Live at 2pm GMT today 21 May…
LATER: Spoiler alert. The answer to the question in the title has to do with:
- inaccurate dogmas
- multiplicity of names
- negative social bias
- lack of research
- narrow ecological niche
- archaeological invisibility
- missing numbers
Rejuvenating the use of traditional food crops is a great step towards high quality food security, particularly when they align with regions of origin. However, the use of the term “orphan” to describe taro, or any indigenous crop, saddens me that we are not more aware of the labels we assign. Orphaned by whom? Think about who decided that for a minute. Even when we say “under-utilized” the question is by whom. It is contextual to culture, nation or region. Any crop is only an “orphan” when we do not honor the food it provides our communities. For the Pacific, taro, is not an orphan but the beginning of their genealogies and center of their families. With all due respect, let us all do better to find and use more appropriate terminology.
To be fair, all that is actually discussed in the talk.