The Food Crisis: Background, consequences and perspectives?

by Henning Otte Hansen, Senior Advisor, Production and Technology Division, Institute of Food and Resource Economiscs, Faculty of Life Sciences

In 2007-08 the world experienced a serious food crisis. The food crisis was characterized by remarkable price increases and price fluctuations

which created price uncertainty in several areas and sectors. A number of reasons can explain the food crisis: Both short and long run factors played a role. The consequences of the food crisis were significant. However, the food crisis was mostly a problem for poor people in the developing countries, where food accounts for up to 80 per cent of consumption. The number of starving people increased by 100 million due to the food crisis.

The food crisis from 2007-08 is over – however, the term “food crisis” may remain on the economic and political agenda for a long period. New perspectives for the future global food situation have appeared and new economic and political initiatives have been taken to deal with the situation.

Famine and Politics

by Olivier Rubin, Consultant World Bank USA, previously part-time lecturer, Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen

While the food price shock of 2007 adversely impacted food security and poverty it had no discernable impact on famine incidents. This provides yet another argument to shift from the existing production- and market-based famine approaches to a politically-based understanding of famine. Although famines might be triggered by economic shocks or natural disasters, modern famines are inherently political – increasingly intertwined in political agendas and power struggles. The article presents a few empirical examples of the strong link between politics and famine in the following fields: (i) the declaration of famine; (ii) the use of famine as a weapon of war; (iii) famine as a tool for ethnic cleansing; (iv) famine as a tool for patronage; and (v) authoritarianism and famine

War and Food

by Niels Bo Poulsen, Centre for Military History

Food production and distribution’s relationship to warfare is multidimensional and structured by spatial-geographic and socio-cultural factors as well as by military technology, the warring parties doctrines and the type of war conducted. Without laying claim to being a full examination of the subject, the present article analyses the relationship between war and food along three main lines: 1) food as a cause of war, 2) food as a crucial ‘raw material’ in sustaining ones own armed forces, and 3) food as a mean to fight the enemy. It is demonstrated that food scarcity as well as competi¬tion for land and access to food resources over time has been an important trigger of armed conflict. Regretfully, the future looks no different as it holds the perspective of ‘food wars’ triggered by for example global heating and over¬population. Feeding the troops has always been a major challenge of military campaign. However, the methods of doing so have varied greatly over time. After the Thirty Years War – the age-old principle of “Living of the land” (a policy often with devastating consequences for the civilian population and local economy) – was gradually replaced by more sophisticated systems for feeding the troops such as the magazine system. Gradually, with the emergence of total, industrialised warfare, feeding the troops has become just one among many logistical challenges facing the generals.

In relative terms, providing food has become less important than supplying the soldiers with ammunition, spare parts and medication. Simultaneously, starvation has changed from being a weapon primarily used against enemy troops in the field and besieged towns and fortresses to a way of targeting the entire enemy population. In its most radical ver¬sion, the Nazi food policy in occupied Europe, food not only served as a tool of war, but also as an instrument of ‘racial’ social engineering with the objective of privileging certain groups, decimating others, such as the Soviet ‘Slavs’, and fully exterminating such groups as the European Jews.

The Fat-crisis in Developing Countries

by Ib Christian Byygbjerg, Professor, Department of International Health, Immunology and Microbiology, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Copenhagen

In the Western World including Latin America 10 - 40% of the adult populations are obese. Obesity is defined as a body mass index (BMI) of more than or equal to 30 (kg/m2). Figures are even higher for overweight, defined as a BMI > or = 25. Obesity and overweight are strong indicators of high risk for developing chronic diseases like type 2-diabe¬tes, cardio-vascular diseases, some cancers and many degenerative disorders, normally considered Western life-style conditioned. Recent research indicates that cut-offs for obesity and overweight in relation to health risks do not apply to large populations in developing countries in Africa and Asia, which make up half of the World’s populations. Fat makes up a larger proportion of these individuals, even when the BMI is ‘normal’ in Western terms. Under- as well as over-nutrition are risky, in particular in pregnancy. Transition from the one to the other in one to two generations is dangerous. Western food habits and life-styles are risky for the Western World, but even more so for Africans and Asians. Thus, there is a hidden health crisis below the apparent food crisis. Quality and composition of food matter as much as quantity. Prevention of chronic adult diseases like type 2 diabetes could and should start before birth.

Coordination of Food Safety: A comparative study of reforms in Norway and New Zealand

by Amund Lie, Ph.d.-Student, Department of Political Science, University of Oslo

Several countries have implemented food safety reforms to ensure a more systematic, consistent and coordinated focus on food safety issues. Since food safety issues involve several other policy fields, these policy fields require inter-organ¬izational coordination. However, such coordination may be more difficult to achieve than intra-organizational coordi¬nation. Both Norway and New Zealand have implemented food safety reforms. Whilst these two countries have selected very different organizational solutions, food safety issues in both countries require inter-organizational coordination. Factors, such as a clear division of labor, active leadership, arenas for coordination, a lack of major conflicting goals, shared obligations, low geographical distance between the organizations, and a low number of organizations involved may contribute to strong coordination.

Economic Legitimacy of Democratic Governance? On legitimization and Governance in public Research Policy

by David Budtz Pedersen. Ph.d.-Student, Department of Media, Cognition and Communication, Faculty of Humanities

In this paper I examine the relationship between science and democracy as a question of science politics. I argue that current science policy is confronted with a democratic dilemma. On the one hand, good democratic governance requires economic accountability in the spending of public research funds, i.e., quantitative and systemic evaluation of the societal impact of science. On the other hand, essential parts of the academic knowledge production, i.e., knowledge that potentially contributes to the democratic political order itself, seems to be intricate, if not futile to quantify and thus challenging to legitimize as part of the government’s portfolio. In demonstrating how this dilemma supervenes on recent developments within organizational theory and science studies, I opt for a critical attitude towards these theoretical strands as well as a greater reflexivity on the long-term knowledge transfer from science to society.

Rule Simplification and Reduction of Administrative Burden - hitting the head againt a brick wall?

by Morten Pedersen & Simon Pasquali, B.sc., Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Copenhagen

Since the 1980s, successive governments have tried to reduce the administrative burdens of the private sector by means of rule simplification. On the whole, these attempts have failed. This paper aims at contributing to explain why. First, the paper examines present regulatory reforms in Denmark. We demonstrate that reregulation (i.e., the type of reform that changes the means of regulation, not its purpose) dominates on behalf of deregulation (i.e., the type of reform that alters the purpose of or dismantles regulation). Second, the paper examines the degree of conflict related to reregulation. This conflict is shown to be low, since reregulation does not threaten those who have an interest in exist¬ing regulation. Third, the paper considers whether reregulation is efficient enough. The marginal potential for reductions might be declining. Furthermore, rule simplification largely depends on a high political priority. Finally, rule simpli¬fication runs into considerable cultural barriers. Fourth, the paper examines the degree of conflict related to deregula¬tion, which is shown to be considerable. This provides some explanation as to why deregulation is not chosen as the primary rule simplification strategy.