Cited by 137Agriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFood Security and Socioeconomic DynamicsAgricultural and Food Production Studies

‘Feeding 9 billion people’: global food security debates and the productionist trap

Fouilleux, Eve, Bricas, Nicolas, Alpha, Arlène·2017·Journal of European Public Policy

Abstract

Food security, a long-established item on the international agenda, raises many issues including production, consumption, poverty, inequalities, healthcare and conflicts. However, in 2007/2008 the global food security debate was relaunched with a single dominant focus which continues to the present day: increasing agricultural production. This paper explains this productionist bias – which may translate into inadequate policies – by combining insights from institutionalist and cognitive analyses. We show that, despite recent reforms, the global food security field remains dominated by macro- and micro-institutions that put food availability and agricultural production at the heart of the problem and solutions. The political and discursive strategies developed by transnational corporations and private foundations to promote their productivist interests are also key, along with the demands of dominant farmers’ unions in exporting countries. Although advocating opposite development patterns, civil society actors implicitly reinforce the productionist perspective through their focus on family agriculture.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13501763.2017.1334084

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Agricultural innovation in Sub-Saharan Africa is strongly dominated by the "Green Revolution" narrative steered by transnational coalitions involving donors, international organizations, agribusiness companies and governments, which exert pressures on agroecological movements.

    “Furthermore, agricultural innovation in SSA is strongly dominated by the “Green Revolution” narrative steered by transnational coalitions involving donors, international organizations, agribusiness companies and governments (Dawson et al. 2016), which exert pressures on agroecological movements (Fouilleux et al. 2017).”

    From The agroecological transition in Senegal: transnational links and uneven empowerment (2022) · cites this paper as Fouilleux et al. 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fouilleux, E., Bricas, N., & Alpha, A.
Affiliations
  • French National Center for Scientific Research (Cnrs), University of Montpellier, Centre d'Etudes Politiques de l'Europe Latine (Cepel), Montpellier, France
  • Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (FR)
Venue
Journal of European Public Policy
Published
2017-06-12
Volume
24
Issue
11
Pages
1658-1677
ISSN
  • 1350-1763 (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-4429
OpenAlex
W2625159568
Cited by
137
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 3
FWCI
38.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of European Public Policy (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Agritrop (Cirad) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-13-JSH1-0008)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Security and Socioeconomic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural and Food Production Studies
Keywords
global food security, productionism, agricultural production, food availability, food policy, multinational corporations, private foundations, farmers' unions, civil society, family farming, institutional analysis, cognitive analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review