Agency: Cordis | Branch: FP7 | Program: CP-FP | Phase: SiS-2007-184.108.40.206 | Award Amount: 1.02M | Year: 2008
Overall aim: The CRPE project will empower and resource civil society organisations (CSOs) to participate in co-operative research on agri-environmental issues, as a means to achieve these subsidiary aims: 1. Capabilities: To strengthen CSOs capacity to participate in research, while engaging with diverse perspectives and expertise, thus facilitating co-operation between researchers and non-researchers. 2. Co-operative research methods: To design, implement, evaluate retrospectively and thus test the methods used for co-operative research in this project, as a basis to inform future efforts. 3. Agri-environmental issues: To analyse diverse accounts of the environment in relation to agricultural methods, technologies, innovations and alternatives. 4. Priority-setting: To relate research more closely to societal needs, as a means to inform policy debate and research priorities for Europe as a Knowledge-Based Society. 5. Solutions: To suggest alternative solutions related to different understandings of societal problems, agri-environmental issues and sustainable development. A CSO partner will lead the study of a specific topic, as follows: WP1: Agrofuel production in Europe and the global South WP2: CSO participation in agbiotech issues WP3: Water scarcity and its virtual export from Spain to the UK WP4: Local agri-food networks and their environmental effects Other partners will lead studies of generic agri-environmental issues: WP5: CSOs interventions into agri-environmental research WP6: European Research Area (ERA): agri-environmental priorities WP7: Innovation narratives in EU-funded research WP8: Co-operative research processes in this project A draft Executive Summary will be presented at an EU-level workshop. The project website will be used for several purposes: participants networking, dissemination of results, and public comment.
MacMillan T.,Food Ethics Council |
Dowler E.,University of Warwick
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics | Year: 2012
The dominant discourse in 20th century UK food and agricultural policies of a liberal, free trade agenda was modified at the turn of the 21st to embrace ecological sustainability and "food security." The latter term has a long international history; the relationship between issues of technical production and equality of distributional access are also much debated. The paper examines shifts in UK policy discourse in the context of international research, policy, and initiatives to promote food security, and highlights the implications for social justice in and through the food system. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
Ingram J.S.I.,University of Oxford |
Wright H.L.,University of Cambridge |
Foster L.,Food and Rural Affairs |
Aldred T.,Fairtrade Foundation |
And 48 more authors.
Food Security | Year: 2013
The rise of food security up international political, societal and academic agendas has led to increasing interest in novel means of improving primary food production and reducing waste. There are however, also many 'post-farm gate' activities that are critical to food security, including processing, packaging, distributing, retailing, cooking and consuming. These activities all affect a range of important food security elements, notably availability, affordability and other aspects of access, nutrition and safety. Addressing the challenge of universal food security, in the context of a number of other policy goals (e.g. social, economic and environmental sustainability), is of keen interest to a range of UK stakeholders but requires an up-to-date evidence base and continuous innovation. An exercise was therefore conducted, under the auspices of the UK Global Food Security Programme, to identify priority research questions with a focus on the UK food system (though the outcomes may be broadly applicable to other developed nations). Emphasis was placed on incorporating a wide range of perspectives ('world views') from different stakeholder groups: policy, private sector, non-governmental organisations, advocacy groups and academia. A total of 456 individuals submitted 820 questions from which 100 were selected by a process of online voting and a three-stage workshop voting exercise. These 100 final questions were sorted into 10 themes and the 'top' question for each theme identified by a further voting exercise. This step also allowed four different stakeholder groups to select the top 7-8 questions from their perspectives. Results of these voting exercises are presented. It is clear from the wide range of questions prioritised in this exercise that the different stakeholder groups identified specific research needs on a range of post-farm gate activities and food security outcomes. Evidence needs related to food affordability, nutrition and food safety (all key elements of food security) featured highly in the exercise. While there were some questions relating to climate impacts on production, other important topics for food security (e.g. trade, transport, preference and cultural needs) were not viewed as strongly by the participants. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and International Society for Plant Pathology.
Barling L.,Food Ethics Council |
Crossley D.,Food Ethics Council
Food Science and Technology (London) | Year: 2014
Food Ethics Council was formed in 1998 and since has undertaken research and written reports on diverse issues such as GM technology, children's food, intellectual copyright, meat production and consumption, water footprints and food poverty. The Council has identified three key areas of 'fairness' that need to be addressed for food security. These are fair shares, fair play and fair say. Its role is to challenge the status quo and ask what people should do, all things considered. The Council also works with forward thinking businesses that are concerned about food security issues despite what many see as a lack of direction from government and a Lack of enthusiasm from many consumers. Cheap food and the health of the nation are just two areas that the Food Ethics Council considers key focus points over the future.