Fair Flavours

Fair Flavours- From the experts! - www.fairflavours.org
Zestien sterrenkoks laten in korte filmpjes zien hoe je culinair kunt uitpakken met duurzame ingrediënten. Laat je inspireren om een faire én culinaire maaltijd op tafel te zetten. Loopt het water je al in de mond, ga naar de Sterrenrecepten en kijk de kunst af van de experts. Door te koken met duurzame ingrediënten kan jij een bijdrage leveren aan de bestrijding van extreme honger en armoede én draag je bij aan het behalen van de Milleniumdoelstellingen! Ga naar de website: www.fairflavours.org

Doe mee aan de Food Fight, wat zijn jouw Fair Flavours?
Durf jij de strijd aan te gaan met sterrenkoks? Doe dan mee aan Fairfoods Food Fight. Upload je duurzame recept en maak een filmpje. Overtuig Fairfood en de sterrenkoks met een origineel filmpje waarin jij bewijst dat jouw recept het beste is! Doe mee en maak kans op bijzondere prijzen!

Deze campagne is een onderdeel van Fairfood’s programma ‘De wereld op je bord’
http://www.fairfood.org/nl/campagne/de-wereld-op-je-bord/ Eat fair, beat hunger! www.fairfood.org

Fairfood Matters: ‘Whodunit? Deforestation in Brazil and the role of soy’

My search for the role of soy in deforestation was like going down a rabbit-hole. The more I looked for evidence of how soy expansion in Brazil was contributing to deforestation, the more I came across different views on the issue - some complementary, some outright contradictory. I set out to discover who is really to blame for deforestation in Brazil and what is the exact role of soy.

Who is responsible for taking down the forest?
Some time mid-decade, people began to notice that the Brazilian soy sector had its foot on the accelerator and wasn't about to lay off. Fueled mostly by Europe’s demand for animal feed, Brazil’s soy industry was expanding fast. Research has suggested that around 60 percent of all supermarket goods in Europe alone contain some form of soy whether in the form of oil, cheap filler for processed food, or as a bodybuilder for the livestock that we have a habit of eating. It was around this time that the soy industry was identified as the new deforestation kid in town. Apparently, soy was eating up the Amazon in the most alarming way. Nonetheless, it was known that soy was not the only culprit in deforestation, but a prominent contributor along with the usual suspects including cattle farming, logging, and mining.

The soy-beef-deforestation complex
After further research, I found that the relationship between soy expansion and deforestation was anything but straightforward. In the name of keeping the Amazon forests standing, research on deforestation started to reveal that the soy industry was less of a direct initiator of deforestation, but part of a wider and exceptionally entangled system. Some call it the soy-beef-deforestation complex since the soy and meat industries are inseparable buddies whose relationship, it turns out, has a lot to do with land. Because of their cheap access to international credit, soy producers buy land from livestock producers which create a need for new land for the cattle to graze on. Aided by soy-related infrastructure such as roads, cattle ranchers move towards forested frontiers, typically the Cerrado and Amazon regions. Forests are then cleared by ranchers to establish new cattle grazing locations. Ranchers benefit from this system as they can capitalize on their business without depending too much on expensive domestic loans once they make revenue from selling land.

Digging deeper
Something suggested there could be more, and indeed there was. That's when I came across a report that contradicted everything I had learned. The report suggested that deforestation had different causes altogether. It stated that soy and cattle were actually wrongly blamed for Amazon deforestation while the real drivers were in fact timber and land-grabbing. One study cited showed that of 630 samples of deforested areas since July 2006, only 12 areas had gone to soybeans and 200 areas to cattle. The remaining 418 sample areas, or 70 percent, were unused indicating that the main reason for cutting down trees was for timber and land grabbing. Another study showed that only four percent of the Amazon has recognized land ownership. In addition, land in the Amazon region considerably rises in price after it has been deforested. Supposedly, this situation generates enough financial incentive for the invasion of public land in order to claim possession. Further, Brazilian law maintains that once land is claimed for a certain number of years, it becomes the possession of the inhabitant. Cattle ranching, when viewed from this perspective, is a result of deforestation instead of a main driver; it constitutes low capital entrance to cleared areas and is an effective way to mark territory. In this scenario, the link between soy cultivation and deforestation is twice removed- a highly indirect cause.

Whodunit?
This was starting to look like a classic whodunit detective story. Through my research, I can surely say that there are no black and white answers. It is a very complex situation however, the soy industry is a significant driver of this system that is invading forested territory. After all, what is noticeable is that a significant share of the industry belongs to an arrangement that disregards conservation of natural ecosystems altogether.

This does not suggest that there are no efforts to make the industry more sustainable. Examples of these efforts include the Basel criteria for responsible soy production, EcoSocial certified soy, and fair trade and organic soy. Stimulation of positive initiatives that take the problems of soy production into account is surely needed. Through this we can make sure that industry practices do not contribute to degradation of natural ecosystems and other priority issues in the sector that need to be mitigated.

The right solutions
Perhaps identifying the real deforestation culprit once and for all (along with accomplices and their different levels of involvement) is of major importance since conservation efforts can misfire and solutions are not always adequate. Properly establishing what is counted as deforestation is also crucial as savannah and secondary forest are not always included in research in deforestation rates and are often considered non-forest. Afterall, we don't want the Brazilian Cerrado region to disappear into a sea of soy when we're not looking.

Diogo Pereira da Silva
Author of the latest version of Fairfood’s soy sector report
Ad Interim Project Leader Sector Analysis
Fairfood International

Increasing degrees, increasing hunger?

A blog about the importance of the Copenhagen summit meeting

By Fairfood International, the Netherlands

Climate change may affect food security everywhere. Ironically food production also contributes to the emission of greenhouse gases. Decisions made by participating countries in the coming Climate Change Conference will set future standards for how to deal with global warming and related effects, such as food security. Therefore, Fairfood will attentively follow the COP15 and keep you informed about its outcomes!

Copenhagen summit meeting
December 7th through the 18th, the United Nations Climate Change Conference will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark.

The prospect seems to be that no new agreement, succeeding the Kyoto Protocol (which expires in 2012), will be signed by participating countries. Bookmakers are pessimistic.

However, the efforts to invert the forecasts will be considerable. Governmental representatives, diplomats, scientists, public officers, unionists, environmental activists, lobbyists from the various industries, students and journalists of many countries will participate in Copenhagen. Let’s hope it is a success.

Climate change, agriculture and food security
Climate change affects many aspects of our lives. A recent investigation conducted by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) shows that climate change will have harmful effects on agriculture and food security if no counter-action is undertaken.

“There cannot be food security without climate security,” was stated by the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon at the World Summit on Food Security in Rome.

In fact, even small temperature shifts of 1-2 degrees Celsius can have severe effects on the production of food. Agriculture is extremely sensitive to shifts in temperature and rainfall. Essential crops such as rice, corn, and wheat are expected to have reduced turnovers. According to Oxfam, some farmers are trying to adapt their cultivations to the new climate conditions by, for instance, growing potatoes where wheat was once grown in areas that are becoming drier. Seasons have become more unpredictable which makes the choice for new crops, as well as the decision on periods for sow and reap, increasingly difficult. Therefore, as a consequence of climate variations, the geography of crops could change as well. Some areas in China, for example, are predicted to become more suitable to grow wheat.

Overall, the challenge will be to match the quantities that are necessary for satisfying the expected rise in food demand. As a result of a growing world population and rising welfare levels, estimates published in a United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report mention a necessary increase in the production of food by 70 percent by 2050.

However, according to today’s expectations, this increase cannot be accomplished. Without changes in emissions, South Asia’s average yields, for example, will drop in 2050. Yields will be about 50 percent less (from 2000 levels) for wheat, 17 percent for rice and six percent for corn. Decreased production in the agricultural sector will also affect the meat industry, as many animals are fed with crops like soy and corn.

Global warming also affects our oceans. Generally fish do not respond well to changes in temperature. Coral reef, an important habitat for marine life, and plankton, from which much sea life feeds, are seriously affected by the changes in our climate. As a result, coral bleaching occurs as well as an increased oceanic acidity obstructing the process of calcification. In the case of plankton, early blooming causes problems in the overlap with other life cycles. Fish and other marine life are important food sources. FAO mentions that fish is essential in the diet of 2.8 billion people. The dependence of people on fish for their animal protein is greatest in developing countries.

Poverty
Some areas are expected to be hit first and hardest by the effect of global warming. These areas are located mainly in developing countries where agriculture and fishing are often the most important sources of income. To worsen the picture, the expected rise of food prices will be added. IFPRI says food prices can triple by the year 2050, which will mean deepening the conditions of poverty in already poor areas.

Hunger
Brazil's president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva described hunger as "the most devastating weapon of mass destruction."

The result of insufficient food production is that calorie availability is expected to be too low in 2050. According to Table 1, if the raise of temperatures connected to climate change occurs, calorie availability will be lower than in 2000. Today, more than one billion people suffer from hunger and every six seconds a child dies of malnutrition. Research states that without measures against the warming of the earth, 25 million children will suffer from malnutrition by the year 2050.

Table 1 - Daily per capita calorie availability with and without climate change

source: ‘Climate Change: Impact on Agriculture and Cost of Adaption’ by IFPRI Note: NCAR and CSIRO use two different scenario’s for climate change

Emission for food production
Producing food contributes to emissions. The agricultural sector causes 13.5 percent of the global emission of greenhouse gases. Warming greenhouses, producing fertilizer, and transporting products all contribute to global warming. By producing consciously, farmers and companies can reduce the emission for the products they produce. Also consumers can make an impact by selecting products with relatively lower emissions ratings. Helpful tools for doing this are for example carbon footprints and in the Netherlands the fruit and vegetable calendar by Milieu Centraal.

Future
The issue of climate change needs to be addressed to ensure food security worldwide. World leaders will have to set the foundation for a follow up on the Kyoto protocol. Furthermore, investments will have to be made by governments to enable farmers to adapt to changing conditions. Financial support will be needed to allow farmers to buy new technologies for effective and efficient irrigation and to invest in research, development, and infrastructure. The premises however are not encouraging. The Times reports that the APEC countries are not willing to commit to the necessary cut of global carbon gas emissions with 50 percent by 2050 (compared to emissions in 1990), as was proposed by the G8 countries. President Obama has emphasized that the USA is not willing to commit to a legally binding deal (although China and the US have committed to a reduction of emissions). Some developing countries are now threatening to walk out of the summit meeting if no commitment is made.

Climate issues, agriculture, and the fight against hunger and poverty deserve extraordinary efforts. The recent international summit on hunger alleviation has not been a success. Let’s hope COP will not follow but rather reverse the trend!

Additional Links
Official website of the COP
Copenhagen channel on Youtube
Guardian on the latest COP15 news

Tommaso Chiamparino
Project leader Fairness Issues Analysis
I am currently investigating the impact of trade restrictions on sustainability in food production and ultimately on the eradication of hunger and poverty.

Fairfood Guests: ‘Ghanaians on fair trade’

As fair trade products become increasingly commonplace in Western shops, more and more people in Europe and the United States are forming opinions about the fair trade phenomenon. During my time as a project assistant at Fairfood International, I had the opportunity to learn about fair trade and its impact on developing countries. I noticed that although many fair trade products come from Africa, the issue is mostly debated among people from Western countries. So, when I travelled to Ghana last summer, I was curious to hear the opinions about fair trade from the local community. I wondered: What do people in Ghana think about fair trade?

Kumasi
I spent three months in Kumasi, Ghana’s second largest city, for a research project at the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology. I lived in the eastern part of the city in a neighbourhood called Ayeduase. Because of Ayeduase’s proximity to the university campus, a large number of the people living in the area are students. Most of the people working in Ayeduase have small businesses that serve the students’ needs, such as diners (chop bars), internet cafes, photocopy services or barbershops. To find out what people in Ayeduase knew and thought about issues such as fair trade, international trade, and food production in general, I decided to interview some people in this neighbourhood.

What do you know about fair trade?
To start, no one with whom I spoke had ever heard of fair trade or certification of food products in general. Although there are many fair trade certified farms in Ghana, there is apparently little awareness about this in the city. This probably has something to do with the availability of fair trade products in Ghana. For instance, the South African population, unlike that of Ghana, is much more aware of the fair trade movement as fair trade products have been introduced into their markets.
When I asked more about international trade, everyone spoke positively of Ghana’s export of food products, as it supports trade, foreign exchange, and cordial relationships with other countries. Only one person I interviewed expressed some reservations, saying that the financial benefits are limited as export prices are quite low due to competition from other African countries. The biggest problem of food exports was said to be that too much food is being exported to Western markets, where the price is the highest. This occasionally causes shortages and high prices on Ghanaian food markets, threatening the access to food for Ghanaians. People seemed to have more detailed knowledge about general problems in Ghana’s food sector and raised a wide range of domestic issues such as inadequate irrigation systems, poor storage facilities, and pesticide use. These problems are associated with low farm productivity, post-harvest losses and reduced food quality.

Solutions from the streets
The solutions that people brought up for the problems only addressed the domestic issues. For instance, people said that improving storage facilities and infrastructure can prevent food from spoiling before it reaches the market, and education on farming practices in combination with loans can increase the scale of farms, in turn improving the productivity and the income of the farmer.
Remarkably, especially since we are talking about fair trade, no one held other countries responsible for solving problems in Ghana. Whereas many people in developed countries tend to think that African countries should receive help for whatever problems they face, the people I interview in Ayeduase agreed that the development of the Ghanaian food sector was an issue for the Ghanaian government, farmers and exporters. I was glad to hear that people did not mention foreign support as a solution for the problems which is something that easily could have happened in a country that is swamped with development programs from international NGOs. People expressed a sense of responsibility for the progress in their country, which is, in my opinion, one of the most important requirements for sustainable development.

Fair trade in Ghana
Although I have my reservations about the effectiveness of some forms of development aid, I do think that Western countries have a responsibility in supporting the advancement of countries such as Ghana. There are more problems in the Ghanaian food sector that need to be solved than I was told about in Ayeduase. For instance, an issue such as the underpayment of farmers was not mentioned as a problem. That does not mean that all farmers in Ghana get a good price for their products, however it is an issue that is not unique to the food sector. Many people struggle to survive on the small wages they earn. Employment opportunities are scarce in Ghana and many are happy to have a job at all. Fair trade can have a positive impact on these problems, and for consumers in Western countries, buying fair trade products is a good way to support the living standards in a country like Ghana. After all, the very least we can do to help people in developing countries solve their problems is to pay a reasonable price for their products, right?

Tim Hendriks
Former project assistant Solution Analysis General

A dull dinner served at Pittsburgh

A blog about the G20

Last September President Barack Obama hosted the G20 in Pittsburgh.. The mass media, NGOs and many other people worldwide followed the Pittsburgh summit attentively, with hopes and expectations'

Crucial questions were in need of urgent answers. Is the world economy effectively recovering from the crisis? What lessons have been learned? Will sustainable growth be guaranteed? Will transparency be fully recognized as a core principle in international economic practices? And what about the increasing number of people suffering from hunger (which reached over 1.02 billion in 2009)?

At Pittsburgh the G8 was unified with the G20. This means a radical shift in how the world is represented. It has changed into an ensemble of old powers, to a summit where 90% of global GDP, 80% of world trade and 2/3 of the world population was represented. In short, new seats had to be added around the (dinner) table.

New and old guests
Historically, the G8 resembled the head of states and prime ministers of the biggest economies in the world. the United States of America, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Japan, Italy, Russia and Canada got together On a yearly basis to talk about world economic strategies and challenges. The G20, instead, was initially created as a forum for economic and financial cooperation and was inaugurated in response to the financial crises of the late 1990’s. In Pittsburgh the two entities joined forces for the first time. “We designated the G20 to be the premier forum for our international economic cooperation”, this was officially stated by the world leaders in the preamble of the Pittsburgh final statement.

So who was new at the table? Of course Brazil, India and China but also Indonesia, Mexico, Turkey and the EU ( its rotating presidency and the EU Central Bank). From a ritual and established dinner of a few old friends (which could potentially be quite boring if one excludes the contagious smile of President Obama and the incredibly rude humour of Mr Berlusconi) it seems to have become a more colourful dinner party!

From the sidelines
Many non-profit organizations were following the developments of the G20 with great interest from the sidelines, (see initiative by Oxfam).
The expected menu included:
1. Confirmation of the promises made in L’Aquila - Italy (the previous G8 meeting) about food security, sustainability and poverty alleviation;
2. Concrete measures for tackling climate change;
3. Recognition of the need for transparency and tax justice in financial flows.

First course: food security, sustainability and poverty alleviation
Some of the expected ingredients were actually there. The G20 confirmed:
- The need to implement the Global Partnership for Agriculture and Food Security. The partnership involves a network of importing and exporting countries, private sectors, NGOs, civil society and international institutions. Its mandate is to provide a comprehensive and coordinated response to hunger in today's world;
- The World Bank (WB) needs to coordinate efforts for increasing agriculture assistance in low-income countries. Additionally, the WB is asked to strengthen its efforts on: poverty alleviation; human development and security; investments on sustainable energy.
- A reform of the voting power within the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the WB. This means emerging and transition countries will have a higher share in the decision making process. To be more precise: 3% and 5% of the voting power for the WB and the IMF respectively will shift from over-represented to under-represented countries.

Why is this last point potentially important? The growing weight of emerging economies can favour the implementation of more effective policies towards the alleviation of hunger and poverty. Yet, some crucial flavours are missing, in particular for the poorer countries. The countries that are most affected by hunger and poverty are still not heard in the decision-making boards.

Second course: climate change
The second course, centred on a “warm” dish called climate change, was very disappointing. Only one timid sign of clear action can be found in the commitment to end harmful subsidies. If this is accomplished by 2020, it is said, greenhouse gas emissions could be reduced by 10% by 2050.
Except for this, no structured plan on how to tackle climate change was made. Not a good sign in view of the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference. The 20 dinner guests seem to be passively waiting for what will happen in Copenhagen instead of giving clear policy lines, strategies or commitments.

Dessert: transparency and tax justice
‘Transparency’ and ‘tax justice’ were expected to be words most frequently repeated in conversations among the world leaders. After all, the financial crisis should have taught us something, shouldn’t it? “We are committed to developing proposals, by the end 2009, to make it easier for developing countries to secure the benefits of a new cooperative tax environment” the G20 finance ministers declared in a preparatory meeting held in London last September.

A sweet dessert was what Fairfood, other NGOs, and especially the countries who are losing billions of dollars in tax income as a consequence of non-transparent flows were patiently hoping for. Only few traces of the main ingredients (transparency, tax justice) can be found in Pittsburgh’s final communiqué:
- A call for adoption of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention and the UN Convention Against Corruption.
- Support for the work of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

Paying the bill
What about the promises of being “ready to use countermeasures against tax havens from March 2010” and “the call upon the FATF to issue a public list of high risk jurisdictions by February 2010”? Will they be maintained? As of now, 50% of the world trade is reported to pass through these havens. The bill is not being paid right now,

Next “dinner” venues
The G20 will be held again in Canada in June 2010, in Korea in November 2010 and in France in 2011.

Links:
- G20 on Twitter; @PittsburghG20
- G20 Youtube channel
- Financial Times – Report on G20 in Pittsburgh

Tommaso Chiamparino

Project leader Fairness Issues Analysis.
I am currently investigating the impact of trade restrictions on sustainability in food production and ultimately on the eradication of hunger and poverty.

Fairfood Talks: ‘Brand owners: How Can They Celebrate ‘Fair’?’

Can Cadbury win?
It seems that Cadbury can’t do anything right. The multinational’s newly launched advertising campaign- aimed at raising awareness of Dairy Milk’s recent Fairtrade status- has been slammed for its racist portrayal of African people. An article by The Independent reports numerous objections and hostility from both Ghanaian and British representatives who are outraged at the over-simplification of African village life.

Behind the Mask
The 60-second television commercial features an African mask that- literally full of (cocoa) beans- comes to life and inspires local Ghanaians to dance en masse. The clip is celebratory in tone, uplifting in its message and, if anything, presents an empowering image of the local people and their important role in the production of Dairy Milk.

Jumpin’ Beans
The musician at the centre of the video metaphorically ‘explodes’ from a cocoa bean, drawing attention to local pride in its top quality cocoa. The ‘real’ locals featured in the video are seen to be enjoying themselves, highlighting their talent for singing and dancing, in particular Ghanaian music-legend ‘Tinny’. To the non-scrutinizing eye, it’s difficult to see the video as a reductive, limiting video for the people of Ghana. In fact, underneath the YouTube clip, one of many supporters of the campaign comments, “I'm proud to be from this background.”

Advert or Adverse?
Nevertheless, complaints received by ASA (Advertising Standards Authority), including those from UK-based African equality leaders, has resulted in a formal investigation. This raises the question: how can a Fairtrade product or, indeed, any of the sustainability-aware brands “ethically” advertise?

Divine comedy
Divine Chocolate also created a YouTube advert to promote their Fairtrade chocolate bars. Interestingly, there seems to be no sign of criticism despite the simple nature of the animation with predictable images of cartoon-Ghanaians pumping water in traditional dress. In comparison with Cadbury’s concept, the background music of African drumming and choral singing sounds archaic and out-of-date.

Lose/Lose
It is fair to say that these brands deserve attention for reflecting on and adjusting their supply chains. But the question of how they communicate this to their consumers is a thorny one. Is Cadbury really getting a fair deal from viewers or are we missing the point? Surely the concern is not the depiction of an accurate African mask but that Western companies are starting to honestly and positively recognize the local people involved in making the products we hold so dear.

Lauren Mills is a regular contributor to Fairfood’s English website. She’s a chocoholic so you can be safe in knowledge that she’ll keep you up-to-date on the ‘fair’ status of your favourite bars!

Fairfood Talks: ‘African perspectives on CSR’

Last week I found myself in a hot conference room in Johannesburg. People working for Non Governmental Organizations (NGO’s), labour unions, researchers and civil society groups gathered for three days to talk about Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Africa. They came from all over the continent: Botswana, Mozambique, Malawi, Ghana, Kenya, Togo, Cameroon, DRC Congo and of course South Africa itself.

The goal was to share experiences, information and strategies to enhance and improve CSR in the region. The ‘Big Question’ was: how can we work together to make the practices from (multinational) companies truly beneficial for the lives of the people and communities down here?

Inspired
I was there to get a picture of what is happening in this field (particularly regarding the food industry), and to make contact with organizations that Fairfood could partner up with to share information and solutions. I got so much information and inspiration from this meeting! The people I met where all extremely dedicated to addressing human rights violations and poverty– even though they often have very limited means.

First-hand information
I attended lots of interesting presentations, participated in discussions and facilitated a workshop on sustainability standards and supply chains. But actually the coffee and lunch breaks were the most interesting. While enjoying a ‘Rooibos-tea’ and banana cake, I talked to a lot of people and learned a great deal about their work and got first-hand information about problems in different food sectors.

An example is the expanding banana industry in Cameroon where pesticides are used so recklessly that it leads to a lot of health problems among the plantation workers. They don’t get any training or information about what they are spraying and how this affects them. I also learned about pineapple farms in Ghana, where respect for labour rights are often not taken seriously at all. Outside of the food scope, I heard how minerals (used for our mobile phones) are extracted from mines in the DRC Congo, fuelling conflict and pollution in the area while the population lives in poverty. (See also the MakeITfair for more info)

Off to a fair World Cup?
But there was good news as well. For the World Cup in South Africa (next year), a number of organizations launched a “Decent Work Campaign”, pressuring the FIFA to safeguard a decent pay and conditions for all those construction builders working on stadia, roads etc. The current challenge is getting commitment on CSR from the restaurants and other service providers. Maybe Fairfood could partner up with other organizations to make sure that football supporters get served sustainably produced snacks & drinks during the matches?

This week I’ll be meeting more exciting organizations around Cape Town and Stellenbosch (a famous wine area); will keep you posted…

Janine Dortmundt
Project Leader Solutions
I’m working as a project leader solution analysis for the sectors fruit and soy.

Also read:
Fairfood Talks: 'Tackling the tricky business of fruit'