Let me state it another way, would you sign a contract where you were on the hook to personally provide everyone else in the world with food? Because that is exactly what signing such a contract would do to you.
Even if they were obligated to provide you food as well, it wouldn't matter because if you both had food then the clause is pointless.
Interesting, in this constitution then do we need to answer the question of who does produce the food?
No, we just need to recognize the process by which ownership of food is determined and the process by which title to food may be transferred.
Yes.
Hmm. Interesting. My guess is I'll need to ponder on this.
Well production of food is technically limited to only those who own land. Or those who can rent land to produce food, But I do certainly recognise your point interms of signing a constitution that guarantees access to food.