From Food Production to Food Security - Global Environmental ...

Importance of this type of research and its impact on the science agendaThe need for interdisciplinary, even trans-disciplinary, approaches for food security researchis now well accepted (Liverman and Kapadia, 2010; UK Global Food Security Programme,2011). Indeed, food security research provides an excellent example of the need for muchenhanced interdisciplinarity, with social science, economics and the humanities all playingcritical roles in addition to the biophysical sciences. As Pálsson et al. (2011) state “Acceptingthat food systems encompass social, cultural, economic and political issues, as well asbiophysical aspects, acknowledges contributions of different disciplines. However, inbridging disciplines we must recognize the importance of framing these systems whendevising appropriate management interventions, development strategies, and policies”.The value of the ‘systems’ approach for research on food securityIn addition to underscoring the need for contributions from a range of disciplines, theGECAFS food systems approach introduced in Paper 1, and elaborated upon in Paper 3,engenders a greatly enhanced discussion on food security. Paper 3 also documents a range ofcase studies where the approach has been helpful in planning and undertaking research. Thework in these examples stems from a number of more fundamental impacts on the scienceagenda:First, and as Ericksen summarises in Ingram et al. (2010), the food systems approach framesthe food system activities as “dynamic and interacting processes embedded in social,political, economic, historical and environmental contexts”. It thereby relates the food systemactivities of producing food, processing, distributing and retailing, and consuming food (the“what we do”) to the outcomes of these activities not only for food security and othersocioeconomic issues, but also on the environment (the “what we get”) (Paper 3, Figure 1).Clearly, this interconnected set of outcomes, and particularly as relating to food security,results from a complex set of interactions in multiple domains but these are often nothighlighted in conventional food chain analyses focusing on food yields and flows. Thestructured integration of the food chain and food security concepts was the key developmentin the Ericksen paper (2008a), and expanded upon in Paper 3.Second, by embedding this integrated concept within the socioeconomic and globalenvironmental change drivers and feedbacks discussion initiated in Paper 1, and developedfurther in Paper 3 (e.g. the ‘Planetary Boundaries’ example), this ‘food systems’ approachenhances the science agenda by explicitly considering feed-backs to both environmental andsocioeconomic conditions for given adaptation options – the “so what” question. This hasgreat policy relevance as the intended consequences (the ‘impact’), and (often moreimportantly) the unintended consequences of a given technical or policy intervention need tobe carefully assessed. As Ericksen goes on to note, “feedbacks from food system activitiesare of a particular concern because they may have unintended, and often negative, social aswell as environmental consequences. This forces society to confront the trade-offs betweenkey ecosystem services and social welfare outcomes” (Ericksen, 2008a).108