Cross-posted from Legal Planet.
Obesity is an environmental issue because the food system (from farm to table) uses a lot of energy and produces significant water pollution. More food equals a bigger environmental footprint. Sweetened soft drinks are a good example: they use corn sweetener, and corn production has a large footprint because so much fertilizer is required. There is a growing epidemic of obesity and of childhood obesity in particular.
The New Scientist has a very thoughtful review of the evidence regarding the connection between sweetened soft drinks and obesity. The evidence is mixed, but favors the existence of a link — especially if you exclude studies financed by the food industry or by researchers with other close ties to the industry. So there’s some reason to think that New York’s recent ban on supersized soft drinks may reduce obesity. That would be good for the environment, and good for the health of the individuals involved. However, it’s not a slam dunk in terms of proof of causation.
What about personal liberty? It’s at least irksome for the government to tell us what size drink we can order, though I find it hard to believe that it strikes at the heart of personal freedom. (I guess that’s part of why I’m not a libertarian.) On the other hand, as New York’s mayor has pointed out, you can still drink just as much soda if you’re willing to order two drinks instead of one. And many of the consumers are probably minors whose liberty is more constrained, though one might argue that the government would do better to try to educate parents. Of course maybe this drink regulation is just the first step on a slippery slope, and eventually the government will force us all onto a diet of unseasoned tofu! Another reason I’m not a libertarian is that I think it’s a bit premature to worry about this possible slippery slope. ( As long as we’re making a list, a third reason is that, unlike a certain vice presidential candidate, I outgrew Ayn Rand’s pop version of Nietzsche in high school.)
Overall, New York’s effort strikes me as a useful experiment which could shed light on the causal link between sugary drinks and obesity. It would be nice, however, if some other jurisdiction would try an alternative instrument such as a tax on sugary soft drinks or some other market mechanisms, for comparison purposes.
Showing 2,817 results
Daniel Farber | September 19, 2012
Cross-posted from Legal Planet. Obesity is an environmental issue because the food system (from farm to table) uses a lot of energy and produces significant water pollution. More food equals a bigger environmental footprint. Sweetened soft drinks are a good example: they use corn sweetener, and corn production has a large footprint because so much […]
Rebecca Bratspies | September 18, 2012
a(broad) perspective Today’s post is the last in a series on a recent CPR white paper, Reclaiming Global Environmental Leadership: Why the United States Should Ratify Ten Pending Environmental Treaties. Each month, this series will discuss one of these treaties. Previous posts are here. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and […]
Robert Verchick | September 17, 2012
I had been wondering what ordinary people in India think about climate change. So last week on my ride home from the office, I asked my auto-rickshaw driver. He was a talkative guy, bearded, with black spectacles and a navy blue turban. He had been keen on identifying for me the many troubles a man […]
Ben Somberg | September 15, 2012
The Administration has just missed another deadline on issuing the final revised “boiler MACT” rule. The revised version of the rule will provide less pollution reduction than the original version, but is still expected to prevent thousands of deaths each year. The EPA had pledged for many months that the rule would be finalized in April. It […]
Yee Huang | September 14, 2012
Agricultural producers in the United States receive billions of dollars in federal subsidies, crop insurance, conservation payments, and other grants. Defying fundamental principles of transparency and openness in a democracy, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is authorized to keep secret much of the basic information that farmers provide to qualify for this public funding. […]
Rena Steinzor | September 14, 2012
If cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is really part of the furniture, you wouldn’t think recently departed OIRA Administrator Cass Sunstein would need to dedicate a column to convincing us it’s so. But there it is, and though Sunstein is now but a private citizen like the rest of us, the claims merit a response. We’re told […]
Emily Hammond | September 13, 2012
The proposed Independent Agency Regulatory Analysis Act, S. 3468, is a troubling idea. As Rena Steinzor explained here when the bill was introduced, it would authorize the President to bring independent agencies under the purview of OIRA. This proposal is worrisome given the persistent flaws inherent in OIRA’s cost-benefit approach; extending the reach of a […]
Ben Somberg | September 12, 2012
Former President Bill Clinton, campaigning for President Obama in Florida on Tuesday, the 9/11 anniversary, offered a passionate defense of government employees, the AP noted. I was curious about the whole quote, so I watched and wrote it out (via C-SPAN, at 34:55): On this day, of all days, we should know that there are […]
Mary Jane Angelo | September 7, 2012
a(broad) perspective Today’s post is the seventh in a series on a recent CPR white paper, Reclaiming Global Environmental Leadership: Why the United States Should Ratify Ten Pending Environmental Treaties. Each month, this series will discuss one of these treaties. Previous posts are here. Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) are toxic substances that remain in the […]