the theoretical foundations of these systems. After the fall of many communist and socialist nations, the emergence of capitalism became the predominant political and economic alternative. Today, however, this system has witnessed some of the same fateful failures that socialist governments have witnessed, yet in an evolved form. As the following two chapters illustrate, these failures are particularly oppressive for global farmers. In a broad sense, capitalism functions within the agricultural sector of global societies in the same way that it functions within the financial sector. However, once we start to look at how our current forms of capitalism work, we see that in many ways capitalism serves just as oppressive as, if not more than, communist and socialist systems. As a 2017 Oxfam report “An Economy for the 99 Percent” illustrates, we notice some shocking statistics that help to illustrate the state of global economic inequalities and the gap between the rich and the poor. Some of the bullet points reported in the brief include the following: • Since 2015, the richest 1% has owned more wealth than the rest of the planet. • Eight men now own the same amount of wealth as the poorest half of the world.

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

47

• Over the next 20 years, 500 people will hand over $2.1 trillion to their heirs—a sum larger than the GDP of India, a country of 1.3 billion people. • The incomes of the poorest 10% of people increased by less than $3 a year between 1988 and 2011, while the incomes of the richest 1% increased 182 times as much. • A FTSE-100 CEO earns as much in a year as 10,000 people in working in garment factories in Bangladesh.3

These are just a few statistics that illustrate the failure of modern forms of capitalism to improve upon previous communist and socialist experiments. Notably, the Oxfam report’s theme is that it is often the poorest of the poor who have suffered under the current global economic system. To quote at length the Via Campesina understanding of the consequences of neoliberalism: Neo-liberal policies prioritize international trade, and not food for the people. They haven’t contributed at all to hunger eradication in the world. On the contrary, they have increased the peoples’ dependence on agricultural imports, and have strengthened the industrialization of agriculture, thus jeopardizing the genetic, cultural and environmental heritage of our planet, as well as our health. They have forced hundreds of millions of farmers to give up their traditional agricultural practices, to rural exodus or to emigration. International institutions such as IMF (International Monetary Fund), the World Bank, and WTO (World Trade Organization) have implemented those policies dictated by the interests of large transnational companies and superpowers. International (WTO), regional (Free Trade Agreement of the Americas-FTAA) or bilateral “free” trade agreements of agricultural products actually allow those companies to control the globalized food market. WTO is a completely inadequate institution to deal with food and agriculture-related issues. Therefore, Via Campesina wants WTO out of agriculture.4

This press release addresses many issues that the food sovereignty movement struggles to counteract. Not only does it highlight how neoliberal policies have failed at the eradication of global hunger but that it has also strengthened the power of industrialized and corporate agriculture. It also highlights the effects of modern agricultural practices on the environment. Through the use of genetically modified seeds, for instance, industrial agricultural systems have exterminated many varieties of seeds around the world.5 Oxfam also contends in its “Food, Farming, and Hunger” report that [o]f the 5.9 million children who die each year, poor nutrition plays a role in at least half these deaths. That’s wrong. Hunger isn’t about too many people and too little food. It’s about power, and its roots lie in inequalities in access to resources and opportunities.6

48

Food as a Human Right

This report emphasizes that those who suffer from hunger and malnutrition are the children of the world, the most vulnerable and innocent beings that the corporate and industrialized food system takes advantage of through their support of an ideology on the basis of self-interest, competitions, free trade, and the acceptance of the unfettered accumulation of wealth. As the Oxfam quote also notes, it is not about not having enough food to feed the world; rather it is about power. When power over national and global economies is concentrated in the hands of a sliver of the world’s population, it becomes difficult to change the system. The only resource poor citizens around the world have is to protest and, perhaps in successful democratic countries, to vote. However, this is often a rarity. The concentration of power in the global food system can be seen in the market control of many agricultural industries. When only a limited number of companies control the vast share of certain markets, they have the ability to affect global prices of the foods they produce. This in turn trickles down into a waterfall of hardships for global farmers at the bottom of these economic falls. FOOD SOVEREIGNTY OVER TIME The concept of food sovereignty has evolved since its inception. Raj Patel, an activist and food justice scholar, has researched several of the different iterations of the definition of “food sovereignty” as it has evolved over time. Drawing somewhat of a contrast between the concept of food security and food sovereignty, he begins with one of the original definitions of “food sovereignty,” quoting on the origins of food sovereignty as they emerge out of definitions of food security. One example from the 1996 UN World Food Summit defined “food security” as follows: Food security, at the individual, household, national, regional and global levels [is achieved] when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.7

As will become apparent, many of the core ideas contained in the concept and goal of food security will be incorporated into the concept of food sovereignty but variations occurred over time. Raj Patel has written on the underlying conditions in which the global food system has evolved into an unjust food system. For Patel, it begins with more foundational economic philosophies that have taken control over time. He traces the earliest development of modern capitalism to the philosopher John Stuart Mill, in which Patel remarks,

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

49

Market society doesn’t simply turn things into commodities—it makes its own culture and ideas about human nature and social order. The embodiment of this culture is a man no one has ever met. He was created by one of the key exponents of classical political economy in the nineteenth century, John Stuart Mill, who intended for his creation to shine a light through the fog of human inconsistency, to find a deeper truth about us all.8

In this quote, Patel outlines the origins of what is deemed homo economicus or “the economic man.” For Patel this is a modern development and not the way humans are naturally supposed to behave in society. The idea of homo economicus is one in which humans are thought to be driven largely, if not completely, by self-interest and their economic conditions. THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVOLUTION OF FOOD SOVEREIGNTY As mentioned earlier, the concept of food sovereignty has evolved over time. As Annette Desmarais notes, “Some refer to food sovereignty as an ‘idea,’ ‘concept,’ and ‘framework’; others prefer to call it a ‘mobilizing tactic,’ a ‘political project,’ a ‘campaign,’ and a ‘movement’; still others refer to it as a ‘process,’ a ‘vision,’ and a ‘living organism.’ ”9 As Desmarais highlights, food sovereignty is a complex entity that cannot be bracketed into one specific term or definition. However, what does become apparent is that there are elements that serve to create a certain vision for food justice. As an idea or concept, it provides a theoretical framework in which people might orient the way they think about global food justice. As a mobilizing and political project, food sovereignty seeks to bring traction to its more theoretical ideas; it recognizes the importance of backing up ideas with actions. Finally, food sovereignty activists recognize that the movement will take different forms and deploy different strategies and tactics depending on geographical location, political environment, cultural contexts, and environmental circumstances. Nonetheless, in its original form, the definition of “food sovereignty” was relatively basic; it outlined the architecture of what a global food system might look like if it were more just and recognized the integral role of global farmers, specifically small-scale, peasant farmers and fisherfolk. Food sovereignty is the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems. It puts the aspirations and needs of those who produce, distribute and consume food at the heart of food systems and policies rather than the demands of markets and corporations. It defends the interests and inclusion of the next generation. It offers a strategy to resist and dismantle the current corporate trade and food regime, and directions for food, farming,

50

Food as a Human Right

pastoral and fisheries systems determined by local producers and users. Food sovereignty prioritises local and national economies and markets and empowers peasant and family farmer-driven agriculture, artisanal-fishing, pastoralist-led grazing, and food production, distribution and consumption based on environmental, social and economic sustainability. Food sovereignty promotes transparent trade that guarantees just incomes to all peoples as well as the rights of consumers to control their food and nutrition. It ensures that the rights to use and manage lands, territories, waters, seeds, livestock and biodiversity are in the hands of those of us who produce food. Food sovereignty implies new social relations free of oppression and inequality between men and women, peoples, racial groups, social and economic classes and generations.10

As this more substantive iteration of food sovereignty demonstrates, it becomes clear why Desmarais emphasizes the importance of unpacking the different ways in which the term is described. At the 1996 World Food Summit, La Via Campesina offered core principles that encapsulate the vision of food sovereignty. First, food should be understood as a human right. This involves access to “safe, nutritious and culturally appropriate food in sufficient quantity and quality to sustain a healthy life with full human dignity.”11 Perhaps what is most important here is the notion that human dignity needs to be at the core of food sovereignty; it needs to orient all of the other demands that the movement struggles to gain. This becomes difficult when discussions with local leaders, national governments, and finally, multilateral organizations such as the IMF and World Bank as well as the WTO are far removed from many of these communities that are making these demands. Although the IMF and World Bank attempt to reach these communities, they ultimately make the final decisions as to what economic and attending political strategies need to be put into action in order for development to succeed in the countries they advise. Second, there is a genuine need for agrarian reform because this “gives landless and farming people—especially women—ownership and control of the land they work and which returns territories to indigenous peoples.”12 This endeavor becomes all the more difficult when we take into consideration the multiple cultural obstacles that global women farmers face, such as abuse, marginalization, and a lack of a strong political voice. However, this is beginning to change. In Peru, one of the most diverse countries in terms of not only its ancient history but also its agricultural diversity and potential, the role of women is slowly becoming recognized. The National Association of Ecological Producers of Peru (ANPE Peru, in Spanish) is a grassroots organization working on agroecology advocacy and capacity building for best agroecological practices, local market access, leadership, and empowerment. Women’s leadership has turned out to be an important initiative developed by ANPE, as women farmers are genetic resources conservationists,

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

51

handle their agro-biodiversity, and are responsible for seeds at the family and community level. For ANPE’s organic farmers, seeds are the masterpieces of campesinos and indigenous people. Without seeds there is no agriculture.13

As ANPE illustrates, often the most important actors in local food sovereignty movements are done by the women of the community. They are the backbone of agricultural production, which is, in turn, the foundation for establishing healthy and flourishing communities. Third, food sovereignty emphasizes the need to protect natural resources, especially land, water, seeds, and livestock. As food sovereignty activist and scholar, Vandana Shiva has focused on many of the aforementioned issues, and particularly, in this chapter, issues associated with seed, women, and food: Seed and food the world over have been shaped by millions of years of nature’s contribution and centuries of women’s intelligence, skills, hard work and perseverance. Today, women are again in the vanguard of defending seed freedom and food sovereignty in the context of globalization, which—worldwide—has facilitated corporate grab, through patents on seed associated with genetic engineering. Corporations have done this via a mechanistic paradigm of biology and agriculture, and through a reductionist paradigm of the economy.14

Shiva highlights the importance of women in the global food system as another way to introduce the importance of food sovereignty. To a certain extent, by coupling an analysis of women and food sovereignty, she illustrates the mostly overlooked role that women play in feeding their communities and, in many cases, the world itself. Fourth, food sovereignty activists emphasize the importance of rectifying past and current infringement on food trade deals made by powerful organizations such as the WTO and national policies of industrialized countries. Rather than seeing food simply as a commodity, food sovereignty activists and communities fight for a more nuanced understanding of food, one in which “national agricultural policies must prioritize production for domestic consumption and food self-sufficiency.” 15 This becomes somewhat problematic for food sovereignty activists, given that some global farmers do not necessarily have the desire to produce food for domestic consumption if it means they will lose money and the means to take care of their families by selling their crops in the global market. Furthermore, this conundrum becomes more problematic when trade agreements such as those enforced by the WTO do not necessarily benefit small-scale and peasant farmers. Fifth, food sovereignty activists illustrate the ways in which multilateral organizations undermine efforts to curb poverty and hunger by speculating in agricultural commodities. This issue is controversial

52

Food as a Human Right

among economists, and the debate largely centers on whether speculation has actually had a negative effect on food prices. Setting aside these debates, what is important to note is the fundamental ethical difference between market values and human values. The market operates by its own standards based on efficiency, self-interest, rational thinking, and the minimization of risk. With respect to speculation in agricultural commodities, “speculators bet on the probability that the price of a commodity will rise and fall in order to profit from changes in prices.”16 Alternatively, at the core of food sovereignty—even if not explicitly articulated in their mission—is the idea that food cannot be simply considered a commodity to be bought and sold without recognition of where it is produced, the labor conditions under which it is produced, and the potential harmful impact these processes have on local communities. While critics may argue that speculation is what makes the market function efficiently, this does not consider the human lives that are actually affected by speculation. Often located thousands of miles away, the communities responsible for the production of agricultural commodities have no direct connection to the buyers and sellers on the floors of Wall Street. Sixth, global poverty, hunger, and malnutrition have often been the unseen or undervalued sources of violence. If human rights are to be protected, then the sources of violence that undermine the protection of human rights must also be addressed. The food sovereignty concept is based on the idea of food as a human right and is therefore a central issue. As food sovereignty advocates note, “The ongoing displacement, forced urbanization, repression and increasing incidence of racism of smallholder farmers cannot be tolerated.”17 Incidents of violence related to shortages of food have become commonplace. Whether it comes in the form of people fighting over bags of rice thrown into crowds by the United Nations or through the hijacking of charitable food supplies by local militias, food often does not get to the community members it is intended to feed. Modern narratives that suggest that urbanization is a process that is inevitable because small-scale agriculture is becoming more and more antiquated remove agency from these farmers. The choice to move to urban centers in pursuit of a better life is not always a choice but rather a necessity. Instead, many farmers desire to remain on the land and to remain in the communities of their ancestors. This desire and option should also be respected and promoted through national and international agricultural policies. Seventh, food sovereignty advocates stress the need for democratic control of the food system. They argue that “smallholder farmers must have direct input into formulating agricultural policies at all levels.” Again, this is difficult given that access to multilateral organizations is often impossible. Decisions about the conditions of local, small-scale farming communities are often usurped by the pure fact that these communities

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

53

do not have the means by which they can voice their wishes or grievances. The participation of women is also essential for this effort, and “rural women, in particular, must be granted direct and active decision-making on food and rural issues.” 18 The inclusion of women, while still an ongoing effort, is essential to the future success of global food justice movements such as food sovereignty. Through equal inclusion of women, certain perspectives are brought to attention, which might not be raised by a simple male point of view. Moreover, through the work of women in the food sovereignty movement, other larger social justice issues are brought to attention. Through the simple example of food, women in impoverished global communities simultaneously tackle issues not only of poverty and hunger but also of gender inequality and discrimination. Not only have the issues of poverty and hunger been the focus of modern food justice movements, such as food sovereignty, but they also have a history in literature. The infamous author and philosopher Ayn Rand has also written extensively on this type of philosophical outlook. In her famous works such as Atlas Shrugged, Rand provides a compelling argument for why it is our moral obligation to act in our own selfinterests, at times, no matter what the cost to others may be. The protagonist of the book, John Gault, is a character that represents what all human beings should strive to become according to author Ayn Rand. Gault seeks his own self-interests even if it entails harming others along the way. In fairness he does not intentionally seek to harm others, but he just believes the world would be a better place if we only look out for ourselves. This does not mean we should deny our love for others, but rather we should do so recognizing that even the most intimate sentiment of love should be determined by one’s own self-interests. While this is a literary example of Rand’s philosophy known by philosophers as “objectivism,” it resembles the same philosophy of homo economicus that is often used in economic parlance. Interestingly, it is not ironic that Ayn Rand was in a close circle of Alan Greenspan KBE, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve of the United States from 1987 to 2006. Nonetheless, it would be too much speculation to determine the influence Rand had on Greenspan, but what is important is Rand’s economic philosophy and understanding of human nature have had an influential history of the way economists and politicians have thought about our world. CAMPESINO A CAMPESINO: AN EXAMPLE OF HOW A COALITION OF FARMER MOVEMENTS AND FOOD SOVEREIGNTY CAN WORK TOGETHER FOR A COMMON CAUSE The Campesino a Campesino or Farmer to Farmer movement is another example of how the world might achieve a more just food and

54

Food as a Human Right

agricultural system. Based largely in Latin America and also taking root all over the world, the original movement began as a way to educate rural and small-scale farmers about ways in which to combat the harmful policies of governments and corporate exploitation. The movement spread through word of voice and the plight of farmers who were fed up with the daily toils of farming just to survive. The Campesino a Campesino movement also recognized the failed policies propagated by the World Bank. In technical terms, Holt-Gime´nez, author and specialist in many Latin American social justice causes, writes, The World Bank produced the “World Development Report,” which specifically celebrated Latin America’s economic progress. But this optimism ignored the negative aspects of capital expansion. By selecting GNP as the sin qua non indicator for development, the World Bank’s report masked the contradictions of economic growth without social redistribution and reinforced the idea that Development was simply a linear process of accumulation.19

As this quote illustrates, organizations such as the World Bank have historically lauded their successes, but in many instances they failed to acknowledge either the “who” their programs were successful for or why the institution itself may be a hindrance for many of the global poor. Instead, the Campesino a Campesino movement has suggested an alternative model to the historic strategies and policies of organizations such as the World Bank. One of the World Bank’s central goals is to “develop” the world’s impoverished countries. While the World Bank may have good intentions, it may not recognize how good intentions go wrong. The movement originally educated farmers through ways of demonstrations and descriptions of how farmers from all different ethnicities and languages might communicate with one another. Initially, the gatherings were held to inform local and regional farmers about how they might express their discontent with their government’s agricultural policies as well as larger socioeconomic conditions under which they live. To give one example of how their meetings and seminars express themselves, we see how one might broach the subject through visual means. In describing the central cause of the movement, workers with the group demonstrate their cause through the imagery of a human body. They write, for instance, To understand the soil and water conservation programs [of Campesino a Campesino], one really needs courage. It’s like when a young man wants to court a woman. First, she says yes . . . then no . . . then messes with your head. . . . A Campesino is like that! “I’ll think about it,” he will say.20

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

55

This quote is telling on a few levels. The main theme is the need for courage. In our current global climate, we face massive decisions that are oftentimes not thought through by our political leaders. In many historical examples, the idea of courage is misconstrued to mean standing up against an enemy. What we also have failed to recognize in some instances is the fact that perhaps our enemy is our own system. Most of the time, we choose to debate issues about global military conflict. We talk about wars and wars on terrorism and wars on drugs. While these are important issues, we also might consider the opportunity to put global hunger and poverty on the table. Looking into the important issues of terrorism and military conflict around the world, one notices that much of these issues have a connection to the global food system. When we look into the dirty details of the global food system, we see the truism of the aforementioned quote that it “messes with your head.” But when things mess with your head, the Campesino a Campesino movement begins to make more sense, and we begin to educate ourselves about our consumption choices. As we do that, we also begin to learn about the cultures and laborers who produce much of the world’s food. In this sense, the Campesino a Campesino movement demonstrates the potential for a positive change in the global food system. Part of the movement is centered on what is known as the “teacher-learner” philosophy and an approach to challenge the global food system and the plight of peasant farmers. What has been called a transformative type of learning, in the campesino way of life, “smallholders do not make a technical distinction between research, training, and extension. Nor do they separate teaching from learning or learning from practice.”21 Instead, they genuinely want to know and learn from one another different strategies for producing more fruitful harvests and helping one another out when their own strategies turn out successful. The Campesino a Campesino movement has often been described to local farmers in the form of a stick figure. As an example, in the form of a person, the movement is [s]aid to “work” with two hands: one for the production of food and another for protection of the environment. The Movement “walks” on the two legs of innovation and solidarity. In its “heart” it believes in the love of nature, family, and community, and it “sees” with a vision of campesino-led, sustainable agricultural development.

What is striking about this simple example is its complexity. However, the complexity comes from the brilliance and knowledge of the farmers themselves. As demonstrated in the previous chapters, organizations such as the IMF and World Bank march into these communities with the idea that “they” know better how to cultivate the land than these local

56

Food as a Human Right

communities do. In the process they impose their ideological notion of progressive development. Implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, they argue that they are better equipped to provide and develop rural farming communities. Rather than being forced by outside organizations to try new techniques in farming more efficiently. Smallholder agriculture in particular is knowledge intensive rather than capital intensive, and relies heavily on cautious but consistent tinkering with new seeds, planting densities, crop mixes planting times and soil, water, and fertility management.22

However, what they miss is the cultural heritage involved in movements such as the Campesino a Campesino movement. They ignorantly, or perhaps unintentionally, do not realize that much of their policies and educational strategies would eventually erase some of the richness of the cultures they are seeking to help. For instance: Because family farming involves men, women, and children, Campesino a Campesino workshops, field days, encuentros, and farmer-experiments are often highly integrated. Learning agroecology in campesino pedagogy is often a family affair.23

When so-called experts attempt to enter communities and “teach” people how to do things more efficiently, they often fail to realize the cultural significance of the hard work and community formation that takes place during the everyday struggles of the campesino. This is not to suggest that many campesinos do not desire a better life and more efficient methods of farming but rather that in the process of learning new techniques, what is equally important is keeping the heart of their cultures. However, it is not simply the sharing of knowledge that takes place in the workshops the farmers organize. When farmers in the movement get together, it is not always just business; it involves a certain sort of joyous celebration of their communities and making new allies and friends. On a more theoretical level, this global struggle to create a more just food and agricultural system may obtain insight from the French theorist Michel de Certeau. In his book, The Practice of Everyday Life, de Certeau distinguishes between what he calls “strategies” and “tactics.” He reflects, A distinction between strategies and tactics appears to provide a more adequate initial schema. I call a strategy the calculation (or manipulation) of power relationships that becomes possible as soon as a subject with will and power (a business, an army, a city, a scientific institution) can be isolated. It postulates a place that can be delimited as its own and serve as the base from which relations with and exteriority composed of targets or threats (customers or competitors, enemies, the country surrounding the city, objectives and objects of research, etc.) can be managed.24

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

57

While this quote is quite difficult to understand, it may prove helpful to apply de Certeau’s thought to the concept of food sovereignty. As the title of his book suggests, in all social movements, there needs to be a careful analysis of both theory and practice. NEW PORT RICHEY, FLORIDA: A DIAMOND IN THE ROUGH Currently people across the world are exploring the relationship between the “local” and the “global.” Renewed interest in examining how the local and global food movements are interconnected and can continue to bridge gaps between the two is no doubt a positive step forward. With that said, continued research and dialogue are still needed in order to work on creative ways to enact concrete policies. The following example provides readers with one such instance in which this can be done. While not directly related to the food sovereignty movement, the small Florida town of New Port Richey offers a unique example of how we might begin to connect the local and the global in a more substantive and meaningful way. The following reflections on questions posed to Dell deChant include the reflections on the basis of his longtime residency in New Port Richey. Dell deChant, a leading instructor in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of South Florida–Tampa, has engaged for decades in local work in New Port Richey, ranging from participation in local political councils to having his own personal garden. Often deChant brings food from his own garden to share with fellow colleagues as well as students. This small gesture represents the vision of food sovereignty on many levels. On the one hand, deChant, like many food sovereignty members, grows his own food. This requires an intimate relationship with the land as well as knowledge about local ecosystems. It is not simply about producing crops but also about sharing experiences with colleagues, friends, and family. This small gesture illustrates the heart of food sovereignty—namely, the desire to rebuild and reconnect communities with the land as well as strengthen community relationships. On the other hand, the work of folks like deChant illustrates the importance of community participation in local issues, whether political or ecological. It is through the hard work of farming that people not only can begin to relate to the plight of small-scale farmers around the world but also might become more informed about the complex dynamics and interconnectedness of farming, politics, and community. In the following reflections, deChant offers a few instances of his experiences in New Port Richey:25 Question: “As a conservationist and activist in the small, local town of New Port Richey (Tampa, FL), how has your own personal work successfully navigated

58

Food as a Human Right

the rough waters of local, state and national agendas that are more interested in advancing political platforms rather than promoting a genuine concern for the environment?”

DeChant reflects: Our work in New Port Richey and West Pasco County has been somewhat successful for many reasons. Here are four of note: First, a large number of the folks involved have lived here for many years, some all of their lives. They have a commitment to this place—the city, the natural ecology of the region, and the cultural ecology of this part of Florida. Projects like this are successful if the folks involved (especially the leaders) are committed to the place where they live, and that commitment is reflected in their longevity in that place. I am convinced that projects of this sort have a much better chance of success if those doing the work are life-long residents of the place where the project is developing. Correspondingly, absent the engagement of folks who are rooted in a place, projects have difficulty getting started and being sustained. “Who are you to tell me what to do with my town?” Second, projects like this work if the leadership includes a significant number of folks who are culturally aware, have a high and positive public profile, and some degree of recognition of their work as professionals. Our projects have routinely had support and leadership from government officials, urban planners, librarians, academic professionals, developers, and business owners. “Oh, the Mayor is for this, let me learn more.” “Jimmy and his family have had that business for 40 years, if he’s for it. . . .” “I heard the professor give a lecture last year, she really knows her stuff. . . .” Third, projects like this work if there is governmental infrastructure that can serve as a platform to launch or support initiatives. This would be something like a Municipal or County board or advisory board tasked with ecological or health topics: a food policy council, an environmental board, an arbor board, a farmers’ market committee, and so on. Groups like this can make proposals directly to government bodies by virtue of their being part of the same governmental structure. Fourth, projects need solid management and planning. There needs to be a point-person who understands the cultural and political terrain. S/he needs to set the agenda and get solid commitment from other leaders (see above). Included in this is professional PR and media outreach, regularly scheduled events based on the project, direct communication with elected officials and relevant government staff, recruitment programs that reach out to businesses, (Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) and nonprofit organizations, religious organizations, and community leaders.

In this brief correspondence, deChant encapsulates much of what the food sovereignty movement is all about. Food sovereignty recognizes not only the fundamental importance of being tied to both local lands and ecosystems but also the need for active political participation that is required to ensure the survival of a community and its resources. Recalling part of the mission of the food sovereignty movement, what is notable

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

59

is deChant’s emphasis on the need for active participation by multiple stakeholders in the community. The food sovereignty movement, while basic in nature, also seeks and needs the support of those in local and national governments as well as various community organizations. THE COALITION OF IMMOKALEE WORKERS: A COMMON PARTNERSHIP WITH FOOD SOVEREIGNTY While the previous example illustrates a very local, community effort, in southern Florida, there are larger organizations that work in the same spirit of the aforementioned work of deChant. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) is an organization and movement that has garnered national attention for fighting for the rights of growers not only in the state of Florida but also around the United States. The CIW was established in 1993 and has fought for the rights and the improvement of immigrant and migrant farmers in Florida.26 The CIW’s work has gained national and international recognition, including the 2015 Presidential Award for Extraordinary Efforts in Combatting Modern Day Slavery from President Obama, the 2010 Trafficking in Persons Hero Award from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the 2007 Anti-Slavery Award from AntiSlavery International of London, a 2005 commendation from FBI Director Robert Mueller, and the 2003 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award from the RFK Center for Justice and Human Rights.27

As this quote exemplifies, the CIW has an active history in the history of Florida’s migrant and immigrant farming communities. While not originally associated with the food sovereignty movement, it has always been dedicated to defending the conditions of local farmers. In particular, their organization has much in common with the idea of food sovereignty in the sense that it advocates for farmers, from both local and regional areas in Central America and the Caribbean. One of the major initiatives that the CIW was able to put into policy is its Fair Food Program. This program has been a successful program that has helped build a program that ensures humane wages and working conditions for the workers who pick fruits and vegetables on participating farms. It harnesses the power of consumer demand to give farmworkers a voice in the decisions that affect their lives, and to eliminate the longstanding abuses that have plagued agriculture for generations.28

Long unnoticed by many local communities, the CIW brought to light the conditions of local farmers and the abuses of the corporate food

60

Food as a Human Right

system, which in turn has propelled them into both national and international spotlight. As a human rights organization, it operates on the philosophy of “Consciousness + Commitment = Change.” 29 The CIW has challenged many local grocery stores as well as national fastfood companies to provide fairer wages for its workers and the farmers who produce the food that they sell and use in their restaurants. It has successfully reached agreements with chains such as Subway, Whole Foods, and Walmart. These companies have agreed to sign an agreement in which they pay a small sum more for the products that farmworkers harvest in the fields, which in turn allows a significant annual raise for farmworkers’ salaries. This might not seem significant, but if you walk the streets of the small town of Immokalee, you would see otherwise. In many cases you will find very poor housing conditions such as small trailers where farmworkers pack up to a dozen people into one living space. At the same time, many of these workers live thousands of miles away from their home countries and without their families for significant periods of each year. This small example of the plight of the workers in Florida resonates with the plight of many global farmers involved in the food sovereignty movement. They, too, face arduous working conditions for meager wages, sometimes not enough to feed their own families. It should be noted that often many of the global farmers in the world are women. Similar to global women farmers, the CIW also advocates for the plight of women farmers in the Florida fields. While much has been accomplished in terms of gender equality in the fields, historically this was not the case. Women in the fields were often paid less, downgraded, and, in extreme examples, sexually assaulted. In an article released by the CIW, they begin with a provocative yet apropos set of two choices. They ask, If you had a choice between purchasing a tomato from: a) a farm where you know farmworker women face a daily barrage of vulgar comments, rampant sexual violence, and unchecked retaliation for speaking out about abuse, or b) a farm where you know women are treated with respect, and abusers face swift and certain justice rather than impunity30 which would you choose?

For many people, this choice might seem an antiquated and outdated proposition. Yet it is not; it is a question that all consumers must face due to the fact that abuse and mistreatment of farmworker women still occur to this day. These abuses compelled the CIW to organize a

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

61

successful and powerful demonstration in Columbus, Ohio, and New York City. At the time of this writing, the CIW has also been in the process of creating a new mobile museum called “Harvest without Violence Mobile Museum,” through which farmworker women will shed light on the long-hidden history of sexual violence that takes place virtually without consequence on farms outside of the Fair Food Program.31 In many ways, this march celebrates the power of women in the agricultural industry and highlights a core philosophy of the food sovereignty movement. Food sovereignty not only fights for the ability to have better control over the conditions in which the world’s farmers produce their products but also fights for the basic human rights of these workers, both men and women. VIGNETTE: RAJ PATEL AND CIW Raj Patel recalls his visit to Immokalee as a shocking and sobering one in which he witnessed, firsthand, the conditions of the farmworkers in this small Florida town. He notes that the name Immokalee means “my home” in the Seminole language. Patel recalls a tour of the town: In Immokalee, housing stock is owned by a handful of local slumlords who rule over an archipelago of run-down and unsanitary houses. I visited a trailer in which eight people slept and lived in poverty, queuing to use the bathroom every morning, and the stove top every night. For this, they paid forty dollars a week. If they wanted an air conditioner, they paid twenty dollars a week more. In one case workers wanting to wash a day’s worth of pesticides off their skin were charged five dollars to hose down outside. Some workers found it cheaper and more effective to wash their hands in bleach.32

Patel’s experience is, unfortunately, accurate. I have traveled to Immokalee and visited the leaders and workers in the city in the past. I regularly invite guest speakers from the Coalition of Immokalee to speak to my college classes. These presentations are quite eye opening for many naive students. Learning about the arduous work that migrants do in order to provide tomatoes for popular fast-food restaurants and grocery stores often shocks students into anger, frustration, enlightenment, and action. Nonetheless, upon my first visit, I learned about the average day of work picking tomatoes in the hot fields nearby. Workers will wake up as early as 3:00–4:00 a.m. and get ready for the day. Many people need to walk or ride their bicycle to a large parking lot where there are dozens of old buses parked and ready to transport workers to whatever field they are working at that day. Once herded into the buses, they are then taken to different fields that range anywhere from 30 minutes to up to

62

Food as a Human Right

two hours away. The day begins, and laborers spend the entire day picking large buckets of tomatoes. They fill large buckets with tomatoes and toss the buckets into the back of large trucks. Then the buckets are emptied and tossed back for them to begin the process once again ad nauseam. Each bucket weighs approximately 50–60 pounds and must be balanced on the workers’ shoulders as they continue down rows of tomato plants. The first time I traveled to Immokalee, I vividly remember a story one of the workers told me. In guiding a tour of wealthy citizens, one particular tourist remarked that she thought it was great that there were so many people riding cars and walking around town to conserve the environment. These people must have been really concerned with “green” forms of transportation. Unfortunately, this is nowhere near close to why people are riding bicycles around town. Instead, it is because workers make so little in wages they cannot afford to own cars. Instead the “luxury” of even a rickety old bicycle might gain a few extra minutes of sleep or time spent with their families. However, this extra “free time” is usually not long-lasting. A new day begins almost before the previous one has ended. For the workers, the days of work are long, hot, humid, and arduous. Much like Patel’s experience, I walked through the blocks and saw the shattered, one-room trailers with no reliable air conditioning, where up to 12 workers would pack in every night for a few hours of sleep before the day begins. I was told that aside from the very minimal expenditures on food and clothing, much of the workers’ wages are sent back to their home of origin, in countries such as Mexico, Haiti, and others in Central America. Although the conditions of work for the immigrant communities in Immokalee are difficult, grueling, and often unfulfilling, they are one example of what farmers around the world also face each day. In many cases, the workers in Immokalee have things better than global farmers who work the same sort of days but are not paid nearly as much as the Immokalee workers. The food sovereignty movement seeks to improve these conditions and, at the very least, bring a voice to the voiceless farmers who provide the foods that Americans eat on a day-to-day basis. Perhaps people in the United States and other affluent countries around the world can pause for a moment to compare the costs of their meals, the ingredients that go into them, and the working conditions of these masses of unknown farmers who produce it. At the very least, people can begin to educate themselves about these unknown, distant farmers and thus become more active in helping—or at least conscious of—the global food system, which is based in the abuses of many of these global families and farmers. Food sovereignty is doing precisely this, although in various ways.

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

63

DESSERT RECIPES Who does not like to eat a bite of, if not an entire, dessert after dinner? Many chefs will argue that you need to begin preparing the dessert course prior to the main course because many dessert dishes require time to sit or cook, thus allowing for a span of time to make the main meal. The following recipes are recipes that not only are largely inspired from southwestern indigenous cultures but also have ingredients that originate in countries around the world. These recipes demonstrate the interconnectedness of our global food systems and food cultures. In researching these variations of different recipes, which any home cook or chef can do, we get a glimpse into the realities of food production and consumption across cultures. This is an important step for those in the food sovereignty movement because the dissemination of knowledge about the conditions of global food producers educates people about the true realities of food deprivation, poverty, and hunger that plague millions of people around the world. Recipe 1: Pumpkin Pie Ingredients for Filling: 1. 2 cups mashed, cooked pumpkin 2. 12 fluid oz evaporated milk 3. 2 large eggs, beaten 4. 3/4 cup packed brown sugar 5. ½ tsp ground cinnamon 6. ½ tsp ground ginger 7. ½ tsp ground nutmeg 8. ½ tsp salt

Instructions: Mix brown sugar, cinnamon, ginger, nutmeg, and salt together. Then slowly mix wet ingredients of pumpkin, eggs, and evaporated milk. Once thoroughly combined, set aside. Scoop filling evenly into a purchased graham cracker pie crust. In a preheated 350° oven, bake pie for approximately 40 minutes or until filling is approximately 1 inch from the top of the crust. Pumpkins are a staple for many cultures around the world. Not only can they make for hearty soups but they are also efficient because virtually the entire pumpkin can be used and eaten in various forms. As a dessert, pumpkin pie is a cherished tradition for American holidays such as

64

Food as a Human Right

Thanksgiving and Christmas. In preparing this pie, the history of American culture should be remembered. With respect to Thanksgiving, we celebrate time with family and friends and indulge in extravagant loads of food but often fail to think about the origins of this holiday. Consumers should recall the darker side of the foundation of the United States. It occurred through the genocide of indigenous peoples, whether through wars on the frontier or, in terms of exterminating various American Indian tribes, through the destruction of their food sources. Alongside the growth of pumpkins by indigenous American Indians, another meat-based example involves the genocidal destruction of the buffalo. Buffalos were a vital source of survival for many American Indian tribes in the West because they provided nourishment through their meat, clothing from their hides, and tools to be fashioned out of their bones. All parts of the animal were used; nothing was wasted. Drawing from the Navaho traditions, we read, In earlier times the Navajos ate everything they could find, and almost all of them spent much of their time working and helping to find food. Men and some boys went on extended hunting trips, often in the fall when the animals were fat, and the boys left at home trapped gophers and wood rats, among other things. Women and girls gather wild plants—seeds, roots, bulbs, greens, fruits, and berries—and prepared them to eat and, when appropriate, for drinking, chewing and smoking.33

As we see from the following tradition of the Navaho, all sorts of foods were used in various ways. What is perhaps more important is the underlying theme that nothing was wasted. Today, we find a stark contrast in many industrialized countries in which food is regularly wasted every day. Take, for instance, the example of airport food. As an article from the Guardian reported in 2018: You probably know about the waste problem in our oceans. But how about the one in our skies? Airline passengers generated 5.2m tonnes of waste in 2016, most of which went to landfill or incineration, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) estimates. That’s the weight of about 2.6m cars. And it’s a figure set to double over the next 15 years. Toilet waste is included in that statistic. But so are miniature wine bottles, half-eaten lunch trays, unused toothbrushes and other hallmarks of air travel.34

These are first world problems for the most part. We enjoy the luxury of traveling and flying when much of the world comes closest to an airplane through seeing one in the sky. In contrast, the Navaho did not need to fly the friendly skies. Instead, they remained grounded in the earth and the bounty that the earth could provide with minimal to no waste.

Food Sovereignty as an Alternative

65

While it might seem odd to draw connections between modern airport food consumption and waste and the Navaho, it is poignantly related to our current global food system. This problem is a small example of the differences between the cultural values of those who truly understand and respect the land and food that is cultivated from it. This is a stark contrast to the corporate food system, which seeks to produce as much as possible without regard to the planet and the people who end up suffering from the unhealthy, processed foods that are largely provided by agribusiness. With mass-produced, mostly processed foods, the corporate food system thrives on the slow (sometimes not so slow) death of both producers and consumers. Recipe 2: Coconut and Mango Pie with Spices from Uganda There is a great cafe´ in the small town of Littleton, Colorado, which serves free meals to anyone who wants to eat. It does not thrive on the death of its community members who come in to eat. It is a revolutionary concept and project that is difficult to sustain, yet it thrives to this day. The concept is you can come into the cafe´ on any given day and receive a meal for free. From the more affluent members of the town of Littleton to the homeless, everyone is welcome and they sit and enjoy a meal together. All the cooks and cleaners are volunteers and put in grunting hours of work each week, all out of a sense of building community and, at the same time, raising awareness about issues affiliated with homelessness, drug addiction, and the implicit and explicit economic gap between the rich and the poor. Ingredients: 1. 2 prebought gram cracker pie crusts 2. 1 cup granulated sugar 3. ½ cup sweetened shredded coconut 4. 4 eggs separated 5. 1 can (14 oz) sweetened condensed milk 6. 1 cup purified fresh mango 7. 2 tbsp fresh lime juice 8. 3 tbsp confectioners’ sugar 9. Pinch of salt

Instructions: Mix sugar, coconut, egg yolks, milk, mango, and juice. Pour equally into crusts. Bake at 350° for 12–14 minutes until center is firm. Beat egg whites, confectioners’ sugar, and salt until peaks form and serve with pie.

66

Food as a Human Right

This is drawn from a personal experience, from a compassionate and friendly person named Heather who was foundational to establishing the Grace Community Cafe´ in Littleton, Colorado. After a trip to Uganda, Heather first tasted this treat and thought it was so good that she would try to replicate it for the cafe´. Not only was it a hit for the customers at the community but it also provided the opportunity for the customers to learn about foreign cuisines as well as the cultures from which they came. This example illustrates not only the generosity of others who are genuinely passionate about uplifting people who suffer from hunger and homelessness but also the broader connection between food cultures around the world. A simple piece of pie might be the initiation of a broader conversation not only about global countries that suffer from poverty but also about their rich history of local cuisines. In this sense, the concept of food sovereignty is apropos. Much of the concept and movement is motivated by the hope of keeping the traditions of various nations and cultures. Recipe 3: Mexican Coffee or Hot Chocolate Coffee in Mexico and Latin America, in general, has been a source of existence for thousands of years. Much like Africa, some of the most popular coffee beans are grown and harvested in these regions. Unfortunately, many of these regions are the same regions that agribusinesses and powerful corporations have devastated through harmful environmental practices. Moreover, out of their desire to extract as much from the land and the people as they can, corporations have destroyed the lives of many indigenous populations. On the upside, when people drink coffee or hot chocolate on a regular basis, there is an opportunity for education. Ingredients: Coffee or hot chocolate of your choice. If you can homebrew your own coffee or melt your own Mexican chocolate, all the better. For people living in towns or cities with a vibrant Latino population, you can find authentic chocolate and beans at your local shops (highly recommended). Instructions: Serve hot and add any other spices that you would like to experiment with. Some like to put a dollop of whipped cream on top to make for a creamier consistency.

CHAPTER 4

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

This chapter analyzes the continued practice of “land grabbing,” the process by which corporations, state governments, and wealthy elites purchase land for financial investment purposes, whether to produce for biofuels, extract natural resources (such as oil), or speculate on future food price volatility. It will also contain several mini case studies of examples of land grabbing. Perhaps some of the most pressing issues facing local farmers are the issues of land grabs. This term has many different forms but means the usurpation of land that is not in meaningful use for agricultural or productive purposes. Part of the problem is that the idea of “unused land” is deceptive. In many cases, this land is, in fact, “in use” but not for agricultural purposes that could benefit landless farmworkers. The Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) in Brazil is a prime example of a movement and organization that demonstrates one strategy for challenging unjust distribution and use of land.1 Based initially out of Brazil, this movement has caught the attention of many similar movements across the world. While not initially tied to the food sovereignty movement, both the MST and food sovereignty have many of the same ideological goals. For both movements, they fight for the unequal distribution of land and the abuse of power by national governments as well as international multilateral organizations. The MST in Brazil says, The great majority of settlers tend to cultivate a variety of crops that constitute their basic diet, such as beans, maize and manioc. Most families also raise animals, such as chickens and pigs, and have a garden where they grow all kinds of

68

Food as a Human Right

vegetables. The choices of food crops by MST settlers are far from being pathbreaking decisions. The favoured crops tend to correspond with the general trend of peasant agricultural production. Throughout Brazil, peasant households and small farmers grow a significant proportion of the food production.2

As this quote highlights, the MST and many other peasant and smallscale farmers around the world depend on farming for their own survival, both in terms of providing food for their families and, if possible, to sell on the market to earn a little extra income. What is somewhat different about the MST and also the most controversial aspect of the movement is they occupy land that is not theirs. It is unused land owned by either the Brazilian government or wealthy landowners who simply own it to one day make a profit through sale or agricultural use. The MST operates by the philosophy that if land is unused, it should be available for cultivation of crops as well as building small communities for those in need. These occupations have often been met with violent resistance as the wealthy owners will hire locals to threaten violence against the MST communities if they do not leave their encampments. For example, the MST’s official mission statement reads, The MST was born through a process of occupying latifundios (large landed estates) and become a national movement in 1984. Over more than two decades, the movement has led more than 2,500 land occupations, with about 370,000 families—families that today settled on 7.5 million hectares of land that they won as a result of the occupations. Through their organizing, these families continue to push for schools, credit for agricultural production and cooperatives, and access to health care.3

As the quote highlights, what is often overlooked is the fact that these settlements are not necessarily a simple example of theft or corrupt behavior. In fact, it is quite the opposite. The MST communities are cultivating land through farming and building productive, healthy, and hopeful communities that either the Brazilian government will not provide or greedy landowners refuse to relinquish (for use for the greater good). This is a classic example that Karl Marx wrote about over 200 years ago. For Marx, much of class conflict occurs through the development of class antagonisms that arise, historically, in large part due to the emergence of private ownership. In a personal reflection, author Vı´tor Westhelle writes, The reflection that follows was first conceived some decades ago when I was working with displaced peasants in the southwest of Brazil. The peasants were once small-scale farmers who could fend for themselves in the little parcels of land they had for family farming. During the radical change in the agrarian policies of the military regime in the country (1964–1985), with subsidies diverted to and

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

69

incentives created for large monoculture export-based farming they ended up in debt and were driven off their land due to fiscal obligations to money lenders. . . .4

As Westhelle’s experience illustrated, many of these Brazilian peasants and small-scale farmers were self-sufficient. It was only when large businesses began to offer incentives to change these farmers’ entire mode of existence with the promise of a better life that unanticipated problems began to occur—namely, many small-scale farmers starting to feel the pressures of competing in a global market that they were ill-equipped to do so in. The market power of large agribusinesses proved too strong to compete with and, consequently, many small-scale farmers were forced to choose other means of survival. While this was not altogether a bad thing, it does illustrate trends that have happened around the world. Powerful businesses and national governments offer enticing promises but end up leaving their people out to dry. It is a metaphor for both the desecration of the land and the destruction of the cultures of people who have historically lived off the land. With regard to the plight of many peasant farmers in Brazil, Leandro Vergara-Camus writes about the nature of these settlements by the MST: [E]ven if the great majority of the settlers have successfully solved the problem of poverty and hunger, they still have to enter the market to satisfy a variety of other needs. Hence, in their struggle to remain on the land, the MST settlers are faced with a major challenge: having to create economic mechanisms that will generate secure sources of income.5

Although this quote centers on the foundational nature of the struggles of the MST, it is interesting to note the use of the words “secure sources of income.” This wording, while unintentional, provides a glimpse into the implicit ideology of the concept of food security. Of course, there is nothing inherently wrong with trying to secure food and resources for one’s community and family; it perhaps diverts attention away from alternative ideas such as those advocated by those who choose to address these issues through the lens of food sovereignty. Simply conceptualizing the flourishing of communities by “secure sources” of income leads down a slippery slope. Of course, all those invested in curbing global poverty want to “secure” sustainable lifestyles for those they advocate for, but the concept of food sovereignty, despite its own conundrums, moves us past the simple language of food security. Although the concept of food security has evolved in a positive way over time, it still remains deficient in terms of providing more substance to what it means to live a flourishing life. Writing in a somewhat different context, Brazilian author Paulo Freire writes of his experiences working with the poor. He discusses the

70

Food as a Human Right

importance of understanding how people discuss and define the concept of “culture”: One of these basic themes (and one which I consider central and indispensable) is the anthropological concept of culture. Whether enrolled in a post-literacy program, the starting point of their search to know more (in the instrumental meaning of the term) is the debate of the concept. As they discuss the world of culture, they express their level of awareness of the concept.6

Here Freire reflects on the importance of communities learning reality on their own terms rather than being told by outside powers the ways in which they should think. This is a stark contrast from many of the historical ideologies of institutions such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). These institutions began operating with the ideology that certain impoverished cultures needed to be educated but educated according to the market rules of modern capitalism. Moreover, it was the World Bank and the IMF that influenced many of the policies that they believed should dictate the ways in which global communities should think about economic development. Once the concept of development is forced upon a population, and it becomes the reigning narrative, people begin the process of losing some of their cultural histories and traditions. Paulo Freire’s thoughts on the education of the masses are apropos again. He writes, We must never merely discourse on the present situation, must never provide the people with programs which have little or nothing to do with their own preoccupations, doubts, hopes and fears—programs which at time in fact increase the fears of the oppressed consciousness.7

Freire is discussing government programs as well as social programs, which both implicitly and explicitly explain the plight of the poor in terms of development and the odds of improving their plight. By making people subtly think they are victims or are up against insurmountable odds is not a good strategy for truly empowering the people. While Freire is not discussing the food sovereignty movement, his words are similar to many of the local seminars and workshops that food sovereignty communities will hold. Instead of simply telling people what to do, how to act, and about the homogeneous ways of protest, food sovereignty discussions involve strategizing ways in which individual communities can work within their own unique circumstances to improve the livelihoods of those who live in them. The pedagogy of the oppressed is often different from the pedagogy of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and charity organizations. While

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

71

mostly well intended, these organizations and charity sponsors sometimes do not truly understand the dynamics of the communities they work in. They may provide helpful assistance with respect to options for improving ways of farming or organizing the community, but it often proves difficult to really understand the conditions under which the communities operate. In a certain sense, this is a perennial problem for sociologists and anthropologists who have attempted to understand the nature of different cultures. The classic example is seen in the work of Clifford Geertz. Geertz worked much of his life studying and living in communities in Southeast Asia and Africa. He broke barriers of previous researchers in the sense that he actually spent years living and learning from the communities that he would eventually write about. In his broader remarks on methodology, he writes, Political theory, which presents itself as addressing universal and abiding matters concerning power, obligation, justice, and government in general and unconditioned terms, the truth about things as at the bottom they always and everywhere necessarily are, is in fact, and inevitably, a specific response to immediate circumstances. However cosmopolitan it may be in intent, it is, like religion, literature, historiography, or law, driven and animated by the demands of the moment: a guide to perplexities particular, pressing, local and at hand.8

Geertz notes several important things here that directly apply to how food sovereignty might be conceptualized in terms of the changing face of the global food system. First, food sovereignty is partly a political movement insofar as it challenges local political leaders as well as national governments to recognize the voices of the marginalized communities that provide much of the food that feeds their countries (as well as other countries around the world). In confronting national governments about the contributions they provide to their local, national food infrastructure, they demonstrate the many ways in which their efforts often go unrecognized. For Geertz, this is a sign of the times insofar as he recognizes that the world is still somewhat in disarray. Food sovereignty recognizes this as well and brings “light” to the injustices in the global food system. Second, Geertz emphasizes the importance of understanding cultural differences and the struggles that face diverse communities that are at the bottom of societies and cultures and have no real say in political theory and practice. Third, and finally, Geertz notes that “[a] much more pluralistic pattern of relationships among the world’s peoples seems to be emerging, but its form remains vague and irregular, scrappy, ominously indeterminate.”9 His reflection begs the question of whether or not we can truly understand the struggles of communities we did not

72

Food as a Human Right

grow up in and the community’s history. Even living among communities and learning their languages and traditions may never be enough to truly understand the existential plight of the people. However, this is not to say that we simply give up on trying to learn about different cultures. But it does educate those who are interested in learning about different cultures and their struggles and about the realities of those cultures. Part of this process is highly important because it helps to educate others about the global situation of many impoverished communities. It helps bring more “light”—as the Geertz book title indicates—what a difficult process this is. With respect to the global food system and food sovereignty, this enlightenment, however frustrating it may be, can also be a source of hope. It can provide people with new ideas as to how we might continue to think about the issues the global poor face as well as how hunger and malnutrition problems might be curbed. Nonetheless, this is currently not the case, and we continue to see many global examples of land and food problems that plague both impoverished and developing countries. In the following two brief case studies, we see how these problems have afflicted countries in Latin America. POVERTY CUISINE IN PERU, BOURGEOIS EATING IN BOLIVIA, AND FINE DINING IN THE FAVELAS IN BRAZIL Poverty Cuisine in Peru: Producing Potatoes and Feeding the Masses? As noted in Chapter 1, Peru is known for its rich history and variety of potatoes. After a walk through most large markets, one will find a rainbow of potatoes—white, yellow, purple, red, and so forth. The Peruvian climate zones make it a region that is ideal for growing potatoes. Located high in the Andean mountains, the soil and weather make it ideal for its production. Many food scholars have argued that the potato first originated in this South American country. However, it has a long history in many cultures around the world. While often associated with historical examples such as the Irish potato famine, it has served to provide a basic form of food substance for many impoverished communities in time of need, deprivation, and ecological crisis. In the case of Peru, the potato is symbolic of all of these conditions. Yet, in Peru, the potato and potato cuisines have evolved to a point of sophistication and taste that make it a popular cuisine for many countries around the world. The following short vignette demonstrates a personal experience involving the issues that are common to food sovereignty and food justice. Reading purely academic texts on food and food sovereignty often lacks the contribution of the authors’ own experiences with food and culture. However, this is precisely the point of the following section. Often,

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

73

the academic study of food loses sight of the more personal aspects of food and the relationships eating together can create. With respect to food justice, one area of further research as well as ongoing inquiry is for the opportunity for academics to share their own personal travels and food experiences. Telling these stories not only provides readers with ideas about new types of food, their recipes, and the communities from which they come from but also challenges the idea that “formal” academic research has to take many specific disciplinary roles such as we find in the divisions between anthropology, sociology, religious studies, ethnography, political science, and so forth. In creating divisions within the study of food, academics exacerbate the divisions within conversations that potentially could help solve core problems with respect to global hunger and malnutrition. Vignette: Living and Eating with a Local Family in Cusco, Peru One summer I had the opportunity to live in Peru for one month. Attempting to improve my Spanish ended up being somewhat fruitless, but the experience was something that I will never forget. Living with a family and experiencing the livelihoods of those countries that you would not be going to, much less living in, is an experience that can bring a certain form of enlightenment if the possibility arises to do so. Of course, Peru is not the best example because of the world-famous Machu Picchu, and there is also a whole other side to the communities and families in Cusco. It is in living and spending time with the local families that foreigners can truly begin to understand the dynamics of food, culture, and the economy of the country. In my personal experience, this was all the more profound than visiting the ancient ruins of Machu Picchu. It was during my brief stay that I learned more about the food, dietary habits, and culture than you could ever learn from a tourist package that only shows the fancy side of life. This experience showed me new sides of the concept of food sovereignty. What stood out most was the simplicity yet, paradoxically, the complexity of eating in Peru a common meal with family members. Normally, breakfast was a sort of smoothie with local fruits and perhaps some toast and butter. Lunch was also small but sometimes included potatoes and chicken, and dinner, if even there was one, was also very light. Often dinner simply consisted of warm tea, which I later learned made perfect sense given the cold evenings that happen at around 10,000 feet altitude. Altitude sickness was a common occurrence for foreign tourists who did not take enough time to acclimate to the altitude. Fortunately, local Cusco families had a variety of teas filled with herbs that could miraculously cure altitude sickness within a day. More importantly, it was the sense of hospitality that stood out.

74

Food as a Human Right

While foreign tourists take advantage of the country with their brief vacations and picture-taking opportunities, few take the time to actually learn about the communities they visit. As food sovereignty emphasizes, the importance of understanding the actual communities that produce our food is integral to the survival of cultures and cuisines. In understanding these cuisines, we also gain an insight into the struggles that many of these communities face, whether in terms of labor conditions, farming conditions, and environmental concerns. Ultimately, this illustrates injustices in the food systems of various global communities as well as possibilities for how to change these conditions. Favelas and Fine Dining: Seeking the Savory in the Slums Rice and beans is a staple for most families, including those who live in the infamous favelas, some of the world’s poorest neighborhoods on the outskirts of Rio de Janeiro. When cooks talk about savory recipes, they are referring to their quality of saltiness or spiciness (as opposed to sweetness). Interestingly, the word “savory” also has the moral connotation that is related to actions that are considered good, wholesome, or respectable. In Bolivia, Gustu 10 is a restaurant opened by the Danish chef Claus Meyer in 2013; Meyer is known famously for his restaurant, Noma, in Copenhagen, which has been named the world’s best restaurant by international critics, chefs, and restaurateurs. 11 Gustu is well known because it is one of the first social and culinary experiments that envisioned a restaurant that would bring together the world’s most refined (and tasty) dishes, which were prepared by some of the world’s most impoverished and marginalized peoples. The idea for Meyer began as a wish to introduce the world cuisines and ingredients that normally the rest of the world (other than regional cultures) would never have the opportunity to taste. In both the examples of the simple rice and beans in Rio and the restaurant Gustu, we get a glimpse of the potential that food has to bring cultures, communities, and the wider world together. Noma co-founder Claus Meyer and his Melting Pot Foundation opened Gustu in 2013 with the intention of starting a new Bolivian gastronomic movement. Now the restaurant has become an independent company with a school inside its premises, many of its students being the chefs, barmen, sommeliers and waiters.12

Gustu is an important yet little-known movement in fine dining around the world. However, this movement has its complexities, moral conundrums, and potentialities. It is complex in the sense that it is a fine dining restaurant and requires the diligent and tireless work of chefs who are

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

75

world renowned. It has certain moral conundrums in the sense that it is located in an impoverished part of Latin America. Finally, it has creative potential insofar as it can bring attention to both local Bolivian cuisine and the plight of the impoverished populations in Bolivia. Similar trends are sprouting up in all parts of the world and bring attention to the food sovereignty movement. This becomes possible only if food cultures are preserved. For food sovereignty, this involves protecting the livelihoods of global farmers. By maintaining sovereignty over local agricultural systems, communities are enabled to produce traditional crops that can be shared with the rest of the world. Food in these two examples also serves to connect us directly with global problems associated with hunger, malnutrition, and poverty. In the example of Gustu and other similar restaurant projects that are experimenting with this new idea, what comes to mind is the following question: What does it mean to create something? The cooking and restaurant industry, while they can be pretentious at times, gives us a glimpse of how modern food movements are evolving. When food becomes an issue in which both the rich and the poor can have the opportunity to eat the same types of food, perhaps communities—rich, poor, and the in-between—can begin to envision and create a more just global food system. Currently, this is more of an idealistic approach to global food issues due to the influence of massive food production corporations as well as economic limitations that force—most times, impoverished—communities to shop at corporate-owned food grocery chains. These three brief examples of fine dining in countries that have been historically plagued by poverty and hunger demonstrate a phenomenon that is somewhat unknown but is rising in popularity by affluent global citizens. Known as “poverty tourism,” many new businesses are sprouting in impoverished communities that can benefit in a small way from the wealth and voyeurism of affluent tourists. As an issue of food sovereignty and human rights, these tourist industries bring attention to issues related to poverty and hunger but unfortunately in a negative way. As tourists, people have a certain morbid fascination with destitute people and communities, but this does not necessarily translate into a proactive political participation that fights to actually change the material conditions of the impoverished communities that voyeurs enjoy observing. Whether it is traveling with guards through the favelas in Brazil, walking through the streets of Lima, Peru, with personal guides, or taking organized transport to a five-star restaurant in La Paz, Bolivia, the underside of development is clear. The following section conceptualizes the food sovereignty movement and food justice as a whole in the spirit of protest and the ability of global communities to take action.

76

Food as a Human Right

FEARLESS SPEECH: FOOD SOVEREIGNTY AND THE WILL TO PROTEST Many of the successes of food sovereignty movement have come when peasant and small-scale farmers have taken to the streets in protest. While often symbolic, they have had the effect of bringing attention to the plight of rural farmworkers and have caught the attention of governments that are looking to avoid social unrest. Unfortunately, at times, these protests have been met with police violence, but they do serve an important role in the movement. Again, the work of the philosopher Michel Foucault provides some potentially important insight into the role of speech and protest. In one of his seminars, Foucault lectures on the Greek word parrhesia, or as he translates it “frankness in speaking the truth.” In setting up his lecture, he notes, [P]arrhesia is a kind of verbal activity where the speaker has a specific relation to truth through frankness, a certain relationship to his own life through danger, a certain type of relation to himself or other people through criticism (self-criticism or criticism of other people), and a specific relation to moral law through freedom and duty.13

For Foucault, the act of speaking itself can be dangerous; it can offend those in power, but at the same time, it also frees individual human beings to be completely honest with who they are and what they experience on a day-to-day basis. More precisely, parrhesia is a verbal activity in which a speaker expresses his personal relationship to truth, and risks his life because he recognizes truth-telling as a duty to improve or help other people (as well as himself).14

Telling the truth is difficult in many cases when it involves the possibility of recognizing one’s own inconsistencies, contradictions, and weaknesses and also, in more extreme cases, when telling the truth involves the possibility of severe punishment or death. Telling the truth has been a classic conundrum for many philosophers. Perhaps the most well-known examples include those of Socrates and, centuries later, Immanuel Kant who will be discussed in Chapter 8. For Socrates, the conflict of whether to tell the truth came to its extreme end when he infamously chose to eat the poison hemlock after being condemned to death by the Athenian juries. Upon his final sentence to death, Socrates’s friends urged him to flee the city-state of Athens. He refused and rather chose to uphold and respect the Athenian law and, instead, drank the poisonous hemlock. What is interesting about this classic story and the notion of truth telling is how it presents a paradox for the

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

77

contemporary food sovereignty movement. In cases such as the Campesino a Campesino movement discussed in the previous chapter, telling the truth in the form of knowledge sharing is a positive thing. It helps peasants and small-scale farmers to share the truth and successful farming strategies that can help their fellow farmers. However, it also involves certain risks because the movement represents an opposition to those in power, a threat to usurp their stronghold on large-scale farming. Moreover, as exemplified by the example of the MST in Brazil, the occupation of land can be considered illegal. In this sense, the case of Socrates illustrates the ultimate opposition to authority. Through ultimately choosing death rather than pleading guilty to the charges levied against him, Socrates illustrated many virtues, not the least of which were honesty and dedication. In a similar sense, the MST communities risk their lives on a daily basis to fight for their right to land, to live in a just world, and to challenge unjust laws that keep their communities oppressed and marginalized. Their encampments are technically illegal, and by bringing attention to their plight as farmers, they inadvertently draw attention to global agricultural struggles that are common to people around the world. Returning to the thoughts of Socrates, one reads that there is another ethical or moral dynamic to his philosophy. It is said that Socrates was able to live a truly “free” life because his words were backed up by his actions. In Foucault’s interpretation of Socrates’s life, he summarizes, (1) Insofar as the philosopher had to discover and to teach certain truths about the world, nature, etc., he assumed an epistemic role. (2) Taking a stand towards the city, the laws, political institutions, and so on, required, in addition, a political role. (3) And parrhesiastic activity also endeavored to elaborate the nature of the relationships between truth and one’s style of life, or truth and an ethics and aesthetics of the self.15

Foucault’s interpretation of Socrates’s way of life further reflects the complexities of the food sovereignty movement and concept. As a movement, food sovereignty must take a stand toward the city, nation, legal system, and relevant players involved in industrialized agriculture. This inevitably requires a political participation, much like that developed by people like Paulo Freire. Finally, truth telling is an individual endeavor in which we are forced to be honest with ourselves about what we care about. If we say we care about issues of hunger and global poverty, the plight of peasant and small-scale farmers, and how our consumption decisions often hurt others, then we must be honest about it. This should not be perceived as a sort of pontification but rather to urge people to simply start thinking about their food consumption choices on a deeper level. Ultimately, this might result in envisioning ways that might help create a more just and human global food system. Furthermore, self-reflection on

78

Food as a Human Right

these issues provides people with an opportunity to more critically examine the nature of the global food system. BUILDING COMMUNITIES, BUILDING A SUSTAINABLE WORLD: LOOKING UP, NOT OUT—AN EXAMPLE OF SUSTAINABLE CHICAGO, ILLINOIS Looking up, not out is a way that many urban centers in the United States are continuing to explore. Rooftop gardens are an innovative experiment that provides the opportunity for people to protect the environment, grow their own food, and utilize space that generally goes by unoccupied. Summarizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency’s extensive research, evidence suggests that growing gardens on rooftops can result in the mitigation of rising temperatures in urban areas. In turn this minimizes the need to use rural landscapes for commercial farming. So, not only does growing rooftop gardens help cities, it concomitantly reduces environmental stresses on rural areas as well.16 Furthermore, the reduction of large commercial farm operations improves the quality of crops grown for our daily meals.17

As this quote suggests, urban and rooftop gardens have many benefits that might mitigate current problems with growing urbanization. As the world becomes more urbanized and space is limited, researchers are exploring ways in which to efficiently use space that is available for food production. Although cities occupy larger swaths of land and spaces for gardening and agriculture are reduced, we forget that, topographically speaking, the spaces lost are not as great as we might imagine. Hence when we think about looking up rather than out, we envision ways in which to recover some of the lost space that occurs due to urbanization. Rooftops on skyscrapers can often be used to provide food that would otherwise not be available in constricted urban spaces. Using rooftop spaces also has a cultural impact in the sense that it can strengthen urban communities, which are often susceptible to alienation due to busy lifestyles and the lack of direct interaction with one’s neighbors. Even if short periods of time are spent watering plants, checking in on herbs and vegetables, and so forth that bring people together, this can have a lasting effect. In Singapore, experiments have tested ways in which to increase food productivity in highly dense urban settings. For example, Crop production within a community can become a potent symbol of the connection between production and consumption, between people and land. It is noteworthy that in Singapore today, this is largely absent. The few existing farms are situated in remote areas on the fringes of community life.

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

79

Localised food production could also reinforce bonds within the community. In a recent report on ideas for Singapore, 2009, local practitioners suggested inclusion of ponds and vegetable plots within the public housing estate to spark a community spirit amongst the young and the old (Tay, 2009).18

As suggested in the research finding in Singapore, the emphasis on building community bonds has a positive effect on both the environment and human well-being. As communities work together to feed themselves, they also become less alienated from one another. Farmers around the world have expressed similar sentiments, although in different ways. Writing in a religious context, author Norman Wirzba reflects, Today’s global, industrial food culture is a culture in exile because it exhibits the marks of injustice, estrangement, and bewilderment. What should we eat, really? Why do many still not have enough to eat when sufficient food is being produced to feed everyone? Why is so much “food” so unhealthy? These questions reveal that food’s production and consumption, rather than being wholesome means of connecting with the world and each other, have in many instances become sites of contention, ill-health, and destruction.19

According to Wirzba, modern food production is at the root of many of our problems, both related to our treatment of the environment and our treatment of each other. Once we begin to address these issues and take specific actions to remedy these problems, we begin to heal a broken world. Instead of eating on the go at fast-food restaurants or buying highly processed, unhealthy frozen foods that are consumed quickly at the dinner table, only to leave many with a stomachache and eventual health problems, Wirzba suggests that we take a step back and slow down our chaotic lives. Reconnecting with mother nature, while difficult, can even occur in urban settings. The rise of urban agriculture (UA) is a way that many communities have fought social injustices, bridged the gap between the urban and the rural, and attempted to combat food shortages, as well as economic opportunities that help to strengthen their local communities. UA provides an opportunity for food justice advocates who seek to mitigate the traumas and difficulties associated with increasing migrations into urban areas. As farmers lose their lands, they are often forced to move into large cities in search for work.20 URBAN GARDENING VERSUS LAND GRABS IN THE CITY OF CHICAGO Although most current land grabs are prominent and destructive in other parts of the world, the United States has its own history as well.

80

Food as a Human Right

While this might be unknown to many people, one of our country’s most populous cities and hub for food culture is the city of Chicago. Today, Chicago is known for its Chicago dogs, Michael Jordan and his legacy with the Bulls basketball team, its friendly midwestern demeanor, and the rivalry between the Chicago Cubs and the Chicago White Sox. However, Chicago has another history behind what it is known for today. Knowing the history of this city introduces us to the little-known fact that land grabs also occurred in the birth of major urban centers here in the United States. There are winds of change in the Windy City among many other major cities in the United States. Researchers John R. Taylor and Sarah Taylor Lovell conducted research on the benefits of urban gardening in Chicago. For their research purposes, they define “Urban Home Food Gardens” as “a garden managed by a single household on owned, rented or borrowed land, either on the same property as the residence or on adjacent land such as a vacant lot tree lawn or right of way.”21 In respondent interviews, the authors encountered many diverse comments on the purpose and success of the city’s gardeners. One particular example revealed how these gardens had a sort of nostalgic connection to previous generations. For example, African American gardeners from the rural American South often recalled fondly the gardens and diverse food crops their parents had grown: “We would plant row and rows of sweet potatoes, a whole field of sweet potatoes, just sweet potatoes. We raised peanuts and made our own peanut butter. All of the gardening that we did I could do. . . . Corn, tomatoes, okra, string beans, all kinds of peppers, eggplant. We grew Brussels sprouts, squash, zucchini, white potatoes, onions, garlic, we had so many things—snow peas, three of four varieties of string beans actually.”22

As the authors note, these types of reflections illustrated how urban gardening can help to remind people of joyous childhood memories of growing food with their families and friends. The process of “remembering” is important for neighborhoods as well as cultures insofar as it serves as a way to preserve culture and tradition. It provided the elders—much like discussed in the case of the Navaho—with a way to teach younger generations the importance of where their food came from and how their cultural history has changed over time. Originally named Checagou by the Miami Nation of Indians, contrary to some popular belief, the geographical region was diverse in both its food systems and cultural dynamics. For instance, Many communities organized themselves around values and political systems that could be considered progressive in society today. Some of those characteristics are values that promote community, balanced power between female and male genders, and political systems based on consensus.23

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

81

These were the values of the first indigenous peoples in the region: the First Nation peoples, which included the Cahokian, Hopewell, Mississippian, Miami, Fox, Menomonee, Potawatomi, and Sauk peoples. Perhaps what is most important for the topic of food sovereignty is the fact that these little-recognized indigenous peoples have habituated the area of Chicago for thousands of years. As Anton Miglietta, the lead author of the aforementioned quote, says simply, “They have roots.”24 Unfortunately, as much of the histories of American Indians contain invaluable knowledge about the land, about growing native crops, and about embodying an ethic of respect for all living beings, this has been bulldozed by the tractors of “innovation,” “modernization,” and “progress.” Nonetheless, over time, the indigenous peoples of the Chicago area continued to fight for recognition. As time moved on, centuries later, the First Nation peoples were again subjected to another form of colonization. During the American Revolution, the Chicago area continued to grow and become a more multicultural city. In the 1770s Jean Baptiste Pointe du Sable became the first person to own unclaimed land in that area. During this era, cultural interactions continued to grow between the First Nation peoples and other European colonizers. However, this peaceful coexistence did not last long. As indigenous peoples continued to migrate west from the Appalachian Mountains, conflicts became more violent. They encountered evolving disputes such as the U.S. government’s acquisition of more lands, French and British fur companies competing in the region, and the seeds of racism that white settlers utilized in an attempt to instill fear in the First Nation Indians.25 The long story is short and is much like the fate of many indigenous tribes in the Americas. Eventually, through years of empty promises, deceit, theft, and brutality, the First Nation Indians of Chicago were overcome by the colonizers. Now that the city was established as primarily a European territory, it was time for another round of exploitation. As Miglietta notes, Located on the shores of Lake Michigan, Chicago was an ideal place for shipping raw materials and eventually manufactured goods. Given its geographical position and access to newly taken land and resources, “Yankees” businessmen quickly bought property, invested large sums of capital, built industries, and recruited workers.26

When business continued to bustle, capitalism took hold. Along with it came the slow start of segregation and the division of the city into rich and poor districts, which continues to this day. The South Side ultimately became the poorest of neighborhoods, but other areas also suffered from the white, rich population slowly gentrifying the more beautiful parts of the city, mostly located on what today is Lake Shore Drive. In the 1960s this area became infamous for its housing projects, such as Cabreni Green.

82

Food as a Human Right

The Greens no longer exists due largely to gentrification and its close proximity to the financial district; instead, folks living in these projects were pushed toward the South Side. Ostensibly it was not intentional; it was “just where the winds of the Windy City blew people.” While this is one example of gentrification in Chicago, it is common in many other major cities. Take, for example, Denver, Colorado. In the 1980s–1990s, Denver had a neighborhood known as “five-points.” This was a place where you were not supposed to find yourself late at night. Today, this neighborhood is one of the most popular areas to go and eat, drink, and attend art galleries. It is a vibrant community and now largely occupied by upper-income families. While these are just two examples, they symbolize the corporatization of the United States. Yet, what might be surprising is the fact that there is fertile land that can be cared for and cultivated in a compassionate and meaningful way. For instance, just about 25 miles outside of the bolstering city of San Diego, California, there are acres of land that, while many of them owned, have been sold to people who care about connecting with nature and are living a more relaxed style of life. Of course, this is not possible for much of the world, but these lifestyles are an example of how we might begin to think about returning to a more basic style of living. This does not mean we become nostalgic people and afraid of and distant from current issues but rather an example of how we can both remember and move forward in a positive way. Unfortunately, from the examples of the Navaho and future marginalized communities in Chicago, the outlook is somewhat unknown. Both communities will continue to fight the forces of development, but when the corporate demand for land, in whatever form that may be, becomes too economically attractive, it is difficult for communities and causes to compete. However, food sovereignty advocates have faced these types of Goliaths since the inception of their different global iterations. They have been and will continue to be the “Davids” in the battle, yet today these battles are slightly different because citizens of affluent countries have the power to affect the outcome of the battle. Depending on responsible consumption decisions that take into account the histories of these communities as well as the current struggles they face, there may still be hope. ARGENTINIAN LAND GRABS Argentina is well known for its cattle production. The Pampas region in northeastern Argentina is known for its fertile ground for agricultural production. In recent decades this region has witnessed a transition from a diversified agricultural sector to a more homogeneous zone of

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

83

genetically modified soybean production. In examining this emerging trend, Lucia Goldfarb and Annelies Zoomers note, Agriculturalization, pampeanization, and the soya-ization processes have an older history in Argentina, which—in combination with liberalization and overall commoditization—left to the soy boom around the 2000s.27

As we have seen in the previous chapters, the themes of liberalization and commodification emerge again as a common theme in the development of modern agriculture. Once trade is liberalized, competition becomes fiercer and the demands of the market take over. In the case of the Pampas region in Argentina, there are also the parallel consequences of the loss of diversity and culture. As discussed in Chapter 2, soy became the main crop produced in the region, and so followed the loss of regional cultural traditions, including the loss of traditional cuisines. The growth of the soy industry has exploded in recent decades as soy is a common product used for the production of many products, everything from food items to industrial products. Traveling north from Argentina, through Central America, and into southern Mexico, one finds the communities of indigenous, revolutionary community of the Zapatistas. The Zapatistas became famous through their rise to symbolic power in 1994 as they first presented their cause in the southern state of Chiapas. The Zapatistas became known for their rejection of government aid as well as their protests against the usurpation of indigenous lands. As Stahler-Sholk remarks on the Zapatistas, They implement new practices within the movements themselves and new social relationships through a “prefigurative politics” that does not wait for a stamp of approval or permission from the state. This amounts to a displacement of “the political” from the institutional realm of the state toward the society, entailing new attention to community cultures and practices (rejecting neoliberal individualism); direct participatory or radical democracy, as opposed to representation by professional politicians; as well as horizontality in social relations and organizational forms.28

The notion of horizontality is important for many grassroots social movements. In refusing to operate by the conventional standards of government, these movements create subversive ways of undercutting the political power of the elite. Part of the rationale in this strategy is based on the realization that it is the traditional forms of power and transition of power that has marginalized certain segments of society and communities in the first place. The Zapatistas recognized that fighting the Mexican government (as well as military) would never be successful given its power and corruption.

84

Food as a Human Right

Instead, the movement sought an alternative approach and started on a much smaller scale. Moreover, with the Zapatista Rebel Autonomous Municipalities (Municipios Auto´nomos Rebeldes Zapatistas, MAREZ) and the “recovery”/occupation of lands in a kind of spontaneous agrarian reform (after the official suspension of land redistribution under a “reform” of Article 27 of the Constitution at the end of 1991), the Zapatistas began to build de facto autonomy without waiting for government recognition.29

The key to this quote is the distinction between “recovery” and “occupation.” For the Zapatistas, the land that was and continues to be usurped by the Mexican government was always held by the indigenous peoples. As Stahler-Sholk notes, In that sense, Zapatista autonomy is an example of “counter power,” which may be relevant for other antisystemic social movements in Latin America, especially in the current twenty-first century context in which many movements are facing the dilemma of how to relate to states that are governed in many cases by the electoral elite.30

The Zapatistas represent a current global movement that brings attention not only to the plight of indigenous peoples but also potentially to the cultural significance of their local food systems. In the following vignette, recipes provide examples of global cultures, which might not be common or known to people in more affluent cultures, which tend to be oblivious to these areas. With respect to local concerns, one way to go about learning about local and global conditions is through educating ourselves about the histories of our own towns, communities, and states. VIGNETTE: SWEETENING THE POT—LAND GRABS AND THE HISTORY OF THE SUGAR INDUSTRY IN FLORIDA The sugar industry has a long and complex history both globally and more locally in places such as Florida in the United States. In Florida, the history of sugar production takes a somewhat intriguing path of development. In some ways, this story begins in what is today one of the most popular tourist destinations: the Everglades. In the early years of political battles between European colonizers over control of the various geographical sections of the (present) United States, Florida became a strategic location with respect to European disputes over land and its agricultural potential. As the only subtropical region in the United States, it provided great potential for growing unique crops that could be sold abroad.

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

85

However, the annexation of the land also came at quite a cost. Much like the standard stories of American colonization, many indigenous peoples such as the Seminole Indians as well as some black marooned populations were going to be the casualties of this European infighting. As a new frontier, fighting over this territory was “driven by a nationalistic economic ideology, and autarkic vision in which Florida, and specifically the Everglades, would free the country from dependence on foreign trade by producing tropical commodities.”31 Climate, soil, and square mile after square mile of empty land led Florida’s business and political leaders to look toward agro-industry as the engine of regional economic development. The only way for Florida sugar boosters to make their imagined Everglades sugar bowl a concrete reality, however, was through direct federal involvement in removing the two biggest obstacles: water and cheap, foreign food.32

With respect to the Everglades, the water dilemma became an essential issue for Floridians who lived in the area as well as those who depended on Florida’s agricultural system for their livelihoods, whether it is farmers, producers, distributors, and, ultimately, consumers. The relationship between water and cheap foreign food became all the more complex given that at the time of Florida’s sugarcane boom, Cuba and the United States were embroiled in disputes regarding water and, perhaps most importantly, global disputes involving the threat of communism. In a certain sense, sugar became a symbolic example of geopolitical relationships. As a simple commodity, sugar represented political and cultural differences but differences that were much more than a simple ingredient that is used in a variety of cuisines. Sugar became a microcosmic ingredient that, instead of serving as a unifying source of eating and cooking, was now a divisive one that was a representation of global, racial, and economic inequalities. As Richardson remarks on the history of sugar around the world, it makes for such an interesting topic because it is both ubiquitous and provocative. Slavery, degradation, obesity, poverty . . . the list is longer still. As such, the commodity can be studied from a number of perspectives, making its productive genesis, its environmental impact, its links to ill health, or even its cultural and symbolic attire a motivation for enquiry.33

In its history plagued by various forms of environmental damage and human slavery, sugar has played an integral role in how we understand various forms of food production and consumption. With respect to production, it reminds us of the checkered past with respect to the laborers who were exploited in the process of its evolution into such a highly

86

Food as a Human Right

demanded commodity. With respect to more current issues, it also serves as an example of how a simple food ingredient can also be used as a means to ignite political debate and, unfortunately, cultural dispute. Sugar serves as a cultural signifier as well. In recent years, it has become an issue of political and cultural contention that has unfortunately had side effects that are divisive for some communities. For example, the controversial attempt to ban large volumes of sugary sodas in New York caught headlines in 2012 as the former mayor Michael R. Bloomberg attempted to limit the sales of sugary sodas over 16 ounces.34 Health issues were the primary concern for advocates of this proposed ban, but as the story unfolded, it became more complex. Questions emerged as to whether this ban was a government infringement on human liberty, whether there were dubious racial dimensions underlying the proposal, and what ultimate purpose the policy served. Ultimately, the courts shot down the decision, but this still provides an example of the powerful symbolic role sugar plays today. Returning to the history of sugarcane production in Florida, we see that it serves as a signifier for many different historical and cultural phenomena. The example of the Florida sugarcane industry signifies some of the more strategic aspects of U.S. production. In the years after the Civil War, many sugar producers began vying for consumer approval by contrasting U.S. producers with those in other countries that used slave labor to produce the crop. Sugar “boosters”—or those organizations that enthusiastically supported the industry—lauded U.S. sugar production as a more humane form of production. As a cultural phenomenon, sugar production would ultimately become one way to fight communist ideologies. As Hollander notes, “In later decades the competition between Florida’s sugarcane region and its rivals, especially Cuba, would be discursively framed as a matter of national security.”35 Although the history of sugar production in Florida is unique in its own right, it represents one example of how food production has played a strategic role in both the history of agricultural economic development in the United States and the cultural influences that shaped how the sugar industry quietly formed the basis for a significant part of our countries founding. Today, the complex history of sugar seen in the examples of consumer-protection groups seeking to limit sales of highly saturated sugar products date back to the earliest development of the industry itself. EMPIRE AND THE MULTITUDE The concepts of empire and the multitude developed by theorists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in their books Empire and Multitude, respectively, discuss the diverse, multifaceted, and enigmatic nature of

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

87

social uprisings in the face of growing imperialistic forces. One such important, recent example of the themes that Hardt and Negri discuss is that of the Zapatistas in southern Mexico. Primarily located in the provinces of Oaxaca and Chiapas, the Zapatistas became famous in the mid1990s for bringing the plight of disenfranchised citizens in this poor region of Mexico. As Hardt and Negri reflect upon the nature of the Zapatista movement specifically, they find both positive and negative aspects of certain types of revolutionary movements. Commenting on the paradoxical nature of some social movements with respect to how power hierarchies are reinscribed in these types of movements, they note, The Zapatista National Liberation (EZLN), which first appeared in Chiapas in the 1990s, offers an even clearer example of this transformation. . . . The Zapatistas also demonstrate wonderfully how the economic transition of post-Fordism can function equally in urban and rural territories, linking local experiences with global struggles. . . . The Zapatistas, after all, call themselves an army and are organized in an array of military titles and ranks. When one looks more closely, however, one can see that although the Zapatistas adopt a traditional version of the Latin American guerrilla model, including its tendencies toward centralized military hierarchy, they continually in practice undercut those hierarchies and decenter authority with the elegant inversions and irony typical of their rhetoric. . . . The paradoxical Zapatistas motto “command obeying,” for example, is aimed at inverting the traditional relationships of hierarchy with the organization.36

For Hardt and Negri, social revolutions can be enigmatic. Parts of them truly fight for social change, yet they sometimes also become subsumed by traditional power structures that they originally sought to dismantle. The Zapatistas confounded the way we think about agrarian-based reform (or revolutionary) movements. Instead, these movements represent a more uncorrupted form of agrarian change. While it would be naive to say that the Zapatista movement does not have its own problems and shortcomings, the vision of the movement is categorically different from the detached logic of neoliberal capitalism. Moreover, it represents a hopeful movement that arduously seeks participatory democracy. For instance, The experience acquired in participatory democracy—through community assemblies to community education and health promoters, rotating responsibilities for service in the structures of self-governance at the level of the MAREZ . . . has the effect of transforming consciousness and social relations among members of the Zapatista support base communities in their everyday lives.37

This form of participatory democracy is unlike many “Western” democratic models such as those of the United States. Rather than a

88

Food as a Human Right

complex system of the Electoral College in the United States, for instance, the Zapatista ideal is a simple form of egalitarian voting by the people in which ideally the majority vote rules. However, it is not simply “majority rules,” but rather the idea that all community members regardless of gender, race, and historical roots have a fair say in how to organize the community and its policies. This sort of ethos is another expression of how the Zapatista communities pride themselves in the development of community and a collective consciousness. It provides members with a common cause, but this cause is different in the sense that it is based on the fight for social justice and recognition rather than partisan politics. For example, They refuse to compete for power in a conventional sense and reject a vanguard role, preferring to invite others to fight for justice, freedom, and democracy in their own spaces and to join heterogeneous networks of those who share similar principles. Their innovative approach to circumventing the state has made the Zapatista movement a significant point of reference for other movements in Latin America.38

Although the Zapatista movement has been labeled everything from a terrorist organization to a nostalgic agrarian peasant movement, they continue to simply demonstrate through action that they are simply fighting for equality and the acknowledgment that the Mexican government has unjustly taken indigenous lands and repressed indigenous peoples. Nonetheless, we can still learn about the conditions of these populations through the simple act of educating ourselves about the cuisines of these cultures. The following recipes provide a few examples that might be of interest to those people who are inclined to learn more about where their food is produced and originates. RECIPES Recipe 1: Argentinian Chimichurri and Steak Investigating the issue of land grabs in Argentina revealed how the production of crops such as soy has become more important than that of traditional crops as well as their cattle production industries. Not only has this homogenization reduced crop and cattle diversity but it has also threatened some of the traditional cuisines that make Argentina a rich food culture. The following recipe is a simple sirloin steak that is dressed with a beautiful green chimichurri sauce. While simple in nature, it highlights the importance of quality ingredients. This recipe suggests serving the steak with rice, but it can also be used in tacos and stir fries. Just like much of the Pampas region, the sky is the limit.

Land Grabs and the Changing Face of Global Food and Agriculture

89

Ingredients: For steak/marinade: 1. 2 garlic cloves, roughly diced 2. 1 lb sirloin steak (amount will depend on how many guests you have or how much you want to eat) 3. ¼ cup of soy sauce 4. ¼ cup of Worcestershire sauce

For chimichurri sauce: 1. 1 cup flat leaf parsley 2. 3 cloves garlic 3. 2 tbsp oregano 4. 1/3 cup olive oil 5. 2 tbsp red or white wine vinegar 6. ½ teaspoon sea salt 7. 1/8 teaspoon ground black pepper 8. ¼ cup hot sauce of your choice

Instructions: Mix all ingredients for chimichurri sauce in a large microwave-safe plastic bag. Marinade steak for at least an hour or up to four to five hours. Cut the steak into 1-inch cubes and preheat a hot cast-iron grill pan. Preheat oven to 375°. Place the cubes of steak into the hot skillet and quickly sear both sides of the meat (approximately two minutes on each side). Then place the entire cast-iron pan into the preheated oven for approximately seven to nine minutes or until cooked at desired level. Drizzle the steak with chimichurri and serve with rice. Recipe 2: Bobotie—Traditional South African Rice Ingredients: 1. 2 cups rice 2. 3 cups water 3. 2 ½ cups milk, divided 4. 2 medium onions 5. 2 slices white bread 6. 2 lbs ground beef

90

Food as a Human Right

7. 1 tbsp curry powder 8. ½ tbsp. cumin 9. 2 eggs 10. 1 tbsp vegetable oil 11. 1tsp salt 12. ½ tsp ground black pepper 13. ½ tsp turmeric (optional) 14. 1 tbsp vinegar 15. bottled chutney 16. diced almonds 17. raisins

Instructions: Cook rice in 3 cups water and 1 cup milk. Brown meat, oil, onion, vinegar, and spices in non-stick pan. Pour 1 cup milk over bread to moisten and mix into meat. Spoon into ovenproof dish. Beat eggs and ½ cup milk together and pour over beef. Bake at 350° for 30 minutes. Serve with rice. Garnish with almonds, chutney, and raisins. Recipe 3: Squash Soup Ingredients: 1. 1 small white onion 2. ½ stick of unsalted butter 3. 1 celery stalk 4. 5 heirloom baby carrots 5. 1 large butternut squash, peeled, seeded, and cubed 6. 3 cups of low-sodium chicken broth

Instructions: In a large pan, melt the butter and saute´ the onions until translucent, and then add the diced celery stalk, diced carrots, and cubes of squash. Add all ingredients into a large pot and three-fourths of the chicken broth along with salt and pepper. Bring to a boil. Let it simmer for approximately 45 minutes or until squash is tender. Remove from heat and place mixture into a blender and blend into a thick consistency. Pour the blended mixture back into your pot and add remaining chicken broth and simmer for another 5–10 minutes and add salt and pepper to taste.

CHAPTER 5

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

The growing power of corporations in the global food system is an issue that is of concern for many global farmers. As corporations continue to consolidate power over the global food system, the role of the nationstate often comes into question. Scholars as well as farmers question the extent to which national borders and, in some cases, state-led food and agriculture policies are removed from the hands of nations and their citizens. Instead, they examine how the evolution of the global food system has fallen into the hands of powerful transnational corporations (TNCs). Today we live in an age where corporations are increasingly consolidating control over the food system. Massive agricultural and chemical companies such as Monsanto, Cargill, and Kraft have taken control of major sectors of the food production, distribution, and advertising system. This has become a problem for sovereign nation-states. On the one hand, country governments want to retain sovereignty over their local economies, but on the other hand, these corporations have a major influence on government officials and their constituents. What is problematic is that often these TNCs will extract resources and outsource labor from local community farmers and workers, putting them in a catch-22. With respect to the farmers, they may have the opportunity to improve their economic positions, but at what risk? In the process of corporatizing the food system, will they slowly lose their culinary and cultural heritages? For corporations, this is simply business. If a larger, more homogeneous farm model proves to be the most efficient and maximizes the output, then this accomplishes the objectives of the corporation. There is a certain logic to this corporate mentality. As Jerry Mander notes, The corporation . . . operates by a system of laws and inherent structural rules that leave it utterly beyond the norms of human “morals,” of concerns for community

92

Food as a Human Right

or for the harms that may be caused by industrial activity. . . . The corporation operates by an internal logic containing certain guidelines: economic growth, profit, absence of ethics and morals, and the endless need to convert the natural world into industrial processes and commercial products.1

As mentioned earlier, in the past, the company Monsanto had often been the target of much criticism. It first caught attention for its attempt to patent what was called the “terminator gene.” Patenting has been a controversial issue that is related to multiple dimensions of the corporate food system. One contested issue that not only companies such as Monsanto but also the major food-producing corporations, in general, face is the battle over food labeling. In the United States, many food corporations have fought vociferously against any strict governmental regulation on companies that do not wish to share the ingredients used in their products. The resistance by major food-producing corporations takes many different forms. For instance, the popular pizza chain Papa John’s has refused to relinquish information detailing what ingredients go into its pizza sauce, citing the risk of revealing potentially damaging information, which other companies could use to replicate their sauce, as the reason behind their secrecy. Not so ironically, Papa John’s touts itself as a franchisee that uses the “best ingredients” yet will not tell consumers what they are. As Elizabeth Smythe notes, “Corporate agribusiness, and the U.S. and Canadian governments, at various points have tried to stop mandatory labelling, claiming that consumers do not need to know the provenance of their food.”2 While Papa John’s is just one example, it represents the antagonistic relationship between agribusiness, major food companies, and consumers in general. While there is an argument to be made about why corporations do not want to publish their recipes, of equal weight is the argument that consumers deserve to know what ingredients go into their foods. Taking the example of Papa John’s, the ingredients that it does make public are the following: Although the fact that Papa John’s garlic sauce, which comes in little packages, is made with a slew of additives—mono and diglycerides, partially hydrogenated soybean oil and the preservatives sodium benzoate and calcium disodium EDTA—does not inspire confidence.3

From the health perspective, this is important for people with certain dietary-related allergies, but from the food sovereignty perspective, avoiding the provenance issue also is concerning because consumers do not know the labor conditions under which their food ingredients are produced. Knowing the origins of where ingredients come from informs consumers about the regions, countries, and cultures that produce the food that ends up on our grocery store shelves or on restaurant plates.

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

93

Walking through the grocery store aisles reveals the status of food labeling here in the United States. Consumers can look on the back side of packages in an attempt to see common things like fat and sodium content, but reading deeper, one will find a host of chemicals, preservatives, and other ingredients that nonfood experts will know nothing about. In part this is intentional. By overwhelming the consumer with highly technical chemical product information, it is easy to give up trying to understand what goes into our food; “just buy it, it tastes good, and I need to get home” is the thought that often runs through our minds. Take, for example, a simple can of A&W Root Beer (the good ol’ American brand, minus the “diet” part). On the front of the can, one will read, highlighted in bold letters, that it is “Made with Aged Vanilla,” which sounds enticing. However, when you read the fine print on the back of the can, the consumer will see that in the fine print, the ingredients include carbonated water, caramel color, sodium benzoate (preservative), aspartame, acesulfame potassium, natural and artificial flavors, malic acid, quillaia extract, and phenylketonurics that contains phenylalanine. Unless you are a chemist, you probably do not know what those ingredients are, hence the problem of food labeling. However, this is precisely what grocery chains and major foodproducing corporations want us to do. Once we begin to question the ingredients in our food, we begin to question our consumption decisions as well as what brands we choose to purchase. Thus begins the journey down the rabbit hole of educating ourselves about food ingredients and food consumption, which is a very risky rabbit hole that big food corporations might not want us to travel down. Once consumers are limited with brand options to choose from, coupled with highly complex ingredient labels, it becomes virtually impossible to truly understand what exactly we are buying. This leads us to certain ethical dilemmas because even conscientious consumers, hoping to better understand where their food comes from and what is contained in it, have an even more difficult task of determining who produces these foods and under what conditions global workers are working to provide the ingredients in our meals. The simple process of choosing what types of foods consumers decide to purchase reflects a larger trend in the breakdown of coherent ethical systems in general. Despite being an emerging trend, food ethics still holds only a small niche in the grand scheme of things. Looking at this breakdown of ethical systems raises other problems as well. For example, a simple survey of undergraduate and graduate school programs shows that different schools offer different “ethics” courses. For instance, at the University of South Florida—a good example of a state university similar to others found across the United States—a quick course search shows that the Philosophy Department offers a “Seminar in Ethics,” the Department of Religious Studies offers “Comparative Religious Ethics,” the

94

Food as a Human Right

Business School offers “Ethics, Law, and Sustainable Business Practices,” and the Law School offers “Ethical and Legal Issues in Healthcare.” Why is this notable? Each different school or discipline has its own version of ethics, and thus it is implied that the issues and ethical models are going to have different normative values. However, this begs the question that is addressed by the philosophy of Immanuel Kant mentioned in Chapter 8. Perhaps what we need is a universal system of ethics that applies regardless of one’s academic training or specific culture. Kant takes this approach to ethics with his “categorical imperative”; the waters become muddied when we start thinking about cultural differences. As is discussed in Chapters 7 and 8, determining a universal or absolute ethical system that applies across all cultures runs the risk of imposing a sort of cultural-ethical imperialism. In other words, it is the value of the dominant culture that will determine what is considered right and wrong. Philosophers have framed this dilemma in terms of the relativist debate—namely, different cultures have different ideas of morality and knowledge and different concepts of the truth. It would be impossible to determine which one, if any, is superior.4 This dilemma is also seen in the great debates between the world’s religions and their respective ethical systems. It becomes most apparent in the world’s monotheistic religions (i.e., Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) and, unfortunately, has been the source of major wars or at least the banner under which major wars begin. While these ethical and philosophical values may seem tangential to the concrete practices of the food sovereignty movement, they, in fact, present an area in which the concept needs further development. This is especially important when food sovereignty communities attempt to challenge the power of the corporate food system. Despite different cultural ethical systems, can communities and cultures find a baseline, common ethic that challenges the corporate ethic of maximizing profits and looking only to satisfy their shareholders? THE FORD FORDSON: WHO GETS THE FAILING GRADE IN BUSINESS ETHICS? The history of the modern farm tractor traces back to the early twentieth century and marks a watershed moment for the future of industrialized agriculture. In 1917, the Henry Ford and Son Company initially started with the construction of 6,000 tractors that were to be sent to England and 1,000 for Canada to help assist in World War I.5 Initially these tractors did not have an official name and were simply called MOMs, which simply referred to England’s Ministry of Munitions. Ultimately, the tractor was trademarked when production began in 1918 for use in the United States.

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

95

Ironically, the original tractor was made to help feed the soldiers who were on the front lines of battle. Food shortages in England needed immediate assistance. They were smaller and more affordable, and according to Henry Ford, they were “the key to eliminating war and improving the human condition.”6 The Fordson went into mass production in 1917; it was agile, with a weight of around 2,500 pounds with a relatively small wheelbase and a powerful engine, which made it more efficient for production on larger scales.7 Mass production not only helped bolster agricultural production but also marked a pivotal moment for large-scale agricultural production. We see that “Ford farm tractors held an important role in changing the way agriculture and other work was conducted.”8 Over time, the Ford tractors went through various model changes that perfected the efficiency of the machine. With the outbreak of World War II, the Ford tractors were forced to reduce production due to a growing scarcity of raw materials to build the machines. Changes in the different models ultimately became symbolic of cultural changes in Europe and the United States. For instance, Ford was one of the early leaders in mass production and the assembly line, and they took these strengths with them into their production of tractors. This allowed them to offer these machines, in the early days, at prices no one could touch, and this made Ford one of the keys toward the mechanization of agriculture.9 One commentary describes the Ford tractor and its legacy: “Their beauty is recognized by those that collect and restore these symbols of American pride and progress.”10 As a sort of iconic example of American culture and society, the Ford tractor also represents an example of the underside of agricultural “development.” While the mechanization of agriculture may have made production more efficient and allowed rural farmers to produce more, which in turn allowed them to feed their families as well as the population at large, the end result has raised ethical questions regarding the consequences of this mechanization of agriculture. For instance, we ask: “At what cost has this ‘progress’ come?” and “Has the innovation of the tractor truly improved the lives of small-scale and rural farmers?” The economic benefits that emerged from the original Ford tractors were largely held by the Ford Company and not the actual farmers. Of course, the farmers benefited to some extent, but they were unsuspecting causalities of the eventual outcomes of the industrialization of agriculture. So, we ask today, who is on the front lines? It is the farmers—and more specifically, the small-scale farmers. While the Ford tractor branched out and many other companies began their own manufacturing of tractors, this ultimately resulted in a rapid consolidation of the agricultural industry. More food was able to be produced and sold at more massive scales, and big food-producing chains, distribution centers, and grocery stores took over the reins. The tractor that was originally supposed to ease the hardships of

96

Food as a Human Right

local farmers became the means by which big business could begin the slow process of exploitation of both the land and local farming communities. As both national and global demand for food increased, it was more efficient to consolidate local farms into larger farms that could produce more food. This in turn caught the eyes of speculators and big agribusiness. The question that some ask today is: Can this process be reversed or at least rectified to some extent? The answer is probably not, but it is movements such as food sovereignty that continue to raise important questions about how we might go about doing so. In its efforts to restore certain elements of traditional farming knowledge and farmers’ lifestyles, food sovereignty fights for the lost or diminishing voices of these communities. The movement does not necessarily become overly nostalgic, but rather it brings attention to how the modernization of agriculture has hurt some of the poorest communities worldwide. Given that even small-scale farmers can make their own decisions whether to mechanize agriculture or not, this should not preclude the voices of those who either do not want to or do not have the means to do so. The Ford Fordson and its eventual competitors in the tractor industry presented a conundrum for modern agricultural movements that seek to reestablish the communities and cultures that are rapidly declining. Just as it is difficult to navigate the path of the tractor through fields so as to not run over plants, so too it is difficult to walk through small gardens to weed and harvest crops. It is a fine line but one that is becoming a more dangerous tightrope walk for many peasants and small-scale farmers worldwide. FAITH AND FOOD IN THE CORPORATE AGRICULTURAL SYSTEM While it may seem odd to think about different religious traditions and the role they play in how we understand the global corporate food system, upon closer examination, they do have an interesting connection. Obviously, food plays a major historical role in different world religions; they have different dietary laws, different practices involved in preparing meals, and different traditions regarding the ways in which food should be consumed. Chapter 8 provides examples from some of the major world’s religions in terms of how food plays a prominent ethical or moral role in the life of practitioners, but how might this all relate to the corporatization of the global food system? In a pilot study research project by faculty at Flinders University in Australia, academics posed the following two guiding questions: 1. What is the role of religious beliefs in an individual’s determination about what foods should or should not be eaten?

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

97

2. How do individuals negotiate any food and trust issues that are a consequence of spiritual or religious belief systems?11

These questions provide an interesting approach to investigating one link between religiosity and food-consumption practices. Given that “faith” plays a strong role in religion itself, can we also ask how people’s faiths are reflected in their decisions to trust certain food providers? In religions such as Hinduism, Judaism, and Islam, for instance, we see dietary laws that might influence purchasing decisions. If certain foods are considered prohibited, practitioners might be forced to make decisions about the markets and grocery stores they shop at. This becomes an issue when the only options might be chain stores that do not necessarily have a wide variety of international or acceptable foods. In certain forms of Hinduism, the prohibition of eating meat will invariably play a role on where to shop. In Judaism and Islam, kosher or halal foods also present restrictions on what people can eat and therefore shop. As such, the options and choices of the world’s faithful are directly impacted by the corporate food system, which homogenizes purchasing choices. To make the relationship between purchasing choices and religious convictions more complex, the following problem or question is asked: How important are dietary concerns and food-consumption choices for practitioners? For example, people might be committed to their particular religious tradition but not hold certain rules as important as others. Instead, rather than preoccupying themselves with strict observance of dietary laws, for example, they might choose to focus on what they find more important for their spiritual lives. Antiquated questions about what types of food are permissible or not permissible might not be as important as fighting against unjust laws, following core messages of peace and compassion found in most religious scriptures, and so forth. Scholar Whitney Sanford has done extensive research in India, focusing on the history of the interconnection between religion and agriculture in India, a rich country of culture and food traditions. She comments on one of the annual celebrations, Holi, which is a festive time of colors and celebration: Devotees and others play Holi by exchanging color with fellow players, and crowds of devotees attired in newly dyed clothing render this festival visually distinct and exciting. The color takes the form of colored powder or colored water, and methods of exchanging range from tenderly applying color to another’s cheek to dousing crowds with buckets of colored water. In Baledeo (INFORM), devotees explained to me that exchanging color is a means to renew social bonds.

Sanford concludes that the interaction between different Hindu gods and goddesses “reflect the naturalization of human entitlement over the

98

Food as a Human Right

earth’s resources and the naturalization of male over female.”12 What is fascinating about this brief example is the interplay of religion, culture, and human interaction. It is a dynamic play between experiences of joy, celebration, reverence to the gods, and the various colors of the world— but physically and, in part, symbolically, the conditions of global women and agriculture in this nation. It is not altogether different with many other countries around the world. In this instance, Sanford observes not only the importance of women in agriculture but also the ongoing marginalization of women in India. Despite these pressing concerns, Sanford’s work also highlights a more joyful and positive side of life and the importance of religion and culture. Through the Holi ceremony, we see women, children, and men all joining together in celebration, which is in part a ritual of thanksgiving for the food that is provided to us. Nonetheless, the cause of food sovereignty and the corporate consolidation of the food system led Sanford to her conclusion: My analysis of this story in its broader social and ritual context helps us understand how the relationship between agricultural social stability, or the “need for productivity,” establishes and maintains social hierarchies, and why the narratives of industrial agriculture remain dominant.13

Sanford focuses on the common theme in corporate food production— namely, the need to produce more and more and as much as possible, regardless of the consequences. This is an important yet complex issue to tackle—namely, in what ways does the current food system need to change if we are concerned about global poverty and hunger? Current trends in varying food industries, particularly in industrialized countries, concentrate on mass production. Buying cheap food and ingredients is good for our wallet but not necessarily the wallets of others. In fact, it makes their wallets much slimmer. In the ethics of corporate production, this might be an externality but, ultimately, a process of “progress.” Wendell Berry, a farmer and poet, has written extensively on the lamentable decline of traditional farming, knowing the land and recognizing its beauty and bountifulness when treated almost as a sacred space. A couple of lines from his poem “Manifesto: The Mad Farmer Liberation Front” read, “Love the quick profit, the annual raise, vacation with pay. Want more of everything ready-made.”14 Berry’s poem laments the path down which modern agricultural “progress” has taken us. For Berry, this process has been one in which modern technology and agricultural innovation have duped consumers into thinking that life could be much easier for farmers if they just succumbed to the rising tide of modern technology. The corporations will

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

99

laud the effects of bigger and better tractors, more chemical-intensive modes of farming, and a general alienation from the lands that we live on. The trick is that corporate models of agricultural production have been successful in doing so by duping the consumer into thinking this is really what they truly want—this type of industrialized production will in fact make them all happier. However, this is part of the whole process and death of the farming lifestyle. Berry would be first to admit that it is not easy, but he would also argue that some people choose that lifestyle as difficult as it may be. Part of it is love of the land, part of it is tradition, and part of it is respecting millennial-long generations of farmers. Food sovereignty relates to this for these very reasons. While some people in the movement do not have the luxury of choosing to farm or not, there are communities who do cherish the work and want to stay connected to the land. For these communities, the land, much like it is understood by Berry, is a sacred space. In fact, nature itself is considered sacred and in need of respect and reverence. This reverence is rapidly being attacked by corporate industry and modern agricultural practices that do not revere the land but rather see it as simply a means to provide profit. For Berry, much like Marx (except for Marx, without the religious undertones), this poem presents the idea that a deep connection to the land and knowledge of it can be a spiritual experience. However, because it is such a deep connection, we are both viscerally and emotionally hurt when the land is hurt. This sentiment is not new; looking back to the experiences of American indigenous people, one sees this in the words of the great chief Smohalla of the Nez Perce Indians: “You ask me to plow the ground. Shall I take a knife and tear my mother’s bosom? Then when I die she will not take me to her bosom to rest.”15 These words, however, represent a conflicting aspect of how we think about nature. For many Amerindians (i.e., American Indians), different tribes had different perspectives about humans’ relationship to the land and its animal inhabitants: the land is considered sacred and to break the soil would involve inflicting pain on mother earth. Hence, certain tribes relied on hunting animals such as buffalo for their primary sustenance. Other tribes did not think the same way and saw foraging and gathering as a much more human way to feed the community. Nonetheless, both perspectives are radically different than what we see in the current corporate perspective with respect to the land and its inhabitants. When we compare the perspective of early indigenous farmers and Amerindians, we see a stark contrast in worldview. Thinking about how farming might harm mother nature or in terms of hunting and eating meat is patentably different from the corporate perspective. From

100

Food as a Human Right

much of the corporate side of things, production at its maximum capacity is what is most important. This ideology is largely reflected in the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This is most prominent in the production of crops such as soybeans, maize, canola, and cotton. In North America, these industries have been subsidized and are a bulwark for the production of unhealthy foods and ingredients. As Elizabeth Smythe continues to note, With Canada and U.S. support for this industry [supermarkets and GMOs] and their influence came limited regulation based on the concept of “substantial equivalence,” which assumed that if the GM product, in its components, was the same as those products already deemed safe, the product would, in its entirety, also be considered safe.16

Using the substantial equivalence argument, many U.S. firms asserted that food labeling was unnecessary, and corporations argue that food labeling would, in fact, harm food-producing corporations because the label itself might be perceived as a sort of warning label by consumers, which would scare them away from certain products. Substantial equivalence with respect to food products refers to the notion that a particular brand or variation of a type of food is just as safe as its traditional counterpart. This often applies to genetically modified foods that are claimed to be just as safe as brand-name variations.17 As consumers become increasingly interested in food safety, there has also been pushback from corporations and their lobbying efforts to avoid labeling. Smythe notes, Consumers might desire such information if they wish to purchase food produced closer to home or if they harbour concerns about how food is produced in other countries or regions. Yet they are totally reliant on the information contained in the food label to know what they are eating and from where it comes from.18

Instead, the control over labeling information is largely in the hands of the corporate producers. This challenge is particularly important for people interested in food sovereignty because knowing where food ingredients come from allows us to gain more informed knowledge of the conditions under which food is produced. VIGNETTE: INCARCERATED ANIMALS—FOOD IN AMERICAN PRISONS The quality of food also finds an unusual place of academic study elsewhere in the American food system. Food in American prisons has a

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

101

notorious history for its poor quality. One study by the American Journal of Public Health found that [i]nmates have no choice in where and little choice in what they eat; they are completely dependent on institutional food safety procedures. Correctional foodborne outbreaks were routinely among some of the largest outbreaks each year, representing a single target for preventing large numbers of illness. Our results show that incarcerated persons suffered more than 6 times more outbreak-associated foodborne illnesses per population than did nonincarcerated persons.19

While some might argue that the concerns of inmate health should not be an area of high concern, it does present difficult ethical questions for people interested in how we treat humans, in the sense that they are both animal and human. In one sense, the way people are treated in the American prison system can be considered inhuman due to the fact that people are fed with lowquality food that is more likely to expose prisoners to foodborne illnesses. If greater purpose of incarceration is rehabilitation and helping individuals to become better, law-abiding citizens upon their release, then we could ask how feeding inmates with dangerous, unhealthy, and contaminated food demoralizes them. It is another small example of how people are treated as subhuman. Of course, this is not to deny the fact that many prisoners have committed atrocious crimes. However, it does bring into question the larger ethical issue of how we might go about rehabilitating and perhaps reconnecting prisoners with society. In another sense, there is a connection between the way we treat prisoners and the way animals, such as cattle and chickens, are treated in the industrial model of food production. In the effort to produce more and more food for mass distribution by corporate food companies, these animals are often caged and slaughtered in horrible ways. In the popular movie, Food, Inc., director Robert Kenner documents phenomena such as rising obesity rates, increasingly unhealthy food, and the role the corporate food industry plays in these issues.20 Although the ethical dilemmas associated with the spectrum of how we treat animals to how we treat prisoners, important issues for conscientious consumers focus on the broader rationale of how the global food system is organized. They want to know precisely what ingredients are in the products they purchase, but at times this is impossible due to the lack of regulatory laws that do not require companies to clarify exactly what ingredients are in their foods. Companies are required to list the components in their foods, but often these components use highly technical language of chemicals that the average consumer is unfamiliar with. Tyson Foods, for example, made headlines at the turn of the century for

102

Food as a Human Right

its attempt to exploit laborers in an effort to reduce labor costs. As the New York Times reported at the time, Tyson Foods Inc., the nation’s largest meat producer and processor, was indicted yesterday with six employees on charges that it conspired to smuggle illegal immigrants across the Mexican border to work in its processing plants. The 36-count indictment, which was unsealed at Federal District Court in Chattanooga, Tenn., accuses Tyson of arranging to transport illegal immigrants across the border and of helping them to get counterfeit work papers for jobs at more than a dozen Tyson poultry plants. The government said it was the largest case brought against a major American company involving the smuggling of immigrants.21

While this happened over a decade ago, it is a small example of the lengths that corporate food corporations will take to minimize their costs and maximize their profits. Wage costs can be a significant corporate cost that dig into profits, and by reducing them, corporations can reduce the costs of their cash flow intake in order to maximize profits. VIGNETTE: PUBLIX AND PARKLAND—TAKING AN NRA-PROUD AIM AT KIDS The mega grocery store of Publix has been in the news for decades and not necessarily for its shining record of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Corporate social responsibility is a relatively complex concept that has been debated by theorists who question: To what extent do corporations have particular responsibilities to overall public well-being? Questions can be framed in two general ways. Do business people have a responsibility to the public in general? And, if so, does this hurt the ability of businesses to maximize profits? This second question becomes important if the paradigm for a corporate ethic is minimalized to the notion that the corporation’s only responsibility is to maximize profits and thus uphold its responsibilities to stakeholders and/or shareholders in the business and business stock.22 With respect to CSR and the corporate food industry, these questions become all the more complicated because of the nature of the business. Food corporations have a responsibility to not only provide safe foods to its customers but also operate as moneymakers for general investors. Thus they must balance the sometimes conflicting interests between simply making profits and, at times, sacrificing profits for the betterment of society as a whole. This becomes all the more complicated because the definition of personhood is concomitantly complex and branches off into another web of controversies about the nature of what it means to be “human.” Court cases have been fought over this issue in

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

103

the United States for decades (if not since the inception of the Fourteenth Amendment and its interpretation of what it means to be “human”). Setting aside these complex debates and histories, the grocery store chain Publix is considered a legal corporation, even if owned by its employees. Its mission statement declares, Our mission at Publix is to be the premier quality food retailer in the world. To that end, we commit to be: Passionately focused on customer value, Intolerant of waste, Dedicated to the dignity, value and employment security of our associates, Devoted to the highest standards of stewardship for our stockholders, and Involved as responsible citizens in our communities.23

This statement is not something one would expect from a big business mission model. In particular, what stands out is its “dedication to the dignity, value, and employment security” of their associates, its “devotion to the highest standers of stewardship,” and finally its commitment to be “responsible citizens in our communities.” 24 At a glance, this looks exactly like a paragon of CSR; it captures all the things that conscientious consumers would want when choosing where to purchase their food. But Then the Parkland, Florida, Tragedy Happened Publix is ostensibly committed to its employees, CSR, and the public as a whole. It is also financially committed to the National Rifle Association (NRA) and political leaders who support it. At the time of this writing, Publix has staunchly supported Republican politician Adam Putnam who is an advocate for the NRA.25 In a story released by the Tampa Bay Times, we read a series of comments and tweets by the father of Jaime Guttenberg, a victim of the Parkland school shooting. That’s what Fred Guttenberg, the father of Parkland shooting victim Jaime Guttenberg, claimed in a series of tweets Tuesday afternoon. Guttenberg tweeted that Publix CEO Todd Jones told him Tuesday that last Friday’s highly publicized die-in made it politically untenable for Jones to visit Parkland. “He had the gall to say to me that because the die in made this so political that he would not be able to come down here to meet with the Parkland kids and families,” Guttenberg tweeted, “and that Publix would not be making any donation to the victim’s fund.”26

Publix immediately revoked many of its policies and stances due to the outcry of community members.27 But was this enough? Does this tragic

104

Food as a Human Right

incident not exemplify the corporate ethic of profit maximization over social responsibility? At the very least, it illustrates the problems associated with the legal status of corporate personhood. If personhood is truly understood in the sense of being a human being, a being capable (for the most part) of making moral decisions, then that corporation should be judged according to both moral and legal standards. By legal standards, the case of Publix can be potentially scrutinized for false advertisement. As its mission statement indicates in its dedication and commitment to “the highest standards of stewardship for our stockholders,” and as “responsible citizens in our communities,” the Publix label, as a particularly unique company, defies some of the legal standards of false advertisement. Publix has grocery stores in many states in the southern United States and continues to grow its operations. Part of this is due to its efficacious advertising strategy of convincing the general public that it is a desirable company to work for. At the same time, as Publix continues to grow, food justice groups have brought attention to the more dubious ways in which Publix flaunts itself as a responsible and caring company. With respect to the broad issue of advertising a brand, Publix is under scrutiny for advertising itself as a store that bolsters community relationships. This in turn has led consumers to question the role of advertising in general. According to the Federal Trade Commission, the definition of false advertisement occurs: When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it’s on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence.28

At the very least, the mission statement of Publix should omit its claim to holding the “highest standards of stewardship.” As was illustrated in Chapter 3 in the example of the contentious relationship between Publix and the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, here we see another example of the true interests of many corporations. Returning to the example of the Parkland students, it is yet to be determined how this will all pan out in the future, but perhaps the real damage has already been done. By the very fact that Publix put up such an initial resistance to donate or to disavow the NRA belies any future policies that might be put in the press to assuage consumer anger. Of course, Publix has every right to deny providing donations to any cause they find unfit or too political to put their company under scrutiny. This is their autonomous right as a company. However, this refusal does not obviate the fact that it initially made no “public” denunciation of organizations (read: NRA) that were the sources of so much pain for all the students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

105

TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS: GROWING TRENDS IN GLOBAL GROCERY STORES Jennifer Clapp’s research on the role of TNCs provides insight about the crucial, yet sometimes unseen, role of major food, agricultural, and corporate influences in how these entities impact the global food system. As she notes, Corporations have long played a central role in the international food system. Some of the first transnational corporations—firms with operations that span more than one country and that have a global outlook on their business transactions—in fact were food and agricultural corporations. As the trade in food has become ever more global over the past fifty years . . . private firms have taken a lead role in that trade.29

TNCs have become the goliaths of food and agriculture industries. As Clapp and the ETC group demonstrate, as of 2007, the top three seed firms were Monsanto, DuPont, and Syngenta, respectively; the top three pesticide companies were Bayer, Syngenta, and BASF, respectively; and the top three food-retail companies were Walmart, Carrefour, and Tesco, respectively.30 In a somewhat unprecedented court case in 2018, the at-the-time Monsanto Company (now part of Bayer) lost a court ruling and vowed to defend its product name. After the verdict, Monsanto issued a statement saying it stands by the studies that suggest Roundup does not cause cancer. “We will appeal this decision and continue to vigorously defend this product, which has a 40-year history of safe use and continues to be a vital, effective and safe tool for farmers and others,” Monsanto Vice President Scott Partridge said.31

This investigative report goes on to note the understudied research about the effects of chemicals on human health. While reports from the corporate version of research often differ in conclusion from consumerwatch groups’ report, what is important is the power of persuasion of corporations. Without long-term academic and scientific research, corporations can release pithy press releases that can potentially assuage the fears of unwitting consumers. Maggie McGrath’s research for Forbes magazine shows that as of 2018, the top three food and beverage companies—Anheuser-Busch, Nestle, and Pepsi—control the lion’s share of the market in the food and beverage industry. Wellness and clean eating might be having a moment, but when it comes to the products that are propelling the performance of the world’s largest food and

106

Food as a Human Right

beverage companies, beer, chocolate and coffee are overpowering quinoa, kale and kombucha.32

While writing somewhat jokingly here, McGrath’s words have an ironic element of truth. As affluent countries experiment and claim to be interested in fair trade, organic food, and fair labor laws, their citizens are also very proud of their consumption of quinoa, kale, and kombucha. While this is not necessarily a bad thing given that these foods and beverages are healthier, we must also look at other consequences that are the results of these consumption choices and preferences. Taking the example of quinoa, the country of Bolivia has a complex history of quinoa production. Much like other countries in South America, Bolivia’s drastic differences in climate zones have made it a fertile area for different types of agricultural production. From potatoes to fruits to quinoa, Bolivia serves as an example of a country that, on the one hand, can produce ingredients for countless global recipes but, on the other hand, can be exploited due to its economic conditions. According to the World Bank, Bolivia’s economy has grown but at a slow rate in the past decade. 33 As their country reports indicate, “For the most part of the 2000s, growth was mainly driven by extractive industries, which benefited from a large demand.” What is important here is the focus on “extractive industries,” which tend to favor exporting natural resources and thus end up increasing the wealth of affluent countries at a more asymmetrical rate than developing and impoverished countries. Quinoa’s rise to popularity and demand came in the 1960s and 1970s as the crop came down from the hillsides of the Altiplano and into flatter land that was normally reserved for grazing animals.34 The rise to popularity of quinoa has brought about a slew of arguments as to whether this is a good or bad thing. Working with the issue of the Altiplano and quinoa, scholar Tayna M. Kerssen recognizes the complexities of the situation. Production of quinoa can bring benefits to some farmers, but it can also be a source of exploitation if national and international policies do not support the farmers. As she remarks, “Despite the highly fraught transformations occurring in the southern Altiplano, there are promising grassroots organising efforts, both at the level of producers’ associations and at the level of local confederations.”35 Kerssen holds hope that local producers, activists, and the attention of global food justice organizations can inform the larger public about the exploitation of global farmers. In the case of quinoa, this exploitation is complex. On the one hand, it does provide local farmers with an opportunity for economic advancement, which helps them and their families. On the other hand, crops such as quinoa are a posh trend that many citizens in affluent countries eat because it is the new trend. Quinoa, both

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

107

physically and psychologically, represents a food that symbolizes the differences in global tastes as well as the global economic inequalities that emerge from the exploitation of farmers for the production of goods that are largely destined for exportation. The export of high-quality and tasty food is not limited to grains such as quinoa. Another popular favorite cuisine is meat. Eating meat has a long and complex history that dates back to the beginning of recorded human history. In Creatures of Empire, Virginia DeJohn Anderson leads readers into the different realm of eating meat. In her careful analysis of how the domestication of animals had an interesting history about Early America, she traces the evolution of different phases of agricultural and animal development. In her study of the domestication of animals in the early years of America, she investigates the sentiment of many early settlers as well as their views on farming and animal husbandry. She observes that early animal husbandry had roots in the religious foundations of many settlers: Because domesticated animals’ subservience to humans so clearly exemplified the divine order of Creation, their presence in the New World Order mark the land as Christians as well as English. Once colonists and their animals had established themselves in America, Indians who had hitherto ignored the divine injunction to exercise dominion over lesser creatures would have appropriate models to follow.36

This domestication and colonialization of the land in Early America are symbolic of the rise of the corporate food model of production. Although in an early form, it mirrors the corporate logic of taking over markets and imposing a business model that stresses the importance of efficiency and profit. As Clapp notes with respect to the complex relationship between large corporations and their ability to influence different levels of the food system, Research into these dimensions of corporate influence in and over the global food system reveals that these firms are able to use the marketplace to their advantage, which further bolsters their business. They are able to influence prices, set standards that suppliers must follow, shape the public regulations, institutions, and norm under which they operate, and influence ideas about their activities and role in the global food system in ways that ensures that they maintain their dominance.37

Perhaps what is most important here is the utter saturation of corporate control through most, if not all, levels of corporate influence in the supply

108

Food as a Human Right

and demand chain in global food systems. The end result of this can be depicted as a sort of hourglass model of the global food system in which the thinnest portion of the hourglass represents the area of the global food system in which corporations can control the flow of the sand. By controlling the flow between producers, distributors, and consumers, they can control prices on food in ways that ensure maximum profits for corporations as well as much of what is available for consumers to purchase. Corporations also have a stronghold on price setting. As dominant players in the industry, they have the power to force other competitors out of business. For instance, Food-retail giant Wal-Mart has used its price-setting power to influence supplier prices as an integral part of its corporate growth strategy. The firm has become such a large retail outlet that suppliers who do not accept the prices it offers to pay will be shut out of the market, ultimately reaching fewer consumers.38

This is yet another means by which large food corporations can manipulate the consumption decisions of everyday citizens around the country and world. It is a subtle manipulation to the extent that strategies not only limit product choices for consumers but also can simultaneously advertise the high quality of the limited product choices that the corporations offer. As a marketing strategy that has tentacles in all levels of the production, distribution, and consumption chain, agrifood corporations are able to shape the paradigm in which consumers must think about their purchasing decisions. Along with price setting, large food corporations have implemented private standard settings, which further put limitations and control on their suppliers: A key reason for the rise of private standards is the food sector is partly that states have stepped back from proactive regulatory roles, allowing and even fostering private sector bodies to take on regulatory activities. Large agrifood firms are interested in taking on this role because it enables them to position themselves in the marketplace as progressive leaders with respect to food safety and quality, which is appealing to consumers and enhances their reputation.39

The results of setting private standards are complex and involve the corporations themselves, along with nongovernmental organizations, and the demands of consumers. As Clapp concludes, while positive outcomes have resulted from much of this standard setting, this “needs to be weighed against the costs to small farmers in developing countries who are squeezed out of markets when they do not have the resources to meet the more stringent food safety standards.”40

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

109

In doing so, corporations are able to position themselves in the most ideal place in the market. Through this positioning, they wield their power and, as Clapp continues, shape their operations in ways that put them between the sellers and the buyers such that others are kept from being able to compete. Not only does this secure them profit, but it also gives them control over production, processing, and consumption of food, is shifted away from farmers and producers on the one hand, and from consumers on the other hand, to the sellers of farm inputs, the grain traders, and the grocery retailers.41

Several things are of note in Clapp’s analysis. First, there is a dilemma when it comes to perspectives on economic competition. Classical economists would argue that competition is essential for a thriving economy because it fosters innovation and keeps prices down for consumers. However, the elimination of competition in the food industry has demonstrably caused problems with food safety. For instance, we can look at the poultry industry as a prime example of how food safety is put in peril due to mass, corporate consolidation. In the United States, we see that only “four firms account for 50 percent of the US market for broiler chickens, and 46 percent of the pork market.”42 Second, another particular problem in the current corporate food system is the aggressive lobbying of food corporations in Congress and local politics. Agrifood corporations lobby with such power as to influence regulatory decisions that shape the environment in which consumers wittingly and unwittingly make their consumption decisions. Lobbying officials have the clout to travel to Congress and “guarantee” the financial support of their particular companies or the local support of consumers. Third, and relatedly, the agrifood empire has the ability of actually shaping the public debate about many food-related issues. They can issue company reports, press releases, website updates, and advertisements on the radio, TV, Internet, and newspapers. It is through these means that agribusiness has been able to manipulate multiple levels of the domestic and international food system. As Clapp notes, The interventions of corporations in public debates on issues ranging from the health impacts of certain food ingredients, to agricultural biotechnology, to food aid, to international trade in agricultural products, issues are perceived by the public.43

Clapp’s research has illustrated a wide variety of current issues and problems associated with the corporatization of the global food system. The issues that are raised by Clapp and others deserve diligent inquiry with respect to how food corporations impact our health as well as broader food justice concerns related to fair and just labor production systems. To

110

Food as a Human Right

conclude this chapter, the following recipes offer a few examples of popular “industrialized” food snacks but in a way to make them healthier.

RECIPES Recipe 1: Homemade Jalapeno Poppers This recipe offers a slightly healthier alternative to a classic bar and frozen-food favorite. Jalapeno poppers are a quick snack or appetizer for many Americans. They are often enjoyed at bars as well as hosting guests for Sunday afternoon football viewing. However, looking at the ingredients and fat content of store-bought frozen poppers reveals that they are not the healthiest of snacks. High in saturated fats and sodium, these simple snacks often provide more than the daily recommended intake of these ingredients. One potential alternative is to make your own jalapeno poppers using fresh jalapenos and baking them instead of frying them. Ingredients: 1. Jalapenos 2. Cheddar cheese 3. 2 eggs 4. 1 cup flour 5. 1 cup panko bread crumbs

Instructions: If you happen to have a garden, you can grow your own jalapenos, but if not, you can pick as many large-sized peppers as needed. Cut off the tip of the pepper, and then make an incision lengthwise down one side of the pepper, making sure to not cut it in half. Remove seeds and fill with shredded cheddar cheese. In three separate bowls, whisk 2 eggs in one bowl, 1 cup flour in another bowl, and 1 cup of bread crumbs in the third bowl. Then dip each sealed jalapeno (filled with cheese and sealed with toothpick) in eggs, then into flour, then into bread crumbs. Place finished poppers on baking sheet. Bake at 375° for 15–18 minutes, depending on the size of the poppers. Serve with cheddar, ranch, or blue cheese dipping sauce. Recipe 2: Homemade Fish Sticks With children and other household costs, many families do not have tons of money in the early years of parenthood. Often both parents work full-time jobs and have to figure out what is for dinner after a long and

The Corporate Consolidation of the Global Food System

111

exhausting day at work. During those early years, many families often resort to heating up some frozen food in the oven. Frozen, processed foods are often the worst you can eat in terms of health value. One option that is a favorite among many is frozen fish sticks. The following recipe offers a homemade version that not only is healthier but also illustrates the contrast to mass-produced and processed foods. Ingredients: 1. Fresh codfish 2. Eggs 3. Flour 4. Panko bread crumbs

Instructions: This recipe takes a little preparation but provides a healthy alternative to processed frozen fish sticks. It can also be made for the entire family. The amount of fish you purchase will depend on the size of your family, but roughly one pound of fresh cod (or any other white fish can substitute) may be enough, which you will put into the blender and finely chop. Once the fish is blended, form it into three-inch logs. In preparation, whisk eggs in one bowl, one cup of flour in another bowl, and finally in a third bowl, one cup of bread crumbs. Using either a large straining ladle or large straining spatula, dip each fish stick into the egg wash, then flour, and then again in the egg wash, and finally place into a large dish containing the bread crumbs. Lightly coat the fish with bread crumbs and place on a baking sheet. Repeat this for your desired number of fish sticks. Bake at 375° until golden brown on the outside (roughly 10 minutes depending on the size of the fish sticks). Recipe 3: Homemade Flatbread Pizza This recipe is a creative and healthier twist on processed, frozen pizzas. Pizzas may never be completely healthy, but similar to the previous recipe, they may be a convenient option for a busy family. With that said, “pizza nights” are often a great source for bringing families together on the weekends for a movie night or gathering of friends. Ingredients: 1. Flatbread (or substitute naan if you would like to experiment with a popular bread found in many Mediterranean cultures as well as in Asia)

112

Food as a Human Right

2. Olive oil 3. Plain spaghetti sauce 4. Dry basil and thyme flakes 5. Mozzarella cheese

Instructions: Lightly brush the bread with a coating of olive oil. Then spread spaghetti sauce onto the center of the bread, leaving a half-inch parameter on the edges that do not have any sauce (this will be your crust). Sprinkle basil and thyme, and then add mozzarella. This makes for a simple cheese pizza, but you can add any ingredients of your choice. For example, American-style pizza will include meats, such as sausage and pepperoni. For the Mediterranean version, you can add olives and artichoke hearts for one example. Either way, the options are endless. The most important point is this is a dish that you can make with friends and family and have a creative time cooking together. Everyone will have his or her own pizza creation, and everyone can share a piece with others.

CHAPTER 6

Water

Water is a vital issue for many global fishermen and fisherwomen. Many communities around the world are dependent on the world’s oceans, rivers, and lakes. Issues associated with the world’s waters are important for food sovereignty, given that they provide both sustenance and the means through which many cultures provide nutrients for their crops. Without water, humans would not survive; it is essential for our very existence. Water takes three basic forms both scientifically and in a more general way in relation to food. For example, in affluent societies, it can provide ice cubes for refreshing beverages. For many global regions, water, in the form of rain, is necessary for survival and for the success of annual harvest. Finally, water can be a source of both sustenance and joy. For example, it provides a way for communities to gather together on hot summer days at local swimming pools, ponds, and rivers. In this sense, water serves as a source for providing not only physical life but also communal life. It is often around different waters that humans congregate together. As a source of both joy and survival, the example of fishing is apropos. For global communities that depend on fishing to feed their families and communities, water can be a source of anxiety. If seasons of fishing are not fruitful, many people will go without food. Communities that depend on water for survival are at the mercy of whether seasonal rains will come and continue to sustain plants and animals, which feed their families. For anyone who has a familiarity with fishing, they can relate to the unknown outcomes of what will come from a day or season of fishing. On a broad level, global fishing communities wonder whether the waters will provide for the survival of the community. In a less extreme example, simple joys involving water include a morning or evening of relaxing (yet, sometimes disappointing) fishing for sport. In the simple example of fishing for sport, fishermen and fisherwomen will relish in the anticipation of whether they will catch anything at all

114

Food as a Human Right

and if they are fortunate enough to hook a fish, waiting to see what kind it is on the end of the line. With this being said, water plays an important part in many dimensions of our lives. It serves as a source of joy, whether through activities such as surfing, boating, and fishing or as a vital source for people’s livelihoods. It is from the waters that many global communities make their living and depend on for survival. As such, it has become an important topic for food justice movements. Water occupies approximately 71 percent of Earth’s surface according to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1 The oceans hold somewhere around 96.5 percent of this water. As a vital resource, it is a concern for many food sovereignty communities. The rest can be found in the air, rivers, lakes, ice caps, and glaciers. For communities either without water or with difficult access to it, national and global policies that affect the ability of impoverished areas to gain access to it suffer severe consequences if global policies limit access to it. Whether communities suffer from lack of water or are subject to the abuse of water by more affluent countries, food sovereignty movements have a grave stake in the use of our global waterways. As the USGS authors point out, it is the oceans that hold the lion’s share of our water resources. This makes the issue and conservation of water all the more important for global communities that depend on water for their survival. Even the World Bank, which as this book has illustrated, estimates that industrial fishing takes place in more than half of the world’s ocean areas.2 In relation to the issue of global land grabs discussed in Chapter 4, “water grabs” are often overlooked but are gaining the attention of concerned citizens worldwide. It is also a subject of interest for scholars around the world. For instance, in relation to land grabs, we see the new, emerging attention to, and interest in, water grabs. As three scholars note, Increasing attention to water has the potential to (re)invigorate inquiry and action along two lines simultaneously: 1) by casting new light on the global land grabs phenomenon itself and related issues of land governance; and 2) by opening up new windows on old questions of political control, social justice and environmental sustainability in relation to the use and management of water.3

This relates to the food sovereignty movement insofar as we see the importance of understanding the delicate, yet essential, connection between food and water. The authors of this quote argue that, while still important, the issue of land grabs has often garnered more attention than the issue of water grabs. The problem with this lack of attention is we fail to recognize the interconnectedness of land and water with respect to agriculture.

Water

115

Diving deeper into global agricultural issues related to water, it is important to recognize the significance of water usage not only in agriculture but also in other social and political debates such as energy use, climate change, and the deterioration of many of our world’s waterways. To provide one global example, in Cajamarca, Peru, large-scale private mining operations are promoting big changes in how water rights are allocated, leading to detrimental changes in the amount and quality of water available to downstream the river.4 This is not a new phenomenon. In communities around the world, competition over water resources is a common source of conflict. In the United States, conflicts over water are especially heated in Western states, where water is often a scarce resource. Water is fought over everything from agricultural needs in impoverished countries to watering fancy golf courses in affluent desert communities. Water grabbing means something different from water appropriation, exploitation, extraction, consumption, or use. It involves the notion of “grabber” and “grabbed,” a dynamic of usurpation based on the power imbalance between subjects that lose and subjects that win, unjustly. The definition of water grabbing deals with the ethical question of when it is appropriate to define a particular case of typology of natural resources extraction as “grabbing.” It also deals with the biophysical question of how do we quantify or identify the appropriation of a resource, that by its own nature is fluid, renewable and difficult to quantify.5

Water is essential for the livelihoods of both affluent global citizens who often take advantage of its availability and those who struggle to get enough water to drink to survive each day. VIGNETTE: HISTORY OF A CONTESTED RIVER—THE COLORADO RIVER The Colorado River has a long and beautiful history. It is beautiful for its natural geography, for the sustenance it provides for both animal and human communities, and for its natural environments that U.S. citizens can explore. As the National Park Service highlights, Unique combinations of geologic color and erosional forms decorate a canyon that is 277 river miles (446km) long, up to 18 miles (29km) wide, and a mile (1.6km) deep. Grand Canyon overwhelms our senses through its immense size.6

Although the Grand Canyon is located in Arizona, it flows and has branched off into different tributaries that provide sources of exploration for many other national parks in surrounding states. The Colorado River

116

Food as a Human Right

serves as a source of adventure for hikers, campers, sightseers, rock climbers, and naturalists, among many other things. With respect to the themes addressed in this book, we might ask, for example: How do the Colorado River and the Grand Canyon serve as metaphors for the topic of human rights, social justice, and the food sovereignty movement? In one sense, the Colorado River could be understood as the core of food sovereignty’s fundamental belief in human rights. If the main river did not exist, none of its tributaries would exist, and thereby none of the subsequent communities that it provides nourishment for would exist. In that sense we can think of it as a metaphor for the concept of human rights. If the core value of human rights does not exist, then the entire global food justice system is at risk of falling apart. In the simple example of the Colorado River, we find a microcosm of many of the same water issues that we find around the world: The damming and diverting of the Colorado, the nation’s seventh-longest river, may be seen by some as a triumph of engineering and by others as a crime against nature, but there are ominous new twists. The river has been running especially low for the past decade, as drought has gripped the Southwest.7

While the Colorado River is one local example in the United States, the history of its origins and where its tributaries ultimately flow is a point of contention for many Western states. Rivers have origins; they flow through different regions and countries and eventually into larger bodies of water. Along the way different states stake claim to water, often taking more than they need, leaving other states high and dry. In a sense this parallels the flow of food and food ingredients in the global food system. Seeds are cultivated in different regions, water comes from different sources, and there are different stages of food production that all, eventually, come together to create a final product. However, along the way, many communities lose out and do not benefit from the end product. With respect to the Colorado River, it is one of the most picturesque rivers in the United States, but alongside its natural beauty, it provides a source of life for many states and natural environments in the Southwest. It originates in the small Grand County in Colorado and grows to eventually flow through many different states and across the border into Mexico where it continues to provide life-sustaining irrigation for farmers as well as transports into cities such as Mexicali, Tecate, Tijuana, and Ensenada. The history of conflict over access to the Colorado River is an old one. Dating back to the early nineteenth century, many states in the southwestern region of the United States have fought over control of the river. The Colorado River is well known for controversies arousing from the diversion of the river and its many tributaries for use to irrigate many cities in the states ranging from Colorado to California. The river also

Water

117

served as a potential source of great wealth during early gold rushes. Perhaps most known for the hydropower it generates through the Hoover Dam, the Colorado River has been a contested river for over 100 years. Commissioned by the Bureau of Reclamation during the Great Depression, this massive, 726-foot-tall dam used approximately 66 million tons of concrete to create. Aside from the sheer size of the dam and the power that it generated, it also became the site of much controversy and the introduction of major disputes between states, indigenous peoples, and environmentally conscientious citizens. For instance, there was little, if any, consultation with local American Indian tribes who also depended on the river for their livelihoods. Fast-forwarding in time, we see, To this day, the primary beneficiary of the Hoover Dam has been California. In fact, the state leads the world in water consumption. Water from the Hoover Dam is transferred to California through a 242-mile aqueduct from the Colorado River, and nearly a third of the hydropower generated by the dam is used to pump water to the state. Although it accounts for a mere 1.6 percent of the 243,000-square-mile Colorado basin, California uses one-fourth of its water. Much of this goes to big farms.8

While California uses most of this water, the river slowly begins to dry up in other states as well. The southwestern United States is largely an arid region with deserts and prairies. These landscapes are beautiful as well as the home of many species of plants and animals that have adapted to these, often harsh, conditions. Despite largely being an arid region, rivers such as the Colorado and its tributaries provide a vital resource that is continuing to be threatened by large corporations or industries that command control over its usage. Traveling across the world, the same sorts of problems are also becoming intensified in countries like India. Water is a sacred resource of income, life, and spirituality in India. But it is also a source of intense conflict for those fighting over water rights and the government. For instance, Every river in India has become a site of major irreconcilable water conflicts. The Sutlej, Yamuna, Ganges, Narmada, Mahanadi, Krishna, and Kaveri Rivers have been the center of heated court cases among states that disagree over ownership and distribution of water.9

In particular, the Kaveri River has become the locus for such heated contention that it has resulted in bloodshed in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, where water “wars between these two states have led to bloodshed and brought down governments.”10

118

Food as a Human Right

These conflicts over water date back to the British imperial rule in the nineteenth century. As activist Vandana Shiva relates, these unlikely and distant water disputes are similar to the same sort of disputes we find in the case of the Colorado River. She relates the fact that “in the Americas, conflict between the United States and Mexico over Colorado River waters has intensified in recent years.”11 What is notable about this example is the fact that disputes involving rivers and global waters are not isolated to one region, country, or state. In her book Water Wars: Privatization, Pollution, and Profit, Shiva also highlights how water wars have taken place, again moving further around the world to the Middle East. She notes, Large dam-related conflicts are not restricted to states—they also involve wars between nations. The Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, the major water bodies sustaining agriculture for thousands of years in Turkey, Syria, and Iraq, have led to several major clashes among the three countries.12

These brief examples illustrate the fact that disputes over waters have millennial-old origins. They have often become the root cause of violence between nations and cultures. The irony of this history is often these conflicts also bleed into violence between different cultures and communities for reasons unrelated to water—it serves as a sort of igniter that flames other disputes An apropos example can be seen in the importance of water, both symbolic and real, in different world religions. A brief survey of the centrality of water can be witnessed across world religions in practices such as ritual bathing and purification. The Ganges River is a place of immeasurable importance for many Hindus in India. People bathe, wash their clothes, and catch fish to feed their families in the Ganges. The Ganges itself is considered sacred and is often referred to as a God, the Mother Ganga. In the Upanishads, a corpus of ancient Hindu texts, we read, for example, “In the beginning there was nothing here at all. Death alone covered this completely, as did hunger; for what is hunger but death.”13 The example of the Ganges, in a different sense, is similar to another form of environmental interests in water. In the case of the world’s oceans, we see common concerns for the harms that modern industrial society has done. In a more local example of water conflicts, we witness disputes over water. Bron Taylor is a scholar, activist, and surfer at the University of Florida. Known for his academic yet spiritual writings, he has reflected upon his experiences with the water. Taylor teaches courses on how we might move forward thinking about the environment and at least attempt to stifle the destruction of nature, our waters, and the animals

Water

119

that live within them. One of the ways Taylor was first introduced to the beauty, delicacy, and power of nature was through surfing. He reflects, [T]here is a mysterious magic in surfing that can only be apprehended directly through the experience; that surfing fosters self-realization; that commercialization of the practice is a defiling act but that even such acts cannot obviate its spiritual power; that surfing can lead to a life characterized by compassion toward other living beings—have been expressed repeatedly and increasingly within surfing subcultures. Indeed, a significant and increasing part of the evolving, global surfing world can be understood as a form of dark green religion, in which sensual experiences constitute its sacred center. These experiences, and the cultural enclaves in which people reflect upon them, foster understandings of nature as powerful, transformative, healing, and sacred. Such perceptions, in turn, often lead to ethical action in which Mother Nature, and especially its manifestation as Mother Ocean, is considered sacred and worthy of reverent care.14

Part of what is most important for people concerned about the environment might not seem intuitive at first. We can read about things like the destruction of rain forests, the rapid decline of our world’s coral reefs, and the visible destruction of our mountains through practices such as strip mining. However, as Taylor conveys, to truly understand these concerns, one has to “experience” them. In other words, it is only through activities such as surfing that we can truly begin to understand the beauty of the ocean, it is only through actually hiking through jungles that we can listen and understand the indescribable noises and activity of their inhabitants, and it is only when we summit a snowcapped peak that we can experience the silence and crisp cold air that has been around for hundreds of thousands of years. For Taylor, this has been largely experienced through his life of surfing. Even though the act of surfing has been commercialized, it nonetheless can provide a glimpse into the beauty of nature. However, experiencing this beauty may also result in a sort of melancholy due to its unfortunate destruction at the hands of our misuse and lack of care for the environment. As a surfer, Taylor, much like others, is dismayed about the ongoing damages that humans inflict on our planet. While there are varying perspectives on whether we can emerge from the shadows and begin to act to slow the destruction of our natural world, we find no reason not to try. The task seems daunting, but movements such as food sovereignty help aid this effort.

120

Food as a Human Right

VIGNETTE: REMARKS FROM BRON TAYLOR—A SCHOLAR AND SOUL SURFER 15 I was lucky to move from smog-choked Los Angeles to Ventura on my 13th birthday—close enough to the ocean to become a “gremlin”—one of those sand-coated, lobster-red kids who hung out at the beach every day. At first, I bodysurfed or surfed with an inflatable raft, a few years later, on one of the first boogey boards ever made. But my teens were not a marine paradise. Due to a deeply dysfunctional family, I would sometimes escape in the middle of the night to the shore, looking out at fish jumping in the path of the moon’s reflection shining across the sea. I took from that pacific scene that, despite the homeland troubles, something was right and beautiful about the universe, and that, our human travails, in the grand scheme of things, were insignificant. After high school, skills learned in the ocean led to a coveted position as an ocean lifeguard, after which, I took up surfing with a fiberglass board. Surfing became, as it is for many, a meditative practice, both an escape from mundane concerns and a paddle to communion with the wider community of life. The practice also produces, of course, adrenaline-fueled, sometimes terrifying, sometimes ecstatic moments. To me, however, these have been less important than the days the dolphins surf and pelicans surf-glide nearby, or otters fart around in the kelp. I learned early on in these ways about their exotic intelligences, their personalities, and I reasonably surmised that, at least at times, they share the joy of existence. Such experiences and perceptions contributed to my environmental concerns. These concerns grew over time during a fifteen-year lifeguard career as I drifted toward environmental studies. I have focused my research on the human animal and our spiritual, emotional, and ethical feelings, and behaviors, regarding the environmental systems from which we emerged, upon which we depend, and that we dramatically transform. Seeing the beaches soiled by the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill, and later, enforcing beach closures due to polluted runoff (often after rainfalls), further fueled my environmentalism: so did losing lifeguard comrades to cancers we reasonably surmise were triggered by pollution, or to solar radiation intensified by a thinning Ozone layer; so did recognizing the extent to which humans were raising the seas, changing their chemistry, killing their coral reefs, depleting marine ecosystems, poisoning their great fish, and thus, eroding food security for billions of humans. Yet the ocean and its denizens are not mere resources for us. Individually and collectively they are agents, valuable in-and-of themselves, with their own purposes and ways. At the same time, however, for me the sea has been a critically important resource, providing insights, tragic as well as peak experiences, a needed sense of equanimity, and food fished or speared from its waters. Ironically, its dangers provided educational and vocational opportunities that otherwise were unthinkable. So whilst I am as concerned about terrestrial as marine ecosystems, I am especially grateful to the ocean. It is, I sometimes say, my first love. But Earth’s seas exist only in relation to the rest of life and the biosphere as a whole, all of which deserves respect, even reverence. To my mind, such reverence is the wellspring of the most ardent defenders of earthly life. For me, like life itself, it all began in the sea.

Water

121

For Taylor, this short example of one’s experience with and in the ocean as well as how it can connect people to our natural world is indicative of the problems we face today with respect to water issues in the global food and environmental systems. Water is a vital source of life; it not only demonstrates the power and beauty of nature but also symbolizes and illustrates the urgency needed for future protection of our waterways. In this spirit, the recipe for the carne asada burrito at the end of the chapter relates to Taylor’s remarks on surfing (this also happens to be my personal favorite meal after an early morning surf). The irony should not be lost here. Carne asada burritos also represent a microcosmic example of the contradictions we all embody. While surfing might connect us with nature and connects us to the good food eaten afterward, it also illustrates the need for continued reflection on our food-consumption practices. After all, a carne asada burrito is provided by the meat from a sacrificed animal, which also was raised on the essential sustenance provided by water and the plants that cows ruminate on for their eventual slaughter. Nonetheless, there is something that is still important in understanding where our food comes from and the natural world that is sacrificed in the process. We do not need to necessarily all become vegetarians or vegans, but we do have the opportunity to educate ourselves about our consumption choices. In a completely different yet apropos example, one is reminded of the movie The Shawshank Redemption in which the last scene, coincidently, involves water and redemption. As the innocent Andy Dufresne (played by Tim Robbins) successfully escapes prison, crawling through sewage and eventually emerging into the rains of a violent thunderstorm, this film is symbolic of many of the water issues we face today. We use water for our human waste, whether it is for home use, refuse disposal, or simply dumping of garbage into our oceans. Water is also a source of life and is sacred for many, if not all, world religions. In other words, both in the movie and in everyday life, water serves as a source of life, as a sort of source of freedom. Without water life would cease to exist. Regardless of the ways we appreciate or abuse the life-sustaining substance of water, what is most critical is educating ourselves about how we can envision ways to mitigate the damages we inflict on our waterways and the global people as well as plants and animals that depend on them for survival. VIGNETTE: A PERSONAL STORY OF THE 14’ER SAGA As the personal account of the importance of water was illustrated in the words of Bron Taylor, the following story is one of my own experiences. As a young teenager, one of my favorite pastimes was hiking the mountains of the Colorado Rockies. There were many stories that became

122

Food as a Human Right

formative for my perspectives on nature as well as how I understood human relationships. Of course, my version of the story—the more accurate version—differs from what my climbing partner and friend, Brett, has looking back on it; this short vignette is a good example of what the food sovereignty movement represents for many global communities. It illustrates the importance of stories, narratives, and different perspectives of how we view community, the environment, and the world. While Brett and I were climbing and were at an altitude of over 13,000 feet, heading upward toward 14,000 feet, we started to hear the rumbles of thunder, yet the skies were still crystal-clear blue. What we did not consider was we were on one imposing face of a mountain and could not see what was looming on the other side. In a matter of moments, we saw billows of dark and ominous clouds come rolling over the summit. At this point we were so high up that the lightning was not striking down on us; rather it was striking sideways in the clouds. We knew this because all of the zippers on our jackets and backpacks were giving us minor shocks each time lightning made its way through the clouds. This is where the narrative diverges. For Brett, he had one thought: “We gotta go!” For me, I as well had the exact same thought, “We definitely gotta go!” But what did that mean? At the time we had been sheltered under a boulder that could not have weighed less than three tons. It provided decent shelter at high altitude, but we were still exposed. We both decided that we were going to “run for it”; however, the communication was lost in translation. We jumped up and started sprinting down a very precarious mountain side, upset that we were so close to making it to the top of the mountain. For folks who mountain climb, they know the risks and the joys of actually being able to summit the mountain and enjoy the beauty of nature as you sit over a lunch and rejoice in your accomplishment. Nonetheless, as I was sprinting down the mountain, I made it down another approximately 1,000 feet before I even turned around to check on Brett’s whereabouts. Well, by “We gotta go!” Brett meant to go for the top of the mountain and I meant we have to sprint to lower ground. Brett made it to the top, and I did not. Herein lies the importance of narratives and communication. Two people who were best friends still did not quite grasp what the other was saying. Thankfully we both ended up safe and sound and were able to laugh about the entire adventure at a local pizza shop on our way back home. So, how does this small story relate to food and food sovereignty? I do not think I have ever had a better slice of pizza in my life after that journey. It tasted amazing due in part to our exhaustion and hunger but also the comradery and memories that we both made that afternoon. It also, unwittingly, showed us the power of nature, communication, and bonds that people can develop. The current global and industrialized food

Water

123

system inherently severs these bonds. The pizza we ate was from a local mom-and-pop shop and was handmade with care. Of course it may have contained some ingredients that were industrialized, corporate, and large-scale, but for the most part, they were all local. This short vignette illustrates much of what the food sovereignty movement stands for. It has a reverence for nature, local ingredients, and building friendships. At the heart of the concept and movement is the tacit belief that food can bring all people together in unforeseen ways. Whether it is at the top of a 14,000-foot mountain or around the dinner table with family and friends, food serves as the unifying element that brings us together. Today’s global food system is destroying this unity through mass production of unhealthy foods, the corporate hijacking of the global food system itself, and consequently the dismantling of communities. Food sovereignty, on the other hand, seeks to restore knowledge and respect for nature and its power, the importance of retaining knowledge of where our food comes from, the communities that produce it, and, perhaps, most importantly, the bonds of friendship and community that are strengthened by sharing a meal with one another. While this short vignette may seem somewhat trivial, it speaks to the ethical dimensions of the food sovereignty movement. Within the movement itself, it has certain common goals as we had, such as not only talking about creating a more just and fair global food system but also conversations on the hike about how these goals cannot be accomplished without a radical change in perspective on food. It requires citizens of affluent countries to better understand the origins of the foods they eat as well as the labor conditions under which they are produced. This in turn inevitably involves our consumption choices. When people choose to investigate the origins of where our food comes from, we become better equipped with the ability to seek out more responsible ways of consumption. Furthermore, if we learn that our favorite foods are produced under substandard or illegal production processes, we are faced with the difficult decision of whether to continue to consume certain foods or foods from corporations that capitalize from these unjust practices. This short vignette illustrates a certain connection to our land, animals, and the foods we eat. And finally this short story illustrates a certain dimension of the global food system with respect to its connection to the environment as well as affluent citizens portending to care for it. When we have the luxury of traveling miles to hike in beautiful mountains, only to accomplish our own personal goals, we often lose sight of the greater picture. While we, affluent citizens, have the opportunity to hike mountains and enjoy a fulfilling meal after the hike is done, after we have been able to experience the beauty of nature, we realize that many, if not most, people do not have that luxury. Instead, they are struggling to survive and feed their families with little other options for relaxation.

124

Food as a Human Right

In the case of hiking in Colorado, food justice movements remind us of this luxury as well as how it came about to be for affluent citizens. It came, in the case of the United States, with the decimation of American Indians, the idea of manifest destiny, and the privilege of those cultures that have committed the same sorts of crimes or actions that have destroyed indigenous cultures. The food sovereignty movement reminds the world of these issues and is currently gaining energy and promise that can potentially effect change in many ways, whether local or global in nature. This is not to say that people of affluent societies should refrain from enjoying nature and friendships that are built around the luxuries we enjoy, but rather we must be constantly cognizant of the sacrifices that were made and the cultures that were eliminated due to this luxury. By realizing this, we begin to reflect on our own ways of life and perhaps, most importantly, the lives of cultures that came before us. It reminds us of the land grabs that took place not only in countries such as the United States but also around the world that have displaced communities. It reminds us of an ethical responsibility to acknowledge these histories and somehow take practical action to attempt to remedy the abuses affluent citizens have inflicted on others. One way to do this is through educating ourselves with food justice issues as well as the potential of the food sovereignty movement to aid in this effort. In doing so, we begin to build other relationships in our local communities in which we share our experiences and inform people of the injustices of local and global food systems. In the United States, we face ethical dilemmas associated with the overconsumption of water. However, in different regions of the world, we see, for example, in Latin America, with its largely diverse ecological ecosystems, the issue of water does not seem like it should be a big problem for food and food sovereignty. However, scientists are increasingly finding that water shortages and the misuse of water are creating harmful environmental conditions. In particular, the food sovereignty movement in this region has highlighted how the growth of agrofuels has changed agricultural communities and economies in this region. Agrofuels are considered by many popular consumers as “green and clean,” but as Eric Holt-Gime´nez and Annie Shattuck have noted with respect to biofuel production, Biofuels invoke an image of renewable abundance that allows industry, politicians, the World Bank, the UN and even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to present fuel from corn, sugarcane, palm, soy, and other crops as allowing a smooth transition from peak oil to a renewable fuel economy. Myths of abundance divert attention away from powerful economic interests that benefit from what in fact is part of an agrarian transition and avoid discussion of the growing price that citizens of the Global South and underserved communities in

Water

125

the Global North are beginning to pay to maintain consumptive oil-based lifestyles in the North. Myths around agrofuels production obscure the profound consequences of the further industrial transformations of our food and fuel systems.16

Biofuels have become an important issue for food justice and food sovereignty movements to the extent that they provide a certain sense of cultural responsibility for the world’s more affluent populations. When industrialized, affluent communities are misled with the environmental consequences of their consumption practices, they fail to duly understand the conditions under which their food products are produced. These conditions affect not only the physical environment but also the small-scale farmers who often produce the food that ends up usurping the water in ways that are necessary for their survival but unnecessary for the luxuries of affluent consumers around the world. This current trend further threatens globally impoverished communities. As HoltGime´nez and Shattuck continue to note with respect to the world’s poorest communities, “They suffer when high fuel prices push up food prices. Now, because food and fuel crops are competing for land and resources, high food prices may actually push up fuel prices.” 17 The food sovereignty movement draws attention to these issues and introduces the global public to how sometimes unintentional consumption choices have graver global consequences in terms of the labor conditions of farmers, the environment, and the overall global food system. In the following section, water-related issues move from the consumption of water-based crops that rely on intensive chemical and land use to how our world’s oceans are being harmed. GARBAGE: THE GARDEN PATCH THAT IS IN DESPERATE NEED OF SOWING AND WATERING Sowing is generally used in reference to planting seeds, but there is another patch that is related not to land but to water instead. There is a growing conglomeration of garbage that continues to grow in the Pacific Ocean approximately halfway between California and Hawaii. A recent study has concluded that “global annual plastic consumption has now reached over 320 million tonnes with more plastic produced in the last decade than ever before. A significant amount of the produced material serves an ephemeral purpose and is rapidly converted into waste.” 18 The amount of waste that increasingly grows is to a degree that threatens our ocean waters not just in the Pacific but in all global waters. For example, it has become commonplace to read stories about marine life that are caught in plastic containers or suffer from oil spills.

126

Food as a Human Right

Sanford reflects on the activist Vandana Shiva by noting that Shiva’s trope of democracy demands that we consciously acknowledge relations among multiple communities, both human and nonhuman, when thinking through food production. Agriculture presents a special dimension of humanearth relations: agriculture is human manipulation of biological processes to produce food. The relationality of agriculture suggests that humans and the earth have agency, but we humans can—and should—decide how we choose and play our roles within the context of what it means to be a citizen within the biotic community.19

Not only are water issues a concern for the Pacific Ocean, they are also a central issue for states on the other side of the country. In Florida, water is a strange commodity. It surrounds the state on three sides, and the state experiences environmental water problems ranging from torrential downpours during the summer months on the West Coast to the possibility of hurricanes on both coasts, and the various weather patterns that originate from the coasts of Africa. For example, with respect to waste, garbage comes in the form of toxic runoff that threatens the oceans’ coral reefs. As Staley and colleagues note, Anthropogenic impacts, primarily in the form of terrestrial runoff, also contribute to nutrient loading, sediment deposition, and the transport of pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and other harmful chemicals to nearby coral reefs, stressing coral communities.20

The stress on coral-reef systems due to pollutions that are released by agribusinesses is another example of the garbage that is released into the world’s ocean waters. Although different from the great garbage circle in the Pacific Ocean, this trend in Florida reminds us that the reckless disposal of waste does not simply occur in one part of the oceanic world. It has examples, although in different forms, on both coasts of the United States. What is important about the previous two quotes involves the fundamental question about the future of our waters. It is quite easy to dump waste into our oceans because we do not always see the visible consequences of these practices. Instead, the garbage that annoys us can simply be sent away into unknown and often unseen oceanic habitats. Alternatively, affluent citizens can travel to exotic beaches that are protected against the reality of the garbage that is not so far offshore. By hiding or diverting human waste, expensive travel resorts are able to cater to their customers by hiding them from the true reality of what goes on off the shores of their pristine beaches. As a consequence, vacationers are led to believe that the world does not have a serious problem with the dumping of our wastes into our oceans. Vacationers can snorkel and scuba dive

Water

127

without major concerns about the toxins that are dumped into the oceans by the tons each year. Unfortunately, the ability for these vacationers and more affluent global citizens to enjoy the beauty of our oceans leads to a sort of complacence with respect to taking active measures to help change the conditions of those who do not have these luxuries. The food sovereignty movement is largely made up with global communities that are precisely the communities affected by the downside of global economic development and inequalities. These communities suffer from the toxins that are dumped into the waters, and in many cases, they are forced to dump their own wastes into their local waters because they have no resources to dispose of trash in a responsible way. It is not that these communities are “irresponsible,” but rather, out of pure need, they need to dump it wherever possible. WATER, FOOD, AND SPORT: LEARNING ABOUT WATER ISSUES BY SPENDING TIME IN THE WATER As alluded to earlier in the chapter, detailing the experience of scholar Bron Taylor, the joy of experiencing nature through the act of surfing and coming into communion with the oceans and their denizens is an experience only a few people are privileged to experience. It nonetheless provides a glimpse into the possibilities that might await future generations who have the opportunity to spend time in the water. For food sovereignty activists and researchers, it is these possibilities that have generated the need to begin speaking of “water sovereignty.” Water is both a source of enjoyment and a basic human need. It provides one of the very basic necessities for growing crops and feeding animals and ourselves. Chapter 4 on land grabs discussed many of the current problems associated with growing shortages of land. While the land grabs discussed in Chapter 4 focused mostly on human encroachment and the theft of land by national governments and food and agricultural corporations, the declining availability of water has many other actors who are involved in its growing scarcity. Industrial forestry is another example of exorbitant water usage. As Vandana Shiva notes, Forest are natural dams, conserving water in catchments and releasing it slowly in the form of streams and springs. Rainfall or snowfall is intercepted by forest floors to absorb water. Some of this water evaporates back to the atmosphere. If forest floors are covered with leaf litter and humus, they retain and regenerate water. Forest logging and monoculture agriculture allow water to run off and destroy the water conservation capacity of soils.21

128

Food as a Human Right

When water becomes more and more scarce due to unnatural, industrial usages and consumption, there is a ripple effect. Forests no longer get the proper nutrients needed and thus die off. When forests die off, the need for more water increases and thus begins the vicious cycle. Water shortages are growing due to the demands of other industries as well. One particularly harmful example is the excessive use of water resources for mining. Mining in many regions of the world has been the culprit of the destruction of the world’s most beautiful and majestic mountain ranges. The following vignette provides an example of the process of fracking in western states in the United States. Although fracking also occurs across the country, the following vignette offers a glimpse into its harmful environmental impact in western states. In places such as Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Colorado, among others, fracking has been a hunting ground for major oil and naturalgas harvesters. VIGNETTE: RI´ O BRAVO DEL NORTE AND SALMON CULTIVATION IN CHILE When reading the title of this vignette one might think: How does the Rio Grande River have connection to the salmon industry in the country of Chile? The answer is not much but more than you would think. The most prevalent links are water usage, industrialized agriculture, and the ongoing disappearance of the “commons.” In a strange way, these two distinct case studies illustrate how water is conceptualized differently depending on the situation and context of its use. In the case of the Rio Grande, the large amounts of water are used for irrigation, tourism, and things of the like. The Rio Grande River originates in the San Luis Valley in Colorado and has been a historical source of contention over water rights between local farmers and encroaching industrial agriculture. Historically, the water has been considered a part of common ownership or usage. As Vandana Shiva visited the area, she recalls, I had the opportunity to visit San Luis, home of traditional acequia systems (gravity-driven irrigation ditch) that nurture soils, plants, and animals. I was there to offer solidarity to local communities engaged in a major struggle to defend the commons and the oldest system of water rights in Colorado. What the irrigation ditches produces is not merely a market commodity but a denseness of life.22

Shiva draws upon the concept of the “commons” or natural resources such as water, air, and land that should be considered available to all for

Water

129

the benefit of all. The concept of the commons is controversial because it challenges modern notions of private property. It suggests that there are certain resources that cannot be privatized and bought and sold like any given commodity. Once water becomes commodified, it transforms the communities that rely on water as a vital resource for agriculture. As Shiva continues, When the water of the Rio Grande is auctioned to the highest bidder, it is taken away from the agri-pastoral community whose rights to the water are tied to the responsibility of maintaining a “watershed commonwealth.” Markets fail to capture diverse values, and they fail to reflect the destruction of ecological value.23

Once natural resources, such as water, are conceived of as simple commodities like cars, cell phones, or televisions, they lose their status as a unique gift given to all humans. The idea of the commons is not new. Theorists, such as Karl Marx, have discussed the evolution of the notion of private property or the closure of the commons. More recent scholars have continued to explore ways in which the commons have been threatened. For instance, looking at the salmon production in Chile, researchers have investigated questions about the environmental sustainability of long-term economic growth with respect to the Chilean salmonproduction industry. As Michiko Iizuka and Jorge Katz note, the Chilean fish-farming industry has created many problems with respect to public health. The overcrowding of salmon in cultivation tanks has created conditions that are highly susceptible to the transmission of harmful pathogens and facilitate the diffusion of viral diseases.24 As Iizuka and Katz continue to argue, It is important to notice that neoclassical production theory is helpful in explaining firm behavior under more conventional circumstances, but it is next to useless in the case of activities like this one in which biological and environmental forces of an unknown nature introduce a significant degree of uncertainty and demand adaptive change in production organization. Neoclassical microeconomics is based upon the robot-like behaviour of a single “representative firm” that optimizes future earnings under the constraint of a given set of exogeneous parameters, perfectly understood and discounted by the entrepreneur. Little attention is paid in such a theoretical environment to the local carrying capacity and to the institutions conditioning form and industry behaviour addressing the protection of the commons.25

Iizuka and Katz illustrate the precise need to understand different communities and their decision-making processes in terms of heterodox

130

Food as a Human Right

economic theory discussed in Chapter 2. Only by understanding specific communities and their needs can we begin to gain a deeper understanding of the way people act in certain situations. In the case of the Chilean salmon industry, a boom in demand for salmon, beginning in 1999, resulted in mass production of the fish so as to increase profit margins for large corporations. Ultimately, this demand resulted in dangerously overpopulated cultivation tanks in which salmon were more susceptible to spreading disease. While this localized example highlights the country of Chile, this phenomenon is not isolated to this country but can be found around the world in countries that mass-produce various animals meant for human consumption. While the salmon hatcheries in Chile are thousands of miles away from the Rio Grande River, the issue that connects these two subjects is that of water. The battles over control of water supplies in the case of the Rio Grande have pitted industry against indigenous populations, while, in Chile, we see an example of using a small amount of water to harvest large amounts of salmon. In both cases, water becomes the substance that can either provide a healthy natural habitat for the natural course of nature and development of diverse fish or easily be contaminated if misused for industrial mass production. VIGNETTE: STOP FRICKIN’ FRACKING—DRILLING FOR NATURAL RESOURCES IN THE WESTERN UNITED STATES The western United States is known for both its rugged yet beautiful sections of the Rocky Mountains mountain range and its dry and unforgiving deserts. Winter runoff—the melting of snow in the springtime— can be both welcomed and feared. It is welcomed to the extent that it provides arid lands both east and west of the range with water for farming. Yet it is feared to the extent that it can produce deadly floods and mudslides and contaminate rivers with harmful chemicals that are used in mining and drilling. The harmful effects of excessive water usage are in large part due to the boom in industrial agriculture. As Shiva notes, Industrial agriculture has pushed food production to use methods by which the water retention of soil is reduced and the demand for water is increased. By failing to recognize water as a limiting factor in food production, industrial agriculture has promoted waste. The shift from organic fertilizers to chemical fertilizers and the substitution of water-prudent crops by water-thirsty ones have been recipes for water famines, desertification, waterlogging, and salinization.26

Water

131

Industrialized agricultural companies see water as an infinite natural resource and thus will exploit it for purposes of mass production of food, among other commodities. The more unhealthy, mass-produced food that food corporations sell translates to higher profits. However, higher profits may come at the cost of not only environmental destruction but also very real danger to U.S. citizens. The following recipes draw attention to diverse global cultures as well as introduce us to the various socioeconomic conditions in the regions from which they come. They provide a glimpse into the labor conditions of certain farmers and farming communities that are often marginalized. Moreover, these recipes provide us with a few examples of how food can tie us all together in a more just global community. Through introducing people to the struggles and misfortunes of global farmers and food producers, we can begin new conversations about how to rectify certain injustices in the global food system. This in turn brings attention to questions about how to enforce human rights and better improve conditions in which to realize a more egalitarian world. RECIPES Recipe 1: Carne Asada Burritos (The Carnage of Eating after a Morning in the Ocean) Burritos are often associated with Mexico, but they have become a popular (big) bite to eat in the United States as well. For this recipe we travel to Mexico and Southern California. For people who have never gone surfing, many will tell them that after an evening of tiring yet fun adventures in the water, there might not be a better thing on the earth to eat than a giant carne asada burrito. Ingredients: 1. 2 lbs of skirt steak 2. 12 corn tortillas (for each taco, use two tortillas to strengthen the exterior) 3. 1 tbsp paprika 4. 1 tbsp cumin 5. 1 tbsp adobo sauce from a can of chilies adobo 6. 1 tbsp chili powder 7. 1 tsp dried oregano 8. ¼ cup soy sauce 9. 4 cloves minced garlic 10. ½ cup lemon juice

132

Food as a Human Right

11. ½ cup lime juice 12. 2/3 cup orange juice 13. 1 tsp salt 14. 1 tsp pepper

Combine all the ingredients for the marinade (3–14). Marinate steak for at least one hour. Instructions: In a hot cast-iron skillet, take the marinated steak and sear on both sides for around two to three minutes depending on the thickness of the steak. In a 375° preheated oven, finish cooking the steak for seven minutes. After removing, let the steak rest for approximately five minutes. Assemble tacos in corn tortillas. If time permits, put a very light grill char on the tortillas. Serve with cilantro, salsa, or any other toppings you like. Part of the beauty of tacos is similar to other recipes, which you can put together by adding your favorite toppings. This recipe serves as a good recipe for small parties where guests can pick and choose how they want their tacos. Note: Another popular favorite among locals in the state of California is the carne asada fries. For this recipe, simply follow the same instructions for the burrito filling, but bake some store-bought french fries and top them with the carne asada mixture. Add guacamole, sour cream, and hot sauce. Recipe 2: Dumplings (Stop Dumping, Make Dumplings Instead) Ingredients: 1. 1 package dumpling wrappers 2. Choice of protein (can be any variation of pork, chicken, or shrimp) 3. 1 finely chopped carrot (or store-bought shredded carrots) 4. 2 cups shiitake mushrooms, finely chopped 5. 1 cup shredded green cabbage 6. 1 cup chives 7. 2 tbsp soy sauce 8. 1 tsp sugar 9. 2 tsp sesame oil 10. 5 tbsp canola oil 11. 1 cup coarsely chopped bean sprouts

Water

133

Instructions: This recipe is a great way to introduce yourself and your friends and family to topics important to the treatment of our oceans. While the food sovereignty movement is still emerging with respect to issues associated with our oceans, this may be the final frontier. Many activists and those concerned with saving waste in our oceans, the destruction of coral reefs through dredging, and the harvesting of both land and ocean animals can reflect and learn about these issues while making this meal. For local communities who traditionally make dumplings or pot stickers, the preferred method is through steaming the dumplings or by saute´ing the pot stickers on low heat. Both recipes are typically served with a broth. Serve immediately while still warm. If making a large portion, you can freeze the rest of the uncooked dumplings or pot stickers and steam for later use. Recipe 3: Ahi and Avocado Mold For those communities that make their livelihoods off the oceans, the role of fish and ocean animals is not only essential for their survival but also an integral aspect of their cultures. To understand different cultures that have founded their communities by a deep connection to the ocean, we learn how protecting our oceans is important for the future of these communities. With that said, you can find some of the most delicious and fresh seafood dishes that global communities have depended on the oceans for not only their next meal but also their livelihood. In this following recipe, if you see something that might sound odd— namely, an “avocado mold”—you will be pleasantly surprised. (Note: For those looking to find a new side dish, to accompany the ahi and avocado mold, at most Asian markets, you can purchase a seaweed salad.) Ingredients: 1. Ahi tuna 2. Avocado 3. Lime juice 4. Jalapeno or serrano 5. Salt and pepper 6. 1 cup balsamic vinegar

Instructions: Start with equal portions of ahi tuna and avocado: one half-pound of tuna steak and two avocados. Experiment with ratio until you get

134

Food as a Human Right

something you like. Sear the tuna just for 1.5 minutes or so per side—it should still be red in the middle. Chop into fine mince. Mash avocado with lime juice and jalapeno or serrano to taste. Mix together the tuna and avocado and put into small molds and chill in the refrigerator for 30 minutes. Meanwhile, over low heat, heat one cup of high-quality balsamic vinegar until the vinegar reduces into the consistency of a thick syrup. Remove mixture from mold and sprinkle with a few cilantro leaves for garnish. Serve with tortilla chips.

CHAPTER 7

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

While the previous chapters have examined some of the most prominent issues and current debates on the global food system, they by no means exhaust all the controversies involved when scholars and activists attempt to make more positive changes in the current system. However, the themes discussed have provided a substantial starting point for better understanding ways in which human rights and food sovereignty can continue to tackle problems affiliated with global poverty and hunger. This chapter utilizes theories of Martha Nussbaum, Amartya Sen, and Thomas Pogge to offer one possible way to creatively envision and articulate concrete practices that might help advance both human rights causes associated with food and the more specific concept and movement of food sovereignty. Ultimately, this chapter argues that the current food system constitutes a massive violation of human rights. Citizens of affluent countries, by their complicity with global food and agricultural policies, are just as guilty of human rights violations because we—whether knowingly or unknowingly—benefit from the policies that continue to impoverish hundreds of millions of people around the world. This last claim may seem the most controversial—namely, it begs the question: If I did not know that my food-consumption choices were negatively affecting millions of people around the world, how can I be actively complicit in this global violation of human rights? For readers who have reflected on the topics in this book, the answer is somewhat simple— namely, the process of learning about the themes discussed has provided ample information so that we cannot claim ignorance any longer. In other words, readers have been provided with the history, evolution, and

136

Food as a Human Right

current status of the global food system, and this information suffices for making a decision about how to move forward. At the very least, we are equipped with the necessary information about whether to take a stance for or against changing the current trajectory of where the global food system is going. The next section reiterates, in detail, the issue of human rights in relation to food. If readers decided that the answer is yes, then difficult decisions must be made as to whether the food sovereignty movement offers the most attractive and substantial way forward. IS FOOD A HUMAN RIGHT? When asking students in food-related courses I teach, one of the most shocking responses to the question “Do you all think having food should be considered a human right?” is “No.” This astounded me at first, but I eventually began to realize that this is often the opinion of many college students. At first, I thought this was a callous and uncompassionate worldview, but I began to learn the rationale behind the student’s sentiments. Many of the responses to the question were based on the misguided or misinformed belief that people around the world can feed themselves but choose to be lazy instead. Students genuinely believe that many communities of the global poor simply chose to live off the benefits of their governments or local communities or the donations from charities. This is not an uncommon misunderstanding. It exists in “first world” as well as developing countries. Understood, historically, as the welfare system, many programs provide people with relatively inexpensive or free access to benefits such as health care and food provision. What is overlooked, however, is the possibility that the very reason people are in need of these programs is the institutional and structural mechanisms that have shaped societies in the first place into what they are today. Take the issue of obesity as one example of why people come to their conclusions about the problem of overconsumption of food. As Julie Guthman writes regarding the question “Why do fat people make other people mad?” she reflects, At the most basic level, what seems to agitate people about obesity is the cost of health care for the obese. The media has played a substantial role promulgating the message the obesity epidemic is costly, beginning with the 2001 Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity, which reported that the healthcare costs associated with overweight had grown from an estimated $39 billion in 1986 to $117 in 2000.1

Guthman highlights the idea that people generally judge others who appear overweight because they have made poor life decisions in terms of diet.

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

137

Often people suffer from obesity because of life situations in which they cannot afford to buy healthy foods or do not have the means to go to grocery stores that sell fresh foods and vegetables. In urban centers around the United States, for instance, we see growing trends in what are called “food deserts.” These are areas, often in inner cities, where healthy options for food are inaccessible for many communities. As the U.S. Department of Agriculture also defines, food deserts are areas where a “low-access community” of at “least 500 people and/or at least 33 percent of the census tract’s population must reside more than 1 mile from a supermarket or large grocery store (for rural census tracts, the distance is more than 10 miles).”2 For people interested in global poverty and food sovereignty, this is an area of concern for the communities that suffer from poverty, hunger, and low access to healthy food. As Jerry Shannon’s research illustrates, Emerging work in the area of food justice contests this framing of low food access. Primarily based in the USA and explicitly building off environmental justice work, food justice considers how efforts to create an alternative, more sustainable food system intersect with broader efforts to empower communities of color. Recognizing that “race and class play a central role in organizing the production, distribution, and consumption of food,” food justice efforts focus around projects that improve the food sovereignty of low-income communities through initiatives ranging from urban agriculture to improving working conditions for farm workers.3

Food justice movements highlight the complex dimensions and intersections of food, race, class, and, ultimately, local food sovereignty movements. While Shannon’s quote focuses on the U.S. context, this resonates with global communities as well. In the United States, food sovereignty potentially can be understood through the eyes of impoverished urban communities that have poor access to healthy foods. As highlighted, this leads to larger social issues related to race, poverty, and access to healthy foods for low-income communities. Often, the access and affordability of healthy foods are simply impossible for isolated communities, whether rural or urban. This leads to larger social issues and conflicts that become political and cultural in nature. In global communities that have marginal access to medical facilities that can help people strategize ways to improve food-related health problems and potential options for alleviating them, these concerns become even more intensified. Nonetheless, here in the United States, problems associated with issues such as obesity continue to be a controversial topic of debate. Take, for example, the conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation. Regarding whether current programs such as health care help or harm people in general, the Heritage Foundation’s mission statement on

138

Food as a Human Right

their home page reads, “Health-care reform should be a patient-centered, market-based alternative that empowers individuals to control the dollars and decisions regarding their healthcare.” 4 This statement has some revealing terminology. First, it emphasizes a “patient-centered” alternative to health care. Indeed, there is some improvement that can be done in this area. Too often people are diagnosed and prescribed a treatment for whatever ailment they have without much say in the process. At the same time, this idea subtly contradicts the second clause in the mission statement, namely that health care should be “market-based.” The underlying problem with this mission statement is the fact that it does not address the fact that many people do not have the financial capabilities to make informed decisions that would provide the opportunities to make their own health-care choices. What is interesting about these two brief examples is how they reveal the underlying ethos of current capitalism. Whether discussions are focused on general health care or, more generally, on the issue of social safety nets, the common thread from a conservative perspective is this should not be dictated by nationalized systems or governments. More boldly put, opponents of nationalized (sometimes incorrectly associated with socialism) systems or government have exacerbated these problems, making them worse for everyone. With respect to issues associated with the food system, these brief examples illustrate small examples of what are categorically different ways of envisioning the world. Recalling the mission statement of food sovereignty, food should be considered a right—a right that is extended to all humans. The following section makes the important distinction between negative and positive rights. While academic debates about the nature of these topics is outside the scope of this book, they nonetheless deserve a brief introduction so as to inform us about broad ways to think about health issues and human rights and the potential for thinking about ways in which to envision the future of food sovereignty. NEGATIVE VERSUS POSITIVE RIGHTS: CONCEPTUALIZING FOOD MOVEMENTS THROUGH THE LANGUAGE OF RIGHTS While human rights theories analyze the dynamics of what constitutes a list of rights that apply to all human beings, there are additional ways in which theorists frame the way we think about rights. One broad way in which thought on rights has taken form is through a distinction between positive and negative rights. This distinction is important for the concept of food sovereignty because it helps to clarify what sorts of rights are involved when food sovereignty activists demand that food should be considered a human right and who should provide these rights.

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

139

In general, negative rights are defined as rights in which people demand the nonintervention of governments and legal institutions. Examples of these types of rights include the right to life (this itself is a debatable position but beyond the scope of this present analysis), free speech, freedom of religion, private property, and so forth. Notice, the basic argument here is that we should have freedoms that cannot be infringed upon by our political leaders and legal systems. However, this leads to a gray area. Upon a closer analysis, one might question, what sorts of institutions must be in place to ensure that negative rights are respected? For instance, if we have a right to life, what happens in the situation in which our lives are endangered? Should there be institutions such as law enforcement that intervene to protect our lives? If we look at freedom of religion (and speech about one’s religious beliefs), should we allow for racist and incendiary language? Finally, does the right to have private property supersede the right for groups such as the Landless Workers Movement to occupy fertile, yet private land as a means for growing food to feed their families? In the example of food versus private property, we see one example of the complex question of what it means to have a right to life. Either we respect the right to have private property and cannot feed our children and they die from hunger or we grow farms on unused private property, thus defying the right to private property, but we are able to feed our children. Alternatively, positive rights are rights in which people demand the intervention of governments, legal systems, and social programs to provide certain public services. These types of rights include things like welfare and food-stamp programs provided by government funding. Demanding the protection of life might also require active intervention of an army or police force. Protection of life also requires a health-care system, which likewise contributes to the protection of the right to life. (Note: This is not to be confused with contentious debates about abortion but rather the more general idea that we should be provided basic health care when needed.) Finally and perhaps most important for theorizing the concept of food sovereignty is the right to food. If we need food and the freedom to survive rather than die from hunger and poverty, who should be obligated to provide this right? Before investigating the notion that we should have a positive right to food, it is helpful to look at the more basic way current documents have framed human rights language in the context of global poverty. HUMAN RIGHTS AND GLOBAL POVERTY: A CLOSER LOOK The Universal Declaration of Human Rights addresses a variety of ethical and moral issues associated with what it means to be a human being.

140

Food as a Human Right

The following articles included in the declaration also provide some instances in which global poverty and hunger can be related to basic human rights. They provide the basis for how we might think about the relationship between global governments and institutions that have an impact on hunger and malnutrition. Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 1 emphasizes the notion of human dignity. It is not simply enough to bring people out of poverty and malnutrition, but human rights should also include the opportunity to live a happy and flourishing life. Here, the responsibility lies with not only communities but also perhaps most importantly the governments of nation-states. This becomes a difficult task to achieve when we have corrupted or nonexistent governments. But this raises the question as to why we have unstable and corrupt governments in the first place. The food sovereignty concept and movement directly address many of these issues by using the language of “rights”—namely, the right of the people to have the basic necessities, which would allow them the possibility to achieve these rights. But readers will notice that the ability for global citizens to realize these rights does not occur in a vacuum but rather requires a certain institutional support system, whether in the form of local communities, national governments, or global institutions. Local communities have a strong potential for providing for their communities because they are most in tune with the needs of their people. However, when these needs cannot be provided by the community alone, it is often necessary for larger institutions such as the national government to provide additional support. Finally, when national governments are unstable or incapable of providing the needs of local communities, global institutions become a means of last resort. Herein lies one of the main conundrums with the global food system and institutions that directly or indirectly affect it. In rhetoric, this has been the goal of institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank as well as trade agreements such as those crafted by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and North American Free Trade Agreement, for instance. The general opening of borders is addressed in Article 13 of the declaration. Articles 13, 17, and 23 are stated here: Article 13 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

141

2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country. Article 17 1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. 2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. Article 23 1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. 2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. 3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection. 4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

These articles demonstrate multiple examples of what it means to live a fully dignified life, which underpins any functioning framework of human rights. In the first clause of Article 23, we see that all people should have the right to work. What is often misunderstood is the notion that people do not naturally want to work, which is not altogether true. In the second clause of Article 23, the article advocates for the right to work without discrimination and with equitable pay. Discrimination in the food industry here in the United States, for example, remains a problem. Workers are discriminated for reasons such as race and gender, and the result is manifest in things such as unfair compensation for women and people of color. In the third clause of Article 23, we see a stronger affirmation of the need for remuneration, a wage that not only is fair but also allows for people to take care of their families without the constant worry of whether or not their paychecks will be adequate to pay the bills, save money for future generations, and educate their children. Finally, in the fourth clause of Article 23, there are safeguards for protecting laborers from abuses of powerful employers who seek to exploit their employees. The right to form unions and assemble to protest or boycott certain businesses that abuse their power necessitates the right to form unions to put pressure on, and bring to attention, the unfair treatment of workers.

142

Food as a Human Right

Article 2 1. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps, individually and through international assistance and co-operation, especially economic and technical, to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present Covenant by all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of legislative measures.

Article 2 not only sets the tone for the rest of the document but also serves as a bookend for the intent of the entire document. It directly states that global businesses and institutions must provide, to the best of their abilities, the economic and technical infrastructure that enables countries and local communities to realize the goals set forth in the document. In terms of the economics of the global food system, the document implicitly suggests that basic human rights require the establishment of institutions that allow people to realize their full human potential. Put bluntly, people have to be alive in the first place in order to exercise their human potential. To even begin to discuss what human rights require, we face the fact that tens of thousands of people perish every day due to poverty and hunger. This simple fact is often lost upon many who dispute whether people should have inviolable human rights. Once this becomes clear, the dialogue between those who oppose these rights and those who fight in favor for them can begin to contribute substance to the debate. One of the first questions involves the controversy about whether the fact that modern human rights laws and ideas are simply a human creation. Drawing on this, the subsequent question is: If they are simply a human creation, do they have any concrete substance? Finally, a third and equally important question is how the concept of human rights might differ depending on cultural norms in countries around the world, particularly in “Eastern” countries.5 This is important for issues associated with food sovereignty and global poverty and hunger due to the fact that many countries that face problems with poverty and hunger are located in “Eastern countries.” For instance, we can look at an unexpected example in the case of religious and cultural tradition of Confucianism. In Confucian cultures, for instance, we see a historical tradition that has been considered by “Western” ethical norms as unethical. In the original formulation of Confucianism, we see values that hold that there should be divisions in society, such as between husband and wife, boss and employee in the workplace, and ruler and citizen. While these are important questions, they also bring to light connected issues and complexities associated with the concept of food sovereignty. These brief examples will be important for the future

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

143

development of how food sovereignty is both conceptualized and realized in different regions of the world. Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum are well-known academic researchers who have crafted the innovative idea referred to as the “capabilities approach.” Their thinking and efforts have resulted in a conceptual framework for a baseline set of requirements that are necessary for every human to lead a flourishing and potentially productive life. Much like the concept of human rights, the capabilities approach is universal in nature; it can be applied to any society. In this sense, the capabilities approach provides a greater deal of substance to the theory of human rights, which can be vague at times. While these two authors share the same general goals in developing the idea of the capabilities approach, they do have some subtle differences. Starting with Amartya Sen’s theory, he begins by examining the diversity of human cultures as well as the idea of certain inequalities. He notices that the general call for equality reflects, “the fact that equal consideration for all may demand very unequal treatment in favor of the disadvantaged.”6

For Sen, once we start to bring substance to the idea of equality for all humans, we quickly run into the problem of conflicting social, economic, and cultural differences that make up this diverse world. Due to the diversity of human cultures and situations, Sen outlines several, more nuanced situations and vocabulary that begin to illustrate the complexities involved in trying to achieve universal equality. One of his more important distinctions is made by comparing the notions of “freedom” and “choice.” He writes, A person’s position in a social arrangement can be judged in two different perspectives, viz. (1) the actual achievement, and (2) the freedom to achieve. Achievement is concerned with what we manage to accomplish, and freedom with the real opportunity that we have to accomplish what we value. The two need not be congruent.7

For Sen, the discussion involves the very practical distinction between having certain opportunities or freedom to achieve our goals and whether or not we do in fact achieve our goals. If we focus on the idea of freedom, we must confront the problem of different “sets of accomplishments that we have the power to achieve.” Although not Sen’s specific example, we might picture the idea of owning a house. If any given country has afforded the possibility to own a house, then we have a certain foundation needed for making this purchase. However, what is also equally important is examining whether or not people are, in fact, able to realize this goal. Do people have the means to purchase their own home?

144

Food as a Human Right

Not only in the United States but also in most countries around the world, we do have the option of purchasing a home, but often we do not have the money to do so. For Sen, this is where the idea of inequality starts to gain traction. A person might have all the freedoms that are necessary for buying a house, but if their income, location, cost of living, and so on are limiting factors, then Sen asks if we really do have the power or freedom to achieve this goal. As Sen surveys different ethical theories associated with freedom and the ability to achieve our goals, he argues that his interests are more focused on whether different ethical theories have the real, substantive content to address the problems we face today in the world. Sen continues to reflect on certain inequalities and how they occur in different “ ‘spaces’ (e.g., incomes, primary goods, liberties, utilities, other achievements, other freedoms).”8 The dilemma of determining where and how equality can be achieved is an interest of theorists such as Michael Walzer, who investigates the complexities of analyzing the ethical conundrums that arise when talking about theories of justice. For Walzer, like Michel Foucault, power is a complex phenomenon. It permeates and blends into many spheres of life, whether economic, political, social, and so on. With respect to food sovereignty, Walzer’s ideas on political power and sovereignty are informative. He notes, A great deal of political and intellectual energy has gone into the effort to limit the convertibility of power and restrain its uses, to define the blocked exchanges of the political sphere. As they are, in principle at least, things that money can’t buy, so there are things that the representatives of sovereignty, the officials of the state, can’t do.9

In Walzer’s quote, he examines the notion of sovereignty. This is related to the concept of food sovereignty to the extent that food sovereignty is fighting for control over the local food systems. They seek to establish a counternarrative and movement that protest against the infringement of governments, asymmetrical trade agreements, and the influence of multilateral organizations such as the WTO and World Bank. Food sovereignty’s notion of sovereignty, however, is not the equivalent with traditional notions of state sovereignty. Instead, food sovereignty, as it is used as a social movement, is using the term “sovereignty” to emphasize the fight to maintain control over local food production. Returning to the work of Amartya Sen, he offers his theory of the capabilities approach. He writes, Capability reflects a person’s freedom to choose between alternative lives (functioning combinations), and its valuation need not presuppose unanimity regarding some one specific set of objectives . . . it is important to distinguish between

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

145

freedom (reflected by capability) and achievement (reflected by actual functionings), and the evaluation of capability need not be based on one particular comprehensive doctrine that orders the achievements and the lifestyles.10

For Sen, this freedom to choose is essential for a deeper understanding of how we go about analyzing the significance of different needs of different people. He correctly emphasizes the diversity of cultures in general. Sen continues to say that humans have diversity in terms of “sex, age, genetic endowments, and many other features.”11 It is because of this diversity that we need a more detailed definition of the “capabilities approach.” Sen’s articulation of capabilities and functionings is substantiated by the work of Martha Nussbaum. She also shares Sen’s interest in improving the lives of the poor and dispossessed but takes a subtly different approach to the notion of capabilities. While Nussbaum is in agreement with Sen’s overall theory of capabilities and functionings, she does contend that Sen’s model might focus a little too much on the concept of freedom. Of course, freedom is essential for human beings to have a meaningful and flourishing life, but Nussbaum also wants to build upon Sen’s work to give even more substance to what is required to live a good life. In her research, Nussbaum’s theory begins with the assumption that not only do humans need freedom to achieve their diverse goals and aspirations but she also wonders what exactly this would look like in reality. Remarking on Sen’s work, Nussbaum uses the example of Sen’s notion of “adaptive preferences.” For example, when discussing the social status of women around the world, Sen has argued that a purely utilitarian understanding of justice is insufficient. According to traditional utilitarian thinking, human happiness can be broken down into a sort of mathematical equation. Choices are made largely by picking an option of an action according to whether or not any given action will produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people. As Lebacqz states, Traditional notions of justice appear to be flouted by a theory that claims the “right” act is whatever maximizes the good. Individual rights claims would be overridden by considerations of the “happiness” of others. For example, if the bloodshed of a threatened race riot could be averted by framing or lynching an innocent person, it seems that the utilitarian would have to say it is “right” to do so. So long as the “greater good” required it, all individual rights and claims would be ignored.12

The earliest architects of utilitarian theory such as John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham recognized this ethical conundrum of their theory. Nonetheless, it still deserves attention because it illustrates the way in which the rights of individuals may be broken if a particular ethical decision would result in the greater good for the greatest number of people.

146

Food as a Human Right

Amartya Sen sees these types of situations as problematic. He gives the example of husband-wife relationships in which the women’s work often goes unnoticed and thus is impossible to be thoroughly integrated into the amount of utility they produce. Authors such as Nussbaum and Sen highlight the fact that often the work women do is unnoticed or unrecognized. Women are often responsible for household activities such as cooking, cleaning, and gardening. These responsibilities are essential for a functioning family, but quantifiable data are sometimes difficult to obtain because many household actions performed by women cannot be put into a simple equation of utility because they cannot be measured in terms of official documents (i.e., a paycheck). Moreover, what is of concern to Sen and Nussbaum is the phenomenon that any attempt to gather measurements on general happiness is difficult to discern depending on cultural, economic, and regional contexts. Although these are difficult to calculate, at the very least, we have examples of scholars, researchers, and scientists who are dedicated to do the best to determine them. Their efforts are largely done with the intention of improving the lives of the world’s most impoverished communities. In the following section, Martha Nussbaum provides an example of her early efforts to accomplish this project. MARTHA NUSSBAUM’S LIST OF HUMAN CAPABILITIES Nussbaum offers the following 10 categories as a sort of blueprint for ensuring a more just and flourishing human experience. It is important to note that these are not fixed categories and can be modified and continue to evolve as humans move forward in time and encounter different situations, issues, and problems. The following list is a slightly rephrased wording of Nussbaum’s list but does not deviate from her core elements:13 1. Life: Being able to live to the end of a human life of normal length; not dying prematurely, or before one’s life is so reduced as to be not worth living. 2. Bodily Health: Being able to have good health, including reproductive health; to be adequately nourished; to have adequate shelter. 3. Bodily Integrity: Being able to move freely from place to place; to be secure against violent assault, including sexual assault. 4. Senses, Imagination, and Thought: Being able to use the senses, to imagine, think, and reason—and to do these things in a “truly human” way, a way informed and cultivated by an adequate education. 5. Emotions: The ability to express human emotions, which are a baseline for a flourishing life and full human experience. This includes things such as to love, grieve, and experience gratitude and justified anger.

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

147

6. Practical Reasons: The free ability to develop one’s conception of the good to have the opportunities to think and realize one’s life plans. This includes the protection of liberty and conscious and religious expression. 7. Affiliation: The ability to associate with groups of our choice and to interact with people freely. Affiliation will necessarily include freedom of assembly and freedom of speech. Affiliation will also include the necessary foundations of self-respect and nonhumiliation. In order to ensure these fundamental requirements, we must have a system of nondiscrimination based on race, sex, class, sexual orientation, ethics, religion, national origin, and species. 8. Other Species: The ability to cohabitate with other animals, plants, and nature in general. 9. Play: The opportunity to play, laugh, and enjoy life to its fullest. 10. Control over One’s Environment: This has two levels, the political and the material. With respect to the political, we must have the capability to participate in political decisions and processes that affect our lives. With respect to the material, we must be able to hold private property and seek equal employment opportunities and must not be subject to unwarranted search and seizure.

Although this basic list of requirements that Nussbaum argues are essential for living, a full human existence requires more elaboration; the requirements can also be applied on a different level to the specific needs and aspirations of people seeking food sovereignty. What is initially most important is the overall goal of achieving a meaningful existence, and for global farmers, this takes the specific form of living in their communities and under just and fair conditions. With respect to the first three categories, the first category establishes the idea that we need to ensure we have secured the conditions for living a healthy and potentially productive life, which directly relates to the second requirement, which details that humans need to have, for instance, certain forms of insurance that they have reproductive rights. The opportunity to build families, which is assured by a secure system of reproductive rights, subsequently requires that we have the opportunities to shelter, feed, and clothe our children. Inherent to the second category is the assurance that our physical bodies are protected and that we are not threatened by our governments, police forces, or fellow community members. This is especially important for women who are often the victims of sexual assault. Nussbaum’s fourth condition begins to more substantively outline additional qualities that can aid in creating a more meaningful existence. Life is not simply a matter of food, water, clothing, and shelter but is also much more enjoyable when we can express our artistic talents and use our minds for more than solely figuring out how to feed ourselves and our families. It involves the opportunity to use our mental capacities to expand our minds and imagine the possible opportunities for happiness

148

Food as a Human Right

and joy that might befall us in the future. Directly connected to this is having the capacity to experience the rainbow of human emotions (i.e., Nussbaum’s fifth requirement), both good and bad. Thinking about the life of global farmers, this becomes particularly important. An agrarian lifestyle can be rewarding, stressful, joyous, frustrating, and rewarding all at the same time. The sixth requirement dives into the complexity of the human ability to reason and make informed decisions. To truly flourish, we should be able to think critically about our decisions. This is not to suggest that all our decisions have to be made by some form of cold, detached, and rational decision processes but rather that we have the option to do so. This requirement can be counterbalanced by Nussbaum’s category of “emotion.” Sometimes we intentionally make decisions that the rest of society would think are “irrational.” For instance, when it comes to the happiness of our friends and family, we occasionally will make choices that might not be the best for ourselves but would produce happiness for them. The seventh requirement of affiliation brings us into more contemporary political and economic realms. Here, Nussbaum alludes to the need for democratic institutions and basic human rights as outlined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights. Specifically, she emphasizes the notion that we should not be discriminated against for reasons that are largely out of our control. This is the same language that advocates the use of the idea that all people have a set of inviolable rights that should be protected. Freedom of assembly and freedom of speech are key components for Nussbaum and, in our current times, are also particularly relevant to heated debates in the United States (and around the world, for that matter). For example, at the time of the writing of this book, there are highly charged debates about the status of immigration. This in turn leads to subsequent, sometimes violent, clashes between racial groups. Tensions rose since 2017 as the country began seeing more news stories about racist and nationalist organizations demanding to counterprotest in rallies held by groups seeking racial and religious equality and the acceptance of people of all national origin. JOHN RAWLS: A THEORY OF JUSTICE The work of John Rawls is prolific and enduring. Although his philosophical writings do not directly discuss food sovereignty issues, they may provide another resource for thinking about how food sovereignty and food justice movements might think about the concept of justice itself. To establish the foundation of his theory of justice, he begins with two assertions or “principles of justice”:

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

149

(a) Each person has the same indefensible claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme of liberties for all; and (b) Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions: first, they are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society.14

These foundations are important for conceptualizing Rawls’s theory of justice. It should be emphasized that for Rawls, these do not exist in reality but must be the starting point for developing a theory of justice that may, ultimately, take substantive form. The first principle argues that all humans require a base position of liberties—namely, we are equal to pursue whatever forms of life that we desire so long as our pursuits do not violate others’ equally important liberties. The second principle poses the idea of “fair equality of opportunity,” which presents challenging issues for Rawls’s ideas. The following questions emerge: What are the conditions under which equality of opportunity can exist? Does the answer require a paradigm shift in our global economic system, which includes the possibility of a system other than capitalism or communism? And what would this system look like? Lastly, Rawls draws attention that, most importantly, the least advantaged are those who benefit the most from any new type of global justice system. This point specifically connects to the food sovereignty movement. Food sovereignty activists come from all socioeconomic levels of society, but they traditionally have been born out of impoverished communities. If these impoverished communities are partly in their situations due to the global economic system, one must ask whether the goals of food justice can only be met through a radical change in the way we conduct our economic relationships. These questions also relate to the subject of human rights. If human rights are to be not visualized but actualized, then they have to be envisioned through the concept of food sovereignty. One practical, although at times, problematic solution to implementing food justice on a concrete level is through the historical interaction between religious institutions and the development of the concept of human rights, which the following section introduces. VIGNETTE: RELIGIOSITY AND QUESTIONS ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS It is widely debated whether human rights are, or should be, considered based originally in major global religious traditions. This debate and, since the inception of modern human rights laws after World War II, many questions with respect to the current conceptualization of human

150

Food as a Human Right

rights are just as pressing now as ever. While progress has been made, these rights are on tenuous ground and being threatened by powerful global leaders. In North Korea, Kim Jong-un has committed massive atrocities against his own citizens; in Russia, Vladimir Putin has flaunted his power by invading sovereign nations and breaking international law. And in the United States, leaders, including the current president (at the time of writing of this book in 2018), have supported and advocated for the violation of human rights by separating children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexican border. These actions are intentional and undeniable. With respect to religious leaders, some have spoken out and demanded immediate change in policy. They reference religious texts that point to the moral virtues that are being dismissed for political self-interests and votes. However, there are also groups of religious leaders in the United States and abroad who are starting to take a stand and defend their own beliefs by pointing out the hypocrisy of many of these political positions. James Ron and colleagues conducted field research on the relationship between human rights and religion. Their main region of research was the “Global South,” and they focused specifically on countries such as Mexico, India, Morocco, and Nigeria. These countries were decided upon due to not only their engagement with human rights issues but also their different cultural backgrounds. In contrast to much human rights research and literature that concentrate more on the philosophical or historical origins of the concept, these researchers ventured to investigate the “public’s varied reception of human rights ideas at the individual level.”15 When conducting their research, they worked on the hypothesis that religious teachings provide practitioners with codes of conduct that help to guide how they live.16 This in turn also informed their subjects’ understanding and opinion of human rights. Their respondents varied with respect to their perspectives, noting that the idea of human rights is sometimes difficult to reconcile with traditional religions. As Ron and colleagues note, A quick look at the empirical record suggests that faith-rights linkages do in fact abound. In the United States, for example, religious groups often inspire civil and human rights activism at home and abroad. In Mexico (and Latin America more broadly), liberation theologians have historically advocated for basic rights for the poor, in India, some Hindu orders have worked hard to reject caste-based discrimination; in Nigeria, the Catholic Church has often been a voice for democratization, social justice, and human rights; and in Morocco, the Islamist and feminist movements have influenced and shaped one another in important ways.17

As this quote highlights, human rights can play an important role and, at the very least, is an issue of debate in many of the world’s

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

151

major religions. Many of the interviewees thought that, regardless of whether religion was a “good” or “bad” phenomenon, local human rights organizations (LHROs) were better equipped to reach ordinary people.18 Perhaps more importantly, many respondents concluded that the protection of human rights should be a coordinated effort between secular human rights groups and religious groups. Research in the countries mentioned in the previous quote led to the following conclusion: We learned that faith-based groups are leading recipients of philanthropy, but our interviews also suggest they are often leading distributors of charity. Bolstered by donations from the public, governments, and international sources, faith groups distribute money, goods, and services through volunteers working in strategically situated venues, such as temples, mosques, and churches, and aided by a broad array of mass communication tools, including radio, newsletters, and websites. As a result, faith groups are far more effective than LHROs at making a direct difference in ordinary peoples’ lives.19

Alongside these tactical advantages, faith groups are also better equipped to organize people and bring them together at designated times and places, making them better organizations for gathering the people together to educate their respective communities. At the same point in time, many respondents to this research found that there is still a healthy percentage of mistrust in religious institutions. Even if people thought that religious institutions were more efficient than largescale, bureaucratic organizations for distributing goods, they still expressed a significant distrust of the hierarchical system of power that is present in both religious institutions and human rights organizations. As the research summates, This suggests that human rights supporters may view the religious hierarchy similarly to political and economic hierarchies, with an underlying skepticism of authority extending to religious institutions. The domestic human rights community’s local constituencies, in other words, may be found among people opposed to hierarchy, power, and elites of all kinds—people who lean against institutionalized power in any form, including religious manifestations.20

This skepticism relates to Michel Foucault’s understanding of the diffuse nature of power discussed in Chapter 4. Foucault’s research on the phenomenon of power is focused on many areas of society, whether it is social and political institutions or the human body itself, and his thought may aid further research for exploring the nature and dynamics of human rights and religiosity. The research in this short vignette concludes with its authors surmising that “religious spaces are often the places where civic

152

Food as a Human Right

and political life plays out, where various interests are promoted and contested, where people make sense of the world and their place in it.”21 In the end, this relates to the food sovereignty movement insofar as religion and religiosity, in all its complexity, must also be factored into how we understand human behavior. Not only does religion have an influence on how people treat each other and interact in society but it also may reflect people’s opinions on human rights. If food is considered a human right, as it is declared in the mission statement of food sovereignty, then any analysis of food sovereignty must involve delving into the research and debates about human rights. Although this may be a difficult task, the continued development of ideas related to human rights, food sovereignty, and food justice remains hopeful. VIGNETTE: HALLAH FOR HALAL FOOD With respect to the food sovereignty movement and food justice concerns, this small example demonstrates how we might begin to conceptualize a more egalitarian global food system. Although tensions have calmed after the first years subsequent to 9/11, we are currently experiencing a resurgence in anti-Islamic sentiment in many parts of the world. In particular, while the Muslim population continues to grow in the United States, there is still an ongoing fear among many American Muslims that they will be the targets of hate speech, discrimination, and violence.22 Perhaps one way to ease this resurgence of anti-Islamism is through the bonds that can be built through sharing food with one another. The following recipes provide just a few examples of how the simple process of cooking, tasting, and experiencing different food cultures can not only serve to educate us about different world cuisines but also, more importantly, encourage us to learn more about the conditions of the people in various regions of the world in which these cuisines originated. In turn, we begin to take a more sober look at the conditions of the world’s most marginalized peoples, including, in many cases, farmers. Food sovereignty, although not directly tied to a specific religion, is represented by global communities that come from a wide range of religious traditions, cultures, and histories. In many instances, these communities are often located in regions that are subject to unfortunate histories of human rights violations by corruption, violence, and the desperation of communities of peoples who are forced to fight for food on a daily basis. The following are a few examples of how consumers might reconceptualize the relationship between different cultural beliefs and practices as well as how they relate to the larger topic of human rights.

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

153

HUMAN RIGHTS RECIPES The following recipes can serve to spark conversations about human rights and the history of various conflicts around the world, both today and in the past. The Greek recipe can introduce the rich history of the regions, dating back thousands of years. In the Italian-inspired recipe, conversations can involve the global popularity of foods from Italy. This demonstrates one instance of how the world’s different food traditions have and continue to be globalized. Finally, the Spanish dessert recipe provides a good end to an evening but proffers the opportunity to continue the conversation about how different foods have evolved and spread across the world. The conversation opportunities in these few examples also relate to the food sovereignty movement insofar as one prominent among them is the preservation of local food cultures. These cultures and the knowledge of their traditional recipes are threatened by the corporate food system and its threat of homogenizing the global food system. Recipe 1: Hummus Bowl Ingredients: 1. 1 package of small pita bread, sliced 3/4 of the way through the center and placed on an oven safe bowl to bake and make crisp 2. 2 cans of garbanzo beans 3. 2 large lemons 4. 2 large cloves of garlic 5. 1 12-oz can of tahini 6. 6 large carrots 7. 1 bunch of full-length celery stalks 8. 2 large cucumbers 9. 1 head of broccoli

Instructions: For the hummus, drain and wash the garbanzo beans. Add them to your food processor or blender and squeeze the juices of one lemon, and add the garlic and one tablespoon of tahini and blend until you have created a thick consistency. Add salt and pepper and more lemon as you please. Meanwhile, in a 400° preheated oven, take two pieces of pita bread and cut them in half. Gently open the pita pieces. On a cooking sheet, place the domes of pita face-side down and bake until they become crisp. Once they are crisp (they will crunch like a pita chip), fill the pita with hummus and serve

154

Food as a Human Right

with your assortment of vegetables. This is a great appetizer, which can also serve as a segue into discussing the origins of this dish. Recipe 2: Tomato Bowl with Spaghetti in the Middle Ingredients: 1. 4 very large and firm beefsteak tomatoes 2. 1 cup of tomato pulp 3. 1 box of store-bought spaghetti 4. 1 finely chopped Spanish onion 5. ½ cup Parmesan cheese 6. 1 cup mozzarella cheese 7. Salt and pepper for taste

Instructions: Preheat oven to 400°. Meanwhile, cut the tops off your large beefsteak tomatoes, roughly one-fourth of the top. Do not discard the tops. Using a small spoon, gently remove all of the pulp, leaving about a centimeter on all sides of each tomato. Once the tomatoes are hollowed out, drain your cooked spaghetti and cut up into roughly two-inch pieces; mix with tomato pulp, one-half cup of mozzarella, and onion. This should look like mini spaghetti. Fill your roasted tomato shells with the spaghetti mixture and top with the rest of your mozzarella and Parmesan cheese. Place caps over the top of the tomatoes before serving, and your guests will have a happy surprise when they remove the top. Recipe 3: Spanish Churro Ice-Cream Bowl Although often associated with Mexican and southwestern treats, churros originated in Spain. Normally these treats are served in the form of long tubelike pastries (looking like oversized fries) that can be dipped in various sauces, most popularly being melted chocolate. When serving these snacks, as an interesting conversation point—or more like a Jeopardy fun fact—you can discuss these origins and how Spain has a rich cultural history related not only to food but also to some of the most infamous examples of human rights violations. Perhaps most well known is the Spanish Inquisition in which people were persecuted and executed for their religious beliefs. Alternatively, these recipes can serve to foster more uplifting conversations about the diversity of cultures and their food traditions.

Human Rights, Human Responsibilities, and the Capabilities Approach

155

Ingredients: 1. 3/4 cup water 2. 3 tbsp unsalted butter 3. 2 tbsp brown sugar 4. 2 large eggs 5. 1 cup all-purpose flour 6. 3 tbsp granulated sugar 7. 1 tsp cinnamon

Instructions: In a large saucepan, combine water, butter, brown sugar, and a pinch of salt and bring to a boil. Once it begins boiling, remove the mixture from the heat and cool. Then in a large mixing bowl, combine wet and dry ingredients and mix (preferably use a mixer, but you can also just mix by hand). Once you have a light, fluffy dough, roll it out into a one-fourth sheet. Using a pint glass or similar-sized circular cutout (you can even eyeball this if necessary), cut the dough into as many circles as possible. On a large baking pan, lined with wax paper, place four 2-inch oven-safe ramekins facedown on the wax paper. Then spray the ramekins outside the surface with cooking spray and gently mold circles of dough over the entire ramekin. This should look like a mini bowl. After baking at 375° for 25–30 minutes, remove and immediately dust all sides of the bowl with a mixture of the granulated sugar and cinnamon. Scoop one or two balls of vanilla ice cream and drizzle with chocolate (for the chocolate, an easy option is to simply melt small chunks of a chocolate bar in the microwave until it is soft).

CHAPTER 8

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

Martha Nussbaum and Amartya Sen’s innovative concept of the “capabilities approach” provides a possible path to ethically examine the global food system. Furthermore, it can be applied to many of the concepts outlined in the food sovereignty movement and concept. Their ethical theories may provide a blueprint for conceptualizing the problems addressed in this book. While this book has illuminated the movement and words of food sovereignty, it is still subject to critiques. Food sovereignty scholars and activists would and should agree. As with all movements, they evolve over time and must change with changing global circumstances. The work of Nussbaum and Sen not only directly addresses human rights but may also provide possible solutions for the problems and issues presented in this book. Most importantly, they can aid in the efforts of the food sovereignty movement. While these scholars were not directly connected to the food sovereignty movement, they can be applicable and in coordination with the ideology of food sovereignty. The food sovereignty movement may draw important conceptual insight from these two thinkers. While they do not necessarily address the specific concept and movement of food sovereignty, they provide an ethical argument that can be applied to the way the world might think about the global food system. CAN THE WORLD’S DIVERSE RELIGIONS ASSIST THE CONCEPT OF FOOD SOVEREIGNTY? While it might seem an odd or unrelated way to think about things important for the food sovereignty movement, the world’s religions can serve as a

158

Food as a Human Right

resource for addressing current issues and challenges facing the future of food sovereignty. Given the diverse meanings of religious beliefs, traditions, doctrines, and institutions’ practices of global religions, their practices may serve as a resource for food sovereignty. The relationship between religion, culture, diet, and new social movements is not new, but it is a relatively unexplored topic with respect to the concept of food sovereignty. This is somewhat odd, considering the diversity of cultures from which food sovereignty movements have emerged, and, as such, deserves attention. Religions have millennial-old traditions of simplicity, fasting, and dietary practices. While not directly connected to any specific religion, the food sovereignty movement can garner support and possible theoretical content that would bolster its causes by looking into various religious traditions and their scriptures that are related to ethical guidelines involving food. A brief survey of some of the themes in various world religions provides a few examples of how this might look. While not exhaustive, the following quote provides an introduction to some possibilities. The possibility of utilizing religious scriptures and traditions for modern causes was exemplified in the 2008 joint meeting between the United Nations and the Alliance of Religions and Conservation. As the mission statement states, the Alliance is a secular body that helps the major religions of the world to develop their own environmental programmes, based on their own core teachings, beliefs and practices. We help religions link with key environmental organisations—creating powerful alliances between faith communities and conservation groups.1

The idea behind this is not to debate about the correctness or truth of any specific religion but rather to join together and discuss common causes and ideas about how to protect the environment. For example, in 1997 the archbishop of Canterbury (England) launched “the Sacred Land Project ‘with the aim of reviving and creating sacred sites in Britain and overseas.’ The idea behind this project was to inform people about their own unique sacred sites as well as reminding people that the landscape where they live can be as sacred as any holy land.” The initiative goes on to read as follows: [In] Britain alone it involved Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim and secular communities in creating and reviving inner-city and community gardens; conserving and celebrating holy wells; rediscovering and renewing pilgrimage trails; protecting trees and woodlands; regenerating community meeting places and their eco-systems; and celebrating sacred places with works of art and poems.2

While specifically referencing Britain, this statement represents the overall objective of the Alliance of Religions and Conservation. It is to

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

159

look to the world’s religious traditions for common causes and ways in which to join together in achieving a more sustainable and environmentally friendly way of living. In their 2008 meeting, leaders of these religions gathered to generate “a labeling system to provide access/knowledge to promote healthy, organic, free-range, etc. foods.” Religious traditions have not only a deep history of food regulations but also suggestions about how our consumption choices provide us with options for a positive movement toward more healthy lifestyles. While important, often food references in sacred texts are interpreted only for their spiritual value and understanding of particular religions. However, they have another dimension as well. They can provide resources and ways of interpreting religious texts for the ethical content that can help present-day consumers make choices about the ways they consume their daily meals. Religion has also spawned certain ethical controversies with respect to how we view issues involving human rights. Emerging right around the time that the food sovereignty movement and concept began to gain global attention, we also saw changes in the ways ethicists began conceiving of moral dilemmas with respect to population growth and poverty. LIFEBOAT ETHICS For example, the famous ecologist Garrett Hardin is well known for his ethical argument developed in the 1970s in his article “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against Helping the Poor.”3 Hardin’s argument can be briefly summarized as follows: We can imagine the scenario in which we find ourselves on a lifeboat, but there are many other humans who are struggling to not drown. There are no other lifeboats around. While our lifeboat has room for a small number of individuals, this might put us in peril. Do we accept a few more occupants? Do we accept every single occupant and eventually the lifeboat itself becomes so overpopulated that it sinks and everyone dies? For Hardin, the question of “accepting more occupants” is a secondary metaphor for how we address the issue of immigration. Hardin applies the lifeboat ethics argument to the more contemporary issue of immigration. Similar to the flooding of the boat in which everyone might die if brought into the boat, Hardin argues that if we accept all immigrants, then we risk the perils of everyone in developed societies incurring harm. However, the nuance is important because it is premised on the question of whether “first world,” affluent countries should look out for their own societies and self-interests rather than for developing countries, which are impoverished. This question provides some important ethical conundrums for the food sovereignty movement.

160

Food as a Human Right

First, with respect to food sovereignty, we see the fundamental belief that all people should have the opportunity to feed their families and moreover to feed their families with culturally meaningful food. Second, as an issue of human rights, Hardin’s philosophy does not emphasize anything close to the idea that people should have a human right to food. Instead, his argument implies quite the opposite—however unfortunate it may be, it is only logical to let people suffer and die from hunger and malnutrition because if we attempted to save everyone, we would all ultimately perish. For Hardin, this is an apropos hypothetical for why we should not necessarily do all we can to help the global poor. Hardin provides several compelling examples as to why we do not have a moral obligation to do so. He concludes with this poignant argument: To be generous with one’s own possessions is quite different from being generous with those of posterity. We should call this point to the attention of those who from a commendable love of justice and equality, would institute a system of the commons, either in the form of a world food bank, or of unrestricted immigration. We must convince them if we wish to save at least some parts of the world from environmental ruin.4

While Hardin’s argument might be persuasive, it draws attention to a certain ethical paradigm shift from what the concepts of human rights and food sovereignty stand for. Of course, as has been addressed, both of these concepts have their problematic components, but is Hardin’s suggestion the only solution? In a different trajectory of ethical thought, the ideas of Immanuel Kant might be contrasted to the ethics of Hardin. Kant is perhaps most known for his remarks on different types of moral imperatives, most importantly his discussion of the categorical imperative. Briefly stated, the categorical imperative is the moral obligation or duty to act in a certain way, or make a certain choice, that cannot be violated regardless of circumstance or situation. Readers will notice how Kant’s moral compass differs from that of Hardin. On the surface it appears logically quite similar, but upon a closer reading, it reflects a certain moral dimension that is in a different perspective than that of Hardin. Kant’s formal articulation of the imperative is as follows: There is, therefore, only a single categorical imperative and it is this: act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law. Now, if all imperatives of duty can be derived from this single imperative as from their principle, then, even though we leave it undecided whether what is called duty is not as such an empty concept, we shall at least be able to show what we think by it and what the concept wants to say.

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

161

Since the universality of law in accordance with which effects take place constitutes what is properly called nature in the most general sense (as regards its form)—that is, the existence of things insofar as it is determined in accordance with universal laws—the universal imperative of duty can also go as follows: act as if the maxim of your action were to become your will a universal law of nature.5

Kant’s language is philosophically technical but can be unpacked in terms of how we might think about how Kant goes on to elaborate his notion of a universal law of nature. He discusses different forms, duties, or situations in which humans might have to make a moral choice, but in the end, he concludes that we can establish certain absolute truths. Looking at human rights and the demands by food sovereignty to view food as a human right, philosophically Kant is diametrically opposed to that of Hardin’s “lifeboat” ethics. The following section provides several brief examples of how major global religions might help to foster new research and direction for food justice movements through deeper analysis of the religious cultures from which they come. Of course, this is not exhaustive, and there are many examples that can be made; they nonetheless provide a few examples of what this might look like in terms of future research on the concept of food sovereignty and food justice. FOOD IN JUDAISM Food and dietary laws in Judaism have been a widely discussed and important aspect to the faith. Both in the Hebrew Bible (known sometimes erroneously as the “Old Testament” in the Christian faith) and later works such as the Talmud, food and dietary laws are central to the Jewish understanding of the faith. While dietary laws are extensive, they also play a role in the stories and narratives that are central to the Jewish faith. Readers will notice that one of the first acts of Adam and Eve involves a scene that takes place in a garden. It is in this garden that Adam and Eve walk freely about in a world without evil. However, as the story continues, the two are eventually tempted by a serpent (often representing the symbol and/or presence of a counterpart to God). This narrative can also be read, as it has by many recent women scholars, in a new light. Instead of the traditional, male-dominated interpretation, this infamous story that is foundational to both Judaism and Christianity (and to a lesser extent, Islam) portrays Eve in a different way. Traditionally Eve is seen as a temptress who disobeys God’s orders not to eat the forbidden fruit. Ultimately, she, in turn, tempts Adam to also eat the fruit, thus corrupting the future of humanity. Genesis 1:29 reads, for example, “God said, ‘See, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its

162

Food as a Human Right

fruit; you shall have them for food.’ ” What is intriguing about this is the notion that God in the Genesis account begins a sort of cosmic narrative that is set in a garden and some of his first words relate to the simple act of eating. FOOD IN CHRISTIANITY Although food still emerges in the New Testament, it is less pronounced than in the Old Testament (which, over time, is what Christians will come to call it). Nonetheless, we see examples that illustrate the centrality of food, even if subtle and not the core focus of the narratives relating to food. Perhaps the most well-known examples are the passages in which the central figure of Jesus chooses to deliver his message as well as attempts to demonstrate that he is the son of God; these are the stories recounting miracles in which he feeds masses of people. While variations of the story exist in the gospel books of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, they all present a common theme, that of feeding the people. Take one example from the book of Matthew. After hearing of the beheading and death of John the Baptist, the narrative continues: Now when Jesus heard this, he withdrew from there in a boat to a deserted place by himself. But when the crowds heard it, they followed him on foot from the towns. When he went ashore he saw a great crowd; and he had compassion for them and cured their sick. When it was evening, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a deserted place, and the hour is now late; send the crowds away so that they may go into the villages and buy food for themselves.” Jesus said to them, “They need not go away; you give them something to eat.” They replied, “We have nothing here but five loaves and two fish.” Then he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass. Taking five loaves and the two fish, he looked up until the heaven, and blessed and broke the loaves, and gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds. And all ate and were filled. (Matt. 14:13–20)6

While this passage is complex and contains many themes that are central to the message of Christianity, it is interesting to notice that the means by which Jesus performs his miracles is through food. He feeds the people. Although food sovereignty does not have any one particular religious affiliation, its mission aligns with the aforementioned passage. For communities advocating food sovereignty, what is most important is providing the means to feed the people who do not have food. However, food sovereignty communities cannot rely on the work of miracles. Instead they must rely on an active political agenda, backed up by concrete practices, to ensure that the people are fed. This does not dilute the biblical example provided earlier but rather demonstrates the need for direct action when the needs of people’s communities are lacking. What

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

163

is also notable about the previous passage is the word “compassion.” In feeding the crowds, Jesus saw their hunger and desperation and felt a deep sense of compassion. As a segue, this core message and theme of compassion are the core of another major world religion, Buddhism. FOOD IN BUDDHISM Buddhism is not commonly renowned for its food habits and practices, yet it still provides a glimpse into the religion and the role of food. In general, Buddhists focus energy on inner peace and spirituality and less on the desires of the material world. Buddhism takes many different forms, but in its most prominent expressions, it is divided into Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism, along with a third branch, common in Tibet, known as Vajrayana Buddhism. In the Theravada branch of Buddhism, particularly in contemporary settings, you can walk through the streets of major cities and often find monks dressed in their traditional robes who will accept food from regular citizens. This is not a form of begging but rather a more spiritual ritual. Monks will accept offerings from regular citizens, whether businessmen and women, local merchants, and so forth, as a way to not only nourish their bodies but also symbiotically provide the opportunity for both them and the general citizens to earn positive karma. The monks earn positive karma by maintaining an ascetic lifestyle, not giving into bodily temptations to overconsume, while the average citizen obtains positive karma by demonstrating the Buddhist virtue of compassion. In this sense we see a commonality with religions such as Christianity and Judaism. Although compassion is a core belief of Buddhism, it is intimately connected to the topic of food. Food plays an interesting history in the legends that portray the life of Siddhartha Gautama, later to be known as the Enlightened One, or Buddha. According to certain legends, the young Siddhartha grew up in a lavish palace. He had all the luxuries of what we would today consider a successful and comfortable existence, one in which we did not have any worries. However, as Siddhartha grew older, he began to grow curious. As his curiosity grew, he decided to disobey his father’s wishes and abscond into the outside world. It was upon various excursions that he witnessed what are known in Buddhist texts as the “four sights.” Accompanying his loyal guard, it was through each excursion that he witnessed the realities of life. He witnessed the human condition through sights of sickness, the inevitable process of age, death, and finally a lone ascetic or monk, which peaked his curiosity. Upon asking his companion about the monk, Siddhartha learned that this was a person who had chosen to take a spiritual path in life and give up most worldly positions in order to learn more about the meaning of existence.

164

Food as a Human Right

Siddhartha was plagued by this newfound reality and ultimately made the decision to leave the confines of the palace and seek answers to the meaning of life. He stripped his clothes and traveled through the forest, seeking answers from various sages. Ultimately, he did not find sufficient answers to his questions and became solemn. One evening he decided he would meditate underneath a Bodhi tree and meditate until he discovered the answers to his questions. As the story goes, he meditated all night (during which he was tempted to return to his lavish lifestyle, which is another interesting parallel to Christianity, which Siddhartha never encountered), and when waking in the morning, he had finally realized the meaning of life. This was his moment of Enlightenment; he was now the Buddha. Upon this experience, he decided he could no longer live the previous life he lived and, instead, needed to share his experience with others. To this extent, the Buddha recognized that the meaning of life and the search for ways to minimize human suffering were through a life of moderation. This directly implicates the current global food system to the extent that we live in a world that is starkly divided by those who have food and those who do not. Perhaps looking to Buddhist traditions may provide resources for a more compassionate coexistence with the natural world as well as ways to live in a way that minimizes waste. It also draws attention to satisfying the needs of others, not because we want the same for ourselves but rather because we should do so simply out of compassion and concern for the less fortunate. FOOD IN ISLAM Islamic food practices are diverse but share commonalities with other, mostly, monotheistic religious traditions. This is notable because it is too often that we hear about religious tensions and violence between Muslims, Jews, and Christians. However, ironically, when it comes to the topic of food, we see areas of common practices and beliefs. As aforementioned, kosher food laws for Jews are similar to halal food laws in many Islamic traditions. For instance, we see similarities in terms of the prohibition of pork, the ways in which food is prepared, and most importantly the idea that food should be prepared and consumed with the mentality that it is a gift from God. The greater message of Islam is perhaps what is most pertinent to locating the role of food in the tradition. Islam, in general, has historically promoted values of honesty, kindness, support of the poor, and protection of the weak. The Qur’an itself outlines what is called the five pillars of Islam. The pillars include (1) the proclamation of the creed of belief in one God, (2) prayer, (3) charity to the poor, (4) observance of Ramadan, and (5) pilgrimage to Mecca. While all these pillars could be related to issues

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

165

connected to the ethics of the global food system, perhaps charity to the poor, fasting during Ramadan, and the pilgrimage to Mecca known as “Hajj” are most apropos. Charity to the poor for Muslims worldwide is an integral part of expressing their faith. It is a representation of their love for God and a manifestation of true faith. The observance of Ramadan, which includes fasting from dawn until dusk, is another way in which Muslims revere God as well as guide them to focus their attention upon God. In practicing the fast—as with fasting in many world religions—the idea is that, when people find themselves hungry, they focus their energies and their hunger pangs on their worship of God rather than their physical pains. It is a way to focus people’s attention less toward worldly desires and more toward their spiritual struggles and journeys. Finally, the pilgrimage to Mecca, which all financially capable Muslims are required to make at least once in their lifetime, represents a gathering of fellow practitioners in a common and visible demonstration of their faith. Often misunderstood is the ritual of the slaughtering of sheep. Outsiders of the religion do not often realize that this practice is one of charity. The animals that are ritually slaughtered provide meat that is sent to communities in need. Vignette: Halal Foods Food that is permissible to eat as per traditional Islamic law is considered halal food. Much like kosher food in Judaism, halal food laws are complex yet central to the Islamic faith. Just as we see in other world religions, food laws are a way for practitioners to both show their devotion to God through sacrifice and take time to reflect on the blessing of food that God has provided the faithful. Observing Islamic food laws is also interesting from a more contemporary perspective. As the Islamic faith continues to grow and spread across the world, the demand for halal foods has subsequently increased. As such, major food corporations have identified the need to produce and cater to consumers who are looking for permissible foods. Today, food purveyors such as Walmart, Carrefour, Kroger and Metro have stocked their shelves with sections that meet halal standards.7 The topic of halal food is also growing in popularity among gourmands. As an evolving religion, many progressive Islamic communities have taken interest in creative ways to not only remain faithful to Islamic dietary laws but also bring a new twist to traditional recipes. As authors Febe Armanios and Bogac Ergene note, Food that Muslims have historically eaten (and cookbooks that Muslims have traditionally written) represents the epitome of gastronomic cosmopolitism in their day. Many traditional dishes were lost; others became integrated into regional and national cuisines and have thus indirectly shaped contemporary halal

166

Food as a Human Right

cooking. Although today’s halal cookbooks mix some of these recipes with modern fare, they are more democratic than their precursors; they are often written by ordinary Muslims, home cooks, blogosphere celebrities, and women.8

These modern changes reflect not only the changing nature of Islam itself but also how food plays an important role in integrating tradition and innovation. Armanios and Ergene also note that food continues to play a prominent role in the way many Muslims related Islam to the environment: Environmentally responsible cultivation and animal husbandry projects are indeed gaining traction in Europe and North America, where eco-consciousness and ethical farming ideals are grown in popularity. In Britain, for example, Abraham Natural Produce and Willowbrook Organic Farm provide, according to the former, “ethically sourced halal meat through a business model that supports localisation and contributes to charitable causes through a fixed percentage donation from profits.”

As this quote illustrates, there is an emphasis on both modernizing Islamic food production and food-consumption practices and showing respect to the natural world. With respect to the focus of this book, Muslims have also suggested that halal food should be considered a human right. Issues associated with access to eating halal food are tied to how dietary equality might be interpreted by various groups and whether minority religious communities have the “right” to demand religiously sanctioned meals, especially in publicly funded venues.9

As a similar theme in other global religions, many Islamic communities understand the simple act of sharing food as a way to demonstrate the compassion of the Prophet Muhammad. While the debate is still controversial among different Muslim communities, the fact is that issues of global poverty and hunger are located in many Islamic regions of the world (such as Indonesia and throughout the Middle East). FOOD IN DAOISM AND CONFUCIANISM Daoism and Confucianism are not typically religious philosophies or traditions that we associate with food. There is a very pragmatic explanation to this. While both of these traditions are deeply concerned with cultural values, practices, and ways of living, they are not often associated with their cuisines. However, just because they are not commonly associated with their food cultures, this by no means suggests that food culture

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

167

is not vibrant as well as deeply embedded in cultural and religious practices. Daoism In Daoism, the central text, the Daodejing, provides short sayings that can be related to the issues associated with food and human rights. Although the text of the Daodejing as well as the concept of the Dao in general is complex and elusive in nature (at times intentionally), it provides insight into how Daoists might think about food. In Daoism, one of the major spiritual focuses is human health and longevity, which is accomplished through exercise, meditation, and focus on eating well. As the Daodejing says, The five colours turn a man’s eyes blind; The five notes turn man’s ears deaf; The five tastes turn a man’s palate dull; Racing through fields hunting turns a man’s heart wild; Goods hard to obtain cause a man’s progress to halt. For this reason, The ruling of the Sage is by the belly not by the eyes. Therefore, Reject the latter and take up the former.10

This short verse in the Daodejing is a microcosmic example of Daoist philosophy as a whole. All of these beautiful things, including food, become temptations that the sage or truly wise person must train herself or himself to avoid. Food is thus connected to the balance of nature, the balance of human health, the ebb and flow of yin and yang, and ultimately to the Dao or ultimate reality itself. In Daoism the five major flavors are sweet, sour, salt, bitter, and spicy.11 This can also have implications for global issues such as climate change and environmental degradation. When we take that wisdom of the Daodejing text and slow down our incessant desire to “progress,” we begin the process of taking time to reflect on the important things in life and start to learn about the harms we may cause to both humanity and nature. The following recipe illustrates a favorite dish for many Daoist communities. Recipe 1: Five-Flavor Pork Roast Ingredients: 1. 1 tbsp sugar 2. 1 medium garlic glove, minced 3. ½ cup soy sauce

168

Food as a Human Right

4. 1 tsp ginger, grated 5. 1 cup red wine 6. ½ tsp five-spice powder 7. 1 tsp Szechuan ground peppercorn 8. 3 lbs boneless pork loin

Instructions: For preparation, combine the first seven ingredients to make a marinade. In a sealed bag, marinate the pork overnight in the refrigerator. Roast the pork in a 300° oven for 1.5 hours, basting often. While soy sauce might be preferable, you can choose your favorite dipping sauce for the cooked pork once you are ready to serve. Rice and/or noodles are often served as an accompaniment, decide according to your mood. Confucianism Confucianism is a difficult concept to comprehend for many reasons. Some scholars argue that Confucianism is a religion, while others consider it a philosophy or way of living. Regardless, it still deserves attention for its potential to illustrate how its teachings might inform how we think about food and food sovereignty. In Confucianism, there are many revered figures, including Confucius, but he did not focus much of his teachings on food and agriculture per se. He was more concerned with creating a more just and equitable world according to Asian values. And it is precisely here in his message that Confucianism can serve as a resource for the food sovereignty movement. Confucianism can be misunderstood in many Western cultures. It is well known for its “five great relationships.” These include the father to son, brother to brother, worker to worker, husband to wife, and ruler to citizen. In traditional Confucianism, the father-son relationship is the most important and serves as the base and model for the ideal family. These relationships also serve as the basis for what Confucius believed to be the two main goals of society writ large—namely, to cultivate excellent individual people and in turn create a harmonious society. These two goals work hand in hand; as we develop a good moral compass and become better human beings, this in turn will naturally result in a more just and ordered society. In Confucianism the ideal human being is known as the “junzi,” the perfect person. This person is diligent in studies, always seeks to gain more knowledge of the world, and embodies compassion for those in need. To this extent, the junzi can help to create a better world. Food sovereignty resonates with this concept insofar as it seeks the simple goals of sharing knowledge about farming, the environment, and the general well-

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

169

being of the world’s most impoverished and marginalized people. According to Confucian philosophy, by striving to become a better person, the natural consequence will be the creation of a more harmonious society. FOOD IN SIKHISM Sikhism is a religion that is not known in many Western cultures, but it is a thriving and powerful religious tradition that is estimated to have over 85 million followers worldwide.12 Sikhs have a strong love for justice and fairness. As such, the religion has much to offer with respect to Sikh ethical ideals and how they might apply to our current global food system. For Sikhs, perhaps the most important expression of how followers embody their religious beliefs is through the common meal at their holy temples or gurdwaras. Generally, participants will all sit (usually on a large open space on the floor) and gather to share food after a religious service. The sharing of a meal allows fellow worshipers to sit across from one another and build friendships through their common bonds of the religion. Meals are often eaten on paper plates and by hand rather than fancy, elaborate table settings. The following is one example of a popular Sikh recipe that you might find eaten during a communal meal. Although this is not necessarily unique to Sikhism, the following recipe is popular in the Punjab region and is often a favorite of Sikhs. Recipe 2: Aloo Gobi with Potatoes and Cauliflower 13 This recipe is a variation of a popular vegetarian meal found largely in the Punjab region of India. Although it is not specifically a Sikh recipe, it offers an example of a meal that can be shared with neighbors and strangers alike. It represents the importance of gathering together over a meal and the bonds that can be made in doing so. In a sense, it represents a counterexample to the corporate model of food production, which focuses more on mass consumption. This recipe can be easily served with naan bread. Ingredients: 1. Following Aarti Sequeira’s lead, create ginger garlic paste by combining ½ cup cloves, ½ cup fresh peeled ginger cut into ½ inch slices, and ¼ canola oil and process into a smooth paste. 2. 1 tbsp ground coriander 3. ¼ tsp turmeric 4. 1 cup water, divided 5. 2 tbsp peanut oil 6. 1 large serrano pepper, split down the middle, leaving halves attached

170

Food as a Human Right

7. 1 tsp cumin seeds 8. 1 small head cauliflower, cut into small florets 9. 1 russet potato, peeled and cut into ½-inch cubes (similar size to cauliflower) 10. Kosher salt 11. 2 tbsp freshly minced cilantro leaves, to garnish

Instructions: Mix paste with coriander, turmeric, and ½ cup water (set aside). Warm peanut oil in a pot over medium high heat. Add serrano for 30 seconds, then cumin seeds. Add garlic paste mixture and cook until thick; add cauliflower and potatoes; ½ cup water and stir to coat. Cook 15 minutes and serve with naan bread. This recipe provides an example of the diversity of a vegetarian meal that is simple, yet it illustrates religious traditions that have an ethic of peace and conviviality. Communal meals at gurdwaras around the world welcome both Sikh practitioners and people of different faiths to join in communion over a meal. As a community meal, this Sikh tradition illustrates the importance of eating together through the common bonds all Sikhs share. However, Sikhs also welcome non-Sikhs to this meal, thus demonstrating a certain solidarity with all those communities who might need nourishment. During these meals Sikhs do not proselytize, rather they simply enjoy the company of those around them, whether Sikh or not. Food sovereignty communities embody much of the same sentiment insofar as they seek to join in solidarity through the acts of farming and eating. While food sovereignty activists will discuss strategies to create a more just global food system, first and foremost is the importance of building community and cultural bonds. FOOD IN HINDUISM Hinduism is a way of life, a religion, and a culture. Food plays a central role in Hinduism and countries around the world. As a way of life, food also becomes a locus of study in which we can understand both the ethical values of the diverse Hindu traditions and the importance and varieties of food in different regions of India. In the Upanishads—some of the earliest Hindu religious texts—references to food are abundant. For instance, in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, one reads, “In the beginning there was nothing here at all. Death alone covered this completely, as did hunger; for what is hunger but death?”14 Food references also occur elsewhere. Then the breath within the mouth procured a supply of food for itself by singing, for it alone eats whatever food is eaten and stands firm in this world. But the other deities said to it: “This whole world is nothing but food! And you have procured it for

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

171

yourself by singing. Give us a share of that food.” It told them, “Come and gather around me.” They said, “Very well,” and gathered around it on all sides. Therefore, whatever food one eats through it satisfies also these others. When someone comes to know this, his people will gather around him in the same way; he will become their patron, their chief, and their leader; he will become an eater of food and a sovereign.15

It is interesting that this quote, while not directly associated with food sovereignty, still offers an insight into the concept of food sovereignty. This quote comes from a dialogue from the famous corpus of texts, the Upanishads. In the Mundaka Upanishad, food is referenced with respect to the highest form of knowledge in which one can experience the “imperishable.” Through heat brahman is built up; thereby food is produced. From food comes breath, mind, truth, and worlds, and immortality in rites. He is omniscient, he knows all; knowledge is his austerity. From him is born this brahman, as also name, appearance, and food.16

In this complex yet pertinent quote, we read about the stature of food in the Upanishads; it becomes part of the ultimate reality known as “Brahman.” Brahman is an ancient concept but can be summed up as the totality of everything. Of course, there are philosophical debates about its nature; Brahman is often understood as the unity that underlies all aspects of existence. It includes everything from the smallest plant, human beings, the world, and the cosmos. Brahman is described as two things, and in the Svetasvatara Upanishad, we read, “Knowledge and ignorance are set down in the imperishable and infinite for of brahman, where they lie hidden. Now, ignorance is the perishable and knowledge is the immortal.”17 Although these are just a couple of examples of early Hindu texts that reference the importance of food, they nonetheless might provide insight into the more contemporary subject of food sovereignty. They show that even in the world’s diverse religions and cultures, food has played a sacred role in the survival of a community, a religion, and a cause. In Hinduism, the idea of a “cause,” while not directly related to food issues per se, is also a potential resource for the food sovereignty movement. In a later, perhaps the most influential, Hindu text, the Bhagavad Gita, we find other examples of how Hindu tradition might provide further resources for the food sovereignty movement. The Bhagavad Gita (Song of the Lord) is a section of the much larger portion of the Sanskrit epic, the Mahabharata.18 The following quotes by the translator are prefaced by the idea that “One reason for the Gita’s universality is its capacity to bear almost any shade of interpretation, because of the variegated nature of its contents.”19 However, the text does have

172

Food as a Human Right

some specific references to the importance of food. For instance, we read in Chapter 17 (8–9): The foods preferred by the pure increase life-span, well-being, strength, health ease and pleasure; they are flavoursome, mild firm-textured, and easy to digest. Foods desired by the passionate are pungent, bitter, salty, very hot, sharp, dry, and burning; they cause pain, anguish, and sickness.20

Here we see somewhat of a contrast to cultures that enjoy foods that are traditionally enjoyed by different cultures, such as in Indian food with its spiciness or indigenous foods in China that enjoy salty tastes. Nonetheless, what is important is the notion that food serves as a means to cultivate well-being and human flourishing. While these brief examples of food in major world religious traditions highlight potential areas of research and interest for those involved in food sovereignty movements, they also introduce us to other more profound philosophies that can also inform the way we conceptualize the role of food in relation to our general ethical responsibilities to our fellow humans. LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE OTHER The writings of Emmanuel Levinas are complex, yet profoundly important, for understanding the ethics of human relationships. As a professor of philosophy at the Sorbonne in France and the director of the Ecole Normale Israe´lite Orientale, he says, In this perspective there is a radical difference between the suffering in the other, where it is unforgivable to me, solicits me and calls me, and suffering in me, my own experience of suffering, whose constitutional or congenital uselessness can take on a meaning, the only one of which suffering is capable, in becoming a suffering for the suffering (inexorable through it may be) of someone else.21

For Levinas, we can only truly begin to understand and articulate the meaning of philosophy, love, and justice through our experience of coming into direct contact with those who suffer. In his terminology, it is experiencing the “Face” of the other. He notes, From the start the encounter with the Other is my responsibility for him. That is the responsibility for my neighbor, which is, no doubt, the harsh name for what we call love of one’s neighbor; love without Eros, charity, love in which the ethical aspect dominates Passionate aspect, love without concupiscence. I don’t very much like the word love, which is worn-out and debased. Let us speak instead of the taking upon oneself of the fate of the other.22

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

173

Levinas draws a profound connection between simply thinking about the “Other”—or in layman’s terms, people we have never encountered or met—and the ethical responsibilities we have to them. Our ethical responsibilities include a sense of passion without lust, a love that is more genuine than mere physical attraction. Instead he suggests our responsibility is to take on the “fate of the other,” a disposition that requires us to understand the circumstances and life of all of those unknown, unseen faces we may never encounter in life. When posed with the question “Would the experience of the death of the other, and in a sense, the experience of death itself, be alien to the ethical reception of one’s neighbor?” Levinas responds, What is there in the Face? In my analysis, the Face is definitely not a plastic form like a portrait; the relation to the Face is both the relation to the absolutely weak—to what is absolutely exposed, what is bar and destitute, the relation with bareness and consequently with what is alone and can undergo the supreme isolation we call death— and there is, consequently, in the Face of the Other always the death of the Other and thus, in some way, an incitement to murder, the temptation to go to the extreme, to completely neglect the other—and at the same time (and this is the paradoxical thing) to Face is also the “Thou Shalt not Kill.” A Thou-Shalt-not-Kill that can also be explicated much further: it is the fact that I cannot let the other die alone, it is like a calling out to me.23

In this quote Levinas tries to explain his idea of the Face. Although his language is technical, his overall idea of our relationships with other people, especially those we may never encounter, is important for understanding the human condition. It is only through direct human contact and specifically through the contact that allows us to witness the suffering of others that we truly begin to understand the meaning of what it is to be human. Of course, Levinas knows we cannot physically come into contact with every human on earth, but we can orient our moral values in a way that we interact with people in such a way that we are speaking with them face to face. For most humans who do not suffer on a daily basis, it is easy to remain complacent about the possible hardships they suffer because we would rather live oblivious to them rather than having the knowledge of how our complacency may be contributing to their suffering. However, for Levinas, this is the starting point of ethics. It is only once we come face to face with the Other that we begin to learn the true nature of human relationships. When Levinas uses the term “Other,” he is referring to all those people who we might be afraid of or begrudgingly avoid because we do not want to feel a sense of guilt because we live comfortable lives and they live painful existences. It is only when we literally look deep into the “Other’s” eyes that we see their pain and we see how we might be contributing to the persistence of that pain.

174

Food as a Human Right

As the previous quote also reflects, this confrontation with the “Other” also involves a paradox. On the one hand, we see another person’s suffering, and our human nature wants to forget this experience, or better yet, we want to erase this memory of the other person’s suffering. This is a sort of defense mechanism because deep down we do not want to see others suffer, but as selfish beings, we care more about ourselves than the “Other.” In the extreme this evokes the desire to actually kill the other person so as to eliminate our own guilt. On the other hand, looking into the face of the other provides us with the opportunity to break down barriers. This confrontation may be uncomfortable, but it is an invitation to make a choice between whether to ignore their suffering or confront it head-on and think about ways in which we may help alleviate their pain. Levinas’s philosophy relates to food sovereignty in the indirect sense that when we look at the meals we, affluent citizens, eat on a daily basis, we should take pause and think about the faces, the humans, who literally provide the food we are nourished with every day. Moreover, we should pause to reflect on the fact that many of the farmers and food producers who provide us with our meals are families and communities who do not have the luxury of eating all the good dishes we make. For many people, they do not have the luxury of eating anything at all. While Emmanuel Levinas discusses the meaning of our ethical decisions on a more technical, philosophical level, his words ring true for those fighting for a more humane global food system. Food sovereignty advocates “call” us in the same sense that Levinas argues that all people who suffer “call” us. It is not a demand, not a violent sort of calling but rather one of desperation and suffering. In fact, this calling is often a silent calling in which we simply have to look into their eyes and see their suffering. In doing so, we are compelled—better yet, responsible—to take action to relieve their suffering in any way we can. While the work of Levinas is more abstract and complex, it might serve as a strange bedfellow to the ethical modes of thought found in cultures such that we might find in India. India is a complex country, and its major religion of Hinduism is difficult to easily summarize. In a somewhat odd way, it is similar to Buddhism in the sense that often even experts and philosophers will debate whether it should even be considered a “religion.” Instead, it is much more a way of life, a culture. Nonetheless, Hinduism plays a potentially important role in how we think about the future of food sovereignty and human rights. India itself has been a focus of concern with respect to human rights. It is a country not only of great wealth but also of great disparities between the rich and the poor. For instance, one of the world’s most infamous slums, Dharavi, is located in Mumbai in a district that is less than 10 miles away from the first ever onebillion-dollar home, the Antilia House.

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

175

Controversy over the construction of this building existed from the beginning. The land was originally allocated for building an orphanage but was eventually usurped by a powerful real-estate firm, which then was able to sell the land for the construction of one of the most expensive homes on earth.24 Unfortunately, this one example is not unique. Rather it is indicative of a global trend in which we see a drastic gap between the rich and the poor, sometimes even within the span of a few miles. This small example is symbolic of the current state of the global food system and the gap between the haves and the have-nots. As discussed throughout this book, a significant problem that faces the food sovereignty movement is rooted in the much more complex issues associated with global poverty. The work of Thomas Pogge analyzed in the previous chapter not only has highlighted this problem but also offers a way forward. For Pogge, we need to take a more aggressive and honest approach to curbing poverty and hunger. Although his language regarding global poverty and the strategies that might curb it may seem extreme, this does not mean they are not true. VIGNETTE: RESTORATIVE JUSTICE, FOOD, AND RECONCILIATION The concept of restorative justice is a contentious but very important ethical concept that has helped a diverse group of global populations and communities as well as individuals who have suffered from simple crimes, such as robbery, to atrocities, such as genocide. Perhaps the most well-known advocate of the idea of reconciliation and restorative justice is Desmond Tutu from South Africa. As the chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Tutu held an important historical role in the development of the struggles of race relations in South Africa. Overseeing violence on both sides of pro- and anti-apartheid movements, he had to navigate the tumultuous waters of bringing victims and perpetrators together, sometimes face to face, to see if there could ever be forgiveness on either end. As Tutu notes with respect to the struggles that occurred with different groups in South Africa during the time of apartheid, In a real sense we might add that even the supporters of apartheid were victims of the vicious system which they implemented and which they supported so enthusiastically. This is not an example for the morally earnest of ethical indifferentism. No, it flows from our fundamental concept of ubuntu. Our humanity was intertwined. The humanity of the perpetrator of apartheid’s atrocities was caught up and bound up in that of his victim whether he liked it or not. In the process of dehumanizing another, in inflicting untold harm and suffering, inexorably the perpetrator was being dehumanized as well.25

176

Food as a Human Right

Tutu points out that the entire process of truth and reconciliation involved a difficult situation of coming to terms by both parties on whether there have been wrongs done. The major question for major players in the global food system is whether they think there have been any wrongs done. In a somewhat different context, Ronald Sider speaks about restorative justice by noting that one of its key elements is the effort to reintroduce the concept of community building when attempting to reconcile broken relationships. Sider works from a Christian ethical perspective, but his thoughts apply to secular notions of community as well. He notes that “justice includes restoration of the things people need for dignified participation in their community.”26 Sider’s emphasis on the importance of community is integral. For the poorest people in society to feel as if their opinions matter, and matter in a substantial way, we need to have institutions and social programs that support this endeavor. Sider continues by noting that [c]ommunity membership means the ability to share fully within one’s capacity and potential in each essential aspect of community. Participation in community has multiple dimensions. It starts with physical life itself and the material resources necessary for a decent life. It also includes participation in decision making, social life, economic production, education, culture, and religion.27

Inclusion of the poor and marginalized in all of these aspects of life is the only way to ensure that people live a flourishing and meaningful life. Sider also emphasizes that certain material possession such as food and shelter are essential for living a dignified life. Without them we cannot begin the process of reconciling broken relationships in the world. Food sovereignty, while not a religious movement, expresses many similar sentiments. In order to create a more just global food system, we need to repair human relationships first. Repairing human relationships, in turn, must begin by educating more affluent global citizens about how their consumption decisions might negatively impact global farmers. Following the theme of reconciliation, Norman Wirzba, a professor of theology, ecology, and rural life at Duke University, notes, It is important to underscore that the scope of God’s reconciling work extends beyond humanity to include “all things, whether on earth or in heaven.” For much of its history the church has suffered from a reconciliation deficit disorder. This disorder is reflected in two misguided beliefs: (1) that God cares only for human beings, and (2) that people can flourish while the memberships of creation languish.28

Wirbza’s quote here brings attention to the issues associated with restorative justice to the extent that caring for the natural world is

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

177

intimately connected to caring for the human world as well. Restorative justice is primarily concerned with reconciling relationships between human beings at the beginning, but it is also often done over the course of eating together. Looking back to infamous historical eras that eventually require reconciliation between races, cultures, and governments, the particular themes appear to be common. In the United States, reconciliation was sought after in the years following the abolition of slavery; in the case of South Africa, it took place after apartheid, and today it takes place in different forms whether it is police violence in the United States or food riots in the Middle East. Although the term “reconciliation” is often discussed in religious contexts, it is also an issue in which secular movements such as food sovereignty seek to rectify past and present injustices. Food sovereignty activists look to reconcile the abuses, mistreatment, and outright violation of human rights by national governments and multinational organizations, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank. How does food play a role into all of this? Restorative justice is partially based on the foundation of upholding human rights, which include the right to food. If food is denied to people due to the policies of multilateral organizations, then there is no reconciliation. Food sovereignty seeks this reconciliation in a nuanced way. On the one hand, it diligently fights for justice, but on the other hand, it also recognizes the need to cooperate with political and cultural forces that might not see them eye to eye. This sentiment is mirrored in the efforts of the South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission interviews and hearings. In a similar sense that victims and perpetrators were brought together to express their personal experience, many of which were utterly unbearable for many, so too do food sovereignty activists attempt to bring together the forces of agribusiness and national governments that wield complete power with the small-scale and peasant farmers who suffer under this global food system. What food sovereignty mirrors in movements such as those in South Africa is the notion that we might have some common foes in the battle against injustices in the food system. However, just like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s committee meetings in South Africa, as well as other experiments with similar proceedings, this is not a free pass to those who have violated people, and, ultimately, most of the power is held by those who have been oppressed and marginalized. For the entire concept of reconciliation, there has to be justice that is ultimately served. Whether it is in the form of legal punishment or in the simple case of allowing for victims to finally have their voices and stories brought to attention, the reconciliation commissions attempted to accomplish these goals. In the same sense, food sovereignty activists and the voices of unheard farmers around the world seek to bring the same injustice issues to light.

178

Food as a Human Right

However, what is perhaps the most important, and possibly the most significant difference between food and the plight of peasant and local, small-scale farmers, is the fact that many organizations and players who have created the current global food system think that they have done nothing wrong. They do not think that they have committed any human rights violations and that they have hurt the potential for the uplifting of impoverished populations, and they do not always think that the birth pains of development are necessarily a bad thing. Instead, we must push through things, and eventually all boats will rise, much like the lifeboat ethics discussed earlier in this chapter. When we can get past these initial birth pains, we will eventually all be in a better place, even if this involves some periods of suffering along the way. This is part and parcel of the ethical dilemma that faces many food sovereignty organizations. On the one hand, they demand justice, and on the other hand, they are often faced with corporations, national governments, multilateral organizations, and global trade agreements that do not see any wrongs being done intentionally. And when these groups see wrongs being done, they attempt to possibly change policies, but this occurs after the harms have been done. It becomes a sort of vicious cycle of back and forth in which those who suffer the most are continually pushing the boulder up the mountain like Sisyphus did in the classic epic in Greek mythology and modernized in literature by Albert Camus. They fight thinking they are making progress—and in many cases they are—but there remains the question of whether this “progress” will actually fundamentally change the global food system. Although somewhat idealistic in nature, food sovereignty movements and the evolution of its definition have already begun to see this conundrum. It is idealistic in the sense that tackling such large problems of inequalities in the global food system can be overcome, yet it is very practical in its street efforts to make this realization come true. Ultimately, this is where we see the close proximity with concepts of truth and reconciliation and food sovereignty in the sense that both seek to heal wounds that might not be able to heal immediately but hopefully will be healed in future generations. Of course, this takes continued diligence, and particular strategies and attempts will remain unfulfilled, but the spirit and energy are not only still there but also growing. As long as the plight of marginalized and dispossessed global farmers continues to be heard, even if in small ways, that hope remains, and that hope is actually supported by certain literal moments of progress. It becomes a beacon and vanguard for potential change in the global food system. The following recipes include three examples of meals that relate to the vision of food justice, the food sovereignty movement, and the cultivation of more humane and joyous human relationships. These recipes provide a very simple and fun way to think about not only the ways in which

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

179

modern societies have lost many of their cultures but also, more importantly, the ways in which we can regain them. Although we face many daunting issues such as climate change, deteriorating plant and animal environments, and persistent poverty and hunger, these recipes provide a few examples of diverse cuisines that introduce us to different cultures and can lessen our feelings of gloom about the magnitude of the global problems we face today. Recipe 3: Mini Pizzas Ingredients: 1. Premade, store-bought pizza dough, or flatbread 2. Pizza sauce or basic marinara 3. Olive oil 4. Mozzarella cheese 5. Dry spices: oregano, basil, rosemary, and thyme

Instructions: Making pizza together can be a great way to bond with friends, family, and the community. For this recipe, the options are limitless. For a quick and easy version, purchase your desired number of pieces of flatbread from your local grocery store. For preparation, add a thin layer of marinara sauce, a generous amount of mozzarella cheese, and whatever ingredients you want on your pizza. Leave approximately ¼–½ inch of space without sauce around the edge of the entire pieces of bread. On the edges of the bread that do not have sauce, lightly brush with olive oil to create a crunchy crust. Preheat your oven to the broil setting, and when pizzas are all assembled, heat until cheese is bubbly, and the crust is crisp. This is a fun way to view the importance of food and the importance of community and conviviality. If you are with family or friends, you get the joys of laughter, storytelling, arguing, and, ultimately, sharing a tasty meal together. As each person creates his or her own, unique pizza, you both learn others’ culinary preferences and provide a venue for discussing the origins of different ingredients and the people and cultures that produce the various ingredients. Recipe 4: Tacos Ingredients: 1. 1 package of 12 hard tacos 2. 1 package of small flour tortillas

180

Food as a Human Right

3. 1 24-oz container of sour cream 4. 1 12-oz jar of pickled jalapenos 5. 5 large beefsteak tomatoes 6. 1 large white onion (diced finely) 7. 2 lbs of taco meat (you can use a variety of proteins, including chicken, steak, shrimp, etc.) 8. 2 cans of refried beans 9. 2 bundles of fresh cilantro 10. 2 large heads of romaine lettuce 11. 6 green limes (cut into quarter wedges)

Instructions: Assembling this requires separate containers for each ingredient. The best way to serve is with biodegradable paper plates. Separate all of your ingredients onto individual plates, and place them on the kitchen countertop in a row (or two rows if space is limited). For soft tacos, one option is to wrap tortillas in aluminum foil and heat in the oven for approximately 7–10 minutes at 375°. More conveniently, for small parties, guests can simply microwave their tortillas for desired warmth. Making tacos is another great way to enjoy spending time with friends and the community. Preparing a taco bar is relatively simple but might make for a crowded countertop, but the end result is worth the effort. For one example, this following recipe offers one option for a traditional taco bar that can be the basis for other creative additions. This recipe provides ingredients for a party of four but can be increased depending on the number of people who will be visiting. Recipe 5: Indian Curry Ingredients: This recipe serves a party of four but can be increased according to the number of guests who will be attending your dinner party. You can make this recipe in either spicy or nonspicy versions. Serve either dish with basmati rice or naan bread for dipping. For a spicier version, keep recipe the same but add one serrano pepper. 1. Store-bought Indian curry powder (Note: There are many varieties varying from yellow, green, and red curry spice mixtures. Choose whichever sounds interesting to you and your guests.) 2. 4 medium Idaho potatoes, peeled and diced into ½-inch cubes 3. 4 large carrots, peeled and diced into ¼-inch discs

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

181

4. 4 large cloves of garlic 5. 1 large white onion 6. 3 cups of roughly chopped cauliflower 7. 1 bay leaf 8. 1 tsp cinnamon 9. 1 48-oz bag of basmati rice

Instructions: Preparing curry can be not only a little time consuming but also a great way to spend a long afternoon, enjoying time with friends and family. Using a large pot, boil potatoes for 30 minutes. Allow them to cool and dice into cubes. Place all ingredients into the large pot, and let them simmer for two to three hours. While waiting for the ingredients to cook, this time can be spent talking about the ingredients in the meal as well as catching up with friends and family. GUERILLA—THINK THERE IS A SILVER LINING? The majestic, endangered, and strong silverback gorilla is an endangered species that lives in central Africa. Poachers kill these animals for sport. Yet these animals can (ironically) teach us about the global food system and food sovereignty. The gorillas are sovereign of their own diminishing habitat, but they persevere. But to do so, they also require the help of human (wildlife protection) organizations to ensure their survival. In a similar sense, the food sovereignty movement tries to see the silver lining but recognizes the need to fight for the plight of the world’s hungry and impoverished. FROM LIVERPOOL TO HONG KONG AND BACK: CONNECTING THE LOCAL AND GLOBAL THROUGH URBAN FARMING The small neighborhood of Granby, Liverpool, in England represents an example of what grassroots groups and food activist movements are experimenting with as an alternative to current neoliberal economic systems. Community members in Granby live in poverty and have become resourceful by exploring ways to overcome their squalor by building community bonds and shared ownership of both shelter and land. Their efforts have emerged as a campaign for a community land trust (CLT), which seeks “to take back empty homes under community ownership.” Known as the “Granby Four Streets” project, this campaign is “an

182

Food as a Human Right

innovative attempt to establish an urban CLT as a vehicle for neighbourhood regeneration.”29 Living in areas where buildings and empty land are left to continue to deteriorate, residents have decided to take matters into their own hands regardless of the legality of occupying the neighborhood and growing food on its vacant lands. This is an experiment in which redevelopment is “envisioned as a piecemeal experiment in community self-help, drawing mostly on local skills and resources, in stark contrast to the speculative development model.”30 Ultimately, this project is an example of resistance against the neoliberal capitalist model that looks at property and land as things to be commodified and bought and sold without regard to the consequences this commodification might have on the residents of the area. Residents have come to recognize that traditional political avenues for enacting change have failed and thus have decided to take alternative actions. One significant strategy that the CLT campaign has utilized is guerilla gardening, the growing of food on unoccupied land but land that is technically not the legal possession of the residents of Granby. As a challenge to the neoliberal capitalist model, the CLT prototype is neo-Marxist in the sense that “the commons stands at the beginning of capitalist history, triggered by initial acts of private enclosure, which formed the basis of primitive accumulation and divorced people from the land and the means of sustaining themselves.”31 To this extent, the CLT mirrors much of what the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) is doing in Brazil—namely, the occupation of unused land for the betterment of the community. As Thompson remarks, Commons are constituted by values and practices largely free from transactional market relations: mutual aid, cooperation, solidarity. Commons are simultaneously material resource and social practice, brought into dialectical unity through collective labour.32

Through the cooperative use of land and housing, the CLT model parallels other food activist movements’ fight for a more humane and just global food system. The food sovereignty movement, while not directly connected to the CLT project, serves as an example of the organic—even if distant—food justice social movements that are in unison in terms of vision. The CLT model is based on two fundamental concepts that not only are at the core of its mission but also contain certain conceptual problems. On the one hand, the CLT movement [e]ffectively captures the value of land locally—anchoring increasingly mobile capital in place and preventing its extraction—for long-term community benefit and economic security against the treat of financial speculation, public

Ethical Analysis of Food Sovereignty and the Ethics of Globalization

183

disinvestment or displacement; thereby challenging neoliberal financialisation of land by blocking the rights of individuals to profit on their share of equity. Second, this enables the “stewardship” of the land for future as well as current inhabitants.33

As a primary concept, the CLT seeks to sustain the longevity of its marginalized and impoverished communities. Equally important is the notion of stewardship. It is only through a profound respect and reverence for the land that we can truly begin to understand how it is the source of human life. Without the land (and its waters), we have no life. Although not specifically articulated by the CLT movement, its goals are part of a larger yet often unnoticed effort to make the poorest parts of the world—particularly urban areas—more beautiful. As Marc Antrop remarks, Landscape changes are seen as a threat, a negative evolution, because the current changes are characterized by the loss of diversity, coherence and identity of the existing landscapes. . . . Landscapes always change because they are the expression of the dynamic interaction between natural and cultural forces in the environment. Cultural landscapes are the result of consecutive reorganization of the land in order to adapt its use and special structure better to changing societal demands.34

In particular, as Antrop notes, urban landscapes can change, and when they do, it often does not settle correctly with all residents. Antrop’s comments identify a potential conundrum for urban communities that decide to grow their own food. For instance, residents might question whether large gardens, with all their growth and lack of uniformity, might be seen as an eyesore to some. Others might consider the greenery an attractive thing that helps bring life to the community, which would otherwise not have the means to cherish the natural growth of plants and gardens. Across the world just outside of the city of Hong Kong, another type of guerilla gardening has taken place. Known as the “morning walkers’ gardens,” this movement is also similar to urban garden movements, such as those exemplified by the CLT, and the MST in Brazil. To the extent that they are considered illegal, they confound the way we think about the human relationship with nature as well as the social, economic, and political conditions that currently dominate the world in harmful ways. The symbolic value of guerilla gardening lies in its capacity to express a message—whether to demonstrate that something widely thought to be impossible is possible, as a reminder to the community about an important event that happened in a place, to transmit hope or optimism, or to show resistance against government planning policies such as redevelopment.35

184

Food as a Human Right

This concluding section began with the odd reference to the silverback gorilla. As an endangered species, the silverback represents how the endangered communities and lands are similar to the extent that the brief examples here illustrate the potential for food justice movements such as food sovereignty that can serve as a beacon of hope for the future of the global food system itself. This beacon is one that sheds light on not only the current injustices of the system but also the cracks and fissures that can be utilized to begin growing a new system. Therein lies the silver lining. The power of the silverback gorilla is representative of the power of the food sovereignty movement. It might be an endangered movement to the extent that it requires respect and preservation, but it also introduces us to new ways to think about the global food system as well as open doors for future opportunities. As a growing movement, food sovereignty has strength in numbers but still remains unknown to many affluent citizens who do not have to worry about whether they will be able to eat each day or where the foods that they do eat come from. As a metaphor for the food sovereignty movement, the silverback gorilla captures much of the symbolism that is involved in the movement’s efforts. As a nomadic animal, the silverback travels many miles each day to forage for food, much like the travels of food sovereignty activists. Groups such as Via Campesina take to the streets across the world on a regular basis to peacefully protest against the injustices that are systemic in the global food system. While the silverbacks travel in small groups of two to four pairs, the communities are relatively small compared to other animal species. But this, too, is somewhat symbolic of global food sovereignty communities. Similar to the silverback and its behavior of building new nests each night before sleep, the food sovereignty movement is also constantly on the move, recognizing that diligent and continual protest against the injustices of the global food system can only be counteracted by persistent and equal fervor, which is necessary for challenging the status quo.

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

So, we begin where we started: food. Whether it is the food sovereignty movements, obtaining food security, or combating global hunger and poverty, we all play a crucial role in this effort. The largely unheard voices of those who produce our food are starting to be heard. Perhaps this echo or call to consciousness is not a coincidence. As has been discussed in this book, the world’s great religions, whether indigenous religions, Hinduism, Buddhism, or the three major monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, have much to say about food, hunger, and compassion. Perhaps we can look to the simple thing of food and all its implications to begin to heal many of the problems we face today. Perhaps, as we have always done, food and the knowledge of food can bring us all together, whether it is around the dinner table or into contact with foreign cultures. But the production, consumption, and distribution of food are not simply religious interests but rather these are secular. Food sovereignty activists do not require members to be part of any particular religion, nor do they insist that people have any religious affiliations at all. If anything, food sovereignty has a certain “absolute truth”—namely, that food should be considered a human right. As a human right, in turn, it also must be produced in just ways, ways that minimize discrimination and inequality and protect the natural environments of those who produce most of the world’s food. Food provides bridges to the many gaps that divide us and also serves as an avenue to bring us together. A famous story of the creations of

186

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

humanity, nature, and the world published by the legendary Subcomandante Marcos of the Zapatista Movement is La Historia de Los Colores (The Story of Colors).1 This is a beautiful, short book that reminds humanity about the beauty, potential, and hopes of all humanity. In many ways it represents the possibilities of human rights and the ideals of food sovereignty. It also offers a poetic yet simple example of how important it is for people to struggle against the status quo of the corporate food system, the harmful policies and practices of multilateral organizations, and governments that support these policies. Instead, what is in need is a paradigm shift where the preservation of diverse human cultures and their foods, unique recipes, and the histories of food traditions are remembered and continue to thrive in the future. A few short excerpts from La Historia de Los Colores are fitting for these goals. Retelling the story of the macaw bird, known for its colorful feathers, the following examples might provide a very simple way in which we might change our perspective about the global food system as well as the causes of human rights and the food sovereignty movement. Marcos begins by saying, “I light my pipe and, after three ceremonial puffs, I begin to tell you—just the way old Antonio used to tell it.” As the macaw and Antonio begin to discuss the beauty of nature, the macaw says, “The macaw didn’t used to be like this. It hardly had any color at all. It was just gray. . . . The gods themselves didn’t know who made the birds. Or why.” According to the legend, after a period of time the gods began quarreling among one another. The story continues to explain that the gods were fighting because there were only two colors: black and white; the black ruled the night, and the white ruled the day. But there was a third color, the blending of black and white: the gray. “It was the gray which painted the dusks and the dawns so that the black and the white didn’t bump into each other so hard.” This quote is symbolic of much of the global communities that suffer from poverty and hunger. Life is gray. The quote is also symbolic of many of the issues facing human rights and the food sovereignty movement. Often the problems that face different communities around the world are not easily solved and require a certain gray area when it comes to discussions and strategies for how to answer the questions about poverty and hunger. Continuing with the story or narrative, after the frustration of the argument, one of the gods went for a walk and injured himself, noticing for the first time that the blood from his wound was red. This was the first introduction that there were colors other than black, white, and gray, and the birth of the color “red” happened. Now that the gods realized that there might be more colors, they became curious, and one of the gods “looked for a color to paint the feeling of hope.” He found it, though it took him

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

187

a while, and he went back to show it to the assembly of gods, and they named this color “green,” the fourth color. Now that the gods were curious, another god decided to dig into the earth attempting to find the heart of the world. As he was throwing dirt in this effort, he discovered the color “brown,” the fifth color. Deciding to join the origins of these newly found colors, another god decided to look in the opposite direction and traveled straight upward, and when he reached a height in which he could look back, he saw that the earth was largely blue. As the gods’ curiosity continued to increase, another god searched for another new color when he heard the sound of a child laughing. It was through the child’s laughter that the seventh color was born, the color “yellow,” the color of the sun. After all the colors were eventually discovered, the gods were tired and decided to drink some pozol and go to sleep.2 They slept underneath a ceiba tree after putting all the colors into a box. But the colors somehow escaped because the box was not secured tightly, and the colors began to play happily and “made love to one another,” making even more colors. When the gods eventually woke up, they climbed the ceiba tree and began to paint the world in all the colors they had discovered. As they were splattering these colors all over the world, they also fell upon men and women “and that is why there are peoples of different colors and different ways of thinking.” Again, after all this work, the gods became tired and decided to sleep. After sleeping, they began to think of ways to preserve all the colors and noticed a macaw bird and started to spread the colors all over its feathers. This is the story of how the macaw became such a colorful bird. And the macaw, goes strutting about just in case men and women forget how many colors there are and how many ways of thinking, and that the world will be happy if all the colors and ways of thinking have their place.3

This brief paraphrasing of this Mexican folklore provides us all with a simple way to think about the global food system, food sovereignty, and human rights. Just as the colors of the macaw are vibrant and diverse, so too are our food and human cultures. Perhaps we can envision a future similar to the ways the gods in this story discovered and created the beauty of the world. This is the vision of food sovereignty and human rights, a vision in which we can all contribute to and help create. But the story of food sovereignty is not simply limited to legendary, religious origins. Although religious beliefs deserve greater attention due to their influence of diverse religious beliefs and practices around the world, perhaps equally important are secular narratives that might have better traction for impelling substantial cultural and political change. The food sovereignty movement not only relies largely on political and cultural

188

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

activism but is also rooted in the ordinary people who make up the movement. Related to the story told earlier, the conceptualization of human rights and food justice also finds an unordinary bedfellow in the realm of classic literary works. In Fyodor Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov, the chapter “Rebellion” recounts the horrible story related to food, war, and hunger and the potential that desperation born out of starvation can ultimately lead to the complete reversal of natural human bonds. Listen: if everyone must suffer, in order to buy eternal harmony with their suffering, pray tell me what have children got to do with it? It’s quite incomprehensible why they should have to suffer, and why they should buy harmony with their suffering. Why do they get thrown on the pile, to manure someone’s future harmony with themselves? I understand solidarity in sin among men; solidarity in retribution I also understand; but what solidarity in sin to little children have? And if it is really true that they, too, are in solidarity with their fathers in all the father’s evildoings, that truth certainly is not of this world and is incomprehensible to me.4

Although this quote refers to a profound ethical and theological conversation between two main characters, Alyosha and Ivan, it speaks to many of the key concepts of food sovereignty. Food sovereignty movements bring attention to the plight of the most dispossessed humans, and often these are children. This small yet poignant story relates to a theme in current human rights and food sovereignty movements to the extent that they bring light to the most vulnerable people affected by the industrialized global food system. According to the joint work of the World Bank Group and UN International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF), the 2016 report, Ending Extreme Poverty: A Focus on Children,5 at the time of its publication concluded that 385 million children were living in extremely poor households in 2013. Perhaps most strikingly, children are more than twice as likely to be living in households in extreme poverty—with 19.5 percent of children in developing countries estimated to live on less than $1.90 a day, compared to 9.2 percent of adults. The suffering of children is particularly cruel, and the quote from Dostoevsky offers a literary example of the intolerable suffering of the world’s most poor and vulnerable. Children do not have the means to fend for themselves, and when a global food system is organized in such a way that it is today in which their parents are also ill-equipped to provide for their children, we find ourselves caught in a vicious cycle of depravity. Returning to the quote by Dostoevsky, the notion of striving toward a more unified world of compassion and provision becomes all the more poignant when we consider our failure to provide for the world’s children. Despite the ostensible coordination between organizations such as

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

189

the World Bank and UNICEF, the record of the World Bank’s historical efforts proves somewhat ineffective if not dubious due to their financial ties to the world’s wealthier countries. Organizations such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) are often perceived as offering a ticket to entrance into the global economy and thus the possibility of impoverished countries to rise out of poverty. Yet contributions to the IMF and World Bank are largely from the United States and other major industrialized countries. The United States was a leading force in the establishment of the World Bank in 1944 and remains the largest shareholder of the World Bank today. As the only World Bank shareholder that retains veto power over changes in the Bank’s structure, the United States plays a unique role in influencing and shaping development priorities.6

Bringing this short narrative back to Dostoevsky’s chapter, ironically, if not fittingly, titled “Rebellion,” ends with the short but incisive words from Ivan claiming that he refuses to accept the conditions in which the belief in God comes with the requisite of accepting human suffering. Referring to his ruminations on the belief in God, Ivan proclaims, Is there in the whole world a being who could and would have the right to forgive? I don’t want harmony, for love of mankind I don’t want it. I want to remain with unrequited suffering. I’d rather remain with my unrequited suffering and my unquenched indignation, even if I am wrong. Besides, they have put too high a price on harmony; we can’t afford to pay so much for admission. And therefore I hasten to return my ticket. And it is my duty, if only as an honest man, to return it as far ahead of time as possible. Which is what I am doing. It’s not that I don’t accept God, Alyosha, I just most respectfully return him the ticket.7

The last lines of Dostoevsky’s quote resonate, again, with the protests of those who advocate for food sovereignty. In their efforts to bring to light the grievances by poor communities against the powers of organizations such as the IMF and World Bank and asymmetrical trade agreements such as the WTO, the food sovereignty movement echoes Dostoevsky’s words in the sense that they are refusing to accept the truth that this present world is the best possible one despite the problems we face. Food sovereignty activists argue that the “gods” of industrialized agriculture who determine the “conditionalities” of how impoverished countries must act in order to receive loans and aid, as well as the “gods” of powerful corporations who are able to exploit the hardships of peasant and small-scale farmers, worldwide, in order to maximize profits are not the “gods” who will inevitably rule. Many of these farmer communities speak in a tone similar to that of Dostoevsky, which says, “We don’t accept

190

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

the ticket you are offering”—namely, we do not necessarily want your aid, your “conditionalities,” or your expert advice. Instead, global farmers demonstrate that they are the most equipped to understand the land and environments in which they live. It is not that they patently refuse help, but rather many communities want the autonomy to make their own decisions. When national governments, which are shackled by multilateral organizations and global trade agreements, are essentially crippled by the current structure of the global food system, there is little room for the voices of small-scale and peasant farmers. Although the task seems daunting, the food sovereignty movement continues to make progress. At the very least, they bring attention to the various “false gods” of industries and multilateral organizations. As the voices of these communities continue to rise, the food sovereignty movement gains more traction and influence. Moreover, it also continues to offer new perspectives to different global communities as to how they might fight for food justice in their own contexts. To conclude this book are the following recipes that are my own. They represent the sentiment of food sovereignty and food justice to the extent that these movements cannot be solely analyzed in terms of purely Western academic research but must also include the personal stories and narratives about our food-consumption practices. In sharing stories about our food-consumption practices, we begin to learn about other cultures, our local communities, and the greater global communities in which our food is produced. These stories also bring attention to current cultural and, perhaps most importantly, political issues that must continue to be explored in the spirit of food justice movements. RECIPES Legend has it that it was the Earl of Sandwich who invented what we consider the modern sandwich.8 Regardless, the sandwich is a popular food artifact that has now become a snack or lunch that can be found in cultures around the world. Whether in the form of open-faced sandwiches (which sandwich connoisseurs will heatedly debate as to whether it is a “true” sandwich) or in the more common form of various meats and vegetables placed between two slices of bread, the sandwich has become a staple meal for many. One might ask how a sandwich relates to the food sovereignty movement. Due to the almost infinite options of what to include in a sandwich, it represents the diversity of food cultures worldwide. There are Cuban sandwiches, ham and cheese sandwiches, banh mi sandwiches, Italian sandwiches, rye and lox sandwiches, and, well, the list goes on and on.

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

191

The following sandwiches are just a few examples illustrating the diversity and global reach of the sandwiches. In a small way, these recipes are a metaphor for the food sovereignty movement to the extent that they are representative of the cultural value of global food traditions. Recipe 1: Italian Sandwich Ingredients: 1. Ciabatta bread (this bread holds up to the salad dressing) 2. Iceberg lettuce 3. Yellow tomato 4. Prosciutto 5. Ham 6. Mortadella 7. Mozzarella ball (try to find a good fresh brand) 8. Italian dressing

Instructions: For sandwich topping, combine in a medium-sized mixing bowl, roughly chopped iceberg lettuce, ½-inch chunks of yellow tomato, salt, pepper, and fat-free Italian dressing. Let them marinate for around 30 minutes. (Note: The popular Food Network chef has made a variation of this sandwich that includes baking thick slices of eggplant that is baked with olive oil, salt, and pepper. This is a good option if time permits.) Recipe 2: Asian Chicken Sandwich Ingredients: 1. 1 thin chicken breast 2. 1 avocado 3. 1 tomato 4. ½ white or red diced onion 5. 1 lemon 6. 2 limes 7. 1 French baguette or ciabatta bread

Instructions: Marinate chicken breast(s) in a simple mix of fresh squeezed lemons and limes, one-fourth cup sesame oil, one-half cup soy sauce, salt, and

192

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

pepper. Heat oven to 375° and bake your chicken breast (or as many portions as you would like) for around 40 minutes depending on the thickness of the breast. Recipe 3: Vegetarian Sandwich Vegetarian sandwiches can be delicious even for committed carnivores. The following recipe is one variation of a packed veggie sandwich that will leave anyone filled up and looking to re-create their own version depending on their tastes. Ingredients: 1. 2 pieces potato bread (or bread of your choice) 2. 1 cucumber, ¼-inch sliced 3. 1 red tomato 4. Alfalfa sprouts 5. Avocado, thickly cut into strips 6. Provolone cheese 7. Cream cheese mixed with chives, finely cut

Instructions: Assemble your sandwich with all ingredients, cut in half, and enjoy with homemade potato chips or your choice of soup or a salad. THE IMPORTANCE OF NARRATIVES As the recipes in this book have demonstrated in a small way, it is the importance of how we tell the stories of our own lives as well as those of others. Scholars have made progress in disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, religious studies, economics, and so forth, but it is the concrete experiences of the people that food justice, human rights organizations, and food sovereignty activists want to bring attention to. In doing so, they fight for a more egalitarian and culturally diverse world that enriches us all. Through learning, researching, and experiencing these movements, and the stories behind them, which bring attention to impoverished global communities and environmental conditions in our common era, we begin to contribute to envision creative ways in which to bring the world to a more just and humane place. Potentially, a good way to do this is to better inform more affluent citizens of the importance of telling the stories of the people who produce our food and under

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

193

which they labor. In a small way, this can come in the form of narratives of these people. Narratives are stories we tell. We tell them in an attempt to articulate many things, whether personal stories, stories of neighbors and communities, and stories about ideals, whatever they may be. Narratives can be enigmatic because just like symbols, they never capture the entire meaning or purpose of what we are trying to express. However, they do provide an invaluable way to communicate certain things that cannot be captured simply in words. Just as symbols mean different things to different people, narratives also draw us into the experiences and life stories of others. As stories, they have plotlines, twists and turns, and endings that sometimes end up being fulfilling and sometimes not. The food sovereignty movement has had many narratives over the course of its emergence on the global scene. It began as a concept and established itself as a movement and now has a global presence that has impacted individuals, communities, national governments, and global institutions. As a narrative, the food sovereignty movement has evolved over time and changed its goals and strategies for curbing global hunger, malnutrition, and poverty. Specifically, food sovereignty focuses on the plight of small-scale global farmers and the challenges and obstacles these farmers experience in the face of economic, cultural, and political narratives that minimize the history of many of these farmers. It challenges capitalistic economic systems, which reduce people, and specifically farmers, to simple faceless numbers, all in the effort to increase profits. While this may have not been necessarily intentional, many times it has been. The conceptualization and growth of human rights have had a similar narrative. In the beginning it was a practical concept that would help to potentially fend off the atrocities of war, but over time it has developed into an idea that is codified into laws and serves as a baseline for how human dignity can be protected and allowed to flourish. Human rights narratives also highlight the plight of many of the world’s voiceless people who produce our food. Whether fortunate or not, the power of human rights has brought invaluable attention to communities who otherwise would remain silenced by the status quo. Human rights laws and their enforcement have had a rocky road and still have much room for improvement, but the questions addressed throughout this book have addressed many of the most pressing issues and conundrums that need continued research. To conclude this with the idea that continued research is needed would not do justice to the urgency of the need to change the global food system. Fortunately, food sovereignty communities continue to fight on a day-to-day basis, and their struggles are just as energized now as they were during its early inception.

194

Conclusion: Where Have We Been, Where to Now?

As consumers in more affluent cultures, we have a certain moral responsibility to, at the very least, recognize and admit to the ways in which we have perpetuated problems in the global food system. Whether through blissful ignorance or through a lack of compassion, consumers of affluent countries must at the very least acknowledge where they stand, and this involves educating ourselves and our communities about the true nature of the global food system. In doing so, the concomitant responsibility is defending why we decide to live the way we do. Fight for the human right to food, and forging a path to food sovereignty is one major way in which we are held accountable to this responsibility.

Notes

INTRODUCTION TO GLOBALIZATION, FOOD SOVEREIGNTY, AND HUMAN RIGHTS 1. Christina Troitino, “Americans Waste about a Pound of Food a Day, USDA Study Finds,” Forbes, April 23, 2018, accessed September 21, 2018, https://www .forbes.com/sites/christinatroitino/2018/04/23/americans-waste-about-a -pound-of-food-a-day-usda-study-finds/#34c8dd394ec3. For various studies, see also, Jean C. Buzby, Hodan F. Wells, and Jeffrey Hyman, “The Estimated Amount, Value, and Calories of Postharvest Food Losses at the Retail and Consumer Levels in the United States,” accessed October 3, 2018, https://www.endhunger.org/ PDFs/2014/USDA-FoodLoss-2014-Summary.pdf. 2. See, for example, Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988). 3. For instance, see the work of scholar Philip McMichael, Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective, 2nd ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press, 2000). 4. William D. Schanbacher, The Politics of Food: The Global Conflict between Food Security and Food Sovereignty (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2010).

CHAPTER 1: GLOBALIZATION, DEVELOPMENT, FOOD SECURITY, AND THE EMERGENCE OF A GLOBAL FOOD REGIME 1. Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto, trans. Paul M. Sweezy and Leo Huberman (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1964), 62.

196

Notes

2. Walden Bello, Dilemmas of Domination: The Unmaking of the American Empire (New York: Henry Holt and Company, Metropolitan Books, 2005), 137. 3. William D. Schanbacher, The Politics of Food: The Global Conflict between Food Security and Food Sovereignty (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2010). 4. Rafael Pe´rez-Escamilla, “Food Security and the 2015–2030 Sustainable Development Goals: From Human to Planetary Health: Perspectives and Opinions,” Current Developments in Nutrition 1, no. 7 (July 1, 2017), https://doi.org/10.3945/cdn.117 .000513. 5. Jennifer Clapp and Doris Fuchs, “Agrifood Corporations, Global Governance, and Sustainability: A Framework for Analysis,” in Corporate Power in Global Agrifood Governance, ed. Jennifer Clapp and Doris Fuchs (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2009), 1. 6. Ibid. 7. See http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4671e/y4671e04.htm#TopOfPage. 8. David Harvey, The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 106. 9. Lenny J. Lowe, Assistant Professor, College of Charleston. Personal correspondence, August 25, 2018. 10. This section was a presentation delivered by William D. Schanbacher at the annual American Academy of Religion meeting in 2011. 11. Paul Farmer, Noam Chomsky, and Jonathan Kozol, The Uses of Haiti (Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press, 2003), 57. 12. See, for example, Daniel Tencer, “Pat Robertson Blames Haiti’s ‘Pact with the Devil’ for Quake,” AlterNet, January 13, 2010. 13. Peter Hallward, Damming the Flood: Haiti, Aristide, and the Politics of Containment (London: Verso, 2007), 20. 14. Ibid., 37. 15. The “status quo” used here refers to the general malaise that industrialized countries such as the United States illustrate toward Haiti. On the one hand, the United States is discomforted by having such an impoverished country so close to its borders. Yet, on the other hand, Haiti does not really prove to be a potential economic resource or trading partner that would greatly benefit the United States. 16. Polly Pattullo, Last Resorts: The Cost of Tourism in the Caribbean (London: Cassell, 1996), 29. 17. Martin Mowforth and Ian Munt, Tourism and Sustainability: Development and New Tourism in the Third World, 2nd ed. (London: Routledge, 2003), 59. 18. Jamaica Kincaid, A Small Place (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2000), 18–19. 19. Mowforth and Munt, Tourism and Sustainability, 64. 20. Paul Collier, “A Report for the Secretary-General of the United Nations January 2009,” accessed February 23, 2010, http://www.focal.ca/pdf/haiticollier .pdf. 21. Robert Zollick, “How to Rebuild Haiti,” The World Bank, accessed February 17, 2010, http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/ 0,,contentMDK:22457984~pagePK:64257043~piPK:437376~theSitePK:4607,00.html. 22. Hallward, Damming the Flood, 5.

Notes

197

23. Ellen Rosen, Making Sweatshops: The Globalization of the U.S. Apparel Industry (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 26. 24. Melissa W. Wright, Disposable Women and Other Myths of Global Capitalism (New York: Routledge, 2006), 2. 25. Joia Mukherjee, “Cholera in Haiti: Another Disease of Poverty in a Traumatized Land,” Partners in Health, October 22, 2010, https://www.pih.org/article/ cholera-in-haiti-another-disease-of-poverty-in-a-traumatized-land. 26. Joseph E. Stiglitz, Globalization and Its Discontents (New York and London: W. W. Norton and Company, 2003), 27. 27. OXFAM, Oxfam Press Release, June 20, 2007, https://www.oxfamamerica .org/press/oxfam-celebrates-win-win-outcome-for-ethiopian-coffee-farmers-and -starbucks/. 28. See, for example, Laura Reiley, “At Tampa Bay Farm-to-Table Restaurants, You’re Being Fed Fiction,” April 13, 2016, http://www.tampabay.com/projects/ 2016/food/farm-to-fable/restaurants/. 29. Peter M. Rosset, Food Is Different: Why We Must Get the WTO Out of Agriculture (Halifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood Publishing, 2006), xii. 30. Accessed May 29, 2018, see, for example, https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/2008/mar/23/food.ethicalliving 31. Rosset, Food Is Different, xix. 32. Roland Barthes, “Towards a Psychosociology of Contemporary Food Consumption,” in Food and Culture: A Reader, 2nd ed., ed. Carole Counihan and Penny Van Esterik (New York and London: Routledge, 2008), 29. 33. See, for example, Tamma A. Carleton, “Crop-Damaging Temperatures Increase Suicide Rates in India,” Proceedings from the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 114, no. 33 (2017). 34. Ibid., 8746–51.

CHAPTER 2: THE UNDERSIDE OF DEVELOPMENT 1. David Harvey, The Enigma of Capital and the Crisis of Capitalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 106. 2. Robert C. Tucker, ed., The Marx-Engels Reader (New York: W. W. Norton & Company; 2nd revised and enlarged edition, March 17, 1978), 77. 3. The various quotes, themes, and paraphrasing of Marx’s ideas can be attributed to The Marx-Engels Reader. 4. David Dequech, “Neoclassical, Mainstream, Orthodox, and Heterodox Economics,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 30, no. 2 (2007): 279–302. 5. Dequech, “Neoclassical, Mainstream, Orthodox, and Heterodox Economics,” 294. 6. Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), 114. 7. Ibid., 275. 8. Lynn White Jr., “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” American Association for the Advancement of Science 155, no. 3767 (March 10, 1967): 1203–7. 9. See, for example, “Advancing Together as One,” accessed September 28, 2018, https://www.bayer.com/en/advancing-together.aspx.

198

Notes

10. Raj Patel, Stuffed and Starved: The Hidden Battle for the World Food System (New York: Melville House Publishing, 2007), 1. 11. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, The State of Food and Agriculture: Leveraging Food Systems for Inclusive Rural Transformation (Rome: 2017), xv. 12. Raj Patel, The Value of Nothing: How to Reshape Market Society and Redefine Democracy (New York: Picador, 2009), 163. 13. Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, trans. Myra Bergman Ramos (New York and London: Continuum, 1970). 14. Paulo Freire, The Politics of Education: Culture, Power, and Liberation, trans. Donaldo Macedo (Westport, CT and London: Bergin & Harvey, 1985), 87. 15. Henry A. Giroux, The Politics of Education: Culture, Power and Liberation, trans. Donaldo Macdedo (Westport, CT and London: Bergin & Garvey), xvii 16. Iris Marion Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990), 56–57. 17. Buffalo Springfield, “For What It’s Worth,” 1966. 18. Kari Marie Norgaard, Ron Reed, and Carolina Van Horn, “A Continuing Legacy: Institutional Racism, Hunger, and Nutritional Justice on the Klamath,” in Cultivating Food Justice: Race, Class, and Sustainability, ed. Alison Hope Alkon and Julian Agyeman (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), 29. 19. Ibid., 29–30. 20. Gustavo Gutie´rrez, A Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1971), 54. 21. Ibid. 22. Mayke Kaag and Annelies Zoomers, eds., The Global Land Grab: Beyond the Hype (Halifax/Winnipeg: Fernwood Publishing, 2014), 71. 23. Fred Magdoff and Brian Tokar, eds., Agriculture and Food in Crisis: Conflict, Resistance, and Renewal (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2010), 160–61. 24. Ibid., 163. 25. Christopher M. Bacon, Kaelin Holland, and Eric S. George, “The Struggle for Food Justice in Fair Trade,” accessed November 5, 2018, Food First Backgrounder 17, no. 4 (Institute for Food and Development Policy, 2011), 2. 26. Gavin Fridell, “Fair Trade and Neoliberalism: Assessing Emerging Perspectives,” Latin American Perspectives 33, no. 6 (2006): 9–10. 27. See, for instance, Walden Bello, Dark Victory: The United States and Global Poverty, New Edition (Oakland, CA: Food First Books, 1999). 28. Peter M. Rosset, Food Is Different: Why We Must Get the WTO Out of Agriculture (Halifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood Publishing, 2006), 4–5. 29. Fridell, “Fair Trade and Neoliberalism.” 30. Ibid. Critics of the position contend that “market choices that can be a matter of life and death for fair-trade producers are merely ethical shopping options for Northern consumers who base their decisions on a variety of factors, including cost, convenience, image and level of disposable income” (22). “Fair trade is not just about enhancing the abilities of Southern partners to survive and compete in the global economy but confronting and changing the unfair structures of world trade” (17). 31. Ibid., 18. Fridell notes the main problem with this perspective is “it does not necessarily provide a more accurate depiction of what fair trade ultimately is

Notes

199

capable of attaining. . . . In fact, the success of the network since reorientation has been achieved not because it is an alternative to neoliberalism but because it is highly compatible with neoliberalism.” 32. Karl Marx, Capital, vol. 1 (London: Penguin Classics, 1990). 33. See also Marx’s “Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844,” in The Marx-Engels Reader, 2nd ed., ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: W. W Norton & Company), 66–132. 34. Fridell, “Fair Trade and Neoliberalism,” 20. 35. Ibid., 21. 36. Gavin Fridell, “The Co-Operative and the Corporation: Competing Visions of the Future of Fair Trade,” Journal of Business Ethics 86 (2009): 81–95. 37. Ibid., 82–83. 38. James Gregory, “The Great Depression in Washington State,” 2009. http:// depts.washington.edu/depress/hooverville_seattle.shtml. 39. Posted by Jason Tchir on November 10, 2015, accessed May 30, 2018, http:// www.foodnetwork.ca/everyday-cooking/photos/looking-back-wartime-recipes -for-home-cooks/#!006ddec80a304fb3de1e481f753d0fe9. 40. Accessed May 30, 2018, see, for example, http://assets.blog.foodnetwork .ca/imageserve/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2014/12/e900e341db600ce1e030f41 7371d1f88/x.jpg. If this specific recipe is not available, consumers can do a quick Internet search for carrot and honey cookies. This recipe is one example from Canada in times of war.

CHAPTER 3: FOOD SOVEREIGNTY AS AN ALTERNATIVE 1. Philip McMichael, “Historicizing Food Sovereignty,” Journal of Peasant Studies 41, no. 6 (2014): 933–57, https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2013 .876999. 2. Annette Aure´ lie Desmarais and Paul Nicholson, La Via Campesina: An Historical and Political Analysis, https://viacampesina.org/en/wp-content/ uploads/sites/2/2013/05/EN-10.pdf. 3. Oxfam Briefing Report, “An Economy for the 99 Percent,” accessed September 21, 2018, https://d1tn3vj7xz9fdh.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/file_attachments/ bp-economy-for-99-percent-160117-en.pdf, 2. 4. Accessed March 12, 2018, https://viacampesina.org/en/food-sovereignty/. See also Peter M. Rosset, Food Is Different: Why We Must Get the WTO Out of Agriculture (Halifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood Publishing, 2006). 5. Vandana Shiva, ed., Seed Sovereignty, Food Security: Women in the Vanguard of the Fight against GMOs and Corporate Agriculture (Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 2016). 6. https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/stories/food-farming-and-hunger/. See also Oxfam GB for Oxfam International under ISBN 978-0-85598-861-6 in January 2017, https://doi.org/10.21201/2017.8616. 7. Raj Patel, Guest Editor, “Food Sovereignty,” Journal of Peasant Studies 36, no. 3 (2009): 663–706, https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150903143079. 8. Raj Patel, The Value of Nothing: How to Reshape Market Society and Redefine Democracy (New York: Picador, 2009), 25.

200

Notes

9. Annette Aure´lie Desmarais, “Food Sovereignty: Some Initial Thoughts and Questions for Research,” in The Global Food System: Issues and Solutions, ed. William D. Schanbacher (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2014), 3. 10. Accessed July 14, 2018, https://nyeleni.org/spip.php?article290. 11. Michel P. Pimbert, Food Sovereignty, Agroecology and Biocultural Diversity: Constructing and Contesting Knowledge (London and New York: Routledge, 2018), 3. 12. Ibid. 13. Patricia Flores, “Seed Saving and Women in Peru,” in Seed Sovereignty, Food Security, 341–42. 14. Shiva, Seed Sovereignty, Food Security, vii. 15. Pimbert, Food Sovereignty, Agroecology and Biocultural Diversity, 4. 16. Eric Holt-Gime´ nez, Food Rebellions! (Cape Town, Dakar, Nairobi, and Oxford: Pambazuka Press, 2009), 16. 17. Pimbert, Food Sovereignty, Agroecology and Biocultural Diversity, 4. 18. Ibid., 5. 19. Eric Holt-Gime´ nez, Campesino a Campesino: Voices from Latin America’s Farmer to Farmer Movement for Sustainable Agriculture (Oakland, CA: Food First Books), 145. 20. Ibid., 112. 21. Ibid., 101. 22. Ibid., 99. 23. Ibid., 105. 24. Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life, trans. Steven Rendall (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 34. 25. Dell deChant, e-mail correspondence with author, June 11, 2018. 26. Accessed September 24, 2018, http://ciw-online.org. 27. Accessed September 24, 2018, http://ciw-online.org/slavery/. 28. Accessed September 24, 2018, http://www.fairfoodprogram.org. 29. https://ciw-online.org/about/. 30. http://ciw-online.org/blog/2017/09/harvest-without-violence/. 31. See, for example, “Announcing: Farmworker Women Launch ‘Harvest without Violence’ Campaign to End Sexual Violence in Wendy’s Supply Chain!” Posted on September 27, 2017, accessed September 24, 2018, http://ciw -online.org/blog/2017/09/harvest-without-violence/. 32. Patel, The Value of Nothing, 125–26. 33. Charlotte J. Frisbie, Food Sovereignty the Navajo Way: Cooking with Tall Women (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2018), 47. 34. Accessed May 26, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable -business/2017/apr/01/airline-food-waste-landfill-incineration-airports-recycling -iberia-qantas-united-virgin.

CHAPTER 4: LAND GRABS AND THE CHANGING FACE OF GLOBAL FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 1. Accessed May 28, 2018, see http://www.mstbrazil.org/content/what-mst. 2. Leandro Vergara-Camus, Land and Freedom: The MST, the Zapatistas and Peasant Alternatives to Neoliberalism (London: Zed Books, 2014), 193.

Notes

201

3. See http://www.mstbrazil.org/content/what-mst. 4. Joerg Rieger, ed., Religion, Theology, and Class: Fresh Engagement after Long Silence (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013), 61. 5. Vergara-Camus, Land and Freedom, 194. 6. Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, trans. Myra Bergman Ramos (New York and London: Continuum, 1970), 123. 7. Ibid., 96. 8. Clifford Geertz, Available Light: Anthropological Reflections on Philosophical Topics (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), 218. 9. Ibid., 219. 10. Accessed August 11, 2018, https://www.theworlds50best.com/ latinamerica/en/The-List/11-20/Gustu.html. 11. See https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/04/04/gustu-fine -dining-for-a-better-world. 12. See https://www.theworlds50best.com/latinamerica/en/The-List/11-20/ Gustu.html. 13. Michel Foucault, Fearless Speech, ed. Joseph Pearson (Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), 2001), 19. 14. Ibid. 15. Ibid., 106. 16. Environmental Protection Agency, “Heat Island Effect,” accessed May 9, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/heat-islands. 17. Lim Yinghui Astee and Nirmal T. Kishnani, “Building Integrated Agriculture: Utilising Rooftops for Sustainable Food Crop Cultivation in Singapore,” Journal of Green Building 5, no. 2 (Spring 2010): 105–13. 18. Ibid., 110. 19. Norman Wirzba, Food and Faith: A Theology of Eating (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 71. 20. See, for example, Daniel R. Block, Noel Cha´vez, Erika Allen Cha´vez, and Dinah Ramirez, “Food Sovereignty, Urban Food Access, and Food Activism: Contemplating the Connections through Examples from Chicago,” Agriculture and Human Values 29, no. 2 (2012): 203–15, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-011-9336-8. 21. John R. Taylor and Sarah Taylor Lovell, “Urban Home Gardens in the Global North: A Mixed Methods Study of Ethnic and Migrant Home Gardens in Chicago, IL,” Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 30, no. 1 (2015): 23. 22. Ibid., 27. 23. Anton Miglietta et al., Urban Renewal or Urban Removal? (Chicago: Chicago Grassroots Curriculum Taskforce, 2012), 9. 24. Ibid. 25. Ibid., 12. 26. Ibid., 27. 27. “The Rapid Expansion of Genetically Modified Soy Production into the Chaco Region of Argentina,” in The Global Land Grab: Beyond the Hype, ed. Lucia Goldfarb and Annelies Zoomers (Halifax/Winnipeg: Fernwood Publishing, 2014), 71–72. 28. Richard Stahler-Sholk, “Constructing Autonomy: Zapatista Strategies of Indigenous Resistance in Mexico,” in The New Global Politics: Global Social

202

Notes

Movements in the Twenty-First Century, ed. Harry E. Vanden, Peter N. Funke, and Gary Prevost (New York: Routledge, 2017), 15. 29. Ibid., 17. 30. Ibid., 19. 31. Gail M. Hollander, Raising Cane in the ’Glades: The Global Sugar Trade and the Transformation of Florida (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008), 29. 32. Ibid., 62. 33. Ben Richardson, Sugar: Refined Power in a Global Regime (London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan), 2. 34. Michael M. Grynbaum, “New York’s Ban on Big Sodas Is Rejected by Final Court,” New York Times, 2014, accessed August 9, 2018, https://www.nytimes .com/2014/06/27/nyregion/city-loses-final-appeal-on-limiting-sales-of-large -sodas.html. 35. Hollander, Raising Cane in the ’Glades, 38. 36. Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (New York: Penguin Group, 2005), 85. 37. Stahler-Sholk, “Constructing Autonomy,” 21. 38. Ibid., 24.

CHAPTER 5: THE CORPORATE CONSOLIDATION OF THE GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEM 1. Jerry Mander, “Machine Logic: Industrializing Nature and Agriculture,” in The Fatal Harvest Reader: The Tragedy of Industrial Agriculture, ed. Andrew Kimbrell (Washington, Cavelo, and London: Island Press: Foundation for Deep Ecology, 2002), 88, 87–91. 2. Elizabeth Smythe, “Food Sovereignty, Trade Rules, and the Struggle to Know the Origins of Food,” in Globalization and Food Sovereignty: Global and Local Change in the New Politics of Food, ed. Peter Andre´e et al. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2014), 291. 3. Melanie Warner, “What Papa John’s Doesn’t Want You to Know about Its Pizza,” U.S. News and World Report, August 14, 2013, accessed June 6, 2018, http:// www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/papa-john-doesn-article-1.1427130. 4. For an introductory text that outlines different ethical perspectives as well as how they might inform contemporary moral issues, see G. Lee Bowie, Meredith W. Michaels, and Robert C. Solomon, Twenty Questions: An Introduction to Philosophy, 3rd ed. (Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1996). 5. Accessed August 31, 2018, see https://www.thebrassworks.net/history-of -the-ford-tractor.html. 6. “History of Ford Farm Tractors,” accessed August 2, 2018, see http://www .ssbtractor.com/features/Ford_tractors.html. 7. “Henry Ford’s Revolutionary Farm Tractor,” accessed August 2, 2018, see https://www.farmcollector.com/tractors/henry-fords-revolutionary-farm-tractor. 8. “History of Ford Farm Tractors,” see http://www.ssbtractor.com/features/ Ford_tractors.html. 9. Ibid. 10. Ibid.

Notes

203

11. Jema` l Nath et al., “Consumer Faith,” Food, Culture and Society: An International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 16, no. 3: 421–36, https://doi.org/ 10.2752/175174413X13673466711840. 12. Whitney A. Sanford, Growing Stories from India: Religion and the Fate of Agriculture (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2012), 77. 13. Ibid., 76. 14. Wendell Berry, “Manifesto: The Mad Farmer Liberation Front” from The Country of Marriage (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1973). Also published by Counterpoint Press in The Selected Poems of Wendell Berry, 1999; The Mad Farmer Poems, 2008; New Collected Poems, 2012. 15. See Alvin M. Josephy Jr., The Nez Perce Indians and the Opening of the Northwest (New York: Houghton Mifflin Press, 1965), v. 16. Smythe, “Food Sovereignty, Trade Rules, and the Struggle to Know the Origins of Food,” 299. 17. See OECD, “Substantial Equivalence,” 2001, https://stats.oecd.org/ glossary/detail.asp?ID=2604. 18. Ibid., 304. 19. Mariel A. Marlow, Ruth E. Luna-Gierke, Patricia M. Griffin, and Antonio R. Vieira, “Foodborne Disease Outbreaks in Correctional Institutions—United States, 1998–2014,” American Journal of Public Health 107, no. 7 (July 1, 2017): 1150–56, https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.303816. 20. Food, Inc., directed by Robert Kenner (2009). 21. David Barboza, “Tyson Foods Indicted in Plan to Smuggle Illegal Workers,” accessed June 6, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/20/us/tyson-foods -indicted-in-plan-to-smuggle-illegal-workers.html. 22. See, for example, Business Ethics Quarterly 13, no. 4 (2003). ISSN 1052-150X, 503–30. 23. Publix, “Mission Statement and Guarantee,” 2018, http://corporate.publix .com/about-publix/company-overview/mission-statement-guarantee. 24. Accessed July 29, 2018, see, for example, the Publix mission statement at http://corporate.publix.com/about-publix/company-overview/mission -statement-guarantee. 25. Accessed July 29, 2018, see, for example, http://www.tampabay.com/ florida-politics/buzz/2018/05/15/publix-is-supporting-adam-putnams-run-for -governor-like-no-politician-before/. 26. Accessed July 29, 2018, see, for example, http://www.tampabay.com/ florida-politics/buzz/2018/05/29/father-of-parkland-victim-i-am-extremely -annoyed-at-publix/. 27. Accessed July 29, 2018, http://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/ 2018/05/25/publix-suspends-political-contributions-amid-statewide-protests/. 28. Accessed July 29, 2018, see https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media -resources/truth-advertising. 29. Jennifer Clapp, Food (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2012), 90. 30. Ibid., 106–9. 31. Susan Scutti, “Unsafe Levels of a Weed Killer Chemical in Oat Products, Report Says,” CNN.com, August 15, 2018, https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/15/ health/glyphosate-oat-products-ewg-study/index.html.

204

Notes

32. Maggie McGrath, “World’s Largest Food and Beverage Companies 2018: Anheuser-Busch, Nestle and Pepsi Top the List,” accessed August 5, 2018, see https://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2018/06/06/worlds-largest -food-and-beverage-companies-2018-anheuser-busch-nestle-and-pepsi-top -the-list/. 33. See, for example, http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/poverty/ 33EF03BB-9722-4AE2-ABC7-AA2972D68AFE/Global_POVEQ_BOL.pdf. 34. Tanya M. Kerssen, “Food Sovereignty and the Quinoa Boom: Challenges to Sustainable Re-Peasantisation in the Southern Altiplano of Bolivia,” Third World Quarterly 36, no. 3 (2015): 494. 35. Ibid., 502. 36. Virginia DeJohn Anderson, Creatures of Empire: How Domestic Animals Transformed Early America (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 77. 37. Clapp, Food, 113. 38. Ibid., 115. 39. Ibid., 117. 40. Ibid., 118. 41. Ibid. 42. Ibid., 99. 43. Ibid., 121.

CHAPTER 6: WATER 1. See, for example, Igor Shiklomanov, “World Fresh Water Resources,” in Water in Crisis: A Guide to the World’s Fresh Water Resources, ed. Peter H. Gleick (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993). 2. See, for instance, The World Bank, “Take Urgent Action to Combat Climate Change and Its Impacts,” SDG Atlas, 2018, accessed September 5, 2018, http:// datatopics.worldbank.org/sdgatlas/SDG-13-climate-action.html. 3. Jennifer Franco, Lyla Mehta, and Gert Jan Veldwisch, “The Global Politics of Water Grabbing,” in Global Land Grabs: History, Theory and Method, ed. Marc Edelman, Carlos Oya, and Saturnino M. Borras Jr. (New York: Routledge, 2015), 135. 4. Ibid., 136. 5. Jampel Dell’Angelo, Maria Cristina Rulli, and Paolo D’Odorico, Ecological Economics 143 (2018): 277. 6. National Park Service, “Grand Canyon,” accessed October 12, 2018, https:// www.nps.gov/grca/index.htm. 7. Sarah Zielinski, “The Colorado River Runs Dry,” Smithsonian.com, October 2010, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-colorado -river-runs-dry-61427169/#BuBJ6C3FpAtZBjcK.99. 8. Vandana Shiva, Water Wars: Privatization, Pollution, and Profit (Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 2016), 55–56. 9. Ibid., 69. 10. Ibid., 69–70. 11. Ibid., 70. 12. Ibid., 71.

Notes

205

13. Upanishads, trans. Patrick Olivelle (Oxford: Oxford World Classics, 1996), 7. References to the Upanishads and other Hindu, Buddhist, and Daoist texts will simply contain the English spelling of the various terms that are cited. 14. Bron Raymond Taylor, Dark Green Religion: Nature Spirituality and the Planetary Future, 1st ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009), 104. 15. Personal correspondence, June 22, 2018. 16. Eric Holt-Gime´nez and Annie Shattuck, “Agrofuels and Food Sovereignty,” in Food Sovereignty: Reconnecting Food, Nature and Community, ed. Hannah Wittman, Annette Aure´lie Desmarais, and Nettie Wiebe (Halifax and Winnipeg: Fernwood Publishing, 2010), 77. 17. Ibid., 79. 18. L. Lebreton et al., “Evidence That the Great Pacific Garbage Patch Is Rapidly Accumulating Plastic,” Scientific Reports, accessed August 9, 2018, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22939-w.pdf, https://doi.org/10 .1038/s41598-018-22939-w. 19. A. Whitney Sanford, Growing Stories from India: Religion and the Fate of Agriculture (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2012), 219. 20. Christopher Staley et al., “Differential Impacts of Land-Based Sources of Pollution on the Microbiota of Southeast Florida Coral Reefs.” Applied and Environmental Microbiology (2017). 21. Shiva, Water Wars, 3. 22. Ibid., 37. 23. Ibid., 27–28. 24. Michiko Iizuka and Jorge Katz, “Natural Resource Industries, ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ and the Case of Chilean Salmon Farming,”Institutions and Economies 5, no. 2 (July 2017): 259–86, accessed July 1, 2018, https://ejournal.um .edu.my/index.php/ijie/article/view/4820. 25. Ibid., 260. 26. Shiva, Water Wars, 108.

CHAPTER 7: HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN RESPONSIBILITIES, AND THE CAPABILITIES APPROACH 1. Julie Guthman, Weighing In: Obesity, Food Justice, and the Limits of Capitalism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011), 48. 2. Accessed May 23, 2018, see http://americannutritionassociation.org/ newsletter/usda-defines-food-deserts. 3. Jerry Shannon, “Food Deserts: Governing Obesity in the Neoliberal City,” Progress in Human Geography 38, no. 2 (2014): 258–59. 4. Accessed May 23, 2018, see https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform. 5. See, for example, Daniel A. Bell, East Meets West: Human Rights and Democracy in East Asia (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000). 6. Amartya Sen, Inequality Reexamined (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992), 1. 7. Ibid., 31. 8. Ibid., 27.

206

Notes

9. Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality (New York: Basic Books, 1983), 282. 10. Sen, Inequality Reexamined, 83. 11. Ibid., 85. 12. Karen Lebacqz, Six Theories of Justice: Perspectives from Philosophical and Theological Ethics (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1986), 17–18. 13. Martha Nussbaum, “Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice,” Feminist Economics 9, no. 2–3 (2011): 33, https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1354570022000077926. 14. John Rawls, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, ed. Erin Kelly (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001), 42–43. 15. James Ron et al., Taking Root: Human Rights and Public Opinion in the Global South (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), viii. 16. Ibid., 114. 17. Ibid., 116. 18. Ibid., 119. 19. Ibid., 123. 20. Ibid., 130. 21. Ibid., 153. 22. Accessed September 29, 2018, see, for example, http://www.pewforum .org/2017/07/26/findings-from-pew-research-centers-2017-survey-of-us -muslims/.

CHAPTER 8: ETHICAL ANALYSIS OF FOOD SOVEREIGNTY AND THE ETHICS OF GLOBALIZATION 1. Accessed June 7, 2018, see their mission statement at http://www.arcworld .org/about_ARC.asp. 2. Accessed June 7, 2018, see http://www.arcworld.org/projects.asp? projectID=9. 3. Accessed June 12, 2018, http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/art_ lifeboat_ethics_case_against_helping_poor.html. 4. Ibid. 5. Immanuel Kant, “Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals,” in The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant, trans. Mary J. Gregor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 73. 6. All further biblical references are taken from the Harper Collins Study Bible (NRSV). Matt. 14:13–20. 7. Febe Armanios and Bogac Ergene, Halal Food: A History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), 166. 8. Ibid., 219. 9. Ibid., 248. 10. Laozi, Daodejing, trans. Edmund Ryden (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 27. 11. S. K. Wertz, “The Five Flavors and Taoism: Lao Tzu’s Verse Twelve,” Asian Philosophy 17, no. 3 (November 2007): 251–61.

Notes

207

12. “Other Religions,” The Pew Research Center: Religion and Public Life, accessed July 9, 2018, http://www.pewforum.org/2012/12/18/global-religious -landscape-other/#spotlight. 13. This recipe is provided by Aarti Sequeira of the Food Network. Accessed July 10, 2018, see https://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/aarti-sequeira/ cauliflower-and-potatoes-aloo-gobi-recipe-1952543. 14. Upanishads, trans. Patrick Olivelle (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 7. 15. Ibid., 11. 16. Ibid., 268–69. 17. Ibid., 261. 18. Bhagavad Gita, trans. W. J. Johnson (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1994). 19. Ibid., vii. 20. Ibid., 71. 21. Emmanuel Levinas, Entre Nous: Thinking-of-the-Other, trans. Michael B. Smith and Barbara Harshav (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), 94. 22. Ibid., 103. 23. Ibid., 104. 24. http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/state-may-refer-ambanis-wakf-land -deal-to-c/825786/. 25. Desmond Tutu, No Future without Forgiveness (New York: Doubleday, 1999), 103. 26. Ronald J. Sider, Just Generosity: A New Vision for Overcoming Poverty in America (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books), 59. 27. Ibid., 60. 28. Norman Wirzba, Food and Faith: A Theology of Eating (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 174. 29. Matthew Thompson, “Between Boundaries: From Commoning and Guerilla Gardening to Community Land Trust Development in Liverpool,” Antipode 47, no. 4 (2015): 1022. 30. Ibid. 31. Ibid., 1025. 32. Ibid. 33. Ibid., 1026. 34. Marc Antrop, “Why Landscapes of the Past Are Important for the Future,” Landscape and Urban Planning 20 (2005): 22. 35. Holvert Hung, “Formation of New Property Rights on Government Land through Informal Co-Management: Case Studies on Countryside Guerilla Gardening,” Land Use Policy 63 (2017): 382.

CONCLUSION: WHERE HAVE WE BEEN, WHERE TO NOW? 1. Subcomandante Marcos, The Story of Colors/La Historia de los Colores: A Bilingual Folktale from the Jungles of Chiapas, trans. Anne Bar Din (El Paso, TX: Cinco Puntos Press, May 1, 1999). The translation of this edition does not contain page numbers.

208

Notes

2. Pozol is a corn-based alcoholic drink consumed in southern Mexico, in regions such as Chiapas. 3. The Story of Colors/La Historia de los Colores. 4. Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, trans. Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (New York: Random House, Vintage Classics, 1991), 244. 5. Accessed September 9, 2018, see, for example, https://www.unicef.org/ publications/index_92826.html. 6. Accessed August 4, 2018, see, for instance, http://www.worldbank.org/en/ country/unitedstates/overview. 7. Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, 245. 8. Legends surrounding the origins of the sandwich are still mysterious. Although attributed to the Earl of Sandwich, we do not know for sure.

Index

Agriculture, xiv, xvii, 3, 6, 10, 12, 15–16, 18, 27, 31, 33, 47, 49–52, 56, 59, 67, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77–79, 81, 83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 94–98, 105, 114, 118, 126, 130, 137, 168; Argentina, 38, 82–83, 88; Brazil, 38–39, 182–183; land grabbing and, 67–90 Alkon, Alison and Agyeman, Julian, 36 Anderson, Virginia DeJohn, 107; domestication of animals and meat eating, 107 Animals, xv, 38, 64, 67, 99–101, 106–107, 113, 117–118, 121, 123, 127–128, 130, 133, 147, 165, 181, 183; treatment of, 99–100; and Tyson Foods, 101 Antrop, Marc, 183. See also Community land trust Armanios, Febe and Ergene, Bogac, 165–166. See also Halla food Barthes, Roland, 17–18 Bayer, 31–32, 42, 105 Bello, Walden, 2 Berry, Wendell, 98–99; and death of farming, 98–99; and indigenous peoples, 101–102

Bhagavad Gita, 171–172 The Brothers Karamazov, 188 Buddhism and food, 163–164 Campesino a Campesino, 53–57 Capabilities Approach, xvi, 135, 137–139, 141, 146–148 Carleton, Tamma A., 19 Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), 2 Christianity and food, 161–164 Clapp, Jennifer, 2–3, 105, 107–109; and international food system, 108–109 Clinton, Bill, 4, 8 Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CWI), 59–62; Raj Patel and, 61 Collier, Paul, 9–10 Community land trust (CLT), 181–183 Confucianism and food, 142, 166–168 Corporate Consolidation, 91–111 Daoism and food, 166–167 deChant, Dell, 57–59 Dostoevsky, Fyodor, 188–189

210 Economic theory, 4; economic man, homo economicus, 49, 53; heterodox vs. heterodoxy, 28–32 Ethics, 27, 77, 92–94, 98, 147, 157, 159–161, 172. See also Food ethics; Lifeboat ethics Ethiopia, 13–14 Export processing zones (EPZ), xiv, 8–11 Fair trade, 39–42, 106; corporate model, 41 Faith and Food, 96–100 Farmer movements, 53–58 Farmer, Paul, 7 Farmer(s), x–xvii, 1, 4, 13–20, 24, 27, 29, 31–32, 35, 38–41, 47–62, 67–69, 75–77, 79, 91, 95–96, 99, 105–109, 116, 125, 128, 131, 147–148, 152, 174, 176–178, 189–190, 193 Farmer–to–Farmer, 53–57 Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 3–4, 33, Food ethics, 93–95 Food justice, 30–37; and food sovereignty, 35–36; Karuk people, 36; mission and values, 36–37 Food security, x–xii, 2–4, 24, 45, 48, 69, 120, 182, 185 Food sovereignty, x–xviii, 2–3, 12–14, 17–20, 24, 27–33, 35–37, 39–41, 43, 45–62, 67, 69–72, 74–77, 81–82, 91–92, 94, 96, 98–100, 114, 116, 122–125, 127, 133, 135–140, 142–144, 147–149, 152–153, 157–162, 168, 170–172, 174–178, 184–194; definition, 45–46, 48; ethical analysis, 157–179; evolution of, 46, 48–62; and fair trade, 39–41; globalization, 157; and human rights, 136–144, 147; La Via Campesina, 45; lifeboat ethics, 159–161; neoliberal impact on, 46–47; religion and, 157–179; sacred land project, 158; and theory of justice, 148–149; and water, 113–116, 122–124, 127 Foucault, Michel, 76–77, 144, 151; on Socrates, 76–77; on truth, 76

Index Free–trade, 2, 4, 16, 18, 39, 41, 46–48 Freire, Paulo, 33–35, 69–70, 77; on culture, 70 Fuchs, Doris, 2–3 Geertz, Clifford, 71–72; methodology of cultural study, 71; political theory, 71–72 Giroux, Henry A., 34 Global food system, x–xiv, xvi–xviii, 1, 3, 16, 18–19, 23, 27, 32–33, 35, 37, 40–41, 43, 48–49, 51, 55, 62–63, 65, 71–73, 75, 78, 101, 105, 107, 108–109, 116, 121, 123–125, 131, 135–136, 140, 142, 153, 157, 164–165, 169–170, 174–178, 181–182, 184, 186–188, 190, 193–194; corporate consolidation, 91; Ford farm tractor, 94–96; Monsanto, 91; Papa Johns, 92 Globalization, xi, xii, 1, 4, 16, 41, 51; and Communist Manifesto, 1; ethical analysis of, 157–179; and food security, 2 Gorilla, silverback, 181, 184; as metaphor for food sovereignty movement, 184 Gutierrez, Gustavo, 37 Haiti, 4–13, 64; economic development, 8–9; poverty, 8–9 Halla food, 99, 152. See also Febe Armanios and Dogac Ergene Hardin, Garrett, 159–161. See also Food sovereignty; Lifeboat ethics Hardt, Michael and Negri, Antonio, 29–30, 86–87; Empire and Multitude, 86 Hinduism and food, 170–171 HOPE II Act, 6–10 Human Declaration of Human Rights, 139–145. See also Human rights Human Responsibilities, 135–155 Human rights, x–xi, xv–xvi, xviii, 12–13, 19, 30, 32, 50, 52, 75, 116, 131, 135, 138–139, 148–150, 157, 161, 167, 174, 177–178, 186–188, 192–193; capabilities approach to human

Index rights, 135–154; and Coalition of Immokalee Workers, 59, 61; and food as, 136–138; food deserts, 137; and global poverty, 139–146; religiosity and, 149–154. See also Human responsibilities; Nussbaum, Martha; Rawls, John; Sen, Amartya; Universal Declaration of Human Rights International Monetary Fund (IMF), x–xi, 2, 6, 10, 12–13, 15, 23, 38, 47, 50, 55, 70, 140, 177–178, 189 Islam and food, 164–166 Judaism and food, 161–162 Kant, Immanuel, 76, 94, 160–161 Kyung–hae, Lee, 15; Korean farmers, 15; and WTO policies, 15–16 La Historia de Los Colores, 186–188 Land grabs, xiv, 67–72, 80, 114, 124, 127; Argentina, 82–83, 88; Brazil, 67–68; Chicago, 79–82; Florida, 84–85; Landless Workers’ Movement, (MST), 67–68 La Via Campesina, 45–47, 50, 184; neo–liberal policies, 46–47; World Food Summit, 3, 48, 50 Levinas, Emmanuel, 172–175 Liberation theology, 7, 34, 37–38, 150 Lowe, Lenny, 5 Marx, Karl, xiii, 1, 7–8, 19, 25–27, 33, 35, 41, 68, 99, 129, 182; alienation, 25; exploitation of labor, 25–26; food sovereignty and, 19, 27, 40; manuscripts of 1844, 24–25 McGrath, Maggie, 105 Mexico, 16, 62, 66, 83, 87, 116, 118, 128, 131, 150 Millennium Summit, 3 MINUSTAH, 5 Narratives, importance of, 192–193 National Association of Ecological Producers of Peru, 50–51

211 Negative rights, 138–139 Neoliberalism, 4, 10, 39–40, 46–47, 87, 181–183; and economic inequalities, 46–47; and food sovereignty, 46; and Via Campesina, 46 New Port Richey, 57–58 Nongovernmental organization (NGO), x, 6, 8, 10, 12, 58, 70, 108 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), 2 Nussbaum, Martha, xiv, 135, 143, 145–148, 157. See also Human capabilities Offenheiser, Raymond C., 13–14 Other, the, 172–175. See also Levinas, Emmanuel Oxfam, 13, 46–48; economic inequalities, 46; food, farming and hunger report, 47–48 Partners in Health, 12 Patel, Raj, 32–33, 48–49, 61–62 Peru, 21, 50, 72–75, 115; Favelas and fine Dining, 74–75; living in Cusco, 72–74; poverty cuisine, 72 Pogge, Thomas, xvi, 135, 175 Publix, 102–104; and Parkland tragedy, 103–104 Rawls, John, 148–149 Recipes: ahi avocado mold, 133–134; aloo gobi with potatoes and cauliflower, 169–170; Asian chicken sandwich, 191–192; bobotie, 89–90; carne asada burrito, 131–132; carrot and honey cookies, 44; chili con carne, 43–44; chimichurri and steak, 88–89; coconut mango pie, 65–66; fish sticks, 110–111; five–flavor pork roast, 167–168; flatbread pizza, 111–112; Hoover stew, 42–43; hummus bowl, 153–154; Indian curry, 180–181; Italian Sandwich, 191; jalapeno poppers, 110; Mexican coffee, 66; mini pizzas, 179; mud Pies, 20–21; nachos, 22; pork

212 dumplings, 132–133; potato chips with paprika, 21–22; pumpkin pie, 63–64; Spanish churro ice–cream bowl, 154–155; squash soup, 90; tacos, 179–180; tomato bowl with spaghetti, 154; vegetarian sandwich, 192 Reconciliation, 176–177 Reiley, Laura, 14 Religion, 6, 26, 30–31, 34–35, 71, 94, 96–98, 118–121, 139, 147, 150–152, 157–160, 163, 165–166, 168–171, 174, 176, 185; religion and agriculture in India, 97–98; Sanford, Whitney, 97–98. See also Buddhism and food; Christianity and food; Confucianism and food; Daoism and food; Hinduism and food; Islam and food; Judaism and food; Sikhism and food Restorative justice, 175–179 Rosset, Peter, 17 Schanbacher, William, xii, 2 Sen, Amartya, xiv, 135, 143–144, 157 Shannon, Jerry, 137 Shiva, Vandana, 51, 118; women in the global food system, 51, 126–127, 128–130 Sider, Ronald, 176 Sikhism and food, 169 Smythe, Elizabeth, 92, 100 Social movements, xvi, 2, 14, 28–31, 38, 45, 57, 70, 83–84, 87, 158, 182. See also Farmer movements South Africa, 175–179. See also Restorative justice Stiglitz, Joseph, 13 Suicide, 18–20; India farmers, 18–19; Kyung–hae, Lee, 15

Index Taylor, Bron, 118–121 Theory of justice, 148–149. See also Rawls, John Transnational corporations, 105–110; in Bolivia, 105–106; lobbying, 109–110; and price setting, 108–109; seed firms, 105, 107; and standards setting, 109 Tutu, Desmond, 175–179. See also Restorative justice UNICEF, 188–189 United Nations, 2, 5, 8, 33, 53, 158 Upanishads, 118, 170–171 Urban farming, 181–182 Vergara–Camus, Leandro, 69; plight of pheasant farmers, 69 Water, 113–131; and biofuels, 125; Chilean salmon fisheries, 129–130; Colorado River, 115–120; fracking, 130–131; garbage patch, 125–127; overconsumption, 124–125; Rio Bravo, 138–130; Rio Grande, 128–129; water grabs, 114–115 Westhelle, Victor, 68–69 White, Lynn, Jr., 30–31 Wirzba, Norman, 79, 176 World Bank, x, xi–xii, 2, 6, 8–10, 12–13, 15, 23, 38, 47, 50, 54–55, 70, 106, 114, 124, 140, 144, 177, 189 World Food Summit, 3, 46, 48, 50 World Trade Organization (WTO), x, 2, 15, 17, 23, 47, 50–51, 140, 144 Young, Iris Marion, 35 Zapatista, 83–84, 87–88, 186 Zoellick, Robert B., 9–10

About the Author WILLIAM D. SCHANBACHER, PhD, is a professor of religious studies at the University of South Florida (USF) in Tampa. He is the author of The Politics of Food: The Global Conflict between Food Security and Food Sovereignty (Praeger, 2010) and editor of The Global Food System: Issues and Solutions (Praeger, 2014). His research interests include ethics and the global food system, religion and food, human rights and theories of justice, and liberation theologies. He is cofounder of and collaborator with USF’s Urban Food Sovereignty Policy Research Group.