Yesterday I attended the launch of the fifth year of IFSTAL, at the Royal Veterinary College, London. This collaborative network between several universities offers a platform for discussion about the diverse and complex nature of food systems and aims to empower change through this conversation. We saw a documentary film 'The Scottish Breed' by film maker, Zev Robinson, as part of his project entitled 'The Art and Politics of Eating', followed by a panel discussion between Vicki Hird of Sustain, Amy Jackson of the agribusiness communications group, Oxtale, Phil Hambling, NFU's Head of Food and Farming, and Lucas Daglish of the multinational hotel and restaurant company, Whitbred.
Photo credit: IFSTAL
Discussion was lively, with topics ranging between policy, Brexit, antibiotic use, changing consumer habits, supply chain issues and environmental conservation. I took away a lot from the debate but what was so refreshing was that none of the speakers, who came from such a diverse range of backgrounds, claimed that there was one overarching solution. Instead there was a consensus that, faced with such a complex set of issues and opportunities, the future of UK food production would have to come from an expansive and multifaceted set of actors. Jackson made the interesting point that we should be deciding on the end goal and considering multiple means of getting there based on different situations. For example, we might recognise that UK beef consumption needs to decrease- by certain sectors of society choosing to abstain from meat altogether, those who can afford to might wish to consume less but higher value meat but, in some respects, we might need to accept that widespread change will only be brought about by policy change.
Relying on government to bring about meaningful change might be even more difficult than bringing about societal change. Hird argued that policy change was, however, what we required. It's an interesting question- "to what extent should regulations control what enters supermarket shelves, and to what extent should it be left to consumer choice and market forces?" This then begs the question, "to what extent is it actually consumer choice?". " How much does the consumer really get told (e.g. the carbon footprint)?" and "should there be stricter regulation of this?"
Food creates conversation- the dinner table has always been a place of coming together. And when we talk food and its future, it seems to spark debate and division. The evening's discussion illustrated the importance of depolarising that debate. This is something I have long believed in- despite being vegan, I don't advocate veganism as the only way of eating more sustainably. We simply must be aware, and recognise the importance of that awareness and the choices we make. It's a luxury if we have that choice - even a farmer rearing their own livestock may not be able to afford to choose what they put on their table.
'It is so complicated, it's so bloody complicated!" Hambling kept saying. And that's just it. It's so endlessly and beautifully complicated. Robinson's film reminded us of the individuals, of the lives that have been devoted to the land and live and breathe for it. Farming and farmers are SO important not only as individuals but also as stewards of the land and proponents of rural communities.
It would be brilliant if future projects could engage universities and the public from the north of Britain. Farming in the north of England is dominated by smaller scale systems and hill farms and it's important that the discussions engage with everyone throughout the industry.
If you're interested in joining IFSTAL's discussions, the next public lecture is on 13th December at SOAS with Sue Pritchard, Director of the RSA Food, Farming & Countryside Commission.