The Political Economy of Food in Developed Economies Is there more than one route to food security?

Brigit Busicchia - Macquarie University Sydney Australia

2013

An Integrated Approach to the Food System

Sustainability of Food

Production

Food Access

Food Utilisation

Sustainability of Food Production

+

Climate Change

Intensive Farming

Unsustainable Farming

Population Growth

Land-Use Planning

Loss of Productivity Increase use

of Inputs

Decline farming

community

AUSTRALIA

• Non-subsidised agriculture within a free trade world (since 1970s when UK joined EU).

• Neo-liberal logic of scale and specialisation that fosters a bio-science dynamics.

• Only recently (2008) did Australia give attention to environmental damage caused by agriculture.

• A very short electoral cycle of 3 years.

Australia: Multi-functionality or Environmental Stewardship?

“Caring for our

Country”

Transition

Farm Family

+

Disaster

Drought/

Floods

2013 Sustainable Farming

$190 m/5 yr

Targeted

approach for

funding

Government

decides what

where and when

2008 Sustainable Environment

$2 b/5 years

Environmental

Stewardship - Discrete

rounds of funding for

targeted areas

Community grants

Regional NRMs –

Competitive Grants

Target Areas for large

projects

•Carbon Farming

•Biodiversity Fund

•Indigenous CFI

•Climate change

adaptation &

mitigation

Farmers receive less

than 3% of agricultural

output value in trade

assistance ($1.3 b) in

form of R&D, Tax

concessions

“Land Sector

Package”

$1.7 b/5yr

Income

Support to

Farmers

2012 Population:

70% in capital

cities

18% intermediate

12% rural

The Australian Government

• Australia promotes WTO notion of environmental stewardship to counteract adverse impact of market forces on farming and rural areas. It dismisses multifunctionality as a protectionist excuse.

• The government recognises need for “greening” its agricultural policies with systemic and enduring approach to conservation and NRM.

• Government encourages partnership approach between governments, landowners and local communities to address environmental problems.

• Producers are expected to be independent of government assistance .

• Accordingly, food security is framed as an issue of global competitiveness, productivity, and resilience.

The Australian Farmer Agriculture has lost its social significance. Distinct interest groups from rural versus agricultural. Landholders are resisting multifunctional approach:

•Economic and balance sheet reasons •Autonomy and suspicion about government agenda •Entrenched culture of productivism (seeing forest as “worthless scrub” and unproductive land as “rubbish country” (Richards, 2008) •Identity, knowledge

Farmers feel they no longer are the key actors in rural landscapes and that their private property rights are undermined by regulation.

The UK: Multifunctionality or farmland diversification?

CAP 2ND PILLAR

15% of total expenditure

€750 million (2011)

Income

Support

€3.3 billion

CAP 1ST PILLAR

82% of total

expenditure

Direct Payments

10% to increase

farm

competitiveness

80% to improve

environment

10% to improve

rural life quality

Source: European Commission

Targeted Top-Down Approach: Government decides

where (nationally) and what for (priorities)

Market

Measures

3%

Population

71% Urban

26%Intermediate

3% Rural

UK ‘s variant of multifunctionality: • Rural development is not

agriculturally centred (since agriculture has lost its centrality in UK society)

• Nature conceived in terms of landscape value and as such, different functions of the land are understood.

• UK has replaced farm-based approach to multifunctionality by a land-based approach, with diverse functions of the land providing alternative sources of farm incomes.

• Distinct separation between rural and agricultural.

• Despite recognising the need to diversify income, no real effort to re-embed farming.

• No real reconfiguration of rural resources nor redefinition of rural sector

• Recent move from regionalisation towards a central state control of agro-environmental measures.

France: A multifunctional agriculture?

Income

Support

CAP 2ND PILLAR + STATE FUNDING

RURAL DEVELOPMENT

10% Expenditure

€1.3 b (2011)

CAP 1ST PILLAR

Direct Payments

80% Expenditure

€7.8 b (2011)

€25,000/yr/farm

France: 80% of

subsidies go to

50% of farmers

Europe: on

average, 80% go

to 20%

30%

increase farm

competitiveness

50%

Improve

environment

and land

management

10%

Improve

rural life quality

Source: European

Commission

Targeted Top Down Approach: Government decides

where (the Region) and what (the objective/measure).

CAP 1ST PILLAR

Market Measures

10% Expenditure

Population:

36% urban

36% intermediate

28% rural

France and Multifunctionality

• In 1999, emergence of a new social contract between farmers and society: multifunctionality

• France views farmers as central to maintaining a healthy environment.

• CAP is instrumental in building equilibrium between agricultural markets and environmental services.

• Fostering income stability to farmer is understood as promoting soil productivity

• Evaluation of agro-environmental measures has given the state more powers but also more expertise.

• Political weight of rural community can be partly explained by early universal suffrage giving full representation to rural community.

• France follows a “politique of structure”, meaning:

– Control of land-use – Control of land leasing prices – And control of land prices

• This is to foster the family-based model.

AUS FRANCE UK

LANDMASS OCCUPIED BY

AGRICULTURE

52% 56% 70%

SELF SUFFICIENCY 93% High 60%

PRODUCTIVITY -1.7%/yr Slightly up Slightly up

FARM TRENDS Fewer farms

Bigger farms

Fewer farms

Bigger farms

25% farmers below

40

Fewer farms

Bigger farms

Ageing farmers (59)

NEW FARMERS ENTRY Entry rate 7%

Exit rate 10%

2011

+13000 in 2010

-21000 in 2010

Net: -2%/yr

Entry rate 2%

Exit rate 18%

2004

ORGANIC FARMING 1% retail value

2000 farms

(2010)

+6% land

13000 farms(2008)

+4% land

5400 farms (2008)

USE OF INPUTS (N – P – K) Constant -5% (2000-2008) -6% (2000-2008)

INTENSIFICATION No data Extensification No clear trend

VISIONS FOR THE FUTURE AUSTRALIA UK FRANCE

Seizing market

opportunities:

Foreign investment and foreign

ownership of agricultural land

to develop the “food bowl of

Asia”

Support biotechnology and

GMO to improve productivity

Reduce trade access barriers

Sustainable supply of

food for the UK

market: “Making the farming

industry more competitive

while protecting the

environment” (Defra)

Lighten regulatory

arrangements

Family-based farming

model:

Multifunctionality is an

expression of political will

that goes beyond

commodity production to

environment + regional

planning + social

production

France at cross-roads

Underpinning logic is that

prosperity will trickle down

Optimistic analysis of the

impacts of reform on

farming structures,

employment

Under pressure from neo-

liberal agenda (WTO)

Some questions about agriculture and the environment

• Can multifunctionality exist in a neo-liberal context that contributes to the commodification of nature?

• Can the restructuring required by liberalisation ever be reconciled with sustainability?

• Can environmental services be provided without the input from agricultural activities?

• Can we challenge the idea that only industrialised agriculture is capable to feed the world?

2ND DIMENSION: FOOD ACCESS AND FOOD PRICES

Food Prices

International markets

Energy Prices Competition Environmental

Degradation

Climate Change

Price Volatility

Food Insecurity

Social

Inequality

Public Health

Food Access: Food Prices and Market concentration

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

AUS UK FRANCE

Overall Food Price Inflation for the period between 2000 and 2010

AUSTRALIA High retail concentration: 2

Supermarkets control 71%

grocery retail

Regulation on competition: very

low

UK High retail concentration: 4 supermarkets

control 76% grocery retail

Regulation on competition: very low

FRANCE Average retail concentration:

5 supermarkets control 65%

grocery retail.

Regulation on competition:

present

10% population access food relief

Food relief: by food banks/charity

organisations

No contribution from governments

About 5% population access

food relief.

Food relief partly financed

from CAP (€70 M) from the

State, from industry , and

population

Very few food banks and food relief

conditional and limited. But very limited

data available yet.

20% of household expenditure on

food and beverage/tobacco

14% of household expenditure on food

and beverage/tobacco

16.8% of household

expenditure on food and

beverage/tobacco 2010

Poverty rate: 20%*

2011

Poverty Rate: 16.2%*

2010

Poverty rate: 14%*

* Poverty line being set at 60%

of median average income

Food Access: Food Prices and Market concentration State Coordination with Industry

Australia UK France

No state intervention – expect

suppliers/retailers to agree

Groceries Supplies Code of

Practice since 2010 acting as

mediating instrument.

Series of legislations to

regulate suppliers/retailers

relationships since 1996

No legislation to coordinate

development of shopping

malls

Bubbles of initiatives but no

real effort yet.

Legislation and land use

planning at local levels

Hunger is totally depoliticised Hunger is totally depoliticised

3rd DIMENSION: FOOD UTILISATION AND NUTRITION

Nutrition

&

Food Waste

High Food Prices/ Food Insecurity

Food Industry

Urban Planning

“Disconnect”

Loss of Productivity

Pressures on Healthcare

Depletion of natural resources

FOOD UTILISATION AND NUTRITION

AUSTRALIA UK FRANCE

Level of urbanisation 88% 97% 72%

Ratio Population

Overweight and

Obesity

Obesity increased by 50%

in past 20 years.

63% overall population

(35% over + 28% obese)

25% children

Obesity almost doubled

in past 20 years

62% overall population

(37% over + 25% obese)

30% children

Has increased over the

last 15 years

47% overall population

(32% over + 15%obese)

10% children

Food prices in rural areas

are 30% more than urban

Demographics of

Obesity

Disadvantage groups

Remote areas

Correlation with low

income for women only

Correlation with low

income

State Intervention

Measures/Policies

Australian Dietary

Guidelines

No Traffic Light Labelling

Future National Nutrition

Policy.

Partnership with industry

to reduce salt/fat

contents

Front of the pack

labelling

National Nutrition &

Health Plan since 2001

Nutrition and Public Health

• Societies with strong traditional food system in which diet encompasses dimensions of health, culture and ecological roles (e.g. Mediterranean diets) see food, medicine and health as interrelated.

• Food is associated with cultural identity and well-being.

• Trade liberalisation and the role of TNCs, urbanisation and migration have led to the convergence towards “international’ diets. Yet cultural factors appear to limit such convergence and help retain dietary diversity.

• The principle of consumer sovereignty is doubtful.

CONCLUSIONS

• Commodification of food is in question: – is the logic of the market inevitable?

– Should the economic status dictate the quality of food on the plate?

– Should hunger be depoliticised?

• Land has been marginalised with the dynamics of capitalism and we need to refocus on the distinct dynamics of the land. Diversity is at the root to resilience. Nature capital is paramount to the sustainability of capitalism. Nature must be at the heart of our initiatives.

• Acceptance and support of small-scale farm holdings may show a healthy future. Existing market-based system gives incentives that drive unsustainable food production methods. The future is in the reward of sustainable farming practices rather than large size monocultures.

CONCLUSIONS

What are we going to do in the face of food prices increases?

More and more governments will be required to ‘intervene’ to address

externalities – how will liberal market economies states deliver these

interventions?