‘Feeding 9 billion people’: global food security debates and the productionist trap
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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
Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People
Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S. M., & Toulmin, C. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1185383 · Cited by 11,943 · see citing works
Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines
Beach, D., & Pedersen, R. (2013) · doi:10.3998/mpub.2556282 · Cited by 1,140 · see citing works
Anatomy of a crisis: the causes and consequences of surging food prices
Headey, D., & Fan, S. (2008) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1574-0862.2008.00345.x · Cited by 725 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Anderson, C. R., Bruil, J., Chappell, M. J., Kiss, C., & Pimbert, M. P. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11195272 · Cited by 375 · see citing works
Dumont, B., Groot, J. C. J., & Tichit, M. (2018) · Animal · doi:10.1017/s1751731118001350 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
The agroecological transition in Senegal: transnational links and uneven empowerment
Boillat, S., Belmin, R., & Bottazzi, P. (2022) · Agriculture and Human Values · doi:10.1007/s10460-021-10247-5 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Alpha, A., & Fouilleux, E. (2018) · NJAS: Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.njas.2017.07.005 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Self-citation
- 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)
- ORCID
- Bricas, Nicolas
- Venue
- Journal of European Public Policy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- 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