Buying veg from Africa

F

Firefly

Registered User
Messages
3,499
Wasn't sure where to post this so please move Mods if appropriate.

I picked up a nice packet of French beans in a German supermarket last weekend as I do most weekends. I noticed when I was opening it last night that it came from Kenya. This got me thinking. With so many people starving in Africa is it morally right that we are eating food products (which we can grow ourselves anyway) while those close to where they are produce starve? Is this not akin to the 1840s here when Irish people starved whilst our produce was sent across the water?

There are essentially 2 sides to this as far as I can see:
PRO: By buying this produce we are supporting jobs in Africa which may not otherwise exist
Con: By not buying these products, they would be produced for people in Africa (*). The owner may not recieve as much for the goods, but those who need it most would get them.

Now, I am usually a believer in free markets and international trade, however, in this case I'm not sure as getting this "wrong" assists in starving people.. I'd be interested in your views.

(*) I imagine that green beans woud not be produced for locals anyway, but something else would be grown.

Firefly.
 
You will find that all supermarkets sell vegetables such as French Beans and Mangetout that come from Kenya. We simply cannot grow these year-round in our climate, and they can be grown from Sept to April in Kenya and shipped to our stores within a day or two of being picked. We do not eat what is 'in season', we want strawberries all year round, we want apples every day of the week and we even want winter veg in the summer.

I watched a documentary on tv not so long ago about the whole issue and it mentioned that there is large employment in the industry, providing many locals with their own business and a decent income.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6383687.stm

http://www.actahort.org/books/158/158_53.htm
 
Many (most?) of the roses we get here come from Kenya as well.
Starvation isn't caused by food shortages, it's caused by uneven distribution of resources (including food). This is caused by many factors including bad transport infrastructure and a bad energy infrastructure as well as corruption and incompetence.

One of the major problems throughout sub-Saharan Africa is the lack of an electricity network. This results in an over reliance on diesel generators with the much higher energy costs that go with it. Therefore industrialisation on a micro level is difficult so perishable cash crops such as flowers and veg are grown in concentrated areas and have little impact on the land resources available to the poorest and most at risk of starvation.
When it comes to poverty proper governance is the solution and lack of it is the cause. Of course there are numerous historical and recent factors that exacerbate the situation but they aren't the root cause.
 
Purple said:
Many (most?) of the roses we get here come from Kenya as well.
Starvation isn't caused by food shortages, it's caused by uneven distribution of resources (including food). This is caused by many factors including bad transport infrastructure and a bad energy infrastructure as well as corruption and incompetence.

One of the major problems throughout sub-Saharan Africa is the lack of an electricity network. This results in an over reliance on diesel generators with the much higher energy costs that go with it. Therefore industrialisation on a micro level is difficult so perishable cash crops such as flowers and veg are grown in concentrated areas and have little impact on the land resources available to the poorest and most at risk of starvation.
When it comes to poverty proper governance is the solution and lack of it is the cause. Of course there are numerous historical and recent factors that exacerbate the situation but they aren't the root cause.
Click to expand...

I appreciate all of that, but my question is if we all stopped buying produce from Kenya, then the owners of this land would probably produce other crops that they could sell locally to those who are hungy..
 
Absolutely correct. I lived in Ethopia for 2 years and one of the developing sources of external income was the floraculture and vegatale/fruit industries. This was developed with the assistance of European investment funds and provided a significant quantity of local employment. The output was not in any way regarded as an export of basic standard food as this industry provided funds to enable the local population to earn sufficient to keep themselves and their families fed and with a basic living standard.
 
44brendan said:
Absolutely correct. I lived in Ethopia for 2 years and one of the developing sources of external income was the floraculture and vegatale/fruit industries. This was developed with the assistance of European investment funds and provided a significant quantity of local employment. The output was not in any way regarded as an export of basic standard food as this industry provided funds to enable the local population to earn sufficient to keep themselves and their families fed and with a basic living standard.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to my post or FireFly's?
 
Firefly said:
I appreciate all of that, but my question is if we all stopped buying produce from Kenya, then the owners of this land would probably produce other crops that they could sell locally to those who are hungy..
Click to expand...
It is possible that the land would be used for local food production but that food would not end up in the hands of those at risk of starvation as a) they can't pay for it and b) it costs too much to get it to them. The net impact on the economy would be negative as the export crops have a higher value per acre and are a source of foreign (hard) currency. The best thing we can do to help stop poverty in Africa (and elsewhere) is to trade with them, not give them charity. The cost of the trade barriers we impose dwarfs the aid we give.
 
Purple said:
It is possible that the land would be used for local food production but that food would not end up in the hands of those at risk of starvation as a) they can't pay for it and b) it costs too much to get it to them. The net impact on the economy would be negative as the export crops have a higher value per acre and are a source of foreign (hard) currency. The best thing we can do to help stop poverty in Africa (and elsewhere) is to trade with them, not give them charity. The cost of the trade barriers we impose dwarfs the aid we give.
Click to expand...

If they exported iPads or something I would be fine that, but it just seems wrong that we are consuming the very thing that could save others from the same/neighbouring countries from starving. If their export market completely dried up then their infrastructure would start to improve eventually so the food suppliers could deliver their goods. In any case, I doubt excellent infrastructure is required...I saw a documentary recently enough about Coke and you can basically buy a can of Coke almost anywhere in the world.
 
Firefly said:
If they exported iPads or something I would be fine that, but it just seems wrong that we are consuming the very thing that could save others from the same/neighbouring countries from starving. If their export market completely dried up then their infrastructure would start to improve eventually so the food suppliers could deliver their goods. In any case, I doubt excellent infrastructure is required...I saw a documentary recently enough about Coke and you can basically buy a can of Coke almost anywhere in the world.
Click to expand...
They need the cash from exports to pay for the infrastructure.
Trade is the lifeblood of any economy.
Coke is not a perishable product, it is highly automated in production and has a high gross margin.
 
If you've traveled there, you'll know that trade is definitely a good thing.
There is plenty of land in Africa, the problem is lack of structures - bureaucratic, a middle class, infrastructure etc. An interesting example of this is in Zimbabwe, where old farms are now being "re-colonized".
By allowing trade in stuff that they can actually do and do well, they get money, get employment, are able to improve their infrastructure, build a knowledge base etc. etc. By all means ensure that there isn't some sort of "slave trade" in terms of badly treated workers and also ensure that vast plantations aren't bought by Western/Chinese corporations - but that is a separate question.
 
Purple said:
It is possible that the land would be used for local food production but that food would not end up in the hands of those at risk of starvation as a) they can't pay for it and b) it costs too much to get it to them. The net impact on the economy would be negative as the export crops have a higher value per acre and are a source of foreign (hard) currency. The best thing we can do to help stop poverty in Africa (and elsewhere) is to trade with them, not give them charity. The cost of the trade barriers we impose dwarfs the aid we give.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. However, the biggest question is this, how much starvation is going on in Kenya? While I don't know the answer, going by media reports the biggest starvation issues of late have been in Somalia and Ethiopia. These may seem close to Kenya, but the cost of moving large amounts of goods into essentially a war zone is huge. So even if we didn't buy those green beans, Somalis and Ethiopians could quite likely still not afford them or other produce.

Firefly said:
If their export market completely dried up then their infrastructure would start to improve eventually so the food suppliers could deliver their goods. In any case, I doubt excellent infrastructure is required...I saw a documentary recently enough about Coke and you can basically buy a can of Coke almost anywhere in the world.
Click to expand...
If their exports dried up then they would have no income to improve infrastructure. While infrastructure may be adequate it may not be adequate enough for mass transport of food for millions. I met a very interesting guy at Dublin airport yesterday, while waiting for the shuttle bus from the car park to the terminal. An African guy who worked for the World Food Program (I think) and he said that most of their efforts in the last 10 years has been on improving the road network in Africa. He said that in crisis situations they used to fly food in, which carried huge costs and ended up being a drop in the ocean. With an improved road network and lots of trucks on standby they are able to move a lot more food around much cheaper and quicker.

The biggest problem for farmers in Africa and other poor regions is that they cannot get a decent price for produce because most of the western world heavily subsidises food production.

I've often encountered people that say that we should not buy from this country or that because they don't pay the people enough or don't treat them well, or something down that line. Generally I respond with, how is giving those people no money better than giving them little money?

The more we buy from Africa the beter off they will be.
 
Chris said:
I've often encountered people that say that we should not buy from this country or that because they don't pay the people enough or don't treat them well, or something down that line. Generally I respond with, how is giving those people no money better than giving them little money?

The more we buy from Africa the beter off they will be.
Click to expand...

I agree with both of you and your arguements are valid and logical. I suppose though from a moralistic perspective, if a space-ship was to land tomorrow and see us flying food directly over fellow human beings who are starving to death just so richer humans further away can consume this food (and dump anything not used) when they already have so much just seems a lot to take. Having said all that though, I do agree with your point above. The problem is not with the end consumer but at a higher level...corrupt ruling governments in poor countries coupled with protectionist measures for food production in western countries. It's funny though....those French beans didn't taste the same..
 
Hi Firefly

While I understand where you are coming from, I don't agree with your logic. The fact that people in Ethiopia and Somalia are suffering is hardly the fault of Kenyan farmers who are themselves trying to survive and make a life for themselves. The depiction of Africa is a monlithic 'dark continent' only feeds prejudice and glosses over the reality. If we baulk at buying goods from Africa simply on the basis that people are starving in some parts of the continent we will merely be adding to this serious problem. How would we feel if Irish produce was shunned in the US because of war or civil disorder in another part of Europe?
 
T McGibney said:
Hi Firefly

While I understand where you are coming from, I don't agree with your logic. The fact that people in Ethiopia and Somalia are suffering is hardly the fault of Kenyan farmers who are themselves trying to survive and make a life for themselves. The depiction of Africa is a monlithic 'dark continent' only feeds prejudice and glosses over the reality. If we baulk at buying goods from Africa simply on the basis that people are starving in some parts of the continent we will merely be adding to this serious problem. How would we feel if Irish produce was shunned in the US because of war or civil disorder in another part of Europe?
Click to expand...

Hi Tommy,

As per my post, I agree fully with previous posters and yourself too. Foreign trade is the only way that things can improve and it's better to give the people in Kenya some money than none at all. However, there is a part of me wishing that Kenya produced something like consumer electronics which are of no use to their neighbours, rather than the very item that their neighbours need who are starving.

As I said though, it's the corrupt governments in the poor African countries who are IMO the culprits as well as the protectionist tactics used by western governments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top