Stop Wasting Food: Alarming Facts About Food Waste

Image taken from FareShare Sussex: https://fareshare.org.uk/fareshare-centres/sussex/

This entry is the latest in our February 2019 “Food and Culture” series. This post is written by Anna Maukner, 2nd year student in International Development and Anthropology.

Every year 1.9 million tonnes of food are thrown away in the UK alone with 250, 000 tonnes still being edible. Meanwhile, 1 in 8 people suffer from hunger. Food is not just an important issue in the Global South, problems of food waste and simultaneous lack of food for whole groups of the population can be found right in front of our doorstep. The UN has calculated that if food waste was a country it would have the third highest carbon footprint after China and the US[. This is clearly a pressing issue which goes hand in hand with climate change. However, instead of recognizing this and becoming proactive, governments in Europe enforce laws and policies which aggravate the fight against food waste and hunger.

Alarming facts about food waste

  • Over one third of all food produced globally goes to waste.
  • UK households waste around 20% of all the food they buy.
  • There are nearly one billion malnourished people in the world, but the approximately 40 million tonnes of food wasted just by US households, retailers and food services each year would be enough to satisfy the hunger of every one of them.
  • On average, a UK family loses 800 pounds on wasted food a year. Collectively, this comes to 15 billion pounds per year.
  • 25% of the world’s fresh water supply is used to grow food that is never eaten. [

To me, it seems like this is an issue that can be solved, and I can’t wrap my head around how in one of the wealthiest countries this problem still persists. Globally, countries need to work together to tackle the root causes of the issue. In the UK a lot of the food that should go to hungry people is used for anaerobic digestion (AD) instead. France has put in place laws that prohibit supermarkets from throwing out unsold food, punishing them with fines of up to €75,000 if they refused to donate it to food banks or charities instead. [As much as this is a political issue and governments as well as corporations need to be held accountable there are things you can do as an individual.

FareShare

Image taken from FareShare Sussex: https://fareshare.org.uk/fareshare-centres/sussex/

FareShare is a national charity redistributing surplus food from suppliers to vulnerable people in need. With local branches all around the country, including one in Brighton just off Moulsecoombe Way, FareShare fights hunger and tackles food waste. I have volunteered at the FareShare Sussex local office for the past year and have witnessed the incredible work they do every day supplying over 120 local charities with food. They are always looking for more volunteers, so if you’re interested sign up now.

Food Waste Café on campus

At the University of Sussex sustainability and the climate are a priority to many students. A group of students under the lead of Society and Citizenship officer Aisling Murray has set up a Food Waste Café. Using food that would have otherwise been thrown in the bin we turn it in to delicious meals and sell it on a ‘pay-as-you-feel’ basis. Come to Bramber House on the 27th February with your reusable dish to save some food and get a tasty meal freshly prepared by lovely student volunteers.

Other ways you can tackle food waste

Image taken from FareShare Sussex: https://fareshare.org.uk/fareshare-centres/sussex/
Posted in Uncategorized

Can Farm-to-Table Restaurants Take on The Industrialized Food System?

This entry launches our new “Topics Affecting Our Community” series of thematic blog posts around issues impacting us at Sussex Global. This is the first post for February’s theme: Food and Culture. It is written by Anna Montanari, 3rd year student in International Development and Anthropology. 

It is common to walk around, especially for those of us who live in Brighton, and see restaurants that display their choice of quality, tasty and unprocessed food. Their menus feature the local source of ingredients highlighting that vegetables are sustainable and organic, the chicken is grass-fed and the eggs are free-range. Farm-to-table restaurants have become powerful symbols for protests against a globalised and industrialised food system, and chefs play a key role in promoting sustainable production and consumption, and in bridging the gap between producers and consumers.

Mission statement of Silo, a restaurant in Brighton. Photo credit: Mike Gibson (https://foodism.co.uk/features/dan-barber-farm-to-table-whole-farm-dining/ )

This worldwide trend of paying particular attention to quality, provenance of food and advocating for a closer relationship between food producers and consumers is particularly well-received among the majority of chefs across US.

It appears quite controversial since few large agribusinesses and transnational corporations have controlled the US market and concentrated a great economic power, while small non-competitive producers have been forced out of business. Other alienated producers have provided bulk commodities, which have been exchanged in national and global markets and sold below the cost of production in supermarkets. American consumers, who do not know the basic details of their food production, have been dependent on imported products and highly processed standardised fast food.

Far more than controversial, since the counter-cuisine of the 1960s and 1970s, some chefs have opposed and found solutions to the environmental and socio-economic problems of the agro-industrial food system by creating alternative markets, choosing to buy from local farmers and give their customers access to non-toxic nutritious meals.

In my Anthropology of Food’s dissertation, I analysed American chefs’ limitations on promoting alternative food in terms of an opposition and the contradictions in advocating for a reconnection between producers and consumers. I approached this in terms of two questions: do chefs’ strategies have a revolutionary potential to challenge the American industrialised food system? Are American chefs driven by self-interest or are they activists dedicated to a broader agenda? I argued that, even though food system ‘localisation’ could be a strategic pathway and have a transformative potential, chefs are neoliberal subjectivities who are driven by self-interest and use strategies of the neoliberal economy without challenging the conventional value chain.

Farm-to-table chefs’ strategies:

  • Intimate relationships with farmers

Matt G., a chef from Tennessee, illustrates how interacting and forging an intimate relationship with producers at the local market are important aspects. When chefs treat farmers respectfully and appropriately, they receive great ingredients that enable them to cook successful meals in their restaurants. If guests like a dish, they will know where to find the best ingredients.

Dan Barber and his team at Blue Hill at Stone Barns. Photo Credit: Dan Etherington (https://breadcakesandale.wordpress.com)
  • Food stories

Through waiters, chefs give a story to their customers in order to make them aware of the importance of supporting farmers and their sustainable practices. For example, Dan Barber, who is the executive chef and co-owner of the top-tier restaurants Blue Hill and Blue Hill at Stone Barns in New York, spends a lot of his time acquainting the waiters with the story behind every item on the menu. When customers know about the origins of the food on their plate, they can appreciate it more and, eventually, change their eating habits.

  • Alternative markets

Mikey Azzara’s Zone 7, which is a New Jersey’s growing zone and distributor of high quality products from organic and sustainable farmers in New Jersey and Eastern Pennsylvania, represents a great opportunity for both chefs and producers. Since Mikey Azzara has founded Zone 7 in 2008, the aim is to create an alternative market for farmers as an attempt to decrease the number of steps between farmers and consumers and support small organic farms, while chefs can have access to quality produce.

Both through stories and connections with farmers, farm-to-table chefs aim to reconfigure a dynamic totality, which is key to establish a sense of belonging and inclusivity, transcend the alienation and displacement of the industrialised food system, and ultimately take political action against the industrialised food system.

Articulating a critique:

  • Federal regulations and neoliberal policies of free market might put pressure on farmers. Moreover, once chefs understand that sustainability is an important element of quality and success for their meals, they cherry-pick the best ingredients in the farm, therefore forcing farmers to grow expensive and ecologically demanding products. Chefs’ quest for flavour and search for variety might put further demand on small farmers.

It is evident that alternative markets are not absent of unequal power relations.

  • Selling local and organic produce directly to restaurants is a way of doing business and mimics other forms of distribution provided by larger national distributors.
  • Teaching people about provenance is not just good for local farmers but beneficial for the restaurant’s profit. It is a strategy to create a positive image and attract tourists, media and customers to return to the restaurant.
  • Through food stories, chefs often singularise their ingredients by emphasising on the effort and energy that farmers invest in sustainable practices, the skills of growers to produce better quality products, and their intimate relations with farmers, turning local products into expensive commodities and therefore generating a profitable income.
Posted in Anthropology, Nature, Uncategorized

How Does The Necessity of Paid Work Impact Our Students?: Learning from The Global Studies Student Employment Survey

This post is written by Dr. Paul Gilbert and was originally published on the Sussex Anthropology blog ‘Culture and Capitalism’

There is little more grating, for those of us who work in Higher Education, than those portions of the British media who insist on propagating lazy stereotypes of ‘work-shy millennials’. Year on year, the hours our students spend in employment outside of the classroom only seem to increase. At the same time, efforts to ensure our courses are relevant and up-to-date only raise the number of publications and news wires we now expect our students to monitor. The demands placed on our students’ time by the need for paid employment alongside their studies is something of an open secret: most of us are well aware of it, but not quite sure what to do about it – especially when a 30-credit module is designed to require 300 hours of learning. Read more ›

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Anthropology, Economy, Rights

Rethinking rebel rule: How Mai-Mai groups in eastern Congo govern

This post by Kasper Hoffmann (University of Copenhagen) and Judith Verweijen (University of Sussex) was originally published on the London School of Economics Conflict Research Programme blog. 

Around the world, vast amounts of people live in areas marked by rebel presence. A growing body of scholarly work examines “rebel governance”, which has emerged as an interdisciplinary field of study. Scholars in this subfield typically share a desire to go beyond stereotypical images of rebels as violent savages or as greedy warlords. By focusing on how rebels govern, these scholars wish to show that rebels are engaged in creating forms of order rather than disorder.

Order may not be apparent in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo’s highly dynamic, fragmented, and fluid military landscape. In the Kivu provinces alone there are presently well over 130 active armed groups. Most of these groups label themselves “Mai-Mai”-an umbrella term for armed groups claiming to engage in “self-defense” against “foreigners”. Read more ›

Posted in Anthropology, Economy, International Relations, Policy, Rights

Fracking democracy, criminalising dissent

This article by Andrea Brock, Dr. Amber Huff, Dr. Judith Verweijen, Professor Jan Selby, Professor David Ockwell, and Professor Peter Newell of the University of Sussex was originally published in ‘The Ecologist’ on 18 October, 2018. 

The anti-fracking victory yesterday should not distract from disturbing trends in the criminalisation of dissent.

Three anti-fracking protesters – Simon Blevins, Richard Roberts and Richard Loizou – were sentenced to 15 and 16 months in prison for ‘causing a public nuisance’ in late September this year. A fourth protester, Julian Brock, received an 18 months suspended sentence after pleading guilty to the public nuisance charges.

The ‘Frack-Free Four’ had been arrested during a ‘month of protest’ in the summer of 2017 that aimed to disrupt exploratory drilling activities at Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road fracking site in Lancashire. The four climbed onto lorries that were delivering part of a drill rig and remained there for up to four days impeding the vehicles’ movement to the fracking site.

Their sentences were overturned, with the judge acknowledging that they were “manifestly excessive”.  It was a huge victory for the anti-fracking movement, and for everyone concerned about the right to protest in the UK and beyond.

Read more ›

Posted in Climate, Climate Change, Economy, International Relations, Nature, Policy, Rights, Uncategorized