Global food shortages, soaring prices and alarm over the environment. But every day, Britain throws away 220,000 loaves of bread, 1.6m bananas, 5,500 chickens, 5.1m potatoes, 660,000 eggs, 1.2m sausages and 1.3m yoghurts.
A new study has exposed the staggering amount of food thrown away every day by the British public, calculating that the annual total of wasted products adds up to a record £10bn. Each day, according to the government-backed report, Britons throw away 4.4 million apples, 1.6 million bananas, 1.3 million yoghurt pots, 660,000 eggs, 5,500 chickens, 300,000 packs of crisps and 440,000 ready meals. And for the first time government researchers have established that most of the food waste is made up of completely untouched food products – whole chickens and chocolate gateaux that lie uneaten in cupboards and fridges before being discarded. The roll call of daily waste costs an average home more than £420 a year but for a family with children the annual cost rises to £610. The Government's waste campaign WRAP (Waste & Resources Action Programme) revealed the extent of Britain's throwaway food culture after sifting through the dustbins of 2,138 people who signed up to an audit of food detritus. Other items on the daily list included 1.2 million sausages, 710,000 packs of chocolate or sweets, 260,000 packs of cheese, 50,000 milkshake bottles and 25,000 cooking sauces. The study is published as millions of the world's poor face food shortages caused by rising populations, droughts and increased demand for land for biofuels, which have sparked riots and protests from Haiti to Mauritania, and from Yemen to the Philippines. Last month India halted the export of non-basmati rice to ensure its poor can eat, while Vietnam, the second-biggest rice exporter, is considering a similar measure after Cyclone Nargis ripped through Burma's rice-producing Irrawaddy delta. In Britain yesterday, it emerged that food prices had risen by 4.7 per cent in the past month. The soaring cost of wheat has increased food prices in the UK by up to 11 per cent in the past year, putting more pressure on domestic budgets already struggling to cope with higher mortgage costs and council tax and energy bills. WRAP suggested households seeking to balance their finances could save money by following basic tips to prevent food waste, such as planning shopping trips better and keeping a closer check on use-by dates. It also pointed out that many people do not know the difference between a "best before date", which has no implications for food safety, and use-by data, which must be followed. The Environment minister, Joan Ruddock, said: "These findings are staggering in their own right, but at a time when global food shortages are in the headlines this kind of wastefulness becomes even more shocking. This is costing consumers three times over. Not only do they pay hard-earned money for food they don't eat, there is also the cost of dealing with the waste this creates. And there are climate- change costs to all of us of growing, processing, packaging, transporting and refrigerating food that only ends up in the bin. Preventing waste in the first place has to remain a top priority." Eliminating the huge level of food waste would have significant environmental consequences. Local authorities spend £1bn a year disposing of food waste, which leads to the release of methane, a potent climate-change gas. Wrap calculated that stopping the waste of good food could reduce the annual emission of carbon dioxide by 18 million tonnes – the same effect as taking one in five cars off the roads. Food experts said the study should serve as a wake-up call to British consumers. As well as an individual "Victorian moral" effort, Tim Lang, professor of food policy at City University, called for the Government to take action to improve the efficiency of the food system to face up to the challenges of climate change, rising oil costs and water shortages. Describing modern supermarkets as "cathedrals of waste", he said: "The British food economy is one of the most wasteful it would be conceivable to design. We have to create a new set of criteria on what we want the food economy to address; it's time for politicians to catch up." Previously, Wrap's Love Food, Hate Waste campaign put the financial cost of the 6.7 million tonnes of food discarded annually in the UK at £8bn. After interviewing 2,715 households – and then analysing the contents of most of their bins – researchers found that people were throwing away a greater proportion of edible, unused products. Rather than half new food and half peelings and scrapings from plates, the proportion of entirely unused products was 60 per cent by weight and 70 per cent by value. Overall, that meant the total level of waste was £2bn higher, at £10bn, with the untouched products discarded worth £6bn. Of those, products worth £1bn were still "in date", Wrap found. Launching The Food We Waste report, Wrap's chief executive, Liz Goodwin, described its findings – which mean that one in three shopping bags is dumped straight in the bin – as "shocking". She said: "People aren't really aware that we are wasting so much food; do we think it's acceptable to throw so much away when people around the world are starving? But also with the economic situation here purse strings are getting tighter yet the average family with children is wasting more than £600 a year on food waste. It begs some questions which we all need to ask ourselves. As individuals we are all wasting food. By class or age, there isn't much difference in how much we waste." |
|
Universities are starting to invest more to prevent postgraducate students from going overseas. Plagued by years of under-funding, UK universities have historically seen postgraduate students as cash cows, bringing in fees in excess of £60,000 each. But this attitude is now changing. Universities are upping their game in the face of growing international competition for the best postgraduate students, in an attempt to meet the knowledge economy agenda, and to create the next generation of academics. Against a backdrop of numerous warnings on the supply of doctoral students, a drive to increase postgraduate numbers is sweeping across the UK. Institutions are now beginning to invest in these students, rather than rely on them for income. For the first time in its centuries-old existence, Oxford University last year recruited more postgraduate than undergraduate students. In October this year, the university will open a new graduate college with room for 500 students as part of its strategy to boost provision still further. New college "There is a sector-wide move towards growing postgraduate studies. This is a very important trend because there are underlying structural issues that need to be addressed, such as affordability for graduate students, international competition for the best students and the importance of postgraduate work as a form of academic apprenticeship," says Dr Colin Bundy, warden of Green College and a former director of the School of Oriental and African Studies, who will be principal of Oxford's new Green Templeton College for graduate students. It will be created through a merger of two existing graduate colleges: Green College and Templeton College. The new college will be located on the old Green College site. A new building will be created in due course to house the new college. "A number of high-quality graduate applicants have accepted offers from our US competitors because we have not been able to match the funding they offer," Bundy says. Green Templeton College is designing a new annual spending programme for its postgraduates. Over its first five years, funding available for students through merit-driven scholarships and bursaries will increase from £200,000 to £500,000. In the future, it will also look at providing needs-driven bursaries aimed at supporting students from less affluent countries. "The creation of the new college is timely, I think, because it is trying to keep in step with the university's agenda of strengthening postgraduate provision, and I hope in some instances a step or two ahead of that agenda," Bundy says. Oxford is not alone. Durham University saw a 50% increase in its postgraduate intake this year compared to 2006-07. The rise puts the institution well on its way to meet a target it set itself in 2005 to increase numbers by 65% by 2010. In mid-February, Kings College London announced 100 new postgraduate studentships and bursaries, which will be available from 2009. "We felt we were lagging behind other research-led universities and needed a large cohort of postgraduate students," says Professor James Stirling, pro vice-chancellor at Durham. "In preparation for the 2008 research assessment exercise, we have increased staff numbers by 25% since 2001. We now have more academics available to supervise students, but we had not matched this with an increase in graduate student numbers." Stirling says there is "no magic wand" for boosting numbers. The university has increased its marketing, and implemented a more efficient recruitment process. It is now also providing £2m in funding for postgraduates through fellowships, studentships and bursaries, and plans to increase this figure next year. Universities' seemingly healthy rise in graduate student recruitment masks a problem, however, with the proportion of UK students contributing to the growth. Professor Mary Stuart, deputy vice-chancellor at Kingston University, has investigated the issues that may be deterring UK students from graduate study. Her research for the Higher Education Academy is due to be published in March. "Graduate students bring advantages over undergraduates, such as skills and knowledge, and they are a more flexible market as there are not the limits on student numbers and fees institutions can charge," says Stuart. "There has been a runaway growth in international student numbers. But there is a worry that UK students are less likely than European or international students to want to do a postgraduate course. This is a concern, particularly if the UK wants a highly qualified workforce," she says. Stuart's research found that students who did not have a family history of going to university were less likely to continue on to graduate study. She found that students who had taken an applied course at undergraduate level felt they had studied enough and wanted to enter the workforce. Worry about debt, rather than actual debt levels, also deterred students. Aware of the benefits But a lack of awareness of the benefits of postgraduate study is one of the strongest factors deterring UK students, Stuart says. "There needs to be more guidance and discussion with students in their final year to make them aware that doing a postgraduate course would benefit them. UK students tend to think an undergraduate degree is enough, but for the UK's future this is not enough," she says. Kingston has implemented reforms to try to tackle some of these deterrents. "We have reorganised the support we offer students in their final year, some of which focuses on employment and some on postgraduate opportunities. We also offer financial counselling," says Stuart. Another factor contributing to the worryingly low levels of UK students continuing on to graduate study is that public funding is slim and highly competitive. The majority of students seek financial support from the research councils, the UK's main science-funding bodies. But after difficult settlements for most of the seven research councils in last year's spending review, funding for postgraduates is being cut. This is a strong driver in universities' decisions to invest their own money in supporting graduate students. "Durham has plenty of applications from UK students but we can't offer them a place unless they have funding," says Stirling. "The number of studentships from the research councils does not meet demand." |
|
Universities are to be told to give preferential treatment to pupils from poorly performing state schools in a move that is likely to anger independent schools.
The government is to endorse proposals that admissions staff should tailor offers to candidates according to the quality of school they attended.
The report, commissioned by Gordon Brown, is intended to devise ways of increasing the number of pupils from the poorest families reaching top universities.
Only 29% of university students come from the poorest socio-economic groups. At Oxford and Cambridge the percentage is even lower – 9.8% and 11.8% respectively.
Ed Balls, the schools secretary, and John Denham, the universities secretary, are expected to give public backing to the report from the National Council for Educational Excellence on Tuesday.
It will say that universities should take into account all available “contextual data” about the performance of a school’s A-level candidates and the number of pupils it sends to university.
The effect is likely to be an increase in the number of pupils from poor schools who are required to get lower A-level grades than those from grammar or independent schools. Last month freedom of information requests by The Sunday Times showed seven top universities had already introduced versions of such schemes.
The report will argue that pupils from the poorest families are being let down by the state school system. It will present new research showing that 11-year-olds from poor families with the best test results are only half as likely as those from better-off households still to be high achievers when they reach the age of 14.
It will be presented to Balls and Denham on Tuesday by Steve Smith, the vice-chancellor of Exeter University, Alison Richard, the vice-chancellor of Cambridge University, and Les Ebdon, the vice-chancellor of Bedfordshire University. The council will present its findings to Brown in the autumn.
“There is a massive gap in your chances of going on to higher education depending on what socio-economic group you belong [to] and there has hardly been any improvement in the situation. That is what we have to put right,” said Smith, who has drawn up the report. He has been helped by Sir Michael Barber, a senior Downing Street aide under Tony Blair.
Independent schools will also regard as hostile a recommendation for a delay until at least 2012 before universities make offers based on the new A* grade at A-level. The grade, which will be awarded for the first time in 2010, was intended to help universities distinguish between the surging numbers of students gaining three As.
Last year more than a quarter of A-level exams taken were given an A grade. Cambridge turns away more than 5,000 candidates a year with three As and is one of the universities planning to use the A* in its offers.
Alan Smithers, professor of education at Buckinghamshire University, was critical of the proposals. He said: “Discrimination of that kind will undoubtedly weaken our universities and make it harder for them to compete in the world league. It introduces institutional unfairness.”
Anthony Seldon, master of Wellington college, said: “I think there’s always danger where you artificially prop up a system. The real effort ought to be to bring up the standard of state schools to independent schools.”
|
|
|
