Planetary food regimes: Understanding the entanglement between human and planetary health in the Anthropocene

Beacham, Jonathan

doi:10.1111/geoj.12407

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The ultra-processed food industry and the beef sector are both dominant players in the global food system. Consequently, their high consumption cannot be attributed to coincidences, but can be seen as part of wider structural conditions resulting from past and current food systems (45)(46)(47) . An underlying factor of this scenario is the political systems that favour the rise of ultra-processed food transnationals and agribusiness (9) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The environmental impact of beef and ultra-processed food consumption in Brazil

da Cruz,

da Costa Louzada,

Silva

et al. 2024

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study evaluated the independent and combined environmental impacts of the consumption of beef and ultra-processed foods in Brazil. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Brazil. Participants: We used food purchases data from a national household budget survey conducted between July 2017 and July 2018, representing all Brazilian households. Food purchases were converted into energy, carbon footprints, and water footprints. Multiple linear regression models were used to assess the association between quintiles of beef and ultra-processed foods in total energy purchases and the environmental footprints, controlling for sociodemographic variables. Results: Both beef and ultra-processed foods had a significant linear association with carbon and water footprints (p < 0.01) in crude and adjusted models. In the crude upper quintile of beef purchases, carbon and water footprints were 47.7% and 30.8% higher, respectively, compared to the lower quintile. The upper quintile of ultra-processed food purchases showed carbon and water footprints 14.4% and 22.8% higher, respectively, than the lower quintile. The greatest reduction in environmental footprints would occur when both beef and ultra-processed food purchases are decreased, resulting in a 21.1% reduction in carbon footprint and a 20.0% reduction in water footprint. Conclusions: Although the environmental footprints associated with beef consumption are higher, dietary patterns with lower consumption of beef and ultra-processed foods combined showed the greatest reduction in carbon and water footprints in Brazil. The high consumption of beef and ultra-processed foods is harmful to human health, as well as to the environment, thus their reduction is beneficial to both.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The environmental impact of beef and ultra-processed food consumption in Brazil

da Cruz,

da Costa Louzada,

Silva

et al. 2024

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers have, to use one of questions asked above as an example, documented the causal links between the growth in international trade in soya grown for animal feed and land use changes in Brazil and the Amazon (Nepstad et al 2006;Yao et al 2018), and soya's role in conjoining planetary to human health (Beacham 2022). A farm's participation in these supply chains has violent yet distantly experienced outcomes: the replacement of small-scale land ownership and indigenous management with ecologically simplified monocultural plantations (Hetherington 2020;Wolford 2021).…”

Section: Metabolism and Materials Flowsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…I argue that agri-care scholarship's focus on proximal and affecting encounters and multispecies entanglements is obscuring the agro-ethical significance of remote and diffuse food system dynamics that unfold beyond the farm gate. Individual farmers managing individual farms are imbricated in the food system's global web, and decisions made in one location have consequences that ripple out and touch down in distant others (Beacham 2022; Yao et al 2018). Food production operations are linked to the food system they operate within by those things that are brought onto (animal feed, labor, fertilizers, diesel, etc.)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metabolic agricultural ethics: Violence and care beyond the gate

Cusworth

2023

Progress in Environmental Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A substantial body of scholarship now exists describing an agricultural ethics of care. This work has integrated insight from feminist ethicists into research on food production, human–nature relations, and agricultural land use. As scholars elsewhere in the humanities have discussed, though, there is often a violence committed in care's name. In the case of food production and farming, I argue that the focus on affect, local multispecies relations and a proximal encounter-based ethics risks obscuring ethically significant and potentially violent food system dynamics that unfold beyond the farm gate. To better accommodate these remote yet important outcomes, I argue that scholars deploying an ethics of agricultural care should pay greater attention to the metabolisms of the farms, labs, nurseries, gardens, and allotments they study. Such an approach can accommodate those things that enter the case study site (fertilizer, animal feed, seed, etc.) and those things that leave it (vegetables, grain, pollution, etc.) as well the more-than-human transformations and interactions that take place within it. By being attentive to these material inflows and outflows, new ethical responsibilities emerge to act in the speculative hope that violence can be minimized, and care can flourish across a broader spatial range.

show abstract

“…The five papers in the Theme Issue are all equally critical of a singular universalising geographical perspective of the Anthropocene when applied to historical and contemporary discourses and empirical cases. They examine respectively: geographies of soy production to theorise a third planetary food regime (Beacham, 2022); the material‐technologic, political‐economic and sociocultural nexus of relations that gave rise to the modern broiler chicken within the Anthropocene (Coles, 2022); cellular dairy technologies in British Columbia, Canada (Newman et al, 2022); urban food partnership initiatives in the UK working to ‘reframe dietary power,’ that is, develop initiatives to eat less meat and adopt plant‐based diets to address the challenge of (de)animalisation (Morris et al, 2022); and an historical account of the food geographies of Western Avadh, in the upper Gangetic plains of northern India (Nagavarapu & Kumar, 2022).…”

Section: Food Geographies ‘In’ ‘Of’ and ‘For’ The Anthropocenementioning

confidence: 99%