91
6 Food Security in the Context of Fisheries and Aquaculture…
women, pregnancy or lactation status. Local food security requires that all in the
locality meet their minimum food needs, to which Alamgir and Arora add the
requirement that the available foods “ re fl ect, at least partially, tastes and preferences and household status” ( 1991 , 7). Kawarazuka and Béné ( 2010 ) identi fi ed
three pathways by which those who work in small-scale fi sheries and aquaculture
improve their household nutritional security: direct consumption of fi sh; increased
purchasing power to buy good food; and empowerment of the women who work in
the fi sh chains to effect better management of family income. Moving up from the
household to the local level already weakens the link to the food intakes of different
types of individuals and this link largely disappears at national and global levels,
where the main or exclusive target becomes average minimum food requirements
per caput. FAO is developing voluntary, cross-sectoral guidelines, the purpose of
which is stated as follows in the opening to its Preface as follows: “To improve the
governance of tenure of land, fi sheries and forests with the overarching goal of
achieving food security for all to support the progressive realization of the right to
adequate food in the context of national food security” (FAO 2012 ) .
There are large differences within and among the vulnerabilities of rural and
urban populations to food insecurity. Research on food system vulnerability, in the
face of societal change and global environmental change, is increasing: see, for
example: www.gecafs.org . Urban food security is particularly challenging because
of burgeoning city populations and the logistics and economics of food distribution.
Low-income urban households typically spend 60–80% of their budgets on food
(FAO 2000 ) . From almost 6,000 household surveys in Asian developing countries,
Dey et al. ( 2005 ) found that fi sh consumption and the choice of fi sh species and
products varied greatly with income class and location, with rural people consuming more fi sh than urban people and poor people consuming more low value, mostly
freshwater, fi sh. Globalization is bringing many other pressures to bear on food
security; for example, recent and still emerging intellectual property arrangements
for food biotechnology and genetic resources have huge implications for ownership
of and access to the means for food security (e.g., Tansey 2002 ) .
For all of the reasons mentioned above inter alia , the realities and risks of food
insecurity are widespread and persistent. FAO ( 2009a ) estimated the world’s population of hungry persons at 923 million in 2007, 80 million more than at a 1990–
1992 baseline. ADB ( 2008 ) reported that 2008 global food prices had increased by
over 50%, with food stocks at their lowest levels since the early 1980s. The concept
of food sovereignty is increasingly promoted, largely by non-governmental organizations, citing the rights of all individuals to produce food, to access resources for
food production, and to unite in using “ people power ” to realize their right to food;
for examples, see www.peoplesfoodsovereignty.org and www.ibon.org .
Speci fi c micronutrient de fi ciencies are a health problem for many millions of
poor persons and are targetted by food forti fi cation (e.g., Hardianti 2005 ) and by the
breeding of vitamin-rich staple foods (e.g., the vitamin A-enriched golden rice;
www.goldenrice.org ). In 2008, the Copenhagen Consensus ranked micronutrient
(Vitamin A and zinc) supplements for children as the most cost-effective among 30
forms of aid ( www.copenhagenconsensus.com ). Though less well supported to date
6 Food Security in the Context of Fisheries and Aquaculture…
women, pregnancy or lactation status. Local food security requires that all in the
locality meet their minimum food needs, to which Alamgir and Arora add the
requirement that the available foods “ re fl ect, at least partially, tastes and preferences and household status” ( 1991 , 7). Kawarazuka and Béné ( 2010 ) identi fi ed
three pathways by which those who work in small-scale fi sheries and aquaculture
improve their household nutritional security: direct consumption of fi sh; increased
purchasing power to buy good food; and empowerment of the women who work in
the fi sh chains to effect better management of family income. Moving up from the
household to the local level already weakens the link to the food intakes of different
types of individuals and this link largely disappears at national and global levels,
where the main or exclusive target becomes average minimum food requirements
per caput. FAO is developing voluntary, cross-sectoral guidelines, the purpose of
which is stated as follows in the opening to its Preface as follows: “To improve the
governance of tenure of land, fi sheries and forests with the overarching goal of
achieving food security for all to support the progressive realization of the right to
adequate food in the context of national food security” (FAO 2012 ) .
There are large differences within and among the vulnerabilities of rural and
urban populations to food insecurity. Research on food system vulnerability, in the
face of societal change and global environmental change, is increasing: see, for
example: www.gecafs.org . Urban food security is particularly challenging because
of burgeoning city populations and the logistics and economics of food distribution.
Low-income urban households typically spend 60–80% of their budgets on food
(FAO 2000 ) . From almost 6,000 household surveys in Asian developing countries,
Dey et al. ( 2005 ) found that fi sh consumption and the choice of fi sh species and
products varied greatly with income class and location, with rural people consuming more fi sh than urban people and poor people consuming more low value, mostly
freshwater, fi sh. Globalization is bringing many other pressures to bear on food
security; for example, recent and still emerging intellectual property arrangements
for food biotechnology and genetic resources have huge implications for ownership
of and access to the means for food security (e.g., Tansey 2002 ) .
For all of the reasons mentioned above inter alia , the realities and risks of food
insecurity are widespread and persistent. FAO ( 2009a ) estimated the world’s population of hungry persons at 923 million in 2007, 80 million more than at a 1990–
1992 baseline. ADB ( 2008 ) reported that 2008 global food prices had increased by
over 50%, with food stocks at their lowest levels since the early 1980s. The concept
of food sovereignty is increasingly promoted, largely by non-governmental organizations, citing the rights of all individuals to produce food, to access resources for
food production, and to unite in using “ people power ” to realize their right to food;
for examples, see www.peoplesfoodsovereignty.org and www.ibon.org .
Speci fi c micronutrient de fi ciencies are a health problem for many millions of
poor persons and are targetted by food forti fi cation (e.g., Hardianti 2005 ) and by the
breeding of vitamin-rich staple foods (e.g., the vitamin A-enriched golden rice;
www.goldenrice.org ). In 2008, the Copenhagen Consensus ranked micronutrient
(Vitamin A and zinc) supplements for children as the most cost-effective among 30
forms of aid ( www.copenhagenconsensus.com ). Though less well supported to date