Should political parties be privately funded in Spain?

(SPANISH BELOW)

This is probably the eternal question and, most likely, with no right answer.

Political parties are supposed to represent the various concerns of citizens, promote economic, legal, political and cultural initiatives to foster the development of a country and its people. But for a political party to attract sufficient interest and access to parliament (either regional or central), requires an infrastructure and commercial activities that cost money. If you will, they look like companies looking for customers.

But there are very noticeable differences.

The private company

If as an entrepreneur you take the risk in your own project, you will probably need financing from a bank. True, the government can also grant certain loans and subsidies, but private companies are mostly privately financed.

This means that if the business goes bust, the bank that lent the money will exhaust any legal means to recover all or part of the money borrowed. Any legal means: lawsuits, foreclosures, evictions and other legitimate measures entitled, assumed and accepted by the borrower at the time he signed the loan. And the annual accounts must reflect the debt and will be available in the companies’ house for review.

Political parties

At present, the Spanish political parties may be funded by 3 means:

- Public Subsidies

- Bank loans

- Donations

80% of the financing of the Spanish political parties comes from public funds.

Aren't we tired of watching public funds to political parties spent on houses, elitist ski trips, luxury goods, art works and others amenities that have little to do with the public service objective of political parties?

If we compare the Spanish case with the U.S, It seems to be a more transparent, at least from a distance. It allows any natural or legal person to fund or donate to a political party without limits. It is true that these donations should only be declared if in excess of $2,500, but the important thing is that there is no stigma as we see in Spain on private funding of political parties.

If Mr. A, business owner of hammer factory Z, funds the X party, everyone knows, nothing is hidden incentivising payments under the table and the misappropriation of public funds.

The elimination of public funding (or its reduction to essential limits) fostering a private and transparent financing, without prejudice or stigma, would significantly reduce the current corruption Spain has always suffered.

Many criticize this solution on the grounds that this would lead to the emergence of pressure groups in the style of American lobbies, thus influencing policy options. But isn't this already happening in Spain?

Others will say that only business oriented parties would obtain sufficient financing. But no worries, right and left have been illegally funded in Spain.

If a bank lends money to a political party, it does knowing that the money will not be recovered, implying more corruption and more favourable treatment. If you were a shareholder of one of these banks, would not you like to know how much your bank has left to X party?

With a private and transparent financing, you would have the choice to switch banks if you do not like to fund the X party. Likewise, you could buy shirts in another store not funding the X party.

In short: as lobbyists already exist and act in Spain but covertly, they could at least do so in a transparent and documented way. Thus, we could also save part of the €84.77 million budgeted to fund political parties in 2014.


SPANISH

¿Deberían financiarse de forma privada los partidos políticos en España?

Probablemente esta sea la eterna pregunta y, lo más seguro, no tenga una única respuesta válida.

Los partidos políticos supuestamente deben representar las distintas inquietudes de la ciudadanía, promover iniciativas políticas, económicas, legales y culturales para el desarrollo de un país y la evolución de su gente. Pero para que un partido político pueda generar un interés suficiente y acceder al parlamento (ya sea regional o central), necesita de una infraestructura y acciones comerciales que cuestan dinero. Son, si se quiere, como una empresa en busca de consumidores.

Pero existen diferencias muy notables.

La empresa privada

Si como empresario uno decide arriesgarse en su proyecto, seguramente necesite financiación que, muy probablemente, provenga de un banco. Cierto es que la administración pública también puede conceder ciertos préstamos y subvenciones, pero la empresa privada, mayoritariamente, se financia de forma privada.

Esto significa que si el negocio va mal, el banco que prestó el dinero agotará cualquier vía legal por recuperar todo o parte del dinero que prestado. Cualquier vía legal: demandas, embargos, desahucios y demás lindezas que el empresario habrá legitimado, asumido y aceptado en el momento que firmó el préstamo. Y sus cuentas anuales deberán reflejar la deuda y estarán disponibles en el registro mercantil para su revisión.

Los partidos políticos

En la actualidad, los partidos políticos españoles pueden financiarse por 3 vías

- Subvenciones publicas

- Créditos bancarios

- Donaciones

El 80% de la financiación de los partidos políticos españoles proviene de fondos públicos.

¿No estamos cansados de ver como los fondos públicos destinados a los partidos políticos se gastan en chalets, esquiadas elitistas, artículos de lujo, obras de arte y demás que poco tienen que ver con el objetivo de servicio público de un partido?

Si comparamos el caso español con el estadounidense, parece que existe una mayor transparencia, por lo menos desde la distancia. Se permite que cualquier persona física o jurídica financie o done a un partido político sin límites establecidos. Es cierto que solo deben declararse estas donaciones si superan los 2,500$, pero lo importante es que no existe la estigmatización que vemos en España sobre la financiación privada de los partidos políticos.

El señor A, propietario de la empresa de martillos Z, financia al partido X. Y todo el mundo lo sabe, no se esconde ni se incentivan los sobres bajo mano ni el aprovechamiento de recursos públicos para fines inapropiados.

La eliminación de la financiación pública (o su reducción a límites imprescindibles) junto a una financiación privada y transparente, sin prejuicios ni estigmas, reduciría de manera significativa la corrupción actual que sufre España.

Muchos critican esta solución aduciendo que ello conllevaría la aparición de grupos de presión al estilo de los lobbies americanos, influyendo así en las opciones políticas. ¿Pero no influyen ya en los políticos la financiación ilegal, la corrupción, y los tratos de favor?

Otros dirán que sólo los partidos afines al empresariado obtendrían financiación suficiente. Pero que nadie se lleve a engaño, en España, todos los colores han sido financiados de forma ilegal.

Si un banco presta dinero a un partido, lo hace sabiendo que ese dinero no se va a recuperar, implicando más corrupción y más tratos de favor. Si usted fuera accionista de uno de estos bancos, ¿no le gustaría saber cuánto ha dejado su banco al partido X?

Con una financiación privada y transparente, tendría la elección de cambiar de banco si no le gusta que financie al partido X. Lo mismo que podría comprar las camisas en otro almacén que no financie al partido X.

Resumiendo: dado que los grupos de presión ya existen y actúan en España pero de forma encubierta, por lo menos que lo hagan de forma transparente y documentada. De esta forma, igual se podían ahorrar parte de los 84,77 millones de euros presupuestados para financiar los partidos políticos en 2014.

Fuentes:

http://www.expansion.com/2014/02/21/economia/1392966146.html

http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20140221/54402426924/gobierno-regula-tesorero-partidos-prohibe-condonacion-deudas.html

http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2013/09/30/espana/1380544936.html

http://queaprendemoshoy.com/como-se-financian-los-partidos-politicos-en-estados-unidos/

Short-term gain, long-term pain: How economy works and how it affects our life

Not a long post today. I would simply like to share with you a link to a Ray Dalio's video on YouTube which I think is great:

How The Economic Machine Works

On this short video, Ray give us a quick and simple macro class explaining:

• How governments and central banks work
• How public and private debt evolve in cycles
• What money supply is and how does it affect interest rates (and us) 
• How we and our governments always repeat the same mistakes...

In short, if we understand what Ray explains on the video, we could try and think how we can adapt the theory to our personal finance. No Golden Rule at all but simple common sense.

And remember, as the old Frankie said, ""after winter comes the spring".

An innovative European Union: invest in R&D

In a time of social and economic instability, nationalist and radical parties (from right to left) are growing fast. Protectionism is an increasingly common practice, even at local level. This is an incredibly narrow minded approach that could lead to poor economic performance in the long run.

Ideally, a united Europe should join forces to improve integration, making all EU members more participants at the same time that some decisions are centralised, for instance, in praise of greater growth, equality, social re-distribution and innovation.

Euro scepticism is becoming more popular than ever, and it may be understandable given the slow and mistaken reaction from the EU members to the current crisis. But smaller, individual entities or countries do not have a brighter future either. One could argue that certain independent small countries have been very successful by their own. And this is partly true: to succeed by being independent and small, a country needs to have a unique offering, a very niche strategy, resources or products that nobody else offers. And by nature, those strategies are not sustainable in the long term unless there is a fair amount of innovation.

But what is innovation?

According to the European Commission (EC), “innovation refers to the creation of new or significantly improved products, process, marketing and organisations that add value to markets, governments and society”.

Innovation appears to be the main driver of economic growth in the EU. Therefore, special attention should be put in such a matter by improving the conditions and access to finance for R&D in Europe. As a matter of fact, it is shown that countries that invest (or invested) in R&D are experiencing a faster recovery from the crisis compared to those with poor R&D investment.

Source: “Innovation Union - A pocket guide on a Europe 2020 initiative”

The EC have currently identified a series of hurdles which need to be addressed to ensure a sustainable growth; namely:

• Public education and innovation systems currently face weaknesses
•  Poor availability of finance
•  Costly patenting (in terms of money and time)
• Need to update regulations and procedures
• Slow standard-setting
• Failure to use public procurement strategically
• Fragmented efforts among member countries and regions

The “Innovation Union” initiative aims to tackle part of the issue by 2020 and, as a result of the initiative, Europe should become a place where:

• A smarter economy supports citizens’ standard of living
• A better use of public money is a reality
• Citizens are empowered thanks to social innovation
• Solutions are found to help us live a longer and healthier life
• A greener Europe is possible
• Entrepreneurs and businesses have improved access to finance
• There are innovation-friendly rules and regulations
• Standard-setting procedures are accelerated
• There is cheaper patenting
• Innovation is supported by the public sector
• Innovation Partnerships are encouraged to give EU
• There is facilitated access to EU research and innovation programmes

Overall, the Initiative should make it possible for researchers to fulfil attractive careers, improving cross-border mobility and increasing training standards.

In my view, by creating a greater, stronger Union, resources could be pooled and the output boosted, positively impacting in citizen’s quality of life. It is necessary to protect and increase public budgets in education, R&D and innovation. But to me, this seems only possible with a bold approach from all Union members.

To get an idea of how the EU members are doing when it comes to R&D spending, the following link offers helpful country reports summarising their innovation potential (http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/index_en.cfmhttp://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/index_en.cfm).

Source: “Innovation Union - A pocket guide on a Europe 2020 initiative”

Doing Business in Vietnam vs. Spain:

After a recent trip to Vietnam, and given that I have never been in China, I was shocked to witness the growth potential from the region.

Comparing Vietnam with my experience in Cuba ten years ago, what I found was not as close to a communist country as I could have expected. Free market was open in any Vietnamese street in big cities and, surprisingly enough, The Financial Times and Warren Buffet’s biography could be easily found in local news agents. This used to be completely banned in Cuba at least ten years ago and I suspect that it may still be.

What I saw was a very young population eager to progress and able to combine their ancient traditions with the latest hi-tech gizmos and western style. But as usual, l will provide you with some fact-based analysis and will compare how easy or difficult it is doing business in Vietnam vs. Spain based on the Doing Business reports from The World Bank.

Doing Business sheds light on how easy or difficult it is for a local entrepreneur to open and run a small to medium-size business when complying with relevant regulations. It measures and tracks changes in regulations affecting 11 areas in the life cycle of a business: starting a business, dealing with construction permits, getting electricity, registering property, getting credit, protecting investors, paying taxes, trading across borders, enforcing contracts, resolving insolvency and employing workers. The numbers considered for the analysis are the ranking positions of each country out of a total of 185 economies from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe (for more data details, see www.doingbusiness.org).

As we will see, there is still as much room for improvement for one country as for the other.

A.      Doing Business in Vietnam:

In the following table , we compare how Vietnam performs in the aforementioned categories compared to the regional average (East Asia & Pacific). On average, we see how Vietnam underperforms by 14% compared to its peer countries. In fact, the biggest concern to any entrepreneur in Vietnam should be “investor’s protection” and “getting electricity”. Access to reliable corporate data and as access to reliable and affordable electricity is vital for businesses. However, Vietnam is outperforming its peers in important areas such as “dealing with construction permits” and “getting credit”.

B.      Doing business in Spain:

  

Following the same methodology as of Vietnam, we can see how Spain underperforms by a 27% compared to the regional average (OECD high income). It is extremely worrying to realize how difficult it is to start a business in Spain, as it ranks 136 out of 185 countries. “Enforcing contracts” and “protecting investors” are the next worse categories in which Spain should really focus to become an attractive economy to investors.

C.      Doing business in Vietnam vs. Spain:

The following comparison is not purely academic as it could be easily argued that we are comparing oranges and apples. However, the exercise is interesting as we can see how a rich country such as Spain underperforms Vietnam in as much as 5 categories out of 11. In other words, doing business in Vietnam it is easier than in Spain in 45% of the total categories considered to determine the ease of doing business in an economy.

Overall, we see how Spain’s average position is 61, compared to Vietnam’s average position 95. However, as stated above, Vietnam outperforms Spain in “starting a business”, “dealing with construction permits”, “registering property”, “getting credit” and “enforcing contracts”. Although the differences in these categories are not too significant, Spain should seriously consider making things easier to entrepreneurs and get rid of much of the red tape needed. Another striking fact is that it is easier to enforce contracts in a communist country such as Vietnam than not in Spain.

This is not a complete analysis as we are only considering the ranking positions and disregarding the causes of such differences, be them political, geographical or economical. However, it seems quite clear that today, Spain is not the best (or at least the easiest) place to start a business.  And in a time when unemployment is at historical records, it is a shame that households cannot access to credit, get rid of bureaucracy and start a business with enough assurance regarding their property and interest.

We do need big corporates such as Inditex or Telefonica. But right now, what Spain is in desperate need of is small and medium-sized successful enterprises able to boost employment and consumption.

Sources:

“Doing Business 2013: Smarter Regulations for Small and Medium-size Enterprises”

“A heavy load” The Economist August 31st 2013

www.doingbusiness.org

http://www.worldbank.org/

Spain: much more than food and sun

With the current economic environment, the world’s perception of Spain has been downgraded in the last 5 years. Government bond yields soared, credit ratings have fallen sharply and corruption scandals are often blamed of Spain’s economic situation by foreign analysts… And as a matter of fact, we do have problems, but as any other country in a worldwide crisis where Brazil’s current growth is merely 0.9% and China’s double digit rates are gone.

Some could feel that many red flags, panic buttons and other pressures thrown over Spain are orchestrated by some countries with conflicting interests.  We are wrongly pictured only as a sunny holiday destination where food and alcohol are cheap and where foreigners are allowed to do whatever they are not in their home countries.

Fortunately, we do have some examples to show we can offer something else to our very welcome foreign friends.

Some facts

§  Despite the crisis and our shameless politicians (but this is another story), Spain is the 4th largest economy in the euro zone, 5^th in the EU and the world’s 12^th largest economy[1].  

§  Spain has a powerful network of infrastructures, placed among the world’s top ten countries with the best quality in this field[2].

§  It ranks Europe’s 3^rd in terms of passenger air traffic and 4^th in maritime freight transport in the EU.

§  Spain offers a geostrategic position as EU member, bridge between Africa and Europe, and key party for establishing relationships with Latin America.

§  IBEX 35 listed companies generate over 60% of their revenue abroad.

§  The worlds’ busiest airport, Heathrow, is managed by a Spanish firm (Ferrovial).

§  Many underground railway lines have been built and are currently managed by Spanish corporations (Dragados extension of NY subway system).

§  A third of the world’s air traffic, as well as 100% of Germany’s airspace, are managed through systems developed and installed by a Spanish company (Amadeus).

§  The world’s largest textile firm, with over 5,500 stores around all five continents is Spanish (Inditex).

Leadership by sector

§  Renewable energies:

o   1^st country in Europe in wind power production, 4^th worldwide in terms of installed capacity (Iberdrola is the world’s top producer)

o   Abengoa is the world’s leading company in renewable energies.

o   Endesa is one of the five largest electric companies in the world.

o   World’s 4^th manufacturer of wind turbines (Gamesa).

§  Infrastructures:

o   The world’s largest highway concessions company is Ferrovial.

o   6 of the world’s 10 largest companies in infrastructure management are Spanish (Abertis, Ferrovial, FCC, OHL, ACS/Dragados, Sacyr Vallehermoso).

o   1/3 of the world’s air traffic is managed through Amadeus.

o   Spanish companies are a reference in building and managing railway infrastructures

§  Automotive sector: Spain ranks 2^nd among European vehicle manufacturers and 9^th worldwide, topping the ranks in industrial vehicles.

§  Financial sector:

o   Two of the world’s principal financial institutions are Spanish (Santander & BBVA).

o   The best bank in the world is Santander[3].

o   12% of the British banking system is controlled by Santander.

§  Healthcare technologies:

o   Spain ranks 1^st in Europe and 3^rd worldwide in the field of agrobiotechnolgy. It also ranks 5^th in the world in biochemistry and molecular biology.

o   Grifols is the world’s 3^rd largest producer of blood derivatives and plasma.

o   We are the country with highest donations rate in the world. The Spanish model for transplant management has been recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

§  Food and agriculture:

o   World’s leading producer of rice and 2^nd of pasta (Ebro foods).

o   Top producer and exporter of olive oil.

o   World’s top exporter of fruit and vegetables.

o   Spain has the world’s largest extension of vineyards and ranks 3^rd worldwide as a wine producer and 2^nd as wine exporter.

§  Tourism:

o   Spain is the world’s top holiday destinations, the 2^nd most visited country and ranks 2^nd in terms of tourism revenue.

o   5 Spanish companies are among the world’s 30 most important hotel groups and one of them is the world’s leading hotel chain.

And the list could go further on, as I have only focused on business. The take out would be that with only over 30 years of democratic history and openness to the rest of the world, Spain has performed  fairly well. In that sense, we should be less pessimistic and be re-assured that as a country, Spain is not that far behind other countries as most people think.

So, next time you think “hey, Nordic countries beat us in almost every single field”, take a minute, enjoy a refreshing glass of Cava and think of what we achieved. After all, we are the only ambassadors that could change our foreign friend’s minds.

PS: Next time I will be much more critical with Spain as reality is far from ideal, but I felt it was right to bring some light on what our industry have achieved so far. 

 

---

Notes:

1: In GDP terms

2: According to the Global Competitiveness Index 2012-2013

3: According to Euromoney Magazine 2012

Sources:

“Spain’s positioning: Leadership key factors”, Marca España

The Economist

CNN Money

 

Supermercados ineficientes?

(English below)

Hasta ahora hemos hablado de bancos centrales, reguladores y entorno macro. Hoy me gustaría comentar algo más del día a día, cercano al ciudadano de a pie.

No hace mucho se creó un gran revuelo en España después que el Gobierno decidiera cambiar la fecha de caducidad de los yogures por la fecha de “consumo preferente”. Hablaré desde mi experiencia en UK, ya que es ahí donde hago la compra semanal y el tema en España lo desconozco totalmente.

Los supermercados en UK etiquetan la gran  mayoría de productos con dos tipos distintos de fechas:

-          “Display until” o fecha de exposición: Es la fecha hasta la cual el producto puede estar expuesto en tienda.

-          “Best before” o fecha de consumo preferente: Fecha a partir de la cual el fabricante/comerciante indica que el producto puede empezar a perder algunas de sus propiedades, sin implicar riesgos para la salud.

La diferencia principal es que al etiquetar un producto con fecha de caducidad, la mayoría de la gente calificará de forma automática el producto como no comestible una vez se rebase dicha fecha. Y ello cuando en el 99.9% de los casos el producto todavía es apto para su consumo. Cuántas veces no hemos tirado un yogur tan solo un día después de la fecha de caducidad?

De ahí se derivan varias  consecuencias:

-          Al ver un producto cercano a su fecha de caducidad en la estantería de un supermercado, evitaremos comprarlo, ya que buscaremos otro más reciente por el mismo precio.

-          Si todos actuamos según el razonamiento anterior, los supermercados se quedan con un montón de productos que no pueden vender y, por tanto, son una pérdida.

-          Si el producto ya lo hemos comprado y ha caducado, lo tiraremos aunque este sea comestible.

-          A nivel global, podemos estar desperdiciando toneladas de comida perfectamente apta para su uso.

Lo que se demuestra es que hay una clara ineficiencia de mercado y, en mi opinión, el sistema británico lo solventa en gran parte. Que conste que desconozco si el sistema es de origen británico, americano, alemán o camboyano. Lo importante es la forma de solventar dicha ineficiencia.

Consideremos primero las fechas. Mientras que la fecha de caducidad es restrictiva, la fecha de consumo preferente es indicativa. Ello significa que la vida útil del producto puede alargarse sin entrañar peligro alguno para la salud. Simplemente, el consumidor deberá aplicar un poco de sentido común antes de consumir un producto que haya rebasado dicha fecha.

Ahora consideremos el precio. Lo que vemos diariamente en los supermercados británicos es que, conforme el producto se acerca a la fecha de exposición, este se rebaja de precio. Y tiene toda la lógica del mundo.

Siguiendo el ejemplo del yogur: Tengo dos yogures a 1€. Uno caduca en 15 días y el otro mañana. Por el mismo precio, compraré el más fresco y dejaré el que caduca en la tienda. Pero si en lugar de costar lo mismo el supermercado aplica diferenciación de precios, y el yogur fresco cuesta 1€ mientras que el que caduca me cuesta 30 céntimos, puede que decida comprar el yogur barato. La cuestión es que se trata del mismo yogur, misma marca, mismo sabor y perfectamente apto para consumir. Un ganga, no?

Mediante la eliminación de la fecha de caducidad y aplicando diferenciación de precios:

-          Se elimina una ineficiencia de mercado

-          Se reducen las toneladas de comida desperdiciada

-          El supermercado evita pérdidas por los productos no vendidos

-          Los productos se hacen asequibles a un rango de clientes más amplio

Considerando la situación económica mundial, y en especial en España, iniciativas como esta deberían ser bienvenidas y aplicadas en la mayoría de establecimientos. Solamente dejaros unas cifras:

-          En el mundo hay 850 millones de personas que sufren hambre diariamente.

-          Cada año, los consumidores de países ricos desperdician 222 millones de toneladas de comida

-          El desperdicio en Europa y Norte América es de 95 a 115kg per cápita

http://www.foodbanking.org/site/PageServer?pagename=work_impact_foodwaste

English:

Inefficient supermarkets?

So far we have spoken central banks, regulators and the macro environment. Today I would like to comment on something more closer to our day to day, to the average citizen.

Not long ago there was much controversy in Spain after the government decided to change the expiry date of yoghurts by the "Best before" date. I will speak from my UK experience only, as here is where I do the weekly shopping and I do not know  anything about the topic in Spain.

UK supermarkets label the vast majority of products with two different kinds of dates: 

-          "Display until": The date until which the product may be exposed to in store

-           "Best before": The date on which the manufacturer/dealer indicates that the product may begin to lose some of its properties, without involving health risks.

The main difference is that by labeling a product with an expiry date, most people would automatically qualify the product as inedible after the due date. In 99.9% of cases the product is still suitable for consumption. How many times have we thrown a yoghurt just one day after the expiry date?

Therefore we can observe some consequences:

-          When viewing a product close to its expiry date on the shelf of a supermarket, we will avoid buying it because we will find another one more recent at the same price.

-          If we all act according to the reasoning above, the supermarkets are left with a lot of products they cannot sell and, therefore, are a waste and a loss for them.

-          If the product we bought expired, will throw it away even if it is suitable for consumption.

-          Globally, we may be wasting tons of food perfectly suitable for use.

What this shows is that there is clear market inefficiency and, in my opinion, the British system has largely solved it. For the record, I do not know if the system is of British, American, German or Cambodian origin. The important thing is how to solve this inefficiency.

Let’s consider first dates. While the expiry date is restrictive, the best before date is indicative. This means that the shelf life can be extended without causing any danger to health. Simply, the consumer must apply some common sense before consuming a product which has exceeded that date.

Let’s consider the price now. What we see daily in British supermarkets is that as the product comes close to the display until date, the price is reduced. And it is perfectly reasonable.

Following the example of yoghurt: I have two yoghurt worth €1. One expires in 15 days and the other one tomorrow. For the same price, I’ll buy the newer yoghurt and leave the one which expires sooner. But if instead, the supermarket applies price differentiation and the fresh yoghurt costs €1 while the “old” one 30 cents, I may decide to buy the cheap yoghurt. The point is that this is the same yoghurt, same brand, same flavour and perfectly suitable for consumption. A bargain, right?

By removing the expiry date and applying price differentiation:

-          Market inefficiency is solved

-          Tons of wasted food are reduced

-          The supermarket avoids losses for the unsold products

-          The products are made affordable to a wider range of customers

Considering the global economic situation, especially in Spain, initiatives such as this should be welcomed and implemented in most establishments. I’ll leave you some figures:

-          Worldwide more than 850 million people do not have enough to eat

-          Every year, consumers in rich countries waste 222 million tons of food

-          Per capita waste by consumers is between 95 and115 kg a year in Europe and North America,

http://www.foodbanking.org/site/PageServer?pagename=work_impact_foodwaste