SUPERSTORE STOPPING
Dear Editor,
I'm a regular reader of Corporate Watch, and have also seen your pamphlet 'What's Wrong With Supermarkets'. A certain large corporate supermarket chain is planning to build a 'superstore' in my local town and I'm worried about the effect this will have on local shops, the environment, and so on. What action would you recommend to help us stop this development?
Irene Ainsworth,
Yorkshire
Dear Irene, You're right to be concerned about the impact of a new superstore in your town. Supermarkets claim they bring choice, jobs and are good for local economies, but the reality is very different. Supermarket-based food retailing creates a negative impact on local jobs and shopping choice, as smaller independent stores close down in the face of competition from supermarkets. The local environment suffers from increased traffic congestion; and supermarkets also push for increased packaging and exploitation of farmers and farm workers. You're also not alone in your concerns; there are at least 250 local groups around the country actively campaigning against supermarket developments and working to build local support for the alternatives to supermarkets.
There are lots of ways to get going with your campaign; the golden rules for successful campaigns seem to be : -Know your enemy
-Build local support
-Understand the planning process
-Develop your arguments and fight them through the planning -process- many local groups have succeeded
-Build a local campaign to support the alternatives to supermarkets
For more information on the impacts of supermarkets, how to oppose them and for case studies of campaigns by local groups see our newly revised report 'Checkout Chuckout: a DIY Guide to Opposing Supermarket Developments' www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=1916. Also see the new Friends of the Earth briefing 'How to ...Oppose a Supermarket Planning Appplication'
www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/campaigning_against_supermarkets.pdf
There's also lots of useful information on the Tescopoly website www.tescopoly.org Good Luck! Kathryn Tulip
Food and Agriculture Researcher
Corporate Watch
NANO-TOXICITY Hi I read your recent Newsletter [No.26] with interest. I'd like to comment on two issues mentioned (although not directly related to Corporate Watch's scope). Thanks to Stagecoach and Oxonica we all now breathe in nanoparticles. The [nano-based] fuel-additive they use reduces diesel-emissions 5-7%. There is, however, very little research on impact of nanoparticles on lungs. Existing reports (in peer-reviewed journals) indicate that breathing nanoparticles cause inflammations in rodents. In some cases their effect is worse than silica particles (reminder: asbestos is of silicate family). Use of nanoparticles in cosmetics (e.g., suncreams of Boots) would defy any logic. These nanoparticles are as small as 10-13nm. Even the scientific establishment (a.k.a. the Royal Society) has warned against such small particles as they translocate very easily in the body and human body seems to be defenceless to particles smaller than 40 nm. It is possible that, in some cases, toxicity of such particles might take 20+ years to develop (remember variant CJD) Semse
by email
NGOS IN THE SPIDERS' WEB I wanted to say how much I appreciate your latest newsletter [No. 26], which I read this morning on your website. I found page 12 - ('Watching them - watching us') of particular interest. I have viewed the work of Arquilla and Ronfeld with a mixture of fascination and steadily increasing alarm since I first encountered Netwar, & esp. Noopolitik &c; in August, 2001. Your Susan George quote ("Those who genuinely want to help the movement should study the rich and powerful, not the poor and powerless... ") struck me - really quite dramatically - as a very simple and useful guiding principle. I am actually frightened by the systematic appropriation of social movement theory, discourse analysis, constructivism and so on by RAND over the last 30-40 years. Not enough is being written about this - but how to approach it? Perhaps more worrying is their explicit objective of copting civil society networks - having us become an extension of the intelligence apparatus - either willingly - or through surveillance. NGOs seem in general (perhaps inherently) to be unwilling or incapable of assessing this risk. Name and address supplied Do you have any comments on something you've seen in Corporate Watch? Drop us a line! send your letters to: The Editor
Corporate Watch
16b Cherwell St
OXFORD
OX4 1BG
mail@corporatewatch.org
Yorkshire
Dear Irene, You're right to be concerned about the impact of a new superstore in your town. Supermarkets claim they bring choice, jobs and are good for local economies, but the reality is very different. Supermarket-based food retailing creates a negative impact on local jobs and shopping choice, as smaller independent stores close down in the face of competition from supermarkets. The local environment suffers from increased traffic congestion; and supermarkets also push for increased packaging and exploitation of farmers and farm workers. You're also not alone in your concerns; there are at least 250 local groups around the country actively campaigning against supermarket developments and working to build local support for the alternatives to supermarkets.
There are lots of ways to get going with your campaign; the golden rules for successful campaigns seem to be : -Know your enemy
-Build local support
-Understand the planning process
-Develop your arguments and fight them through the planning -process- many local groups have succeeded
-Build a local campaign to support the alternatives to supermarkets
For more information on the impacts of supermarkets, how to oppose them and for case studies of campaigns by local groups see our newly revised report 'Checkout Chuckout: a DIY Guide to Opposing Supermarket Developments' www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=1916. Also see the new Friends of the Earth briefing 'How to ...Oppose a Supermarket Planning Appplication'
www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/campaigning_against_supermarkets.pdf
There's also lots of useful information on the Tescopoly website www.tescopoly.org Good Luck! Kathryn Tulip
Food and Agriculture Researcher
Corporate Watch
NANO-TOXICITY Hi I read your recent Newsletter [No.26] with interest. I'd like to comment on two issues mentioned (although not directly related to Corporate Watch's scope). Thanks to Stagecoach and Oxonica we all now breathe in nanoparticles. The [nano-based] fuel-additive they use reduces diesel-emissions 5-7%. There is, however, very little research on impact of nanoparticles on lungs. Existing reports (in peer-reviewed journals) indicate that breathing nanoparticles cause inflammations in rodents. In some cases their effect is worse than silica particles (reminder: asbestos is of silicate family). Use of nanoparticles in cosmetics (e.g., suncreams of Boots) would defy any logic. These nanoparticles are as small as 10-13nm. Even the scientific establishment (a.k.a. the Royal Society) has warned against such small particles as they translocate very easily in the body and human body seems to be defenceless to particles smaller than 40 nm. It is possible that, in some cases, toxicity of such particles might take 20+ years to develop (remember variant CJD) Semse
by email
NGOS IN THE SPIDERS' WEB I wanted to say how much I appreciate your latest newsletter [No. 26], which I read this morning on your website. I found page 12 - ('Watching them - watching us') of particular interest. I have viewed the work of Arquilla and Ronfeld with a mixture of fascination and steadily increasing alarm since I first encountered Netwar, & esp. Noopolitik &c; in August, 2001. Your Susan George quote ("Those who genuinely want to help the movement should study the rich and powerful, not the poor and powerless... ") struck me - really quite dramatically - as a very simple and useful guiding principle. I am actually frightened by the systematic appropriation of social movement theory, discourse analysis, constructivism and so on by RAND over the last 30-40 years. Not enough is being written about this - but how to approach it? Perhaps more worrying is their explicit objective of copting civil society networks - having us become an extension of the intelligence apparatus - either willingly - or through surveillance. NGOs seem in general (perhaps inherently) to be unwilling or incapable of assessing this risk. Name and address supplied Do you have any comments on something you've seen in Corporate Watch? Drop us a line! send your letters to: The Editor
Corporate Watch
16b Cherwell St
OXFORD
OX4 1BG
mail@corporatewatch.org
Download