Review 3 Units 17–25, exercise 1
Write a short critical evaluation of one of the topics below. Use the model evaluation below to help you. Briefly describe the background or context and give an objective assessment, either positive or negative. Try to use some of the words from Section 3.
- A policy or programme, e.g. to improve standards of education, to promote health
- A practice or technique, e.g. for marketing a product, for preventing crime
- A design or product
Section 3 Words to learn (PDF)
Introduction:
The sustainability of the global food system has been at the centre of much debate in recent years. It has been argued that Alternative Food Networks (AFNs) are more sustainable than the 'conventional' industrialized, intensive farming methods. Furthermore, this emergence can be seen as a result of concerns surrounding the consequences of modern food production and consumption. However, to simply equate sustainability of the global food system with AFNs should be met with caution, as this ignores the actual nature of the system in different contexts. Moreover, the definitions of some of these terms need proper consideration to fully understand both what the concept of sustainability is, and whether such 'alternatives' meet its criteria. This report will critically analyse such issues by first understanding how and why sustainability is applicable to the global food system. Secondly, it will assess the nature and implications of AFNs, and thirdly, the credibility of foods labelled as 'local' and 'quality' will be examined.
Sustainability and food:
As stated in the United Nation's Brundtland report, 'sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs' (UN, 1987). In the context of food systems, meeting 'need' involves the production and consumption of food. The link to sustainability is thus obvious, as the ability to continue to produce food is a key component of human existence. Yet policies that support intensive farming seem to have been short-sighted: mass producing food to the detriment of the environment, and animal and even human health. Growing concern for the long-term sustainability of such 'conventional' systems has led to an increasing interest in 'alternative' methods (Tansey & Worsley, 2000). However, the sustainable fulfilment of 'need' is not necessarily accomplished simply by rejecting conventional methods. AFNs will now be assessed within this context to establish their feasibility.
[The writer goes on to explain more about 'AFNs and local food production' and 'Quality and consistency in AFNs' ...]
Conclusion:
This review has critically examined some of the key aspects of AFNs to evaluate their sustainability. AFNs can be seen as an 'alternative' to 'conventional' methods of food production-consumption, but in reality, the situation is far more complex. What emerges clearly, however, is a theme of 'reconnection' through the creation of shorter supply chains that benefit the land and people. However, the concept of 'local' is somewhat ambiguous, and ensuring consistency can be difficult. Furthermore, AFNs rely heavily on ethical and moral priorities, meaning that many advocates of AFNs are those able to afford this luxury. While a transition to AFNs may be economically difficult for less wealthy people and places, 'conventional' food systems are clearly unsustainable, and so there is a need for all actors in the production-consumption process to consider gradually incorporating the principles of AFNs into mainstream food networks.