THE UNSUSTAINABILITY OF THE FOOD CHAIN
Autor: Jairo Cantarelli | Publicado: 2015-03-31T06:04:00-07:00






Last week I wrote a post about the Vectors of
Sustainability, being Ethics and Efficiency each one of them.



Throughout the text, I cited Brazil as an
example of unsustainable country, based on the general inefficiency of the
country, specifically workers, whose current efficiency is following indicators
of the 1960s.



Taking the issue of efficiency for the planet
as a whole, and looking at two very important points for the human being
survival, water and food, unfortunately I also come to the same conclusion. The
way we treat these two vital items for our survival on Earth is extremely
inefficient, leading me to an unsustainable vision for the planet, considering
the increase in population and the waste we generate with water and food.



Focusing only on meals, according to the FAO,
the organization of the UN for Food and Agriculture, each year we lost in the
world 1.3 billion tons of food, equivalent to 33% of everything is produced.


Assuming that every human being could live with
½ kg of food per day, they would need 180 kg/year, or 0.18 ton/year/person.
Considering this consumption, the wasted food would be enough to feed the
entire population of Earth in this average consumption condition, or 7.2
billion people. Remaking the acount, considering a daily consumption of 1 kg/person,
the wasted food could feed 3.6 billion people. And 1 kg/day/person of food is a
very good quantity.



This waste, a great indicator of inefficiency,
is present in the entire production chain, from cradle to grave, from the
farmer to the end consumer, or from the harvesting up the food remains uneaten in the plates, which end up in the trash.



There are efficiency problems in harvesting
operation, either manually or mechanically. Added to these, the losses that occur
in the logistics system, in the loading, in the transport and in the unloading.
After, come the problems with the capacity and the storage conditions. In
addition, losses in processing systems, packaging, storage of the processed
product, new logistical problems from the processors to intermediate deposits
and so on, until reach the end consumer.



Getting to the final consumer, both individual
and commercial, losses continue. Lack of planning leading to unnecessary
purchases, problems with domestic storage and expiry dates, losses in the
preparation, waste produced in kitchens, larger volumes prepared over than
demand and debris left on the plates.



This inefficiency crosses all our values
​​connected to sustainability, according to our diagram with 2 horizontal beams
at the base and 6 columns over this base, to support the achievement of
sustainability.



The 1st value not reached is the metaphysical
or transcendental vision, because the food is being seen throughout its chain
as just a commercial product, being treated like any other trade item where the
economic pillar is what talks. How many times have we watched at tv, farmers pouring
milk to the ground, destroying portions of their productions, protesting
because they did not have the minimum trade amount for the product?



This same example above serves to demonstrate
how we attack the 2nd value, ethics. Is it fair to destroy something in a side
of the world while in the other side are people who do not have anything to
eat? Where is the ethics of these same producers or agencies of governments or
the UN, which could equate this kind of problem? They are all thinking about a
solution, but considering in 1st place, the economic pillar.



The economic pillar acts as a villain, when
makes all to see food as a commercial product based on its economic value, but
also suffer consequences because every loss means a cost, which is paid by
someone in the entire chain, usually the end consumer. The producer charges extra
costs when he sells and receives for the net volume (total cost / final volume).
The governments charge their taxes, considering the final value of producers
(with losses included). The consequence is for those who consume the product at
the end and for those who do not have access to food. The economic system is
impacted by the financial losses of the total chain.



The environmental pillar is affected, as 33% of
losses makes necessary 50% of additional land for planting (assuming that all
food comes from ground), which increases the impacts on ecosystems, besides the
pollution caused by certain types of loss, like impact on water and many
others. An environmental chain full of losses, increased by urban waste, also
impacting the costs of the chain and generating new environmental problems for
it storage and the consequent generation of greenhouse gases.



The impact on the social pillar is immense,
blocking millions of people to have a full development, not achieving some
progress, not fulfilling their natural cycles of life. This same social pillar
associated with the cultural pillar, also act as villain on the form of
organization of some societies, some families, focused on consumption.



The cultural pillar is at the heart of the
problem, being responsible for the large consumption behavior of the
population. Full tables with different types of dishes, in amounts much higher
than necessary, are still very present in our families. "What the guest will tell if we offer only one type of food?"
"What the guest will tell if all offered food is eaten?" They are
still very important issues for most families and leading to unnecessary waste.



The aesthetic pillar is also attacked, as
ecosystems are affected and the landscape view is being altered, often not very
suitable for local food production, such as the Amazon, for example. Replacing
the magnificent forest by low efficient pasture and several other implications,
it is an aesthetic problem for the planet.



And lastly, the political pillar, one that
should organize things in the world, also falls, not managing, not negotiating,
not mitigating critical situations in certain parts of the planet with the
excesses of other sides. And many other things, that will not go on merit on
this post.



Returning to the beginning of my posts and my
ideas, looking at the eight intelligences of Howard Gardner, one of the points
that we should invest enough, would be the development of several people's
minds. Only with this development, people would be able to connect the waste that they cause with
the consequences on the planet. The direct appeal, based on rationality, does
not seem to have any effect on people who follow consuming resources
unsustainably.




Until the next post !!!