Summary
This work, attributed to Jackson (2024), appears to offer a critical analysis of the economic model underpinning large-scale industrial food production, arguing that its apparent cost advantages constitute a 'false economy' when broader externalities are accounted for. The title suggests the paper interrogates how subsidies, regulatory gaps, and the non-pricing of environmental and health damages allow 'Big Food' to present itself as economically efficient whilst displacing costs onto public systems, ecosystems, and future generations. Without a confirmed journal, DOI, or abstract, the specific empirical basis and methodological rigour of the work cannot be verified.
UK applicability
The arguments around externalised costs, food system subsidies, and public health burdens are highly relevant to UK policy debates, particularly in the context of post-Brexit agricultural transition, the National Food Strategy, and ongoing discussions about true cost accounting in food and farming.
Key measures
Externalised costs of industrial food production; market price distortions; public health costs; environmental costs
Outcomes reported
The work likely examines the hidden or externalised costs of industrial food systems, including environmental, health, and social costs not reflected in market prices. It may argue that apparent economic efficiencies of large-scale food production are offset by broader societal harms.
Topic tags
Dig deeper with Pulse AI.
Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.