Post on 12-Apr-2017
transcript
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
By Margarita Alcoz Cases
Global Project- Professional Diploma in Global Trade and e-Business
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ 3
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 5
CLIMATE CHANGE.............................................................................................. 6
FOOD MILES ........................................................................................................ 9
Food miles definition ...................................................................................... 9
Measurement of Food miles ......................................................................... 9
1. Modes of transport ........................................................................... 11
2. Transport efficiency .......................................................................... 13
3. Food production systems ................................................................. 14
Other impacts of food miles ....................................................................... 14
Methodology ................................................................................................ 15
Case Study: Tesco UK .................................................................................. 16
LOCAL FARMING IN THE UK ............................................................................ 18
AFRICAN EXPORTS TO THE UK ......................................................................... 21
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 23
RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 24
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................. 25
3
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The aim of this project is to analyse the different aspects that are being
discussed in the UK on the food miles debate. Food miles is a concept
that arises due to the alarming climate change and which is putting
pressure on the food industry. Food miles are the distance that food
travels from farm to plate. Its target is to identify the carbon footprint that
each unit carries to measure the impact on the environment. However,
the implications that food miles have go beyond the environment, as they
have important social an economic impacts.
A quality approach has been used to gather secondary data from online
articles and reports commissioned by state bodies and trade/professional
bodies. Many opinions and approaches have been written both boosting
the use of food miles and criticizing it. Through the collection of this data,
the projects aims to set some recommendations that may support ethical
shoppers that face a dilemma between being green and being fair.
Climate change has grabbed media attention in the past few months
and as it is already an alarming reality. Industrialised countries committed
in the Kyoto Protocol of 1992 to tackle the global warming by reducing
the dioxide of carbon (CO2) which are greatly harmful to the
environmental. However, this has been ignored and instead the emissions
will increase significantly.
The concept food miles come from the increasing concern on climate
change. However, it has been subject to self interested parties which their
only objective is to protect local farming and increase trade barriers to
countries exporting to the UK. These barriers reverse all principles of a
global economy that seeks comparative advantage to boost
international trade and competitiveness.
The case study of the new “eco-friendly” measures announced by Tesco
has been used as a case study in this project to show the scope of the
debate in the UK and its implications in the global economy. Tesco, the
4
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
main food retailer in the UK with 31% market share, targets to reduce the
import of airfreighted food and new carbon footprint labels will be placed
on over 70,000 lines.
The consumer awareness of the effects that food transport has on the
environment makes local shopping greener and may contribute in the
switch of buying habits. This fact may have devastating consequences for
those developing countries where are highly dependant on the exports to
the UK. Most of the fruit and vegetables available in the UK come from
sub-Saharan African countries. From this market alone, an estimated £200
million is injected into rural economies. Having said this, a cut down on
imports will reduce the total emissions in the UK only by 0.1%, but will effect
over a million African livelihoods removing their main source of income
and devastating many local communities.
A set of recommendations have been included at the end of the project,
in order to reduce the impact of food to the environment:
1. Review of the distribution strategies.
2. Promotion of rail transport.
3. Promote local food shopping.
4. Reduction of trade barriers.
5. Research of food production techniques.
6. Use of life-cycle assessment across all type of commodities.
7. Labeling of commodities with excess of energy consumption due
to any stage in the supply chain.
After analyzing the different perspective on the debate, the current
concept of food miles should be replace by a broader one that measures
the impact of food on the environment taking into account many other
factors and processes in the whole foodstuff lifetime, including food
transport. This way, a more accurate assessment will be gathered and
may not lead into a conflict between being green and being fair.
5
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
INTRODUCTION
Food miles in the concept used to identify the carbon footprint that food
has after travelling long distances from the farm until it reaches the
consumer plate. Most of the fresh fruit and vegetables (FFV) available in
the UK are coming from further a field, providing additional carbon
dioxide emissions that contribute to the climate change.
However, the debate on food miles goes beyond the environmental
impact. This paper will give an overview of the economic and social
implications that food miles have in the international trade and how the
term has been subject to self interested parties involved in food
production and distribution industry. Even tough research has found that
producing certain FFV locally in heated greenhouse or organically may
have a bigger impact on the environment than producing them overseas
and shipping them to the UK, food miles have been used to promote local
food. Imports of FFV are seen as a threat to local farming and carbon
friendly measurements have been put in place to increase barriers in the
global economy. The attempt of reducing imports may also have
devastating consequences, especially for those developing countries,
where most of the production is exported to the UK. These exports support
domestic economies and may be one few means they have to
overcome poverty.
The paper will begin by introducing the scope of climate change, the
concept of food miles and the controversy surrounding its measurement.
It will also analyse other negative impacts in addition to the direct ones.
Finally it will seek to put all the explored points together and set some
recommendations for those ethical consumers that might face a dilemma
between being green and being fair.
6
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate change1 is already an alarming reality and a threat that is racing
up the global political agendas.
Many factors contribute to the climate change, but transport is one of the
causes with a greater impact since it is the fastest growing sector in OECD
countries (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).
Transport consumes 31% of energy in the EU and it is responsible of 14% of
global greenhouse gas emissions, mainly due to road and air transport
[Hm Treasury, 07].
In the Kyoto Protocol of 1992 (commitment made by the industrial
countries to address the climate change issue by reducing their level of
pollution), the industrial countries agreed in reducing the dioxide of
carbon (CO2) emissions by 5.2% and six greenhouse gases by 8% of the
1990 level by 2008-2012 [European Commission, 07a]. However, this has
been completely ignored. Instead, Europe will increase these emissions by
40% compared to the levels of 1990, mainly because of road traffic.
Moreover, according to a report launched by Tyndall Centre from
Climate Change Research, “the UK has reached a “tipping point” and
needs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 90 per cent below 1990
levels by 2050 to make sure that world temperatures do not rise 2 degrees
centigrade above pre-industrial levels” [Tyndall Centre for Climate
Change, 06a] [Tyndall Centre for Climate Change. 06b].
The main impact that food transport has on the environment is the
following:
• Emissions of greenhouse gases (including water vapor, carbon
dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone) contributing to climate
change of the planet with global and long term consequences.
1 Climate change is the variation of the atmosphere state due to processes internal to the Earth, external
causes and human activities.
7
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
• Emissions of compounds that weaken the ozone layer and therefore
the protection of the Earth against ultraviolet radiations.
• Emission of CO2 that contributes to the air pollution.
• Noise pollution.
• Other externalities such as water contamination due to ship’s spills.
Other stages in the food chain also have a great impact on the
environment. The contribution of these factors to climate change has
increased dramatically over the past few years due to changes on the
food consumption patterns. Some of the factors that have most
influenced these new patterns are:
• Globalisation of the industry that now imports fresh fruits and
vegetables from further a field to offer and extended range of food
at any time of the year.
• Sales have moved from frequent shopping on foot in small shops to
weekly shopping by car in massive supermarkets placed on the
suburbs of towns and cities.
• Increased use of HGV (Heavy Goods Vehicles) trucks in the food
distribution strategies that operate from regional distribution
centres. As shown in Figure 1, there is an increasing trend in the
HGV use, contributing to the emission of greenhouse gases. Since
1978 the annual amount of food transported by HGVs in the UK has
grown by 23% and the average distance by 50% [AEA Technology,
05].
8
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
Figure 1: Trends in food trade and HGV food transport in the UK, 1991-2002 [AEA
Technology, 05]
However, even though many other stages in the supply chain contribute
significantly to climate change, such as production of pesticides, fertilizer
packaging and machinery which is especially harmful to the environment
[Edwards-Jones, 06], the debate in the UK is only focused on the impact
that transport has.
9
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
FOOD MILES
Food miles definition
The terms food miles as the distance (miles) that food stuffs have travelled
from the farms to the consumer’s plate was first coined by SAFE Alliance
almost ten years ago when the first concerns about the impact of food
transport were arising [AEA Technology, 05]. However, it has only been
recently when the term has grabbed the media attention.
The aim of food miles is to identify the carbon footprint that each product
has to make the consumer aware of his/her social responsibilities when
shopping food. Even though only one third of the British consumers are
aware of the meaning of food miles [James MacGregor et al, 06], the
concept is becoming very popular and it is already changing their buying
habits.
According to the report commissioned by DEFRA (Department for
Environment food and Rural Affairs), food miles are subject to 1.8% of the
total carbon dioxide emissions per annum in the UK [AEA Technology, 05]
Measurement of Food miles
Food miles are normally measured based on the distance travelled (miles
or Km) multiplied by the unit weight (tonnes). However, in order to know
the environmental impact of each unit, the measurement has to be
converted into vehicle kilometre which is the result of the “sum of the
distances travelled by each vehicle carrying food” [AEA Technology, 05].
Based on this measurement, the true cost of foodstuff imported to the UK
is shown on the Table 1.
PRODUCT TYPICAL
EXPORTER
FOOD MILES
TO UK
CO2
By sea By air
Apples US 3,700 0.06 kg/pack of
four
1.68 kg/pack of
four
10
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
Beef Argentina 6,900 0.22 kg/kg 6.33 kg/kg
Pineapple Ghana 3,100 0.22
kg/pineapple
6.26
kg/pineapple
Tomatoes Saudi Arabia 3,100 0.04 kg/pack of
six
1.2 kg/pack of
six
Spring onions Thailand 5,900 0.04 kg/pack 1.28 kg/pack
Potatoes Israel 2,200 0.07 kg/kg 2.0 kg/kg
Asparagus Peru 6,300 0.05 kg/pack 1.44 kg/pack
Broccoli Spain 780 0.01 kg/broccoli 0.22kg/broccoli
King prawns Indonesia 7,300 0.03kg/pack 0.84 kg/pack
Bananas India 5,106 0.16 kg/kg 4.67 kg/kg
Sugarsnap
peas Guatemala 5,450 0.04 kg/pack 1.0 kg/pack
Grapes Egypt 2,200 0.04 kg/pack 1.0 kg/pack
Strawberries Spain 780 0.01 kg/pack 0.19 kg/pack
Carrots South Africa 6,000 0.19 kg/kg 5.5 kg/kg
Avocados Mexico 5,500 0.03 kg/
avocado
0.89 kg/
Avocado
Pears Argentina 6,900 0.22 kg/kg 6.3 kg/kg
Blueberries South Africa 5,600 0.03 kg/pack 0.77 kg/pack
Green beans Zambia 4,900 0.03 kg/pack 0.9 kg/pack
Baby
sweetcorn Thailand 5,900 0.04 kg/pack 1.03 kg/pack
Sweet
potatoes China 5,000 0.16 kg/kg 0.92 kg/kg
Lamb New Zealand 11,700 0.38 kg/kg 10.7 kg/kg
Canned tuna Thailand 5,900 0.04 kg/pack 1.0 kg/pack
Table 1: The true cost of importing food to the UK. Source: [Joanna Blythman, 07]
It is obvious that the transport of food has an environmental and socio-
economic impact. However, one of the key findings of the report
commissioned by DEFRA, states that there is a very weak relationship
between the food transport and the external impacts of such. For
instance, 65% of food is transported by sea, whereas its impact when it
11
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
comes to congestion, accidents, carbon and other emissions, only
accounts for 12% [Defra, 07].
There are more factors to take into account when designing and
indicator to measure food miles. These factors are as follows:
1. Modes of transport
There are four main modes of transport: road, air, sea and rail. Only the
first three are commonly used for the transport of food. All of them have
an impact to the environment but at different levels.
* Road Transport
Road transport is responsible of the 84% of the CO2 emissions produced by
the transport sector [Euroactiv, 07] with a 32% of energy consumption and
28% of the CO2 emissions in the EU [European Commission, 07a].
In regards to food miles, road transport has an important impact on the
environment due to the transport from the farm to the supermarket, but
also the transport used by consumers for their weekly shopping.
*Air Transport
It is quite commonly used for the transport of perishable products across
long distances because of their short shelf life. It has a great impact in
regards to noise pollution. This mean of transport has been under intense
heat in the UK since it is used for the transportation of FFV from afar. But
international freight only counts for 5% of the air transport emissions,
whereas 90% of them are due to passenger flights in the UK.
From all the FFV imported by the UK, only 1.5% reaches the UK by air, but it
contributes to 50% of the total emissions caused by the transport of FFV
[James MacGregor et al, 06].
*Sea Transport
It is the main source of atmospheric pollution in terms of nitrogen oxides
(NO2) and sulphur oxides (SOx). It also contributes to acidification, ground-
level ozone, eutrophication, health, climate change and ozone depletion
12
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
[European Commission, 07]. Moreover, ships have a great impact on the
environment in terms of spills from heavy tankers to the sea.
*Rail Transport
It is a declining mode of transport even though it is the most
environmentally friendly mode of freight transportation for its low level of
air pollutants.
The following ranking evaluates the different pollutants emissions per each
mode of transport.
Ranking of the transportation modes-emission of air pollutants, EEA-25, 2001.
RANKING CO NOX NMVOC SO2
BEST
1 RAIL RAIL RAIL RAIL
2 AIR AIR AIR AIR
3 SHIP ROAD SHIP ROAD
4 ROAD SHIP ROAD SHIP
WORST
Table 2: Ranking of the transportation modes-emission of air pollutants, EEA-25, 2001.
Source: [European Environmental Agency, 03a]
Taking the total quantity in Ktonnes of the emissions of air pollutants into
consideration, rail transport is the mode with less impact on the
environmental while road and marine transport are the ones with a
greater impact.
In 2002, the transport of food generated 30 billion vehicle kilometres, 82%
of which were generated in the UK. What is more, 19 million tonnes of CO2
were emitted in 2002, 10 million of which were emitted in the UK, mainly
due to road transport. Air transport is the mode with the highest relative
CO2 emission (11%) and even though it is not largely used for freight
transport, except for FFV, it is the fastest growing mode [AEA Technology,
05 ].
13
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
Figure 2: UK food vehicle-kilometres by transport mode (2002). Source [AEA Technology,
05].
Figure 3: CO2 emissions associated with UK food transport (2002). Source [AEA
Technology, 05]
2. Transport efficiency
The current supply chain model used in the UK, involves centralised
distribution centres where large HGVs travel long distances until they
reach the shops across the country. These large trucks have a
14
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
considerable impact on the environment compared to smaller ones.
Nevertheless, they are extremely efficient when it comes to loading,
reducing the impact per tonne of food.
3. Food production systems
Certain food can be more efficiently produced or grown naturally in some
countries from further a field than doing so artificially in local farms.
Therefore even if the overseas food has to travel long distances, the
overall impact can be less than those foodstuffs produced locally. For
instance, growing tomatoes in a heated greenhouse in the UK during the
winter can have a more negative effect than growing them naturally in
Spain, even though they will have to be shipped across longer distances.
Like the case of the Spanish tomatoes, according to Lincoln University in
New Zealand, producing dairy products, lamb, onions and apples and
shipping them to the UK has less harm to the environment than actually
producing them locally, since New Zealand farming and processing
consumes less energy [The Economist, 06].
Therefore the straightforward approach of calculating food miles by
identifying the distance that food has traveled before reaching the
consumer’s plate, is over simplistic since the factors mentioned above
should be also be taken into account. Instead, a life cycle assessment
(LCA) should be used to assess the total energy spent in all the important
processes during the product’s lifetime.
Other impacts of food miles
The transport of any freight has an impact on the environment and
contributes to the alarming global warming. However, only the transport
of food, especially fresh fruit and vegetables, has captured attention
within the FMCG (Fast Moving Consumer Goods) sector. This is partly due
15
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
to the many self interested parties that are involved in the debate which
will be mentioned below.
But the debate of food miles have some collateral consequences that
have to be taken into account since they may do more harm than good
and they could prove disastrous. Some of them are:
• Congestion costs (42% of the total congestion costs in the UK is due
to food transportation), infrastructure costs (20% of the total due to
food transportation) and accidents (19% of which are related to the
food industry) [Defra, 07].
• They create trade barriers which are anti-competitive and raise
prices in the market place. It is against the principles of international
trade.
• The protectionism of the farming communities in the UK by lobbies
against import of food have a significant effect in the rural
economies in developing countries that depend on the exports to
Europe [The Economist, 06].
• The interest of northern countries to localise African exports reverses
the principles of comparative advantage on which the global
economy seeks specialisation in what a country can do best to
boost international trade and competitiveness. The main
comparative advantage of African countries is agriculture.
Methodology
Food miles is a topical issue that is being currently discussed world-wide.
Information can be largely found in articles, reports and opinions that
have been used as secondary data for this paper’s bibliography. A
qualitative approach has been used since it is generally the most efficient
method to gather information on consumer’s behaviours and trends.
What is more, the food miles controversy is relatively new, so large
statistical information is not available or easily accessible. The data has
been gathered from online articles and reports commissioned by State
16
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
bodies and trade/professional bodies. On the other hand, many opinions
have arisen from the debate, putting into perspective the different
aspects of food miles which has facilitated the focus of this project.
Many articles have recently been written after Tesco’s announcement of
its new “eco friendly” measures to be put in place across its stores in the
UK in the next few months. This fact has been used below as a case study
to show how the food miles debate is increasing among Britons and it is
putting pressure in the industry to shift buying habits. Tesco, as a market
leader in the retail market of UK, will be followed by the other multiples
competing in the market-place, such as Marks &Spencer and Asda.
Tesco’s latest target to bring the green movement into the mass market
by boosting the term food miles will have great implications in the global
economy. The concept of food miles as it is being used by media, implies
that local food is greener than food produced in further a field and
shipped into the UK. These implications, which are now being promoted
by retailers, increase the protectionism of local farming and rise new trade
barriers that lead to less suppliers competing in the market-place and
therefore higher prices.
Case Study: Tesco UK
The threat of climate change and the concern of food miles have also
had an impact on the food retailers in the UK. The main players have spot
that the green approach in their business strategies, not only makes sense
but makes money too.
Tesco, the main player in the UK food retailer market in the UK with 31%
market share and 1,900 stores nation wide, has been the first multiple in
becoming more eco friendly. Tesco produces 2m tonnes of carbon a year
in the UK due to its stores and distributions centres and it aims to bring
down such emissions by 50% by 2020 [Julia Finch et al, 07].
The multiple plans to reduce its air import from the current 2%-3% to less
than 1%. Moreover, it will place new carbon footprint labels on over
17
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
70,000 lines available in Tesco’s stores [Julia Finch et al, 07]. However, this
plan will not be put in place immediately due to the food miles
measurement controversy. Meanwhile, an airplane symbol will be added
to the labels of all food products that have been airfreighted into the UK.
This way, Tesco will enable consumers to express their views through their
choices, instead of imposing boycotts as it has been done in the past.
They will be able to compare carbon costs like they compare their
nutritional values in order to make sustainable choices.
Nonetheless, what it may look like a green approach to combat climate
change can be also seen as a marketing strategy to differentiate Tesco
from its competitors. Unlike Sir Terry Leahy, Tesco’s chief executive, stated
to the Guardian [Julia Finch et al, 07], its ultimate target may go beyond
the concern for global warming; it may aim to attract prospective
customers that are seeking to feel socially responsible when shopping
food. Tesco’s green approach may be just a profit-maximizing strategy
that provides an added value to their customers.
18
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
LOCAL FARMING IN THE UK
The consumer awareness of the effects that food transport has on the
environment makes local shopping greener and an ecological necessity.
National farm lobbies and anti-corporate activists are putting pressure on
the industry, stressing the impact of food shipped in from afar. For
instance, according to the Farmers Weekly [Farmers Weekly, 07], food
miles:
• Are harmful for the environment. As explained above, the longer
the distance a foodstuff has to travel to reach the consumers plate,
the more additional carbon dioxide is emitted.
• Reduce freshness as foodstuffs have to travel long distances.
• In non steady international environment, importing food from
overseas will never be secure, as trade may be affected at any
moment.
• Make consumer lose their sense of seasonality as any fruits and
vegetables are available in the market place all year round.
• Make it harder to monitor the producer performance and
standards as most of them are on the other side of the globe.
• Increment the transport costs because of the increased distance
that foodstuffs have to travel.
However, targeting food miles does not necessary mean that the
greenhouses emissions will be reduced, as there are many other stages
within the food supply chain where these gases are also emitted.
Especially in western-style farming methods which are energy intensive,
adding significant emissions, compared to other methods used in
developing countries which are labour intensive instead.
Even if it was the case that local food is less harmful that the overseas
food and consumers were willing to switch their buying habits, the offer of
fresh fruit and vegetables will be dramatically reduced in both variety and
availability. In the figure below, it is shown the seasonality of some of the
19
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
most common commodities available in the UK and the months of the
year on which they would be available if no food were imported from
abroad.
Figure 4: Local food seasons. Source: [Joanna Blythman, 07]
On the other hand, it has to be stressed that if farmers were seriously
about combating the climate change and real green measures were to
be taken, both imports and exports should be largely cut down. And even
though imports are larger than exports in the UK, 27% of imports versus 15%
of exports [AEA Technology, 05], the supposed “buy local” but also “sell
local” would have substantial economic impacts.
Mackerel
Welsh Lamb
Watercress
Strawberries
Asparagus Typical origin: nationwide
Typical origin: Hereford
Typical origin: Hampshire, Dorset
Typical origin: South Wales
Typical origin: Scotland
Ma
y
Ja
nu
ary
Fe
bru
ary
Ma
rch
Ap
ril
Ju
ne
July
Au
gu
st
Se
pte
mb
er
Oc
tob
er
No
ve
mb
er
De
ce
mb
er
20
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
Figure 5: UK Food Balance in 2000 (by weight), [AEA Technology, 05].
21
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
AFRICAN EXPORTS TO THE UK
In today’s global economy, barriers are decreasing in imports and exports
of goods and services across the globe. However, in the agricultural
industry there are many bilateral trade pressures, self interested parties,
protectionism by governments and lobbies that difficult the international
trade of foodstuffs. This fact, is worsened when the food miles terms is put
into the equation. What it may seem as a sensitive action that aims to
reduce the environmental impact of food transport, also has important
social and economic consequences when other countries are taken into
account. The green attitude that Northern countries have recently
adopted it is seen by others as a form of “environmental colonialism” that
plans to protect the local agriculture and increase import barriers.
Increased sales on locally produced foods result in a decrease in the
exports of overseas farmers which may have devastating consequences.
Most of the fruit and vegetables available in the UK come from sub-
Saharan African countries (except for South Africa). According to the
International Institute for Environment and Development, over £1 million is
spent in fresh fruits and vegetables originated in this region every day in
the UK [James MacGregor et al, 06].
Exports to the UK are the main income and one of the few supports of
sub-Saharan African countries (SSA) domestic industries. From the UK
market alone, an estimated £200 million is injected into rural economies
and it supports 1-1.5 million of African livelihoods [James MacGregor et al,
06].
But now the shopping habits are already changing in some northern
countries towards the locally produced food since it is believed that food
miles are harmful for the environment. However, it has been found by
DEFRA that not only 3.1% of food miles are due to imports from developing
countries and but air-freighted fruit and vegetables from SSA accounts for
22
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
less than 0.1% of the total carbon dioxide emissions in the UK [James
MacGregor et al, 06].
The debate can be also analysed from the “ecological space”
perspective which plays a role in the global warming debate. “Ecological
space” is the right to natural resources that each individual has. Some of
the most common natural resource will be water, food, land and energy.
The current ecological space or the right to emit carbon dioxide per
capita is very uneven across the globe. The average global ecological
space is 3.6 tonnes, whereas UK counts for 9.2 tonnes and Africa only 1
tonne. For instance, according to World Bank figures, a Briton emits 30
times more carbon dioxide in average than a Kenyan [Aidan Hartley, 07].
This means that if the emissions of carbon dioxide have to reduced,
industrialised countries such as the UK will have to reduce them
dramatically, whereas African countries could remain steady since they
are by far below the average. Not only the contribution of Africans to
climate change is not significant enough to reduce the consumption of
food coming from these countries, but the excess of ecological space
could be used to reduce poverty by continued exports of food to the UK.
From the global perspective, food miles are being used by developed
countries to protect local markets, making the rich people richer and the
poor people, more miserable and angry.
And even if countries such as Kenya have been lobbying retailers in the
UK to label properly the FFV to protect their market share [Zeddy Sambu,
07], developing countries are already suffering the consequences of the
climate change caused by developed countries.
23
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
CONCLUSION
The concept of Food miles as the additional carbon dioxide emitted by
food transported from countries afar to the UK is an over-simplistic view.
Greenhouse gases which are one of the main external costs contributing
to climate change are emitted along the whole supply chain, i.e.
packaging, storage and distribution centres across the UK. However, sights
are only set on the fresh food and vegetables transportation costs.
Other environmental (i.e. energy inputs of agricultural practises), social
and economics aspects have also to be taken into account, as a shift in
the buying habits of the Britons can do more harm than good in the
bigger picture.
In western countries, many self interested parties are pressuring the
industry to promote locally produced food. Even though their interests
may go beyond the combat of global warming, they might mislead the
consumers to cut down food imports and increase barriers in the
international trade.
“Carbon friendly” measures such as the carbon footprint labels on
products, will promote local fresh fruits and vegetables against those
coming from developing countries, i.e. sub-Saharan countries, where
exports to the UK is the main support to their regional economies. A cut
down on imports will reduce the total emissions in the UK only by 0.1%, but
will effect over a million of African livelihoods, removing their main source
of income and devastating many local communities.
The threat of climate change it is already a reality and it is racing up the
global political agenda. Hopefully the pressure for reducing food miles will
be replaced by pressures to reduce emissions in the food life cycle as a
whole, especially in developed countries.
24
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
RECOMMENDATIONS
There are recommendations that can contribute to reduce the impact
that the food industry has on global warming, without necessarily focusing
exclusively on food miles:
1. Review of the distribution strategies used in the food supply
chain.
2. Promotion of rail transport for freight where possible as it is the
mean with less impact on the environment.
3. Promote food shopping into areas with public transport access,
so consumers do not have to use the car.
4. Reduction of trade barriers to decrease energy intensive
farming.
5. Support in research of effective and environmentally friendly
food production techniques.
6. Use of life-cycle assessment to measure the total impact that
foodstuff has in all important process it its lifetime.
7. Use of life-cycle assessment across all type of commodities, as
environmental impact is not only due to FFV.
8. Labeling of commodities with excess of energy consumption
due to any stage in the supply chain.
The target to be achieved is to replace the concept of food miles that is
blind to many environmental, social and economic implications, by a
broader concept that does not lead to a conflict between being green
and being fair.
25
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[The Economist, 06] “Voting with your trolley”. Retrieved on 1st of February
2007, from:
http://www.economist.com/world/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id
=8380592
[AEA Technology, 05] “The Validity of Food Miles as an Indicator of
Sustainable Development: Final report”, July 2005. Retrived on 1st of
February 2007, from:
http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/reports/foodmiles/execsumm.pdf
[James MacGregor et al, 06]”Fair Miles? The concept of “food
miles”through a sustainable development lens”, International Institute for
Environment and Development, 2006. Retrieved on 3rd of February 2007,
from: http://www.iied.org/pubs/pdf/full/11064IIED.pdf
[Zeddy Sambu, 07] “Farmers wage war on food mile campaign” , Business
Daily Africa, 11th July 2007. Retrieved on 16th of July 2007 from:
http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id
=1880&Itemid=5822
[Joanna Blythman, 07] “Food miles: The true cost of putting imported food
on your plate”, Independent, 31st of May 2007. Retrieved on the 16th of
June 2007 from:
http://environment.independent.co.uk/lifestyle/article2600309.ece
[Defra, 07] “Report of the Food Industry Sustainability Strategy Champions'
Group on Food Transport”, Defra (Department for Environment Food and
Rural Afairs), May 2007. Retrieved on 1st of July 2007, from:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/farm/policy/sustain/fiss/pdf/report-food-
transport-may2007.pdf
[Julia Finch et al, 07] “You’ve checked the price and the calorie count,
now here’s the carbon cost”, Guardian 19th of January 2007. Retried on
26
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
14th April 2007 from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1994034,00.html
[European Commission, 07a] “ Sustainable surface transport”. Retrieved
21st of December 2006, from
http://ec.europa.eu/research/transport/index_en.html
[Hm Treasury, 07] “Emissions from the transport sector”. Retrieved on 2nd of
January 2007, from
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/3DD/5D/Transport_annex.pdf
[Euroactiv, 07] “Sustainable Transport”. Retrieved on 2nd of January 2007,
from http://www.euractiv.com/en/transport/sustainable-transport/article-
117545
[European Commission, 07] “Transport and environment”. Retrieved 21st
od December 2006, from
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/transport.htm#1
[European Environmental Agency, 03a] “Transport emissions of air
pollutants”. Retrieved 6th of January 2007, from
http://themes.eea.europa.eu/Sectors_and_activities/transport/indicators/
consequences/TERM03%2C2003.09/TERM2003_03_EEA31_Transport_emissio
ns_of_air_pollutants_by_mode_final.pdf
[Kelland et al, 07] “Food Miles May Be Green, but Are They Fair”,
Environmental news Network. Retrieved 9th of March 2007, from
http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=12175
[Farmers Weekly, 07] “Food miles facts”. Retrieved 16th of July 2007, from
http://www.fwi.co.uk/gr/foodmiles/facts.html
[Edwards-Jones, 06] “Food miles don't go the distance”, BBC News.
Retrieved 9th of March 2007, from
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4807026.stm
[Tyndall Centre for Climate Change, 06a] “The Future Starts Here: The
route to a low carbon economy”. Retrieved on 15th of March 2007, from:
http://www.foe.org.uk/resource/reports/low_carbon_economy.pdf
27
FOOD MILES TRADE-OFFS
[Tyndall Centre for Climate Change. 06b] “Living with a Carbon Budget”.
Retrieved on 15th of March 2007, from:
http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/reports/living_carbon_budget.pdf
[Aidan Hartley, 07] “Kenyan fury at threat to organic trade”, The
Guardian. Retrieved 17th of July 2007, from:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2126614,00.html