Organic food shopping while millions go hungry
Blogged by: Mark Snelling
A chef prepares a tray of organic asparagus at The Ritz Hotel in London, April 2006.
REUTERS/Catherine Benson
REUTERS/Catherine Benson
Reverse culture shock can be one of the hardest adjustments for any journalist or aid worker.
It's one thing acclimatising to the very immediate demands and deadlines of an assignment in a strange and often hostile environment. It's quite another then having to readjust to the alleged normality of a comfortable life in the West when you get back. To put it bluntly, it can really do your head in.
I was reminded of this again this week wandering around the new Whole Foods superstore in west London. This is a branch of a U.S.-based organic produce emporium that's finally made its way across the Atlantic. It's big, it's brash, and it's eye-wateringly expensive.
Trailing along the cavernous aisles of organic delicacies - groaning shelves of perfectly formed fruits, vats of smoothie drinks and home-made soups, the thousand-yard stares of harassed dinner-party shoppers - I'm left with that old feeling that something has gone very, very wrong.
True, there's nothing worse than a preachy aid worker silently berating westerners for their profligate emptiness. Let's face it, some parts of the world are very poor and some parts of the world are very rich. That's a reality. Life in London and New York may be more affluent, but it's every bit as present and real for the people who live there as it is for residents of Dili, Dhaka or Gaza.
Nevertheless, my thoughts are inexorably drawn to the old, blind woman in Niger trying to feed her grandchildren on a bit of milk powder and a lot of empty promises. I think of the crippled, dispossessed and the mad struggling to make sense of anything at all in Mogadishu. I wonder about the hungry refugees I've met who will die of AIDS long, long before they get the chance to see home again. And then, returning to the present with a thud, I arrive at the sushi counter.
REAL COST OF FOOD
Back at the AlertNet office, a news release arrives from Save the Children that somehow gives shape to all of this.
A report published by the charity on Friday reveals how it costs the world's poorest people more than three times their income to feed their family a basic healthy diet.
Research for the report, entitled Running on Empty, was carried out in four countries - Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Myanmar and Tanzania. It shows that between 15 and 79 percent of households just do not have the means to give their children a decent diet.
To put this in context, the report calculates what the average family food bill would be in Britain if you applied the same differential between average weekly earnings and the actual cost of feeding a family.
Consider then that a Bangladeshi family would need to spend the equivalent of £1,704 a week to feed itself properly. In Ethiopia, the bill is £677, followed by Tanzania at £593 and Myanmar at £584.
"The poorest families simply do not have the money to afford to ever feed their children enough good food for them to grow up healthy and strong," says Costanza de Toma, Save the Children's hunger advocacy advisor. "Poverty has condemned them to a hand-to-mouth existence and their children to a future of stunting or early death."
Save the Children has joined the growing consensus in favour of cash benefit schemes for the world's poor as opposed to traditional food handouts.
"Food aid can be a blunt tool for tackling chronic malnutrition. Putting cash, rather than food, directly into people's hands means they can buy what they need, not take what they are given," says de Toma.
The charity estimates that chronic malnutrition is responsible for 5.6 million child deaths a year. It's a number so vast that it threatens to become frighteningly meaningless. But as I finally make my escape from the Whole Foods Market, I can almost hear the bells tolling.
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
19 responses to “Organic food shopping while millions go hungry”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
05 Jul 2007 17:02:07 GMT
Thank you for this great article. It is so important that we in affluent countries recognize how privileged we are and do as much as possible to help people in poorer countries achieve food security -- for example, by supporting those aid agencies with effective ways of helping people, or by pressuring our governments toward trade policies that are better for devoloping countries.
Where I take issue with your article is the suggestion that buying organic food is somehow worse than buying other food. I can see your point in that it is generally more expensive, but I think that most people who buy organic have a higher appreciation for the value of food and proper nutrition. Such an attitude is more compatible with the needs of the undernourished than the attitude of people who de-value food by mindlessly consuming cheap "manufactured food" without thought for how or where it was produced, or if it is even healthy.06 Jul 2007 08:56:37 GMT
"True, there's nothing worse than a preachy aid worker silently berating westerners for their profligate emptiness."
Perhaps you should have stopped at that.06 Jul 2007 09:00:06 GMT
Nobody's denying the existence of poverty. Your point about choosing more expensive organic food when people are starving could just as well be made about luxury cars, nice clothes, nice furniture, anything that goes beyond what we must have to live. Yes, it's a lottery whether we're born in western Europe or western Africa, but that being the case, I'd never deny people the opportunity to enjoy what they have worked for.
Organic food is something like any other hierarchy of needs. We in many parts of the world have plenty of food; now we can get picky about it. Hence the increasing demand for organics not just in Europe and the US, but throughout the world. Fortunately this also increases demand for agricultural products and gives third world farmers the chance to feed a hungry niche (yes, of course, most importantly they need to feed their families.) And since many organic consumers also look for Fair Trade, they help ensure a reasonable return to those farmers that conventionally grown products do not. Debbie http://www.organic-food-and06 Jul 2007 09:09:33 GMT
I agree it is a great article. Reverse culture shock is so much harder than the initial culture shock, and only people who have experienced it can truly understand.
In response to T Wiebe, I don't think the article intended to imply that buying organic is "worse" than buying anything else. I think the point is that we have so many options in developped countries that we can have an enormous grocery store dedicated solely to one particular type of food production. It was only to point out the options that we have and that a place like Whole Foods can exist and prosper, not to place blame on the people who shop there. After all, the author himself was in the store.06 Jul 2007 13:35:24 GMT
I completely identified with this article. After returning from working in aid in Cambodia I found myself experiencing similar reverse shock. For me it was in a playground - watching the well-dressed children play and laugh on swings while their parents stood protectively by brought into my head images of naked starving toddlers carrying their baby brother or sister on their hip while asking for some money or food. Reverse culture shock is difficult to explain to those who haven't experienced it, and I found most people unable to understand what I was feeling. Something is terribly wrong with the state of the world, and I think Mark Snelling made his point well.
06 Jul 2007 16:18:37 GMT
What we in the west have achieved is not something to be ashamed of. Materially at least, if not ideologically, it is what most people in the world aspire to as well. Comfort, wealth, security and choice. Fridge freezers, Toyota's and mars bars. So let's not be too quick to mock and disparage - i'm sure many people are thrilled that the Whole Foods store has made it to London, or would like to have one in their city. But with our earnestness, let's also not forget that we should keep tackling the underlying obstacles that mean even basic dignity is not possible everywhere yet. And that doesn't necessarily mean charity, because as anyone who's ever been on the dole knows, it doesn't feel at all dignified. That is, unless NGOs plan to start handing out Jojuba and Mung Bean Smoothies or serving up Frapuchinos in eastern Chad...
06 Jul 2007 16:21:06 GMT
Curiously I had a conversation on this very topic while preparing to celebrate Independence Day here in the States. The discussion fit neatly into the same context Mr. Snelling laid out in his article, with trade, food aid, and organic consumption as the subject. I find that folks choose organic foods for a variety of reasons- from an affinity for freshness, nutritional advantages, to other perceived health benefits. While there are some in these groups who are really sold out and buy nothing but certified organic foods in an almost religious fashion, most folks I run into are fairly mainstream and like the food because it is fresher than perhaps some of the more traditionally grown produce. Consumer preferences absolutely should drive markets, and organics are a great example of the impact. Not long ago you had to really hunt around for a small shop which sold a version of organic foods. Now, Whole Foods and even Wal-Mart are providing a tremendous outlet for these products. Yes, the food is often a little more crisp, fresh, and tasty than some competing produce. However, the very reason for its quality is also the reason for its price and perhaps shows the limits of organic production. Without the advantage of conventional products to keep insects and plant diseases at bay, the products can face lower yields and shorter shelf life. So, while we have become affluent enough in the West to afford a return to painstakingly grown produce, we might want to be careful about how much conventional production is displaced for a luxury good. There are a lot of hungry people in this world; about 850 million by most counts. Just make sure that you do not forget about them as you shop for something you have rightfully come to afford.
06 Jul 2007 16:21:40 GMT
I so can relate with the feeling you expressed. It is an odd feeling to be sure and I don't think you need to apologize for for being a preachy aid worker; we really hear what you are saying. I had the hardest time in a similiar situation. Now, I can't even get people to sign letters about Darfur. Truly, it is difficult to be in the midst of so much affluence and feel so alone. It is overwhelming.
09 Jul 2007 10:06:24 GMT
Thanks for a wonderful article. I wish you could have included a link to 'Save the Children' or another helping organization.
We should not forget that our job here is to bring the downtrodden UP. No one benefits by trying to push ourselves down in an embarassed outward 'show of equality'. Organic farming works because it supports so many skilled and valuable workers and owners who take pride in their work. We hope that one day these treasures will show up around the planet. And we hope that we are moving in that direction, more and more everyday. But in times of the kinds of scarcity that threaten people's very lives or those of their children, we oughtn't forget that there are other lessons we have learned. Such as those found in Dennis Avery's book, 'Saving the Planet with Pesticides and Plastic; The Environmental Triumph of High-Yield Farming'. Alas, miracles don't happen overnite. We also shouldn't assume that we are poisoning the world just because we are feeding them. Be patient and do something good in the world. We are all working together in the same direction.09 Jul 2007 10:08:43 GMT
The point, I believe, is not whether people are eating foods that are healthy and organic, but rather, what we can do to help those who are not able to do so. There are thousands upon thousands in the U.S. and Europe who are starving and eating whatever they can, amidst the wealth. To point the finger at a store or company who sells organic food is not the point. I am sure none of us know about the culture shock, but thank you for sharing, hopefully we can take that information and help where we can and not numbly sit on our hands.
09 Jul 2007 10:10:23 GMT
Strongly agree with you. It's mind bogglingly unfair that affluent westerners can turn their nose up to some types of food while people all across the world starve.
If those same westerners were all ALSO donating a big chunk of their wages to groups like MSF or Save the Children, the complaint would be unfounded because the issue would no longer exist. But.........yeah, here we are. Excellent article. Thank you very much for writing it.09 Jul 2007 10:11:46 GMT
I read this article very much understanding the author's comments on the decadence of the Western world. What's interesting to me is that we must comment on this difference in "worlds"! the "developed" and the "developing"...it's basically the same discussion as "civilized" and "primitive", which none of the shoppers in Whole Foods Market would say, of course...
But what is also interesting is that the Whole Foods Market itself is actually a corporate model never before seen in the western world, essentially a gigantic cooperative food enterprise operated largely by employee stockholders. It's success flies in the face of every mega-conglomerate money monster corporation to come before it, and if I may...the real villains of the world we live in. If there is evil in this world, it must be corporations whose bottom line dictates labor exploitation, resource exploitation, unfair trade practices, greed on a scale most can't comprehend, withholding medicine, food, and shelter from those in poverty simply because they can, because those are the principles of capitalism. There's only one way I can see for our world, and perhaps even in our lifetimes, for these principles to change...that is for more organizations like Whole Foods to multiply and prosper. The organic food movement is significant to educating people to the option of buying food without chemicals, grown on small independent farms, with the hands of the farmer and his/her family. I can't think of anything more healthy for the World that is not mired in decadent consumption than for their to be a market for clean, simple, home grown foods.09 Jul 2007 10:13:29 GMT
Excuse me? Do you work for Monsanto or another one of those monstrous corporations trying to take over all the worldsââ¬â¢ food production?
Without traveling, I have experienced reverse culture shock too, simply by translating or editing a lot of documents for certain aid organizations. And I can say, by all means, please do rail against the profligate emptiness of greedy and wasteful westerners but, in your state of shock, donââ¬â¢t shoot down one of the few trends that might have some real merit. Perhaps all of what I have to say here is obvious or old news, but I will say it again anyway, at the risk of looking un-cool. I donââ¬â¢t care about that, but I do care about these issues, and it is worth repeating it all. I live in a large, rich, expensive city and spend more of my measly, hard-won and harder-to-stretch income than I can reasonably afford on organic produce for two reasons: 1) for my own health and 2) for political motivations, out of genuine, carefully-considered concern for the poor and hungry in our world and for the health of the planet. The prices are high and have recently gone even higher. Yet I still consider it worthwhile. And it might even be money better spent than giving to charities that will use up most of every dollar donated to pay for their own inefficient organizational costs and do precious little to ever help a real needy person (though I do try to give in ways that are useful when I can). I know that my purchase of organics will not, by itself, help those hungry people directly, but it will help the whole organic farming movement stay alive, along with other related sustainable practices, not to mention fair trade practices, and that is extremely importan! t. And that *will* have an impact on the poor, in the long run. Because if we don't change the very core of the way we do things, if we donââ¬â¢t quickly choose sustainability and organic farming and local food autonomy (in the rich countries and the poor ones) all over the world, then the monster companies and their pet politicians will soon have control of everything, with their false promises of relieving world hunger (which they are not doing ââ¬" they might well even be aggravating it ââ¬" and getting obscenely rich in the process) and their destruction of the environment, human, animal and plant health, heritage crops, land, small farmers and viable local food production and other small-scale, sane, reality-based economic practices everywhere. If you want to weep, do some digging and find the real crime scenes. In case you need a place to start, you might watch the movie called ââ¬ÅThe Future of Food,â⬠by Deborah Garcia, and once your perceptions have been stirred up a bit, start researching some more. Read the latest appallingly blithe spin concerning consumer acceptance of GM crops in France offered by Monsanto: http://news.scotsman.com09 Jul 2007 10:14:52 GMT
I think what we all tend to forget is that the very presence of well-meaning aid agencies and charities in these poorer regions jack up the prices of all basic commodities. As someone working in the aid sector myself, I'm often wondering how I contribute to inflation with every meal I order and how I'm willing to pay for it simply cos prices here are always cheap to me despite the fact that they are creeping up very quickly. Wherever there are richer expats flocking in, prices will go up.
09 Jul 2007 11:49:38 GMT
So what's the point here? That we should abandon organic/sustainable agriculture? Am I a bad person because I garden organically?
I don't think that's what the author meant at all, but I do think it was a tremendous mistake to somehow imply it. Spoiled an otherwise excellent article.11 Jul 2007 17:21:31 GMT
TO whom it may concern: I am 73 and did not need to go in a poorer country (poverty ,starving ) etc. Having been poor in this country and seeing first hand what the Depression did on my me (not my family ) I remember about ten years ago ,a twelve year old boy whose father was in the military was transferred to California and the family was having a hard time surviving ; there were only 4 people in this family and this boy was had a younger brother and he was so worried that his younger brother would not get enough to eat that he committed suicide : Now that was tragic but i am completely in tune with that .When i was twelve i was sent to work in a bowling alley to help the family .We had just been evicted and i was told not to come back to the eight grade at a catholic boys school in Woonsocket R.I. because we weren't paying our tuition money. And many times iwas thinking suicide and it was worse when my 2 older brothers died of c! ancer and heart attack at the ages of 38 and 46 ... I hate going into a food store like Whole Foods or anyother of that type ... I was the smallest in my family with 5 siblings before me and 5 after me .My younger brother was taller and heavier than me even when i was 10 and he was 8 ... I am not condemning anyone for the food they eat or where they buy but the people in these countries are not at fault for what is happening .We were born here out of pure luck and their situation is the same ..GOD bless america is not in my vocabulary ,IT sucks ,the ugly americans have grown UGLIER ,i was born in aug of 1934 ,the depression ended in 1941
13 Jul 2007 13:41:12 GMT
I appreciate for the wonderful article. Its really disappointing havin to know that by the time you dispose off your food wastes others are dying of hunger and millions are about to die because they have nothing to eat and atleast that waste could have been a help to them.
Its about time that we come to our senses of humour and save these children not for a reason of a 'good heart' as developed countries assume but because we owe them, its our responsibility after all, the development of European nations highly depended on African resources they manage to acquire during colonialism and probably if it weren't to them those children couldnt be dying by now. ''We are helping LDCs shouldnt be the vocabulary but we are paying back for what we owe them should be''. I PRAY THAT THIS WORLD BECOMES A BETTER PLACE SOMEDAY.29 Jul 2007 12:32:56 GMT
Itâs not the case of preachy aid worker silently berating westerners for their profligate emptiness. Itâs everyoneâs realization of where we live and how we are allowed to live like this, either be it in the north or south.
Westerners are not âluckyâ to be born where they are born and by definition everyone else is âunluckyâ. The only difference between all of us is that in the west we have a greater responsibility to stop the total injustice of the west can live as they do while others live in poverty. We have more choice, more economic choice. If you can live with how the western society works so be it, thatâs your choice. A lot of the world doesnât have that choice, the wets makes that decision for them. Who knows how much longer the west will be âluckyâ?19 Sep 2007 16:35:20 GMT
The point of this article has been completely lost in the terrible way the writer chose to express it.
It would have been much better if he compared starving people with outlets like Macdonald's. It is how cheaply we can get food here, not how expensively, that is worrying. It is these kinds of businesses, (especially coffee and cocoa importing ones) that are not only grossly far off from the reality of starving babies, but one of the direct causes of poverty in these regions. Organic food is not designer food consumed as a fashion statement. It is food as it should be grown, it is the kind of food African farmers would be growing if they weren't working for big multi-nationals to supply you with your cheap cup of morning coffee. Organic farming is not only less harmful, it is cheaper as it doesn't rely on chemical fertilisers purchased from richer countries. Buying organic food from Africa or locally is the only way to ensure fair trade, a dignified living for the poor, and the boycott of multinational companies that make people poor in the first place.