I’ll never forget how perplexed I was when my now sister-in-law first explained that her family ran an “ah-mond” ranch in Northern California. Silly me, I’d thought they farmed “ahl-monds,” but she insisted that the five generations of her family were ranchers, not farmers, and that the word almond should be pronounced just as salmon— “the ‘l,’” she said, “is silent.” I’ve since learned to avoid calling their rows of carefully cultivated trees an orchard, although I still have visions of cowboys rounding up fleeing packs of wily almonds when I think about her family’s ranch.
In spite of drought conditions in recent years, new large-scale almond groves (I still can’t bring myself to call them ranches) have proliferated in California as the demand for alternatives to dairy milk have grown (Philpott, 2014). Soy milk was once the go-to substitute for milk drinkers concerned about the lactose content or ethical considerations of dairy, but due to health concerns soy milk has declined in popularity (Saner, 2015). Almond milk has now become increasingly popular, not only domestically, but internationally as well, particularly in Asia (Philpott, 2014).
The ecological impact of fulfilling this growing demand has been significant. Almonds require an astonishing amount of water to produce—according to Mother Jones, roughly 1.1 gallons of water are needed in order to produce a single almond (Park and Lurie, 2014).
Image source: Mother Jones
Consequently, thousands of new wells have been drilled in California (which produces 80% of the worlds almonds), thereby contributing to draining already taxed aquifers (Philpott, 2014). Almond cultivation alone now accounts for an astounding 10% of California’s total water supply per year (Holthaus, 2014). To illustrate the fragility of these aquifers, consider that US Geological Survey hydrologists have discovered that in California’s San Joaquin valley, ground levels have dropped an average of eleven inches a year due to excessive groundwater removal (Sneed, Brandt, & Solt, 2013).
In short, the drive to capitalize on global demand for almonds comes into conflict with current and future public access to the resource of water. As it stands now, growers are experiencing something “akin to an arms race,” according to one hydrologist, because new, deeper wells tap ground water below the level of existing wells, leaving neighbors to choose between drilling even deeper or running dry (Krieger, 2014). “People don’t know, or don’t care, that they are also pulling water from thousands of feet around them,” [the hydrologist explained], “If their neighbor suffers? Well, it’s a dog-eat-dog world” (Krieger, 2014). Unless measures are taken to fairly manage water consumption, this situation could become a classic case of what William Lloyd referred to as the tragedy of the commons (Schneider, Grubman, & Coutts, 2012).
In addition to placing legislative constrictions on water use, I believe applied social psychology interventions could be implemented to influence consumer demand for water-intensive agricultural products. Taking shorter showers is a nice step to take in order to be more environmentally conscious, but curtailing the purchase of some of our preferred products can, potentially, have a greater ecological impact. For example, while the amount of water used to produce almond milk is startling, it pales in comparison to the amount of water needed to produce animal products such as dairy or beef (Walker, 2015). Regardless of which agricultural product one believes should be vilified, the fact remains that altering our consumer behavior can impact our environment as much as (if not more than) our personal habits.
References:
Holthaus, E. (2014, May 14). 10 percent of California’s water goes to almond farming. That’s nuts. Retrieved September 14, 2016, from http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/05/_10_percent_of_california_s_water_goes_to_almond_farming.html
Krieger, L. M. (2014, March 29). California drought: San Joaquin Valley sinking as farmers race to tap aquifer. Retrieved September 14, 2016, from http://www.mercurynews.com/2014/03/29/california-drought-san-joaquin-valley-sinking-as-farmers-race-to-tap-aquifer/
Park, A., & Lurie, J. (2014, February 24). It takes how much water to grow an almond?! Retrieved September 14, 2016, from http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/wheres-californias-water-going
Philpott, T. (2014, July 14). Your almond habit is sucking California dry. Retrieved September 14, 2016, from http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/07/your-almond-habit-sucking-califoirnia-dry
Saner, E. (2015, October 21). Almond milk: Quite good for you – very bad for the planet. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2015/oct/21/almond-milk-quite-good-for-you-very-bad-for-the-planet
Schneider, F. W., Coutts, L. M., & Gruman, J. A. (Eds.). (2011). Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Sneed, Michelle, Brandt, Justin, and Solt, Mike, 2013, Land subsidence along the Delta-Mendota Canal in the northern part of the San Joaquin Valley, California, 2003–10: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5142, 87 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20135142
Walker, T. (2015, May 5). California drought: Almond growers fight back over reports they are causing chronic water shortages. The Independent – Americas. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/california-drought-almond-growers-fight-back-over-reports-they-are-causing-chronic-water-shortages-10224339.html
Tags: Applied social psychology, environment, resource dilemma, social change
Hi Courtney,
When researching this issue, I found conflicting information about the relative water consumption associated with dairy versus almond milk. As I mentioned at the end of the post, “while the amount of water used to produce almond milk is startling, it pales in comparison to the amount of water needed to produce animal products such as dairy or beef (Walker, 2015),” as you point out as well. The insidiousness of the growing popularity of almond milk, however, is that the increased worldwide demand for almond milk disproportionately impacts one particularly drought-prone region of California. Also, since they grow on trees (long life cycle – must be watered during drought or future harvests will be lost), rather than as annual crops (short life cycle – field can remain fallow in drought years to conserve resources), growers have a greater investment to protect. Like many issues, there is more than one perspective that can be taken, to be sure! I thought it was a nice example of a resource dilemma nonetheless.
Your blog caught my attention instantly. For starters I am a health nut, in addition I am lactose intolerant and I am an almond milk drinker. However, I never really took to account the water issue going behind this new health craze. I always wondered how they got milk out such a dry food. However, now I see the science behind it. I agree that intervention to this environmental issue would be of great help to raise awareness. I did not know about this until I read your blog, and it doesn’t seem that the media or anyone is really focusing on this issue. People take water supply for granted it seems and that should not be the case.
Hi Marissa,
Thanks for taking the time to read my post! I live in California’s Coachella Valley, and while there have been some significant changes made in individual water usage as a result of escalating financial penalties for using more than one’s allotment, as well as some changes in public use (such as replacing grass medians with drought-tolerant “xeriscaping”), it’s true that there has been less than desirable reduction in institutional and agricultural water consumption.
It does seem that people prefer to put financial considerations first, and conservation second, even if that means flirting with disaster. There is a degree of wishful thinking that operates where people find it easier to believe that an environmental solution will magically appear in the future that will retroactively make their selfish behavior in the present a non-issue. A nice way to side-step cognitive dissonance, don’t you think?
This is why I feel that using social psychology principles to target consumer behavior is the only way to alter anti-social corporate decisions, since corporations are only motivated by increasing profits.
I loved reading your post, particularly about how “almond” is pronounced by almond ranchers, and I delighted at the mental image you portrayed of a rancher wrangling ornery almonds! Before your post, I hadn’t considered that the water consumed by almonds may have been considerable or increased dramatically by consumers seeking an alternative to milk. You mentioned that the water required to produce almonds is far less than that needed to raise livestock for meat or milk, and I was curious to know just how much that might be. I hope you don’t mind, but I did a few calculations to compare the water impact of almond milk compared to dairy milk to see if consumers switching from dairy to almond were impacting the environment. It turns out, almond milk only contains an estimated 2 percent almonds (Oh, 2015; Szalay, 2015), and since one almond is 1/23rd of an ounce (Szalay, 2015), an 8-ounce serving of almond milk would contain 3.68 almonds. Turning about four gallons of water into an 8-ounce cup of almond milk is hardly efficient or good for the environment, but it’s much better than milk produced from cows. Turns out, an 8-ounce glass of dairy milk requires about 64 gallons of water to produce (The Guardian, 2013). I suppose consumers switching from dairy to almond milk are impacting the environment, but for the better!
You mention in your post that applied social psychology and environmental psychology could be used to impact consumer choice with regard to the water required to produce their favorite foods. I absolutely agree with you and think that informing consumers through an intervention might be a great way to reduce the environmental impact of agriculture. What do you think of introducing iconography on food labels that indicate the water required to produce each serving, perhaps alongside an estimated carbon footprint? This information could be stacked against the average for similar products or for all products, and consumers could choose between options based on the environmental impact as well as the health and nutrition of the food. Then again, as we learned in this week’s lesson, information is not enough to produce behavior change. What could the next stage of the intervention be to inspire people to consider the impact of water on their food? Perhaps an imaginary water tax could be added to the price of items at a grocery store, both on the price tag and printed on the receipt, and participants could be informed and interviewed about their awareness of water usage for different foods after they leave the store. Do you think that might work?
References
The Guardian. (2013, January 10). How much water is needed to produce food and how much do we waste? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jan/10/how-much-water-food-production-waste
Oh, I. (2015, July 22). Good news, bad news: Your almond milk may not contain many almonds. Mother Jones. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2015/07/your-almond-milk-has-no-almonds
Szalay, J. (2015, July 30). Almond milk: Nutrition and benefits. LiveScience. Retrieved from http://www.livescience.com/51695-almond-milk-nutrition.html
Wow, this post is extremely thorough and well-researched. I honestly had no idea that California even grew a notable amount of almonds, let alone that almond production is impacting them so strongly.
It leads me to wonder: Is almond milk truly this necessary? I understand that it’s the most viable milk substitute for people who can’t handle milk’s lactose, but it seems to me like any vitamins found in milk (cow or almond) could be supplemented elsewhere, which means it’s really just a preference thing – correct me if I’m wrong.
Taking into account California’s current drought, the continued consumption of high volumes of water by almond-growers (see, I didn’t say ‘ranchers’ either) is honestly ridiculous. It’s not just a matter of preference anymore, it’s a matter of survival. According to the LA Times (link at the bottom), when the state tried to impose a 25% conservation goal and fined people who failed to meet it, enough people complained about ‘lost revenue’ that the state was basically like, “Eh, this drought’s only two or three more years anyway, I guess you can go ahead and waste the water and we’ll just wing it.”
All of which is really unfortunate, because there the state was making a sincere effort to conserve natural resources and they got bullied into leniency by people whining about a lowered profit margin.
I guess that’s America, for you.
Gold, M. (2016, September 12). “California is backsliding on water conservation. L.A. can’t and won’t follow suit.” Retrieved September 15, 2016, from http://www.latimes.com/opinion/livable-city/la-ol-california-water-conservation-20160912-snap-story.html