New director-general must have a sustainable vision for the 21st century, says Tim Lang
Next week, democratic choice faces Britain. I don't mean the AV referendum, but hustings in Westminster for the June election of the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) director-general.
The FAO is the biggest food-related international body, whose budget and staff dwarf UN health, environment or labour bodies. It's the parent body for the World Food Programme, the world's food aid system.
The FAO was proposed at the 1943 Hot Springs Conference, when the 'free world' debated the food system needed for the post-war period. There, in Virginia, the Allies sketched how "the goal of freedom from want of food, suitable and adequate for the health and strength of all peoples, can be achieved."
The strategy laid equal emphasis on hunger, health, employment and what today we'd call the natural infrastructure. It's a rare politician today who'd give a speech on soil's importance for health, but the US, remember, had gone through the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. And Western capitalism saw food markets collapse after the Wall Street crash.
Why does this matter today? Because scientific evidence suggests that, again, we need renewed vision to tackle the world food system. This month, I attended a Royal Society/British Academy conference discussing the warning signs.
Some analysts think politicians are data deaf. Others think they are torn between rampant consumers and powerful companies. Others see hope in commercial self-interest, citing giant companies starting to engage. A military meeting I attended recently concluded, soberly, that it'll take a crisis to get the requisite change.
The world needs new food diplomatic voices. Jacques Diouf, FAO DG since 1994, hasn't been a success. Critics say his reflex is the old order: begging bowl and fudge. With hunger figures rising and donor countries withholding aid, that policy model is threadbare.
Six new hats are in the ring, including former EU Agriculture Commissioner Franz Fischler, who will be at the May 3 Parliamentary session. Though smart, he'll need to show why a former Common Agriculture Policy supremo deserves world governmental support.
There's much in FAO that is good: data collection, hunger monitoring, support programmes. What's missing is an overall vision of food for the 21st century: sustainable diets from sustainable food systems.
Tim Lang is professor of food policy at City University.
Next week, democratic choice faces Britain. I don't mean the AV referendum, but hustings in Westminster for the June election of the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) director-general.
The FAO is the biggest food-related international body, whose budget and staff dwarf UN health, environment or labour bodies. It's the parent body for the World Food Programme, the world's food aid system.
The FAO was proposed at the 1943 Hot Springs Conference, when the 'free world' debated the food system needed for the post-war period. There, in Virginia, the Allies sketched how "the goal of freedom from want of food, suitable and adequate for the health and strength of all peoples, can be achieved."
The strategy laid equal emphasis on hunger, health, employment and what today we'd call the natural infrastructure. It's a rare politician today who'd give a speech on soil's importance for health, but the US, remember, had gone through the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. And Western capitalism saw food markets collapse after the Wall Street crash.
Why does this matter today? Because scientific evidence suggests that, again, we need renewed vision to tackle the world food system. This month, I attended a Royal Society/British Academy conference discussing the warning signs.
Some analysts think politicians are data deaf. Others think they are torn between rampant consumers and powerful companies. Others see hope in commercial self-interest, citing giant companies starting to engage. A military meeting I attended recently concluded, soberly, that it'll take a crisis to get the requisite change.
The world needs new food diplomatic voices. Jacques Diouf, FAO DG since 1994, hasn't been a success. Critics say his reflex is the old order: begging bowl and fudge. With hunger figures rising and donor countries withholding aid, that policy model is threadbare.
Six new hats are in the ring, including former EU Agriculture Commissioner Franz Fischler, who will be at the May 3 Parliamentary session. Though smart, he'll need to show why a former Common Agriculture Policy supremo deserves world governmental support.
There's much in FAO that is good: data collection, hunger monitoring, support programmes. What's missing is an overall vision of food for the 21st century: sustainable diets from sustainable food systems.
Tim Lang is professor of food policy at City University.
No comments yet