Monocropping: The Perfect Food?

Believe it or not our shared desire for the best looking, flawless fruit has devastating effects on the development of frankenfoods. 

With the innumerable blessings of the Industrial Revolution, also came the industrialization of agriculture and the development of our nation’s current foodways. Foodways, as discussed in the previous blog, is a term used to describe the cultural, social and economic practices relating to the production and consumption of food. Due to the expanding of the world economy, foodways have become internationalized: spreading our nation’s agricultural practices around the world. Among these practices is the concept of monocropping, which is the practice of planting the same crop year after year. In more sustainable agricultural practices, farmers rotate fields to give soil time to rest, but this practice has less yield. While monocropping is efficient, it has few other redeeming benefits, none of which seem to outweigh its huge environmental and social costs.

The saving grace of monocropping is its efficiency. But of what, exactly? By growing a single crop, farms are able to invest in equipment that can streamline the processes of seeding and harvesting. Unfortunately, and ironically, monocropping is actually chemical—and energy —intensive, and is an all-around outdated way of going about large-scale agriculture. Planting the same crop on a single plot of land year after year causes mineral depletion in the soil— necessitating fertilizers—and can quickly become a liability to farmers and industries in cases of a sudden drop in demand or spread of pesticide/herbicide resistant maladies. Eventually, land can become so depleted that it is simply cheaper to abandon.

As an assessment of risk, the practice of monocropping lacks any bit of sense. Anytime an entire region is dependent on a single crop for food or income, that population puts itself in an incredibly vulnerable situation. Monocropping is by its very definition unsustainable. Did we learn nothing from the great famine?

In Americas foodways a few crops that are infamously monocropped: corn, bananas, and soybeans. While each of these exemplifies a unique problem with monocropping, they all share the environmental problems of mineral depletion, requiring expensive fertilization and use of harmful pesticides/herbicides to prevent widespread crop failure.  Corn, as mentioned in the previous blog, is so pervasive in our foodways and potential energy sources that a crop failure or contamination could be economically devastating and politically destabilizing.

The banana industry, however, is a unique case. Unlike corn, bananas are not grown domestically, and remain the most consumed fresh fruit by the American populous, far surpassing apple consumption for the past twenty years. Therefore, bananas are double-trouble when it comes to the environment, because they are both imported (traveling vast distances) and their agricultural practices cause excessive environmental damage. 

Bananas have been to hell and back, historically speaking. Their long and complex history of cultivation has inspired a wealth of socio-political literature, too intricate for the purposes of this exploration.  However, one noteworthy element when we consider the difficulties with monocropping is the banana’s characteristic over-perfection.  The banana industry and 15,000 years of human cultivation has perfected its look, taste, and texture while eradicating its ability to fight disease.  The once coined “world’s perfect food” has become too perfect.  The genetic diversity that naturally protects a crop from disease no longer occurs in the current banana gene pool. This makes bananas highly susceptible to crop failure that can wipe out entire industries, and has.

In the 1960’s, a banana apocalypse occurred in which Gros Michel banana variety (also called Big Mike) was destroyed by a fungus called the Panama disease. Millions of dollars were spent in infrastructure changes, rainforest destruction, and mechanical updates to accommodate a new variety dubbed Cavendish. This variety is a smaller and less-sweet variety, but as a monospecies still faces the same dilemma. In fact, a new strain of fungus called the “Panama disease Race 4” has already wiped out plantations in Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia, Taiwan and is expected to wipe out the rest of the remaining crops around the world—erasing the banana as we’ve come to know it (or at least make them really expensive).

To prevent the spread of these potential apocalyptic diseases, bananas require a battery of harsh pesticides/ herbicides, which have negative human and environmental impact. While touring a banana plantation in Nicaragua in 2006 with a class on Central American Health Care, we were introduced to a dozen women who had suffered miscarriages and gave birth to children with physical and mental developmental issues, which correlated to exposure of these pesticides. Many large banana firms and other organizations have taken action to minimize risks of exposure, but the threat is still sprayed on acres and acres of land every day.

There is no simple solution in sight. The debate has stirred up even more controversy about “safe” food practices. Scientists have proposed everything from conventional hybridization to genetic modification. Current public opinion seems unlikely to support the modification of the banana—despite its potential to completely eliminate the need for harsh herbicides and pesticides.

Genetic modification of crops has long been considered a solution to the problems with monocropping. Unbeknownst to many American consumers, most pre-packaged foods and large percentages of produce in the U.S. are already genetically modified. For now, notions of “frankenfood” and the unknowns surrounding potential damage to the earth, the animals and our bodies have thus far halted the widespread development of genetically modified foods, but not completely.

In 2007 the worldwide soybean industry, for example, was estimated to be 58.6% genetically modified. And this is where it gets really complicated. For example, whereas the soy you are eating may eventually be labeled as genetically modified in the future, you can’t really tell if genetically modified materials have somehow entered foodways via stock-feed or by other means. This brings up the issue of government regulation in an already powerless Food and Drug Administration (an issue we will discuss in the following blog).

It is said efficiency is doing things right, while effectiveness is doing the right thing. Unfortunately, there are no clear solutions to these problems, but consciousness is a start. While many have committed themselves to eating more locally and supporting sustainable foodways, we must take note of the economic privileges that have enabled us to do so. For example, spending ten more cents per organic banana at Trader Joe’s is not that big of a sacrifice for many (in fact, it’s really important that we vote with our dollars in this way). However, making the trip to Trader Joe’s is not an option for all. When we look at the larger world economy, there are entire nations who don’t have this bargaining power. Responsible consumption takes on a very literal meaning when it comes to foodways. Food is a global issue, and the lack of transparency is purposeful. It is incredibly important that we keep track of the impact of our cultural practices surrounding food for the preservation of our collective health and the earth.

Comments

[Term Papers]

We don’t discriminate against people who can’t eat regular pizza. We have options for anyone with an allergy (dairy, wheat, gluten, nuts, casein, etc).

[a]

i love spicy foods. i want to know what other people think of spicy foods. what do you think? what is your favorite spicy foods and regular food? what is the spiciest food that you have ever had? what is the worst food that you have ever had?.....and the best? what is your favorite foreign food.....and least favorite foreign food?

[Generic Viagra]

I mean, all my life people have called me lazy, but now we know I was sick, and that's why I've set up the patient group, Unmotivated Anonymous, and we've got some corporate sponsorship, we've got a website and we intend to raise public awareness about this genuine disease.