The restriction of long-distance organic trade would damage African farmers while having minimal effects on the environment, argue Stephen Browne & Alexander Kasterine.Â
A rising concern with personal and environmental health in the world’s richer countries is influencing lifestyles and public debate alike. One significant trend is the increase in the consumption of organically grown produce – a significant proportion of which is imported. International trade in organic food and beverages currently has a value of more than £15 billion ($30 billion) per year; the United States, Britain and Germany account for two-thirds of imports.The effect of this trade on developing countries is considerable. As tastes have become more exotic and consumers have increasingly sought out year-round availability of food (particularly fruit and vegetables), exports from the global south have grown appreciably. The British market, where the proportion of organic imports is the highest in Europe for certain items, sources a significant portion of its fresh organic produce from Africa; 70% of the green beans grown in Kenya, for example, was sent to Britain in 2007. More than a million African farmers are estimated to benefit from this trade, and many livelihoods depend on its continuation.The advantages of this trading cycle are evident. But – like many other promising developing-country export opportunities – “organics” are under threat. This time, however, the obstacle is not just events such as Kenya’s post-election turmoil, but arguments by people who in many cases are motivated by the same environmental considerations that lead them to prefer organics in the first place.Read more at OpenDemocracy.org…
