An astounding one in eight people on the planet are undernourished, over three million children die every year from hunger or malnutrition, and two billion people suffer from one or more micronutrient deficiencies (Caritas). And as the world’s population continues to grow, with estimates putting it at ten billion by 2050, we can only expect the situation to get worse. Unless, of course, we do something about it. But for that to happen, we need to recognize that food insecurity on this level is not simply unfortunate, but it is deeply unjust. We need to reframe the global hunger problem in terms of food justice.

So, why are so many people on the planet malnourished or starving? It’s not because there isn’t enough food being produced in the world. People are hungry and malnourished because they either can’t afford the food that’s available, or the food that’s available is just not healthy and nutritious. Yet about a third of all the food that’s produced in the world doesn’t even make it onto the table, and of the food that we actually put in front of us, a lot of that ends up in the trash too. There’s obviously something wrong with a system that allows so many to go hungry, while at the same time, all this food is being grown simply to be thrown away. As Pope Francis put it, "We are in front of a global scandal of around one billion people who still suffer from hunger. We cannot look the other way.”

If we already produce enough food to feed everyone on the planet, then can’t we just figure out a better way to distribute that food to the most needy? It sounds like a simple, obvious solution, but the reality is a little more complicated. First, in order to transport food, certain infrastructure needs to be in place, and that’s often not the case in places where there’s a lot of food insecurity. Second, transporting all this food has costs—not just monetary costs, but climate costs. Most of our transportation system is still reliant on fossil fuels, which contributes to carbon in the atmosphere, so distributing food around the world cannot be the complete answer to the problem. And even if we figure out a more sustainable way to distribute all this food, it doesn’t mean that those who are most in need of healthy food will suddenly be able to afford to buy it.

Another solution would be for more people to grow their own food so they can be self-sufficient, but again, while this might sound simple enough, there are many factors preventing this from happening on the ground. Growing food requires resources—land, water, seeds, time, and so on. And as the global temperature increases, bringing with it more erratic weather patterns, such as extreme drought or flooding, in many places where there is already food insecurity, it is getting harder and harder to grow food on any consistent basis.

To understand why this depressing situation should be thought of as aninjustice, we need to understand the role that we play in creating the problem. For example, lots of forests are cleared to raise livestock due to the high demand for meat. As forests are cut down, more carbon is released into the atmosphere, then there’s all this flatulent livestock, which has to be fed. So, in addition to the land used to house the cattle, there’s also land (and, of course, water) being used to grow food for livestock instead of for people.

不仅仅是肉。还有热带水果和蔬菜、茶、咖啡、巧克力，以及许多我们西方人想要便宜买到的其他食物。很多这种食物都生长在食物和水缺乏的偏远地区。所以，所有这些可以用来为穷人种植粮食的当地资源都被用来种植用于出口的经济作物，以满足需求our消费者的要求。因此，虽然全球有数百万人在挨饿或营养不良，但我们却在享受咖啡、藜麦和椰奶，这导致全球穷人无法获得粮食安全。我们的消费者选择有隐藏的成本，最终是穷人买单，一方面是我们直接掠夺他们当地的资源，另一方面是间接导致全球变暖，这不成比例地影响了贫困地区的人们种植粮食的能力。For a cogent and persuasive treatment of the relationship between food justice and climate change, seethis articleby Lori Gruen (recent guest on our show on the ethics of captivity) and Clement Loo.

Now, I don’t want to come across as lecturing anybody for their consumer choices. I include myself in the problem, and I understand that we can all be morally weak to some degree. We suffer from what the Greeks calledakrasia, or weakness of will. We might know that something is the right thing to do, but it’s another thing to actually do that thing. This is part of the reason why many people still drive cars, knowing full well how the resulting carbon emissions contribute to climate change. So, while you might feel guilty about eating meat and drinking coffee, it’s another thing to stop.

但从道德上讲，承认我们中的许多人都有意志薄弱的毛病并不能让我们摆脱困境。为了解决气候变化问题和相关的粮食不安全问题，我们需要的不仅仅是个人改变他们的消费选择，尽管显然这必须是解决方案的一部分。我们还需要进行重大的结构改革，为了实现这些改革，我们需要个人向政府和企业施加政治压力，让它们做出适当的改变。

We also need to shift away from the idea that solving the food insecurity problem is a matter of personal choice, or charity. Charitable contributions can obviously help people, but if we think about it as just a matter of charity, we miss something important. Why? Because charity is what philosophers call a supererogatory act—it’s a good thing to do, but it’s not morally required. Instead of thinking about it as a personal choice, we need to shift our framework toward a view that considers solving the food insecurity problem as a matter of moral duty—something we are obligated to do, whether we want to or not. Another way to frame the issue is by thinking of access to healthy, nutritional food as a basic human right, something that every person on this planet is entitled to. We need to create a just food system to protect those rights for everyone. And if we’re serious about that, and about ensuring that future generations will be able to produce enough food to feed everyone on the planet, we simply cannot continue with our rampant consumerism.

Our guest on this week's show is Tim Benton, the UK's 'Champion' for Global Food Security.