Thursday, January 19, 2006

food, farming, and fair trade


yesterday i spent the day at writtle college in essex, attending a conference with the above title. it was put on as a partnership between the centre for environment and rural affairs (cera) and the diocese of chelmsford. the idea of the conference was good as it sought to engage with the issues of food production for an ever-increasing global population, and how the 2 institutions might work together on those issues.

there were about 33 attendees, most of whom were anglican clergy, along with some farmers from essex. that number had the potential for the conference to have been quite interactive, but instead it was done in classic 'lecture' style as an information impartation exercise that left one's brain feeling somewhat overloaded at the end of the day. 3 of the attendees were the diocesan bishop, his advisor for mission and ministry, and an archdeacon, all of whom got an email from me suggesting they consider any future conferences to experiment with open-source conferencing to stimulate more of an interactive and conversational style of conference (jonny baker has a good post on open-source conferencing here).

the issues discussed by experts in their fields included: pressures on eu and uk farmers, including the common agricultural policy (cap); food security, population growth and environmental pressure in the developing world; ethics of global food trade; fair trade; global food chain issues; food miles; traceability and food packaging issues; and corporate social responsibility. and yes, we got hit with all of those one after the other!

the overall picture the combined information gave was not at all rosy, or even particularly hopeful. world population is outpacing the world's current ability to feed itself. the food mountains and milk lakes that were stored in the 1980s have now disappeared. the world population is rising at the rate of 100 million people per year and may peak in 2050 at 9.1 billion. world food production has been declining since 1984 and would need a 50% rise in current production to meet demand for 2020. prof. michael alder, principal of writtle, did a great job in introducing us to the complexity of what he called 'the problematic' that includes food, poverty, climate, environment, health, and a range of other issues that are intertwined and multi-faceted.

most of the speakers were explicit in saying that, while they could provide an analysis of the problems, they had no answers.

bishop john suggested that the church could begin to help through awareness raising, education, and advocacy. this is good, but if that's as far as it goes then i suspect little will actually change.

a good example of christians actually engaging with these kinds of issues is the generous project, which came out of greenbelt 2 years ago. the big idea is that people will commit to practical, sustainable actions that give legs to the idea of living more generously on the planet in interconnectedness with the rest of humanity. the website allows people to connect with each other, learn from each other, and be encouraged that their little actions are becoming cumulative as others join in. this is one of the benefits of the internet as it allows a small idea to grow into a sizable groundswell through connecting people. that groundswell can become politically volatile and have a tangible effect on the way people live and behave.

perhaps we could get the diocese to engage with the generous project, and link writtle's experts in as well to help with hard data, bring other issues to the fore, while we try to give constructive theological critique to the debate, etc.

our diocese has already sigend up to be a fair trade diocese, has written and adopted an environmental policy, and is encouraging parishes to become fair trade parishes.

church house publishing produced an excellent little book called 'sharing god's planet' last year that gives a great introduction to engaging with a christian vision for a sustainable future.

the reality is that doing nothing is not an option.

No comments: