Jul 12

King crops: The dangers of monocrops (part I)

The food market is a difficult one. Production depends on weather and soil, prices are very volatile (they fluctuate a lot) and products are easily perishable. In spite of these difficulties, a few crops have managed to dominate the agricultural market. They have become the “king crops“ (in reference to the great documentary King Corn), the most cultivated and the most used and consumed. Crops such as soybean and corn are used in creative ways to justify their huge production.

 

Indeed, the crops that are most grown in the United States are corn and soybeans. Together they comprise 50% of US agricultural products (more info). Nonetheless, we don’t eat fried corn in every meal, just as we don’t eat tofu everyday. So why is the production of those crops so high?

 

There are two major reasons why the demand and the production of these crops have increased so much in the recent years, but one of the most important reason involves our food system as a whole. It is a system that has become unsustainable both for our environment and for our nutritional needs. (another problem that justify massive production of corn is the increasing demand of biofuels. To be covered in a future post).

 

Corn and soy are crops that we eat everyday, the only thing is that they are processed in ways that make it impossible to notice them. This happens in two ways. The corn is either used to feedlivestock or it is processed in such ways (corn syrup mainly) that make corn an important ingredient of a lot of unhealthy products

 

According to the National Corn Growers Association, about eighty percent of all corn grown in the U.S. is consumed by domestic and overseas livestock, poultry, and fish production. The crop is fed as ground grain, silage, high-moisture, and high-oil corn. For Soybean, it is estimated that 98%percent of the U.S crop is used for livestock feed (see here). The problem is that cattle was not naturally designed to eat corn or soybean (and obviously fish and poultry weren’t either). It is an animal that feeds on grass. Nevertheless, agro-industrial companies have found that feeding beef with corn and soybean is cheaper and more profitable, even though the quality of the meat decreases. Indeed, feeding beef with corn makes the meat more greasy and increases the fat in the meat. It also disrupts the cow’s digestive system, therefore cattle excrements emit much more methane (the most dangerous green house gas)when they are fed with corn. I don’t think the consumption of meat is by itself the problem, not as much as how big our consumption has become. Our consumption has risen so much becasue we produce beef in such big quantities that have led to decreased prices and increased the demand. Unfortunately, feeding beef with corn is a necessary process to make meat so cheap.

 

It is not only the production of meat that is making our agricultural market produce only a few crops. Most of our “junk food” also needs either the oil or the starch of soy and corn, respectively. Both soybean and corn are processed to become vegetable oil and sweet corn syrup. About 12% of the U.S. corn crop ends up in foods that are either consumed directly (e.g. corn chips) or indirectly (e.g. high fructose corn syrup). Most of our cookies, ice creams, sodas, burgers, and several main cooking ingredients are high fructose corn syrup and other types of vegetable oil. The massive consumption of these unhealthy products, and therefore the massive need to produce these crops, is one of the reasons the American diet has become extremely unhealthy. Worldwide, over 2 billion people suffer of obesity related disease (such as heart disease, diabetes etc). This rate is higher than the number of individuals that suffer chronic hunger (estimated to 1 billion). This is largely due to the fact that we are feeding ourselves with a few crops and a few ingredients. As pointed out in a previous post, food security is not a problem of production as much as it is a problem of distribution.

 

So why is the production of these crops so high? It is not only tied to bad economics (companies that look to produce in the cheapest way and so on) but also to the legal system. The Farm Bill (which a new version is supposed to pass in 2012) largely supports farmers who grow corn and soybeans, but does not incentivize farmers to grow other types of crops, or more vegetables. Indeed, the subsidies that go into the production of corn and soybeans are huge (see here). Therefore the industries that lobby to protect this bill (such as the National Corn Association) are very powerful, and they neglect the opinions of every-day Americans that are concerned about the interests of citizen’s health. These opinions have never had a chance to change what we grow and how we feed ourselves. Nevertheless, we should have a right  and be guaranteed that what we produce is healthy for everyone!

 

In order to solve this, I think we could easily allocate our land resources better. Instead of growing so much corn to feed cows, we could grow more wheat to feed people or more vegetables to have a healthier diet.  By diversifying our agricultural production, we could feed ourselves in a healthier manner and in one that impacts our environment differently. We have enough land and technology to produce as much as we want. But we should choose wisely what we produce.

 Julia Naime is a research intern at the SISGI Group. She is a student at New York University majoring at Economics. One of her greatest fears is high-fructose corn syrup; this has lead her to make Sustainable development and Environmental Policies a focus of her research with the SISGI Group. She also researches on issues in International Development. To learn more about the SISGI Group, visit www.sisgigroup.org
 

 

Share

Jul 12

Youth Issues Tweet Chats

The SISGI Group’s Youth Initiative, the Alliance for Positive Youth Development will be conducting tweet chats starting on July 18th at 4pm Eastern time.  The tweet chats will consist of specific questions regarding youth issues in today’s society.  After assessing the data from the Alliance for Positive Youth Development surveys, the tweet chats will act as focus questions to get more in-depth thoughts regarding key concerns found in the surveys.  Using a popular social media connection, like Twitter, the APYD team is hoping to get a great deal of feedback about what the youth, parents, educators, organizations, and others believe are core youth issues.

In order to get the most information in an organized fashion, there will be four tweet chats that will be split to allow questions and concerns to be focused on specific age groups. 

July 18th Young People 18-25
July 19th High School age youth
August 1st Middle school age youth
August 2nd Elementary school age youth

All of the chats will be at 4pm Eastern, and are open to anyone who wishes to join the conversations. In order to join in on the tweet chats on the given dates and times, please follow the APYD team @ideas4youth on twitter. All responses, concerns, and statements should have the #APYD hashtag so the APYD members can follow up on what people are saying about youth issues.

Since the tweet chats will be based on the information gleaned from the APYD surveys, it would be helpful if individuals take part in the surveys in order to provide even more input regarding youth issues and our work.  Many issues such as underemployment, bullying, and education reform will be mentioned in the chats because they are popular topics on the surveys.  All of this information will be used to complete our annual report on Issues Facing Youth.

Want to add your input but not on Twitter? Become our friend on Facebook or write on our Facebook wall to add to the conversations. Or you can also email us at ideas4youth@sisgigroup.org. Keep the dates and times of the tweet chats in mind, and let the youth initiative team know what concerns you believe are most important and affecting youth today!

Share

Jul 11

Read and Dance — Keep Your Mind Active

Like many people my age, I eagerly await this week’s release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2. When I go to the midnight premiere on Thursday night, I will probably reflect on how much J.K. Rowling has given our generation. She gave us a hero to grow up with, stories to read and re-read, understanding on concepts such as love and friendship, and the most successful book and movie series in world history. I am grateful for many of the memories and lessons she has provided to me and many of my friends, but a few days ago, I was reminded of one of the most important things she gave us – a healthy mind.

An article recently published in the journal Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine studied the relationship between teens’ exposure to certain forms of media (music, video games, the Internet, magazines, newspapers, and books) and having depression. According to the study, teens who read books are unlikely to be depressed. On the other hand, teens who listen to music excessively are 8.3 times as likely to be depressed as young people less exposed. None of the other forms of media had a significant correlation to depression. When I saw this study, I wondered why reading Harry Potter could help the state of my mental health, whereas listening to my favorite bands could hurt it.

I do take the findings with a grain of salt. I highly doubt that people who don’t listen to music would be 8 times more likely to become depressed just by listening to a lot of music. There must be many confounding factors that play into this very significant correlation. Perhaps people who naturally love music are inherently susceptible to depression, or perhaps people who are already depressed choose to listen to music instead of read to find comfort. Nonetheless, the results are too significant to ignore. Even if confounding factors bias some of the results, I find it unlikely that there is absolutely no causal link between listening to music and being depressed, just as I find it unlikely that there is no causal link between reading a lot and not being depressed. Psychologists and neuroscientists should study this link and find a physiological reason for it. In the meantime, I will offer possible explanations and some protective measures we should take to avoid depression.

One potential factor for music causing depression could be that when listening to music, Continue reading

Share

Jul 11

Food Talk

There are currently one billion people around the world who are hungry. With inefficient farming practices, poor distribution, record high food prices, and a global population that’s expected to reach over nine billion by 2050, food security is a huge challenge worldwide. Plain and simple: current methods aren’t working, and changes must be made in order to meet present needs while preparing for the future. The way we make and distribute food is not just unsuccessful, but unsustainable.

Food security is a complex problem, so the solutions certainly won’t be simple. It is the intersection of research, technology, science, and government and international support that will bring the innovation necessary for change. A rapidly growing global population has created a new urgency to end hunger. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), food production needs to increase by 100% in developing countries – and 70% globally – in order to eradicate hunger. Those are not small numbers, which means that each plan for a solution will be ambitious and they’ll have huge obstacles.

Food security is also not a new problem. There are many organizations that are trying to eradicate hunger and develop sustainable ways to produce and distribute food. The FAO, for example, has introduced a new farming model called Save and Grow. The initiative is hoped to increase food production sustainably and without compromising the environment. Save and Grow intensifies crop production without the use of pesticides or techniques that affects soil’s fertility, like tilling and ploughing. The initiative targets smallholder farmers in developing countries and enables them to minimize food production costs. With these savings, farm families can invest in themselves in other ways, like education.

Additionally, The DuPont Advisory Committee on Agricultural Innovation and Productivity for the 21st Century has spent about eighteen months analyzing the numerous challenges that are faced and potential solutions to eradicate hunger. One farming practice they identified that makes a huge impact on food production and distribution is simply having some type of storage facility for seeds and harvested grains. This doesn’t have to be a huge, expensive structure – just a small building would be sufficient. Without storage, farmers can reportedly lose more than a third of their harvest to environmental factors and pests. If it’s unrealistic for each and every farm family to have a storage facility, perhaps there could be shared buildings or community storage areas that farmers could use.

There are also efforts being made to combat a wheat fungus that has spread throughout Africa and is anticipated to reach India and Asia as well. The fungus threatens the viability of wheat and consequently hampers the already inadequate food supply. At the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), scientists have been working on developing wheat strains that are resistant to the fungus. Amazingly, these resistant strains could become widely available in as little as three to four years. This increases the ability to avoid famine and perhaps the ability to develop other crops that are resistant to a certain fungus.

The good news is that hunger and food security issues are being attacked from multiple angles, which gives the potential solutions the greatest chance for success. From revamping farming practices and techniques to organizations simply delivering food to areas where hunger is prevalent, efforts are being made to eradicate hunger worldwide everyday. It’s important to continue brainstorming, researching, and pursuing new ideas that will (hopefully!) work together to finally put an end to hunger for good.

Rebecca Birnbaum is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group focusing on nonviolent conflict resolution, nonprofit management, and sustainable development. She is a senior at the University of Michigan, where she studies Anthropology, Political Science, and Peace and Social Justice. To learn more about the SISGI Group, visit www.sisgigroup.org.
Share

Jul 11

Youth and International Development

On Thursday, July 8th, a rather interesting live web chat was conducted by USAID Administrator Raj Shah and actor Kal Penn.  The topic of the web chat, “How to Make Change: Youth and International Development,” was especially important for young people who are curious about their role in the world today.  Administrator Shah directly answered questions posed to him on twitter, facebook, and by the few young men and women in the conference room with him.  As questions continued to stream in, Administrator Shah continued to stress a few key points that are worth mentioning again.

First and foremost, many of the questions that young people asked Administrator Shah revolved around how the United States planned to eradicate poverty across the globe, and how the U.S. planned on helping impoverished countries stand on their own feet.  The response to both of these inquiries started with specific programs the U.S. had established to help with the above mentioned issues.  For example, the Obama administration has created the Feed the Future program in order to target the root of hunger in impecunious nations, and creating lasting solutions to stop hunger.  However, more so than the programs, Administrator Shah continuously stated that international aid was changing, and that it is important to create self-sufficient foreign nations.  This cannot be done by simply writing out a check to a country, but by helping nations use technological advancements to increase food production, have clean water, and educate the people to use such resources. In this way, structured partnerships can be created with developing nations in order to increase job opportunities, build relations, and solve global problems.

On the domestic level, many questions to Administrator Shah asked why the United States should provide foreign aid in this dire economy, and how to get the youth more interested in global issues.  Mr. Shah answered the first question by stating that it is much cheaper for the U.S. to build bridges than to send soldiers.  When the U.S. is seen as a positive force and partner in the world, many developing countries are eager to create lasting partnerships with the United States.  These partnerships can also cause more jobs to be created in America because developing nations will most likely begin to increase their demand for American inventions.  Since international development can lead to economic connections, Administrator Shah urged the youth to become interested in global issues.  One way to do so is to visit whitehouse.gov/youngamericans, and getting involved in projects and developments.  Administrator Shah also mentioned that many universities, like UC Berkeley, have places like the Blum Center that look for lasting solutions to fight poverty in developing economies. 

The live webchat conducted by Administrator Shah was a worthwhile listen because it addressed many issues regarding the youth, and their role in the world.  Furthermore, the webchat proved that the youth also have a responsibility to learn about the world they live in from an early age.  It is extremely important that young people get involved in learning how they can make lasting and positive changes in developing nations.  As a growing force, the American youth can begin the movement towards making the world a better place for themselves and millions of others. 

Share

Jul 11

The Arab Spring Reaches Eastern Europe

It seems that the revolutionary spirit of the Arab Spring has spread from North Africa and the Middle East all the way to troubled Belarus in Eastern Europe.  Belarus has been called “Europe’s Last Dictatorship” ever since 1994, when the “Last Dictator” Alexander Lukashenko came to power in a highly contested election.  In a distinct parallel to the governments of Libya and Syria and the other countries of the Arab Spring, the government of Belarus has spent the last 17 years jailing opposition leaders, rounding up protesters, banning “dangerous” books, and attacking journalists.  The economy has collapsed.  Inflation is rising.  And in another distinct parallel to the Arab Spring, the Belarusian people are fed up with Lukashenko’s oppressive regime and the problems he has caused and they are taking a stand.

Lukashenko, like Gaddafi and Mubarak before him, is not taking these protests sitting down.  In the past week alone he jailed over 250 people (some estimates are as high as 400) after a silent protest in Minsk, and before that he used a mixture of preventative arrests and internet attacks to attempt to stop the clapping protests planned for Independence Day (July 3rd).  Public gatherings have been outlawed, and Lukashenko regularly addresses his people dressed in military attire as he blames foreign countries for the economic troubles Belarus currently faces.

But Belarusians are not threatened by Lukashenko’s crackdowns and military rhetoric (he recently compared the current troubles to the Nazi invasion).  Activists have taken to the streets, and they’ve been using social media to plan their protests, inspired by the Arab Spring.  However, as you may recall from my very first post, I hesitate to give Facebook and other social media sites too much credit for the recent revolutions in North Africa/the Middle East—and the same applies to Belarus.  Social media sites may make gatherings like the clapping protests easier, may help activists coordinate times and places and methods of revolt, but in today’s technologically advanced world what else can you expect?  Activists are not going to arrange meetings by mail.  Social media has become a part of our lives, especially for the younger generations, and so to use it for revolution seems as natural as to use it for party planning or coordinating an event like the Rally to Restore Sanity.

I would say that the inspiring part of the Arab Spring, the lesson that Belarusian protesters should take from the events, is the persistence the protesters showed—though I suppose the same can be said of any successful revolution.  The activists and protesters who led the revolutions in North Africa were willing to give up everything for their cause, and they were not stopped by government crackdowns or threats.  They were fed up with their conditions, and they did something about it.

The people of Belarus certainly have plenty to be fed up with.  Despite numerous “elections,” Lukashenko has remained in power for almost 2 decades, and he appears to be grooming his young son to take over.  He caused the economic collapse by printing more money, and because of the following inflation, half of the Belarusians can barely afford to feed their families.  Peaceful protests are violently shut down by police, known activists jailed, and it has been reported that people’s Twitter ID’s are being stolen and used to report false information.  So while social media may play an integral role in the planning of revolutions and the spread of information, I think true inspiration comes from the knowledge that others facing similar, if not worse, circumstances, have held their ground and worked to bring about change.  The revolutions may not be over, or even close to over, but the willingness of the protesters to fight for the rights they felt they deserved in the face of powerful dictators is the real message of the Arab Spring, not the fact that they used such-and-such social media site to do so.

Michelle Bovée is a SISGI Group Program and Research Intern focused on international affairs, economic development, and responsible tourism. To learn more about the SISGI Group visit www.sisgigroup.org

Share

Jul 08

Gender Inequality in the Workplace

Gender inequality is a deplorable reality that runs rampant across the globe.  Women are vulnerable to injustice at home, work and in their communities.  Socially, economically, politically and culturally, women have been treated as second class citizens throughout history.  In the workplace, women earn less money on average than their male counterparts and face a lack of opportunity for moving up the corporate ladder or even securing equal access to the jobs men occupy.  In general, the wage gap between men and women is relatively large despite laws (in some parts of the world) that require employers to pay both genders equally for positions that are comparable in education, skill and responsibility.  Governmental and nongovernmental agencies, as well as human rights advocates have made significant progress in advancing the rights of women through empowerment, education and progressive legislation over the past century or so.  Nevertheless, there is still a long road ahead in obtaining total equality.

UN Women, a fairly new branch of the United Nations specifically focusing on advancing gender equality and the empowerment of women, released their first major report this week that reviews the rights of women around the world—Progress of the World’s Women: In Pursuit of Justice.  Their findings focused on several areas of injustice faced by women from domestic violence to voting and political rights to rights in the workplace.  They reported that globally, women are paid 10-30% less than men despite 117 countries adopting equal pay laws.  This figure holds true across all job sectors from low-level to high-level.  Furthermore, in one-third of the countries analyzed, women were forbidden from working in the same industries as men leaving them vulnerable to low economic opportunity and poor working conditions.  600 million women, or more than half of working women worldwide, are in unpaid, insecure, informal and/or unprotected labor jobs.  Similar facts and figures have been suggested in other studies.  In the U.S., it has been reported that a full-time working woman makes 77 cents to every dollar earned by a man, with an even wider gap when looking at minority women—African-American women earning 71 cents and Hispanic women 62 cents.

UN Women make a strong recommendation in their report for justice funding and reform to eliminate gender discrimination.  They suggest that reforming the justice system and transforming legislation will lay the foundation for improving the status of women in society.  While I agree that fair and just legal systems and laws are significant practices in changing the negative ways in which women are treated in society, I cannot help but to wonder if it will significantly alter negative attitudes towards women overall.  Even in industrialized, or developed, countries where laws and regulations are set in place regarding gender equality in the workplace, tremendous gaps between men and women exist.

The laws do not necessarily equal a change in attitude or major change in behavior.  If laws laid the groundwork, then why do women only represent 3.2% of S&P 500 CEOs in the United States?  Why do so many men (even women at times) in positions of power ostracize other women’s ability to become powerhouses as well?  Take for instance, the CEO of New Zealand’s Employers and Manufacturers Association, Alasdair Thompson, who remarked this past week that women do not get ahead in the workplace because their menstruation cycles make them less productive.  Or how about Facebook female exec Sheryl Sandberg’s recent interview in which she expressed her thoughts on the reasons for gender inequality in the workplace—women too often “blaming others” and “not taking responsibility for ourselves.”

Many studies have attributed wage gaps to traditionally-defined gender roles—women as child-bearers and caretakers and men as protectors and breadwinners.  This has created a glass-ceiling for women in the workplace that is difficult to break through.  Yet, those who do move ahead often have to sacrifice family life for work life, conforming to a stereotypical male role that does not have parenthood on the list.  Men suffer as well—expected to put work time ahead of family time.  This is where not only law-reform needs to come into play (i.e. paid maternity, paternity leave; childcare; etc.), but gender norm reform as well.  Women are not the only ones experiencing gender-conflict, men are too!  A new study reveals that men now have more work-life conflict than do women which is associated with this idea of being stuck in traditional ways of thinking in a progressive society.  The world is changing and gender norms are transforming.  Societies need to become more educated on the generational changes that continue to take place and begin to acknowledge and accept that gender roles are not the same as they once were.  What do you think is the foundation for changing societal attitudes about women (or gender roles in general)—justice reform or education and awareness building?  How can we combine the two?

Cynthia Castaldo-Walsh is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group focused on gender-based conflict, non-violence and peacebuilding for conflict transformation, and sustainability for conflict resolution.
Share

Jul 08

Enough of ‘Running to Stand Still’

Once in a while, we all hear songs that hit us in the face. In a good way. I’m not referring to the ones that are on Top 40 charts that we sing along with our friends at parties, or even the really good ones that we repeat on our iTunes continuously for a few days before inevitably killing them. I’m talking about the rare, once in a blue moon, timeless songs that combine melodies and lyrical mastery that stop us in our tracks. It’s these songs, the ones that we can really relate to, that give us insight on the perspective of others, or even paralyze us in awe of the musicians’ talents, that demonstrate the power of music.

I recently felt this power when I was driving back home to North Carolina with my brother from our family reunion in New Jersey. As I rifled through his CD collection (including the likes of Bob Dylan, the Beatles, and Led Zepplin…my brother’s music tastes are much more refined than mine), I settled on The Joshua Tree – one of U2’s most esteemed albums that was released in 1987. The first three tracks on the album were also three of U2’s biggest hits – “Where the Streets Have No Name,” “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For,” and “With or Without You.” But it wasn’t until track five that I got hit-at-first-listen. 30 seconds into the song, I knew there was something special about “Running to Stand Still.”

After playing the song several times on the car ride, and then reading all about it on the internet at home, my appreciation continued to develop. In just over 4 minutes, U2 was able to convey the perils of the heroin epidemic in Dublin in the 1980s by illustrating the stories of a man and woman battling their addictions. In spite of their desire to “run from the darkness” and overcome their addiction, Bono lamented that they would eventually “suffer the needle chill.” After all, they were “running to stand still.”

This final disheartening and vivid phrase really encapsulates the battle that people face when struggling with addictions. No matter how hard they try, they often fail to make progress. What makes U2’s song so special is that it acknowledges the addicts’ continuous poor decision making without passing moral judgments. Rather than being accusatory, the song has a sympathetic, melancholy, and even resigned tone to it. It’s as if the musicians in U2 know the terrible fate that many heroin addicts face, and are sorry that they can do nothing to fix the situation.

Considering that the song was recorded in 1987, it was progressive for its time. Even today, 24 years later, rather than accepting and trying to help them, we often shun and morally indict drug users. We seem to be victims of our own addictions of imposing our morals on others. In many ways, our desire to fulfill this addiction holds our country back. To address the needs of our drug users, we need to overcome this woeful addiction to our preconceived biases.

I have referenced in a previous post my discontent with the current drug policy in America. I argued that criminalizing some drugs did not successfully deter people from taking drugs; rather, it bred discontentment for laws. I also argued that criminalization of drugs cost the government tons of money and allowed drug trade to propagate inner-city crime. Most importantly, I have always thought that it makes little sense to punish some of the people who need our help most.

I recently read a report published by the CATO Institute that supported some of my arguments. In 2001, a Portuguese law kept all drugs illegal but decriminalized the use of drugs. Thus, Portugal serves as a good case study for what happens when such policies are in place. The CATO Institute’s report suggested that drug abuse has not Continue reading

Share

Jul 08

Oh Budget Cuts!

Budget Cuts Equal Shorter School Years for Many Children

It seems as though the education reform movement that has swept through the United States is unable to conquer the growing budget crisis.  Though the issue with budget cuts has been mentioned in previous posts, it is still imperative to highlight what exactly children are going to lose to this social calamity.  Last week, the fear of growing classroom sizes was mentioned in a post, and this week the issue to highlight is the shortening of the school year.  Traditionally, students in the U.S. have to attend 180 days of school; a number that a great many education reformers believe is too small.  Unfortunately, thousands of children have, and will continue, to experience shorter school years.

 A plethora of school districts in California, Oregon, Nevada, and other states have already implemented shorter school years, in the form of four day weeks, in order to trim school costs.  Though the four day week is used in many states like Idaho and New Mexico, the shorter school week is found in mostly rural areas.  Reports have been published in order to assess the benefits and drawbacks of a four day week, and the results are interesting.  The benefits of a four day week are that costs are cut down for transportation, heating and air conditioning, and meal services.  The benefits of a shorter week remain inconclusive, and it is unknown whether students succeed more when the school week is reduced.

In today’s world, inconclusive evidence regarding the strengths of the education system is counter intuitive.  According to Philip Hoffman, a Board of Trustees member of a community college in Michigan, the shorter school year will inadvertently affect children negatively.  Since the shorter weeks are not implemented across the country, Hoffman fears that children affected by the change will be unable to compete academically with their peers from other states.  This same fear has been expressed by many educators and researchers in California.  Jack O’Connell, a school superintendent in California, believes that the shorter school weeks will academically harm students from lower-income backgrounds.  Though the shortening of the school week will save up to $1.1 billion, the students will be losing out on their education in the end.

Despite the domestic issues of having a shorter school week, American students face international ramifications as well.  It is well-known by U.S. researchers and educators that children in India and China spend far more time in schools compared to students in America.  The traditional 180 days of schooling has been considered too short in comparison to schooling in other nations, but the school day gap is getting bigger; not smaller.  In order to lay a strong foundation for the necessary skills children need to become capable global competitors, the education system of the United States needs to be reassessed.  Though the economy may be in a funk, and budgets need to be tightened across the nation, education standards need to be strengthened.  The world is becoming an increasingly competitive occupational arena, and American students deserve the very best education a developed country has to offer.    

Share

Jul 07

Understanding Your Food: Part I

Understanding Your Environmentally Conscious Eating Options

A few years ago, I decided to become vegetarian after reading numerous reports on the production of meat and viewing horrific footage of the fishing industry in Japan, which I mentioned last week.  For a year, I dedicated myself to avoiding meat and seafood.  After a while of living this lifestyle and having my friends jokingly entice me with many meatball subs from the dining hall, I began to question why I had become a vegetarian.  I finally realized that I had become a vegetarian for not altogether the wrong reasons, but that I had made an uneducated decision based on my many assumptions of what the food industry was like.

I thought that eating vegetarian was the only way for me to protest animals being inhumanely slaughtered, avoid meat riddled with hormones and antibiotics – whether from medicine or tainted food the animals are often fed – and contribute to bettering the environment.  Well long story short, I was very wrong.  I started researching ways to eat meat products and seafood in ways that were conscious of the environment, as well as animal friendly.  Although I’ll admit that I was originally motivated to do this research because I was so tempted to start eating those meatball subs again, the information I found on environmentally conscious eating can be applied to not only meat and seafood, but fruits and vegetables as well.

Some problems within the agricultural industry are:

  • Damaging the environment through soil, air and water pollution from animal waste, chemicals in fertilizer, and pesticides
  • Inhumane treatment of animals that are susceptible to disease
  • Meat and dairy products coming from animals injected with growth hormones

With these inherent dangers coming from the agricultural industry, there’s currently a big movement towards eating organic foods.  Another good way to be environmentally conscious is to buy foods that are locally produced, meaning from local farmers at a farmer’s market for example.  You’ll not only be supporting small-time farmers rather than the corporate giants of the agricultural world, but you’ll also be buying from a local source that didn’t have your zucchini shipped across several states, which also cuts down on the impact of fossil fuels used in food transportation.  Now what does it mean for something to be organic, and what’s the benefit in eating these types of foods?

  • Animals live “stress-free lives”, are fed natural feed, not injected with hormones, and roam freely in pastures
  • Meat and dairy production is clean and humane
  • Produce is grown without the use of pesticides or fertilizer
  • Produce will not be genetically modified
  • Farm workers will be healthy because they’re not constantly in contact with chemicals
  • Farms put out less pollutants and greenhouse gases than industrial farms

I think that in an era where mass produced food rules, it’s especially important to understand where your food comes from.  It’s not necessary, nor is it smart to assume that being vegetarian is the right way to eat responsibly.  This deeper understanding of food can support responsible and sustainable farming practices, and keep you healthy!  Make sure you check out these guides for seasonal fruits and vegetables and farmers markets in your area.

Yvonne Chen is a SISGI Group Program and Research Intern.  Her focuses are in environmental sustainability, human rights issues, and economic aid in developing countries. 

Share