i am not an expert on global agricultural markets, but my suspicion is drought, followed by a global (human) pandemic, but i don’t know if those actually caused it even if you could prove they (both) happened. you can also see a significant drop in the 90s correlating with mad cow disease. there it’s easy to say “we destroyed a bunch of cattle instead of slaughtering them” but that’s not exactly reducing suffering. i seem to recall similar stories during the pandemic.
i highly doubt we could draw a causal link between buying beans and either of those dips, though.
no, it’ can’t. this is an unscientific claim.
It’s a graph. It doesnt interpret itself. It doesnt really do anything on its own.
it can only support your position if you could prove your counterfactual, which you cannot.
Well, if you look at the graphs last three points, it goes up from the first to the second much higher than it does from the second to the third.
Should I just assume there was a production problem that caused the reduction?
What’s caused that very minor decrease in the rate?
i am not an expert on global agricultural markets, but my suspicion is drought, followed by a global (human) pandemic, but i don’t know if those actually caused it even if you could prove they (both) happened. you can also see a significant drop in the 90s correlating with mad cow disease. there it’s easy to say “we destroyed a bunch of cattle instead of slaughtering them” but that’s not exactly reducing suffering. i seem to recall similar stories during the pandemic.
i highly doubt we could draw a causal link between buying beans and either of those dips, though.