Does Big Organic Scare You?
Because it scares Kay Steiger
To me, this isn’t a problem specific to the grocery industry or even Big Organics. This is more of a problem with how our economy is set up. We reward stores that resemble the corporate structure, even if they’re advocating something that theoretically liberal. Consumers look for chain stores because that’s what’s familiar. We really don’t give much credit or support to independent retailers. Instead, it’s not enough to be a good corner store. If you have a good business model, you aren’t supposed to inspire other store owners in other cities, you’re supposed to form a franchise and open up your own stores in other cities. We’re far too dependent on the brand name.
I’m very confused by this argument. How is our economy set up? Who is doing this setting up? What reforms would Kay introduce so that it would be “enough to be a good corner store.” The reason people like chains is because they have lower prices, a wide variety of goods, higher average quality of goods, constant high volumes and because one can basically get the same quality of product in a wide variety of locations. The reason we don’t “give much..support to independent retailers” isn’t some kind of “choice” in the way Steiger seems to conceptualize it, but because the chains can offer standardized high quality and variety at lower prices than the independent retailers. Independents deserve all the credit they get, that’s how a market works.
Steiger’s second contention, that good corner stores turning into franchises is somehow undesirable (wait, I thought corner stores were good!) is even more baffling. Let’s say I run a successful organic grocery in Oakland. I have good deals with suppliers, high quality products and offer competitive prices. Should I try to “inspire” potential organic grocers in Berkeley and San Francisco to follow my business model and start poaching my suppliers? No, my business model kicks ass, I’m a good grocer, my brand is becoming respected, of course I should start the new grocery stores. How could that be bad? This is a feature of how our economy is set up, not a bug.
I think the base of our disagreement is her assertion that the “corporate business model” is somehow illiberal or unprogressive. I see no reason to think this is always and necessarily true. The success of Whole Foods, the spread of organic foods to Wal Mart and the proliferation of fair trade coffee at Starbucks would seem to prove otherwise. If organic foods and the like are good things, which I imagine Steiger thinks they are, don’t you want them to be sold in the most widespread and efficient manner? The model isn’t good or bad in and of itself, it’s a question of how good it is at providing the goods we like. If corner stores and indepedent retailers can’t do that as well as Big Orgnaics like Whole Foods and Wal Mart, too bad for them.
It’s also important to remember that many of these “corner stores” big box centers and Wal Marts replace aren’t that great. In urban areas, it’s not all that uncommon to see rotten produce that is much more expensive than what is being offered at Wal Mart. Yglesias wrote a superb column on horrible mom and pop grocery stores can be, and it should be read and reread by all.
you might want to check out Michael Pollan’s “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” on this issue, as he makes a pretty compelling argument that there IS a real difference between “big organic” and “real” organic food production. The former, like any good corporation, needs food to be uniform, always available, and relatively cheap. In other words, big organic food may be organic (e.g. no pesticides) but it is still a commodity. Pollan suggests that stripping food of its association with the land and location removes something important from the food itself and the way it is produced. So, for example, Horizon organic milk gets a lot of milk from cows that live in enormous feedlots; organic “free range” chickens don’t really go outside b/c if you don’t use antibiotics yet you still need to keep thousands of chickens in one place (which big organic requires) they are quite vulnerable to pathogens. Chickens raised on family farms, which eat grass, bugs, etc. and have plenty of room to roam don’t suffer from the same problems (and incidentally taste better and are probably happier animals). Big organic food production requires much more fossil fuel input than carefully managed small farms would, etc.
Anyway, this is not to say that the tradeoffs for big organic aren’t worth it – as you point out, there’s something to be said for getting more people to eat organic food. But there is a difference, and an argument can be made that this difference is important.
bc
November 1, 2007 at 2:50 pm