Woke Farm and Food Policies in the Post-truth Era: Calamitous Consequences for People and the Planet

Abstract

The woke food movement, epitomized by the EAT-Lancet Commission, is a relatively recent phenomenon—more prevalent in high-income countries where food is comparatively abundant, and, within those countries, more associated with rich liberal elite groups than others. Perhaps this movement is doing some good, by generating interest and discussion about issues that matter. But it is easy to find instances where they have done harm and to see possibilities for more harm to come. This happens because the movement is essentially intolerant, insisting on imposing its views on others even if those views turn out to be ill-informed (or simply silly), and even if a majority may disagree with them. We have already seen calamitous consequences from misguided policies initiated by such interests—witness the global opposition to genetically engineered food, and particular examples such as Golden Rice, with their consequences for the poor—as well as a multitude of mostly more minor instances of food policy non-sense that collectively may loom large in terms of their overall social cost. Of current concern is the possibility that these forces are becoming more influential as we are all coming to depend more on social media and non-traditional sources for information about issues that are sometimes complex. When farm and food policies are made by plebiscite, and voters are ill-informed, policy non-sense seems more likely. Some further harm can be done, even without the involvement of government, given the role of market intermediaries as gatekeepers in the food chain, imposing private policies as de facto technological regulations at the behest of activist groups. Misguided foreclosing of technological possibilities has concerning implications for the supply side of the world food equation and the global incidence of poverty and malnutrition, and for the environmental burden of agricultural production, in ways that the woke food movement does not appear to understand or anticipate.

In June 2017, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) announced it had added woke and post-truth as new words (public.oed.com/blog/june-2017-update-new-words-notes/).

“The original meaning of adjectival woke (and earlier woke up) was simply ‘awake,’ but by the mid-twentieth century, woke had been extended figuratively to refer to being ‘aware’ or ‘well informed’ in a political or cultural sense.” I use it here in this broader sense rather than the more recently popularized ways related to racism and sexual misconduct.

Post-truth was Oxford’s 2016 word of the year. It is defined as “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping political debate or public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” (Perhaps “post-trust” would be better, but this has not yet made it into the OED.)

The same update also included a new last word: Zyzzyva, the name of a genus of tropical weevils native to South America and typically found on or near palm trees, supplanting zythum, a kind of malt beer brewed in ancient Egypt.

Julian Alston is a distinguished professor in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Director of the Robert Mondavi Institute Center for Wine Economics, both at the University of California, Davis in Davis, California. He is also a member of the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics.