We need to double food output by 2050.
Oh yeah?
Who says?
Monsanto and a few other agri-companies say so.
Not the most trusted sources, as far as I am concerned.
A far more trusted source, the organic charity, the Soil Association, believes that the message currently driving food-policy to “double food production by 2050” is based on a lie.
This call to double food production (convenient for agribiz) is based on a forecast that production of animal feed would need to increase by 70% in order to feed developing countries with the same fast-food junk that is making the west ill.
Apparently half the world’s crops are feeding animals not humans. This is nuts. Do we really need more meat? If we ate less meat, we could use the crops to feed more humans.
The ideal organic vision is for a “closed” system – that is, where the animals are fed by crops grown on the farm, and in turn help fertilise the soil with their poo.
This is Simon Fairlie’s argument in his new book, Meat, which even persuaded George Monbiot that meat thus produced could be ethical.
A mixed farming system (crops+animals+poo all on the same farm) is completely different way of producing meat in factory farms – where the animals are treated as a commodities without sensibilities and their poo goes to waste (literally).
Carnivores – eat meat by all means – but in moderation (remember when we had chicken as a treat?) and from mixed organic farms.
I am at the launch of a new Soil Association report.
Peter Melchett, policy director, gives us the lowdown, starting with above context.
Feeding the animals that feed us is the first of several Soil Association reports on the future of farming including phosphate, water and oil.
Not promising answers – more starting a discussion.
Real Food Lover 