An Occasional Newsletter of Food System Analysis & Beyond No.

303, May-June 2014

ISSN 0827-4053

In the Absence of the Sacred

The title of Jerry Mander’s 1991 book seems appropri- sacred. It is this attitude that also underlies the deter-
ate for a story about trucking young Chinook salmon mined opposition of so many British Columbians to the
from the interior of California to the coast because the proposed Enbridge pipeline.
drought has reduced the waterways to the point where
they are unlikely to survive the migration on their own. But, as Mander pointed out, we are living in the
We learned about the salmon cycle when we lived in absence of the sacred. For example: In California, where
Secwepemc (Shuswap) territory in B.C. near the Adams people famously water their driveways, the current
River which hosts the largest salmon migration in the drought has put young salmon migrating to the
country if not the world. It goes like this: ocean at extreme risk from thermal stress and
predation. The solution? to take them from the
Pacific salmon are born in creeks hatcheries to the ocean in tanker trucks. In
and streams in the mountains, and fact, the state and federal wildlife agencies
grow for one to three years (depend- have been doing this for some time, but
ing on the species) there before head- now it is being increased to cover most
ing downstream through lakes and of the Chinook smolts (young salmon).
rivers to the ocean – about 500-600 The problem, of course, is that never
km from where we lived. In the having made the journey downstream,
salt water they can continue to they no longer know how to get back.
migrate for hundreds of kilo-
metres, perhaps as far as One option that is being tried
Alaska, before they reach full is to release smolts into the
maturity and start to head creeks when rain has tempo-
back ‘home’ to spawn. When rarily improved river flows, in
they reach fresh water at the the hopes that at least a small
mouth of the river they have number of them will return in
to swim up, they change col- a few years and serve as
our; the Sockeye turn from sil- broodstock for future gen-
very blue to bright red with erations.
green heads, and they stop eat- – sources: AP, CBC, 15/6/2014
ing, living off their stored fat
for the arduous journey back Another example:
up to the creek where they Lester Brown (World
were born. There they mate, Watch) reports that China
lay their eggs, and die, and SALMON & EAGLE PAINTING BY BC ARTIST DANNY DENNIS is depleting the deep aqui-
their battered bodies are fers under the North China
dragged off and eaten by bears and eagles with the Plain (which produces half of the country’s wheat and a
remains (and the bear droppings) left to fertilize the third of its corn) through excessive irrigation. The
forests. The trees, in turn, filter the snowmelt from the ancient aquifers do not recharge, and in some places the
mountains, slowing and cooling the water so the rivers water table is falling by over three metres per year.
are suitable for the fish, who can’t live in warm waters.
The same arrogance underlies the management of
If we adopt an attitude of humility, this cycle – one the economy in other aspects, as the Ram’s Horn contin-
of the threads that ties the land, water, and creatures ues to point out. Read on. – C.K.
together in an elegant and cohesive whole – is indeed
THE RAM’S HORN PAGE 2
Food Cartels & Food Policy – B.K.
Some time ago – maybe a couple of years – I stopped
extensive reporting on consolidation in the food indus-
try. The ‘industry’ had become so concentrated, from
top to bottom and around the world, that it seemed to me
that there was really little of significance left to report.
But maybe I was jumping the gun. The corporate
names involved in a single story (GM, 10/6/14) include
a lot of long infamous food brands. The story was
ostensibly about Tyson Foods’ plan to buy ‘sausage-
maker’ Hillshire Brands, but the variety of corporate
brands named was a strong reminder of the continuing
consolidation of, and speculation in, the foods industry.
The story cites Warren Buffet’s acquisition of
H.J.Heinz, Shuanghui International Holdings’ purchase
of Smithfield Foods pork processing, and restaurant
food supplier Sysco’s takeover of its rival, US Foods.
While we were not looking, in recent months, Mondelez
International also merged its coffee business with that
of Master Blenders 1753 to create what the firm calls
“the world’s largest pure play coffee company” (please
don’t ask me to explain that phrase); Canadian-based
Saputo bought Australia’s Warnambool Cheese and
Butter Factory to obtain a launching pad for the China
market; and Del Monte Pacific, identified as a Singa-
pore fruit juice maker, bought the unrelated Del Monte
Foods as a way to expand into the USA.
Roughly half of all produce sold by Del Monte
Fresh Produce, based in the Cayman Islands, is grown
on company-controlled farms, with Costa Rica serving
as its “most significant sourcing location,” according to
a company’s financial report for 2012. The country
represents more than one-third of Del Monte’s total
fresh produce sales, which topped $1.5 billion in 2012.
The Del Monte brand, over the years, has
been applied to many entities as companies were
taken apart, put together in different combina-
tions, and jiggled around many times. Take a
look at freshdelmonte.com/our-company/com-
pany-overview/history
With this further consolidation comes a
more coherent attempt to impose the corpo-
rate agenda on food policy. For
Canada, the top of the list is the
government Canadian Agri-Food
Policy Institute. (The “Agri-
Food” identifies it as a govern-
ment-related agency). Then
there is the Conference Board
of Canada, which is still, a little
desperately, trying to make it
appear that their National Food Strategy reflects a
broad spectrum of important interests in the food sec-
tor. As we pointed out in RH #295, (March 2013), this is
an attempt to seize the initiative from Food Secure
Canada with its National Food Policy for Canada, “Re-
setting the Table”.
Now there appears to be resistance from beyond
civil society. World Health Organization Director Gen-
eral Margaret Chan opened the annual World Health
Assembly May 19th with strong calls to address a wide
range of top health concerns across the world. This
included a call for the ‘global health community’ to work
to assert the primacy of health concerns over economic
interests where necessary.
“International trade has many consequences for
health, both positive and negative,” Chan said in her
opening remarks. “One particularly disturbing trend is
the use of foreign investment agreements to handcuff
governments and restrict their policy space.” For exam-
ple, “tobacco companies are suing governments for
compensation for lost profits following the introduction,
for valid health reasons, of innovative cigarette packag-
ing.” This is a reference to the attacks Australia (and
soon other countries) are facing for introducing a policy
of plain packaging for tobacco products as a way to
discourage their use.
“In my view, something is fundamentally wrong in
this world when a corporation can challenge govern-
ment policies introduced to protect the public from a
product that kills,” said Chan.
In addition, she said that “some member states
have expressed concern that trade agreements cur-
rently under negotiation could significantly reduce ac-
cess to affordable generic medicines.”
“Given the
importance of
prevention, we
will need to
argue for

the supremacy of health concerns over economic inter-
ests with other industries,” she said. “This will not be
easy. As recent experience shows, even the very best
scientific evidence can have less persuasive power than
corporate lobbies.” – Intellectual Property Watch, 19/5/14
The limited ability of national governments to
pursue any agenda that has not first been
endorsed by international capital and its prox-
ies is no longer simply the cross they have to
bear; it is the cross to which we all have been
nailed. – Gary Younge, Guardian Weekly, 6/6/14
This can affect NGOs as well as governments,
as Brewster argues in his chapter “Alignment
and Autonomy” in NGOization: Complicity,
Contradictions and Prospects, edited by Aziz
Choudry and Dip Kapoor, Zed Books, 2013
New “Flexible” EU Policy on GM
Crops
The European Union will allow member countries to
make their own decisions on whether to allow geneti-
cally modified (GM) crops in a compromise deal struck
in early June after years of fraught discussion and
widespread public unease over safety issues.
“All member states, with the exception of Belgium
and Luxembourg, have given their agreement,” Greek
Agriculture Minister Ioannis Maniatis said after a
meeting with his EU colleagues.
The key point of the accord gives individual EU
states the right to ban GM crops – even if they have
already won clearance on health and safety grounds at
the EU level. Under normal EU procedures, approval
granted in Brussels means member states have no
further say in the matter and must comply.
In practice, however, widespread public unease
over GM foods and fierce opposition from environmen-
talists, especially in countries such as France, have
resulted in GM approval requests in Brussels being
blocked for years.
Last year, US agro-chemical giant Monsanto aban-
doned efforts to get new approvals, saying it was no
longer worth the effort. The current proposals, how-
ever, according to Friends of the Earth Europe, give
biotech companies the legal right to decide whether a
ban should be allowed. If companies refuse, govern-
ments are forced to fall back on vague, non-scientific
legal grounds upon which to ban GM crops, opening the
THE RAM’S HORN PAGE 3
door to legal challenges. – France 24, 16/6/14
Adrian Bebb, food campaign coordinator for Friends
of the Earth Europe said: “It is an affront to democracy
that companies like Monsanto will be given legal status
in any decision to ban their products.
Friends of the Earth Europe are calling for na-
tional governments to be given genuine powers to keep
their fields GM-free and to protect consumer choice. As
a minimum, the proposal that national governments
must first request permission for a ban from the biotech
company should be rejected, and the legal basis for
banning GM crops strengthened. – FoE Europe, 28/5/14
To satisfy both sides, the agreement envisages
that when a company now applies for GM clearance, a
member country can cite objections other than those
connected to health and safety – such as concern over its
impact on the environment or law and order issues – so
as to be excluded from EU approval.
At the same time, those countries that want to
allow GM crops will be free to approve them. “The new
system guarantees that the member states have a
choice,” French Environment Minister SégolPne Royal
said.
Of course, given the well-known facts of GM con-
tamination, it will be very difficult for states that wish
to refuse GM crops to ensure that they do not drift
across the border from a neighbouring country. This
agreement may look good politically, but it will not solve
the ongoing issues.
This point was not lost on the Welsh. Welsh
parliamentarian Jill Evans commented, “The de facto
ban on GM crops in Europe was a reflection of the
public’s opposition to GMOs. The UK is in the minority
in wanting GM crops, so they have pushed to get the
decision taken in London, ignoring Wales’ views. It is
not democratic. ... These powers are now being trans-
ferred from Europe to member state governments, so
decisions on GM crops will be made a on a country-by-
country basis. ... As it was the UK Government arguing
in favour of their use, we can assume that they will push
for their introduction.”
Revealing the agenda behind the EU move, Con-
servative Environment Secretary Owen Paterson wel-
comed the decision to allow member EU states to block
GM crops, saying: “This is a real step forward in un-
blocking the dysfunctional EU process for approving
GM crops, which is currently letting down our farmers
and stopping scientific development. If the European
Parliament passes this law, farmers in all regions of the

THE RAM’S HORN PAGE 4

UK will have more power in deciding whether to grow
GM crops that have passed a robust, independent
safety assessment.”
A spokeswoman for the UK Government’s Depart-
ment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)
added: “The Welsh Assembly will have the freedom to
decide whether GM crops can be grown in Wales.” And
they claim: “We maintain a precautionary approach to
GM crop cultivation in Wales whilst adhering to the UK
and EU legislative framework.”
production and peer-reviewed scientific research show
this technology is safe for the environment and con-
sumption.” – Statement of US, Australian and Canadian
organizations 5/6/2014
What they don’t say is that they have fought
labelling since day one because they ‘know’ that their
results are ‘safe’, whatever that means. They might also
say that they ‘will continue to offer choice’ as long as the
regulators accept ‘reasonable tolerance levels’ of engi-
neered foods in non-GMO foods.

That is exactly the rhetoric the corporate interests

are employing in relation to the law passed in the
Labels and “Free Speech” Vermont state legislature in April, to come into effect
two years from now, that requires the labelling of
Five of the Canadian grain organizations* that devoted packaged food containing genetically modified (GMO)
their energies to supporting the Harper regime’s efforts ingredients.
to destroy the Canadian Wheat Board are now working
together with similar political organizations in the USA After much on-line expectation that Monsanto
and Australia to promote the development of geneti- would launch a legal challenge of the law, it was the
cally engineered wheat. *Canadian National Millers Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), the Snack
Association, Cereals Canada, Grain Farmers of Ontario, Food Association, the International Dairy Foods Asso-
Grain Growers of Canada, Western Canadian Wheat Grow- ciation and the National Association of Manufacturers
ers Association (NAM) who filed suit on June 12th challenging the
state’s new law. (Of course Monsanto is a member of the
The nine organizations claim to be “representing
wheat farmers and millers” and say they are “united
to responsibly advance wheat
innovation [because] wheat
enhanced through biotech-
nology ultimately offers
the promise of improved
products, more sus-
tainable production
and environmental
benefits.”

Not surpris-
ingly, they don’t talk
about health, given
the deepening suspi-
cion on the part of LAUNCHING A SUIT AGAINST VERMONT
many people that the
‘technological ad- GMA, along with all the other heavy-hitters in
vances’ already im- the food sector.)
posed on wheat vari-
eties may be contrib- The food industry lobbyists are challeng-
uting to increased gluten ing the labelling requirement on free speech
intolerance. grounds. “Act 120 imposes burdensome new speech
requirements – and restrictions – that will affect eight
“... We encourage exporting and importing nations out of every ten foods at the grocery store,” said the
to maintain sound, science-based biotech regulatory GMA. A statement from the NAM said, “With zero
systems. . . Additional regulations and oversight are justification in health, safety or science, the State of
not needed as biotech wheat will be developed with the Vermont has imposed a burdensome mandate on manu-
same proven technologies that have been safely used on facturers that unconstitutionally compels speech and
many other crops. ... “More than 15 years of commercial interferes with interstate commerce.”

Assembling Farm Land:
For the Common Good ...
Farmland Legacies is a non-profit organization and
registered charity devoted to sustainable agriculture
and food security. “We acquire arable land through
donation or bequest and lease that land to persons who
share our commitment to sustainable agricultural prac-
tices and act as stewards of the land.
“Farmland Legacies pioneers the concept of set-
ting land aside for the common good. Thanks to the
generosity of the Gillis family in the Wynyard district,
Farmland Legacies now has its permanent home near
the largest single land base in its holding.
“Farmland Legacies envisions a healthy mix of farms
and food. The landscape, with balanced soils and healthy
ecosystems, will be home to farmers of all ages. Farm
interests will be diverse and market influence will be
shared by many. Farmland Legacies believes in a re-
newable and secure food system.
“Farmland Legacies follows four Guiding Principles of
land stewardship:
• Caring for the system as a whole – understanding the
fundamental roles and values of natural systems, build-
ing up biological fertility in the soil, incorporating an
understanding of the ecological cycles of the landscape
(water, energy, nutrients) and how land-use practices
can either benefit, be in harmony with, or negatively
impact these cycles and other land-users, flora and
fauna.
• Resource conservation – maximizing efficiency and
striving to reduce the one-time consumption of renew-
able and non-renewable resources; aiming for long-
term optimization versus short-term maximization of
production.
• Maintaining, building and enhancing stability in
Nature – maintaining and encouraging natural biologi-
cal diversity and complexity; maintaining natural ar-
eas and functions on the land (i.e., wildlife habitat
conservation).
• Cultural values and ethics – caring for the health of
the land for future generations and long-term economic
stability; the link between civilization, urbanization,
and the land-base and ecosystems that are vital to
survival; the intrinsic value and right to exist of all life
on Earth.” – Farmlandlegacies.org
This fall, Farmland Legacies will deliver its first
hamburgers to Food Banks Saskatchewan, represent-
ing 27 food banks in the province that assist 25,000
people a month.
THE RAM’S HORN PAGE 5
Duane Guina, program manager of Farmland
Legacies, said, “We were looking for a way as a charity
to bring this full circle and do good directly in the
community. The concept was to grow food and increase
the nutritional value of hampers at Saskatchewan food
banks”. The hamburger-headed beef is from the herd
under the care of Pamela and Nick Wolanski who live
on the original Gillis-donated land and utilize their
training in holistic management in managing the farm.
... For Corporate Control
Cargill has doled out $200 million for a stake in
UkrLandFarming, Ukraine’s largest agribusiness hold-
ing, in a deal that should see both groups partner up in
future grain exports to China and other growing mar-
kets.
The deal, for 5 percent of the holding, boosts
Cargill’s already strong trading presence in one of the
world’s most promising agriculture commodity produc-
ers. It comes amid reports that China was increasingly
rejecting imports of genetically modified US corn as it
stepped up organic purchases from Ukraine.
The transaction puts a value of $4 billion on
UkrLandFarming, the world’s eighth-largest land cul-
tivator and second biggest egg producer through its 77
percent ownership in London-listed Avangardco. The
conglomerate was founded and built up in recent years
through acquisitions by Oleg Bakhmatyuk, a Ukrain-
ian billionaire.
Ukraine, which harvested a record corn harvest
last year of 29m tonnes, hopes to boost exports this
season by some 35 per cent to 18m tonnes, catapulting
the eastern European country to the ranks of the world’s
top corn exporters. It now vies with Argentina for the
rank of the world’s third largest corn exporting country.
Cargill opened a Ukrainian operations base in
1991. In recent years it has acquired or built grain silos,
sunflower seed processing capacity and an animal feed
mill in the country. Rival traders, including Bunge and
Archer Daniels Midland and Swiss-based Glencore,
also have businesses in Ukraine including processing
plants and export terminals on the Black Sea.
– Kyiv Post|Financial Times,12/1/14
Brewster comments:
I have always regarded Cargill as sophisticated and
pragmatic, not an adherent of classic market-economy

THE RAM’S HORN PAGE 6

theory in its own business interests (though happy to tion and feed information, GIS land information, crop
recommend it to others), so I was surprised to read the health information from UAV (unmanned aerial vehi-
president and CEO of Cargill, David MacLennan, state cle) surveys, real-time weather and market informa-
Cargill’s global policy so simplistically and ideologically tion, and crop storage facilities information – all com-
in an article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, Cargill’s bined with fiscal information systems.
home town newspaper (16/5/14):
“Equipment fleets are selected to ensure adapt-
“Open trade benefits consumers, enabling greater ability to varied environments. OEF employs Genestar’s
choices and lower prices. . . Open trade is essential to technology to facilitate the natural selection of superior
feeding the world. . . More food will need to move across genetics within its cattle operations. GPS tracking
borders to feed a planet that is more populous and enables OEF to manage the logistics and inventory
prosperous. . . Trade agreements foster competition. . . management of its large fleets of machinery and equip-
Our state, our country and our planet benefit from an ment. ...”
‘open to the world’ orientation where nations specialize
in producing those goods and services they can produce This is not a labour intensive form of farming, and
more efficiently as a result of their respective endow- the operators of very expensive machinery are not going
ments and trade with others for those goods and serv- to be untrained seasonal employees. Its intent to create
ices where they do not have comparative advantage.” “104 long-term, sustainable employment opportunities
in Saskatchewan and Alberta’s agriculture industry” is
not impressive.
Not So Simple “Our focus on building strong relationships with
How the Mighty [Investors] Have Fallen the First Nations and our leadership in employment
and training opportunities are creating new jobs and
In September 2001, Brewster produced the following long-term careers. ... Our team is excited about creating
profile of Sprott Resource Corp. and its subsidiary, One change in a centuries-old industry and applying knowl-
Earth Farms, based on material from their websites. edge, skill and technology from the agriculture industry
as well as other industries. Through the use of leading-
One Earth Farms(OEF) and Sprott Resource Corpora- edge technology and sound management concepts, One
tion (SRC) are both projects of and directed by Eric Earth Farms is putting these pieces together to meet
Sprott. the needs of its stakeholders.”
(i.e., investors)
“The goal of One Earth
Farms Corp. is to become Cana-
da’s largest fully integrated cor- In March, 2013, One Earth
porate farm. A true partnership Farms was told that it will not be
between the private sector and able to farm on the Blood Re-
First Nations, One Earth Farms serve in 2013 or into the future.
represents a new model for North The Lethbridge Farm Manager
American farms. One Earth has been released and the
Farms is committed to becoming Lethbridge office has been closed.
an industry leader by delivering This is a fall from grace for One
COMING DOWN THE HIGHWAY
superior results and a reduced Earth Farms in terms of its ob-
risk profile through economies jective of farming one million
of scale, professional manage- acres. At one time One Earth
ment and progressive farming practices.” Farms promised many things for the natives on the
– sprottresource.com, 2011 Blood Reserve but the relationship was short lived and
One Earth farmed on the Blood Reserve for only 3 years.
OEF describes its farming operations as follows: At the peak, One Earth Farms farmed 25,000 acres on
“One Earth Farms employs the latest in precision the Blood Reserve and the company was not bashful or
farming and tracking technology for all of its opera- quiet regarding its plan to farm the entire Blood Re-
tions, from seeding to harvesting. serve which totals roughly 150,000 acres of irrigated
and dryland. – RealAgriculture News, 5/3/13
“One Earth Farms’ methodology seeks to inte-
grate a wide range of farming and industry data, includ- One year later, it was reported that One Earth
ing equipment monitoring information from sprayers, Farms had sold its machinery and terminated lease
tractors, seeders, and combines as well as cattle produc- arrangements on hundreds of thousands of acres of

cropland across the West. At the height of its opera-
tions, One Earth Farms was growing crops on almost
200,000 acres of farmland, most of it rented from First
Nations in Saskatchewan and Alberta. By the end of
this year, the amount of leased land controlled by the
company will be down to approximately 5,000 acres,
said Mike Beretta, the company’s chief executive of-
ficer. Much of the cropland previously controlled by the
company has been taken over by other farmers.
The company’s business dealings with First Na-
tions groups have been reduced significantly. Two years
ago the company had hundreds of leases with First
Nations and individual aboriginal landowners.
One Earth is now focusing its efforts on beef
production and brand development, owning roughly
17,000 head of cattle, managed through arrangements
with ranchers and private landowners in Alberta, Sas-
katchewan and Ontario. – WP, 15/5/14
Klebsiella pneumoniae, a bacterium carried in
the intestines, has become resistant to the last
line of antibiotics available, the carbapanems.
... “We know that the pathogens are every-
where. They were here before humanity,” Dr.
Carmen Pessoa Da Silva, team leader of antimi-
crobial resistance a the WHO said. “It is a
problem that belongs to the entire planet.”
– GW, 9/5/14
A Growing Problem
Palmer pigweed (Amaranthus palmeri) is not a weed to
trifle with. It can reach more than 2.5 metres tall,
grow more than 6 centimetres a day, produce 600,000
seeds and has a tough, woody stem that can wreck
farm equipment that tries to uproot it. It is native to
the Sonoran desert and southwest United States,
germinates throughout much of the growing season,
starts earlier and grows faster than other weeds, and
is a prolific seed producer. It can tolerate drought and
heat extremes that would kill other plants. It is also
becoming more and more resistant to the most com-
mon herbicides used to combat
it, including glyphosate.
THE RAM’S HORN PAGE 7
The first such resistant population was confirmed
in 2005 in a cotton field in Georgia, and the plant now
plagues farmers in at least 23 US states. It is just
one of many resistant weeds marching through
the world. ... There is broad agreement that the
spread of these resistant plants has its roots in
the widespread adoption of crops
engineered to be resistant to
glyphosate. ... by 2012, glypho-
sate-resistant weeds had infested
25 million hectares of US cropland.
They have also appeared in other coun-
tries that have embraced glyphosate-
tolerant crops, including Australia, Bra-
zil and Argentina. Blanketing crops
year after year in the same herbicide
is the perfect way to foster resistant
weeds.
Chemical companies have come
up with a solution: crops engineered to
tolerate multiple herbicides. They claim
that the likelihood of a weed becoming
resistant to more than one chemical is
very small. – Nature, 510: 187, 12/6/14
University of Illinois researchers,
on the other hand, suggest that killing
the plant before it can go to seed is the
best way to control it. That means
treating young plants with
herbicides when they are
less than 4 inches tall.
. . . continued next page
THE RAM’S HORN PAGE 8

“Once it is taller than 4 inches, the effectiveness of
herbicide treatments drops off very dramatically and
very quickly,” Hager said.
Catching the plant that early is problematic, how-
ever. As a seedling, Palmer amaranth looks a lot like
waterhemp, another problematic weed that is difficult
to control. This means farmers have the dual challenge
of determining whether Palmer has invaded their fields
and, if it has, taking effective action to kill it before it
takes over.
“In other parts of the U.S., this species has devas-
tated cotton production and in many areas, especially in
Georgia, it was not uncommon to see cotton fields
literally mowed down to prevent this weed from produc-
ing seed,” Aaron Hager, a University of Illinois crop
sciences professor said. “It’s hard to imagine another
weed species that would be more injurious to crop
production than what this one will be.” Hager said.
– Weed Society Science Journal
Transform our food system
The ownership of the wheat-to-bread value chain deter-
mines the quality and cost of one of South Africa’s most
important foods and the current ownership rests with
corporations that continue to profit while those below
the breadline suffer. In 2009, while producer prices
decreased by 20%, the price of a 700g loaf increased by
9%. In 2011, producer prices decreased by a further 3%
and thebread price increased by 10%. According to
Mariam Mayet of African Centre for Biosafety, “It is a
matter of urgency that we break up these cartels that
have South African consumers, especially the poorest of
the poor, in a vice grip through control of our two staple
foods, maize and bread. There is a rapidly growing
social movement in South Africa demanding a different
food system for our country – one that invites and
nurtures small players to enjoy a livelihood from lucra-
tive value chains and ensures transparency, account-
ability and food produced from sustainable and socially
just systems.”
The wheat-to-bread value chain is 70% controlled
primarily by just four companies – Tiger Brands, Pre-
mier Foods, Pioneer Foods and Foodcorp. It feeds into
a concentrated food retail market, primarily controlled
by Shoprite/Checkers, Pick n Pay, Woolworths and
Spar, which together account for a significant portion of
the remaining 30% of the bread market. In a country
where more than 50% of the population do not have
regular access to food, Tiger Brands and Pioneer Foods
made a profit of roughly $247 million Canadian in 2013
just from their baking divisions. The ACB report points
out that the consolidation of the bread industry shuts
out smaller players, including small-scale farmers and
millers, and that GM crop farming systems are ecologi-
cally unsustainable and socially unjust.
– African Centre for Biosafety, 21/5/14

Subscriptions:
Canada, $25(regular), $50 (patron)
Published by Brewster and Cathleen Kneen United States: US$25, CDN $27
phone/fax: (613) 828-6047 outside North America: $28 (airmail)
email: brewster@ramshorn.ca
www.ramshorn.ca
Subscriptions cover 10 issues

If you would like a paper copy of The Ram’s Horn, please subscribe (see rates and
address above). You are also invited to suppport our work through a donation to
help cover costs of research, writing, and circulation of the print version for free
to people who cannot afford it, especially those in the ‘global south’.

The publishers of The Ram’s Horn do not claim copyright ‘protection’ for this material. It is in
the public domain to be freely used and built upon. We appreciate mention of the source.
Line drawings not otherwise identified are the work of Cathleen Kneen.