December 16, 2006

Food politics | Voting with your trolley | Economist.com

Food politics | Voting with your trolley | Economist.com

While, British in its perspective, this Economist piece raises some tough questions about the economics underlying the Fair Trade movement, organic benefits/drawbacks, as well as the 'buy local' food paradigm.

It's well worth the read for a different, if not facts-based, perspective. Given the absence of facts and reliance on anecdote, perhaps the article would be better on the editorial page of the Economist.

However, this is worth noting:

Yet even an apparently obvious claim ?that organic food is better for the environment than the conventionally farmed kind turns out to be controversial. There are many different definitions of the term '?organic'?, but it generally involves severe restrictions on the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilisers and a ban on genetically modified organisms. Peter Melchett of the Soil Association, Britain's leading organic lobby group, says that environmental concerns, rather than health benefits, are now cited by British consumers as their main justification for buying organic food. (There is no clear evidence that conventional food is harmful or that organic food is nutritionally superior.)

But not everyone agrees that organic farming is better for the environment. Perhaps the most eminent critic of organic farming is Norman Borlaug, the father of the 'green revolution', winner of the Nobel peace prize and an outspoken advocate of the use of synthetic fertilisers to increase crop yields. He claims the idea that organic farming is better for the environment is '?ridiculous' because organic farming produces lower yields and therefore requires more land under cultivation to produce the same amount of food. Thanks to synthetic fertilisers, Mr Borlaug points out, global cereal production tripled between 1950 and 2000, but the amount of land used increased by only 10%. Using traditional techniques such as crop rotation, compost and manure to supply the soil with nitrogen and other minerals would have required a tripling of the area under cultivation. The more intensively you farm, Mr Borlaug contends, the more room you have left for rainforest.

No comments: