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.