British Supermarket TESCO's move to lock out Kenyan fresh produce unfounded

Background

· On our about the 18^th of January 2007, Tesco Supermarket Chain pledged to revolutionalise its business by becoming ‘ a leader in helping to create a low carbon economy’ by adopting new measures to tackle climate change.

· In the most significant step announced, the UK's biggest retailer, which produces 2m tonnes of carbon a year in the UK, said it would put new labels on every one of the 70,000 products it sells so that shoppers can compare carbon costs in the same way they can compare salt content and calorie counts.

· The Company also pledged to cut the emissions produced by its stores and distribution centres by 50% by 2020 and slash by 50% within five years the amount of CO2 used in its distribution network to deliver each case of goods.

· Tesco's move is the latest in a series as the big supermarkets battle to prove their green credentials. The trend was kick-started in 2005 by Lee Scott, president of the Wal-Mart discount chain in the US and the parent company of Asda. Mr Scott made a $500m (£255m) commitment to use 100% renewable energy, create zero waste and cut greenhouse emissions by 2009.

· Last year Tesco unveiled a 10-point plan designed to make it a "good neighbour" which included promises to install wind turbines and solar panels, source more food locally and encourage healthier eating. It has also started offering loyalty card points to shoppers who do not take carrier bags.

· Asda and Sainsbury's have unveiled similar initiatives. Marks & Spencer lhas recently unveiled a £200m environmental plan which included a pledge to become carbon neutral and send no waste to landfill by 2012. M&S boss, Stuart Rose, even pledged to trade in his BMW for a hydrogen-fuelled model.

· The British government has also waded into the issue. In 2006,the British environment secretary, David Miliband, told the bosses of the big four supermarkets to set and meet targets to cut carbon emissions, to use their buying power to demand greener products and to label electrical goods more clearly so that shoppers could more easily buy the most efficient products.

Time lines

· The new carbon labelling programme will not be immediate. Tesco has said that it would first have to develop a "universally accepted and commonly understood" measuring system.

· Implementation of carbon labeling shall be complex and could take several years to implement.

· As an initial step it would put airplane symbols on all goods imported by air as air travel is one of the most carbon intensive forms of transport.

The Problem.

· It shall be easy for British shoppers to misconstrue that a product with an airplane symbol depicts lots of carbon emissions, which is likely to contribute to poor sales for airlifted products, especially those from Africa.

· The carbon-footprint initiative is different from food-miles. Proponents of food-miles claim that the further food travels to market the less sustainable or energy efficient it is, and therefore the closer to its market that food is produced the better it is for the planet.

· The food-miles concept is fundamentally flawed because it does not accurately reflect the total energy used in production and processing, only the energy used for transport. As such it is not a useful or valid tool for assessing environmental impact.

Undermining of social and economic development of African countries through carbon labeling – recent research

Research conducted in late 2006 and released in January 2007 by the International institute for Environment and Develoment (IIED) in the United Kingdom has established that:

· The placement of an airplane symbol on a product, and eventually a carbon label on it, shall present an argument for the customer to purchase goods that have traveled the least distance from the farm to the table.

· This shall discriminate against long haul transportation, especially air freighted goods.

· Food miles is the vanguard of climate change in the United Kingdom.

· Food miles has captured consumer attention and is changing consumer behaviour, although only one third understand the concept.

· High value produce from Africa, especially flowers and horticulture are air-freighted, and are being singled out as the epitome of unsustainable consumption.

· Food miles as a concept is blind to social and economic benefits associated with trade in food, especially from developing countries.

UK consuming fresh produce from Africa

· The United Kingdom is consuming more fresh produce from Africa than never before.

· A wide range of fresh produce is imported to the United Kingdom from Sub-saharan Africa, excluding South Africa.

· This trade is dependent on the UK consumer as well as on air freight.

· 40% of air freighted fresh fruit and vegetables are from sub Saharan Africa

· Poor African countries rely on the UK market to support their domestic industry

Ecological space

· ‘Ecological space’ is the individualised (per capita) right to natural resources for utilization such as energy, food, land and water. The concept of equitable ecological space translates well into “per capita carbon dioxide emissions” and the “per capita right to emit carbon dioxide”.

· Currently, carbon dioxide emissions per person are very unequal and the gap is widening: global, 3.6 tonnes; the UK, 9.2 tonnes; Africa, 1 tonne. Furthermore, African figures are skewed towards oil-rich countries, and only two countries exceed the global average. Hence,Sub Saharan countries have considerable reserves of “ecological space” compared with industrialized countries.

Inequality of impact and adaptive capacities of climate change.

· Many African countries are feeling the force of climate change impacts, the root cause of which was produced in developed countries. Poorer countries have fewer disposable financial resources to commit to adapting to these impacts.

The Kyoto Protocol

· The Kyoto Protocol recognises the need for equity and economic development for developing countries in the transition to a low-carbon future. Current calculations of a sustainable carbon future estimate equitable ecological space per capita as 1.8 tonnes. This represents the estimated absorptive capacity of natural carbon sinks, both land and sea. Yet this per capita space is falling owing to projected warmer climate accelerating the decay of carbon in soils coupled with projected population increases.

Trade offs between global environmental goods and local poverty

· Kenya is a good example of how local economic development follows export horticulture development. Kenya was the first Sub Saharan African to develop systems in which high-value horticulture is exported to the UK. A full 70% of green beans (of exportable quality) produced in Kenya come to the UK.

· This business is perceived as a success, and a number of other countries have followed - 87% of UK green beans imports are from five African countries.

Decisions of policy makers and consumers to be based on good information.

· What is clear is that decisions – of consumers, of policy makers,

and of the food chain businesses – should be based on good

information.

· If environmental harm is to be weighed against

developmental gains, it is essential that

(1) the degree of harm is quantified and put into the context of other food choices,

(2) the degree of harm is put into context of Africa’s current use of ‘ecological space’, and

(3) the degree of development gain is quantified, to demonstrate whether this trade really benefits those living in poverty.

Are food imports from Africa driving climate change

· There is increasing evidence that the UK’s carbon footprint is largely domestically generated. Indeed, to reach targets under Kyoto the UK needs to prioritise addressing domestic road transport and energy use first, then aviation.

· Estimates of doubling of air travel in the next twenty years coupled with high carbon emissions, and the exacerbating effect of “radiative forcing”, make aviation cuts a necessary part of the solution.

· Yet the main share of increased flights appears to passenger traffic; in the UK, passenger flights account for 90% of emissions from air transport, and international freight for 5%. But, air-freight is a significant contributor to total food transport

emissions in the UK.

· Only 1.5% of imported fresh fruits and vegetables arrive in air transportation but that portion produces 50% of all emissions from fruit and vegetable transportation.

· It is clear that for most products that can be grown outside

greenhouses and without heating, air-freighted produce usually scores poorly in terms of emissions compared with locally grown produce. Plus, air-freight is responsible for 200 times more emissions if flown rather than shipped from Kenya, or 12 times more energy.

· There is no firm evidence that UK consumers not eating imported fresh fruits and vegetables, fewer planes would fly today or in future. Indeed, an annual expansion of 6% in air traffic in all sectors (fresh fruits and vegetables imports, passenger volumes, and dedicated freight).

· Air-freight of fresh fruits and vegetables from sub Saharan countries accounts for less than 0.1% of total carbon UK emissions.

· In the big picture, the environmental cost of international food transport is trivial compared with UK domestic food-miles. Plus, air-freight is the only possible mode of transport for some highly perishable produce where no other infrastructure exists.

· Fresh fruits and vegetables imports highlight one of the key reasons for not including aviation emissions under Kyoto Protocol - the difficulty of allocating carbon between trading nations.

· While a 50-50 split appears to be a simple equitable solution, in practice there are measurement difficulties associated with transport hubs, passengers/cargo split, mail service, triangular flight paths and problems assessing the necessity of some cargo (such as medicines and vaccines). Plus, for fresh fruits and vegetables the large majority of imports to the UK are carried opportunistically in the belly-hold of passenger aircraft, and the rest in dedicated freight.

Are food imports from Africa driving African poverty reduction?

· Air-freighted produce from Sub Saharan Africa to the UK bestows considerable direct benefits on poor rural economies.

· Over one million people in rural Africa are supported by the fresh fruits and vegetables exports to the UK.

· An estimated 50-60,000 small-scale producers and 50-60,000 employees on larger farms grow produce that is consumed in the UK.

· When dependents and service providers are factored in, an estimated 1-1.5 million people’s livelihoods depend in part on the supply chain linking production on African soil and consumption in the UK.

· An estimated £200 million is injected into rural economies in Africa through fresh fruits and vegetables trade with the UK alone.

· From a development perspective, airfreight of fresh fruits and vegetables from sub Saharan africa is a relatively efficient “investment” by the UK in allocating its carbon emissions to support livelihoods when compared to the efficiency of the remaining 99.9% that is supporting 60 million UK residents.

Observations and Recommendations

· Economic development for the poorest in a low carbon future will mean expanding emissions for some. For those countries with excess “ecological space”, there exists a potential to use some of this space to reduce poverty, generate low-carbon economic growth and foster development.

· Export horticulture is one of the few genuine opportunities for developing countries that have direct and indirect benefits that reach into poor rural areas. Plus, there is projected future growth in export horticulture from existing and emerging producer countries in Africa, owing to tourism, economic development and more socially conscious procurement patterns in all industries.

· The food miles and carbon labelling concepts needs reform, to include social and economic development aspects. Singular comparisons do not necessarily help us to generate good policy.

· All environmental and social aspects need to be analysed, and trade-offs assessed.

· Over one million livelihoods in Africa are supported by UK consumption of imported fresh fruit and vegetables.

· Not buying fresh produce air-freighted from Africa will reduce UK total emissions by less than 0.1%. It is time to look to the huge impacts of the food system at home, rather than pull up the drawbridge on Africa.

· There must be intense negotiations and agreement between affected Governments as well as orgnisations representing the interested parties.