- 过去十年，大型连锁超市被骂得最多的三件事是：浪费食物、压低供应商价格、制造过量塑料垃圾——这篇文章就是从这盆冷水开始的。
- 面对消费者反弹，英国部分大型超市签署了"2025 年前实现塑料包装重复使用/回收/堆肥"的承诺，甚至有超市宣布 2023 年前淘汰自有品牌的所有塑料包装。
- 但食物浪费这块进展有限——慈善机构估计超市捐出的食物只占其总剩余量的 2%，而且大多数超市对具体浪费数字守口如瓶，外界根本没办法系统监督。
- 相比之下，柏林 Original Unverpakt、伦敦 Bulk Market 这类无塑料小店，以及靠电动车直配农场鲜货的 Farmdrop，反而用更彻底的商业模式绕开了大超市的老问题。
重点内容
原文 / 段落
Many of the major supermarket chains have come under fire with accusations of various unethical acts over the past decade. They've wasted tonnes of food, they've underpaid their suppliers and they've contributed to excessive plastic waste in their packaging, which has had its impact on our environment.
But supermarkets and grocers are starting to sit up and take notice. In response to growing consumer backlash against the huge amounts of plastic waste generated by plastic packaging, some of the largest UK supermarkets have signed up to a pact promising to transform packaging and cut plastic wastage. In a pledge to reuse, recycle or compost all plastic wastage by 2025, supermarkets are now beginning to take some responsibility for the part they play in contributing to the damage to our environment, with one major supermarket announcing their plan to eliminate all plastic packaging in their own-brand products by 2023.
In response to criticisms over food waste, some supermarkets are donating some of their food surplus. However, charities estimate that they are only accessing two per cent of supermarkets' total food surplus, so this hardly seems to be solving the problem. Some say that supermarkets are simply not doing enough. Most supermarkets operate under a veil of secrecy when asked for exact figures of food wastage, and without more transparency it is hard to come up with a systematic approach to avoiding waste and to redistributing surplus food.
Some smaller companies are now taking matters into their own hands and offering consumers a greener, more environmentally friendly option. Shops like Berlin's Original Unverpakt and London's Bulk Market are plastic-free shops that have opened in recent years, encouraging customers to use their own containers or compostable bags. Online grocer Farmdrop eliminates the need for large warehouses and the risk of huge food surplus by delivering fresh produce from local farmers to its customers on a daily basis via electric cars, offering farmers the lion's share of the retail price.
There is no doubt that we still have a long way to go in reducing food waste and plastic waste. But perhaps the major supermarkets might take inspiration from these smaller grocers and gradually move towards a more sustainable future for us all.
生词表
| 英文 | 中文 | 备注 |
|---|---|---|
| come under fire | 遭到猛烈批评 | 习语，常用于媒体报道 |
| unethical | 不道德的 | unethical acts：不道德行为 |
| backlash | （公众的）强烈反对 | consumer backlash：消费者反弹 |
| pact | 协议、公约 | sign up to a pact：签署一份公约 |
| compost (v.) | 堆肥处理 | reuse, recycle or compost |
| surplus | 剩余（物） | food surplus：食物剩余 |
| veil of secrecy | 保密的面纱 | operate under a veil of secrecy：在保密状态下运作 |
| transparency | 透明度 | without more transparency |
| take matters into one's own hands | 自己动手解决问题 | 习语 |
| compostable | 可堆肥的 | compostable bags：可堆肥的袋子 |
| lion's share | 最大的份额 | the lion's share of the retail price |
| eliminate | 消除、淘汰 | eliminate all plastic packaging |
理解要点
- 文章是"问题—回应—但回应不够—更彻底的替代方案"四段式论证，读的时候抓住每段开头的转折词（But/However/Some say）就能跟上论证的推进方向。
- 塑料包装和食物浪费是两条并行的论证线，作者对前者的态度偏正面（超市确实在改），对后者偏负面（2% 远远不够），读的时候要分开评估这两条线，不要混成同一个结论。
- "veil of secrecy"这类比喻性说法是作者态度的直接体现——暗示超市在刻意隐瞒真实数据，这比单纯说"超市不透明"更带批判色彩，要读出这层隐含态度。
- 最后一段小公司案例（Original Unverpakt、Bulk Market、Farmdrop）是用来反衬大超市改革不彻底的对照组，理解这几个例子时要抓它们"从根本上绕开问题"的共同点，而不是记住每家公司的具体做法。
Sources
Blog / Website：