The Perils of the Global Soy Trade: Economic, Environmental and Social Impacts

Categories

Food

DOWNLOAD PDF VIEW ON SCRIBD
GET INVOLVED

Globalization has fundamentally changed agriculture across Europe. The idyllic image of small farms with sustainable agriculture has been replaced with agricultural cogs producing food-ingredient inputs for international industrial agri-businesses. The pork chops and chickens on European tables begin their lives far away on soybean plantations in Latin America, where the feed for European livestock is harvested.

The international tentacles of the food chain tie deforestation in Brazil and Argentina to factory-farmed livestock in Europe. International trade agreements like the World Trade Organization facilitated the global corporate agri-business network that delivers soybeans and maize from Latin America to giant pig and chicken holdings in Europe and finally to a handful of supermarket chains.The beneficiaries of deregulated trade in agricultural goods have been the international grain traders, the investors in Latin American plantations, and the largest meatpacking and supermarket chains.

This paper connects the dots between the global agricultural commodity trade and the real-life impacts on consumers, rural communities in Europe and Latin America, and the environment. Findings include:

  • European feed imports surged since the WTO went into effect. Since 1995, soy meal imports from outside the European Union to the 15 member states prior to 2004 (EU-15) grew 57.1 percent to 20.2 million metric tonnes in 2007. Total maize imports nearly doubled to 21.6 million metric tonnes.
  • Soy exports from Latin America fueled deforestation. Four-fifths of EU soymeal imports came from Brazil and Argentina. The demand for more soybeans has been a key catalyst for clearing 44.5 million acres of forests in these two countries.
  • Powerful soy interests drive small farmers off the land. Soybean plantations in Argentina and Brazil average about 1,000 hectares, but can be between 10,000 and 50,000 hectares. These large farms concentrate the land in the hands of a cadre of powerful investors and landowners, hurting indigenous farmers. There have even been reported cases of exploitation and enslavement of soy workers in Brazil.
  • Industrial soy plantations feed European livestock genetically modified (GM) feed. In 2009, Brazil and Argentina were the second- and third-largest cultivators of GM crops (herbicide-tolerant or insect-resistant engineered seeds), growing 42.7 million hectares of GM soybeans, maize and cotton combined.
  • Soybean imports supersized European pig and chicken farms. Low-priced soybean meal has helped reduce the number of European pig and chicken farmers and expand the scale of the remaining farms to gargantuan proportions. In 2007, 74 million pigs were fattened on the largest 1 percent of holdings — half of all pigs in the EU.

None of this is inevitable. Just as we created these changes, we can fix the problems with a few straightforward steps. Agriculture should be removed from the binding strictures of international trade agreements; nations should pursue farm policies that promote sustainable production, food sovereignty and food security for their populations; and food should be labeled to show the full life cycle of its production, including GM feed labeling for meat and dairy products. These are concrete steps we can take immediately to address the problems raised by the international soy and feed industrial complex and move toward improved food sovereignty in the EU and in countries that supply our food.

Unseen Hazards: from Nanotechnology to Nanotoxicity

Categories

Food

nanotech-reportUnfortunately, the enormous potential of nanotechnology to quell the world’s problems may be offset by its potential to cause harm. There is legitimate concern that the nano-sized particles employed in this new technology will have seriously damaging effects on the health of humans and the environment. Dozens of studies from the emerging field of nanotoxicity have already demonstrated hazards associated with nanoparticles.

DOWNLOAD PDF  

VIEW ON SCRIBD

Unseen Hazards: from Nanotechnology to Nanotoxicity

Categories

Food

nanotech-reportUnfortunately, the enormous potential of nanotechnology to quell the world’s problems may be offset by its potential to cause harm. There is legitimate concern that the nano-sized particles employed in this new technology will have seriously damaging effects on the health of humans and the environment. Dozens of studies from the emerging field of nanotoxicity have already demonstrated hazards associated with nanoparticles.

DOWNLOAD PDF  

VIEW ON SCRIBD

Climate Change: It’s What’s for Dinner

Categories

FoodCommon Resources

What you put on your plate matters

We all know that driving a gas-guzzling SUV contributes to climate change,but did you know that what you put on your plate could too? Here’s how your food choices affect climate change and what you, as a consumer, can do about it.

DOWNLOAD PDF

 

Biotech Diplomacy

Categories

Food

Injecting the Corn to Create GMOsWhen you think of an embassy, you might think of diplomats dining with world leaders and consulate staffers assisting travelers who have lost their passports. Lately, however, ambassadors representing the United States have been carrying out a less traditional sort of mission in the European Union: promoting the interests of biotechnology companies and the genetically modified products they are attempting to sell around the world.

DOWNLOAD PDF
VIEW ON SCRIBD

The Rush to Ethanol

Categories

Food

Excerpt from the executive summary

Rising oil prices, energy security, and global warming concerns have all contributed to the current hype over biofuels. With both prices and demand for oil likely to continue to increase, biofuels are being presented as the way to curb greenhouse gas emissions and to develop homegrown energy that reduces our dependency on foreign oil.

Related Documents

In this context, corn-based ethanol has emerged as a leading contender to reduce dependence on fossil fuel,based gasoline. At first glance, corn,based ethanol seems simple, even patriotic: take the sugar from corn that U.S. farmers grow, and ferment it with yeast to distill basically the same stuff found in alcoholic beverages. By products, such as distiller‚ grain and corn gluten, serve as livestock feed and help offset refining costs. The industry claims that ethanol blends will lower tailpipe emissions, promote energy independence, and revitalize rural America.

Farmers and investors envision a new gold rush. Ethanol production is registering record growth rates, and reached nearly five billion gallons in 2006. Dozens of new ethanol refineries are being constructed, with production capacity forecast to double as early as 2008.1 President Bush intensified this momentum in his 2007 State of the Union address with a call to produce 35 billion gallons of alternative fuels by 2017 — a fivefold increase from the currently established goals.

However, the leading raw material for ethanol in the United States-corn-is among the least efficient, most polluting, and overall least sustainable biofuel feedstocks.

This report reviews the most up to date scientific evidence and concludes that corn-based ethanol is not the silver bullet everyone is seeking.