ABSTRACT
In a world where intensive farming, especially that of livestock, has become the most profitable option for producing food, the result has been a physical disconnection from the natural world by both farmers and consumers. A large proportion of our food is now grown in systems where nature and agriculture are completely separate. This reductionist, separationist approach to farming has made it difficult to argue an economic case for sustainable farming practice. The current policy framework supports a dishonest economic food pricing system, as a result of which, the best business case is for farmers to grow using industrial methods and for retailers to buy the commodity products from industrial farms, process and package them so the consumer knows nothing about their backstory and then make a profit by turning that around.
So, we need new incentives and disincentives, which ensure that the polluter pays and those who farm in a truly sustainable way are better rewarded for the benefits they deliver. A return to mixed farming, involving a fertility-building phase, primarily of grass and legumes, accompanied by grazing ruminants, is part of the solution. The phrase “eat less meat but better” is often used, but what this really means is that we, as consumers, must give up cheap, industrially farmed livestock such as chicken and pork, as well as cutting out industrially produced dairy products.
