If you want to live healthily, you have to dig deep into your pockets. At the latest since the (among other things) inflation-related price increase of our food, the difference between organic and non-organic is becoming more and more conspicuous. In January 2023, a report by the price watchdog thus suspected retailers of skimming off excessive margins. So instead of paying farmers more, the majority would go into the coffers of Coop, Migros & Co. Depending on the product, this is up to 50% that organically produced fruits and vegetables cost us more.
Little transparency in pricing
How sensitive the issue is is proven by the fact that Migros initially wanted to prevent the publication of the report by price supervisor Stefan Meierhans. Shortly before Christmas, Migros prevented the publication of a report by price supervisor Stefan Meierhans on excessive organic prices at the two large distributors Migros and Coop. The report concludes that of the high price difference between standard and label / organic meat products, only a fraction ends up with the farmer, while the rest flows into the pockets of the final seller. The opposite is also the case: prices are pushed down, but consumers do not pay the same amount less in the shop. An example of this is the price collapse of pork: from June 2021 to October 2022, farmers received 33% less for their animals, but the prices in the shop only fell by about 12%.
Buy directly from the farmer
The fact is: if you buy directly from the producer, you get more quality for less money. There are many farm shops where you can get regional and seasonal produce. With some farmers, you can even harvest the vegetables yourself, so that, thanks to the freshness, as many nutrients as possible are preserved. This is the case, for example, with Marianne and Jakob Bürgi on their organic farm in 8834 Schindellegi.
The most important thing first: generosity brings happiness. And not just generosity with oneself, by giving oneself gifts and living large. Rather, it's the small gestures and gifts to others that fill us with lasting happiness. Studies have even concluded that money only increases psychological well-being when it is spent on donations or gifts.
Double happiness lasts longer
A sorrow shared is a sorrow halved. But shared happiness brings joy to two people who are close to each other. It is clear that gift giving strengthens existing relationships and builds new ones. It is important that the gift really fits the preferences and wishes. Over a personal gift, which was selected carefully, one is pleased more than over a thoughtless fast purchase. This can be something homemade, a joint excursion or a specialty that is only available in selected stores.
The right gift for every age
The requirements for gifts seem endless. Regional and seasonal, preferably from the farmer next door, produced in an environmentally and people-friendly way, with a certificate and seal of approval, not packaged in plastic, the price must be right, etc., etc. The list of criteria can be extended at will.
Age also plays an important role: What should I give to a child who already has everything? What does my partner want? Doesn't my mother already have enough pans? But first things first:
Generation Z prefers to get its gift ideas on Tiktok and Instagram. Experiences are high on the list. They'd rather have a ski weekend together than a saucepan that's gathering dust in the cupboard and that they could buy themselves if necessary.
For your own parents, carefully selected gifts are more important. A good bottle of red wine, cuddly socks, family games or a beautifully framed photo occupy the first places on the bestseller list.
And now the crux: What should I give a child who already has everything? A child who has the world at his or her feet - 365 days a year. Whether there are 30 instead of 12 presents under the Christmas tree doesn't really seem to increase the barely existing joy. And every year one wonders again why one should invest time and money in the gift search at all, if in the best case a thank-you comes back. For such hard cases there are the following options: a we-do-what-YOU-want day, exclusive time for two, a good book, a movie voucher, an action cam, a magazine subscription or something that encourages creativity (e.g. window painting pencils, music class) or gets the child moving (e.g. bike, ice skates, skateboard, balls).
Shared experiences, whether hiking, eating at a spa or traveling, are always a good gift.
Gift baskets, experience days and regional specialties
If you still don't know what to give, you can find regional specialties in the store of Mucca.ch (click here). Whether alpine cheese, cereals, cosmetic products or organic beeswax cloths: the sustainably produced specialties from the homeland are a very special gift and they are delivered directly from the producer to the doorstep - without long detours, intermediate storage or high margins.
Of course, experiences are not to be missed: For example, there are vouchers for vacations in a Bernese alpine hut, a tree sponsorship or experience days in the schnapps distillery, on the Heiterhof or in the smokehouse with Claudia.
Who has the choice, has the agony. With this in mind: Merry Christmas!
Animal welfare or their own wallets - which is more important to the Swiss electorate? With their initiative, "Sentience Politics" with Green National Councilor Meret Schneider wants to reduce the consumption of animal products and introduce import regulations. All this in favor of animals and nature. But what does this mean for consumers and farmers? Mucca.ch provides an overview of the most important arguments and possible consequences of the Factory Farming Initiative (MTI).
Demands of the factory farming initiative
- Animal-friendly housing with more space, species-appropriate feeding, opportunities for play
- Daily access to pasture and slower growing breeds
- Gentle slaughtering methods with short transport routes and better control of anaesthesia
- Maximum group sizes and fewer animals per hectare of pasture
- Import regulations so that only animal products that meet all standards enter Switzerland
A change in agriculture explains Meret Schneider in an interview about the goal of the initiative. Grazing animals such as cattle, cows, sheep and goats are better suited to the topography of Switzerland, where grassland accounts for around two-thirds of agricultural land. At the same time, however, cattle numbers are to be reduced to the standards required by Bio-Suisse, although opponents say that Swiss animal welfare laws are already "among the strictest in the world".
Today, farmers who keep their animals according to the RAUS guidelines (regular outdoor exercise) receive an annual subsidy if, for example, they let their animals out to pasture for at least 26 days per month in summer. Currently, a maximum of 18,000 laying hens per farm is permitted in Switzerland, with 4,000 for organic farmers. In nearby countries, the numbers are correspondingly higher: in Germany, farms with over 100,000 laying hens are not uncommon, in some cases there are up to 600,000.
The agriculture of the future
Swiss agriculture is changing rapidly: while in 2000 there were still around 70,000 family farms providing our food, by 2020 there were only 50,000 - a decline of 30%. Expand, work more economically, produce cost-covering: In recent years, falling producer prices have forced many farmers to produce more cheaply and buy additional land. To what extent this was good for the environment remains to be seen. The MTI is now demanding more space for fewer animals, which is likely to accelerate the decline of farms and the associated jobs. Direct payments are already vital for the survival of some farmers. For Meret Schneider, the decreasing meat supply is a step in the right direction to reduce the consumption of animal products for climate and resource reasons.
A tightrope walk
It is not clear whether and to what extent Swiss citizens will give up their meat in the future. Surveys assume that if the initiative is adopted, the self-sufficiency rate for chicken would drop from 58% today to 5% and for pork from 92% to 50% - unless consumption drops drastically at the same time. The difficulty, then, is to produce Swiss meat according to organic guidelines, while consumers also take a leaf out of their book and want to eat less meat, pay more for quality and avoid food waste.
Rethinking must take place
The fact is that meat consumption per capita in Switzerland actually increased in 2021. And it is no secret that higher prices lead to more shopping tourism. The initiative demands the same standards for foreign animal products. Only products that meet Swiss standards may be imported. For example, Brazilian chicken or genetically modified Argentine beef should be banned. However, it is not clear how these imported goods will be controlled. For example, it is not defined whether the individual ingredients of processed products must also comply with the MTI standards. The initiators speak of a "pragmatic approach" because it would be too time-consuming to check the ingredients of a finished product for compliance with Swiss standards, i.e. whether, for example, eggs from caged farms are in it. In addition, the new requirements would probably violate some international obligations.
Financial impact
The additional costs of the MTI must be covered by the federal government and the market - and thus by us consumers. Meret Schneider assumes that the required barn conversions and reduction of livestock will cost around CHF 400 million. Furthermore, the cattle farms, which currently receive about CHF 5,000 p.a. for complying with the animal welfare standards (RAUS), would probably have to do without this subsidy. Schneider hopes that this loss will be compensated by higher prices. At the same time, the price pressure caused by cheap imported food should disappear.
What the initiators are calling for is understandable and protects the environment and climate. But the question is and remains whether the timing is right and whether we are not doing more harm than good to Swiss agriculture and our food security. The farmers would be helped most by a change of system if they could once again focus on quality instead of quantity and if this would also be financially worthwhile. Because with the currently very low producer prices, we are doing neither our health nor the environment any good.
What would our Alps be without the countless hiking possibilities and cows that graze all around? The picture of the original brown cattle with two horns and mountains in the background could not be more Swiss. However, it is a fact that currently only 10% of all cows carry horns. To stop this development, a group around the mountain farmer Armin Capaul wants to create financial incentives to keep cows and goats with horns. Opinions on the federal popular initiative “For the Dignity of Farm Animals” are divided.
Overview of arguments
The development towards hornless cows has been accelerated by the construction of free-range barns since the end of the 1970s. Free-range barns are more animal-friendly because the cows have more space to run and no longer have to be permanently tied up. Since free-range animals with horns can pose a safety risk, they are usually dehorned.
Safety is also a main argument of the opponents of the initiative. Not only the cows in the barn, but also the farmers and hikers can be fatally injured. Furthermore, no study has so far proven a negative influence of dehorning on the well-being of the animals.
The supporters of the initiative disagree. For them a cow loses not only its dignity with dehorning: As an organ with a strong blood supply, the horn is also connected to the digestive system and serves as a means of communication between the animals. Dr. med. vet. Wilhelm Höfer even writes that the quality of the milk is impaired (more information in german on zalp.ch). In order to ensure that more horned cows graze on Swiss meadows in the future, their owners will receive financial support. Horned animals in free-range barns are basically possible, but take up much more space. As compensation, the initiators originally proposed one franc per cow and day or 20 centimes per goat and day. That is around 30 million francs a year, to be financed by redistributing the direct payments. The initiative text leaves the amount open. It is also unclear how to deal with livestock farmers whose horned cows spend most of their lives in their tethered barn.
The consumer decides
Today, cows are kept more animal-friendly in free-range barns. For reasons of safety and efficiency, however, they usually have to pay for this new freedom with their horns. The extent to which the cow suffers during dehorning and the effects it has on milk have not (yet) been scientifically proven. As long as producers have to struggle with the milk price, which does not cover costs, the structural change in agriculture towards ever larger farms cannot be stopped. Then not only horned cows will become rare on our hiking trails, but also small farms, which until now have barely been able to keep their heads above water.
Wir verwenden Cookies, um unsere Website und unseren Service zu optimieren.
Funktional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Vorlieben
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
