It’s official. My family has become the latest victim of “green noise,” that cacophony of conflicting environmental messages and concerns lobbed at consumers by marketers, environmental groups, and well-intentioned do-gooders. It’s simply become impossible to decide which eco-friendly choice is the best.

Here’s how it goes for me. I walk into a grocery store with a vague idea of what I need to get. I head to the produce section and meet with my first roadblock: which organics should I buy? The ol’ grocery budget forces me to pick and choose. The organic bananas seem like a steal at 89 cents a pound--but I’ve read that the less expensive conventionally grown bananas have only minimal levels of pesticide residues, and if I’m worried about the environment, don’t I need to consider that the bananas have racked up a considerable carbon footprint after being transported from South America? Hmm…peaches? The peaches are almost in season and at least were grown in the continental US. Easy decision ‘til – good Lord! Who can afford organic peaches?!

Click to read more ...

Global food prices have jumped an attention-grabbing 83% in the last three years and  food riots have broken out in multiple countries in the last few weeks. Bad weather, ethanol policies, and dwindling reserves can take some of the blame.

Will this apply the brakes to foodie culture? Much as I am comfortable speaking the occasionally overwrought language of gourmet land, recent news items give me pause. A carriage-trade kitchen designer is selling $185,000 marble-fitted show places. Food & Wine featured an attorney’s “dream kitchen,” where he’d installed chef-level tools, including his very own thermal circulator (a favorite toy of the molecular gastronomist).  Time taste-tested a $182 bottle of olive oil, reporting a 17% increase in gourmet food sales over the last two years.

The great majority of us who like to dabble with the occasional luxury ingredient or obsessively combine beef suet with butter for their pie crust (it works, trust me) are hardly on this plain. But, essentially, playing with your food at the level described above feels somehow an impropriety in the face of what could be starvation for swaths of World 3. And, as costs rise, the ingredients for “Ancient Roman Duck” may get so steep that the foodie challenge may instead be to put together the most intriguing dish for the least amount of money. Did you know kudzu can be made into a rather nice salad? And those dandelions that have taken over the back lawn are looking particularly fresh this morning...

 Image: littledan77 (Flickr)

If you found this post useful, make sure to sign up for our RSS feed or subscribe by email.

PETA has announced a $1 million dollar prize to any researchers who could come up with a commercially viable "in vitro meat" product by 2012.  (The LATimes has more details on the offer.)

It seems like an unusual offer from PETA, which typically promotes vegetarianism. Perhaps they're coming to terms with the fact that some of us just aren't willing to give up our beloved meat, although widespread vegetarianism would admittedly be better for both animals and the environment. In vitro meat--there seems to be a consensus on the message boards that it needs a new name--would solve both these problems. It's also a topic that we covered last year in our Global Lifestyles project (subscribers only).

This decision apparently inspired a near-civil war within PETA, dividing the vegetarian purists and the animal rights advocates. Despite the internal controversy, this appeal to carnivores takes "cruelty-free" meat beyond free-range chicken.

Think this sounds like a half-baked sci-fi plot? William Saletan of Slate points out that scientists have already done some pretty impressive work on other body parts (hearts, livers, etc.), so in terms of science, this really isn't so out of the question.

Image: VirtualErn (Flickr) 

If you found this post useful, make sure to sign up for our RSS feed or subscribe by email.

Though the super-macho deer hunter seems like an unlikely ally for the proponents of organic, community-supported agriculture, this op-ed from the New York Times argues that hunters could do themselves a favor by aligning their interests closely with that of the local food movement:

In New York State alone, roughly half a million hunters harvest around 190,000 deer in the fall deer hunting season — that’s close to eight million pounds of venison. In the traditional vernacular, we’d call that “game meat.” But, in keeping with the times, it might be better to relabel it as free-range, grass-fed, organic, locally produced, locally harvested, sustainable, native, low-stress, low-impact, humanely slaughtered meat.

It will be interesting to see what other kinds of groups that don't readily seem to fit the tradtional notion of environmentalist start to realign their "branding" as green goes mainstream.

Image: Odalaigh (Flickr)

What are our futurists reading? The following are some sources that are sparking the interest of Social Technologies' analysts at the moment:

Image: Social TechnologiesJohn Cashman:

• China CEO: Voices of Experience from 20 International Business Leaders, by Juan Antonio Fernandez & Laurie Underwood -- I’ve been slowly picking my way through this fine collection of insights, anecdotes, and advice from leaders of prominent multinationals such as Carrefour, BP, Unilever, and GE. They share their experiences, good and bad, on entering into China’s complex business landscape. The advice ranges from practical discussions on how to choose expatriate staff with the temperament for China (hint: don’t forget the effects of relocation on the employee’s family), to advice on the best strategies for entry into the Chinese market (Go it alone? Joint venture? Strong or weak joint venture partner?), to creating the proper incentive structures for managing Chinese staff (education and training opportunities, rapid advancement, and impressive-sounding titles seem to be a good place to start).

Matt Sollenberger:

• "The End of Cheap Food," in The Economist -- The Economist argues that higher food prices are not a spike but are, in fact, here to stay due to a collection of underlying factors they lump under the term “agflation.” However, the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization and the IMF tell a slightly different story.

Gio Van Remortel:

• “A Lush Business,” by Vitisia Paynich in Electronic Retailer magazine -- Lush founder and CEO Mark Constantine discusses the business approach of his wildly successful soap and cosmetic store. The company uses organic ingredients for its products and also employs a strategy of transparency and interactivity with its customers. The story piqued my interest not only because ethical consumption and transparency are trends that we monitor, but also because a colleague expressed such enthusiasm on seeing the story headline and mentioned how much she loves their store. The article confirms that this type of customer enthusiasm has much to do with their growing success.

Your new best friend? Image: Scott SmithA recent one-day "snapshot" of global health indicates that obesity is becoming a global problem, not just one concentrated in a few Western countries. A study of 168,000 people in 63 countries worldwide found that more than half--in some cases up to two-thirds--of men and women in those countries are obese.

The project, called the International Day to Evaluate Obesity, looked at both waist circumference and a calculation known as Body Mass Index, which measures weight and height to establish whether someone is overweight. A BMI of 25-29 is considered overweight, and over 30 obese. The study found the average BMI for Latin America for both men and women is 28. More surprisingly, 38% of women in the Middle East were found to be obese. Only East Asia shows some signs of resistance to the trend at the moment, with just 7% of the studied population considered obese.

Another recent study in Britain blamed a cocktail of cheap, energy-rich foods, labor-saving devices, less costly motorized transportation, and less active lifestyles as contributing to the problem of obesity. One UK minister declared obesity on par with the impact of climate change in that country, and there are early indications of the same reasoning (i.e. economic costs/impact) being applied to obesity as has been applied to climate issues.

Will playing the environmental card be the trick that slows or reverses climbing rates of obesity? It's too early to say, but some government economists around the world are starting to count the cost of the obesity "pandemic" in dollars and cents, putting it in a new class of "meta-issues" (such as aging and climate change) that are on the radars of world leaders. Will global obesity be on the agenda at Davos this year? Will there be a worldwide series of  "Stop the Fat" concerts worldwide next summer? In the next few years, it could happen.

Image: Scott SmithLast week, as the first cool evening of autumn settled in, I decided to make my traditional "beginning of fall" meal. It's a recipe I picked up living in rural England for (get your cultural fusion here) Moroccan lamb. It's a very tasty dish, combining roasted lamb with a variety of root vegetables over couscous. Fair enough. I managed to pick up some lamb at Costco, and proceeded to my nearest mega-grocery to get the vegetables.

I spent 20 minutes in the produce section (the entrance to which is ironically obscured by the "fresh food" department, selling sushi, pizza made in a brick oven right there, and "fresh" juices and soups) picking up the six or seven seasonal vegetables to slice and broil in the dripping lamb fat and then went to the check out.

Once there, things ground to a halt. I already have a reputation in the family for buying fresh food at the expense of the more favored canned variety, and now the shoppers in line behind me were beginning to share my relatives' view of me. The holdup? The 20-something cashier was stumped as to what the vegetables were as he attempted to key in the produce codes. Once he got past the carrots and onions--which I guess are the obvious items known to everyone--he stopped. One after another, he held up my items, wrinkled his nose and asked, "What's this?" Parsnip. "And this?" Turnip. "And?" Fennel.

What I realized at that moment is that you can be of a certain age, still work at a grocery store probably 20 hours a week, and not have a clue as to the types of foods our grandparents probably would have recognized right away. Granted, not everyone is a foodie, but the inability to recognize a turnip when confronted with one in an indicator of an important change between generations and food. It's one thing to grow up not knowing what a 45RPM record is. I can hardly remember them myself. But generations are losing their collective memory of actual fresh food as our supply chains from "farm" to table become hyperindustrialized.

The vast majority of foods only exist to us in processed or simulated form today in World 1, and this trend is accelerating in World 2. We may encounter a once-obscure chili pepper as the flavor du jour at our favorite quick-serve restaurant, but are losing touch with many of the real, tangible foods.

So, while he may not have known a parsnip from a rutabaga, my college-aged cashier could probably have described the delicate flavor of smoked chipotle, which he has never met in person in his life.

Vertical farms—urban, indoor, multi-story agricultural systems that some envision supplementing or even replacing conventional farms—have been receiving a bit of press recently, such as this CNNMoney.com article.
Farmland of the future? The innovative concept is being promoted by Dr. Dickson Despommier at Columbia University, among others.

We reported on Despommier’s idea several years back in our Technology Foresight project, and as I think about it now, they are an interesting twist on another trend we’ve been tracking for a while—the rising interest in “local food” and in reducing the carbon footprint and “food miles” of one’s food. To view our 2005 analysis of Dr. Despommier’s idea, see this research brief.

For more from Dr. Despommier, check out his vertical farming site here.

Image: Photos.com

This summer I've made the trek from LAX to Orange County and back a number of times while working on an interesting project that touches on urban lifestyles. My path, and some occasional spare time, has allowed me to meander around parts of Los Angeles I might not otherwise check out--parts of South Central LA in particular. This same project has taken me back to my home town of Atlanta, as well as to some declining Detroit suburbs.

One common factor in all of these locations is the high density of fast food joints. In LA, it's fast burgers, a profusion of donut shacks and taquerias. In Atlanta, plenty of fast food chains (many run down) and cookie-cutter fast-casual outlets surround the big malls. In Detroit, food courts and liquor stores. The common theme? Lower-income areas seem chock-a-bloc with brightly colored, cheap, but dubious gastronomic choices. Within a few hundred yards of a resident's front door, one can find any manner of fried, spicy, or triple-decker meal, often for under $5 or so.

In much the same vein as some public schools' removal of junk food from cafeteria's and vending machines, the LA City Council is mulling a motion to place a two-year moratorium on new fast food outlets--but only in South Central, one of LA's poorer neighborhoods. The move goes a step beyond similar movements in places such as New York City, by attempting to make enact a law, rather than limiting things to a call to action. The moratorium's supporters say the urban poor have few healthy food choices that are affordable. Detractors say the big fast food chains do provide some access to healthy choices, but also provide a "safe" area in often-dangerous neighborhoods, as well as critical jobs, and that most important American value, convenience.

Regardless of how the moratorium vote goes, this move represents an indicator--an early hint--of new ways the nutrition and obesity battles may be cast: jurisdictions singling out particular geographies for intervention. Will Whole Foods get a tax break for moving into inner city neighborhoods to fill the perceived nutritional vacuum? Watch this space.

My computer with its 17 inch flat-screen is just a few feet away from the kitchen. The kitchen being control central of my home (I need a lot of food to command and control), the proximity make sense.

Finding out what my spouse is doing at work or how many Weight Watcher points I just spent on my lunch is just a click away. This week, I came across a signpost of how transparency is integrating into our lives as consumers. On the peel of Dole’s organic bananas is a sticker with a “farm code.” If you want to know more about where your banana came from, you can enter the farm code number at Dole’s website.

Photos of smiling women packing away bananas in a warehouse became surprisingly personal when I looked down at the banana in my bowl…”did you once lie on that table in Colombia?” In addition to photos, a link to Google Earth will zoom in on the farm from above, and a listing of farm certifications, awards, and recognitions provides all the technical information you might need about how the your banana was grown. But it seems a smiling face was all I needed. 

Eukanuba’s “Feed the Breed” website gives adoring dog owners customized food recommendations based on 3 breed sizes, 3 lifestage options (puppy, adult, senior), 4 activity levels, and 3 weight profiles (ideal, under, over).

There are also other variables that play into the recommendation. Is your puppy going through the weaning period? There is a food for that. Is your dog active? The “active” mix has “Glucosamine and Chondroitin Sulfate for healthy joints and mobility.” Do you have a sporting dog? If so, the sporting mix has “highly digestible carbohydrates to help support a short exercise recovery time…and is rich in Omega-3 fatty acids to help promote a good nose and scenting ability.”

Basically, we’re talking about functional foods for dogs. This got me thinking about the food I eat, and wondering where all the functional foods for people are.

Well, we’re starting to see them hit the shelves, too.

• DanActive, the probiotic drink from Dannon, has reached sales of over $100 million already, according to this article.
• Tropicana is about to release an orange juice with omega-3 described here.
• And Groupe Danone is about to launch a yogurt in Spain and France that claims cosmetic benefits. As reported in the LA Times, the yogurt will supposedly “improve the health of the skin of people who eat it for at least a month.”

This is a start, for sure, but I’m waiting for the day when my diet can be as tailored as those offered by Eukanuba, and eventually that will be the case.

At least that’s what research from the Institute of Food Technologists suggests. We’ve profiled some of their research in our Technology Foresight project and it indicates that as researchers learn more about the biochemical effects of nutrients and gain an understanding of the differences among different sub-groups of people at the genetic level, recommended dietary allowances will be tailored to specific populations—giving us highly customized diets too.

This could have several effects, from reducing chronic disease risk to allowing consumers to choose optimal diets based on activity or lifestage (e.g., adolescence, pregnancy, athletic goals, stress level, job activities, etc.). In the meantime, your dog can have a breed-specific meal and you can check out the full report from the Institute of Food Technologists, Functional Foods: Opportunities and Challenges.

Image: Social Technologies 

Scenario planning is a key tool used by futurists to explore the future by crafting snapshots of what different alternative futures might look like. One way of crafting scenarios of the future of an issue is to identify the key uncertainties shaping it. That is, what is important to the future of the issue, but is also highly uncertain in terms of how it might play out. The extremes of this uncertainty form a continuum that helps set the boundary conditions.

Two recent pieces help us to frame the issue of the future of food and agriculture. Population continues to grow, arable land is declining, but there is growing concern about the safety and quality and food. Thus, a key uncertainty is how food will be produced in the future. On one extreme is the rise of organic foods. This reflects people's growing concern about the quality and safety of industrial production, and a desire for a more sustainable approach to land and the treatment of animals. Organics foods are just 2.5% of the food supply in the US, but have been rising 15%-20% annually the last several years. The challenge, however, is that it is a very land-intensive approach. At the other extreme, we have the rise of the potential for bioengineered foods that would not require land at all. Wired News recently featured a story, “Test Tube Meat Nears Dinner Table,” that talked about the potential for artificially growing meat in a bioreactor.

Thus we have an uncertainty to monitor. Will the demand for organic production shift our land use patterns to bringing more land into cultivation, or will we move more production to the factory and use land for other activities? Keep in mind that this sets up the extremes of how the issue might play out, and that the actual future will likely lie somewhere in the middle. It also instructs us not to be overly persuaded by indicators pointing in one direction. It reminds us that for every trend, there is a countertrend. And we can look for other issues in which a desire for things natural will confront our growing capabilities to engineer the future.

It also creates an interesting dilemma for those committed to the more humane treatment of animals. On the one hand, organically raised livestock are treated humanely. On the other, bioengineered meat could mean not having to raise and slaughter them at all. Organic foodies eating bioengineered meat? An interesting scenario indeed!

The recent news that Nestlé, the Swiss food giant best known for its chocolates, plans to buy weight-loss company Jenny Craig provides another illustration of the increasingly dialectic nature of the food and beverage industry. On the one hand, leading food and beverage companies want to give consumers what they want—and sales of products high in sugar and/or fat content show that they still want lots of “junk food.” On the other hand, increasing awareness of the rise in overweight and obese adults and, even more alarmingly, children in World 1 and World 2 countries has begun to transform public opinion: more and more, food manufacturers are in danger of being seen as pariahs.

In an attempt to avoid the situation faced by—and comparison with—cigarette companies, many food purveyors are doing their best to burnish their public image. McDonalds introduced an array of salads to their menu and added apple slices and milk to its Happy Meals. Kraft promised to stop advertising less nutritious fare to children under age 12. Coke, Pepsi, and Cadbury Schweppes have agreed to remove sweetened drinks from school cafeterias and vending machines over the next three years. And now Nestlé buys Jenny Craig.

Nestlé recognizes that when it comes to their own diets, many consumers are beginning to resemble the Sneetches in the Dr. Seuss story who run from the Star-On to the Star-Off machine and then back again to the Star-On machine. I think we’re going to see more and more food and beverage companies hedging their bets by offering both Weight-On and Weight-Off products and programs—the latter the outgrowth of either R&D or acquisitions—over the next decade and beyond. The smart money in the food and beverage industry recognizes that consumers in World 1 and increasingly in World 2 have a love-hate relationship with food: they love to eat sweets and fatty foods, but hate what eating these foods can do to their bodies and their overall health.

Those buzzkills at the Center for Science in the Public Interest have been systematically suing the food industry, and have seemingly been getting some results:

In recent months, CSPI has turned to litigation to get food companies to market their products more honestly. It has negotiated out-of-court settlements with Tropicana, Quaker, Frito-Lay, and Pinnacle Foods and was credited (along with Heideman Nudelman & Kalik) with being the catalyst for an agreement to get soda out of schools that the industry reached with former President Clinton and others. CSPI will likely soon sue Cadbury-Schweppes for rebranding 7UP as "all-natural" (it's not) and is currently suing the maker of a fungus-based meat substitute called Quorn. for failing to inform consumers that the product can cause severe vomiting, diarrhea, and breathing difficulties. Also, CSPI and the Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood are having discussions with Kellogg about marketing junk food to young children and may ultimately sue that company and Viacom/Nickelodeon.

This would in part explain some of the recent changes in the food industry we have been discussing at S)T.

Now CSPI is turning their attention to KFC, over the level of trans-fats in fried chicken. If this pattern holds up, KFC will settle out of course and announce a "healthier" reformulation  of its frying oils.

While some may question CSPI's vision of healthiness, the organization can be a rather useful tool for keeping one step ahead of food industry change.