is produced nor where it is purchased.
The industrialization of the food system
has led to the paradox that food is as
cheap as it has ever been—yet large
populations who can’t afford to pay for
food go hungry or rely heavily on food
banks. The economic-growth paradigm
coupled with techno-scientific attempts
to “fix” the environment reinforces
these practices by focusing on
automation and large-scale production.
To address these problems,
agroecologists and members of
grassroots social movements have
been developing methodologies
and systems to leverage biodiverse
ecosystems for food production toward
food sovereignty. Food sovereignty
asserts control over local production,
ecological production and distribution
practices for long-term environmental
sustainability, and decentralization
of the food system. For example, in
many places, cash cropping driven by
multinational corporations has replaced
subsistence production, leading to food
insecurity and ecological degradation.
Organizations such as La Via
Campesina [ 6] are working to restore
subsistence production to ensure local
food grown sustainably for the long-term health of local communities.
A sustainable food system includes
both short and circular supply chains to
enable access to food, as well as food-waste reduction. Technology can, for
example, be used to support distributed
food networks and democratic
governance structures that oversee and
manage the production and distribution
of food.
Sustainable food policy. Many
government policies are enacted for
food planning and regulation, from
control of foodborne pathogens such
as E. coli to organic certifications.
These policies are created, regulated,
and administered at various scales. At
the international level, organizations
such as the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development
(OECD) and the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations
(FAO) develop programs to support
sustainable development in agriculture.
Most countries have agencies (e.g.,
the United States Department of
Agriculture) that focus on national
policies. The combined policies, actions,
and programs of these organizations
can result in positive change. For
example, the chemical pesticide DDT
HCI researchers have long engaged
with issues surrounding “food +
sustainability.” In 2009, Eli Blevis and
Susan Coleman introduced the HCI
community to concepts regarding
sustainable food and demonstrated
how information technologies for
food present both problems and
opportunities [ 4]. Recently, there has
been increasing interest in “disrupting”
food through technology ranging from
food-delivery mobile applications and
component-based cooking to creating
data-driven sustainability ratings. Such
technologies could improve aspects of
the food system for some people, but are
these technologies creating sustainable
food systems for everyone?
Here, we reflect on the core
opportunities for HCI design and
research within a sustainable food
system. This article serves two
purposes. First, we situate food
as a grand challenge for HCI and
discuss three emerging themes that
challenge the paradigm and practice
of technology. Second, based on these
themes, we put forth a research agenda
for food + sustainability within HCI.
EMERGING THEMES
The question of what actually
constitutes sustainable food systems is
complex. At the FoodCHI workshop,
we explored the potential of HCI in
supporting various forms of sustainable
food. Three themes dominated our
conversations: trust and accountability,
food sovereignty, and sustainable food
policies. While these do not encompass
the full range of issues, we believe
that these themes allow for an initial
framing of a research agenda on food +
sustainability in HCI.
Trust and accountability. For a food
system to be sustainable, actors must
form a web of trust and accountability
regarding the sustainability of others,
in addition to behaving sustainably
themselves. For example, consumers
must trust in the retailer’s practice, the
retailer must trust in the distributor’s
practice, the distributor must trust
in the manufacturer’s practice,
and the manufacturer must trust
in the producer’s practice. Because
information flows through this chain, all
actors of a sustainable food system are
collectively responsible for generating
and maintaining trustful information.
Trust is more easily formed in
small-scale interactions. However,
when a single product is composed
of globally derived ingredients, trust
relationships may be stressed, as global
supply chains hide harmful practices
from decision makers downstream.
There is a need to support transparent
flows of information through the
food system, from the conditions of
production, to processing, distribution,
and waste-management practices. This
information sharing needs to be done
while respecting the data ownership and
privacy. For example, certified-organic
farms in the U. S. are publicly listed, but
the farms may also be family farmers’
homes [ 5].
Food sovereignty. Unsustainability
in food systems is predicated on
inequality. For actors in a food system
to regain and retain sovereignty,
they must have an ability to control
the production of their own food.
Currently, a few global actors control a
majority of global food production; this
leads to inequality and unsustainability
on several levels. Environmentally
unsustainable farming, processing,
transport, waste management, and food
standards have a powerful negative
impact on climate change, which in
turn is destroying livelihoods around
the world. Workers are poorly paid
and small producers are forced to sell
at low prices dictated by large bulk
processors, supermarket chains, and
buyers. Profits stay neither where food
Unsustainability in food systems is
predicated on inequality. For actors
in a food system to regain and retain
sovereignty, they must have an ability to
control the production of their own food.