INSTITUTIONEN FÖR GEOVETENSKAPER
Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 18
Dietary Changes in Sweden and Belgium During the Late 20 th and Early 21 st
Century and Their Implications for Sustainability
Friedel Geeraert
Dietary changes in Sweden and Belgium during the late 20
thand early 21
stcentury and their implications
for sustainability
Friedel Geeraert Supervisor: Professor Phil Lyon Master in Sustainable Development May 2011 Uppsala University
2
Abstract
This dissertation focuses on the changing food consumption patterns in Sweden and Belgium during the latter half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century and the implications as seen from a sustainability point of view, both from a qualitative and quantitative perspective. It is shown that changes in agriculture, food processing, distribution and consumption during the period under assessment were considerable and had a clear impact on the food consumption pattern in both countries. Statistical data on the consumption of different food groups such as meat, milk and dairy products, fish, fruits, vegetables, cereal, potatoes, sugar, margarine and chocolate were compared. Overall, an increase in the consumption of meat, cheese, yoghurt, cream, fruits and vegetables was observed in both countries, while the consumption of milk, butter and potatoes decreased. For the sustainability assessment three parameters were chosen: land requirement, greenhouse gas emissions and energy use. The assessment was based on quantitative data about food consumption in 1960 and 2004. It was shown that the Swedish and Belgian diets in 2004 required more resources and emitted more greenhouse gas emissions than in 1960. The Belgian diet had higher values for all parameters than the Swedish, except when considering the values for the emissions of greenhouse gases in 1960 when the Swedish diet had higher values.
Keywords: history, sustainable development, food consumption, dietary changes, 20th century, Sweden, Belgium
3
Foreword
This dissertation is a combination of my previous background in history, my current studies in sustainable development and one of my biggest passions: food. It has been an interesting journey back in time and I hope that it will be for you as well.
4
Acknowledgements
It is common knowledge that dissertations are not written by one person alone. This was no different for this dissertation. A number of people have helped me reach the final stage of the process and therefore deserve to be acknowledged.
First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor Professor Phil Lyon at Umeå University for his unfailing guidance throughout the whole process and, more specifically, for answering my e-mails so quickly which enabled me to work very efficiently. Your insightful comments have helped me improve my work significantly and I have enjoyed our collaboration a lot.
Dr. Dawn Wood at the University of Abertay Dundee in Scotland has, as an external reader, also helped me improve the quality of my work considerably for which I would like to thank her.
Philippe Lebailly from the Gembloux Agricultural University in Belgium and Monica Eidstedt from the Swedish Board of Agriculture also deserve to be acknowledged for making the data series on Belgian and Swedish food consumption available in Excel.
I would also like to thank all interviewees in both countries for sharing their memories with me. It was incredibly interesting to hear your stories about daily life in the past. Thanks to all of you I learned a lot about how food used to be handled, knowledge that is not self- evident anymore for people in my generation.
My parents and my sister Marieke deserve many thanks. Not only for supporting me and giving me the opportunity to study abroad, but also for introducing me, in the most pleasant way possible, to the wonderful world of food in all its shapes and varieties. My love for food, the initial inspiration for this thesis, can be attributed to you all.
Lastly, I would like to thank my friends. To all the wonderful people I met in Uppsala:
thank you for all the good times I spent in your company. I learned at least as much from you all as I did during my classes, not in the least about your food cultures which can differ greatly from mine. My lovely friend Alin Kadfak deserves a special thank you for taking the trouble of teaching me how to cook some delicious Thai dishes. To my friends back in Belgium: thank you for keeping in touch despite the considerable geographical distance. Your e-mails, skype conversations and visits have helped me stay motivated and have, in the case of the latter, also kept my indispensable stock of Belgian chocolate at an agreeable level. Mats Pylyser also deserves a special thank you for providing me with good film and music advice, which has kept me entertained throughout the writing process.
5
Table of content
ABSTRACT ... 2
FOREWORD ... 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... 4
TABLE OF CONTENT ... 5
INTRODUCTION ... 9
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER ... 11
I Methodology ... 11
II Limitations ... 12
III Previous studies and further research... 13
IV Sweden and Belgium in numbers ... 14
CHAPTER 2: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW ... 16
I Agriculture ... 16
I.1 Swedish agricultural policy ... 16
I.2 Belgian agricultural policy ... 22
I.2.1 Post-war agricultural policy ... 22
I.2.2 Internationalisation of the market ... 24
I.2.3 The oil crises ... 27
I.2.4 Quality and variety ... 28
I.3 Agricultural innovations ... 29
I.3.1 Mechanisation ... 29
I.3.2 Introduction of IT ... 32
I.3.3 Plant refinement, fertilizers, pesticides and insecticides ... 33
I.3.4 Manure problems in Belgium ... 35
I.3.5 New crops due to internationalisation ... 36
I.3.6 Livestock diseases, hormones and food scares ... 36
I.4 Societal and economic changes... 39
I.4.1 Urbanisation and gardening ... 39
I.4.2 Economic structure ... 43
I.5 Ecological agriculture ... 44
II Processing ... 46
II.1 Product development ... 46
II.2 The rise of convenience food ... 47
II.3 Foreign influences ... 48
6
II.4 The influence of food recommendations ... 50
II.5 Packaging ... 51
III Distribution ... 52
III.1 The Dutch auction system ... 52
III.2 The rise of the supermarket ... 53
III.3 Logistics ... 56
IV Consumption ... 56
IV.1 Disappearing housewives ... 56
IV.2 Food prices and income ... 58
IV.2.1 Belgium ... 58
IV.2.2 Sweden ... 59
IV.3 Household appliances ... 60
IV.4 Food recommendations ... 63
IV.5 Media and lifestyle ... 65
IV.6 Consumer ethics ... 66
IV.7 Swedish food is safest ... 68
IV.8 Meal patterns ... 69
V Summary ... 71
CHAPTER 3: QUANTITATIVE CHANGES IN FOOD CONSUMPTION ... 75
I Statistics ... 75
I.1 Direct and total food consumption ... 75
I.2 Calculation method ... 76
I.3 Statistical limitations ... 77
II Quantitative analysis ... 78
II.1 General overview ... 78
II.2 Milk consumption ... 80
II.2.1 Milk consumption in Belgium ... 80
II.2.2 Milk consumption in Sweden ... 81
II.2.3 Comparison of milk consumption ... 83
II.3 Consumption of dairy products ... 84
II.3.1 Consumption of dairy products in Belgium ... 84
II.3.2 Consumption of dairy products in Sweden ... 85
II.3.3 Comparison of consumption of dairy products ... 86
II.4 Meat ... 87
II.4.1 Meat consumption in Belgium ... 87
II.4.2 Meat consumption in Sweden ... 90
7
II.4.3 Comparison of milk consumption ... 92
II.5 Fish ... 94
II.5.1 Consumption of fish in Belgium ... 94
II.5.2 Consumption of fish in Sweden ... 94
II.6 Eggs ... 95
II.6.1 Consumption of eggs in Belgium ... 95
II.6.2 Consumption of eggs in Sweden ... 97
II.6.3 Comparison of consumption of eggs ... 98
II.7 Fruit and vegetables ... 99
II.7.1 Fruit and vegetable consumption in Belgium ... 99
II.7.2 Fruit and vegetable consumption in Sweden ... 100
II.7.3 Comparison of fruit and vegetable consumption ... 102
II.8 Potatoes ... 103
II.8.1 Potato consumption in Belgium ... 103
II.8.2 Potato consumption in Sweden ... 104
II.8.3 Comparison of potato consumption ... 105
II.9 Cereals ... 105
II.9.1 Cereal consumption in Belgium ... 105
II.9.2 Cereal consumption in Sweden ... 106
II.9.3 Comparison of cereal consumption ... 108
II.10 Sugar ... 109
II.10.1 Sugar consumption in Belgium ... 109
II.10.2 Sugar consumption in Sweden ... 109
II.10.3 Comparison of sugar consumption ... 110
II.11 Margarine ... 110
II.11.1 Margarine consumption in Belgium ... 110
II.11.2 Margarine consumption in Sweden ... 111
II.12 Ice cream and chocolate... 111
II.12.1 Consumption of chocolate in Belgium ... 111
II.12.2 Consumption of ice cream and chocolate in Sweden ... 112
III Summary ... 112
CHAPTER 4: IMPLICATIONS OF DIETARY CHANGES FOR SUSTAINABILITY ... 115
I The data ... 116
I.1 Land requirements ... 116
I.2 Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions ... 117
II Greenhouse gas emissions ... 118
8
III Land requirements... 119
III.1 Belgium ... 121
III.2 Sweden ... 123
IV Energy use and emissions of greenhouse gases ... 126
IV.1 Belgium ... 128
IV.2 Sweden ... 131
V Summary ... 134
CONCLUSION ... 136
EPILOGUE: TOWARDS A MORE SUSTAINABLE DIET ... 138
REFERENCES ... 140
Agricultural journals ... 140
Bibliography ... 140
Internet sources ... 148
APPENDICES ... 150
Appendix 1: Interview questions ... 150
Appendix 2: List of interviewees ... 152
Appendix 3 List of illustrations, tables and graphs ... 154
9
Introduction
Vägen till hagen går genom magen.
Liefde gaat door de maag.
Food. It is both a necessity and a pleasure. It is a founding cultural value and an important medium for creating a sense of community between people.1 Food also structures the daily human life and creates certain routines.2 Marie Antoine Carême (1784-1833), who was one of the first haute cuisine chefs, even said: ‘If there is no more cooking in the world, there is no more literature, elevated and quick intelligence, inspiration, binding relationships, there is no more social unity.’3 Even though this might seem a little exaggerated, food is an essential part of life and is, at the same time, the main focus of this thesis.
Since the cultural turn in the social sciences in the 1980s, food has become interrelated with identity.4 Food consumption differs between social classes within societies as well as between nations.5 Entire countries are, for example, associated with certain food products.
This is no different for the two countries that are under consideration here: Sweden and Belgium. Sweden for example is known for its fermented herring (surströmming), its processed sour milk (filmjölk) or its meatballs with lingonberry jam (köttbullar med lingonsylt). Belgian food culture is usually associated with waffles, chocolate, beer and French fries.6 Certain nations are also considered to be bigger food lovers or ‘gourmands’
than others. In one publication it was mentioned that: ‘Only the French and Belgians would choose a restaurant for the sake of the food. We heard that they did not even mind to drive more than ten km to find a good restaurant.’7 Scholliers agrees by stating that: ‘Overall, Belgian consumers have gained a reputation for being demanding in terms of quality and freshness’.8
The association between countries and certain food products, however, does not imply that food consumption patterns remain the same over time. Changes in the food cultures of nations are ongoing processes, owing to better living standards and to the global exchange of cultural experience by travelling, education and information processes. 9 Food consumption patterns depend on several factors: personal preference, habit, availability, economy,
1 Burstedt, A., Fredriksson, C. & Jönsson, H., ‘Inledning’ in Mat, genealogi och gestaltning, A. Burstedt, C.
Fredriksson & H. Jönsson, eds., s.l., 2006, 7.
2 Burstedt et al., Mat, genealogi och gestaltning, 2006,, 18.
3 ‘Lorsqu’il n’y a plus de cuisine dans le monde, il n’y a plus de lettres, d’intelligence élevée et rapide, d’inspiration, de relations liantes, il n’y a plus d’unité sociale.’ Moulin, L. & Leonard, L., L’art de manger en Belgique: trente portraits, trente maisons, Antwerpen, 1979.
4 Scholliers, P., ‘Meals, food narratives, and sentiments of belonging in past and present’ in Food, drink and identity. Cooking, eating and drinking in Europe since the Middle Ages, P. Scholliers (ed.), Oxford, 2001, 7.
5 Carlsson-Kanyama, A. & Lindén, A.-L., ‘Trends in food production and consumption: Swedish experiences from environmental and cultural impacts’, International Journal of Sustainable Development, 4 (2001), no. 4, 293.
6 Scholliers, P., Food culture in Belgium (Food culture around the world), Westport, 2009, xii.
7 Odevall, P.-E., ‘I den svenska matkorgen 1940-2000’, Tidernas mat. På svenska bord 1970-2000 (Nordiska museets – Allt om mat), 2000, 31.
8 Scholliers, Food culture, 2009, 79.
9 Carlsson-Kanyama, A. & Lindén, A.-L., ‘Trends in food production and consumption’, 2001, 293.
10
convenience, ethnic heritage, tradition and other cultural and nutritional requirements.10 Certain periods of transition can be distinguished. Duquesne et al. for example state that, from the moment income restraints and food supply allow it, three distinct phases can be discerned in the food consumption patterns of developed countries. The first phase consists of a quantitative growth in the consumption of all food products until a certain level of calorie saturation is reached. Afterwards, a nutritional transition takes place: the consumption of basic food products diminishes while animal products, sugar, fruits and vegetables are increasingly consumed. This is followed by a stationary phase, in terms of food rations, which consists of a general differentiation of food.11
In the Western European countries, the level of calorie saturation, 3000 Kcal per person per day, was reached at the end of the 19th or the beginning of the 20th century. The nutritional transition has taken place mainly throughout the first part of the 20th century while the latter half of the 20th century has seen important changes when it comes to the food products that were consumed.12 For example, there is no more standard Belgian or Swedish diet these days;
the average diet is much more diversified than before. Consumers do not choose food products any longer, but rather food models in which certain products are valued and others marginalised.13
The changes in food consumption patterns during the latter half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century will be the main focus of this dissertation. The central question is: how did food consumption in Sweden and Belgium evolve during the second half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century and what implications do these changes have for food sustainability? The aim of this research is to map changes in food consumption patterns in Sweden and Belgium during the latter half of the 20th and the early 21st century both from a qualitative and quantitative perspective and analyse the consequences of these changes from a sustainability point of view.
In order to fully understand how these dietary changes came into being, a historical background is provided in chapter two. An overview of societal changes and changes in agricultural practices is provided as a framework for the changes that have occured in the food consumption pattern. The focus in this chapter will be on the different stages food goes through: agricultural production, processing, distribution and consumption.
The third chapter consists of an analysis of the data of food consumption in both countries. The focus will be on the nutritional changes in Sweden and Belgium during the second half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century. First, a general overview is provided, after which the different food groups, such as dairy products, meat or cereal, are discussed in more detail.
The fourth chapter focuses on the impact of these changes from a sustainability point of view. Three parameters have been selected to assess this impact: land requirement, energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. In this chapter, the data series for the food consumption in the years 1960 and 2004 were used for further calculations.
Before moving on to the historical background, the methodology used in this dissertation will be discussed in the first chapter, along with a short introduction to both countries.
10 Gerbens-Leenes, P.W., Nonhebel, S. & Ivens, W.P.M.F., ‘A method to determine land requirements relating to food consumption patterns’, Agriculture, ecosystems and environment, 90 (2002), 48.
11 Duquesne, B., Matendo, S. & Lebailly, P., Evolution de la consommation alimentaire en Belgique et en Région wallonne, Conference paper ‘Des aliments sains et naturels dans l’assiette des jeunes, une utopie’, Gembloux, May 17, 2006, 1-2.
12 Ibidem.
13 Duquesne, B., Hypermoderne, le mangeur belge?, Conference paper ‘Révolutions dans les assiettes’, Gembloux Agricultural University, Gembloux, February 3, 2010, 9.
11
Chapter one
Introductory chapter
In this chapter, the methodologies used for this research are presented, along with the limitations, previous studies and suggestions for further research. In the last section, a short introduction to both countries is provided, including their geographical location and population.
I Methodology
The study consists of a literature review, a comparison of statistical data and several primary sources. The literature consists of publications in French, Dutch, Swedish and English. The statistical data stem from two publications: a report about the food consumption between 1960 and 2006 by the Swedish Board of Agriculture and a conference paper about the evolution in food consumption in Belgium between 1955 and 2004 by Duquesne et al.14 For the sustainability analysis two publications were very valuable: an article by Gerbens-Leenes and Nonhebel entitled ‘Consumption patterns and their effects on land required for food’ and an article by Wallén, Brandt and Wennersten entitled 'Does the Swedish consumer's choice of food influence greenhouse gas emissions?’.15
Several primary sources have been used as well. Semi-structured interviews in both countries have been conducted. The interviewees were selected by means of chunk sampling.
In both countries five interviews were conducted, two with farmers and three with non- farmers. Different abbreviations were used to indicate the interviewees: BI stands for Belgian Interviewee, SI for Swedish Interviewee, BF stands for Belgian Farmer(s) and SF for Swedish Farmers(s). The full list of participants can be found in Appendix 2 along with a short biography of each interviewee. The youngest interviewee was born in 1958, while the oldest was born in 1917. The interviews were conducted in Flemish or Swedish. Extracts from the interviews are used in an illustrative way for the changes in agricultural practices, society and food consumption patterns.
Two agricultural newspapers have also been selected. All issues of the weekly Belgian newspaper ‘Landbouwleven’ (Farming Life) and of the Swedish magazine ‘Lantmannen’
(Man of the Land) between 1955 and 2004 have been consulted. ‘Landbouwleven’ is the best known agricultural newspaper in Flanders and is published by Landelijke uitgeverijen or Rural Publishers. ‘Lantmannen’ is the newspaper of the Lantbrukornas Riksförbund or the National Farmers’ Association in Sweden. Much like the interviews, extracts from articles are used as illustrations in Chapter two. Originally, a new issue of Lantmannen appeared every
14 Jordbruksverket, Livsmedelskonsumtionen 1960-2006 (Statistik från jordbruksverket, statistikrapport 2009:2), Stockholm, 2009; Duquesne, B., Matendo, S. & Lebailly, P., Evolution de la consommation alimentaire en Belgique et en Région wallonne (Evolution of the alimentary consumption in Belgium and in the Walloon region), Conference paper ‘Des aliments sains et naturels dans l’assiette des jeunes, une utopie’, Gembloux, May 17, 2006.
15 Gerbens-Leenes, P.W. & Nonhebel, S., 'Consumption patterns and their effects on land required for food', Ecological economics, 42 (2002), 185-199. Wallén, A., Brandt, N. & Wennersten, R., 'Does the Swedish consumer's choice of food influence greenhouse gas emissions?', Environmental Science & Policy, 7 (2004), 525-535.
12
week, while from 1965 onwards, ‘Lantmannen’ appeared only every two weeks. In 1993
‘Lantmannen’ became a monthly magazine.
It needs to be noted that throughout this paper the continental notation of decimal numbers will be used, i.e. 7,5 instead of 7.5 for example. Similarly, large numbers such as hundred thousand will be written as 100.000 instead of 100,000.
II Limitations
First of all the study is limited to approximately the last fifty years. Geographically seen, the limits were set to include Sweden and Belgium. Both countries have approximately a similar population size and are now both well-developed countries after having been subject to the same macro-level changes after the austerity of the Second World War and its immediate aftermath. Their location within Europe, however, and their climate as well, are different which might result in interesting dietary differences. Sweden also is a much bigger country than Belgium and has by consequence a much lower population density. Because of these similarities and differences, it will be interesting to see how the inhabitants in these countries now feed themselves and if their inhabitants eat more or less similar foods.
Statistical information always has certain limitations. These will however be discussed in more detail in Chapter Three since the limitations are relevant for the interpretation of the information that is offered in that chapter. The influence of the price level on the changes in food consumption will be largely omitted and will only be mentioned sporadically in the second chapter. Food consumption is also related to the age and education level of the consumers and can even differ regionally.16 Older people in Sweden, for example, eat more potatoes, root vegetables and edible offal, while younger people eat more pasta, rice, pizza, nuts and candy. Swedish people with lower education eat less fruit and vegetables than people with high education.17 Similar trends exist in Belgium.18 These distinctions, however, will be disregarded since it would make the scope of the study too extensive. It was also not possible to take all food products into account that constitute Belgian and Swedish diets in their entirety due to a lack of data. The consumption of vegetable oils and beverages, for example, will not been discussed.
In the Chapter Four, which consists of the sustainability analysis, there were also limitations when applying the conversion data for energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and land requirements on the data series of food consumption in 1960 and 2004. The conversion factors for several food products and the different food categories used in the statistical data about food consumption were sometimes not compatible. Other limitations are discussed in more detail in Chapter Four.
Food is also not only related to the environment; there are a lot of socio-economic issues involved as well. The rise in the level of obesity, for example, which can be directly related to food intake, entails serious health risks. Such implications of the quantitative changes in yearly food consumption, however, have been omitted from this thesis.
16 Julin, E. & Olszon, E., ‘Samhälle och livsstil styr våra matvanor’ in Mat och miljön. Råvaror, resurser, recept, L. Lundgren (red.), Naturskyddsföreningens årsbok, Stockholm, 1996, 76; Elg, U., Johansson, U., Tollin, K. &
Wikström, S., Matens metamorfos. En studie av matkonsumtionens förändring under 1960, 70- och 80-talen, Stockholm, 1987, 14.
17 Mat och hälsa. Faktabok från livsmedelsverket, Livsmedelsverket, Ödeshög, 2007, 33.
18 Duquesne, Hypermoderne, le mangeur belge?, 2010, 10.
13
III Previous studies and further research
Food consumption in the latter half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century is still relatively unexplored, especially in comparative terms between two European countries of similar population size. Only in the last few years have a few studies been published and data made more generally available. On the other hand, quite a few detailed studies were made about the environmental impact of food consumption for Sweden.19 No Belgian counterparts, however, are available.
When it comes to further research, it would be interesting to include a Southern- European country in the comparison so that more comprehensive information could be provided about the relation between geographical location and differences in food culture and consumption. Not only could the geographical focus be expanded, but also the temporal focus. It would be even more interesting to assess the changes in food consumption patterns over the entire 20th century for example.
As mentioned above, specific studies have been conducted that include Life Cycle Assessments for specific food products that are available in Swedish stores. It would be very interesting to conduct the same kind of study for Belgium – or any other country for that matter - since production systems differ between countries. This could lead to a better assessment of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions or land requirements related to food.
More specific information about the conditions of the production systems and yields in the middle of the 20th century would also be welcome since this would enhance the accuracy of sustainability assessments over time.
The inclusion of more parameters in the sustainability assessment would also have added more value. The more parameters are included, the more complete the impacts of food consumption can be assessed. Calculating changes in the use of water, for example, would have been very interesting as well.
19 Carlsson-Kanyama, A., Ekström, M.P. & Shanahan, H., ‘Food and life cycle energy inputs: consequences of diet and ways to increase efficiency’, Ecolgical Economics, 44 (2003), 393-307. This article includes the energy input for the production, distribution and consumption of about 150 food items that are available in Swedish stores. Carlsson-Kanyama., A., ‘Climate change and dietary choices – how can emissions of greenhouse gases from food consumption be reduced? ‘, Food Policy, 23 (1998), 277-293. This article presents findings about the greenhouse gas emissions and energy use related to the production and transportation of carrots, tomatoes, potatoes, pork, rice and dry peas consumed in Sweden. Carlsson-Kanyama, A., ‘Food consumption patterns and their influence on climate change. Greenhouse gas emissions in the life-cycle of tomatoes and carrots consumed in Sweden’, Ambio, 27 (1998), 528-534. This article presents greenhouse gas emissions related to the production and transportation of carrots and tomatoes as consumed in Sweden. Carlsson, A., Swedish food consumption and the environment, a trend analysis during the period of consumerism (IMES/EESS report no. 19), Lund, 1995.
This article examines changes in Swedish food consumption by assessing the changes in five parameters: the consumption of animal products, processed food, low-calorie food, locally produced food and ecologically produced food. Johansson, S., The Swedish foodprint. An agroecological study of food consumption, Doctoral dissertation Uppsala University, Uppsala, 2005. In this study, the entire Swedish foodprint is calculated.
14
IV Sweden and Belgium in numbers
Illustration 1: Map of Europe20
As can be seen on the map above, the geographical location of both countries is quite different. Sweden is situated in Northern Europe bordering Norway and Finland. Belgium, on the other hand, is situated in the middle of Europe and has France, Luxemburg, Germany and the Netherlands as its neighbouring countries. The difference in geographical location also results in climatic differences. The average temperature in Belgium is 9,7 degrees Celsius.21 In Sweden, the average temperature differs significantly between the North and the South of the country due to its large latitudinal stretch. Farthest North the average temperature is minus
20 Map of Europe (copyright free), http://www.world-maps.co.uk/continent-map-of-europe.htm, last accessed April 10, 2011.
21 Average temperature in Belgium, Koninklijk Meteorologisch Instituut,
http://www.kmi.be/meteo/view/nl/4223602-2009.html, last accessed April 10, 2011.
15
three degrees Celsius, while in the South it is seven degrees Celsius.22 The agricultural land in Sweden is by consequence concentrated in the South of the country.
The total surface of Belgium is 30.528 km2, excluding the sea area, while Sweden has a total surface of 450.295 km2.23 Around 1960 the population in Sweden was about 7,5 million while nowadays there are almost 9,5 million Swedes.24 In Belgium, the population was about 9.190.000 in 1960 while by 2007 this number has increased to 10.584.534.25 The population density in Belgium thus increased from 301 persons per km2 in 1960 to 346 in 2007, while in Sweden it increased from 17 persons km2 in 1960 to 21 persons per km2 in 2006.
22 Average temperature in Sweden, Sveriges meteorologiska och hydrologiska institut, http://www.smhi.se/klimatdata/meteorologi/temperatur/1.3973, last accessed April 10, 2011.
23 Geographical statistics, Nationaal Instituut voor de Statistiek, http://statbel.fgov.be, last accessed April 10, 2011; Geopgraphical statistics, Statistiska Centralbyrån, www.scb.se, last accessed April 11, 2011.
24 Hedenborg, S., Kvarnström, L., Det svenska samhället 1720-2000. Böndernas och arbetarnas tid., s.l., 2006, 247; Population statistics, Statistiska Centralbyrån, www.scb.se, last accessed February 21, 2011.
25 Population statistics, Nationaal Instituut voor de Statistiek, http://www.statbel.fgov.be, last accessed April 10, 2011.
16
Chapter two
Historical overview
Now that the methodology has been described in the previous chapter and that both countries are shortly introduced, it is time to plunge back in time and take a closer look at what has changed. The aim of this second chapter is to offer a broader perspective on the changes in Belgian and Swedish society and economy that have influenced the way in which we produce, process, distribute and consume food after the Second World War. This broad perspective follows the different stages food goes through before it lands on our plates. The chapter will thus treat agriculture, food processing and refining, distribution and consumption. Most aspects will be discussed for both countries simultaneously although some sections, the agricultural policy section for example, focus on each country separately. The interviews that were conducted and the farming newspapers that were consulted will be used as illustrative material. At the end of this chapter a timeline has been included to provide a visual overview of the changes as they occurred in both countries.
I Agriculture
The structure of the Belgian agriculture has not changed considerably between 1950 and 2000. The most important sector is the livestock sector which in 2000 represented about 60 percent of the total production of the Belgian agriculture. The second largest sector in 2000 was horticulture with 25 percent. Arable farming represented the other 15 percent.26 Other aspects of the Belgian agriculture, however, have undergone considerable changes as will be explained below.
Milk production represents about 20 percent of the total value produced by Swedish agriculture. Poultry and pig rearing are also big sectors within Swedish agriculture. The production of cereals and ley (grassland) are important crops as well. Wheat, oil seeds and sugar beets are grown in the South while barley and oats are important crops in the North.27
I.1 SWEDISH AGRICULTURAL POLICY
During the period under examination, agriculture has undergone considerable changes.
During the latter half of the twentieth century, Swedish agriculture changed from a mixed agriculture, which entailed, for example, both the breeding of several kinds of livestock and cultivation of crops to a specialised, mechanised and chemical-based agriculture.28
26 Segers, Y. & Van Molle, L., Leven van het land: boeren in België 1750-2000, Leuven, 2004, 117.
27 Sveriges jordbruk i siffror, Jordbruksverket,
http://www.sjv.se/omjordbruksverket/dusomarkonsument/sverigesjordbrukisiffror.4.4ef62786124a59a20bf80007 6016.html, last accessed March 20, 2011.
28 Flygare, I. A. & Isacson, M., Det svenska jordbrukets historia. Jordbruket i välfärdssamhället 1945-2000, Örebro, 2003, 107; 75; 22.
17
World War II served as a watershed which stimulated agricultural development.29 Even though Sweden was neutral during the war, everyday life in Sweden was affected by the conflict elsewhere. Rationing on imported and domestic products such as coffee, tea, sugar, flour, bread, meat, offal, butter, fish and potatoes was introduced.30 Interviewee SI 2 clearly remembered the rationing system during World War II:
‘During the war there were a lot of things that we didn’t get. There were ration cards and everything, so you couldn’t eat normal food during the war. You mostly ate what you could get. […] We maybe got meat twice a week, the rest of the time you ate what you could gather. Those cards only allowed certain amounts. [...] When I was home over the summer [in Luleå], people catched a lot of herring since that was not on the ration cards. There were several products that could not be found anymore. […] We had bread coupons and coffee was rationed as well. [...] Even shoes and clothes were on the ration cards. […] My mom could still remember the situation during the First World War and she told me that people almost perished back then. They didn’t get enough milk for all children. I was born exactly when the ration cards were introduced [in 1917]. My parents got a card for me too, and that was good because then they had more food. […] It was worse then; during the Second World War, you could at least feed yourself with the things that could be found. Not that the meals were always good, but you could always fill out your meal so that you didn’t get hungry.’
As a consequence, after the war, one of the main goals of the Swedish agricultural policy was to stimulate production. Swedish food supplies had to be guaranteed.31 Therefore, quantity was considered more important than quality; there was a movement towards greater volumes and units within agriculture. Rationalization of farms was the means to achieve the second goal: the efficiency goal. Smaller farms were to shut down or merge with others in order to form bigger farms of at least ten to twenty hectares. However, the tradition of family farms remained strong in Sweden.32 Interviewee SF 2 commented on this rationalisation process:
‘The biggest difference for me is that agriculture has lost part of its charm. When I started as a farmer [in 1962], it was family agriculture. We did a lot by hand and we had a lot of physical labour. We were more than one person on the farm; we had family members or some employees. We did not have a big farm either; it was only forty, fifty hectares. Agriculture has undergone an urbanisation process; everything has to be so big: you have to have a lot of acreage, big machines and one person has to do everything himself.’
At the same time, state-influence over Swedish agriculture increased. The state kept the prices for agricultural products high in order to ensure a sufficient income for the agricultural sector, which formed the third goal.33 The main tools to achieve these goals were price regulations, import tariffs and export incentives. This also meant an increase in bureaucratic work for the farmers. Swedish state intervention had arrived.
29 Perlinge, A., Bondeminnen. Människan och tekniken i jordbruket under 1900-talet, Borås, 1995, 15.
30 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 301.
31 Rydén, R., Medvindens tid. Ekologiska lantbrukarna och jordbrukspolitiken 1985-2000, (Ekologiskt lantbruk 36), 2003, 8.
32 Perlinge, Bondeminnen, 1995, 320.
33 Ibidem, 23.
18
The increasing specialisation led to the decoupling of crop production from animal production, which created an increase in the amount of animal food that had to be purchased.34 In general, Swedish farms started to sell almost all their products while they bought domestic and foreign means of production such as animal food, seeds, fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides and machinery.35 This higher dependency on external resources increased the vulnerability of the sector.36 As a consequence farms having both cattle and growing crops began to diminish because of these specialisation policies.37 Between the early 1950s and the late 1980s, the percentage of farms with cattle diminished from 90 percent to 20 percent.38 Some farmers clearly regretted this development. An article in Lantmannen commented that ‘a farm without animals is a soulless farm’.39 A parallel development was that certain activities that previously had been done on the farms themselves were transferred to the food industry - such as slaughtering or the processing of milk into dairy products.40
In 1967, the Swedish government introduced more measures to guide the agricultural sector towards more efficiency, specialisation, intensification and growth.41 The income objective became less important.42 Not all farmers were happy with the changes; Lantmannen regularly commented on the agricultural rationalisation from the early 1960s onwards.43 The policy also aimed at extricating resources from agriculture in favour of other economic objectives.44 For some farmers this meant shutting down their farms - creating a feeling of marginalisation within society. This led to a number of farmer demonstrations at the beginning of the 1970s.45 In 1971, for example, 200.000 Swedish farmers gathered in Jönköping to protest. According to Lantmannen, the situation of the farmers was untenable, Swedish agriculture had come to a standstill because of rationalisation. The rationalisation policies for acreage were considered a threat by small farmers.46 Several years later, in 1979, however, Lantmannen commented that the rationalisation between 1974 and 1978 had been economically fruitful but that it would be hard to continue the same trend since before, the goal of rationalisation had been mainly obtained by replacing man with machines.47
34 Saifi B. & Drake, L., ‘Swedish agriculture during the twentieth century in relation to sustainability’, Ecological economics, 2008 (68), no. 3, 376.
35 Steen, E., ‘Från bondejordbruk till marknadsjordbruk, 1900-2000. Hundra år av produktionsteknisk utveckling i svenskt jordbruk’ in Bruka, odla, hävda: odlingssystem och uthålligt jordbruk under 400 år (Skogs- och lantbrukshistoriska meddelanden 33), U. Jansson & E. Mårald (eds.), Stockholm, 2005, 94-95.
36 Saifi, B., The sustainability of Swedish agriculture in a coevolutionary perspective (Agraria 469), Doctoral dissertation, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, 2004, 93.
37 Westman, A., Då gräs och gröda gror, en översikt av jordbrukets utveckling i Sverige, Vingåker, 1998, 98.
38 Saifi, The sustainability of Swedish agriculture, 2004, 88.
39 ‘En gård utan djur är en gård utan själ’, Lantmannen, 41 (1957), no. 13, 283.
40 Perlinge, Bondeminnen, 1995, 323.
41 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 228-244.
42 Perlinge, Bondeminnen, 1995, 322.
43 ’Jordbruksrationalisering och skatter’, Lantmannen, 74 (1963), no. 4, 67; ’Mera pengar till rationalisering’, Lantmannen, 74 (1963), no. 14, 343; ’Ökad stimulans till rationalisering’, Lantmannen, 74 (1963), no. 15, 403;
’Rationalisering som gav vinst’, Lantmannen, 74 (1963), no. 16, 476; ’Storleksrationalisering – en av vägarna till bättre effektivitet’, 74 (1963), no. 22, 555; ’Kan svenskt jordbruk bli effektivare’, 74 (1963), no. 37, 734;
’Jordbruksministern satsar på rationalsering och forskning’, Lantmannen, 76 (1965), no. 2, 3; ’Vi behöver ett rationaliseringsvänligt klimat’, Lantmannen, 76 (1965), 3; ’Rationalisering med förhinder’, Lantmannen, 81 (1970), no. 6, 5; ’Rationalisering och krediter’, Lantmannen, 81 (1970), no. 14, 5.
44 Andersson, Å., ‘Lantbruket och lantbruksstyrelsen åren 1890-1990’ in Statens jordbrukspolitik under 200 år (Skrifter om skogs- och lantbrukshistoria), J. Myrdal (ed.), 1996, 71.
45 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 228-244.
46 ’Bondedemonstrationer’, Lantmannen, 82 (1971), no. 6, 5; ’Vi måste ur dödläget’, Lantmannen, 82 (1971), no.
5, 5; ’Jordbrukets väg till välfärden’, Lantmannen, 82 (1971), no. 14, 10.
47 ’Rationalisering till döds’, Lantmannen, 100 (1979), no. 6, 4
19
During the same period of time, problems of overproduction started to arise. Already in 1958 an article in Lantmannen discussed different remedies for overproduction: eating more butter, cheese, meat and eggs, or plant more forest.48 Another article stated that Swedish farmers should be prepared for impeding problems of overproduction.49 In 1967, concerns about overproduction rose once again. The number of milk cows had to diminish and discussions were published about whether or not overproduction was really harmful.50
At the end of the 1960s and early 1970s food prices were also very high.51 The quick increase in food prices was hard on some Swedish families and some people decided to demonstrate. Housewives from Skärholm, for example, decided to boycott milk in 1972.52 As a consequence the Swedish government introduced food subsidies in 1973 since they were deemed advantageous for both the farmers and the consumers. By the middle of the 1970s, agricultural policies focussed on the farmers themselves. Their income was once again the key issue. 53
During the 1970s and 1980s environmental care and nutritional quality were new themes. Reduction of pollution, prudent use of non-renewable resources, the protection of agro-ecological systems and humane treatment of animals were all placed on the political agenda.54 In the early 1960s and 1970s, a number of articles appeared in Lantmannen that called for more research concerning the effects of the chemicals.55 During the late 1970s and 1980s, the main reasoning in several articles was that diminishing the use of chemicals in agriculture was acceptable provided that the efficiency level stayed the same for the farmers.56
Despite food subsidies, food prices increased considerably again towards the end of the 1970s because of inflation induced by decreased industrial productivity and the expansion of the public sector which caused budgetary deficits. This led to decreasing consumption while production kept increasing. When asked about overproduction problems, interviewee SF 2 commented:
‘During the 1970s we had overproduction. Mostly of milk and butter. [...] Then Bregott [a margarine-like product that is a blend between animal and vegetable oil]
came along, so they added margarine to butter in order to make it malleable, because if you put butter in the fridge it gets hard.’
Apart from the development of new products, the government tried to alleviate the situation by exporting the surplus in cereal production and selling it at a low price on the
48 Carlsson, C.-E., ’Botemedel mot överproduktion. Ska vi plantera skok eller äta mer smör, ost, kött och ägg?, Lantmannen, 41 (1958), no. 18, 387.
49 ’Beredskap – överskott – konsumtion – livsviktiga problem för vårt jordbruk’, Lantmannen, 74 (1963), no. 10, 216; ’Kan vi klara en överproduktion’, Lantmannen, 74 (1963), no. 44, 869.
50 ’Mjölkkornas antal måste minska’, Lantmannen, 78 (1967), no. 7, 7; ’Det finns inga skadliga överskott’, Lantmannen, 78 (1967), no. 10, 7; ’Bryr vi oss om fläskberget?’, Lantmannen, 78 (1967), no. 25, 5.
51 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 241.
52 Odevall, ‘I den svenska matkorgen’, 2000, 18.
53 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 228-244.
54 Saifi, The sustainability of Swedish agriculture, 2004, 105; Domeij, Å., ’Vägar till framtidens jordbruk’, Aktuellt från lantbruksuniversitetet, 1995, issue 432, 5.
55 ’Bekämpningsmedel måste prövas objektivt’, Lantmannen, 75 (1964), no. 9, 215; ’Forskningen rörande ogräsbekämpning måste få ökade rsurser’, Lantmannen, 75 (1964), n. 7, 167; ’Nyansera giftdebatten’, Lantmannen, 82 (1971), no. 2, 5; ’Kan vi garandera giftfria livsmedel?’, Lantmannen, 83 (1972), no. 2, 5;
’Giftfria livsmedel’, Lantmannen, 85 (1974), no. 6, 8.
56 ’Vi måste ha kemisk bekämpning’, Lantmannen, 89 (1987), no. 11-12, 4; ’Kemiska tillsatser i valfläsket’, Lantmannen, 89 (1978), no. 16, 4. ’Gifter i jordbruket? Ingens fel – men allas ansvar’, Lantmannen, 103 (1982), no. 5, 4; ’Gärna kemikaliefritt men inte utan ersättning’, Lantmannen, 105 (1984), no.7, 4; ’Mål i mun’,
Lantmannen, 108 (1987), no. 4, 3; ’Bud om vår’, Lantmannen, 108 (1987), no. 6, 3.
20
world market and by pressing farmers to reduce their production. This led to a new wave of demonstrations at the beginning of the 1980s.57
Food subsidies were abolished in 1983 except for milk. Meat and cereal consumption decreased and the government still had to deal with surpluses. People talked about butter- and meat-mountains and milk seas.58 ‘Omställning 90’ (or ‘Readjustment 90’) was proposed as a solution for the surplus in cereal production. The goal was to stimulate alternative usages of acreage such as forestation or the cultivation of energy crops and other niche crops by offering financial compensation.59 Omställning ’90 and the considerable decrease in acreage did not leave farmers untouched. An article in Lantmannen commented: ’Finally people start to see what happens to the acreage and the landscape. Perfect acres are forested.’, while another journalist wrote: ’Expected by free-trade economists, feared by farmers. 500.000 hectares of acreage have to get a new purpose within a year or should be converted into forest.
The question is how and to what it should be changed.’60
However, the debate about a more liberal agricultural policy was not quelled. The debate about deregulation was lively in the 1980s as several articles in Lantmannen and Bolin et al.’s publication in 1986 illustrate.61 Common concerns about deregulation were that many farms would be driven out of business, that the price levels would fluctuate sharply and would not cover the real production costs any longer and that it would lead to negative environmental effects.62
In 1990 the Swedish government decided to deregulate and increasingly adjust agriculture to the world market. This was believed to be a good method for reducing agricultural surpluses.63 Price interventions and the income goal were abolished and quality became a more important goal than quantity. Health and environmental concerns were prioritised. However, deregulation created new problems and, by comparison, EU membership seemed a more stable option for many.64 An article in Lantmannen described the EU policies as completely opposite to the Swedish deregulation policy of the early 1990s:
’The new European agricultural policy, the MacSharry plan, includes low product prices and income support, which will give the farmers a good income but at the same time it will diminish the intensity of agriculture and the surpluses. The European Union wants to favour small-scale agriculture, which is in clear contrast with the Swedish deregulation policy.’65 For Swedish farmers, deregulation meant dire times. Interviewee SF 1 recalls:
‘The whole 1990s were a crisis. Yes, the 1980s, when I started, those were good years with no big problems. During the 1990s, the whole of the Swedish agricultural sector was basically disintegrating. There was a lot of acreage that was not cultivated anymore. [...] We were adjusting to the world market for a while, before we became a member of the EU in 1994. We were then on the level of the world market. [...]
Agriculture was outside the whole support system. Now we are in the European Union, which has both positive and negative sides.’
57 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 244-248.
58 Lycksell, S., En jordnära historia. Om bonder i efterkrigstidens Sverige, Stockholm, 1995, 71.
59 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 248-250; Rydén, Medvindens tid, 2003,9.
60 ’En omedelbar omställning’, Lantmannen, 111 (1990), no. 9, 3; ’Stryk kravet på varaktighet i omställningen’, Lantmannen, 112 (1991), no. 10, 3
61 ’Avreglera låter bra’, Lantmannen, 105 (1984), no. 14, 3; ’Konsekvens i galenskapen?’, Lantmannen, 104 (1983), no. 22, 4.
62 Bolin, O., Meyerson, P.-M. & Ståhl, I., The political economy of the food sector. The case of Sweden, Kristianstad, 1986, 121-125.
63 Westman, Då gräs och gröda gror, 1998, 99-100.
64 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 254-255.
65 ’Med EG i framtiden’, Lantmannen, 112 (1991), no. 22, 3.
21
When Sweden entered the European Union in 1995, deregulation came to an end and the Swedish agricultural policy was adjusted according to decisions made by the EU.66 The implications for the food market were that food from all over Europe could be sold, distributed and purchased in every member state without legislative borders.67 The issue of a Swedish EU membership was often discussed in Lantmannen. In 1958, for example, the author of one article introduced his readers to the workings of the EEC and regularly, articles debated the respective advantages and disadvantages of a possible membership.68 Alternatives to the EU were also considered; in 1968 there was a discussion about whether or not a common Scandinavian market should be created.69 Farmers had different opinions about whether or not Sweden should become a member. Initially Lantbrukarnas Riksförbund (National Farmers’ Association) was for the EU membership while the Ekologiska Lantbrukarna i Sverige (Swedish Ecological Farmers’ Association) was against.70 In 1993, an article in Lantmannen stated: ’Sweden thus has a good chance to become a member in the EU (if you see the EU as something positive that is). A lot of people are against a membership in the EU, but others look forward to the membership because the agricultural policies of the EU seem more farmer-friendly.’71
The goals established in the CAP or Common Agricultural Policy resembled the Swedish ones before the deregulation initiative: raise productivity, ensure a good living standard for farmers, food security and reasonable food prices.72 This included certain price guarantees and protection from the lower world price by import levies.73 When asked whether he preferred Swedish agriculture before or after the membership in the European Union, interviewee SF 1 stated:
‘Ideologically, I prefer the situation as it was before [before Sweden became member of the EU]. I don’t like it that much, you can see it often that a lot of support goes to a lot of production processes, but then the productions do not adapt to the market. [...]
The market reacts quicker than the EU system, it adapts... but, economically, you have an important income from the EU. Not that the percentage is that high, maybe 20 percent or something like that, 15 or 20. For milk production, we get subsidies for the quota we have and they are highest for the acreage.’
When asked if there are other consequences of the entry of Sweden to the EU interviewees SF 1 said the following:
‘[Wife] It is really hard to say. We do have more paperwork now, but maybe we would have had that anyway.’
66 Rydén, Medvindens tid, 2003,3.
67 Jansson, S., ‘Mental borders on the European open market? A case study of Sweden and their notions of Swedish and imported foods’, Europeans. Essays on culture and identity, Å. Daun & S. Jansson, s.l., 1999, 127.
68 ’Föreningsrörlesen inför EEC’, Lantmannen, 73 (1962), no. 21, 594; ’Svensk fläskproduktion inom eller utom EEC’, Lantmannen, 79 (1968), no. 5, 5; ’Löser EEC-anslutning överskottsproblemen?’, Lantmannen, 82 (1971), no. 17, 5; ’Efter EEC-avtalen’, Lantmannen, 83 (1972), no. 14, 5; Swedborg, E., ’Europamarknaden och jordbrukskrisen’, Lantmannen, 42 (1958), no. 34, 711.
69 ’Varför inte en nordisk jordbruksmarknad’, Lantmannen, 79 (1968), no. 9, 5.
70 Rydén, R., Medvindens tid, 2003, 20; Lycksell, En jordnära historia, 1995, 48.
71 ’Efter jordbruksreformen’, Lantmannen, 114 (1993), no. 10, 3.
72 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 255.
73 Rydén, Medvindens tid, 2003,19.
22
The shutdown of farms has nevertheless continued but the majority of the farmers in 2000 claimed to want Sweden to remain member of the EU.74 Nevertheless, the high level of agricultural subsidies within the EU is not uncontested as several articles in Lantmannen illustrate. One article read: ’The way forward for farmers is to find ways to find profitability even without several forms of support.’75 However, the part of the European budget that goes to agriculture has diminished considerably.76 The GATT or the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade did not go without criticism either. The author of one article stated: ‘GATT makes the rich richer and the poor poorer’.77
I.2 BELGIAN AGRICULTURAL POLICY
Agriculture within the initial member-states of the European Economic Community, one of which was Belgium, went through a number distinct phases. The period between 1940 and 1957 was a period of scarcity. The regular food market was interrupted by the Second World War. The period between 1957 and 1984 was characterised by growing affluence due to the unification of the market. Between 1984 and 2007, after the introduction of agricultural reforms, the focus on quality and variety was increased. Since 2007 sustainability and innovation have become the most important guiding concepts.78
I.2.1 POST-WAR AGRICULTURAL POLICY
In Belgium food production and provisioning were heavily affected by the war and had led to the implementation of food rationing systems. Immediately after the war there was, in particular, a shortage of fertilizer and cattle fodder. One of the interviewees, BF2, mentioned:
‘At some point during the war we had thrown herring in the cess pool since we could not get any fertilisers. [...] My sister and I still had to pump it manually but it did not go smoothly because of all the fish in the cesspool. [laughs] I do not know where those fish came from, but they must have been cheap. [...] Did you know that we also had two or three sheep in the meadow at that time? We had to collect their dung and throw it in the cess pool as well. Those were meagre times for the farmers during the war, if you cannot buy the things you need.’
She and her family had presumably bought their herring in 1943 since there had been a
‘miraculous catch of herring’ during that year. However, as the war had left a lot of farmers financially well off, investments could be made.79 As a consequence, food provisioning recovered quite quickly after the war and in 1948 the rationing system was dissolved. By
74 Flygare & Isacson, Det svenska jordbrukets historia, 2003, 256-257.
75 ’Lär dig leva utan stöd’, Lantmannen, 125 (2004), no. 9, 3; ’Svårt att bli fri från stöd’, Lantmannen, 126 (2005), no. 7, 3.
76 Segers & Van Molle, Leven van het land, 2004,115.
77 ’GATT gör rika rikare och fattiga fattigare’, Lantmannen, 115 (1994), no. 1, 3.
78 Bisschop, C. & Segers, Y., Supermarkt Europa magazine: 50 jaar landbouw en voeding. Gids van de tentoonstelling, s.l., 2008, 1-8.
79 Van Molle, L., 100 jaar ministerie van landbouw. Het Belgisch landbouwbeleid in de wisselwerking tussen economische en sociale toestanden, politiek en administratie 1884-1984 (Historica Loveniensa 173), Leuven, 1984, 65.
23
1955 the food provisioning had again reached a satisfactory level.80 Agricultural production advanced once again and by 1960 reconstruction was complete.81
Some parallels can be drawn between the post-war agricultural policies of the two countries. As in Sweden, one of the most important goals of the post-war agricultural policy was a striving towards adequate living standards for farmers. Another goal was to protect the domestic market and ensure a certain price level for agricultural produce. The autarchy principle was influential in both countries.82 This implied, certainly in Belgium with its rather limited acreage compared to Sweden, intensive agriculture. Modernisation and rationalisation of farms, research and education together with price interventions and subsidies were aimed at increasing the agricultural production.83
During the 1950s, Belgian farmers started to focus more on livestock. As an illustration, by 1960, the number of pigs had tripled compared to immediately after the war and between 1945 and 2000 the chicken production increased tenfold.84 Both farmers’ families that were interviewed focussed increasingly on livestock after the 1950s while before they had mixed farms that were almost entirely self-sufficient. With the increasing specialisation, they had to rely more upon external companies for resources such as cattle feed or fertilizers. In the horticultural sector, the heated glass greenhouses were the biggest sign of specialisation during the 1950s.85 Interviewees BF 1 commented on this change:
‘A farmer in the neighbourhood had a small farm. [...] His sons had attended the school for horticulture and they were not afraid of taking risks. I remember when they built their first glass greenhouse for 200.000 Belgian franks. [...] Other farmers said that the children of that farmer would financially ruin him and that he was mad to pay such an amount for a little piece of glass, however, they became one of the most successful farmers’ families in the region.’
Another consequence of the increasing specialisation was the concentration of certain branches of agriculture in certain regions in Belgium.86
80 Geyzen, A., ‘Popular discourse on nutrition, health and indulgence in Flanders, 1945-1960’, Appetite, 56 (2011), 280-281; Niesten, E., Raymaekers, J. & Segers, Y., Lekker dier!? Dierlijke productie en consumptie in de 19de en 20ste eeuw (CAG Cahier 4), Leuven, 2003, 33.
81 Segers, Y., ‘Food recommendations, tradition and change in a Flemish cookbook: Ons kookboek, 1920-2000’, Appetite, 45 (2005), 10; Niesten, E. & Segers, Y., Smaken van het land. Groenten en fruit vroeger en nu, Leuven, 2007, 127.
82 Van Molle, 100 jaar ministerie van landbouw, 1984, 85.
83 Van Molle, 100 jaar ministerie van landbouw, 1984, 82.
84 Niesten et al., Lekker dier!?, 2003, 31.
85 Niesten & Segers, Smaken van het land, 2007, 131.
86 Segers & Van Molle, Leven van het land, 2004,131.
