Posts filed under ‘food’
Water : the new carbon
Rachel Claydon writes:
Carbon consciousness is now here to stay. However the CO2 intensity of different activities isn’t the only issue concerning environmentalists. We’ve been aware of water shortages in many parts of the world for many years, but as these become more acute, the ‘water intensity’ of various products and processes is moving into the spotlight, particularly those relating to food and drink production. This is not about turning off the tap to save water when you brush your teeth, rather understanding how much water has been used to make the items that we consume every day, or what’s known as ‘embedded water’ (opens in pdf). The data are pretty staggering – it takes 35 litres to produce a cup of tea; 170 to produce a glass of orange juice; and 2400 to produce a hamburger – and are much easier to visualise than grams or tonnes of carbon.
Unlike carbon, the water issue has not yet reached mainstream consciousness, but this isn’t far off. Individuals can now calculate their personal ‘water footprint’ thanks to a collaboration between UNESCO and the University of Twente, and manufacturers are also starting to respond. The Coca Cola Company announced a new partnership with WWF in June last year around water conservation, and was already talking about reducing the water intensity of its products at the time. It may take a while to convince the British consumer that the world is short of water, even though the South East of England has less water per head than Istanbul. In many other markets, from Spain to China to Australia, consumers are already acutely aware of shortages. Without doubt companies need to actively scrutinise their supply chains and implement water saving strategies. This said, water footprinting may prompt people to move away from certain ‘water heavy’ categories altogether – meat, especially red meat, is a prime candidate.
The chart at the top is from the Australian news site crikey – perhaps not surprisingly, given Australia’s acute water shortage.
A dog’s breakfast?
Alastair Morton writes:
In recent years cookery shows have picked up and amplified a wide range of consumer trends, from Gary Rhodes’ rock-chef rebelliousness of the mid ’90s to the apparent ‘authenticity’ of Ramsey’s Kitchen Nightmares providing, at times, gripping viewing.
This thought was brought home to me by Delia’s latest offering – more a case of ‘How to Cheat at Tapping into Trends’ than a food heaven. The premise is clearly to help out the ‘time-starved’ consumer, but there’s more than a pinch of ‘community connections’ with both family and tribal (Norwich City FC) references, topped off last week by a good slug of Catholicism to tap into the search for meaning. And let’s not forget about ‘health and wellness’ – tinned food as nutritious as its fresh counterpart? Well, I could go on.
I know that different trends play out in different ways for different people, and that Delia’s trying to stand out in a crowded market where there’s also a significant movement towards ethical food and slow food, with Hugh and Jamie’s respective chicken liberation fronts leading the charge. But beyond the fact that not all trends pull in the same direction, Delia’s approach comes unstuck, at least for me, because I think the joy in cooking is in the dream of what you’re going to create, from start to finish, and not just opening the relevant cans or defrosting the right pellets.
Image courtesy of http://www.joe-ks.com
Barbie knows no bounds
Sarah Davies writes:
On a recent visit to the US I was stopped in my tracks by an enormous pile of Barbie branded cereal boxes, on offer at 2 for $5. I was so mesmerised by this spectacle that I felt compelled to purchase a box. To the disappointment of my two daughters, I didn’t buy the cereal as a gift to add to their burgeoning collection of Barbie merchandise, but rather as an example of what can only be described as irresponsible marketing to children.
Does a brand like Kellogg’s need to go to such lengths to sell its products? Close inspection of the box reveals a long list of additives and general ‘nutritional’ profile of the product. The pieces of ‘cereal’ and marshmallow bits look more like sweets than breakfast food.
In an age where childhood obesity and diabetes are on the increase, it seems hard to justify using Barbie to encourage children to eat such things for breakfast. But on second thoughts, perhaps this is all a storm in a teacup? Reassuringly, on the back of pack, Barbie is able to share her ‘fab tips’ with children, telling them to “Live active” and “Keep it green”. So that’s alright, then. But it’s hard to tell which brand is being damaged more by this co-marketing venture.
Eating the planet
Trevor Harvey writes:
I contributed to an event run by one of our food retail clients this week, and one of the other speakers showed some pictures from Hungry Planet, a photo-essay (“30 families, 24 countries, 600 meals”) about who eats what around the world.
Time magazine did a selection of the families, with some data on their food budgets and their favourite meals, and there’s also a audio feature from the US National Public Radio show All Things Considered with an associated web page which has the full weekly food shops from four of the 30 families (Darfur, Gemany, the USA, and China).
Looking through the pictures, it seems as if – with the obvious exception of the very poor – that those with more money for their food budgets are likely to have worse nutrition, at least judging by the amount of processed foods on display. They have less fresh food and an awful lot more packaging. In contrast, those with smaller budgets tend to have favourite family meals (the richer families talk about ‘favourite foods’ – processed again – rather than favourite meals). At risk of romanticising, the poorer families also seem to be smiling a lot more.
One of the trends we’re noticing at the moment is that the proportion of income spent on food is going up, for the first time in three decades. This is partly because basic prices are going up. Although it’s a complex story, it’s possible to imagine that a combination of price increases, the pursuit of wellbeing, and a desire for the more authentic might mean that the more affluent will start shifting their food budgets to more natural foodstuffs – with the health benefits that would follow.
The photo above by Peter Menzel, taken from The Hungry Planet, shows the Melander family, from Bargteheide, Germany, with a week’s worth of food.
14 March 2008 at 10:00 am thenextwavefutures Leave a comment
