There is debate and scepticism about ecological food: Do we need it, and what is it?
At present ecological food represents a low percentage of food consumed in most countries. The figure is maybe about 2-5%, but many countries aim for much higher figures of 15-20% in the near future. Ecological quality is also questioned, and prices are generally higher.
The idea of ecology must be the basis of it all, and this is where the “confusion” starts: There are no common standards and definition, there are several selfmade definitions so the field is rather open. Ecological is not a fully developed concept, the agreement is not wide enough and does not cover all aspects of food production. Some say it has to do with the Earth as a system, deep ecology, small scale, diversity, values, ethics etc. At the same time we see the industrial giants muscling in with their own marketing and definitions. This is the basis that need settling: Give us a standard!
It is surely not enough for giants to change labels and call their food ecological. Industrialization means large scale, centralisation, standardization. What we need is local taste, different taste, new products, traceability, identification, short transports. We also want choice, alternatives, consumer power developing and reduction of corporate power with increasing buying power.
Ecological food is surely not for giants, it must be small scale and diverse: It must be better than industrial food for consumers and the Earth. It is rather sad that all food can not be called ecological and be really ecological too.
Food authorities should be part of this to make sure food is exactly what it is claimed to be.
So to make some headway: Standards and definitions must be settled, and then adhered to. This is part of the learning process of ecological living. Can we find agreement?
And remember that we are what we eat.
