Department of Food and Information Technology, Comsats University Islamabad, Sahiwal, Pakistan
Received: 03-Jun-2022, Manuscript No. JFPDT-22-68136; Editor assigned: 06-Jun-2022, Pre QC No. JFPDT-22-68136 (PQ); Reviewed: 21-Jun-2022, QC No. JFPDT-22-68136; Revised: 27-Jun-2022, Manuscript No. JFPDT-22-68136 (A); Published: 04-Jul-2022, DOI: 10.4172/2321-6204.10.3.005
Visit for more related articles at Research & Reviews: Journal of Food and Dairy Technology
A food system in which those who produce, distribute, and consume food also have authority over the processes and regulations governing that production and distribution is known as food sovereignty. In contrast, the current corporate food regime controls the world's food system through the use of market institutions and businesses. Local food economies, sustainable food supply, and culturally appropriate foods and behaviours are prioritised by food sovereignty. Food sovereignty is centred on indigenous people since changing climates and disturbed foodways adversely affect indigenous populations and their access to traditional food sources while also raising the prevalence of some diseases. Numerous international organisations, including the United Nations, have addressed these requirements in recent years, and many nations have passed legislation enshrining food sovereignty principles. Food sovereignty activists' detractors contend that the system is based on false presumptions ignores the causes of the problems it targets, and suffers from a lack of agreement on the solutions that are being suggested.
The ability "to breed and share a variety of open-sourced seeds" is referred to as "seed sovereignty." It is closely related to food sovereignty since proponents of seed sovereignty think that preserving seeds is a good way to improve food security. These activists contend that a closed food system made possible by seed saving can help communities become independent of large agricultural corporations.
Food sovereignty versus food security
In contrast to food sovereignty, seed sovereignty places more of an emphasis on seed preserving than on complete food systems. Rather than only using arguments for food justice, seed sovereignty proponents frequently use In contrast to food sovereignty, seed sovereignty places more of an emphasis on seed preserving than on complete food systems. Rather than only using arguments for food justice, seed sovereignty proponents frequently use arguments for the environment. In light of climate change, they contend that seed saving plays a crucial role in generating plant types that are more adaptable to changing climatic circumstances and restoring biodiversity to agriculture.
In reaction to activists' frustration with food security, the mainstream global discourse on food provisioning and policy, food sovereignty was produced. The latter emphasises everyone having access to appropriate nourishment, whether that comes from domestically produced food or foreign imports. The "corporate food regime"-large-scale, industrialised corporate farming based on specialised production, land consolidation, and trade liberalization-has thus been promoted in the guise of efficiency and increased productivity. The corporate food regime's negative impacts, such as the widespread eviction of small farmers and the destruction of the environment worldwide, are said to be hidden by the food security movement's neglect of the political economy of that regime, according to its detractors.
Criticisms of the green revolution
Some proponents of food security support the Green Revolution, which refers to advancements in plant breeding during the 1960s and 1980s that increased yields from important cereal crops, as a success story in boosting crop yields and reducing world hunger. Through significant private and public investment, the programme largely focused on research, development, and transfer of agricultural technologies, including hybrid seeds and fertilisers, with the goal of revolutionising agriculture in a number of nations, beginning in Mexico and India.
The green revolution, according to many in the food sovereignty movement, has received criticism for adhering too closely to a technocratic Western country programme that is disconnected from the needs of the majority of small farmers and peasants.
The green revolution may have increased food production, but it did not address access issues, therefore there is still hunger in the globe. Supporters of food sovereignty contend that the highly concentrated distribution of economic power, notably access to land and purchasing power, has not changed as a result of the green revolution. The increased use of herbicides during the green revolution, according to critics, led to extensive environmental harm and a decline in biodiversity across many regions.