Food for Thought: DC, Michael Crichton & Ethical Food
The New Republic's web edition has a piece on DC getting a congressional vote and Michael Crichton's incredibly childish takedown of Michael Crowley.
And the Economist, an issue back, had a great article (subscription required, I think) on the harms of ethical food shopping. The gist is:
On Organic
On Fairtrade
Certainly worth keeping in mind. They fininsh by arguing that buying local instead of from a supermarket is actually probably a waste of fuel, since most people live closer to a supermarket than to a farm, and going out of the way en masse to buy produce locally contributes more to pollution than shipping it from across the globe.
Definitely food for thought.
And the Economist, an issue back, had a great article (subscription required, I think) on the harms of ethical food shopping. The gist is:
On Organic
Organic food, which is grown without man-made pesticides and fertilisers, is generally assumed to be more environmentally friendly than conventional intensive farming, which is heavily reliant on chemical inputs. But it all depends what you mean by “environmentally friendly”. Farming is inherently bad for the environment: since humans took it up around 11,000 years ago, the result has been deforestation on a massive scale. But following the “green revolution” of the 1960s greater use of chemical fertiliser has tripled grain yields with very little increase in the area of land under cultivation. Organic methods, which rely on crop rotation, manure and compost in place of fertiliser, are far less intensive. So producing the world's current agricultural output organically would require several times as much land as is currently cultivated. There wouldn't be much room left for the rainforest.
On Fairtrade
Fairtrade food is designed to raise poor farmers' incomes. It is sold at a higher price than ordinary food, with a subsidy passed back to the farmer. But prices of agricultural commodities are low because of overproduction. By propping up the price, the Fairtrade system encourages farmers to produce more of these commodities rather than diversifying into other crops and so depresses prices—thus achieving, for most farmers, exactly the opposite of what the initiative is intended to do. And since only a small fraction of the mark-up on Fairtrade foods actually goes to the farmer—most goes to the retailer—the system gives rich consumers an inflated impression of their largesse and makes alleviating poverty seem too easy.
Certainly worth keeping in mind. They fininsh by arguing that buying local instead of from a supermarket is actually probably a waste of fuel, since most people live closer to a supermarket than to a farm, and going out of the way en masse to buy produce locally contributes more to pollution than shipping it from across the globe.
Definitely food for thought.
