It’s a slightly perverse argument but we’re not the only ones to be making the connection between the recent rise in US corn prices and the good that might do us all.
As followers of Michael Pollan know well, major subsidies to US corn producers have made processed foods containing high fructose corn syrup much cheaper to buy than fresh fruits and vegetables. And that has led a great many people on limited incomes to make choices that, while economically smart in the short term, have terrible health consequences over time.
But with corn prices soaring (thanks in part to growing demand for ethanol, the cost of petroleum-derived fertilizers and gasoline for transportation), it’s harder for manufacturers of highly-processed foods to low-ball their not-so-nutritious creations and easier for people looking to sell locally-produced, organically raised produce and meats to compete on price.
The same thought has apparently struck the New York Time’s Kim Severson, who wrote yesterday:
“if American staples like soda, fast-food hamburgers and frozen dinners don’t seem like such a bargain anymore, the American eating public might turn its attention to ingredients like local fruits and vegetables, and milk and meat from animals that eat grass. It turns out that those foods, already favorites of the critics of industrial food, have also dodged recent price increases.”
Kudos to Severson for calling up Pollan himself for a quote: “higher food prices,” he suggests, “level the playing field for sustainable food that doesn’t rely on fossil fuels.”
“On March 29, 2007, Cuban leader Fidel Castro berated Bush’s economic initiatives for ethanol production in the Cuban Communist party newspaper Granma, stating that using corn, or any food source, to produce ethanol could result in the “premature death” of upwards of three billion people.”
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=13111
Don’t yell too loud. Your small price increase is another’s starvation.
Fair enough, naught101. I’m cheering for the increase in the price of high fructose corn syrup and what that might mean for American consumers and local US organic food producers. Not for what higher corn prices might mean for people dependent on low priced corn for sustenance. Or for the environmental destruction that increased demand for ethanol might mean.
Thanks for reminding us that there’s a bigger, global picture, too. I’m not sure how far the ethanol band wagon will run, though, to be honest. It’s very much been led by the current US administration and it’s been so roundly criticized by so many people that I think that, once Bush is gone, the hype will have crested.
Let’s at least hope so — but hope, too, that that short window of high US corn prices will have helped local, organic food producers in the US gain some fans among US consumers.
I wish you were right about it being led by Bush, but Hillary Clinton is definitely in on it too, McCain will surely be the same as Bush, and Obama isn’t exactly opposed to it. The Dems are probably a bit more malleable on the topic, but I don’t see it going away too quickly.
I hope you’re right about organics – you probably are, but that to is going to be a fairly slow process. Can’t wait for the critical mass.
[…] weren’t alone in surmising that a rise in the price of conventionally farmed foods (mostly caused by a rise in the price of […]
[…] 29, 2008 by Simon A few weeks ago we noted that high prices for industrially-produced food might be a good thing if you wanted people to buy […]