supermarket? Low prices are not for free!
against exploitation, repression and ecological. -
a completely different climate!
Given the coincidence of food, energy, climate and economic crisis it is important to question the prevailing production and consumption standards radically. For this it is necessary to deal with specific actors, which together the threads of production and consumption: the supermarket.
Whoever thinks of the hectic shopping trips between the end of work and closing the simple fact that supermarkets act as highly selective doormen of the global food system and contribute significantly to social exploitation and environmental destruction? With every purchase we enter a - invisible - network, food producers, suppliers, employees and consumers in a specific way with one another and against each other. While the balance sheets of the retail chains shine like the sale in its supermarkets offered goods, the impact of the enormous centralization and consolidation processes of production, distribution, sale and consumption of food remain hidden in the Dark. Hunger amid abundance, wage and social dumping, exploitation of workers and peasants and environmental destruction around the world - feature a deep crisis of the food system.
If the supermarket comes to us as common sense personified, it is time, the balance of power to light and shadows behind this system - from a global and local perspective at the same time.
expansion of supermarkets and its consequences Few industries have in recent decades experienced a similar high concentration as the food trade. In Austria, master the three largest supermarket chains, 78 percent of the Market.
Over the past 50 years, gradually conquered supermarket chains in Europe and the U.S. food trade. Did this expansion into the 80 years, mostly at the expense of smaller markets and grocer, began with the achievement of market saturation a tough battle for market share between the new leader status - increasingly in Eastern Europe. The fight was and is essentially a price war that attempts to sell the end products as cheaply as possible without jeopardizing their own profit margin. Therefore it is necessary to minimize the costs in all areas of the value chain. "If we see a possibility of price reduction, we make it" or "Highest quality - lowest price," the philosophy of Austria's leading supermarket chains. But is the much vaunted cheap goods is not for nothing - they would not at all without systematic violation of social rights and without the destruction of environmental resources possible.
oppressive working conditions in the supermarkets, life-threatening conditions of contract for Austrian dairy farmers / growers or Latin American coffee producers, extreme exploitation of often disenfranchised migrant workers, Bodendegenerierung and devastation as a result of monocultures and current output maximization - all these aspects are equally Key to the supermarket's policy as their constant "action" and "effective today" - cries.
price dictates supermarket chains provide not only price, they determine production and delivery, for example, by quality standards, packaging standards, minimum order quantities, etc., are particularly affected worldwide, mainly small farmers and agricultural workers, as these long runs are often not can meet.
The consequences are often concentration processes of the producers who produce on large areas, drawing on mostly migrant farm workers. At this, the price pressure on supermarket chains increasingly passed. The example Almería shows that workers usually have no other choice than ten-hour work days for a pittance, no job protection, unpaid overtime and extremely precarious accommodation to accept. Whoever tries to fight back is simply thrown out and replaced without difficulty.
harassment, discrimination, racism and sexual assault shape the everyday life of the so-called harvesters.
Whether pineapples and bananas from Latin America, strawberries from the March Field or vegetables from the Netherlands - the world of work behind them invisible workers is the same everywhere.
cheap at the expense of the environment Not only the harvesters as the last link in a long chain likely to feel the pressure on prices. The environment is a consideration in this mode of production affected. The industrial, agricultural monocultures translated can not do without excessive pesticide and fertilizer applications. The soil, water and food quality is being undermined in this way and increases the energy intensity of food production dramatically. The narrow agro-industrial form of agriculture associated with this sector is thus a driving force of climate change. The approach of the supermarkets and the environmental degradation are often directly related. They drive the dominant form of the industrialized and thus greenhouse Agriculture preceded afford the packaging and freezing madness in disposable feeding capitalism and force constant availability of fruit and vegetables from around the world, which is associated with a high transport costs and energy-intensive, exploitative and environmentally destructive production. Furthermore, they promote their site and parking policy by purchasing the car.
Supermarkets employer wage pressure, anti-union attitude, work rate, high level of supervision, unpaid overtime and perilous conditions describe the working conditions in supermarkets, which are driven especially Discounters to the extreme. The retail Total is one of those sectors in which the deterioration of working conditions is paced most advanced. So the trade is
an industry that has a relatively high turnover of jobs and forces. For employees, this means a great deal of uncertainty regarding their employment. The proportion of part-time workers is increasing more and more, though many would actually want a full-time employment. This is linked to the dissatisfaction of employees with their income. Women and migrants are employed in this sector very often - and no wonder: even here, the pressure can most easily Weaker be passed.
consumption good, everything good? Given the continuing poverty and precariousness other population groups could give the appearance that it is necessary to produce cheap, to provide cheap food and that negative consequences must be taken into account for this. But this argument is, putting the cart before the horse: because the supermarket chains with their wage dumping represents a significant proportion of precariousness. In addition, screw cheap food, labor costs back in other economic sectors and thus serve as an indirect subsidy for companies "wages up," not "prices down "so the claim would be to break out of the increasing spiral of poverty can.
The ongoing development of the food industry does nothing to problems caused by the enormous inequality of income to alleviate them. On the contrary, it strengthens and clarifies the same fault line between rich and poor, privileged and excluded. This occurs both through the dualization of the food market: while discounters produce cheap products of dubious quality, meets the upper and upper middle classes their needs with convenience and organic products. Our "Buyer-class society" comes to light here. On the other going strong concentration processes in the food trade at the expense of local supply. Already disadvantaged regions, particularly in rural areas lose close to home shopping, while shooting in new centers huge temple of consumption from the soil.
not only the obliteration of entire neighborhoods or villages are the result, and labor market policy, this represents a problem for a job at Lidl fall away about three other jobs in retail. Even more pointedly, the situation in poor countries. Vietnam example: here replaced a worker at the supermarket four to five small or street vendors. In Guatemala, these are currently sold by force and murdered. large producers benefit from the new structures and increase their profits, while small producers around the world fight for survival. The dramatic hunger crisis is only the most obvious consequence.
supermarkets and food sovereignty? The crisis of the food sector can be clearly read in the following context: a billion hungry people worldwide, is facing an even larger number of overweight people. The predominant food system is to ensure, despite abundant production is not in a position to all men an adequate, healthy and environmentally sustainable food and livelihood. This crisis calls for a paradigm shift in the direction of food sovereignty. This requires a different, democratic, environmentally and socially sustainable production and consumption system.
The crisis is largely linked to poverty, exploitation, inequality, concentration of power, expropriation and environmental degradation. Global Supermarkets intensify and accelerate these dynamics. Supermarkets have no interest to feed the hungry. The daily destruction of the unsold food proves this. Under capitalism, the bread is better off, not distributed to the hungry without money. - The right to food is a matter of affordability and at the same time by the (over) production undermined the have-nots.
The consumers are called upon their apparent (consumption) freedom to question more closely. Supermarkets have the leeway in choosing a healthy diet if product offering and set out the consumers-quality but on a few policy makers in the purchase of the retail chains? Who decides what is in food? Who decides on price and wage? And at whose expense? Do these costs are not the whole of society negatively? Offered by the top "consumer democracy" is, given these relationships, not a sufficient alternative dar. Critical consumption is important enough but given the problems do not. Critical, ethical and consumer awareness can only be a first, but ultimately not sufficient step.
The offer of organic products in the supermarkets can not mitigate the criticism: although many chains more or less wide range of green products out in the range, then the question arises as to the impact on biological agriculture. With the introduction of organic food in the supermarkets connect the importance of organic farming as a social movement and the right to self-determined economies in regional contexts in the background. Conventionalization and unification held various production, competition and great dependence on the declining supermarkets instead of producer-consumer solidarity, output maximization rather than quality, price erosion and a simplification to make a pure method of production is now widely in organic agriculture. The same applies to "fair trade" products. Organic and fair trade products contain the same time the possibility of another economic activity, and because we want to tie. This will, however, other economies in the super market system, clear limits and ensure that our stay, we do not want. Whether man entrusted to a purely profit-oriented trading system to build a social and ecological alternatives (with organic and fair-trade niches) wants, everyone should be able to decide for themselves because of what is said!
These questions will be seriously on the agenda. It's about the beginning of a democratic debate and a full democratization of the food system. The decision criteria and basis on which our food system may not consist of profit maximization. Out of that system are not sufficient changes are expected, it takes people around the world to confront the dominant actors on these issues. We need to make visible the points at which the crisis shows every day. The "I buy, therefore I am" we set the demand for a social Paradigm shift towards. We need new alliances and global solidarity. We want to build an alternative food system. - Examples abound to show the world that this is possible otherwise. We need new forms of democratic mediated production and consumption. Nothing is more unrealistic than to go on just as before. We want a different food system!
prosperity for all! Global (social) rights to acquire! For a very different climate! Food sovereignty now!
background Download PDF
