WHEN Stephen Lewis spoke to a Saskatoon audience recently, he voiced wariness about corporate initiatives to supply foreign aid.
The former United Nations ambassador and spokesperson for humanitarian causes said he is “paranoid” about the Alliance for a Green Revolution for Africa being fuelled by the private sector.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, as well as corporate and government partners from around the world, contribute money, expertise and goods to help improve agriculture and boost food production in Africa.
Lewis also expressed opposition to the use of genetically modified crops in the project.
Read Also
Meat and plant protein are both good for human health – McMaster study
A study from McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont. has found that meat consumption doesn’t increase the risk of death.
But despite his misgivings, predictions about the world’s burgeoning population compels us to explore every option available or risk a grim future.
Great Britain’s top science institute, the Royal Society, issued a report last week that said the world will have to find a way to feed 2.3 billion more people by 2050. That will mean a 70 percent increase in food output.
At the same time, we must find ways to make agriculture greener. Among other things, that means reducing water and fertilizer use and limiting further agricultural land-use expansion.
Last year, the world was given a brief preview of what might happen in the event of a worldwide food shortage. Prices skyrocketed, supplies dwindled and riots erupted in some developing countries.
Luckily, the phenomenon was short-lived, but it showed a need for action.
If we are to meet the challenges of feeding the world’s hungry, we must take advantage of every opportunity. With proper oversight, corporate initiatives and GM technology are keys to success of the plan.
Among consumers, GM technology and increasing corporate encroachment into our lives are hot button issues. When influential people such as Lewis speak against them, even while admitting lack of knowledge about GM, it risks unnecessarily heightening public fears.
And when emotion gets overly involved and clouds good judgment, it has potential to place unnecessary limits on the effort needed.
Philosophical biases or emotions must not be permitted to get in the way of what needs to be done.
However, the corporate-driven model should not be given carte blanche. Some corporations have in the past shown an unwillingness to act beyond their own financial self-interests when left without proper regulation and restraint.
While the discussion about private versus government foreign aid must continue, it must be based on what is best for humanity, according to the best information we have.
It should not be based on vague, unsubstantiated feelings of discomfort.
Besides, why should we not expect our corporations to contribute to society’s greater good? Why shouldn’t we expect them to be good global citizens?
Rather than shun corporations by suggesting they are shortsighted and profit-driven, we should challenge them to do well and do better.
The world hunger problem is looming and by most accounts we are going to need all the help we can get.
Bruce Dyck, Terry Fries, Barb Glen, D’Arce McMillan and Ken Zacharias collaborate in the writing of Western Producer editorials.
