ethics vs. economy?!

[ralf-nz]

'Shopping with a conscience can add a quarter to the weekly food bill, a Weekend Herald experiment has found.' for the full article go here http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/arti...ectid=10777234

IMHO they shoul have addressed in more detail the health aspect (or lack thereof) of cheap food too.

[Super_BQ]

It's been accepted that organic and fair-trade food costs more than their conventional equivalent. However, it's not been showed clearly to the public how the higher prices are warranted. One food i've never understood is organic bananas. The thought that fruits and veggies are pesticide free (hence by being organic) is better for your health, but in the case of bananas, how much pesticides are in it? After all we don't eat the skin (which would hold most of the pesticides?). Similar to the case of oranges. - so I think maybe that's what the article is trying to address ; consumers may be paying a lot of $ for such food but the benefits aren't really clear.

Even major corporations in the cotton textile business may advertise their product as being fair-trade, but somehow later on discover that their products were actually not made from fair-trade cotton. I mean how does the consumer know just because the products you see on the shelves can make such a claim?

Ethical or not, there's no proof that organic produce is more healthier. Likewise fair-trade or not, there's no for sure way to 100% monitor every chain of the production to ensure unethical practices doesn't exist.

[ralf-nz]

Ethical or not, there's no proof that organic produce is more healthier

Do I understand you correctly in saying that pesticides/herbicides and the like on our fruits (e.g. cherries, plums) don't harm? I personally think differently.

I also think that local produce has especially in NZ the advantage of avoiding huge transport costs, so they really can be competitive.

[Super_BQ]

The problem with organically grown foods is in order for a farmer to classed with that certification, all they have to do is go according to the guidelines of maximum allowable pesticides to be used. Organic does not mean 100% pesticide free, it just means the food is grown with less levels of chemicals and pesticides (or used in processed food).

I havn't seen any real competitiveness in fruits and veggies sold at the supermarkets. I mean their prices are insanely high compared to what the dedicated fruit and veggie suppliers can sell. Transportation cost isn't a huge cost, for the longest time I buy imported navel oranges from the US at the same price as locally grown NZ oranges. So if you buy the NZ grown ones, who is really pocketing the profit? Could it be because of large economies of scale of the imported grown fruits and veggies? Like Sunkist oranges are grown at such a huge volume that they can land the product in NZ cheaper than local grown oranges?

Each year in Alaska I see the same issue. The Mexican grown tomatoes were always priced less than the BC (Canadian) grown hothouse tomatoes despite Alaska being a lot closer to Canada than Mexico.

There's another more important issue looming in NZ. It's the invasion of genetically modified seeds for use in NZ - a la the likes of Monsanto. With GM, they can produce plants that resist pests and thus eliminating the use of harsh pesticides. What classification would be given to such fruits and veggies and most importantly, at what price? If they were priced on the market far less than what we have now, would people still refuse to buy GM foods?

[NikT]

Cobblers. LOL..

Oooh ey lighten up boys,

Nick..