NationStates

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:28 am**

Against Unnecessary Food Wastage (just a working title)

Category: Social Justice (probably - one could argue this to be Environmental: Manufacturing, too)
Strength: Mild

The World Assembly,

Concerned that in many nations the current trend in food industry is to ignore the loss of edible foodstuffs at every step of the process from the producer to the consumer, and simply produce more than is needed,

Aware that in many nations the sheer overabundance of food available leads to a lot of it spoiling rather than being eaten,

Reminding the representatives of the member nations that in some nations food is scarce without an actual famine situation, despite the previous efforts of WA legislation,

Hoping to encourage goodwill and cooperation between the member nations to ensure adequate nutrition¹ to every legal resident² of the World Assembly nations³,

Hereby,

1. Defines, for the purposes of this legislation,
"unconsumed food" as food that is still safe to eat, but which has passed an arbitrary sell-by-date,
"donatable food" as food that will still be safe to eat after being transported a reasonable distance in an adequately equipped transport vehicle,
"manufacturing leftovers" as foodstuffs⁴ which still can be used to gain nutrition from, but which the food industry considers unprofitable to process further,
"food loss" as the wastage of safe and nutritionally sound foodstuffs,

2. Requires that all member nations conduct a survey to find out the total food loss within their jurisdiction, with the intent of finding out which step of the producer-to-consumer chain needs improvements most critically,⁵

3. Requires that all food manufacturers take all possible reasonable steps⁶ to reduce the amount of manufacturing leftovers,

4. Encourages food manufacturers to donate manufacturing leftovers to non-profit organizations that are willing to process them further for the purpose of donating the foodstuffs to a foreign nation⁷,

5. Encourages grocery stores and other food sellers to either sell unconsumed food at a large discount, or donate it to non-profit organizations that will see to it being distributed further⁸,

6. Mandates that no non-profit organization, whether state-owned or otherwise, can distribute foodstuffs they know are not safe to eat, and requires them to do randomized tests to ensure the safety of the donated food,

7. Encourages member nations to waive the taxes and tariffs on donatable food, when it is exported or imported by a non-profit organization with the intent of minimizing food loss by distributing the foodstuffs to the poor and needy.

OOC: Inspired by, and offered for the use of The Great Boom, but as they didn't want it, posted by myself.

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:31 am**

"This version prevents poisoning. We oppose any measure that requires government funding to enable aid of our enemies unless we can poison the crap out of that aid."

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:39 am**

Separatist Peoples wrote:"This version prevents poisoning. We oppose any measure that requires government funding to enable aid of our enemies unless we can poison the crap out of that aid."

"Sounds like a good reason to do this then... Although, could you point out the bit that requires government funding to send food out of the country? Especially to your enemies?"

OOC: :rofl:

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:43 am**

Opposed. Not an international issue.

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:51 am**

Araraukar wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:"This version prevents poisoning. We oppose any measure that requires government funding to enable aid of our enemies unless we can poison the crap out of that aid."

"Sounds like a good reason to do this then... Although, could you point out the bit that requires government funding to send food out of the country? Especially to your enemies?"

"We have to cover surveys to enable nonprofits to donate, possibly to our enemies. Unacceptable. We oppose any government funding that indirectly benefits our enemies, and oppose anything that prevents us from poisoning those filthy Biggies."

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:58 am**

Separatist Peoples wrote:"We have to cover surveys to enable nonprofits to donate"

"Actually, no. You just need to pay for a "survey to find out the total food loss within their jurisdiction, with the intent of finding out which step of the producer-to-consumer chain needs improvements most critically". And also, if your food manufacturers are state-owned enterprises, they need to reduce said food waste. Everything else is simply encouragement, your nation doesn't have to act on it."

"and oppose anything that prevents us from poisoning those filthy Biggies."

"Buy me a drink in the Bar and I'll let you know of the loophole that still lets you do that..."

OOC: You being a legal person thingy, is "foodstuffs" an official enough a word for legislation?

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:02 pm**

Alexander Smith, Tinhamptonian Delegate-Ambassador to the World Assembly, whilst dumping a jacket potato from the Wing W canteen a few blocks down the corridor: In all honesty... I'll have to say no to this one.

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:03 pm**

Araraukar wrote:"Buy me a drink in the Bar and I'll let you know of the loophole that still lets you do that..."

OOC: You being a legal person thingy, is "foodstuffs" an official enough a word for legislation?

Bell taps the side of his nose and then sits down.

OOC: Yeah, it's fine. Food products would work, too.

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:46 pm**

I think there's been a misunderstanding. This resolution isn't aimed at the legal restrictions that mine targets, so they are fundamentally different and don't overlap, except for some language and the tax cuts, which I incorporated from your draft. I guess by suggesting the feedback and then drafting your own resolution, you leave me no choice but to cut those features in order to avoid duplicate legislation. It's a shame - I wanted to work together and form a resolution aimed at protecting food donors and regulating donation. If you're no longer in that fight, I will modify my resolution accordingly. I appreciate your contributions regardless, and if you still have feedback, ill accept it.

On the subject of this resolution, I obviously support it.

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:06 pm**

The Great Boom wrote:I think there's been a misunderstanding. This resolution isn't aimed at the legal restrictions that mine targets, so they are fundamentally different and don't overlap

OOC: I don't think there's any misunderstanding. I know there isn't much overlap, which is why I posted this as an independent draft. I wouldn't have done that if it had been too similar to what you have.

I guess by suggesting the feedback and then drafting your own resolution, you leave me no choice but to cut those features in order to avoid duplicate legislation.

Duplication of other proposals isn't a problem, it's only after a proposal becomes a passed resolution that the duplication/contradiction becomes a problem, so don't worry about editing yours.

It's a shame - I wanted to work together and form a resolution aimed at protecting food donors and regulating donation.

The problem is that we're disagreeing on the methods; you want to strip restrictions from humanitarian food distributors, I want to make sure they can have some food to distribute but that they have to do that responsibly. And also limit food wastage, which I think you're kind of approaching from a different tangent, but not quite getting there.

There's more to avoiding wasting edible stuff than just ignoring sell-by-dates. For example, there was a hassle a year or two ago about meat (pigs, cows, chickens) that was gained from the carcasses after the prime meats had been cut away, for use in microwave meals and such, where the meat in any case is basically ground up or in small pieces. But because it's not manually cut from the bones, but rather sort of scraped off by machinery, there was some weird EU directive that meant it wasn't classified as meat. (It was cleared up faster than the outrage over it ended, I think, but it was very amusing.) Such meat is not prime beef or chicken filet, but it's perfectly edible and using such scrapings in food industry means that it's that much less meat needed in total, and that much less that's thrown out.

I appreciate your contributions regardless, and if you still have feedback, ill accept it.

Oh I didn't mean that I would no longer help you, by posting this one. It's just that the basic rule is "one thread per proposal, one proposal per thread". So with two different proposals, it was best to move one into its own thread.

Unrelated: Something random I learned today.

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2017 5:36 pm**

Separatist Peoples wrote:"This version prevents poisoning. We oppose any measure that requires government funding to enable aid of our enemies unless we can poison the crap out of that aid."

Posted: **Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:37 am**

The Bible Baptist Republic wrote:

OOC: You know that smiley spam is against the forum rules, right? If you have no comment whatsoever, don't post. And if you do have a comment, even just to say that your character agrees with Mr. Bell, then post it.

Posted: **Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:54 pm**

Araraukar wrote:
The Bible Baptist Republic wrote:

OOC: You know that smiley spam is against the forum rules, right? If you have no comment whatsoever, don't post. And if you do have a comment, even just to say that your character agrees with Mr. Bell, then post it.

OOC: Turn off smileys. Best setting I've made on this forum.

Posted: **Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:57 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:OOC: Turn off smileys. Best setting I've made on this forum.

OOC: Which would make their post entirely empty and thus still spam.

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:11 am**

OOC: Bumping this one up again. Really need opinions on the category. Social Justice? Environmental - Manufacturing? Other?

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:12 am**

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Bumping this one up again. Really need opinions on the category. Social Justice? Environmental - Manufacturing? Other?

"Well, umm... it's umm... difficult to decide. It kind of overlaps with Social Justice, Environmental - Manufacturing and maaaaybe Advancement of Industry - Environmental Deregulation."

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2018 6:28 am**

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Bumping this one up again. Really need opinions on the category. Social Justice? Environmental - Manufacturing? Other?

OOC: thinking about this.
If you add a line in the preamble explicitly stating that reducing waste is likely to increase the supply of edible food (at least slightly), and thus to help the poor, that would strengthen the argument for Social justice.
Also, would your definition of wastefulness include using crops that people could eat directly to to feed livestock instead?

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:04 am**

Bears Armed wrote:OOC: thinking about this.
If you add a line in the preamble explicitly stating that reducing waste is likely to increase the supply of edible food (at least slightly), and thus to help the poor, that would strengthen the argument for Social justice.

OOC: Good point. I'll see what I can do for the next draft.

Also, would your definition of wastefulness include using crops that people could eat directly to to feed livestock instead?

Well, kinda yes and kinda no, because I personally won't voluntarily give up meat-eating so I won't write a proposal that would in essence require that, but it might work if the clause had "when a viable alternative exists", because I'd also rather eat a cow that ate grass and hay during its lifetime than one that ate something unnatural for its species...

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:27 am**

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Which would make their post entirely empty and thus still spam.

No, it would turn them into colon form,

Code: Select all: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:30 am**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Araraukar wrote:OOC: Which would make their post entirely empty and thus still spam.

No, it would turn them into colon form,
Code: Select all
:clap: :clap: :clap:

OOC: Well, learn something new every day. Still fitting "Short, Pointless, Annoying Message", though.

(EDIT: I also learned today that making a vegan b'day cake is very difficult if it also has to be wheatless and soyless...)

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:20 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Araraukar wrote:OOC: Which would make their post entirely empty and thus still spam.

No, it would turn them into colon form,

Code: Select all
:clap: :clap: :clap:

wat code?

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2018 6:33 pm**

Araraukar wrote:Well, kinda yes and kinda no, because I personally won't voluntarily give up meat-eating so I won't write a proposal that would in essence require that, but it might work if the clause had "when a viable alternative exists", because I'd also rather eat a cow that ate grass and hay during its lifetime than one that ate something unnatural for its species...

Well all the crops fed to cows are unnatural for them. They ain't gonna be growing corn without humans planting & breeding it.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:55 am**

Araraukar wrote:(EDIT: I also learned today that making a vegan b'day cake is very difficult if it also has to be wheatless and soyless...)

OOC:
Thought trying to work that out might turn out fun.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:53 am**

Bears Armed wrote:
Araraukar wrote:OOC: Bumping this one up again. Really need opinions on the category. Social Justice? Environmental - Manufacturing? Other?

OOC: thinking about this.
If you add a line in the preamble explicitly stating that reducing waste is likely to increase the supply of edible food (at least slightly), and thus to help the poor, that would strengthen the argument for Social justice.

It might help the category but it's a very weak argument. Contrary to what what your parents might have told you, famines are a product of things like war, crop failure or government policy, not people in other countries wasting food.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:18 am**

Aclion wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:OOC: thinking about this.
If you add a line in the preamble explicitly stating that reducing waste is likely to increase the supply of edible food (at least slightly), and thus to help the poor, that would strengthen the argument for Social justice.

It might help the category but it's a very weak argument. Contrary to what what your parents might have told you, famines are a product of things like war, crop failure or government policy, not people in other countries wasting food.

OOC: Famines are (If you add 'corporate policy' to your list of causes), but food insecurity is a function of food pricing (Through either costs of manufacture which includes losses on wastage or scarcity-induced price increases). Reducing wastage would lower manufacturing costs (Thus lower prices) and would reduce scarcity (Again, lower prices). Unless you contend that there's a famine due to war, crop failure, government policy or corporate policy in the US right now, 15,6 million food insecure households would very much like people to stop wasting food that they could have used.

NationStates

DRAFT: Against Unnecessary Food Wastage

DRAFT: Against Unnecessary Food Wastage