The Forum > Article Comments > Renewing our focus on food > Comments
Renewing our focus on food : Comments
By Julian Cribb, published 12/1/2011The challenge for Australia in coming decades is to assure its own food security in an increasingly food-insecure world.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
-
- All
Very good article Julian. I hope that people will take this issue seriously. As an irrigation farmer i am very concerned with peak oil, most people in our society have no idea how dependent modern agricultural output is on cheap oil. Best of luck with this.
Posted by Souphound, Wednesday, 12 January 2011 7:37:36 AM
| |
Thanks Julian. I am particularly interested in your last point: "This is due to a market failure driven by the growing imbalance in market power between 1.8 billion producers and the handful of corporates who now dictate the world price of food." I agree that the global food system at present appears to be in a condition of "market failure". You mention one mechanism of failure whereby prices are set via a mechanism that is remote from true production costs. A second mechanism of failure is that food's status as just another commodity in the global economy means that investment and production decisions are driven by profitability, rather than need. People who, through poverty, are unable to express their need for food in the form an economic demand, do not feature in this food system, and hence they starve.
I also wonder how many Australians are aware of the implications for our food system of our decades-long practice and advocacy of deregulation of the farm sector. Our policy position is clear: we look for our food security to the global free market. This policy implies that we will eat whatever food corporate actors in the free market decide is profitable for us to eat. In the short term that is likely to mean that high labor-cost products, particularly fruit and vegies, will increasingly be imported. Who knows what it will mean as the cost of factors of production changes in response to peak oil. As you say, if we lose particular industries they can't be reinvented over night. I wonder about the sense of trusting global markets to put food in our pantries when in 2008, and again in 2010, we saw dozens of countries responding to conditions of food shortage by banning food exports - WTO rules be damned. So what would a national food policy look like that harnesses the innovation and entrepreneurship of free markets, while maintaining some measure of control of our food destiny? I agree that paying farmers for stewardship services is likely to be a useful step, but suspect that more will be required. Posted by MultiMick, Wednesday, 12 January 2011 9:47:17 AM
| |
Souphound:
“most people in our society have no idea how dependent modern agricultural output is on cheap oil” And may I add to your text: ..And how dependent are consumers on their ability to pay for the power to cook it, and the available resources to pay super inflated prices in chain stores to acquire your food production for their very survival; after the inclusive burden of rip-off prices for petrol at the pump to the same beleaguered consumers of food in our society. So souphound, we the consumer, have every idea of the “sinking-feeling” of dependence and relate well to your concerns over the cost of oil at the farm gate. If the farmer were paid fairly for his product and the consumer were charged with the same fairness for the farm product, all would be well. What is needed is that all-round fairness of costs and profits which would eliminate the need for Government subsidies to selected groups! Posted by diver dan, Wednesday, 12 January 2011 10:06:28 AM
| |
This just lobbed into my in-box:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1et_HBmLYw A few things about Woolies/Coles people might not know about. Does anyone have a solution? Posted by bonmot, Wednesday, 12 January 2011 10:44:32 AM
| |
The NSW government has abandoned public involvement in Agriculture.
Over 5 years there have been 5 rounds of redundancy within what was NSW Agriculture along with effective cuts in budget in real terms; that body has disappeared through mergers of Departments into what is now the Department of Industry and Investment. There is now a review undertaken by Price’s commissioned by Treasury that has concluded the Department can no longer do what it once did and should be cut further! Supposedly in excess of $50,000,000 is to be cut. A decade of decline has led to the Department no longer having expertise in many areas – for example horticulture no longer has a principal Research Scientist, there is no technical expertise in locusts yet the Department still pretends to be credible in dealing with outbreaks! This picture has been repeated in all states. Julian Cribb points out “The context in which Australia must shape its future agriculture and food policies is one of a world in which global food demand will double by the mid-century ... resources needed to satisfy it … will become much scarcer or increasingly unaffordable … Strategic think tanks … are already warning about the consequences of this for conflict and refugee crises, for economic shockwaves and food price hikes, even in affluent and otherwise food-secure countries”. Government’s have primary responsibility in this area. Public commitment to the areas identified by Cribb must occur, and lead times of 15+ years born in mind. The NSW Department has become moribund. It is a body in which hope has died, current plans will see an end to research and extension with what remains becoming Biosecurity NSW with some policy staff to advice the Minister. Years of being a backdrop to the political aspirations of the Minister of the day has developed sycophantic behaviour amongst staff lacking the integrity to argue for what they believe (one must first believe anything to do that) as well as despair due to the loss of hope. Posted by Cronus, Wednesday, 12 January 2011 10:58:34 AM
| |
Continued…
The ‘system’ has conspired to ensure only palatable advice is produced for the Minister with anything contentious marked ‘Cabinet in Confidence’ to ensure it can’t be released; unpalatable advice is returned as not having been received. Time is spent filtering what is produced second guessing what the political masters want to hear. The picture that emerges is of a group of people who lack hope, lack direction and are slated for closure. So who will look to the food security of our children let alone our children’s children? Coles and Woolworths? NSW Government needs to recreate NSW Agriculture with clear outcomes in terms of food security. It needs to directly address the points raised by Cribb and break the nexus between employment and project mentality which leads to people writing up the issue they are dealing with as being bigger than Ben Hur in order to guarantee funding. Whilst Price’s may have provided a report calling for budget cuts managers make decisions not consultants; any Minister that hides behind a report should not only leave the Ministry they should leave parliament. The choices are simple; either adopt the cuts and abandon research and extension leaving Biosecurity and policy advice OR rebuild an organisation that pursues outcomes in terms of food security (remembering lead times of 15-20 years will prevail). Cribb has provided an invaluable input to the debate. The public at large needs to realise the ongoing destruction of public investment in Agriculture that addresses food security means your children and their children will face threats to food. To quote Cribb “Food production cannot be turned on and off like a tap, at the whim of global markets or politicians. It takes decades for a new technology or farming system to be widely adopted: meantime drought, poor returns and global competition can eradicate local food industries.” If the recommendations from Price Coopers are adopted then Government will have abandoned their responsibility of ensuring food security in the future. Posted by Cronus, Wednesday, 12 January 2011 10:59:27 AM
|