Why Food and Faith?

Ultimately, the test of any food system, and the policies that shape it, is a moral one. Our individual consumer choices, our institutional actions and our public policies must put human needs ahead of economic profits. They must recognize and protect the dignity of humankind and the integrity of God's creation. They must foster community accountability, responsibility and create broad-based ownership and opportunity for all. And they must strengthen family, the community and society. In short, they must uphold the vision of God's community of love.

The Presbyterian Hunger Program (PHP) broadly addresses hunger and its underlying causes such as poverty through direct service, support for community economic development, education of fellow Presbyterians about the issues and related lifestyle connections and by advocating for public policies that promote just social and economic systems. Over the years, we have supported and participated in national efforts to positively influence policy in favor of the poor and hungry, including policies that affect how food is produced, through such organizations as the National Family Farm Coalition, National Farm Workers Ministry, National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture and more recently the Community Food Security Coalition, as well as many state rural initiatives that aim to protect small and/or minority farmers. We have also supported rural and agricultural projects directly and through Agricultural Missions, Inc.

To complement this emphasis on food production and food systems, PHP is directing more domestic grant funds to groups that are building local and sustainable food systems in various ways:

• Spreading urban gardening — developing church, school and community gardens
• Training young people to garden and develop value-added products for sale
• Training new farmers — ethnic minority and young
• Facilitating direct marketing of local foods(e.g. farm to cafeteria, CSA, farmers' markets) with special emphasis on getting fresh, healthy food to lower-income communities
• Starting local food policy councils
• Supporting local processing and coordinating decentralized distribution systems
• Promoting water and soil-saving agricultural practices with decreased chemical use
• Advocating for humane treatment of livestock animals and the workers in processing plants
• Advocating for fair wages, safe conditions and dignity for farm workers
• Supporting state and federal policy advocacy that benefits farmers who practice conservation and other environmental practices
• Educating and mobilizing people to oppose trade rules that hurt smaller producers
• Promoting fair trade — Fair Trade coffee, chocolate, tea and other food products
• Supporting tours of farmers to the United States to educate Americans about how subsidies, overproduction and low prices bankrupt farmers here and abroad
• Raising the moral, social and environmental concerns about genetic engineering in agriculture

And we continue to work with ecumenical and secular groups and coalitions to raise consciousness about these issues and contribute to collaborative work in this area.

See the food systems projects PHP has supported in 2004.

Revolutionary changes in agriculture this century and the ongoing family farm crisis, along with environmental, food safety, GMO, seeds/inputs supply and food, as well as economic justice, concerns compel PHP to do more to address food system issues which get to the core of hunger in the Unites States and abroad. What are the actual human, societal and environmental costs of the dominant, industrial food system? Careful consideration of this question puts into doubt the sustainability, health and fairness of the U.S. and global agribusiness and food distribution system. Some examples include:

• In the United States, there are more people in prison than people in farming. (2 million vs. 1.9 million). Over 10 years, more farmers will lose their jobs than any other profession. (The projected decrease during 1998-2008 is 13 percent.)
• Many economists agree that when the top four firms control 40 percent or more of an industry, fair competition becomes impossible. (Four corporations control 62 percent of U.S. flour milling. Four pork packers control a 62 percent share. Four have 53 percent control of U.S. poultry. Only four control 81 percent of the beef market. Europe has experienced similar corporate consolidation.)
• States with anti-corporate farming laws saw lower unemployment, fewer impoverished families and more farms realizing cash gains than counties in states without such legislation. See Drs. Welsh and Lyson's study for details.
• Huge debt payments have made poorer countries around the world desperate to earn cash through agricultural exports, but farmers must compete against giant multinational agribusiness corporations from Europe and the United States. Larger farms capable of producing for export receive most support from their governments here in the United States and internationally.
• Farmers in poorer countries are forced to switch from growing food for local hungry people, including themselves and their families, to commodities for the global market.
• Farm workers are the poorest-paid occupation in the United States; they are often exposed to toxic chemicals; they have no rights to bargain collectively and often work and live in horrible conditions.
• The nutritional value of our food has been compromised by market, profit and distribution considerations.
• Meat and dairy products, in particular, have become increasingly unhealthy due to the antibiotics and hormones fed to the cattle and as a result of ineffective food safety testing systems backed by powerful meat packer lobbies. In the Unites States, thousands of people (especially children and elders with weaker immune systems) die each year from feces-borne pathogens and hundreds of thousands are hospitalized.
• Many low-income people have little or no affordable healthy foods, fruits and vegetables in their communities because the profit margins are considered too low by supermarket chains.
• Now giant pesticide corporations are touting genetically engineered crops and animals as the answer to world hunger, despite the fact that the world produces 1.5 times the amount needed to feed everyone.