Food Sovereignty Food Security Paper instructionsYou will writ.docx

Food Sovereignty/ Food Security Paper instructions:
You will write a paper on a country or group of people (If you
want to write about the United States you must find a distinct
culture and have instructor approval) which explores issues of
food security and/or food sovereignty for these people. Begin
your paper with clear definitions of food security and food
sovereignty (p. 17-18, Seeking Food Rights), and then briefly
introduce the people or culture you are discussing. Clearly
explain the issue and why you chose this particular people or
culture.
Look up the food sovereignty principles of Via Campesina on
the web so that you understand the many aspects of life that can
be considered in relation to food sovereignty. Your paper
should include statistics, but these need to be fleshed out with
details about people’s lives in a social, political, and economic
context. You should choose certain aspects of the food system
or food life to discuss. Make sure that they are relevant to
questions of food security and/or food sovereignty. Be able to
explain briefly why you chose this particular aspect for your
paper.
Seeking Food Rights is a good model because it suggests
different areas of life that are significant to food security and
food sovereignty in Uzbekistan (Chapters 1-7) and in the US in
Chapter 8. Note that in the Uzbek case, questions of inequality
by class, urban-rural differences, gender, and ethnicity are
important to food security and food sovereignty for various
people and groups. The government and/or market’s control
over agriculture, land, and people’s shopping opportunities are
also important to consider. On a global scale, the amount of
food and kinds of food that are imported and exported from a
country influences food security and food sovereignty. For
example, if farmers mostly grow coffee or bananas, there is

little land to grow their own food to eat.
When investigating a country think about such questions as the
following. But be careful to pick a few to answer as you will
not be able to answer all of them.
· What kinds of food are most preferred and who gets to eat
them?
· How do food habits differ between rich and poor? Are health
differences related to this?
· What kinds of crops do farmers grow? Why? Has that changed
in the last twenty or thirty years?
· Do people eat food that is grown in their country or in their
region?
· Do men and women relate differently to food in its growth,
preparation, eating, etc? How does this affect their relation to
food?
· Are minority ethnic groups able to access enough food and the
kind of food that they want to eat from a cultural point of view?
Why or why not?
· How do minority and majority ethnic groups participate in the
process of producing, processing, and serving food?
· Is the country able to grow enough food to feed its
population? In what areas does it lack food? On whom is it
dependent for food?
· Do people feel that their food is safe?
Acceptable references:

In addition to course materials the paper must be based on at
least two out-of-class articles—one of at least 2-3 pages and
one of at least 5 pages—that are found in peer-reviewed
journals and also one book. Peer review means that the research
in the paper has been reviewed by other researchers and is
accepted by other academics. These papers may be found in the
Library’s databases or in hard copy in academic journals.
Wikipedia and other on-line sites and resources are not
acceptable. If you need help with research the Valley Library on
campus has an anthropology librarian who can help you to find
materials. The help desk at the library can also show you how to
access academic journals. You must provide a complete “works
cited”/bibliography with the paper.
Book chapters are acceptable, but likely longer. Make sure that
you reference in your actual paper (in-text) each of the sources
you use with the author, year of publication, and page number
(Smith 2000:35). Only references used in the paper should be
listed in the bibliography, and all references used in the paper
must be included in the bibliography. Make a bibliography
following MLA style. If there is another style you would like to
practice (one, for example, that your major requires you to use)
contact your instructor in advance of submitting your paper.
Remember, the bibliography does not count toward the three to
four pages.
You will deliver this paper to your instructor on Wednesday of
Week Ten.
advertisement
|
your

ad
here
PrintThisArticle
Back
to
Article
SHAME
OF
THE
CITY
A

Rugged
Refuge
Many
homeless
men
would
rather
sleep
on
the
street
than
in
San
Francisco's
most

notorious
shelter,
calling
it
a
dangerous
drug
haven.
Kevin
Fagan,
C
hronicle
Staff
Writer
Tuesday,
December

2,
2003
(Third
in
a
five-day
series)
Many
homeless
men
would
rather
sleep
on

the
street
than
in
San
Francisco's
most
notorious
shelter,
calling
it
a
dangerous
drug
haven.
But
for
the

regular
inhabitants
at
Fifth
and
Bryant
streets,
the
shelter
offers
a
warm
place
to
sleep,
a
solid
meal

and
a
chance
to
be
with
friends.
The
big
metal
doors
at
Multi-Service
Center
South

opened
with
a
clang
at
4:30
p.m.
The
line
of
men
leaning
against
the
beige
outside
wall
began

shuffling
through.
MSC,
they
call
it
on
the
street.
The
homeless
who
refuse
to
set
foot

in
here
believe
this
is
the
toughest
of
San
Francisco's
emergency
shelters,
a
filthy,
violent
drug
den
where

everything
not
tied
down
is
stolen.
You
wouldn't
have
known
it
from
the
looks
of
the

men
clumping
up
the
concrete
steps
toward
the
registration
desk,
bags
or
backpacks
in
their
hands.
"Can't
wait

to
eat,"
said
one
skinny
man
in
a
tattered,
brown
leather
jacket.
He
slapped
a
high-five
with
a

fellow
in
line
next
to
him.
"Man,
could
I
use
some
sleep,"
his
friend
replied.
Fifty

were
in
this
line,
and
it
was
just
the
beginning.
Three
hundred
more
would
filter
in
throughout
the

warm
July
evening
as
MSC
South,
the
two-story
hulk
at
Fifth
and
Bryant
streets,
slowly
filled
up.

At
the
front
desk,
everyone
was
handed
a
thin,
gray
wool
blanket.
In
15
minutes,
the
whole

line
was
logged
inside
--including
a
Chronicle
reporter
and
photographer,
beginning
a
two-night
undercover
stay.
"Go

pick
your
mat,"
the
clerk
said.
He
pointed
to
a
large
gymnasium-like
room
with
ceilings
about
20
feet

high
and
gray-tile
floors
mopped
to
a
shine.
On
the
floor
were
150
plastic
mats
--each
about
3

inches
thick
and
slightly
smaller
than
a
single-bed
mattress.
The
5
o'clock
news
droned
to
20

men
sitting
on
chairs
or
mats
on
one
side
of
the
room.
On
the
other
�

side,
the
TV
was
broken.
One
man
lay
on
his
mat,
propped
on
one
elbow,
smoking

a
filtered
Camel
and
taking
in
the
scene.
Like
most
of
the
men
in
the
shelter,
he
offered

only
his
first
name;
it
was
Lawrence.
"Just
remember
where
you
are,
and
how
you
got

here,"
said
Lawrence,
a
middle-aged
trucker
who
hadn't
been
behind
a
wheel
since
the
beginning
of
the
year.

"You
got
people
of
all
walks
here,
and
a
lot
of
their
trouble
is
of
their
own
making,

but
that
doesn't
mean
they
don't
all
want
to
get
out
of
that
trouble.
"We
mostly

want
to
work.
Something
just
got
in
our
way."
He
said
he
expected
to
have
a
trucking
job

in
a
few
days.
Lawrence's
wife
died
a
year
ago,
he
said,
pitching
him
into
a

tailspin
that
sent
him
wandering
from
his
South
Carolina
home.
He
drove
his
truck
through
several
states
looking

for
work,
finding
little.
"Why
did
I
come
here?"
he
mused.
"Well,
I
was
driving
in

New
York
and
heard
(talk
show
host)
Michael
Savage
on
the
radio
saying
any
nut
can
land
in

San
Francisco
without
a
penny,
and
they'd
take
care
of
him.
So
I
turned
the
wheel
and
drove

here."
A
young
man
dumped
his
Hefty
bag
of
belongings
on
the
floor
with
a
loud

smack
and
sat
down.
"I
hear
you
know
what
goes
on
around
here,"
he
said
nervously.
Lawrence
stared

at
him.
"All
I
can
tell
you
is
get
your
business
together
and
get
out
of

here
as
fast
as
you
can,"
Lawrence
said,
"because
you
don't
want
to
spend
too
long
around
the

wrong
guys."
Four
men
drifted
upstairs
to
the
second
floor.
Two
were
middle-aged.
They
had
crack

pipes
in
their
pockets.
Behind
them
were
Jason
and
Dale.
They
were
younger.
They
carried
two
six-packs
of

beer
in
paper
bags.
"What,
you
think
they
want
to
go
through
our
bags?"
Dale
said

incredulously
when
asked
how
he
got
the
beer
inside.
"I
put
it
right
in
with
my
socks."

The
two
big
rooms
upstairs
had
a
total
of
150
single
beds,
not
mats,
and
each
had

a
drawer
underneath.
Wooden
privacy
walls
surrounding
three
sides
of
each
bed
were
5
feet
high,
easy
for

ducking
from
the
occasional
staff
member
coming
by
on
patrol.
Jason
and
Dale
picked
a
corner

bed,
and
in
10
minutes,
they
slammed
down
four
211
brand
brews
each.
Two
beds
over,
the
other

two
men
sat
hunched
over,
watching
the
beds
around
them
from
the
corners
of
their
eyes
as
they

took
deep
hits
off
a
crack
pipe.
They
handed
it
to
a
third
man
in
a
red,
white

and
blue
striped
shirt.
"Need
some?
Cheap,"
the
man
in
the
striped
shirt
asked.
"Shut
up,"

snapped
one
of
the
two
men
smoking.
"Don't
sell
our
crack."
�
Back
downstairs,
a
big

white
sign
of
rules
posted
on
the
wall
prohibited
drugs
and
alcohol.
It
also
listed
other
prohibitions
that

were
ignored.
A
man
strolled
the
mats
in
front
of
the
sign
selling
cigarettes
at
25
cents
apiece;

the
rules
said
no
selling.
Several
men
sprawled
over
two
chairs
or
bagged
a
couple
of
blankets;
the

sign
said
only
one
chair
and
one
blanket
per
person.
Upstairs,
radios
pulsed
rap
or
jazz;
the
sign

said
you
had
to
use
earphones.
The
vibe
was:
Just
don't
be
obnoxious,
and
nobody
will

come
down
on
you
hard.
"This
isn't
the
street,
and
you
won't
catch
me
sleeping
out

there,"
said
Claude
Adams,
a
55-year-old
disabled
warehouse
worker.
"Out
there,
it's
rough.
Here,
it's
clean.
No
one's

going
to
stab
you
while
you
sleep."
Once
the
doors
clanked
shut
at
7,
you
were

stuck
inside
until
wakeup
call
at
5:45
the
next
morning.
No
coming,
no
going
--no
exceptions.
The
half-dozen

attendants
patrolled
constantly.
"This
is
where
the
city
sends
the
dopers
or
boozers
who
say
they

don't
want
to
clean
up,"
said
one
late
night
attendant.
"We
get
a
lot
of
innocents
here,
too,

but
--I
guess
it's
OK.
If
they
don't
want
to
buy
the
crack
and
booze
--yeah,
we
know

it's
here,
we
just
don't
hunt
for
it
so
hard
--they
don't
have
to.
"Nobody
gets

hurt
bad.
It's
all
anybody
can
ask,
really."
Dinner
was
at
6
p.m.,
and
the
line

snaked
from
the
downstairs
cafeteria
up
the
stairs
into
the
main
room.
"Fried
rat
today!"
joked

Byron,
a
ponytailed
man
with
a
street-hard
face
and
a
Harley-Davidson
T-shirt.
Joe,
a
young
man
with
baggy

black
pants,
chuckled
and
punched
Byron's
arm.
"Beats
that
Dumpster
you
dove
this
morning!"
he
fired
back.

As
the
line
moved
ahead,
the
metal
food
bins
came
into
view;
Byron
and
Joe
fell
silent,

shifting
their
weight
anxiously
from
one
foot
to
the
other.
The
steaming
bins
offered
yellow
squash,

peas,
mashed
potatoes
and
hamburger
patties.
The
spartan
dining
room
filled
with
the
universal
smell
of
stewed
institutional

food.
At
the
end
of
the
array
of
bins
were
chocolate
pudding
cups
and
an
ice-water
jug.
Everything

was
behind
a
long
glass
counter.
Three
workers
filled
plates
and
trays
and
slid
them
to
a
server,

who
handed
them
out
at
the
end
of
the
counter.
"Better
eat
it
all.
There's
no

seconds,"
the
server,
a
thin
woman
with
a
hair
net,
warned
as
she
handed
a
full
plate
to

Byron.
He
grimaced
and
she
gave
him
a
big
smile.
"OK,
honey,
we
might
have
some
potatoes
left

over
later.
Y
ou
just
come
back
and
ask."
The
tables
were
cafeteria
foldouts,
arrayed
side

by
side
to
seat
about
50
men.
A
waterfront
mural
covered
the
back
wall,
and
another
wall
held

a
memorial
collage
to
Bill
Hansen,
a
cook
who
died
of
cancer.
Byron
and
Joe
sat
down
alongside

Nick,
who
was
shoveling
peas
into
his
mouth
with
his
head
bent
low
to
the
spoon.
He
glanced

quickly
at
Joe's
tray,
then
back
to
his
plate.
�
"Want
your
pudding
cup?"
Nick
asked

Joe,
who
promptly
batted
the
cup
to
the
side
of
his
tray
near
Nick.
Nick
snatched
it
without

looking
up,
and
put
the
cup
in
his
lap.
He
was
into
his
hamburger
patty
now.

It
all
tasted
like
college
dorm
food.
Bland.
And
nobody
left
a
speck
on
his
plate.

After
dinner,
everyone
filtered
back
upstairs,
singly
or
in
groups
to
plop
down
on
the
mats
or
hit

the
two
big
--and
clean
--shower
rooms.
Shampoo
and
soap
were
free,
just
like
the
room
and
food.

There
was
plenty
for
everyone.
"Look
at
those
guys
over
there,
just
standing
around
in
their

skater
shorts
looking
as
happy
as
you
please,"
grumped
56-year-old
Gordon,
meticulously
checking
his
thinning
black
hair
to

make
sure
it
was
slicked
right.
He
pointed
to
six
young
men,
lolling
at
the
entrance
to
the

main
room
bathroom.
"They're
dealing
crack,
up
to
no
good,
and
if
the
city
got
together

enough
medical
students,
it
could
give
all
those
guys
a
lobotomy
and
solve
the
homeless
problem,"
he
said.

Gordon
had
just
showered,
and
he
sat
at
his
mat
organizing
his
backpack:
socks,
"Lord
of

the
Rings"
paperback
trilogy,
toiletry
kit
in
the
right
pocket.
His
wife
died
a
few
years
ago,
he

said,
and
he
was
laid
off
around
2001
after
19
years
as
a
warehouse
manager.
Been
in
shelters

or
cheap
hotels
most
of
the
time
since,
he
said.
"Worked
all
my
life,
and
I'm

not
proud
of
being
here,
but
I
worked,"
Gordon
said.
"Not
like
that
scum
that
deals
drugs."

At
the
counter,
tall
and
lean
Joseph
stood
with
his
five
pals
and
beckoned
with
his
eyes

toward
the
bathroom
door.
Inside,
he
went
into
a
stall
and
shut
the
door.
With
one
foot
planted

on
the
toilet,
he
opened
his
scruffy
blue
coat
to
reveal
his
wares:
"Crack,
$5
a
rock;
pot,

$1
a
joint,"
he
said.
What
about
beer?
"That's
$1
a
can,
but
you
gotta
go

to
someone
else,"
he
said.
"Not
my
department."
By
8
p.m.,
the
main
room
was
quiet

except
for
a
few
conversations.
Men
lay
snoring
on
mats.
Most
watched
TV.
Paul,
white-haired
with
a
pot

belly,
lay
on
his
mat
reading
"The
Talisman"
by
Stephen
King.
"Hemingway
is
really
my
favorite,
but
I

haven't
found
one
in
a
while,"
he
said.
A
few
men
walked
around
wearing
one
of

three
looks:
beaten
down,
defensive
defiance
or
lost
in
their
own
world.
Harry,
a
skinny,
older

man,
wore
a
thick
coat
and
black
knit
cap
--and
on
his
back
was
a
full
pack
with

a
sleeping
bag
as
he
paced
up
and
down
the
length
of
the
main
hall.
"I

missed
my
appointment
at
the
clinic
so
I
didn't
get
my
meds,
and
I'm
paranoid
and
can't
let

anyone
steal
my
stuff,
and
do
you
have
a
cigarette,
and
I
hope
I
get
a
good
bed,"

Harry
said
in
one
stream
when
asked
what
he
was
doing.
He
turned
to
his
right
and
murmured

to
the
air,
"Get
out
of
my
head,
I'm
right
here,
get
away
from
my
stuff."

�
At
the
front
desk,
a
white-haired,
elderly
woman
in
a
long,
brown
overcoat
--buttoned
to
the
throat

despite
the
warm
night
--began
slamming
her
bag
against
the
check-in
counter.
She
wanted
to
get
into
the

30-bed
women's
room
of
the
MSC,
a
separate
shelter
downstairs
kept
rigidly
apart
from
the
men's
section.

"You
don't
know
what
I've
been
through
just
to
get
here!"
she
screamed.
"I
want
a
bed!

Give
me
a
bed!"
The
head
clerk
stared
impassively
at
her.
"I'm
sorry,
you
have
to

be
registered.
Just
be
patient."
"Damn
you!
Give
me
a
bed!"
the
woman
screamed.

"Now
how
do
you
think
we
feel
with
you
yelling
at
us?"
the
clerk
coolly
responded.
Four
other

staff
members
surrounded
her,
trying
hard
to
look
impassive.
The
woman
ranted
for
about
a
half-hour

until,
still
screaming,
she
was
sent
to
another
shelter
that
had
an
open
spot.
Lights
out

came
at
9
p.m.,
but
the
televisions
kept
playing
cable
broadcasts
of
"Waiting
to
Exhale"
with
Whitney
Houston

and
"Murder
at
1600"
with
Wesley
Snipes
until
midnight.
Then
it
was
nothing
but
snores
and

the
whirring
of
a
soda
machine
in
the
corner
of
the
main
room.
Most
slept
in

their
clothes,
curled
on
the
skinny
mattresses
under
their
blankets,
side
by
side
like
disaster
victims
in
a

Red
Cross
shelter.
The
stench
of
dirty
feet
and
unwashed
clothes
filled
the
air.
Outside,
the

lights
along
the
Interstate
80
on-ramp
shone
harshly
all
night,
alongside
snappy
ads
for
Travel
Smith
clothing
and

the
Renaissance
Pleasure
Faire.
"Reveille,
gentlemen!"
called
out
a
burly
attendant
at
5:45
a.m.
sharp.
Every

man
lurched
to
his
feet
and
stacked
his
mat
in
the
center
of
the
room.
Within
15
minutes,

the
floor
was
clear.
Breakfast
was
another
20-minute
line,
at
the
end
of
which
was
cereal,

toast
and
coffee.
And
it
was
here
that
the
men
got
another
jolting
reminder
--
in
addition

to
the
ranting
woman,
the
locked
doors
and
the
wandering
mental
patient
--that
this
was
no
youth
hostel.

On
the
stairs
leading
down
to
the
cafeteria,
the
jostling
between
two
friends
named
Eugene
and

Eric
turned
ugly.
Eugene
insulted
his
pal,
police
later
said,
and
Eric
poked
a
piece
of
metal
into

Eugene's
abdomen
and
shoulder,
drawing
blood.
Shelter
staff
called
the
cops,
but
by
the
time
they

got
there,
Eric
had
fled
and
Eugene
was
saying
he
wouldn't
press
charges.
It
was
just
a
dustup

between
friends.
"It
started
fast
and
ended
fast,
with
no
sense
to
it,''
said
Lawrence,
who

was
in
line.
It
was
the
worst
fight
anyone
had
seen
in
a
year,
a
shelter
attendant
said.

�
By
7
a.m.,
the
place
was
silent
and
empty.
Everyone
had
headed
to
the
street.

At
4:30
p.m.,
it
was
the
same
drill
all
over
again.
The
line,
the
mat,
the

mushy
food,
and
many
of
the
same
men
settling
in
to
wait
out
the
night.
But

around
7
p.m.,
a
young
counselor
in
a
gray
scarf
strolled
three
times
all
around
the
bottom
floor

calling
out
cheerily,
"Support
group?
C'mon,
guys,
sit
with
us."
She
got
no
takers
until
one
fellow
stood

up
on
her
last
stroll.
They
headed
to
an
office
to
talk.
One
sign
on
the

wall
offered
acupuncture
clinics,
another
chiropractic.
There
also
was
massage,
breathing
therapy
and
Reiki
Energy
Healing
--all
free,

as
was
the
once-a-week
wound
clinic,
mostly
offered
for
abscesses
from
the
ravages
of
dope
needles.
Nearby,
a

notice
read,
"Sleeping
in
a
congregate
setting
like
a
shelter
puts
you
at
high
risk
for
tuberculosis!
Get

tested
every
Tuesday."
Upstairs,
Med
pored
over
a
textbook
titled
"Unified
Modeling
Systems."
He
was
the

neatest
dressed
in
the
place,
with
pressed
black
slacks,
a
gray
polo
shirt,
and
smart,
new-looking
wire-rim
glasses.

"I
lost
my
job
as
a
computer
programmer
a
year
ago
in
Tennessee,
and
now
I've

come
here
to
look
because
everyone
says
California
has
jobs,"
Med
said.
"So
far,
no
job."

Next
to
him,
Phillip,
a
25-year-old
with
Celtic
cross
tattoos
on
his
arms,
read
a
Bible.
"See
here,

in
Corinthians
13,
it
says
we
must
give
charity
to
the
poor,"
he
said,
pointing
urgently
to
the

page.
"I
like
the
versions
that
say
'love'
better,
but
it's
still
the
same,
really."
Claude

Adams
ambled
up,
and
the
two
traded
road
stories.
"Ventura
--the
cops
are
terrible.
You
sit,

they
move
you
on,"
Adams
complained.
"Kick
you
out,
throw
you
in
jail
faster
than
you
can
think."

"It's
a
bad
place,"
Phillip
said.
"Cops
don't
want
you,
people
don't
want
you.
Not
like

here."
Adams
brightened.
"That's
right
--San
Francisco,
you
gotta
love
it,"
he
said.
"Even
the
cops

love
us
here."
He
spread
his
arms
wide.
"Everyone
loves
us
here!"
he
said,
and
Phillip
grinned.

The
next
morning,
Adams
skipped
breakfast
and
grabbed
a
cup
of
coffee
at
All
Stars
Donuts
two

blocks
from
the
shelter.
He
was
headed
to
a
park
to
watch
a
softball
game
--and
as
he

left
the
shop,
he
looked
across
the
street
and
shook
his
head
at
what
he
saw.
There,
at

the
I-80
off-ramp
to
Fifth
Street,
Israel
Benjamin,
58,
held
out
a
cup
to
traffic,
with
a
sign

reading,
"Starvin
Like
Marvin."
Others
of
the
MSC
crowd
filtered
past
Benjamin
as
they
ambled
downtown.

He
didn't
look
at
them.
They
didn't
look
at
him.
"Stay
there?
Are
you
nuts?"
Benjamin

said
when
asked
if
he
was
going
to
check
into
MSC
that
night.
"No,
sir,
they
beat
you

up
in
there.
Never
been
there,
but
that's
what
I've
heard.
�
"Too
scary
for
me.

I'll
take
the
outside."
Most
inhabitants
satisfied
with
shelter
Emergency
shelters
have
been
at

the
heart
of
the
debate
over
how
to
best
house
the
homeless
in
San
Francisco.
Organizations
and
leaders

ranging
across
the
political
spectrum
--from
the
Homeless
Coalition
to
Supervisors
Gavin
Newsom
and
Chris
Daly
--say
too

many
shelters
are
unsafe
and
unsavory,
and
they
say
they
would
prefer
permanent
housing
with
counseling
services.

But
according
to
the
city
Department
of
Human
Services
figures,
three-quarters
of
shelter
inhabitants
say
they're
satisfied

with
their
stays.
And
they
record
only
about
a
dozen
minor
criminal
incidents
throughout
the
whole
shelter
system

every
year.
The
Chronicle
sent
a
reporter
and
a
photographer
into
Multi-Service
Center
South,
the
biggest

and
reputedly
toughest
of
the
city
shelters,
to
see
what
life
was
like
there.
They
did
this
using

their
full
names.
But
they
did
not
disclose
that
they
were
researching
a
story,
so
they
would
get

the
most
direct,
unfiltered
view.
There
are
11
emergency
shelters,
totaling
1,350
beds,
for
single
adults,

who
constitute
a
majority
of
the
city's
homeless
population
of
8,600
to
15,000.
In
the
rough
caste
system

of
the
down
and
out,
those
who
stay
in
the
shelters
are
a
cut
above
the
most
desperate

people
on
the
streets
--a
middle
class
of
homelessness,
if
you
will.
Many
work
during
the
day
or

are
in
job-training
programs.
Perhaps
because
of
the
shelters'
bad
reputation
on
the
street
--many
homeless,

particularly
the
hard
core,
say
they
are
afraid
to
stay
in
them
--there
are
usually
a
few
vacancies

every
night.
Systemwide,
according
to
the
Department
of
Human
Services,
not
a
single
person
was
turned
away
for

a
bed
between
Oct.
6
and
Nov.
2.
The
shelter
network
had
134
beds
unfilled
for
the
night

of
Nov.
2.
--Kevin
Fagan
KPIX-TV
Channel
5
continues
its
coverage
of
San
Francisco's

problems
with
homelessness,
in
conjunction
with
The
Chronicle,
tonight
at
11..
To
view
more
photographs
and

to
read
previous
Chronicle
stories
on
the
homeless,
go
to
www.sfgate.com/homeless/
...
Join
staff
writer
Kevin
Fagan
and

photographer
Brant
Ward
for
an
online
chat
about
the
homeless
series
at
11
a.m.
Thursday
on
sfgate.com.
Send

your
letters
and
comments
about
this
series
to
[email protected]
Shame
of
the
city
San

Francisco
has
the
nation's
worst
problem
with
hard-core
homelessness.
Thousands
of
people
are
without
shelter
and
as
many

as
5,000
spend
virtually
all
their
time
on
the
street.
Chronicle
reporter
Kevin
Fagan
and
photographer
Brant
Ward

spent
four
months
among
the
homeless
and
those
who
deal
�
with
them.
In
a
five-day

series,
they
explore
how
one
of
the
nation's
wealthiest
and
most
cultured
cities
came
to
have
so
many

people
living
on
its
streets.
Sunday
Life
is
a
hand-to-mouth
ordeal
for
the
hard

core
on
Homeless
Island.
Monday
The
Silver
family
is
a
rarity
among
San
Francisco's

930
homeless
families
--despite
living
in
its
van,
the
children
do
well
at
school.
Today

Word
on
the
street
is
that
homeless
shelters
are
dangerous
drug
dens,
but
that's
not
what
The

Chronicle
found.
Wednesday
The
aid
San
Francisco
provides
the
homeless
perpetuates
the
problem.

Thursday
San
Francisco
knows
how
to
solve
its
problem
with
homelessness,
but
it
needs
decisionmakers

to
agree
on
a
plan.
E-mail
Kevin
Fagan
at
[email protected]
http://sfgate.com/cgi-
bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/12/02/MNGB13E11F1.DTL
This
article
appeared

|
RSS
Feeds
|
FAQ
|
Site
Index
|
Contact
�
mind&bodyhappinessmind&bodyhappiness
The New Science of
HAPPINESS

What makes the human heart sing? Researchers are
taking a close look. What they’ve found may surprise you
By CLAUDIA WALLIS
S
S
ugary white sand gleams under the bright yucatán sun,
aquamarine water teems with
tropical fish and lazy sea turtles, cold Mexican beer beckons
beneath the shady thatch of palapas—
it’s hard to imagine a sweeter spot than Akumal, Mexico, to
contemplate the joys of being
alive. And that was precisely the agenda when three leading
psychologists gathered in this
Mexican paradise to plot a new direction for psychology.
For most of its history, psychology had concerned itself with all
that ails the human mind: anxiety,
depression, neurosis, obsessions, paranoia, delusions. The goal
of practitioners was to bring patients

from a negative, ailing state to a neutral normal, or, as
University of Pennsylvania psychologist Martin
Seligman puts it, “from a minus five to a zero.” It was Seligman
who had summoned the others to Akumal
that New Year’s Day in 1998—his first day as president of the
American Psychological Association
(A.P.A.)—to share a vision of a new goal for psychology. “I
realized that my profession was half-baked. It
wasn’t enough for us to nullify disabling conditions and get to
zero. We needed to ask, What are the enabling
conditions that make human beings flourish? How do we get
from zero to plus five?”
Every incoming A.P.A. president is asked to choose a theme for
his or her yearlong term
in office. Seligman was thinking big. He wanted to persuade
substantial numbers in the
profession to explore the region north of zero, to look at what
actively made people
feel fulfilled, engaged and meaningfully happy. Mental health,
he reasoned, should be more than the absence
of mental illness. It should be something akin to a vibrant and
muscular fitness of the human mind and spirit.

Over the decades, a few psychological researchers had ventured
out of the dark realm of mental illness into
the sunny land of the mentally hale and hearty. Some of
Seligman’s own research, for instance, had focused on
optimism, a trait shown to be associated with good physical
health, less depression and mental illness, longer life
and, yes, greater happiness. Perhaps the most eager explorer of
this terrain was University of Illinois psychologist
Edward Diener, a.k.a. Dr. Happiness. For more than two
decades, basically ever since he got tenure and
could risk entering an unfashionable field, Diener had been
examining what does and does not make people feel
satisfied with life. Seligman’s goal was to shine a light on such
work and encourage much, much more of it.
To help him realize his vision, Seligman invited Ray Fowler,
then the long-reigning and influential ceo of the
A.P.A., to join him in Akumal. He also invited Hungarian-born
psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pronounced
cheeks sent me high), best known for exploring a happy state of
mind called flow, the feeling of complete engagement
in a creative or playful activity familiar to athletes, musicians,
video-game enthusiasts—almost anyone who

loses himself in a favorite pursuit. By the end of their week at
the beach, the three had plans for the first-ever conference
on positive psychology, to be held in Akumal a year later—it
was to become an annual event—and a strategy
for recruiting young talent to the nascent field. Within a few
months, Seligman, who has a talent for popularizing
and promoting his areas of interest, was approached by the
Templeton Foundation in England, which proceeded
to create lucrative awards for research in positive psych. The
result: an explosion of research on happiness, optimism,
positive emotions and healthy character traits. Seldom has an
academic field been brought so quickly and
deliberately to life.
WHAT MAKES US HAPPY
So, what has science learned about what makes the human heart
sing? More than one might imagine—along with
some surprising things about what doesn’t ring our inner
chimes. Take wealth, for instance, and all the delightful
things that money can buy. Research by Diener, among others,
has shown that once your basic needs are met, additional

income does little to raise your sense of satisfaction with life
(see story on page A32). A good education?
Sorry, Mom and Dad, neither education nor, for that matter, a
high IQ paves the road to happiness. Youth? No,
again. In fact, older people are more consistently satisfied with
their lives than the young. And they’re less prone
to dark moods: a recent survey by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention found that people ages 20 to 24
are sad for an average of 3.4 days a month, as opposed to just
2.3 days for people ages 65 to 74. Marriage? A complicated
picture: married people are generally happier than singles, but
that may be because they were happier to
begin with (see page A37). Sunny days? Nope, although a 1998
study showed that Midwesterners think folks living
in balmy California are happier and that Californians
incorrectly believe this about themselves too.
On the positive side, religious faith seems to genuinely lift the
spirit, though it’s tough to tell whether it’s
the God part or the community aspect that does the heavy
lifting. Friends? A giant yes. A 2002 study conduct-
Reprinted through the courtesy of the Editors of Time Magazine
© 2004 Time Inc.

�
ed at the University of Illinois by Diener
and Seligman found that the most salient
characteristics shared by the 10% of students
with the highest levels of happiness
and the fewest signs of depression were
their strong ties to friends and family and
commitment to spending time with
them. “Word needs to be spread,” concludes
Diener. “It is important to work on
social skills, close interpersonal ties and
social support in order to be happy.”
MEASURING OUR MOODS
Of course, happiness is not a static state.

Even the happiest of people—the cheeriest
10%—feel blue at times. And even the bluest
have their moments of joy. That has presented
a challenge to social scientists trying to
measure happiness. That, along with the
simple fact that happiness is inherently subjective.
To get around those challenges, researchers
have devised several methods of
assessment. Diener has created one of the
most basic and widely used tools, the Satisfaction
with Life Scale. Though some schol
ars have questioned the validity of this simple,
five-question survey, Diener has found
that it squares well with other measures of
happiness, such as impressions from friends
and family, expression of positive emotion

and low incidence of depression.
Researchers have devised other tools to
look at more transient moods. Csikszentmihalyi
pioneered a method of using beepers
and, later, handheld computers to contact
subjects at random intervals. A pop-up
screen presents an array of questions:
What are you doing? How much are you
enjoying it? Are you alone or interacting
with someone else? The method, called experience
sampling, is costly, intrusive and
time consuming, but it provides an excellent
picture of satisfaction and engagement
at a specific time during a specific activity.
Just last month, a team led by Nobel-
prizewinning psychologist Daniel Kahneman

of Princeton University unveiled a
new tool for sizing up happiness: the day-
reconstruction method. Participants fill out
a long diary and questionnaire detailing
everything they did on the previous day
and whom they were with at the time and
rating a range of feelings during each episode
(happy, impatient, depressed, worried,
tired, etc.) on a seven-point scale. The method
was tested on a group of 900 women in
Texas with some surprising results. It
turned out that the five most positive activities
for these women were (in descending
order) sex, socializing, relaxing, praying
or meditating, and eating. Exercising and
watching TV were not far behind. But way
down the list was “taking care of my children,”

which ranked below cooking and
only slightly above housework.
That may seem surprising, given that
people frequently cite their children as their
biggest source of delight—which was a finding
of a Time poll on happiness conducted
last month. When asked, “What one thing in
life has brought you the greatest happiness?”,
35% said it was their children or grandchildren
or both. (Spouse was far behind at just
9%, and religion a runner-up at 17%.) The
discrepancy with the study of Texas women
Just How Happy Are We? ...
TIME POLL FEELING GOOD IN THE U .S.
Do you consider yourself
an optimist?

Based on their own assessment, Americans are overwhelmingly
happy and optimistic people, regardless of income
Over $100,000 a year
$50,000 to $99,999
$35,000 to $49,999
Under $35,000 a year 68% 24%
14%
13%
11%
7%
5%
2%
1%
81%
37%
13%
33%
15%

2%
85%
88%
78% 16% 5%U.S. total
... not very often?... some of the time... most or all of the
timeWould you say you are happy ...
Would you say that so far you have lived the best possible life
that you could have,
a very good life, a good life, a fair life or a poor life?
Best possible
Very good
Good
Fair
Poor
Do you generally
wake up happy?
Yes
79%
No

15%
Depends/
don’t know: 6%
Yes
80%
No
14%
Depends/
don’t know: 6%
This TIME poll was conducted by telephone Dec. 13-14, 2004,
among 1,009 adult Americans by SRBI Public Affairs. Margin
of error is ±3 percentage points. “Not sure” omitted for some
questions
All of the time Most of the time
... And What Makes Us That Way?
Most people find happiness in family connections and
friendships
63%
55%
51%

45%
47%
38%
24%
29%
24%
20%
21%
25%
27%
30%
30%
35%
39%
38%
52%
51%
18%

25%
Talk to friends/family
Pray/meditate
Have sex
Take a drive in a car
Eat
Go out with friends
Exercise/work out
Play with a pet
Take a bath or shower
Help others in need
Listen to music
Do you often do any of the following to improve your mood?
Your relationship with your children
Your friends and friendships
Contributing to the lives of others
Your relationship with spouse/partner or your love life
Your degree of control over your life and destiny

The things you do in your leisure time
Your relationship with your parents
Your religious or spiritual life and worship
Holiday periods, such as Christmas and New Year’s
What are your major sources of happiness?
35%
17%
11%
9%
Children/grandchildren
Family
God/faith/religion
Spouse
What one thing in your life has brought you the greatest
happiness?
Top four answers
Top eight answers
Women
Men

77%
76%
75%
73%
66%
64%
63%
62%
50%
TIME, JANUARY 17, 2005
�
points up one of the key debates in happiness
research: Which kind of information is
more meaningful—global reports of well-being
(“My life is happy, and my children are
my greatest joy”) or more specific data on enjoyment

of day-to-day experiences (“What a
night! The kids were such a pain!”)? The two
are very different, and studies show they do
not correlate well. Our overall happiness is
not merely the sum of our happy moments
minus the sum of our angry or sad ones.
This is true whether you are looking at
how satisfied you are with your life in general
or with something more specific, such
as your kids, your car, your job or your vacation.
Kahneman likes to distinguish between
the experiencing self and the remembering
self. His studies show that what you remember
of an experience is particularly influenced
by the emotional high and low
points and by how it ends. So, if you were
to randomly beep someone on vacation in

Italy, you might catch that person waiting
furiously for a slow-moving waiter to take
an order or grousing about the high cost of
the pottery. But if you ask when it’s over,
“How was the vacation in Italy?”, the average
person remembers the peak moments
and how he or she felt at the end of the trip.
The power of endings has been demonstrated
in some remarkable experiments
by Kahneman. One such study involved
people undergoing a colonoscopy, an uncomfortable
procedure in which a flexible
scope is moved through the colon. While a
control group had the standard procedure,
half the subjects endured an extra 60 seconds
during which the scope was held stationary;
movement of the scope is typically

the source of the discomfort. It turned out
that members of the group that had the
somewhat longer procedure with a benign
ending found it less unpleasant than the
control group, and they were more willing
to have a repeat colonoscopy.
Asking people how happy they are,
Kahneman contends, “is very much like
asking them about the colonoscopy after
it’s over. There’s a lot that escapes them.”
Kahneman therefore believes that social
scientists studying happiness should pay
careful attention to people’s actual experiences
rather than just survey their reflections.
That, he feels, is especially relevant if
research is to inform quality-of-life policies
like how much money our society should

devote to parks and recreation or how
much should be invested in improving
workers’ commutes. “You cannot ignore
how people spend their time,” he says,
“when thinking about well-being.”
Seligman, in contrast, puts the emphasis
on the remembering self. “I think we are
our memories more than we are the sum total
of our experiences,” he says. For him,
studying moment-to-moment experiences
puts too much emphasis on transient pleasures
and displeasures. Happiness goes
deeper than that, he argues in his 2002
book Authentic Happiness. As a result of his
research, he finds three components of
happiness: pleasure (“the smiley-face

piece”), engagement (the depth of involvement
with one’s family, work, romance and
hobbies) and meaning (using personal
strengths to serve some larger end). Of
those three roads to a happy, satisfied life,
pleasure is the least consequential, he insists:
“This is newsworthy because so many
Americans build their lives around pursuing
pleasure. It turns out that engagement
and meaning are much more important.”
CAN WE GET HAPPIER?
One of the biggest issues in happiness research
is the question of how much our
happiness is under our control. In 1996
University of Minnesota researcher David
Lykken published a paper looking at the

role of genes in determining one’s sense
of satisfaction in life. Lykken, now 76, gathered
information on 4,000 sets of twins born
in Minnesota from 1936 through 1955. After
comparing happiness data on identical vs.
fraternal twins, he came to the conclusion
that about 50% of one’s satisfaction with life
comes from genetic programming. (Genes
influence such traits as having a sunny, easygoing
personality; dealing well with stress;
and feeling low levels of anxiety and depression.)
Lykken found that circumstantial factors
like income, marital status, religion and
education contribute only about 8% to one’s
overall well-being. He attributes the remaining
percentage to “life’s slings and arrows.”
Because of the large influence of our

genes, Lykken proposed the idea that each of
us has a happiness set point much like our set
point for body weight. No matter what happens
in our life—good, bad, spectacular,
horrific—we tend to return in short order to
our set range. Some post-tsunami images last
week of smiling Asian children returning to
school underscored this amazing capacity to
right ourselves. And a substantial body of research
documents our tendency to return to
the norm. A study of lottery winners done in
1978 found, for instance, that they did not
wind up significantly happier than a control
group. Even people who lose the use of
their limbs to a devastating accident tend to
bounce back, though perhaps not all the way
to their base line. One study found that
a week after the accident, the injured were

severely angry and anxious, but after eight
weeks “happiness was their strongest emotion,”
says Diener. Psychologists call this
adjustment to new circumstances adaptation.
“Everyone is surprised by how happy
paraplegics can be,” says Kahneman. “The
reason is that they are not paraplegic full
time. They do other things. They enjoy their
meals, their friends. They read the news. It
has to do with the allocation of attention.”
In his extensive work on adaptation,
Edward Diener has found two life events
that seem to knock people lastingly below
their happiness set point: loss of a spouse
and loss of a job. It takes five to eight years
for a widow to regain her previous sense of
well-being. Similarly, the effects of a job

loss linger long after the individual has
returned to the work force.
When he proposed his set-point theory
eight years ago, Lykken came to a drastic
conclusion. “It may be that trying to be happier
is as futile as trying to be taller,” he
wrote. He has since come to regret that sentence.
“I made a dumb statement in the
original article,” he tells Time. “It’s clear
that we can change our happiness levels
widely—up or down.’’
Lykken’s revisionist thinking coincides
with the view of the positive-psychology
movement, which has put a premium on
research showing you can raise your level

of happiness. For Seligman and like-
minded researchers, that involves working
on the three components of happiness—
getting more pleasure out of life (which
can be done by savoring sensory experiences,
although, he warns, “you’re never
going to make a curmudgeon into a giggly
person”), becoming more engaged in what
you do and finding ways of making your
life feel more meaningful.
There are numerous ways to do that,
they argue. At the University of California
at Riverside, psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky
is using grant money from the National
Institutes of Health to study different kinds
of happiness boosters. One is the gratitude
journal—a diary in which subjects write

down things for which they are thankful.
She has found that taking the time to conscientiously
count their blessings once a
week significantly increased subjects’ overall
satisfaction with life over a period of six
weeks, whereas a control group that did
not keep journals had no such gain.
Gratitude exercises can do more than
lift one’s mood. At the University of California
at Davis, psychologist Robert Em-
mons found they improve physical health,
raise energy levels and, for patients with
neuromuscular disease, relieve pain and
fatigue. “The ones who benefited most
tended to elaborate more and have a wider
span of things they’re grateful for,” he notes.

Another happiness booster, say positive
psychologists, is performing acts of altruism
or kindness—visiting a nursing home, helping
a friend’s child with homework, mowing
a neighbor’s lawn, writing a letter to a
grandparent. Doing five kind acts a week,
especially all in a single day, gave a measurable
boost to Lyubomirsky’s subjects.
Seligman has tested similar interventions
in controlled trials at Penn and in huge
experiments conducted over the Internet.
The single most effective way to turbocharge
your joy, he says, is to make a “gratitude visit.”
That means writing a testimonial thanking
a teacher, pastor or grandparent—anyone
to whom you owe a debt of gratitude—and
then visiting that person to read him or her

the letter of appreciation. “The remarkable
thing,” says Seligman, “is that people who
do this just once are measurably happier and
less depressed a month later. But
it’s gone by three months.” Less powerful
but more lasting, he says, is an exercise he
calls three blessings—taking time each day to
write down a trio of things that went well and
why. “People are less depressed and happier
three months later and six months later.”
�
Eight Steps Towarda
More Satisfying Life

Want to lift your level of happiness? Here are some practical
suggestions from
University of California psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky, based
on research findings
by her and others. Satisfaction (at least a temporary boost)
guaranteed
1. Count your blessings.
One way to do this is with a
“gratitude journal” in which
you write down three to five
things for which you are
currently thankful—from the
mundane (your peonies are in
bloom) to the magnificent (a
child’s first steps). Do this
once a week, say, on Sunday
night. Keep it fresh by varying

your entries as much as
possible.
2. Practice acts of
kindness. These should be
both random (let that harried
mom go ahead of you in the
checkout line) and systematic
(bring Sunday supper to an
elderly neighbor). Being kind to
others, whether friends or
strangers, triggers a cascade
of positive effects—it makes
you feel generous and capable,
gives you a greater sense of
connection with others and
wins you smiles, approval and
reciprocated kindness—all

happiness boosters.
3. Savor life’s joys. Pay close
attention to momentary
pleasures and wonders. Focus
on the sweetness of a ripe
strawberry or the warmth of
the sun when you step out
from the shade. Some
psychologists suggest taking
“mental photographs” of
Seligman’s biggest recommendation
for lasting happiness is to figure out (courtesy
of his website, reflectivehappiness.
com) your strengths and find
new ways to deploy them. Increasingly, his
work, done in collaboration with Christopher
Peterson at the University of

Michigan, has focused on defining such
human strengths and virtues as generosity,
humor, gratitude and zest and studying
how they relate to happiness. “As a professor,
I don’t like this,” Seligman says, “but
the cerebral virtues—curiosity, love of
learning—are less strongly tied to happiness
than interpersonal virtues like kindness,
gratitude and capacity for love.”
Why do exercising gratitude, kindness
and other virtues provide a lift? “Giving
makes you feel good about yourself,” says
Peterson. “When you’re volunteering, you’re
distracting yourself from your own existence,
and that’s beneficial. More fuzzily,
giving puts meaning into your life. You
have a sense of purpose because you matter

to someone else.” Virtually all the happiness
exercises being tested by positive
psychologists, he says, make people feel
more connected to others.
That seems to be the most fundamental
finding from the science of happiness.
“Almost every person feels happier when
they’re with other people,” observes Mihaly
Csikszentmihalyi. “It’s paradoxical because
many of us think we can hardly wait to get
home and be alone with nothing to do, but
that’s a worst-case scenario. If you’re alone
with nothing to do, the quality of your experience
really plummets.”
But can a loner really become more
gregarious through acts-of-kindness exercises?

Can a dyed-in-the-wool pessimist
learn to see the glass as half full? Can grat
pleasurable moments to
review in less happy times.
4. Thank a mentor. If there’s
someone whom you owe a
debt of gratitude for guiding
you at one of life’s crossroads,
don’t wait to express your
appreciation—in detail and, if
possible, in person.
5. Learn to forgive. Let go
of anger and resentment by
writing a letter of forgiveness
to a person who has hurt or

wronged you. Inability to
forgive is associated with persistent
rumination or dwelling
on revenge, while forgiving
allows you to move on.
6. Invest time and energy in
friends and family. Where you
live, how much money you
make, your job title and even
your health have surprisingly
small effects on your satisfaction
with life. The biggest
factor appears to be strong
personal relationships.
7. Take care of your body.
Getting plenty of sleep,
exercising, stretching, smiling

and laughing can all enhance
your mood in the short term.
Practiced regularly, they can
help make your daily life more
satisfying.
8. Develop strategies for
coping with stress and hardships.
There is no avoiding
hard times. Religious faith
has been shown to help
people cope, but so do the
secular beliefs enshrined in
axioms like “This too shall
pass” and “That which
doesn’t kill me makes me
stronger.” The trick is that you
have to believe them.

itude journals work their magic over the
long haul? And how many of us could
keep filling them with fresh thankful
thoughts year after year? Sonja Lyubomirsky
believes it’s all possible: “I’ll quote
Oprah here, which I don’t normally do.
She was asked how she runs five miles a
day, and she said, ‘I recommit to it every
day of my life.’ I think happiness is like
that. Every day you have to renew your
commitment. Hopefully, some of the
strategies will become habitual over time
and not a huge effort.”
But other psychologists are more skeptical.
Some simply doubt that personality is
that flexible or that individuals can or
should change their habitual coping styles.

“If you’re a pessimist who really thinks
through in detail what might go wrong,
that’s a strategy that’s likely to work very
well for you,” says Julie Norem, a psychology
professor at Wellesley College and the
author of The Positive Power of Negative
Thinking. “In fact, you may be messed
up if you try to substitute a positive attitude.”
She is worried that the messages
of positive psychology reinforce “a lot of
American biases” about how individual initiative
and a positive attitude can solve
complex problems.
Who’s right? This is an experiment we
can all do for ourselves. There’s little risk in
trying some extra gratitude and kindness,

and the results—should they materialize—
are their own reward. —With reporting by
Elizabeth Coady/Champaign-Urbana, Dan Cray/
San Francisco, Alice Park/New York and Jeffrey
Ressner/Los Angeles
Measure Your Happiness
How happy are you? Sure, you may think you know, but this
little test will help you keep
score. The Satisfaction with Life Scale was devised in 1980 by
University of Illinois
psychologist Edward Diener, a founding father of happiness
research. Since then the
scale has been used by researchers around the world.
Read the following five statements. Then use a 1-to-7 scale to
rate your level of
agreement.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
In most ways my life is close to my ideal.
The conditions of my life are excellent.
I am satisfied with my life.
So far I have gotten the important things I want in life.
If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing.
Not at all true Moderately true
2
3
4
5
1
Total score _____________
Absolutely true

Scoring:•31 to 35: you are extremely satisfied with your life•26
to 30: very
satisfied•21 to 25: slightly satisfied•20 is the neutral point•15 to
19: slightly
dissatisfied•10 to 14: dissatisfied•5 to 9: extremely dissatisfied
�

Food Sovereignty Food Security Paper instructionsYou will writ.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Food Sovereignty Food Security Paper instructionsYou will writ.docx

Similar to Food Sovereignty Food Security Paper instructionsYou will writ.docx (12)

More from budbarber38650

More from budbarber38650 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Food Sovereignty Food Security Paper instructionsYou will writ.docx