Nanotechnology in Food & Agriculture - denix

34
requirements, but increase capital costs
could also make it even more difficult for
small farm owners to remain economically
viable. Whereas the cost of agricultural
inputs, including technological inputs, has
increased in recent decades, commodity
prices have fallen and farmers’ incomes
have stagnated or declined; small farmers
around the world have struggled to
remain viable (Hisano and Altoé 2002;
La Via Campesina and Federasi Serikat
Petani Indonesia 2006; Philpott 2006).
By deepening existing trends towards a
globalised agriculture and food industry
controlled by small numbers of large
operators, nanotechnology could further
undermine the ability of local populations
to control local food production, a right
known as food sovereignty (Nyéléni -
Forum for Food Sovereignty 2007).
Nanotechnology could further erode
our cultural knowledge of food and
farming
Whereas nanofoods are increasingly
marketed as delivering consumer
benefits, in addition to the new health
and environmental risks they introduce,
they could also have negative
social consequences by eroding our
understanding of how to eat well and
agricultural knowledge which has
developed over thousands of years.
Nano food processing and
nanonutritional additives are likely to
erode our cultural understanding of the
nutritional value of food. For example
many of us eat citrus fruit or berries which
are naturally high in vitamin C, when we
feel the onset of a cold. However nano
processing and nano nutritional additives
could enable nano-fortified confectionery
to be marketed as having the same
health properties as fresh fruit. With the
increasing use of nanotechnology to alter
the nutritional properties of processed
foods, we could soon be left with no
capacity to understand the health values
of foods, other than their marketing
claims. Similarly, nano packaging that
incorporates sensors which indicate
| NANOTECHNOLOGY IN FOOD & AGRICULTURE
whether food is still ‘fresh’ or edible
could displace knowledge passed down
through generations on how to identify
safe, fresh food. Traditionally we have
sourced vegetables by their colour
and texture, and fish by the clarity of its
eyes. But the expansion of nano-sensor
packaging could mean that we buy
these packaged products on the basis of
the colour indicated by the nano-sensor
instead.
If farm nano-surveillance and
automated management systems are
developed as predicted, our ability
to farm could come to depend on
technological packages sold by a small
number of companies. Nano farming
systems could commodify the
knowledge and skills associated with
food production gained over thousands
of years and embed it into proprietary
nanotechnologies on which we could
become completely reliant (Scrinis and
Lyons 2007).
Nanotechnology introduces new
privacy concerns
Nano-sensor and track and trace
packaging also introduce new privacy
concerns. They are designed to increase
the ability to monitor food products and
their condition through each link in the
supply chain (LeGood and Clarke 2006).
This capacity is useful for a number of
commercial, security and public health
reasons. But the potential tracking of
foods after their point of sale also raises
privacy and ethical concerns, especially
relating to what sort of information will be
collected and how this information will be
controlled. Information gathered about
the consumer (for example purchasing
habits or their location of residence) could
be used by companies who hope to
gain a commercial advantage through
targeted marketing or product promotion,
or on-sold to others. There is also the
potential that nano-sensors could be used
to gather more sensitive information about
individuals, for example genetic makeup,
health or disease profiles.