Abstract
This paper explores the conditions under which the changes leading to the Great Transformation of food systems called upon by a growing number of international experts and development agencies, will (or not) happen. After discussing the meanings of ‘transformation’ in the specific context of food systems, we draw on different elements of political economy to show how various self-reinforcing dynamics are contributing to lock food systems in their current unsustainable trajectories. Those include the concentration of economic and market power in the hands of the Big Food transnational corporations but also other actors’ ideology, policy incoherence, national interests or culturally-embedded aspirations, which together create irreconcilable trade-offs and tensions between divergent individual and societal objectives and prevent the system from aligning toward a more sustainable trajectory. In this context, while innovation is often presented as a ‘game-changer’, we show how the current profit-driven nature of its evolutionary selection creates a random, adirectional, process incapable of steering food systems towards sustainability. We argue that unless those different issues are tackled all together in a resolutely normative, global, and prescriptive manner in which science would have a new role to play, there are serious risks that the Great Transformation will not happen. Based on these analyses, we identify pathways to move the systems past its current locks-in and steer it toward its long-awaited sustainable transformation. In doing so we demonstrate that what is needed is not just a transformation of the food systems themselves, but a transformation of the governance of those food systems as well.
Generated Summary
This research article delves into the challenges and potential barriers hindering the “Great Transformation” of food systems, a concept proposed by experts and agencies to address global food system issues. The study employs a political economy approach, supplemented by sociological and knowledge-based perspectives, to analyze the forces that impede sustainable change. The methodology involves examining the dynamics of power, governance, and innovation within food systems, with a specific focus on the red meat industry as a case study. The article investigates how economic concentration, divergent interests, technological innovations, and the politics of evidence contribute to the current unsustainable trajectory of food systems, and it proposes pathways to overcome these challenges and achieve a more sustainable future.
Key Findings & Statistics
- In 2019, 690 million people were undernourished, and 340 million children suffered from micronutrient deficiency.
- 2.1 billion adults were diagnosed as overweight or obese in 2020.
- Agriculture and agri-food industry is the economic sector with the world’s highest prevalence of forced and child labour.
- The cause of 30% or more of total greenhouse gas emissions.
- The EAT-Lancet Commission suggests a 50% reduction in global consumption of beef, pork, and lamb.
- The average individual consumption of red meat in many regions exceeds the reference diet intake by 300% to 600%.
- Beef consumption is projected to increase by 76 million tons over the next ten years.
- Global pork consumption will increase by 127 million tons.
- In 2020, China consumed about 40.3 million tons of pigmeat.
- The annual growth in per capita meat consumption is projected to double, compared to the last decade.
- The world’s 10 leading pesticide companies are estimated to control 94% of the world sales.
- Six companies control more than 75% of all private sector crop research.
- Three companies account for around 77% of worldwide sales in farm machinery.
- Four firms account for 97% of poultry research & development and broilers.
- Three companies supply 95% of the commercial breeding stock for broilers.
- More than 70% of UK grocery purchasing is concentrated in four main supermarket chains.
- In the last 50 years, the number of domesticated species seed companies have focused on was reduced to less than 200 (from initially more than 30 times this number).
Other Important Findings
- The article highlights the resistance to change from transnational corporations, the misalignment of interests among various actors, the profit-driven nature of technological innovations, and the failure of science to play its role in the socio-technical debate as key factors hindering the Great Transformation.
- The study argues that the current profit-driven nature of evolutionary selection creates a random, adirectional process incapable of steering food systems towards sustainability.
- The paper posits that food system transformation is not just about private sector’s interests versus public health or environmental considerations but involves the perceptions, beliefs, and views of individual consumers, institutions, public and private policy-makers, investors, and suppliers.
- The study emphasizes that unless a combination of stringent conditions is fulfilled simultaneously, the Great Transformation may not happen.
- The study also finds that technological innovation, while often presented as a “game-changer,” is intrinsically driven by profit and not by sustainability, preventing it from creating the strong uni-directionality needed for the Great Transformation.
- The paper underscores the need for a shift in governance, empowering smaller actors, and ensuring that innovations align with sustainability goals.
Limitations Noted in the Document
- The study acknowledges that food systems transformation is a complex issue involving various actors, including individual consumers, institutions, policy makers, and other stakeholders. Analyzing their interactions and understanding their perceptions, beliefs, and views can be challenging.
- The paper’s argument is centered around the trends observed in the global consumption of red meat, it does not apply to those individual households in countries where the consumption of red meat is below the suggested reference level.
- The research focuses on the “Great Transformation” of food systems, it acknowledges the need for international accountability but also highlights that, achieving the desired changes will require overcoming the existing constraints and the implementation of effective mechanisms.
Conclusion
The study concludes that the “Great Transformation” of food systems faces significant challenges rooted in economic power dynamics, divergent interests, and the nature of innovation, along with the misuse of scientific evidence. The paper emphasizes that unless a combination of stringent conditions is fulfilled simultaneously, the Great Transformation may not happen. “Food systems are not driven to deliver optimal human diets but to maximize profits” (Stuckler & Nestle, 2012, p.1). The authors stress the need for a foundational shift in the governance of food systems, advocating for a system where smaller actors are empowered, and innovations are guided by sustainability norms. The paper suggests that a shift in governance is needed, dis-empowering Big Food actors, and destabilizing the status quo to foster a truly competitive environment. The authors also suggest that a prescriptive restructuring of the innovation process is also required to establish a normative environment, guiding the technological innovation process to make sure innovations are not just economically viable but also aligned with the societal goal of sustainability. The ultimate takeaway is that achieving the Great Transformation requires political will and a commitment to challenging the existing power structures and embracing hard choices to create a sustainable and equitable food system.