katkin wrote: »
Maybe the demand for vegetables would increase if the price dropped. Price is often used as an explanation by people who don't eat enough veg / fruit.
Cheaper priced veg from outlets like Aldi, Lidl, farmers markets etc aren't the most perfectly shaped, but there's a demand for them.
I'm sure there will always be consumers who want easy prepared and perfect prepacked veggies, but there's plenty more out there on tight budgets keen to eat healthier and learn how to prepare and cook them. As this forum testifies.
There needs to be more education and incentives to cook and eat a variety of fruit / veg regardless of its shape and looks. It's well known that UK people don't eat enough of them. A drop in price and increase in skills and recipe ideas would certainly help. Never mind reduce appalling waste.
carrielovesfanta wrote: »
I could be mistaken about the situation as I'm not a farmer, and it would be interesting to get the perspective of someone from the farming community, but I don't think it's as simple as an oversupply issue, based on supply and demand.
I would understand it as:
Farmer has a contract with supermarket to supply (say) 10000 tonnes of parsnips
Super market standards mean that the parsnip has a 30% fail rate, based on aesthetic qualities
So the farmer has to grow 14300 tonnes in order to guarantee supply. The farmer has paid for the seeds, the fertiliser and all the labour costs for growing the extra parsnips, but won't get paid for them. Unfortunately, such is the buying power in the market, the farmer cannot set the correct price for the parsnips, based on their expected waste.
If the aesthetic criteria was relaxed, to say a fail rate of 5% or 10%, the farmer will have to grow fewer parsnips in order to fulfil their orders and so will save money in the long run, and there would be less waste.
Ken68 wrote: »
If the supermarkets can't make a profit from veg. they will put up prices on other stuff, so no change there.
And the surplus parsnips, whatever, isn't wasted, it goes for animal feed.
jack_pott wrote: »
Many of the comments on this thread have been about farmers ploughing mis-shapes back into the ground, but the average family is throwing away £700 worth of food a year, and I think that HFW will have an uphill slog trying to change that.
jack_pott wrote: »
Well, that was interesting, wasn't it. The guy said that during years with a bad harvest all the mis-shapes went into the supply chain and were consumed without anyone noticing. So the problem is one of oversupply then, and not mis-shapes at all. The fact that the waste happens to come from the ugly portion of the harvest rather than the pretty is neither here nor there, the reason that some farmers are working for nothing is because they're producing more food than the population can consume.
If 25% of the harvest is going to waste, the idea that you can solve the problem by making smoothies and soups is ridiculous, the population is obese enough as it is, without consuming a third more food than they already do.
moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »
During the last week I noticed that one of the spam adverts that comes up these days was advertising for mystery shoppers for Morrisons and offering people the chance to buy £100 of goods there. That surprised me - as the last I knew is that the rate of pay for mystery shoppers is absolutely pathetic these days (courtesy of so many people competing to do it).
So to see they were specifically advertising for people to mystery shop and actually paying a reasonable rate of pay for once got me thinking.....and I wonder if its connected to all this?
Incl. free 0% overdrafts and railcards
Here's what we've found...
Here's what you need to know