Every strategy needs an overall aim, a purpose. What’s it all for?
This Government ‘food strategy’ (their lower case) doesn’t have an aim, or purpose.
If it had a clear aim, a purpose for the strategy, we have a rationale for why the objectives are there, how they fit together.
So when it came to implementing the strategy, the do-ers have a reason for doing what they’re doing, they know their bit of action fits into a bigger, worthwhile scheme of things.(1) (2)
‘Strategy’, arguably the best book ever on the topic, was written by Lawrence Freedman, Emeritus Professor of War Studies at Kings College, London.
Here’s how it begins:
Among all these wise words, this sentence has always stood out to me:
- “Without a strategy, facing up to any problem, or striving for any objective would be considered negligent.”
Now read this extract from page 8 of the Government food ‘strategy’, where it says:
But why these three objectives? To what end?
We’re not told. Begs the question, does the Government know?
(1) For example, it could be:
To ensure that all UK citizens have access to sufficient supplies of safe, nutritious food both now and into the future . . .
Plus a statement about the values, the ethics behind it all. So that, when deciding upon and implementing actions to meet the objectives, the do-ers consider the needs of everyone and every other living critter on the planet.
(2) Dimbleby’s National Food Strategy Independent Review: The Plan (his caps) didn’t have an overall aim, either. His Plan had “four strategic objectives’, listed on p12.