Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Rights-based food systems and the goals of food systems reform

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Food security, health, decent livelihoods, gender equity, safe working conditions, cultural identity and participation in cultural life are basic human rights that can be achieved at least in part through the food system. But current trends in the US prevent full realization of these economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR) for residents, farmers, and wageworkers in the food system. Supply chains that strive to meet the goals of social justice, economic equity, and environmental quality better than the dominant globalized food value networks are gaining popularity in the US. However, achieving important human rights has become conflated with other goals of food system reform over the past decade, such as being “community-based,” local, and sustainable. This conflation confuses means, ends, and complementary goals; and it may lead activists trying to help communities to regain control of their food system choices into less productive strategies. This paper introduces a new concept, rights-based food systems (RBFS), and explores its connection with localization and sustainability. The core criteria of RBFS are democratic participation in food system choices affecting more than one sector; fair, transparent access by producers to all necessary resources for food production and marketing; multiple independent buyers; absence of human exploitation; absence of resource exploitation; and no impingement on the ability of people in other locales to meet this set of criteria. Localization and a community base can help achieve RBFS by facilitating food democracy and reducing environmental exploitation, primarily by lowering environmental costs due to long-distance transportation. Sustainability per se is an empty goal for food system reform, unless what will be sustained and for whom are specified. The RBFS concept helps to clarify what is worth sustaining and who is most susceptible to neglect in attempts to reform food systems. Localization can be a means toward sustainability if local food systems are also RBFS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Status of ratification is posted on the website of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights: http://www.ohchr.org/english/countries/ratification/3.htm

  2. Tim Lang has popularized this term recently (e.g., Lang 1998), but the basic arguments were made several years earlier by Lappé (1990) and in the US context build on a long agrarian legacy (see Carlson 2000).

Abbreviations

ESCR:

Economic, social, and cultural rights

RBFS:

Rights-based food system

References

  • Aldington, T.J. 1998. Multifunctional agriculture: A brief review from developed and developing country perspectives. Internal Document 29, Agriculture Department. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

  • Allen, P. 2004. Together at the table: Sustainability and sustenance in the American agrifood system. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M.D. 2007. The case for local food systems. Farm & Food Policy Project Background Paper. Available by request from news@farmandfoodproject.org.

  • Becker, B. 1997. Sustainability assessment: Review of values, concepts, and methodological approaches. Washington: Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boele, R., H. Fabig, and D. Wheeler. 2001. Shell, Nigeria and the Ogoni. A study in unsustainable development: II. Corporate social responsibility and “stakeholder management” versus a rights-based approach to sustainable development. Sustainable Development 9: 121–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boody, G., B. Vondracek, D.A. Andow, M. Krinke, J. Westra, J. Zimmerman, and P. Welle. 2005. Multifunctional agriculture in the United States. Bioscience 55 (1): 27–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Born, B., and M. Purcell. 2006. Avoiding the local trap: Scale and food systems in planning research. Journal of Planning Education & Research 26: 195–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowe, J. 2007. Nobodies: Modern American slave labor and the dark side of the new global economy. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadway, M.J. 1995. From city to countryside: Recent changes in the structure and location of the meat- and fish-processing industries. In Any way you cut it: Meat processing and small-town America, ed. D.D. Stull, M.J. Broadway, and D. Griffith, 17–40. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2007. Occupational outlook handbook, 2006–07 edition. US Department of Labor. http://www.bls.gov/oco/home.htm Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Carlson, A. 2000. The new agrarian mind: The movement toward decentralist thought in twentieth-century America. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caswell, M., and K. Day-Rubenstein. 2006. Agricultural research and development. In Agricultural resources and environmental indicators (2006 ed., Chapter 3.2), ed. K. Wiebe and N. Gollehon, Economic Information Bulletin No. EIB-16. http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/arei/eib16/eib16_3-2.pdf. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Center for Consumer Freedom. nd. 2008. What is the center for consumer freedom? http://www.consumerfreedom.com/about.cfm. Accessed 1 March 2008.

  • Chambers, R., and G.R. Conway. 1991. Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century. IDS Discussion Paper 296, Institute of Development Studies. Sussex: University of Sussex.

  • Covey, T., M. Ahearn, J. Johnson, M. Morehart, R. Strickland, S. Vogel, L. Traub, D. Brown, C. McGath, B. Williams, P. Stenberg, R. Green, K. Erickson, and M. Harris. 2007. Agricultural income and finance outlook. Washington: Economic Research Service AIS-85. US Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, C. 2006. The height of inequality. The Atlantic Monthly, September 2006.

  • De Feyter, K. 2005. Human rights: Social justice in the age of the market. London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Justice. 2002. Three Florida men convicted in conspiracy to detain workers in conditions of involuntary servitude. Press Release 28 June 2002. http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2002/June/02_crt_381.htm. Accessed 30 December 2007.

  • Drewnowski, A., and S.E. Specter. 2004. Poverty and obesity: The role of energy density and energy costs. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 79 (1): 6–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economic Policy Institute. 2007. Minimum wage. Frequently asked questions. Revised April 2007. http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/issueguides_minwage_minwagefaq. Accessed 30 December 2007.

  • Economic Research Service (ERS). 2002. Farm structure: Questions and answers. http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/FarmStructure/Questions/aging.htm. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Eide, W.B. 2005. The importance of economic and social rights in the age of economic globalization. In Food and human rights in development, Volume I: Legal and institutional dimensions and selected topics, ed. W.B. Eide and U. Kracht, 3–40. Antwerp: Intersentia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2004a. The state of agricultural commodity markets (SOCO). http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5419e/y5419e01.htm. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2004b. Final report of the chair. Intergovernmental working group for the elaboration of a set of voluntary guidelines to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security. http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/008/J3345e/j3345e01.htm. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Fields, A.B. 2003. Rethinking human rights for the new millennium. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gliessman, S.R. 2007. Agroecology: The ecology of sustainable food systems (2nd ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gready, P., and J. Ensor, eds. 2005. Reinventing development? Translating rights-based approaches from theory into practice. London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häni, F.J., L. Pinter, and H.R. Herren. 2007. Sustainable agriculture: From common principles to common practice. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holloway, L., and M. Kneafsey. 2000. Reading the space of the farmers’ market: A case study from the United Kingdom. Sociologia Ruralis 40: 285–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe, R., and K. Wiebe. 2002. Agricultural resources and environmental indicators: Land ownership and farm structure. Washington: Economic Research Service, Publication Number AH722. US Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, S.W., and F. Gale 2006. China’s rising profile in the global market for fruits and vegetables. Economic Research Service. http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/April06/DataFeature/. Accessed 7 February 2007.

  • Human Rights Watch. 2004. Blood, sweat, and fear: Workers’ rights in US meat and poultry plants. http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/usa0105/usa0105.pdf. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • IANR News Service. 2002. Food industry consolidation mostly hikes consumer prices, NU research shows. University of Nebraska-Lincoln: Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources. http://ianrnews.unl.edu/static/0209054.shtml. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Jerardo, A. 2004. The US ag trade balance … more than just a number. Economic Research Service. http://www.ers.usda.gov/amberwaves/February04/Features/USTradeBalance.htm. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Johansson, E. 2007. Undermining worker rights. In Wal-Mart’s sustainability initiative: A civil society critique, ed. S. Anderson, 21. http://www.bbc.wikispaces.net/space/showimage/CounterSustainability. Accessed 30 December 2007.

  • Kandel, W. 2006. Meat-processing firms attract Hispanic workers to rural America. Economic Research Service. http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/June06/Features/MeatProcessing.htm. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Kates, R.W., T.M. Parris, and A. Leiserowitz. 2005. What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environment 47 (3): 8–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khoza, S. 2005. The role of framework legislation in realizing the right to food: Using South Africa as a case study of this new breed of law. In Food and human rights in development, Volume I: Legal and institutional dimensions and selected topics, ed. W.B. Eide and U. Kracht, 187–203. Antwerp: Intersentia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kneen, B. 2006. The tyranny of rights. The forum on privatization and the public domain. http://www.forumonpublicdomain.ca/node/84. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Kusmin, L., and T. Parker, eds. 2006. Rural employment at a glance. Economic Research Service. Economic Information Bulletin Number EIB-21. Washington: US Department of Agriculture.

  • Lang, T. 1998. Towards a food democracy. In Consuming passions: Cooking and eating in the age of anxiety, ed. S. Griffiths and J. Wallace, 13–24. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, T., and M. Heasmann. 2004. Food wars: The global battle for mouths, minds, and markets. London and Sterling: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lappé, F.M. 1990. Food, farming, and democracy. In Our sustainable table, ed. R. Clark, 143–159. San Francisco: North Point Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, D., T. Reader, and P. Buseck. 2002. Community attitudes toward traditional Tohono O’odham foods. Sells: Tohono O’odham Community Action and Tohono O’odham Community College.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacGregor, J., and B. Vorley. 2006. Fair miles? The concept of “food miles” through a sustainable development lens. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre, R.S., and T.D.C. Nguyen. 2004. Corporate income taxes in the Bush years. Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. http://www.ctj.org/corpfed04an.pdf. Accessed 6 February 2007.

  • Morland, K., S. Wing, A. Deiz Roux, and C. Poole. 2002. Neighborhood characteristics associated with the location of food stores and food service places. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 22: 23–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). 2007. Statistics by subject—Demographics. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_Subject/Demographics/index.asp. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Nayga, R., and Z. Weinberg. 1999. Supermarket access in the inner city. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services 6: 141–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neault, N., J.T. Cook, V. Morris, and D.A. Frank. 2005. The real cost of a healthy diet: Healthful foods are out of reach for low-income families in Boston, Massachusetts. Boston Medical Center, Department of Pediatrics. http://dcc2.bumc.bu.edu/csnappublic/HealthyDiet_Aug2005.pdf. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Neefjes, K. 2001. Environments and livelihoods: Strategies for sustainability. Oxford: Oxfam Great Britain and Redwood Books, Trowbridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • New York Times. 2006. Stop: Don’t test those cows! The New York Times (New York), 6 April 2006. Section A: 24.

  • Nord, M., M. Andrews, and S. Carlson. 2007. Food security in the United States, 2006. Economic Research Service, Economic Research Report Number ERR-49. Washington: US Department of Agriculture.

  • National Research Council (NRC). 2002. Publicly funded agricultural research and the changing structure of US agriculture. Committee to Review the Role of Publicly Funded Agricultural Research on the Structure of US Agriculture. Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources. Washington: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogden, C.L., M.D. Carroll, L.R. Curtin, M.A. McDowell, C.J. Tabak, and K.M. Flegal. 2006. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in the United States, 1999–2004. Journal of the American Medical Association 295 (13): 1549–1555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira, V. 2007. The food assistance landscape: Fiscal year 2006 annual report. Economic Research Service, Economic Information Bulletin Number EIB6-4. Washington: US Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organic and Non-GMO Report. 2008. Battle over rBGH-free labeling continues in US states. Organic and Non-GMO Report, March 2008.

  • Oxfam America. March 2004. Like machines in the fields: Workers without rights in American agriculture. http://www.oxfamamerica.org/newsandpublications/publications/research_reports/art7011.html. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Papademetriou, D., J. Audley, S. Polaski, and S. Vaughan. 2003. NAFTA’s promise and reality: Lessons from Mexico for the hemisphere. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. http://12.150.189.35/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1390&proj=zted. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Passel, J.S., R. Capps, and M.E. Fix. January 2004. Undocumented immigrants: facts and figures. Washington: Urban Institute. http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=1000587. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Pettit, J., and J. Wheeler. 2005. Developing rights? Relating discourse to context and practice. IDS Bulletin 36 (1): 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. 2006. Public sentiment about genetically modified food. http://pewagbiotech.org/research/2006update/. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • PIPA/Knowledge Networks Poll. 2004. Americans on farm subsidies. http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/jan04/FarmSubs_Jan04_quaire.pdf. Accessed 9 February 2007.

  • Pirog, R., T. van Pelt, K. Enshayan, and E. Cook. 2001. Food, fuel, and freeways: An Iowa perspective on how far food travels, fuel usage, and greenhouse gas emissions. Ames: Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Iowa State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J., ed. 2008. Sustainable agriculture and food. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J.N., A.S. Ball, T. Lang, and J.I.L. Morison. 2005. Farm costs and food miles: An assessment of the full cost of the UK weekly food basket. Food Policy 30 (1): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray, D.E., D.G. de la Torre Ugarte, and K.J. Tiller. 2003. Rethinking US agricultural policy. Knoxville: Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reuters. 2007. Poll: 92 percent want “country of origin” labels. Consumer Reports finds Americans more worried about food safety. Published 11 July 2007. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19709686/. Accessed 16 December 2007.

  • Rondeaux, C. 2002. Fear and knowing in Immokalee. St. Petersburg Times, 1 December 2002. http://www.sptimes.com/2002/12/01/State/Fear_and_knowing_in_I.shtml. Accessed 30 December 2007.

  • Scoones, I. 1998. Sustainable rural livelihoods: A framework for analysis. IDS Working Paper 72, Institute of Development Studies. Sussex: University of Sussex.

  • Smith, K., and P. Salant. 2005. Rural America depends on the food stamp program to make ends meet. Policy Brief No. 1. Durham: Carsey Institute, University of New Hampshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suppan, S. 2008. Cattle abuse, beef recall highlight systemic weaknesses. Commentary. Minneapolis: Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, I. 2007. Mapping the terrain of sustainability accounting. In Sustainability accounting and accountability, ed. J. Unerman, J. Bebbington, and B. O’Dwyer, 19–36. London & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tveiten, M. 2005. Justiciability of socio-economic rights: Reflections on Norwegian and South African debate and experience. In Food and human rights in development, Volume I: Legal and institutional dimensions and selected topics, ed. W.B. Eide and U. Kracht, 163–185. Antwerp: Intersentia.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (UN). 1991. Fact sheet No.16 (Rev.1). The Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet16rev.1en.pdf Accessed 11 January 2008.

  • United Nations (UN). 1995. Report of the World Summit for Sustainable Development. Copenhagen, 6–12 March 1995. http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N95/116/51/PDF/N9511651.pdf?OpenElement Accessed 11 January 2008.

  • Winter, M. 2003. Embeddedness, the new food economy and defensive localism. Journal of Rural Studies 19: 23–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, T.A. 2005. Identifying the real winners from US agricultural policy. Working Paper 05–07, Global Development and Environment Institute. Medford: Tufts University.

  • Zogby International. 2007. Zogby poll: 85% want to know where their food comes from. Survey shows 90% believe knowing the country of origin of the foods they buy will allow consumers to make safer food choices. Released 9 August 2007. http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1345 Accessed 16 December 2007.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I wish to acknowledge Oxfam America for financial support in 2005, at the beginning of this paper’s development, and for introducing me to the rights-based approach.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Food Systems Integrity, 22 Lawrence Lane, Arlington, MA, 02474, USA

    Molly D. Anderson

Authors
  1. Molly D. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Molly D. Anderson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Anderson, M.D. Rights-based food systems and the goals of food systems reform. Agric Hum Values 25, 593–608 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-008-9151-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-008-9151-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation