The battle in favour of biodiversity in food farming and against the speculative economies damaging small producers has been carried out for over 30 years: this global “conflict” has a leader in Carlo Petrini. Known as Carlìn, the agronomist from Bra is sociologist, writer and activist, as well as the mind behind festivals like the Salone del Gusto in Turin. He is famous for founding the Slow Food association in 1989, with the aim of promoting and safeguarding biodiversity, a respect for the environment and the well-being of the consumers through responsible food choices, from the Langhe to the whole world.
Here is our all round interview with Petrini.

Mr Petrini, you usually use the term “co-producer”, a term giving the individual more responsibility compared to the abused “consumer”. Can the choices we make while shopping be the first steps to trigger a virtuous change?
I believe that what we can all do is steering towards a more local economy. In relation to food, for example, that means favouring products from the territory. If we shifted even just a small percentage of our food consumption – usually from supermarkets – to local economies (like farmers markets and small shops, or directly from the farmers), we would hugely increase the financial support to local communities rather than to the international market. The products we find in supermarkets are often monopolized by big multinational companies and have travelled for thousands of miles from one continent to the other. Seen in perspective, this is not a sustainable trend, because it asks us to implement a productive process which wastes a lot of energy and resources in transportation and doesn’t favour the change of paradigm, which is undoubtedly the one of facilitating the local economy.

On one hand the collective awareness of the importance of consuming healthy food and the consequent attention we pay to what we bring to our tables seem to be growing, on the other, fast foods are also becoming more and more popular, giving the impression that eating healthy is not a priority in our daily life. Is this inconsistency real? How can we sensitize to a responsible consumption people not caring about what they put in their trolleys?
Recently, the scale has tilted in favour of a more responsible consumption. This was also determined by fears caused by the fact that a lot people have realized that the food system is also causing health problems. Many have therefore started thinking that the choices shouldn’t be dictated by a low price, but by factors of responsibility, care for the local economy and for our own well-being. This means we have to work harder on quality, waste less and understand that apparently cheap choices are in fact ultimately extremely expensive, because they have consequences called “negative externalities”, which the whole collectivity will have to pay for. If I implement and intensify monoculture, I will destroy the fertility of the ground; who’s going to pay for this loss? We all are! If I eat cheap but unhealthy products, I will have to spend in health care: these are the “negative externalities”. It is therefore essential that we all have and demand more information like product traceability, telling us the modalities of the transformation processes. This awareness is what I call “co-production”.

The Ministry for Agricultural Policies has a new leader: Gian Marco Centinaio, the Lega Nord / Five Star Movement candidate. What do you think about the politician from Pavia?
I don’t know him personally, and I don’t know what the guidelines of his mandate are. We have to let him express his ideas and consider them carefully, hoping that Italy doesn’t reject virtuous solutions, but rather implement them. I believe for example that this new government will make sure not to penalize international treaties and therefore favour big multinational companies, taking less care of small producers, but let’s wait and see.

Leaving aside the current controversies about the Aquarius (the SOS Mediterranée ONG ship coming from Libya carrying six hundred migrants which has been denied access to Italian ports), do European politics on immigration need to be revised? Does “helping them at home” make sense? Or the sensible option is to have more civil and efficient immigration policies?
Both. “Helping them at home” is a nice thought but nobody does it. It is also essential that Italy is not left alone to deal with the situation, the whole of Europe needs to change its attitude. And, thirdly, it is important to be aware of the fact that these mass exoduses are the result of a colonialism and neo-colonialism still bringing Africa to its knees to benefit the most powerful countries. The statement “let’s help them at home” must be put into practice, otherwise it is meaningless. Also, we must not forget that if people are at sea and in danger it is everybody’s duty to safeguard their lives and their safety. This is one of the basic rules of sea people. Going back to your question, it’s all about common sense, on both sides.

In a conference held at Turin’s International Book Fair, you criticized the excessive spectacularization of TV chefs, protagonists of endless talent shows and programmes and almost always male. A media attention that seems to focus on the personalities rather than the food. What’s causing this global trend? Could these TV programmes become a useful instrument to spread a correct food education while retaining their format?
Yes, but without pushing it too far. Today, spectacularity prevails on contents. This exasperation we are witnessing could play a positive part in favour of good food and farming practices though, and no doubt of responsible purchasing too. But the two things don’t necessarily coincide. We can’t think that the solution is in spectacularization, contents and “alliances” are essential. If a chef actually promoted farmers and their virtuous production, exploiting the mediatic impact to support the message, the result could be interesting. But if it is all about showbiz and cooking techniques, there can be no real change, which is what we really and urgently need in the food sector.

Do you think that solving hunger issues in developing countries is a realistic expectation? And if so, what are the means? We talk a lot about diets, calories, organic products, etc., but 1000 km from us people are dying of starvation…
Hunger is an international political issue. It’s down to all the communities to strengthen the governments’ sensibilities, because the Western world’s contribution to these economies is minimal. We are back to the message “let’s help them at home”: if we think about how the funds to help underdeveloped countries have been reduced by 90% in the last ten years, we see how this claim is based on nothing. On the contrary, we all need to assume a more responsible attitude. Consumers and citizens can not only influence politics, but, modifying their food behaviour and avoiding waste, also prevent environmental disasters. It is a process of empowerment which implies a wider mobilization.

The 5th June was the World Environment Day (proclaimed in 1972 by the UN General Assembly on the occasion of the launch of the UN environmental programme): one of the major threats to our planet is plastic. What’s your perspective about this global emergency?
It is a worrying situation, but we can’t think of totally eliminating plastic given how widespread its use is in our daily lives. We can reduce this use, in particular avoiding disposable items polluting the environment. It is a work of sensitization, mobilization and awareness-raising which must start from the whole society. Let’s talk for example about plastic straws: they used to be actually made of straw, therefore recyclable. We need to find a way to make plastic bottles “valuable” making people get a benefit from recycling them. Today, only 9% of the plastic produced is recycled, which is obviously not sustainable. Two are the things to do at an individual level: reduce the consumption of disposable plastic and recycle as much as possible.

What actions is Slow Food carrying out in the sector of sustainable farming?
The main one is facilitating the creation of farmed gardens for self-consumption: school, citizens, family, educational, community gardens; this has a great impact in Africa, for example. Secondly, working towards a local economy, saving the food from long journeys and promoting local production instead, i.e. the agriculture of proximity. Helping farming to survive and thrive, without being under the thumb of industrial companies shipping products from one continent to the other. The third element is the establishment of farmers markets, reducing the supply chain to a minimum and allowing for a direct relationship between farmer and citizen.
One good thing would be the institution of community support schemes whereby groups of citizens pre-pay local producers for their products, thus avoiding speculations by the farmers, because they would be paid in advance. Citizens would have an immediate benefit when they deliver their products fresh and at reasonable prices. These are forms of collaboration which can determine a change in the paradigm independently from politics, creating a society more ethical, more fair, less wasteful, more prone to change, to protect the environment, to reduce the consumption of fossil energy in favour of renewable ones, to eat local products… a society which anticipates what politics should implement on a mass scale.

Last March, in Turin, you were one of the protagonists of the conference “The Three Oaks”. In the course of the evening you, Franco Berrino and Michelangelo Pistoletto discussed about a responsible social transformation, stressing how this is also triggered by a virtuous food behaviour. What did you take away from the exchange about a 360 degree sustainability with the doctor and the artist?
These themes don’t belong to specific fields of work, we are in fact dealing with a holistic dimension. Everything is connected. My food culture doesn’t make me insensitive to people’s health or to the captivating quality of art: we are all artists, doctors and good food lovers in some measure. I don’t feel the difference, I can only perceive a link between people able to change the world and the importance of teaming up, because everything is tied together so you can’t face issues considering them from a single point of view.

In 2008, the English newspaper “The Guardian” named you as one of the 50 people who could save the planet. Mr Petrini, what are the ingredients to change the world?
I have always been sceptical about that definition. If the world needs 50 people like me to change, it is messed up – he says laughing, editor’s note -. I don’t share this notion, I believe that the world can change with the help of many people modifying their behaviours, thus affecting the environment, the politics and the community. In particular, I think that communities are the form of congregation able to change the world. A community can have extremely ambitious objectives and possibly start acting on them, believe in them and realize them, simply because they feel emotionally motivated. A dimension where change, emotional motivation, a pleasure in doing things and a small dose of happiness are the best ingredients to change the world.