Air freighted (or local) organic produce?

An animated debate has recently been playing out, particularly in the United Kingdom, around the subject of air freighted organic imports. Those opposed to the importation of air freighted organic foodstuffs site the irreparable environmental damage caused by the release of green house gases brought about by the unnecessary burning of aviation fuel. Those in favour appear to have adopted the stance that source (country of origin) organic certification should be the only determinant used to assess whether an item should be allowed to present as organic in its destination market. They also site the fact that the vast majority of airfreighted organic foodstuffs, which routinely make their way to so-called first world nations, are generally sourced from developing nations which, were it not for their capacity to generate this revenue stream, might otherwise be unfairly penalized in world markets. It’s an interesting dilemma.

It’s reported that there has been an 800% increase in air freighted organic foodstuffs in the past five years. Clearly, this outstrips the already significant growth in global demand for organic produce. So, what’s driving this increase in demand for air freighted organic foodstuffs? The answer is simple. Developed nations are comprised of wealthy individuals who are demanding the highest quality organic produce irrespective of whether its in-season or not. This is exacerbated in countries such as the United Kingdom where the climate is not conducive to growing many of the types of fruits and vegetables that consumers have grown accustomed to. In short, developed nations are seeking out counter-seasonal organic produce from around the world and flying it in to ensure it arrives as fresh as possible.

Unfortunately, while the source of the problem is relatively easy to identify, the solution is somewhat more complicated. You see, consumers in developed nations have developed a taste for the good life. We want to know that we can walk into Tesco’s or Sainsbury’s in mid-December and pick up a fresh organic pineapple. Previous generations, unless originating from very wealthy families, wouldn’t have dreamt of doing anything of the sort. But now we’re all relatively well off, so we can make these choices.

What does it all mean? At this point, it might be useful to revisit what I see as being the main arguments both for and against the importation of air freighted organic foodstuffs.

Arguments in favour of air freighted organic foodstuffs

Most air freighted organic foodstuffs are sourced from developing nations whose farmers, generally speaking, have very small carbon footprints in comparison to their developed nation counterparts. It is often the case that farms in developing nations use greater amounts of human labour. This means that they tend to rely less on equipment (such as tractors and trucks) which require the burning of fossil fuels.

Export trade in organic foodstuffs provides an opportunity for farmers from developing nations to sell their produce at prices higher than would otherwise be the case if they were forced to sell into their own local markets. Arguably, this opportunity has the capacity to raise the standard of living in developing nations by providing the much-needed funds to facilitate projects in areas such as healthcare and education. However, the truth of this argument depends of course on how equitable any distribution of realised benefit is between the global supermarket chains (who are ultimately the ones sourcing airfreighted organic produce from distant location) and the farmers from those developing nations. Like me, you may have a view as to where the majority of any pricing differential ultimately resides in situations such as this where an obvious power imbalance exists. Accordingly, this would appear to lessen the validity of the “benevolence” argument.

Arguments against allowing air freighted organic foodstuffs

Fossil fuels, particularly high-octane aviation fuels, destroy the planet. Arguably, reducing green house gas emissions should be something that those aspiring to lead an organic lifestyle should be actively involved in.

Our own local organic farmers often struggle to make ends meet. Sure, there are the exceptions. We’ve all heard of the millionaire organic farmer, but generally speaking, our own local farmers can do with all the support they can get. After all, they have children to send to school and repairs they need to undertake to ensure their farms remain operational.

Increased reliance on food imports, which appears to be happening in other sectors within the food industry right now - in all developed nations - means that we risk losing control of one of the basic requirements for maintaining self-sufficiency. That is, the ability to feed ourselves. Arguably, if we keep on squeezing our small local farmers until there is nothing left, they’ll stop doing what they’re currently really good at. We may ultimately pay much higher prices for our food than we’re anticipating. After all, cars imported from Japan to the United States during the 1970s were sold at a significant discount in comparison to locally made vehicles. If you’re in the United States, what sort of discount would you expect now on a new Toyota in comparison to an equivalent locally made vehicle? Ask someone in Detroit!

Am I sitting on the fence on this one? No. That’s not my style. I think that we, as organic consumers, owe it to our local farmers to source – at least where possible – our produce from them. And just maybe, if you reside in the United Kingdom, you’ll need to hold off on purchasing that organic pineapple this Christmas!