<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for sustainable food economics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com</link>
	<description>An economist&#039;s thoughts about bringing sustainability into the food system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 17:54:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on farmer share of SNAP expenditures? by JC Dwyer</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1364#comment-468</link>
		<dc:creator>JC Dwyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 17:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1364#comment-468</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We use 16 cents, based on this analysis: http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/131096/err114_reportsummary.pdf]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We use 16 cents, based on this analysis: <a href="http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/131096/err114_reportsummary.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/131096/err114_reportsummary.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on economic benefits and measurement error by Debra Tropp</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1349#comment-463</link>
		<dc:creator>Debra Tropp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 16:23:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1349#comment-463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Love your blog, Carolyn.  Sometimes it&#039;s like you&#039;re reading my mind ;-). Let me know what you think about my response to your recent email when you have a chance.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Love your blog, Carolyn.  Sometimes it&#8217;s like you&#8217;re reading my mind <img src='http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> . Let me know what you think about my response to your recent email when you have a chance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on economic benefits and measurement error by Jill Clark</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1349#comment-462</link>
		<dc:creator>Jill Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 21:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1349#comment-462</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great post!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on food miles by Gareth</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1342#comment-460</link>
		<dc:creator>Gareth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 13:22:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1342#comment-460</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a really good point and thanks for highlighting that study. I&#039;m currently looking at environmental labeling for food as a potential topic for a thesis, and thought it might be worth mentioning that, along with production and shipping, it is also worth considering quantity as well as packaging and cooking methods. There&#039;s a famous example of a tin of chick peas vs. a bag of dried chickpeas. Environmentally speaking, it might appear that the dried chickpeas are the more sustainable option given that they have simply been picked and dried in the sun, whilst the tinned goods have been cooked and preserved in tins. However, when you factor in the cooking process, the tinned goods are actually the more sustainable option. Whilst the dried chick peas will be cooked in relatively small batches at home - a relatively carbon intensive process - the tinned have already been cooked on an industrial scale, which produces less emissions thanks to economy of scale.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a really good point and thanks for highlighting that study. I&#8217;m currently looking at environmental labeling for food as a potential topic for a thesis, and thought it might be worth mentioning that, along with production and shipping, it is also worth considering quantity as well as packaging and cooking methods. There&#8217;s a famous example of a tin of chick peas vs. a bag of dried chickpeas. Environmentally speaking, it might appear that the dried chickpeas are the more sustainable option given that they have simply been picked and dried in the sun, whilst the tinned goods have been cooked and preserved in tins. However, when you factor in the cooking process, the tinned goods are actually the more sustainable option. Whilst the dried chick peas will be cooked in relatively small batches at home &#8211; a relatively carbon intensive process &#8211; the tinned have already been cooked on an industrial scale, which produces less emissions thanks to economy of scale.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on updated statistics on beginning farmers by John Rhoads</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1331#comment-458</link>
		<dc:creator>John Rhoads</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2013 18:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1331#comment-458</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m surprised (and I bet new farmers would be too) that selling direct to consumer is less profitable than selling through an intermediary.  Most new farmers opt to sell direct thinking they can achieve better prices and hence, better profits.  Always important to consider the big picture.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised (and I bet new farmers would be too) that selling direct to consumer is less profitable than selling through an intermediary.  Most new farmers opt to sell direct thinking they can achieve better prices and hence, better profits.  Always important to consider the big picture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on food companies and GMO labels by Jeff Gillman</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1306#comment-450</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Gillman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 17:18:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1306#comment-450</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very interesting article.  I like the idea of having GMO labels, but I&#039;m concerned that consumers will think that these GMO labels mean that GMOs have demonstrated themselves as being somehow dangerous to eat when they haven&#039;t.  Furthermore, I&#039;m concerned that consumers will preferentially select conventionally grown, non-GMO products which have the potential to be more dangerous than GMOs because of the more frequent use of certain long residual pesticides (including herbicides such as atrazine and long residual pyrethroids) in this type of production.  For me....yes, I like the GMO label, but it&#039;s not as simple a choice as it first appears.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting article.  I like the idea of having GMO labels, but I&#8217;m concerned that consumers will think that these GMO labels mean that GMOs have demonstrated themselves as being somehow dangerous to eat when they haven&#8217;t.  Furthermore, I&#8217;m concerned that consumers will preferentially select conventionally grown, non-GMO products which have the potential to be more dangerous than GMOs because of the more frequent use of certain long residual pesticides (including herbicides such as atrazine and long residual pyrethroids) in this type of production.  For me&#8230;.yes, I like the GMO label, but it&#8217;s not as simple a choice as it first appears.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on last stop on our tour by admin</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1266#comment-444</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:24:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1266#comment-444</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You bet! Christy is the bomb, btw!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You bet! Christy is the bomb, btw!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on last stop on our tour by Ben S</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1266#comment-443</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:19:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1266#comment-443</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for blogging the trip.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for blogging the trip.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on more about day 6 in Puebla by Gustavo</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1185#comment-442</link>
		<dc:creator>Gustavo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:40:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1185#comment-442</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The trip sounds absolutely fascinating! I think there is a lot to be gained for students of sustainable food by looking comparatively across advanced industrial and developing countries. These two sets of countries are becoming linked very closely through globalization and integration schemes like NAFTA, and there is a lot of convergence in terms of how farming and food systems are evolving. But, as you&#039;ve observed, there are enormous asymmetries as well, which means different constraints and opportunities. I’ve posted some materials on my blog in response to your points about poverty alleviation programs in Mexico. Hope they are helpful and I hope the rest of the trip goes well!

http://www.gustavosetrini.com/?p=99]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The trip sounds absolutely fascinating! I think there is a lot to be gained for students of sustainable food by looking comparatively across advanced industrial and developing countries. These two sets of countries are becoming linked very closely through globalization and integration schemes like NAFTA, and there is a lot of convergence in terms of how farming and food systems are evolving. But, as you&#8217;ve observed, there are enormous asymmetries as well, which means different constraints and opportunities. I’ve posted some materials on my blog in response to your points about poverty alleviation programs in Mexico. Hope they are helpful and I hope the rest of the trip goes well!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.gustavosetrini.com/?p=99" rel="nofollow">http://www.gustavosetrini.com/?p=99</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on more about day 6 in Puebla by Agricutlural Sustainability Without Boarders &#124; Sustainable Food Politics</title>
		<link>http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1185#comment-441</link>
		<dc:creator>Agricutlural Sustainability Without Boarders &#124; Sustainable Food Politics</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:26:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sustainablefoodeconomics.com/?p=1185#comment-441</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] of their discussion has focused on poverty and whether poverty alleviation programs in Mexico have had a positive [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of their discussion has focused on poverty and whether poverty alleviation programs in Mexico have had a positive [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
