Introduction
There is evidence of the fact that even if the world has become increasingly disconnected, inequality in various aspects of life remains. Among the issues that are at the core of the inequality are global poverty, hunger, and malnutrition (Beuchelt and Virchow 2012). The quandaries are all linked to the global food system. The predicament of global food security is one of the most troubling to the global community. There are a growing number of people who are facing starvation and malnourishment every year. Food security relates to the idea of the people having a right to access food. It means that every human being has the right to have adequate and healthy food (Schanbacher, 2013). With the recent growth in global agricultural trade, the idea of food security has attracted more interest. Another concept that has emerged within the same context is food sovereignty. The discussion focuses on the ways that the concept of “food sovereignty” improves on conventional notions of food security.
Background of Food Security
Conventionally, the concept of food sovereignty is viewed from the light of food security. To understand the idea of food sovereignty, it becomes critical to evaluate the development of “food security” (Jarosz 2014). Thus, it is not possible to completely discount the role of food security in comprehending the emergence of the concept of food sovereignty. To understand how the concept of food sovereignty has improved that of food security, it is plausible to define food security. According to FAO (2003), the original official definition of food security entails:
The availability at all times of adequate world food supplies of basic foodstuffs to sustain a steady expansion of food consumption and to offset fluctuations in production and prices (FAO 2003 cited in Raj 2009, 663).
At the time the definition was conceived, the foundation was on the political economic context. The concept served its purpose, ensuring that there were efforts to address the food issues affecting the people at the time. There were major conditions that made the concept suitable, including the Sahelian famine. It also came at the pinnacle of demand for a New International Economic Order. The Third Worldist power was also at the zenith at the time. The conditions also formed the basis for the successful establishment of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (Raj 2009). During this time, the states were solely the defining factors in the technocratic faith, the basis for the redistribution of resources. It was believed to be the basis for dealing with the issues of inequality in resource distribution. It made a lot of sense at the time to provide adequate supplies through price stabilization.
As time went by, there was a need to improve on the definition of the concept of food security to capture the changes in the global food system. A more recent definition was conceived, during the early 1970s:
Food security [is] a situation that exists when 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 (FAO 2003 Raj 2009, 663).
The State of Food Insecurity 2001 was the foundation for the new definition of the concept of food security. The new definition was based on the efforts of more global activists as well as Non-Governmental Organizations and the policy-making society to improve the definition of the policies geared towards the achievement of food security. With the new definition, there was also involvement of other actors, including the non-state actors who played an important role in the area of food security (Kent 2005). There was the shift in attention from production concerns towards more general social issues. The changes were brought about by the need for interventions to address the global food security challenges. There was no Non-Aligned Movement or any alternative to US-style neoliberal capitalism (Wittman, Desmarais, and Wiebe 2010). However, the interventions did not work effectively in addressing the changing reality of food problems as the world became more interconnected and complex. This became the basis for the introduction of the concept of food sovereignty as an improvement of the concept of food security.
Background of Food Sovereignty
In the developed world, during the post-war era, national self-sufficiency became a priority for the agricultural productivity framework. This was critical due to the reality that faced the food system, including a war that disrupted the supply. The extremely integrated and global food supply chain eclipsed the reality (Patel 2009). While some states can boast of having food security, there are others that are experiencing extreme rates of under-nutrition and hunger. Even with the developments taking place globally, there are parts of the world that are facing serious food security predicaments. It is out of the reality that there have been efforts to come up with food security strategies, some influenced by forces related to trade. Food sovereignty is emerging as a global social movement aimed at addressing issues associated with food security (Lee 2007). The movement, made up of networks of Non-Governmental Organizations, is demanding for more effective means of ensuring operational strategies for addressing the problems associated with food security.
Food Sovereignty Defined
Schanbacher (2013) is critical of the way the concept of food sovereignty has challenged the paradigm of food security. The global food and agricultural system has undergone major transformations. It is as a reaction to some of the changes that the social justice movement has emerged. Food sovereignty is among the forms of the movement that have come up.
As defined by the Via Campesina, food sovereignty refers to:
The right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through sustainable methods and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems. It develops a model of small-scale sustainable production benefiting communities and their environment. It puts the aspirations, needs and livelihoods of those who produce, distribute and consume food at the heart of food systems and policies rather than the demands of markets and corporations (Via Campesina, n.d. cited in Schanbacher 2013, 7).
There are major elements within the global agricultural system that the concept of food sovereignty challenges. The concept relates to the eradication of agriculture from within the global trade system. Conventionally, the concept of food security has been entrenched within the global trade system, a highly constraining reality (Pimbert 2009). Major changes introduced in agriculture are also challenged by the introduction of the concept of food sovereignty. Use of agricultural biotechnology and industrial agriculture, for instance, is being challenged. The concept favors the use of localized food production to ensure that the local communities profit from the food that is produced. Protecting the rural livelihoods in all parts of the world is at the core of the movement, given the reality of the growing inequality. This does not mean that the concept of food sovereignty challenges that of food security (Wittman 2009). On the contrary, it introduces new conceptualizations of food security, but as a social movement aimed at making the food reality of the people better.
Food sovereignty is the basis for a more substantive characterization of food security. It is founded on the conditions within which the production of the food occurs and the people for which the production is intended. When the concept of food security is applied, the localized aspect of the policies is not felt behind. The international trade in agriculture is being liberalized, something that the concept of food security has not achieved. International factions are interconnected towards the goal of attaining food security. An improvement on the concept of food security emanates from the need for ensuring that the global food system is sustainable. At the time during which sustainability is critical, it becomes important that the same is introduced in the area of food security (Wittman 2011). In the past, the problems associated with food security emanated from the fact that the needs of the local communities were not addressed. Making agriculture for the people and customized to their needs would be more effective in addressing the problems. The idea is that of placing production back into the hands of the locals.
Food Sovereignty and Food Security
From the definition of the concept of food sovereignty, there is evidence of major contrasts with the idea of food security (Schanbacher 2010). The concept is also different from that of human right to food. However, there is evidence of some common goals of food sovereignty and food security. At the core of the two concepts is the basic aspiration of providing food to the hungry. Achievement of food security for the people is an element that is being pursued from the perspective of preventing hunger, starvation, and malnutrition. Food security is believed to be attainable in the event that at all times, everyone has access to adequate, safe, and healthy food, which should maintain the active and healthy life of the people (Schanbacher 2013). Regardless of the positive intentions of the concept of food security, it does not necessarily have policy implications. It does not provide a particular plan for action on how the economic system must operate towards the end of achieving food security for the people. It does not indicate the sort of foods critical in the achievement of a “healthy and active life” (Schanbacher 2013, 6). Thus, there is a need for a policy plan towards the attainment of food security.
Lee (2007) posits that the food sovereignty movement has emerged as a paradigm change in food security. It arose from the reality that the concept of food security is no longer achieving the goal of addressing the problems of starvation and malnutrition in different parts of the world. According to Schanbacher (2013), the concept of food security, in its conventional form, has failed to sufficiently have defined parameters for implementing specific policies for the achievement of improved access to adequate and healthy food. However, this does not mean that the idea of food security is no longer applicable to the international food discourse. It is not all about providing the hungry with food. In fact, it is the achievement of food security through the use of sustainable means (Altieri 2009). The concept goes beyond the simplistic goal of ensuring that those in need have the adequate food that they require. The concept emerges as a means of ensuring that more effective food policies are implemented to make sure that the food security issues are adequately addressed.
From the perspective of the lack of a policy plan, the idea of food sovereignty plays a critical role in the attainment of food security (Alkon and Mares 2012). It entails a particular economic system with clear steps towards the end. When one is looking into the idea of food sovereignty, there is a clearly defined goal and legally-binding means through which food security is achievable. Provision of sufficient food, within the community constraints, is at the core of food sovereignty. It is based on the individual and community access to adequate healthy food, especially in the regions where the people are facing deprivation (Boyer 2010). Despite the fact that it does not indicate the measurable quantity of the necessary food to achieve food security, it does indicate the importance of ensuring that all the members of a community have adequate food to cater for the current and future needs (Alkon and Agyeman 2011). The ability of the people to access sufficient food is at the core of the concept of food sovereignty. It also indicates the criticality of the means by which the people are able to access the food.
The prevailing global food crisis would not allow for a narrow concept like food security to be applicable in search of the solution. For decades, the idea of food security has been used, but without success in getting to the highest level of food security. Capitalist agriculture has not been the much-needed solution to the achievement of food security. These have only been corporate monopolies which have been dominant in the global food system. The crisis has been made worse by the industrial agrifood complex (Burnett and Murphy 2014). The idea of food security led to the development of the self-serving neoliberal interventions through proposals of global multilateral institutions (Tomlinson 2013). The interventions have been subject to skepticism, disenchantment, and indifference of the public and other interest groups. The global food crisis called for the proposal of more effective solutions, which also necessitated the replacement of the narrow concept of food security. The impact of the crisis on the local communities called for the localization of the solutions (Giunta 2014). This became the basis for the adoption of the concept of food sovereignty as an improvement of that of food security.
By investigating the nature of food sovereignty in practice, it is possible to establish that it did not emerge as a replacement for food security. While it is nothing similar to the large-scale corporate-driven agricultural production, it does not do away with the fundamental goal of food security (Agarwal 2014). Instead, the focus is on the local as well as regional farming and the methods applied, in generating food sufficiency at the more localized level. It is not necessary that food is generated at large scale, but that food is produced at a local level such that the needs of the locals are adequately met (Windfuhr and Jonsén 2005). The focus is on the provision of food security in such a manner that the locals are advised and educated on their needs and the mechanisms applicable for them to meet the needs. The farming experiences and practices are entrenched within the local realities, making it more effective to address the food crisis (Holt-Giménez 2011). At the center of food, sovereignty is the need to meet the local needs such that the global ones are met by extension.
From the conventional point of view, food security focused on the role of the agriculture experts or aid groups in meeting the global needs for food to avert crisis. At the core of food, sovereignty is to eradicate the need for these players such that the locals are more empowered to play a role in meeting the food security needs. “Campesino pedagogy” is introduced in the food sovereignty paradigm (Holt Giménez and Shattuck 2011). From this perspective, the local farmers are brought into the fold to engage in the achievement of the food security objectives. The experiences and practices in farming are dissimilated with the locals such that there is a reality of a “deeper culturally embedded exchange in which knowledge is generated and shared” (Holt-Giménez 2006, 78). The food security paradigm is brought closer home where the concept of food sovereignty is introduced. This is unlike the conventional view where the local farmers did not have an active role in meeting the food security goal.
The people-centered approach to food security suggests a paradigm shift. The idea is that food security issues can be conceptualized from a point of deeper understanding given the important role of the locals introduced in practice. The concept does not eliminate the focus on food security in the events that it is proposed towards making the commodity more accessible to the local communities (Hospes 2014). The events involve the weaving of impenetrable networks of reciprocity as well as solidarity, making the efforts stronger and effective. The traditional view did not take this into consideration given that the efforts were global as opposed to local (Holt-Giménez 2006). In improving the concept of food security, the reality of the paradigm shift where identity and power relations have also shifted radically. The communities are forming individual and collective identities around self-determination and food security.
Conclusion
Evidently, the concept of food sovereignty is at the center of the current food security discourse. The concept has not developed due to the need to replace the food security concept. On the contrary, it has developed out of the realization of the increasing food crisis regardless of the decades of efforts to deal with the predicament. The concept of food security developed out of the need to ensure that the global community has access to adequate and healthy food. In the process of considering the global nature of the problem, the localized challenges appeared to be forgotten. It is out of this reality that an improvement of food security is proposed. Food sovereignty begins to address the local problem by engaging the locals who are directly affected. The concept of food security has been changing with the variations in the context within which the problem is dealt with. Hence, introduction of the concept of food sovereignty is simply another paradigm shift.
Reference List
Agarwal, B., 2014. Food sovereignty, food security and democratic choice: Critical contradictions, difficult conciliations. Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), pp.1247-1268.
Alkon, A.H. and Agyeman, J., 2011. Cultivating food justice: Race, class, and sustainability. MIT Press.
Alkon, A.H. and Mares, T.M., 2012. Food sovereignty in US food movements: radical visions and neoliberal constraints. Agriculture and Human Values, 29(3), pp.347-359.
Altieri, M.A., 2009. Agroecology, small farms, and food sovereignty. Monthly review, 61(3), p.102.
Beuchelt, T.D. and Virchow, D., 2012. Food sovereignty or the human right to adequate food: which concept serves better as international development policy for global hunger and poverty reduction?. Agriculture and Human Values, 29(2), pp.259-273.
Boyer, J., 2010. Food security, food sovereignty, and local challenges for transnational agrarian movements: the Honduras case. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 37(2), pp.319-351.
Burnett, K. and Murphy, S., 2014. What place for international trade in food sovereignty?. Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), pp.1065-1084.
Giunta, I., 2014. Food sovereignty in Ecuador: Peasant struggles and the challenge of institutionalization. Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), pp.1201-1224.
Holt Giménez, E. and Shattuck, A., 2011. Food crises, food regimes and food movements: rumblings of reform or tides of transformation?. The Journal of peasant studies, 38(1), pp.109-144.
Holt-Giménez, E. 2006. Campesino a Campesino: Voices from Latin America’s Farmer to Farmer Movement for Sustainable Agriculture. Oakland, CA: Food First Books
Holt-Giménez, E. ed., 2011. Food Movements Unite! Oakland, CA: Food First Books
Hospes, O., 2014. Food sovereignty: the debate, the deadlock, and a suggested detour. Agriculture and Human Values, 31(1), pp.119-130.
Jarosz, L., 2014. Comparing food security and food sovereignty discourses. Dialogues in Human Geography, 4(2), pp.168-181.
Kent, G., 2005. Freedom from want: The human right to adequate food. Georgetown University Press.
Lee, R., 2007. Food security and food sovereignty. Centre for Rural Economy Discussion Paper Series, 11, pp.1-16.
Patel, R., 2009. Food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(3), pp.663-706.
Pimbert, M., 2009. Towards food sovereignty. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.
Raj P. 2009. Food sovereignty, Journal of Peasant Studies, 36:3, 663-706
Schanbacher, W. 2013. Conceptualizing the Human Right to Food in the Food Sovereignty Framework, INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE YALE UNIVERSITY SEPTEMBER 14-15, 2013
Schanbacher, W.D., 2010. The politics of food: The global conflict between food security and food sovereignty. ABC-CLIO.
Tomlinson, I., 2013. Doubling food production to feed the 9 billion: a critical perspective on a key discourse of food security in the UK. Journal of Rural Studies, 29, pp.81-90.
Windfuhr, M. and Jonsén, J., 2005. Food Sovereignty: Towards democracy in localized food systems.
Wittman, H., 2009. Reworking the metabolic rift: La Vía Campesina, agrarian citizenship, and food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(4), pp.805-826.
Wittman, H., 2011. Food sovereignty: a new rights framework for food and nature?. Environment and Society, 2(1), pp.87-105.
Wittman, H., Desmarais, A. and Wiebe, N., 2010. The origins and potential of food sovereignty. Food sovereignty: Reconnecting food, nature and community, pp.1-14.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
