Initial steps towards a Great Food Transformation are being driven by the creativity and ingenuity of farmers.
Last week I raised three key issues with the EAT-Lancet Commission’s report calling for a “Great Food Transformation.” In today’s post, the last in the series, I address a glaring omission in the process and outcome of the EAT-Lancet Commission: farmers are treated as problems to be solved rather than as sources of solutions and innovation.
Farmers are considered in the report mainly as groups to be incentivized or guided to achieve Great Food Transformation goals, rather than as sources of innovation and problem-solving. The section on governance largely emphasizes top-down regulation of farming, though more participatory approaches are noted. I agree with other commentators that to transform our food systems will require partnership with, not control of, farmers.
Farmers face systemic constraints for food system transformation
The EAT-Lancet Commission report proposes little to address the challenges for farmers to adapt to large-scale, rapid and profound shifts in product markets, regulations, and production systems. A hundred years of policies, programs, technological development, fixed physical asset investment, farm and equipment financing, and vertical market development have heavily promoted specialization of production – particularly for grains and livestock. The system generated short-term profits at the expense of diversified local food systems and the environment. This specialization is not only at the farm level but across large farming regions.
Many agribusiness and food trading companies are extremely specialized; some want only to work with commodities for which they are one of the top three global suppliers. So even if pushed by policymakers to modify some aspects of production for those specific commodities, they have little incentive to encourage diversified farms and sourcing regions. Government agricultural programs overwhelmingly support just a few key products. A few examples are encouraging, like some coffee companies in Latin America helping their farmer-suppliers to commercialize their secondary crops. But far more innovative business models, and input and supply chain structures, need to be developed.
Including farmers is not only just, it’s practical
It is critical that farmers, including women and indigenous peoples, play a central role in co-designing and co-leading the system transformations they are being asked to undertake, together with other actors in their regions or landscapes whose future will be profoundly affected. Ideally, this could be a powerful catalyst for shaping more sustainable, democratic and inclusive economies and societies, stronger rural-urban linkages, and a rural renaissance. But such a prospect will be strongly affected by the political approach used to mobilize the Great Food Transformation.
There is no question that a Great Food Transformation is needed towards healthier diets and environmentally-friendly food production systems. The EAT-Lancet report suggests some of the parameters that must be considered in crafting that transformation. Many landscape partnerships are already working closely with local land stewards, farmers, fishers and ranchers, to design creative solutions to align agricultural production, nutritional security, and environmental goals. Policymakers committed to implementing a Great Food Transformation would be wise to seek out these farmers and their landscape initiatives as sources of innovation.