Not all scientific controversies are fought in the laboratory: Today much of our planet is the testing ground in a scientific controversy touching virtually every human being on Earth. It centers on the path we choose to feed ourselves, a choice that will create ripples ranging from the extent of hunger and the severity of climate change to how many species remain at century’s end. And that path will be shaped by what social philosopher Erich Fromm (1973) called a “frame of orientation”—the core assumptions, often beneath conscious awareness, through which we each view our world. For human beings, these frames function as filters, determining what we see and what we do not see. Today, two quite different ways of seeing the global food challenge are emerging as scientists, farmers, and engaged citizens struggle to answer the question: How will we feed ourselves? Here I contrast the frames, the first and dominant one—promoted in most US agricultural universities and by farm-related corporations—I call “productivist” because the frame defines the challenge of conquering today’s hunger and meeting growing demand largely as that of producing more food. Limiting the human population is also seen as critical. The second lens is my own and that of a growing number of food and farming experts worldwide. It is sometimes described as “ecological” or “sustainable.” But such terms might mislead by suggesting a worldview focusing principally, or exclusively, on the environment. So I prefer to call the lens “relational,” suggesting a way of seeing that embraces both the ecological and social dimensions of the food system. Its focus is not primarily on the quantities produced but the qualities of relationships within both human and nonhuman aspects of food systems, as it asks whether these relationships enhance life. I first present the productivist frame and then the relational. Worldwide, our “food system is working for the majority of people,” notes the UK think-tank Foresight (2011, p. 36). Yields of major food crops have grown markedly.
XXII. On the Consolidation of the Strata of the Earth
