Food security is often defined by the three pillars of accessibility, safety, and defense. With increasing complexity brought on by our environment, regulations, and science & technology, having a safe food supply is all about appropriate, proper, disciplined, and rigorous risk assessment programs and tools. If we were to look at the intersection of food safety, consumer eating habits, regulatory environment, and application of science & technology (bio-engineering) it is not hard to see that without appropriate risk assessment at the farm level through to the finished product, the vulnerability of our supply chain to an outbreak becomes almost unavoidable.
Our agricultural land is primarily used for commodity items, GMO for resistance to insects, and structured for maximum growth, with overall few recalls and outbreaks. On the other hand fruits and vegetables which are grown in a disproportionately smaller share of agricultural land are in most cases non-GMO, but are involved in more recalls and outbreaks
Ten years ago, a report came out by the Union of Concerned Scientists that covered how much of our agricultural land was being used to grow a variety of commodity crops versus what at that time was anticipated pull from consumers following recommended dietary requirements. A pull from the marketplace that still has not materialized or come close to early promises despitelarge-scalee communications from organizations such as the USDA. At the time this report was one of the first to economic model dietary shifts on farm production. Highlighted was a simple fact that the US agricultural land is not growing what we should be eating. That is, at that time about 2 percent of US farmland was used to grow fruits and vegetables, with 60 percent devoted to commodity crops such as wheat, corn, and soy.
Healthier eating habits would lead to changes in agricultural land usage, which would in turn result in healthier soil, better air, and water quality, as well as better access to a wider range of fresh produce for consumers.
In an economic model by Purdue University’s Global Trade Analysis Project, it determined if Americans ate fruits and vegetables at USDA recommended levels, or 173 percent over levels at that time, US farmers would grow 88 percent more fruits and vegetables. On the other hand, according to a Harvard University School of Public Health study, if Americans refocused their diet and ate less meat and dairy, approximately 8 million acres of agricultural land could be re-purposed.
Healthier eating habits would lead to changes in agricultural land usage, which would in turn result in healthier soil, better air, and water quality, as well as better access to a wider range of fresh produce for consumers. From an economic viewpoint, diversity in food systems resulted in job creation, and enhanced farm profits. Heavy reliance on commodity items also results in the heavy application of fertilizers and pesticides. Commodity programs can be heavily subsidized, and therefore results in large-scale CAFOs (confined animal feeding operations) which among other outputs can also be a significant food safety risk. The economic and social impact on local communities can be further damaged with regards to soil quality, air, and water quality, and even property value can be negatively impacted.
Consumers also face challenges not only from changing internal discipline of taking more care of what goes into their bodies. Federal subsidy policies actually work to prevent better and more enhanced diversification of crops, with the corresponding effect being that the growers continue to migrate to more profitable commodity crops and away from fruits and vegetables. There is hardly a dent in the critical diet[1]related chronic diseases impacting most Americans like cardiovascular disease.
In Florida alone, there are nearly 50,000 farms, inclusive of approximately 10 million acres used for agriculture. Florida remains strong in oranges, sugarcane, tomatoes, watermelons, strawberries, cabbage, grapefruit, and seed corn. The economic value of items such as tomatoes and oranges reach half a billion, and nearly a billion respectively.
Improving diet quality will shift food demand at the source. Nearly 50 percent of fruits and 67 percent of vegetables consumed in the United States are produced domestically. Global agricultural land area is approximately 5 billion hectares, roughly 38 percent of the global land surface. 1/3 is used for cropland, 2/3 are used for grazing livestock. For cropland, 10 percent of its area is for permanent crops such as fruit trees and cocoa plantations, an additional 21 percent has irrigation. Global cropland area per capita has decreased from .45 hectares per capita to .21 capita per capita or less.
In the US alone, between 7 and 13 million acres will need to be cultivated to address the consumer dietary guidelines for fruits and vegetables. Areas to cultivate for fruits and vegetables are available, but more immediate threats such as labor availability, resistance to adoption, and environmental changes such as recent high precipitation levels in California will be the challenge. Each of these factors also needs to be assessed for risk.
Healthier diets require more transition of available agricultural land fruits and vegetables. As consumers continue their journey to recommended dietary levels of fruits and vegetables, there is evidence that both the economic impact for the grower, and the local community will be positive, and the impact on the environment would be supporting sustainability efforts. Moving from commodity, GMO resistance, to fresh healthy options will be positive for all consumers across the globe.
![Takashi Nakamura, Vice President, Fresh Del Monte[FDP: NYSE] | Agri Business Review](https://www.agribusinessreviewapac.com/newstransfer/upload/Untitled-13-450x308_469l.jpg "Takashi Nakamura, Vice President, Fresh Del Monte[FDP: NYSE] | Agri Business Review")
