This week’s Economist has an article on agricultural nutrient pollution in the Mississippi River.
The economics way to deal with agricultural pollution presents us with a dilemma. The changes required are so radical the screaming from those affected would generate enough hot air to destroy the world from global warming.
I believe the price of any item should include the full costs of producing the item. This way we can make purchasing decisions according to our own values. This applies to food as well as everything else.
Therefore the costs of agricultural pollution should be paid by the producers and passed on to consumers.
In some cases it may be difficult to calculate the costs of pollution but we could start by eliminating all subsidies which would probably reduce a lot of pollution. In any case subsidies should be given to consumers rather than producers.
If we had to pay the full costs of producing food, there would probably be some major changes in our eating habits to healthier foods and more home gardens.
Filed under: Economics, Environment, Food supply | Tagged: agricultural pollution, agriculture, consumers, costs, eating habits, Economics, farming, global warming, home gardens, nutrient pollution, pollution, subsidies, values | 1 Comment »
Economics 102 