30% waste! Pareto's law?

[Grelinette]

We hear it everywhere: 30%, a third of the food produced for human consumption, on a global scale, is lost or wasted!

For now, we are only talking about food because the food imbalance between countries, or even between citizens of the same country (including France, like all so-called rich countries) is an unbearable plague.

But when we look in more detail at the general waste in all areas, this 30% is reminiscent of Pareto's economic law ("80-20 principle") which states that 80% of the effects are the product of 20% of the causes.
This principle applies to many areas, and more generally it is said that 20% of the population holds 80% of wealth.

To come back to this 30% (of food waste), it is very likely that it applies to all areas of our consumer society:
- housing
- the dressing
- objects and materials (household appliances, cars, children's toys, ...)
- Etc.

In short, in the same way that 80% of the effects produce 20% of the causes, that 20% of the population holds 80% of the wealth, it can be said that 30% of all goods produced, all fields combined, are lost, wasted or not used by some while others are sorely lacking.

You only have to look at what ends up in the dumpsters and recycling centers to be convinced.

[Christophe]

Another good Grelinette topic! Thank you!

Hey yes long live "capitalism" ...

The bakers who are bleaching their previous day's bread before putting it in the dumpster so that nobody can recover it is just stacking ... no pun intended!

It is above all the fault of the tax system: giving a commercial product is prohibited because it is, in theory, a destruction of wealth (and especially a shortfall in VAT and tax) so the system encourages real physical destruction rather than donation!

On the other hand, the government gives us the moral and big speeches to be more eco-friendly ... vast outrageous as long as the base is not cleaned up!

We have the same concerns with professional travel costs ...

[Ahmed]

Christophe, you write :

... giving a commercial product is prohibited because it is, in theory, a destruction of wealth.

Indeed, a "wealth" exists only in an exchange, it is what is counted in the GNP; everything that is done in a domestic or friendly context is not wealth in the economic sense. However, these are essential goods that the market cannot satisfy.
This is not surprising since the role of the economy is not to meet needs, but to increase the abstract mass of value.

[Grelinette]

What may surprise in this wasteful practice, more or less organized or induced by the system, is that the population indulges in it while recognizing its absurdity.

What drives a citizen to throw away a still consumable good, food or not, rather than giving it to his neighbor? The baker who bleaches his unsold items before throwing them in the dumpster has no economic interest in doing so.

This notion of Waste is also linked to that of Partage, which was also the subject of a post on econology.

It is a whole state of mind, even a social and societal formatting, which governs these absurd behaviors, which, in the end, bring nothing to their authors, quite the contrary, because they weaken the society in which they live and always make it more unlivable.

The human species is indeed an archetype of contradiction.

[Ahmed]

... these absurd behaviors, which, in the end, bring nothing to their perpetrators, quite the contrary, because they weaken the society in which they live and make it ever more unlivable.

Contrary to what claimed Adam Smith, the selfish interest of each one does not contribute involuntarily to the wellbeing of all, it is even the opposite: the immediate interest of your baker is opposed, always involuntarily, with that of the society in which he nevertheless lives.

Cf. my post on the wire, so badly titled: "The genetic inheritance of the man".

[Grelinette]

I come back to this post to have a clarification on one point.

We’ve been saying in all media for a while 30% of food production is wasted, and given the widespread waste, all sectors combined, I wondered if this 30% was not an unavoidable figure (new Paretto law) applicable to all the goods produced by our consumer society, food and non-food.

In short, when we consider the chain from producer to consumer, we realize that at each level there is a waste, especially in food:

- during production: anything that is not calibrated, standardized, perfectly "smooth", presentable and in line with the fashion of the moment scrap.
Recently during a report on fruit production, a producer explained with resignation that the most beautiful and sweetest fruits were destroyed because they had signs of this "over-quality" which might worry the consumer.

- on sale : the problem is known, what is not sold within an "acceptable" timeframe is usually simply destroyed! This is true for many foods such as bread.

- for consumption: at the end of the chain, the consumer buys but does not consume everything. Most reports insist on this last step: the consumer buys with excess (result of aggressive marketing and a need to have more than necessary) and wastes a lot.

Finally, by accumulating waste at these 3 levels, are we still in the 30%? ...

[Ahmed]

It does not matter the determination of any number since the purpose of any production is, ideally, its waste!

[Grelinette]

It does not matter the determination of any number since the purpose of any production is, ideally, its waste!

I do not understand this allegation.
The purpose of a production is its consumption, and ideally, if we exclude any pseudo-commercial practice to artificially inflate consumption, the ideal being balance, namely production = consumption; the waste being a fictitious consumption or even a defect reflecting a dysfunction in the system.

(definition http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production )

[Ahmed]

No, wastage is not, I quote you, "a defect indicating a malfunction in the system", on the contrary it is one of its operating conditions.
In addition, the finality of a production should not be its consumption, but its use (for the goods which are not said, precisely, of consumption).

The faster the production / consumption cycle, the more often the exchange takes place and the more the realization of value increases (to the detriment of wealth *) (Cf. the thread on planned obsolescence).

* Wealth is what comes back to the agent of value, value is a fictitious entity which is the purpose and the mode of action of the system ...

[Christophe]