Thursday, August 16, 2007

Wishing It Were Simple




Richard raised a really good question in response to my last post, and drew my attention to the Lincoln University analysis of the concept of "food miles." If you want to dig into the issue for yourself, look at his comment in the previous post and follow the URLs. It is important to note that the study was done by economists in New Zealand who were motivated, in part, to defend Kiwi (as in from New Zealand) producers whose primary markets are in Europe--not exactly local, in other words. But the question is valid, and just because something is locally produced does not automatically mean it has a lower carbon footprint. And of course, how you count carbon footprints and food miles depends entirely on which factors are included--and excluded-- from the analysis. I've never met anyone as clever at manipulating variables in a computer model as an economist, and you really do have to look hard at the assumptions being used.


There are other reasons to buy local, however, besides simply wanting to fight global warming and lower the carbon footprint of your meal. Today I attended a summit on agriculture and food safety from the farm to the fork sponsored by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture. I learned something there today that I frankly was stunned to find out, until I reflected on it further. We are, as a country, now importing more food than we are exporting. The last time food imports merely equalled our exports was 2003. And the trend is rapidly heading toward a day when the United States will be as dependent on foreign countries to produce our basic food stuffs as we are on foreign oil producers. That is staggering to me. And the single largest exporter of food products into the U.S. today is China.


It would be easy to go all xenophobic right at this point, but it truly is sobering to consider what that means. Today only 3% of the U.S. workforce is engaged in food and fiber production, and the average age of farmers in the U.S. is something like 60 years old. We are losing the producers, and that may actually be something we want to think about as a matter of national security. In the past year we have seen melamine added to food additives, antifreeze added to cough syrup and toothpaste, and lead-based paint on toys coming out of China. Less than 1% of imported products are inspected at the border, and less than 1/2% of products are analytically tested for chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, and antibiotics. Whatever you may think about modern industrial agriculture production practices, it is fair to say that foods produced locally in the United States have a better chance of being safer than many of the products coming in from countries that put less of an emphasis on food safety and product integrity than our producers do.


And, if you buy local produce from conscientious (perhaps also organic) farm producers, you may very well buy food with a lower total carbon footprint. That is not necessarily guaranteed, but it is certainly possible. It will also likely be a lot fresher. Something that was still on the vine this morning and bought this afternoon at the Farmer's Market is bound to be fresher than something packed, trucked, flown and moved about all over the globe before you took it home from the grocery store.


Before you decide I'm a raving anti-globalization lunatic, I have to admit that nothing about our modern food chain is simple, and I also worry about foreign producers. Last year I was in Guatemala, and I was really surprised to find out how hard it is to get a decent cup of coffee there. I was expecting (naively) that if you travel to the source, you will find amazing blends you can't get in the U.S. What I learned was that their best coffee was grown purely for export to Europe and the U.S. The locals are even having to mount a cultural campaign to teach Guatemalans about coffee and how to brew a good cup of coffee. When I saw the poverty and other social conditions there, of course my desire was to see their producers be able to grow a product and earn a living from it. As long as it is done fairly and safely, I do believe part of what America has to do to be good world citizens is to buy goods from overseas producers. I am just worried that we must do more to support our own producers, for lots of reasons, than we are doing today. And I do count my food miles a lot more straightforwardly than some economists might.

12 comments:

Richard said...

Thanks for following up on my comment. I don’t have any professional or personal stake in the food miles debate, and I haven’t taken the time to sort out all of the factors. It would be perverse if locally produced foods usually had a bigger carbon footprint, so I suspect that buying local makes a lot of sense from the global warming perspective much of the time, and as you point out there are many other arguments for buying local. I’m just very much aware of H.L. Mencken’s warning that “for every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.”

One of my colleagues has been as troubled as you about the fact that the U.S. is now a net importer of food. I’m a big believer in trade. When trade is done right, everyone wins. Pareto optimal and what not. I’m not too worried about dependence on imported foods yet, because we aren’t overly dependent on a single country or region for any critical food. However, extensive trade obviously makes food safety a lot more difficult, as recent events have demonstrated.

The final point I’d raise is one of economic efficiency. If we are going to tackle global warming, we should do it as efficiently as possible. Locally grown food usually costs more than what you would pay in a grocery store. One would have to do the math, but purely from a carbon perspective it might do more good to buy the cheaper food from the grocery store and invest the difference in effective carbon offsets.

Ken (EnvironmentalChemistry.com) said...

Wow, this post really gave me some food for thought. Being a net importer of food is really scary from a national security standpoint and China being the single biggest exporter of food to the U.S. is scary from a food safety standpoint. This is especially scary since unlike other goods, food products are not required to label the country of origin of ingredients. I really think that the country of origin for food and/or food ingredients should be required to be disclosed on all food products. This would give the consumer the ability to vote with their wallet and maybe help give domestic farmers some sort of competitive advantage.

By the way, what was your source of data for your facts and figures?

Richard said...

Country of Origin Labeling is on the way, but it’s been a bumpy ride. One of my colleagues shared the following newspaper article with me:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/327950_label17.html?source=mypi

Apex DBS said...

I pulled the percentages from slide talks I saw at the Ag First summit in Raleigh this week and from speeches given by two of our Congressmen (Bob Etheridge and Walter Jones) who spoke there. The speakers giving the slides were officials from the NC Department of Agriculture, but I don't have better references to give you than that.

Ken (EnvironmentalChemistry.com) said...

I've been searching high and low for any statistics related to food imports vs. exports and thus far have only found one reference dated 2005 stating that U.S. food imports exceeded exports for a few months in 2004. Beyond that I've found nothing. I did learn, however, that food imports from China have doubled since 2004. See: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10410111

I have been working researching and writing on a big article on the subject of China and product/food safety for almost a week and will be posting the article on my blog on Monday morning. What we have seen in the news is just the tip of the iceberg. The problem with imported food/product safety, especially from China, is much bigger than what most people realize.

Richard said...

Ken, a colleague of mine has been following the net import story and the problems with food safety of imported foods. I'll see if he can point me to the original sources for the net import information on Monday.

I've seen the same numbers about inspection and analysis that DBS posted, but I don't have the original source.

Ken (EnvironmentalChemistry.com) said...

I have found the numbers for inspection and analysis rates all over the Internet on really respectable news sources so I'm good with that. I just couldn't find any reliable numbers in regards to imports vs. exports.

Richard said...

I might be able to help you with that, Ken. I'll get back to you on Monday.

Richard said...

Ken,
Sorry, my colleague did not have a source for the imports>exports statistic. He'd read it in a newspaper article but didn't keep the article.

Ken (EnvironmentalChemistry.com) said...

Richard, thanks for checking.

I did publish my blog article this morning. It is titled "Made in China with lead or other toxins". I may look at the bigger food/product import issue again rather than just focusing on China at a later date. I think people will be stunned to the sheer extent of this issue once they read my article. What is being reported in the news is only the tip of the iceberg and all one needs to do is go to the CSPC and EPA websites and dig through their action notices and recall statements to realize how extensive this issue is. My article provides links to both.

Apex DBS said...

Ken

Very nice piece--well documented and laid out. Amazing, isn't it? Only 1% of imported goods get inspected, and 1,877 times Chinese goods were rejected? Not to be alarmist or anything, but there really is no telling what all we are consuming every day, chemically speaking.

Ken (EnvironmentalChemistry.com) said...

Thanks Apex,

Yes only 1% of food imports getting inspected really blew me away. What really blew me away was some of the investigative reports by the New York Times. In particular NY Times tracing how the cough syrup in Panama became contaminated. The deeper one looks into the matter the more one sees that there is a culture of lawlessness contaminating Chinese manufacturing and trade. It doesn't matter how many laws the Chinese central government enacts because those laws have to be enforced by regional authorities who often have other priorities. Furthermore no law is very successful without the support of the people. Unfortunatly the people don't fully appreciate the importance of strict safety standards when their own lives don't benefit from strict safety standards.