Example Of Explaining The Key Quotes Essay

Introduction

In the article “Voting with your trolley” published in The Economist, the author argues that even as the voter turnout has seen a fall throughout the world, the number of buyers buying organic, fair-trade or local food has seen a rise. It is almost as if people want to make a change, not by casting their vote, but by changing their food buying patterns and preferences. The basic psyche behind more people opting for organic, fair-trade or local food is to bring economic justice to the poor producers who are otherwise being exploited by big firms and politicians. The rest of the article continues on the similar lines, providing explanation for the actions of such buyers and the impact – positive and negative – it has in a macro-sense to all aspects involved. The article also further provides certain myths and thoughts that incite such pro-local/organic buying actions in people, but which, in truth, are not validated in practicality.

Thesis statement

According to the article, the consumers of today are making food buying preferences based on their beliefs and over-estimating the power of this decision in changing the world. The negative effects of the same are being felt by the economics world-wide though. I stand in agreement with the thesis statement of this article.

Summary

The article begins with explaining the current trend amongst the voters or consumers, which is to propound their belief by way of purchasing a certain sect of food items, namely – organic, local or fair-trade products. According to the article, consumers decided it was better to retaliate to the big corporations by simply opting for organic/local food, which benefitted the farmer instead of the middlemen.
However, the article dissects each of the points it presents and brings out the positive and the negative of every aspect discussed. Therefore, the article says that the consumers who are buying organic food for the reason that they have health benefits are disillusioned. Research has proven that there are minimal benefits on the health by consuming organic food. Further, those who are concerned about environment and hence opt for organic food are disillusioned too. The fact is that if genetically modified seeds and the latest pesticides and fertilizers were not used, the humans would have had to cultivate thrice the amount of land being cultivated today to produce the same yield as we get today. This would have cut down on the area covered by the rainforests and would have potentially harmed the environment more than using artificial manure. Similar criticisms go for consumers who are more pro-local food and buy food produced locally. Some experts, according to the article, are of the view that food produced locally increases the production costs rather than when the same food is imported from a place where the investment in producing that food is much lower and hence, energy saving.
The crux of the article is that the consumers are blindly following food politics irrespective of the effects it is having on a macro level. The macro economics and the micro are all being affected by this type of buying pattern. While the micro level is being less affected, the macro level economics is being majorly hit and getting misbalanced. The consumers must make an informed choice instead of a whimsical one and not overestimate the power of food choices they make.

Quote 1: “Consumers have more power than they realize and we see that happening on the ground.”
In the quote mentioned above, Chris Wille of the Rainforest Alliance explains that consumers have the power to bring about a change in the society. There is a whole food supply chain between the farmers and the consumers and if the consumers decide to change their buying patterns and preferences, no middleman or organization can change that. Therefore, the sellers will have to work according to the consumers.
Quote 2: “Fair-trade – its aim is to address the injustice of low prices provided they meet particular labor and production standards.” In these lines, the author explains the postulates of free-trade, the requirements and the benefits it has for the producers.
Quote 3: “Buying direct means producers get a fair price, the smaller number of food miles makes local food greener too.” In these lines, the author explains how consumers are preferring to buy food produced locally because it decreases the amount of food miles and hence the energy imprint of the food being sold in the market. This type of buying pattern is specifically seen amongst environmentalists.

Criticism

Quote 1: One needs to understand the extent of the change that changing buying preferences would bring. Research indicates that more energy imprint is required in producing organic products to meet the demand in the market. The fact is that by using genetically modified seeds and manure, the yield can be increased three times. However, one needs to enhance the area cultivated in order to match the demand supply chain. This would cut down on the rain forests’ area, thereby harming the environment furthermore. What needs to be considered more is the cost-result ratio. The fact is that costs involved in producing organic products does not yield the results in similar proportions and hence, overall are not profitable or beneficial to the farmer. The reason for the same is that in organic farming the crops are prone to illnesses, low yield, bad seeds etc.
Quote 2: The truth is that while fair-trade items do have a certain advantage to the seller, the marginal utility of the product is extremely low for the consumer, especially since the consumer is paying exorbitant prices for the same product available at a cheaper rate. Secondly, fair-trade is now being used as a tool by big corporate firms to gain positive image amongst the consumers. This also gives these firms an opportunity to price their products exorbitantly, fooling the end consumer, even as the benefit to the producer is extremely minimal (Only 10% of the actual price is given to the producer; the rest goes to the corporate’ wallets’). Therefore, if we consider the overall economics behind the fair-trade and the product utility in comparison, the tall claims made by the fair-trade supporters do come to be questioned.
Quote3: While it is true that buying local food benefits the local producers, the fact is that if we consider the overall world economy, this is a wrong choice to make. Food imported from poorer nations helps build the economy of the poor nations. Comparing the transport costs involved with the economic benefit to the poor nation would prove to be minimal on that front. Secondly, even for the local farmers, producing food which is not climate-effective may prove to be a costly and time consuming affair, the means of which are not easily available to the background of the farmers who are selling food locally or in the farmer’s market. Therefore, the whole idea of the benefits behind buying local food is extremely romanticized and short-sighted.

Conclusion

Therefore, in consent with the author’s explanation, I agree that the power of the food politics and that of the consumer in bringing a change about the world is indeed highly over-estimated. If such myths were purportedly blasted, the world economics and the environment would be in a more balanced state than it is presently.

Reference List

(2006, December 7). Voting With Your Trolley. The Economist, Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/8380592