Student: Jaya Gatchell
Graduation date: May 2019
Type: Concentration (single major)
Date approved: November 2016
Summary
Food commodities are objects of sustenance that are bought or sold. Geopolitics are the intrinsic link between power politics and geographical resources (Jensen and Rottem 2010). In the last two decades, a transnational food network formed, connecting food commodities and geopolitics. A series of circumstances led to its formation. Farming technologies have changed since the 1900s. Less labor is required for greater yield, leading to global trends of urbanization because rural areas no longer provide as many jobs (Busch and Bain 2004). Similarly, new distribution technologies have allowed farmers to profit from monocropping which decreases biodiversity and increases land degradation. Furthermore, in the late 1970s, government and business interests encouraged free trade and discouraged state regulation (Busch and Bain 2004). Thus, creating the privately regulated and capitalist structuring of the network; structuring that builds uneven accumulations of wealth globally. This concentration focuses on how the geography and labor of food production conflicts social perspectives and political interests. Simultaneously, this concentration examines how conflicting social views and political incentives may alter geography and labor. In order to study geopolitics, it will investigate the web of actors and processes complicating equitable food consumption and production.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) provides the official regulation of the transnational food network. The WTO encourages private trade over government led self-sufficiency (Scrinis 2007). Private corporations rely on a consumer base. This means the network is also informally regulated by social dimensions; food-culture, norms, health-fads, advertisements and social constructions that surround food consumption. This creates a hierarchy where food retailers have the most wealth and power due to their proximity to consumers (Busch and Bain 2004). Food processors, often global corporations, benefit from controlling distribution technologies but are constrained by food retailers and consumer choice. Food producers are limited by their land, and thus are increasingly reliant on both food retailers and food processors. In the global North, producers also rely on government subsidies (Scrinis 2007, Busch and Bain 2004). Due to the network’s capitalist structuring, these subsidies disadvantage food producers in the global South (Scrinis 2007).
The banana is an example of how food production has altered society in Latin America (Striffler and Moberg 2003). Capitalist systems in the Global North encouraged countries in the global South to expand banana plantations (Striffler and Moberg 2003). Latin American social structures were reorganized as laborers moved to work on plantations, leading to social conflicts (Striffler and Moberg 2003). In the 1980s and 90s, this expansion created labor exploitation and land degradation (Arias 2002). To calm consumer scrutiny of production impacts, transnational banana companies began to work with NGOs and third party certifications (Busch and Bain 2004). When consumers buy bananas, they are given the choice between differently certified bananas at different prices, under the assumption that the certified bananas have moral value.
Almond production in California and Spain give context for how local landscapes are tied to the global food system. California’s almond cultivation techniques allow for the state to be the world’s most productive almond producer (Alston and Sexton 1991). Concurrently, California’s almond production is connected to global trends such as drought and the decline of bees. California almonds are grown on large-scale monoculture farms. These monoculture farms are reliant on a massive import of honey bees for pollination and considerable water resources (Agnew 2007, Cuthbert 2014). In Spain, the techniques of almond cultivation are drastically less efficient (García et. al 2004). In Spain, almond trees are often grown in biodiverse and rain-fed (rather than irrigated) farms (Cuthbert 2014, Wesenmal et. al 2003). The transnational food system awards California’s use of their land and disincentivizes Spain by lowering almond prices based upon California’s high production rates. California’s efficiency and success perpetuates these techniques and technologies on almond farms. Growers invest heavily in almond trees, further constraining themselves to their production habits and land.
Herring production in the Barents Sea exemplifies the complications of geopolitics. Melting ice enables new fishing areas in the sea to increase in availability and productivity (Diekart et. al 2009, Tsan and Tsai 2010) Due to how The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) defines ocean boundaries, disputable areas have emerged (Tsain and Tsai 2010). Norway and Russia’s diplomatic relationships are intensified by the oil and fish areas at stake (Jensen and Rottem 2010). Policy decisions, like Russia’s tariff on Norwegian herring, will impact the food web of the Barents Sea (“Russia”, 2016).
References
Agnew, Singeli. 2007. “The Almond and the Bee.” San Francisco Chronicle.
Alston, J., and R. Sexton. 1991. “California Almond Markets and Reserve Strategies Analyzed.” California Agriculture 45 (4): 18–21.
Arias, Pedro Asesor da. 2003. The World Banana Economy, 1985-2002. Food & Agriculture Org.
Busch, Lawrence, and Carmen Bain. 2004. “New! Improved? The Transformation of the Global Agrifood System.” Rural Sociology 69 (3): 321–46.
Cuthbert, Pamela. 2014. “Big, Bad Almonds.” Maclean’s 127 (36): 71–71.
Diekert, Florian K., Dag Ø. Hjermann, Eric Nævdal, and Nils Chr. Stenseth. 2010. “Non-Cooperative Exploitation of Multi-Cohort fisheries—The Role of Gear Selectivity in the North-East Arctic Cod Fishery.” Resource and Energy Economics 32 (1): 78–92. doi:10.1016/j.reseneeco.2009.09.002.
García, J., P. Romero, P. Botía, and F. García. 2004. “Cost-Benefit Analysis of Almond Orchard under Regulated Deficit Irrigation (RDI) in SE Spain.” Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 2 (2): 157–65.
Jensen, Øystein, and Svein Vigeland Rottem. 2010. “The Politics of Security and International Law in Norway’s Arctic Waters.” Polar Record 46 (1): 75–83. doi:10.1017/S0032247409990076.
May, Gregory D., Rownak Afza, Hugh S. Mason, Alicja Wiecko, Frantisek J. Novak, and Charles J. Arntzen. 1995. “Generation of Transgenic Banana (Musa Acuminata) Plants via Agrobacterium-Mediated Transformation.” Bio/Technology 13 (5): 486–92. doi:10.1038/nbt0595-486.
“Russia: Government Subsidies for Transportation of Herring Will Contribute to Import Substitution | USDA Foreign Agricultural Service.” 2016. Accessed October 3.
Scrinis, Gyorgy, and others. 2007. “From Techno-Corporate Food to Alternative Agri-Food Movements.” Local-Global: Identity, Security, Community 4 (2007): 112.
Stiansen, Jan Erik, Bjarte Bogstad, W. Paul Budgell, Padmini Dalpadado, Harald Gjøsa eter, Kjellrun Hiis Hauge, Randi Ingvaldsen, et al. 2005. “Status Report on the Barents Sea Ecosystem, 2004-2005.” http://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/handle/11250/113621.
Striffler, Steve, and Mark Moberg. 2003. Banana Wars: Power, Production, and History in the Americas. Duke University Press.
Tan, Wei-en, and Yu-tai Tsai. 2010. “After the Ice Melts: Conflict Resolution and the International Scramble for Natural Resources in the Arctic Circle.” Journal of Politics and Law 3: 91–99.
van Wesemael, Bas, Erik Cammeraat, Mark Mulligan, and Sophia Burke. 2003. “The Impact of Soil Properties and Topography on Drought Vulnerability of Rainfed Cropping Systems in Southern Spain.” Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 94 (1): 1–15. doi:10.1016/S0167-8809(02)00019-1.
Questions
- Descriptive: What complicates the movement of food transnationally? What populations and institutions are involved in transnational commodity chains?
- Explanatory: How do institutions, such as governments, companies, and food retailers, distribute consumption and production on a transnational scale? How do climate and terrain conditions necessary for crops structure the network of commodity production and consumption? How have political regimes, urban migration, and export profits influenced the way transnational commodities are structured?
- Evaluative: Who benefits and who suffers due to profit accumulation within the network? What influence do political and social dimensions have on international trade networks? How is international food trade influencing political and social structures? Is the WTO the best-suited to oversee transnational food trade?
- Instrumental: How could long-term planning be incentivized in the commodity chain of transnational food? Should state governments be held accountable for the food production techniques and distribution within their nation? Who should enforce the regulation of the transnational food economy?
Concentration courses
- IA 312 (Studies of Diplomacy, 4 credits), Fall 2017. I will be able to study the strategies and laws between nations and use this knowledge in the context of food commodities.
- GEOL 340 (Spatial Problems in Earth System Science, 5 credits), Spring 2017. Will aid in my understanding of spatial constraints that have a role in global food chains.
- SOAN 249 (Political Economy of Food, 4 credits), Fall 2016. Professor Goldman's class is a direct study of the actors and processes complicating food trade.
- SOAN 296 (Wines and Vines, 4 credits), Fall 2017. Exploring the political economy and social context of wine will give provide a situated example of the issues I deal with in my concentration.
- IA 340 (International Political Economy, 4 credits), Spring 2018. Understanding how political economies work internationally is a key aspect to my concentration.
- HIST 388 (What's for Dinner, 4 credits), Spring 2018. Susan Glosser's class will help me understand the conception of food consumption.
Arts and humanities courses
- HIST 261 (Global Environmental History, 4 credits). Pre-approved A&H course; no justification required.
- PHIL 215 (Philosophy and the Environment, 4 credits). Pre-approved A&H course; no justification required.