Sweden - Cash has one foot in the grave

Money. Paying by mobile phone is easy, fast, and modern. Sweden tries to implement cash-free payment methods and is predicted as the world’s first cashless society.

Applications such as iZettle help make cash unnecessary

While our grandparents still remember going shopping without a credit card, future generations will maybe never hold coins in their hands. A development in this direction is taking place in Sweden. The percentage of payments by cash has reduced from 40% (2010) to 15% (2016) within six years and a continuing trend is expected. Two thirds of the Swedes could imagine going completely cashfree according to a study of the central bank. The application iZettle and Swish as well as contactless credit cards are now part of everyday life in the Scandinavian country.

iZettle is a Stockholm start-up that connects a smartphone with a terminal for paying by credit card. Possibilities like these are welcomed not necessarily by sellers, but also small shops that can adapt to the consumers who often have less and less cash on them. There are many other advantages, for example, it will get easier to create a balance sheet, to prevent fake banknotes from being used and to reduce the cost of transporting cash, to name but a few.

Other applications such as Swish allow the transfer of money without any real purchase. 3,7 million of the 9,8 million habitants of Sweden have already downloaded it. Giving money to friends, donating to churches, or even buying the journal "Stockholm Situation" from homeless people is now all possible thanks to this innovation.

So why are some people against a cash-free living?

The organization PRO, the Swedish National Pensioners' Organization, is one of the opponents against this movement. Recently, they took legal steps against the government of the southern city Jönköping. The goal is to protect citizens from the interdiction of cash in public institutions. The government has already established a law that allows enterprises to refuse paying by cash. In some public transport people are obliged to use prepaid cards or the application of the bus company to pay.

Furthermore, the Bank of Sweden mentioned another important point in this debate regarding the case of an enemy attack or breakdown of the computer system where life would stand still. Sweden would be more vulnerable in giving up cash completely as it doesn't have any alternative.

People joined together for the initiative “kontantuppropet”, the revolt of cash, to take a stand and have shown the risks of this movement. They are afraid that some people may not be able to use the new technology because of their age or wealth. Another critical argument is the poor infrastructure in the countryside. Without access for everyone this change doesn't make sense, especially in the model social economic market of Sweden. The government must make more effort before we can imagine "the world’s first cashless society”. 

 Tale Nina Meier

Sources:  

https://www.letemps.ch/economie/2017/09/29/suede-un-pays-cash

 

http://www.france24.com/fr/20151016-suede-danemark-premiers-pays-argent-liquide-monnaieelectronique-carte-debit

 

http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2016/04/25/la-suede-pays-presque-sans-pieces-nibillets_4908032_3234.html 

http://www.liberation.fr/futurs/2016/01/01/en-suede-les-especes-en-voie-de-disparition_1423903

https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate/fr/articles/news-and-expertise/sweden-we-dont-acceptcash-201503.html

What do you call chicken that isn’t chicken? SuperMeat!

Victor LAFONT and Rosanna MANIGLIO

     Eating meat is not environmentally sustainable: according to researchers all over the world. Now an Israeli startup wants to sell you artificial chicken meat. Are you ready?

     Strong demographic growth around the world is leading to increased meat consumption. More and more natural resources such as water, land and grain are being drained to support and feed livestock. Today 70% of all farmland is dedicated to livestock and its food. Moreover, nearly half of the world’s grain production is used to feed livestock and not humans, even though an animal consumes much more food than it produces. In fact, we could feed more people with a cow’s food than with its meat. Today, raising  livestock is an absurd and counterproductive system.

     One of the environmental issues of the 21st century is to find solutions to eat differently. One important trend of the past several years is veganism: not eating any animal products, including meat, milk, or eggs. But not everyone is ready to become vegan. Now the Israeli startup “SuperMeat”, claims to have found another solution and intends to revolutionize the food industry. It has developed a new technique to produce artificial meat grown in a laboratory instead of on an animal.

     Experiments on cultured meat had already been conducted some years ago, with beefsteak made from stem cells, but the meat produced was not convincing, and making a single steak cost around 250,000 € per portion.

Thanks to a new process, starting from chicken cells (see Protocol), SuperMeat has managed to produce small quantities of artificial chicken meat, which it claims has “a taste and appearance similar to a real piece of meat”, at a cost under 5 €/kg.

 

     SuperMeat promises us a better life with their “environmentally friendly” industry which would  require 99% less land, 90% less water and create 90% less greenhouse gas emissions.

It invites us to “join the revolution” and “make history” by contributing to the financing of its industry. The startup needs at least $500,000 to develop a full-scale prototype, and the final device will probably cost $2.5 million. Meanwhile, the firm already plans to provide supermarkets, restaurants and even  households with meat-production equipment by 2021.

     SuperMeat’s solution seems to be a good alternative to raising livestock: it’s green, ethical, inexpensive and can be set up quickly. But, when you think about it, doesn’t SuperMeat represent a threat to our consumer society? If SuperMeat becomes a monopoly -- the only firm offering meat -- it will be feeding most of humanity. So it will have total control of the meat market and could decide to significantly raise prices, speculate on natural resources, or ruin companies who produce meat in a traditional way. What appears to be an effective solution to a crucial environmental issue could create some serious societal and economic problems.

     Perhaps SuperMeat’s solution is too extreme. Why not return to a more eco-friendly way of production? After all, it might be more appetizing.

  

http://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/high-tech/conso/20160901.OBS7294/supermeat-une-startup-qui-veut-democratiser-la-viande-artificielle.html

http://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-services/conso-distribution/0211257103962-supermeat-lisraelien-qui-veut-creer-du-poulet-synthetique-2024951.php

http://www.notre-planete.info/actualites/4223-cultures-calories-viande-vegetalien

http://ecologie.blog.lemonde.fr/2011/06/28/de-la-viande-artificielle-pour-reduire-nos-emissions/