What next for Chilean grapes?
01 December 2007 15:04 | Permalink
Maura Maxwell - Editor
These are challenging times for Chile’s grape producers. The sliding dollar and rising labor costs have eroded the sector’s profitability, sparking a period of upheaval and change whose repercussions are being felt across America.
Dole, for example, has almost halved its Chilean grape program in just five years, citing external pressures as being largely responsible for its decision. Chiquita, too, is permanently scaling back growing operations to concentrate strictly on marketing after several poor seasons.
Is this the beginning of the end of what history will judge to be the golden era in Chilean fruit production, or merely a painful period of readjustment that’s vital to put the industry back on a steady course for the future?
Currency woes aside, analysts point out that it was only a matter of time before something had to give. Buoyed by a series of record-breaking seasons, planted area has soared in the past decade, coinciding with similar production increases in other Southern Hemisphere countries. As one US importer puts it succinctly: “the days of minimum pricing guarantees are a thing of the past”.
Thompson production is already being scaled back – particularly in the south of the country – and growers who are in it for the long haul are anticipating better returns once supplies start to fall.
But with South Africa giving exporters a run for their money in Europe, the US is set to remain its core market. The weak dollar will no doubt put some exporters off in the short term, but the leading players will not wish to risk damaging the long-term relationships they have carefully cultivated with US importers and retailers throughout the years.
The outlook is by no means entirely gloomy. For some US companies, such as Paramus, New Jersey-based Pro-Fruit Marketing, the multinationals’ decision to scale back operations presents an exciting opportunity to expand own their programs by forging new relationships with the country’s growers.
And the short-term prospects for growers aren’t looking at all bad. The late start of both the Chilean and Peruvian deals should result in a shortage of fruit during the peak Christmas and New Year period, bolstering returns and providing a glimmer of Christmas cheer at least.
These are challenging times for Chile’s grape producers. The sliding dollar and rising labor costs have eroded the sector’s profitability, sparking a period of upheaval and change whose repercussions are being felt across America.
Dole, for example, has almost halved its Chilean grape program in just five years, citing external pressures as being largely responsible for its decision. Chiquita, too, is permanently scaling back growing operations to concentrate strictly on marketing after several poor seasons.
Is this the beginning of the end of what history will judge to be the golden era in Chilean fruit production, or merely a painful period of readjustment that’s vital to put the industry back on a steady course for the future?
Currency woes aside, analysts point out that it was only a matter of time before something had to give. Buoyed by a series of record-breaking seasons, planted area has soared in the past decade, coinciding with similar production increases in other Southern Hemisphere countries. As one US importer puts it succinctly: “the days of minimum pricing guarantees are a thing of the past”.
Thompson production is already being scaled back – particularly in the south of the country – and growers who are in it for the long haul are anticipating better returns once supplies start to fall.
But with South Africa giving exporters a run for their money in Europe, the US is set to remain its core market. The weak dollar will no doubt put some exporters off in the short term, but the leading players will not wish to risk damaging the long-term relationships they have carefully cultivated with US importers and retailers throughout the years.
The outlook is by no means entirely gloomy. For some US companies, such as Paramus, New Jersey-based Pro-Fruit Marketing, the multinationals’ decision to scale back operations presents an exciting opportunity to expand own their programs by forging new relationships with the country’s growers.
And the short-term prospects for growers aren’t looking at all bad. The late start of both the Chilean and Peruvian deals should result in a shortage of fruit during the peak Christmas and New Year period, bolstering returns and providing a glimmer of Christmas cheer at least.
|
Farmers head south as crackdown bites
01 October 2007 10:27 | Permalink
Maura Maxwell
The wider availability of imported fruits and vegetables has played an important role in pushing up consumption levels in the US. According to a recent USDA report, annual US imports of fresh fruit and vegetables surged from US$2.7bn to US$7.9bn between 1990-92 and 2004-06. During the same period, fruit consumption rose from 88.7 lbs to 101.2 lbs, while vegetable consumption climbed to 173.5lbs from 123.2lbs.
A major part of this rise has come from the growing popularity of exotic fruits like mangoes, pineapples and papayas, whose market share has doubled in just over a decade. By and large, fruit imports supplement, rather than replace American production, either because they are products not grown locally or because imports are limited to times of the year when there is no domestic production.
The rise in sales of imported vegetables – most of which hail from Mexico and Canada – has also come in response to consumer demand for year-round supplies. But recently, US farmers have started moving their operations out of the country for altogether different reasons. A government crackdown on illegal immigrants has left many large-scale vegetable farmers scrambling to find enough workers to harvest their crops and an increasing number of them are shifting production south of the border into Mexico, where labor is in cheap and plentiful supply.
While it is difficult to obtain precise figures on the extent of American farming interests in Mexico, one US senator, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, claims to know of more than 46,000 acres that American growers are cultivating in just two Mexican states, Guanajuato and Baja California.
The effects of the clampdown on migrant workers are already starting to be felt in America’s agricultural heartland, where fears are mounting that many working in agriculture and supporting industries could lose their jobs if the exodus continues.
The erosion of national borders is part and parcel of today’s increasingly globalized food industry as producers chase cheaper sources of production. By moving to plug the tide of migrant workers from Central and South America, the US is simply speeding up the process.
And one man’s loss is another man’s gain. Foreign investors are pouring huge amounts of capital into the construction of state-of-the-art farms in Mexico whose output is trucked north of the border to satisfy the growing appetite for healthy food. The farmer is happy, the consumer is happy.
The wider availability of imported fruits and vegetables has played an important role in pushing up consumption levels in the US. According to a recent USDA report, annual US imports of fresh fruit and vegetables surged from US$2.7bn to US$7.9bn between 1990-92 and 2004-06. During the same period, fruit consumption rose from 88.7 lbs to 101.2 lbs, while vegetable consumption climbed to 173.5lbs from 123.2lbs.
A major part of this rise has come from the growing popularity of exotic fruits like mangoes, pineapples and papayas, whose market share has doubled in just over a decade. By and large, fruit imports supplement, rather than replace American production, either because they are products not grown locally or because imports are limited to times of the year when there is no domestic production.
The rise in sales of imported vegetables – most of which hail from Mexico and Canada – has also come in response to consumer demand for year-round supplies. But recently, US farmers have started moving their operations out of the country for altogether different reasons. A government crackdown on illegal immigrants has left many large-scale vegetable farmers scrambling to find enough workers to harvest their crops and an increasing number of them are shifting production south of the border into Mexico, where labor is in cheap and plentiful supply.
While it is difficult to obtain precise figures on the extent of American farming interests in Mexico, one US senator, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, claims to know of more than 46,000 acres that American growers are cultivating in just two Mexican states, Guanajuato and Baja California.
The effects of the clampdown on migrant workers are already starting to be felt in America’s agricultural heartland, where fears are mounting that many working in agriculture and supporting industries could lose their jobs if the exodus continues.
The erosion of national borders is part and parcel of today’s increasingly globalized food industry as producers chase cheaper sources of production. By moving to plug the tide of migrant workers from Central and South America, the US is simply speeding up the process.
And one man’s loss is another man’s gain. Foreign investors are pouring huge amounts of capital into the construction of state-of-the-art farms in Mexico whose output is trucked north of the border to satisfy the growing appetite for healthy food. The farmer is happy, the consumer is happy.
Put school programs on the slow burner
01 August 2007 10:24 | Permalink
Maura Maxwell
America’s childhood obesity epidemic has prompted a raft of government programs to encourage kids to eat more healthily. Yet disheartening new research into the effectiveness of such schemes appears to show they are, by and large, a waste of time.
The Associated Press review of the scientific studies examining 57 government nutrition programs reveals that just four achieved any real success in improving the children’s eating habits. A typical example is a pilot program offering free fruits and vegetables to school kids, in which Grade 5 pupils became less willing to eat them than they had at the start – because they didn’t like the taste!
Since the 1970s, obesity rates in the US have risen five-fold among 6-11 year-olds and tripled in teens and children aged 2-5, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Government and health professionals are scratching their heads as to how to halt the inexorable ticking of the obesity time bomb.
As one eminent pediatrician acknowledges: “the forces that make kids fat are really strong and hard to fight with just a program in school”.
He’s right of course, but it’s too early to
write off such schemes yet. What is needed is a fundamental shift in attitudes. Just look at drinking and driving. It has taken almost 40 years of relentless media campaigning for it to become socially unacceptable, whereas most of our parents’ generation regularly drove after enjoying more than a tipple.
It takes time for attitudes to change and, as with road deaths, there will be many casualties along the way.
But we must persevere with school programs and hope that on some level, they do leave a lasting impact on children. Perhaps not enough to make them modify their own behavior. But at the very least they will be equipped with the right tools to help them make the right nutritional choices for their children.
America’s childhood obesity epidemic has prompted a raft of government programs to encourage kids to eat more healthily. Yet disheartening new research into the effectiveness of such schemes appears to show they are, by and large, a waste of time.
The Associated Press review of the scientific studies examining 57 government nutrition programs reveals that just four achieved any real success in improving the children’s eating habits. A typical example is a pilot program offering free fruits and vegetables to school kids, in which Grade 5 pupils became less willing to eat them than they had at the start – because they didn’t like the taste!
Since the 1970s, obesity rates in the US have risen five-fold among 6-11 year-olds and tripled in teens and children aged 2-5, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Government and health professionals are scratching their heads as to how to halt the inexorable ticking of the obesity time bomb.
As one eminent pediatrician acknowledges: “the forces that make kids fat are really strong and hard to fight with just a program in school”.
He’s right of course, but it’s too early to
write off such schemes yet. What is needed is a fundamental shift in attitudes. Just look at drinking and driving. It has taken almost 40 years of relentless media campaigning for it to become socially unacceptable, whereas most of our parents’ generation regularly drove after enjoying more than a tipple.
It takes time for attitudes to change and, as with road deaths, there will be many casualties along the way.
But we must persevere with school programs and hope that on some level, they do leave a lasting impact on children. Perhaps not enough to make them modify their own behavior. But at the very least they will be equipped with the right tools to help them make the right nutritional choices for their children.
Will glitzy greens catch on outside US?
01 June 2007 10:21 |
Permalink
Maura Maxwell
Whole Foods Market has exploded onto the UK consciousness, with last month’s opening of its flagship store in London heralding the start of an ambitious European expansion program for the Austin, Texas-based company.
Even residents of the affluent neighborhood of Kensington, well used to the lavish excess of nearby Harrods, have never experienced anything quite like it: 80,000ft2 of foodie nirvana, among which you can find 40 types of home-made sausage, 17 varieties of tomato and 200 types of olive oil.
But how will the concept go down with the punters once the initial hype has died down? Some analysts believe the company’s success in the US, where up to now it has occupied a niche position at the premium end of the market, will be harder to replicate in the UK. Established supermarkets like Waitrose and Marks & Spencer already stock extensive organic ranges – and at considerably more competitive prices.
While Whole Foods’ green credentials appear impressive, in fact only half the produce sold at its Kensington store is organic – the rest is marketed as “natural”, although how natural a product has to be to make the hefty prices any more palletable to the savvy British shopper remains to be seen.
And despite a commitment to source locally wherever possible, the sheer depth and breadth of products on offer must crank up the store’s food-mile tally considerably. Just recently, a study by the University of Alberta revealed that with many organic products traveling further than conventionally-grown food, the greenhouse gas emitted during transportation cancels out the environmental benefits of growing the food organically.
All of which should not detract from the Whole Foods experience. The company’s stated mission – to sell the highest quality natural and organic products available – is backed up by an array of impressive policies, such as donating 5 per cent of its profits to local not-for-profit organizations and recycling all packaging and waste.
But it’s hard to escape the feeling of excess that permeates from every unblemished apple and succulent steak that gleams attractively under the store’s ambient lighting. One can’t help wondering whether this temple to gluttony – albeit virtuous gluttony – will revolutionize Europe’s organic scene as it has done back home, or whether customers will be put off by the glitzy green approach.
Whole Foods Market has exploded onto the UK consciousness, with last month’s opening of its flagship store in London heralding the start of an ambitious European expansion program for the Austin, Texas-based company.
Even residents of the affluent neighborhood of Kensington, well used to the lavish excess of nearby Harrods, have never experienced anything quite like it: 80,000ft2 of foodie nirvana, among which you can find 40 types of home-made sausage, 17 varieties of tomato and 200 types of olive oil.
But how will the concept go down with the punters once the initial hype has died down? Some analysts believe the company’s success in the US, where up to now it has occupied a niche position at the premium end of the market, will be harder to replicate in the UK. Established supermarkets like Waitrose and Marks & Spencer already stock extensive organic ranges – and at considerably more competitive prices.
While Whole Foods’ green credentials appear impressive, in fact only half the produce sold at its Kensington store is organic – the rest is marketed as “natural”, although how natural a product has to be to make the hefty prices any more palletable to the savvy British shopper remains to be seen.
And despite a commitment to source locally wherever possible, the sheer depth and breadth of products on offer must crank up the store’s food-mile tally considerably. Just recently, a study by the University of Alberta revealed that with many organic products traveling further than conventionally-grown food, the greenhouse gas emitted during transportation cancels out the environmental benefits of growing the food organically.
All of which should not detract from the Whole Foods experience. The company’s stated mission – to sell the highest quality natural and organic products available – is backed up by an array of impressive policies, such as donating 5 per cent of its profits to local not-for-profit organizations and recycling all packaging and waste.
But it’s hard to escape the feeling of excess that permeates from every unblemished apple and succulent steak that gleams attractively under the store’s ambient lighting. One can’t help wondering whether this temple to gluttony – albeit virtuous gluttony – will revolutionize Europe’s organic scene as it has done back home, or whether customers will be put off by the glitzy green approach.
What goes around, comes around
Luisa Cheshire
Isn't it funny how things come full circle? The last CPMA convention held in Montreal marked one of my first forays into the North American produce industry – and a chilly experience it was too. But the bone-freezing February temperatures failed to dent my enthusiasm for a sector that I quickly learned is both fascinating and fast-moving – not to mention extremely welcoming.
It seems fitting, therefore, that just as Canada’s leading trade show returns to Quebec’s historic city for its 82nd convention, I should hang up my produce hat (temporarily at least) to pursue pastures new – namely motherhood.
A great deal has happened within the industry during my few years at Americafruit Magazine; the most salient of which seems to be the sector’s latest push towards securing food safety. This April alone some US$8m has been pledged for research into preventing the spread of food-borne pathogens (see p4-5 of the latest issue) in the wake of the tragic E.coli outbreak that swept across the US and Canada last autumn and winter.
Industry bodies, government agencies and private firms are clubbing together to protect the health of consumers, as well as their own future, by setting up research centres, studies and projects to stop similar occurrences from ever happening again. It’s not often an industry demonstrates such solidarity: a fitting reaction to a dreadful event.
The tide is also turning within the realms of US import law. Instead of barring items left, right and centre, the country has recently opened up to a flurry of new products – seemingly relaxing its protectionist stance. Within the last six months or so, the US has allowed Mexican avocados into all 50 states, granted access to New Zealand citrus (see p33), and agreed to let in fresh mangoes from India (see p5). Could the country be mellowing in its old age? Or is it simply capitulating to globalisation pressures and consumer demand for produce year-round?
Perhaps Mother Nature is another contributing factor? Climatic disasters and erratic weather patterns are making securing domestic supplies ever more unpredictable. But retailers have shelves to fill, so importers need to widen their sourcing net to meet demand.
It goes without saying that the next several years will see a great many more changes, driven to a large extent by developments in supply chain technology. I wish you luck keeping pace with them all, and to all of you, the very best for the future – whatever it may bring.
Isn't it funny how things come full circle? The last CPMA convention held in Montreal marked one of my first forays into the North American produce industry – and a chilly experience it was too. But the bone-freezing February temperatures failed to dent my enthusiasm for a sector that I quickly learned is both fascinating and fast-moving – not to mention extremely welcoming.
It seems fitting, therefore, that just as Canada’s leading trade show returns to Quebec’s historic city for its 82nd convention, I should hang up my produce hat (temporarily at least) to pursue pastures new – namely motherhood.
A great deal has happened within the industry during my few years at Americafruit Magazine; the most salient of which seems to be the sector’s latest push towards securing food safety. This April alone some US$8m has been pledged for research into preventing the spread of food-borne pathogens (see p4-5 of the latest issue) in the wake of the tragic E.coli outbreak that swept across the US and Canada last autumn and winter.
Industry bodies, government agencies and private firms are clubbing together to protect the health of consumers, as well as their own future, by setting up research centres, studies and projects to stop similar occurrences from ever happening again. It’s not often an industry demonstrates such solidarity: a fitting reaction to a dreadful event.
The tide is also turning within the realms of US import law. Instead of barring items left, right and centre, the country has recently opened up to a flurry of new products – seemingly relaxing its protectionist stance. Within the last six months or so, the US has allowed Mexican avocados into all 50 states, granted access to New Zealand citrus (see p33), and agreed to let in fresh mangoes from India (see p5). Could the country be mellowing in its old age? Or is it simply capitulating to globalisation pressures and consumer demand for produce year-round?
Perhaps Mother Nature is another contributing factor? Climatic disasters and erratic weather patterns are making securing domestic supplies ever more unpredictable. But retailers have shelves to fill, so importers need to widen their sourcing net to meet demand.
It goes without saying that the next several years will see a great many more changes, driven to a large extent by developments in supply chain technology. I wish you luck keeping pace with them all, and to all of you, the very best for the future – whatever it may bring.