Getting Food Where It’s Needed

I am confused about food. For those who know I’m underweight, this is not what I’m talking about: I’m talking about worldwide food security.

On the one hand is the concept of food justice. Wikipedia says about it:

It notes that globally enough food is produced to feed the entire world population at a level adequate to ensure that everyone can be free of hunger and fear of starvation. That no one should live without enough food because of economic constraints or social inequalities is the basic goal.

This approach is often referred to as food justice and views food security as a basic human right. It advocates fairer distribution of food, particularly grain crops, as a means of ending chronic hunger and malnutrition. The core of the Food Justice movement is the belief that what is lacking is not food, but the political will to fairly distribute food regardless of the recipient’s ability to pay.

On the other hand, perhaps in contrast, is opposition to “import dumping”, defined as allowing low-cost subsidized food from industrialized nations into developing countries, which can destroy the livelihoods of farmers who need to sell some of their food crops to get the variety of nutrition that they need and provide for their other needs: water, sanitation, health, &c.

Both ideas seem to have their merits, and neither perpetuates the myth of wholesale overpopulation. It appears, though, that any reference to freer distribution of food across national borders would indeed involve import dumping and its ill effects. Is there a solution, or will Americans alone be able to afford locally grown food made for eating and not primarily for shipping, while much of the world exhausts one place’s resources after another’s?


2 responses to “Getting Food Where It’s Needed

  1. I was reading the other day how Japan buys rice so that its own industry isn’t impacted by low prices overseas. That is only solution. Actually, the article proceeded to say that if Japan could release all this stored rice, the price of rice would go back to normal. Unfortunately, the U.S. is protesting releasing their rice back into the market.

    I actually believe some protectionist policies are okay in a global market. It is important that certain industries, for reasons you stated, and many others, like security and sovereignty but maintaining competitiveness. With this particular issue, the U.S. should show some flexibility.


  2. So not only does the U.S. destabilize economies all over, it hinders lowering of food prices in an effort to get Japan to accept a more even trade balance. Grand.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s