How to feed and not to eat our world?

Within the finite boundaries of planet Earth, agriculture plays an essential role in the production of renewable resources for the desires and needs of the growing human population. As production inputs such as soil, water and nutrients are limited, choosing between different functions for agriculture results in moral discussions. To analyse the ethical debate, Aerts et al. (2009b) developed the 6F-framework, assigning six different functions to agriculture: Food, Feed, Fuel, Fibre, Flower and Fun. In their framework, Flower comprises both ornamental plant production and nature. Because ornamental plant production is also Fun and since humanity not only expects agriculture to take care of nature as such, but also to maintain other ecosystem services and keep agricultural land in good condition for future generations, it seems more adequate to adapt the framework by replacing Flower by Foster, stressing the caring role of agriculture for its environment and for the present and future generations.

During the last decades, agricultural production strongly increased, as shown in chapter one. Nevertheless, more than 800 million people still suffer from hunger. With a global population that will increase up to 9 billion people by 2050, focussing on increasing food production alone will not solve the hunger problem. As discussed in Boonen et al. (2012a), animal production can play an essential role in producing food on ‘useless’ land or by converting ‘useless’ energy or proteins. Nevertheless, chapter two shows that the role of animal production can change, with e.g. an increasing interest in aquaculture production. Some new ethical discussions will probably occur during the next decades, e.g. the globally increasing population of carnivorous pets that demands for larger numbers of animals raised and killed to feed them. When reconsidering the role of animal production within sustainable agricultural production, several traditional parameters are likely to change: the species used (e.g. insects), the use of new by-products (e.g. from algae production) and animal welfare norms.

Searching for a more sustainable agriculture, ‘sustainability’ as such is discussed in chapter three. Several definitions are used and depending on one’s worldview, priorities are different between people, planet and profit. Furthermore, one has to question if the fulfilment of the desires of a rather small group justifies that the needs of many are compromised. In the consumer society, overconsumption and waste are a way to feel that we are alive (Baudrillard, 1998). Since consumption focuses narrowly on ‘having’ within the framework of human needs from Max-Neef (1992), it cannot lead to true happiness. Therefore, agricultural production should focus on needs in the first place, before fulfilling desires. Searching for these needs, one has to be aware of a possible inversion of goals and means. The production of a certain crop or animal product as such is not the goal, but only a means. If other means are more sustainable to reach the goal, a rethinking of the agricultural production system can help to reach a sustainable equilibrium within the 6F-framework, with respect for the boundaries of the ecosystem Earth.

Animals play a pivotal role in the 6F-framework. Current animal production uses a large area, often competing with other functions. Animal production is under ethical scrutiny, not only from an animal welfare point of view, but some consider it as competing with human food production. This discussion is not new: in 1975, van Es calculated the efficiency of several types of animal production, comparing the amount of energy and proteins that humans get from the animal products with the amount of energy and proteins that could be available by direct human consumption of the feed ration. Due to improvements in animal production during the last forty years, the efficiency ratios were in need of recalculation. As shown in chapter four, an increase in protein efficiency can be found in almost all types of animal production, although this strongly depends in how ‘edible’ is defined. Barley for example is not eaten in Western diets, although it is suitable for human consumption. When it is considered ‘inedible’, cattle production by Belgian blue changes from inefficient to a conversion that more than doubles protein availability for humans. Although progress in efficiency is made in animal production, one could question if one is looking for the desired or for the needed efficiency gain. The main focus is on increasing the efficiency of the most used species like pig, chicken and cow, while poikilothermic species are more efficient. A shift in used species therefore could lead to a large increase in protein efficiency, making it possible to produce more with less.