Self Reliance in Qatar has become a prominent aspect after being blockaded by neighboring gulf countries. This ultimately led Qatar to become more dependent on producing locally. New agricultural businesses like Baladna arose to begin producing necessary foods. Qatar was able to act quickly to annihilate a short supply of products locally, and prices for other dairy products rose before the opening of Baladna. Before Qatar grew to become self-sufficient its food production was merely from abroad, but that changed quickly. This was a moment of pride as the people were able to see products being made upfront in Baladna. It’s critical to acknowledge that even with the arising social benefits behind the scenes, there is a relationship between the local/national and global/ transnational. Qatar was able to be self-dependent, but before being so, the country had to import cows from abroad so that there would be a consistent supply of dairy products produced locally. This portrays the ideas of slow food as it promotes cultural and environmental aspects and deterritorialization in Qatar as a way to guarantee food security through a modern take.
Slow Food, Low Tech in Qatar:
Although Qatar has proven great lengths of success with producing locally and very efficiently, it is critical to unveil that it is not as easy as it looks. Qatar struggled in the past to grow its local food industry because of a lack of nutrient-filled soils, technologies, and other areas. This forced Qatar to depend on having fertilizers sent from other Middle Eastern countries as well as having them import food from their own local produce. This made Qatar’s own local produce be very limited in markets and wasn’t bought very often before the blockade in 2017. When really analyzing the pattern of Qatar’s growth after the pandemic, it looked like a fast recovery action, despite requiring many steps to fulfill that. This is extremely similar to the argument Allison Carruth makes in her text “Slow Food, Low Tech”. She emphasizes the complexity that comes with trying to improve ecological diversity and cultural aspects when dealing with certain environmental issues. Carruth criticizes there are problems with the slow food motions, she is skeptical of the idea of a sustainable agriculture system and slow food production. In Qatar, It is considered a slow food production but with the immense help of technology, labor, and fertilizers that are imported from overseas. This indicates that there is a local and national relationship with Qatar’s agriculture, as they tend to require help from abroad to keep up with local produce. It is not critical to be preserving local foods as much as we assume. For example, locals in Qatar have a mixed preference for what they would purchase in the grocery stores, some would prefer organic foods (which are not local) and some explicitly go to the grocery store to find locally manufactured foods.
During the blockade, many locals mentioned that they are proud to see local produce in the markets, that they chase any opportunity they get to consume them, and that it is also a cheaper product compared to imported produce. But others suggested that they go to certain markets such as Monoprix in order to get the produce from abroad. When analyzing it, there is an ironic sense to it in a way, Qatar’s food cannot be fully seen as local produce because it does receive help from countries about to be manufactured. This is not in any way demeaning how local produce is being made but rather portrays the relationship that local produce has on transnational networks. Without these networks, Qatar wouldn’t be able to have local produce regularly, to begin with. Additionally, the concept of urban political ecology is present in Carruth’s essay, she discusses that slow food has its security issues arguably that is seen in the context of Qatar during the blockade. Carruth discusses the concept of ecological security isn’t solely a local matter but rather a more global aspect that should be intertwined within countries. The quality of food doesn’t necessarily mean it’s worse if it comes abroad but some tend to see it as unclean. The concept of globalization through agribusinesses appeared in Qatar’s implementation of their own dairy-producing farm, to start the business they needed cows immediately. Which led them to import cows from countries like Australia and Germany in an attempt to have guaranteed food security that will benefit the community. To this day it proves that social benefits are crucial in forming a bond between people and agriculture, which is why Qatar has opened the doors of the Baladna Farm for anyone to enter to witness production itself. This doesn’t only enhance Qatar’s economy but preserves its culture and biodiversity.
Deterritorialization in Qatar:
Generally, there is a negative connotation with the concept of deterritorialization, but Heise looks at how it is a positive aspect of the environment. She focuses on becoming a citizen of the world by being able to delocalize an environment and feel restrained about a certain area.
Heise argues that there should be an emphasis on how communities and individuals are tied together with the areas that they inhabit and that a subtle understanding of the emphasis on environmental aspects of local areas is a product of international and global forms. Many environmentalists think that local implications should be more represented. However, Heise proves otherwise, there should be a de-localized value in aspects to give a more well-rounded view of what an environment really consists of. Deterritorialization has enriched society with more modern and higher mobility and altered local industries that benefit the social, cultural, and economic aspects. Deterritorialization is executed in Qatar as mentioned in the previous paragraph by importing materials that are required to enhance Qatar’s environmental system. Materials are necessary for the growth of plants, technology, and labor, all of which portray the sense that Qatar is a privileged country that is affected by deterritorialization.
Heiss also mentions that even though there is cultural and social uproar there is also a critical side of deterritorialization and there are fast effects that delocalization and global influences have on the day-to-day lives of communities. This is a structure seen in Qatar’s approach to creating Baladna in Qatar, these agricultural farms are seen everywhere else in the world, but Qatar needed a political shock like the blockade in order to widen their prospects. By bringing in cows and technologies from abroad Qatar is now in full control over its dairy and food production. They can rely on themselves on how much they should produce based on how much is being consumed. Baladna overall proves the values that it is a local and transnational business that emphasizes the idea of deterritorialization. This is because most of the produce is sold in Qatar’s markets, but a percentage of the products are also being exported. This shows how Qatar was influenced by bringing in cows from abroad, but now is proceeding to extend their agribusiness by supplying across national borders, therefore raising the success of the farm business. Again proving Heisses argument that having de-localized values comes with great opportunities that venture into having a more modern take on the environment.
To conclude, Qatar is a great example of how the relationship between the local/national and global/ transnational is required for a country to be self-sufficient. With the blockade as a shifting movement moment, Qatar has undergone several procedures in order to be stable and enhance its economy. Local agribusiness was made which promoted social benefits for locals to gain a connection with the environment. Overall, it was important to acknowledge that the country’s independence, including help from abroad, and importing resources, materials, and technologies all played a role in creating food security locally.
