Stop Playing Not to Lose and Start Playing to Win<br />Re-defining Agriculture to Build Consumer Trust<br />Charlie Arnot<...
CFI Mission<br />To build consumer trust and confidence in today’s food system by…<br /> sharing accurate, balanced inform...
CFI Vision<br />To provide leadership in building public understanding and support that producing the food we need using f...
Three Strategic Platforms<br />Building trust through shared values communication<br />Redefining today’s food system as t...
Building Consumer Trust <br />
Freedom to Operate<br />Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />Freedom to Operate<br />
Social License<br />Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />
Social License<br />Definition: The privilege of operating with minimal formalized restrictions (legislation, regulation, ...
The Social License To Operate<br />Flexible Responsive Lower Cost<br />Rigid Bureaucratic Higher Cost<br />Tipping <br />P...
 Values
 Expectations
 Self regulation</li></ul>Social Control<br /><ul><li> Regulation
 Legislation
 Litigation
 Compliance</li></ul>Single triggering event  Cumulative impact<br />
Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />Social License<br />Freedom to Operate<br />
Trust<br />Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />Trust<br />Social License<br />Freedom to Operate<br />
Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />Confidence<br />Trust<br />Value Similarity<br />Social License<...
Skills<br />Shared Values<br />What drives Consumer Trust?<br />Shared values are 3-5X more important in building trust th...
What Does It Mean?<br />“They don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care!”<br />- Theodore Roosevelt<b...
Questions of Values and Ethics          Kohlberg’s Moral Hierarchy<br />Three Levels – Six Stages<br />Pre- Conventional<b...
Questions of Values and Ethics          Kohlberg’s Moral Hierarchy<br />Universal ethical principle orientation<br />We ha...
Questions of Values and Ethics          Kohlberg’s Moral Hierarchy<br />Universal ethical principle orientation<br />NGO’s...
Sustainable Balance<br />Economically Viable<br /><ul><li> ROI
 Demand
 Cost Control
 Productivity
 Efficiency</li></ul>Profitability<br />Scientifically Verified<br /><ul><li> Data Driven
 Repeatable
 Measurable
 Specific</li></ul>Objectivity<br />Scientifically Verified<br />Economically Viable<br />Sustainable Systems<br />Knowled...
 Responsibility
 Respect
 Fairness
 Truth</li></ul>Value Similarity<br />Feelings<br />Belief<br />
Consumer Perception<br />The public senses change in the way food is produced but does not understand<br />Lack of underst...
Animal Welfare<br /><ul><li>Values: The proper care of animals is very important to me. My family and I have an ethical ob...
Science: That’s why we use the latest technology on the farm to keep our animals comfortable, protected from disease, pred...
Economics: Treating my animals with the best care allows my family and me to help provide consumers with abundant, safe an...
Thank You to the 2009 Consumer Trust Research Sponsors<br />
CFI Annual Consumer Trust Survey<br />Qualitative research in 2009 study<br />“What will cause consumers to grant more soc...
Two Observations<br />Uninterested and uninformed.<br />"Give me safe food, and I will trust you to give me safe food. I w...
The Challenge<br />Building trust and confidence in the contemporary food system among a public that is largely uninterest...
Times Have Changed<br />“It is not the strongest   species that survive, nor   the most intelligent, but the ones who are ...
National Discussion<br />“A long-overdue national conversation about food so far hasn’t been much of a conversation. Inste...
Is This The Ethical Choice?<br />
1950<br />U.S. population 154 million<br />5.6 million farms<br />One farmer produced enough to feed 30 people<br />Source...
2010<br />U.S. population 308 million<br />2 million farms<br />One farmer produced enough to feed 155 people<br />Source:...
Then and Now<br />	If the number of farms and level of productivity remained constant since1950, there would be no food fo...
Then and Now<br />151 Million People<br />9 Most Populous US States<br />California<br />Texas<br />New York<br />Florida<...
Heightened Public Interest<br />The public has a right to expect farmers, food companies, restaurants and grocery stores t...
BLT and a Glass of Milk<br />
Pork<br />Compared to 1950 we produce 176% <br />more pork per sow with 44% fewer sows<br />“Because we take care of our a...
Corn<br />Primary ingredient in feed for pork production as well as poultry and cattle<br />
Corn<br />Compared to 1950 we produce 333% more corn      on 11% more acres<br />“My proper care and husbandry of the soil...
Lettuce & Tomatoes<br />
Lettuce Monterey County, California<br />Compared to 1950…<br />12 times the production<br />2.5 times the land<br />Tomat...
Lettuce & Tomatoes<br />“We love being able to supply our state with healthy, fresh, and safe vegetables.”<br />- Jason Ru...
Mayonnaise<br />Eggs<br />Soybean Oil<br />
Eggs<br />Compared to 1950, we produce 53% more eggs <br />with 3% fewer hens<br />“Our family is committed to making safe...
Soybeans<br /><ul><li>Oil used in food production, i.e. mayonnaise
Meal used in livestock feed</li></li></ul><li>Soybeans<br />Compared to 1950, we produce 11 times more <br />soybeans on 5...
Bread<br />
Bread<br />Compared to 1950 we produce 69% more wheat <br />on 6% fewer acres<br />“It’s a good feeling to provide food, f...
Milk<br />
Milk<br />Compared to 1950 we produce 63% more milk <br />with 58% fewer cows<br />“Everything we do is for the health and...
	Surely this means we can meet the world’s growing demand for food …RIGHT? <br />Source: USDA<br />
Record High Food Insecurity<br />14.6 percent of U.S. households were food insecure in 2008, up from 11.1 percent in 2007....
Food Affordability<br />Source: USDA-ERS<br />
1 billion<br />11 million<br />1 billion<br />11 million<br />Source: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, 20...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Stop Playing Not to Lose and Start Playing to Win

714 views
666 views

Published on

Re-Defining Agriculture to Build Consumer Trust

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
714
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Consumer choice
  • Some are suggesting we turn back the clock … that we produce food using farming methods from the “good old days.”
  • In 1950 there were 154-million people and 5.6-million farms in the United States. A single farmer produced enough in one year to feed 30 people.  In 2009, there were an estimated 305-million people and 2-million farms in the United States. A single farmer produced enough in one year to feed 140 people.  If the U.S. today relied on the farmers of 1950 to produce their food, 151 million people would go hungry.  151-million is the combined populations of the 9 largest states in the U.S. (California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Georgia). Taking into consideration there are only 2 million farms in the U.S. today (compared to 5.6 million in 1950), using 1950s technology would produce enough food for only 54 million people (the combined population of California and Texas). http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004986.htmlSource: American Farm Bureau, Census Bureau
  • In 1950 there were 154-million people and 5.6-million farms in the United States. A single farmer produced enough in one year to feed 30 people.  In 2009, there were an estimated 305-million people and 2-million farms in the United States. A single farmer produced enough in one year to feed 140 people.  If the U.S. today relied on the farmers of 1950 to produce their food, 151 million people would go hungry.  151-million is the combined populations of the 9 largest states in the U.S. (California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Georgia). Taking into consideration there are only 2 million farms in the U.S. today (compared to 5.6 million in 1950), using 1950s technology would produce enough food for only 54 million people (the combined population of California and Texas).Source: American Farm Bureau, US Census Bureau
  • Est. U.S. population in 1950 – 154,000,000Est. U.S. population in 2009 - 305,000,000Source: Census Bureau
  • The public’s increased concern on where their food comes from provides the food system the opportunity to look in the mirror and tell our story.
  • Source: University of Missouri Commercial Ag Swine Team, Ray Massey
  • Compared to 1950 we produce 4.3 times more corn on only 11% more acres. Source: USDA/ERS1950 – 3 billion bushels of corn on 72 million acres2009 – 13 billion bushels of corn on 80 million acres
  • Source: Monterey County Annual Crop Report
  • Lettuce1950 – 59,500 acres, 11,686,387 cartons, 185 cartons/acre2008 – 153,500 acres, 136,481,000 cartons, 889 cartons/acreSource: Monterey County Annual Crop Report, 2007 and 1950Carton = 40 lbs or approx 24 head of iceberg lettuceReasons for increased yields:-Better pest control-Better geneticsTomatoes1950 – 13,500 acres, 202,500 tons, 15 tons per acre2008 – 37,000 acres, 1,529,000 tons, 41.3 tons/acreSource: Yolo County 2008 Agricultural Crop Report, Yolo County 2008 Agricultural Crop ReportTons delivered to the canning plantBetter plant genetics. New varieties have much higher yield potential.Mechanical harvesting more efficient than the hand-harvesting of 1950Better pest control. Irrigation practices drastically better now than 60 years ago.
  • Source: USDA/NASS1950 – 58,954,000,000 eggs from an average of 349,439,000 hens2009 – 90,359,000,000 eggs from an average of 337,376,000 hens
  • Source: USDA/NASS1950 – 300 million bushels on 14 million acres (22 bushels/acre)2009 – 3.3 billion bushels on 76 million acres (44 bushels/acre)
  • Source: USDA/NAS1950 – 1 billion bushels on 62 million acres (17 bushels/acre)2009 – 2.2 billion bushels on 50 million acres (44 bushels/acre)
  • 1950 – 22,000,000 cows produced 116,000 thousand pounds of milk at a rate of 5,300 pounds/cow2009 – 9,200,000 cows produced 189,300 thousand pounds of milk at a rate of 20,500 pounds/cowTo produce that much milk at 1950 rates would take 35,600 cows. Four times as many cows.1950 – 344,500 square miles were devoted to dairy. http://www.dairyfarmingtoday.org/DairyFarmingToday/Learn-More/FAQ/
  • Source: USDA taken from “Food Economics and Consumer Choice,” Jeff Simmons, Elanco
  • USDA/ERShttp://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/FoodSecurity/Food Research and Action CenterDuring the 2008-09 school year, 31.2 million children participated in the National School Lunch Program through more than 101,000 schools and residential child care institutions. On a typical school day, 19.4 million of these 31.2 million total participants were receiving free or reduced price lunches.http://www.frac.org/html/federal_food_programs/programs/nslp.htmlUSA Today, June 2009In New York City, which has the nation&apos;s largest school system, 73% of students received free or discount lunches this year, up from 71% in 2007-2008. In Chicago, participation jumped to 84.3% from 82% in 2007-2008 and 75% the year before. Dade County, Fla., schools saw a 3.8% jump, to 66.7%. http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2009-06-10-schoollunchinside_N.htm
  • 1 billion food insecure globally11 million food insecure in the U.S.
  • Source: U.S. Census Bureau, “World Vital Events Per Time Unit: 2010”75.4 million represents births minus deaths.
  • Source: U.S. Census Bureau, “World Vital Events Per Time Unit: 2010”75.4 million represents births minus deaths.6.3 million represents births minus deaths.6.3 million is the approximate combined populations of LA and Chicago.
  • Source: U.S. Census Bureau, “World Vital Events Per Time Unit: 2010”206,500 represents births minus deaths.Philadelphia population = 1.54 million1.54 million X 7 = 1.44 million
  • Doubling agricultural output by 2050, while freezing agriculture’s environmental footprint, will require growing the Total Factor Productivity (TFP - the output per unit of total resources employed in production) to at least 1.75 percent annually from the current 1.4 percent. Not only will we need to raise the average rate of TFP growth by one-fourth above its present rate to close the gap, but also productivity will need to grow even more rapidly during the next two decades, when demand will be increasing faster before leveling off by 2050. The primary lever for raising TFP growth is by increasing investments in science and technology. http://www.globalharvestinitiative.org/documents/GAP%20Report.pdf
  • Source: “How to feed the World in 2050?” by Hartwig de Haen/UN FAO
  • Stop Playing Not to Lose and Start Playing to Win

    1. 1. Stop Playing Not to Lose and Start Playing to Win<br />Re-defining Agriculture to Build Consumer Trust<br />Charlie Arnot<br />Charlie.Arnot@Foodintegrity.org<br />www.foodintegrity.org<br />www.bestfoodfacts.org<br />
    2. 2.
    3. 3. CFI Mission<br />To build consumer trust and confidence in today’s food system by…<br /> sharing accurate, balanced information<br /> correcting misinformation<br /> modeling best practices and<br /> engaging stakeholders <br />
    4. 4. CFI Vision<br />To provide leadership in building public understanding and support that producing the food we need using fewer resources through responsible production, processing and distribution is the ethical choice that is right for people, animals and the planet. <br />
    5. 5. Three Strategic Platforms<br />Building trust through shared values communication<br />Redefining today’s food system as the ethical choice for people, animals and the planet<br />Supporting choice<br />
    6. 6. Building Consumer Trust <br />
    7. 7. Freedom to Operate<br />Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />Freedom to Operate<br />
    8. 8. Social License<br />Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />
    9. 9. Social License<br />Definition: The privilege of operating with minimal formalized restrictions (legislation, regulation, or market requirements) based on maintaining public trust by doing what’s right.<br />Public Trust: A belief that activities are consistent with social expectations and the values of the community and other stakeholders.<br />
    10. 10. The Social License To Operate<br />Flexible Responsive Lower Cost<br />Rigid Bureaucratic Higher Cost<br />Tipping <br />Point<br />Social License<br /><ul><li>Ethics
    11. 11. Values
    12. 12. Expectations
    13. 13. Self regulation</li></ul>Social Control<br /><ul><li> Regulation
    14. 14. Legislation
    15. 15. Litigation
    16. 16. Compliance</li></ul>Single triggering event Cumulative impact<br />
    17. 17. Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />Social License<br />Freedom to Operate<br />
    18. 18. Trust<br />Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />Trust<br />Social License<br />Freedom to Operate<br />
    19. 19. Earning and Maintaining the Social License(Sapp/CMA)<br />Confidence<br />Trust<br />Value Similarity<br />Social License<br />Competence<br />Freedom to Operate<br />Influential Others<br />Trust research was published in December, 2009 – Journal of Rural Sociology<br />
    20. 20. Skills<br />Shared Values<br />What drives Consumer Trust?<br />Shared values are 3-5X more important in building trust than demonstrating competence<br />Trust research was published in December, 2009 – Journal of Rural Sociology<br />
    21. 21. What Does It Mean?<br />“They don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care!”<br />- Theodore Roosevelt<br />
    22. 22. Questions of Values and Ethics Kohlberg’s Moral Hierarchy<br />Three Levels – Six Stages<br />Pre- Conventional<br /><ul><li>Direct impact on me</li></ul>Conventional<br /><ul><li>Societal expectations</li></ul>Post-Conventional<br /><ul><li>Principle driven</li></ul>Lawrence Kohlberg, 1927 - 1987<br />
    23. 23. Questions of Values and Ethics Kohlberg’s Moral Hierarchy<br />Universal ethical principle orientation<br />We have an ethical obligation to our employees, our animals, the environment, our customers and our communities<br />Post Conventional Principle driven<br />Social contract orientation<br />The “law & order” orientation<br />We comply with all environmental and employment laws and regulations<br />Conventional Societal expectations<br />The “good boy / nice girl” orientation<br />Personal rewards orientation<br />We take care of our land and animals because that’s when we get the best ROI<br />Pre-Conventional Direct impact on me<br />Punishment-Obedience<br />
    24. 24. Questions of Values and Ethics Kohlberg’s Moral Hierarchy<br />Universal ethical principle orientation<br />NGO’s<br />Post Conventional Principle driven<br />Social contract orientation<br />The “law & order” orientation<br />Conventional Societal expectations<br />The “good boy / nice girl” orientation<br />Business<br />Personal rewards orientation<br />Pre-Conventional Direct impact on me<br />Punishment-Obedience<br />
    25. 25. Sustainable Balance<br />Economically Viable<br /><ul><li> ROI
    26. 26. Demand
    27. 27. Cost Control
    28. 28. Productivity
    29. 29. Efficiency</li></ul>Profitability<br />Scientifically Verified<br /><ul><li> Data Driven
    30. 30. Repeatable
    31. 31. Measurable
    32. 32. Specific</li></ul>Objectivity<br />Scientifically Verified<br />Economically Viable<br />Sustainable Systems<br />Knowledge<br />Knowledge<br />Ethically Grounded<br />Ethically Grounded<br /><ul><li> Compassion
    33. 33. Responsibility
    34. 34. Respect
    35. 35. Fairness
    36. 36. Truth</li></ul>Value Similarity<br />Feelings<br />Belief<br />
    37. 37. Consumer Perception<br />The public senses change in the way food is produced but does not understand<br />Lack of understanding creates opportunity for activists and detractors<br />The food system must engage in value based communication that is ethically grounded, scientifically verified and economically viable to build trust in today’s systems<br />
    38. 38. Animal Welfare<br /><ul><li>Values: The proper care of animals is very important to me. My family and I have an ethical obligation to make sure the animals on our farm are well cared for.
    39. 39. Science: That’s why we use the latest technology on the farm to keep our animals comfortable, protected from disease, predators and the elements, and fed a well-balanced diet for optimal health.
    40. 40. Economics: Treating my animals with the best care allows my family and me to help provide consumers with abundant, safe and affordable food, and allows me to make a living so I can provide for my family.</li></li></ul><li>2009 Consumer Trust Qualitative Research<br />Summary Slides<br />This information is wholly owned by CMA and licensed to CFI; Study was conducted by Gestalt Inc.<br />
    41. 41. Thank You to the 2009 Consumer Trust Research Sponsors<br />
    42. 42. CFI Annual Consumer Trust Survey<br />Qualitative research in 2009 study<br />“What will cause consumers to grant more social license?”<br />Eight consumer focus groups<br />April 2: Des Moines, IA<br />April 7: Syracuse, NY<br />April 8: Nashville, TN<br />April 13: Fresno, CA<br />
    43. 43. Two Observations<br />Uninterested and uninformed.<br />"Give me safe food, and I will trust you to give me safe food. I will trust you (farmers) until you do something to break that trust.“ – Connie, Nashville focus group<br />“They could let us know more about what they do… I’ve never been on a farm, I don’t know what they do.” – Judy, Des Moines group<br />Trust farmers but aren’t sure contemporary production is still farming.<br />"Large producers are about the money and rushing production with antibiotics… Small farmers are concerned about their name…“ – Consuela, Nashville focus group<br />"There is a difference: a farmer grows and sells locally with ethics, whereas commercial producers are all about the paycheck.“ – Maria, Nashville focus group<br />
    44. 44. The Challenge<br />Building trust and confidence in the contemporary food system among a public that is largely uninterested and uninformed.<br />The contemporary food system is not perceived as being consistent with the understanding or values of consumers or with the positive attributes historically assigned to farmers.<br />Voices questioning current food system practices are increasing in number, volume and impact.<br />
    45. 45.
    46. 46. Times Have Changed<br />“It is not the strongest species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the ones who are most responsive to change.”<br />- Charles Darwin<br />
    47. 47. National Discussion<br />“A long-overdue national conversation about food so far hasn’t been much of a conversation. Instead, what we have are two armed camps deeply suspicious of one another shouting past each other.”<br /> - Russ Parsons, Los Angeles Times, Jan. 2010<br />
    48. 48.
    49. 49. Is This The Ethical Choice?<br />
    50. 50. 1950<br />U.S. population 154 million<br />5.6 million farms<br />One farmer produced enough to feed 30 people<br />Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Farm Bureau<br />
    51. 51. 2010<br />U.S. population 308 million<br />2 million farms<br />One farmer produced enough to feed 155 people<br />Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Farm Bureau<br />
    52. 52. Then and Now<br /> If the number of farms and level of productivity remained constant since1950, there would be no food for anyone in the following states.<br />
    53. 53. Then and Now<br />151 Million People<br />9 Most Populous US States<br />California<br />Texas<br />New York<br />Florida<br />Illinois<br />Pennsylvania<br />Ohio<br />Michigan<br />Georgia<br />
    54. 54. Heightened Public Interest<br />The public has a right to expect farmers, food companies, restaurants and grocery stores to act in a responsible manner.<br />New public interest about food provides the U.S. food system the opportunity to:<br />1. Look in the mirror …<br />2. Tell our story …<br />
    55. 55. BLT and a Glass of Milk<br />
    56. 56. Pork<br />Compared to 1950 we produce 176% <br />more pork per sow with 44% fewer sows<br />“Because we take care of our animals the way that we do, we pride ourselves in supplying a safe, nutritious, affordable food product .”<br />- Kenny Brinker, Missouri hog farmer<br />
    57. 57. Corn<br />Primary ingredient in feed for pork production as well as poultry and cattle<br />
    58. 58. Corn<br />Compared to 1950 we produce 333% more corn on 11% more acres<br />“My proper care and husbandry of the soil and the crop, allows me to look forward to passing it on to the next generation, either my daughters or other relatives, to keep producing the food that we do for the world." <br />- Kurt Stiefvater, South Dakota corn farmer <br />
    59. 59. Lettuce & Tomatoes<br />
    60. 60. Lettuce Monterey County, California<br />Compared to 1950…<br />12 times the production<br />2.5 times the land<br />Tomatoes<br />Yolo County, California<br />8 times the production<br />3 times the land<br />
    61. 61. Lettuce & Tomatoes<br />“We love being able to supply our state with healthy, fresh, and safe vegetables.”<br />- Jason Ruhlig, Michigan vegetable farmer<br />
    62. 62. Mayonnaise<br />Eggs<br />Soybean Oil<br />
    63. 63. Eggs<br />Compared to 1950, we produce 53% more eggs <br />with 3% fewer hens<br />“Our family is committed to making safe and affordable food in a responsible way. We want our customers to feel good when they consume our product knowing how much care is given to each dozen eggs.” - Harry Herbruck, Michigan egg farmer<br />
    64. 64. Soybeans<br /><ul><li>Oil used in food production, i.e. mayonnaise
    65. 65. Meal used in livestock feed</li></li></ul><li>Soybeans<br />Compared to 1950, we produce 11 times more <br />soybeans on 5 times the acres<br />“We know the challenges of a growing population in the world and our farm is going to be a part of producing food for that population.” - Vicki Coughlin, Wisconsin, soybean farmer<br />
    66. 66. Bread<br />
    67. 67. Bread<br />Compared to 1950 we produce 69% more wheat <br />on 6% fewer acres<br />“It’s a good feeling to provide food, fuel and fiber for <br />others worldwide.” - Chet Edinger, South Dakota wheat farmer<br />
    68. 68. Milk<br />
    69. 69. Milk<br />Compared to 1950 we produce 63% more milk <br />with 58% fewer cows<br />“Everything we do is for the health and safety of our cows and the quality product that ends up on the grocery story shelf.” - Stephanie Dykshorn, Iowa dairy farmer<br />
    70. 70. Surely this means we can meet the world’s growing demand for food …RIGHT? <br />Source: USDA<br />
    71. 71. Record High Food Insecurity<br />14.6 percent of U.S. households were food insecure in 2008, up from 11.1 percent in 2007. <br />Highest recorded rate since 1995 (the first national food security survey).<br />Approximately 60% of the 30 million children who participate in the National School Lunch Program receive free or reduced-price meals.<br /> (NYC 73%, Chicago 84%, Dade Co. 67%)<br />Source: USDA-ERS/FRAC/USA Today<br />
    72. 72. Food Affordability<br />Source: USDA-ERS<br />
    73. 73. 1 billion<br />11 million<br />1 billion<br />11 million<br />Source: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, 2008<br />
    74. 74. And by mid-century,<br />the world will be home to <br />3+ billion more people.<br />
    75. 75. Global Population Increases …<br />75.4 Million Annually<br />Population of Iran<br />Source: U.S. Census Bureau<br />
    76. 76. Global Population Increases …<br />6.3 Million Monthly<br />Los Angeles<br />Chicago<br />Source: U.S. Census Bureau<br />
    77. 77. Global Population Increases …<br />206,500 Daily<br />Another Philadelphia <br />Every Week<br />Source: U.S. Census Bureau<br />
    78. 78. In 40 years, the world will need 100% more food than we produce today.<br />Source: Science Magazine, 2005<br />
    79. 79. The Need for More<br />“…The world has the technology to feed, on a sustainable basis, 10 billion people. The pertinent question today is whether farmers and ranchers will be permitted to use this technology.”<br />— Norman Borlaug, 2000<br />
    80. 80. “By almost any measure, producing food has the <br />largest impact of any human activity. Most estimates suggest that we will need to produce twice as many calories on the same amount of land we use today if we want to maintain biodiversity and ecosystem functions.”<br /> - Jason Clay, World Wildlife Fund <br />
    81. 81. Closing the Gap<br />1.4%<br />Source: Global Harvest Initiative – 2010 GAP Report<br />
    82. 82. Closing the Gap<br />1.75%<br />GAP Index TM<br />1.4%<br />Source: Global Harvest Initiative – 2010 GAP Report<br />
    83. 83. Closing the Gap<br />1.75%<br />300 Million People<br />GAP Index TM<br />1.4%<br />Source: Global Harvest Initiative – 2010 GAP Report<br />
    84. 84. Growth Limitations<br />80% of future production growth must come from increased yields- responsible use of innovation & technology<br />10-15% could be achieved from higher cropping density<br />5-10% from expansion of land use<br />Source: UN FAO<br />
    85. 85. Three Things You Can Do<br />
    86. 86. Engage Consumers and Support Choice<br />Choice is good<br />Americans have the most affordable food in the world<br />1908 – 50% of income<br />Today - <10%<br />The public has a right to expect the food system to act in a responsible manner<br />
    87. 87. Learn More about your Food and Understand the Consequences of Policy and Market Decisions<br />Decisions have consequences<br />Decisions that limit our ability to increase productivity will result in increased hunger in the US, around the world and for future generations<br />
    88. 88. The Ethical Choice<br /> Support responsible, food production systems that allow us to produce the food we need using fewer resources to meet the growing global demand for food.<br />
    89. 89. It’s the ethical choice for people, <br />animals and the planet<br />
    90. 90.  <br />
    91. 91. Stop Playing Not to Lose and Start Playing to Win<br />Re-defining Agriculture to Build Consumer Trust<br />Charlie Arnot<br />Charlie.Arnot@Foodintegrity.org<br />www.foodintegrity.org<br />www.bestfoodfacts.org<br />

    ×