Thursday, September 09, 2010

Food and Health

With salmonella recall expanding to half a billion eggs, it’s time to rethink ‘efficiency’

by Tom Philpott.

In his recent New York Times op-ed, “Math Lessons for Locavores”—discussed at length by several contributors in the first edition of our new “Food Fight” feature”—Stephen Budiansky writes:

The best way to make the most of these truly precious resources of land, favorable climates and human labor is to grow lettuce, oranges, wheat, peppers, bananas, whatever, in the places where they grow best and with the most efficient technologies—and then pay the relatively tiny energy cost to get them to market, as we do with every other commodity in the economy.

Budiansky is essentially applying the doctrine of comparative advantage to food—the idea that every region should specialize in producing what (if any) crop it can grow more cheaply than other regions, export it widely, and import everything else its residents need to eat.

In doing so, he is defending the intellectual basis for America’s and what is fast becoming the global food system: concentrate production of key commodities in certain regions, and let the magic of trade ensure that everyone gets plenty to eat.

The massive ongoing recall of salmonella-tainted eggs—which expanded this week to include another 170 million eggs, for a grand total of more than half a billion, with more possibly to come—got me to thinking about Budiansky’s defense of regional consolidation of food production for maximum efficiency.

By this logic, there’s much to love about the U.S. egg industry. According to Food & Water Watch, half of U.S. egg production is concentrated in just five states: Iowa, Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, and California. And for decades, egg producers have been scaling up and implementing “the most efficient technologies”—forgoing the farmyard chicken run and moving their hens into massive, streamlined, highly mechanized factories. Iowa State University’s Ag Marketing Resource Center (AG MRC) puts it like this:

In the table egg industry, specialized production replaced the general farm flock due to improvements in breeding, feeding, disease control, management, and marketing. Technological innovations in the 1950s and 1960s, including automated egg washers, blood spot detectors, and automated egg cartoners, encouraged large-scale production and mechanized handling and distribution of large numbers of eggs.

As the industry made huge investments in technology, fewer and fewer entities produced more and more of the eggs we eat. In 1987, AG MRC reports, there were 2,500 producers that kept at least 75,000 laying hens. Today, there are just 205, and these companies produce 95 percent of the eggs Americans eat. According to the USDA, there are 338 million laying hens in the United States. If 95 percent of them belong to just 205 egg producers, then the average egg producers keeps about 1.6 million hens. As someone who takes care of fewer than 20 laying hens, I can testify that just keeping 1.6 million of them alive would require breathtaking efficiency!

Of course, the very largest companies maintain many more birds than that. The largest of them all is Cal-Maine Foods. The company recently released an “Investor Report” that stands as one of the most revealing documents I’ve seen about the egg industry. To impress the investors, the report singles out a single $30 million facility in Texas with 1.67 million hens kept in nine laying houses, or 185,000 chickens in each house.

The report also offers a convenient list of the largest U.S. egg producers. Cal-Maine rules the roost, with its flock of 28 million hens. The two companies involved in the egg recall both crack Cal-Maine’s list of the top ten producers—Hillandale Farms, with its 14 million hens, comes in third, while DeCoster Egg Farms and its 9 million layers place ninth. All in all, the ten largest producers have 135 million hens —about 40 percent of the nation’s total flock of 338 million.

No one can say these mega-producers aren’t adept at keeping prices rock bottom. According to its Investor Report, Cal-Maine sells fully a third of its eggs to Walmart. I just got off the phone with the Walmart in Boone, N.C., near where I live. A carton of 18 eggs sells for $1.86 there—about a dime an egg. Walmart, with its vast fleet of trucks, highly rationalized inventory/storage system, and nationwide web of stores, is surely a highly efficient conduit for getting eggs from gigantic facilities to consumers.

But the egg recall is now exposing, yet again, the underside of maximum efficiency and regional concentration of the food system. Those fleets of trucks don’t just move millions of eggs from a handful of companies to hundreds of millions of consumers; they also, with stunning efficiency and breadth, move pathogens hatched in those very factory-scale facilities along with eggs.

It’s worth noting that the two firms embroiled in the recall, DeCoster and Hillandale, have more in common than the Iowa locations of their salmonella-tainted operations. “Hillandale Farms of Iowa and [Decoster-owned’] Wright County Egg Farm share a number of common suppliers because they are in the same industry in the same state,” Hillandale recently declared in a statement quoted by the New York Times. Indeed, “the company said that it bought young birds, called pullets, and feed from a company run by the DeCosters,” the Times reports.  

That’s regional concentration in action: Budiansky’s ideal. The upside, if you see it that way, is 10-cent eggs. One of the many downsides is the rapid, wide spread of pathogens. Another is leaving the food system in the paws of a handful of companies whose products are so cheap that they can only make money by relentlessly slashing costs. To understand the repercussions of that kind of economic arrangement, see my post from last week about the DeCoster operations.

Related Links:

A ‘habitual offender’ unleashes nearly half a billion salmonella-tainted eggs

USDA wants us to ‘know your farmer,’ FDA wants us to stay home

Sports stadiums rack up gag-worthy food violations (especially Florida’s)



Read more: With salmonella recall expanding to half a billion eggs, it’s time to rethink ‘efficiency’

 

My Intentional Life: Hot Flies in the Summertime

by Grist.

Last week, the sustainably minded roommates figured out how to navigate the messes of everyday life. This week (in Episode 5), their high-flying plans for an organic garden yield results that are more plague than paradise. See what happens when this new garden meets a rainy summer and feral cats. And for the scoop on all the characters, and links to every so-called comic strip, visit the My Intentional Life homepage.

Visit the My Intentional Life homepage.

Related Links:

From Motown to Growtown: The greening of Detroit

Urbivore’s Dilemma, Week 11: Cast iron and pot luck

My Intentional Life: Things Get Messy



Read more: My Intentional Life: Hot Flies in the Summertime

 

From Motown to Growtown: The greening of Detroit

by Tom Philpott.

The Feeding the City series is profiling several cities with thriving urban-agriculture and alt-food scenes.

“We Shall Rise Again from the Ashes.
We Shall Hope for Better Things.”
—Mottoes on the Official Seal of Detroit (1826), quoted in Thomas Sugrue’s Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit

“Detroiters have an edge to us,” community organizer and urban-agriculture activist Malik Yakini told me. “We were forged in a furnace. You have to have a rough exterior to survive, to not be crushed.”

If he were talking about nearly any other U.S. city, Yakini’s language might sound overblown. In Detroit, it comes across as understatement.

Yakini was born at mid-century, at the peak of Detroit’s heyday as a manufacturing power, and he has watched the city’s long economic decline. Now, as chairman of the Detroit Black Food Security Network and a leader in several farm and garden projects around the city, he is at the center for a budding movement to revive it through food production.  

Few cities outside of war zones have been subjected to such rapid, relentless economic decline. For the city’s legion of food activists, the vexations of the garden—marauding insects, galloping weeds, ravenous squirrels—must seem like child’s play. It’s impossible to understand Detroit’s urban-ag revival without understanding the forces that made it necessary.

Down and out in the Rust Belt

Like a weed shooting up through a crack on a well-trafficked sidewalk, Detroit’s urban-ag movement flourishes under difficult conditions. It marks the triumph of a resilient citizenry over a long series of brutal shocks stretching back 60 years.

Hailed by the media as the “Capital of the Twentieth Century,” 1940s-era Detroit was an industrial behemoth, churning out the vehicles in which a growing and prosperous middle class would glide down Eisenhower’s freshly laid highways. But those same cars and highways facilitated post-war America’s rapid suburbanization—and the economic evisceration of Detroit itself.

Getting a grip on the scale of Detroit’s economic catastrophe is difficult, like trying to estimate the size of an mastodon. You could start by looking at the fate of mass transit. By 1950, the nation’s most extensive network of streetcars connected the dense neighborhoods of the metropolis to its bustling factories. Confident in the automobile as the urban transportation vehicle of the future, Detroit’s leaders dismantled the streetcars in 1956.

Ironically, the city’s manufacturing engine had already begun to sputter. As the car industry consolidated and shifted toward automation, its factories needed more room to spread out. It found that room in the suburbs. As the historian Thomas Sugrue writes in his 1998 book, Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit, “Between 1947 and 1958, the Big Three built 25 new plants in the Detroit metropolitan area, all of them in suburban communities, most more than 15 miles from the center city.” And the car industry headed for the ‘burbs, inner-city employment plunged. Between 1947 and 1963, Sugrue reports, Detroit surrendered more than a third of its manufacturing jobs. Later, the car industry would begin fleeing Michigan altogether, seeking bargain-priced labor in the union-hostile South.

A steadily accelerating torrent of residents followed jobs to the suburbs. In 1950, Detroit’s population peaked at 1.8 million. Within a decade, the city had shed 10 percent of its residents, or more than 100,000 residents. Meanwhile, the suburban frontier swelled; the population of Detroit’s suburbs grew by 25 percent over the same period.

The long process of Detroit’s hollowing out—and the expansion of its suburban ring—had begun. Today, Detroit’s population stands at 900,000—half of its 1950 level. Meanwhile, the greater metropolitan area houses 4.8 million people—an 85 percent jump from 1950.  

“If you’re here in the city, you cannot hide from poverty and suffering. It’s right there in your face. You can either embrace humanity and try to live every moment to try to make everyone’s life easier, or you leave ... if you have the option to.”—Ashley Atkinson, Greening of Detroit

Detroit’s economic collapse also had an ugly racial dimension. As Sugrue makes clear, the hundreds of thousands of African-Americans who streamed into Detroit from the South in the 1930s and ‘40s confronted savage racism along with economic opportunity. By the ‘50s, economic opportunity had begun to crumble, but discrimination persisted. Racist real estate practices largely kept blacks in the inner city, Sugrue shows.

While all Rust Belt cities experienced “white flight” after World War II, in Detroit, the phenomenon reached its zenith. Yakini remembers encountering hostility when his family moved into a largely white neighborhood around 1960. Within a few years, he told me, it had transformed into a black neighborhood. Today, more than 80 percent of Detroit’s population is African-American; whites make up just 12 percent of the population. Jobs remain scarce; the city’s unemployment rate stands at 15.5 percent—more than 50 percent higher than the national average. Crime filled the vacuum as jobs vanished. The onetime “Capital of the 20th Century” now reigns as the U.S. “murder capital.”

Unbuilding boom

As Detroit’s manufacturing base shrunk and population halved in the decades after 1950, its tax receipts plummeted. That meant as, Yakini pointed out to me, a long, slow decline in the quality of public services—everything from mass transit to road and park maintenance and garbage collection and fire fighting.

“We have half the population, but we still have to to maintain the whole footprint” of the city, Yakini points out.

The city’s population exodus left hundreds of thousands of residences empty. The roar of bulldozers knocking down homes has been a familiar sound for decades. In an extraordinary 2006 essay in Lost Magazine called “Disappeared Detroit,” Jeff Byles teases out the ramifications of life in a city with more homes than people. “Unbuilding,” a local architect told Byles, “has surpassed building as the city’s major architectural activity.” The citizenry, fed up with the hazards of living near rotting structures, has gotten caught up in recurring demolition frenzies over the decades.

Between 1970 and 2000, Byles reports, “more than 161,000 dwellings were demolished in Detroit, amounting to almost one-third of the city’s occupied housing stock—that’s more than the total number of occupied dwellings today in the entire city of Cincinnati.”  And demolition activity continues today. “Mayor Readies Detroit Demolition Plan,” declares a March headline. As Byles makes clear, every Detroit mayor since the ‘70s placates the public by boasting of the next big demolition spree.

All of the resulting vacant land, much of which ends up owned by the city, provides the very asset that fuels the garden movement.

Fertile ground for a revival

Given the past half-century, it’s no wonder that Yakini and his fellow Detroit citizens “have an edge” to them. Yet Detroit’s postwar furnace has also forged a remarkable resiliency and creativity in its citizens. You can hear it in the Motown Sound of the ‘60s—and see it in the urban-agriculture movement of today. Detroit residents have a “fortitude and resilience that produces creativity,” Yakini told me. “People trying to survive in a hard environment tend to become very creative.”

Ashley Atkinson, 31, director of urban agriculture and project development for Greening of Detroit, a nonprofit founded in 1989, echoes that idea, adding that the relentless tension of living in a city under economic siege can bring people together. “You can be the most wealthy, privileged person in the world,” she told me. “But if you’re here in the city, you cannot hide from poverty and suffering. It’s right there in your face. You can either embrace humanity and try to live every moment to try to make everyone’s life easier, or you leave ... if you have the option to.”  

It’s that civic-minded impulse to “make everyone’s life easier” that drives the garden movement. I talked to several agriculture activists for this essay, and they all characterized the urban-ag revival as a community-based, almost painfully cooperative effort, anchored by a few key local nonprofit institutions. Greening of Detroit may be the most pervasive of them—it provides a broad array of support, including tools and compost, to the city’s nearly 1,200 registered vegetable gardens. These gardens range from single-family plots to community and school gardens to 37 market gardens, which are business enterprises that sell their goods at farmers’ markets.

According to Atkinson, gardens of all types continue sprouting up at a steady rate throughout the city. What kind of potential do they have to bring healthy food to the city as well as jobs? Atkinson pointed me to a study released in June by the C.S. Mott Group at Michigan State University gauging “The Production Potential of Detroit’s Vacant Land.”  

The city’s food-production capacity is, in a word, immense. The Mott researchers reckon that there are 44,000 vacant publicly owned land parcels, representing nearly 5,000 acres, around the city. That’s more than enough land for the city’s farmers and gardeners to crank out a significant portion of Detroit’s fruit and vegetable needs, the study showed. They calculate that with proper investments in season-extension infrastructure like hoop houses (which wouldn’t require fossil fuel for heating even in Detroit’s frigid winters) and space to store crops like potatoes, skilled farmers using biointensive techniques on just 570 acres could produce 70 percent of the vegetables consumed in Detroit and 40 percent of the fruit. (Non-professional-level gardeners could produce that much food with 2,100 acres under cultivation.)

The Mott study doesn’t comment on the possible economic benefits, but back-of-the envelope calculations suggests that they are significant. Detroit residents spend less than the residents of any other American city on food—about $2,200 combined at home and in restaurants and bars in 2009, according to the data crunchers at the financial website Bundle. If fruit and vegetables make up about 7.5 percent each of that $871 spent on food consumed at home, going by USDA estimates, and if Detroit growers were to provide 70 percent of the vegetables consumed by the city’s 900,000 residents, that would amount to $41.2 million million in annual sales. For fruits, receipts would be $23 million. Grand total: $63 million per year into the local economy.

Seeding the next phase of growth

One can imagine that infusion rippling through the economy in myriad ways. In her book The Economy of Cities, Jane Jacobs argues that in vibrant urban economies, new industries are always arising from existing one. Once that process stops—as it did in the case of Detroit’s car factories—economic stagnation sets in. Urban agriculture, dispersed throughout the city at the scale envisioned by the Mott study, could provide a Jacobsian engine for sustainable growth.

New distribution networks, for example, would need to arise to move that produce from farmers to retail outlets, providing opportunity for entrepreneurship. Then there’s retail, which in itself represents a massive opportunity, both to capture profits from local produce and to improve public health. In 2007, A&P closed its last two Detroit-area supermarkets. It had been the last national supermarket chain operating in the city. Now, more than half of Detroit residents live in areas that have severely limited access to healthy food, a study from Yale’s Rudd Center recently found, making them “statistically more likely to suffer or die prematurely from a diet-related disease, holding other key factors constant,” the report concluded.

Yet high-quality food retail could be economically viable activity. “A 2003 University of Michigan study concluded that the city could support 41 supermarkets with at least 40,000 square feet of space based on its population and spending habits,” the Detroit Free-Press reports. Today there are none. If a bounty of city-grown vegetables began to overwhelm existing farmers markets, local citizens might be moved to band together, raise investment cash, and create full-service food retail outlets that feature local produce. Such projects would keep food dollars circulating within the community, broaden access to healthy food, and provide robust market access to local farmers.

Detroit’s heritage as a manufacturing powerhouse could come into play as well. Yakini told me that people are already talking about launching businesses to fabricate the kind of hardware necessary for intensive urban agriculture: hoop houses for season extension, hand tools, etc. Working closely with innovative farmers at the frontier of intensive urban agriculture, such businesses could generate urban-farming tools sought out the world over.

To hear Atkinson tell it, the city is well on its way to becoming a powerhouse of community-based urban agriculture: dotted with smallholder farms, along with myriad family and community gardens, churning out top-quality produce, feeding the city’s citizens as well as its economy.

The obstacles mainly have to do with policy, she says. “Right now, farming is essentially illegal in the city,” she told me. Farming can’t be the principle use of city land, legally. That means you can have a market garden on the land around your home—the principle use of your land; but you can’t buy an empty parcel explicitly to farm it. “Those rules have to change for market gardening to take off here,” she told me.

Happily, policy change is afoot, even if the pace is slow.

Late in 2009, the Detroit Food Policy Council, which advises the City Council, started meeting. Yakini chairs it— Atkinson told me it grew out of efforts by the Black Food Security Network—and Atkinson also sits on it. One of its tasks is to amend and propose policies to facilitate urban agriculture. Then there’s the Urban Agriculture Work Group, which operates under the City Planning Commission, and which has also been working on tweaking city policy to make it friendly to for-profit farming.

Atkinson is confident that these efforts will change city policy. She and fellow members of the Policy Council and Work Group “wouldn’t be working so hard, doing homework and attending theses meetings, if we didn’t believe it would happen ... eventually.”

Yakini agrees that urban agriculture has “tremendous economic potential” in Detroit, but doesn’t want to overplay it. He stresses the need for investments in infrastructure along with policy change. Moreover, he sees Detroit not in isolation, but rather as part of a regional food economy, joined in a network with urban centers and rural areas in Michigan as well as Illinois and Ohio.

Yakini also sees vast value beyond the economics of Detroit’s urban agriculture scene. “Even if the gardening movement had no economic viability, just the fact that it’s bringing people together for the common good is very significant,” he said. “African-Americans in Detroit tend to have a sense of despair and helplessness that is a direct result of oppression. Producing even some of our own food restores a sense power, a sense that we can shape our own destiny.”

In the next week, I’ll profile three of the projects that are greening Detroit’s fate.

Related Links:

My Intentional Life: Hot Flies in the Summertime

My Intentional Life: Things Get Messy

Seattle’s new urban-ag models are sprouting in friendly soil



Read more: From Motown to Growtown: The greening of Detroit

   

A ‘habitual offender’ unleashes nearly half a billion salmonella-tainted eggs

by Tom Philpott.

As a jaded observer of  the livestock industry, I just sighed when I learned the scale of the current salmonella-tainted egg recall: 380 million eggs, distributed under 10 different brands in 17 different states, all from a single producer—Iowa-based Wright County Farms. Another day, another industrial-ag gaffe imperiling the health of millions.

USA Today reports that as many as 1,300 people have already been sickened by the tainted eggs. According to a recent GAO report, companies recover only about 36 percent of targeted products in a typical recall. That means that literally millions of people stand just an undercooked egg or an unwashed hand away from a nasty case of salmonella.

But then William Neuman’s New York Times piece hipped me to the name of the owner of Wright County Farms: one Austin “Jack” DeCoster. That’s when my sigh became a gasp.

Jack DeCoster is one of the most reviled names in industrial agriculture. I first heard of him back in 2007, when I visited Hardin County, Iowa, for a story on the ravages of industrial hog production. One day, as a group of disgruntled farmers gave me a tour of their CAFO-scarred county, they muttered darkly about DeCoster. They said he had been run out of Maine for the egregious practices of his vast egg factories, and that he had set up shop in Iowa with massive, highly polluting hog factories. He was cited as the owner of several operations as we passed foul-smelling concentrations of hog buildings, sometimes as many as eight plunked down together in a cluster, each containing thousands of hogs and each draining mass quantities of waste into a single fetid “lagoon.”

Looks like he still is. A Google Earth search by Grist of Wright County Egg Productions’ address turned up the satellite image above, of four complexes with a dozen massive, 200-meter-long sheds and a manure lagoons.

DeCoster has been making headlines for more than a decade. In 1996, the New York Times described him like this:

For more than three decades, Jack DeCoster has been an emblem of hard work and ambition in this little farming town, a self-made multimillionaire who started out with 125 hens and created an agricultural empire: Five million hens producing 23 million brown and white eggs a week.       

But that’s not what landed him in the paper of record. Get this:

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration last month fined Mr. DeCoster $3.6 million for violations in the workplace and at workers’ housing. Federal investigators said they found workers, many of whom are immigrants from Latin America, handling manure and dead chickens with their bare hands, and living amid rats and cockroaches in the company’s trailer park. 

Robert B. Reich, the then-Labor Secretary, denounced DeCoster Egg Farms as “an agricultural sweatshop,’’ where “the workers are treated like animals,” the Times reported.

DeCoster’s reputation hasn’t improved since. By the mid-‘90s, Decoster had already set up shop in Iowa. He opened Wright County Eggs in 1996, and also jumped into the state’s then fast-growing hog-production market. His vast hog factories in Iowa quickly ran afoul of authorities. In 1999, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled against DeCoster Farms in its appeal of a $59,000 fine for “variety of water pollution and animal waste control violations at six separate hog facilities in Wright, Hamilton, and Hardin counties in north central Iowa.” The complaint had originated in 1996, and DeCoster had dragged out the process with a series of appeals.

By 2000, he was back in trouble again. The Iowa Attorney General declared him the state’s very first “habitual offender” of water-quality laws, slapping him with a $150,000 fine.

In 2002, DeCoster’s Wright County egg operation made news in a particularly unconscionable way. Reported the Times:

Five illegal Mexican immigrants who say they were raped while working at an Iowa egg producer have agreed to pursue criminal charges, their lawyer said. The women are working with the Wright County prosecutor. The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit in August against the women’s employer, DeCoster Farms, saying three former supervisors attacked them and threatened to have them fired or killed if they did not submit.

The company later settled the suit for a cool $1.5 million. The payment of fines, it seems, is a mere cost of doing business for DeCoster—and an ongoing one. In January, reports the Sun-Journal, his Maine Contract Farming operations were fined $36,000 for 10 counts of animal abuse. 

The outrage here is not that Wright County Eggs has released nearly half a billion tainted eggs into the market, exposing untold numbers of people to sickness. DeCoster’s record of abuse—of people and the environment—has taught anyone who’s paying attention to expect such things from his operations.

The outrage is that regulatory authorities at both the state and national levels have allowed him to continue hiring workers and producing food as violations piled up.

Related Links:

With salmonella recall expanding to half a billion eggs, it’s time to rethink ‘efficiency’

Food fight: Do locavores really need math lessons?

More research linking pesticide exposure to ADHD in kids



Read more: A ‘habitual offender’ unleashes nearly half a billion salmonella-tainted eggs

 

Whiskey biofuels getting tanked

by Ashley Braun.

Scottish scientists have been thinking a lot about drinking and driving lately. So much so that they may have cracked open the code to a biofuel actually worth toasting: They’ve poured the world a promising fuel distilled from the whiskey-making process. Like whiskey itself, this biofuel packs a punch, producing butanol, which knocks the traditional biofuel, ethanol, off its feet with 30 percent more power.

Should we give this new fuel a shot, it could be served straight up in your car’s tank (neat!), and possibly, even in airplane tanks, where it would probably be served in those mini liquor bottles. And since the materials are by-products instead of dedicated crops, nothing will get wasted—except, perhaps, all the overjoyed whiskey-drinkers who will be putting a few back for the planet.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Like what you see? Sign up to receive The Grist List, our email roundup of funny and pun-usual green news just like this, sent out every Friday.

Related Links:

Climate change found to be rapidly altering ... the English language

Get your granny hip to climate change [VIDEO]

Flush away greenhouse gases



Read more: Whiskey biofuels getting tanked

   

Rising temperatures threaten rice yield growth

Rising temperatures could slow the growth of rice production unless farmers adapt by changing management practices and switch to more heat-tolerant varieties, scientists say. Rice is among the world's most important crops and a staple for people in Asia and Africa, with Asia producing and consuming more than 90 percent of the world's output. A drop in production could lead to higher prices, fears over food security and more hunger in a world with a rising human population. A team of researchers led by Jarrod Welch of the University of California, San Diego, found that rice yields drop as night time temperatures rise over time, although the exact reasons why are not perfectly understood.

Read more: Rising temperatures threaten rice yield growth

 

Afghanistan and Africa food supplies most at risk from drought & floods

Afghanistan and nations in sub-Saharan Africa are most at risk from shocks to food supplies such as droughts or floods while Nordic countries are least vulnerable, according to an index released on Thursday. "Of 50 nations most at risk, 36 are located in Africa," said Fiona Place, an environmental analyst at British-based consultancy Maplecroft, which compiled the 163-nation food security risk index. Maplecroft said that it hoped the index could help in directing food aid or to guide investments in food production.

Read more: Afghanistan and Africa food supplies most at risk from drought & floods

   

Page 2 of 31

Share on facebook