Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T21:48:23.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Food for thought: food systems, livestock futures and animal health

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2013

Angela Wilkinson
Angela Wilkinson*
Affiliation:
Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford, Hayes House, 75 George Street, Oxford OX1 2BQ, UK
*
E-mail: angela.wilkinson@smithschool.ox.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Global food security, livestock production and animal health are inextricably bound. However, our focus on the future tends to disaggregate food and health into largely separate domains. Indeed, much foresight work is either food systems or health-based with little overlap in terms of predictions or narratives. Work on animal health is no exception. Part of the problem is the fundamental misunderstanding of the role, nature and impact of the modern futures tool kit. Here, I outline three key issues in futures research ranging from methodological confusion over the application of scenarios to the failure to effectively integrate multiple methodologies to the gap between the need for more evidence and power and control over futures processes. At its core, however, a better understanding of the narrative and worldview framing much of the futures work in animal health is required to enhance the value and impact of such exercises.

Keywords

animal health and climate changeglobal food systemsfutures toolkitscenariosforecastingvisioning
Type
Review Article
Information
Animal Health Research Reviews , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , December 2013 , pp. 159 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, TFH, Tainter, JA, Pires, C and Hoekstra, TW (2001). Dragnet Ecology – ‘Just the facts, Ma'am’: the privilege of science in a postmodern world. Bio-Science 51: 475–485.Google Scholar
Belis-Bergouignan, M, Lung, Y and Heraud, J (2001). Public foresight exercises at an intermediate level: the French national programmes and the experience of Bordeaux. International Journal of Technology Management 21: 726–738.Google Scholar
Freibauer, A, Mathijs, E, Brunori, G, Damianova, Z, Faroult, E, Girona i Gomas, J, O'Brian, L and Treyer, S (2011). Sustainable food consumption and production in a resource-constrained world. The 3rd Standing Committee on Agricultural Reaserch (SCAR) Foresight Exercise. Brussels: European Commission. pp. 18–31.Google Scholar
Heffernan, C (2013). The climate change-infectious disease nexus: is it time for Climate Change Syndemics? Animal Health Research Reviews 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heffernan, C, Misturelli, F and Thomson, K (2011). The representation of HPAI in Chinese newspapers. Health, Risk and Society 13: 603–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heffernan, C, Salman, M and York, L (2012). Animal infectious disease and climate change: a selected review. CAB Reviews 7: 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrero, M, Gerber, P, Vellinga, T, Garnett, T, Leip, A, Opio, C, Westhoek, HJ, Thornton, PK, Olesen, J, Hutchings, N, Montgomery, H, Soussana, JF, Steinfeld, H and McAllister, TA (2011). Livestock and greenhouse gas emissions: the importance of getting the numbers right. Animal Feed Science and Technology 166–167: 779–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, B, Preston, F, Kooroshy, J, Bailey, R and Lahn, G (2012). Resource Futures: A Chatham House Report, December 2012. London: Chatham House.Google Scholar
Perry, B, Grace, D and Sones, K (2011). Current drivers and future directions of global livestock disese dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA. pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1012953108.Google Scholar
Sanderson, I (2009). Intelligent policy making for a complex world: pragmatism, evidence and learning. Political Studies 57: 699–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitz, C, Biewald, A, Lotze-Campen, H, Popp, A, Dietrich, JP, Bodirsky, B, Krause, M and Weindl, I (2012). Trading more food: implications for land use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the food system. Global Environmental Change 22: 189–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharpless, J (1995). World population growth, family planning and American foreign policy. Journal of Political History 7: 72–102.Google Scholar
Smith School (2012). Re|Source 2050 Flourishing from Prosperity: Faster and Further. Oxford: University of Oxford.Google Scholar
Thornton, P (2010). Livestock production: recent trends, future prospects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 365: 2853–2867.Google Scholar
UK Foresight (2010). Food and Farming Futures. London: The Government Office for Science.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, AJ (2009). In search of theory. Journal of Futures Studies 13: 107–114.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, AJ, Heinrichs, T and Hurley, P (2009). Analysing the future of European food systems in a changing world. In ESF/COST Forward Look: European Food Systems in a Changing World. Brussels: European Science Foundation. pp. 16–31.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, AJ and Ramírez, R (2010). Canaries in the mind: how the financial crisis impacts 21st century future-mindfulness. Journal of Futures Studies 14: 45–60.Google Scholar
World Resources Institute (2012). Earth Trends Meat Consumption Database. [Available online at http://earthtrends.wri.org/]Google Scholar
Wright, A (2005). the Role of Scenarios as Prospective Sensemaking Devices, Management Decision. Journal of Futures Studies 43: 86–101.Google Scholar
WRR (2001). Exploring Futures for Policymaking, The Scientific Council for Government Policy (Wetenschappelijke Raadvoor het Regeringsbeleid), The Hague. [available online at http://www.wrr.nl/fileadmin/en/publicaties/PDF-samenvattingen/Exploring_Futures_for_Policymaking.pdf].Google Scholar