问答题
"You don't have to wait for government to move … the really
fantastic thing about Fairtrade is that you can go shopping!" So said a
representative of the Fairtrade movement in a British newspaper this year.
Similarly Marion Nestle, a nutritionist at New York University, argues
that "when you choose organics, you are voting for a planet with fewer
pesticides, richer soil and cleaner water supplies." The idea
that shopping is the new politics is certainly seductive. Never mind the ballot
box. vote with your supermarket trolley instead. Elections occur relatively
rarely, but you probably go shopping several times a month, providing yourself
with lots of opportunities to express your opinions. If you are worried about
the environment, you might buy organic food; if you want to help poor farmers,
you can do your bit by buying Fairtrade products; or you can express a dislike
of evil multinational companies and rampant globalization by buying only local
produce. And the best bit is that shopping, unlike voting, is fun; so you can do
good and enjoy yourself at the same time. Sadly, it's not that
easy. There are good reasons to doubt the claims made about three of the most
popular varieties of "ethical" food: organic food, Fairtrade food and local
food. People who want to make the world a better place cannot do so by shifting
their shopping habits: transforming the planet requires duller disciplines, like
politics. Organic food, which is grown without man-made
pesticides and fertilizers, is generally assumed to be more environmentally
friendly than conventional intensive farming, which is heavily reliant on
chemical inputs. But it all depends what you mean by "environmentally friendly".
Farming is inherently bad for the environment: since humans took it up around
11,000 years ago, the result has been deforestation on a massive scale. But
following the "green revolution" of the 1960s greater use of chemical fertilizer
has tripled grain yields with very little increase in the area of land under
cultivation. Organic methods, which rely on crop rotation, manure and compost in
place of fertilizer, are far less intensive. So producing the world's current
agricultural output organically would require several times as much land as is
currently cultivated. There wouldn't be much room left for the
rainforest. Fairtrade food is designed to raise poor farmers'
incomes. It is sold at a higher price than ordinary food, with a subsidy passed
back to the farmer. But prices of agricultural commodities are low because of
overproduction. By propping up the price, the Fairtrade system encourages
farmers to produce more of these commodities rather than diversifying into other
crops and so depresses prices—thus achieving, for most farmers, exactly the
opposite of what the initiative is intended to do. And since only a small
fraction of the mark-up on Fairtrade foods actually goes to the farmer—most goes
to the retailer—the system gives rich consumers an inflated impression of their
largesse and makes alleviating poverty seem too easy. Surely
the case for local food, produced as close as possible to the consumer in order
to minimize "food miles" and, by extension, carbon emissions, is clear?
Surprisingly, it is not. A study of Britain's food system found that nearly half
of food-vehicle miles (i.e., miles traveled by vehicles carrying food) were
driven by cars going to and from the shops. Most people live closer to a
supermarket than a farmer's market, so more local food could mean more
food-vehicle miles. Moving food around in big, carefully packed lorries, as
supermarkets do, may in fact be the most efficient way to transport the
stuff. What's more, once the energy used in production as well
as transport is taken into account, local food may turn out to be even less
green. Producing lamb in New Zealand and shipping it to Britain uses less energy
than producing British lamb, because farming in New Zealand is less
energy-intensive. And the local-food movement~ s aims, of course, contradict
those of the Fairtrade movement, by discouraging rich country consumers from
buying poor-country produce. But since the local-food movement looks
suspiciously like old-fashioned protectionism masquerading as concern for the
environment, helping poor countries is presumably not the point.
The best thing about the spread of the ethical-food movement is that it
offers grounds for hope. It sends a signal that there is an enormous appetite
for change and widespread frustration that governments are not doing enough to
preserve the environment, reform world trade or encourage development. Which
suggests that, if politicians put these options on the political menu, people
might support them. The idea of changing the world by voting with your trolley
may be beguiling. But if consumers really want to make a difference, it is at
the ballot box that they need to vote.
问答题
Paraphrase the sentence "Never mind the ballot box. vote with your supermarket trolley instead". (para. 2)
【正确答案】Elections occur relatively rarely. But lots of people believe that when people do shopping, it is also a good opportunity to express their political views. People who are concerned about environmental protection might buy organic food; People who want to help poor farmers can buy Fairtrade products. People who dislike the evil multinational companies and rampant globalization can buy only local produce.
【答案解析】
问答题
What is "organic food"? Why does the author believe that it may lead to the problem that "there wouldn't be much room left for the rainforest"?
【正确答案】Organic food is the food grown without man-made pesticides and fertilizers. Organic agricultural methods rely on crop rotation, manure and compost in place of fertilizer. The "green revolution" of the 1960s initiated greater use of chemical fertilizer, and tripled grain yields with very little increase in the area of land under cultivation. But now, the organic agricultural methods are far less intensive. If we produce the world's current agricultural output organically, we would require several times as much land as is currently cultivated. That's why the author believe "there wouldn't be much room left for the rainforest".
【答案解析】
问答题
How is "Fairtrade food" designed to help poor farmers? According to the author, can this goal be achieved?
【正确答案】Fairtrade food is designed to raise poor farmers' incomes. It is sold at a higher price than ordinary food, with a subsidy passed back to the farmer. Prices of agricultural products are low because of overproduction. But since the prices are raised, farmers would be reluctant to diversify into other crops, they would continue to produce more of the over-produced products. And in fact, only a small fraction of the subsidy on Fairtrade foods actually goes to the farmer—most goes to the retailer. The system gives rich consumers an illusion of their generosity and makes alleviating poverty seem too easy.
【答案解析】
问答题
How is the "local food" generally believed to help protect the environment? Why does the author say that "local food may turn out to be even less green"? (para. 7)
【正确答案】Local food is produced as close as possible to the consumer, so that the "food miles" would be minimized, and thus, by extension, carbon emissions were also minimized. But a study found that nearly half of food vehicle miles were driven by cars going to and from the shops. Since most people live closer to a supermarket than a farmer's market, more local food could mean more food-vehicle miles. What's more, once the energy used in production as well as transportation is taken into account, local food's impact on environmental protection should be further questioned.