I don’t necessarily want to knock on Chipotle here—Here’s my disclaimer: I think they do have good principles; sustainably sourced food is always a plus for a chain restaurant.
However, the new ads that are all over the metro just piss me off. My least favorite says the following: “We wanted to have farmers in our ads, but big burritos sell better than lessons on sustainable farming.”
Wait a minute! Why can’t lessons on sustainable farming sell? Is our society than shallow that we will only pay attention to a mouth-watering burrito over the future of our planet?
Okay, yes, its marketing tactics, and I suppose they work on some level. I get it, they are a sustainable company and burritos are yummy… but it bothers me still, the message is all-wrong.
Yes, this rant is a little, well there’s not much to it, except the fact that the ad annoys me so much on my way to work everyday. And, hey, what do I have this blog for anyways?
28 June 2010
24 June 2010
Certified Organic: The importance behind label
I find that individuals, who start to buy “sustainable food” items, often fixate on buying solely organically certified products. While this is a good step, to begin thinking about our food—organic is not synonymous with sustainable. It is a common misconception we have as consumers prone to marketing tactics and green washing of products.
As vulnerable customers, we need to remain wary of the product’s legitimacy. Labels can say “natural” or even “organic” without actually obtaining the certification—therefore the product is not necessarily complying with the regulations as it claims. Even with an “official seal” of organic, there is reason for question. Different organizations offer third-party certifications and while all claim to offer the best package of compliance rules and regulations, the specifics are not listed on the package. (And let’s be honest, who really is checking the company or label’s background when doing the week’s shopping?)
For example, the United States Department of Agriculture has it’s own set of guidelines, with the National Organics Program, but as we all know—any government program (Okay, any program really—but government in particular!) is accompanied by a great deal of compromise. This is not necessarily a negative component of our system; in fact, it is often one of the greatest aspects of it. However, in situations such as with food and agricultural policy, really do need strict guidelines and sacrificing standards and assurances may be in the best interest of the policy makers but not of the general public.
I am not claiming that organic certified products are bad here—it certainly is a step in the right direction and good when it claims are fulfilled. If nothing else—green washing or not—the mainstreaming of organic food instills awareness in the public. It is merely important to remain conscious of the information we are fed and to be cautious concerning the matter of what our food claims to be and what it, in fact, contains.
As vulnerable customers, we need to remain wary of the product’s legitimacy. Labels can say “natural” or even “organic” without actually obtaining the certification—therefore the product is not necessarily complying with the regulations as it claims. Even with an “official seal” of organic, there is reason for question. Different organizations offer third-party certifications and while all claim to offer the best package of compliance rules and regulations, the specifics are not listed on the package. (And let’s be honest, who really is checking the company or label’s background when doing the week’s shopping?)
For example, the United States Department of Agriculture has it’s own set of guidelines, with the National Organics Program, but as we all know—any government program (Okay, any program really—but government in particular!) is accompanied by a great deal of compromise. This is not necessarily a negative component of our system; in fact, it is often one of the greatest aspects of it. However, in situations such as with food and agricultural policy, really do need strict guidelines and sacrificing standards and assurances may be in the best interest of the policy makers but not of the general public.
I am not claiming that organic certified products are bad here—it certainly is a step in the right direction and good when it claims are fulfilled. If nothing else—green washing or not—the mainstreaming of organic food instills awareness in the public. It is merely important to remain conscious of the information we are fed and to be cautious concerning the matter of what our food claims to be and what it, in fact, contains.
17 June 2010
The Cost of Food Part II
Can sustainable food be ethical if it is socioeconomically un-just? A peek at the American food system and why we need a change.
I feel the need to the write a follow-up to my previous post, The Cost of Food. In reference to a comment stating that sustainable food is a result of privilege and access—and I agree. Yes, I am privileged in that respect—I have access and the choice, there is no denying that. And yes, I do choose to prioritize both my time and money to ensure my food is more sustainable, for the reasons I have explained.
I should, however, clarify that when I talk about the need to eat sustainably and make the sacrifices to do so, I am talking about people that are able to do that. Let me be clear that an overwhelming number of people, who are able to do so, choose not to. I am not denying the fact that there are people who do not have the means to guarantee their next meal, let alone debate between organic versus local vegetables.
Herein lies the problem with the American food system. Quick lesson: government subsidies are provided to large corporations that manufacture unhealthy food at a cheaper cost, creating the situation we have today where it is cheaper to buy a bag of chips and a soda than apples and milk. For people who struggle to make ends meet, the concern is not centered on if the food is ethical, but rather if the price is affordable. The affordable food is not ethical nor is it healthy—hence the health crisis. But the system does not have to be this way; it is not something that we should take as it is. The richest nation in the world should not be food insecure; Food security is not only defined as access to food, but as access to nutritious food.
Is this too communistic for you? I am not advocating for handouts here, rather I think market-based solutions can be found that do not compromise the livelihood of the consumer not the future of the planet. I am not naïve to think that we can change the system overnight or single-handedly. Nevertheless, I am still idealistic enough to believe that with effort, with a movement and with collective steps, a difference can be made. And part of that is making the effort to do what you can in your own life.
So, to reiterate, often eating sustainably at this time in our society is a privilege. However, if you are privileged enough to be able to do that—than it’s a good place to start and then the next step is to insure that sustainable food is not a privilege, but a right.
I feel the need to the write a follow-up to my previous post, The Cost of Food. In reference to a comment stating that sustainable food is a result of privilege and access—and I agree. Yes, I am privileged in that respect—I have access and the choice, there is no denying that. And yes, I do choose to prioritize both my time and money to ensure my food is more sustainable, for the reasons I have explained.
I should, however, clarify that when I talk about the need to eat sustainably and make the sacrifices to do so, I am talking about people that are able to do that. Let me be clear that an overwhelming number of people, who are able to do so, choose not to. I am not denying the fact that there are people who do not have the means to guarantee their next meal, let alone debate between organic versus local vegetables.
Herein lies the problem with the American food system. Quick lesson: government subsidies are provided to large corporations that manufacture unhealthy food at a cheaper cost, creating the situation we have today where it is cheaper to buy a bag of chips and a soda than apples and milk. For people who struggle to make ends meet, the concern is not centered on if the food is ethical, but rather if the price is affordable. The affordable food is not ethical nor is it healthy—hence the health crisis. But the system does not have to be this way; it is not something that we should take as it is. The richest nation in the world should not be food insecure; Food security is not only defined as access to food, but as access to nutritious food.
Is this too communistic for you? I am not advocating for handouts here, rather I think market-based solutions can be found that do not compromise the livelihood of the consumer not the future of the planet. I am not naïve to think that we can change the system overnight or single-handedly. Nevertheless, I am still idealistic enough to believe that with effort, with a movement and with collective steps, a difference can be made. And part of that is making the effort to do what you can in your own life.
So, to reiterate, often eating sustainably at this time in our society is a privilege. However, if you are privileged enough to be able to do that—than it’s a good place to start and then the next step is to insure that sustainable food is not a privilege, but a right.
05 June 2010
The Cost of Food
The other day a friend of mine asked me if my groceries cost me more than normal people. My first response was to question the integrity of the question—excuse me, what qualifies “normal people”? After thinking about it—I said, yes, when I go to the organic market, the farmers market, or even the Supermarket, my food probably does cost me more than “the average person.”
But, then again, maybe not—I buy lots of fruits and vegetables, I don’t buy meat, I don’t buy ultra-processed snack foods… I buy whole foods (no, not the store), raw foods, and ingredients. Regardless of the cost of my actual groceries, the cost-benefit (what up, economics!) analysis will still come out in my favor if I am paying more for my food in order to ensure that it is good for me.
The taste is the most common reason. Paying for higher quality food just plain tastes better and I enjoy what I’m eating. When it costs more, I am more conscious about my appreciation for it. (See previous post to hear more of my ranting on this matter!)
Beyond the obvious, the health benefits from eating better quality food also weigh into the cost. Paying the higher price for food, the health care costs are often reduced. As epidemics of diabetes and obesity are becoming bigger issues for the public, the cost of healthy food that prevents these diseases is low in comparison.
The benefits behind the price of food do not stop on the personal level. The environment, of course, is another major reason to care about our food. The environmental impact of industrialized agriculture and farming the United States uses today is catastrophic. Buying food that has less of an impact may cost more at face value, but the long-term costs on the planet are far worse.
I am going to conclude with something that my vegetarian roommate (who is doing her best to convert me—into a vegetarian, that is) lives by. Although we spend more on our vegetables when we buy high-quality Organic, we still are saving money compared to the “conventional” shopper because we do not buy meat, which is expensive on all accounts.
So, “Average Shopper,” next time at the store, spend a little extra on the spinach and apples—it might be worth it at the end of the day.
But, then again, maybe not—I buy lots of fruits and vegetables, I don’t buy meat, I don’t buy ultra-processed snack foods… I buy whole foods (no, not the store), raw foods, and ingredients. Regardless of the cost of my actual groceries, the cost-benefit (what up, economics!) analysis will still come out in my favor if I am paying more for my food in order to ensure that it is good for me.
The taste is the most common reason. Paying for higher quality food just plain tastes better and I enjoy what I’m eating. When it costs more, I am more conscious about my appreciation for it. (See previous post to hear more of my ranting on this matter!)
Beyond the obvious, the health benefits from eating better quality food also weigh into the cost. Paying the higher price for food, the health care costs are often reduced. As epidemics of diabetes and obesity are becoming bigger issues for the public, the cost of healthy food that prevents these diseases is low in comparison.
The benefits behind the price of food do not stop on the personal level. The environment, of course, is another major reason to care about our food. The environmental impact of industrialized agriculture and farming the United States uses today is catastrophic. Buying food that has less of an impact may cost more at face value, but the long-term costs on the planet are far worse.
I am going to conclude with something that my vegetarian roommate (who is doing her best to convert me—into a vegetarian, that is) lives by. Although we spend more on our vegetables when we buy high-quality Organic, we still are saving money compared to the “conventional” shopper because we do not buy meat, which is expensive on all accounts.
So, “Average Shopper,” next time at the store, spend a little extra on the spinach and apples—it might be worth it at the end of the day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)