10 Aug 2009
The government has today called for a "radical rethink" of the UK's food policy in order to prepare the agricultural sector for the impact of increased global demand for food and the effects of climate change on production.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has released a package of new reports and consultation documents outlining food policy proposals, ranging from measures to save water and cut food waste to plans for "sustainability indicators" that could see all foods carry labels detailing their environmental impact.
The package also includes the publication of the UK's first Food Security Assessment, which concluded that the country's food supplies are currently in a strong state but warns that action is required now to prepare for the detrimental effects of climate change and increased global demand on food security.
The study found that around two thirds of food consumed in the UK is produced here and that a further 20 per cent comes from Europe, resulting in higher levels of food security than in the past.
But it warns that some areas continue to prove a cause from concern, noting that supplies of fish, for example, are "unfavourable" and look unlikely to improve over the next decade.
Environment secretary Hilary Benn warned that the interconnected nature of global food markets meant no country could afford to be complacent about food supplies, particularly as the effects of climate change become more severe.
"Last year the world had a wake-up call with the sudden oil and food price rises," he said, adding that "a radical rethink of how we produce and consume our food" is required if the agricultural sector is to meet growing global demand while cutting carbon emissions.
"Globally we need to cut emissions and adapt to the changing climate that will alter what we can grow and where we can grow it," he warned. "We must maintain the natural resources – soils, water, and biodiversity – on which food production depends. And we need to tackle diet-related ill health that already costs the NHS and the wider economy billions of pounds each year."
Benn urged "everyone in the food system" to contribute to the new consultation exercise, which aims to develop a food policy for the next 20 years capable of curbing environmental impacts while increasing UK supplies.
Central to any new strategy will be efforts to encourage consumers to opt for more sustainable food products, primarily through a proposed system of sustainability indicators designed to provide information on food's environmental impact.
The government today issued draft proposals for how the indicators would attempt to combine a range of metrics that provide an insight into a product's environmental efficiency, supply security, and nutritional content.
Controversially, Benn also signalled that any new food policy could include support for genetically modified (GM) crops.
Speaking on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme earlier today, he said that GM crops were already being used in some countries and could yet play a major role in helping to meet increased demand for food.
"If GM can make a contribution then we have a choice as a society and as a world about whether to make use of that technology, and an increasing number of countries are growing GM products," he said. "The truth is we will need to think about the way in which we produce our food, the way in which we use water and fertiliser, we will need science, we will need more people to come into farming because it has a bright future."
In addition, he said that the government was in talks with supermarkets about scrapping "best before" dates on food, which he said were contributing to the high quantities of edible food that is sent to landfill each year and increases UK greenhouse gas emissions.
He argued that while "use by" dates were essential for food safety purposes, "sell by" dates were often being misinterpreted by customers and used as a reason to throw out perfectly good food.
"In the past, long before any such labels existed, people would look at the food in the fridge or in the larder and decide whether it was okay to eat," he said.
LATEST STORIES ABOUT LEGISLATION
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
LATEST JOBS
TODAY'S TOP STORIES
HIGHLIGHT
Solar sector warns proposed cuts to feed-in tariffs would make it impossible for them to deliver promised rates of return
INSIGHT
INSIGHT
The science and practical application of an improved method for the specification of power and cooling infrastructure for data centres
A look at alternative approaches to managing energy for cost and/or sustainability reasons in data centres
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Add your comment
What happened to common sense?
As usual, politicians, scientists and even news organisations are covering this topic without mentioning the other - and quite possibly ONLY - long-term solution, which is population control or even reduction. Humans do irreparable damage to the Earth's environment just by existing - the damage caused by those in rich nations outweighing the damage caused by those in poor nations by multiples of tens or even hundreds, it must be said. So, do politicians and supposedly intelligent/rational scientists realistically hope to achieve a better future by finding better ways to keep an ever-increasingly-expanding human population alive? There, I've pointed out the elephant in the room. Now let's think about and discuss this topic in a manner befitting a species who, perhaps, just might be the slightest bit interested in the long-term future of its global environment (and therefore itself). Does anyone actually believe the future of humanity and/or planet Earth can be assessed through the myopic vote-tinted lenses of politicians, or guaranteed by scientists looking after their own research or industry career interests?
Posted by Etienne Shui, 10 Aug 2009