Rising Food Prices
Posted by Diane Abbott, MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington, at 13:20, Tue 17 June 2008:
There has been a lot of attention in the news recently given to the current global food shortages and rising food prices. Hackney North and Stoke Newington residents have always shown an interest in international issues and I believe this is a problem that will resonate with many constituents.
We are told that in real terms, food prices have reached a 20 year high. The UN’s World Food Programme estimates that chronic hunger will affect 10 million people worldwide. Already we have seen instability and even riots over food resources in poorer countries.
The reasons for the sudden rise in food prices are complex. Some commentators are pointing to an increase in demand for food. Growing economies like India and China have an increasing number of people with money to buy more food, and the world’s population is constantly growing. Others point to the global economic crisis that has seen the dollar become weak and oil prices rise considerably. There is an argument that the effects of climate change have ruined crops and some commentators are pinpointing the move towards creating crops for biofuels instead of for food as the problem. Finally, money being put into developing world agriculture has dropped over the past 20 years – both from foreign aid and from the states themselves.
Experts are also divided on what the best solution to the problem is. Some of the suggestions put forward are: • Western countries giving more in short-term aid for those populations who are chronically hungry • Western countries focusing their aid on rural development in the developing world • Developing world countries putting more of their budgets towards rural development • Creating cheaper access to fertiliser and seeds to prevent food crises next year • Pushing forward with the “Doha round” of trade liberalisation that would see a reduction in protectionist agriculture polices by the EU and the US that favour farmers in the Western world • Increasing the use of GM crops • Returning to a system of “peasant farming” whereby smaller farms in both the Western and developing worlds farm crops for use within the local area • A complete reworking of how we think about food. People should consume less and stop relying on imported produce
Gordon Brown has said that food and oil prices will form an important part of his upcoming EU and G8 talks, what action would you like to see the Prime Minister push for?
Comments
Commenting on this message is now disabled.
Posted by Matthew Lever, 14:00, Tue 17 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
Elimination of unfair and conditional debts (and all exorbitant accrued interest on these) to third world countries would without doubt provide the most effective relief to those people throughout the world who are being hit hardest by this phenomenon.
Unfortunately the continued greed of 'the West' and the venal, parasitic multinationals it has produced will no doubt ensure this will not happen.
I expect that instead there will be some minor tinkering around the edges of aid provision and a lot of hot air from these talks and little else. Obviously I'd love to be less cynical, but time and time again this - and similar - has proved to be the modus operandi of the G8 nations, the WTO and other self-serving international bodies who display barely a shred of concern for the most vulnerable in society. Shame on them.
What action would I like to see from the PM? I'd like to see him join the ranks of those living hand-to-mouth in the 3rd world for a month, and upon his return see how he might better, and more humanely approach this issue.
Posted by Thomas, 14:12, Tue 17 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
More research is needed on the causes of food price inflation - I feel we are still unable to fully comprehend all the issues of this complex problem.
Less narrow-minded waffle from those who just want to blame the West and multinationals.
There is nothing anyone can do about rising populations, and in a way, it is good news that poorer nations are getting richer and so are able to eat more/better food.
But higher prices will effect everyone, especially poorer countries with inefficient food production.
Increased aid should be targetted to countries in need, except ones which are ruled by venal, parasitic governments, with no interest in the welfare of their own people, including Sudan and Zimbabwe.
Posted by Jonathan Hogg, 14:23, Tue 17 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
Free trade: CAP and the US farm subsidies have to be put down.
It's not a popular position these days I know, but we should let market forces sort this out. The problem is not that we can't feed the world, but that we grow too much of the wrong things in the wrong places and too little of the right things in the right places. This is because subsidies and tariffs distort the market and reduce the incentive to get it right.
Posted by Thomas MacManus, 14:31, Tue 17 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
For me there are two main issues - stop bio-fuels; people in need of food cannot compete with our appetite for energy. And return to a system of peasant farming; proven to be more efficient than big corporate farms and the benefits can be immediately realised by those in need.
I am skeptical about GM food, but if the need becomes great enough and the science community is happy that they are safe then it should be used as a last resort.
We do need to rethink the whole way we think about food - the UK throwing away two thirds of the fresh food bought!
For my part, I am considering the drastic measure of becoming vegetarian to reduce by 1,000% my drain on the world's food producing resources.
As for DOHA - this round should always be on the agenda - trading fairly is not just about food - it is about justice.
Posted by Tim Evans, 16:38, Tue 17 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
GM foods - seems to me the transnationals have 2 main aims here:
1) creating pesticide resistance so they can sell more pesticides; the claims that resistance will not cross to related plants have been shown to be shaky, so in due course there will be resistant weeds which will lead to stronger pesticide use. Which will suit Monsanto fine.
2) terminator genes which will prevent farmers saving seed. This is related to the rush to patent seeds, which is why guarding of traditional strains outside their control is so important.
Posted by John Callon, 18:19, Tue 17 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
It would be nice to see the menu for the series of G8 and EU summits, and to know that these bodies are setting a good example.
There is really nothing that can be done by the great powers to magic up more food and fuel at such short notice.
We have a series of countries which are no longer self-sufficient in food, our own being one of them. Self sufficiency should be a goal, with surpluses being used for trade as applicable and for aid BUT NOT FOR DUMPING in third world markets.
The one thing the EU and G8 can and should do is to remove all subsidies to agriculture production within their own countries. (Isn't it funny how liberalisation of markets is forced on the rest of the world by countries that do not practice it themselves!)
Farming needs to be like all other industries - it pays its way or fails. That then opens up the market for more efficient producers who can produce food at a better price for consumers.
A return to cooking and eating meals at home would probably result in less waste and might help the waist as well.
It would appear that like our former chancellor not putting money aside for a rainy day, stocks of grains, etc have not been put aside in the years of plenty for the years when production is down due, in the most part on this occasion, I believe, to drought in Australia.
And don't forget the former breadbasket of southern Africa, Zimbabwe, is now a basket case itself.
Posted by Kate Creedy, 09:54, Sat 21 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
If we had the will and the commitment and the sheer intelligence to apply our minds to the problem, we could organise to feed ourselves as a world community. However wealthy the West is, aid is not the answer...creating welfare dependency, whether on an individual basis or in the world economy is not fundamentally helpful to enabling people's creativity in finding different and potentially unique solutions to their problems.
Why base your major foodstocks on wheat, grain and other commodities shipped around the world with oil based transport ....except to maximise the hidden profits of large agricultural world companies? GM is now being seen as a saviour to the world food crisis. Dangerous and short sighted as we will face the loss of even more biodiversity and tie in basic agricultural communities to fertilisers etc that make them dependent on the company. Short term thinking from government.
We could address the coming scarcity of water now, we could address the explosion of population and regulate our population growth by educating women instead of aborting girl babies,(inadvertent solution?). We could look to develop other means of fuel and we could, given enough will, actually pay attention to ourselves as thinking biological animals with a connection to the natural world. We could green the desert with water if we thought together with national interests in mind as well as geopolitical understandings
Practically I would like a British government to think on generational spans, who demonstrates a respect for the electorate and who thinks pragmatically rather than in outmoded theories. The need to have an educated debate rather than score political points can be seen when politicians speak on the radio in the morning. Do politicians not know that people are attuned to tone of voice and can hear the party line? they know the evasive reply and can sense the politician play safe and patronise the electorate. We pay our politicians to think and to inform us of their thinking not to legislate us out of existence!
I believe politicians want to get it right. They are briefed by many sources .... but to remain in power becomes more relevant than informing the electorate. Where is the sense that that the political class have a view of the generational currents for the next 100 years and are thinking of this?
In terms of food, we need to invest in agricultural practices that have a respect for biodiversity and do not land us in the lap of multi-nationals who have a thought for profit not the long term interests of the globe.
Posted by karwan raza, 20:08, Mon 23 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
I believe that too much spending on continuing war by the west in particular and others alike have a great impact on the price and shortage of food and fuel.FOOD WASTE,unnecessary driving, and going holiday abroad also undoubtedly have considerable effect. Undeniable that the money which is spent on luxury items and high-living by most people in the west can feed 'by a few times' the poor and hungry people around the world. The developed countries need to change their attitude towards spending.
Giving 'real and continual help to the developing and poor countries in terms of how to improve their agricultural produce is substantial. The difference in harvest in some developing country compared to one in the developed country is one to ten. The globe is the land home of everyone therefore everyone had to take care of it.
Posted by Jo Homan, 13:05, Tue 24 June 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
YES:• Returning to a system of “peasant farming” whereby smaller farms in both the Western and developing worlds farm crops for use within the local area • A complete reworking of how we think about food. People should consume less and stop relying on imported produce.
Of course we should be more self-sufficient and go for minimal environmental impact
NO: • Creating cheaper access to fertiliser and seeds to prevent food crises next year • Increasing the use of GM crops
Haven't we been here before? Scientific solutions promising to "cure world hunger" which simply feed the pockets of whoever supplies the GM crops, fertilizers etc.
Posted by Laura Necchi-Ghiri, 12:26, Fri 12 September 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
No to GM crops - they feed only vested interests and constitute an iatrogenic solution - The cure is worse than the disease -DO NO HARM. Yes to a return to 'Peasant' farming - or how about Community Cooperative Farms? - which besides avoiding oil transportation mileage would also increase the UK's food security. Yes also to nuclear power as a necessary short term fix to carbon emissions (we are at the 11th second of the 11th hour and the clock is ticking); nuclear power is also a way of gaining energy independence from an increasingly authoritarian Russia and a fascist Middle East. No to the Saudi Wahabi fifth column in UK mosques and Yes to supporting Women against Fundamentalism. Yes to the UK -wide acceptance of the need for some services to be nationalised and the common sense of having a mixed economy (NOT the scary ''socialist'' bogey the Tories and other Free Market Fundamentalists would paint it to be)...