Anna Sammassimo

Ricercatrice di Diritto canonico ed ecclesiastico presso la Facoltà di Giurisprudenza dell’Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Milano

The right to food in the Catholic Social Doctrine*

Summary: Introduction. 1. 1. The right to food in the international law. 2. Definition of the right to food and states’ corresponding obligations. 3. The Catholic social doctrine. 3. The Catholic social doctrine: a) the problem of hunger is a moral problem; b) the right to food is a “positive” right; c) the right to Food is a basic human right; d) adequate solidarity in the era of globalization requires the right to food to be defended; e) the objective of eradicating hunger and, at the same time, of being able to provide healthy and sufficient food also demands specific methods and actions that mean a wise use of resources that respect Creation's patrimony. Conclusions

Introduction

At present times, we seem to be facing a typical Malthusian situation, where the supply of food is unable to meet growth in demand, as a result of a number of very important structural factors (like, i.e., the population growth, the climate change, the energy needs and particularly the demand for oil increase, the (growth of) agricultural productivity decline and so forth) which are de facto threatening our ability to feed the planet[1].

Although, it must be said, in comparison to 40 or 50 years ago, we actually know more about what causes hunger and food (in)security. In particular, we know that markets (left to their own devices) cannot always produce a sufficient amount of food everywhere and certainly cannot bring it to parts of the world where there is an endemic condition of Malthusian under-production due to very well known issues[2].

In general, the public, including some specialists, often seems to underestimate the political economy considerations, the responsibilities of actors, the governance issues, because its attention is focused exclusively on the levels of food availability, on altogether productivity, thus, in short, forgetting about issues of accessibility, justice and the needs of engaging against discrimination and marginalisation[3].

In his very famous reading of certain famines in this century, Amartya Sen showed us that hunger, and the plague of famines, occur in times of increased production that, paradoxically, generates an increase in, almost a booster, for existing famines. In other terms, for Sen famines do not occur simply, or even mainly, nowadays as a result of there being too little food produced, too little food available on the markets. Famine occurs, according to him, or rather a number of contemporary famines do, when the incomes of certain groups of the population rise much faster than  the incomes of other groups, so that the latter are priced out and have no sufficient purchasing power to cope with the increase of prices of food commodities. Taking into consideration his view, the real challenge is not just to produce enough food, it is not just a question of food being available, it is also, and perhaps primarily, a question of food being accessible to the poorest, it is a question of social justice, it is a question of combating discrimination, it is a question of redistributive policies. If you want to fight hunger in Milan, you should not just multiply by two or three the number of supermarkets in Milan: you would need to provide money to those who are homeless, the poor, marginalised and hungry, not because there is no food available to them but because their purchasing power is inadequate, insufficient in their economic ambiance[4].

Now, ideally, the two views - the one focusing on food availability, on sufficient quantities in storage and the other focusing on accessibility, entitlements to food on the market - should be complementary. Ideally,  there should  be both conditions  happening simultaneously in order to address efficiently, and solve, the problem of hunger[5].

If you consider the issue from this very perspective, the viewpoint of a rights-based consideration on the mainstream ideas and conjectures on the causes and solutions for the hunger problem, you have at hand an added valuable tool in understanding and framing the issue of hunger. That is what I suggest considering with my paper: a new tool, based on the human rights epistemological stance, to be used regarding the debate on the right to food in our contemporary world.

I will try to explain briefly what and how is understood as the right to food in international  law system in order to show the  teaching about it of Catholic Church.

1. The right to food in the international law

The right to food was first recognised as a human right both in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)[6]. Article 25 of the UDHR provides that: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control”.

The ICESCR recognises ‘the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food…and to the continuous improvement of living conditions’ (Article 11, § 1) as well as ‘the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger’ (Article 11, § 2).

At the international level, the formal legal recognition of the right to food in the ICESCR — with its two main components being the right to adequate food and the fundamental right to be free from hunger — was not immediately met with a strong commitment at the political level to ensure its full implementation[7]. It was only in 1996, at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) World Food Summit (WFS), that political leaders finally made a more solemn commitment towards the realisation of this very right and requested the UN human rights system to better define it. In response, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) adopted its General Comment 12 in 1999, in which it outlined the normative content of the right to food and stated corresponding obligations, while the UN Commission on Human Rights created the mandate of the first UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food in 2000[8]. At the second WFS, organised by FAO in 2002, States welcomed these developments and tasked an intergovernmental working group with the elaboration of Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realisation of the right to adequate food - in the context of national food security (Right to Food Guidelines) - in order to provide practical guidance for reducing hunger. The Right to Food Guidelines are voluntary by nature but they represent an important political commitment to strengthen the implementation of the right to food. They were adopted unanimously by the FAO Council in November 2004 and, since then, have been used as practical tools by States that have chosen to address hunger through a rights-based approach[9].

With the 2008 global food crisis, the UN Secretary General made a strong appeal to integrate the right to food more effectively in responses to food insecurity. At a high-level meeting on food security in 2009, the Secretary General stated: “We must continue to meet urgent hunger and humanitarian needs by providing food and nutrition assistance and safety nets, while focusing on improving food production and smallholder agriculture. This is the twin-track approach…We should be ready to add a third track, the right to food, as a basis for analysis, action and accountability”.

The recognition of the right to food at the international level was not mirrored at the regional, i.e. stateside, level, where the right appears explicitly in only one legal instrument, the Protocol of San Salvador, completing the American Convention on Human Rights, which is generally considered to be characterised by weak enforcement mechanisms. To fill this gap, other human rights, including the rights to life, health, environment, and property, have been used to protect the right to food indirectly in the African and Inter-American human rights systems. At the national level, the right to food has been incorporated into a growing number of constitutions in the past 20 years, e.g. most recently in Brazil, Bolivia, Ecuador and Kenya, and it is increasingly being adjudicated by international courts[10].

2. Definition of the right to food and states’ corresponding obligations

In its General Comment 12, the CESCR provides the following definition of the right to food: “The right to adequate food is realised when every man, woman and child, alone or in community with others, has physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or means for its procurement”.

According to this definition, all human beings have a right to food that must be available in sufficient quantity, nutritionally and culturally adequate, and physically and economically accessible. Interpreting the right to food through the lens of human dignity, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food has underlined that it is the right of every human being to feed oneself and one’s family with dignity. As stated in the Right to Food Guidelines, this can be achieved by ensuring everyone’s access to productive resources, in particular land, water and seeds, but also fisheries or forests, as well as access to labour or social assistance schemes.

The corresponding obligations of States were first developed by human rights experts and subsequently defined by the CESCR, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, and by States through the adoption of the Right to Food Guidelines. It is now generally accepted that state parties to the ICESCR have the obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the right to food, without any discrimination. The obligation to respect is essentially an obligation to refrain from action that would interfere with the right to food. The obligation to protect requires States to ensure that enterprises as well as  private individuals do not deprive individuals of their access to adequate food. The obligation to fulfil implies that states should, first of all, facilitate the realisation of the right to food by creating an environment that enables individuals and groups to feed themselves by their own means and, secondly, provide the right to food for those who are not capable of feeding themselves for reasons beyond their control[11].

In respecting, protecting and fulfilling the right to food, States must comply with human rights principles: -in particular the principles of participation, accountability, non-discrimination, transparency, human dignity, empowerment and the rule of law. When they develop and implement food security strategies, policies and programmes, states must therefore consult and inform all relevant actors, adopt and use budgets in a transparent manner, and take measures with the explicit aim of improving the realisation the right to food, especially with respect to vulnerable groups. States must also ensure that these steps empower rights holders to claim their rights and duty bearers to fulfil their obligations[12].

Finally, under this framework, access to justice must be available to victims of violations of the right to food. In the context of LSLTs, the foregoing discussion entails that the conclusion and implementation of LSLTs should not lead to violations but, rather, to a better realisation of the right to food, and should be carried out in compliance with the foregoing human rights principles[13].

3. The Catholic social doctrine

The right to an adequate and healthy balanced food diet has been, and still is, one of the doctrinal point of reference of, as well as a practical course of action taken by, the Catholic Church, since the Catholic Church has always considered poverty first and foremost as lack of material food.

The fight against poverty has found a strong motivation in the preferential love of the Church for the poor since Jesus’s teaching[14]. According to the book of Matthew in the New Testament, feeding the hungry is absolutely imperative for a good Christian. It is an absolute duty and as such it cannot be escaped, irrespective of the consequences. In fact, Christians are called to work not only to provide themselves with bread, but also in acceptance of their poorer neighbours, to whom the Lord has commanded them to give food, drink, clothing, welcome, care and companionship (“For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me”, cf. Mt 25:35-36). While Catholic teaching calls us to seek the common good of the entire human family, Scripture and our Catholic tradition also call us to a priority concern for the poor and vulnerable[15]. Like the prophets of the Old Testament, Jesus calls us to care for the powerless and those on the margins of society. For us, hungry children, farmworkers, and farmers in distress are not abstract issues. They are sisters and brothers with their own God-given dignity. In the words of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, they are also “Jesus in his distressing disguise”.

The right to food has very operational consequences[16] in that it obliges us to establish accountability mechanisms to identify the food insecure and the food vulnerable in order to target our efforts very carefully. It obliges us to evaluate the effectiveness of our programmes in reaching the poorest and so it is something more than just trying to achieve food security, it is something which ensures accountability of governments towards the needs of the poorest and the most vulnerable[17]. It is an issue of governance, one which is added to the traditional approaches which are providing emergency assistance or investment into agriculture - which are the two tracks usually pursued in order to achieve food security. It is necessary to think about how to use the right to food as a third track in addition to emergency assistance and to agricultural investment[18].

Under Pope Paul VI, the Church took up this issue in the 1960s with the Encyclical Populorum Progressio. The Pope wrote: “the hungry nations of the world cry out to the peoples blessed with abundance. And the Church, cut to the quick by this cry, asks each and every [person] to hear his brother’s plea and answer it lovingly” (3).

More recently, Popes St. John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis made several speeches and wrote documents on the topic. They pointed out that not only the vision of an effective international public authority at the service of human rights, freedom and peace has not yet been entirely achieved but that there is still, in fact, much hesitation in the international community about the obligation to respect and implement human rights. This duty touches all fundamental rights.

In 2003 John Paul II said that we are witnessing the emergence of an alarming gap between a series of new ‘rights' being promoted in advanced societies – the result of new prosperity and new technologies – and other more basic human rights still not being met, especially in situations of underdevelopment [Message for the 2003 World Day of Peace]. It is the case of the right to food and drinkable water which are still far from being guaranteed and realized.

Today, Pope Francis cry that “while it is true that an unequal distribution of the population and of available resources creates obstacles to development and a sustainable use of the environment, it must nonetheless be recognized that demographic growth is fully compatible with an integral and shared development. To blame population growth instead of extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues. It is an attempt to legitimize the present model of distribution, where a minority believes that it has the right to consume in a way which can never be universalized, since the planet could not even contain the waste products of such consumption. Besides, we know that approximately a third of all food produced is discarded, and whenever food is thrown out it is as if it were stolen from the table of the poor” (Laudato si’, 50).

The principal common threads of these documents and statements are the following.

a) the problem of hunger is a moral problem

The problem of hunger in the world is not so much a material, economic or technical problem, but rather a moral problem. That’s why John Paul II in his first Encyclical, Redemptor hominis (4 March 1979),warned us “that authentic human development has a moral character. It presumes full respect for the human person, but it must also be concerned for the world around us and take into account the nature of each being and of its mutual connection in an ordered system. Accordingly, our human ability to transform reality must proceed in line with God’s original gift of all that is”.

That’s also the leitmotiv of the message of the 4 October 2007 of Pope Benedict XVI to Mr. Jacques Diouf, Director General of the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization, on the occasion of World Food Day 2007. In fact, he wrote that “the available data show that the nonfulfillment of the right to food is not only due to natural causes, but also and above all, to situations provoked by the conduct of men and women that lead to a general deterioration of social, economic and human standards. Increasingly, there are always more people who, because of poverty and bloody conflicts, feel obligated to leave their own home and loved ones in order to search for support outside their own country. In spite of international pledges, many of these people are refused” (2).

b) the right to food is a “positive” right

The right to food is not simply a “negative” right but also et especially a “positive” one.

What does it mean?

Let’s take into account the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, and then 1996, in connection with the access to food. There is a strong Kantian edge to the extent that these documents state that people have the right to food in adequate amount and quality. This right is a “negative right” in classical terms, as long as individuals are not to be hampered in their endeavour to produce or collect food. Indeed, hunger is often the result of violent conflicts and wars, which result in food being taken away or prevented from being produced. 

But the right to food is also a “positive right” – meaning that if you are poor and unable to produce your own food, then somebody else within the community must provide it for you. This is exactly the position proclaimed, reaffirmed and taken by the Catholic Church: a combination of negative and positive rights both conceptually and practically (through the Church’s commitment to supporting the poor in various ways).

Negative rights are mostly linked to markets and their efficiency, whereas positive rights are linked to solidarity, the welfare state and international donors. Regarding the morality behind food security, these two pillars – individual freedom as a force for good and social responsibility to guard against the worst – cannot be separated. In other words, there must be a certain balance between opportunities for profit and basic solidarity.

c) the right to Food is a basic human right

The Catholic Church proclaims the central truth that every human person is sacred. Created in God’s image and likeness and redeemed by the death and resurrection of Christ, every person has fundamental human dignity that comes from God, not from any human attribute or accomplishment.

John XXIII (Pacem in terris, 1963) remembered that “each individual man is truly a person. His is a nature, that is, endowed with intelligence and free will. As such he has rights and duties, which together flow as a direct consequence from his nature. These rights and duties are universal and inviolable, and therefore altogether inalienable. When, furthermore, we consider man's personal dignity from the standpoint of divine revelation, inevitably our estimate of it is incomparably increased. Man has the right to live. He has the right to bodily integrity and to the means necessary for the proper development of life, particularly food, clothing, shelter, medical care, rest, and, finally, the necessary social services” (9-10).

Every person has a right to life and to the material and spiritual support required to live a truly human existence. The right to a truly human life logically leads to the right to enough food to sustain a life with dignity. The poverty and hunger that diminish the lives of millions in our own land and in so many other countries are fundamental threats to human life and dignity and demand a response from believers.

In the message (4 October 2007) to the Director General of the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization, Pope Benedict XVI recalled“the importance that the right to food has for the realization of other rights, beginning above all with the fundamental right to life” and that “observe that the endeavours made until now have not significantly diminished the numbers of those suffering from hunger in the world, even though all know that food is a primary right. This is perhaps due to the fact that one tends to be solely and principally motivated by technical and economic considerations, forgetting the primary, ethical dimension of "feeding the hungry".  “Among the mature members of the Community of Nations, however, a strong awareness is needed that considers food as a universal right of all human beings, without distinction or discrimination”. (1).

Pope Benedict XVI, in Caritas in veritate, restated again that“The right to food, like the right to water, has an important place within the pursuit of other rights, beginning with the fundamental right to life, It is therefore necessary to cultivate a public conscience that considers food and access to water as universal rights of all human beings, without distinction or discrimination” (27).

There are many more considerations to draw from the above statements.

The human person possesses not only sacred but also social dimension. Each and every person lives and develops in a given community. Our inherently human social nature makes pursuit of the “common good” an important goal and measure of any society. The way we organise, structure and manage society economically and politically, including the way our agricultural system, deeply impacts human dignity. So much so that, even in the western legal tradition, justice has three key dimensions: commutative, distributive, and social. Commutative justice demands fairness in all relations and exchanges. This must be considered and understood in the context of both distributive justice, which requires that the benefits of social, economic and political life reach all people, including those on the margins of society, and social justice, which insists that all people have equal opportunities for participation and authentic human development. All three of these dimensions of justice must shape decisions about the global agricultural system. Catholic teaching’s focus on justice and on the social nature of the person emphasising family, community, solidarity and cooperation along with the need for people to participate effectively in the decisions that affect their lives. Rural communities and cultures, with their focus on family life, community, and close ties to the land, serve as welcome signs of these social dimensions of the Catholic teaching.

d) adequate solidarity in the era of globalization requires the right to food to be defended

Solidarity is understood both a principle of Catholic social doctrine and as a virtue to be practiced[19]. We live in a world where Disease, economic forces, capitals and labor continuously cross national boundaries therefore creating a closely knit international community. For these reasons, we must, as our moral obligation, care for all the children of God in our living environment for we are part of one human family, wherever we geographically, physically live.

We should perceive Starvation and widespread hunger as a clear-cut indictment issued to us as believers. Although It may be tempting to turn away from the world and its many challenges, the Gospel and our Catholic heritage point us believers to another way, a way that sees others as sisters and brothers, no matter how different or how far away they are from us. Agriculture today is a global reality in a world that is not just an economic market  - it is the home of one global human family. Our interdependence, as expressed by the principle of solidarity, leads us to support the development of organisations and institutions at local, national, and international levels. Solidarity is complemented by the concept of subsidiarity, which also reminds us of the limitations and responsibilities of these organisations and institutions.

Subsidiarity defends the freedom of initiative of every member of society and affirms the essential role of these various structures. In the words of John Paul II, subsidiarity asserts that “a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.” In the case of agriculture, both solidarity and subsidiarity lead us to support and promote smaller, family-run farms not only to produce food but also to provide a livelihood for families and form the foundation of rural community life.

The lack of solidarity is the most important catalyst for underdevelopment and, in the worst cases,  for provoking hunger. Caritas in Veritate explicitly addresses the role of globalisation in the contextual consideration expressed above: the conclusion it draws is that as society becomes even more globalised, it makes us well networked and connected but it does not make us brothers and sisters just for the fact of being linked together. Reason by itself is capable of grasping the notion of equality between human beings (thus providing the foundation of social coexistence) but it cannot establish fraternity, which can only originate from God and the teachings of Jesus Christ. In essence, the Church believes that, by reason alone, we will never achieve the kind of relationship among individuals and societies which is needed to eliminate underdevelopment, poverty and hunger. This is all the more significant because the elimination of world hunger has also become a requirement for safeguarding the peace and stability of the planet: we are therefore looking at the “absolute imperative” of Kantian ethics.

Constantly reaffirming the principle of solidarity, the Church's social doctrine demands action to promote “the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all” [John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis].

Solidarity also means appealing to the responsibility of developing countries, and in particular of their political leaders, for promoting trade policies that are favourable to their peoples and in an exchange of technology that can improve the conditions of their food supply and health.

e) the objective of eradicating hunger and, at the same time, of being able to provide healthy and sufficient food also demands specific methods and actions that mean a wise use of resources that respect Creation's patrimony

The above statement has been reaffirmed by Pope Benedict XVI in his address (4 October 2007) to the Director General of the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation, on the occasion of World Food Day 2007.

Pope Benedict recalled our attention to the idea that  All creation is a gift. Idea reinforced by the Scripture when it tells us that “the earth is the Lord’s, and all it holds” (Ps 24:1). All of us, especially those closest to the land, are called to a special reverence and respect for God’s creation. Nurturing and tilling the soil, harnessing the power of water to grow food, and caring for animals are forms of this stewardship. The Church doctrine has repeatedly taught us that the misuse of God’s creation betrays the gift God has given us for the good of the entire human family. While rural communities are uniquely dependent on land, water, and weather, stewardship is a responsibility of our entire society.

Pope Francis has also devoted his attention to this issue in his Encyclical Letter writing extensively on  the topic.

Conclusions

As we have seen, the Catholic social teaching displays theoretical, gnoseological, anthropological and ethical frameworks that can be of great assistance and help if used - particularly, at this very historic moment - to identify a sure fundamental basis for the right to food as well as offering a tool apt to give both meaning and direction in the active involvement and commitment to realise historically. In particular, this approach offers a new model in the development of this right to food which is understood as a completely global, all inclusive, solidarity and sustainability sense capable to be open to the Transcendence.

On the basis of this approach, it is possible to engage and fight against the  consumerism considered as an absolute which yet and again is falsely and deceitful presented to us as a means to achieve happiness. In reality, this deceitful view enhances us to look for new short-living products which waste energy and induce goods waste as well, including the waste of food.

Only moving from a standpoint that intends development as common wealth oriented, would it be possible to partake in a new paradigm based on production, consumption  and distribution of food conceived as right for all beings in our community. This new paradigm is severed from the ties of utilitarianism, from opportunistic views and from that kind of cynicism that, faking an interest in the campaign involved in the respect of the environment and life, in reality only protects the future profits of corporate companies and individuals. Regarding food security alongside production and distribution of an energy sustainability for all, the social doctrine of the Catholic Church offers us an economic model involving manifold activities carried on both by institutions and individuals. This moral model is intended as justice oriented in his essence and at all levels in which it is manifested: from its various degrees of execution and logic of the gift, including the principle of gratuity.

* Paper presented at the International Colloquium "Right to Food, Peace and Democracy. Research and Education in an Ethical Perspective" (17th to 19th September 2015, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan).

[1]O. De Schutter, The right to food, in AAVV, Catholic social doctrine and human rights. The Proceedings of the 15^th Plenary Session of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. 1-5 may 2009, Vatican City 2010, pp. 324 ss. See also Id., How not to think of land-grabbing: three critiques of large-scale investments in farmland, in Journal of Peasant Studies 38 (2) 2011, pp. 249 ss.

[2] O. De Schutter, Countries Tackling Hunger with a Right to Food Approach, Briefing Note 1, Special Rapporteur on the right to food, 2010; Id., The green rush: the global race for farmland and the rights of land users, in Harvard International Law Journal 52 (2) 2011, pp. 504 ss.

[3]B. Wisner -P. Blaikie - T. Cannon & I. Davis, At Risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability, 2^a ed., 2003, in www.preventionweb.net/files/670_72351.pdf; S. Narula, The global land rush: markets, rights and the politics of food, paper presented at the “International Conference on Global Land Grabbing II”, Cornell University, 17-19 October 2012; G. Kent, Freedom from want. The human right to adequate food, Washington, 2005.

[4] See R. Künnemann & Monsalve Suárez, International human rights and governing land grabbing: a view from global civil society, in Globalizations 10 (1) 2013, pp. 123 ss; C. Golay & M. Büschi, The Right to Food and Global Strategic Frameworks: The Global Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition (GSF) and the UN Comprehensive Framework for Action (CFA), Rome, FAO 2012; W. Wolford – S.M. Borras jr. - R. Hall - I. Scoones & B. White, Governing global land deals: the role of the state in the rush for land, in Development and Change 44 (2) 2013, pp. 189 ss.

[5] O. De Schutter, The right to food, cit.

[6] See L. Knuth & M. Vidar, Constitutional and Legal Protection of the Right to Food around the World, Rome, FAO, 2011; W. Barth Eide & U. Kracht (ed.), Food and Human Rights in Development: Legal and institutional Dimensions and Selected Topics,Antwerp: Intersentia, 2005; J. Ziegler, C. Golay, C. Mahon & S.A. Way, The Fight for the Right to Food: Lessons Learned, London 2011.

[7] See P. Alston & K. Tomaševski (ed.), The right to food, Dordrecht, 1984; P. Clays & G. Vanloqueren, The minimum human rights principles applicable to large-scale land acquisitions or leases, in Globalizations 10 (1) 2013, pp. 193 ss.

[8] See C. Golay, C. Mahon & I. Cismas, The impact of the UN special procedures on the development and implementation of economic, social and cultural rights, in International Journal of Human Rights 15 (2) 2011, pp. 299 ss; S. Subedi, S. Wheatley, A. Mukherjee & S. Ngane, The role of the special rapporteurs of the United Nations Human Rights Council in the development and promotion of international human rights norms, in International Journal of Human Rights 15 (2) 2011, pp. 155 ss.

[9]C. Golay & I. Biglino, Human rights responses to land grabbing: a right to food perspective, in Third World Quarterly 34 (9) 2013, pp. 1630 ss.

[10] L. Knuth & M. Vidar, Constitutional and Legal Protection of the Right to Food around the World, cit.

[11] See C. Cicatiello, B. Pancino, S. Pasucci & S. Franco, Relationship Patterns in Food Purchase: Observing Social Interactions in Different Shopping Environments, in Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics 28 (1) 2015, pp. 21 ss.

[12] See M.V. Ploeg, P. Dutko & V. Breneman, Measuring Food Access and Food Deserts for Policy Purposes, in Applied Economic Perspectives & Policy 37 (2) 2015, pp. 205 ss.

[13] C. Golay, The Right to Food and Access to Justice: Examples at the National and International Levels, Rome, FAO, 2009.

[14] D. Dorr, Option for the Poor, Maryknoll N.Y. 1984.

[15] See F.H. Müller, The Church and the Social Question, Washington-London 1984; AAVV, Il magistero sociale della Chiesa. Principi e nuovi contenuti, Milano, 1989; Pontificio Consiglio della giustizia e della pace, Compendio della dottrina sociale della Chiesa, Città del Vaticano, 2004; Pontificio Consiglio della giustizia e della pace, Terra e Cibo, Città del Vaticano, 2015.

[16] See A. Ryan, Social Doctrine and Action, New York 1941.

[17] G. Concetti (ed), I diritti umani. Dottrina e prassi, Roma 1982; Fédération Internationale des Universités Catholiques, Droits de l’homme, approche chrétienne, Rome 1984; Id., Los derechos humanos, enfoque cristiano, Quito 1986.

[18] H. Carrier, Nuova evangelizzazione e dottrina sociale della Chiesa, in La Civiltà Cattolica 3422 (1993), pp. 116 ss; Id. Dottrina sociale. Nuovo approccio all’insegnamento sociale della Chiesa, Milano, 1993.

[19] See M. Toso (ed.), Solidarietà, nuovo nome della pace. Studi sull’enciclica «Sollicitudo rei socialis», Torino-Leumann 1988.