Food security: – Norway must produce meat
DEBATE
The idea that only we spit in enough money so we can revel in Norwegian-produced fruit and vegetables is ignorant.
External comments: This is a debate article. Analysis and position are the writer’s own.
Some believe that the state should move the current agricultural allocations, which go to meat, eggs and milk production, to fruit and vegetables. But where should this food be produced?
The need for more climate-friendly and sustainable food production is an important issue. In a recently published article, NOAH veterinarian Siri Marthinsen argued that one should cut support for meat production and instead focus on fruit and vegetables.
But money can hardly buy a production of raw materials that both climatic conditions and resource base speak against. If we are to strengthen food security, we must focus on what we have.
The thugs in Oslo
Norwegian agriculture is not European agriculture. Where the Central European countries have between 30 and 60 percent topsoil, only three percent of Norway’s areas are arable land. Only one percent is well suited for the production of food grains, fruits, berries, legumes and other vegetables.
To move store sums up for fruit and vegetable production when we barely have areas where it can be grown, or a climate that makes it possible, is not sustainable.
What we have a lot of in this country, on the other hand, is grass and pasture. This utilizes the livestock so that we get meat and milk. In other words, domestic animals are absolutely central to Norwegian food production. It is true that they not only eat Norwegian feed, but for grazing animals, cattle and sheep, the Norwegian share is between 82 and 97 percentwith the aim of increasing it further.
The domestic animal is an important piece in a sustainable, Norwegian food system. They help to maintain natural areas for important plant and insect species and through fertilizer production ensure that many thousands of tonnes of nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen return to the soil.
Compared to artificial fertilizers, natural fertilizers from animals are a far more sustainable way of supplying nutrients to the soil. Without it, the EU goal of reducing the use of fertilizers by 20 percent by 2030 will be difficult to achieve.
No, parents do not know best
Reducing support for Norwegian meat production will not have a positive effect on sustainability. Innovative measures such as breeding for more climate-friendly animals and methane-reducing feed ingredients are under development, and several researchers point out that condition can be a positive contribution to being made in the right way. But if we are to get the farmers involved in the green shift, they must be paid for the work.
It is true that the farmers who produce animal raw materials receive the largest transfers. But since they also make sure that we are closest self-sufficient on meat, milk and eggs, while we import well over half of all fruit and vegetables, it makes sense. Livestock producers are important for Norwegian food safety.
To increase production of fruit, vegetables and cereals is a clearly stated objective that Norwegian agriculture is in the process of realizing. But cutting back on animal production does not mean more fruit and vegetables. Neither Norwegian resource conditions nor climate are conducive to this. The risk will be reduced self-sufficiency and increased imports.
The health card is also highlighted in Siri Marthinsen’s debate post. And that there is money to be made from the fact that the population eats healthily, there is little will. But the official dietary guidelines clearly state that a healthy and varied diet with a moderate intake of meat is beneficial to meet the nutritional needs.
Succeed with cynical play
Especially the elderly and children have good benefits from the proteins and composition of amino acids that animal raw materials contribute. It is also not given by the transition from a diet with a touch of meat to a purely vegetarian is compatible with healthy. A recently mentioned examination showed that vegetarians in Norway eat too little fruit and vegetables, get too little iron and too much sugar.
To think that it works in Central European countries is transferable to Norway is naive at best. If it had been easy to produce fruit and vegetables, she would not have been so tall. The idea that only we spit in enough money so we can revel in Norwegian-produced fruit and vegetables is ignorant.
We have to work with what we have and develop this in a sustainable direction on the premises of nature and the resource base. If we are to strengthen the degree of self-sufficiency, we must continue to pay for the livestock and what they produce.