Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Third, the geopolitics of food security (globally and in particular countries) needs
to be brought back onto the research agenda. Fourth, given the confl uence of politi-
cal and moral economy approaches in contemporary food and agriculture, is the
nature of knowledge production itself. Cook et al. (2007, p. 1113) assert that 'com-
modity geographies are politically weak'. This challenge has profound implications
for interventions. What advice and warnings are offered in the food and agriculture
literature?
One mainstream answer is: prepare a food strategy. But as Maxwell and Slater
(2004) note, this has problems - overloading policy with analysis, designing exces-
sively complex organisational structures and planning in such detail as to make
implementation impossible. Vorley et al. (2007, pp. 210-11) contend that the capac-
ity for public policy response is limited, because changes are invisible to most poli-
cymakers. They say 'the debate around pro-poor growth and rural livelihoods
is . . . proceeding as if national public policy is still the key determinant of rural liv
elihoods. . . . The focus should be on dynamic restructured national and regional
markets that are displacing existing chains and their interactions with small-scale
farmers and local rural economies'. In a sobering refl ection Lang (2006, p. xv) writes
of the complexity of mobilising actors,
When it (food) enters our bodies, our identities are shaped through it and we gain
an entire and sometimes poorly understood appreciation of the supply chain. Some
contemporary industry analysts argue that consumers neither want to nor need to
understand the complexities behind the check-out till. The brand is the seal of trust.
But when we eat, we partake in an increasingly long chain of reactions. If brand is the
sole mediator of trust, this is a fragile relationship.
According to Morgan et al. (2006, pp. 192-97) three major battle grounds are
obvious in a globalising world. These are (i) the international, where concessions
from the WTO are called for (around dumping and non-trade concerns to allow
other models of agricultural and rural development); (ii) the national, where the
emphasis should be on getting and maintaining state commitment; and (iii) the sub-
national level, where - in the context of a supportive multilevel polity - food chain
revisioning can be promoted.
The contemporary moment of food and agriculture is distinguished by a prolif-
eration of big and small actors fi ghting over new material and moral issues. This is
a turbulent context calling for new research directions. Four are especially promis-
ing. The fi rst is 'following' (Cook et al., 2006). This idea can be extended beyond
the commodity, to include following the organisation - public, private and civil -
and tracing its ramifi ed connections in time and space. The second, 'entangling', is
a strategy aimed at tying supply chains up in knots with monitoring, revealing the
origins of food and detailing passage points, so stifl ing the free fl ow of power along
chains. A third is pedagogy. This leads on from developing strategies of engagement
in following and entangling that open up opportunities to get among agri-food
actors. It must involve pro-activity in changing pedagogies and methodologies to
confront the need to identity and get into decision spaces. The fourth strategy is
'being present'. This involves both resisting and engaging with food systems in
multiple ways, and zeroes-in on key moments of decision making. Decision making
involves creativity when power to remake the material and moral fi bre of food is
exercised. The inescapable knowledge-production challenge is seeing critique and
resistance as necessary but insuffi cient for changing the outcomes and patterns of
