The everyday foods that could become luxuries - Some bugs are more luxurious than others

  • 🔧 Issue with uploading attachments resolved.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Everyday foods such as coffee, meat and spices could become luxury items due to global climate impacts and changing tastes.

As we head towards the end of another extraordinary year, BBC Future is taking a look back at some of our favourite stories for our "Best of 2021" collection. Discover more of our picks here.

Ordering lobster in a restaurant or serving it at a party is considered the height of gastronomic sophistication.

But that hasn't always been the case – lobster has worked its way up from humble beginnings to become a gourmet delicacy.

In the 18th Century, lobster was considered a highly undesirable food that wealthy families steered clear of. The crustacean was so abundant along the east coast of the US that it was used as fertiliser and served in prisons. Kentucky politician John Rowan quipped: "Lobster shells about a house are looked upon as signs of poverty and degradation."

It was the development of railways in the US, which transformed lobster into a luxury. Train operators decided to serve lobster to their wealthy passengers, who were unaware of the seafood's poor reputation. They quickly got a taste for lobster and brought it back to the cities, where it appeared on the menus of expensive restaurants. By the end of the 19th Century, lobster had cemented its status as a luxury food.

What determines which foods are luxury items? Scarcity and price both play an important role.

You might also like:
Like lobsters, oysters have long been associated with fine dining and special occasions, largely due to their high price. But they haven't always enjoyed this status. Oysters used to be eaten by the poorest in society in the 19th Century. "They were so plentiful and cheap they were added to stews and pies to bulk them out," says food historian Polly Russell.

By the early 20th Century, oyster supplies in England started to dwindle due to overfishing and pollution from industrial waste. As they became more scarce, their status rose and they were seen as something special, says Russell.

We see the opposite with products such as sugar and salmon, which used to be difficult to come by and only available to the wealthy. These foods lost their "aura of luxury" over time as people started farming them and, as a result, they became less scarce, says Richard Wilk, emeritus professor of anthropology at Indiana University.

Many fruits and vegetables used to be much scarcer than they are today. Certain fruits such as strawberries and raspberries used to only be available in the summer, but now we can buy them all year round. "That changes the perception of luxury," says Peter Alexander, a senior researcher in global agriculture and food security at the University of Edinburgh.

Our obsession with sourcing scarce, luxury foods comes at a high price for the planet. As a particular species of fish or seafood becomes more scarce, the price goes up. The increased value gives people an incentive to fish even harder and catch the remaining ones, which can lead to an extinction spiral, says Wilk.

When and where we eat certain foods also determines how much we value them. "Eating context is really important for creating desire," says Esther Papies, a professor of social psychology at the University of Glasgow, noting that luxury foods are often associated with special occasions, such as eating in restaurants or holidays.

Studies show that being in an environment associated with expensive food can increase the attractiveness of food or drink typically consumed there and people's willingness to pay more. A recent study found that people's desire for sushi increased if they ate it in a sushi restaurant, rather than on the beach.

Positive, warm memories of sharing a meal with others also increases how much people value certain foods, says Papies. Often luxury foods are shared with friends and family, for example at Christmas.

During Covid-19 lockdowns, experiencing food with other people became a luxury in itself, notes Russell. "People were craving to cook together and eat in a social way," she says. "In a world where resources are short and food availability is precarious, the experience of eating food together could become a luxury."

The next luxury foods

While historically certain foods such as coffee, chocolate and spices were luxury items, today these foods are supermarket staples in many developed countries. However, rising temperatures and unreliable rainfall could turn this around again over the next few decades.

At the height of Mayan civilisation, cacao beans were a valued currency, used to pay workers and traded in exchange for goods in the marketplace. Spanish merchants brought cocoa to Europe, where it became a popular indulgence in royal courts. In 1828, Dutch chemist Coenraad Johannes van Houten invented a process to treat cacao beans with alkaline salts and produce powdered chocolate that could be mixed with water. This process transformed chocolate into an affordable product that could be mass produced.

Coffee was once a little-known delicacy used for religious rituals in Ethiopia, before Western traders took the aromatic drink back to their home countries in the 17th Century and served it in coffee houses, popular among shippers, brokers and artists. After the Dutch secured seedlings, coffee cultivation quickly expanded worldwide and became a popular, everyday drink.

Today, chocolate and coffee are, once again, at risk of becoming expensive and inaccessible.

"Chocolate and coffee could both become scarce, luxury foods again because of climate change," says Monika Zurek, a senior researcher at the Environmental Change Institute at the University of Oxford.

Vast swathes of land in Ghana and Ivory Coast could become unsuitable for cocoa production if global temperature rises reach 2C, according to a 2013 study. "Cocoa used to be for kings and nobody else. Climate change is hitting production areas hard...it could become more luxurious again," says Zurek.

Climate change could wipe out half of the land used to grow coffee worldwide by 2050, according to a 2015 study. Another study suggests that areas suitable for growing coffee in Latin America could decrease by 88% by 2050 due to rising temperatures.

For thousands of years, spices were the epitome of wealth and power. Demand for aromatic spices sparked the first global trade routes, established vast empires and came to define the world economy. Today spices are ubiquitous and often the cheapest items on supermarket shelves. But they could revert to being luxury items, says Zurek.

Spice crops are already bearing the brunt of climate change. High rainfall and humidity provide fertile breeding grounds for pests like aphids and diseases like powdery mildew. In Kashmir, India's largest saffron-growing region, dry conditions have ravaged harvests of the lush purple crop.

Vanilla production on Madagascar has been hit by extreme weather in recent years. A cyclone devastated 30% of the island’s crop in 2017, sending prices to a record high of $600 (£434) per kilogram, briefly making the spice more expensive than silver.

"The danger of everyday products becoming luxury items is disheartening," says Monique Raats, director of the Food, Consumer Behaviour and Health Centre at the University of Surrey. "Many foods could become out of reach for a lot of people."

Moving away from meat

It's not just climate impacts and scarcity that could transform everyday foods into luxury items. People's changing behaviours and tastes will also impact the status of these foods.

"Another way to think about luxury food is as something that you shouldn't eat often and lots of," says Raats, citing meat as a prime example.

Meat, which is currently part of a regular meal for many people, is likely to become a luxury item in the next few decades as more people adopt a plant-based diet to reduce their carbon footprint, she says. People may also make the move because of the sheer volume of agricultural land taken up by meat production, which may no longer be viable as the world's population increases.

Eating meat could become socially unacceptable and viewed in a similar light to smoking, says Alexander. "It could get to a point where eating a burger is not a cool thing to do with your friends."

But getting to that point isn't straightforward, says Papies. "Eating meat is the norm – it becomes part of a national identity. Deviating from that is hard," she says, adding that many vegans and vegetarians struggle with the fact that they have to explain, or justify, why they don't eat meat.

Veganism, in particular, seems to stir up strong feelings, ranging from irritation to passionate anger (Read more from BBC Future about the hidden biases that drive anti-vegan hatred).

Providing more exposure to meat free options, in advertising and shops, could help tackle the identity struggle experienced by many vegans and vegetarians, says Papies. "It would help make it more equitable."

The true cost of our food

In a bid to lower their emissions, countries may also choose to tax meat in future as many have done with sugar, says Alexander. This would raise meat prices and make it more of a luxury product.

Farming animals is responsible for 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions and the production of red meat accounts for 41% of those emissions. Global beef production produces emissions roughly equal to those of India and requires 20 times more land per edible gram of protein than protein-rich crops, such as beans.

According to the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization, "there is a worrying disconnect between the retail price of food and the true cost of its production" in many countries.

"As a consequence, food produced at great environmental cost in the form of greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution, air pollution, and habitat destruction, can appear to be cheaper than more sustainably produced alternatives," the UN body wrote in a report on agricultural sustainability.

When we eat a steak, we are not paying for the environmental degradation caused by the meat industry, says Alexander. "We are not valuing those outcomes and paying for them when we consume meat.

A meat tax would reflect some of these harmful environmental impacts, but remains politically unpopular. "That could change," says Alexander, as more people view meat as "something we cannot afford to eat, in terms of sustainability."

"Hopefully in the near future, we will have more accurate pricing and agricultural subsidies that reflect the food we produce and help us create a more sustainable system," says Papies.
 
"Many foods could become out of reach for a lot of people."
Like, okay, but the follow-up question would be: is that unfair? We're not living in the Star Trek future where supplies are unlimited and we can replicate pangolin burgers. There are better vegetarian options now than ever before in human history. Hundreds of types of produce are available year-round and in huge variety. Nobody's going to starve because they don't have coffee or chocolate (except Amberlynn Reid).

Salmon is a really unsustainable seafood choice and it's fucking everywhere even while salmon runs on the West Coast are going extinct due to damming and overfishing and orcas that depend on them are starving. It would probably be for the best if developed countries stopped eating so much wild-caught salmon and ate more oysters, which are super easy to farm (drop a seeded line in the ocean, wait, profit) and benefit the ecosystems they are farmed in through filtration.
 
Meat will never become a luxury because only pretentious assholes and control freak politicians give a shit about how the steak you ate just caused 0.00000000000000001 degrees of global warming. Just like how no one cares that Funkopops are made from slave labor in China from highly polluting plastic and then shipped across the ocean on highly polluting cargo ships crewed mostly by poorly-paid Filipino workers. The only way it would become a luxury is if said control freak politicians decided to step in and tell us to eat the bugs instead.

I'm pretty sure the amount of rainforest and other land suitable for coffee cultivation simply shifts with climate change, according to their own models. It's just like how a bunch of land in Alaska and Siberia will be some really good farmland once the growing season gets longer and better soil can accumulate.
Salmon is a really unsustainable seafood choice and it's fucking everywhere even while salmon runs on the West Coast are going extinct due to damming and overfishing and orcas that depend on them are starving. It would probably be for the best if developed countries stopped eating so much wild-caught salmon and ate more oysters, which are super easy to farm (drop a seeded line in the ocean, wait, profit) and benefit the ecosystems they are farmed in through filtration.
That's the wild caught salmon, a lot of salmon is farmed nowadays and is a huge industry in places like Chile. Fish is actually a really fucked market long-term because of overfishing since aquaculture of some species is hard. Plus there's shit like how once a species is overfished, it sometimes NEVER comes back because other species replaced it in the food chain so it will be very rare.
 
Like, okay, but the follow-up question would be: is that unfair? We're not living in the Star Trek future where supplies are unlimited and we can replicate pangolin burgers. There are better vegetarian options now than ever before in human history. Hundreds of types of produce are available year-round and in huge variety. Nobody's going to starve because they don't have coffee or chocolate (except Amberlynn Reid).

Salmon is a really unsustainable seafood choice and it's fucking everywhere even while salmon runs on the West Coast are going extinct due to damming and overfishing and orcas that depend on them are starving. It would probably be for the best if developed countries stopped eating so much wild-caught salmon and ate more oysters, which are super easy to farm (drop a seeded line in the ocean, wait, profit) and benefit the ecosystems they are farmed in through filtration.
It probably isn't fair but I'd rather see the third world starve to death and every city in the world drown in salt water than change for these people.
 
I'm seriously getting 'sumptuary law' vibes from all of this (The plebs being told what to wear, what to eat, where to travel etc.)

Thankfully nobody I know buys into this shit
 
There is plenty of land to farm cocoa and coffee in Africa. that stuff is very important. you realy dont want european going back to the good old ways because of Coffee and chocolate cold turkey....
 

She looks like she could use some more meat and fewer processed carbohydrates in her diet


That's a man, baby


Broomstick-man here could also use some more meat in his diet


Pure Br*tish filth woman


Another malnourished-looking bint

Global vanilla production is worth less than 1 billion dollars a year, a commodity so cheap will only see an increase in production with price increases

Iran produces 76% of the world's saffron and about 300 tons is produced per year, another commodity far below production capacity

Global meat production is expected to increase about 75% from current levels by 2050. What scarce luxury again?

This is cope and seethe food edition
 
Last edited:

She looks like she could use some more meat and fewer processed carbohydrates in her diet

This is cope and seethe food edition
Why are obese women always in charge of health education? I swear, I've never seen anyone that looks even remotely healthy be the head of an organization like that.
 
"Have we mentioned lately that you can actually eat bugs?! WERE YOU LISTENING? I DON'T THINK YOU LISTENED BECUASE YOU STILL AREN'T EATING BUGS!"
 
Meat will never become a luxury because only pretentious assholes and control freak politicians give a shit about how the steak you ate just caused 0.00000000000000001 degrees of global warming.

Governments have a way of making you give a shit via laws and regulations. Cars are increasingly becoming an unaffordable luxury thanks to green regulations, and the shift to EV is going to accelerate the scarcity.

Just like how no one cares that Funkopops are made from slave labor in China from highly polluting plastic and then shipped across the ocean on highly polluting cargo ships crewed mostly by poorly-paid Filipino workers. The only way it would become a luxury is if said control freak politicians decided to step in and tell us to eat the bugs instead.

Yeah, that's what I'm worried about. You are increasingly seeing articles like this in the media that more or less gives us an advance warning of what the elites are thinking about. Remember, Time magazine announced the troon stuff was on its way in 2014 with its Laverne Cox issue. Seven and a half years later, publicly expressing doubt that a biological male should be able to swim competitively against actual women is a good way to get yourself fired and blacklisted from many white-collar professions.

In 2022, they're talking about meat becoming a thing of the past; I fully expect that by 2030, there will be land use regulations and other policies driving the price of beef to the moon and leaving us with only tofu and cricket paste as affordable protein options.
 
Could 6 millioning fatties help with avoiding that future?
Fatties are fine. They consume more than average, but they're fugly so long term their nonexistent offspring will balance it out.

The problem is people who depend on gibs to eat but don't stop breeding. I don't mind too much if you breed and breed and then fall into misfortune later, but people who already have a couple kids and are living beyond their means probably don't need to create more starving mouths in this world. (Not that childless people should, but at least they have the excuse of an unfulfilled biological drive)


She looks like she could use some more meat and fewer processed carbohydrates in her

f84706c4189627a1441f7c3fac5231e32cc92523.jpg
Archive
"The danger of everyday products becoming luxury items is disheartening," says Monique Raats, director of the Food, Consumer Behaviour and Health Centre at the University of Surrey. "Many foods could become out of reach for a lot of people."
"Another way to think about luxury food is as something that you shouldn't eat often and lots of," says Raats, citing meat as a prime example.

That's a man, baby
7c630fdc1ec29787021c42d823f75a6a546ba604.jpg
Archive
"Chocolate and coffee could both become scarce, luxury foods again because of climate change," says Monika Zurek, a senior researcher at the Environmental Change Institute at the University of Oxford.
"Cocoa used to be for kings and nobody else. Climate change is hitting production areas hard...it could become more luxurious again," says Zurek.
For thousands of years, spices were the epitome of wealth and power. Demand for aromatic spices sparked the first global trade routes, established vast empires and came to define the world economy. Today spices are ubiquitous and often the cheapest items on supermarket shelves. But they could revert to being luxury items, says Zurek.

Broomstick-man here could also use some more meat in his diet
25db452d5bf5d4167215ae7080efe564c692c881.jpg
Archive
Many fruits and vegetables used to be much scarcer than they are today. Certain fruits such as strawberries and raspberries used to only be available in the summer, but now we can buy them all year round. "That changes the perception of luxury," says Peter Alexander, a senior researcher in global agriculture and food security at the University of Edinburgh.
Eating meat could become socially unacceptable and viewed in a similar light to smoking, says Alexander. "It could get to a point where eating a burger is not a cool thing to do with your friends."
In a bid to lower their emissions, countries may also choose to tax meat in future as many have done with sugar, says Alexander. This would raise meat prices and make it more of a luxury product.
When we eat a steak, we are not paying for the environmental degradation caused by the meat industry, says Alexander. "We are not valuing those outcomes and paying for them when we consume meat.

A meat tax would reflect some of these harmful environmental impacts, but remains politically unpopular. "That could change," says Alexander, as more people view meat as "something we cannot afford to eat, in terms of sustainability."

Pure Br*tish filth woman
f41466b40812a85d45e1adb7897e4285c6b986d0.jpg
Archive
Like lobsters, oysters have long been associated with fine dining and special occasions, largely due to their high price. But they haven't always enjoyed this status. Oysters used to be eaten by the poorest in society in the 19th Century. "They were so plentiful and cheap they were added to stews and pies to bulk them out," says food historian Polly Russell.

By the early 20th Century, oyster supplies in England started to dwindle due to overfishing and pollution from industrial waste. As they became more scarce, their status rose and they were seen as something special, says Russell.
During Covid-19 lockdowns, experiencing food with other people became a luxury in itself, notes Russell. "People were craving to cook together and eat in a social way," she says. "In a world where resources are short and food availability is precarious, the experience of eating food together could become a luxury."

Another malnourished-looking bint
12f076ed1781d523153c236839c957f3f07af859.jpg
Archive
When and where we eat certain foods also determines how much we value them. "Eating context is really important for creating desire," says Esther Papies, a professor of social psychology at the University of Glasgow, noting that luxury foods are often associated with special occasions, such as eating in restaurants or holidays.
Positive, warm memories of sharing a meal with others also increases how much people value certain foods, says Papies. Often luxury foods are shared with friends and family, for example at Christmas.
But getting to that point isn't straightforward, says Papies. "Eating meat is the norm – it becomes part of a national identity. Deviating from that is hard," she says, adding that many vegans and vegetarians struggle with the fact that they have to explain, or justify, why they don't eat meat.
Providing more exposure to meat free options, in advertising and shops, could help tackle the identity struggle experienced by many vegans and vegetarians, says Papies. "It would help make it more equitable."
"Hopefully in the near future, we will have more accurate pricing and agricultural subsidies that reflect the food we produce and help us create a more sustainable system," says Papies.


Archive everything. Plus inlining it is just generally helpful.

... I realize the irony in my asking, but anyone got the angry archive kiwi handy?

Edit: Added the excerpts pertaining to each person under them, because honestly there's too many characters here.
 
Last edited:
Fatties are fine. They consume more than average, but they're fugly so long term their nonexistent offspring will balance it out.

The problem is people who depend on gibs to eat but don't stop breeding. I don't mind too much if you breed and breed and then fall into misfortune later, but people who already have a couple kids and are living beyond their means probably don't need to create more starving mouths in this world. (Not that childless people should, but at least they have the excuse of an unfulfilled biological drive)


View attachment 2848258
Archive


View attachment 2848263
Archive


View attachment 2848267
Archive


View attachment 2848268
Archive


View attachment 2848287
Archive

Archive everything. Plus inlining it is just generally helpful.

... I realize the irony in my asking, but anyone got the angry archive kiwi handy?
I'm not wasting my time on the archooving obsession sorry
 
Fatties are fine. They consume more than average, but they're fugly so long term their nonexistent offspring will balance it out.

The problem is people who depend on gibs to eat but don't stop breeding. I don't mind too much if you breed and breed and then fall into misfortune later, but people who already have a couple kids and are living beyond their means probably don't need to create more starving mouths in this world. (Not that childless people should, but at least they have the excuse of an unfulfilled biological drive)


View attachment 2848258
Archive


View attachment 2848263
Archive


View attachment 2848267
Archive


View attachment 2848268
Archive


View attachment 2848287
Archive

Archive everything. Plus inlining it is just generally helpful.

... I realize the irony in my asking, but anyone got the angry archive kiwi handy?


I'd rather resort to ritualized cannibalism of these freaks to strike fear into them than eat fucking bugs.
 

Attachments

  • 1641061745765.png
    1641061745765.png
    239.7 KB · Views: 2
  • 1641061866715.png
    1641061866715.png
    211.2 KB · Views: 2

Waiting for the inevitable "White people drinking coffee is cultural appropriation" article. :roll:
A meat tax would reflect some of these harmful environmental impacts, but remains politically unpopular. "That could change," says Alexander, as more people view meat as "something we cannot afford to eat, in terms of sustainability."

Sorry poor people. Meat is for the rich. Now be a good little podizen and eat your bug patty.
 
Back
Top Bottom