FHCE 3000 Lecture Notes - Lecture 25: Paradigm Shift, Consumerism, Life-Cycle Assessment

17 views3 pages

amaranthsquirrel732

29 Mar 2017

School

University of Georgia

Department

Financial Planning, Housing and Consumer Economics

Course

FHCE 3000

Professor

Dr.Kabaci

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

No class a week from today (next tuesday. Sustainability is about conscious design and the consideration of the impacts consumption choices make on the environment given finite resources. Sustainability is about meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs . Is there a long-term economic gain for people and communities. Can be found at all levels from the individuals to the family to community organizations to government and industry. The recycling rate has doubled during the last 15 years in the u. s. There is a growing recognition of the total product life cycle. The study of life cycle of household products involves: material resources, human resources involved in manufacture, distribution, and disposal, including energy use. Four types of concerned consumers: green consumerism. Concerned with environmental and health issues, along with impact on ecosystem. Promotes the philosophy of 3rs (reduce, reuse, recycle) environmental movement: ethical consumerism.

Related Questions

1.) Using the computed financial ratios from question 1, compare Grounds Keeperâs performance from 2011 to 2012. Address what areas the company has improved and what areas it has not

a.) Liquidity

b.) Activity / turnover / efficiency

c.) Profitability

d.) Leverage / use of debt / solvency

2.) If you were the CEO of Grounds Keeper, what area(s) would you concentrate on to improve the performance of the company?

	2012	2011
Current ratio	2.54404052	2.37843623
Quick ratio	0.91950568	0.81560714
Inventory turnover	3.0658051	2.37047444
Average Collection Period	37.5274142	46.9735877
Total asset turnover	1.07567837	0.82629249
Net profit margin	0.09345852	0.07608566
Operating profit margin	0.15403918	0.13639319
Times Interest Earned	26.0681373	6.25082817
Debt/Net worth Ratio	0.59903778	0.67234699
Return on Equity ratio	0.16075336	0.1051388

Below is the provided information/scenario.

Grounds Keeper is considering adding fair trade coffee to their line of products. Other larger coffee companies are now including it, at consumersâ insistence. At a recent strategic management meeting, the companyâs officers identified the following points:

Fair trade coffee may attract new customers.

Fair trade coffee would allow Grounds Keeper to demonstrate its social responsibility.

Fair trade coffee would require more paperwork to meet certification and contract requirements.

The higher cost of Fair Trade Coffee would require a higher price or a reduced profit margin.

If coffee prices worldwide continue to increase, consumers may be reluctant to pay extra for Fair Trade Coffee.

Current suppliers of coffee to Grounds Keeper might be in competition with Fair Trade Coffee cooperatives.

One officer present asked the following question: Should we as a company have a good reason to try to influence actions in other parts of the world? Donât we have governments to do that?

Fair Trade Coffee

What is fair trade certification?
Much like organic certification, fair trade certification lets you know about the origin of a product. Fair trade certified products come from all over the world, but share a common history. Farmers who grow fair trade products receive a fair price, and their communities and the environment benefit as well.

Fair trade certified coffee directly supports a better life for farming families in the developing world through fair prices, community development and environmental stewardship. Fair trade farmers market their own harvests through direct, long-term contracts with international buyers, learning how to manage their businesses and compete in the global marketplace. Receiving a fair price for their harvest allows these farmers to invest in their families' health care and education, reinvest in quality and protect the environment. This empowerment model lifts farming families from poverty through trade, not aid, creating a more equitable and sustainable model of international trade that benefits producers, consumers, industry and the Earth. The Fair for Life label is backed by IMO, one of the third-party certifiers of fair trade products for the U.S. market.

The Fair for Life label guarantees:

Fair price: Family farmers receive fair prices for their harvest, and premiums specifically earmarked for community development projects; even higher premiums are given for certified organic products. Farmer organizations are also eligible for pre-harvest credit.

Environmental sustainability: Harmful agrochemicals and GMOs are strictly prohibited in favor of environmentally sustainable farming methods that protect farmers' health and preserve valuable ecosystems for future generations. Fair trade farmers protect the land and wildlife habitat by intercropping plant species to improve soil fertility and protect against erosion. Stringent environmental management programs, including water conservation, proper waste disposal and prohibitions on planting in protected areas further encourage environmental stewardship.

Fair labor conditions: Workers on fair trade farms enjoy freedom of association, safe working conditions and fair wages. Forced child labor is strictly prohibited.

Direct trade: Importers purchase from fair trade producer groups as directly as possible, eliminating unnecessary middlemen and empowering farmers to develop the business capacity needed to compete in the global marketplace.

Democratic and transparent organizations: Fair trade farmers and farm workers decide how to invest fair trade revenues, and proof of a democratic process is required.

Community development: Fair trade farmers and workers invest fair trade premiums in social and business development projects like scholarship programs, healthcare services and quality improvement training.

Examples of community projects include:

Members of the COSURCA coffee cooperative in Colombia successfully prevented the cultivation of more than 1,600 acres of coca and poppy used to produce illicit drugs.

In the highlands of Guatemala, indigenous Tzutuhil Mayans in the La Voz cooperative are sending local kids to college for the first time.

Near Lake Titicaca, in Peru, the CECOVASA cooperative is assisting members from Quechua and Aymara indigenous groups in improving coffee quality and transitioning to certified organic production.

The CECOCAFEN cooperative in Nicaragua established a reproductive health program providing tests for the virus that causes cervical cancer.

What is IMO "Fair for Life" fair trade certification?
"Fair for Life" is a brand neutral third party certification program for social accountability and fair trade in agricultural, manufacturing and trading operations. The program complements existing fair trade certification systems. Social accountability and fair trade have become important indicators to select business partners in a global market place. The Fair for Life Social & FairTrade Certification Program offers operators of socially responsible projects a solution for objective inspection and certification by a highly qualified external verifier. It combines strict social and fair trade standards with adaptability to local conditions.

Why is fair trade certification needed today?
Throughout the global south, family farmers follow generations of tradition to cultivate food products we enjoy every day. Yet many family farmers in the developing world don't receive a fair price for their crops. These isolated rural communities lack direct market access, often selling their premium crops below the cost of production to local middlemen who misrepresent global prices. This cycle of debt forces many to abandon their land and years of agricultural heritage, destroying the social and cultural fabric of these communities. When farming communities in the developing world suffer, the whole world suffers - forced immigration, inferior-quality products and large-scale farming methods that often compromise the environment.

Who benefits from fair trade certification?

Producers: Beyond receiving a fair, stable price, fair trade also empowers producers to invest in their organizations, improve their communities and protect the environment.

Consumers: Fair trade certification enables consumers to "vote with their dollar" by providing an independent guarantee that products were produced and traded fairly. We all lead busy lives, and we want to do the right thing, but we're busy. What if we could make a positive impact just with the purchases we make every day? And not have to go out of our way to do this? That's the compelling proposition of fair trade.

The Earth: Fair trade certification requires and rewards environmentally sustainable farming practices that protect farmers' health and preserve valuable ecosystems for future generations, and provides the resources and technical assistance needed for organic certification.

viridianreindeer138

Please read the article below and answer the following question, use economic analysis to answer the question. In your answer, ensure that you use relevant economic theories, concepts, and/or diagrams.

d) What can we as private individuals do to address these concerns in the absence of government intervention? Are such private solutions likely to be effective?

The Australian dairy farming industry is in a state of crisis. Cheap dairy products and fluctuations in both the domestic and global markets have taken a financial toll on farmers. Consumers have rallied to help struggling dairy producers. But this is only half the problem. The true cost of dairy is also paid by dairy cows and the environment.

Welfare problems:

Despite the idyllic image of outdoor farming, several industry practices negatively affect dairy cows. To meet production demands, dairy cows are subject to a continuous cycle of impregnation, induced calving, and milking. Tail-docking and horn removal are routinely performed without pain relief. Lameness is another major animal welfare problem, often the result of environmental pressures, such as tracks, herd size, and handling. The average lifespan of a dairy cow is six to seven years, whereas generally, cows can live for 20 to 25 years. One of the most controversial issues is young bobby calves. A bobby calf is a newborn calf, less than 30 days old, who has been purposely separated from its mother. Immediately after separation, the cow and calf call out and search for each other. Most bobby calves are slaughtered within the first week of their life. Handling and transport pose added problems for young calves who have not developed herding behaviors, are vulnerable to stress, and are forced to go without their mother's milk. Each year, 450,000 bobby calves are slaughtered. Dairy farmers are being milked dry, but let's remember the real cost of milk May 25, 2016, 6.11 am AEST The dairy industry faces a number of welfare and environmental issues. Cow image from www.shutterstock.com Advocacy groups frequently uncover the routine abuse of bobby calves in Australian abattoirs and challenge the dairy industry to do something about it. Yet aside from the wider ethical questions over the use and exploitation of animals, farmers are not legally doing anything wrong. This is because the treatment of animals operates in a legal context where animals are considered absolute property. What's more, farm animals are exempt from the provisions of anti-cruelty legislation. Codes of practice are practically useless because they promote low welfare standards and are unenforceable.

The environmental impact:

As well as systematic welfare problems, livestock farming is, both directly and indirectly, one of the most ecologically harmful human activities. The Australian livestock sector is worth A$17 billion and dairy cattle farming is a A$4.2 billion industry. In Australia, livestock farming accounts for 10% to 16% of greenhouse gas emissions, with dairy farms contributing 19% of this or 3% of total emissions. Methane emissions, from digestion and manure, and nitrous oxide from livestock are significant contributors. Globally, the livestock sector is responsible for more greenhouse gases than the world's transport. Livestock production accounts for 70% of all agricultural land, including the land used to grow crops to feed these animals. Animal agriculture is a key factor in land degradation, deforestation, water stress, pollution, and loss of biodiversity. Livestock farming will also be affected by climate change, particularly changes in temperature and water. The quantity and quality of pasture and forage crops will also be affected. Diseases may increase due to fluctuating weather and climate.

Emissions can be reduced:

Just as the energy sector is attempting to transition to low-carbon energy sources to tackle climate change, the agricultural sector needs to transition to an ethical and sustainable alternative. From the current crisis, there are several opportunities for farmers to seize. Large transitions are possible in land use, production, output, and profitability. Places such as Gippsland in Victoria, which currently produces 19% of Australia's dairy, have the opportunity for agricultural development based on apples and brassicas, such as broccoli, kale, cauliflower, cabbage, turnip, and mustard. Some of these crops are already popular in the region. As a result of climate change and increasing temperatures, some areas will be more suitable than others. While still in the stages of research, perennial grain crops that store more carbon, maintain better soil and water quality, and manage nutrients better than annuals have the potential to contribute to sustainable agriculture. New land uses could also include carbon plantings, biofuels, and bioenergy crops. Investing in further research for alternatives to livestock farming is needed. Some have argued that livestock emissions can be technically mitigated by modifying animal feed, better managing pastures, carbon sequestration, and manure storage.

Welfare issues remain:

But technical mitigation does not address the endemic animal welfare problems in the livestock industry. Consumer demand is one of the most powerful strategies to combat animal welfare and environmental problems. Research shows that we must reduce food waste and losses in the supply chain and change our diets toward less resource-intensive diets, such as plant-based diets. Doing so would cut emissions by two-thirds and save lives. It's possible to eliminate animal suffering and reduce carbon emissions by reducing and replacing livestock production and consumption. Alternatives to dairy milk include soy and almond milk. Soy milk is nutritionally comparable to dairy milk and has a significantly smaller environmental footprint. Policy initiatives also need to address these issues. The Food and Agriculture Organization's Livestock's Long Shadow report recommends a policy approach that correctly prices natural resources to reflect the full environmental costs and to end damaging subsidies. In the interim, higher taxes on meat and other livestock products will be necessary to improve public health and combat climate change. Denmark, for instance, is considering proposals to raise the tax on meat after its ethics council concluded that climate change is an ethical problem. Governments everywhere need to have a transitional plan for livestock producers and workers - one that helps to cultivate the ethical and sustainable agricultural endeavors of the future.

rubycat219

Please read the article below and answer this question:

a) The article calls for public policy initiatives to address animal welfare and environmental concerns associated with dairy farming in Australia. With reference to economic concepts covered in this course, explain why the government might want to intervene in the dairy market.

View partners of The Conversation The Australian dairy farming industry are in a state of crisis. Cheap dairy products and fluctuations in both the domestic and global markets have taken a financial toll on farmers. Consumers have rallied to help struggling dairy producers. But this is only half the problem. The true cost of dairy is also paid by dairy cows and the environment. Welfare problems Despite the idyllic image of outdoor farming, several industry practices negatively affect dairy cows. To meet production demands, dairy cows are subject to a continuous cycle of impregnation, induced calving, and milking. Tail-docking and horn removal are routinely performed without pain relief. Lameness is another major animal welfare problem, often the result of environmental pressures, such as tracks, herd size, and handling. The average lifespan of a dairy cow is six to seven years, whereas generally, cows can live for 20 to 25 years. One of the most controversial issues is young bobby calves. A bobby calf is a newborn calf, less than 30 days old, who has been purposely separated from its mother. Immediately after separation, the cow and calf call out and search for each other. Most bobby calves are slaughtered within the first week of their life. Handling and transport pose added problems for young calves who have not developed herding behaviors, are vulnerable to stress, and are forced to go without their mother's milk. Each year, 450,000 bobby calves are slaughtered. Dairy farmers are being milked dry, but let's remember the real cost of milk May 25, 2016, 6.11 am AEST The dairy industry faces a number of welfare and environmental issues. Cow image from www.shutterstock.com Advocacy groups frequently uncover the routine abuse of bobby calves in Australian abattoirs and challenge the dairy industry to do something about it. Yet aside from the wider ethical questions over the use and exploitation of animals, farmers are not legally doing anything wrong. This is because the treatment of animals operates in a legal context where animals are considered absolute property. What's more, farm animals are exempt from the provisions of anti-cruelty legislation. Codes of practice are practically useless because they promote low welfare standards and are unenforceable. The environmental impact As well as systematic welfare problems, livestock farming is, both directly and indirectly, one of the most ecologically harmful human activities. The Australian livestock sector is worth A$17 billion and dairy cattle farming is a A$4.2 billion industry. In Australia, livestock farming accounts for 10% to 16% of greenhouse gas emissions, with dairy farms contributing 19% of this or 3% of total emissions. Methane emissions, from digestion and manure, and nitrous oxide from livestock are significant contributors. Globally, the livestock sector is responsible for more greenhouse gases than the world's transport. Livestock production accounts for 70% of all agricultural land, including the land used to grow crops to feed these animals. Animal agriculture is a key factor in land degradation, deforestation, water stress, pollution, and loss of biodiversity. Livestock farming will also be affected by climate change, particularly changes in temperature and water. The quantity and quality of pasture and forage crops will also be affected. Diseases may increase due to fluctuating weather and climate. Emissions can be reduced Just as the energy sector is attempting to transition to low-carbon energy sources to tackle climate change, the agricultural sector needs to transition to an ethical and sustainable alternative. From the current crisis, there are several opportunities for farmers to seize. Large transitions are possible in land use, production, output, and profitability. Places such as Gippsland in Victoria, which currently produces 19% of Australia's dairy, have the opportunity for agricultural development based on apples and brassicas, such as broccoli, kale, cauliflower, cabbage, turnip, and mustard. Some of these crops are already popular in the region. As a result of climate change and increasing temperatures, some areas will be more suitable than others. While still in the stages of research, perennial grain crops that store more carbon, maintain better soil and water quality, and manage nutrients better than annuals have the potential to contribute to sustainable agriculture. New land uses could also include carbon plantings, biofuels, and bioenergy crops. Investing in further research for alternatives to livestock farming is needed. Some have argued that livestock emissions can be technically mitigated by modifying animal feed, better managing pastures, carbon sequestration, and manure storage. Welfare issues remain But technical mitigation does not address the endemic animal welfare problems in the livestock industry. Consumer demand is one of the most powerful strategies to combat animal welfare and environmental problems. Research shows that we must reduce food waste and losses in the supply chain and change our diets toward less resource-intensive diets, such as plant-based diets. Doing so would cut emissions by two-thirds and save lives. It's possible to eliminate animal suffering and reduce carbon emissions by reducing and replacing livestock production and consumption. Alternatives to dairy milk include soy and almond milk. Soy milk is nutritionally comparable to dairy milk and has a significantly smaller environmental footprint. Policy initiatives also need to address these issues. The Food and Agriculture Organization's Livestock's Long Shadow report recommends a policy approach that correctly prices natural resources to reflect the full environmental costs and to end damaging subsidies. In the interim, higher taxes on meat and other livestock products will be necessary to improve public health and combat climate change. Denmark, for instance, is considering proposals to raise the tax on meat after its ethics council concluded that climate change is an ethical problem. Governments everywhere need to have a transitional plan for livestock producers and workers - one that helps to cultivate the ethical and sustainable agricultural endeavors of the future.

amethystlouse173

FHCE 3000 Lecture Notes - Lecture 25: Paradigm Shift, Consumerism, Life-Cycle Assessment

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

GEOG 170 Study Guide - Comprehensive Final Guide: National Environmental Policy Act, Yosemite National Park, 1969 Santa Barbara Oil Spill

INTL 3400 Lecture Notes - Lecture 2: Triple Bottom Line, Ecological Network, Sustainable Development

GE CLST M1A Study Guide - Midterm Guide: Burping, Genetic Drift, Phenology

Related Questions