Helmut Melzer
Director Kurt Langbein (Pictured left) has recently been commendable and extremely positive Documentation "Time for Utopias" brought to the cinema. Option Editor Helmut Melzer seize the opportunity with him and FairtradeManaging Director Hartwig Kirner (right) to conduct a rather detailed conversation, which we bring here in original length.
OPTION: I watched the movie yesterday, and I really liked it. Especially because it goes in one direction, in which also shows option.
KURT LANGBEIN: Then we are almost brothers in spirit.
OPTION: We are brothers in spirit, I think, all here. Of course we will talk about the film in our conversation, but I would like to discuss a bit more. A discussion about a question that occurs several times in the film, which is generally our topic in general, namely what is actually the biggest lever. What is the best way to achieve the much cited transformation to a society that thinks differently? These are of course many different small projects taken together, Fairtrade is a big move. And a film about Fairtrade is of course also a great lever. But: Is the existing system changeable via consumption? Many people still pay only the cost of a product.
LANGBEIN: My answer is a clear yes. I believe that consumer movements, even independent and good labels such as Fairtrade, unlike the industry-directed Schmählabels, which are actually only marketing optimization, are a very important contribution to the consciousness work and for stimulating, and also recognizable make that there is a strong need there. Fairphone goes a similar way, so to speak, within the market logic to try to produce fair products, but they also know that this is only partially. You can see that, too, and they do not hide that. But I think the goal is going a bit further and, logically, a little further away, and that is sort of the breaking of the Iron Curtain, which we call the market economy, the Iron Curtain between producers and consumers. And I would hope and expect that movements such as Fairphone will also create consumer organizations that are even more interested in direct exchange and direct information to consumers. And that in principle is possible, I mean, shows the example of Hansalim in the film. As the exchange takes place as we do in a small solidary agriculture. And I actually thought: "That's great, that's nice, but that's never the big one." And you can see that it works.
1,5 can provide millions of people directly from the farmers with regional, fresh organic food. The exchange takes place directly and the market is switched off in the case, which leads to the pleasant result that the farmers still get much more than they would get in a Fairtrade product, namely 70 percent of what consumers pay , So that would be the next step.
For me these two forms of active engagement with the destructive power of this economic system in a positive sense are not against each other, but actually with each other. But there are two stages in a development that I believe needs to take place, so that our children and grandchildren, to remain at this platitude, have no, no chance of living reasonably on this earth.
HARTWIG KIRNER: For me it is definitely a way to change the world through conscious consumption. More consumption will not improve the world. Of course, if I buy more shoes, more cars, more cell phones, the world will not get better. It will get better by buying more consciously. I have personally set an example for myself. I've always bought relatively cheap shoes now, and now that three pairs have broken up after wearing them ten times because they were so cheap, I thought, "What are you doing? You throw away three pairs of shoes here in a year, though you actually can, if you buy a sensible pair, who can wear for seven, eight years. "It may cost a lot more in the beginning, but at the end of the day I have a product, with which I have much more pleasure.
That is, the problem we often have is that we falsely believe that sustainability is a sacrifice, that is, a renunciation of one's own well-being.
The same problem had the bio-movement at the very beginning, that we thought that these were just the gummy products. But that is long gone, organic products are now really one of the good products. And the feeling that I still have to consume and eat a product that does not somehow harm the environment, makes me personally much happier, as if I'm eating any product. And the same applies to every sustainable aspect. We must stop presenting this sustainability theme with an uplifted finger and connect it with this renunciation and ascetic aura.
LANGBEIN: Which is all about it, but we believe that we all agree that we need a significant reduction in the amount of consumed goods. But that is not a renunciation, but that can be a gain in quality of life. In the cooperative Kalkbreite, which can also be seen in the film, people spend about a quarter of their energy on living like others, they do without cars and they have a lower consumption per square meter of space. These are all things that you think are very restrictive. But they live wonderfully, that is a joyful, pleasant life, a self-determined one, because they make all decisions collectively, because it is a cooperative that deserves its name, and not just a label.
These examples show that reducing consumerism is by no means a limitation on quality of life. On the contrary, as the old, wise Mr. Fromm has said: The orientation to being is actually not only better, but more beautiful than the orientation towards having.
KIRNER: That's a very good statement. I can absolutely sign it.
OPTION: But do you have the impression that the majority of our society understands and understands this? We live in a society that buys how many percent of Fairtrade products?
KIRNER: This is now a relatively good percentage, well over half.
LANGBEIN: But not the total consumption.
KIRNER: No.
OPTION: That's the point.
LANGBEIN: More than half of the people occasionally choose organic products.
OPTION: An incredible number of people buy organic products, but not exclusively, but every now and then. And that's the point. I compare this also with this commitment today, which in truth only about Likes and the so-called Clicktivism expires. That means you feel active and committed when signing a petition online, which is done within 15 seconds. That's good and important, but it's not real activism. So my question is, what about the rest that does not come along, which is actually likely to make up an estimated 70 percent of our society?
LANGBEIN: That’s one thing, no doubt. And I'm still amazed when I see a column of students in the Ninth District, all of them buying some convenience food product, even in the evening. I think to myself: I'm really on an island. This is of course a problematic trend.
And if you look at the overall consumption of food, for example, we are still a long way from a reasonable development, because a reasonable development is called only regional, fresh and then organic.
There is a fundamental rethinking necessary so that a peasant agriculture can still exist, and so we continue to eat reasonably healthy and not at the expense of the Third World, by now we import more than half from countries where people anyway too little Have food. But the other side, I believe, should already be seen. There is really no serious evidence there, but more and more people say: "No, I prefer to go with myself. I start a food coop or work there, I work on a trading circle, I join the commons movement or common good economy. "Many people are also taking active steps, but overall this is not sufficiently visible. I mean, a petition is nice as a signal, but it fizzles and does not really have substance. But what these people lack is a common narrative and images of the future, where we actually want to go together. And I now understand, for example, the film as a small contribution to such a common narrative and I also understand movements like Fairtrade as a contribution to this narrative. Only we need the narrative as a whole, we need visions of the future that convey us together: we could go there. This is the post-growth society and it is not in cowardice and ashes, but this is a beautiful life that is about it, a better life and a resource-saving life. And there we all want to go. And this shared narrative is something that is still missing. And I think that's what they should build and tell.
KIRNER: It's the danger of saying, "The others do not understand." That's not true. If we look at regional products, for example, it is a major concern of the Austrians that we use regional products. There will not be anyone from less educated classes in rural Austria who does not say: "I think it's great that we eat products that grow in my region."
OPTION: But the point is, when they go to the supermarket, they buy the fruits from far away countries, although there are also regional products in the area.
KIRNER: That too is one side. On the other hand, supermarkets are increasingly turning to having their own corners of local food, even in rural areas.
And that is no coincidence, but a result of the pressure of consumers who want and need it. And that just has to get stronger and that needs to get stronger faster.
Well, the impatience that I hear from your questions, I completely share because we do not have that much time left. Every year we use the world's resources twice, so to speak, but we only have one world. So it's really time to make a significant change.
OPTION: Whereby, as you said yourself, this change noticeably gets going. I think we all feel this. Whether that is sufficient and whether we actually have 25 years or whether we still want to look at it so slowly, that's the question. For me, the key is whether that is actually the biggest lever. For example, if I look at our climate strategy, which in terms of sustainability is taking two steps back from the point of view of many NGOs ...
KIRNER: But I can not relieve people of responsibility and delegate it to any political decision-makers in Vienna or in Brussels. I'm responsible for that. Just today, when I drove up, I read an interesting article about plastic in organic waste. It is not the politician's fault, but the people who are too lazy to remove the plastic from the bin. The plastic bag I throw in there is of course distributed in the fields. We are responsible for it.
At the moment it is fashionable to criticize the sustainability movement and say that consumers are not responsible for everything. That's right, but they're responsible for a lot.
LANGBEIN: But I would also like to avoid dismissing the policy from the responsibility and already point out that many of the biggest ecological sins of recent years have emerged from lack of regulation. And if we now have governments that see in these regulations an almost enemy image and say that is not necessary, then care is appropriate. I believe that we must demand that politics actually translate the findings of ecological science into laws, and of course the whole European Union is in demand, not just Austria. What hinders politics from drastically restricting this criminal nonsense plastic in these quantities by regulations? The opposite is true, it is more and more, the plastic containers are increasing more and more, especially with the convenience products. Everything is packed in plastic. Of course, laws can or must intervene, because the consumer alone is too weak. And we have to move politics there.
And that can be a lobby. At present, agricultural policy shows how well it can do that, where large-scale industry and big money make music, so to say, and the whole of politics dances to this music.
OPTION: There's the best example of glyphosate. This development has gone completely wrong politically.
LANGBEIN: Yes, and the real problem with glyphosate is not, in my opinion, as a health journalist, that it is carcinogenic, but the real problem is that it is an accompaniment and a lever of a completely insane development in agriculture, namely the genetically engineered hybrid seed. Industry now trying to assert itself with terrible pressure all over the world and with the help of European politics. As you can see, politics can do a lot. In that case, it will cause seed diversity to be restricted everywhere, and smallholders will have even fewer opportunities than before.
OPTION: Is the topic of self-realization, which also occurs in film, a big factor in motivating people in this area?
KIRNER: Self-realization, self-determination, I would also say, already inasmuch as I am not the puppet of consumption, but create my life and have the possibilities to influence that. This is something that, I believe, we need to focus a little more on. Americans have it much stronger than us in Europe in their genes, in their mentality that they are responsible for their own lives. The Europeans sometimes push that away a bit.
And I agree that political arrangements are absolutely necessary, but I think we have it in our own hands. And it's beautiful if I can decide for myself.
I make my life the way I want it, and not because someone else wants me to wear a certain brand or maybe I have to have two cars in front of the door, I do. It's my choice.
LANGBEIN: But for that too I need framework conditions. And this form of self-determination, which I also consider to be very important, because we as humans need resonance and suffer from alienation, is the framework condition in economic activity, that is to say in working, be it agricultural products among farmers or trade and industry. That the incentives are going in the wrong direction there is a product of politics. And this product is not irreversible, and that should be reversed.
Promoting co-operative economic forms would be a political task, and we should demand that. Because one is the individual behavior and the other is the work. And the forms of work are at the moment still very far removed from self-determined forms. And if you promote manual production forms again and if you support rural farming production forms again instead of the large agricultural industry and large-scale industry, then the conditions are different.
OPTION: Because you are addressing this, it is, of course, fundamentally understandable from a political point of view that industry and large companies are given special support because, of course, they create a completely different level of job creation.
KIRNER: Since I have to contradict now. Especially in Austria, medium-sized companies are the ones who create jobs.
OPTION: From my point of view, of course, you make it easier for yourself by simply supporting large companies in a variety of ways in order to be able to maintain or expand jobs. How could you turn that around? By promoting SMEs or craft businesses more?
KIRNER: For example, in the field of energy too, it is a real mistake to think that, for example, the centralized energy supply that we currently have creates more jobs than a decentralized one.
It would be a huge opportunity for new jobs to promote alternative energy. And I believe that we are partly and also the political decision makers in a thinking arrested, which is simply no longer up to date.
Because alternative energy would have a lot of potential, and if you tried to steer our energy system in the direction of greening, also in terms of taxes, would create jobs, not destroy.
LANGBEIN: I also believe that we would be well advised to go one step further. Because the pressure to grow is inherent in our economic system, and politics is lagging behind, and the only thing that matters is growth. That really counts a lot, only not only positive but also a resource consumption, which is simply no longer sustainable.
And I think we also have to go step by step and wisely, but out of this growth logic. Capitalism can not survive without growth, it needs it, so we need other forms of economy.
And the cooperative forms of production are by definition beyond this logic. Of course, when they are competing in the economic system, they are always forced to make compromises, but the very decisions and criteria of decisions there are fundamentally different. You can see that in large cooperatives or cooperative associations that still work and are not just labels.
Raiffeisen was a cooperative two hundred years ago and now it is a global corporation that only uses this label. So, not all that is called cooperative is cooperative.
But I believe that we are well advised to make demands on politicians, too, that such start-ups and initiatives are promoted because they simply make another economy visible.
OPTION: Keywords Raiffeisen. How could that happen? Of course we are talking about a different time, no question.
LANGBEIN: If you look back a bit, you can see that even the original Raiffeisen cooperative movement deliberately did not want to question the economic system, but only used certain forms of exchange and forms of cooperation alongside it. She was consciously not a system transcending movement. And such movements, if they are not careful, once they reach a certain size, are almost inevitably condemned to marry with the system because otherwise they can not evolve. And that's exactly what happened. Even the large housing cooperatives, which arose from a similar consideration, have completely integrated into the system. There are, I believe, today two or three housing cooperatives worthy of their name, who are really trying to make cheap, energy efficient homes and not maximize profits. And the consumer cooperatives have degenerated into the sadness of social democracy. For the most part they broke down because they were simply no longer alive and democratically organized.
But the failure of this co-operative movement from before 150, 200 years should not tempt us to say that does not work. There are international examples that show that it already works.
Mondragón in the Basque Country, for example, is a cooperative association. We were there too, that only found no place in the movie. They spell out the idea of cooperation within companies, between companies and in the region, and finance educational institutions and research institutions from cooperatives there themselves. This shows that this can go much further and that there are movements that are already able to question the completely one-sided fixation on growth and money multiplication.
Economists, too, have to move out of their comfortable market-economic-ideological chair, which is empirically proven to be false in many cases, and really begin a serious theoretical debate on the post-growth society.
And there you need models and transitions, there are aspects like that guaranteed basic income certainly a role. How big that will be should be the subject of the debate. But we also have to solve the existence of gainful employment as it is now understood, in some other way, because otherwise everything will break up, and then we will actually face a decivilization. And we also have to evaluate socially meaningful and necessary work beyond work, which would only be fair and reasonable, and thus also create a different understanding of our social cohesion.
KIRNER: The topic is: we can not stop technological progress, that is absolutely impossible. You do not have to be an apocalyptic to say that if we do not do it, somebody else does it.
In other words, if we do not face the technological innovations in Europe, others will, and they will be able to produce so cheaply in the context of this market economy that we will be forced out of the market.
In other words, we have to find a way to deal with it, and so far, in my opinion, we have simply failed. There is this timid little plant like that unconditional basic income, which was thrown into the race, but I really miss the alternatives. We will not have a generation more time to find solutions.
OPTION: But it does not look like it's going to be politically directed in any direction. Keyword machine or vending machine tax.
LANGBEIN: At the moment things are just the opposite in Austria. But if you are optimistic, you can also say that this may be a small episode. Because if we continue to operate policy blindly and backward, then our society drives to the wall. And I think more and more people are recognizing that.
OPTION: We want the transformation to sustainability, to renewable energy, to the cooperative model, to postal growth. But how do we achieve that? In other words, can this work within the capitalist system by possibly exploiting the function of the system to strengthen its own development? That's actually what Fairtrade does. Or does it really require a major change in the rules by saying, "We really want to soften and change capitalism now." That would have to take place at a higher level, for example at EU level.
LANGBEIN: It would have to be, anyway, I think. As a first step, we should remember what 1945 20 through 30 used to be the political maxim of for years, providing capitalism with sensible shackles and creating framework conditions that limit the most destructive effects of capitalism, such as financial capitalism. That's the order of the day.
The need of the hour would be to consider what an economy that is free from the logic of growth can look like. And there must be other dominating factors than the mere increase of money as a principle, because otherwise we will remain in the growth logic and can not really survive companies that are not growing. In other words, we need other forms of economic activity, first off and, hopefully, in the future as the dominant form of economic activity.
KIRNER: Yes, I sign it that way.
OPTION: That does not really answer my question. For me, the key point is: what does it take to fundamentally change the economy? How does a transformation to a post-growth society come about?
KIRNER: I think that's why initiatives like Fairtrade are important, and not just us, but many other cooperative initiatives if they make us see that things are different. That we do not believe it must go on and on. And I'm already relying on the next generation. It is always said that the young people have something else in mind. But that's not true. When I look at how much idealism and forward-thinking my children and their environment and many others at the schools I lecture on here go to work, then I am already optimistic that this can go relatively quickly.
We always think in these linear developments. That is not so. Fairtrade has also taken 15 years to get under way, and over the last decade, there has been a veritable upward momentum.
It was similar to Bio, it took longer to get started, and then it went up. Such developments can go relatively fast. For example, a car no longer has the same status for young people today as it did for us back then. Of course the young people are into consumption, because each of us wants to consume and own, but not to the extent that we have.
LANGBEIN: We find it difficult to find interns who can drive a car, because that simply does not matter to these people. But I wanted to add something else: there is also the power of examples and pictures.
When I listened to you, it occurred to me that I was in Uganda in the first Fairtrade Gold Mine in Africa. You have seen her. And I did not know the extent of that before, but there 100 millions of people are working with their hands to dig our resources out of the ground. I had a completely different picture. 100 million people. And there you can see what incredible massive changes there are for the people who now work in this Fairtrade gold mine, in a cooperative, co-operative organized.
The security standards are still a bit antiquated, but there are no more dead, but there is a reasonable work. They can do without mercury and get 95 percent instead of 30 percent of the world market price for their gold. These initiatives suddenly make life possible. So we should spread such pictures, because they show every person who actually wants to destroy anything with the products he buys, that it is not necessary that he destroys something with it. Such pictures have power.
OPTION: Of course, that's a lot. But when we talk about pictures and stories, you inevitably have to observe our media landscape as well. And since it does not look as if this content would be strongly conveyed.
KIRNER: Media criticism is currently in vogue, and that's why I find it really hard to push into this horn. I think it's just important for the press to do their job. However, I have a problem with constantly seeking to attract attention and looking for something that excites people to read it. Take, for example, the political situation in Austria alone. We live in an extremely stable country that has, over the last few decades, had policy makers doing a good job, you just have to say that. Of course, there are things that did not go well, but the bottom line is that we came out of the economic crisis very well. We live in a country where nobody has to starve to death and basically everyone has health care. So we are actually in a good situation.
And yet, the scandal is constantly being sought. Of course you have to uncover things as well. For example, if there is a problem with the hospital, you have to point that out. But it's a problem that you are always focused on it.
LANGBEIN: The tendency of the media to hysteria for a short-term success is of course problematic. And we should all work against it and try to keep our colleagues from moving forward in this dynamic. There is not a media world, but there are very different media worlds. And there is also the media world of sustainable questioning and viewing and images of the future drawing and discussion stimulating, and that needs to be strengthened. Of course, politics can do that with their subsidies and advertisements, which they are currently doing.
OPTION: Let's go back to mass consumption. In my view, one needs a change in values.
LANGBEIN: In any case.
OPTION: That's why I came to the topic of media. In my opinion, most of our ideals are completely wrongly focused. For many, the ideal in our society is someone who is rich, someone who is popular, a pop star, an actor.
LANGBEIN: But why do people now choose the right-wing populist or even far-right way? Because they are afraid and because they feel like losers. They notice that they are being hung up. You notice that only a very small part, and in the per thousand range, can rise to these realms.
Most are among the losers of this development. On the other hand, there is the movement of people who are moving towards contentment, life satisfaction, wanting a different life, a different economy.
I sincerely hope that in this contest, the loser and the winner of a new life can ultimately gain more power from the good images of another, better life. At the moment it is not so, I agree with you.
KIRNER:
I mean, just that the term do-gooder has become a dirty word, is actually completely perverted. I remember, I grew up in a time when these idealists were the heroes, Gandhi and as they were called. These were the people you wanted to emulate. But then in the nineties, the Wall Street bankers have become general role models.
LANGBEIN: But that's starting to break.
KIRNER: Yes, that is not God-given.
LANGBEIN: But it's just an indifferent rage now. This anger can be directed, and that is happening now in the direction of right-wing populism.
OPTION: But in the wrong direction.
LANGBEIN: Of course, in the wrong direction. But it is not God-given that it has to stay that way.
KIRNER: I'm a bit more optimistic about that now. For example, when I look at the United States, people simply have had such anger because they feel nobody cares about them. Then you choose someone who at least pretends to speak for them and change something for them. If you look at these so-called fly-over states, how much misery has arisen there in the last decades, jobs have been lost en masse, of course, people are looking for the big deal someday, and that has now been chosen.
The question is, and that will also be the crux of Europe in general: are we able to address these people again?
I also meant that with the elite that one should not give the impression that this is a program only for the educated upper class. That's a topic that should move everyone. If I buy a product here, for example a banana, then I do not want the worker on the other side of the world living in terrible conditions. Because I do not want that either.
Someone who works in a factory also wants to be respected and get a decent wage. And with that you can reach people already. And I think Fairtrade is doing just fine. And others can do that too, including regionalism. This collaborative economy can be something that people can use to address.
OPTION: I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, I am already in a critical position during the whole conversation.
KIRNER: That's your job too.
OPTION: Basically, I am also an optimist. But does not it still need appropriate, up-to-date rules, for example with regard to ecology, regarding the transport of products from, for example, China to Europe? For example, an eco-tax on all products that travel longer than 300 kilometers.
LANGBEIN: With taxes is controlled and with taxes must be controlled. It is only completely wrongly controlled at the moment. The overburdening of labor income accelerates the process that less and less labor will be needed. The fact that transport is publicly subsidized in one form means that we almost only have products with us that are produced on the other side of the world, because they are produced there a little cheaper.
But if you look at the ecological consequences of this insanity with method, the bill is not right. We need other bills. We have to demand reasonable policies because we urgently need them.
KIRNER: We come from an era in which the products had to become cheaper, so that people could afford them and so prosperity could be increased. But we are now really on a threshold, where that does not work anymore.
If the products get cheaper, we will not be able to create more wealth for a large number of people. We can do it if we consume reasonable and if we also develop the jobs regionally here in Europe and the USA and also in China.
LANGBEIN: Sustainable consumption is not a buzzword, but a requirement of the hour.
KIRNER: Yes. This is something that can really be an absolute engine for job growth. And this change in thinking that, for example, taxes energy and relieves labor.
If we look at ourselves alone, that we pay 50 percent taxes, the employer again 30 percent, that is an enormous tax burden, which is in reality on the worker. Energy, on the other hand, is taxed relatively low. Also Automation, machine worker.
I'm not saying that there is a simple solution to that. But if we do not do that soon, this momentum will intensify, and eventually there will not be enough labor taxes. Then we need another solution.
LANGBEIN: And to come back to my momentary passion, the examples in the films show that when people take the destiny that moves them and the forms of life they move into, there are creative possibilities to an extent, as we usually do not think possible.
1,5 can provide millions of people with regional, fresh organic food. You can defy a global corporation like Unilever and say: No, we will not let our factory relocate to the East, but we will occupy it for three years, until the corporation gives in.
If this happens on the doorstep, each of us would say that never works. And behold, it went. It simply shows that it all depends on us all to take matters into our own hands. We live in a democracy, and in a democracy politics can be influenced by people. Let's start with it.
OPTION: But is not it perhaps the difference that these actions and initiatives work when directly affected?
LANGBEIN: Yes, but we are all directly affected.
OPTION: Yes, but that is far away from us. If I am an Austrian farmer, I am more inclined to take an initiative than if I am a consumer who is now buying organic products.
LANGBEIN: But just movements like the organic movement and Fairtrade show that it is possible, the moment in which it becomes clear what I influence with my purchasing decisions. And that's what it's about, you have to make those connections. In a society based on division of labor, one can no longer always produce the pictures directly, which is of course the preferred way. It makes sense, of course, if the consumer knows the farmer who makes his vegetables, but that will not always work. And that you know every miner in Katanga, who supplies the cobalt for the batteries in our cell phones, that will not work either. But it can be conveyed by giving organizations such as Fairtrade and the like, who take over this placement and information function.
OPTION: A great example is Hansalim in South Korea. Is this something that is missing in Europe?
KIRNER: Maybe not to the same extent as Hansalim, but the Swiss traders are still co-operative structured. So that is very well, although not this direct connection to the extent as in South Korea exists. It matters, even in Switzerland, but not to the extent that I can see it, as in South Korea.
LANGBEIN: I firmly believe that this is a very important point.
OPTION: Is this a gap in the market?
LANGBEIN: Yes.
And I'm optimistic. At least in Germany, discussions are already underway among these food coops and solidarity-based agricultural initiatives, right up to the slow food movement, which all share this concern in some way, only they are very isolated, resulting in a larger joint organization.
Because then, of course, the power of this movement is quite different, as if they each work individually for themselves. So, individualism has gone a bit too far and the cooperative should be there. I hope that there is this movement.
OPTION: Hansalim is not a wholesaler but also a marketer? Do you also have shops?
LANGBEIN:
Hansalim is a cooperative between several 10.000 small farmers who are members of the cooperative, and 1,5 millions of consumers who are members of this cooperative, and a small, lean logistics in between, which manages it with only 30 percent of the effort, including refining the food tofu production, and so forth, to produce 2000 agricultural products and to provide the city dwellers with exclusively regional, exclusively fresh food, and almost exclusively organic.
And on the one hand the small farmers have an economic perspective, because instead of 20 to 25 percent of the consumer price, they suddenly get 70 percent. This can also survive a peasant farmer, and there can be from the peasant profession and a normal profession, in which one can afford free time. That is the important key, the survival of peasant structures, the fact that the peasants become a profession as others, as regards the possibilities to live. On the other hand, you can not go to a supermarket chain in the cities, as we unfortunately do, and buy organic fruit from Chile at Denn's.
OPTION: How does that look from the consumer side? Are they members?
LANGBEIN: Yes. Only the members can get their goods there.
OPTION: But there are no supermarkets?
LANGBEIN: These are 220 stores, with a few coming each year. Every year 60.000 new members join, because that is very attractive. If you are a member there, you can refer to the prices offered there, the products, otherwise not. And the prices are discussed and defined each year between consumers and producers, so farmers know that they get their fixed price for their mandarins or their grains or soybeans year round, regardless of world market fluctuations or other fluctuations.
OPTION: Here we are back at the value presentation. After all, most start a business in order to earn, not just to live.
LANGBEIN: I would deny that in the case. Cooperative Hansalim was founded before 30 years ago as a very small initiative like any cooperative we may have today and has grown so within 30 years because it provides the farmers with a good, stable income. This is in contrast to the misery of our peasants, apart from the big farmers. It also gives consumers in the cities regional, fresh produce. This is a business model that goes much further than the mere increase in money. But I think so, and we have sufficiently discussed that more and more people are actually looking for other forms of economic activity and their own realization, which go beyond pure money-making or the increase of money as an end in itself.
KIRNER: Of course, this could also be an option for existing traders to move in that direction. Because internet trading is something that, I believe, this sector is very much trembling for, because this is the next step forward in this anonymisation. And regional products, or products where you know where they come from, and where you have the working conditions behind them under control, is something that regional traders can well distinguish from a large, anonymous consignor. For cooperative structures, the question is whether this will still be rapid in size today in Austria. The point is: that's a very young cooperative. Of course, when cooperatives are created, there is always a lot of momentum behind them. I always remember the example of Nicaragua. There you drive from the next town two hours by jeep. But the people there do not have a Jeep, which means they travel a long way to market their goods.
If a cooperative collects a truck and collects the goods from the farmers, it is a huge step forward for them. A farmer in Nicaragua gets no credit. That is, they can only grant each other credit. This is how the cooperative system came into being in Europe.
LANGBEIN: Yes. And many Fairtrade projects are organized cooperatively.
KIRNER: We are trying to do this in cooperation with the existing retail chains. And we try to make progress in existing structures. This means that cooperative structures are being developed among the farmers, who can then deliver as directly as possible to dealers in Europe. Sometimes you need middlemen because, for example, they handle customs clearance. But the bottom line is that the value chains should become more transparent and shorter, and the payment flows of who gets what should also become more transparent. And that is something that we currently see as a really big development in supply chains. This blockchain technology can also play a role in that delivery flows can be easily traced. Well, there are things going on that have the potential to change a lot in the next ten or 20 years. So that means I'm completely optimistic that it can succeed.
OPTION: Finally, what would be the top priority? What has to happen? What would be the most important thing, the biggest lever? We already mentioned that the consumer should consume accordingly, that's clear. Does it need a pressure on politics?
LANGBEIN: We are now approaching the first questions again, but they have already been answered. I would repeat myself now.
OPTION: I need a final word.
LANGBEIN: It needs both. And there is not the lever, but there are many levers. This is also a realization from my work on the film that there are simply different approaches and different levers and that it is all about us all because we have realized that the world will not work if we continue like that As in the past, businesses are taking one of these levers, be it cooperative movements, or ensuring that we eat regionally and freshly again, rather than following the destructive pathways of the food and agricultural industries. We have to take matters into our own hands with a sense of civil courage that we can not afford anything, and certainly not from this policy. I also wish this policy a very short life. On the other hand, we need to support initiatives such as Fairtrade or similar, which seek to create meaningful transparency in the complex supply chain of the world market and to ensure fairer conditions at the beginning of this chain. The point is to make us aware that we have our future in our hands and that we can only change them if we take what we have in our hands into our own hands.
KIRNER: What it needs now is the understanding that the world has actually got better and better in the last decades. It is not a desperate place. It is getting better and better for many people, prosperity is rising, we live longer, we live healthier than ever before. And we can do what we've said here, that we really need a new system if we want to survive the waves of technologization that are about to get through to us, politically. We need new ways to move forward.
With the recipes of the last century are not the problems of the 21. Century be solved. We really need to take a very concrete look at how we tackle the issues and how we can make life worth living for our children and grandchildren. And there is a need for new ways and also the responsibility of individuals to consume so that they do not overuse the earth, and not burden themselves with things that nobody needs anyway, but to consume reasonably, to consume healthy food. And that simply solves many problems.
Thank you for reading!
Photo / Video: Melzer / Option.
