Australia’s food security

The latest report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change paints a grim picture for the future of Australia’s food security. Its publication coincides with the recent release of the final report from the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter, which details the failures of the ‘Green Revolution’ and calls for a new paradigm in the way we produce, consume and legislate in relation to food – and quickly!

Statistics indicate that Australia’s population will exceed 40 million by 2060. In the current relatively stable climatic circumstances Australia now feeds 60 million people directly. But that’s no cause for complacency.

In 2010 the Gillard Government’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council released its report ‘Australia and Food Security in a Changing World’. The authors presciently highlighted that: ‘…If our population grows to 35-40 million and climate change constrains food production, we can see years where we will import more food than we export…’

Scientists pointed out in March this year that the world is on track to become more than 2°C warmer and that farmers could face significant drops in agriculture, especially in the Murray Darling Basin. They also predicted that global warming will cut crop harvests by 2% each decade based on a 2°C rise by 2050.

The mounting likelihood of a significantly larger population combined with water scarcity, lower food yields and rising temperatures – all within decades – should be a wake-up call for Australian politicians who are genuinely concerned about Australia’s food and national security.

Food scarcity generates internal instability: just last year complex systems theorists at the New England Complex Systems Institute warned that if food prices climb above 210 on the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) food price index – in any particular country – riots prompted by and fought on empty stomachs are the inevitable result.

Whether Labor or Liberal is in power, the Australian Government’s reactions to these threats has been and is slow, misguided and disintegrated.

On 6 February 2014 the Minister for Agriculture, Barnaby Joyce, announced the preparation of an issues paper on Agricultural Competitiveness with a view to developing the ‘Agricultural Competitiveness White Paper’. It is to consider, among other things, food security in Australia and the world through the creation of a stronger and more competitive agriculture sector. It doesn’t cover human nutritional health issues and the issues paper – not the white paper – is due for release only towards the end of 2014. Submissions close on 17 April 2014.

Notwithstanding the enormity of the future food security problem the nation is likely to face the issues paper is constrained to be ‘developed in the context of findings of the Commission of Audit, the constrained fiscal circumstances and the Government’s commitment to return the Budget to surplus. ‘

Even so, budgetary constraints aren’t likely to be the most serious source of restrictions on the government’s power to confront the issue.

While these preliminary steps at identifying the problem are being set in train, the Government is simultaneously in advanced negotiations about the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP).  If that agreement is made it will significantly impact on agricultural policy, and particularly on the scope for the government’s use of policy instruments affecting agriculture, even before we have fully analysed and understood Australia’s current and future food security risks and what policy instruments might be most efficacious.  That’s like agreeing to have one hand tied behind your back to go into a fight before you’ve had a chance to assess your opponent.

Proceeding with the TPP agreement at this point is even more disturbing when the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food has confirmed that now more than ever we need to re-democratise food to ensure that local communities can withstand shocks linked to peak oil, imbalances in the cycle of nitrogen, genetic erosion because of mono-cropping schemes, soil degradation and repeated shocks from climate change.

The publication by WikiLeaks of various chapters from the TPP should have raised serious concerns about how the TPP agreement may hinder  the Australian Government in its use of public policy to re-invent food systems to protect Australia’s food security.  Will it limit the ability to explore new options to reduce vulnerability to volatile international markets and to build integrated local food systems? What rules about discrimination against foreign suppliers are to be included, and how will they limit government policy options? Will the commitments being negotiated in the TPP advance or stifle human rights to food and development? Is the Government willing to carry out a human rights impact assessment – as the UN Special Rapporteur suggested  – before signing the TPP?

Food security is an issue that must be carefully and comprehensively addressed by our government as a matter of critical forward planning.  And it must be given priority over trade “arrangements” that may have attractions now but which will limit the government’s policy options when current circumstances change, which all indicators point to being soon.  To effectively confront the problem the Australian Government needs first to investigate and understand the issues, next to properly assess the probabilities and risks, and finally to formulate contingency plans that can be put into effect by the full range of policy options reserved to a sovereign state.  It’s not something that can be dealt with piecemeal as its effects surface, by a policy arsenal limited by international agreements.

Copyright Kellie Tranter 2014

Print Friendly
  • Michael Croft

    Thanks Kelly, I have always liked your thinking – on all issues.

    One point that most miss in this discussion (including the PMSIEC report) is that Australia currently feeds 60 million people in a good year, but in a bad year best guestimates are that we only feed some 30 million. So throw increased severe El Nino events into the mix, as is predicted for this summer, and we are heading for trouble sooner than we realise – and of our own making.

    btw I have met Special Rapporteur Olivier on occasion in my role as Australasian civil society delegate to the UN/FAO Committee on world Food Security – he is seriously impressive, and we hope someone as good replaces him as his tenure has just ended.

    fyi “food security” is an outcome, and under the definitions most commonly used – FAO, WHO and USDA – you can be a well fed slave and be food secure/ have food security. As an outcome “food security” isn’t interested in the means by which we become food secure. Food sovereignty, on the other hand, pays close attention to the democratic and equitable means by which food security is best achieved for all.

    Best regards, Michael Croft – Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance