I got worried when I saw the UC Berkeley link. But turns out it is not about research—it’s an opinion piece on the “Ugly Food MOVEMENT” (God...). Which is fronted by, yeah, you guessed it, some scrappy startups who are asserting that there is a market failure[1] and that they can amend it. Then there is a link to some concrete numbers which links to a Hill article. Which is a puff piece for one of these startups—the cause of the food waste is just asserted in the first paragraph.[2]

Then there’s the crucial farmer link. Which is just some loose “farmers we’ve talked to, like X” (one step above “people are saying”) and a link to a human interest or whatever you call those uninteresting subject-driven The New Yorker articles.

I don’t know how people are in the USA (spoiler alert), but where I am from food is the everyday grocery product that people are most stingy about.[3] Lower prices are always good. So it seems bewildering that the consumer would send such signals to the Market—surely this would cause higher prices for the consumer? Not only that but here (like in America) there are farmer subsidies. Payed for by tax payers which are also consumers.

(And Americans care about food æstehetics that much? Well let’s look to the article again: “Psychologists argued that the lack of public interest in ugly food was connected to self-esteem.” What the fuck? Seriously?)

Not to mention inflation which makes such everyday products more expensive. Which everyone who cares about Economics on this site seems to be tearing their hair out over on a weekly basis.

The article talks about how these noble startups are enabling ugly produce to be sold to smoothie retailers or whatever. Or juice factories... like the Market is so catastrophically mismanaged that you need a hipster startup for that? To connect that an orange shaped like Steve Buscemi doesn’t taste bad as juice?

I am not being negative about the article by the way. Just the Movement. The article raises the question several times about whether this is really A Thing or if it is an astroturf, someone trying to make a buck on real climate change and environmental issues. Just look at penultimate paragraph.

> The ugly produce movement exemplifies the twenty-first century consumer’s reliance on social media to navigate lifestyle changes. Food waste isn’t a simple problem; it’s an example of the broken agricultural system’s inability to distribute resources in a way that benefits all consumers. If individuals really want to be part of the solution, they have to look beyond the glitzy marketing of ‘socially responsible’ firms and become more vigilant of companies that claim to have an answer for everything.

Would you look at that.

A somewhat funny part is where they describe how the customers of these things are higher-income because it is more expensive. So the Market is so screwed up that “ugly food” isn’t something that the poor buy out of practical necessity? It’s been relegated to social indulgences-buying upper-middle class uh, people?

All in all this damning evidence that you have presented here demonstrates to me that The Ugly Food Movement is a silly, boutique food practice that some I Want To Make a New Consumer Need marketing firm cooked up, some startups made A Thing, and that upper-middle class water cooler NPCs are probably now doing the good work of spreading the word about.

[1] Because if this was about consumer choice, according to these startups, what difference would a new kind of company make?

[2] “One innovative company called [Redacted], based in [Hipsterville, USA]”

[3] Just imagine if people were given the chance to buy almost-expired or some other such ugly food... and of course they are and people love it. Why the heck do you need a startup for that?