Guest Post: Horsemeat Economics
Submitted by John Aziz of Azizonomics blog,
The British (and now Europe-wide) scandal of corporations selling horse meat as beef is emblematic of many of the problems with big, unwieldy systems.
The similarity between horse meat and subprime have already been noted in a Financial Times editorial:
The food industry has long known that processed meat is susceptible to fraud. While it is relatively easy to verify whole cuts of meat taken from a carcass, this is not the case for the bits left behind. These are gathered up and shipped out to thousands of outlets for processing into lower-value products. In Britain, monitoring this industry is left to local authorities and the retailers themselves.
Yet this surveillance has become virtually impossible in the modern world of food production. Consumers want ever lower prices. But food margins are already wafer thin. The drive to cut costs has sent retailers scouting for cheaper suppliers in far-flung parts of the world. Supply chains have become vast and unwieldy. And internet tenders drive prices down even further.
This has brought big benefits to consumers who until recently enjoyed consistently falling prices. But in a disturbing parallel to the financial sector’s subprime crisis, the growing distance between supermarkets and their suppliers has also opened the door to fraud on a scale that as yet can only be guessed at. The meat used in these products now travels across multiple borders and through myriad companies. Regulators do not have the resources to keep up. Only those who buy the processed products and sell them under their own brands can apply the pressure that will limit chances for fraud.
Just as with subprime, complicated, impersonal systems have bred fraud. Once upon a time, banks were impelled to lend responsibly, because if they did not their balance sheets would become filled with trash, and they would face bankruptcy. Then they discovered that they could pull a ruse — lend irresponsibly, and pass off the risk to someone else. Purchasers of subprime mortgage-backed securities thought they were buying a AAA grade product, as that is what ratings agencies passed them off as being. But it turns out they were just buying unsustainable trash. It is, of course, possible that the subprime crisis could have been avoided had the price of oil and other commodities not risen so steeply and precipitously, squeezing consumers’ budgets.
But sooner or later, the banks’ irresponsibility would have come home to roost, and the ruse would have collapsed. If it hadn’t been ballooning commodities prices, it would have been something else.
Similarly, in an equally sprawling and disconnected system — the global food supply chain — anonymity has bred irresponsibility once again. Retailers claim to have been misled. Meat processors and food manufacturers claim to have been misled too. But somewhere along the line, someone is lying. Someone, at some point decided that horse was a cheaper alternative to beef, someone tested it for taste, to affirm that it would be taken as an acceptable substitute. And someone decided that horse would enter the food chain, and that consumers could be fooled into thinking that it was beef. Would that be possible with a local butcher? Would it be possible for unwanted substances to penetrate the food chain if the supply chain was much shorter?
Maybe, but there are strong disincentives. With a shorter supply chain, it is not so easy to pass off the blame to someone else. If a local British butcher decides to substitute horse for beef, it would be more easily discoverable than if a sprawling multinational — whose abattoirs are located in Romania or Cyprus, but its customers in Britain, Spain, France and Italy — decided to do so. British abattoir workers would know, and might dissent. Butchers would be able to tell the difference, and most would have a serious problem with deceiving customers who they see face to face. A supermarket that sells meals packaged in plastic containers by other companies, has no such problem with deception. Customers don’t ever get to meet the person who butchered or cooked or shipped their ready meal. This provides a barrier of anonymity. There is no immediate embarrassment in deception carried out at distance. Simply, anonymity makes deception easier, and big, complex systems create anonymity.
In 2010, The Telegraph reported on some empirical research supporting this idea:
There is a growing body of research to support the logically obvious idea that humans become increasingly dishonest as cheating becomes easier:
From finding a £50 note on the floor to being accidentally given the answers to test questions, even normally honest people can suddenly become dishonest, it found.
But they will only cheat if it does not involve any work, said the academic study for the journal Psychological and Personality Science.
In an experiment on 84 students, researchers set up a trial involving a maths test on a computer, without telling them the reasons why they were doing it.
Half the students were warned the system was not working properly. If they pressed the space bar on the keyboard the answers would come up.
The other half were told that if they did not press the enter key immediately after seeing the question, then the answer would come up.
Overall, few cheated at all. But those who did not have to press a key to cheat were almost TEN times as likely to do so, said the researchers from the University of Toronto.
They said it was because pressing a key was like ‘intentionally’ trying to cheat while those who didn’t acted as if they were cheating by accident, so they did not feel they were making an immoral choice.
In a second test, the volunteers were tested on their willingness to help a fellow student with a disability complete an exam paper.
Half were told the way to volunteer was to follow an online link, the other half simply had to click ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on the screen.
Those who had to follow the link were five times less likely to volunteer to help, because it was easier for them to get out of it than the others who had a clear choice to make.
Study author Rimma Teper said: “People are more likely to cheat and make immoral decisions when their transgressions don’t involve an explicit action.”
I am coming to believe very strongly that as this century continues, and as systemic interconnectivity and complexity increases, we will see many more horse meat and subprime style scandals exploiting the anonymity of big systems.
Meanwhile, those who do not wish to be exposed to such counterparty risk will avoid such complexity like the plague.
(15 votes)
- advertisements -
»
- 11350 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
Too big to trust...
The 1/4 pounder has been pipped at the post by the new, giant size, 1/4 horse.
"SOYLENT GREEN IS TRIGGER!"
We're running out of basic foods so horsemeat could one day be a luxury.
The global wild fishcatch has plateaued. Next will be land-based food production.
http://www.planbeconomics.com/2013/01/30/chart-global-fish-catch-has-fla...
Big unwieldy systems are a psychopath's best friend.
Buy local. You'll know what you're getting and you'll be voting for much needed decentralization.
Decentralization. The only "ism" that matters.
Decentralizationism Bitchez!
But people is not know what is good, central State Apparatus is necessity to manage means of production. All must kneel at alter of big government and serve high priests, even if eat contamination beef. All hail to central power and submit!
(Boris is infuse dialog with caustic sarcasm, please is do not down for thumbs!)
I appreciate the necessity for thickly veiled satire when discussing the state, the party and other sacred entities.
For Boris, today is horsemeat luxury. When run out, must eat neighbor cat (after first is shave, but not over-cook).
Roy Rogers bitchez! The double horse burger.
http://www.royrogersrestaurants.com/#/food
And do you want fries, fruit, or saddle with that?
"HO-RSES! WE ARE EAT HO-RSES!" - Charlton Heston, who is raise thoroughbred horse
There are INFINITELY more cattle than horses, horses are more costly to raise and maintain, so why the switch/uproar ??
I paid for a KIA and they gave me a Lexus.....those bastards.
Quarter Horse Burger...i like it
I once asked my dad 'What's a non-performing loan?', and he answered by way of analogy that a horse at the glue factory is a non-performing race horse... except that now instead of glue-base it's become Mcfood.
Indian media reports cow flesh found in horse meat products in Europe.
The people won't care about horsemeat in their burgers as long as they can still get a side order of Extra Big-Ass Fries™.
I can't believe its not udders!
Doctor told me have to watch what I eat, so I bought a ticket to the track.
I got the trots after eating at Burger King once.
Only the freshest chicken lips and asses for Sir'ah.
I think that most have seen this equation from me:
BIG = FAIL
That said, there's going to be more and more ponies given up, and despite all the "give the ponies a home" foundations out there, I suspect that horse meat WILL be on the menu for a while (in the not-to-distant future).
I'm not sure I agree that anonymity is the problem. I tend to think it is influence. If you pay off the cops (regulators), you can sell horse meat and then when someone else catches on, you grease your local law maker and have him rewrite the law to increase the minimum required horse meat content in beef.
That's assuming there's enuf regulators to inspect. Funny they're always under staffed.
It's easier to see down a straight path than one that's got lots of turns. The more links there are, the more crooked the road and the harder for anyone to see. With fewer links you're going to have more people (outside the production/distribution chain) who are willing to poke around the corner of a bend or two; I'm thinking, then, that while there can/will be local abuses, such abuse will be hard to conceal and less-likely to result in the levels of distortion that we're seeing with these BIG systems.
Horsemeat.....Don't knock it til you ride it.
"I've had better food at the ballgame, you know? This steak still has marks from where the jockey was hitting it." Caddyshack.
Caddyshack& Scarface(directors cut) and bag of Doritoes. I'm sitting pretty.
Dan Quayle, is that you?
No 'e' in that factory food nightmare known as Doritos.
.
That's how they've gotten away with selling it as beef: there's nothing riding on it.
Everyone is up in arms about the horse meat yet we are all more or less oblivious to the absolute crap contained in the food chain overall.
I'm calling you out on the bad punnage. Puns can only go so far.
Quit being an Ass! Oh, wait! You've definitely got room for concern here, we've moved into the equine food class :-)
.
Gimme a bray-k. They can't all be whinniers.
Make sure it's well dun.
I've ridden a horse, but I haven't "ridden" a "horse."
stick your Whole Foods "Organic" olive oil in the fridge. If it's still liquid at 40 F, it ain't olive oil. It's probably mixed 50-50 with GMO corn oil.
Pinto or Arabian for lunch? At least step out of the cloud you junkster. You look like an idiot attacking me with no game!
I bridle at junksters dumping and bolting too.
A fine person you are. Thanks for your honesty.
Anonymous junksters need to pony up. They mustang out with the wrong people. Don't let them stirrup your emotions.
Agreed.
Stirrups aren't for emotions - They're for wrists and ankles, my friend.
Last time I had Pinto, there was an explosion of flavor in my mouth.
That's what she said!
This will go on until the central banks vote 'neigh' on the next QE.
You're beating a dead horse by saying that on ZH.
Monsieur, would you like Grey Poupon with your horsemeat?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itHhhYxqSSE
No thank you, Garcon. I'll try the horse d'oeuvres instead.