fbpx

Search for: china

Attacks on forestry industry strain credulity

Canadian forest management is an envy of the world, routinely atop the global standings for stewardship and sustainability, writes Yaël Ossowski and David Clement

With an immense land mass filled to the brim with natural resources, Canada is bountiful with energy and industry that provide dividends for its citizens.

Whether that means reserves of oil, softwood lumber, or iron ore used to make steel, responsible use of these resources makes Canada punch above its weight when it comes to economic growth, productivity, and a strong standard of living.

While these jobs continue to power the nation, many environmentalist activist groups — both foreign and domestic — have continued to call our country to task on the sustainable production of our natural resources. And too often, their bombastic and unfounded claims are accepted wholesale by many media outlets.

In only the latest example, the US NGO Natural Resources Defense Council partnered with Nature Canada to release a report making the shocking claim that carbon emissions from the forestry sector are even more than oilsands production.

Instead of applying a critical analysis to a claim that has been rejected by Natural Resources Canada and international experts, The Canadian Press accepted the activist groups’ claim, accusing our own agencies of “using questionable methods to underestimate emissions from the forest industry.”

Even though our government ministries use internationally accepted standards for calculating emission levels from activity, NRDC and Nature Canada aim to paint Canada as a powerhouse, not of responsible resource management, but reckless greenhouse gas emission.

This stands against science. According to the United Nations, Canada’s forest area has remained relatively stable for the last 30 years, despite the surge in forestry industries, wildfires, and clearing for residential use. That means Canada is actually a global leader in replanting and repopulating its forests, especially compared to Brazil, China, and other nations with large forests.

If this is true, why then are activist groups claiming that Canada’s industry providing us with both construction wood and paper (used in now-mandated cardboard food packages) is more of a polluter than oil extraction?

The major claim in the report is that industry emissions must be combined with those from naturally-occurring wildfires, plant diseases, and invasive insects, none of which are understood to be commercial activity undertaken by Canada’s loggers. Rather, these are part of nature’s ordinary life cycles that we can only hope to mitigate and limit, if not prevent.

Considering that The Canadian Press and other outlets that reported on these claims didn’t reject them outright is concerning. But more concerning is what these activist groups seek as a result of their flawed findings.

Just days after the report’s release in October, activists were meeting with senators and ministers to “force the hand of policy-makers themselves,” potentially leading to restrictions and emission limits that would hurt not only Canadian jobs and industry, but also significantly skew our fight against climate change.

It is worth remembering that Canadian forest management is an envy of the world, routinely atop the global standings for stewardship and sustainability.

Cardboard, made from pulp sourced in our forests, is now the destined alternative to plastic for food packaging products, mostly due to restrictions and bans sought by these same groups.

The aim of making Canada a global leader for sustainable climate progress is noble, and one that we should all agree on. However, that must be done with scientific facts and evidence, not the twisting of facts and caution to fit the narrative of heavily funded environmental groups with another agenda.

If our news media aims to both inform and educate our citizens, it will have to do a better job of calling out misinformation on all sides. That is the only way we will be equipped to deal with climate issues going forward.

Originally published here

Biden Administration’s abandonment of Section 230 undermines tech innovation that will harm and disadvantage consumers

Washington, D.C. – Yesterday, lawyers from the Biden Administration filed an amicus brief in a Supreme Court case that will undermine future American tech innovation and inevitably harm and disadvantage online consumers.

In Gonzalez v. Google, the Supreme Court is asked to decide whether YouTube can be held liable for content on its platform, and more specifically its algorithms. The argument brought by plaintiffs is that the algorithm that recommends content based on user preference is not covered by Section 230 of the Communications and Decency Act, and other legislation, and that Google (YouTube’s parent company) can be held liable.

Such a ruling would have a sweeping impact on Internet freedom of speech and tech innovation based here in the U.S.

Yaël Ossowski, deputy director of the consumer advocacy group Consumer Choice Center, responds:

“In a global race to defend freedom and innovation online, it’s beyond disappointing to see the Biden Administration take a position that undermines Section 230, American digital entrepreneurship, and freedom of speech online,” said Ossowski.

“China and the EU are promoting and subsidizing their tech companies and future start-ups massively while our own officials are trying to kneecap them, whether by antitrust litigation by the Federal Trade Commission, Senate bills to break up tech firms, or general hostility to the growth and innovation that Section 230 has afforded to the benefit of consumers,” he said.

“The Biden Administration’s abandonment of Section 230 is concerning and puts much at risk for consumers online.

“The ability of digital entrepreneurs to offer unique and tailored services to consumers who enjoy them would be severely constrained if a Supreme Court ruling upends our modern understanding of the legal system’s protection of platforms online. Added to that, it threatens free speech on the Internet if platforms have an undue obligation to perform content moderation so as to avoid any and all legal liabilities posed by user-generated content.

“For the sake of consumers and American innovation, we hope that an eventual ruling protects the core of our freedom of speech and association online, and protects citizens’ choices to use the services they want. Thus far, the Biden Administration’s views leave us concerned that this is in peril,” he concluded.

Learn more about the Consumer Choice Center’s campaigns for smart policies on tech innovation.

Vape Fair Indonesia 2022 dan Optimisme Industri Vape di Indonesia

Rokok elektrik atau vape saat ini merupakan salah satu produk yang memiliki konsumen yang semakin meningkat. Kita, khususnya yang tinggal di daerah urban dan perkotaan besar, pasti bisa dengan mudah menemukan berbagai pengguna vape di sekitar kita, dan juga berbagai tempat yang menjual produk-produk tersebut.

Bagi sebagian kalangan, vape atau rokok elektrik merupakan bagian dari keseharian. Tentunya, dengan semakin banyak dan meluasnya jumah pengguna vape atau rokok elektrik di seluruh dunia, termasuk juga di Indonesia, ada berbagai faktor yang menyebabkan seseorang untuk memilih untuk menggunakan vape sebagai bagian dari keseharian mereka.

Salah satu faktor yang paling umum yang menjadi penyebab seseorang untuk menggunakan vape adalah menjadikan rokok elektrik sebagai produk pengganti rokok konvensional yang dibakar, yang sebelumnya mereka gunakan sehari-hari. 

Dengan kata lain, mereka menggunakan produk-produk vape dan rokok elektrik sebagai cara untuk membantu mereka berhenti merokok (health.detik.com, 24/12/2018).

Menggunakan produk-produk vape atau rokok elektrik sebagai salah satu cara untuk membantu seseorang berhenti merokok memang saat ini menjadi langkah yang diambil oleh banyak orang. 

Hal ini dikarenakan, berdasarkan laporan berbagai lembaga medis, vape atau rokok elektrik merupakan produk yang jauh lebih tidak berbahaya bila dibandingkan dengan rokok konvensional yang dibakar.

Salah satu dari lembaga kesehatan yang mengeluarkan laporan tersebut adalah lembaga kesehatan publik asal Inggris, Public Health England (PHE). Dalam laporannya tahun 2015 lalu, menyatakan bahwa vape atau rokok elektrik merupakan produk yang 95% jauh lebih tidak berbahaya bila dibandingkan dengan rokok konvensional (gov.uk, 19/8/2015).

Selain itu, faktor lain yang menyebabkan tidak sedikit orang yang beralih untuk menggunakan vape atau rokok elektrik adalah rasanya yang lebih variatif, dan juga harganya yang cenderung lebih murah secara total bila dibandingkan dengan rokok konvensional. Hal ini tentu merupakan beebrapa faktor yang penting yang dapat membuat banyak konsumen untuk tertarik mengganti rokok konvensional yang mereka gunakan dalam keseharian ke rokok elektrik (health.detik.com, 24/12/2018).

Semakin meningkatnya pengguna vape di Indonesia, juga tentunya memunculkan banyak event dan berbagai acara yang bertemakan mengenai vape atau rokok elektrik. 

Acara-acara tersebut umumnya diadakan, selain untuk tujuan marketing berbagai produsen rokok elektrik untuk memperkenalkan produk-produk mereka, juga diikuti dengan berbagai program-program kompetisi dan juga sebagai sarana untuk menampung aspirasi para pengguna vape, yang didominasi oleh kaangan muda

Salah satu perhelatan vape dan rokok elektrik terbesar yang diadakan di Indonesia adalah Vape Fair Indonesia 2022, yang diadakan di ibukota Jakarta pada tanggal 24-25 September lalu. Acara ini sendiri merupakan acara rutin yang diadakan setiap tahun (vapemagz.co.id, 27/9/2022).

Vape Fair Indonesia 2022 merupakan event vape terbesar di Asia Tenggara, dan dipenuhi bukan hanya dengan pameran berbagai produk vape dan rokok elektrik, tetapi juga diisi berbagai kegiatan lainnya. Beberapa diantaranya adalah kegiatan kompetisi seperti competisi trik asap, kompetisi seni, dan lain sebagainya (vapemagz.co.id, 27/9/2022).

Selain itu, para tenant yang menjadi peserta dari ajang ini juga bukan hanya dari Indonesia saja, tetapi juga dari berbagai negara lainnya, diantaranya adalah Malaysia, China, dan juga Amerika Serikat. 

Acara ini sendiri sudah berkembang dengan pesat dan signifikan, dibandingkan ketika event ini diadakan pertama kalinya 8 tahun lalu pada tahun 2014, ketika acara tersebut hanya dihadiri beberapa tenant dari dalam negeri. Tidak kurang juga acara ini diramaikan oleh banyak artis dan selebrti papan atas dari Indonesia.

Suksesnya acara Vape Fair Indonesia 2022 ini sendiri juga merupakan salah satu bukti mengenai optimisme dari para pelaku industri rokok elektrik yang ada di Indonesia. 

Dan juga, acara pameran ini juga berpotensi besar bukan hanya memperkenalkan berbagai produk-produk vape kepada konsumen, tetapi juga bisa menjadi tempat bagi konsumen untuk mencari tahu info-info seputar vape dan rokok elektrik, seperti kandungan dan pengaruhnya bagi kesehatan, dan lain sebagainya.

Dengan demikian, industri rokok elektrik dapat semakin berkembang di Indonesia, yang tentunya akan semakin banyak membuka lapangan kerja bagi banyak tenaga kerja di negara kita. 

Selain itu, dengan semakin berkembangnya industri vape dan rokok elektrik, diharapkan hal ini akan membuat semakin mengurangi jumlah konsumen rokok konvensional yang dibakar yang ada di Indonesia, yang tentunya akan membawa dampak yang positif terhadap kesehatan publik, dan juga akan mengurangi tingkat berbagai penyakit kronis yang disebabkan oleh rokok konvensional di Indonesia.

Sebagai penutup, berhasil diadakannya acara perhelatan bertema vape terbesar di Asia Tenggara tahun ini di Indonesia merupakan salah satu pertanda optimisme industri vape yang ada di Indonesia. 

Semoga, melalui semakin berkembangnya industri vape dan rokok elektrik di Indonesia, akan dapat membawa manfaat bagi konsumen dan juga tenaga kerja di negara kita.

Originally published here

Nobody needs a car trade war

Brussels, BE: In recent comments, French president Emmanuel Macron has suggested that the European Union should use protectionist measures to defend Europe’s electric car industry. Macron pointed to the fact that rental car companies are buying Chinese electric vehicles and voiced the view that Europe does not have adequate means to protect its manufacturers. Commenting on the statements by the French president, Consumer Choice Center’s Senior Policy Analyst Bill Wirtz says that protectionism is ill-advised:

“If countries such as the United States or China are suspected of unfairly favouring their industries, then France needs to take this up at the WTO level, not trying to emulate their policies within the European Union”, says Wirtz.

“Protectionism is often sold to us as a duty to protect our industries when in reality, it hurts consumers on all sides alike. Consumers need choices on the marketplace to make informed decisions for their own comfort and their pocketbooks. Reducing the number of competitors will only make things worse.”

“Emmanuel Macron’s notion of European sovereignty ought to be about creating a business environment that favours innovation, not the stepping stone for another trade war”, concludes Wirtz.

June 2022

Want to know what the Consumer Choice Center team has been up to for the past month? Let’s go through some of our best moments together


European Railway Station Index 2022 is out!

Want to know which European cities offer the best experience for passengers traveling by train? We’ve got you covered. We looked at Europe’s 50 largest railway stations and ranked them in terms of passenger experience and a mix of factors ranging from how crowded platforms are and accessibility to the number of destinations. This year’s leader is Zurich HB followed by Frankfurt Main hbf and Munchen hbf. Make sure to read the full paper for more information on this!
READ MORE

Crossover episode between ConsEUmer podcast and Consumer Choice Radio

We had the hosts of ConsEUmer podcast and Consumer Choice Radio join their forces and deliver an amazing episode discussing G7 – politicians becoming jokers, Macron making a case for American oil and also giving an advice how tip in North America – very useful one for Europeans traveling across the atlantic. This also happens to be 80th episode of ConsEUmer podcast, give it a listen! 
LISTEN HERE

FDA’s Menthol Melee hosted by Yael

In response to the FDA’s proposed rules to outlaw both menthol cigarettes and all flavors in cigars, we hosted our own session, called the Menthol Melee. Yael brought together community organizers, law enforcement, researchers, and policy experts who talked about why the FDA’s proposed bans on flavored cigars and menthol cigarettes will do more harm than good, emphasizing the impact these bans will have on minority communities, interactions between police and citizens, illicit markets and safety, public health, and more. If you haven’t already, make sure to watch the full video!
WATCH HERE

Instead of embracing harm reduction, Canada is taking a step in the wrong direction

Ottawa is not only targeting vape flavours but also scaling up taxation. Targeting vaping with flavour bans and high taxation will certainly discourage people from vaping but it will also encourage some former smokers to go back to cigarettes and keep some current smokers from switching to vaping. Vaping is an effective harm reduction tool and should be incorporated into any plans of achieving a smoke-free society, as has already been done in the United Kingdom.
READ HERE

War-induced food crisis in Europe could serve as a good example for the US

The European Union’s ambitious Farm to fork strategy, among others aiming to reduce farmland by 10 percent, and cut pesticide use in half, has been put on hold due to war-induced food crisis, with Macron making it clear that now is not a good time for such drastic changes. Lawmakers in the United States have, in the past, attempted to copy European Union food regulations, but hopefully, the current European crisis will serve as a good example of why this is not such good of an idea for a country that has already fallen behind China and India on the worldwide scale of food production.
READ MORE

Not in my backyard mentality in crypto policy is a no-go!

In this blogpost, Yael points out everything that is wrong with the bill awaiting its fate in the Senate, that would impose a two-year moratorium on crypto mining permits, and launch an expansive environmental review. In times of such high inflation and having people who are locked out of the traditional finance and banking sector, their choices will become even more limited.
READ HERE
Thank you for your attention, as you can see it’s been quite a productive month! We have a lot of projects in progress, so make sure to follow our social mediato be the first to know about them!

May 2022

We’re back bringing you the latest updates from the team CCC. Let’s recap what we have been up to this past month!

Removing patent protection will cost us decades of progress

Member states of the World Trade Organization are discussing a draft agreement on TRIPS flexibility to waive intellectual property protections. If adopted, the agreement would legalise compulsory licencing, a practice that allows the government to hand out the right to produce COVID-19 vaccines without the consent of a patent owner. While the mass production of vaccines is a noble goal, Maria warns us that scraping patent protection will create a dangerous precedent and will put all future innovations in jeopardy.
READ MORE

Bees are doing just fine!

In his latest op-ed, Bill reiterates that declines of both managed and wild bees occur naturally through weather changes and the decisions of beekeepers about how many bees they currently need. Radical conservationists have blamed pesticides for the decline of bee population, even though there has been a 35% increase of beehives since 2000. Bill calls for journalists to do a better job at fact-checking and not to spread misinformation in their chase of catchy click baits.  
READ MORE

PFAS ban or EV transition? The choice is up to Democrats

Democrats have put electric vehicles at the heart of their climate ambitions. But little do they know that their green agenda can not be realized without PFAS, so-called forever chemicals that they want to ban altogether. In this op-ed, Maria and Anna pointed out that these chemicals are an essential part of green energy applications and argue that the ban will simply shift production to countries like China, giving them the upper hand for the production of EV battery, solar panels, and semiconductors.
READ HERE

Canada can learn a thing or two from the US on how to tackle a housing crisis

Our North American Affairs manager David has previously stated that exclusionary zoning is the root cause of the housing crisis. Recently, President Joe Biden voiced the same opinion and the federal government will be seeking to tackle this specific cause in their attempt to alleviate the crisis. The U.S. offers plenty of examples of state and municipal legislators carrying out dramatic zoning reforms which lead to decreasing rental prices. It’s time the Canadian government took and example, abolished exclusionary zoning and started building more houses
READ HERE

Keep an eye on our social media not to miss our first Index of the year

European Railway Stations Index 2022 is coming! We looked at Europe’s 50 largest railway stations and ranked them in terms of passenger experience and according to a mix of factors ranging from how crowded platforms are and accessibility to the number of destinations. Last year Leipzig Hauptbahnhof ended up in well-deserved first place, followed by Wien Hauptbahnhof.  Let’s see which railway station ends up leading the list of this year’s best railway stations.
CHECK OUT LAST YEAR’S INDEX 

Help us fight the Consumer Choice Supervillains

If you’re just as tired of being told what you can or can not consume as we are, we might have a solution for you. We need your help fighting consumer choice supervillains, like mini Michael Bloomberg and Sleepy Joe Biden, watch the video below to find out more!
WATCH HERE
That’s a wrap for this month! Make sure to follow us on our social mediachannels to get all the updates we couldn’t fit in here! See you next month

UK PFAS Ban Could Undermine Semiconductor Manufacturing Efforts

London, UK: A new report published by the Consumer Choice Center highlights how calls for heavy handed chemical policy could exacerbate the state of the UK’s semiconductor production.

Maria Chaplia, Research Manager at the Consumer Choice Center explained: “A few weeks ago, the UK announced an inquiry into the state of UK chips. The global microchip shortage has hampered UK car production in 2021, with limited signs of recovery. As the security concerns over UK semiconductor firms, sold to China, continue to grow, boosting domestic production should be a priority. However, regaining a competitive edge in the semiconductor industry is impossible without a flexible evidence-based stance on PFAS.

PFAS are the next target of green groups. As the pressure to ban PFAS in the UK builds up, the evidence should prevail.

“PFAS, a grouping of 4000+ man-made chemicals, are vital for the production of semiconductors, and if the UK follows these green groups and bans their use, increasing domestic chip manufacturing will be incredibly difficult. If the UK is serious about increasing domestic chip production, they have to also work to secure the key inputs involved in the production process, and PFAS are one of those key inputs.” said David Clement, an author of the report.

“In fact, we know that this is what will happen if the UK opts for a phase out. This is exactly what happened when Belgium paused production at a PFAS chemical plant in response to the tightening of environmental regulations. Reporting done by Business Korea highlighted that semiconductor producers have only 30 to 90 days of coolant inventory left before they will encounter serious production problems.” said Clement.

“With the global chip shortage, the UK has a unique chance to become a semiconductor powerhouse if it doesn’t ban PFAS. Among other things, this will ensure the UK can effectively counter China’s increased chip manufacturing. Banning PFAS would achieve nothing but feed the green groups with yet another socially disruptive victory and shift the production of chips elsewhere. The UK government shouldn’t succumb to calls to ban all PFAS,” concluded Chaplia.

EU’s green agenda and PFAS ban are incompatible

As part of the climate agenda, the European Union and member states have advocated the phasing out of gas-powered vehicles by 2035. The goal is to have at least 30 million electric vehicles on European roads by 2030, which would be a 2900% increase from the current amount. With demand for electric vehicles soaring in the EU, domestic industries are looking for innovative ways to establish supply chains for batteries and other components.

On the one hand, the EU seeks to boost the market for electric vehicles to achieve its climate targets. On the other hand, the proposed blanket PFAS (Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) ban, pledged by the European Commission, will make it impossible to manufacture EVs in the EU.

PFAS are key to the production of EVs. However, instead of considering the spillover effects of banning over 4000 chemicals that carry individual risks, the EU decided to take the same approach as the US move towards banning all of them. In the US, the PFAS Action Act which would heavily restrict all these substances is awaiting the final decision in the Senate. Both the EU and US are on the verge of making the same policy mistake that will achieve nothing except make consumer products more expensive and hinder innovation.

PFAS are used to produce life-saving medical equipment and are vital for contamination-resistant gowns, implantable medical devices, heart patches, etc. These chemicals are also widely used in green technology production. In particular, solar panels, wind turbines, and lithium-ion batteries.

Fluoropolymers (one specific class of PFAS) are an essential part of green technology. Fluoropolymers are used to produce lithium batteries, the power source behind electric vehicles. They are durable, heat and chemical resistant, and have superior dielectric properties, all of these qualities make it hard for other chemicals to compete. If PFAS are banned as a class, the green ambitions of switching to electric vehicles would be extremely difficult to turn into policy. The blanket PFAS ban would cause further disruptions in the EV supply chain, increasing costs for consumers and ultimately making them less attractive as an alternative to gasoline vehicles.

Fluoropolymers are also used in coating and sealing solar panels and wind turbines that protect against harsh weather conditions. Fluoropolymers provide safety by preventing leaks and environmental releases in a range of renewable energy applications. The unique characteristics of PFAS such as water, acid, and oil resistance make these substances hard to replace.

Unless damaged, solar panels continue to produce energy beyond their lifeline. Fluoropolymers are what make solar panels durable. Going solar requires significant investments and without fluoropolymers, the risk of producing and installing them will increase, and production shortages will follow. This is exactly what is currently happening in Europe with microchips, which rely on PFAS in the production process. The closing of a plant in Belgium has left semiconductor manufacturers on the verge of serious production delays.

That is not to say that PFAS are risk-free. A 2021 study by Australian National University confirms that the PFAS exposure does carry some risk, but that most exposure comes from contaminated water. If EU regulators really want to make a difference, their legislation should focus on regulating PFAS from a clean water approach, as opposed to a full ban that comes with a long list of externalities.

The proposed ban is also problematic because fundamentally it won’t drive down demand for PFAS. Banning will shift production to countries like China, where environmental considerations are nearly non-existent. As a result, European regulators will be giving China the upper hand for both EV battery production, solar panels, and semiconductors. Not to mention, banning a substance that is key to so many production processes will magnify the damage caused by inflation. For European EV and solar panels producers, the PFAS ban will be a huge hurdle that is extremely difficult to overcome.

If the European Union is really as determined to pursue a transition to EVs as they suggest, the PFAS blanket ban should be called off. Instead, PFAS should be assessed individually and where poor production processes result in water contamination, the government should intervene.

Originally published here

What the US can learn from Europe’s war-induced food crisis

Lift the sanctions on Russia, and we’ll allow for Ukraine to export its food: that was the message that Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko passed on to its European counterparts recently. Moscow has been responsible for blocking Ukrainian transport ships carrying grain from passage through the Black Sea. Around 24 million metric tons of wheat and maize are currently unable to leave the country as prices are exploding. Wheat prices have jumped, now double compared to last year, while maize prices have gone up by 82 percent.

As Europe scrambles to find food imports from other trade partners — Russia being sanctioned and Ukraine unable to export — lawmakers are divided over the steps forward. In fact, the European Union had been discussing a comprehensive reform to its agricultural system through the so-called “Farm to Fork” plans. This roadmap seeks to reduce farmland by 10 percent, cut pesticide use in half, and increase organic farming to a fourth of the overall farmland use, up from the current 8 percent. Farmer representatives had been critical of the plans, and USDA published an impact assessment showing that the reforms would lead to a reduction in GDP between 7 and 12 percent. However, politicians in Brussels insisted that the plans were needed for the sake of the bloc’s carbon dioxide emission reduction targets.

Now that the war in Ukraine rages on longer than anyone expected, the tide is turning.

Both the European Parliament’s largest parliamentary group and France’s President Emmanuel Macron have made it clear that “Farm to Fork” comes at the wrong time and that in wartime Europe cannot afford the ambitious reforms. On top of that comes the pressure from Brexit Britain: England just introduced legislation that would legalize gene-editing in food production, in what is by far the most significant divergence from EU legislation since the exit. An adviser to the UK’s environment department said that this would have numerous benefits, from building crops that are more resistant to the climate crisis, pests and diseases to increasing crop yields, which could help to combat global hunger. All these factors are not just crucial in the long run but can also help the country weather food supply chain disruptions such as those created by the war in Ukraine.

This comes at a time when scientists just developed a gene-edited tomato that boosts vitamin D levels. Between 13 and 19 percent of Britons have a low vitamin D count, making innovations such as these essential.

Lawmakers in the United States have, in the past, attempted to copy European Union food regulations. The Protect America’s Children from Toxic Pesticides Act (PACTPA), supported by lawmakers including Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) would copy-paste EU food regulations into federal law. This piece of legislation, which could be approved by Democrats, would undermine the entire American food system as we know it. The United States has always preferred innovation over a hawkish approach to the precautionary principle, which is why, in contrast to Europe, it has assured that food is readily available and affordable. In 2020, Americans spent 5 percent of their disposable income on groceries, compared to 8.7 percent in Ireland (the lowest in the EU), 10.8 percent in Germany, 12 percent in Sweden, 17 percent in Hungary and 25 percent in Romania.

On the worldwide scale of food production, the United States has already fallen behind China and India. Both countries’ stake in food exports is negligible compared to the overall domestic production. However, unburdened by the increasing restrictions on modern agriculture, they could soon increase the economic competition in international food markets. China is already the leading trading partner for an increased number of countries in the world, particularly in developing nations.

The United States cannot afford to fall behind in the world food trade and should guarantee its competitive edge to support its allies in times of crisis.

Originally published here

Scroll to top
en_USEN